Roman Manliness: Virtus and the Roman Republic

"' A That

did the concept of m anliness among the ancient Romans?

VV mean

How was it related to other Rom an social and political institutions, such as the family and the Res Publica? How did it change over time? Recent studies of ancient Roman m asculinities have concentrated on the private aspects of the subject, particularly sexuality, and have drawn conclusions from a narrow field of reference, usually rhetorical practice. In contrast, this book examines the public and the most important aspect of Rom an masculinity: manliness as represented by the concept of virtus. Using traditional historica!, philological, and archaeological analyses, together with the methods of socio-linguistics and gender studies, it presents a comprehensive picture of how Roman manliness developed from the middle to the late Republic. Arguing that virtus was not, in essence, a moral concept, Myles McDonnell shows how the semantic range of the word, together with the manly ideal that it embodied, were altered by Greek cultural ideas; and how Roman manliness was contested in the religion, culture, and politics of the late Republic.

ROMAN MANLINESS

What did the concept of manliness mean among the ancient Romans? How was it related to other Roman social and political institutions, such as the family and the res publica? How did it change over time? Recent studies of ancient Roman masculinities have concentrated on the private aspects of the subject, particularly sexuality, and have drawn conclusions from a narrow field of reference, usually rhetorical practice. In contrast, this book examines the public and the most important aspect of Roman masculinity: Manliness as represented by the concept of virtus. Using traditional historical, philological, and archaeological analyses, together with the methods of socio-linguistics and gender studies, it presents a comprehensive picture of how Roman manliness developed from the middle to the late Republic. Arguing that virtus was not, in essence, a moral concept, Myles McDonnell shows how the semantic range of the word, together with the manly ideal that it embodied, were altered by Greek cultural ideas; and how Roman manliness was contested in the religion, culture, and politics of the late Republic. Myles McDonnell teaches in New York City, currently in the History D epartment of Columbia University. He is Director of the Classical Summer School of the American Academy in Rome (2 004-07), where he also has been a Mellon Fellow.

MYLES McDoNNELL

is Visiting Associate

Professor at Brooklyn College, The City University of N ew York. Director of the Classical Summer School of the American Academy in Rome (2003- 2005), where he is also a Fellow, he has contributed to the Journal of Roman

Archaeology and Journal of Hellenic Studies.

Jacket illustration: Capitoline Brutus. Musei Capitolini, Rome, Italy. Photo Credit: Scala / Art Resource, NY Jacket design by Ho lly Johnson Printed in the United States of America

ISBN 0-521-82788-4

Ill"

11111" "11""" 9 78 0521 82788111

>

ROMAN MANLINESS

What did the concept of manliness mean among the ancient Romans? How was it related to other Roman social and political institutions, such as the family and the res publica? How did it change over time? Recent studies of ancient Roman masculinities have concentrated on the private aspects of the subject, particularly sexuality, and have drawn conclusions from a narrow field of reference, usually rhetorical practice. In contrast, this book examines the public and the most important aspect of Roman masculinity: Manliness as represented by the concept of virtus. Using traditional historical, philological, and archaeological analyses, together with the methods of socio-linguistics and gender studies, it presents a comprehensive picture of how Roman manliness developed from the middle to the late Republic. Arguing that virtus was not, in essence, a moral concept, Myles McDonnell shows how the semantic range of the word, together 1ith the manly ideal that it embodied, were altered by Greek cultural t. as; and how Roman manliness was contested in the religion, culture, politics of the late Republic.

td

yles McDonnell teaches in New York City, currently in the History partment of Columbia University. He is Director of the Classical mmer School of the American Academy in Rome (2004--07), where also has been a Mellon Fellow.

ROMAN MANLINESS VIRTUS AND THE ROMAN REPUBLIC MYLES McDONNELL

!~'N CAMBRIDGE :::

UNIVERSITY PRESS

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS

Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, Sao Paulo Cambridge University Press 40 West 20th Street, New York, NY 10011-4211 USA www.cambridge.org Information on this tide: www.cambridge.org/9780521827881

© Myles McDonnell 2006 This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 2006 Printed in the United States of America

A catalog record for this publication is available from the British Library. Library

of Congress

Calaloging in Publication Data

McDonnell, Myles. Roman manliness: virtus and the Roman Republic I Myles McDonnell. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-I3: 978-0-521-82788-1 (hardback) ISBN-10: 0-521-82788-4 (hardback) I. Men - Rome.

2. Masculinity - History. 3. Virtue. HQID90.7.R6M33 2006 20050I9038 305.31'0945'632 - dC22

1. Tide.

ISBN-I3 978-0-521-82788-1 hardback ISBN-ID 0-521-82788-4 hardback Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLS for external or third-party Internet Web sites referred to in dris publication and does not guarantee that any content on such Web sites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.

For Myles) patri et filio

CONTENTS

List of fl/ustrations

page

Priface

Xl

Xlll

List of Abbreviations

XVll

Introduction - Manliness and Virtus

1

I. Manliness as Courage in Early Latin

12

I.

2.

3. 4. 5. 6.

Virtus and Early Latin Plautus and Roman Comedy Early Latin Inscriptions Early Latin Epic, Tragedy, and History M. Porcius Cato Virtus and Martial Courage in the Middle Republic

11. Hellenization and 'ApETT) - Semantic Borrowing Bilingualism and Semantic Calque Virtus and Fortuna 3. Virtute Deum I.

2.

Ill. 'ApETT) and Manly Virtus

12

16

33 44 50 59

72 72 84 95 10 5

Semantic Borrowing and Popular Theater 2. Virtus as Human Excellence 3. Ethical Virtus 4. Virtus and the Canonical "Virtues" 5. Virtus as a Political Value I.

vu

105 10 7 110

128

134

CONTENTS

IV. Visual Representations of Virtus Visualization of Abstract Concepts in Ancient Rome Virtus as the Armed Amazon 3. Virtus and the Mounted Warrior 4. The Equestrian Image in Republican Rome I.

2.

V. The Boundaries of Manliness Virtus, Slaves, and Foreigners Virtus and Women 3. Virtus and Sexuality 4. Fatherhood, Family, and Wealth - Virtus and Private Life 5. Man and Boy - Patria Potestas and Virtus I.

2.

VI. Manliness in Republican Rome 1. Teaching Manliness 2. Aristocrats and Horses 3. Institutional Constraints on Displays of Manliness

VII. Divine Virtus - M. Claudius Marcellus and Roman Politics Manliness and Politics Abstract Deities and Divine Virtus 3. Virtus and Honos 4. Breaking the Constraints 5. Mal.'Cellus' Successors I.

2.

VIII. Virtus Contested 1.

2.

3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

142

142 146 149 154 159 159 161 165 168 173 181 18 I 185 195

206 206 209 212 228 235 241

The Experience of War Equites Equo Publico Cultural Change and Hellenism The New Man of Virtus Marius and the Gods Competing Definitions of Manliness Virtus and the Legacy of Marius

IX. Virtus Imperatoris

242 248 259 26 5 26 7 27 1

290 293

Virtus in the Late Republic The Virtus ofPompey 3. Virtus and Caesar's Commentaries I.

2.

VU1

293 295 300

CONTENTS

x.

Manliness Redefined

320

Virtus and the New Man Imperator Togatus - Cicero's Claim to Virtus 3. The Dual Nature of Virtus in Saliust

320 33 2 35 6

1.

2.

Epilogue - Roman Manliness and the Principate

Bibliography Index Locorum General Index

lX

ILLUSTRATIONS

Jugate heads of Honos and Virtus. Obverse type of denarius, 70 B.C. or 68 B.C. 2. Bust ofVirtus. Obverse type of denarius, 71 B.C. or 65 B.C. 3. Honos crowning Virtus. reverse type of denarius, I.

100 B.C.

page 146 147

148

4. Dioscuri. Reverse type on denarius, c. 206-200 B.C. 5. Mounted warrior. Reverse type on denarius, 129 B.C. 6. Mounted warriors. Reverse type on denarius, 127 B.C. 7. Mounted warrior. Reverse type on denarius, II6 or 115 B.C. 8. Republican Tempe at Cora: (a) plan; (b) fayade elevation; (c) side elevation. 9. State Plan. Area sacra dello Largo Argentina, Rome. 10. Elevations and plans of (from left to right) the Tholos in the Sanctuary of Athena Pronaia at Delphi; the Philippeion at Olympia; the Tholos at Epidauros. 11. Frontal, axial view of Temple B in Area sacra dello Largo Argentina, Rome.

Xl

250 251 252

253

276 282

283

284

PREFACE

For some of the years I was a graduate student I worked in Manhattan Night Court, where, it being New York City, my colleagues were of varied ethnic backgrounds of which they were highly conscious. One, named Vince, proud of his Italian heritage, took a special interest in my study of the ancient Romans and would often peruse the books I brought to the courthouse after a day of classes and study. But Vince consistently expressed disappointment with titles such as Roman Politics, The Roman Citizenship, and Agricultural Implements of the Roman World, protesting that they failed to capture what he considered to be the essence of his ancestors, the ancient Romans. Disappointment ended when I showed up one evening with a particularly large volume whose title immediately won Vince's approval. "Now that's a book that might teach you something about the Romans." The book was Italian Manpower, and Vince, not unreasonably, had mistaken Brunt's demographic study for one about something else. In a sense then, the present book was written for Vince; although I think he will be somewhat surprised, and I hope not too disappointed, by what ancient Roman manliness comprised, and what it did not. On examination, Roman manliness, or the kind of manliness ancient Romans meant by the Latin word virtus, turns out to have little to do with the qualities and activities - sexually aggressive display and behavior, fathering of children, support and protection of familycommonly associated with manliness in Mediterranean as well as other cultures. The discourse over virtus took place on a different plain. Virtus was a quintessentially public value that was displayed, tested, won, or lost in the delimited context of service to the Republic. For this, as XlIl

PREFACE

well as other reasons, this book is not about cultural studies, but rather history informed by philology. Because earlier philological studies of virtus have proved to be inadequate in one way or another, the first three chapters of the book are devoted to an examination of the meanings of virtus in pre-Classical Latin, which I hope are sufficiently rigorous without being overly tedious. These are followed by chapters that treat the interaction of the determined meanings of virtus with the social, political, and religious contexts in which they were used. This approach raises fundamental issues about the degree to which language produces rather than expresses meaning and about the relationship between language and "reality" (issues which, in my opinion, ultimately bring us up against unanswerable epistemological questions). A premise of this book is that a relationship does exist between words and things, albeit a complex one, that in the end is not demonstrable. Although open to criticism, this position seems preferable to that of epistemological skepticism. For once taken, that path will take us, if with Socrates we have the courage to follow the argument wherever it will go, to a Samuel Beckett nightmare world of solipsism or of silence. Better to make a leap of faith, if that is what it is, for meaning. This book has its origins at Columbia in the early eighties, at a time when William Harris had just written War and Imperialism in Republican Rome, and Richard Brilliant was lecturing on, among other things, visual images of Roman abstract concepts. The discrepancy between what my teachers were saying about virtus and what philologists had written led to a dissertation directed by William Harris entitled, "Virtus as a Social, Political, and Religious Concept in Republican Rome," which profited greatly from the comments of the dissertation committee members, Roger Bagnall, Alan Cameron, Morton Smith, and Joseph Solodow. This book was written with, and its publication delayed by, meager institutional support. It is all the more pleasing, therefore, to acknowledge the institutions and individuals without whose support the book would not exist - John Graham, Mike Peachin, Mervin Dilts, Roger Bagnall, William Harris, Jim Russell, Darby Scott, Julia Gaisser, David Lupher and Bill Barry, Carol Thomas and Richard Johnson, Barbara

XIV

PREFACE

Boyd, David Sider and Sarah Peirce, Roberta Stewart, the Intercollegiate Center for Classical Studies in Rome, and the American Academy in Rome. I owe a great deal to the generosity of spirit of the working people with whom I grew up and worked, separated from me now, to paraphrase Tony Harrison, by years and books, books, books, as well as to many scholars, both living and dead. Becoming acquainted with the tradition of Plautine scholarship that runs from Rits chl , to Leo, to Fraenkel, was a particular pleasure. Of my undergraduate teachers, special debts are owed to Alan Schulman, Konrad Gries, Ursula Schoenheim, and Zvi Yavetz, of my graduate teachers to Morton Smith and William Harris. For their support and encouragement over the years, I am also indebted to Ernst Badian, Erich Gruen, and to John D'Arms. The comments and criticism on various chapters of the book by Barbara Boyd, Jon Roth, Tim Pulju, Paul Zanker, and the anonymous readers saved me from numerous errors. I also thankJason Gajderowicz and Maggie Meitzler for their editorial help. I am especially grateful to Sue Treggiari for her guidance and encouragement after reading an early and very long version of this book. The period during which the book was written was not without personal difficulties. During this time it was good to count as friends Larissa Bonfante, Jim and Jenny Russell, Laura Zurlini, Pasquale Pesce, Liz Bartman, Lee Sherry, Gail Cornell, Jon Roth, lli Nagy and Eric Lindgren, Ed Harris, Kate Miner, Lisa Fentress, and the 1998 fellows of the American Academy in Rome. My greatest thanks go to Kate Welch, who alone knows how much I owe her. The book is dedicated to my father and my son. M.McD. Rome June, 2005

xv

ABBREVIATIONS

ANRW = H. Temporini, W Haase, Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischen vvclt. Volumes 1-11 37.3. Berlin, New York 1972-96. BMC, Greek Coins I. Italy = R. S. Poole, Catalogues if Greek Coins in the British Museum. I. Italy. London. 1873. Reprinted Bologna. A. Forni, 1963. BMC, Rom. Emp. = H. Mattingly, Coins if the Roman Empire in the British Museum. 6 volumes. London 1923-62. Brunt IM = P. A. Brunt, Italian Manpower, 197I.

BSL

=

225

B.G-A.D.

14.

Oxford

Bulletin de la Societe linguistique de Paris

CAF = T. Kock, Comicorum Atticorum fragmenta. 3 volumes. Leipzig 1880-8. Reprinted Utrecht 1976. CAH 2 = Cambridge Ancient History. 2nd edition. 12 volumes. Cambridge 1970-2005. CGFP = C. Austin, Comicorum Graecorum fragmenta in papyris reperta. Berlin, New York 1973. Charpin

=

F. Charpin, Lucilius Satires. 3 volumes. Paris 1978-9I.

Chassignet = M. Chassignet, Caton, Les Origines (fragments). Paris 1986.

CIG = A. Boeckh et alii, Corpus inscriptionum Graecarum. Berlin 182877·

CIL = Th. Mommsen et alii, Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum. Volume 1XVIII. Berlin 1853-1995.

XVll

ABBREVIATIONS

CJI = J.-B. Frey, Corpus qfJewish Inscriptions. New York 1975. CRAI

=

Comptes rendus de l'Academie des inscriptions et belles-lettres

Earl, MPTR = D. C. Earl, The Moral and Political Tradition of Rome. Ithaca 1967. Earl, PTS = D. C. Earl, The Political Thought qf Sallust. Cambridge 196I.

EG = G. Kaibel, Epigrammata Graeca ex lapidibus conlecta. Berlin 1878. Eisenhut, VR = W Eisenhut, Virtus Romana. Munich 1973. Enn. Ann. S = O. Skutsch, The Annals qfQ. Ennius. Oxford 1985. Enn. Ann. Vahl. = J. Vahlen, Ennianae poesis reliquiae. 2nd edition. Leipzig 1928. Reprinted Amsterdam 1967. Ernout-Meillet = A. Ernout, A. Meillet, Dictionnaire hymologique de la langue la tine. 4th edition. Paris 1960.

FGH = F. Jacoby, Die Fragmenta der griechischen Historiker. Parts 1-3. Berlin 1925-58. Franekel, E. PI. im PI. = Elem. = E. Fraenkel, Plautinisches im Plautus. Berlin 1922 = Elementi Plautini in Plauto. Florence 1960. FRH = H. Beck, U. WaIter, Die Fruhen romischen Historiker 1. Darmstadt 200I.

Harris, WIRR Oxford 1979.

=W

V. Harris, War and Imperialism in Republican Rome.

HRR = H. W G. Peter, Historicorum Romanorum reliquiae. 2nd edition. 2 volumes. Leipzig 1906-14.

IDel

=

F. Durrbach et alii, Inscriptions de DClos. Paris 1926-2002.

IG = F. Durrbach et alii, Inscriptiones Graecae. 10 volumes. Berlin 1873-72. ICUR = L. Moretti, Inscriptiones Graecae urbis Romae. Rome 1968-90. IGRRP = R. Cagnat et alii, Inscriptiones Graecae ad res Romanas pertinentes. 4 volumes. Paris 1901-27. ILLRP = A. Degrassi, Inscriptiones Latinae liberae rei publicae. 2 volumes. Florence, 1957-63. XVlll

ABBREVIATIONS

ILS = H. Dessau, Inscriptiones Latinae selectae. 3 volumes. Berlin 18921916. JlWE = D. Noy, Jewish Inscriptions if Western Europe. I Italy, Spain, Caul. 1993; 11 The City if Rome. 1995. K-T = A. Korte, A. Theirfelder eds. Menandri quae supersunt. Leipzig 1957-9· Krenkel

=

W Krenkel, Caius Lucilius. Satiren. Leiden 1970.

= K. Latte, Romische Religionsgeschichte. Munich 1960. Leo, PI. For. = F. Leo, Plautinische Forschungen zur Kritik und Ceschichte Latte, RR

der Komodie. 2nd edition. Berlin 19I2. LSJ = H. G. Liddell, R. Scott, H. S. Jones, P. G. W Glare, CreekEnglish Lexicon. Oxford 1940. LTUR = E. M. Steinby, Lexicon topographicum urbis Romae. 5 volumes. Rome 1992-2000. MRR = T. R. S. Broughton, The Magistrates oj the Roman Republic. 2 volumes. New York 1951-2. Marx = F. Marx, C. Lucilli carminum reliquiae. 2 volumes. Leipzig 1904-5·

MDAIR = Mitteilungen des deutschen archaologischen Instituts, Romische Abteilung MEFRA = Melanges de l'Ecolejrancaise de Rome Men. Korte = A. Korte, Menandrea, ex papyris et membranis vetustissimis. Leipzig 1910. Mommsen, R. Staatsr = Th. Mommsen, Romisches Staatsrecht. 3rd edition. Leipzig 1887-8. Reprinted Graz 1969.

NAC = Numismatica e antichita classiche Oakley, Commentary = S. P. Oakley, A Commentary on Livy Books VI-X. 2 volumes. Oxford 1997-8. Ogilivie, Commentary = R. M. Ogilvie, A Commentary on Livy, Books 1-5. Oxford 1965.

OCIS = W Dittenberger, Orientis graeci inscriptiones selectae. 2 volumes. Leipzig 1903. Reprinted Hildesheim, Zurich, New York 1986.

XIX

ABBREVIATIONS

OLD = P G. W Glare, Oxford Latin Dictionary. Oxford 1968-82. ORF4 = H. Malcovati, Oratorum Romanorumfragmenta liberae rei publicae. 4th edition. Turin 1976. PA = S. B. Platner, T. Ashby, A Topographical Dictionary Rome. Oxford 1929.

if Ancient

PCG = R. Kassel, C. Austin, Poetae comici Graeci. 8 volumes. Berlin 1993-2001 . RA = Revue archeologique RAL

=

Atti della Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei

RE = A. F. von Pauly, G. Wissowa, et alii, Real-Encyclopadie der classischen Altertumwissenschqft. Stuttgart 1894-2000. Ribb. = O. Ribbeck, Scaenicae Romanorum poesis fragmenta. 3rd edition. I Tragicorumfragmenta; 2 Comicorvmfragmenta. Leipzig 1897-8.

RIC = H. Mattingley, E. A. Sydenham, Roman Imperial Coinage. 10 volumes. London 1926-67. ROL = E. H. Warmington, Remains of Old Latin. Revised edition. 4 volumes. Cambridge, Mass, and London 1979. RRC = M. H. Crawford, Roman Republican Coinage. 2 volumes. Cambridge 1974. Sarsila = J. Sarsila, Some Aspects of the Concept of Virtus in Roman Literature until Livy. Jyvaskyla 1982.

SDHI = Studia et documenta historiae et iuris S VF = H. von Arnim, Stoicorum veterum fragmenta. 4 volumes. Leipzig 1903-5· SEG = Supplementum epigraphicum graecum. SylP = W Dittenberger, Sylloge inscriptiones graecarum. 3rd edition. Leipzig 1915-24.

= A. Nauck, Tragicorum Graecorumfragmenta. Leipzig 1856. TrGF = B. Snel1, R. Kannicht, S. Radt, Tragicorum Graecorum frag-

TGF

menta. 5 volumes. Gottingen 1971-86. TLL = Thesaurus linguae Latinae.

IQ

xx

volumes. Leipzig 1900-2004.

ABBREVIATIONS

Walbank, Commentary = F. W Walbank, A Historical Commentary on Polybius. 3 volumes. Oxford 1957-79. Wissowa, RKR = G. Wissowa, Religion und Kultus der Romer. 2nd edition. Munich 1912.

WS = Wiener Studien: ZeitschriJt fur Klassische Philologie, Patristik und lateinische Tradition

XXI

INTRODUCTION - MANLINESS AND VIRTUS

On the fifth of December in 63 the Roman senate met to discuss a grave crisis. I Senators and a sitting praetor had been accused of conspiring to murder the chief magistrates and overthrow the state. Over the previous seventy years, the old and aching Republic had suffered terrible violence, but seldom if ever had men from the inner circles of power been accused of such crimes. In the debate to decide the fate of the accused senators, three of Rome's leading figures gave speeches that would become famous. Cicero's Fourth Catilinarian became a classic of Latin oratory, mined for examples of urbane wit. 2 Even more celebrated were the speeches delivered by Caesar and the younger Cato, which were immortalized by the historian Sallust, writing some twenty years after the event. 3 A central concern of Cicero's speech, and of the words Sallust placed in the mouths of Caesar and Cato, I

2

3

All dates are B.C. unless noted otherwise. It was a source for Dornitius Marsus' De urbanitate. See Quint. Inst. 6.3.109 and E. S. Ramage, Urbanitas (Norman, 1973) pp. 100-6. The present form of the Fourth Catilinarian was published by Cicero three years after it was delivered with considerable revision; Cic. Att. 2.I(SB 21).3, with G. Kennedy, The Art of Rhetoric in the Roman World, 300 B. C.-A.D. 300 (Princeton, 1972) pp. 176-82, esp. p. 177, n. 45. Caesar's speech is at Sallust, BC SI, Cato's at BC 52.2-36. The debate between Caesar and Cato was famous; notices of it appear at Dio. 37.36; Plut. Cic. 20-1; App. BC 2.6 (20-2); Suet. Iul. 14, but all that survives of the speeches are Sallust's renderings. The relationship between the speeches Sallust gave to Caesar and Cato to what they actually said does not affect the point made here, which is the concerns shared by the contemporary participant Cicero and the near contemporary historian Sallust. Many other eminent senators also spoke that day; for the consular speakers, see Cic. Att. I2.2I(SB 260).1 with E. G. Hardy, 77u Catilinarian Conspiracy in Its Context: A Re-Study of the Evidence (Oxford, 1924) pp. 89-97.

ROMAN MANLINESS

was the decline of ancestral standards of manliness. 4 Given that some of the men charged with planning to slaughter their peers had held the highest offices of the Roman state, and were the descendants of men who had made Rome great, this is not surprising. 5 "Manliness" what it was and how it had been perverted - was, in a real sense, what the debate and the crisis were about. The Latin word for manliness is virtus, from vir, meaning man,6 and virtus designates the activity and quality associated with the noun from which it is derived; virtus characterizes the ideal behavior of a man. 7 In all accounts of ancient Roman values virtus holds a high place as a traditional quality that played a central part in war, politics, and religion. So close was the identification of virtus with Rome that when virtus was honored with a state cult, the image chosen for the cult statue was the same as that of the goddess Roma herself an armed amazon. Virtus was regarded as nothing less than the quality associated with, and responsible for Roman greatness, and was central to the construction of the ancient Roman self-image. The place of virtus in

4

5

6

7

For example, Sit Scipio clarus ille cuius consilio atque virtute Hannibal in AJricam redire atque Italia decedere coactus est. - "Celebrate that Scipio by whose intelligence and manliness Hannibal was forced to return to Africa and to leave Italy." Cic. Cat. 4.21; see also Sall. BC 51.42 and 52.22. Conspirators included men from noble families and some patricians, as well as ex-consuls and praetors. See E. S. Gruen, The Last Generation cif the Roman Republic (Berkeley, 1974, repr. 1995) pp. 418-22, and pp. 282-4, and Florus 2.12.3. A primary meaning of vir is man as opposed to woman or child, but virtus rarely denotes this sense. Vir is one of a number of Latin words that denote a man. It is usually carries positive connotations, and often refers to a politically active man, as opposed to homo, which is frequently coupled witlr an adjective that denotes the status a man is born into (nobilis, novus, Romanus), or with a pejorative adjective. It is tlre close connection between vir and Roman citizenship that informs the usages of virtus. On vir and homo, see G. Landgraf, Kommentar zu Ciceros Rede Pro Sex. Roscio Amerino (Leipzig, Berlin, 1914) p. IIS; T. Pulju, "Vir and Homo in Cicero's Pro Milone," LACUS Forum 19 (1994) pp. 567-74; also P. Hamblenne, "Cura ut vir sis! ... ou une vir(tus) peu morale" Latomus 43 (1984) pp. 369-88 (376, and n. 26 on vir and civis); S. Treggiari, Roman Marriage (Oxford, 1991) p. 7; F. Santoro L'Hoir, The Rhetoric oJ Gender Terms, 'Man', 'TMlman', and the Portrayal cif Character in Latin Prose (Leiden, 1992) pp. 9-28. Another Latin word, mas, denotes man as the males of the species. The word is formed from vir and the suffix tut, which conforms to a pattern seen in iuventus-iuvenis, senectus-senex; see A. Ernout, A. Meillet, Dictionnaire etymologique de la langue latine. 4th ed. (Paris, 1960) p. 739.

2

INTRODUCTION - MANLINESS AND VIRTUS

ancient Roman values is well expressed by Cicero in a speech he gave before the Roman populace in 43 : crudelitatem mortis et dedecus virtus propulsare solet, quae propria est Romani generis et seminis. hanc retinete, quaeso, Quirites, quam vobis tamquam hereditatem maiores vestri reliquerunt. [quamquam] alia omnia falsa, incerta sunt, caduca, mobilia: virtus est una altissimis defIxa radicibus, quae numquam vi ulla labefactari potest, numquam demoveri loco. hac [virtute] maiores vestri primum universam Italiam devicerunt, deinde Carthaginem exciderunt, Numantiam everterunt, potentissimos reges, bellicosissimas gentis in dicionem huius imperi redegerunt. But virtus usually wards off a cruel and dishonorable death, and virtus is the badge of the Roman race and breed. Cling fast to it, I beg you men of Rome, as a heritage that your ancestors bequeathed to you. All else is false and doubtful, ephemeral and changeful: only virtus stands firmly fIxed, its roots run deep, it can never be shaken by any violence, never moved from its place. With this virtus your ancestors conquered all Italy fIrst, then razed Carthage, overthrew Numantia, brought the most powerful kings and the most warlike peoples under the sway of this empire. Philippics 4.138

Virtus is the special inheritance of the Roman people, and it was by this virtus, this "manliness," that Roman supremacy had been built. The Romans believed they were successful because they were "better" men. 9 In order to understand the ancient Romans, therefore, one must understand their concept of manliness, and to understand that, one must understand virtus. Yet virtus is a notoriously difficult word to translate. As in most cultures, in ancient Rome the term for manliness had a number of different denotations. Yet it is striking that a word whose etymological connection to the Latin word for man is so apparent, can be attributed IQ

8

9

10

The text and translation (adapted slighdy) is that of D. R. Shacketon Bailey, Cicero Philippics (Chapel Hill, London, 1986). For similar sentiments about virtus, see Cic. 2 Verr. 4.81 and Sail. BC 53.2-5. Cf. Plin. NH 7.130, in the context of a discussion ofjortuna. Although Romans did attribute virtus to some of their enemies, commonly to Gauls, see Claudius Quadrigarius, frag. rob HRR, p. 208, and Caesar, De bello Gallico, where the attribution is common; cf. Sail. BC 53.4; and subsequently in Chapters IX and X. D. C. Earl, The Moral and Political Tradition of Rome [henceforth MPTR] (Ithaca, 1967) p. 20, claimed that virtus is untranslatable.

3

ROMAN MANLINESS

not only to women, but to deities, animals, abstract ideas, and inanimate objects. II As a purely linguistic phenomenon this is noteworthy, but since virtus was regarded by the Romans as a preeminent social and political value, its wide and sometimes odd semantic range has implications that go beyond philological significance. The phenomenon has received less attention than it deserves primarily because scholars have viewed virtus as an unchanging Roman value and have construed the word as having a semantic range intrinsically so elastic as to make almost any use of the word unremarkable. The general opinion among philologists and political historians is that virtus was an essentially unchanged concept, which from earliest times had a wide semantic range. Moreover, virtus is said to have been a single, all-embracing concept that subsumed other cardinal Roman virtues. It has been termed "homogeneous" or "undivided Roman virtus," and its significance sought in a "virtus complex" of moral ideals. The prevailing view is that whatever changes may have occurred in the meaning of virtus were minimal and insignificant. 12

II

I2

It is clear from usage that virtus struck the ear of an ancient Roman much as "manliness" does that of the English speaker; see James J. O'Hara, True Names- Vergil and the Alexandrian Tradition of Etymological Wordplay (Ann Arbor, 1996) pp. I07 and 127-8. But the semantic range of manliness is much more restricted. Although manliness may qualify an abstraction, e.g., "the silent manliness of grief," Goldsmith, Deserted Village (OED, s.v., "manliness,"), unlike virtus, it cannot qualify something like farmland. W Eisenhut, Virtus Romana [henceforth VR] (Munich, 1973) pp. 14-22, acknowledged the influence of Greek words, but argued that from the beginning virtus had broad semantic significance centering around the idea of general capability. The same view is found in Eisenhut's entry on "virtus als gottliche Gestalt," RE, SuppL XIV (1974) cols. 896-9IO. K. Buchner, Humanitas Romana (Heidelberg, 1957) pp. 3IO-13, wrote of einheitliche romische virtus. For the virtus complex, see D. C. Earl, "View Complex," MPTR, pp. II-43, esp. pp. 34-6; see also "Political Terminology in Plautus," Historia 9 (1960) pp. 235-43; The Political Thought of Sal/ust [henceforth PTS] (Cambridge, 1961) pp. 1840; "Terence and Roman Politics," Historia II (1962) pp. 469-85. To a great extent, this evaluation of virtus is derived from ideas formulated by earlier philological studies of the principal Roman virtues - ideals such as pietas, constantia, gravitas, dignitas, auctoritas, etc. - that dominated German scholarship between the two world wars; see, e.g., U. Knoche, "Der romische Ruhmesgedanke," Philologus 89 (1934) p. II5, reprinted in Vom Selbstverstiindnis der Romer (Heidelberg, 1962) p. 23. Similar views were expressed by V. Poschl, Grundwerte romischer Staatsgesinnung in den Geschichtswerken des Sal/ust (Berlin, 1940) pp. 12-26; cf. M. Pohlenz, Die Stoa (Gottingen, 1948-9) n, p. 134 fr. For a caustic evaluation of the whole approach, see A. Momigliano, Alien Wisdom (Cambridge, 1975) p. 16.

4

INTRODUCTION - MANLINESS AND VIRTUS

The central ideals of a society are, however, seldom entirely static. Speaking at a time of civil war, when he was rallying forces to defend traditional senatorial government against generals who challenged it, Cicero in the Philippics strove to present virtus as both traditional and unaltered. But, as Cicero knew, the meaning of virtus had changed over the course of centuries. Many Latin texts certainly do present virtus as a wide-ranging and all-encompassing ethical concept, but such texts, almost without exception, date to the period of Cicero or later. A general weakness of philological analyses of virtus, and other Latin values as well, has been their tendency to impose usages found in laterepublican and imperial literature on to occurrences of virtus found in early (pre-Classical) Latin. I3 The consequence of this myopic emphasis on uses of virtus found in Classical Latin has been, on one hand, to undervalue the meaning of virtus that predominates in early Latin martial prowess or courage - and, on the other hand, to underestimate seriously the extent of Hellenic influence on virtus. That the Latin language was greatly influenced, especially in its lexicon, by borrowing from Greek, is certainly the case. In addition, the idea that virtus had an intrinsically wide semantic range is at odds with the conclusions of historians of ancient Roman institutions, religion, and art, who in examining the evidence for its cult, have agreed that virtus was primarily a martial concept. I4

See, e.g., K. Biichner, "Altromische und Horazische virtus," Die Antike 15 (1939) pp. 145-64, reprinted in Biichner's Studien zur romischen Literatur In Horaz (Wiesbaden, 1962) pp. 1-22, = Romische wertbegriffi, ed. H. Oppermann (Darmstadt, 1967) pp. 37699 where the picture of "old Roman virtus" draws very heavily on the works ofPublilius Syrus; H. Dahlmann, "Das romische Mannesideal," in Mannestum und Heldenideal, ed. F. Miiller, (Marburg, 1942) pp. 22-35; reprinted as "Virtus Romana," in H. Dahlheim, Kleine Schriften (Hildesheim, New York, I970) pp. 9-22. J. Hellegouarc'h, Le vocabulaire latin des relations et les partis politiques sous la republique. Publications de la Faculte des lettres et sciences humaines de Universite de Lille, vol. II (Paris, 1963) pp. 242-4, emphasized the political aspect of virtus, but his study is based almost entirely on late-republican texts; as noted by J. Sarsila, Some Aspects of the Concept of Virtus in Roman Literature until Livy (Studia Philologica Jyvaskylaensia 16, 1982) p. 90. Early Latin is that before the time of Cicero's literary productions (before c. 80 B.C.); Classical Latin is that written from c. 80 and c. A.D. 20. '4 E. Saglio, "Honos," Daremberg-Saglio, Dictionnaire des antiquites grecques et romaines, III I (paris, 1889) col. 248; G. Wissowa, in W H. Roscher Aus Fiihrliches Lexikon der griechischen und romischeni Mythologie I. 2 (Leipzig, 1886-90) "Honos," p. 2707; IV (192437) "Virtus," p. 336; and Wissowa, RKR (Berlin, 1902) p. 135; H. L. Axtell, The Deification 1J

5

ROMAN MANLINESS

It is Latin usage itself, however, that makes the notion of virtus as a wide-ranging ethical ideal untenable. This will be demonstrated in the following chapters, but two passages are worth noting here. In his tragedy Hectoris lytra - The Ransom if Hector - the Latin poet Ennius, who lived from about 239 to 169, has Priam state that justice - ius - is better than virtus because bad men often possess virtus: Melius est virtute ius: nam saepe virtutem mali Nanciscuntur: ius atque aecum se a malis spernit procul. justice is better than virtus, for bad men often acquire virtus: justice and fairness take themselves far away from bad men. 155-6 Jocelyn = se. 188-9 Vahlen = 200-1 ROL

The lines repeat a famous Socratic dictum about justice - OIKT] - and courage - 6:vopEio, IS and it might be argued that Ennius' characterization of virtus merely reflects the paucity of Latin vocabulary that compelled the single word virtus to regularly translate both 6:vopEio, the Greek word for courage, and 6:pETT], the Greek word for excellence. Indeed, 6:pETT] was a broad-ranging and decidedly ethical concept, and virtus was the standard Latin word used to translate it. I6 But in Greek literature one does not find 6:PETT] contrasted with ethical ideals as Ennius here contrasts virtus to ius. Quite the contrary, as early as the mid-seventh century, the poet Theognis expressed the view that "the whole of 6:pETT] is summed up injustice" - EV oE olKolocrvvn crvAAT]f301lV m):s' 6:PETT] 'crTIV. (147 West). By the mid-fourth century

of Abstract Ideas in Roman Literature (Chicago, 1907) pp. 22 and 25; E. Samler, "Honos," RE VIII. 2 (1913) cols. 2292-4; J. A. Hild, "Virtus," Daremberg-Saglio V (1917) col. 926; G. DeSanctis, Storia dei Romani, IV ii I (Florence, 1953) p. 302; K. Latte, RRG (1960) pp. 235-6; Combes, pp. 205-12; G. Dumezil, ARR (Paris 1974) p. 252. W V Harris, War and Imperialism in Republican Rome [henceforth WIRR] (Oxford, 1979) p. 20. Contra Eisenhut, "virtus als gottliche Gestalt," RE Suppl. XIV (1974) cols. 896-9IO. 15 Xen. Sym. 3.4; PI. Prot. 329E; also Isoc. 4.197; cf. O. Ribbeck, Die romische Tragodie im Zeitalter der Republik (Leipzig, 1875, reprinted Hildesheim, 1968) p. 30. H. D. Jocelyn, The Tragedies of Ennius (Cambridge, 1968) p. 295. Earl, Historia II (1962) p. 476 and Eisenhut, VR, p. 30, commented on the "un-Romanness" of the lines. 16 For 6:pETT] as an ethical concept, see U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Sappho und Simonides, Untersuchungen uber griechische Lyriker (Berlin, 1913) pp. 169-89; and A. W H. Adkins, Merit and Responsibility (Oxford, 1960).

6

INTRODUCTION - MANLINESS AND VIRTUS

this idea had become proverbial. I7 Ennius' lines, however, which were recited before a Roman audience, draw a clear contrast between ius, an overtly ethical quality, and virtus, and stand in stark contradiction to the theory that virtus was conceived of as an ethical ideal representing the sum of the qualities valued by Romans. 18 Some might argue that the view of virtus expressed in these lines of Latin tragedy are poetic, Greek-influenced, and somehow un-Roman. Such things, however, cannot be said of its appearance in the prose work of a quintessentially Roman author. In Book Three of De bello civili, Juhus Caesar writes of two Allobrogian brothers named Raucillus and Egus, who commanded Caesar's Gallic cavalry at the battle of Dyrrachium in 48. Caesar states that he had given them position and wealth because of the great virtus they had displayed in war: ... singulari virtute homines, quorum opera Caesar omnibus Gallicis bellis optima fortissimaque erat usus. his domi ob has causas amplissimos magistratus mandaverat atque eos extra ordinem in senatum legendos curaverat, agrosque in Gallia ex hostibus captos praemiaque rei pecuniariae magna tribuerat locupletesque ex egentibus fecerat. hi propter virtutem non solum apud Caesarem in honore erant sed etiam apud exercitum cari habebantur; ... men of outstanding virtus, whose excellent and very brave serVIces Caesar had employed in all his Gallic wars. Because of this he had given to them the highest offices in their own country, and had seen to it that they, extraordinarily, were enrolled in the senate, and had awarded to them land in Gaul captured from enemies and a great amount of very valuable booty, and 17

18

Aristot. EN II29B29; see Adkins, Merit and Responsibility, p. 78. On 5iKT] and apETT], see also Phocylides, 16, and note the reluctance of Thrasymachus to contrast the two at PI. Rep. 348D. Sarsila, p. 42, cited Xenophanes (frag. 2 Diels-Kranz) contrasting apETT] to pW~T] -"strength;" not at all to the point. See Cicero, Off. 1.62, where in translating Panaetius Cicero uses Jortitudo for av5pEia, virtus for apETT]; cf. A. R. Dyck, A Commentary on Cicero, De Officiis (Michigan, I996) pp. I9I-2. The ethical meaning of apETT] predominates in Greek literature of the fourth century and later, especially Middle and New Comedy; see Chapter Ill. This is true, whatever specific meaning virtus might have in Ennius' lines; on which see Chapter I. A connection between virtus and unethical conduct is also found in two unattributed fragments of Latin tragedy. In one, an act of violence that is characterized as virtus is also described as ethically repugnant, inc. inc. Jab. I97-9 Ribb. = I02-4 ROL, p. 6I7 (on which see later Chapter I). Another fragment suggests that virtus is ethically neutral, and that while it is best to make ethical use of it, virtus could also be employed in the sacrilege of sacking a temple, inc. inc.Jab. 30-3I, Ribb. = 98-9 ROL, p. 6I7 (see Chapter I).

7

ROMAN MANLINESS

had turned them from poor to rich men. Because of their virtu5, these men were not only held in honor by Caesar, but were also dear to the army; BC 3.59.1-3

Succumbing to greed, however, the brothers embezzled the pay of the soldiers under their command. This conduct is described as an ethical failing by Caesar, who writes that it brought public scorn as well as guilt to the two Gauls. 19 Caesar, however, decided to put off any punishment of the brothers, and did so, he tells us, in large measure because of their virtus. 20 Caesar neque tempus illud animadversionis esse existimans et multa virtuti eorum concedens rem totam distulit; ... Caesar, deciding that it was not the time for punishment, and conceding much to their virtu5, postponed the whole business; ... BC 3.60.1

The statement of Caesar, who was famous for his precision with words,21 that he had temporarily excused the ethical failings of Raucillus and Egus because of their virtus, makes little sense if virtus were normally considered a single all-inclusive and ethical concept. The contention that virtus comprised a "complex" of moral ideals that was "regarded by the Romans themselves as embodying the specially Roman ideal" is, therefore, demonstrably untrue. 22 Yet it is the case that Caesar's contemporary Cicero both states that an ethical usage of virtus (as the quality that engenders and preserves friendship) is its meaning in colloquial speech - ex consuetudine vitae sermonisque nostri -, and not infrequently employs virtus as a unified, all-embracing, ethical

I9

20

2I 22

Caes. BC 3.59.3. Magnam tamen haec res illis offensionem et contemptionem ad omnis attulit, idque ita esse cum ex aliorum obiectationibus tum etiam ex domestico iudicio atque animi conscientia intellegebant. - "Nevertheless, this affair brought to these men [Raucillus and Egus] great discredit and scorn in the sight of all, and they realized that this was not only a result of the aspersions of strangers, but also of the judgment of their friends and of their own conscience." (BC 3.60.2). Here, as almost always in Caesar's works, virtus has a martial meaning, see Chapter IX. For Caesar's careful and pure diction, see Cic. Brut. 261. Earl, MPTR p. 36. Hellegouarc'h, p. 568, saw that in the late Republic, virtus was not used as a moral term in ordinary language. Harnblenne, Latomus 43 (1984) pp. 369-88, came to a similar conclusion about the political uses of vir.

8

INTRODUCTION - MANLINESS AND VIRTUS

term.23 Virtus was a far more complex value than modern scholarship has supposed, and how it came to be used in various and contradictory ways requires explanation. But a study that privileges usages of virtus found only in Classical Latin will not do. The first three chapters of this book examine the various meanings of virtus, from its earliest occurrences, with each instance of the word evaluated on its own terms by paying close attention to both textual and historical contexts. The influences of Greek words and ideas, in particular exPETT], on some of these meanings are evaluated, as are the socio-linguistic mechanisms by which these influences were effected. From a philological perspective, this will be seen to be largely a process by which Latin virtus came to take on the modern meaning of "virtue." But analyzed as a purely ethical concept, virtus is inevitably a poor cousin to the more semantically wide-ranging and philosophically sophisticated Greek concept exPETT] , from which many of the ethical references of virtus were adopted. A proper study of virtus must situate the Roman concept in its cultural and historical context as well as concentrate on the basic meaning of the term, which is "manliness," and how it functioned in Roman society. It will be seen that the pervasive influences of Hellenism on midand late-republican Rome, not only altered the meaning of the word virtus, but the idea of manliness itself. As a consequence, two distinct conceptions of the term developed - one traditionally Roman and essentially martial in nature, the other Greek-influenced and primarily ethical. 24 Not only that, but beginning in the late-second century, the divergent meanings of the term denoting Roman manliness were publicly debated, and the contested meaning of virtus played a critical 2J

24

Cic. Amic. 21. sed haec ipsa virtus amicitiam et gignit et continet nec sine virtute amicitia esse ullo pacto potest - "but this very virtus both engenders and preserves friendship, nor can friendship possibly exist without virtus" Cic. Amic. 20. For Cicero's use of virtus as an all-embracing ethical term, see, e.g., Off. 3.13; De or. 3.136; Mur. 30; Imp. Pom. 64. The distinction between the two meanings of virtus seems to have been appreciated and employed by Machiavelli; see J. H. Hexter, The Vision of Politics on the Eve of the Reformation (New York, 1973) pp. 188--92. Most recent classical scholarship has followed Earl and Eisenhut. Those who have not are disappointing. C. A. Barton, Roman HOl1or: The Fire il1 the Bones (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, 2001) p. 57, renders virtus as "effective energy," referring, pp. 41-2, to the dubious semantic connection between virtus and vis; on which see Chapter n, n. 3. Most of what Barton writes about virtus is impressionistic.

9

ROMAN MANLINESS

ideological role in the crisis that shook and finally ended the Roman Republic. Anthropological and sociological studies have shown that despite differences of content and definition, in most cultures manhood is regarded not as a status gained merely by coming of age, but as something that must be demonstrated or won, a concept that is precarious, elusive, and exclusionary. Moreover, in most cultures the term denoting manliness comprises a variety of qualities, emphasis on one or exclusion of another depending on societal values. 25 This book, therefore, also addresses the fundamental questions of what it meant to be a man - vir - in ancient Rome, how the status was attained, and how it changed over time. Institutions that taught and encouraged the aggressively martial types of behavior that Roman manliness traditionally comprised are examined, together with the ways in which manliness was demonstrated. Of great importance for understanding the nature of Roman manliness are the distinctive ways in which virtus was represented visually - the armed amazon and the mounted warrior - and the ideological significance of the latter in regard to republican values. In addition, it will be shown how, in order to insure the stability of the state, the Republic developed a singular system of institutional constraints on aggressive displays of manliness, and that the cult to divine Virtus played a central role in challenges to those constraints that were posed in the late Republic by ambitious Roman leaders. The scope of this study is limited, with certain exceptions, to the republican period. (Because of the notoriously poor documentation for much of this period, some of the arguments that are later advanced 25

So D. M. Gilmore, Manhood in the Making (New Haven, 1990), M. Hertzfeld, The Poetics of Manhood (Princeton, 1985), and for multiple masculinities, and the idea ofhegemonic and subordinate masculinities, see R. W Connell, Masculinities (Berkeley, Los Angeles, 1995) pp. 76-86; discussed in Chapter V. Despite the obvious importance that family and reproduction held for the ancient Romans, and that the word vir was used in reference to these, they were excluded from the ideal concept of manliness as represented by virtus. It is, therefore, unnecessary, and perhaps counterproductive, to analyze all the various meanings and nuances of the word vir, in order to understand the Roman ideal of manliness. To understand that, we must concentrate on the meanings and nuances of the word virtus, and on its place in Roman society and culture. On meanings of vir, see the works previously mentioned n. 6. For an illuminating treatment with a different emphasis, see the essays in A. Giardina, ed. L'uomo romano (Bari, 1989). 10

INTRODUCTION - MANLINESS AND VIRTIJS

are ambitious; I hope not excessively so.) This decision was made, in part, to keep the book to a reasonable length, but for a number of substantive reasons as well. First, with the exception of one or two new usages found in late Latin, the semantic development of virtus seems to have been completed by the time of Cicero. Second, it was under the Republic, as Rome grew from an important Latin community to a great Mediterranean power, that the institutions and mores that are characteristically Roman were shaped, and the ancient Roman selfimage was constructed. Roman values that changed under the Empire did so, to a large degree, in reaction to the lost but not forgotten Republic. Finally, there is an intrinsic connection between virtus and res publica. Before the establishment of the Republic, royal women, such as Tanaquil and Tullia, were imagined to have played an important and active role in public affairs, and the political power of imperial women rose to great heights with the Principate. But in the intervening 500 years, the Republic defined political power as male. In this Rome was not unusual, because political power was a male preserve in virtually all ancient societies. But the bond between the form of the state and the status of being a man was closer and more essential in Rome than in others, because in Rome, serving the Republic was the only way many Romans males could lay claim to being a man.

II

I

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

I do not blame the words, which are like excellent and precious vessels, but the wine of error, which was introduced into them for us by intoxicated teachers. Augustine, Confessions

A basic and necessary premise for the theory that virtus had an intrinsically broad semantic field of reference is the contention that its very common meaning of courage, especially martial courage, was but one aspect of a wide-ranging concept. Support for this view can certainly be found in the works of various authors of the late republican and the imperial eras. But in the time between the late Republic and the earliest surviving texts, the Latin language had undergone considerable change, and whether the notion that virtus had an intrinsically broad semantic range is supported by early Latin usage is questionable. This chapter will explore the issue, focusing on close readings of a number of critical early Latin texts and will argue that in pre-Classical Latin (before Cicero) the predominant meaning of virtus is courage. I I.

VIRTUS AND EARLY LATIN

Virtus occurs in pre-Classical Latin with considerable frequency, but determining its meaning is often difficult. Its first occurrence is in a passage from Rome's earliest legal code, the XII Tables, usually dated I

What kinds of courage - a complex and problematic concept in any language - virtus denoted is discussed in this chapter, Section 6. 12

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

to the mid-fifth century. No complete text of the original survives, but scholars have pieced together the code from quotations found in the works of various later Latin authors. Virtus is mentioned in Table X, among notices of restrictions on burial honors, specifically in regard to a provision about crowns awarded for virtus. 2 Two of the texts relevant to this provision are, flla iam significatio est, laudis ornamenta ad mortuos

pertinere, quod coronam virtute partam et ei qui peperisset et eius parenti sine fraude esse lex impositam iubet. - "Now the meaning is that decorations of renown belong to the dead, because the law orders that a crown obtained by virtus may with impunity be placed upon him who had won it and upon his father." (Cic. Leg. 2.60), and from Servius' commentary on Vergil's Aeneid II .80, in antiquis disciplinis relatum est, quae quisque virtute ornamenta consecutus esset, ut ea mortuum eum condecorarent. - "In the ancient rules it was related, anyone who because of virtus had won decorations, these may adorn him when he is dead." The provision is part of what seems to have been an attempt by the Roman aristocracy at self-restriction by placing limits on extravagant funeral displays. 3 The reference to crowns won by sons being conferred on their fathers conforms to the old and peculiarly Roman system in which the pateifamilias legally owned anything acquired by a member of his family. 4 The meaning of virtus in this provision of the XII Tables, however, hinges on a third problematic passage from Pliny's Naturalis Historiae, which has caused considerable discussion in regard to both text and Pliny's interpretation of the ancient regulation. namque ad certamina in circum per ludos et ipsi descendebant et servos suos equosque rnittebant. Inde ilia xii tabularum lex: "qui coronam parit ipse pecuniave eius virtutis suae ergo duitur ei." quam servi equive meruissent pecunia partam lege dici nemo dubitavit.

2

J

4

For all of the texts of the provision in question, Tabula X, 6-7, see M. Crawford, et aL, Roman Statutes II (London, 1996) pp. 708-IO and pp. 556--'75 on the date and collection of the XII Tables. So E Wieacker, "Die XII Tafeln in ihrem Jahrhundert," in Les Origins de la republique romaine (Vandoeuvres-Geneva, 1967) pp. 291-359, esp. p. 313; E. Baltrusch, Regimen Morum (Munich, 1989) pp. 44-50; cf. T. J. Cornell, The Beginnings of Rome (London, New York, 1995) pp. I07-8. Crawford, et al., p. 563. On this provision, see Mommsen, R. Staatsr. P p. 426, n. 2.

13

ROMAN MANLINESS

For they themselves went down to the CIrcus during the games to compete and they sent their slaves and horses. From whence that law of the XII Tables: "who obtains a crown himself or by means of his chattel, it is conferred on him because of virtus." No one has doubted that in the law, what is said to be obtained 'by means of chattel,' slaves or horses had won.

Plin. NH 21. 7

Following this reading of the text, Eisenhut interpreted virtus in the passage as the quality of either the victorius individual himself or of his possessions, and rendered it as "general excellence."5 The reading virtutis suae, which is that of most editions of Pliny, is, however, found only in one manuscript; all others have virtutisve suae. The preferred reading, therefore, should probably be: qui coronam parit ipse pecuniave eius virtutisve suae ergo duitur ei, - "who obtains a crown by himself or by means of his chattel, or it is conferred on him because of his virtus, 6 with a distinction between the first clause, which refers to a crown being won by a man or by his chattel in games, and contains no reference to virtus, and the second, which refers to a crown conferred on the man for his own virtus. Given what is otherwise known about the awarding of coronae during the Republic, the meaning of virtus here is most likely physical courage. 7 5 Eisenhut, VR, p. 23 citing R. Diill, Leges duodecim tabularuml Das Zwolftafelgesetz (Munich, 1944). See also C. Mayhoff, C. Plini Secundi Naturalis Historiae (Leipzig, 1892); ad loco J. Andre, Pline L'Ancien, Histoire Naturelle, Livre XXI (paris, 1969); ad loc approved by Sarsila, p. 23. 6 As was pointed out by Crawford, Roman Statutes (London, 1996) m #40, p. 708. In ROL III p. soo, Warrnington printed eius virtutisve ergo arduitur ei. Pliny's entire interpretation is very dubious and the text may be corrupt. Crawford, pp. 709-10, wrote: "Pliny's picture of the circus is bizarre ... his explanation of pecuniave eius is absurd and the text itself in any case unsatisfactory." Contra E. Rawson, "Chariot-Racing in the Roman Republic," PRSR 49 (1981): pp. 1-6, esp. pp. 3-S = Roman Culture and Society (Oxford, 1991) pp. 389-407, esp. pp. 392-4. In addition, when introduced with phrases like nemo dubitavit - "no one doubted" - Pliny's statement are frequently suspect; cf., e.g., NH 9·2S; 30 .I. 7 So Mommsen, R.Staatsr. P p. 426, n. 2 and E. Courtney, Archaic Latin Prose (Atlanta, 1999) pp. IS-16 and 22-S; contra F. Bernstein, Ludi Publici; Untersuchungen zur Entstehung und Entwicklung der Offentlichen Spiele im republikanischen Rom (Stuttart, 1998) pp. 70-I. On the various types of coronae given for martial valor, see H. O. Fiebiger, "corona," RE IV (1901) cols. 1636-43; for coronae given for competitions, see cols. 1642-3. Note that the early fIfth-century (c. 480) Tomb of the Warior from Lanuvium contains both weapons and athletic equipment; see F. Zevi, "Tomba del guerriero di Lanuvio," in M. R. Di Mino, M. Bertinetti, ed. Archeologia a Roma (Rome, 1990) pp. 166,0

14

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

Unfortunately, like the XII Tables passage, most Latin from before the age of Caesar and Cicero survives only in fragments -lines from otherwise non-extant works quoted by later writers. More often than not the fragments have no more, and frequently less, of a context than the provision of the XII Tables just examined, making it difficult to know exactly how a particular word is being used. It is, therefore, the relatively few works of pre-Classical Latin that survive in a more or less complete form that must be the starting place in the search for the meanings of words in early Latin. Of such complete works, it is the earliest, the comedies ofPlautus, that furnish the best opportunity for determining the meanings of virtus. For in addition to the large number of occurrences of the word it provides, the Plautine corpus also exhibits virtus in a relatively wide range of dramatic situations, as opposed to the predominantly military contexts in which the word is found in early Latin epic, tragedy, and history. The significance of any finding about the term is reinforced by the wider range of references. Furthermore by providing the contexts in which virtus is used, the comedies ofPlautus not only facilitate the determination of the meaning of the word in the passage under consideration, but, if the numerous instances of virtus in Plautus can be clearly categorized by context, they may furnish a basis by which to compare and judge the more obscure occurrences of virtus in the fragmentary remains of non-Plautine literature. In order to determine the meanings of virtus in early Latin, then, Plautine usages will be analyzed first, followed by an examination of the occurrences of virtus in other early Latin texts. In the comedies of Plautus, however, virtus sometimes occurs in a passage where the context is ambiguous or seemingly neutral, and determining the word's precise connotations is consequently difficult. Here Plautus' consistent patterns of word and phrase usage can be helpful. Because if a character in a play is frequently associated with virtus in passages where the word clearly has a specific and particular meaning, it is likely that virtus will carry the same meaning when applied to that character in what otherwise might be considered a neutral context. Because Plautus' words were heard by an audience, it follows that if, for example, virtus occurs in a martial context and reappears a few lines later in a neutral context, the references and meaning of the first occurrence would be transferred to the 15

ROMAN MANLINESS

second. 8 Words having multiple meanings offer the poet the opportunity for play, and Plautus was a punster, but puns are usually easy to identify, and none involving virtus has been found in Plautus' works. Two influential studies of virtus have claimed that the meaning of courage is common neither in the Plautine corpus nor in other early Latin literature. Earl maintained that such a meaning functioned as only one aspect of a much wider political and moral concept of virtus, whereas Eisenhut asserted that in Plautus courage is a rare and exceptional meaning for virtus, becoming prominent only in a later period. 9 Eisenhut's case is refuted by even a casual examination of two of PIautus' comedies, Amphitruo and Miles gloriosus, in both of which the courageous meaning for virtus is common. IO Occurrences of virtus in these most military of Plautus' plays far outnumber those in other plays, but the fact that virtus often has a martial denotation in plays in which military matters figure prominently could indicate only that this particular aspect of virtus is being emphasized because of the theme of the play. II A closer examination of the occurrences of virtus in Plautus is required. 2.

PLAUTUS AND ROMAN COMEDY

Virtus occurs sixty-six times in the Plautine corpus: fifty-five times in the singular, eleven in the plural. All who have studied the subject are in agreement that of these, nineteen unequivocally convey the idea of physical courage. I2 Most of these are found in the context 8

9 10 II

12

For this method of discovering an inrmediate and consistent context for words and phrases within a play, see W Thomas MacCary, Servus Gloriosus: A Study of Military Imagery in Plautus (diss., Stanford, 1968) and S. L. Hines, The Metaphorical Use of Mythological and Historical Allusions in Plautus (diss. Minnesota, I973). Earl, MPTR, pp. 3I-2; Eisenhut, VR, p. 25. As demonstrated by Sarsila, pp. 28-33. So Earl, Historia II (I962) p. 470. G. Lodge, Lexicon Plautinum II (Leipzig, 1904) pp. 878--9. Two of these occurrences, at Amphitruo 75 and 78, are in an interpolated passage; see M. McDonnell, "Ambitus and Plautus' Amphitruo 65-8I,"AJPh I07 (I986): pp. 564,6, and subsequently Chapter Ill, pp. I99-200. Virtus meaning courage occurs with martial connotations at Amphitruo I9I, 2I2, 260, 534, 648--9, 652-3, Miles gloriosus I2, 32, 57, I027,Asinaria 556, Epidicus I06, 38I, 442, 445, Pseudolus 532, Curculio 179, and Truculentus I06. See Lodge, I1, pp. 878--9; A. N. Van Omme, Virtus, een Semantiese Studie (Utrecht, I946); Earl, Historia 9 (I960) pp. 235-43; K. Strawecka, "Spuren der philosophischen virtus in

16

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

of the actions of men in war, common soldiers and leaders both. In such contexts virtus often denotes an aggressive martial quality, as for example at id vi et virtute militum victum atque expugnatum oppidum est "That town was conquered and sacked by the strength and virtus of the soldiers." - (Amph. 191).13 The same usage is found in Terence, at Bunuchus 778, where the aggressive martial virtus of a general is combined with the might of soldiers - imperatoris virtutem noveram et vim militum. I4 At the end of the same play, reference is made to facta et virtutes tuas- "your deeds and courageous acts" (Bun. 1090) of the same soldiers, and virtutes surely means the soldiers' martial deeds. IS When Plautus attributes virtus to military leaders, it sometimes represents a heroic quality such as in the awarding to Amphitruo of the golden libation vessel of the king whom he had personally slain. Amph.

260

post ob virtutem era Amphitruoni patera donata aurea est, qui Pterela potitare solitus est rex. afterwards, in recognition of his virtu5, a golden bowl was given to my master Amphitruo, with which king Pterela was accustomed to imbibe. 16

IJ

14

IS

16

den Komodien von Plautus," Eos 57 (1967-8) pp. 2Il-18; Eisenhut, VR, pp. 24--9; and Sarsila, pp. 28--9. See Eisenhut, VR, p. 40, Sarsila, pp. Il-I2. "Courageous" virtus has an aggressive connotation at Amph. 75, 191,260, 534, Asin. 556, Cas. 88, Cist. 198, Mil. 12,32, 57, 1042, and Cure. 179, Epid. 381, Pseud. 532, True. 106; see below. Unless otherwised noted, the Plautine texts cited are those ofF. Leo, Plauti Comoediae (Berlin, 1895). So Eisenhut, VR, p. 29 and P. McGlynn, Lexicon Terentianum II (London-Glasgow; 1967) p. 283; cf. Eun. 776. That the comedies of Terence were more faithful to their Greek models than were those of Piautus, and consequendy they display distinctively Roman values somewhat less commonly, was argued by Earl, Historia II (1962) pp. 469-85; see the cautions and comments ofS. M. Goldberg, Understanding Terence (princeton, 1986) pp. 3-3 0 . Contra McGlynn, p. 283 and Eisenhut, VR, p. 29, who were misled by the word mores at Eun. 1089. Here, as often in early Latin, the word mos is morally neutral and means "habit" or "characteristic;" cf. Plaut. Mil. 1327 and subsequendy p. 39. Of the nine occurrences of virtus in the surviving plays ofTerence, two, Eun. 778 and 1090, have a martial meaning, whereas a third, Phor. 33-4, seems to mean courage, so Earl, Historia Il (1962) p. 473 and Eisenhut, VR, p. 30, "merit, with the nuance of courage," contra McGlynn, p. 283. Cf. Amph. 252. Virtus is also attributed to Amphitruo at Amph. 534, 648-9, 652-3, and to other commanders at Epid. 106,442,445, Mil. 12, 32, 57, 1027. At Amph. 534 and Mil. 12 and 32 virtus describes heroic conduct; in the latter two examples used ironically.

17

ROMAN MANLINESS

But Plautus also uses virtus to describe the "non-aggressive" courage that men rely on in defense of their homeland: ... magnanimi viri freti virtute et viribusl . .. respondent bello se et suos tutari posse, ... - "bold men relying on their virtus and strength ... they answer that they could defend themselves and their people in war .. :' (Amph. 212, 21 4).17 In other passages, virtus is used within military images referring, often ironically, to non-military characters, usually slaves. In fact, the comic use of military imagery by or of a slave is a hallmark ofPlautine style. A good example is found in Plautus' Epidieus, when the slave of that name is described as a victorious general, virtute atque auspicio Epidici eum praeda in eastra redeo. - "I return to camp with booty because of the virtus and auspices of Epidicus." (Epid. 381).18 There are a number of Plautine passages where the context seems to indicate a meaning of courage for virtus, but where this meaning has been denied by those who argue that virtus was a general, wide-ranging concept. Examination of the passages in question shows, however, that such denials have little foundation in the texts. In most cases they ignore the dramatic contexts in which the term occurs and misinterpret the word's meaning. In Act 11 of Plautus' Trueulentus, the soldier Stratophanes makes a speech complaining about mendacity in reports of battles. strenui nimio plus prosunt populo quam arguti et cati:

True. 494 facile sibi facunditatem virtus argutam invenit, 495

sine virtute argutum civem mihi habeam pro praefica, quae alios conlaudat, eapse sese vero non potest. Doers are far more beneficial to the people than eloquent and clever men: virtus easily finds its own ringing eloquence, without virtus an eloquent citizen is to my mind like a wailing woman, who praises others, but is, in truth, not able to do the same for herself.

'7

IS

On the differences between the aggressive and steadfast denotations of "courageous"

virtus, see this chapter, Section 6. Virtus is used in military images by a slave at Pseud. 532, by a youth at Cur. 179, and by a prostitute at True. ro6. See J. Chr. Dumont, "La strategie de ]' esclave Plautinien," REL 44 (1966) p. 203 and MacCary, Servus Gloriosus, pp. 71-6, 91, 139, 209. For military imagery in Plautus, see Fraenkel, PI. im PI. pp. 231-50

18

= Elem. pp. 234-41.

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

Arguing for his theory of a virtus complex that included a range of values among which was excellence in oratory, Earl claimed that here virtus is the quality "from which good oratory arises."19 But the lines suggest no connection between virtus and oratory; quite the contrary. The soldier presents the old and familiar contrast between words and deeds, with the latter represented by virtus. 20 That the deed in question is martial is made plain by the preceding lines ofStratophanes' speech: manibus duella praedicare soleo, haud in sermonibus. - I am accustomed to making my battles famous with my hands, not in speeches. (True. 483) and non placet . .. / neque illi quorum lingua gladiorum aciem praestringit domi. - nor do I like those whose tongues· at home blunt the edge of a sword. (True. 491-2)21 To interpret the line facile sibi facunditatem virtus argutam invenit to mean that oratorical eloquence is a function of virtus, as Earl did, is to completely misunderstand the text. Virtus here plainly means martial courage. References to virtus occur a number of times in Plautine prologues. The prologues to the comedies were often used to explain the complicated plots about to be presented by having a character break the dramatic illusion and address the audience directly.22 In the prologue of Amphitruo the character of Mercury, speaking directly to the audience, makes reference to a number of Roman deities.

Amph.42

nam quid ego memorem (ut alios in tragoediis vidi, Neptunum Virtutem Victoriam Martem Bellonam, commemorare quae bona vobis fecissent) quis bene factis meus pater, deorurn regnator, architectus omnibus? For why should I mention (as in tragedies I have seen others, Neptune, Virtus, Victoria, Mars, Bellona, recalling whatever good deeds they had done for you) the benefits that my father, ruler of the gods, designer of all?

19

20 21 22

Earl, Historia 9 (1960) p. 241. In fact, the connection of virtus with rhetoric is first found in the firSt century, e.g., Cic. Brut. 84, De or. 1.134 and is derived from uses of apE,." in Greek rhetorical treatises; see subsequent text. Cf., e.g., Xen. Cyr. 3.3.50-51, and cf. Sail. Bl85.31. Other references to war in Stratophanes' speech occur at True. 482, 484, and 486. On prologues, see K. Abel, Die Plautusprologue (Millheim, 1955), passim.

19

ROMAN MANLINESS

Victoria, Mars, and Bellona were all gods of war, and among such bellicose companions a martial meaning for Virtus seems obvious here. The passage has generally been taken as a reference to divine Virtus as the personification of martial courage. Yet Eisenhut found reason to deny this. Passing over Victoria, Mars, and Bellona, he claimed that Neptune was not a martial deity and on that basis denied the warlike nature ofVirtus. 23 But the status of Neptune as a god of victory at sea is well attested for the age of Plautus. It was to Neptune that Scipio Africanus credited his great victory at Cartagena in 210, and before setting out on his African campaign in 204, he sacrificed to Neptune. 24 These lines from the Amphitruo prologue, therefore, not only confirm that divine Virtus was a martial deity, but they demonstrate that references to war and to gods of war were common in Roman drama of the late-third and early-second centuries. Plautus' plays were originally staged between roughly 210 and 184, a time of intense Roman military activity, and in the prologues characters addressing the audience frequently mention Roman military victories. 25 Near the end of the delayed prologue to Plautus' Cistellaria, the character of personified "Aid" or "Assistance" - Auxilium says to the audience: Cist. 198

... bene valete et vincite virtute vera, quod fecistis antidhac; servate vostros socios, veteres et novos, augete auxilia vostra iustis legibus, perdite perduelles, parite laudem et lauream, ut vobis victi Poeni poenas sufferant . . . . Be well and goodbye, and conquer by true virtu5, as you have done before; secure your allies, both old and new,

2J

24

25

Eisenhut, "virtus als gottliche Gestalt," RE SuppL XIV (1974) cols. 896-7, the starting point for his overall misinterpretation. Divine Virtus appears at Plautus, Bacch. 892, but in the company of so many other deities that nothing can be determined about its nature. For Virtus as a martial deity at Amph. 42, see, e.g., Wissowa, in Myth. Lex. F coL 2707 and Hild in Daremberg-Saglio, 5, "wtus" col. 926. On Scipio at Cartagena, see Poly. 10.11.7, with O. Skutsch, HSCP 71 (1966) p. 126; for the African campaign, App. Lib. 13, cf. Liv. 29.27. See St. Weinstock, "Neptunus," RE XVI (1933) cols. 2514-35. For other references to victory and war in Plautine prologues, see Asin. 14-15, Capt. 67-8, Rud. 82, and True. 74-5. 20

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

increase your auxiliaries with just laws, destroy your enemies, gain praise and laurel, so, that the Carthaginians, conquered by you, may suffer the penalty. The same lines occur, nearly verbatim, in what seems to be a later Plautine play, Casina, when at the end of the prologue the speaker addresses the audience with: ... valete, bene rem gerite et vincite Cas. 88 virtute vera, quod fecistis antidhac.

Goodbye, carry out your affairs successfully, and conquer by true virtus, as you have done before."26 Eisenhut thought that in these prologues virtus carries not a military meaning, but a general, non-specific one. Earl was of the same opinion, holding that at Cistellaria 198, virtus denotes a standard of conduct that extends beyond victory in war to include the proper conduct toward allies and the just laws mentioned in lines 199-200.27 But it is not necessary to suppose that the injunctions to preserve allies and to augment defenses should be understood as aspects of virtus. The text exhorts the Romans to employ virtus simply for the purpose of conquest. Allies are secured, auxiliaries augmented by just laws. Moreover, the overall emphasis of lines 197-202 of the Cistellaria prologue is firmly military. The meaning of vincitel virtute vera, therefore, should be "conquer with your true courage." If the collocation does denote a standard of conduct, it is a martial one, as most commentators have agreed. 28

26

27

28

The relationship of these passages is complex and debated. Most scholars have dated Cistellaria to shortly before the end of the Hannibalic War and the original staging of Casina to sometime in the early 180s. Some attribute both prologues, excepting Casina 5-20, to Plautus. Others think the relevant section of the Casina prologue is a nonPlautine interpolation, see E. Paratore, Casina (Florence, 1959) pp. II f.; A. DeLorenzi, Cronologia e evoluzione plautina (Naples, 1953) p. 197. A cogent case can be made for Cistellaria 197-202 being non-Plautine interpolation; see H. B. Mattingly, "The First Period of PIautine Revival," IAtomus 19 (1960) pp. 240--6, esp. 241-3, and E Ritschl, Parerga zu Plautus und Terenz (Leipzig, 1845) p. 237, note. Eisenhut, VR, p. 26; Earl, Historia 9 (1960) pp. 241-2. Earl based his argument on a comparison of Cist. 198 with Amph. 75--6, but in the later passage virtus as a political standard is being compared to its function as a military standard, see Chapter Ill, Section 5. So Lodge, 1I, p. 879 and Sarsila, p. 32. 2I

ROMAN· MANLINESS

The use of virtu5 in military metaphors by slaves has also been misinterpreted. At the beginning of Act II of the play that bears his name, the slave Pseudolus ironically describes his devious schemes as if they were the strategies of a general: ... nam ego in meo pectore prius ita paravi copias, duplicis triplicis dolos perfidias, ut, ubiquomque hostibus congrediar

Pseud.

s8r

(maiorum meum fretus virtute dicam, mea industria et malitia fraudulenta), facile ut vincam, facile ut spoliem meos perduellis meis perfidiiis . . . . for I have already prepared troops in such a way in my mind, tricks and deceits in double and triple lines, so that I may do battle with enemies anywhere (trusting, I may say, in the virtus of my ancestors, in my own energy and my deceitful roguery), so that I may easily conquer, easily despoil my enemies with my deceptions.

Eisenhut gave virtus here a non-specific meaning of capability or proficiency.2 9 But the usage occurs in the song in which Pseudolus compares his guileful plans to those of a general attacking a city. These lines, and the entire passage, abounds in military images (see Pseud. 586-7). Pseudolus' song, in fact, parodies aristocratic speeches in which Roman citizens often heard mention of the martial accomplishments of noblemen's ancestors. Near the end of his song, Pseudolus states that he will win booty - praeda (Pseud. 588) - and subject his enemies to terror and flight - metum etfugam perduellibus meis (Pseud. 589)so that, he says, his enemies "may know that I was born; that I was from such a family that I was" - me ut sciant natum. leD sum genere gnatus. (Pseud. 589-90). The parallel between the purely martial ancestry referred to in lines 589-90 and the phrase maiorum meum . .. virtute

29

Eisenhut, VR, p. 25, Tiichtigkeit. Lodge, p. 879, gave a meaning of "power, or aid," but was misled by the similarity of PseudoIus' phrase to the Plautine collocation virtute deum (et maiorum). The latter formula is, however, quite distinct; cf. Aul. r66, Per. 390, Trin. 346, and the discussion of the phrase in Chapter n. 22

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATtN

at Pseudo Ius 581, suggests that in the latter virtus denotes the martial valor of ancestors. 30 A similar situation occurs in Plautus' Asinaria at the end of a mock prayer spoken by the slave Libanus (Asin. 545-57) and in the response of - his fellow slave Leonidas: Lib. - eae nunc legiones, copiae exercitusque eorum vi pugnando, periuriis nostris fugae potiti. Asin. 556 id virtute huiius collegae meaque comitate factumst. qui me vir fortior ad sufferundas plagas? Asin. 558 Leon. - Edepol virtutes qui tuas non possis conlaudare sic ut ego possim, quae domi duellique male fecisti. Lib. - Now these legions, troops, and their armies by violent fighting, have been put to flight by our perjuries. This was accomplished by the virtus of this colleague, and by my own generosity. Who is a braver man than me for suffering blows? Leon. - By the god, you could not praise your virtutes as I could the evil things you have done at home and at war.

Long ago Fraenkel recognized Libanus' prayer to Peifidia as a parody of a triumphator's prayer to Jupiter,3 ' and the martial language of the last four lines of the prayer indicates that at Asinaria 556 virtus means martial courage, as most agree. 32 It is reasonable to suppose that the same meaning would be carried over to the occurrence of the word in the plural - virtutes - two lines later. In early Latin plural forms of qualities like virtus regularly denote individual instances of the quality in question, and" deeds of courage" is the regular meaning of virtutes in the comedies of PIautus and generally in early Latin. 33 Earl, however,

30

31

32 33

So Harris, MRR, p. 20, n. 3. For Pseudolus' song as a parody of aristocratic speeches, see Dumont, REL44 (1966) p. 203 and MacCary, Servus Gloriosus, pp. 179-80; cf. Fraenkel, PI. im PI. pp. 63-5 = Elem. pp. 59-61; F. Leo, "Ueber den Pseudolus des Plautus," Naehriehten Konigl. Gesellsehaft der Wissensehtiften zu Gottingen, philol-hist, klasse (1903) pp. 347-54; E. Lerevre, Plautus' Pseudolus (Tiibingen, 1997) pp. 61-2. Fraenkel, PI. im PI. p. 238 = Elem. p. 229. Cf. Asin. 545, and Capt. 768 ff. and Per. 753 and 251, also see MacCary, Servus Gloriosus, p. 139. Sarsila, p. 31, n. 3. Lodge, p. 879, gavefirmitudo animo. For the plurals of abstract Latin nouns see E. Liifstedt, Syntaetica I (Lund, 1942) pp. 30-6. On the meaning of virtutes in Plautus, cf. Mil. 12, Cure. 179, and see Piischl, Grundwerte, p.22.

23

ROMAN MANLINESS

interpreted the official-sounding phrase of line 559, quae domi duellique male fecisti - "things that you have done wickedly both at home and in battle" - with its comic substitution of quae male fecesti, for the normal quae bene fecisti - "things you have done well" - as synonymous with virtutes in the previous line, thus giving virtutes a broader domestic as well as military reference. 34 This interpretation is possible, since the words quae domi duellique malefecisti do echo an official phrase found in formulaic triumphal language. But such triumphal formulae did not regularly contain the words virtus or virtutes, and when they did, virtus referred invariably and exclusively to martial exploits. 35 Moreover, Earl's pleonastic interpretation is unnecessary. Domi duellique can be taken independently of virtutes, as being used by Plautus to further emphasize the contrast between the mock-martial boasts of Libanus at Asin. 554-7 - duelli - and the dressing-down these receive from Leonidas at Asin. 558-65 - domi -, where military metaphors are entirely lacking. At Asinaria 558 virtutes occurs in a typical servile military metaphor and most probably means simply "deeds of martial courage," as most commentators and translators have rendered it. 36 Thus far all the examples of virtus that have been examined are military in nature. Most denote an aggressive type of physical courage, fewer the courage needed to withstand attack. But in Plautus' comedies a courageous meaning of virtus is also found in non-military contexts denoting the ability to overcome fear of death and pain. Cicero, in fact, defined virtus in this very way. Appellata est enim ex viro virtus; viri autem propria maxime est fortitudo, cuius munera duo sunt maxima mortis dolorisque contemptio. For virtus is derived from [the word for] man; for a man, however, courage is the most essential thing, the requirements of which are two - great scorn for both death and pain. Tusc. 2.43

Although the theme of contempt for pain and death is found elsewhere in the first two books of the Tusculan Disputations, and although 34 Earl, Histaria 9 (1960) p. 242. 35

See Chapter n.

36 Eisenhut, VR., p. 28 and Lodge, p. 879, ef. Posehl, Grundwerte, p. 22

24

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

the Greek author on whose work Cicero drew in these books did lay stress on courage as a virtue,37 the etymological connection between virtus and vir in this passage indicates that the definition of the former as "contempt for pain and death," is a Ciceronian reference to a value traditional associated with manliness by the Romans. 38 Willingness to endure pain and death was, indeed, central to the Roman ideal of manliness, the most famous example perhaps being that of C. Mucius Scaevola placing his hand in the fire to demonstrate Roman virtus to an enemy king. 39 Yet this well-attested specific usage has been largely ignored by those who have gone off in search of vaguer and more general meanings for virtus. The willingness and ability to withstand pain as an aspect of virtus is found in the extended dialogue between the slaves Libanus and Leonidas that takes place in Act II of Asinaria. Leonidas addresses the following words to his fellow: Asin. 323 Em ista virtus est, quando usust qui malum fert fortiter; fortiter malum qui patitur, idem post potitur bonum.

Ah, that is virtus, one who bravely bears something bad when required; He who bravely undergoes something bad, afterward obtains something good.

Focusing on the play between malum and virtus, some have taken the latter to represent something broader than physical courage. 37

38

39

In Books I and II of the Tusculan Disputations Cicero followed the Stoic philosopher Panaetius. For the latter's opinions on courage, see M. Van Straaten, Panetius, sa vie, ses &rits et sa doctrine avec une edition des fragments (Amsterdam, 1946) pp. n8-80; cf. Aristot. ENII50A. See the co=ent of A. E. Douglas, Cicero, Tusculan Disputations, II and V (Warrninster, 1990) p. 7 I, "The etymological observation ... does not seem necessary to the argument." The attempt of A. Grilli, Marco Tullio Cicerone, Tusculane, libro 11 (Brescia, 1987) pp. 312-14, to reconstruct a Greek model for Cicero's etymological note is unconvincing. Note that at Tusc. 2.43 Cicero cites as an example of contempt for pain death contra dolorem et mortem disciplina; - the wholly Roman cultural institution of gladiatorial games; cf. Tusc. 4.64 and Rep. 5.9. Liv. 2.12, esp. 2.12.14 - Iuberem macte virtute esse, si pro mea patria ista virtus staret. In the form Livy gives, the story goes back to c. 200. But the story's emphasis on enduring pain is considerably older; see R. M. Ogilvie, A Commentary on Livy, Books 1-5 (Oxford, 1965) pp. 262-3. For the relationship of enduring pain and the fear of death to virtus see also Caesar, BGVI.14.5, and VII.77.5, respectively.

25

ROMAN MANLINESS

Interpreting the lines in general ethical terms, Earl translated "to bravely withstand evil fortune," and took virtus as a general "standard of conduct. "40 But the context makes it clear that here both malum and virtus have quite specific meanings. The dialogue between Libanus and Leonidas contains repeated references to brutal physical punishments that Roman slaves were subject to (Asin. 276-7, 285, 297-305, 309-14), the description of which is characteristic of Plautine comedy. 4I Moreover, the lines immediately preceding the occurrence of virtus refer to the beating Libanus expects to suffer: Lib. -

tantum facinus modo inveni ego, ut nos dicamur duo omnium dignissumi esse, quo cruciatus confluant.

Leon. - Ergo mirabar quod dudum scapulae gestibant mihi, hariolari quae occeperunt, sibi esse in mundo malum. Lib. -

I have just now found such a deed, so that we two may be said to be the most worthy of all, where tortures assemble.

Leon. - Ah, I wondered that my shoulders were itching a while ago, they began to predict there was something bad for them at hand. Asin. 313-16

and Lib. - Si quidem O1=es coniurati cruciamenta conferant, habeo opinor familiare tergum, ne quaeram foris. Lib. - Even if they all pledged to collect the tortures, I reckon that I own a back, and don't have to look for one outside. Asin. 318-19

There is nothing vague about the nature of the malum mentioned by the slaves in lines 316 and 323. It is not a reference to general evil, but a clear and specific reference to a painful whipping. Consequently, at 40 Earl, Historia 9 (1960) p. 243. Van Ornrne, p. 57, also claimed "something broader than

41

military or physical courage." Strawecka, p. 215, rejected anything resembling martial courage, and argued that virtus represents the Epicurean idea of "good coming out of evil." Lodge, p. 879, gavefortitudo animi. The reference to slave punishment fit Fraenkel's criteria for Plautine originality; see PI. im PI. p. 19 = Elem. p. I7; cf. Philemon, frag. 23 K, however.

26

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

Asinaria 323 virtus also has a specific reference, and means "the courage to bear pain. "42 In Plautus' play Persa, in another comic prayer, this one to Jupiter, the slave Sagaristio reflects on the punishment he will suffer if he misspends his master's money and uses the word virtus as follows: Per. 268

virtus, ubi occasio admonet, dispicere ....

virtus [is], when the situation is at hand, to perceive it clearly ....

As at Asinaria 323, Earl interpreted virtus in Persa 268 in a general sense, denoting a "standard of conduct".43 But again, the context shows that the meaning of virtus is quite specific. Immediately after defining virtus, Sagaristio tells the audience what it is that will require virtus - corporal punishment. quid faciet mihi? / verberibus caedi iusserit, compedes impingi?"What will he do to me? Will he order me to be flogged with whips, to be held down with shackles?" (Per. 268-9).44 Again, the meaning of virtus at Persa 268 is "the courage to face up to pain" and so be able to see things clearly.45 If one part of Cicero's definition of virtus - "scorn for pain" - is exemplified in the attitudes of certain Plautine slaves toward corporal punishments, the other part - "scorn for death" - can be seen in the play Captivi. The central figure of this play, Tyndarus, the slave who is not a slave, and who risks his own life for that of his master, is perhaps Plautus' noblest character. So it is not altogether surprising that in passages where his actions are described by virtus, the word has been interpreted in a broadly ethical sense. But again, if the contexts are 42

43 44

45

The dialogue between Leonidas and Libanus is also full of military images, see Asin. 267-71,278-80,294-5,307 and 317. Cf. Fraenkel, PI. im PI. p. 232 = Elem. p. 224, and MacCary, Servus Gloriosus, pp. 135-7. Earl, Historia 9 (1960) p. 242. Lodge, p. 879, gave .the general meaningfirmitudo animi. Sagaristio had also referred to a whipping a few lines earlier: tux tax tergo erit meo. - "He will smack whack on my back" (Per. 264). Compare the admonition to "be a man" written by P. Cornelius Lentulus Sura to Catilina in 63: cura ut vir sis et cogita quem in locum sis progressus. Vide quid tibi iam sit necesse, - "Take care that you are a man and recognize what circumstance you have come to. See what you must now do." Cic. Cat. 3.I2; cf. Sall. Cat. 44.5, with Hamblenne, Latomus 43 (1984) pp. 372-3. Cf. Also A. O. Rorty, Mind in Action (Boston, 1998) p. 300, on courage: " ... it is the very practical matter of seeing situations in such a way as to elecit relevant actions and reactions."

27

ROMAN MANLINESS

examined, it becomes clear that within passages praising the overall nobility of Tyndarus' behavior, references to virtus denote a distinct and specific quality - the courage to face pain and death. In Act 11 of Captivi, Tyndarus, embarking on his scheme of reversing roles and pretending to be his master Philocrates, speaks these words to the real Philocrates, who is about to be set free:

Capt. 410 nam tua opera et comitate et virtute et sapientia fecisti ut redire liceat ad parentis denuo, cum apud hunc confessus es et genus et divitias meas: quo pacto emisisti e vinclis tuom erum tua sapientia. For by your effort, and generosity, and virtu5 and good sense, you made it possible to return again to my parents, since you revealed in the presence of this man both my good birth and my wealth: By this arrangement, by your good sense, you have freed your master from chains.

A variety of meanings, all vague, have been proposed for virtus here "general excellence"; "the devotion of a slave"; a Greek philosophical ideal. 46 But at Captivi 410, virtus, like its companions opera, comitas, and sapientia, has a specific meaning. Tyndarus is covertly asking his master to remember his good deeds and not to abandon him when he, Philocrates, is free. In line 410, he lists the specific things he has done, and will do, for his master. Opera is the energy with which he is putting his scheme into effect; sapientia, here practical intelligence,47 refers to the cleverness with which Tyndarus carries out the ruse; comitas generosity or kindness - explains Tyndarus' reason for making the sacrifice; and virtus is the courage that Tyndarus displays by risking his life. This is made clear by reference to an earlier scene in which Tyndarus had made the same appeal to Philocrates, invoking the same qualities of affection and courageous self-sacrifice: Nam tu nunc vides pro tuo caro capite / carum oJferre < me> meum caput vilitati. - "For 46

47

"Personal excellence or ability" - Eisenhut, VR, pp. 24-5; a slave's devotion - Van Omme, pp. 63-4; the Stoic idea of social responsibility, - Strawecka, 214; Lodge, p. 879, gave the meaning animi vis, potentia. The regular meaning of sapientia in Plautus; see G. Garbarino, "Evoluzione semantic a dei termini piens e sapientia nei secoli III e II a.c.," AAT lOO (1965-66) pp. 254-84, esp. 255; U. Klima, Untersuchungen zu dem Begriff Sapientia von dey repuhlikanischen Zeit his Tadtus (Bonn, 1971) pp. 75-83

28

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LA'TIN

you. now see that for your dear life I sell my own dear life cheaply." (Capt. 229-30). Captivi 410 certainly describes an ethically laudable act, but since that act is broken down into four specific categories, a specific meaning of" courage to face death" is the most appropriate meaning for virtus. 48 After his master has escaped and his scheme has been discovered, Tyndarus invokes virtus in his proud reply to his captor Hegio's threat on his life: Heg. - Facito ergo ut Acherunti clueas gloria. Capt. 690 Tynd. - Qui per virtutem, periit, at non interit.

Heg. - So be it then, that you may enjoy glory in Hell. Tynd. - He who dies through virtu5 is not annihilated. Most commentators have concentrated on connection of virtus to a willingness to die. So Earl, noting the connection between virtus and gloria, thought that the former designates some general standard of conduct by which posthumous fame is won. 49 Again, facing death for a noble cause is ethically laudable, and the ethical tone of the dialogue is made plain by Tyndarus' words, Dum ne ob male facta, peream, parvi aestumo. - "So long as it is not because of evil deeds, let me die, I consider it a small matter." (Capt. 682). But the immediate context must be taken into account. Tyndarus is here responding directly to Hegio's threat of torture in the previous line: At cum cruciatu maxumo id factumst tuo. It has been done, but with terrible pain for you.

Capt. 681

The context also makes clear what Tyndarus means by "dying per virtutem." His proud description of what he has done, meumque potius me caput periculo praeoptavisse, quam is periret, ponere. So Harris, WIRR, p. 20, n. 3. 49 Earl, Historia 9 (1960) 240. Van Omme, p. 89, thought that here Plautus translates apETT] in a Greek commonplace meaning "virtue is deathless." Strawecka, p. 214, gave virtus 48

an ethical sense as "the willingness to help a friend." Sarsila, p. 26, commented only on the notion of immortal fame. Lodge, p. 879, gave the meanings mores, probitas, honestas for virtus.

ROMAN MANLINESS

that I had preferred to place my own life in danger, than that he [Philocrates] should die: Capt. 687-8

followed by his declaration in line 690 that to die by virtu5 confers undying fame, provokes this savage response from Hegio: Quando ego te exemplis pessumis cruciavero atque ob sutelas tuas te morti misero, vel te interiisse vel periisse praedicent; dum pereas, nihil intererit: dicant vivere. When I have tortured you in the most painful ways, and have caused you to die because of your cunning plans, let them proclaim either that you are annihilated, or merely dead; so long as you are really dead, I do not object at all that they say you are alive. Capt. 691-4

There can be little doubt that, as earlier in the play, virtu5 at Captivi 690 is not a vague, ethical term, but rather the courage to face death by torture. 50 At the end of the play, after learning that Tyndarus is his long-lost son, the humbled Hegio, on seeing him returning in chains from the quarries, utters these words: Capt. 997 sed eccum incedit huc ornatus haud ex suis virtutibus. Here he is, he is coming here, but decorated not at all according to his virtutes.

Some have favored a general meaning of "merits" for virtute5 and because the phrase ornatu5 . .. ex 5ui5 virtutibu5 seems to have been a commonplace expression in republican Rome, such an interpretation is possibleY But the fact that all earlier references to Tyndarus' virtu5 50

51

The notion that bravery bestows undying fame was central to Roman values and is stated by Naevius, corn. ro8-ro Ribb. and Ennius, Ann. 382 S. A meaning of "merits" - Verdienste, - was proposed by Strawecka, 2I4 and by Eisenhut, VR., p. 25 - Verdienste, Wiirde, Wiirdigkeit. Lodge, p. 879, gave mores, probitas. It may derive from the Greek commonplace KOo"~EiO"eat EK 6:pETwV, see, e.g., Thuc. 2.42.2, Dem. I8.287. The Latin phrase is found at Ter. Adel. 176, and with some variation at Plaut. Mil. 6I9; see later Chapter Ill.

30

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

refer to the courage he displayed in the face of torture and death, and that in Plautus' plays the regular meaning for the plural form of virtus is "deeds of courage," suggest that at Captivi 997, ornatus . .. ex suis virtutibus means "decorated according to his courageous acts." That these acts refer to Tyndarus' undergoing pain and eventually death is supported by the immediate response that he gives to Hegio's reference to his virtutes at Captivi 998-1000. Vidi ego multa saepe picta, quae Acherunti fierent cruciamenta, verum enim vera nulla adaeque est Acheruns atque ubi ego fui, in lapicidinis. I have often seen many tortures that took place in Hell depicted, but truly, there is no Hell equal to where I was, in the stone quarries.

This harrowing description of the punishment he suffered for the actions that saved his master's life, spoken by a character wearing heavy chains - compedibus (Capt. 1025) - is a strong indication that Tyndarus' virtutes are his "courageous deeds." The principal meaning of virtus in Plautus emerges from this analysis. To be sure, virtus displays a variety of meanings other than martial and courageous in the Plautine corpus - meanings that will be considered in due course. But of the sixty-six Plautine occurrences of virtus, fully half convey the idea of physical courage, 52 outnumbering any other particular meaning that can be assigned to the word. 53 In military contexts virtus can denote the kind of courage required to defend the homeland, but more often it designates aggressive conduct in battle. In non-military situations courageous virtus usually refers to the capacity to face and endure pain and death. The predominance of courageous virtus in Plautus is not only statistical however. In Act 11 of Amphitruo, Alcumena, the noble wife of the general for whom the play is named,

52

53

It is significant that virtus occcurs far more frequendy in the two most military of Piautus' plays, Amphitruo and Miles gloriosus, than in the others. Amph. 75 and 78 occur in an interpolated passage; see earlier, n. 5. At Amph. 75 virtus means martial courage; for its meaning at Amph. 78, see below Chapter Ill, Section 5. Many of the other particular meanings can be shown to have been affected by Greek influences; see Chapters Il and Ill.

31

ROMAN MANLINESS

recites a long soliloquy (Amph. 634-53) that ends with praise of her husband and his virtus. . .. id modo si mercedis datur mi, ut meus victor vir belli clueat. satis mi esse ducam. virtus praemium est optimum; virtus omnibus rebus anteit profecto: libertas salus vita res et parentes, patria et prognati tutantur, servantur: virtus omnia in sese habet, omnia adsunt bona quem penest virtus

.... if only this reward is given to me, that my husband is praised as victor in war, I will consider it enough for me. Virtus is the greatest prize. Virtus, without a doubt, comes before everything liberty, safely, life, property and parents, fatherland and children are guarded and preserved [by it]. Virtus has everything in itself. The man who possesses virtus has all that is good.

In the last two lines virtus is said to embrace all that is good, but it does so in a way very different from that described by those who have regarded virtus as a wide-ranging and all-encompassing ethical concept. In Alcumena's song virtus is specifically and unequivocally the quality of a general and warrior. 54 Moreover, the relationship described between virtus and all the other things Romans valued -liberty, property, family, and fatherland - is one of dependence. Virtus embraces all that is good because it is virtus that guards and preserves all that is good. Such an attitude about martial valor fits well with the historical circumstances, because the years during which Plautus' comedies were first staged witnessed an almost uninterrupted string of great and lucrative Roman victories. The words given here to Alcumena, the model Roman wife, testifY to the paramount place that martial virtus held in the

54

Lodge, p. 878; Strawecka, pp. courage in Alcumena's song.

2I2-I3;

and Sarsila, pp.

32

30-2

agreed that virtus means

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LA TIN

popular comedies of Plautus and in the society whose values they reflect. 55 The dramatic action of Plautus' comedies occurs in the decidedly private world of family intrigues and servile chicanery. If the most common meaning of virtus is physical courage in the Plautine corpus, then it seems likely that the same meaning would prevail in types of republican Latin where military themes predominate. Because emphasis on military accomplishment is ubiquitous in surviving public inscriptions from the republican period, it should not be surprising if in them the meaning of virtus is martial courage. 3. EARLY LATIN INSCRIPTIONS

Virtus is found with relative frequency in the relatively few surviving Latin republican inscriptions. The concept plays an especially important role in some of the earliest and most important of these, the elogia celebrating the lives and deeds of the Cornelii Scipiones that are inscribed on their tombs near the Via Appia. In these inscriptions virtus has again been interpreted as a broad-ranging quality centering around public political values, but extending to private values. 56 An examination of the texts in question shows otherwise. Virtus is mentioned in the earliest of the elogia, that ofL. Cornelius Scipio Barbatus (consul in 298), which has recently been dated to 55

56

Alcumena's monologue falls into two sections: Amph. 633-4I, which is solely concerned with Alcumena, and Amph. 64I -53, which refers to the deeds of Arnphitruo. The second section, in which all the occurrences of virtus are found, has long been recognized as a Plautine expansion. If there is Greek influence in the monologue, it is limited to Amph. 633-4I. See P. Langen, Plautinische Studien (Berlin, I886) p. 6; R. Perna, L'originalita di Plauto (Bari, I955) p. 206, n. I;]. Genzmer, Der Amphitrio des Plautus und seingriechisches Original (diss. Keil, I956) pp. I24-5; and G. Williams, review ofGenzmer,JRS 48 (I958) pp. 220-I. For the division of the monologue into two sections, see Genzmer, pp. 120-5. Although it is certainly true that Plautus' characterization of Alcumena contains much that is farcical, it is mistaken to interprete every word and phrase she speaks as comic, see E. Segal, "Perche Arnphitruo," Dioniso 46 (I975) pp. 254-67, esp. p. 254. Earl, PTS, pp. 20-I and MPTR, p. 22-3, tried to fit this evidence into his theory of a virtus complex in which virtus subsumed other cardinal Roman values. Eisenhut, VR., pp. 208-ra, also saw virtus in these inscriptions as a broad value, Tiichtigkeit, but insisted that virtus is not here given a value superior to honos, jama, sapientia, etc., which also appear.

33

ROMAN MANLINESS

the 250s. 57 The inscription reads as follows: Cornelius Lucius Scipio Barbatus Gnaivod patre Iprognatus, fortis vir sapiensque quoius forma virtutei parisuma Ifuit, consol, censor, aidilis quei fuit apud vos. Taurasia, Cisauna ISamnio cepit, subigit omne Loucanam opsidesque abdoucit. Lucius Cornelius Scipiuo Barbatus Born to his father Gnaeus, a brave and sagacious man, whose fine looks were equal to his virtu5. Consul, censor, aedile he was among you. He captures Taurasia and Cisauna in Samnium, he reduces all ofLucania and leads away hostages. lLLRP 309 = elL F 6-7

Eisenhut and Earl both rendered virtus generally as "excellence," primarily because of the Hellenic flavor of other lines in the elogium. 58 Greek influence is clear in the architectural form of Barbatus' sarcophagus as well as in the phrases fortis vir sapiensque, and quoius forma virtutei parisuma fuit, which correspond to the elite Greek ideal of KOAOKO:yo6io. 59 But care must be taken to understand the nature of the Greek influence, and it should not be overestimated. There is no ethical or philosophical coloring present, because in the phrase fortis vir sapiensque, the latter term represents practical knowledge q>POV1IlOS, not croq>OS - and may have a military connotation. 60 Nor 57

58

59

60

The redatingwas done by R. Wachter, Altlateinische Inschriften. Sprachliche und epigraphische Untersuchungen zu den Dokumenten his etwa 150 v. Ch. (Bern, 1987) pp. 301-42. Objections have been expressed by E. Courtney, Musa Lapidaria (Adanta, 1995), pp. 216-20, and F. Zevi, "Sepulcrum Scipionurn," in LTUR 4 (1999) p. 85, but see the arguments of G. Radke, "Beobachtungen zur Elogium aufL. Cornelius Scipio Barbarus," RhM 134 (199 I) pp. 69-'79 and H. 1. Flower, Aristocratic Masks an Aristocratic Power in Roman Culture (Oxford, 1996) pp. 170-'7. For earlier discussions, see F. Coarelli, "Il sepolcro degli Scipioni," DArch 6 (1972): pp. 36-ro6, with bibliography. Eisenhut, TIR, p. 208; Earl, MPTR, pp. 21-2, cf., PTS, p. 20, arguing for his "virtus complex." Degrassi, ILLRP, 309, commented,forma cum virtute coniuncta ex more Graecorum. On the Hellenistic form of the sarcophagus, an altar, see Coarelli, DArch (1972) pp. 36-ro6, the entries of Coarelli and Zevi in Roma, medio repubblicana (Rome, 1977) pp. 234-9, and Flower, pp. 160-6. See Zevi, Studi Misc., 67-'71; Eisenhut, TIR, p. 208. On "sagacity" as the regular meaning of sapientia in early Latin, see G. Garbarino, AAT roo (1965-6) pp. 254-63, who held it

34

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LA TIN

does the joining offorma and virtus dictate a non-martial meaning for latter. When, half a century later,forma et virtus were joined by Plautus in Miles gloriosus, the collocation was inspired by a Greek source, yet clearly refers to physical beauty and martial courage. 6r A Greek ideal of practical wisdom and martial courage seems to have been current in Rome during the lifetime of Scipio Barbatus. A story is told of a Roman embassy to Delphi in the time of the Samnite Wars (sometime during the mid-fourth and early-third centuries), in which the oracle directed that the Romans erect two bronze statues, "one to the bravest and another to the wisest of the Greek people." Statues of Pythagoras and Alcibiades were placed in the Comitium. 62 Because Alcibiades had been "the foremost in beauty of his time" (Plin. NH 36.28), as well as a great commander, it is clear that his statue represented a Greek-inspired ideal of beauty and martial courage - virtus et forma. It seems that in the lifetime of Scipio Barbatus, Romans were familiar with a Greek ideal that placed emphasis on beauty, wisdom, and martial courage. Greek influences on the elogium are, therefore, no reason to deny that the virtus of Barbatus refers to his successes in war, which are, in fact, emphasized in the rest of the elogium. 63 The next two elogia in which virtus occurs refer to men who died young: Quei apice insigne Dial[is fl]arninis gesistei I mors perfec[it] tua ut essent omnia I brevia, honos, fama,virtusque I gloria atque ingenium. Quibus sei I in longa licuiset tibe utier vita, I facile facteis sup erases gloriam I maiorum. Qua re lubens te in grerniu, I Scipio, recipit terra, Publi, I prognatum Publio, Corneli.

has a political meaning; so too Klima, pp. 58-65. For the possibility of a military meaning see E. L. Wheeler, "Sapiens and Stratagems," Historia 37 (1988) pp. 166-95. 61 The courage and beauty credited to Pyrgopolynices at Mil. 12, 57, 1027, 1042, and I327 are central to his characterization and were taken from the Greek model; see L. Schaaf, Der Miles Gloriosus des Plautus und sein grieehisehes Original (Munich, 1977) pp. I44-5 and Leo, PI. Fors. p. 179. 62 fortissimo Graiae gentis et alteri sapientissimo. Plin. NH 34.26. Pythagoras is perhaps to be explained by his fame in Magna Graecia, but the choice of Alcibiades is more puzzling; see Zevi, p. 67 ff., who offered explanations for the choices. 6J SO Zevi, Studi Mise., p. 7I; also Courtney, Musa Lapidaria, pp. 41-2 and 223-5.

35

ROMAN MANLINESS

You wore the distinctive cap of the Flamen Dialis death made everything of yours brief - office, reputation, virtus, glory, and talent. If you had been permitted to make use of these in a long life, you easily would have outdone the glory of your ancestors with your deeds. Therefore, happily does the earth take you to her bosom, Publius Cornelius Scipio, son ofPublius lLLRP 3II = elL F 10 L. Cornelius Cn. f. Cn. n. Scipio. Magna sapientia I multasque virtutes aetate quom parva Iposidet hoc saxsum. Quoiei vita defecit, non I honos honore, is hic situs, quei nunquam I victus est virtutei. Annos gnatus (viginti) is Il[oc]eis mandatus . Ne quairatis honore I quei minus sit mandatus.

Lucius Cornelius Scipio, son of Gnaeus, grandson of Gnaeus This stone holds great sagacity and many virtutes, but a short life. Here lies a man whose life not his esteem, denied him office, who was never conquered in virtus. He was given to this place with twenty years. Do not ask about an office that was not given to him. lLLRP 312 = elL F II

These inscriptions are problematic, and have been variously dated anywhere from 175 to c. 135. 64 The first is thought by some to be that of P. Cornelius Scipio the Augur, the son of the great Scipio Africanus, who adopted P. Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus sometime before 168. This man was made augur in 180, but was unable to pursue a career and hold office because of poor health. 65 But all who favor this identification must explain how an inscription stating that its subject had a short life, mars peifecit tua ut essent omnia brevia, can be that of a man who lived to be at least 40 years old. It is also very unlikely that the same person would have been both augur and Flamen Dialis. Because Publius was a common praenomen among the Scipiones, the identification of the tomb must remain uncertain, but it cannot be that of Scipio the Augur. G. V. Surnner's suggestion that the 64 65

Coarelli, DArch 6 (1972); pp. 36-ro6 Flower, pp. 327-8. See Miinzer, "Cornelius (331)" RE 4 (1901) cols. 1437-8; Degrassi, ILLRP 3II; and H. H. Scullard, Roman Politics 220-150 B.C.' (Oxford, 1973) p. 286.

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

inscription refers to an otherwise unattested son of the augur is attractive, however. 66 Various suggestions have been proposed for the identification of the young man honored in the second inscription (ILLRP 312); all are speculative. 67 But if the identity of the young men commemorated by these two inscriptions is uncertain, something can be said about what they were honored for. Because both inscriptions celebrate men who died before they held major public offices, virtus has been interpreted as a semi-private value, which expresses the potential for great deeds in a public career precluded by death. 68 But there is little in either inscription to recommend such an interpretation. The only reference to potential in either elogium occurs in lines four and five of the inscription honoring the man who was Flamen Dialis, which state that if he had lived longer he would have surpassed his ancestors in gloria. But the inscription also suggests that the Publius in question had already achieved honos,Jama, virtusque, gloria atque ingenium, if only in· a small measure - tua ut essent omnia brevia. The other inscription, to Lucius Cornelius Scipio, says that although he never held public offices, the deceased had multas virtutes to his credit and had never been bested in virtus. The obvious question is in what ways a Roman aristocrat who died before he could hold major office might have distinguished himself. Polybius says that Roman candidates for office had to have served in ten military campaigns, and that the office of military tribune required either five or ten years of such service. Military service at Rome usually began in the eighteenth year. 69 If the young men for whom the elogia were composed were normally ambitious Roman aristocrats - and 66

67

68

69

See G. V. Sumner, The Orators in Cicero's Brutus: Prosopography and Chronology (Toronto, 1973) pp. 36-7, for the identification with the son ofScipio the Augur. Eisenhut, VR, p. 208, n. 613, suggested that line three of the inscription implies that the deceased had at least begun a political career, but there is no mention of an office, not even military tribune. Cf. Courtney, Musa Lapidaria, p. 226. See Degrassi, lLLRP 312 and Courtney, Musa Lapidaria, p. 227 Earl, MPTR, pp. 22-3, on virtutes in ClL F II; cf. Earl, PTS, p. 21, Historia II (1962) p. 475. Eisenhut, VR, p. 209, took virtutes in ClL F II as "good characteristics" rather than "great deeds," because he thought the latter had been denied by an early death. Poschl, Grundwerte, p. 20, n. 3, claimed that in ClL F II, virtutes translates apETal, but the meaning "brave deeds" is required. Polyb. 6.19.4 and Harris, WIRR, pp. II-14.

37

ROMAN MANLINESS

the inscriptions imply that they were - they would have spent a considerable part of their youth serving the state in war. In that case the young P. Cornelius Scipio may have been seriously wounded as a military tribune - hence his honos, fama, virtusque gloria - and being precluded from a regular political and military career, was granted the office of Flamen Dialis through the influence of his family shortly before he died. 70 L. Cornelius Scipio may have died in battle. Certainly the diction of both inscriptions suggests an atmosphere of martial accomplishments. The collocation virtusque gloria from the first elogium has a military ring, and in the second, nunquam victus est virtutei can hardly be taken in any other way. Because "valorous deeds" is a regular meaning of virtutes in early Latin, multas virtutes should have this meaning here. 7! The last of the Scipionic elogia to include virtus is that of Cn. Cornelius Scipio Hispanus, who either as military tribune or quaestor accompanied Scipio Nasica in I49 on the mission to disarm Carthage, and as praetor peregrinus ten years later expelled Jews and Chaldaeans from Rome and Italy.7 2 Hispanus seems to have died shortly after the praetorship, and the elogium, which is in elegiac meter, is dated to the I30S.

Cn. Cornelius Cn.f. Scipio Hispanus, I pr(aetor), aid(ilis) cur(ulis), q(uaestor), tr(ibunus) mil(itum) (bis) , (decem)vir sl(itibus) iudik(andis), I (decem)vir sacr(is) fac(iundis). Virtutes generis rnieis moribus accumulavi, progeniem genui, facta patris petiei,

70

71

72

This P. Cornelius Scipio cannot have died in battle while he was Flamen Dialis, because of the restrictions prohibiting the priest of Jupiter from military service; on which see Gell. NA ID.I5. Cf. Plaut. Amph. 191 and the prologues at Amph. 75, Cist., 197 and Cas. 88. Courtney, Musa Lapidaria, pp. 40-3, translates virtus as "courage" in ILLRP, 3II, but mistakenly as "merit" in IURP, 312. For the pun on honos in the fourth line of ILLRP 312, see F. Klose, Die Bedeutung von honos und honestus (diss. Breslau, 1933) p. 19 and Courtney, p.227-8. See Miinzer, RE IV, coL 1493 andMRR I, pp. 459 and 482 and Courtney, Musa Lapidaria, p.229

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

Maiorum optenui laudem ut sibei me esse creatum laetentur; stirpem nobilitavit honor. Gnaeus Cornelius Scipio Hispanus, son of Gnaeus, praetor, curule aedile, quaestor, military tribune twice, member of the board of ten who judge legal cases, member of the board of ten who oversee religious matters. I increased the virtutes of my family by my actions, I produced offspring, I tried to equal the deeds of my father. I maintained the renown of my ancestors, so that they are happy that I was born into their line; public office ennobled my family. lLLRP 316 = elL F 15

Earl saw in "the extreme insistence on family" expressed here a mark of the loss of aristocratic self-confidence. He translated virtutes as "merits."73 Eisenhut, too, denied a martial significance to virtutes because of the presence of mores and compared virtutes here to "accumulated family property."74 But mores does not impart an ethical quality to virtutes. In early Latin mores is a morally neutral word meaning "manner or way of doing things." When the word has moral coloring it is because of some qualifYing word or phrase attached to it.75 In combination with virtutes, it is likely that mores would take on the martial references of the former, as it does in a line from Plautus' Miles gloriosus about the soldier <si> forma huius, mores, virtus, animum attinuere hic tuom, ... ifhis beauty and his conduct and his virtus capture your spirit here ... Mil. 1327 73

74

75

Earl, Historia 9 (1960) p. 237; MPTR, p. 27 and PTS, p. 26. Eisenhut, VR, pp. 209-10. Eisenhut also thought a martial reference unlikely because what we know of Hispanus' career tells only of diplomatic and domestic actions. In fact we know very litde about his career. Biichner, Antike IS (1939) pp. 9-10 = Romische wertbegriffe, p. 386 took virtutes as "deeds of ancestors" without an edllcal reference, because he claimed that mores has an ethical sense here. H. Roloff, Maiores· bei Cicero (Gottingen, 1938) p. 27, n. 314, took virtutes as the sum of the virtutes of the ancestors, the deceased having added to this. Plautus uses mos to denote both positive and negative values and almost always qualifies it with an adjectival or an appositional phrase; see Poen. 306-7, Mer. 383, Trin. 283, and Ter. Phor. 55; cf. Lodge, n, pp. 88--9.

39

ROMAN MANLINESS

As virtus denotes a martial quality in earlier Scipionic elogia, so here virtutes should mean" deeds of valor," its regular meaning in pre-Classical Latin. 76 Other later republican inscriptions in which virtus occurs are honorific in nature, paying tribute to a public figure, and in them uses of virtus are often modeled on Hellenistic Greek formulae, with the phrase virtutis causa mirroring the common phase 6:pETf\S EVEKEV "on account of excellence."77 The closeness of the parallel is clearest in bilingual inscriptions. In Greek inscriptions, 6:pETT] has a wide range of meanings, some of which are non-military. In the various formulae of Hellenistic honorary inscriptions, for example, the meaning of 6:pETT] was often influenced by the words associated with it: KaAoK6:yaeia - "goodness"; 51KOlOcrVVll - "righteousness"; 6:v5payaeia - "bravery. "7 8 But 6:pETT] itself often has a clearly martial meaning in inscriptions. It is certainly martial on the inscription of the base of the equestrian statue at Delphi, which depicted Philopoemen charging into combat, and in fact martial excellence is the regular meaning of 6:PETT] when it is associated with equestrian statues. 79 Similarly, where virtus and 6:pETT] are found in bilingual honorary inscriptions, the contexts are usually military in nature. The Greek text of a bilingual inscription dedicated by peoples of Asia Minor and honoring an otherwise unknown legatus, who seems to have served with Lucullus in 74-3, leaves no doubt as to the nature

76

77

78

79

Courtney, Musa Lapidaria, p. 43, translates virtutes as "glorious deeds," somewhat too broadly in my opinion. Numerous Hellenistic inscriptions of this type can be found in OGIS. For earlier precedents, see W Larfeld, Griechische Epigraphik (Munich, 1914) I, p. 509 f., II, p. 836 f. Greek inscriptions of this type honoring Romans can be found in IGRR. See the study of W Schubart, "Das hellenistische Kiinigsideal nach Inschriften und Papyrus," AFP 12 (1937) pp. 1-27, esp. p. 5. On the Philopoemen statue see Plut. Phi/o. IO.8; H. B. Siedentopf, Das hellenistische Reiterdenkmal (Waldsassen Bayern, 1968) p. 108 (= Syll. 625); and G. Daux, BCH 90 (1966) p. 283 if. See also the inscription on the statue ofPhilopoemen at Tegea recorded by Pausanias, 8.52.6. The martial connotation of apETTJ is found on the inscribed bases of other equestrian statues; see Siedentopf, nos. 65, 76, 136, and 48. For a martial meaning of apETTJ in fifth- and fourth-century inscriptions, see e.g. R. Meiggs, D. Lewis, A Selection of Historical Inscriptions (Oxford, 1969) no. 48, M. R. Todd, A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions II (Oxford, 1948) nos. 120, 131, and 178.

40

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

of virtus, because it is translated with the specific Greek word for courage - av8pEia: C. Saliuio C. f. Nasoni, leg(ato) pro pr(aetore) 1 Mysei Ab[b]aitae et Epic[tete]s I, quod eos bello Mitrhida[ti]s conservavit, virtutis ergo. r[ai]w:LaAAoviwI faiov vl0:)J NaO"wvI, 1 TIpECJ[3EVTn Kat aVTlo"TpaT7']yWI MvO"ot 1 'A[3[3a!E1Ta! Kat 'ETIlKTTJTE1S, (hI a\JTOVS EV TWI TIOAEI-\WI TWI MI6pI5aTovs 1 5IET7']PTJO"EV, 6:v5p7']as EVEKEV.

1

To Gaius Saliuvius Naso, the son of Gaius, legate with the authority of a praetor, the Mysians, Abbaitians, and Epictetes, because he protected them in the war with Mithridates, on acount of his virtus - 6:v5pEia. lLLRP 372 = ClL P 743 80

In a bilingual inscription erected on the Capitol in Rome, the Lycians give thanks to the virtus of the Roman people, with virtus translated by apETT]. [Ab co]muni restitutei in maiorum leibert[atem 1 Lucei] Roma(m) Iovei Capitolino et populo Romano v[irtutis] benivolentiae beneficique causa erga Lucios ab comun[i]

/\vKiwv TO KOlVOV KOl-\lO"al-\EVOV TT]V TIaTpIOV 5TJ1-\0- 1 KpaTiav TT]V 'PWI-\TJV ~It KaTIETWAiwI Kat TWI 57']I-\WI TW[I] 'Pwl-\aiwv 6:pETf\S EVEKEV Kat Evvoias Kat EVEpYECJias 1 Tf\S Eis TO KOlVOV TO /\vKiwv.

1

The Lycians community, having been restored to their ancestral self-government, give [a statue of] Roma to Capitoline Jupiter and to the Roman people, on account of their virtus-6:pET7'], their good will, and their good deeds toward the community of the Lycians. lLLRP 174 = ClL P 725 = lLS 31

Eisenhut denied a Inilitary reference to virtus here because the Greek reads apETT]SEvEKEV rather than av8pEias EVEKEV. But, as we have seen, apETT] frequently has a martial meaning in inscriptions, and Eisenhut's point would be valid only if both words, apETT] and av8pEia, had appeared in the same inscription. Mommsen connected this inscription to Sulla's victory over Mithridates; others have placed it in the period

80

On the date of the campaign see MRR

n, p. 41

lO5, and additional note, pp. lO6-7.

ROMAN MANLINESS

after the defeat of Perseus. 81 In either case, the reference suggests a military victory and that virtu5 refers to the military might of Rome. A fragmentary bilingual inscription from the base of a statue in the Italian agora at Delos, made by a sculptor who worked there around 100, refers to virtu5. Mommsen attributed the inscription to C. Marius, who was in the east in 98-97, and supplemented the text, together with that of a fragment of a Greek inscription found nearby and mentioning 6:pETtl, acccordingly: [e. Marium e.f. lega]tum Alexandreae Italicei quei fuere I [virtut]is beneficique ergo. 'Ayacrias MTlvo<j:>ii\ov I 'E<j:>EO"lOS ETIoiEl. lLLRP 343 = elL III 7241 = IDel 2489

The other fragment, with supplement, reads TIPEcr~EV]"TT)V 01 EV 'Ai\E~av5pEiaJ [TIapa hai\lK]oi 6:pnf\s Kai EVEpymias [evEKa].

[faiov M6:pIOV YEVOIlEVOl

I I Del 699 E. 94

For Gaius Marius, son of Gaius, ambassador, the Italians who reside in Alexandria, on account of his virtus - 6:pnT] and good deed(s). Agasias the Ephesian, the son ofManophilos, made it.

It has been suggested that the bilingual inscription belonged to a statuary group depicting a defeated barbarian warrior, and both statue and inscription have been connected to Marius' great victory over the Cimbri and Teutoni in 102-1. 82 If the inscription does honor Marius, whose reputation as a military hero was then at its height, the connection between his German victories and his temple to Honos and Virtus makes a reference to martial virtu5 certain. 83 A late-republican inscription, which seems to be a copy of a considerably earlier original, tells of a public tomb, a rare honor during the 8I

82

83

Eisenhut, VR, p. 212. Mommsen, ClL I 589, argued for a SulIan date on the basis of App. Mith. 61; see R. MelIor, Ch iron 8 (1978) pp. 3I9-30; A. W Lintott, "The Capitoline Dedications to Jupiter and the Roman People," ZPE 30 (I978) pp. I37-44, and bibliography in SEC XV 603-I2, for other opinions. Mommsen, ClLIII 724I; Ch. Picard, "Le guerrier blesse de l'agora des Italiens aDelos," BCH (I932) p. 49I fr. and A. Passerini, "Epigrafica Mariana," Athenaeum ns 17 (I939) P·7 0 -3· Picard, 524, surtout une victoire militaire.

42

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

Republic, located at the foot of the Capitol for an otherwise unattested Roman-

I virtutisque caussa senatus I consulto populique iussu locus I monumento, quo ipse postereique I eius inferrentur, publice datus est.

C. Poplicio L.f. Bibulo aed(ili) pl(ebis) honoris

To Gaius Poplicius Bibulus, the son ofLucius, who was plebeian aedile, because of his office (reputation) and virtu5, by a decree of the senate and a law of the people, this place was given as a public monument, to where he and his decendants may be conveyed. lLLRP 357 = ClL F 384 The collocation honoris virtutisque recalls the cult of Honos and Virtus and implies a martial reference. 84 In the bronze inscription that records Cn. Pompeius Strabo granting Roman citizenship to a contingent of Spanish cavalrymen in 89 during the Social War, the martial reference of virtus is patent. 85 [C]n. Pompeius Se[x.f. imperator] virtutis caussa lequites Hispanos ceives [Romanos fecit in castr]eis apud Asculum a. d. XIV k(alendas) Dec(embres) ex lege Iulia ... en. Pompeius Sex. f. imperator I virtutis caussa turmam I Sailuitanam donavit in I castreis apud Asculum I cornuculo et patella, torque, I armilla, palereis et frumen[t]um I duplex. Gnaius Pompeius, the son of Sextus, as general, because of virtu5, made the Spanish cavalrymen Roman citizens in the camp at Asculum on November I6, according the Julian law. Gnaius Pompeius, the son of Sextus, as general, because of virtu5, gave the Sailuitanian troop at the camp of Asculum a helmet-horn and plate, a torque, an arm bracelet, breast-pieces and a double ration of grain. lLLRP 5I5 = ClL F 709 = lLS 8888 Almost all occurrences of virtus in republican inscriptions, then denote a martial idea of manliness. 84

85

See Degrassi, ILLRP; but this cannot be the man who was tribune of the plebs in 209; see MRR I, p. 289, n. 4. On the cult, see later, Chapter VII. Granting Roman citizenship for bravery in batde is otherwise attested; see the fragment of the historian Sisenna, frag. 120, HRR, and later, in Chapter V

43

ROMAN MANLINESS

4. EARLY LATIN EPIC, TRAGEDY, AND HISTORY

Military themes also loomed large in non-comedic genres of early Latin literature such as epic, tragedy, and history. Unfortunately, these survive only in fragments. Although virtus is regularly found in them, many of the fragments are too short to allow reconstruction of a context. But where the fragments are full enough for the context to be understood, virtus usually denotes martial courage. The strongly military theme ofEnnius' national epic poem, Annales, suggests that where virtus is found in the surviving fragments it denotes martial courage. 86 The word occurs five times in four fragments of Annales. Two are too short to permit certainty, but from what is known about one of them, it seems very likely that in it virtus denotes martial valor. The line in question is preserved in Servius' comments on Vergil's Aeneid II .27, where the Ennian verse is quoted: (quem) non virtutis egentem - "(whom) not lacking virtus" (Ann. 605 S = 473 ROL). The fact that Vergil's adaptation attributes virtus to the young warrior hero Pallas, mittatur Pallas, quem non virtutis egentem - "Pallas would be sent, whom not lacking virtus" - (Aen. II .27), suggests that Ennius too had used virtus to refer to the martial valor of a warrior. 87 In a fragment from Annales where there is a reasonably full context, the virtus of an army is described. 88 Aspectabat virtutem legionis suai Expectans si mussaret [dubitaret] quae denique pausa Pugnandi fieret aut duri laboris He was observing the virtus of his army, waiting to see if they would mutter, what respite finally would there be from fighting, or what end of hard work. Ann. 326-8 S = 333-335 ROL89 86

87

88 89

Sarsila, p. 40. For the military theme of the poem see 0. Skutsch, The Annals of Q. Ennius (Oxford, 1985) pp. 5-8. So Skutsch, p. 737. The brevity of another fragment - Nee metus ulla tenet, fieti virtute quieseunt - "Nor does any fear hold them; relying on virtus they rest" (562 S = Ann. 478 ROL), precludes certainty, but a courageous meaning is likely. The text of Annales is that of Skutsch. So Eisenhut, VR, p. 30 and Skutsch, p. 503. Skutsch, p. 503, connected the fragment to the rebellion P. Villius faced on arriving in Macedonia in 199.

44

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

Pursuing his idea of virtus as a wide-ranging concept, Earl contended that here virtus refers to something more than just a martial quality and represents a standard of political conduct. But this interpretation has no basis in the text. The lines describe a general considering the military standard that he expects his soldiers to display in war. Here virtus represents the steadfast rather than aggressive courage of Roman soldiers, but has nothing to do with politics or anything other than the conduct of war.9 0 Virtus also occurs with a fuller context in the famous speech that Ennius gave to the general Pyrrhus in Book VI of Annales: Nec mi aurum posco nec mi pretium dederitis: Non cauponantes belium sed belligerantes Ferro, non auro vitam cernamus utrique. Vosne velit an me regnare era quidue ferat Fors Virtute experiamur, et hoc simul accipe dictum: Quorum virtuti belli fortuna pepercit Eorundem me libertati parcere certum est. Dono - ducite - doque - volentibus cum magnis dis. Neither do I demand gold for myself, nor should you have given me recompense. Not bargaining over war, but fighting it with iron, not gold, let each of us risk his life. Whether Lady Fortune may want you or me to be supreme, what she may favor let us test by virtus. And at the same time accept this pledge Whose virtus the Fortune of war has spared the freedom of the same I am resolved to spare. I give these, take them, I give them with the great gods willing. Ann. 183--<)0 S = 186--<)3 ROL

Earl again asserted that in this speech virtus does not mean simply courage, but stands rather for the whole aristocratic ideal. But he offered no argument for this interpretation, nor did he provide an analysis of the passage other than pointing out the obvious contrast

90

So Eisenhut, VR, p. 30 and Skutsch, p. 503. To support his interpretation, Earl, Historia 9 (1960) pp. 238-9, cited another Ennian fragment, Ann. 435-6 S = 434-5 ROL, but in this passage also mussare is contrasted to military activities.

45

ROMAN MANLINESS

between virtus and commerce. 91 The context - ransoming prisoners of war - and the language, especially ferro non auro, argues strongly in favor of virtus meaning martial valor. 92 There is no justification for extending Ennius' use here beyond a martial reference, because nothing in the passage suggests that it refers to anything other than the standard Roman contrast between victory achieved honorably by arms and a victory dishonorably purchased or bargained for - a contrast that was a topos in the Roman world. 93 Virtus is also found in a fragment from the work of the late-sec and-century epic poet A. Furius Antias, where its meaning is martial: Increscunt animi, virescit volnere virtus. "The spirits rise up, virtus is made stronger by a wound."94 The fragments of Roman tragedies written during the republican period preserve numerous occurrences of virtus. Earl claimed to see a different and un-Roman employment of virtus as it was used by Ennius in his tragedies. 95 But while the general influence of Greek ideas was perhaps more pronounced in Roman tragedy than in epic, the consistent meaning of virtus in two fragments ofEnnius' tragedies, as well as in the fragments of tragedies written by Livius Andronicus (c. 290-C. 204), Pacuvius (c. 220-130), Accius (nO-c. 8S), and in a number of unattributed fragments from Roman republican tragedies, is the very Roman notion of valor in war. In some cases the martial meaning of virtus can be discerned from the context. In two unattributed fragments, where virtus has a clear unethical connotation,9 6 a martial meaning is indicated by what context there is. Nam sapiens virtuti honorem praemium haud praedam petit, Set quid video? [era saeptus possidet sedis sacras. 91 92

93

94 95 96

Earl, Historia 9 (1960) p. 238; PTS, p. 23; cf. MPTR, p. 31. Eisenhut, VR, p. 30 and Sarsila, p. 40, took virtus here as martial courage, as did Skutsch, pp. 348--9, where the context of the fragment is discussed. The combination of virtus and fortuna points to Greek influence; see the subsequent discussion in Chapter H. See, e.g., Plut. Caes. 41.4, about Caesar, with M. McDonnel1, "Borrowing to Bribe Soldiers," Hermes lI8 (1990) pp. 60-1. For charges of bogus victories and purchased spoils in Ennius' own day, see Cato's speeches, O.RF4 8 58, and OR? 8 97, respectively; cf. Plaut. Bacch. 1072-3, on false triumphs. E. Courtney, The Fragmentary Latin Poets (Oxford, 1993) frag. 3, p. 97. Earl, Historia II (1962), pp. 476-'7. Referred to earlier in the Introduction.

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

For the wise man seeks honor as a reward for virtus, not as its booty. But what do I see? Carrying a sword he occupies holy places. inc. inc.fab. 30-1 Ribb. = 98-9 ROL [po 617] Here the relationship of virtus, together with its cultic partner honos, to booty and a sword points to a martial meaning, as does the violent context of the second fragment: Sive ista virtus seu latrocinium , Horrendum miserandum inpium esse clamitant, Quod expulisti saucios patrio lare. Whether that was virtus or theft, They cry out that it is terrible, wretched, and impious that you drove wounded men from their ancestral home. inc. inc. Jab. 197-9 Ribb. = 102-4 ROL Similarly, the coupling of virtus with arms in a third tragic fragment perhaps by Accius indicates a martial meaning: Quem ego me profiteor esse, mest aecum frui fraternis armis mihique adiudicarier vel quod propinquus vel quod virtuti aemulus. I declare that I am the one, it is fair that I should enjoy the arms of my cousin, and that they be awarded to me either because I am a relative, or an equal in virtus." Accius, 106-8 ROL = inc. inc.fab. 52-4 Ribb. 97 The connection between virtus and "bravely opposing foes" in a fragment from Ennius' tragedy Phoenix favors a martial meaing of virtus in these lines. Sed virum vera virtute vivereanimatum addecet fortiterque innoxium stare adversum addecat. ea libertas est qui pectus purum et firmum gestitat; aliae res obnoxiosae nocte in obscura latent; But it is fitting for a man to live endowed with true virtus, and blamelessly to stand bravely against foes.

97

Warrnington, ROL n, p. 362, assigned these to Accius' play Armorum iudicium.

47

ROMAN MANLINESS

This is freedom, to proudly display a blameless and unwavering chest. Other actions are subservient, and hide in dark night. 254 Jocelyn = 308-II ROL = se. 300-3 Vahl98

In fragments where a context is lacking it is naturally more difficult to determine the precise meaning of virtus. Most Roman tragedies were modeled on Greek originals, and the titles of the Roman plays, together with our knowledge of the heroic subject matter of the Greek originals (or of the legends on which these were based), suggest that where virtus occurs it is that of a hero. If so, it is likely to be martial in nature. 99 In a passage discussed previously from Ennius' Hector lytra The Ransom if Hector, where justice is said to be better than virtus, because bad men often possess the later (155-6 Jocelyn = sc. 188-9 Vahl. = 200-201 ROL), the evocation of the Socratic contrast between justice and courage (OIKT] and avopEia) assures that virtus here denotes courage, but the title and subject of the play suggest that virtus is also martial in nature. lOO The titles and subjects of plays by Livius Andronicus (Aiax mastigophorus - Aias the Whip-Bearer), Pacuvius (Armorum iudicium - The Awarding if the Arms), and Accius (Armorum iudicium, Neoptolemus, and Nyctegresia - The Night Alarm), suggests that occurrences of virtus in them would most likely refer to a martial quality. Ior 98

99

roo IOI

Eisenhut, VR p. 30 gave "courage"as the meaning. Warmington, ROL I, p. 333 and Earl, Historia II (1962) pp. 476-7, took animatum to be governed by vera virtute in the first line, and consequently they rendered virtus with a meaning that is perhaps somewhat broader than martial courage - "but it is fitting for a man ofvirtue to live a life inspired, and when innocent to stand bravely against his enemies." Sarsila, p. 41, approved, as did Jocelyn, Tragedies, p. 390. But, as Jocelyn noted, the sense is obscured by textual corruption in the line. The text used here is that of Warmington. Jocelyn printed adiecit rather than addecet in line one, and vocare instead of stare in line two; see his comments, p. 390. Eisenhut, VR, pp. 23 and 39, commenting on Livius Andronicus (16 f. Ribb.), strained to avoid this conclusion; see the remarks of Sarsila, pp. 23-24. See Xen. Sym. 3.4; Pl. Prot. 329B; see Introduction, pp. 6-7. In Andron. Aiax mastigophoru5, 16-17 ROL = 16-17 Ribb., which seems to have been taken from the Greek original (cf. Soph. Aias. 1266-7 and Eur. frag. 736), the reference of virtus is to the ruined reputation of Aias. Eisenhut, VR, pp. 23 and 39, translated virtus in this passage with Tiichtigkeit; but see Sarsila, p. 23-4. Virtus occurs at Pacuvius, Armorum iudicium, 23-24 Ribb. 39-40 ROL. Accius, Armorum iudicium,123 ROL = 156 Ribb. (cf. Sophocles, Aias. 550), Neoptoiemus, 482 ROL = 473 Ribb., and Nyctegresi, 493 ROL = 492 Ribb. The precise meaning of virtus cannot be determined in the fragments from Pacuvius' Duiorestes, 146 Ribb. Accius' Teiephus (tr. 619-20

=

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LA TIN

Virtus is found, somewhat surprisingly, only six times in the fragments of Latin histories written before Sallust. The first century annalist Q. Claudius Quadrigarius used it to describe the valor of Manlius Capitolinus in saving Rome's citadel from the Gauls, Nam Marcus, inquit, Manlius, ... is et genere et vi et virtute bellica nemini concedebat. ' 'For Marcus Manlius,' he said, ... he yielded to no one in birth, strength and warlike virtus.' frag. 7 HRR, p. 48 = Gell. 17.2.14

and it occurs in a fragment about Valerius Corvinus killing a Gaul in single combat, which is perhaps to be attributed to Claudius, sic tribunus [sc. Valerius] spectante utroque exercitu et sua virtute nixus et opera alitis propugnatus ducem hostium ferocissirnum vicit interfecitque atque ob hanc causam cognomen habuit Corvinus. So the tribune with both armies looking on, and confident in his virtus and protected by the actions of the bird advanced into batde and defeated and killed the fierce leader of the enemy, and for this reason had his cognomen Corvinus. frag. 12 HRR, p. 212 = Gell. 9.I1.8

In his description of the single combat between T. Manlius Torquatus and a Gaul, Claudius refers to the virtus of the Gaul: Cum interim Gallus quidam nudus praeter scutum et gladios duos torque atque armillis decoratus processit, qui et viribus et magnitudine et adulescentia sirnulque virtute ceteris antistabat. Meanwhile a Gaul, nude except for a shield, two swords, and the adorned with a torque and bracelets, came forward. He exceeded the others in strength, size, youth and virtus as well. frag. rob HRR, p. 208 = Gell. 9.13.7

and of the Roman people, Is [Manlius], ut dico, processit neque passus est virtutem Romanam ab Gallo turpiter spoliari.

Ribb. = 625-26 ROL; and the unattributed tragic fragment, inc. inc.Jab. n6 Ribb. = 126 ROL III = Cic. Alt. 3.19 [SB 64].3.

49

ROMAN MANLINESS

As I say, this man went forward, nor did he permit Roman virtus to be foully despoiled by the Gaul. frag. IOb HRR, pp. 208-9 = Gell. 9.13.14 Since all these uses of virtus occur in contexts where men heroically risk their lives in combat, the word represents a quality that is both martial and aggressive. Virtus is found twice in the fragments of the historical monograph ofL. Cornelius Sisenna, once in a fragment too short to determine its meaning I02 and a second time to describe the valor of provincial soldiers who in 90 had been granted Roman citizenship, milites, ut lex Calpurnia concesserat, virtutis ergo civitate donari ... As the lex Calpurnia allowed, the soldiers were given the citizenship because of their virtus. frag. 120 HRR, p. 292 = Nonius, s.v. ergo p. I07 Given the martial meaning of virtus in the surviving fragments of other Latin histories, it is not surprising that the word has the same meaning in the fragments of the first history written in Latin, Cato's Origines. But Cato was a prolific and diverse author, and in the remains of his speeches, and of his agricultural treatise, De agricultura (the earliest Latin prose work to survive intact), there are instances where the martial sense of virtus seems to have been expanded into other related, but non-military spheres. 5. M. PORCIUS CATO

In the surviving works of M. Porcius Cato (234-I49) virtus occurs a total of ten times. In its three occurrences in the Origines fragments it is used in military contexts exclusively. Virtus occurs twice in the account of the military tribune Q. Caedicius, whose brave deed in Sicily during the First Punic War Cato complained, did not win for the Roman the type of renown that Leonidas' earlier heroic death at Thermopylae had won for the Spartan king in 480. 103 I02

IOJ

de virtute eorum accusanda proloqui supersederunt (frag. ro8 HRR, p. 291 supersedere p. 40).

=

Nonius, s.v.

For the date and place ofCaedicius's deed, see Fran. Strat. 1.5.15; 4.5.ro; Flor. 1.18.1314; Liv. 22.60.II.

50

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

Dii immortales tribuno militum fortunam ex virtute eius dedere. Because of his virtus, the immortal gods granted good fortune to the tribune of the soldiers. and Leonides Laco, qui simile apud Thermopylas fecit, propter eius virtutes omnis Graecia gloriam atque gratiam praecipuam claritudinis inclitissimae decoravere monumentis: signis, statuis, elogiis, historiis aliisque rebus gratissimum id eius factum habuere; On account of his virtutes all Greece endowed Leonidas the Spartan, who did very much the same thing at Thermopylae, with glory and high gratitude by monuments of the most celebrated renown, they held that deed of his in the greatest gratitude by means of paintings, statues, elogies, histories, and other honors. Origines IV 7 (a), p. 38 Chassignet; = frag. 83 HRR,= p. 80, 1.14 = FRH 3.4, 7a = Gell. 3.7.1-19 The explicit comparison ofCaedicius to Leonidas, and the presence of the virtus - fortuna trope indicates the passage was influenced to some degree by a Greek model. I04 But virtus here clearly denotes courage and virtutes brave deeds. The plural form, virtutes, is also found in Cato's notice about the banquet songs that the Romans of old sang, canerent ad tibiam clarorum virorum laudes atque virtutes. they sang to the flute about the praises and virtutes of famous men. Origines VII, I, 13, p. 54, Chassignet; = frag. lI8 HRR = FRH 3.7,13 = Cic. Tusc.4.3 '05

10 4

105

See Courtney, Archaic Latin Prose, p. 78, and later, Chapter n. On virtus and fortuna and Greek influences see Chapter n. The degree to which Cato was influenced by Greek literary models is a controversial subject; it is generally underestimated in my view. For a survey of scholarly opinion, see A. E. Astin, Cata the Censor (Oxford, 1978) p. 148, n. 36, and Courtney, Archaic Latin Prose, pp. 42-3, who concludes that Cato did possess Ha degree of technical knowledge" in regard to rhetoric. In other texts about the banquet songs, the word virtus occurs only at Cic. Tusc. 1. 3, and at Hor. Carm. 4.15.26-32; cf. Cic. Brut. 75; B. Riposati, M. Terenti Uzrronis De vita populi Romani (Milan, 1972) frag. 84; Quint. Inst. 1.10.20.

SI

ROMAN.MANLINESS

The striking similarity between what Valerius Maximus stated as the purpose of these songs, ad ea imitanda iuventutem alacriorem redderent - "they made the youth more keen to imitate those deeds" (2. I .10) - and Polybius' statement that the principal effect and purpose of the Roman aristocratic funeral ceremony was to encourage young Romans to win fame in battle (6. 54.3), implies that by virtutes Cato meant brave deeds. In Cato's famous remarks about his conduct during his Spanish campaign, which are preserved by Plutarch and probably come from Origines, O:pETT] almost certainly translates an occurrence of virtus in which the word had a martial meaning. 6.t.:A6. /3OVAOIJa! lJat.:Aov TIEP! 6.PETTlS ToTs aplCYTolS i) TIEP! XPTJIJ(XTWV ToTs TIAOVCYIWTO:TOIS CxIJIAAacy6a! Ka! ToTs qnAapyvpwTCxTOIS TIEP! qnAapyvpias. I would rather strive in bravery with the bravest than in possessions with the wealthiest and in greed with the greediest." frag. 129 HRR, p. 95 = Plut. Cat. Mai. 10.4 ro6

Victory in Spain brought him military glory, not wealth, Cato claims. His point is not that honest administration is virtuous, but that bravery, not greed, is the mark of a good man. I07 It is in his speeches, and in De agricultura, that Cato seems to use virtus in a new way. For a variety of reasons it is difficult to demonstrate that a particular usage of a Latin word was being expanded. First, the ability of a Latin author to introduce new words or new usages was limited, because in Latin literature diction was determined not only by subject matter, but also by genre. 108 Second, neologisms in the works of Cato or any Latin author are difficult to identify because so little ro6

107

roB

This passage is not in M. Chassignet, Caton, Les Origines (fragments) (paris, 1986), nor inDie Friihen romischen Historiker I, eels. H. Beck, U. Walter (Darrnstadt, 2001), but cf. Sail. BC 54.6. Cf. Ennius Ann. 183-90 S. and Chapter 1. The contrast of martial valor to greed and luxury is a recurring theme io Cato's work; see the subsequent discussion. So Courtney, Archaic Latin Prose, p. 42, writes that "Cato had an acute sense of generic distinctions." To appreciate the dignified language associated with Latin histories, for example, compare the diction of Tacitus to that of Suetonius' biographies; and see R. Syme, Tadtus 11 (Oxford, 1958) II Chapters XXVI-XXVII, esp. p. 342 fr. and appendix F.

52

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

survives as a basis for comparison. But if there is any early Latin author in whose works verbal innovations can be expected, it is Cato. With reason he has been called "the founder of Roman prose literature." Cato was the author of a range of new literary forms, among them the first history in Latin, and the first specialized treatises in the language (on warfare and agriculture), as well as being the earliest Latin orator whose speeches were preserved and studied by later generations. ID9 In addition, Cato was noted by later authors not only for his use of striking and unexpected words, but also for his neologisms. no It is in the remains of Cato's speeches that we find evidence for the martial associations of virtus being exploited for comments on issues that were not strictly military. Latin orations that were produced before the last third of the second century have fared very poorly; little remains even in fragments. III That the great majority of the fragments surviving from the period before 133 are from the speeches of Cato testifY to his enduring reputation as an orator. It is significant that among the characteristics of Cato's style that impressed later Romans was his dexterity in interchanging words and their meanings. II2 Virtus occurs three times in the fragments of Cato's speeches, and although lack of a full context makes it difficult to determine how the word is being used, enough remains that, given what is otherwise known about Cato's thoughts and deeds, an indication of the references of virtus can be gained. In a fragment of the speech against Q. Minucius Thermus, De falsis pugnis - "On Bogus Battles," virtus appears once. Here Cato is berating

I09

lIO

III

II2

For the quotation and discussion see Astin, Cato, pp. 183-239 and 131-56. The bibiography on Cato's literary works is large, see R. Hehn, "Porcius (9)" RE XXI!. 1 (1953) cols. 145-67. Also see the works cited by Astin, p. I31, n. 1. Hor. Ars 55-8; cf. Gell. NA 4.9.I2; Fronto, Ad M. C. 4.3.2 (= 1.4H); Astin, Cato, p. 139-41. The study by R. Till, La lingua di Catone, traduzione e note supplementari di C. de Meo (Rome, 1968), concentrates on Catonian neologisms, and exaggerates them; see Astin, Cato, p. 142, n. 27. Martial virtus occurs in a fragment of a speech said to have been delivered around 20I by Q. Caecilius Metellus (ORF4 6.3 = Val.Max. 7.2.3), but the historicity of the speech is dubious; see W Hoffinann, "Die rornische Politik des 2 Jahrhunderts und das Ende Karthagos," Historia 9 (1960) p. 320, n. 29, who argued that the theme of the fragment is anachronistic; cf. Harris, UlIRR, p. 266. Cic. Brut. 69; cf. Brut. 65; Hor. Ars. 55 if. On Cato as an orator see RE XXII.1 cols. 162-4; Astin, Cato, pp. 131-56.

53

ROMAN MANLINESS

Minucius for the public beating he inflicted on allied Italian magistrates, decemviri, who allegedly had not provided the Roman army with adequate supplies. The fragment ends with Cato's description of the nature of the outrage: servi iniurias nimis aegre ferunt: quid illos, bono genere gnatos, magna virtute praeditos, opinamini animi habuisse atque habituros, dum vivent? Slaves would hardly bear such injustices; what kind of emotions do you think that those men, born from good families, marked out by great virtus, had and will have while they live? ORF 4 8 58,11.12 fr. = Ge11.IO.3.14

Although fairly extensive, the fragment in itself gives little help in determining the meaning of virtus, but a consideration of the context is suggestive. Cato delivered this speech before the senate in 190 as part of a successful effort to deny Minucius a triumph for his Ligurian campaign. lI3 To underline the outrageousness of Minucius' actions, Cato presented the allied Italian magistrates in the most favorable light possible. He stressed their high birth, mentioning it here in combination with virtus. lI4 In mid-republican Rome, high birth was frequently and naturally linked with military undertakings and accomplishments. When in Plautus' play, Pseudolus similarly couples virtus with a reference to ancestors, maiarum meum fretus virtute dicam, mea industria, (Pseud. 581-2), the martial nature of virtus is made clear a few lines later, when Pseudolus again connects his birth to his martial courage, ... appleba,lmetum et fugam perduellibus meis me ut sciant natum. lea sum genere gnatus (Pseud. 588-90). lI5 Moreover, in the early-second century, military service for Rome was the most important function of Italian allies, lI6 and when praising allies, it was normal practice for Romans to mention the high birth and martial courage of their leaders. A century and a half later, Hirtius did just IlJ Il4

IlS Il6

See OR.F4, p. 26; Astin, Cato, p. 59, and Courtney, Archaic Latin Prose, p. 85. Some lines earlier in the fragment, Cato referred to the decemviri as bonis, bono genere gnatis, boni consultis - "good men from good families with good intentions." But clearly magna virtute praeditos is not the same as bonis . .. boni consultis. For translation and analysis of these lines, see previously in this chapter. p. A. Brunt, Italian Manpower (Oxford, 1970) p. 681, estimated that from 204 to 180, Rome required allied soldiers to serve in greater numbers than before or after that period. For the Roman view of the military importance of socii, see Polyb. 6.2I.4, 26.5" 3I.9 andA. N. Sherwin-White, The Roman Citizenship 2 (Oxford, 1974) p. 125.

54

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LA TIN

that in his praise of Surus, a commander of allied Gallic cavalry of the Aedui: qui et virtutis et generis summam nobilitatem habebat - "He had the greatest renown because of his family and virtus" (BC VIII.45.2). In a speech otherwise devoted to military matters, Cato's mention of the virtus of the leaders of Italian allies should be a martial quality. It is in two fragments of a speech Cato made sometime after 182 against the repeal of the Lex Orchia (a law that restricted the number of guests at public banquets) that we see the denotation of virtus expand from the martial to a related sphere. II7 The first fragment is very short and reads: Magna, inquit, cura cibi, magna virtutis incuria. great concern for food, he said, makes for great neglect of virtus. ORF4 8 146 = Amm. Marc. 16.5.2

The second is a little longer: ut summae gloriae sint a virtute proficiscentia, dedecoris vero praecipui existimentur quae voluptas suadeat non sine labe vitiorum. As the beginnings of the highest glory are from virtus, so, in truth, the beginnings of paramount disgrace are judged to be the things that pleasure urges not without the stain of vices. ORF4 8 141 (= Schol.Bob., Cic. Sest. p. 141.15" 8

That there is a moral sense to Cato's use of virtus in the speech is seen in its contrast to vitia and voluptas - "vices and pleasure." Hostility to luxury was a major and continuous theme in Cato's career, but there is abundant evidence that Cato's advocacy of the simple life was related to his belief that it produces good soldiers, and conversely, that growing extravagance and luxury were enervating the martial qualities of the Roman people. II9 One such extravagance was the table. Cato II7

lIB

II9

For the Lex Orchia, see ORF4, pp. 54-5 and Scullard, Roman PoliticS', p. 265. The fragment may not report Cato's words verbatim, because the use of the participle proficiscentia is unknown before Cicero. The preface of De agricultura says that farming produces the best soldiers, and Origines frag. 51, HRR = 3.2, 22 FRH, claims that Roman military success stems from the stern and simple morals of the Sabines; cf. Orig. frag. 76, HRR = 3.3, 9 FRH. That Cato was generally concerned about the decline in the martial spirit of Roman youth is seen in his remarks on Carneades' influence; Plut. Cato. Mai. 4.22.5. Astin, Cato, p. 174 and pp. 94-'7, recognized the connection between opposition to luxury and concern

55

ROMAN MANLINESS

had strong ideas about diet and its effects on military preparedness. He maintained that he would have preferred his own diet to consist of bread alone, but that he ate meat and fish only to keep his body fit for military service. In addition, Cato drew a close connection between eating habits and the ability of Romans to be effective soldiers. When conducting the military review of the equites as censor, Cato had reproached a fat cavalryman, L. Veturius, with the words, "How can such a body be useful to the state when everything between the breast and the genitals is devoted to the belly"; he then deprived the man of his public horse. 120 In Cato's speech against the repeal of the Lex Orchia, virtus certainly has a moral sense, but given the connection that Cato made between culinary extravagance and the weakening of the Roman martial spirit, his moral use of virtus was closely connected to the word's strong martial connotation. 121 It is in De agricultura that the most remarkable usages of virtus are found. In one instance Cato employs virtus to qualify farmland, a rare usage certainly derived from the Greek word 6:PETll, which will be discussed later.122 But at De agricultura 3.2, virtus is used in a manner almost as remarkable, but, unlike its application to land, not unrelated to traditional Roman ideas about the concept. Patrem familiae villam rustic am bene aedificatam habere expedit, cellam oleariam, vinariam, [dolia multa,] uti [l]ube[at] caritatem expectare: et rei et virtuti et gloriae erit. It is useful for the head of the household to have a well-built farm house, a storage cellar for oil and wine, and many storage jars, so it may be pleasing to await a high price. It will be a source of wealth, virtu5, and glory. Agr·3· 2

120

121

122

for military vigor. Cato had earlier, in a speech delivered to cavalrymen in the field, contrasted voluptas to the toils of military campaigns, ORP 8. 17 (= Gell. 16.I.1). On the fat cavalryman, Plut. Cat. Mai. 9.6 and ORF4 8.78 (= Gell. 6.22.I). For the meat in Cato's diet, see Plut. Cat. Mai. 4.3. For some of Cato's thoughts on diet see, Ad Marcumjilium (frag. 3 Jordan p. 78); Plut. Cat. Mai. 23·5, and Agr. I56-8, II4-5, I22, I26---'7. The same contrast between martial virtus and luxuria, especially vinum, is made by Caesar in describing the customs of the N ervii, BG IV.2. On the tide of a speech by Cato, De suis virtutibus contra Thermum - "Concerning his Virtues in Opposition to Thermus," see later, Chapter Ill, Section 4. Agr. I.2, and later, Chapter ll.

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LA TIN

The connection of virtus and gloria with res, which in De agricultura means profits made on goods stored for later sale at a higher price, is novel and somewhat startling. I23 Roman tradition idealized farming for its associations with frugality, parsimony, even poverty, but not as a source of profits from speculation, which is what Cato refers to here. I24 In composing De agricultura, Cato was breaking new ground. He was advocating a type of farming that was not traditional among the senatorial class. In addition, in Cato's day literary composition itself was not an entirely respectable occupation for a senator. Most ofCato's literary predecessors had written about war and politics; nothing like De agricultura had been written by a senator. Justification for such an endeavor was obligatory. I25 Cato's innovative treatise on agriculture, as well as the profit farming that it described, required defense, and for a Roman the best defense was an appeal to mos maiorum. The key to understanding Cato's linking of virtus and gloria to resprofit - is a parallel found in the preface to De agricultura. In the preface, appeal to practicality is strong, but the dominant note is apologetic: agriculture is socially respectable, and consequently a book on agriculture is respectable. I26 The argument of the preface runs as follows: (a) trade is profitable but risky; (b) usury is profitable but, according to mos maiorum, dishonorable; (c) farming, however, is both profitable 12 3

124

12 5

126

Although the res-virtus-gloria combination is unique in early Latin, the joining of res and gloria is not uncommon, and virtus and res are found together in Plautus. For res andgloria see Plaut. 7Nn. 272, 656; Ter. Hec. 796-8, Heaut. II2. For res and virtus see Plaut. Most. 144. Some of these passages show Greek influences (7Nn. 272 and perhaps Most. 144), but there is no reason to deny a native Roman association also. Contra G. Tibiletti, Relazione del X congresso internazionale de scienze storiche Il (1955) pp. 241-2, who took the ideas expressed at Agr. 3.2 as a traditional attitude. The legend of simple and poor Roman aristocratic farmers (e.g., Cincinnatus, Curius) seems to have been alive in the early-second century; see Plut. Cat. Mai. 1.1,2.1; Cic. Sen. 55; Rep. 3.40; Nepos, Cat. 1.1 and Miinzer, "Curius (9)," RE IV (1901) cols. 1841-5; "Fabricius (9)," RE VI (1909) cols. 1931-38 193Iff. Harris, WlRR, p. 18, n. 6, thought that in this passage Cato "probably intended to jolt the aristocratic reader." Possibly true, but Cato could not have afforded totally to offend Roman tradition. The combining of res with virtus andgloria occurs again in a speech by L. Licinius Crassus, ORP 66.45, on which see later Chapter Ill, Section 4. Cf. the apologetic tone of the three fragments from the preface to Cato's Origines, frag. 1,2 and 3 HRR = FRH 3.1, I,Ia, and 2. See E. Flores, Latinita arcaica e produzione linguistica (Naples, 1978) pp. 72 ff., and Astin, Cato, p. 253 ff., esp. p. 255. Astin, however, in arguing for the ad hoc nature of the preface, underestimated the apologetic nature of its argument.

57

ROMAN MANLINESS

and approved by tradition because it produces the best soldiers; therefore (d) farming is a socially respectable way to make profit. I27 But in his preface Cato does not specify what type of farming he means to discuss, and clearly there is a great difference between the farming that had produced Rome's soldiers and the type of investment farming that De agricultura is concerned with. I28 But the vagueness of the reference suits Cato's apologetic purpose. No one in Rome would question the respectability of traditional farming, but some may have had reservations about the propriety of Cato's profit farming, if only because it was being publicly advocated by a senator. I29 In the preface Cato anticipated objections by attempting to connect the new agricultural methods to the traditional Roman regard for farming. It is of great significance that the connection that Cato made in the preface between farming and mos maiorum rests on a military consideration. Just as Cato vindicated both investment farming and the publication of De agricultura in the preface by connecting a new method of farming with the traditional Roman association between agriculture and soldiering, so later at 3.2 he justified making large-scale profit by appealing parenthetically to values - gloria and virtus - that were traditionally military. Storage facilities, states Cato, will bring not only wealth - res - , but virtus and glory also. In light of the importance of both martial accomplishments and wealth (and the close relationship between the two) in the lives of elite Romans of the middle Republic, the collocation is not in itself surprising. I3 0 But the joining of the

127

128

129

'lO

Cf. Agr. praef 2, et virum bonum quom laudabant, ita laudabant: bonum agricolam bonumque colonum. - "and when they praised a good man, they praised him in this way: a good farmer, a good cultivator." Cf. Cato, Ad Marcum jilium 6 (Jordan, p. 78), Vir bonus, Marce jiU, colendi peritus, cuius ferramenta splendent. Courtney, Archaic Latin Prose, p. 52, noted the flaw in Cato's argument in that the absentee owners for whom the work was written would not be hardened by farm work into good soldiers. The emendations to the text of the preface proposed by A. S. Gratwick, "A Matter of Substance: Cato's Preface to the De Agri Cultura," Mnem. 54 (2002) pp. 41-72, would have Cato making a more explicit reference to profit farming. But that still leaves unanswered how absentee farming could possibly make goods soldiers, which tells against Gratwick's arguments. Cato had a keen interest in profits, but had high ethical standards; see Plut. Cat. Mai. 21.5 and R. Martin, Recherches sur les agronomes la tins (Paris, 1971) p. 91 If. The gloria-virtus combination almost always has a martial reference, even in Cicero; see Cic. Phi!. 11. 18, Red. pop. 16, Red. sen. 5, Imp. Pom. 27, vat. 28, Pis. 44, Sest. 143, Phi!.

S8

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

martial qualities of virtus and gloria to the profit-taking that res represented in De agricultura was audacious. Audacity, however, was the hallmark of Cato's literary style and life. 131 6. VIRTUS AND MARTIAL COURAGE

IN THE MIDDLE REPUBLIC If the fragmentary remains of early Latin are at all representative of what the intact originals were like, then, as in the works ofPlautus, so in early Latin in general, the primary meaning of virtus was courage. In fact, in pre-Ciceronian Latin there does not seem to have been another word regularly used to convey the concept. Audacia is a word that can mean courage, but its connotations are often very different from those of virtus. In pre-Classical Latin it is found in both military and nonmilitary contexts. In both its meaning can be positive, negative, or neutral. In martial situations audacia is found in a positive sense denoting boldness, but used negatively, it means rashness or recklessness. In non-military contexts audacia conveys a sense of self-confidence and self-assertion. Its more common meaning, however, is impudent audacity.1 32 These usages remained stable into the late Republic, at which time the negative associations became predominant; audacia is exclusively negative in Cicero's works. In Caesar's writings, audacia is relatively rare, and has positive, negative, and neutral meanings. Under the right circumstances, especially in war, audacia might be beneficial, and as such, could be seen as close to virtus. 133 But

IJI

IJ2

IJJ

14.31 and esp. Plane. 60; also cf. Off. 1.90 and Deist. 12. For a discussion, see H. Drexler, "Gloria," Helikon 2 (1960) 6 f. On the importance of wealth for Roman aristocrats, see the laudatio of L. Caecilius Metellus, Plin. NH 7.139-40 and on the relationship between wealth and war, see Harris, WIRR, Chapter H. Cato is said to have justified his passion for profit by claiming that the man who adds to his inheritance should be honored as a god. Plutarch censured the remark, Cat. Mai. 21.8. Military, negative: Sisenna, frag. II4 HRR; military, positive: Plaut. Mil. 464; Cato, Orig. frag. 83 HRR. Non-military, negative: Plaut. Amph. 367, Capt. 287, Cas. 626, Men. 313, Mil. 189; Ter. And. 217, Bun. 994, Heaut. 313, Phor. 134,997; non-military, positive: Plaut. Most. 409; Ter. Phor. 182; Cato, ORF4 8.22. In describing M. Antonius and Fufius Calenus, Caesar writes of their audacia et virtus (BC 3.26.1). In Caesar's works audacia is positive at BC VH 5.1, BC 3.16-4; negative at BC 1.5.3, 3.104.2; neutral (?) at BC I 18.3. For audacia in Cicero's works, see Eisenhut, VR., p. 41. For audacia in a military context, see G. Horsmann, Untersuehungen

59

ROMAN MANLINESS

in its negative sense, audacia could be regarded as the opposite of virtus. 134 In and of itself, audacia is unreliable, even at its best deserving of suspicion, and, therefore, distinct from virtus. Animus is another word that sometimes has the denotation of courage, but which can mean a great many other things as well. When used to convey the idea of courage in pre-Classical Latin animus has a positive meaning in military situations, but can be negative in other contexts. Animus is often associated with the emotional states, and when used to denote martial courage it perhaps corresponds to the psychological and physiological effects of adrenaline. In this sense it might be thought of as close to, or even as a component of virtus. But unlike virtus, courageous animus is transient in nature and therefore unstable. 135 A more common Latin word for courage isfortitudo, formed on the adjective fortis - meaning brave or strong, and ubiquitous in early Latin. Although it carries a positive denotation, unlike virtus, the semantic range offortitudo is narrow; it means courage only. Yet fortitudo is very rare in surviving pre-Classical Latin, occurring only three times, once in a very short fragment from a tragedy of Pacuvius (174 Ribb. = 178 ROL), again in Terence's comedy Phormio, (324-5), where it is combined with the word fortis in a form of rhetorical word play (the so-called figura etymologica), and a third time in a fragment of a comedy by L. Afranius (b. c. ISO), (com. 65, Ribb.), where the word was almost certainly chosen to avoid the awkwardness of ascribing virtus, with its clear etymological association with vir, to a woman. 136 The rarity of

zur militiirisehen Ausbildung im republikanisehen und kaiserzeitliehen in Rom (Boppard am Rhein, 1991) p. 196. IJ4 The contrasting of virtus to audaeia is found in SaIlust' passage (BC 3.3) about the corrupt atmosphere of his political career, where largitio is contrasted to abstinentia, pudor to avaritia, and virtus to audada. The frrst two pairs are clearly opposites. The pairings reoccur in Cato's remarks on the corruption oflanguage at BC 52. II, but here fortitudo replaces virtus. In Bellum Catilinae, audada occurs in a positive sense only when used by Caesar (BC 51.37), Catiline (BC 58.2, 15, 17), and in SaIlust's own description of early Rome (BC 9.3). IJS Negative animus: Plaut. Aul. 167, True. 603; Quadrig. HRR, frag. 61; positive military animus: Plaut. Amph. 250, Asin. 289; Furius Antias, frag. 3; emotional states: Plaut. Amph. 131, Asin. 664, Baeeh. 416, Men. 35, Mil. 6, True. 603. IJ6 On this passage and attributions of virtus to women in general, see later, Chapter V, Section 2. On the rarity offortitudo in pre-Classical Latin, see Eisenhut, VR, p. 4.

60

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

fortitudo continued into Latin of the late republic and early empIre, where it has a specialized use. m Because of the relative paucity of the Latin lexicon, examining the terms with which· courageous or martial virtus is contrasted is not as illuminating as One might hope. In fact, when used in this sense virtus rarely occurs in such verbal oppositions in pre-Classical Latin. As we have seen, Ennius contrasted martial virtus with ius, and in a passage in the Annales where virtus probably means courage, he contrasted it with metus - "fear."13 8 In the speech Ennius give to Pyrrhus, there is an implied contrast between martial virtus and bargaining for victory, and in Truculentus, Plautus opposed martial virtus to cleverness in speaking in a variation on the words/deeds contrast, Cato seems to have contrasted martial virtus with divitiae (
137

IJ8

IJ9

140

Fortitudo is used extensively in the philosophical works of Cicero, where its function is almost exclusively to translate 6:V5pEio - "courage" - (one of the four cardinal Greek virtues or 6:pEToi), in passages where virtus renders the meaning of 6:PETT] as the generic term for virtue. The use of fortitudo follows the same pattern in Auctor ad Herennium, see Eisenhut, VR., pp. 41-3, and, 64-5, 68. On virtus used to translate the ethical use of 6:PETT] as the term that comprised the various canonical "virtues," see later Chapter Ill. For more on Cicero's use offortitudo, see later Chapter X. In the writings of Caesar, in which virtus is ubiquitous,fortitudo is found only once, at BC 1.2.5. (In the Caesarian corpus fortis occurs 26 times, see H. Meusel, Lexicon Caesarianum [Berlin, 1958]. Virtus takes up five columns in Meusel's book.) In the surviving works of Sallust fortitudo is found three times, twice in Cato's speech at BC 52.II and 31, and at Hist. inc. 22 M; see later Chapter X. It occurs a single time in the history ofLivy (41.4.I) and once in the history ofVelleius Paterculus (2.I8.3). Enn. Hectoris Lytra I55-5J = I88-9 V = 200-I ROL = Ann. 562 S = 478 ROL; treated earlier at pp. 6-7 and at n. 87, respectively. Cato, Orig. frag. I29 HRR, and earlier; Enn. Ann. I83-90 S = I86-93 ROL and earlier pp. 45-50; p. 52 Plaut. True. 494-5, on which, see earlier, Chapter 1. In such instances virtus is found contrasted to any number of terms - vitium, jlagitium, peifidia, ftaudulentia, /uxuria, amor, ambitio (in political sense). All these are treated later in Chapter Ill, as are the ignavia contrast at Naev. Tarent. I2 and in various passages in Plartus. The ubiquitous virtusjortuna contrast is discussed in Chapter 11.

61

ROMAN MANLINESS

before Cicero. Indeed, outside of Naevi us and Plautus ignavia does not occur in pre-Classical Latin. I4I Clearly the word that users of Latin of the middle Republic employed when they wished to convey the idea of courage was virtus. That courage, particularly of the martial variety, represented the highest standard of manliness in Rome of the middle Republic is in no way surprising. Few societies have ever sent a higher proportion of their citizens to war, and warfare was central and basic to republican Roman values and institutions. I4 2 But courage is a complex idea, not easy to define in any culture. There can be no doubt, however, that among the ancient Romans courage was regarded neither as a morally neutral concept, nor as an emotion. I43 In pre-Classical Latin the predominant meaning of virtus was physical courage, and it carried the highest social approval, even if it did not necessarily represent, and indeed was sometimes contrasted to, ethical conduct. But physical courage is itself complex. As represented by virtus it has, in broad terms, two aspects: one, an aggressive quality credited to men who stormed cities, or killed opponents in single combat; two, a more passive, enduring quality, denoting steadfastness in the face of danger. The latter quality, to be sure, is a regular meaning of virtus that is found in the earliest surviving Latin. It can be seen, for example, at Amphitruo, 212-14, where Plautus employs virtus to denote the courage used to defend the homeland. In some instances it includes what might be called "moral courage," or at least a kind of courage

'4' Virtus - ignavia at Cic. Tusc. 3.17; and e.g., Sall. BC 20.2; Liv. 24.44.8. In Caesar maritial

'42

virtus is contrasted to timor - "fear" (BC 1. 39-40); turpitudo fugae - "the disgrace of flight," (BC II.27.2); and mollitia - "cowardice" or "weakness" (BC V1.77.5). Caesar's uses of virtus are discussed later in Chapter IX. For the high number of Romans serving in the army, see S. Oakley, "The Conquest of Italy," in eds., J. Rich, G. Shipley, VVtlr and Society in the Roman fiVorld (London, New York, 1993) pp. 28-9. Cf. K. Hopkins, Conquerors and Slaves (Cambridge, 1978) pp. 31-5. The central place of war in the Roman Republic was demonstrated by Harris,

WIRR. '43

The emotional quality inherent in animus might sometime be as aspect of virtus, but was often sharply distinguished from it. For courage as an emotion, and a dangerous one at that, see Hobbes, Leviathan, p. 503 and W 1. Miller, The Mystery of Courage (Cambridge, MA, 2000) p. 89. On the difficulty of defining courage, note the comment of A. O. Rorty, Mind in Action (Boston, 1998) p. 299.

62

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LA TIN

that is anticipatory and not directly, physically confrontational. In a military context this is seen in the fragment ofEnnius' Annales (326-8 S = 333-335 ROL) , where a Roman general contemplates the virtus of his army before a battle; in non-military contexts, an example is the willingness ofTyndarus in Plautus' Captivi to risk torture and death to insure his master's freedom. 144 But in pre-Classical Latin courageous virtus is more often than not an aggressive quality,1 45 and the common claim that a more passive kind of courage, in particular the steadfastness of the Roman soldier in the battle line, constitutes the essence of virtus, or that it represents a characteristically or peculiarly Roman kind of courage, is not supported by the evidence. The clearest statement of this idea of virtus is perhaps found in Karl Buchner's essay "Altromische und horazische virtus," first published in 1939. 146 Drawing a sharp distinction between what he called the fearless aggressive courage of the Greek hero and that of Romans, Buchner described traditional virtus as steadfast perseverance, defiant self-assurance, the tough steadiness of the Roman farmer. For Buchner virtus was a steadfast quality that was complemented by an aggressive counterpart, which he designated as animus. But some of the qualities Buchner claimed for virtus are, as we have seen, more appropriate to audacia, and the aggressive quality a Roman brought to battle was by no means limited to his animus. Moreover, Buchner's use of textual evidence is misleading. To bolster his case for steadfast virtus he refers to, of all things, an account ofValerius Corvus' heroic victory in single combat. And he frequently attempts to clinch his argument about old

144

145

146

A non-military context is also seen at Persa, 268-9, where the slave Sagaristio reflects on the punishment he will suffer if he misspends his master's money, see earlier; On Amphitruo, 212-14, see earlier; on the Ennius fragment, p. 44, see also p. 47 for steadfast virtus in a fragment from Ennius' Phoenix (308-I! ROL= 254Jocelyn = se. 300-3 Vahl.). On Captivi 4IO, see previously, pp. 28--9. Aggressive virtus at: Amph. 75,191, 260, 534, 648-53, Asin. 556, Cas. 88, Cist. 198, Cure. 179, Bpid. I06, 381,442,445, Mil. 12, 32, 57, I042, Pseud. 532, 581, True. I06, Ter. Bun. 778, Enn. Ann. 187-8 S, Inc. ine.Jab. 30-1 Ribb. = 98-9 ROL, Ine. ine.Jab. 197-9 Ribb. = I02-4 ROL, Quadrig. frags. 7, lob, 12 HHR, Cato, Orig. IV 7 a (C) = FRH 3-4.7a = 83 HRR. In Antike 15 (1939) pp. 145-64, esp. 146-8= Studien, pp. 1-22, esp. 1-3, and in = Riimisehe Wertbegr!ffe, pp. 376-99; so also Dahlmann, "Das romische Mannesideal," pp. 24, 28-31 = "Virtus Romana," pp. II, 15-18.

ROMAN MANLINESS

Roman virtus with a quote from the late republican mimes ofPublius SyruS. 147 Buchner is not compelling on this issue. More recently, a similar case was made by Nathan Rosenstein, not with lexical arguments about virtus, but rather by analysis of the nature of Roman courage as depicted in historical texts. Rosenstein held that the courage of Roman soldiers was predominantly steadfast in nature and proposed the interesting idea that this was a function of the distinctive three-line battle formation used by the Romans - hastati, principes, triarii - in which the primary fighting was done by the first line, while the majority of soldiers, held in reserve in the second and third, waited and watched in the rear. "The cardinal virtues in a Roman soldier were to follow orders and to stand their ground at all costS."14 8 The inference seems to be that because in the Roman battle formation a greater number of soldiers stood and waited, the courage required of Romans was of a different order than that of Rome's enemies. 149 But was it courage that kept a Roman soldier at his position as he watched and waited in the rear ranks? Rosenstein appealed to the writings ofPolybius, far and away the best source for the Roman army and Roman military attitudes of the middle Republic, where he had no difficulty in finding references to what might be called a "defensive" kind of Roman courage. In introducing his description of the aristocratic funeral procession, for example, Polybius writes, somewhat vaguely, that Romans would "endure all" - TTav VTTOIJEVE1V - in order to acquire a reputation for courage - 6:pET~ -, here certainly corresponding to virtus. (6.52.n; cf. 6.54.2, where the phrase reoccurs). What Polybius thought this "enduring" kind of virtus comprised can perhaps been seen in the example of Roman heroism he offers a little further on. Polybius relates the story of Horatius Codes (6.55), famous as the defender of the bridge, writing that the enemy wondered 147

14 8

149

The justification is a dubious assertion about Publilius Syrus' language -" der in seinen Mimen in der Sprache des Volkes dessen altertumliche 14trte vertritt," p. 1. For a critique, see Eisenhut, VR, pp. 34-5. N. Rosenstein, Imperatores Victi: Military Defeat and Aristocratic Competition in the Middle and Late Republic (Berkeley, 1990) pp. 95-6, quotation on p. 96. For more on the threeline formation, see L. Keppie, The Making of the Roman Army (London, 1984) pp. 34-6, 38--9. In fact both types of courage can encompass the psychological struggle of overcoming fear, see Miller, pp. 6 and 46-51.

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

at TT)V VTIocnacn v alhov Kai TOA~av (6.55.2). But TOA~a denotes an aggressive quality, courage of a audacious or even rash nature (perhaps translating audacia here), whereas VTIocrTacns refers to the endurance to withstand blows, which is different from what is required of soldiers in the rear line who must wait to fight. Again, when Polybius writes that Roman soldiers at Trasimene regarded it as most important -TIEpi TIAEicrTOV TIOlOVIlEV01- not to flee or desert their positions in battle (3.84.7), the conduct he describes standing and fighting to the death (J .84.8-10) - required a quality that goes well beyond the nerve needed to stand and wait. ISO Moreover, Polybius states that the determination of Romans to die rather than abandon their position at Trasimene was a result of Roman institutions (or practices) - EK T0."W E61cr~WV (3.84.7). When he describes these Roman institutions in Book Six, and explains why Roman soldiers did not flee and leave their posts, the reason Polybius gives is the fear of severe punishments - public disgrace, flogging, and the probable death that the fustuarium and decimation entailed (6.37-8, cf. 1. 17. II - 12). This is discipline, not courage, and Romans recognized a distinction between the two. They were certainly made distinct in Caesar's later presentation of the Roman army. 151 The distinction between aggressive and defensive courage can also be seen in Polybius' comments on centurions. Polybius says that the quality valued in centurions was steadfastness - crTacrlllos - as opposed to daring - 6pacroS - and love of danger - <j>lAOKiv5vvoS. According to Polybius, centurions were relied on to set an example not by leading men into battle, but by holding their position when pressed, and dying there if necessary (6.24.9). Laudable and effective as their function may have been, centurions are not presented by Polybius as examples of virtus. In writing about them, he makes is no reference to either apETT) or av5pEia. Again, Caesar's portrayal of centurions corresponds

ISO

I5 I

Note that here Polybius is describing the behavior of Roman soldiers in defeat. The same qualification applies in Sallust's description of Catiline's soldiers having maintained their positions in defeat and death (BC 61.1-2), also cited by Rosenstein, Imperatores Victi, pp. 96,. Disciplina is a word Caesar rarely uses in this sense, but it is clearly what is lacking when he criticizes the temeritas and cupiditas of his men at the siege of Gergovia, BC VII 52, cf. V 52.6; see later Chapter IX.

ROMAN MANLINESS

to and illuminates that of Polybius. Caesar regularly commented on the bravery of his centurions. When it is aggressive in nature, such as rushing into battle, Caesar often credits a centurion with virtus. But if the centurion is praised for steadfastness under attack, no mention of virtus occurs.15 2 If the Roman battle formation did require a greater degree of a particular kind of nerve in a soldier, it was surely discipline enforced by fear of punishment that provided it. But according to Polybius there was more to the Roman army then this. Polybius does attribute the Roman soldiers' reluctance to abandon their posts in battle to the same factors that caused them not to easily accept defeat; but this is not the whole story. Polybius repeatedly makes the broad claim that the Romans were most severe, and most to be feared, when faced with danger and defeat (3.75.8; 21.17.1; 27.8.8). But again it is necessary to distinguish refusal to accept defeat from virtus. The two are not normally associated. Polybius usually presents the refusal to accept defeat as a characteristically Roman attitude or behavior, but not as an aspect of 6:pETf) or 6:v8pEicx. The exception is at 6. 52.5-6, where, writing about the superiority of Rome's citizen soldiers (as opposed to the mercenaries who made up a large part of the Carthaginian army), Polybius states that Romans rely on their own brave deeds EV TCXIS mpETEpCXlS 6:PETcxIS - so that, if defeated at the beginning, they conquer in the end. But what Polybius then goes on to say is significant. He attributes Romans' ability to overcome adversity to the fact that as citizen soldiers, they were fighting for their homes and families (6.52.7). Concern for hearth and home would seem to imply a defensive mentality, steadfastness as opposed to aggression. It is therefore somewhat surprising when Polybius writes that, as a consequence of being citizen soldiers, Romans "can never relax their

152

In De bello Callico centurions are praised for their steadfastness under attack at BC 11 25.1; V 35.6-7; VI 38, 40.7. Note that at BC VI 40.7 the men are said to have displayed virtus prior to becoming centurions. The centurions T. Pullo and L. Vorenus are credited with virtus for aggressive action at BC V 44. So also it is the aggressive actions of centurions that earn them virtus at De bello civili 1.46.4, and 3.91,99. The aggressive behavior of the centurion L. Fabius is presented negatively at BC VII 47.7, 50.3; but that of M. Petronius positively at BC VII 50-4-6. On Caesar, see later, Chapter IX.

66

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LA TIN

rage - 6pY-rl - but stay there fighting to the death until they master their enemies" (6.52.7). 0pY-rl is an aggressive quality, "a propensity to violent action."I53 So even what might be called a "defensive" form of courage - the Roman refusal to accept defeat - is attributed by Polybius not only to discipline, but also to an active and aggressive quality that Romans regularly displayed in battle. I54 In regard to the values of Roman aristocrats, Rosenstein recognized the importance of aggressive forms of courage, and was right to argue that Roman commanders could and did display virtus in defeat. But again, the refusal to accept defeat should not be confused with virtus. There are many examples of praise for the former in the texts of Polybius and others, and Rosenstein provided pages of examples, but their connection to virtus is dubious. The best examples of this Roman characteristic, on Rosenstein' own account, are those of C. Terentius Varro, the general at Cannae who rallied surviving Romans to fight again, and of C. Hostilius Mancinus, who after accepting defeat and ignominious peace in Spain, volunteered to hand himself over to the enemy. But the laudable qualities exhibited by Varro and Mancinus respectively do not include virtus. It is the animus and constantia ofVarro, and the fides, pudor, and probitas of Mancinus that are praised. I55 The only explicit connection between virtus and refusing to accept defeat is found in an interesting passage in De bello Callico, where Rosenstein rightly interpreted the virtus exhibited by Q. Cicero (BC V-4I), and praised by Caesar (BC V52), as referring to the former's refusal to accept the terms of besieging Gauls. But Caesar' use of virtus here is

IS3

IS4

155

As shown by W V. Harris, "Readings in the Narrative Literature of Roman Courage," in Representing War in Ancient Rome, eds. S. Dillon, K. Welch (Cambridge, New York, 2005) pp. 656--'702, where he also points out the surprising nature ofPolybius' use of DPY" here; cf. Harris, Restraining Rage: the Ideology of Anger-Control in Classical Antiquity (Cambridge, Mass. 2002) p. 63. I use Harris' translation. Barton, pp. 52-3, misrepresented the Elder Pliny's explanation ofwhy the corona graminea was regarded as the highest honor (NH 22.6-8), when she suggested it was because it celebrated doomed heroism. Pliny's explanation clearly emphases that the grass crown was preeminent because it was awarded to a man who had saved an entire army quid tandem existimari debet unius virtute servatus universus exercitus? - "what indeed should be thought of a whole army having been saved by the virtus of one man? (NH 22.8). On Varro, see Cic. Rep. 3.28; Off. 3.109; on Macrinus, Front. Strat. 4.5.6, Florus 1.22.17. Mancinus' statue presented him in the garb he wore when he surrendered (Plin. NH 34.18); hardly a mark of virtus; contra Rosenstein, Imperatores Vieti, pp. 140-50.

ROMAN MANLINESS

tendentious, and unusual, both in being "defensive" in character, and in being assigned to a Roman officer. I56 That Romans would" endure all" to acquire a reputation for it, is by no means all that Polybius has to say about virtus, however. In writing about military decorations he states that Roman soldiers regarded them as signs and proofs of apETf]; here again certainly translating virtus (6.39.10). In discussing these signs of virtus, Polybius takes pains to emphasize that the decorations were given not to Roman soldiers who performed exploits in regular battle situations (he did not see the need to mention that remaining at one's post in battle was not deserving of decoration), but to those who had voluntarily and consciously placed themselves in danger (6.39.4). That awards for extraordinary courage were given for actions that were not normally expected of Roman soldiers is self-evident. I57 Polybius' point is that the recognition of extraordinary individual acts of bravery inspired emulation and rivalry (6.39.8). By honoring examples of aggressive and daring behavior, the military decorations encouraged young Romans to risk danger - TIpOS TO K1V8vVEVE1V (6.39.1); that is to act aggressively themselves. As valuable as Polybius' analysis of Roman institutions is, in using it to establish the norms of Roman behavior in war certain considerations must be factored in. On the one hand, the emphasis on defense and resolve in defeat found there, is, to some measure, a function of Polybius' dramatic placement of Book Six directly after his description of the disastrous Roman defeat at Cannae. I5 8 On the other hand, in discussing the effects of exemplary conduct, whether it be Horatius at

15 6

157

158

See later Chapter IX, and for the tendentiously political ways in which Caesar portrayed his officers, see K. Welch, "Caesar and his officers in the Gallic War commentaries," inJulius Caesar as Artful Reporter, eds. K. Welch, A. Powell (London, 1998) pp. 85-no; on Q. Cicero, pp. 97-8. Rosenstein discussed Q. Cicero at Imperatores Vieti, pp. 134-5. Caes. BC 3 .38.5 seem to reflectthe vitium-virtus contrast, on which see later ChapterIII. On the basis ofPolybius' words Rosenstein, Imperatores Vieti, p. 97, n. 26, drew the conclusion that Romans recognized a distinction between bravery among soldiers which was expected, and individual courage, which was not. True enough, but it misses Polybius' point. So also Polybius' general emphasis on defense is a function of the centrality of the Hannibalic War to his ideas about Rome. Harris, "Readings," pp. 674-6, thinks that Polybius understated the aggression and brutality of Roman warfare, "for political and personal reasons." Another explanation is the influence of Fabius Pictor, whose hero, Fabius Maximus, was famous for a non-aggressive strategy; see later Chapter VII.

68

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LATIN

the bridge, or individual monomachists, Polybius is dealing with ideal behavior - the kind that Roman commanders might have desired, but normally did not observe in most of their soldiers. Under the best of circumstances, a Roman general could not expect to command a whole army of heroes. What was normally expected of Roman soldiers is perhaps better represented in the exhortations to them that Polybius gives to various Roman generals. These speeches do not, of course, record what was actually said. 159 But although they are rhetorical compositions, their content and context are not fanciful. For a historian like Polybius, who had a military background and who wrote with authority on military matters, the content of such speeches are likely to be what he thought would have been said, and what his informed readers might have expected. 160 Polybius, in describing the effects of the speech that he gives to P. Scipio before the attack on New Carthage in 209, writes that his soldiers exhibited "great desire and zeal" - IJEYO:AT]V 0PIJT)V KCxi TIp06viav (IO.I1.8). He also comments that the exhortation of the elder Scipio before the battle of Ticinus in 2I8 made his soldiers "ardent for hazarding battle" - EK6vlJG0S EXOVTG0V TIpOS TO K1VOVVEVE1V - and has Scipio praise their 0PIJT] (3.64. II). 161 On the day before the battle of Cannae, Polybius has the consul L. Aemilius Paullus, after encouraging his men,162 say that all that is lacking for a victory is "their willingness

r59

r60

r6r

r62

It would not have been possible to deliver such speeches before a battle to an entire army in formation. An army gathered together prior to being drawn up in formation is another matter, however. What generals could do before battle was traverse the line and give short words of encouragement to various units. See M. H. Hansen "The Battle Exhortation in Ancient Historiography," Hi5toria 42 (1993): pp. 161-80. The best Greek historians used speeches to express the themes that they wanted to convey; see R. C. Jebb, "The Speeches ofThucydides," in Essays and Addresses (Cambridge, 1907) pp. 359-445. K. Sacks, Polybius on the Writing of History (Berkeley, 1981) pp. 79---95 and F. W Walbank, Speeches in Greek Historians (Oxford, 1965) esp. pp. 6-13, whose suggestions that Polybius "developed" the speeches that he found in his sources, are overly optimistic about Polybius' adherence to ipsissima verba. P. Pedech, La Methode historique de Polybe (Paris, 1964) pp. 255-302, gave a larger role to Polybian composition, rightly I think. On this speech, see Pedech, pp. 273-4 and F. W Walbank, A Historical Commentary on Polybius. I (Oxford, 1957) p. 397. Previously Paullus cited various reason for previous Roman armies having been defeated by Hannibal - lack of discipline, inexperience, and ignorance of Carthaginian tactics (3.108.6--'7), see Rosentein, Imperatores Victi, p. 98. Pedech, p. 274, thought the speech

ROMAN MANLINESS

and zeal" - TllS V~ETEpas ~OVATjcrE0JS Ka! TTpoev~ias (3.109.5). Both qualities seem active in nature, the later - TTpOeV~ ia - aggressively so. 16 3 Moreover, the qualities that Polybius says Roman generals sought to instill in their soldiers, are the same aggressive qualities that Roman soldiers are said to exhibit in combat. To describe the qualities exhibited by Roman soldiers as they closed with the enemy at the battle of Zama, Polybius employs the same phrase - TT]S ~EyicrTT]S 6p~llS Ka! TTpoev~ias (15.14.5), that he had Scipio use in praise of his men after his speech at New Carthage. In writing of the manner in which Scipio's soldiers stormed the walls of New Carthage, Polybius uses the word 6p~Tj (10.13.10), the same word he uses elsewhere to describe the quality that would impell a Roman aristocrat, Scipio Aemilianus, to accept a challenge to single combat (35.5). Of particular interest is the distinction between the roles of Roman generals and the soldiers made in the Paullus' speech before Cannae and in Polybius' comment on the speech ofScipio at New Carthage. To encourage his men Paullus first assures them that all the preparations necessary for victory had been seen to by their commanders; then he says that the soldiers must supply "willingness and zeal" (3.109.5). Polybius states that it was the accurate calculations of Scipio (plus the promise of gold and assurance of divine aid) that stirred up "great desire and zeal in the Roman soldiers at New Carthage." According to Polyhius, therefore, the proper role of a general is to employ knowledge, intelligence, and planning in preparation for victory; a truly outstanding general would continue to do this during the course of battle, as Scipio didat New Carthage (10.13.3-5).16 4 This is not to say that Roman generals were not expected to display virtus in battle. There were, however, different ways to do this, and Polybius' opinions on the subject are complicated and tendentious, as we will see. 165 But, if we

16J

was composed by Polybius; Walbank, Commentary I, p. 442, thought Fabius Pictor a possible source. On the meaning of ~OVAT\(J"IS here, cf. Polyb. 3.34.6, where it has the implication of "consent."

164

16 5

Rosenstein, Imperatores Vieti, pp. 92- II3, underestimated the role of a Roman general's expertise and skill in battle; see A. K. Goldsworthy, The Roman Army at VVczr, lOoBCAD200 (Oxford, I996) p. I65, who, however, was wrong to include these under the rubric of virtus; see later Chapter IX. See later Chapter VII, for Polybius on M. Claudius Marcellus.

MANLINESS AS COURAGE IN EARLY LA TIN

accept the opinion ofPolybius, what Romans soldiers were expected to provide in battle was aggressive attitudes and actions to complement the preparations of their commander. Here again Polybius presents a distinction that reoccurs in Caesar, who uses the words diligentia, consilium, ratio, and scientia to describe what the Roman commander contributes and virtus to denote what is expected from Romans soldiers. Polybius and Caesar agree that what the Roman general wanted from his men in battle was aggressiveness. r66 Virtus was a broad enough concept to include both the quality of endurance that Romans were supposed to show when under attack or torture, and the aggressive bellicosity that was displayed by monomachists, and encouraged and valued in all Roman soldiers. r67 Analysis of the meanings of virtus in pre-Classical Latin, and of Polybius' description of the Roman army of the mid-Republic, however, provides no basis for the idea that traditional virtus was a predominantly defensive, steadfast qualifY. According to Polybius, even the famous Roman resolve in the face of defeat was to a large degree a function of an aggressive characteristic. Aggressive courage is essence of virtus. It was precisely because the ideal of Roman manliness was belligerent and aggressive that it was thought to pose a threat to society and why a central element of Roman republican ideology and institutions was that virtus be constrained. r68 But the ways in which virtus was controlled should not be confused with the ideal itself. 166

16 7

168

Note Goldsworthy's comment, Roman Army, p. 281: "Yet in itself discipline did not bring victory, although it might have prevented, or at least delayed, defeat. Boldness and aggression, often by a few individuals, was vital to actually beating the enemy and causing him to run away." Rosenstein's conclusions about Roman courage underestimated the later. The emphasis on the soldiers' steadfastness at Plaut. Amph. 238-41 referred to by Rosenstein, Imperatores Victi, p. 97, is preceded by a reference to soldiers who "fierce in their might, advance against [the enemy]" - ... nostra contra ingruont {vicimus] viferoces. Amph. 236-7. So, too, the reference to the steadfastness of Catiline's defeated soldiers at Sallust BC 61.1-2, which Rosensten cited, p. 97, is balanced by Sallust's use of audacia as well as animi vis, in telling how each man died at his position. On the ideology of constraint see later Chapter VI, Section 3 pp. 399-412.

71

11

HELLENIZATION AND 'APETT] - SEMANTIC BORROWING

To the great despair of historians, men fail to change their vocabularies every time they change their customs. Marc Bloch

The tendency of Roman speakers and writers such as Cato to exploit the high prestige of martial virtus in fields of conduct that were not strictly military, accounts for some of the usages to which virtus was put, but not all of them. Because in the Latin of the Roman Republic virtus was used in ways that not only have nothing to do with courage and war, but that have no obvious relationship to men and manliness. How a concept that was so closely tied to the notion of what a Roman man should be, and that was held in such high esteem, came to have such a wide and peculiar field of semantic reference will tell much about the society of republican Rome and its development from the third through first centuries, particularly in relation to Hellenism.

I.

BILINGUALISM AND SEMANTIC CALQUE

Virtus is derived from vir - as Cicero wrote, appellata est enim ex viro virtus (Tusc. 2-43) - and its essential meaning is "manliness."I But the ascription by various Latin authors of virtus to lions, elephants, even trees,2 shows that at some time and somehow virtus underwent I

2

See also Varro, Ling. 5.73; Eisenhut, VR, p. 12-13. Virtus of lions - Luer. 5. 858 and 863; of an elephant - B.AJr. 72.4; of trees - virtus ulmorum - or perhaps forearms (the text is uncertain) - virtus ulnorum; Plaut. Asin. 547.

72

HELLENIZATION AND 'ApET11- SEMANTIC BORROWING

a fairly radical shift from its etymological sense of manliness, to a much broader range of meanings. Semantic shifts of this kind occur in two ways: as an indigenous development of the native language or as the result of foreign linguistic influences. Some have favored an indigenous explanation, positing a primitive meaning for virtus as "the magical power of the god" and proposing a meaning based on a dubious connection between virtus and vis - "strength"; neither of these stand up to scrutiny.3 That the semantic shift that permitted virtus to be applied to animals and inanimate objects was not an indigenous development is suggested by a number of factors. First, the etymological bond between virtus and vir remained strong and persistent. A Latin speaker encountering virtus would certainly have been conscious of the constituent element vir. Otherwise it is difficult to account for the continued combining of vir and virtus by Latin authors who exploited the figura etymologica. 4 Second, the etymological bond is supported by the pattern of usage; it is rare for virtus to qualifY anything but a man. Of the over 140 occurrences of virtus in pre-Classical Latin, the word is used to describe inanimate objects or abstract qualities in only six instances,5 is applied to deities eight times (all but one in the Plautine collocation virtute deum 6 ), and is directly attributed to a woman once in the context of a

J

4

5

6

On virtus and vis, see Van Omme, pp. 29-3I, Sarsila, p. 42, and Barton, pp. 41-2. But the semantic association between the two is late; see Ernout-Meillet, s.v. vis, p. 740. The citations in Ernout-Meillet, p. 739, for early examples of virtus meaning "la force pure et simple," are incorrect - at Verg. Aen. 2. 390-I, virtus means courage (cf. Liv. 42.47.5); at Nep. Reg. 2.3 the virtus - fortuna trope is derived from apnTJ - TVXll; see, later in this chapter. In the passages cited from republican and classical Latin by Van Omme, pp. 29-3I, for a primitive meaning of "magical power," virtus, in fact, has its regular meaning of martial prowess; Plaut. Amph. 212, Enn. Ann. 188 S; Accius, 473 Ribb., Claudius Quadrigarius, rob and 12 HRR, as well as at Liv. 8·3LI, 9.6.13, 22.58.3,27.33.9, 38.48.7, and 39.32.4. At Ov. Met. 14.357, herbarum virtus, and Apul. Met. Lro, virtutibus eantionum, virtus do mean magical power, but these are better explained as borrowings from a common cultic use of apnTJ; on which see later. Van Omme also appealed to a nebulous etymological connection between virtus and 'ner (an Indo-European root for man). E.g., Plaut. Asin. 556-7, Amph. 212, Cic. Sest. 93, 76, Tuse. 2.43, Plane. 12; see Eisenhut, VR, pp. 12-13. Plaut. Asin. 547, Mil. 12II, Most. 173, Mil. 728, Cato, Agr. 1.2, Lucil. XVI I C = 532-3 M = 557-8 ROL = 528-9 K; discussed subsequently. For the phrase virtute deum, and on Plaut. Mil. II -12, see the subsequent discussion.

73

ROMAN MANLINESS

jocular sexual role reversal (Plaut. Amph. 925). Such uses are somewhat more frequent in later Latin, but they remain unusual. 7 Finally, the Romans themselves regarded the attribution of virtus to non-human subjects as aberrant. While rendering a Greek philosophical concept into Latin, Cicero explicitly stated that when virtus is used of a tree or horse, it is misused: ... nam nec arboris nec eqm virtus quae dicitur, (in quo abutimur nomine,) ... . . . for neither what is called, when we misapply the word, the virtus of a tree or of a horse, ... De legibus I.45 8

There is also positive reason to believe that uses of virtus that seem alien to its etymological roots were the result of foreign linguistic influences. Almost all these odd usages of virtus correspond closely to meanings of the Greek word apETT), and many occur in Latin works modeled on, or even translated from, Greek originals. The clearest example of this kind ofinfluence is the application of virtus to farmland to designate its excellence or fertility. The usage is very rare and appears first in Cato's treatise on agriculture. At De agricultura 1.2, Cato gives advice on the type ofland to buy, [Praedium] ... uti bonum caelum habeat, ne calamitosum siet; solo bono, sua virtute valeat. - "The land ... should have good weather, so that there will not be great damage; it should be robust because of good soil and by its own virtus." In republican Latin the usage is found again once, in a fragment ofLucilius, Fundi, delectat virtus te, vilicus paulo/strenuior si evaserit. - "The virtus of a farm gladdens you, if the overseer/turns out to be a little more energetic." (XVI I Charpin = 532-3 Marx = 557-8 ROL = 528-9 Krenkel). The use of virtus to qualifY farmland, in a phrase that essentially means "the manliness of the land," is distinctly odd. From its earliest 7

8

On Plaut. Amph. 925, Poen. 1328, and other rare attributions of virtus to women in republican Latin, see Chapter V. Later attributions of virtus to non-human subjects usually occur in works closely modeled on Greek works; see the beginning of Chapter IX. On the passage see L. P. Kenter, M. Tullius Cicero, De legibus A Commentary on Book I, trans. M. L. Leenheer-Braid (Amsterdam, 1972), p. 182. Cf. Quint. Inst. 8.6.34 and 12.10.34, and see also Eisenhut, VR, pp. 12-13.

74

HELLENIZATION AND 'ApETll- SEMANTIC BORROWING

occurrences, however, the Greek word c'xPETf] was applied to a wide range of subjects to indicate "what is best" and was regularly used of things both animate and inanimate - men, horses, wool, eyes and ears ~ as well as of abstract qualities,9 Moreover, starting with Herodotus, c'xpETf] is frequently found denoting good land, and it is Polybius' regular word for fertile land, The ubiquity of the usage is indicated by its presence in a papyrus of the second century. The application of virtus to farmland, then, was borrowed from a common use of the Greek word c'xpETf]. IQ That the usage appears first in Cato's De agricultura suggests that the borrowing was literary, because the frequent occurrence of borrowed Greek terms and neologisms demonstrates that Cato had read a Greek technical treatise on agriculture, II Literary borrowing is supported by the rarity of the usage in later Latin and by the fact that it appears again in a technical work on agriculture. I2 The use of virtus to designate the excellence of something inanimate, or of a quality, is also most common in technical or quasi-technical treatises, where it translate standard usages of c'xpETf]. It is, for example, found with some frequency in rhetoric works in phrases such as virtus (virtutes) dicendi - "stylistic excellence in speaking," (Cic. De or. 1.48, Brut. 232, 235), verborum virtus- "excellence in the use ofwords " - (Cic. De or. 3.170), and virtus narrationis - "excellence of the narrative" (Cic. De or. 2.326), as well as in works on architecture and argiculture. Like the example from Cato, all of these occurences appear to be 9 See Arist. EN I106AI5. 'APETT] is used of horses at Horn. n. 23.276; wool at Hdt. 3.106; eyes and ears at PI. Rep. 353B-C, and of abstract qualities at PI. Leg. 772B and 643D. For a collection of the usages of apETT], see 1. Ludwig, Quae fuerit vocis 'APETT] vis ac natura ante Demosthenis exitum (diss., Leipzig, 1906). For the basic meaning of apETT] as "excellence," see Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Sappho und Simonides, pp. 169-78, and W Jaeger, Paideia2 I (New York, 1945) pp. 5-6. 10 See LSj, apETT] , 2b. A. Mauersberger, Polybios Lexikon (Berlin, 1956) 1. p. 220, lists eleven such usages of apETT]. Eisenhut, VR, p. 31, deemed that this meaning of virtus is impossible without the influence of apETT]. II De agricultura has many neologisms and semantic loan words; e.g., de Agr. 33.1, 36, 43.2, with S. Boscherini, Lingua e scienze greca ne! "De agricultura" di Catone (Rome, 1970) pp. 28-9· 12 Virtus is specifically applied to land again only at Columella, Rust. 1.4. I and here in the conventional vitia et virtutes trope. Even this passage seems to be influenced by Cato, Agr. 1.2. Ov. Met. "4.357 - herbarum virtus has a different, miraculous meaning, contra Eisenhut, VR, p. no, see subsequent notes. Ov. Met. 15.205 - virtus in frondibus - is metaphorical; cf. Met. "5.207 - valens iuvenis.

75

ROMAN MANLINESS

literary borrowings. 13 The type of usage also appears in Plautus' work. In a passage from Miles gloriosus, the gods' rule of the world is compared to a juster human institution of the market-inspector ensuring an honest price: Mil. 728

SIcut merci pretium statuit qui est probus agoranomus: quae probast mers, pretium ei statuit, pro virtute ut veneat, quae inprobast, pro mercis vitio dominum pretio pauperat, itidem divos dispertisse vitam humanam aequom fuit: In the same way as a market-inspector who is honest sets the price for merchandise: he sets a price for that which is good merchandise, so it would sell according to its virtu5, what is not good, he marks down the price of the owner, according to fault of the merchandise. It would be fair that the gods had divided up human life in the same way.

The use of virtus here to mean the excellence or the value of merchandise is odd. But 6:PETrl was used in this way to denote value, and in significant parts of this passage Plautus seems to have followed his Greek model. I4 We should not, however, imagine that such shifts in the meaning of virtus can be explained by literary borrowings alone. The sociolinguistic process by which the semantic range of virtus was expanded was also, perhaps predominantly, non-literary in nature. The type of borrowing that extended the semantic reference of virtus and other I3

Cicero's treatises on rhetoric were also closely patterned on Greek originals, see Eisenhut's discussion, VR, pp. 7 I -6. Virtutes is also used by Cicero to translate apETol Tf\S AE~ECJ)S at Opt. gen. 23, on which see later Chapter X. Such usages also occur in Vitruvius' De architectura, a work where Greek technical terms and borrowed usages abound; see also O. Lendle, "Vitruv als Ubersetzer aus dem Griechischen," in Zum Umgang mit fremdem Sprachen in der griechisch-romischen Antike, eds. C. W Milller, K. Sier, J. Werner (Stuttgart, 1992) pp. 189-200. For virtus in Caesar's comparison of Terence and Menander, frag. I, p. 153 (Courtney), see Courtney, p. I54; cf. Eisenhut,

VR, p. 45. I4 For apETTj as value in New Comedy, see Antiphanes, frag. 2IO PCG frag. 2I2 CAF, i'i60s Tt XPVo-OVV lTp6S apETTjV KEKTTj,U§VTjS, OVTWS holpos. For the influence of apETTj on this usage of virtus, see Eisenhut, VR, p. 27-8, Sarsila, p. 37. On the virtus - vitium trope, see Chapter Ill. Close adaptation from Mil. 725 forward was seen by Perna, pp. I9-20; G. Williams, "Evidence for Plautus' Workmanship in the Miles Gloriosus," Hermes 86 (I958) pp. 88-
=

HELLENIZATION AND 'ApETT1- SEMANTIC BORROWING

Latin words is conventionally termed calque, but usually described by linguistic scholars as semantic calque, loan-shift, or loan synonym. It works by expanding the semantic range of an indigenous word by analogy with a foreign word with wider references but some common meaning. 15 Linguistic research has shown that semantic borrowing is most frequent among bilingual populations,16 and there is abundant evidence for a significant Greek-speaking population in Rome by the late third century. Whatever other effects the Pyrrhic War (280-275) had on the economy of Magna Graecia, it surely caused numbers of Greek artisans and traders, as well as actors to migrate from southern Italy to Rome, where there is evidence of their presence. 17 It was also standard Roman practice to enslave the populations of captured communities, and Greeks were not exempted. IS In 272, the Romans enslaved Greek citizens of Tarentum, and it is highly likely that other cities of Magna

The term calque can also be used as equivalent to "loan translation," which is the unit-by-unit translation of a word or phrase from one language to another; e.g., German Wasserstoff < "hydrogen." The meaning common in a semantic calque between virtus and apETi) was martial courage or prowess, frequent in Greek epic, rhetorical and historical works, see Eisenhut, VR, pp. 15-16. Numerous Latin words had their meanings expanded by this type of borrowing; e.g., ludus to mean "school" at Rud. 43, is from the Greek word for both "leisure" and "school" - O"xoi\i). See LofStedt, Syntactica n, p. 433 ff., Ernout, Aspects, pp. 86-91, C. Nicolas, Utraque lingua. La calque semantique: domaine greco-Iatin (Louvain, Paris, 1996); B. A. Krostenko, Cicero, Catullus, and the Language of Social Peiformance (Chicago, 2001) esp. pp. 6-14; J. N. Adarns, Bilingualism and the Latin Language (Oxford, 2003) esp. pp. 461-4; and the articles by D. R. Langslow, F. Biville, and S. Swain, in J. N. Adarns, M. Janse, S. Swain eds., Bilingualism in Ancient Society (Oxford, 2002). 16 For the relationship between bilingualism and linguistic borrowing, see H. Paul, Prinzipien der Sprachgeschicte8 (Tiibingen, 1968) Chapter 2; E. Haugen, Bilingualism in the Amercias (Alabama, 1956) pp. 22--'7, and U. Weinreich, Languages in Contact (New York, 1953), P·54· '7 For third century Greek influences at Rome, see Roma Medio-Repubblicana (Rome, 1977); also F. Zevi, Stud. Etr. 71 (1973) pp. 508-9 for opus signinum mosaic at Ostia c. 250. On Greek actors in Rome, see N. Horsfall, "Roma," in La spazio literario della Crecia antiqua, ed. G. Cambiano, et al., vol. I, tom. II (Rome, 1993) pp. 791-822, esp. pp. 800-3. 18 On the enslavement of Greeks, see Dion. Hal. 19.9-4 and Polyb. 9.39.2. Captured communities whose populations were not enslaved were exceptions, see Polyb. 10.17.616. K. R. Bradley, Slavery and Society at Rome (Cambridge, 1994), records only two instances of Romans capturing a city where it is specifically stated that slaves were not taken (Liv. 27.9.2 and Polyb. 10.17.6-16; 10.17.15-16). 15

77

ROMAN MANLINESS

Graecia received the same treatment both during and after the war with Pyrrhus. 19 The protracted Punic Wars created both an increased need for slaves and increased opportunities for acquiring them. Livy reports shortages of slaves during the Hannibalic War (2I8-20I), and the drain on Roman manpower during the long but poorly documented First Punic War (264-241) would have produced the same effect.20 Although reliable figures for persons enslaved in this period are few, and although estimating the size of populations in the ancient Mediterranean world is always hazardous, notices that go back to contemporary texts state that the number of Greeks enslaved was large. The total number of those enslaved at the captures of the Greek cities of Agrigentum (in 262) and Tarentum (in 209) was over 55,000. Between 262 and 200, the populations of eleven Greek communities are said to have been enslaved by Romans, and enslavement can be assumed for another seven Greek communities recorded as having been sacked by Romans during this period. Many more must have gone unrecorded. A conservative estimate puts the number of Greeks enslaved during the second half of the third century at between 90,000 and 100,000 persons. 21 Because many of the Greeks taken in war would have come

19

20

21

For enslaved Tarentines, see Polyb. 1.6.7,2.24.13, and Liv. 25.7.11. During the Pyrrhic war several Greek cities in Italy were destroyed by Romans and Epeirotes (Paus. 6.3.12). Some slaves would have been taken when rebellious Croton and Locri were recaptured by the Romans in 278-7 (Zon. 8.377; Front. Strat. 3.6.4; App. Samn. 12.1-2). In 276 the Locrians killed the Roman garrison and returned to their alliance with Pyrrhus (Zon. 8.6). Croton is said to have lost halfits population in the Pyrrhic War (Liv. 24.3.1). Shortages of slaves during the Hannibalic War at Liv. 28.11.9, cf. 22.57.II and 27.38.10; cf. T. Frank, An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome I (Baltimerc, 1933) pp. 67 and 100. According to Brunt, fM, p. 67, "an estimate of 500,000 need not be too high," for the number of slaves in Italy during the Hannibalic War. For Greek populations enslaved during the Pyrrhic Punic First and Second Macedonian, and Antiochan Wars, see H. Volkmann, Die Massenversklavungen der Einwohner eroberter Stiidte in der hellenistisch-riimischen Zeit (Wiesbaden, 1961), pp. 20-4, 41-3, 55-6. Sacked communities where Romans took booty: in 259 - Macella (polyb. 1.24.1, ILLRP 319); Hippana (Polyb. 1.24.n; Diod. 23 .9.4); Camicus (Diod. 23.9.4); in 251 - Therma (Polyb. 1.39.13; Diod. 23.19.20); Lipara (polyb. 1.39.13; Diod. 23.19.20); in 208 - Oreus in Euboea (Liv. 28.5.18, 6.7f.; 28.7.4; cf. Polyb. 11.4.8; Dio. 17.58); in 200 - Antipatreia in Eprius (Liv. 31.27.3). Cf. Horsfall, "Roma," pp. 806-'7. On slaves being included under the term booty, see K. H. Vogel, praeda RE xxii. I (1953) cols. 1200-13. For estimates of the populations of the Greek cities in question, see J. Beloch, Die Beviilkerung des

HELLENIZATION AND 'Apml - SEMANTIC BORROWING

from urban environments, and because from at least the third century, Hellenic culture was held at a premium by some of the Roman elite, a higher proportion of Greek than non-Greek war captives, especially those who had a trade or skill, would have been brought to Rome. 22 If as few as a quarter of the estimated enslaved Greeks reached Rome, the number of Greek speakers residing in the capital during the second half of the third century would have amounted to around 12% of the city's population, which has been placed at about 200,000 in 200. 23 To these must be added the number of free Greek immigrants engaged in Rome's commerce, manufacture, and other activities. It is reasonable to assume that during the second half of the third century Greek speakers made up at least I5% of the population of Rome. 24 This is well within the range necessary to affect significantly the language habits of the native Latin-speaking population. Over the course of the second and first centuries B. C., the percentage of Greek speakers in Rome became greater. 25 There is, of course, no direct evidence as to how the language exchanges between Greek speakers and native Latin speakers worked. Moreover, the status of the Greek language in ancient Rome is unusual. On the one hand, as the language of a literature that was esteemed by

22

griechisch-romischen Welt (Leipzig, IS86), for Sicily, pp. 281-90; Magna Graecia, pp. 3013; Greece, pp. IS0-90; and Rome, pp. 392-412. Cf. Adams, p. 366. Liv. 2S. 11.9 records a shortage of slaves in 206 in the context of farming in Latium. That only three years earlier 30,000 had been enslaved at the capture of Tarentum (Liv. 27.16.7) suggests that many of the Tarentines had been taken to Rome. For the importance to the Romans of skilled workman among war captives, compare Scipio's making the artisans of New Carthage into public slaves of Rome (Polyb. 10.17.910).

23

24

2;

Population estimates for this period are admittedly informed guesses. N. Morley, Metropolis and Hinterland (Cambridge, 1996) p. 39, posited as a "working figure" 200,000, of which he estimated that 50,000 were slaves. Manumission was relatively frequent, but would have had litde effect on the language habits of the freedperson. Brunt, IM, p. 69, estimated the population of Rome in the early third century to be about IS0,000 and that it had doubled by c. 133. I. Kaimio, The Romans and the Greek Language (Helsinki, 1979) pp. 23-4, estimated that Greek slaves or persons of Greek servile extraction constituted 20% to 30% of Rome's population in the late Republic and Empire. Morley, pp. 39-54; Brunt, IM, pp. 69, 383; Frank, ESAR I, pp. IS7-S; cf. Horsfall, "Roma," p. S07. For the Empire, see Kaimio, p. 24 and R. MacMullen, "The Unromanized in Rome," in Diasporas in Antiquity, eds. S. J. D. Cohen, E. S. Frerichs (Adanta, 1993) pp. 47-64.

79

ROMAN. MANLINESS

numbers of the Roman elite, Greek had prestige. At the same time it was a servile language, spoken by conquered people who had lost all and who did the bidding of Roman masters. Although no single modern analogy matches the ancient Roman situation, nevertheless, the linguistic behavior of certain modern populations is suggestive as to how the language exchange between Greek and Latin speakers might have operated. 26 Research on New World slavery has shown that many house and town slaves were bilingual or bidialectal- conversant in the English of their masters as well as in the Plantation Creole spoken by field workers. This phenomenon exerted a significant impact on the American southern English dialect. The same pattern is found among the slave populations of South America. 27 Like their New World counterparts, many Greek slaves living in Rome would have become bilingual, and the mixed speech of bilingual domestic slaves would have affected the Latin of slave-owning Roman family members, especially children, while daily contact between free or hired Latin-speaking workers and bilingual slaves would have had reciprocallinguistic consequences. 28 In addition, notwithstanding dialectical differences, because Greek slaves in ancient Rome spoke a common native language, the impact of servile Greek on Latin was likely to have been greater than that of slave languages in the New World. 29 In ancient Rome, however, the hope of manumission provided strong social and economic incentives, lacking in New World slavery,

26

27

28 29

Kaimio, p. 20-1, noted the general dilliculty of adopting the modern sociolinguistic typologies of "conquest" and "immigration" to ancient Rome because of the institution of slavery. On the influences of slave languages on English, see J. L. Dillard, Black English, Its History and Usage in the United States (New York, 1972) Chapter Ill; J. E. Holloway, W K. Vass, The African Hertitage cifAmerican English (Bloomington, 1993) esp. pp. I07-60. On South America, see D. Pierson, Negroes in Brazil, A Study cif Race Contact in Bahia (Chicago, 1942, rep. 1967) pp. 75-80, 244-5. For the dual direction of the borrowing, see Paul, p. 391 and Weinreich, p. 98. Enslaved Greeks from Magna Graecia had lived in a dialectically diverse region where Ionic Euboean, and Laconian, Rhodian, and Sicilian Doric were spoken. But by the third century Attic KOIViJ was widely influential, and its impact on Doric KOIViJ was considerable; see C. D. Buck, The Greek Dialects (Chicago, 1928, repr. 1955) pp. 10-14, 175-8. Among New World slaves, the language-mixing practice of slave dealers had led to the creation of a lingua franca in the slave communities - Pidgin English and Portuguese that limited the influence of native African languages in the new environment.

80

HELLENIZATION AND 'ApETll- SEMANTIC BORROWING

to abandon the servile language in favor of Latin, so the question arises as to whether the influence of servile Greek on the Latin language was sustained. Here studies of the linguistic habits of North American immigrants may be helpful. 30 These show the normal pattern is for co-linguists to seek each other out and form communities within which dialects tend to level out toward standardization. At the same time practical considerations encourage immigrants to learn the new language. In this atmosphere the two languages, immigrant and native, "tend to become calques of each other," creating a bilingual dialect in which semantic borrowing of all kinds occurS."3! Most borrowing is done by the immigrant population and tends not to transcend the limits of its community, and immigrant languages tend to die out within three generations or less in the absence of monolingual newcomers. But so long as the tide of immigration continues, and a core population speaking the foreign language exists, the influence of the immigrant language will persist. 32 Roman slaves would not have had the freedom of association available to North American immigrants, but it is probable that manumitted Greeks would have been drawn to associate with fellow Greek speakers. Most important, however, is that the continuing influx of Greek slaves throughout the second half

30

The subject has long been the focus of study by American linguists. For surveys and critical bibliographies, see E. Haugen, Bilingualism in the Americans, and "Bilingualism, Language Contact and Immigrant Languages in the United States. A Research Report 1956-1970," in]. A. Fishman, ed., Advances in the Study of Societal Multilingualism (The Hague, Paris, New York, 1978) voL I, pp. I-Ill. For studies on non-American populations, see J. F Hamers, M. H. A. Blanc, Bilinguality and Bilingualism (Cambridge,

3'

Haugen, Bilingualism, p. 65. Immigrants speaking a bilingual dialect switch from one language to another in mid-sentence (code-switching) and are frequendy mistaken about the linguistic membership of given items in their own speech, so Haugen, The Norwegian Language in American: A Study of Bilingual Behavior (philadelphia, 1953) pp. 63-9; F Grosjean, Life with Two Languages (Cambridge, MA, 1982) p. Il7· An example of the pattern can be seen in the history of the word "turner" meaning "gymnast" (from Ger. der Turner) in American English. In 1872 the usage was reported as "now universally admitted to our speech," M. Schere de Vere, Americanisms (New York, 1872, rep. 1968) p. 141. But as German immigration declined in the mid-twentieth century, the usage waned, and it is rarely encountered in contemporary American English; see H. Kloss, "German-American Language Maintenance Efforts," in]. A. Fishman, ed., Language Layalty in the United States (The Hague, 1966, repr. New York, 1978) pp. 206-52, esp. pp. 212-14.

1989).

J2

81

ROMAN MANLINESS

of the third century and later would have sustained a core population of Greek speakers. In whatever circumstances it occurred, the process of monolingual Greek slaves becoming bilingual in Latin would then have been repeated over and over, ensuring that the sound of Greek continued to be heard, and to exert influence, in the homes and streets ofRome. 33 If we imagine the streets of third- and second-century Rome as frequented by numerous native Greek speakers, a high proportion of them slaves going about the daily business assigned to them by their masters, we find ourselves in the world of Plautus. Because, as was pointed out long ago by Leo and others, and as has been confirmed by statistical studies, in Plautus' plays the great majority of Greek words are spoken by slaves or characters of low status. 34 Plautine comedy is full of Greek words, phrases, and word-play, and a high proportion of these have to do with domestic life, retail commerce, and street life. 35 Some of the linguistic borrowing was certainly done by Plautus

Later arriving immigrants tend to learn the native language faster from bilingual compatriots who preceded them, see J. A. Fishman, The Rise and Fall of the Ethnic Revival (Berlin, New York, Amsterdam, I985) p. 62. Various factors affect language maintenance, see A. Tosi, "The Notion of Community in Language Maintenance," in Bilingualism and Migration, ed. P. Jordens, Studies on Language Acquisition I4 (Berlin, New York, I999) pp. 325-43, respectively. Among Roman slaves the lack of stable family structures might have discouraged maintenance of Greek, and diseases and late marriages limited the growth of both servile and freed populations; see Morley, p. 45; Brunt, IM, pp. I43-6; and S. Treggiari, Roman Freedmen during the Late Republic (Oxford, I969) p. 35. But to a great extent, these would have been overridden by the continuing influx of Greek-speaking slaves into Rome. On generational factors in language maintenance, see Adams, pp. 367-9. 34 N. 1. Tuchnaendler, De vocabulis graecis in linguam Latinam translatis (diss., Berlin, I876) esp. p. 66; E Leo, "Lectiones Plautinae," Hermes I8 (I883) pp. 558-87, esp. p. 566; PI. For. pp. ro6-7; G. P. Shipp, "Greek in Plautus," WS 66 (I953) pp. ro5-I2; M. E. Gilleland, Linguistic Differentiation of Character Types and Sex in the Comedies of Plautus and 11rence (diss., Univ. of Virginia, I979); R. Maltby, "The Distribution of Greek Loanwords in Plautus," Papers of the Leeds International Latin Seminar 8 (I 995) pp. 3I -69, with lists of Greek words in Appendix 1. The same is true for Terence; see Maltby, "The Distribution of Greek Loan-Words in Terence," CQ 35 (I985) pp. IIO-23. H. D. Jocelyn's arguments to the contrary, "Code-Swithching in the Comoedia Palliata," in Rezeption und Identitiit, eds. G. Vogt-Spira, B. Rommel (Stuttgart, I999) pp. I69--95, are unconvincing; see Adams, p. 35I, n. roD. 3S On Greek words in Plautus, see, in addition to the works cited in the previous note, Fraenkel, PI. im PI. p. I95, n. I = Elem. p. I85, n. I; J. N. Hough, "The Use of Greek Words in Plautus," AJP 55 (I934) pp. 346-64, with bibliography in n. 3; F. Middlemann,

33

82

HELLENIZATION AND 'ApETl1 - SEMANTIC BORROWING

himself, because he modeled his plays, sometimes with close verbal parallels, on Greek originals. However, it has been argued cogently by Leo and others that some of the Greek words and phrases in the plays were not taken from the models of New Comedy, but instead originated in the everyday speech of contemporary Rome, which Plautus was, to an extent, mimicking. 36 From the mid-third century on, Rome possessed a significant Greek-speaking population. Many would have been slaves, but given the Roman practice offrequent manumission, considerable numbers of those who had been enslaved in earlier wars would be free. Working in Rome and perforce bilingual, they would be engaged in occupations domestic service, commerce, and manufacturing among them - that made certain Greek words and phrases familiar to Latin speakers. 37 The Greek used in the streets of Rome would have been the dialectically mixed Greek (Doric and Attic KOIVTj) of third-century Magna Graecia, further standardized by the dialectically heterogeneous servile population of Rome. 38 In the conversations that took place in the streets, markets, and in some of the elite homes of mid-republican Rome, Greek and Latin were constantly being interspersed. Linguistically,

36

37

)8

Griechische Welt und Sprache in Plautus' Komodien (1938); and G. P. Shipp, "Plautine Terms for Greek and Roman Things," Glotta 34 (1955) pp. 139-52· Leo, PI. For. pp. 106-'7, and the works cited in n. 35. E.g., OIXETat in contrast to apparet at Trin 418-19. The phrase dicam scribere, meaning "to bring a lawsuit," at Aul. 760 and Poen. 800, is the Greek legal procedure - 8iKllV YPCUPE1V - well-attested in inscriptions and Ptolemaic papyri and common to all Hellenic states, see A.-J. Boye, La denuntiatio introductive d'instance sous le principat (Bordeaux, 1922) pp. 101-2; M. Kaser, Das Romische Zivilprozessrecht (Munich, 1966) p. 170, n. 36; cf. Adams, p. 351, n. 100. See Adams, pp. 351-5. The significance of Roman soldiers and veterans who had picked up Greek words and phrases while serving in Magna Graecia was much exaggerated by T. Frank, Life and Literature in the Roman Republic (Berkeley, 1930, repr. 1965) pp. 69-73. Horsfall, "Roma," p. 798, was right to stress that large numbers of Romans had served in Magna Graecia from an early period, 225, but it is doubtful that Greek so acquired would have by itself enabled veterans to understand the amount of it that occurs in Plautus (an average of about ninety occurrences per play). In addition, ex-soldiers would not have formed a bilingual core community necessary for sustained linguistic influence. For the dialects, see earlier n. 29. There are numerous examples of non-Attic Greek words in Plautus, e.g., thermopolium - "cafe" - (Curc. 292, Pseud. 742, Rud. 529, Trin. 1013) is not found in Greek literature, and is almost certainly a south Italian word. See Middelmann, pp. 13-17,29,39,97-9; A. S. Gratwick, The Cambridge History of Classical Literature, II Latin Literature, ed., E. J. Kenney (Cambridge, 1987) p. II2, n. I; Maltby, "Distribution in Plautus," p. 42, n. 12 and n. 16.

ROMAN MANLINESS

the situation must have resembled that of the bustling immigrant neighborhoods of twentieth-century American cities. But unlike modern cities, Rome in the time of Plautus was not segregated or "zoned" into elite and non-elite neighborhoods, but rather displayed a pattern of spacial integration of commerce and politics with large parts of the Roman Forum being fronted by both elite houses and shops.39 Language mixing, therefore, was not confined to the non-elite classes. Here was an atmosphere in which upper-class Romans, who were so inclined, would have been able to master the Greek language with relative ease. 40 Here also was an atmosphere capable offostering the types of linguistic borrowing that can be observed in the works of Plautus and other early Latin authors, and in which the semantic range of virtus was extended beyond its native etymological range of manliness by the process of semantic borrowing, particularly, semantic calque, from the Greek word 6:PETT]. The variety of semantic changes wrought by Greek on Latin, and something of the process by which such changes occurred, can be appreciated by examining two very different instances of how the semantic range of virtus was extended by borrowing from 6:pETT]. One, the contrasting of virtus to fortuna, was enormously influential and became a standard part of Latin literature and language. The other, the attribution of virtus to deities, seems to have operated primarily on a non-literary level, and, although it had a less discernible impact initially, would eventually exert great influence, principally through Christian Latin usage.

2.

VIRTUS AND FORTUNA

The contrast between innate human ability and either the favor or opposition of fortune is commonly expressed in Latin by the joining of virtus with felicitas or fatum, but most often by far is its pairing with 39

40

See A. Wallace-Hadrill, "Elites and trade in the Roman town," in City and Country in the Ancient World, eds. J. Rich, A. Wallace-Hadrill (London, 1991) pp. 241-72, esp. pp. 261-4· Romans who learned to speak Greek well through informal language acquisition would not necessarily be learned in or even sympathetic toward Greek literature or culture, so rightly and refreshingly Adarns, Bilingualism, pp. 12-13.

HELLENIZATION AND 'ApETTj - SEMANTIC BORROWING

fortuna. Although ubiquitous in the literature of the Classical period and later, the virtus - fortuna collocation is surprisingly rare in earlier Latin. It occurs in only two passages in Plautus (one of which may be interpolated), not at all in Terence, once in a surviving line ofEnnius' Annales, and once in a fragment from Cato's OriginesY There is an obvious correspondence between virtus - fortuna and 6:pETT] - TVXll, but to what degree is the Latin pairing dependent on the Greek? In Greek literature, the association between 6:pETT] and TVXll was both general and longstanding, and although it eventually became a trite commonplace, it expressed a basic and characteristic concern of ancient Greek culture - the relationship of human power and responsibility to extra-human forces in the determination of eventsY In this relationship, TVXll represents the superhuman powers that to one degree or another direct the course of events. At first TVXll seems to have been closely identified with the beneficence of the gods, but later it acquired an arbitrary and sometimes ominous character. 43 Opposed to this was 6:PETT] , which, as we have seen, was applied to a wide range of things, but in this collocation specifically designates human excellence. The relationship of 6:PETT] meaning human excellence to the divine is complex. 'APETT] is applied to the gods in the fliad, but the attribution is otherwise rare in literature. 44 As we will see, in the cultic usage 6:PETT] TOU eEOU, the word has a distinctive and very different meaning of "the miraculous power" of the deity (in the plural "the wondrous deeds" of

41 Plaut. Mil. 9-I2 and Poen. I328; Ennius, Ann. I86-7-S; and Cato, Orig. IV 7 (a), Chassignet; on all these passages, see below. The pair also occurs later in the second century in two fragments of tragedies by Accius, Telep., 6I9 Ribb., and Arm. iud., I56 Ribb. 42 The central theme of the fliad. The emphasis placed on the human aspect is distinctively Greek and very different from the view of the Romans and of everyone else. 43 The identification of TVXTJ with the gods is found in Archilochus, frag. 8, on which see Jaeger, Paedeia2 I p. I24; Pindar, al. I2.I-2, Nem. 6.24; Alcman frag. 44 (Diels Il); Hdt. I.26.8. Although challenged, this view of TVXTJ was always present in Greek thought; see U. von Wilomowitz-Moellendorff, Der Glaube der Hellenen Il (Berlin I932, repr. Basel-Stuttgart, I959) pp. 298-303; and M. P Nilsson, Geschichte der griechischen Religion2 Il (Munich, I96I) p. 200-IQ. 44 A'PETTj of the gods occurs at Horn. fl. 9.498, but for the prominence of apETTj as human excellence, see Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Sappho und Simonides, pp. I69-78; and see Jaeger, Paedeia2 I pp. 5-IQ.

8S

ROMAN MANLINESS

the god). In the Hellenistic period, 6:PETT] was commonly associated with divine kingship as a quality that the good ruler should and did possess; yet cults honoring the divine qualities of Hellenistic rulers did not celebrate their 6:pETT].45 It was likewise rare to represent 6:pETT] as something bestowed by the gods. Alexandrian court poetry might urge the king to seek 6:pETT] from Zeus (along with OA~OS - "happiness" so not regarded as a divine quality), but it was a subject of philosophical debate whether or not 6:PETT] was even compatible with the idea of . deity.46 Although 6:PETT] was personified early in Greek literature,47 it was not commonly regarded as a divine quality. In Greek art, 'APETT] was represented together with various divine, human, and personified figures, but was itself almost certainly a personification rather than a deity. There is no good evidence that the Greek concept 6:pETT] ever received a public cult. 48

45 C. Habicht, Gottmenschentum und griechische Stiidte (Munich, 1956) p. 223: For apETTJ as a quality of the king, see Schubart, AFP 12 (1937) pp. 24-7. 46 Theoc. 17.135 ff.; Callim. Hymn I 94-96. For apETTJ being shared by god and man, see

47

48

i.e. PI., Leg. 631B-D; an idea central to Stoic doctrine, Cic. ND 2.79-80, 30--9. 153. Incompatibility between apETTJ and deities was held by Aristot. EN II45A 25-7, 1178B ID-15, and fully argued at Sex. Emp., Adv. phys. 152-77. See the comments and references of A. S. Pease, M. Tulli Ciceronis De Natura Natura II (Harvard, 1958) pp. 1036-7, on Cic. ND 3.38. Early personification - Hes. Op. 289--93; Simon. frag. 37; Bacchyl. 13.175-81; Prodicus, in Xen. Mem. 2.1.22-34. Aristotle's Hymn to I'IpETr) (Athen. 696A, Diog. Laert. 5.27) concerns a personification, not a deity; see M. Bowra, "Aristotle's Hymn to Virtue," CQ 32 (1938) pp. 182-9, esp. pp. 188--9. Personified 'ApETTJ was represented in paintings by Parrhasios (plin. NH 35.70) and Aristolaos (Plin. NH 35.137), and in a colossal statue group by Euphranor (Plin. NH 34.77). Contra R. R. R. Smith, Aphrodisias I, The Monument if C. Julius Zoilos (Mainz, 1993) p. 57. Syll. J 985 records a late-second century cult, which is distinctly private, and in large part non-Greek. In private cults of the Hellenistic period the line between personification, abstract quality, and deity often became blurred by idiosyncratic innovation; see O. Weinreich, Stifung und Kultsatzungen eines Privatheiligtums in Philadelphia in Lydien (Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften 16 Abh., 1919) pp. 168, esp. pp. 15-21, and S. C. Barton, G. H. R. Horsley, "A Hellenistic Cult Group and the New Testament," Jahrbuchfur Antike und Christentum 24 (1981) pp. 7-41. (I owe the last reference to Angelos Chaniotis.) In Athenaeus' description of the great procession of Ptolemy II Philadelphus (201D), the statue - &yaA~a - of 'APETTJ is not evidence of a cult, because the word &yaA~a can designate a statue that is merely located in a sacred context; see S. R. F. Price, Rituals and Power (Cambridge, 1984) pp. 176--9; esp. p. 17 8, n. 4. The earliest reliable evidence for a public cult to 'APETTJ, a second-century A.D. inscription from Aphrodisias (CIG II 2786), is an adaptation of the Roman cult

86

HELLENIZATION AND 'ApET11- SEMANTIC BORROWING

In literature and in popular thought, apETf) was preeminently innate human excellence, and it was as such that it was counterposed with extra-human TVXil. The relationship between these qualities was expressed in two ways. TVXil could be presented as the complement of apETf), as in a fifth-century epigram praising heroes of the Persian War that voiced the traditional idea that the powers that control the world favor the brave (AP 7. 253). But TVXil and apETf) could also be antithetical. The earliest explicit statement of this type of relationship was made by Theognis and reflects anxiety about the arbitrary nature of life, an anxiety that grew during the fifth century and was clearly and frequently stated by Euripides. 49 Under this aspect, TVXil was regarded as a fickle, even malevolent power. During the fourth century, TVXil gained greater importance, and its relationship to apETf) was discussed by orators and philosophers. In general, orators emphasized the dramatic opposition of the pair, while philosophers sought reconciliation. 50 Literary and epigraphical evidence testifies that during the Hellenistic period, TVXil became a major deity for large numbers of people. Official cults honored a goddess who brought benefits to her favorites, but a fickle and malicious TVXil also held a high place in popular thought as an all-powerful deity. 51 Nilsson attributed the

49

50

SI

to Virtus. Likewise the reference at Philostr., Vita soph. 1.25.II; so righdy K. Wernicke, "arete," RE III (1895) coL 678. Theog. 129. The idea that TVXTJ is fickle is implied at Soph. OT 977--97, Ant. II58, and in numerous passages in Euripides, e.g., Cye. 603-6, Hee. 488-91, Troad. I009, frag. 901. Euripides' ideas on TVXTJ are complex and influential, see W C. Greene, Moira (Gloucester, Mass, 1957) pp. 172-219. Cf. Isoc. 4.91, 11.IO; Lycurg. Leoe. 48; Dem. 61.9, 61,32, 60.19-20, and see WJaeger, Demosthenes (Berkeley, 1938) pp. 130-38, and PL Ti. 25E-26E; Leg. 709B-C and Aristot. NE IIOIA 6 fr. Most of dre evidence for all-powerful and fickle TVXTJ is from tragedy and comedy. TVXTJ is characterized as omnipotent by Chairemon, frag. 2 (TrGF); Menander, Aspis 147-8, frag. 372 PCG = 417 K-T, = 438 CAF; Nicostratus, frag. 31 PCG = 32 CAF; arbitrary by Antiphanes, frag. 80 PCG = 80 CAF; Menander, 372 PCG = 417 K-T, 380, PCG= 424 K-T; and Moschion, frag. 9 (TrGF); blind by Menander, Kon. 13-14, frags. 256 PCG = 295 K-T, frag. 682 PCG = 463 K-T; unjust by Diphilus, frag. I07 PGC= 107 CAF; and Menander, frag. 852 PCG= 629 K-T and 853 PCG= 630K-T. Epicurus wrote TTjv 51: TVXTJV O(ITE 6EOV, WS oi TIOAAol vo~iZ;ovo"JV, llTIoAa~l3av6VTvs, Ad Herod. III (134), H. Usener, Epicurea (Leipzig, 1887) p. 65. For malicious TVXTJ in inscriptions, see R. Lattimore, Themes in Greek and Latin Epitaphs (Urbana, 1962) p. 149;

ROMAN MANLINESS

rising importance ofTuXT1 to two causes: a crisis in traditional Greek religion in the fifth century and the political, social, and economic upheavals caused by Alexander and his successors, which created a world in which status changed quickly and drastically and where consequently T UXT1 seemed omnipotent. 52 In these circumstances, 6:pETT] TUXT1 reached greater prominence than ever before. The relative importance of the two was debated by Stoics and Peripatetics, 53 and the latter school's hostility toward Alexander was expressed by crediting the king's exploits to the favors ofT UXT1 rather than to his own 6:PETT]. 54 The dramatic effect achieved by the contrast made it a favorite theme in Hellenistic history and especially in biography where it appeared in both its antithetical and complementary aspects. 55 The complementary relationship of 6:pETT] and T UXT1 was also used in the propaganda of Hellenistic kingship, meeting the traditional requirement that a ruler have innate abilities and be favored by heaven. 56 That the notion of personal6:pETT] gaining the favor of TUXT1 was a commonplace is witnessed by a fourth-century Theban epitaph that bitterly denies the

BC 334; BC 489.4, BC 526.1-3. Also see Wilamowitz, Claube, n, 298-309; Nilsson, vo!. 2, pp. 200-7 and K. J. Dover, Creek Popular Morality (Berkeley, 1974) pp. 138-40. 52 Nilsson, vo!. 2, pp. 208-210. 53 Theophrastus wrote a ne pi evoaJl-lovlas and a nepi eVTvXlas (Diog. Laert. 5.43,47). Sphaerus, a disciple of Zeno, wrote a TTepi Tvxfis; see F. Wehrli, Die Schule der Aristoteles IV, Demetrios von Phaleron (Basel, 1949) p. 58. 54 Cf. Diod. Sic. 16.1.6 on Philip to Diod. Sic. 17.38.5 on Alexander. The tradition is reflected in Plutarch's essay, De fortuna Alexandri. 55 Influenced by rhetoric, fourth-century historians gave TUXll a significant role. For TUXll in Ephorus, see Diod. Sic. 13.21.4-5, 23.2-4, 24.6, 27.5-6 and 14.21.4, also M. Muhl, "Zur Entstehungszeit der Historien der Ephoros," Klio 29 (1936) pp. IlI-13; on Ananirnenes of Lamp sac us, FCR 72 F31, lIb 5. For the apETiJ-TUXll dichotomy in Theopompus' work on Philip of Mace don, see Polyb. 8.Il, also P. Pede ch, La Methode historique de Polybe (paris, 1964) p. 331 f. For the apETiJ - TUXll theme and Demetrius Poliorcetes, see Polyb. 29.21 and Wehrli, frag. 79-81 and pp. 57-8. The collocation is reflected in the Latin biographies of Cornelius Nepos, i.e., Lys. 1.1 and Bum. 1.1. Polybius wrote his history to oppose the notion that Roman domination was due to TUXll; cf. Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 1.4. For TUXll in Polybius, see 1.63·9; 6.43.4-44.8; 10.40.6-9; 18.28.5; 23.12.3; and 31.25.10, with Walbank, Commentary, I pp. r6-26, and Pedech, pp. 331-54. On TUXll in Duris and Phylarchus, see Pedech, p. 3P· 56 See Schubart, APF I2 (1937) pp. 24-6.

88

HELLENIZATION AND 'ApET1'l- SEMANTIC BORROWING

proposition. 57 The 6:pETT] - TVXTJ pairing was then a characteristically Greek idea that pervaded all levels of Greek society and culture, but that was especially important in rhetoric, and that was most prominent at that period when Greek influences on Rome were strongest. Although the origins and nature of the archaic Latin deity Fortuna are obscure, it is clear that it was very different from TVXTJ. 58 Certainly by the middle Republic, Latin Fortuna was a goddess of blessing and good fortune, which lacked the omnipotent, arbitrary, and malevolent nature of Hellenistic TVXTJ. 59 The immission of these negative characteristics to Fortuna occurred during the second century, but the assimilation that produced the Fortuna/T VXTJ amalgam was not immediate. In Plautus deified Fortuna. is rare in comparison to the. references to TVXTJ in Greek New Comedy. Furthermore, in Plautus, Fortuna is almost always presented as a beneficent deity. 60 The influence of T vXTJ is evident in some of Terence's treatments of Fortuna, but that there was a distinction between the native Latin goddess and the Greek-influenced concept. 61

57

58

59

60

6,

EG 489.4; see Lattimore, p. 149; also see Diogenes Sinopensis, frag. 3 (TrGF) for 6:PETT] as the slave ofTvXll. For the history of scholarly controversy on archaic Fortuna - a goddess of good fortune or a Frauengottin, see J. Charnpeaux, Fortuna, Le Cult de la Fortune aRome et dans le monde romain I (Rome, 1982) pp. vii-xxiii. See I. KaJanto, "Fortuna," ANRW, 11 17 I, pp. 502-58, for benevolent cultic epithets; also J. Champeaux, "Fortuna' et la vocabulaire de la famille de 'fortuna' chez Plaute et Thence," RPh 56 (I982) pp. 57-7I; cf. Charnpeaux, Fortuna, 11 (Rome, I987) pp. 3843. On the distinction between native Latin Fortuna and TVXll see also the comment of K. Latte, RRG, p. 179, approved by Dumezil, ARR, 11, p. 423, n. 31. H. D. Jocelyn, The Tragedies ofEnnius (Cambridge, 1967) p. 301 and Chambeaux, RPh 56 (I982) p. 69, but see Pseud. 678 and 680; Trin. 36I-4; andAsin. 727 together with 7I6 and 7I8. Even in these few instances where the influence ofTVXll might be detected, Plautus is careful to qualifY the fickle or omnipotent characteristics of Fortuna. The debate over the power of fortune was taken from the Greek literature; see Men. Dysk. 275 ff., and frags. 687 PCG = 468 K-T; 709 PCG = 486 K-T; 846 PCG = 623 K-T; and frag. ro83 CAF; also Philemon, frags. 56 PCG = 53 CAF; II6 PCG = 99 CAF; I25 PCG = 137 CAF; I37 PCG = 150 CAF; and Aristot. EN II20 Bn ff.; Phys. I95B3I-I98Aro; Polyb. 1.37.4; 2.7.I-3; I5.21.3. Made clear by Donatus' comment at Ter. Pl1Orm. 84I, so Champeaux, Fortuna, I, p. 245. Fortuna was also affected by Stoic ideas about fate, but these were less at odds with the benificent Roman concept than was TVXll; Champeaux, Fortuna, 11, pp. I63-70.

ROMAN MANLINESS

That the Romans were initially less sympathetic to the idea of a world dominated by an arbitrary and impersonal deity agrees with the differences between their historical experiences and those of the Greek world. Rationalist critiques of traditional Roman religion were not nearly as important or influential as the sophistic movement had been for Greek culture. At Rome such criticism was inspired by foreign ideas and was consequently suspect for many. The fickle, omnipotent Fortuna/TVXTl composite seems to have not gained prominence at Rome until the later second century. The dramatic contrast between innate human ability and an omnipotent but uncaring goddess, central to the popularity of the 6:PETT] - TVXTl dichotomy, was therefore foreign to the traditional Roman concept offortuna. As fortuna differed from TVXTl, so did virtus from 6:pETT]. Although virtus was also the preeminent quality of a man, unlike 6:PETT], it was not considered an innate human quality set against supernatural power. Quite the contrary, at Rome virtus was itself viewed as a numinous quality granted to certain men. As Varro wrote, ita Virtus, quae dat

virtutem, Honoy, qui honorem, Concordia, quae concordiam, Victoria, quae dat victoriam. - "For it is the divinity Virtus who gives courage, the divinity Honos who gives honor, divine Concordia who gives concord, and divine Victoria who gives victory." (frag. 189 Cardauns, apud Aug. CD 4.24.). As such, Virtus received a state cult in the late-third century - something that the Greeks never did for 6:PETT].62 There is no evidence for a cultic relationship between Virtus and Fortuna at Rome before the innovations of Augustus' religious program,63 the traditional cultic partner ofVirtus being Honos. Therefore, the basis for the 6:pETT] - TVXTl pairing, a contrast between innate human ability and supernatural favor, was also alien to the native Roman concept of virtus. The virtus - fortuna collocation was a predominantly rhetorical topos unrelated to traditional Roman ideas about the qualities involved. It 62

6)

For the temple and cult of Honos and Virtus see MRR I, pp. 233 and later Chapter VII. For the text, see B. Cardauns, M. Terentius Uzrro Antiquitates Rerum Divinarum I (Wiesbaden, 1976); Cic. ND 2.60-2. In 19 an altar to Fortuna Redux was erected in front of the temple of Ho nos and Virtus to honor the return of Augustus, Res Gest. II (ed. H. Volkmann, Berlin 1969).

90

HELLENIZATION AND 'ApET1] - SEMANTIC BORROWING

was derived from the 6:pETT) - TUXil model that the Romans encountered in their contacts with Greek culture and literature. The relatively few occurrences of the collocation in the remains of early Latin support this. Reference to the virtus - fortuna pairing occurs only twice in the Plautine corpus, at Poenulus 1326-8, and, Miles gloriosus 9-12. 64 It also is found in a passage from Ennius' Annales, in Pyrrhus' words on the ransoming of Roman prisoners (Ann. 185-9 S = 188-92 ROL) discussed previously. The particular idea of fortune sparing courage expressed here is a variant of the "fortune favors the brave" topos, which was proverbial and Greek in origin. 65 One other reference to the virtus - fortuna trope in the remains of early Latin occurs in the fragment of Origines, discussed previously, where Cato compares the brave deeds of the Roman military tribune, Q. Caedicius, to those of the Spartan king, Leonidas at Thermopylae. 66 Here again we see a variant on the Greek "fortune favors the brave" theme. The passage shows indications of Greek influences. 67 Although Cato was clearly consulting Greek sources about the story of the Spartan sacrifice in 480, and although the motif of 6:pETT) - TUXil had become a traditional

64

65

66 67

Stat propter virumIJortem atque jortunatum et jorma regia; /tam bellatorem Mars se haud ausit dicere/neque aequiperare suas virtutes ad tuas. - "He stands next to/a brave and fortunate man, and one of regal beauty./Mars would not dare to call himself such a warrior/nor to equate his brave deeds to yours." The text of Mil. II adopts Bathe's emendation, see M. Hammond, A. M. Mack, W Moskalew, T Macci Plauti Miles Cloriosus (Cambridge, MA, 1963) ad loc., pp. 77-8. These lines most likely mirror a reference to 6:PETT] and TVXTI by the stock comic figure of the boastful soldier that Plautus found in his Greek models; see Schaaf, pp. I28, 139, 144, and Leo, PI. Fors. p. 179. A reference to 6:pE"TT]TVXTI may also be behindgaudeo et volup est mihi, /si quid lenoni optigit magni mali. / [quomque e virtute vobis jortuna optigit. - " ... I am glad and it is pleasurable to melif some great evil happens to the pimp/and any good fortune happens to you because of your virtus." (Poen. 1326-8); see M. Francken, "De Poenuli Plautinae Compositione" Mnemosyne 4 (1876) pp. 169-75; G. Jachmann, Charites, Festschrift jur F. Leo (19II) p. 265, and Plautinisches und Attisches (Berlin, 1931) pp. 206-8. But see Langen, pp. 186, 343-50, who thought the lines a post-Plautine interpolation; Leo's text brackets the lines. E.g., Soph. frag. I2; Lycurg. Leoc. 48; AP7.253; BC 489.4; cf. Cic. Tusc. 2.n; Ter. Phor. 203; Enn. Ann. 233 S, with Skutsch's comments on p. 414; Hectoris lytra, 166 Jocelyn = ROL 193; Lysias 2.10; and see Chapter 1. Cato, Origines IV 7 (a), Chassignet. For text and discussion, see Chapter 1. Particularly suggestive is Cato's use of the form Leonides, cf. Polyb. 9.38.3, rather than Leonidas or Leonida; see Courtney, Archaic Latin Prose, p. 78.

91

ROMAN MANLINESS

part of that story,68 Cato's use of the virtus - fortuna may have been taken over from a Greek work about the famous stand of the Spartans at the same pass. 69 The rarity of the virtus - fortuna collocation in surviving Latin written before c. 130, and the fact that the few passages where it does occur seem to be modeled on Greek works, speak for it being a borrowing. By the latter half of the second century, the trope seems to have become regular in Latin.7 0 It is ubiquitous in the works oflate-republican writers, common in the mimes of Publilius Syrus and the biographies of Cornelius Nepos, both of which relied heavily on Greek models, as well as in Livy's work, where the influence of apETT] - TUXTJ is also clear. 71 But that knowledgeable Romans recognized the virtus - fortuna pairing as an essentially Greek rhetorical trope is made clear by Cicero. In discussing the composition of panegyrics in his dialogue De oratore, Cicero has his speaker, Antonius, talk about "giving praise in the manner of the Greeks"; whereupon he immediately discourses on the virtus - fortuna contrast. vel ut nosmet ipsi ornandi causa Graecorum more si quos velimus, laudare possimus, sit a nobis quoque tractatus hic locus. Perspicuum est igitur alia esse in hornine optanda, alia laudanda: genus, forma, vires, opes, divitiae cetera[que], quae fortuna dat aut extrinsecus aut corpori, non habent in se veram laudem, quae deberi virtuti uni putatur; See Diod. 11.11.3. For Ephorus as the source for this passage. see M. A. Flower, "Simonides, Ephorus, and Herodotus on the Battle of Thermopylae," CQ 48 (1998) pp. 365-79, esp. pp. 365-8; cf. Isoc. 4.91 on the Athenians at Artemisium. 69 A close parallel to Cato's words appears in an epigram said to be about Thermopylae, AP 7.253, T. Bergk, Poetae Lyrici Graeci4 III (Leipzig, 1882) p. lOO; D. L. Page, Further Greek Epigrams (Cambridge, 1981), Simonides, VIII; J. H. Molyneux, Simonides, A Historical Study (Wauconda, IL, 1992) pp. 184 and 197-8. The epigram was well enough known to be imitated in a late-fourth-century epitaph from the Keramicus cemetery, W Peek, Griechische Vers-Inschriften: I Grab-Epigramme (Berlin, 1955) 1689; cf. Page, p. 198. 70 As can be seen in Accius' adaptation of Sophocles' Aias 550, W TTai, YEVOlO TTaTpos E\lTVXEcYTEPOS, Ta 8, aAA, 6~OlOS. - "0 boy, may you be more fortunate than your father/but like him in all else." to virtuti sis par, dispar fortunis patris - "be like your father in courage, unlike him in fortune."(156 Ribb. = ROL 123), with the general phrase TO: aAAa being rendered with a reference to virtus - fortuna. 7 1 For Publilius and Nepos, see Eisenhut, VR, pp. 38-9 and 46-8 respectively. See e.g., Liv. 9.18.12; 22.29.2, with Eisenhut, VR, p. 121-4; I. Kajanto, God and Fate in Livy (Turku, 1952) pp. 63-75 and 90-5; D. S. Levene, Religion in Livy (Leiden, 1993) pp. 30-3.

68

92

HELLENIZATION AND 'ApET1'l- SEMANTIC BORROWING

or so that we ourselves may be able, if we wish, to praise certain people with the aim ofhonoring them in the Greek manner, let this subject also be considered by us. It is evident then, that some things should be desired in man, other things should be praised: family, beauty, strength, resources, wealth, and other things that fortune gives, either in regard to external circumstances or to the body, do not contain in themselves true praiseworthiness, which is thought to depend on - virtus - innate character - alone. (De or. 2.341-2)

Virtus is commonly found expressing the contrast between innate human ability and fortune in two other expressions. One, the virtus fatum combination, is rare, appearing first in the Ciceronian period, and even then infrequently. The collocation is more common in Augustan literature. It is clearly derived from Greek models, often expressing Stoic-influenced ideas about fate. 72 More frequent is virtus - felicitas. It most often represents the "martial prowess and good luck" of the successful general - virtus ac felicitas imperatoris. 73 The notion that a successful general should possess felicitas seems old, and felicitas, or at least feliciter, was probably a regular part of an official formula used for a triumph or supplicatio.74 But there is little reason for thinking that the felicitas of a general, or of anyone else, was thought of as an innate quality.75 Like virtus,Jelicitas was regarded as a divine entity and received a temple and state cult c. 150.76 It is in literature that the virtusfelicitas combination is found most often, and there almost always as a rhetorical trope, paralleling virtus - fortuna, and derived ultimately

See Kajanto, God and Fate in Livy, pp. 16, 53-63, and Levene, pp. 14-15 and 30-3. For the range of meanings and applications offelicitas, see 1. Zieske, Felicitas, eine Wortuntersuchung (Hamburg, 1972) esp. pp. 3 and 182 ff.; cf. H. S. Versnel, Triumphus (Leiden, 1970) pp. 364-5. 74 E.g., Liv. 38-48.15; 31.8.2; see H. Erkell, Augustus, Felicitas, Fortuna, lateinische Wortstudien (Goteborg, 1952) p. 54 f; M. A. Levi, "Auspicio, imperio, ductu, felicitas," RIL LXXI I (1938) pp. 108-18; Combes, p. 210; E. Pais, Fasti triumphales populi Romani I (Rome, 1920) pp. lxviii-lxix. 75 So Erkell, p. 41 ff., contra F. Taeger, Ph. W 53 (1933) p. 932; A. Passerini, Philologus 90 (1935) pp. 90-7; and H. Wagenvoort, "Felicitas imperatoria," Mnem. 7 (1954) pp. 300- 22 . 7 6 See 1. Richardson, Jr, A New Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome (Baltimore, 1992) p. 150. 72

73

93

ROMAN MANLINESS

from apETT] - TUXTl. 77 The claim that the virtus - felicitas combination was an official and traditional Roman formula has little textual support.7 8 The only evidence is Cicero's comment on the triumph of Scipio Africanus in 201, An senatus, cum triumphum Africano decerneret, "quod eius virtute" aut "felicitate" posset dicere. or could the senate, when it decided on a triumph for Africanus, have stated, 'because of his virtus' or 'his good fortune,' ... Fin. 4.22

Even if Cicero is here quoting from an official triumphal document, and this is by no means certain,79 the text presents virtus and felicitas as alternative causes for Scipio's great victory, and there is no indication that either is regarded as an innate quality. 80 It is not until the year 55 that virtus is found joined with felicitas in an official context, Pompey's theater dedication of cult statues to Honos, Virtus, and Felicitas, together with a shrine to Venus Victrix (elL P 324). Twelve years later, quoting from a contemporary senatorial decree, Cicero wrote, eius virtute, auctoritate, felicitate - "because of his virtus, prestige, and good luck" - (Phil. 5.41)8I In both cases the critical point is that when virtus andfelicitas are employed together in an official document they do See, e.g., Cic. Inv. I.94; Imp. Pom. IQ; Mil. 6; SuI!. 83; Mur. 12; Dom. 16; Phil. 14.II and 28, with 14.37; Nepos, Lys. I.l; Val. Max. 6.2. ext. 3; Sall. BI 95.4. Also see Livy, e.g., 6.27.1, 8.3I.2; 22.58.3; 30.12.12; 38.38.7, with Eisenhut, VR, pp. 122-3, and Kajanto, God and Fate in Livy, p. 92 fr. 7 8 Contra Wagenvoort, Mnem. 7 (1954) p. 309, and Versnell, Triumphus, p. 361-4, who misrepresented L. Halkin, La suppUcation d'actions de graces chez Romains (Paris, 1953) p. IQ9 fr. In Livy, generals' requests for a triumph (or perhaps for a triumph and a suppUcatio), include the virtus - feUcitas combination only once, at 41.16.8. A variantfortiter feliciterque - occurs at Liv. 28.9.7; cf. 37.59.1; 38.44.9; 39.4.2, and see R. Laqueur, "Ober das Wesen des romischen Triumphs," Hermes 44 (1909) pp. 215-36. Virtus is not found in any surviving triumphal decrees or commemorations, where the operative terms were imperio auspicioque; see Liv. 4I.28.8; ILLRP 122 = CIL P 626, cf. Plaut. Amph. 192 and 657. Unfortunately, there is a lacuna in the crucial line ofLivy's text at 4 0 .52.5. 79 See Pais, I p. 125, Erkell, p. 58, and Combes, p. 2II, contra Wagenvoort, Mnem. 7 (1954) 77

80

8r

P·3 0 4· It is unlikely that only four years after the dedication of a temple to Honos and Virtus, a triumphal decree would imply that virtus was anything other than a divine power. Attempts to emend aut to ac are contrary to all manuscript readings. Cf. Phil. 9. 13; 6. 13; cf. Ad Brut. 233. On Pompey, see Chapter IX.

94

HELLENIZATION AND 'ApETl']- SEMANTIC BORROWING

not correspond to the rhetorical virtus - fortuna lfelicitas) trope found in literature. In Pompey's dedication, both virtus and felicitas are divinities. Whatever importance the contrast between felicitas and innate virtus may have had in the rhetoric of the late Republic and early Empire, it was not central to Roman republican religious ideology. The so-called Theology of Victory was a literary trope. 82 3. VIRTUTE DEUM

If the virtus - fortuna collocation was a trope borrowed from Greek that was to become ubiquitous in literary Latin, the application of the Roman word for manliness to deities was much rarer, and seems to have been predominantly a non-literary usage. In pre-Classical Latin it is virtually restricted to the phrase virtute deum, which is found only in the Plautine corpus, where it occurs seven times: three alone (Mil. 676, 679, Trin. 355) and four in the expanded form virtute deum et maiorum (Aul. 166, Capt. 324, Per. 390, Trin. 346). The phrase invariably expresses the speaker's thanks for sufficiency ofwealth, and is often used to justify the proposition that money should be used to help friends. The general sense is clear enough, something like "by the favor of the gods" or "thanks to the gods."8 3 Standard lexical reference works place virtute deum under the general construction of ablative with the genitive, or ablative with possessive adjective, meaning "through the merits or services (0£), thanks (to),"8 4 and it has been suggested that 82

8)

84

Contra J. Gage "La Theologie de la victoire imperiale," Revue Historique I7I (I933) I-43, and J. R. Fears, "The Theology of Victory at Rome," ANRW H 17.2, (I98I), pp. 736-826, which rely almost exclusively on rhetorical literary texts, many ofwhich are misinterpreted. The attribution to Pompey of divina virtus (Imp. Pom. 33, 36) has nothing to do with Aristode, contra Fears, p. 798, and is probably a reference to Marius' temple to Honos and Virtus. Cotta's claim that "no one ever credited a god with conferring virtus" (Cic. ND 3.86), is not only untrue (see Pease, 2, pp. I204-5), but is a part of the Academic polemic against Stoic doctrine (cf. ND 2.6I, and cf. 3.44), and is not representative of a general Greek attitude toward abstract deities, much less a general Roman one, contra Fears, p. 748. Virtute deum is associated with helping friends at MU. 676, Trin. 346, 355, and possibly at Capt. 324 (cf. Capt. 327), which may be an interpolation. The phrase is used as a reason not to marry at Aul. I66 and MU. 679, and at Per. 390 to reassure a daughter about dowry. In a dramatic situation similar to the last, Terence has dis gratia (Adel. I2 I). OLD, s.v. virtus T virtute deum and virtute Jormae; also virtute (with genitive of gerund apparendy), meaning by virtue (of an action). Cf. Lewis & Short, A Latin Dictionary, virtus HA; Lodge, voL 2, p. 879, under animi vis, potentia, 'aliquando' auxilium 'fere.'

95

ROMAN MANLINESS

virtute deum is a native Latin idiom, like the French en vertu de and English "by virtue of. "85 But the passages cited offer little support, and the idiom seems illusory. 86 Aside from its rarity, the principal reason that virtute deum is unlikely to be a native Latin idiom is its strangeness. Because if, as Cicero stated, it was odd for virtus to be used of trees and horses, it was no less so for a word denoting the quality of a man to be credited by a Roman to the gods. Although virtus was itself regarded as a divine power, the antithesis evoked in the standard military thanksgiving, deum benignitate ac virtute militum - "by the kindness of the gods and the manliness (or courage) of the soldiers" implies that virtus was a quality possessed characteristically by men, not deities. With justification the phrase virtute deum has been called a "colossal oxymoron.,,8 7 This is corroborated by general usage. Because while other abstract qualities were regularly attributed to both men and gods - fides, for example: pro deum atque hominum fidem - "by the good faith of gods and men,,88 - , virtus was seldom so used. In the opening scene ofPlautus' Miles gloriosus the allegation is made that Mars would be reluctant to compare his virtutes - "valorous deeds" - to those of the boastful soldier (Mil. 9-12). But this is a comic comparison and a fantastic exaggeration rather than a serious attribution of virtus to a deity. In the following lines Pyrgopolynices is credited with defeating a grandson of Neptune, A native idiom was proposed by Van Omme, p. 29, followed by Sarsila, pp. 35-6, contra Eisenhut, VR, p. 25. In fact, both the French and English idioms seem to be derived from Greek through Latin; see the subsequent discussion. 86 In all the passages cited for the construction, with the exceptions of virtute deum and virtute formae, virtus has the specific and regular meaning of either martial prowess (Epid. 381, Pseud. 581), or a broad ethical quality (INn. 643, Most. 33, and True. 741). Tua virtute or sua virtute meaning "thanks to" is found rarely, if at all, in Latin. True. 741 is very doubtful; perhaps Cic. Plane. 13 and vat. 28 are legitimate examples; cf. Ter. Adel. 257 with Aeli Donati commentum Terenti, Adel. 257, vo!. 2, ed., P. Wessner (Stuttgart, 1905, repr. 1963) ad loco For criticism of Van Omme, see earlier note 3. 87 J. Ferguson, Moral values in the Ancient World (London, 1958) p. 162. For deum benignitate ae virtute militum, see Cic. Cat. 4.19; and Liv. 8.13.n; 24.38.2; 45.23.1. 88 For fides see Plaut. Epid. 580 and the numerous examples collected by E. Fraenkel, TLL VI. I, fides I.2a (1912-26) cols 665-6. Note also the VI I sacral formula merito deorum - "by the favor of the gods" - Plaut. Capt. 922; lLIRP 136 = ClL F 1531; Cic. Cat. 3.15; Liv. 6.42.12, 28.9.8; also mentes deorum immortales, Cic. Her. resp. 23, and Liv. 1.20.7. 85

HELLENIZATION AND 'ApET11- SEMANTIC BORROWING

maiming an elephant with his fist, and personally slaying 7,000 men in a single day (Mil. 13-56).89 Aside from these lines and the seven virtute deum passages in Plautus, the application of virtus to a deity is almost unknown before Christian Latin. Moreover, the few ascriptions of virtus to deities by nonChristian authors after Plautus are invariably found in passages that were strongly influenced by, if not translated from, Greek originals. For example, in describing how temples of particular deities should be designed according to convention, Vitruvius wrote: Minervae et Marti et

Herculi aedes doricae fient; his enim diis propter virtutem sine deliciis aedificia constitui decet- "Temples to Minerva, Mars, and Hercules will be Doric; for it is fitting that buildings be erected for these gods, because of their virtus, without decorations." (De arch. 1.2.5). Here virtus denotes the martial associations of the deities in question, but the sentence occurs in a series of definitions of architectural terms, some with their Greek equivalents (e.g., 6EI-\OTIO"I-\6S, 1.2.5), that expound Greek aesthetic theory and are clearly derived from a Greek source. 90 It is the two other passages from classical Latin where virtus is attributed to a deity, and where it specifically denotes divine works or divine manifestations, that provide the key to the Plautine phrase virtute deum. In his Topica, a work based on Greek rhetorical manuals,9 1 Cicero, while discussing "divine evidence" - divina testimonia writes deorum enim virtus natura excellit - "for the virtus of the gods is superior by nature" (Top. 76). Cicero then goes on to list the various ways in which opera divina - "divine works" - are manifested. The attribution of virtus to a deity is found again in Propertius' promise to be the poet of the god Bacchus' virtus, quod superest vitae, per te et tua cornua vivamlvirtutisque tuae, Bacche, poeta ferar. - "What is left of my 89

90

91

The whole passage seems to follow a Greek original, see Schaaf, pp. 129-31. The description of Pyrgopolynices' mighty deeds may be a parody of an aretalogy; cf. Ter. Adel. 535-6, and later. De arch. 1.2.1-9. At 1.2.5, virtus could have translated either av8pEia or apETTj. S. Ferri, Vitruvio, De architectura (Rome, 1960) pp. 48-60, gave probable Greek equivalents for Latin architectural terms where Vitruvius does not provide them. For the Greek provenance of De arch. 1.2. 1-9, see].]. Pollitt, The Ancient View of Greek Art (New Haven, 1974) pp. 67-8 and 343. On the complex question of the Greek and Latin sources of De architectura, see P. Gras, Vitruvio, De Architectura I (Turin, 1997) pp. lxiii-Ixxvii. For the Peripatetic, Stoic, and rhetorical sources of Cicero's Topica, see B. Riposati, Studi sui "Topica" di Cicerone (Milan, 1947).

97

ROMAN MANLINESS

life, I will live through you and your horns. I will be advanced as the poet of your virtus, Bacchus." (3.17.20). These lines are followed by a short hymn recounting Bacchus' miraculous deeds (21-38). Over a century ago Salomon Reinach showed that the phrase apETll TOO eEOO was used by Greeks to indicate "the beneficial intervention of the gods in human affairs and the manifestation of that intervention." In the singular, apETll denotes the "miraculous power of the deity;" in the plural, it denotes "the wondrous deeds of the god." From this usage arose the term and profession apETcxAoyOS - one who relates the wondrous deeds of the gods - which can be traced back to the fourth century. This use of apETll occurs most often in inscriptions, but also appears in papyri and literature. Found in dedications to healing gods, but by no means restricted to them, it was used as an expression of thanks for a variety of benefits conferred. 92 In Cicero's and Propertius' attributions of virtus to deities, the word carries this meaning of "divine power" and mirrors the uses of apETll commonly found in aretalogies. Cicero's listing at Topica 76 of the ways in which the deorum virtus was manifested - divine oracles, the heavens, songs and flight of birds , thunder and lighting, extispicy, and dreams, - is related to usages of apETcx{ as found in aretalogies,93 and Prop ertius , recounting of the Bacchus' miraculous birth and deeds (3.17.21-38) is itself an aretalogy ofBacchus with Propertius as the aretalogus. 94 In Christian Latin, the use of virtus to mean "miraculous power" and virtutes "wondrous deeds" is common and found, for example, at

92

93

94

S. Reinach, "Les aretalogues dans l'antiquite," BCH 9 (I885) pp. 257-65 = Cultes, mythes et religions, voL 3 (Paris, 1908) pp. 293-301 - definition on p. 299. See IC 11 142b; SIC II72; Str. 17.1. 17; cf. Schol. Bob. Iuv. 15. 16.'ApETCXi TOU eEOU occurs at Menander Rhetor, Rhet. graec. 3.443. 13, on which see E. Norden, Agnostos Theos (Leipzig and Berlin, 1913, reprinted Stuttgart 1956), p. 165, n. 2. For further references see LSJ, apETTj, I b. Most of the evidence was assembled by A. Kiefer, Aretalogische Studien (diss., Freiberg, 1929) pp. 38-9. The term apETcxi TOU eEOU and the cultic use of apETTj seem to be fourthcentury creations; see W Aly, "aretalogoi," RE, suppL VI (I935, repr. 1960) coL 15. Cf. the aretalogy of Athena Lindia, for example, for which see Bourguet and Reinach, REC (I908) p. 19I. For EpyCX and apETcxi in an aretalogy see IC XI 4 1299. So M. Rothstein, Die Elegien des Sextus Propertius2 voL 2 (Berlin, 1924, repr. New York and London, 1979) p. 139; R. Reitzenstein, Hellenistische Wundererzahlungen (Leipzig, 1906), p. II; Norden, Agnostos Theos, p. 154; and Kiefer, p. 22; Eisenhut, VR, p. I04, n. 292, demurred weakly.

HELLENIZATION AND 'ApETl'J- SEMANTIC BORROWING

Lactantius, De mortibus persecutorum 2.5, 1.6, Divinae institutiones 1.3.3., 2.17.2,4.13.16; Minucius Felix, 32.4; Tertullian, Apologeticus 18.5.16. This usage is also based on Greek, directly translating exPETT) as it is used in the Septuagint and the New Testament to mean the "power" or the "miraculous deeds" of God. 95 A related usage of virtus is to denote the supernatural power possessed by a person and of virtutes to mean the miracles done by men through the power of a god. Christian writers employed the usage most often for miracles done by Christians, but also to designate the magic performed by non-Christian "false prophets."9 6 The usage is certainly related to earlier use of expETT) and expETcxi to describe the miracles that divine men perform through the powers given to them by a god or gods. Because in all other instances the attribution of virtus to deities is closely tied to Greek usage, it is reasonable to seek a Greek model for the Plautine virtute deum. It is possible that Plautus found expETll TWV 6EWV in New Comedy and simply translated it. Terence seems to have transferred the cultic sense of expETT) in his play Adelphoe, when a slave tells how he represents his young master to his father, laudarier te audit lubenter: facio te apud ilium deum; virtutes narro. He joyfully hears you praised: I make you a god to that man; I tell of your virtutes - wondrous deeds.

95 This usage of 6:pETT] is found in the Septuagint Rb. 3.3, Is. 42.8.12,43.21, 63.7, called an old Greek usage by E. Preuner, Bin Delphisches TM!ihgeschenk (diss., Bonn, 1899), approved by Reitzenstein, p. 10; contra Eisenhut, VR, p. 197. See also Philo De spec. leg. 1.209, De vit. contemp. 26. The usage occurs in the New Testament at I Pet. 2.9, 2 Pet. 1.3 f. On Tertullian, see J. P Waltzing, Tertullien, Apolghique (Paris, 1934) p. 127; cf. Eisenhut, VR, p. 198-205. The Vulgate regularly uses vir'us to translate the more common 5Vva~.llS: see Eisenhut, VR, p. 204. But in this sense 6:PETT] and 5vvcQllS are virtually synonymous, see Hesychius, 6:PETT], 6Eia 5vva~llS; cf. Philo De spec. leg. 1.209, 308; De vit. contemp. 26; and Lactantius Div. inst. 2.17.2. On the earliest Christian Latin, see G. Bardy, La question des langues dans l'eglise ancienne (Paris, 1948) pp. 90-II5; cf. Eisenhut, VR, pp. 196-207. 96 Of Christians at Tert. Adv. Iud. 9.3; De praescr. haer. 13.4; of non-Christians at Matt. 7.22. At De praescr. haer. 44.6, Tertullian uses virtutes maximas to render Matt. 24.24, CJT)I.lEia I.lEy6:Aa Kai TEpaTa, where the Vulgate has signa magna et prodigia; see Eisenhut, VR, p. 198. It is this miraculous or magical meaning that should be seen at Ov. Met. 14. 357, herbarum virtus, and ApuL Met. I. IO, virtutibus cantionum.

99

ROMAN MANLINESS

Here the slave is playing the role of an aretalogos who relates the wondrous deeds (virtutes = apEToi) of this" divine man. "97 It is likely that in Terence's Greek model, Menander had employed apEToi in its cultic sense. Another reason for thinking that Plautus might have taken virtute deum directly from his Greek sources is that the phrase is always invoked as a thanks for wealth in dramatic contexts that reflect Greek rather than Roman social practices. It is well documented that in classical antiquity, wealth was commonly thought to depend on extra-human forces, and in Greek, New Comedy wealth is most often attributed to the power of TVXT).9 8 But wealth could also be ascribed to the workings of the gods, and it is especially significant that a fragment of the fourth-century Greek comic playwright Antiphanes states that wealth, which should be used to help friends, is god-given. Tou8E yap T1S &AAOV TIpOS eEWV OOVEKO EO~OITO TIAOVTE1V EtmopElv TE XPTJlJaT0JV 11 TOU 8vvocrem TIOpof30TJeE1V TOls q>IAOlS crTIElpE1V TE KOPTIOV XaPITOS, Tj8lcrTTJS eEWV. For why should anyone beseech the gods to be wealthy and to have plenty of money if it were not to be able to come to the aid of friends and to beget the fruit of Gratitude, sweetest of the gods? frag. 226 PCG

= 228

CAP .99

The parallel to dramatic situations in which Plautus uses virtute deum, at Miles gloriosus 676 and Trinummus 346-8 and 355-6, is striking. 100 97

98

99

This interpretation was proposed to Reitzenstein, p. 9, and followed by Aly, RE suppl. 6, 14, but strenuously denied by Eisenhut, VR, p. IO, n. 3. E.g., Men. Geor. 1-6 Dysk. 797 if., with the comments ofE. W Handley, The Dyskolus of Menander (London, 1965) p. 271. Also see Polyb. 29.21; Damoxenus, frag. 16 CAF; Philemon frag. 178 PCG, 1. I2f. = 213 CAF; and Arist. EN 1I2oB17if. Paus. 9.16.1, describes a temple ofTvXTJ at Thebes in which the cult statue was represented carrying the child DAOihos. See also Alexis, frag. 267 PCG = 265 CAF; cf. Ar. Pax 1320-21. It is not uncommon to find TVXTJ and SEOI together; see Lys. 13.63, Dem. 4-45, 40.24, Polyb. IO.5.8; cf. Plaut. Rud. 185-87. In inscriptions ayaSi] TVXTJ was an alternative for SEOI; see Nilsson, vol. 2, p. 208, n. 5.

100

On hospitalitas as a theme of the Greek original ofMilesgloriosus, see Schaaf, pp. 283-4. The dramatic themes that the phrase virtute deum is used to amplifY have numerous 100

HELLENIZATION AND 'A pET" - SEMANTIC BORROWING

But not only was the imperative to use wealth to assist friends a frequent plot device in New Comedy, it was also an important and wellattested social duty for elite Greek males. lOI But the obligation to render fmancial assistance to impecunious peers was not shared by Romans of the second century; quite the contrary. Polybius (by far our best source for such things) wrote that in Rome, "no one ever gives anything of his own to anyone ifhe can avoid it."Io2 So Plautine lines containing the phrase virtute deum, and referring to gratuitous financial generosity as a duty, reflect Greek custom. A problem in supposing that virtute deum was a Plautine literary borrowing is that its specific model, 6:pETT] Tc0V eEc0V - "of the gods" - . is unrecorded in what remains of ancient Greek. But Plautus used a number of Greek words and phrases that are unattested in surviving Greek that reflect the non-literary mixed-Doric Greek parlance of south Italy, thermopolium, for example. The semantic calque from 6:pETT] Tc0V eEc0V to virtute deum might, therefore, have originated as a popular borrowing. In fact, the two explanations, direct translation and colloquial expression, are not mutually exclusive. The absence of virtute deum outside of the Plautine corpus perhaps speaks for it being a popular colloquialism. Popular usage in the time of PIautus cannot be demonstrated because of the dearth of contemporary non-literary evidence, but in later periods, when surviving inscriptions are more numerous, and when the sociolinguistic circumstances in Rome between Greek

101

102

parallels in New Comedy and may have come from one or another ofPlautus' Greek sources; see Schaaf, pp. 277-91. Two of the other occurrences of virtute deum (Aul. 166 and Mil. 679-81) refer to wealth and may also have been drawn from a New Comedy. For disinterested fmancial generosity as a Greek social obligation see, e.g., Pind. Nem. 1.32; Plut. Arist. 1.5, Arist. EN II20A; SVF (Arnim) 3.686; and Dover, Greek Popular Morality, pp. 177-80. For such generosity as a form of apET", see Antiphanes frag. 208 PCG = 210 CAF, and D. MacDowell, "ARETE and Generosity," Mnem 16 (1963): pp. 127-34. For the obligation as a plot device see Men. Dysk. 797ff; Antiphanes, frag. 202 PCG = 204 K; also E. Fantham, "Philemon's Thesauros as a Dramatisation of Peripatetic Ethics," Hermes !O5 (1977): pp. 406-21, esp. p. 412, n. 27. Polybius' strongly-worded comment on Roman parsimony is at 31.26.9; see also 3L27.II. N. Zagagi, Tradition and Originality in Plautus: Studies of the Amatory Motifs in Plautine Comedy (Giittingen, 1980) pp. !O8-31, presents further evidence for the distinction between disinterested Greek generosity and obligatory and contractual reciprocity between Romans. 101

ROMAN MANLINESS

and Latin speaking populations would have been much the same, virtus is found meaning "the power of God."I03 Evidence for how the cultic use of 6:pETT] (6:pETOi) influenced the use of virtus is supplied by an early imperial Latin inscription to Aesculapius and Hygia from the city of Rome. In Greek dedications to Aesculapius, the cultic use of 6:pETT] (6:pEToi) is common, found in dedications from Aesculapius' temple in Rome itself.104 The Latin dedication in question was made by a Greek bean merchant and his wife, and reads as follows: domino Aesculapio et Hygiae ex permissu eorum negotiationis fabariae gratias agentes numini et aratis eorum, T. Iulius Genesiacus et Caecilia Balbilla ceriolaria duo Saturi et Antiotes (Antiopae) libentes donum dederunt. To Lord Aesculapius and Hygeia by their permission expressing the thanks of a bean merchant for their divine power and aratis (sic) T. Julius Genesiacus and Caecilia Balbilla gladly dedicated two candle holders of a satyr and Antiotes (Antiopa) elL VI 18 (= lLS 3851)

The word aratls m the third line had long puzzled editors. I05 But the regularity with which 6:PETT] is found in Greek dedications to Aesculapius all but assures that aratis is a transliteration of 6:PETolS meaning "wondrous deeds."I06 Moreover, the inscription provides 103

10 4

105

106

Occurrences of virtus meaning "the power of God," are found in non-elite Jewish or perhaps Christian inscriptions from the city of Rome, e.g., JlWE 2 616 (Noy) = Cij 172 = ClL VI 29758. The same usage of virtus occurs in other Christian inscriptions, in lLCV II 1005 from Ravenna, and perhaps in lLCV II 4779, at virtutem [ ... ] deum metere [ ... ], from Rome. The Roman inscription is lG XIV 966, ll. 5-6 ... ~wCYat O:PETOi EYEvovTo ElTi TOU CYE!30CYTOU ... cf., lGRRP I 38. For other Greek dedications to Aesculepius see, Syll. IIP II72, line 10 ff; lG IV 950, lines 57 and 78; lG IV 954 (= Syll. IIP II68, line 56a); and P. Oxy. X 1381, L 130. Neither Mommsen's conjecture of "paratis," ut intellegantur opes ex negotiatione fobaria paratae dedicantibus deorum auxilio, nor Cannegieter's meritis, will stand in light of the comment of Henzen, who saw the stone - omnino lectio certa est, quid subsit parum liquet. Dessau despaired, writing non intelligitur. The usage was identified by S. Reiter, "A'pETT] und der Titel von Philos Legatio," in Epitymbion H. Swoboda dargebracht (Reichenberg, 1927) pp. 228-37, esp. p. 234. 102

HELLENIZATION AND 'Apm1 - SEMANTIC BORROWING

evidence for how the process of semantic borrowing worked among the population of ancient Rome. For the use of a Greek word by Greeks in a Latin dedication to Greek deities conforms to what sociolinguistics calls "code-mixing" within a "language domain," a pattern observed in modern bilingual speakers when they switch from one language to another to accommodate a particular social situation. ro7 Although outside of Christian Latin the use of virtus to mean "the power of a god" seems to have been largely non-literary, the frequency of the usage in texts that were written for (or to be recited to) non-elite Christian audiences, and that became canonical, would have long-term influence on English and French. The phrases "by virtue of" and en vertu de are both traceable to the effect of a cultic use of apETr) on virtus. roS A usage similar to virtute deum, also found only in the Plautine corpus, is virtute Jormae - "because of the excellence of (your) beauty." Plautus employed it twice; once in Miles gloriosus, where the slave Palaestrio flatters the soldier Pyrgopolynices by saying, saltem id volup est, quom ex virtute Jormae evenit tibilmea opera super hac vicina, quam ego nunc concilio tibi. - "Nevertheless it is a pleasure that, because of the virtus of your beauty, and because of my effort, it has succeeded for you in regard to this woman your neighbor, whom I am now procuring 10 7

ro8

The concepts of code-switching or nlixing and domain were pioneered by J. A. Fishman, The Sociology of Language (Rowley, MA, 1972). See also J. Notier, H. Schatz, "From One-Word Switch to Loan: A Comparison Between Language Pairs," Multilingua 1I (1992) pp. 173-94. Stock Greek phrases written in Latin ~haracters occur in other Latin inscriptions, e.g., in Jewish inscriptions EV Eipi]v1J Tj Koi~TjO"iS O"ov - "sleep in peace" is sometimes found as en irene ae cymesis su,jIWE 2217,379, 577 (Noy) = Cij I 206, 224, 523. For Greek inscriptions with some words in Latin characters, see jIWE 2 157, 204 (Noy) = Cij I 373, 229. For the Latin phrase Dis Manibus written in Greek characters in Greek-speaking Magna Graecia, see K. Lomas, "Urban Elites and cultural definition: Romanization in southern Italy," in Urban Society in Roman Italy, eds. T. Corneil, K. Lomas (New York, 1995) p. 1I0. See the texts and discussion of Adarns, Bilingualism, pp. 348-50. The English phrase "by virtue of' first appears in the thirteenth century in a religious context, where its meaning is "by the power of God," OED vol. XIX, p. 676, virtue: n. Similarly, the related archaic meaning of "virtue(s) " to mean "rniracle(s)" is also first attested in the thirteenth century in reference to wondrous works done through the power of God, OED vol. XIX, p. 675, virtue: la. Both usages were based on the use of virtus found in the Bible and other Christian writings, which was ultimately derived from apETi]. The French phrase en vertu de has the same history, A. Rey, Dictionnaire historique de la langue Franfaise (paris, 1992) p. 2241.

103

ROMAN MANLINESS

for you" (Mil. 12II-2), and again in Mostellaria, in a colloquy where the maid Scapha flatters her courtesan mistress, Philematium: Philem:

Most. 173 Sc: Philem:

Sc:

Quid nunc? Se: Quid est? Philem: Quin me aspice et contempla, ut haec me deceat. Virtute formae id evenit, te ut deceat quidquid habeas. What now? Sc: What is it? Philem: Why not look at me and consider whether this becomes me. Because of the virtu5 of your beauty, it happens that whatever you have becomes you.

In both cases, the phrase occurs in dramatic circumstances that indicate an origin in Plautus' Greek model, and in the second, perhaps ultimately via New Comedy travesty, Homer.... 11 TO! EIlT)V apETT)V EIOOS TE OEIlCXS TE WAEO"CXV ae6:vcxTol ... - "in truth, the excellence of my beauty and my form the immortal gods destroyed."(Od. 18.124-5, 19· 12 4)· I09

109

The Greek accusative of respect, 800S TE OEI-las, translated at Most. 173 by a Latin genitive construction. The Plautine application of the phrase to a courtesan may reflect a New Comedy travesty of Pen elope; cf. Duris ofSamos' tale about Penelope and the suitors (FGR 76, F2I). For parody of epic in Greek comedy, see T. B. L. Webster, Studies in later Greek Comedy" (Manchester, 1970) p. 57. The scene in Mostellaria is an example of the stock "lesson in love" - TEXVTJ epWTIKT] - scene in Greek New Comedy, in which the topos of "the sufficiency of beauty unadorned" was often presented; cf. Most. 250-92, Poen. 301-8; see Leo, PI. For. pp. 140-57. The mocking ascription of physical beauty to the boastful soldier at Mil. 12 II was a recurring and integral theme in Plautus's Greek model, see Schaaf, p. 144. The association between physical beautyK6:i\oS - and apETT] is found in New Comedy, and was longstanding in Greek, e.g., Eur. frag. 15; Xen. Cyr. 5.1.5; Plat. Sym. 209B-C; Pol. 444D-E, and from New Comedy, Anon. frag. 412 CAP. On virtuteformae and apETT], see Eisenhut, VR, pp. 26-7.

10 4

III

'ApETT] AND MANLY VIRTUS

Now let us explain virtus according to the usage of our plain everyday speech, ... Cicero

While the use of virtus to denote the excellence of inanimate objects, animals, and abstract qualities remained a specialized and relatively rare usage, the related meaning of virtus as human excellence was common in Classical and later Latin. Because 6:pnT)'s basic meaning of" excellence" clearly did affect some usages of virtus, it is reasonable to ask if the Greek word had also influenced the use of virtus to denote human excellence. The degree to which semantic borrowing from 6:pnT) may have influenced this or any use of virtus that refers to a man is admittedly difficult to determine because, unlike the application of virtus to horses or trees, such a meaning does not violate the etymological integrity of the word, and because the common meaning of virtus as man's physical prowess or courage could have been, and in fact was, expanded to other aspects of human conduct without apparent foreign influences. Nevertheless, there are good reasons to think that 6:pnT) did affect usages of virtus as it was applied to men. I.

SEMANTIC BORROWING AND POPULAR THEATER

The Greek-Latin language-mixing that took place in the streets and homes of contemporary Romans, influenced and was minicked by some of the mixed Greek and Latin found in Plautus' plays, I but might I

See Chapter H. 105

ROMAN MANLINESS

the language heard in a popular play have affected the Latin spoken and written by contemporary and later Romans? The evidence suggests that it did. Compared to Greek, Latin was a word-poor language,2 and when adapting a Greek work a Roman dramatist, like an essayist, would have had to stretch the semantic range of some Latin words in order to convey the sense of the original. Latin playwrights, therefore, almost certainly introduced neologisms, and although they are difficult to identify, their existence is strongly suggested by the number of unusual Latin usages in the Plautine texts that have a close correspondence to Greek usages known from New Comedy. This is significant because studies of semantic borrowing among better-documented bilingual or bidialectal populations have shown that meanings transferred from one language or dialect to another are often stabilized by their presence in popular literary or theatrical works. 3 It is reasonable to suppose, therefore, that some neologisms adopted or coined by Plautus or other dramatists would have exerted a lasting impact on general Latin usage. One can imagine numbers of ways in which such neologisms may have influenced spoken and written Latin; one, however, happens to be documented. We have recently been reminded that the people of ancient Rome regularly memorized songs, which they then sang publicly in the streets and parks of the city. Some of these songs were learned in the theater, and they were learned well. Theater audiences are reported to have known the lines of plays well enough to recite them en masse when an actor had missed his cue. 4 This practice demonstrates the existence of at least one sociolinguistic link between 2

3

4

See Lucr.1.830-3. 260; Sen. Contro. 7.1.I7; Gell. NA 2.26.7. Also by their use in public statements by a widely known figure; see Hope, T. E. Lexical

Borrowing in the Romance Languages. A Critical Study of Italianisms in French and Callicisms in Italian from 1100--1900 (New York, I97I) p. 6IO, discussing Italianisms in French and Gallicisrns in Italian. N. Horsfall, "The Cultural Horizons of the Plebs Romana," MAAR XLI, eels. M. Bell, C. Bruzelius (Ann Arbor, I996) pp. IOI-2; La Cultura della plebs Romana, Repertoris i materials per a l'estudi del Mon Classic 2 (Barcelona, I996) pp. 9-I6, citing Ov. Fast. 3·535; Gell. NA 4.5.5; Stat. Si/v. 1.2.I72; and Hor. Serm. 2.3.60-I; Suet, Calb. I3. On the importance of music, see Cultura, pp. I6-20. In modern American culture many usages that originated in Black English have become standard colloquialisms through the medium of popular music; see J. L. Dillard, Lexicon of Black English (New York, I977) pp. 6I-83·

106

'ApET11 AND MANLY VIRTUS

neologisms in the text of PIautus, and the effect of neologisms on the development of the Latin language. For Romans who had memorized and then repeatedly recited lines they had heard in the theater would have internalized and then popularized new or expanded usages the lines might· contain. The pattern of usage of virtus as it is applied to men in Plautine and other early Latin texts suggests that new or expanded usages, based on apETT] and presented to the public in dramatic performances, did affect the way in which the word was used by the audiences, and consequently its general usage. 5

2.

VIRTUS AS HUMAN EXCELLENCE

That the use of virtus to denote general human excellence or ability was affected to some degree by apETT] is suggested, on the one hand, by the surprising rarity with which the usage occurs in pre-Ciceronian Latin, 6 and on the other hand, by the fact that in early Latin the usage is found only in Roman comedy. Significantly, it is where virtus is used to describe the behavior of individuals in private life that the influence of apETT] is most discernible. This kind of usage occurs six times in the Plautine corpus (at MU. 619, 649, 738 and True. 741; twice in a more specialized sense of "intellectual" excellence at Pseud. 726, and Bacch. 673, in addition to being found once Terence's Adel. 257). Some occurences of the usage are found in specific scenes and passages that seem to be closely mode1ed on Greek originals. 7 Three

5

6

7

Dramatic performance is, of course, only one, and by no means the most important, vector for the influence of Greek on Latin. As has been shown in Chapter I, in many passages where virtus has been said to convey a meaning of "general excellence," "ability," or the "merit" produced by these, the more regular meaning of physical prowess or courage is to be preferred. It is disconcerting that recent scholarship has come to drastically divergent conclusions about Plautus' relationship to his Greek New Comedy models - the Freiburg school of E. Lefevre holding that Plautus was largely independent of them; 0. Zwierlein arguing that he followed them relatively closely. But the position of Le:fevre and his colleagues rests on some very speculative assertions about Atellan farce, and rather rigid ideas about the nature of New Comedy; see N. Zagagi, Gnomon 73 (2001) pp. 17-21. Papyrological discoveries have shown that Plautus exercised more freedom in adapting Greek originals than had been previously recognized, but also that he sometimes translated colloquial Greek expression closely, see E. W Handley, Menander and Plautus: A Study in Comparisons (London, 1968) pp. 24-5. The method, and many of the conclusions of Leo, Fraenkel,

I07

ROMAN MANLINESS

occurrences of the usage, for example, are found in a single scene of Plautus' Miles gloriosus (the long and complex first scene in Act III),8 in which virtus refers to the exploits of the old man Periplectomenus, who boastfully asserts his youthful vigor and manners (at Mil. 738 he credits virtus to himself and to the youth Pleusicles). There are a number of signs that Plautus was following his Greek source closely at Mil. 738, where the old man uses the phrase ex virtute: 9 Mil. 738

nunc volo opsonare, ut, hospes, tua te ex virtute et mea meae domi accipiam benigne, lepide et lepidis victibus. Now I want to go shopping so that, my guest, I may welcome you hospitably in my home, suitably to your virtu5 and mine, delightfully and with delightful food.

Having a character state that he or she must go off to market was a standard stage device in Greek New Comedy, and the word Plautus has Periplectomenus use, opsono, is Greek - OI.flCVVECV. The old man's remark also jars badly with the action of the scene in which it occurs. IO Instead of leaving after announcing his intention to do so, Periplectomenus remains to continue the discussion for another sixty lines. The subject of the discussion in these sixty lines is, moreover, dining, a stock theme in New Comedy, and during the discussion the Plautine characters employ phrases of Greek origin. I I So Plautus' use of ex virtute at Mil. 738 may well reflect the presence of expETTJ in his Greek source. I2 Whether or not the influence of expETTJ should be seen in the and Jachmann are still useful. Hope, vol. 2, p. 645, n. 2, showed that new borrrowed meanings frequendy occur not only in technical uses of words, but also in "a specialized sense in common usages." 8 On this scene, see Leo, PI. Fors. pp. 1I5-6; cf. Fraenkel, PI. im PI. pp. 140-I;Jachmann, Plautinisches, pp. 164 fr.; Williams, Hermes 86 (1958 p. 88 fr.; and Schaaf, p. 267 fr.; and J. J. Tierney, Proc. of Royal Irish Acad. (1943-4) p. 167 fr. The diction of lines. 616 fr. shows signs of PIautine reworking, see Williams, 93. 9 See Schaaf, pp. 268-7 I. 10 See Fraenkel, PI. im PI. p. 255 = Elem. p. 246; Williams, Hermes (1958) p. 79 fr; Schaaf, pp. 291-3. On the stock theme of going to market, see Tierney, pp. 180-1. II Odiorum flias - "an Iliad of evils" (Mil. 743) = KOKWV' IA10S; cf. Dem. 19.148, and mihi quidvis sat est. - "anything is enough for me" - (Mil. 750), translates an axiom of Cynic philosophers; see Schaaf, p. 427, n. 304; cf. Sex. Turpilius, frag. 144 Ribb. 12 The closeness of the phrases ex virtute to decora . .. tuis virtutibus - "worthy of your deeds" (Mil. 619) and ornatus . .. ex suis virtutibus - "decorated by ... - (Capt. 997), suggests a 108

'ApET11 AND MANLY VIRTUS

occurences of virtutes meaning excellent deeds or merits in this scene (at Mil. 619 and 649, respectively) is more difficult to say. 13 Greek influence may also be seen in the use of virtus in a scene from Plautus' Truculentus, where a maid prevents a lovesick youth from entering the house of her courtesan mistress by asking him for more money. Here the maid replies to the youth's protests with, True. 74

... Idem istuc delatum scio. de eo nunc bene sunt tua virtute . . . . I know that very amount was delivered here. In regard to this, things go very well due to your virtus. '4

The usage here has been taken for a paraphrasis for tvu, but because tua virtute refers here to the money that the young man had earlier given to the courtesan, the remark is more likely a sarcastic reference to the boy's excellence or his "excellent deed." The context suggests a close rendering of a Greek original. For the scene of the attendant barring the lover from the courtesan's door is standard in New Comedy.'5 Another common image in New Comedy, which is the courtesan as the teacher of love to whom tuition must be paid,,6 occurs in the preceding five lines (True. 735-8). That the phrase tua

IJ

'4

15 16

close translation, since they have a precise parallel in the Greek commonplace, Kocr~Eicrea! EK 6:pETWV, which is found in well-kown passages: Thuc. 2.42.2 and Dem. (De corona) 18.287; cf. Simonides' epigram on Leonidas, Diod. Sic. lI.1I.13, and cf. Xen. Hier. 7.9. Moreover, when Terence employed the phrase at Adelphoe 176, it is in a passage that he seems to say he translated word for word from his Greek model (Adel. Il); discussed later in this chapter. Eisenhut, VR., p. 25 and Sarsila, p. 29, denied Greek influence; Van Omme, p. 120, n. 123 and Strawecka, 215, favored it. The use of 6:pETT) to denote good qualities or deeds, is found at, e.g., PI. Ap. 18A; cf. Pi. 0.7.89; Bacch. 9.13; Thuc. 3.58; Xen. An. 1.4.8; Dem. 19.312. Donatus, Ter. Adel. 257, wrote that tua virtute is a paraphrasis for tu. Cf. OLD, virtus #7, p. 2074. Sarsila, p. 36, cited tua virtute at Cic. Fam. 1.7 [SB 18]8, Ad Brut. 24[SB 25]10, but in these virtus has a specific reference. At Most. 33, Mil. 738 and 12Il, the meanings of virtus are better explained otherwise. Mil. 738 and Most. 12lI are discussed in Chapter n. Most. 33 will be discussed later in this chapter. See Leo, PI. For., pp. 149-5', for references. See Anaxandrides, frag. 60 PCG = 61 CAF; Anon., frag. 122 CAF; and Plaut. Asin. 226-7; Per. '73; Bacch. 66 ff.; Mer. 303; and Leo, PI. For. pp. 146-8, contra Fraenkel, PI. im PI. p. 35 = Elem. p. 32. For characters oflow status as teachers, see Pseud. 447; Most. 186, 188-9 and 194; True. 734 ff.; Asin. 226 ff.; also Ter. Hec. 203; Eun. 262-5, cf. E. Fantham, Comparative Studies in Republican Latin Imagery (Toronto, 1972) pp. 35-8. 10

9

ROMAN MANLINESS

virtute comes from the Greek is suggested by the fact that according to Greek mores, financial generosity was a mark of apETi), and a sarcastic reference to generosity would fit the context perfectly. 17 The influence of apETi) on the other occurences of virtus meanin~ human excellence in early Latin cannot be determined. 18 3. ETHICAL VIRTUS The influence of apETi) is also apparent in another more specific usage of virtus that refers to humans - its meaning as ethical excellence. Although this meaning is common, and although there can be conceptual overlap between courageous and ethical virtus, as, for example, in the brave conduct of the noble slave Tyndarus in Plautus' Captivi and in the speech of Cato where virtus is contrasted with vices and pleasure,I9 nevertheless the effect of apETi) is implied by the fact that the confluence of these two senses of virtus - ethical and courageous - was never total, and that ethical qualities and conduct could be opposed to martial virtus. Viewed synchronically, the overtly non-ethical use of virtus by Ennius and Caesar, and the regular use of virtus in a strictly ethical sense by Cicero and others, is a puzzling linguistic phenomenon. 2o Diachronically considered, however, it makes sense. The contradictory usages suggest that the narrowly ethical sense in which virtus is found in Roman comedy and in later Latin was not a traditional or indigenous usage, but one that developed as both a literary and cultural borrowing. Such a development, moreover, corresponds to what is known about the values of Rome of the middle Republic. The contradiction in the usage of virtus reflects a distinction observed in many cultures between societal norms and mores on the one hand and a more strictly ethical consideration ofright and wrong on the other. In some cultures, the two more or less correspond, but in ancient Rome native moral 17

18

19

20

See MacDowell, Mnem. 16 (1963) pp. 127-34 and earlier Chapter Il. Plaut. Pseud. 724-6. At Bacch. 673-5 virtus signifies an intellectual excellence or ability regularly associated with apETTJ. See, e.g., Xen. Mem. 3.9.5; PI. Ap. 18A. A meaning of ability or excellence or ability may perhaps be found for virtus in Terence's play Adelphoe at line 257. Vitia and voluptas at Cato, ORF4 8.141, 146. At Capt. 682 and 690, the courageous virtus of Tyndarus is contrasted to ne ob male facta. See earlier Introduction. IIO

'ApETTl AND MANLY VIRTUS

concepts seem to have been predominantly social as opposed to private, and they centered around the ideas of function and success rather than abstract ethical notions of right and wrong. 21 Traditional Roman prayers, for example, did not petition for ethical qualities or guidance, and the Roman gods aided not the ethically good but the ritually correct, in the same way that early Roman law assisted the person who followed correct legal procedure over one who might have had the better claim. 22 Moreover, in a society as militaristic as that of middle republican Rome, not only was martial prowess considered the ideal of manly behavior, but issues of right or wrong were apparently not paramount, and an individual's ethical failing might be overlooked if he excelled as a soldier. An example is the story of C. Fabricius Luscinus supporting P. Cornelius Rufinus for the consulship of 290. The upright Fabricius was said to have despised Rufinus for his ethical failings, but to have supported his candidacy because he was "good fighter and experienced in military tactics. "23 Things were different in Greek culture, where ethical considerations had gained new prominence during the fifth century, when the Sophistic movement and Socrates called into question the meanings of numbers of central moral concepts, 6:pETT] among them, by uncompromisingly applying ethical standards of right and wrong to traditional societal values, and demonstrating the disjuncture between the twO. 24 As the Romans came into more frequent and closer contact with an elite Greek culture and a literature that had been profoundly affected by fifth-century ethical thinking, the meanings of 21

22

23 24

The distinction between ethical concepts and social values in ancient Rome was noted by R. Heinze, "Zur rOnllschen Moral," in Vom Geist des Riimertums (Stuttgart, I960) p. 83, and by H. Drexler, "Honos," Romanitas 3 (I965) p. I37, reprinted in H. Oppermann, ed., Riimische Wertbegriffe (Darrnstadt, I967) p. 448. For the social and political nature of Roman moral values, and their difference from Greek ethics, see also Ed. Schwartz, Ethik der Griechen (Stuttgart, I95I) p. I3. Contra]. A. Hanson, "Plautus as a Source Book for Roman Religion," TAPA 90 (I959) pp. 48-IOI, who adoped the "uncritical" principle that everything in Plautus is to be considered Plautine." C. Bailey, Phases in the Religion of Andent Rome (Berkeley and Los Angeles, I932) pp. 85-6, remarked on the lack of ethical content in Roman prayers. For the legalistic nature of Roman religion, see, e.g., Liv. 22.IO with North, PBSR 44 (I976) pp. I-12, esp. p. 5 f. bel/ator bonus militarisque disdplinae peritus, Gell. NA 4.8.2; Cic. De or. 2. 268. See Jaeger, Paideia2 II pp. 27-76, esp. p. 59 ff.; Adkins, Merit and Responsibility, Chapters ix--xvi. III

ROMAN MANLINESS

certain traditional Roman concepts would naturally expand their primary field of reference. The transformation of a central Roman value from a moral term based on social considerations to one that also comprised a private ethical element can be seen in the metamorphosis of a number of Latin words. Fides, meaning "trust" or "loyalty," was expanded from a morally important, but essentially social, religious, and legal concept, to a word that contained the ethical references of the Greek term lTicrT1S.25 Another example of a Latin term expanded to accommodate a Greek ethical concept is sapientia, which originally denoted practical knowledge and ability. In Plautus, the word normally means the common sense or cunning that enables a character to work things to his or her advantage. 26 But the influence of the Greek term croq,ia, which denotes philosophical wisdom as an ethical standard and a cultural ideal, appears also in certain Plautine passages. Good examples are found in Stichus, where the wisest woman - sapientissuma - is described as one who knows herself well enough to maintain an even disposition in times of good fortune, and in Persa, when the parasite's daughter attempts to imitate the philosophical sophistication of a Greek courtesan. 27 As the traditionally warlike society of mid-republican Rome was adapting to a more ethically sophisticated Greek culture, it was inevitable that the meaning of a central concept such as manliness would also expand its primary field of reference. Because virtus 25

26

27

Although E. Fraenkel, "Zur Geschichte des Wortesjides," RhM 71 (1916) pp. 187--99, went too far in claiming that in early Latin jides is "morally colorless," (see R. Heinze, Hermes 64 [1929] pp. 140-66), he was correct about occurrences ofjides as an ethical term denoting "honesty" or "sincerity" reflecting the semantic influence of lTlo"T1S. Ethics and traditional religion are often in conflict. Cf. E. S. Gruen, "Greek lTIO"T1S and Romanjides," Athenaeum 60 (1982) p. 64, n. 68. In this sense sapientia corresponds with the Greek word <j>pOVT)O"lS, as is stated at Plaut. True. 78a. Lindsay bracketed the last line, but even if the line is a gloss, the correspondence of sapientia and <j>pOVT)o"IS in Plautine usage is patent; see Garbarino, AAT 100 (1965-6) pp. 255-7. Plautus plays on the etymological relationship of sapientia to sap or at Pseud. 737-8 and Mil. 587; see Garbarino, pp. 260-5. St. 123-5; Per. 549-60. On the latter, see L. Van Hook, "The Praise of Athens in Greek Tragedy," CW 27 (1934) pp. 85-8; S. Cecchi, "La propaganda di prestigio a favore d'Atene nelle tragedia greca," Dioniso 34 (1960) pp. 143-64. See also Enn. Ann. 2II12 S = 229-30 ROL, with Skutsch, p. 378 ff. On sapientia in Terence, see Garbarino, p. 274 ff. II2

'ApnT] AND MANLY VIRTUS

certainly took on a variety of new meanings borrowed from 6:pETT], it would not be surprising if the decidedly ethical connotations of 6:pnT] also affected the Latin word. Because although the martial meaning of 6:pnT] predominates in Greek epics, histories, and tragedies, the ethical sense of 6:pnT] was extremely common in Greek literature of the fourth century and later. 28 It was especially so in Middle and New Comedy, where 6:pnT] was employed almost exclusively as an ethical term. Of the fourteen times it occurs in the fragments of Middle and New Comedy, only once does 6:pnT] have a clearly non-ethical denotation. 29 Conversely, when virtus has an ethical meaning in early Latin, it is almost always found in Latin adaptations of Greek comedies. The best place to examine the ethical usages of virtus in early Latin is in the comedies of PIautus, where there are full contexts. Here the influence of 6:pnT] is suggested by the correspondence, found in usage and context, between ethical uses of virtus, and 6:pnT] when it occurs with an ethical meaning in Middle and New Greek Comedy. In the Latin plays almost all occurrences of ethical virtus are found in dramatic situations that conform to a few moralizing topoi with which 6:pnT] is regularly associated in Greek comedy: lectures about virtue and vice by a father to a son, or one friend to another; speeches of self-reproach For the development of 6:PETT] as an ethical term, see Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Sappho und Simonides, pp. I69-89; Adkins, Merit and Responsibility H. F. North, "Canons and Hierarchies of the Cardinal Virtues in Greek and Latin Literature," in The Classical Tradition, Literary and Historical Studies in Honor of Harry Caplan, ed. L. Wallach (Ithaca, I966) pp. I68-83, and more recently M. Finkelberg, "Time and Arete in Homer," CQ 48 (I998) pp. I5-28, and "Virtue and Circumstances: On the City-State Concept of Arete," AJPh I23 (2002) pp. 35-49. 29 Only in Anon., frag. 4I2 CAF. 'ApETT] is clearly ethical at Antiphanes, frag. 208 PCG = 2IO CAF; Philemon, frag. 74 PCG = 7I CAF; Menander, frag. 30I PCG = 338 K-T = 408 CAF; frag. 7I6 PCG = 493 K-T = II09 CAF; Anaxandrides, frag. 7I . PCG = 2 CGFP = Alexander, frag. 5 CAF; Anon., frags. 126, I63, I90, I95, 1286 CAF; Menander, frag. I79c K-T = 203 CAF; cf. E. W Handley, BICS 26 (I976) pp. 84-6. 'APETT] occurs seven times in the fragments offourth-century and later tragedies in Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, vol. I, ed. B. Snell (Gottingen, I97I) and vol. 2., ed. R. Kannicht/Snell (I98I). The word has ethical denotations in five, possibly six of these examples; Carcinus (70) frag. 4 TrGF I; Diogenes Sinopensis (88) frag. 3 TrGF I; Apollonidas (I52) frag. 2 TrGF I; Zenodotus (2I5) frag. I TrGF I; Anon., frag. 346 TrGF II; Anon., frag. 327 TrGF II. At Antiphon (55) frag. 2 TrGF I 6:pETT] denotes bravery. In Aeschylus and Sophocles 6:PETT] usually means courage; in Euripides the word is about evenly divided between valorous and ethical references. 'ApETT] is used with a wide variety of meanings by fourth-century rhetoricians. 28

II3

ROMAN MANLINESS

by a contrite youth; and accusations against a guardian or teacher for corrupting his ward. Some occurrences of ethical virtus also correspond to specific, well-known Greek phrases employing apETi). The patterns of usage for ethical virtus that occur in Plautus are also found in a comic fragment of Gn. Naevius, and, somewhat modified, in the comedies of Terence. All are useful for understanding how ethical virtus was employed by later non-dramatic authors. An old and recurring theme in popular as well as philosophical Greek literature is the opposition between virtue and pleasure, expressed in Greek by apETi) and i]50vi) respectively.3 0 Beginning with Prodicus' story of "the Choice ofHerakles," a common way for the apETi) - i]50vi) dichotomy to be treated was as an ethical decision presented to young men. In fourth-century rhetorical works addressed to or discussing young men, the contrast between the life governed by i]50vi) (or po6vllio - "laziness") on the one hand, or by apETi) , on the other, is common. 31 This choice occurred in Greek New Comedy in a variety of stock dramatic situations, and when these were adapted by Roman playwrights, the ethical sense of apETi) seems to have been regularly translated by virtus. Greek comedic writers often presented the theme in the form of a harangue by a father or the complaints of a more level-headed youth about the dissolute life of a friend,3 2 and it appears as such in Roman comedy.33 A good example of the use of virtus in this trope is found in Trinummus. The prologue of this play states that Plautus adapted it from a Greek comedy called Thesaurus written by the late fourth, early third century playwright Philemon. Philemon is known to have been 30

JI

J2

JJ

The dichotomy was mnch favored by the Stoics; see Cic. Fin. 1.6I, 2.69, 3-49, Acad. pr. 2.I40; PInt. De Stoic. I5(I040D); Stob. Flor. 6.66. The choice was offered to Herakles by the personified figures of A'PETT) and KOKio "Evil," see Xen. Mem. 2.2.20-34. For fourth-century examples, see, e.g., Isoc. 1.5-8, 9.46, I1.23, I6.29; Dem. 60.2; cf. 61.32, and Thuc. 2-42.2-4. See Anon., frag. 1286 CAP; cf. P. Oxy. inv. 50 4B 30 H (5) frag. A, Handley, BICS 26 (1979) pp. 84-6. For the ways in which Menander exploited this convention, see T. B. L. Webster, An Introduction to Menander (Manchester, I974) p. 39 ff., and W T. MacCary, "Menander's Old Men," TAPA I02 (I97I) pp. 303-35. For tirades against hetairai, see Anaxilas, frag. 22 PCG = 22 CAP; and Alexis, frag. I03 PCG = 98 CAP. For examples of this type of stock scene in Roman comedy, see Ter. Adel. 60-80; Heaut. 20I-IO; Plant. Mer. 61-79. For full references and discussion, see Ph.- E. Legrand, Daos, tableau de la comedie grecque pendant la periode dite nouvelle (Lyon, I910) p. I63 ff.

II4

'Apml AND MANLY VIRTUS

especially fond of ethical themes, and the theme of his Thesaurus is reported to have been "the helping friend."34 In Act 2, scene 2 of Trinummus, after a long lecture on proper ethical conduct by an old man named Philto to his son Lysiteles, the latter asks his father to help a young friend who has squandered his inheritance on pleasure. The father characterizes the friend by contrasting his dissolute behavior to virtus, Trin. 336 337

qui quidem nusquam per virtutem rem confregit, atque eget;

nil moror eum tibi esse arnicum cum eius modi virtutibus. [a person] who indeed under no circumstances wrecked his wealth through virtus, and is in want. I don't care much for a person with virtutes of that kind being your friend.

The ethical sense of virtus is patent and in the second instance ironic. 35 It is generally agreed that the moralizing tone of the father-son dialogue in this scene of Trinummus was derived from Philemon's play.36 What Philemon seems to have presented in this scene was a debate over the nature of apETT]. The conventional father character proposes a limited definition of private self-control with no element of social responsibility. He views social contacts only as a source of ethical corruption. 37 His son Lysiteles argues for a social standard of ethical conduct, placing particular emphasis on helping friends in distress (Trin. 344 ff.). The debate reflects Greek, not Roman, moral concerns. For the obligation 34

35

36

37

Trin. 18-19. For the theme ofPhilemon's Thesauros, see Apul. Fiar. 167 fr. This play seems to reflect Peripatetic ethics and ideals, Apul. FIar. 16. 63-4 and 67; P. Grimal, "Analisi del Trinununus e gli albori della fuosofia in Roma," Dioniso XLIII (1969) pp. 363-75; and Fantham, Hermes 105 (1977) p. 406. For the overall seriousness ofPhilemon's works, see also Jachmann, Plautinische, p. 225 fr. So Lodge, p. 879; and Van Onune, p. 66, n. 92, and Strawecka, 216-17, who both saw the influence of 6:pETTj, contra Eisenhut, VR. pp. 24-5. Earlier in the scene Lesbonicus is clearly described in ethically negative terms, Trin. 312, 334; cf. Trin. 281,284-6,320; Most. 139-144. See Fraenkel, PI. im PI., pp. 56 and 140 = Elem., pp. 53 and 133; F. Leo, Geschichte der romischen Literatur 1: Die archaische Literatur. I (Berlin, 1913, Reprinted Darmstadt, 1967) pp. n6-7; but also Zagagi, Tradition, pp. 90-104. Fraenkel, PI. im PI., p. 128, n. 2 = Elem., p. 156, n. 2, thought that Plautus introduced much of the moralizing into Trinummus, but see Jachmann, pp. 224 and 226 fr., and Webster, Studies, p. 139. Cf. Trin. 337; also 280-90, 339-43. On the narrowly private nature ofPhilto's ethics, cf. Trin. 305-12 and 317-18.

II5

ROMAN MANLINESS

to render financial assistance to friends in need was a traditional Greek value, which also figured strongly in Peripatetic ethics. A fragment of the comic poet Antiphanes specifically states that it is a mark of apET~ to use money to help one's friends, apETT) TO TTPOtKO TOtS <j>iAOlS VTTllPETEtV, - "virtue is to help friends willingly." (frag. 208 PCG = 2 IQ CAP), and it has been shown that financial generosity was considered to be one aspect of apET~. 38 The obligation to help impecunious peers, however, was quite foreign to Romans of the middle Republic (as Polybius states very explicitly), and had no connection to virtus. 39 Because the entire scene of Trinummus revolves around a distinctly Greek notion of what virtue is, it is likely that at lines 336-7 Plautus' uses of virtus were derived from Philemon's treatment of apET~ in his play Thesaurus. The same moralizing reproach by father to son is found in a fragment of Naevi us' comedy Tarentilla. The fragment seems to have presented the stock situation of a philandering son, a courtesan, and a disapproving father in a moralizing rebuke that includes a reference to virtus, primum ad virtutem ut redeatis, abeatis ab ignavia, domi patris patriam ut colatis potius quam peregri probra. First that you go back to virtus and depart from idleness that you look after your father and fatherland at home rather than disgraces abroad. corn. 92-3 Ribb. = Tarent. 12 Marmorale = 90-1 ROVo

N aevius clearly adapted his Tarentilla from a Greek model, and although the style of these lines betrays Naevius' hand, it is wrong to claim 38

39

40

MacDowell, Mnem. I6 (I963) pp. I27-34; Antiphanes, frag. 226 PCG= 228; see previous Chapter n, p. roD Cf. this scene in Trinimmus with Menander, Dysk. 797-812, and Handley, Dyskolos, pp. 207 fr. There is no reason to doubt Polybius' strong words about the Roman lack of generosity in regard to money: "[Scipio's generosity] was astonishing in Rome, for there absolutely no one gives away anything of their property to anyone, ifhe can help it." (31.26.9); " ... so extreme is their precision about accounts and their profiting in regard to time [of repayment]," (31.27.II). See Walbank, Commentary, UI, p. 505-9 and Zagagi, Tradition, pp. ro8-31. E. V Marmorale, Naevius Poeta (Florence, I950). Other fragments from Tarentilla show the scorn for courtesans so typical of fathers in New Comedy (Naevius, com. 75-9 Ribb. = Tarent. 2 Marmorale = 74-9 ROL); cf. Anaxilas, frag. 22 PCG = 22 CAP, and Alexis, frag. I03 PCG = 98 CAP; and paternal anger over the squandering of money by sons (com. 83-4 Ribb. = Tarent. 6 Marmorale = 80-I ROL).

rr6

'ApET11 AND MANLY VIRTIlS

that the opposition of virtus and ignavia and the emphasis on patres and patria display a distinctively "Roman morality. "41 We have seen that the contrasting of apETT] and paev~ia - "laziness" - was a topos in Greek moralizing on young men, and Greek as well as Roman tradition stressed loyalty to fathers and fatherland. 42 We may, therefore, surmise that the influence of the Greek topos was at work, and that the presence of the apETT] - i)8ovT] motif in a Greek comic model influenced Naevius' use of virtus is likely. A similar topos, this time revolving around a profligate son, a levelheaded friend, and the former's father, appears in Plautus' Bacchides, when old Philoxenus speaks of his request that young Mnesilochus reform Pistoclerus, the son of another old man, Bacch. 1085

nunc Mnesilochum, quod mandavi, viso ecquid eum ad virtutem aut ad frugum opera sua compulerit, ... Now I'm going to see Mnesilochus, whether, as I requested, he has forced him to virtus or morality by his efforts ....

The ethical connotation of virtus is clear from the use of the word frux at line 1085, and from the description a few lines earlier ofPistoclerus' wild life (Bacch. 1076-7). The request that Philoxenus refers to here occurred earlier in the play at Bacch. 494-5, lines that are a direct translation of the Greek of Plautus' model, the Dis exapaton of Menander. It seems likely, therefore, that the occurrence of ethical virtus at Bacch. 1084a-85 conforms to the dramatic situation that Plautus found in his Greek model. 43 41

42

43

Eisenhut, VR., p. 24; Sarsila, pp. 26-7. For the Naevian style of the line, see Fraenkel, "Naevius" RE suppL VI (1935), coL 630. For a discussion of possible Greek models for Tarentilla, see Marmorale, p. 171. For a discussion on Naevius' comedy and its relationship to Greek models in general, see Marmorale, p. 161 and Fraenkel, RE, 628. A glance at J. Geffcken's Griechische Epigramme (Heidelberg, 1916) demonstrates the importance of patriotism and allegiance to family in Greek values; see esp. pp. 189, 191; see also G. Kaibel, Epigrammata Graeca ex lapidibus conlecta (Berlin, 1878) p. 30, ll. 5-6. On the relationship between Bacch. 494-5 and Menander's lines, see Handley, Menander and Plautus, pp. 9-10 and 22. Webster, Studies, p. 131, stated that Philoxenus' monologue, or something like it, had appeared at this point in Menander's play, because the sentiment expressed was important to the movement of the plot. The same kind ofmoralizing about virtue and pleasure appears in the form of a lecture by one friend to another at Plautus'

II7

ROMAN MANLINESS

Another way in which New Comedy dealt with the 6:PETT] - i)50vT] dichotomy was to have a young man soliloquize on his moral failings, promising himself to reject his evil habits; this usually occurs just before an accounting with his father must be made. In the beginning of Plautus' Mostellaria, in his lament, young Philolaches sings, venit ignavia, ea mihi tempestas fuit, mi adventu suo grandinem [imbremque] attulit; Most. 139 haec verecundiam mi et virtutis modum deturbavit detexitque a me ilico; postilla optigere me neglegens fui. continuo pro imbre amor advenit [in cor meum], is usque in pectus permanavit, permadefecit cor meum. Most. 144 nunc simul res, fides, fama, virtus, decus deseruerunt: ego sum in usu factus nimio nequior. Idleness came, that was for me the storm, by its arrival it brought to me hail and rain; this toppled for me moderation and a measure of virtus and unroofed these from me then and there. Mterwards, I was careless to cover myself. Immediately love arrived like a storm, into my heart it seeped, right into my breast, it soaked through my heart. Now, all at once, property, credit, reputation, virtus, esteem departed. I have been made through [this] experience totally worthless.

The ethical reference of virtus at line 139 is clear from its joining to verecundia - "moderation" - and its contrast to ignavia - "idleness" and amor.44 This meaning would be carried over to the occurrence of virtus five lines later at line 144, where the inclusion of virtus in what is a list of traditional Roman values - res,jides,fama, decus - does not alter its ethical meaning, since the obligation to maintain property, credit, reputation, virtue, and esteem was as well established among Greeks as it was among Romans. 45

44

45

Trin. 642-51, on which see the discussion later in this chapter, and in Terence's Heauton Timorumenus, 207· Lodge, p. 879, Van Omme, p. 88, Strawecka, p. 127, and Eisenhut, fIR, p. 26 gave the general sense of "praise" as a native Latin meaning. On all these as Greek values, see note 99 later. For the joining of virtu5 and res in Cato, Agr. 32, see previously, Chapter I.

IIS

'ApETl1 AND MANLY VIRTUS

Philolaches' song (Most. 9I-I56), while clearly a Plautine creation, seems to have been based on a similar theme to that expressed in a monologue in the Greek original. That young men should reject i]8ovT] or pa6vI-\ia and follow 6:pETT] was, as we have seen, a topos in Athenian rhetoric that also appears in the fragments of New Comedy. Young lovers soliloquizing on their moral failings were also a common theme in New Comedy and the trope has been traced back to Euripides. 46 The clearest sign of the Greek background ofPhilolaches' song is the reference to ars gymnastica at line I5I and Fraenkel argued that Plautus' extended comparison was adapted from a less elaborate comparison of youth to a house that appeared in the Greek model for Mostellaria. The ethical meaning of virtus in the passage may then reflect the appearance of the 6:pETT] - i]8ovT] contrast in the Greek original. 47 In New Comedy the 6:PETT] and i]8ovT] dichotomy was also frequently connected with the ethical development and education of young men, and a common comic motif is the corruption of a youth by a degenerate teacher or a slave. Plautus' Mostellaria opens this way, with the country slave Grumio accusing the city slave Tranio of ruining their master's son by catering to his vices.

Most. 33

nam ego ilium corruptum duco, quom his factis studet; quo nemo adaeque iuventute ex omni Attica antehac est habitus parcus nec magis continens, is nunc in aliam partem palmam possidet. virtute id factum tua et magisterio tuo. For I reckon him corrupted who pursues such activities; No one of all the youth of Attica previously had a thrifty character equal to his, none was more restrained.

46

47

See Leo, Geschichte, pp. 112-13, who also compared these lines to Trin. 223-31. On the structure of the first act of Mostellaria and its relationship to the Greek original see M. KnOrt, Das griechische Vorbild der Mostellaria des Plautus (diss., Munich, 1934) pp. 36-8. Cf. Most. 150-5, and Bacch. 426-7, and Eur. Ale. 557, Phoen. 94; see Leo, PI. For. p. 135. Fraenkel, PI. im PI. pp. 169-77 = Elem. pp. 160---9, provided parallels for the comparison from the fragments of New Comedy. The image of the house recurs later in the play; see Webster, Studies, p. 133, n. 2, and E. W Leach, "'De exemplo meo ipse aedificato': An Organizing Idea in Mostellaria," Hermes 97 (1969) pp. 318-32. Fantham, Comparative Studies, p. 25, n. 16, commenting on tempestas at Most. 137, wrote, "The metaphorical use of tempestas in Plautus is virtually confined to the Philemon plays."

II9

ROMAN MANLINESS

Now he carries off the palm in the other direction. This happened because of your virtus and your teaching. Most have seen a vague and general meaning for virtus here. 48 But in view of Grumio's charges of Tranio's moral corruption a few lines earlier: nunc, dum tibi lubet licetque, pota, perde rem, corrumpe erilem adulescentem optumum; dies noctesque bibite, pergraecarnini, arnicas ernite liberate, pascite parasitos, opsonate pollucibiliter. Now while you want to and you have the opportunity; go ahead drink, waste wealth, corrupt the master's fine young son; drink day and night, behave like a Greek, buy girls and free them, feed parasites, buy food sumptuously.

Most.

22-4

The meaning of virtus must be in some sense ethical, and clearly ironic. Plautus' Mostellaria seems to have been adapted from Philemon's Phasma, and this scene, like Mostellaria in general, well fits the ethical themes that characterized Philemon's comedies. 49 Moreover, the debate between Grumio and Tranio shows signs of its Greek model, and echoes parodies of philosophical schools and doctrines that are known to have occurred in New Comedy. 50 Tranio's corruption Lodge, p. 879, gave auxilium; Eisenhut, VR., p. 24, Tiiehtigkeit- "ability," as a native Latin meaning, citing Trin. 643, Pseud. 725-6, Capt. 410-Il, Pseud. 581, and Trin. 336-7. But in all these virtus has other meanings. Van Omme, p. 30, saw an idiomatic expression meaning "thanks to," but the passages he cited are not proper parallels. E. A. Sonnenschein, Plauti Mostellaria (Oxford, 1907) p. 24, cited Aul. 166, Mil. 676, Trin. 355, Most. 173 and True. 74I, but the first three have virtute deum, and True. 74I has the virtus fortuna trope. 49 A didascalic notice gives only the tide of the model for Mostellaria. Menander, Theognetus, and Philemon all wrote plays entided (j)6:(J~a, but Philemon's seem most likely; see Webster, Studies, p. I42 fr. and F. Delle Corte, Da Sarsina a Roma (Florence, I967) p. I29 fr. Greek style moralizing occurs throughout the Grumio-Tranio debate, beginning at Most. I; also at Most. 84-I57. 50 The theme goes back to Aristophanes' Cloudes. See F. Della Corta "Stoiker und Epikueer in Plautus Komodien," in Musa iocosa: fur A. Thieifelder (1974) p. 89; Leo, PI. For. pp. I36-7. Opening expositions featuring slave debates are standard in New Comedy; see, Leo, Gesehiehte, p. Ill. The occurrence of peregraeeamini at Most. 22 and 64 shows Plautus' hand, but the reworking is minimal and explicable. 48

120

'ApET11 AND MANLY VIRTUS

centers around his excessive eating and drinking (references to Tranio's eating habits occur at Most. 2, 5, 20, 22, 24, 35, and 63-5) and in New Comedy extravagance at the table as a sign of moral corruption was part of the stock attack on Epicureans. 51 A number of fragments of New Comedy have corrupt paedagogoi justifYing themselves before irate fathers with explicit references to "Epicurean" habits of eating and drinking. Furthermore, the reference to Tranio's magisterium at Most. 33 indicates that he is being likened to a teacher, and in New Comedy it was common for a low character, often a slave, to assume the role of teacher in comic dialogue. The Greek paedagogus as escort and teacher was a protector of morals. 52 If magisterio tuo is a sarcastic reference to the doctrine of a philosophical school by which the mock paedagogus Tranio has corrupted his charge, then, in view of the traditional connection between lTatoEia and 6:PETrl in attacks on corrupt teachers of the young, it is reasonable to think that virtus at Mostellaria 33 is a translation of Philemon's 6:PETrl. The fundamental and wellknown indifference of Epicurus to both 6:pETrl and lTatoEia would only have heightened the comic irony of the original Greek parody. 53 But while a parody of an Athenian philosophical school by Philemon would have played well before an Athenian audience, an explicit reference to Epicurus or his doctrines would have been unintelligible

For Epicurean eating habits in New Comedy see Baton, frag. 3 PCG = 3 CAF; Damoxenus, frag. PCG = 2 CAF; and Webster, Studies, p. III ff. The confrontation ofGrumio and Tranio is that of country versus city, a trope older than either Epicurus or New Comedy; also see Ter. Adel. I04-S, 809 ff., 833 ff., 866 ff., and 881 ff. 52 At Pseud. 447 a slave is called paedagogus; at Most. 186 the ancilla Scapha plays teacher to Philematium's student, see esp. Most. 188-9 and 194. At True. 734-8 another aneilla acts as teacher. At Asin. 226-9 a lena plays a teacher and in Act. I, se. 2 of Poenulus a parasite does. See also Ter. Hee. 203 and Bun. 261-S, with Fantham, Comparative Studies, pp. 3S-8. For the "Epicurean" habits of corrupt paedagogoi, see Baton, frag. S PCG = S CAF; Hegisippus, frag. 2 PCG = 2 CAP. On the paedagogus as a comic type, see R. Schottlaender, "Die Komische Figur des Padagogen bei Plautus," Das Altertums 19 (1973) 233-40. On the blame that accrued to the paedagogus ifhis pupil was corrupted, cf. Plaut. Baeeh. 379-81 and 419-34. 53 For virtue and teaching, see Cic. Off. 3. 139. The conjunction of 6:pETT) and TIaJoEJa occurs repeatedly in attacks on sophists as corruptors of youths; see PI. Gor. SI9E, Prot. 324B; Xen. Cyr. 13.1-3; cf. Cic. Pis. 69; Plaut. Baeeh. 148. On Epicurus' attitude toward 6:pETT), see Bp. coni. 8(Il6) Usener, p. 137; on TIaJoEJa, Bp. conI. 26 (163). Usener, p. ISO. Epicureans were a proselytizing group, who memorized the words of the master (Cie. Fin. 2.21), so Epicurus' opinions would have been known to Athenian audiences. 51

121

ROMAN MANLINESS

to the average member of Plautus' audience. Plautus would have had to replace these with a more general reference, and he seems to have done just that with general anti-Greek catch phrases at Most. 22, pergraecamini and at Most. 64-5, bibite, pergraecamini, / este, eifercite vos, saginam caedite. - "drink, behave like a Greek, eat, stuff yourselves, slaughter the fattened animal."54 Ethical virtus occurs with a more general reference in Plautus' Rudens, which was adapted from a Greek original by Diphilus (Rud. 32), and there are indications that the usage is dependent on 6:pETT). Early in the play, a fisherman gives his opinions of a pimp, whom he first described as fraudulentum, / deorum odium atque hominum, malum, mali viti probique plenum, - "dishonest, hated by gods and men, full of evil and true vice" (Rud. 318-19), and then says of him:

Rud.

32I

Cum istius modi virtutibus operisque ornatus qui sit, eum quidem ad carnificem est aequius quam ad Venerem commeare. For one who is decorated with virtutes and accomplishments of that kind it is more just that he merit the executioner than Venus.

Virtutes clearly has an ethical sense, used ironically. 55 Given the closeness of cum virtutibus operisque to the very common Greek formula 6:pETf\S KCXt EVEpYEcrlcxs EVEKCX, Plautus may be translating closely here. This is supported by the occurrence of a similar phrase ornatus ex virtutes, also applied ironically to a pimp, found in a scene in Terence's play Adelphoe (155-96), which we are told Terence took from a play by Diphilus. Moreover, we are also informed that Terence translated the scene in question very closely; verbum de verbo expressum extulit are the words used. 56 Here a youth, Aeschines, argues with a pimp named Sannio: Adel. 176 54 55

56

San: quid hoc reist? regnumne, Aeschine, hic tu possides? Aes: si possiderem, ornatus esses ex tuis virtutibus.

See Della Corte, "Stoiker," p. 88 fr. So Lodge, p. 879, Van Ornme, pp. 67, 88, and n. 92, and Strawecka, 216. When in the prologue, Rud. 13-30 and 47-8, the ethical theme of the play is stated explicitly; the pimp is clearly the evil man referred to there. I use E. A. Sonnenschein's text here. See Ter. Adel. 6-II. For the meaning "word-for-word translation," see W Beare "Contamination in Plautus and Terence," RPh 14 (1940) p. 31, n. 1. On the correspondence

I22

'ApnTJ AND MANLY VIRTIlS

Pimp: What is this? Do you own a kingdom here, Aeschines? Youth: If I did, you would have been decorated according to your virtutes.

The phrase ornatus ex (or cum) virtutibus, although rare in Plautus and Terence, corresponds to the proverbial Greek expression Kocr~Elcreat EK TWV 6:PETwVY If Terence's ornatus ... ex tuis virtutibus is a close translation of this Greek commonplace, then given our knowledge that Plautus sometimes stayed very close to his Greek model, it is possible that Plautus' cum virtutibus operisque is also a translation of an ironic use of 6:pETcxi that Diphilus had used more than once to describe a pimp.5 8 Greek influences can also be seen in some of the uses of ethical virtus by the late second-century satirist C. Lucilius. 59 In the seven fragments of the satires where it occurs, virtus is employed in a wide variety of senses. Most of the fragments are too short to permit definite determination of the meaning of virtus, although a martial meaning in some is probable. 6o Lucilius' surviving writings, however,

57

58

59

60

ofDiphilan scene Terence inserted into his adaptation of Menander's 'A5EAcpoi to Adel. 155-96, see Donatus, Commentum Terenti, Adel. 199. The common Greek expression is found at, e.g., Thuc. 2-42.2 (pericles' Funeral Oration); Dem. 18.287 (De corona); Xen. Cyr. 8.1.21; and Polyb. 9.10.1, where it is clearly proverbial; cf. Diod. Sic. I I. II. 3. Other than in the two passages under discussion, ornatus ex tuis virtutibus occurs in pre-Classical Latin only at Capt. 997; cf. decora . .. tuis virtutibus - "worthy of your deeds" - Mil. 619 and 738. It is found six times in Cicero's philosophical works, each time in a Greek context - Tusc. 3.37, 5.28; Off. 1.46; Fin. 2.II2, 4.59,5.93 - and in the orations at Plane. 58; Qu. Rose. 7, Imp. Pom. 51, Phil. 13.24, and Phil. 13.49. On the similarities between Terences's Diphilan scene and Plautus' Rudens, see A. Mariage, "Difuo cornico," SIFCXV (1907) p. 508 If., esp. p. 515; Leo, Geschichte, p. 246; Marx, Plautus Rudens, pp. 293-6; H. Drexler, "Die Komposition von Terenz Adelphen und Plautus Rudens," Philologus, suppl. XXVI, heft II (1935) p. 105 If.; Webster, Studies, p. 160; and E. Fantharn, "Terence, Diphilus and Menander," Philologus II2 (I968) pp. 196-215. On the vexing question ofLucilius's dates, see E. S. Gruen, Culture and National Identity in Republican Rome (Ithaca, 1992) pp. 272-83. Lucilius seems to have begun writing C. 131, see W J. Raschke, "The Early Books of Lucilius," JRS 69 (1979) pp. 7889· Macte, inquam, virtute simulque his viribus esto! - "Praise, I say, for your virtus together with your strength!" (V 27 Charpin = 225 Marx = 245 ROL = 228 Krenkel), preserved in Servius's comment on Aen. 10.641 where Ascanius kills his first enemy in battle;

12 3

ROMAN MANLINESS

display considerable Greek influence as well as Greek words, and his use of virtu5 to denote the fertility of land has already been discussed. 6I In three of the fragments, virtu5 has a clear ethical denotation, which is most explicit in Lucilius' lengthy and famous description of virtu5. 62 Virtus, Albine, est pretium persolvere verum quis in versamur, quis vivimus rebus potesse; virtus est homini scire id quod quae que habeat res; virtus, scire, homini rectum, utile quid sit, honestum, quae bona, quae mala item, quid inutile, turpe, inhonestum; virtus quaerendae finem rei scire modumque; virtus divitiis pretium persolvere posse; virtus id dare quod re ipsa debetur honori; hostem esse atque inimicum hominum morumque malo rum, contra defensorem hominum morumque bonorum, hos magni facere, his bene velle, his vivere amicum, commoda praeterea patriai prima putare, deinde parentum, tertia iam postremaque nostra. Virtue, Albinus, is to be able to pay in full a true price for things in which we participate, and in which we live; virtue is to know what each circumstance may hold for a man; virtue is to know what is right, what is useful, and what is honorable for a man, what is good and likewise, what is bad, what is useless, shameful, and what is dishonorable; virtue is to know the end and the means of something worth seeking; virtue is to be able to pay the price in full by means of wealth; virtue is to give what, by its nature, is owed to honor; to be an enemy and an opponent of bad men and bad behavior,

61

62

cf. Accius, 473 Ribb. = 482 ROL; Pacuvius, I46 Ribb. = l56 ROL; Sex. Turpilius, com. 7 Ribb., and Ogilvie, Commentary, p. 265. A martial meaning seem likely at primum qua virtute <sese> servitute excluserit. - "fIrst, by what virtus did he free himself from slavery." - (XXVII 30 C = 715 M = 787 ROL = 733 K); cf. Liv. 24.l6.9; 27.57.II and Cic. Ba/b. 9.24). More ambiguous are Luc. XXX l3 C = l085 M = IOl3 ROL = I066 K, and XXX l2 C = I084 M = IOl4 ROL = I065 K. On fertility of land, see earlier Chapter II. For Lucilius' own use of Greek, see Wc. Korfrnacher, "'Grecizing' in Lucilian Satire," Cl30 (l934-5) p. 45; on Hellenic influences, see later. The text is that ofF. Charpin, Lucilius Satires III (paris, 1991) p. l05. 124

'Apml AND MANLY VIRTUS

and, on the other hand, to be a defender of good men and good behavior, to esteem these men greatly, to wish them well, and to live as a friend to them, furthermore, to put the interests of the fatherland first, of parents next, and third and last, our own. H 23 Charpin = 1326-38 Marx = II96-1208 ROL = 1342~54 = Krenkel The passage is preserved by Lactantius, who in introducing it states that here Lucilius had collected the ways in which virtue had been described by philosophers, implying that he was drawing on Greek sources. In addition, the underlying theme of the passage, that virtue is knowledge, is a Greek philosophical idea. 63 The majority of scholars who have studied the passage have agreed that it reproduces Greek, in particular Stoic, ideas about the nature of virtue, and most have seen the major influence as Panaetius, the leader of the Stoic School during the later third of the second century, and a man who visited Rome frequently and was a close acquaintance of men, most notably Scipio Aemilianus, with whom Lucilius was intimate. 64 Some, however, have denied Greek influence, insisting that the virtus fragment is a statement of traditional Roman ideals. In opposing Greek influences, Earl, for example, commented disrnissively that "these fragments have been a happy hunting ground," in the pursuit of Stoic parallels in Lucilius' work. If so, the hunting has been good. 65 Lucilius' phrase pretium persolvere - "to pay the price in full" - reflects

63

64

65

Lact. Instit. div. 6.5.2. Eisenhut, JIR., p. 36, noted three occurrences of scire. For Panaetius as the main influence, see F. Marx, C. Lucilii Carminum Reliquae II (Leipzig, 1905) pp. 425-'7; C. Cichorius, Untersuchungen zu Lucilius (Berlin, 1908) p. 350; J. Heurgon, Lucilius (Paris, 1959) p. 167; Poschl, Grundwerte romischer, pp. 19-20, n. 3; Charpin, pp. 255-7. W GorIer, "Zum virtus-Fragment des Lucilius und zur Gescmchte der stoischen Giiterlehre," Hermes II2 (1984) pp. 445-68, argued that the fragment reflects a number of different sources, and that Antipater of Tarsus, Panaetius' predecessor as head of the Stoa, was the major influence. F. Alesse, Panezio di Rodi, Testimonianze, Edizione, traduzione e commento (Naples, 1997) p. 237, saw Stoic influence on Lucilius, but expressed reservations about the direct influence of Panaetius on the virtus passage. On the background ofLucilius, see Gruen, Culture, pp. 272-83. See W Krenkel, Lucilius Satiren II (Leiden, 1970) p. 7II. Earl, Historia II (1962) P·4 82 .

12 5

ROMAN MANLINESS

Stoic doctrine on 6:~ia - "moral value or worth,,66 - and the admonition to be an enemy to bad men and a friend to good - hostem esse . .. vivere amicum - is paralleled by the Panaetian passages at De officiis 2.18. Indeed, the general similarities between Cicero's rendering of the doctrines of Panaetius at De officiis 2.18 and the Lucilius fragment are striking. 67 Earl argued against Greek influence by claiming that the identification of Stoic doctrines in the fragment rests on the false assumption that Lucilius was himself a Stoic. In a similar vein, W J. Raschke objected that Lucilius and the active public men with whom he associated would not have "accepted a theoretical brand of Stoicism in totO."68 But whether Lucilius was or was not a Stoic has little importance for understanding the virtus fragment, because a Roman need not have been a devotee of a Greek philosophical school to have been familiar with its doctrines. Similarly, the fact that in some other Lucilian fragments a whimsical attitude toward Greek philosophy and culture is expressed hardly proves that the ideas in the virtus fragment are not a reflection of Stoicism. Lucilius might mock Romans who used Greek words for mere effect, but on occasion he himself employed them. Consistency of thought is the virtue of a philosopher, to be expected least of all in a satirist. Lucilius was one of a number of elite Romans active during the last three decades of the second century who, having absorbed Greek literature and culture, began for the first time to assert

66

67

68

Cf. Diog. Laert. 7.I05 and Sen. Epist. 89.14; also see SVF 3, 124-6; Cic. Fin. 3.20; Pohlenz, Die Stoa n, p. 134, note to p. 262, and for detailed discussion, Gorler, 446-51, 456-63· See the point by point comparison to Cic. Off. 2.18 done by M. P. Piwonka, Lucilius und Kallimachos (Frankfort am Main, 1949) p. 36, n. I; cf. Charpin, pp. 255-7. See also the comment ofDyck, Commentary, p. 383, on honestum and utile. Alesse, p. 237, expressed doubt. W J. Raschke, "The Virtue ofLucilius," Latomus 49 (1990) pp. 352-69, quotation on 353, who followed Earl, Historia I I (1962) p. 482. Raschke, 359-66, concluded that the tone of the passage is ironic, noting the "mercantile diction" of pretium persolvere verum. Gruen, Culture, p. 3IO, thought the passage is parody. But Lactantius, who had read the passage in context, and noted its philosophical background, clearly regarded it as a serious ethical defInition, and the use ofpretium persolvere verum is a function not of irony, but of the paucity of words that Latin writers faced when attempting to render Greek philosophical ideas into their own language.

126

'ApETll AND MANLY VIRTUS

self-confidently the value of Roman culture. 69 One way this was done was through language, and this is what the virtus fragment attempts - to render complicated Greek doctrines in a purely Latin style. The Latin is clumsy precisely because Greek terms are studiously avoided. 70 The underlying weakness of arguments for Lucilius' description being a traditional Roman view of virtus stands out clearly in Earl's comment on the hierarchy of values - fatherland, parents, personalwith which the passage ends. "At least," wrote Earl, "the final couplet preserves the traditional Roman order of priorities." But the placing of fatherland before parents was traditional among Greeks as well as Romans, and shared societal values cannot be used to demonstrate a peculiarly Roman standard. 7' In this particular case, the demonstration is especially vulnerable, since the hierarchy of duties presented in the last two lines corresponds to ideas expressed by Panaetius, which Cicero reproduced at De rjficiis, 1.57-8.72 But the major obstacle to considering Lucilius' definition of virtus as traditionally Roman is what is missing from these last lines. The Romans were famous for their reverence of the gods, and Polybius stated that this was one of the things that distinguished them from Greeks. If Lucilius were setting forth a Roman view of values, one would expect to find in the list,

69

70

7'

72

See Gruen, Culture, pp. 272-317, who, however, overestimated the degree to which earlier generations were Hellenized. Lucilius' vocabulary generally agrees with that later used by Cicero and Seneca to translate Greek philosophical terrns, see R. Fischer, De usu vocabulorum apud Ciceronem et Senecam Graecae philosophiae interpretes (diss., Freiburg im Breisgau, 1914); 1. Mariotto, Studi Luciliani (Florence, 1960) p. 10, n. 5; Charpin, pp. 254-7. For Lucilius' criticism of the intermixing of Greek and Latin see II 15C = 84-6M = 84-6 ROL = 74-6K. The sceptical comments ofN. Terzaghi, Lucilio (Turin, 1934) p. 20, n. 2, were based on observations that only show the difference between poetic and philosophical forms of expression. FOr references of devotion to fatherland and fathers being a Greek value, see earlier, n. 42, and those cited by Dyck, Commentary, p. 178. Earl quotation, Historia I I (1962) P·4 82 . For the Panaetian origin of the hierarchy, see A. R. Dyck, "On the Composition and Sources of Cicero De officiis 1.50-8," CSCA 12 (1979) pp. 77-84; and Commentary, p. 179; contra E. Lerevre, Panaitios' und Ciceros 1?flichtenlehre (Stuttgart, 2001) pp. 37-8. Panaetius' student, Hecaton ofRhodes, treated the problem of the competing obligations to parents and fatherland in his own work nEpi TOU Ko6ijKOVTOS and came down in favor of the latter; Cic. Off. 3.63 and 90.

12 7

ROMAN MANLINESS

together with regard for the fatherland and parents, some mention of the gods. The absence of any such sentiment is conspicuous. Panaetius, however, was well known for his belief that speculation about the gods is futile, highly unusual for a Stoic. So, far from reflecting traditional Roman values, the final couplet of Lucilius' lines on virtus is strong evidence for a Greek source, probably Panaetius. 73 The nature of the evidence precludes precision in determining to what degree virtus, when it was applied to men with a meaning of general excellence, or with the more specific meanings of intellectual or ethical excellence, was affected by semantic borrowings from O:pE'TT]. The semantic range of virtus may have always included some activities other than those associated with physical prowess or courage, and it is possible that in some instances a more general meaning for virtus was extended into non-physical and non-martial contexts without the beneftt of foreign influence. But the relative rarity of such meanings of virtus in early Latin, together with their close correspondence, in both usage and context, with common and regular uses of O:PE'TT], strongly suggests that in many instances we are dealing with borrowings. This is especially true in regard to the meaning of virtus in a strictly ethical sense. Otherwise, the overtly non-ethical sense in which virtus was employed from the time of Ennius to that of Caesar is difficult to explain.

4. VIRTUS AND THE CANONICAL "VIRTUES"

The last common usage of virtus that shows the influence of O:pE'TT] is as the generic term for various other virtuous qualities. This usage is found only in classical and later Latin and is especially frequent in rhetorical and philosophical works, where the canonical four virtues, prudentia, iustitia, temperantia, and Jortitudo - "prudence," "justice," "self-control," and" courage," respectively, - are presented as aspects 73

See Van Straaten, frag. 68 = Alesse, frag. 134. On the difficult question as to whether or not Panaetius was an atheist (probably not), see Van Straaten, p. 88, Alesse, p. 267, and M. Dragona-Monachou, The Stoic Arguments for the Existence and the Providence of the Gods (Athens, 1976) pp. 269-'78. For traditional Roman reverence for the gods, see Polyb. 6.56; Cic. ND 2.9 with Pease, n, pp. 566-7, where numerous such passages are collected.

128

'Apml AND MANLY VIRTUS

of virtus.7 4 This subdividing of virtus, or naming of various qualities as virtutes, is also found in Cicero's speeches. At Pro Murena 30, for example, iustitia, fides, pudor - "propriety" - , and temperantia, are termed virtutes, and later in the same speech Cicero names the four cardinal virtutes as aequitas - "fairness" - , temperantia,fortitudo, and prudentia, or variants of these. When circumstance required, Cicero could expand the list of virtutes to include just about any and all positive qualities. 75 In his Second Catilinarian, Cicero contrasts a long list of positive and negative qualities, and equates the former with virtutes omnes - "all the virtues" (Cat. 2.25). It is this categorization of virtues that has led some to claim that virtus traditionally represented a single, wide-ranging ethical ideal that subsumed other cardinal Roman values, physical prowess and courage among them, and that this constituted a special Roman ideal. 7 6 That an ethical element had been a central and traditional component of virtus is contradicted, as we have seen, by its nonethical uses by Ennius and Caesar. But beyond this, the use of virtutes as a term that subsumes and encompasses other principal virtues corresponds precisely to the wellknown division of apETTJ into the four cardinal virtues: <j>pOVllp0
74 There is some variation in the canon, e.g., ratio - "reason,"or sapientia - "wisdom," for prudentia; see Pease, n, pp. I036-7. 75 Cic. Mur. 60, 63, and 66, also Mur. 23, on which see Eisenhut, VR, p. 59. See also Plane. 7S, So; Font. 2S; cf., Eisenhut, VR, p. 62, n. I61. Cicero also presents, in one place or another, consilium - 'Judgment," - dementia - "clemency," - moderatio "moderation," - humanitas - "humane disposition," - gravitas - "earnestness," frugalitas - "temperance," - and magnitudo animi - "high-mindedness," - as variations of the four cardinal virtues. For references and discussion, see H. F North, pp. 176-7; Hellegouarc'h, p. 243 ff., esp. pp. 254-94. For Cicero's use of the catagories of the virtues in De imperio en. Pompei, see later Chapter IX. 76 E. g., Buchner, Humanitas Romana, pp. 3IO-I3; Earl, MPTR, pp. 34-6; and see earlier Introduction. 77 Four apEToi (unnamed) are first found in Pindar, Nem. 3.74-5. On their development in the fifth and fourth centuries, see Jaeger, Paedia 2 I, pp. I05-S; H. F North, pp. I65-S3. References demonstrating the influence on Latin literature and especially Cicero were collected by Pease, n, p. I037 and discussed by North, pp. 175-8. 12 9

ROMAN MANLINESS

that Greek influence is at work. That the correspondence was not noted by scholars who held that virtus was an all-embracing concept is striking. The influence of apETT] is confirmed by the fact that most of the Latin qualities that serve as "virtues" are associated with the word virtus only in classical or later Latin, where they function as one or another of the cardinal four. 78 Of qualities that have older connections with virtus, such as gloria, honos, fama - "reputation" - and forma"physical beauty" - few are ever named as virtutes. The same is true of a class of words denoting activity and hard work, industria - "purposeful activity" - , labor - "toil" - , diligentia - "attentiveness" - , and the adjective strenuus - "vigorous" - , which also have old associations with virtus. These also are not normally classified as virtutes, and when found in association with virtus function independently of it.79 Of all the qualities that have old associations with virtus, only three, sapientia - "wisdom" - ,fides - "trust" or "honesty" - , and frugalitas "honesty" or "temperance" - , together with the adjective frugi "honest, worthy, or thrifty" - are regularly treated as virtutes and only by classical authors. In the combinations of virtus and sapientia found in pre-Classical Latin, however, sapientia serves as an independent complement to virtus. Similarly, when virtus is joined with either fides or

78

79

Fides is the exception; see later. For the virtutes, see Cic. Deiat. 26. For virtus andglaria - Plaut. Capt. 689-90; Cato, Orig. 83, HRR = 3· 4, 7a FRH; Agr. 3.2; ILLRP 3II; hanos - ILLRP 312; Plaut. Cure. 179; Trin. 643-6; forma - ILLRP 309; Plaut. Mil. 57, I027;jama - Plaut. Most. 144; ILLRP 309. In all of these instances, save Most. 144, Trin. 643-6, and Cato, Agr. 3.2, virtus has a martial connotation, see earlier Chapter 1. The oldest attested occurrence of the virtus-industria pair has an exclusively martial meaning, e.g., Pseud. 581; see Chapter I and Combes, pp. 279-87. On the virtus and industria of the homo novus, see Chapter X. In Classical Latin, labor and diligentia are applied to any number of activities, but when either is joined to virtus the context is usually military, and again, the oldest combination of virtus and labor is of a martial nature, Enn. Ann. 326-8S, with Chapter I earlier. For the military associations of labor, see Combes, pp. 265-70 and esp. Cic. Tuse. 2.35. Strenuus has military connotations from its earliest appearances (Plaut. True. 492-5, Naevius, Marmorale, BP 1.10, p. 238 ROL, BP 1.9; Cato, Agr. praef 3), and these are maintained when it is paired with virtus in later Latin, see Gell. NA 4.8.1-9; Sall. BC 60.4, 61.7; cf. Hellegouarc'h, p. 250, n. 5; and Till, La lingua di Catone, pp. 140-1. Only at Lucilius XVI 1 C = 532-3 M = ROL 557-8 = 557-8 K, does strenuus have a non-martial meaning. For the borrowed Greek meaning of virtus in this passage, see earlier Chapter n.

=

I3 0

'Apml AND MANLY VIRTIJS

Jrugi in pre-Classical Latin, they are unquestionably independent qualities. 80 There is, in fact, no Latin passage earlier than the first century in which any quality is denoted by or subsumed by virtus. There is no support, either in the pre-Classical usage of virtus, or in the text as we have it, for the assumption that the "ten greatest and best achievements" credited in his funeral speech (ORF4 6.2 = Plin. NH 8. 139-40) to L. Caecilius Metellus - "to be the best warrior, the best orator, and the bravest general, to exercise high office and high command, to have great sagacity, leadership, wealth, numbers of children, and reputation" - were in any sense aspects of virtus. 81 In the Scipionic elogia, virtus means martial courage throughout, and is independent of any other quality named. In Roman comedy, no specific quality is ever named a virtus. Alcumena's statement that "virtus has everything in itself, the man who possesses virtus has all that is good" (Amph. 652-3), may resemble the Greek philosophical doctrine that the man who possesses one virtue possesses them all, but it is different. In Alcumena's speech, virtus is a martial quality, and the sense of the Plautine passage is that the other social goods named - liberty, property, family, and fatherland - are dependent on virtu5, not comprised or subsumed by it. 82 Even the use of virtutes meaning "virtues" is rare in Roman comedy. Of sixty-four occurrences of virtus in Plautus, this plural meaning is found only four times, and in Tetence it occurs twice. In all these cases, virtutes seems to be translating apEToi of the Greek originals. 83

Ba

Br

B2

B3

In the Scipionic elogia (ILLRP 309, and 3I2), for example, sapientia is neither inferior to nor subsumed by virtus, see previously Chapter I and Eisenhut, VR, pp. 208-IO; cf. Plaut. Capt. 4IO, with Chapter 1. See Plaut. Most. I44 and Ter. Adel. 438-42 for fidesvirtus; and Plaut. Bacch. I084a forfrugi-virtus. But for special status ofjrugi andjrugalitas in the Roman tradition, see later, n. 90. Delivered by his son in 221. On the question of modernization and accuracy of citation from the original speech, see W Kierdorf, Laudatio Funebris (Meisenheim am Glan, I980) p. 12 and N. Horsfall, CR 32 (1982) p. 37. See earlier Chapter 1. On possessing one virtue and possessing them all, see Cic. Off. 2.35, which goes on to name Panaetius as the source. Virtutes at Rud. 321, in a phrase which translates a Greek commonplace (see earlier); at Trin. 337, where virtutes probably translates apETa{; and at Mil. 619, 649. The regular meaning of virtutes in Plautus, brave deeds, is found at Capt. 997, Asin. 558, Cure. 179, Epid. 445, Mil. 12,32,1027. Ter. Heaut. 207 has ad virtutem omnia, and at Adel. 176 virtus

131

ROMAN MANLINESS

There is no sign of virtus as a wide-ranging concept in the fragments ofEnnius or in what survives of the works of the elder Cato; in both, virtutes always has its regular meaning of brave deeds. The occurrence of virtutes meaning "virtues" in the title of one of Cato's speeches, De suis virtutibus contra Thermum - "Concerning his Virtues in Opposition to Thermus" - is not original, but was given to the speech by a grammarian and reflects later usage. 84 Nor do any of the occurrences of virtus in the fragments ofLucilius' satires conform to the use of the word as the generic term for the virtues. In his description of virtus, Lucilius states what virtus comprises, and notably does not define it with any other substantive or give synonyms. 85 The earliest evidence of anything like a subordination of other qualities to virtus dates to the early first century, and is found in a fragment of a speech delivered by L. Licinius Crassus against M. Iunius Brutus dated sometime between 101 and 91. Here, referring to Brutus' recently deceased aunt, Crassus asks what she could say about him to his ancestors. 86 Quid illam anum patri nuntiare vis tuo? ... quid te agere? cui rei, cui gloriae, cui virtuti studere? patrimonione augendo? at id non est nobilitatis. sed fac esse, nihil superest; lubidines totum dissupaverunt. an iuri civili? est paternum. sed die et te, cum aedes venderes, ne in rutis quidem et caesis solium tibi paternum recepisse. an rei militari? qui numquam castra videris! an eloquentiae? quae neque est in te et, quidquid est vocis ac linguae, onmes in istum turpissimum calumniae quaestum contulisti! What do you want that old woman to report to your father? ... What should she say you are doing? To what wealth, what glory, to what virtus do you

84

85

86

appears in a translation of a Greekcornrnonplace; at Bun. 1090, virtutes means brave deeds. Titles of republican speeches were originally specific, even technical, and were modified (usually shortened) by grammarians to facilitate citation; see P. Fraccaro, "Catoniana," Studi Storici 3 (1910) pp. 265-6 = Opuscula I, pp. 243-4; N. Horsfall, "Some Problems of Titulature in Roman Literary History," BICS 28 (1981) p. 104. The speech in question came to be known by a number of different titles; see B. Janzer, Historische Untersuchungen zu Redenifragmenten des M. Porcius Cato (Wurzburg, 1937) p. 24; ORF4 8 128-35 and p. 51; Scullard, Roman Politics2 , p. 264. H 23 Charpin = 1326-38 Mane = II96-I208 ROL = 1342-54 Krenkel, and previously. On the case, E. Fantham, The Roman World of Cicero's De Oratore (Oxford, 2004 p. 42, and M. C. Alexander, Trials in the Late Roman Republic, 141/50 BC (Toronto, 1990) p. 52. 13 2

'Apm) AND MANLY VIRTUS

devote yourself? Increasing your patrimony? But this is not worthy of high birth. Even if it were, there is nothing left. Sexual desires have squandered the whole thing. To the civil law, your paternal bequest? But she will report that when you were selling the house, you did not even hold onto your father's chair among the rights to stones that had been quarried and trees felled. To a military career? (You) who are one who never have seen a camp! To eloquence, of which there is nothing in you, and what there is of voice or language, you have brought it all to that most foul occupation of bringing false accusations! ORF4 66.45. 37 fr. = Cic. De or. 2.225-6

It is not entirely clear what specific activity Crassus is associating here with virtus. If parallel structure applies at all, the first undertaking mentioned patrimonio augendo - "increasing patrimony" - should corresponds to res, meaning property or wealth. The problem is that Crassus lists only two other qualities, gloria and virtus, but goes on to name three further activities - civil law, a military career, and a career as an orator. The joining of gloria and virtus with res is unusual, but not without precedent. We have seen how at De agricultura 3.2 Cato joined the three in what has been argued to have been a conscious and tendentious attempt to associate the high prestige of martial gloria and virtus with wealth in order to justify writing a work about acquiring wealth by speculating in agriculture. 87 The vagueness of Crassus' formulation suggests that he was engaged in a similar strategy, intending to blur the line between the traditionally military associations of virtus and gloria and other non-martial endeavors, and thereby garner the high prestige of martial virtus and gloria for law and especially for rhetoric. Crassus, like Cicero after him, lacked a military reputation, and, like Cicero, was highly educated and a philhellene. As such he would have been familiar with use of 6:pETT] as the generic term for the virtues, as well as with the idea expressed by some Greek writers, that public speaking is to be counted as one of virtues. 88 The attempt to 87 88

See earlier Chapter I. The connection of eloquence to the apnal goes back to futh-century sophists' claim to teach apnT], by which they meant political rhetoric; see Eurip. Autolyeus, frag. 282. 23-8 (TrGF). During the fourth century the elevation of rhetoric culminated in the notion that it was the rhetor alone who possessed true apETT]; see Anonymous Iamblichi, DK 89, p. 400; Aeschines, 2.169-170. At the same time a more traditional virtue, av5pEla"courage" - was being demoted to a secondary status; see PI. Rep. Bks. I and II; Isoc.

133

ROMAN MANLINESS

capitalize on the high regard that virtus traditionally enjoyed at Rome by expanding its references to include eloquence on the analogy of O:pETT] would have been natural for a man like Crassus. Crassus' suggestion that the practices of eloquence and civil law were somehow aspects of virtus was a borrowing from Greek ideas about o:pnT], not a traditional Roman notion. It is a rhetorical gambit attested in the works of Cicero, but rarely found in republican Latin outside of his theoretical works. 89 More typical is Pro Balbo 54, where Cicero states that traditionally the Romans had a higher regard for the warrior than the orator and contrasts the lingua et ingenium of the accusator to the manus et virtus of the bellator.90

5. VIRTUS AS A POLITICAL VALUE

Closely related to, and dependent on, the use of virtus as the allembracing term for the virtues, is the assertion that virtus was traditionally and essentially a political value, broad-ranging in its denotations. That virtus was a public value is patent, but the claim that it was essentially political has generally been based almost wholly on the writings oflate republican authors, most often those of Cicero. 91 Using works written during the last decades of the Republic's existence to demonstrate that a value was traditional is a hazardous procedure, because it risks overlooking important cultural changes that occurred in Rome over the course of the third and second centuries. In evaluating the political denotations of virtus, the words of Cicero are especially hazardous, because Cicero, as we will see, had his own reasons for elevating

89

90

9'

12.197; with H. F. North, passim, and Jaeger, Paideicr I pp. 291-3; A. Dyck, "On Panaetius' Conception of MEYOAOIVvXio, Mus.Hel. 38 (1981) pp. I53-6I. On Crassus, see Fantham, The Roman World of Cicero's De Ora tore, pp. 26-48. For example, De or. 3.55; Off. I.74, 76-8, 121; Brut. 255-6. See later Chapter X, pp. 586-7. If there was a native Roman idea that had been traditionally thought to embrace all the virtues, it was Jrugalitas . ... reliquas etiam virtutes Jrugalitas continet, ... tres virtutes, Jortitudinem, iustitiam prudentiam Jrugalitas complexa est. - " ... indeed Jrugalitas does embrace the rest of the virtues ... .Jrugalitas therefore comprised the three virtues - courage, justice, prudence." Cic. Tusc. 3.16-17; cf. Tusc. 4.36; Deiot. 26; and Eisenhut, VR, pp. 64-5. For example, by Knoche, Vom Selbstverstiindniss der Romer, p. 23; Roloif, Maiores bei Cicero, pp. 31; Poschl, pp. 12-56; and Hellegouarc'h, pp. 242 if.; Buchner, Die Antike 15 (1939) pp. 145-9 = Studien zur romischen Literatur Ill, pp. 1-5.

134

'ApETTl AND MANLY VIRTUS

the activities of the forum to the high levels that had by tradition been associated with the battlefidd. 92 The only attempt to identify virtus as a traditional political value to take account of pre-Ciceronian texts was made by D. C. Earl, who argued that virtus represented a complex of values that constituted a political standard of conduct. The close resemblance of Earl's "virtus complex" to the position of 6:pETT] in the Greek philosophical and rhetorical canons should have led him to consider the possibility of Greek influence; instead he dismissed it as unimportant. 93 But Earl's theory finds no support in most of the texts he appeals to,94 resting entirely on his interpretation of virtus in the comedies of Plautus. Basing a theory for a central element of Roman political ideology on comedies that were adapted from Greek models is in itself risky. But, in addition, most of the Plautine passages Earl cited provide little evidence that "standard of conduct" was a regular meaning of virtus or that it was commonly used in a political sense. More often than not, the passages in question either do not mean what Earl claimed they do, or will admit interpretations other than those he offered. So at Asinaria 558, virtutes does not denote a standard of conduct, but means rather "deeds," probably "deeds of courage," and if the words vincite virtute vera at Cistellaria 197-8 and Casina 87-8 do denote a standard of conduct, it is a martial one. 95 Earl's argument that virtutes means "standard of conduct" in the description of the senex Periplectomenus at Miles gloriosus 649, 0 lepidum senem, in se si quas memorat virtutes habet, - "0 what a delightful old man if he has the virtutes he recounts," rests on a selective reading of the context. 96 At Miles gloriosus 649 virtutes need 92

93

94

95

96

On Cicero's uses of virtus, see later Chapter X. Dismissal - MPTR, p. 36. Virtus complex - Historia 9 (1960) pp. 235-43; Historia II (1962) pp. 469-85; PTS, pp. 18-40; MPTR, pp. II-43, esp. p. 21, and p. 36. For Earl on the Scipionic elogia, see MPTR, p. 22; for criticism, see earlier Chapter 1. For Earl on virtus in Ennius, see Historia 9 (1960) pp. 238-9, Historia II (1962) pp. 47677; on which see Chapter I, pp. 50-2. For Terence and Lucilius, Earl Historia I I (1962) pp. 470-5, 482; For criticism, see previously. Historia 9 (1960) p. 242. On Asinaria 558, see Chapter I, pp. 43-6. Earl's argument that at Plautus' Truculentus, 494-5 virtus somehow denotes an oratorical standard is bizarre, see earlier. On Cist. 197-8 and Cas. 88, see earlier. Periplectomenus does not recount his convivial exploits, but rather described how he carries them out at Mil. 652. In fact, he relates both how he behaves, and what he is and what is not, see Mil. 642 and 647. Earl's interpretation also ignores the fact that

135

ROMAN MANLINESS

not, and probably does not, denote a standard of conduct. It certainly has nothing to do with politics. Earl was seemingly on stronger ground in seeing virtus used in a political context in Trinummus in a passage where young Lysiteles urges his profligate friend Lesbonicus to abandon his wastrel's life and to take up virtus. 97 itan tandem hanc maiores famam tradiderunt tibi tui,

Trin. 643 ut virtute eorum anteparta per flagitium perderes? atque honori posterorum tuorum ut vindex fieres, tibi paterque avosque facilem fecit et planam viam ad quaerundum honorem: tu fecisti ut difficilis foret, culpa maxume et desidia tuisque stultis moribus. Trin. 648 praeoptavisti, amorem tuom uti virtuti praeponeres. nunc te hoc pacto credis posse optegere errata? aha, ... non itast: Trin. 650 cape sis virtutem animo et corde expelle desidiam tuo in foro operam amicis da, ne in lecto amicae, ut solitus es. Did your ancestors, after all, hand down this reputation to you that you might ruin with outrageous conduct what was acquired in the past by their virtus, and so that you would become a champion to the honor of your descendants, your father and grandfather made an easy and smooth road for you to attain honor (or office). You have made it difficult by your extreme misconduct and idleness, and your stupid behavior. You have preferred to place your love life ahead of virtus. Now you believe that you can hide your mistakes by this means? Not at all. Please, take up virtus with your mind, expel idleness from your heart. Give your best efforts to your friends in the forum, not to your mistress in bed, as you are accustomed to do.

There is nothing particularly Roman about the speech in general. The choice offered to Lesbonicus fits the traditional apETrl - i)8ovrl

97

recounting past deeds would not have suited Periplectomenus' purpose, because he is arguing that he is still capable of youthful behavior and therefore speaks in the future and present tenses. Earl, Historia 9 (I960) p. 236.

'Apml AND MANLY VIRTUS

topos, which had been touched upon earlier in an dialogue between Lysiteles and his father. 98 In the speech to Lesbonicus amoris contrasted with four obligations: (I) ancestral responsibility, (2) gaining public respect through public service, (3) preserving inherited wealth, and (4) serving friends. All are traditional Greek values that correspond to aspects of apETrl.99 Signs of PIautus' hand occur in a pun on honos in lines 644-8, lOO and in the words foro operam amicis da at Trin. 651, and a similarity between these lines and Polybius' description of young Roman nobles establishing political reputations by speaking in the courts has been noted. lO1 But Earl's contention that Plautus' words demonstrate that such activities were specifically regarded as a mark of virtus is very dubious. No support for it is provided by Polybius, who does not use apETrl to characterize the forensic activities of Roman aristocrats. 102 The only element in the Plautus passage that corresponds to the Polybian description is the reference to helping friends in the forum. But this may be only a Plautine substitution of a familiar Roman social value for an unfamiliar Greek one. The connection between in foro operam amicis da at Trinummus 651 and virtus in the previous line occurs in the context of a play on amicis and amicae and a humorous contrast between in foro and in lecto. But at Trinummus 650 virtus is 98 99

100

101

102

See earlier, on Trin. 336 fr. For public service and honors the 6:pETol, see Aristot. EN II07B 22-30, II22B 29II23. On the connection between ancestors, 86~o, and public office, see, e.g., Thuc. 6.16.1; Lycurg. Leoc. IIO; Dem. 43.84; Lattimore, Themes in Greek and Roman Epitaphs, pp. 225 and 239-40; and Dover, Greek Popular Morality, pp. 226-45. On the preservation of wealth, see Aristot. EN 1099A 31-1099B 9, II22A, II22B 25-34, II63B 5-8. On wealth and on helping friends, see Dover, pp. 173-84 and Fantharn, Hermes 105 (1977) pp. 412-18. For the relationship between 6:PETT] and the triad of friends, family; and fellow citizens, see Aristot. EN 1097B 10-12. For the relationship between friendship and politics, Aristot. EN II55A 23-32. Zagagi, Tradition, p. 104, noted that the conflict between love and property found at Trin. 651-3 is not found in the remains of New Comedy, but see R. Hunter, "Philemon, Plautus, and the Trinummus," MusHel 38 (1980) pp. 218-30 esp. 222 fr., who pointed to Euripidean parallels, and cf. Xen. Mem. 21.1.28 fr., where KOKlo promises sexual pleasure, 'ApETT] wealth. F. Klose, Die Bedeutung von honos und honestus (diss., Breslau, 1933) pp. 16-19; Fraenkel, PI. im PI. p. 19 = Elem. p. 17. Polyb. 31.23.II-12; cf. 31.24.5; 31.29.10; M. Gelzer, Die Nobilitiit der romischen Republik (Berlin, 1912) p. 68, n. 4 = The Roman Nobility, trans. R. Seager (Oxford, 1969) p. 83, n. 186; Walbank, Commentary, rn, pp. 496-7. Note, however, that in Polybius' description of how the Romans trained their youth for war (6.39 fr.; 6.52-54), 6:PETT] occurs no less than seven times and clearly corresponds to virtus; see esp. 6.39.9 where 6:PETT] and 6:v8pElo are synonyms.

137

ROMAN MANLINESS

opposed to desidia, continuing the general O:pETT) - Tj8ovT) motif of the speech, and of the entire play. Because the plot of the Greek original on which Plautus modeled Trinummus turned on an ethical value - the social obligation to give financial assistance to impecunious peers - that seems to have been expressed as an exercise of O:PETT), and because, according to Polybius, this attitude toward money was foreign to Romans, it is likely that Plautus replaced the Greek social value with witty word-play referring to the more familiar Roman political obligation to assist amici in the forum. IQJ Earl's case comes down to Trinummus 650, Cistellaria 197-8 and Casina 88, Asinaria 558, and Miles gloriosus 649. Even ifhis interpretation of them were accepted, these few passages, one of which has no possible reference to politics, are slim reeds on which to erect a virtus complex that functioned as a central political ideal of the Roman aristocracy of the middle Republic. If virtus did not function as a political ideal, it is found with political connotations in pre-Ciceronian Latin. But the usage is rare, and when virtus does convey this sense, the relationship between the political denotation and its far more common martial and courageous usage is clear. One, possibly two, occurences of virtus with a political connotation are found in prologues of Plautus' plays, which is significant because Plautine prologues were generally less influenced by their Greek models than other parts of the plays, and because they were spoken directly to the audience. In the prologue ofPlautus' Amphitruo, virtus is contrasted with ambitio, a word that means the gaining of political ends through illicit means. Amph. 75 virtute dixit vos victores vivere,

Amph. 78

non ambitione neque perfidia: qui minus eadem histrioni sit lex quae summo viro? virtute ambire oportet, non favitoribus. he said that that you live as victors because of virtu5, not by soliciting or duplicity: why should not there be the same law for an actor that there is for the highest man? It is proper to strive with virtu5, not with paid supporters.

IO]

For the role of apET'!') in Philemon's Thesauros, see earlier.

'Apml AND MANLY VIRTUS

At line 78 virtus does represent a standard ofbehavior, r04 and its political sense is underlined by its occurrence in a parody of a lex de ambitu (a law against illicit political canvassing) that Amphitruo 76-8 has been recognized to be. r05 But just as clear is that this meaning is an extension of the more regular martial one of virtus three lines earlier at Amphitruo 75, virtute dixit vos victores vivere. As the Romans won their wars by virtus, so too virtus was the standard that should be used in politics and in theatrical competitions as well. Significantly, this political use of virtus and the parody of the lex de ambitu were probably not written by Plautus, but occur in an interpolated passage (Amph. 65-81) that was written sometime after 18 I, probably in the 150S. ro6 The political use of virtus in the ambitio - virtus contrast is also found iR a fabula togata by the playwright Titinius. Ubi [iam] ambitionem virtuti vide as antecedere. Where you would see soliciting placed before virtu5. frag. II Guardi

104 105

106

107

= corn.

II

Ribb. r07

Earl, Historia 9 (1960) pp. 240- I. The parody is widely acccepted; see A. Palrner, ed. Amphitruo (London, 1890) pp. 137-8; o Fredershausen, De lure Plautino et Terentiano (Gottingen, 1906) p. 6 I; W B. Sedgwick, ed. Amphitruo (Manchester, 1960) pp. 61-2; Mattingly, Latomus 19 (1960) pp. 230-52, esp. pp. 237-40; J.-P. Cebe, La caricature et la parodie dans le monde romain antique (Paris, 1966) pp. 77-8; McDonnell, AJPh 107 (1986) pp. 564-5. The repeated references to a lex (Amph. 73, 76), as well as the description of the illicit activity (Amph. 70-1), make a fictitious comic law on histrionic ambitio unlikely, as well as considerably less funny. This is quite different from Poen. II-43, contra D. M. Christenson, Plautus Amphitruo (Cambridge, 2000) p. 150. See McDonnell, AJPh 107 (1986) pp. 564-76. Interpolations, even in prologues, are currently out of fashion in Plautine scholarship, and Christenson, pp. 150-1, objected. But he misunderstands what a proposed interpolation entails; Plautus' capable is not the issue. The proposed interpolation is based on the intrusive nature of Amph. 65-81, and the repetition of ut conquistores at Amph. 65 and 82. There are also reasons for thinking that Livy would have recorded a lex de ambitu had there been one before 18 I, see McDonnell, 567-73. For proposed interpolations in Plautine prologues, see Cas. 5-20, Poen. 121-3 and 124-8, Cist. 125, 130-2, and 126--9; cf. H. D. Jocelyn, YCS 21 (1969) pp. 97-123, and HSCP 73 (1969) pp. 135-52. T. Guardi, Titinio e Atta, Fabula Togata, lframmenti (Milan, 1984). Titinius' dates are controversial. He may have been a contemporary of Terence, writing in the 160s and 150S; Leo, Geschichte, p. 213, n. 3; W Beare, The Roman Stage, p. II9; cf. Ritschl, p. 194·

139

ROMAN MANLINESS

and was used by Lucilius, aurum atque ambitio specimen virtutis utrique est: tantum habeas, tantum ipse sies tantique habearis. gold and political ambition is the appearance of the virtue of both; as much as you might have, such you are, and so you are regarded. H 3SC = II9-20M = II94-S ROL = II27K'08 A final example of pre-Classical Latin where virtus has an obvious political sense occurs in a speech delivered to the Roman people by C. Gracchus in about 124. nam vos, Quirites, si velitis sapientia atque virtute uti, etsi quaeritis, neminem nostrum invenietis sine pretio huc prodire. ornnes nos, qui verba facimus, aliquid petimus, neque ullius rei causa quisquam ad vos prodit, nisi ut aliquid auferat. ego ipse, qui aput vos verba facio, ut vectigalia vestra augeatis, quo facilius vestra commoda et rem publicam administrare possitis, non gratis prodeo. For you, citizens, if you want to employ wisdom and virtu5, even if you seek them, will find that not one of us steps up here without recompence. All of us who use words want something, nor has anyone stood before you for any cause, unless he would obtain something. I myself, who am making a speech before you so that you may add to your tax revenues and can manage your interests and the Republic more easily, I do not appear before you without expectation of recompense.

The speech opposed a law that, according to Gracchus, would have deprived Rome of tax revenues that he wished to use to help finance his elder brother's program of land distribution. 109 The joining of virtus and sapientia recalls the elogium of Scipio Barbatus and perhaps the Hellenic influences associated with it. In the Scipionic elogia, however, virtus denotes military prowess or courage. In Gracchus' speech, virtus also means courage, the physical as well as moral courage that was 108

109

The second line of the fragment is a commonplace; cf. Hor. Sat. 1.1.62; Petron. Sat. 77; Apul. Apol. 23; Cf. Marx, p. 355, and Cichorius, p. 334. The speech is called Dissuasio legis Aujeliae, Aufeius being an unusual name; see Courtney, Archaic Latin Prose, pp. 126-7. On the name, date, and background of the law, see E. Badian, Foreign Clientelae (264-70 B.C) (Oxford, I958) pp. I83-4 and R. Kallet-Marx, Hegemony to Empire (Berkeley, I995) p. I09-I3.

I40

'Apml AND MANLY VIRTUS

required, in light of the fate of Ti. Gracchus, of a Roman politican to stand up for the interests of the Roman people. Gracchus' usage would seem to be a natural extension of the martial meaning of virtus to the political. no An analysis of the occurences of virtus in pre-Classcial Latin shows that the wide and sometimes peculiar range of meanings that the word displays is attributable in large measure to the effects of semantic borrowing from apETT], whose central meaning of general excellence had a profound influence that is particularly evident in usages where virtus has no relationship to men or manliness. Virtus, however, always remained closely tied to its etymological base of vir, and while Greek influences are discernible in some usages where the word is applied to men, the predominant meaning of virtus in pre-Classical Latin as prowess or courage in battle seems to have been little affected by semantic borrowing. The evidence indicates that the strictly ethical meaning of virtus occurred as both a literary and cultural borrowing and was a function of a general change in values during which the concept of manliness, like so much else in Rome, was altered in the wake of Hellenic ideas. no

Courtney, Archaic Latin Prose, p. 127, conunents on "the very unusual way" in which virtus is used in this passage, but compare it with Plaut. Per. 268, on which see Chapter 1. It is possible, but less likely, that the reference is to the sapientia and virtus of the Roman people, in which case virtus might mean the moral courage required of the people if they are to see things as they are. But see Sarsila, pp. 50-I.

IV

VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF VIRTUS

I.

VISUALIZATION OF ABSTRACT CONCEPTS IN ANCIENT ROME

Visual imagery ... gives insight into people's values and imagination that often cannot be apprehended in literary sources. Paul Zanker If visual images are important for understanding times in which textual evidence is relatively abundant, knowledge of a society's system of representations assumes an even greater historical value in periods for which written records are sparse. Because visual signs played a particularly extensive and significant role in ancient Roman society, it follows that much that is obscure about the sometimes ill-documented values of the Roman Republic may be clarified by investigating their visual imagery. Knowledge of how the visual symbols associated with virtus functioned is critical to understanding the role of virtus in Roman republican society. In his description of the Roman aristocratic funeral, Polybius (6.534) placed special emphasis on clothing and accouterments as symbols of status, achievement, and power. From this and other ancient evidence it is clear that significant aspects of the highly stratified and hierarchical society of ancient Rome were discernible by visual signs alone. A visitor to the city during a public celebration could, for example, have distinguished Roman citizens from foreigners and slaves by the togas the citizens wore. The different orders within the citizen body were marked by various types of clothing: senators wore special shoes and tunics with a broad purple stripe, members of the equestrian

VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF VIRTUS

order wore narrow-striped tunics, and those who held or had held priesthoods and high public offices, or who had won military honors were recognized by their distinctive costumes, furnishings, and badges. I Attitudes and emotions also could have been perceived visually. Among the Romans, dark clothing and uncut hair signified not only mourning for the dead, but also criminal prosecution or impending political crisis. 2 Visual signs, however, also functioned more abstractly in ancient Rome. We know from Tacitus that the rods and axes and the toga were understood as symbols representing Roman power (Ann. 1.59-4). Employed in this abstract, representational manner, visual signs also played a prominent part in the art of the Republic. Although little evidence of the sculpture and painting from the period survives, the phenomenon is well-documented on coins. From the beginning of Roman coinage "public" or "state" types (those with communal rather than individual or familial references) displayed images that were symbolic - the wolf and twins are a well-known example. With the introduction in the mid-second century of "private" or "family" types (those referring to the familial or personal achievements of the magistrate responsible for the coinage) such images became more varied and important. The difficulty is knowing what meanings or associations the images conveyed. 3 The problem is well-illustrated by coin types representing deified abstract concepts such as Fides, Victoria, and Pietas. 4 Representations of these deities, usually in the form of a female head, appear as

I

2

J

4

On the symbolic importance of dress in ancient Roman society, see L. Bonfante, "Introduction," in The World of Roman Costume, J. L. Sebasta, L Bonfante (Madison, 1994) pp. 3-10. On the toga as the national dress worn only by Roman citizens, see H. R. Goette, Studien zu romischen Togadarstellungen (Mainz, 1990) esp. pp. 2-3 and S. Stone, "The Toga: From National to Ceremonial Costume," in Sebasta and Bonfante, pp. 1345. On senatorial dress, see Mommsen, R. Staatsr. P pp. 408-35, lIP 888--93; Bonfante, "Roman Costumes," ANRW I 4 (1973) pp. 605-14; on honorific decorations, see V Maxfield, The Military Decorations of the Roman Army (London, 1981). On slaves as visually distinguishable, see Bradley, Slavery and Society, pp. 95--9. For the effects that Roman funerals had, see also Plin. NH 35.6 and Sall. BI. 4.5.6. For example, Liv. 6.16.4,8.37.9; App. BC 1.14(62); cf. Bonfante, ANRW, p. 591, n. 23. Crawford, RRC, II, pp. 713-44, used the terms "public" and "private,"which are problematic; perhaps "state" and "family" are less ambiguous. On the phenomenon of deified concepts or "virtues," see later Chapter VII.

143

ROMAN MANLINESS

personifications on obverse coin types. But because of the relative rarity of legends on republican coins, it is often unclear what the image represents. 5 Identifications are made in a number of ways. On some coins unlabeled heads are accompanied by distinctive iconographical details on the obverse, or securely identified symbols on the reverse. It is possible, for example, to identifY the unlabeled female appearing on a coin of 75 (RRC 391.3) as Libertas by the presence of the pileus, well-known from texts as the cap symbolizing freedom (e.g., Liv. 24.]2.9, cf. 24.16.18). Other coin types can be identified because the iconography of republican coins was continued into the imperial period, when identifYing legends became a more regular feature of the coinage. So the female head on the legend-less obverse of a coin of 108-7 (RRC 306) can be identified as Victoria from the same image appearing on numerous coin types of the imperial period, where an identifYing legend is present. 6 But in addition to being represented by personified figures, important or deified Roman concepts were also represented by symbolic images. On republican coins these are usually more difficult to interpret. This is because not only do they ordinarily lack an accompanying legend, but also because the symbols were sometimes mixed or merged to represent a variety of concepts. The caduceus, for example, functioned as an attribute of Mercury on many coins (RRC 285.6; 348.6; 449·5; 470-4; 472-4), but also served as a symbol of Felicitas and Pax, and it is found in association with a number of different deities -with Mars (RRC 296.1), and with the Dioscuri (RRC 60.1a; 108.1).7 In order to discover what these sometimes complex symbols 5

6

7

The great majority oflegends on republican coins are names of the persons (moneyers) responsible for the coinage. Other identifYing legends are almost always associated with figures, usually the image of the deity represented. Only eleven divine or personified figures, however, are identified with legends, and aside from Roma, all occur relatively late in the coinage: Roma in the years 217-14 (RRC 38.6), Pietas ro8-7 (RRC 308), Salus 91 (RRC 337.2), Victoria labeled VICTRIX 89 (RRC 343), Virtus 71 or 65 (RRC 401), Honos and Virtus 70 or 68 (RRC 403), Concordia 62 (RRC 415), Libertas 55 (RRC 428.2), Fides 47 (RRC 454), Fortuna populi Romani 49 (RRC 440), Felicitas 45 (RRC 473.3), Honos 45 (RRC 473.2). BMC, I, Augustus, 97 and 603, where the female bust has small wings. Cf. RRC 485.1. For the caduceus as a symbol of pax, see Gel1. NA 10.27.3. Felicitas is explicidy associated with the caduceus on imperial coins, see, e.g., BMC, I, Galba, 120, BMC, n, Vespasian, 603; cf. Crawford, RRC, n, p. 860.

144

VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF VIRTUS

signified on republican coins, it is necessary to use non-numismatic evidence. 8 A good example of how this can be done is offered by P. G. Hamberg's analysis of the association between the Roman concept fides and the image of clasped-hands. Clasped-hands first appears on republican coins (the earliest a denarius of 44) with no accompanying legend (RRC 480.6; 480.24; 494.10).9 Hamberg established the connection between clasped-hands and fides by reference to imperial coins, where the image frequently appears with such legends as FIDES EXERCITUM, FIDES MILITUM, and by FIDES PUBLICA. 10 But he was able to illustrate a much older link to fides through literary and linguistic evidence that associates the handshake with ideas such as trust and oath-taking, and specifically with deified Fides. I I Hamberg also demonstrated the complexity of the image's associations. At some time during the course of the Republic the symbol of clasped hands also came to be associated with concordia, a concept closely related to fides. The earliest evidence is a denarius of 42 showing clasped-hands on the reverse and a female bust with the legend CONCORDIA on the obverse (RRC 494-41). The symbol is also found on a number of imperial coins accompanied by the legend CONCORDIA

8

9

ID

II

Crawford's discussion of the horse's head as a symbol of war on early coins (RRC, n, pp. 713-4) is exemplary. P. G. Hamberg, Studies in Roman Imperial Art (Copenhagen, 1945) pp. I8-23. The obverse of RRC 480.24 bears the head and legend of Pax, and the clasped-hands on the reverse, but this represents a mixing of two distinct images - Pax and Fides, which is typical of the coinages of the period; see Crawford, RRC, I, p. 494. BMC, I, Galba, 53, Vitellius, 2, 86-7, I03-4, II3-I7; BMC, n, Vespasian, 756, 603. The legends FIDES MILITUM and FIDES EXERCITUM also appear with the head of personified Fides on imperial coins: BMC, I, Civil War, 64-9, Vitellius, 2, 86, I03, BMC, IV, Antoninus Pius, I990-I, Marcus Aurelius, I395-7, Septirnius Severus, I, 349, 651. For example, Liv. 1.21.4; 23.9.3; cf. Cic. Red. sen. 24; Deiot. 8; Tac. Hist. 1.54. The evidence was collected and analyzed by A. Hagerstrom, Der Romische ObligationsbegrijJ, ii, Skrifter KungL Humanistiska Vetenskapssamfundet, I Uppsala 35 (Uppsala, I94I) pp. I53-69; see also, TLL, VI. I, dexter (I9I2-26) coL 934; W F. Otto, "Fides," RE VI. 2 (I909) cols. 2282-3; Hamberg, p. 22-3, n. 30-4; and P. Boyance, "La main de Fides," Hommages aJ Bayet i (Brussels, I964) pp. IOI-I3. Hamberg overlooked the republican Concordia coin of 42, but Crawford's contention that "clasped-hands" on republican coinage was a symbol of Concordia only (RRC, I, pp. 494, 5IO), cannot stand against the literary and linguistic evidence Hamberg assembled.

145

ROMAN MANLINESS

I. Jugate heads of Honos and Virtus. Obverse type. Denarius, 68 or 70 B.C. (RRC 403). Courtesy of American Numismatic Society.

EXERCITUM. 12 Under the Empire, the associations of the symbol of clasped-hands were further widened and it was used with other related concepts such as conse115US and adoptio, but without losing its primary connection to fides. 13 By using literary, linguistic, and historical, as well as numismatic evidence, Hamberg showed how it is possible to identity a visual sign that was associated with a particular concept during the republican period, and the way in which these associations might be expanded over the course of time.

2.

VIRTUS AS THE ARMED AMAZON

References to deified Virtus occur on a number of republican coins. Only two are explicitly identified as such by legends however. A denarius (RRC 403) [Fig. I] coined in 68, or perhaps 70, shows a jugate bust of the cultic pair Honos and Virtus with the accompanying legends HO, VIR, and KALENI on the obverse, and CORDI on the reverse, with a representation of personified Italia and Roma clasping 12

13

BMC, HI, Nerva, 4-6, 95, 99; 7-9, 86; BMC, IV, Marcus Aurelius, '495-97; Hamberg, pp. 21-3· Hamberg, pp. 24-7. References to clasped-hands appear with the legends CONSENSUS EXERCITUS (BMC, H, Vespasian, p. 74, 369, p. 85,414-16) and ADOPTIO (BMC, Ill, Hadrian, p. 237, 5-8, cf. BMC, IV, Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, p. 386, 7-9).

VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF VIRTUS

2.

Bust ofVirtus. Obverse type.

Denarius, 65 or 71 B.C. (RRC 401). Courtesy of American Numismatic Society.

hands. The coin was jointly minted by Q. Fufius Calenus and probably P. Mucius Scaevola. Another denarius (RRC 401) [Fig. 2] coined by M'. Aquilius in 65, or perhaps in 7I, displays the head of a female wearing a crested helmet with side feather, and the legend VIRTUS. On the reverse is a warrior lifting up a fallen figure with the legend SICIL. 14 The earliest representation of Honos and Virtus, however, appears on a denarius of c. 100 (RRC 329), [Fig. 3] not surprisingly, without an identifying legend. The reverse type is a standing amazon figure in a helmet crested with side feathers, wearing a short chiton and boots and holding a spear in her right hand. She is crowned by a male figure wearing a hip mantle and holding a cornucopia. At the bottom is the legend, LENT. MAR. F. The moneyer is P. Cornelius Lentulus Marcellinus, a descendant of the M. Claudius Marcellus, who I4

The SICIL reverse on RRC, 401 refers to the victory of moneyer's grandfather, M'. Aqulius, cos 101 in Sicily; see W Hollstein, Die stadtromische Miinzpriigung derJahre 78-50 v. Ch" zwischen politischer Aktualitiit und Familienthematik (Munich, 1993) pp. 108III and the discussion that follows. The dates of 68 and 65 for RRC, 403 and 401 are those of C. Hersh, A. Walker, "The Mesagne Hoard," ANSMN 29 (1984) pp. 10334; Crawford dated them to 70 and 71, respectively. For CORDI meaning P. Mucius Scavola, see Crawford, RRC, p. 413. For a summary of other opinions about the moneyer as well as interpretations of the Italia-Roma reverse, see Hollstein, pp. 124-32. An association with virtus on this coin is not sufficient to establish Calenus as a new man, contra Wiseman, New Men, p. 232 and Crawford, RRC, I, p. 413; see later Chapter X. His father and brother may have been senators, and a Lex Fufia of c. 153 (see MRR, I, pp. 452-3) may be the work of a senatorial ancestor; see D. R. Shackleton Bailey, CQ 10 (1960): p. 263, n. 9.

147

ROMAN MANLINESS

3 - Honos crowmng Virtus_ Reverse type_ Denarius, c. 100 KC. (RRC 329)- Courtesy of American Numismatic Society_

won the spolia opima at the cavalry victory at Clasitidium in 222, as well as the son of the M. Claudius Marcellus, who had served as C. Marius' cavalry commander at the great victory over the Germans at Aquae Sextiae in 102. It was at Clastidium that Marcellus vowed the first temple to Honos and Virtus, and Marius dedicated another temple to the pair after his victory over the Germans. The figures on Marcellinus' coin are, therefore, almost certainly Honos and Virtus. IS It is also possible that the armed amazon in the feathered helmet was modeled on the original cult statue of Virtus, since feathered helmets were ,vorn by Roman legionaries at the time when the cult to Virtus was first established. I6 What is certain, from the coins types and from what we know about the persons responsible for them, is that the image of deified Virtus on coins had a clear martial connotation. IS

16

L. Richardson, AJA 82 (1978) p_ 245, cf LIMC "Honos" 12, contra Crawford, RRC, I, pp_ 329-30, who identified the figures as Roma and Genius populi Romani_ For M_ Claudius Marcellus, (RE 226) as Marius' cavalry commander at Aquae Sextiae, see Front. Strat_ 2_4_6; Plut_ Mar. 20-4, 21.1; Polynaen_ 8_10_2; and Miinzer, "Claudius (226)," RE III (1899) coL 276Richardson, AJA 82 (1978) p_ 244, citing Polyb. 6_23 _12, with Walbank, Commentary, I, p_ 703 _A feathered helmet is seen in the Esquiline painting, probably mid-third century in date, F Coarelli, in Roma media repubblicana (Rome, 1977) pp. 200-8_ But note that Roma also is sometimes represented on coins wearing a helmet with t\vo upright feathers (RRC 292,309,380,381,435,434)-

VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF VIRTUS

The image of the armed amazon, however, was not employed for Virtus only, but also for Roma, the personification of Rome itself. It is difficult to decide which figure, Virtus or Roma, was portrayed as an amazon first, because the evidence is ambiguous for a cult statue of Roma earlier than the late-third-century cult of Virtus. 17 Great efforts have gone into trying to distinguish between the two figures, Roma and Virtus, but to no avail; the types are for the most part iconographicaily indistinguishable. But this itself is of great importance. It suggests that ancient Romans had no conceptual difficulties in conceiving of an armed amazon seated in the attitude of a city goddess as Roma, and of a standing amazon as Virtus. What is significant about the relationship between the two images is that when the Romans wanted to represent Virtus in cult, on coins, and in art, they employed the very same image used for the personified Roma. Stronger evidence for the close conceptual connection between Rome and virtus is difficult to imagine.

3. VIRTUS AND THE MOUNTED WARRIOR

Most imperial coins bearing the legends VIRTUS, VIRTUS AUGUSTI, or VIRTUTI AUGUSTI display images of the personified deity - in the form of either a portrait of the helmeted female figure, or a standing helmeted amazon figure carrying a spear and shield - familiar from the republican virtus coins. But virtus is also represented on the imperial coinage by a symbol. Numerous coins with the legends VIRTUS or VIRTUS AUGUSTI display the image of the emperor as a mounted warrior, either riding into battle, or, more actively, charging into battle sometimes over a prostrate enemy.I8 The earliest such coin

17

18

The head of Roma appears as a Roman standard obverse type in the third century; cf. the third century didrachm of Locri Epizephyrii with a seated Roma, BMC, Greek Coins - Italy, p. 365, and 15, C. Fayer, "La Dea Roma sulie monete Greche," Studi Romani 23 (1975) pp. 273-88. But there is no hard evidence for a cult this early. The earliest attested cult statues of Roma are from the Greek East at the beginning of the second century, see R. Melior, (J EA PWtvlH The Worship of the Goddess Roma in the Greek World (Gottingen, 1975). In the classification of J. Bergemann, Romische Reiterstatuen (Mainz am Rhein, 1990) pp. 4 and 169, mounted warrior reverses correspond to his types II, III, IV, VI, VII, VIII, IX. For the image of the galloping horse being more "heroic" than that of the stationary horse, see Zanker, Image, pp. 37-9.

149

ROMAN MANLINESS

was struck in Gaul in AD 68 and shows the familiar bust of divine Virtus with the identifying legend on the reverse, and on the obverse the recently proclaimed emperor Galba riding in military dress, with his cloak floating behind and with his hand either raised or brandishing a spear. 19 Other reverse types show later emperors, spear in hand, riding down an opponent accompanied by the legend VIRTUTI AUG [USTl] or INVICTA VIRTUS. 20 Although the basic connection between the equestrian image and virtus has been recognized,21 that the mounted warrior was the preeminent symbol of virtus has gone unnoticed. The close association between virtus and the mounted warrior is easily understood, given the tactics favored by the Roman cavalry. Armed extremely lightly until the late third century, Roman cavalrymen favored a close, stationary type of fighting, that put them at great risk. 22 But the identification of the equestrian image as the symbol of virtus can be demonstrated conclusively from the evidence of imperial coinage. For aside from representations of personified Virtus, the mounted warrior is, with only two exceptions, the only reverse type to bear the legend VIRTUS or VIRTUS AUG on the coinage of the high empire. 23 Conversely, the great majority of imperial coins displaying the image of the mounted warrior have either the legend VIRTUS - VIRTUS AUG., or no legend 19

20

21 22

2)

C. H. V. Sutherland, Roman Imperial Coinage I, rev. ed, i (London, 1984), p. 237, 94 (Paris), and without the spear, p. 237, 93 (= BMC, I, Galba, 215); cf. BMCV, Septimius and Caracalla, p. 224, 374, p. 260, 523-VIRTUS AUGUSTORUM. BMC, Ill, Hadrian, p. 337, 774; BMC V, Septimius, p. 179, 142-3, and p. 219, 340. On some coins ofHadrian and Commodus, two emperors criticized for ending ruinous wars, the defeated opponent is replaced by a lion or a panther; for Hadrian, see P. L. Strack, Untersuchungen zur romischen Reichspragung des 2 ]hs. n (Stuttgard, 1934) 499; F. Gnecchi, I Medaglioni Romani, iii (Milan, 1912) p. 20, 95/; for Commodus, BMC, IV, Commodus, p. 703, 90, p. 719,168, p. 777, 480, and p. 800, 562; cf. Bergemann, pp. 178 and 180-1. By Bergemann, pp. 4-5. See J. B. McCall, The Cavalry cif the Roman Republic (London, New York, 2001), pp. 2651, 53/7,94-6. The only exceptions are a single issue ofDomitian, BMC n, Domitian, p. 400, 451, with the image of Mo neta and VIRTUTI AUG S. c., and a reverse type of Marc us Aurelius labeled VIRTUS AUG. and showing the emperor walking across a bridge with soldiers, BMC, IV, Marcus Aurelius, p. 466, 567; p. 624, 1427; p. 626, 1431. This changes in A.D. 193 in the civil wars following the death ofPertinax; see BMC, V, Wars of Succession, p. 81, 316, p. 101, 4II, p. 85, 327. Thereafter, it is common to find a standing emperor holding a spear with the legend VIRTUS AUG. 15 0

VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF VIRTIlS

at all beyond the normal imperial titulatur (PaNT. MAX., cos., TRIB. POT.) , or a geographical reference (HISPANIA, GALLIA, etc.). The few exceptions follow the pattern illustrated by Hamberg for the symbol of clasped-hands in that when the mounted warrior reverse types do not refer directly to virtus, they refer to concepts or practices that are clearly related to virtus. So coins depicting young emperors or imperial princes not in actual combat, but as mounted warriors performing military exercises are labeled DECURSIO, or PRINCEPS IUVENTUTIS, and a few Hadrianic reverses show the emperor mounted with his cloak flying behind, accompanied by the legend EXPED[ITIO] AUG[USTI]. 24 Reverse types displaying the emperor charging over a defeated enemy that have a legend other than VIRTUS AUGUSTI are very rare. Before the third century, the only such legend that is found with this reverse type is the distinctive title OPTIMUS PRINCEPS of the martial emperor Trajan.25 That this symbolic association between virtus and the mounted warrior was also present in the republican coinage is revealed by the fact that two of the three republican issues bearing the image of Virtus display a clear reference to cavalry combat. As pointed out, the moneyer responsible for the denarius of c. 100 with the Honos-Virtus reverse (RRC 329), P. Cornelius Lentulus Marcellinus, used the type to commemorate not only his ancestor M. Claudius Marc ellus , but also his father, the M. Claudius Marc ellus , who was Marius' cavalry commander. The denarius coined by M'. Aquilius in either 65 or 71 (RRC 401) has the legend SICIL on the reverse, and celebrates the deeds of the moneyer's ancestor M'. Aquilius, cos. 101, who in 24

25

An Augustan aureus of either 8 or c. 5-3 B.C. displays on the reverse young C. Caesar armed and galloping. For Nero's decursio coins, see BMC, I, Nero, pp. 226-9, I42-55, and Sutherland, I, pp. I62, I75, I77, I80, I84. For Dornitian on horseback as princeps iuventutis, H. Mattingley, E. A. Sydenham, Roman Imperial Coinage n (London, I926) Vespasian, p. 80, 556, p. 82, 579, p. IOO, 728 = BMC, n, p. I57, 686 and 728; Titus and Dornitian, RIC, n, p. I25, 76 = BMC, n, p. I8I, 750; and BMC, in. Hadrian, p. 433, I312-I4, p. 425, I259-62. BMC, Ill, Trajan, p. 176 fr, 833-4I, pp. 65 fr., 245 ff; cf. Bergemann, p. 176. Trajan's coinage contains no issues with the legend of virtus, only VIRTUTI ET FELICITATI, BMC, Ill, Trajan, p. I03, 5Il, and p. 205, 968. This changes with Caracalla, who issued a reverse type showing the emperor riding down an enemy accompanied by the legend PROP AUGG. (BMC, V, Septimius, Caraealla, and Geta, p. 35I, 858, p. 390, I76); ef. Bergemann, p. 43. 15 1

ROMAN MANLINESS

putting down a slave revolt in Sicily, defeated the leader of the revolt, Athenion, in single mounted combat. 26 The numismatic link: between virtus and the image of the mounted warrior, in fact, mirrors an old connection between virtus and Roman cavalrymen. From the mid-fourth century, the principal way in which upper-class Romans displayed virtus was in mounted combat. In addition, there were close associations between the cult to Honos and Virtus, the transvectio equitum, and Temple of Castor, all of which were political-religious ceremonies and institutions which honored the Roman state cavalry. Finally, the first temple to honor deified Virtus was vowed at the battle of Clastidium, the greatest cavalry victory in Roman history, by M. Claudius Marcellus, who during the battle had engaged in single mounted combat with the enemy's king and won the spolia opima. 27 Just how closely the association of the symbol of the mounted warrior was with virtus, or with a man closely associated with deified Virtus, can be seen in its use as a singular poetic image. In lines 756859 of Book Six of the Aeneid, Vergil presented his famous catalogue of the heroes - men who, over the centuries, had contributed to Roman greatness. In brief but immediately recognizable sketches, Vergil told how each man had gained fame- Torquatus and the pitiless ax (824-5), the two Scipios bane of Libya (843), Fabius Maximus winning victory by delaying (845-6). The types of shorthand references that Vergil employed were so well-known that sometimes it was not necessary to name the individual referred to. So Numa's act of establishing Rome's laws (808-n), Mummius' conquest of Corinth (836-7), Aemilius Paullus' victory over King Perseus (838), and the civil war between Caesar and Pompey (826-35), are all invoked without reference to the names of the principals. But as aids to identification, Vergil sometimes used images that seem to have been based on well-known 26

27

Diad. 36.10.1; Cic. 2 Verr. 5.3, and see Hollstein, p. I08-IIO. The account of Florus, 2.6.12, is to be rejected in favor ofDiodorus' version; see K. Bradley, Slavery and Rebellion in the Roman World 140 BC-70 BC (Bloomington, 1989) p. 159, n. 24; cf. BMC, I, Augustus, p. 9, 49 = C. H. N. Sutherland, RIC2 rev. ed. (London, 1984) p. 63, 3IO. RRC 401 has nothing to do with C. Verres, contra Hollstein. For a possible connection between the Honos and Virtus coin (RRC 403) of either 68 or 70 and Pompey, see Hollstein, pp. 129-32 and later Chapter IX. See later Chapter VII on all this. 15 2

VISUAL REPRESENT A TIONS OF VIRTUS

physical representations in statues and relief sculpture - Silvius leaning on his spear (760) and Romulus in the double plumed helmet (779-80) being two examples. 28 At the end of the catalogues, Vergil described M. Claudius Marcellus, who surpassed all in military prowess (... victorque viros supereminet omnis. 856) with the following words: hic rem Romanam magno turbante tumultu sistet eques, sternet Poenos Gallumque rebellem In a great and confounding attack this man will maintain the Roman state as a horseman, he will strike down the Carthaginians and the rebellious Gaul. 29 Aen. 68 57-8

The image Vergil used to invoke the man who had won the spolia opima in a mounted duel, and who had vowed the first temple to Virtus, is the verbal equivalent of the symbol seen on the virtus coins - the mounted warrior triumphantly riding down the enemies of Rome. If the association between the image of the mounted warrior and the man who founded the cult to Virtus was so well known that Vergil could use it in his catalogue of heroes, and if on imperial coins the image of the mounted warrior is consistently accompanied by a legend naming virtus, and if two of the three republican coins bearing the image and/or the legend of virtus have reference to victorious cavalry combat, then it follows that all republican coins bearing the image of a mounted warrior but no legend would carry an explicit reference to virtus, just as the image of clasped-hands on legendless republican coins referred to fides. The association would naturally extend beyond The influence of statues and relief sculpture on Vergil was pointed out in lines 772, 784, 809, 815, and 824-5 by E. Norden, P. Vergilius Maro Aeneis Buch VI9 (Stuttgart 1927, rep. 1995) p. 315; see also L. Delaruelle, "Les Souvenirs d'oeuvres plastiques dans la revue des heros au livre VI de I'Eneide," RA 21 (1913) pp. 153-70; R. D. Williams, "The Sixth Book of the Aeneid," Greece and Rome xi (1964) p. 59; also see R. G. Austin, Aeneidos, Liber sextus (Oxford, 1977) p. 232-3. 29 Norden, Buch VI, ad loc., p. 339, gave strong metrical arguments for punctuating line 858 before sternet, and most editors have followed him. But the meaning of sternere, "to strike down" goes better with eques than does sistere, which means "to stabili2e, or strengthen," see Servius, Comm. in Verg. Aen. ad loc. The ancient text was of course unpunctuated, but even if an ancient reader paused before sternet, it would have been a light pause, with the word eques serving as a kind of pivot from one clause to the next, and continuing to resonate with sternet Poenos Gallumque rebellem. I owe this point to Stephen Hinds; see also the comment ofF. Fletcher, Virgil Aeneid VI (Oxford, 1941) p. 97.

28

I53

ROMAN MANLINESS

numismatics to other categories of visual representations. This is not to say that the mounted warrior was the only image associated with virtus in the Roman imagination. A warrior fighting on foot, or a trophy representing the spolia opima could also symbolize virtus. But the numismatic evidence shows beyond a doubt that the mounted warrior was the preeminent symbol of virtus for the ancient Romans. 30 Although the analysis of the coins has demonstrated that the image of the mounted warrior was synonymous with virtus in the ancient Roman imagination, images of mounted warriors in other media, artistic representation and literature, can legitimately be taken to indicate a close and conscious relationship between virtus and the individual being portrayed. During the republican period, not only the mounted warrior, but equestrian representations in general were associated with the martial qualities inherent in virtus.

4. THE EQUESTRIAN IMAGE IN REPUBLICAN ROME

Yet the image of the mounted warrior as the preeminent symbol of virtus presents what appears to be a paradox. The highly competitive nature of Roman politics had begun with the formation of the patrician-plebeian nobility in the second half of the fourth century. Not coincidentally, the same period saw the origin of various institutions - manubial temples, the laudatio funebris, and self-representation in art and architecture - by which Roman aristocrats advanced their political fortunes and those of their families. 31 The fourth century was also the time, as we will see, when true cavalry was introduced into Roman warfare, and upper-class Romans began to regularly fight, and therefore to demonstrate virtus, from horseback. One would, therefore, 30

3'

For a warrior on foot, see the Virtus coin of71 (RRC 401), and for the spolia opima, see the coin of 50 displaying M. Claudius Marcellus carrying a trophy (RRC 439). On the varying patterns of competition, see K.-J. Holkeskamp, Die Entstehung der Nobilitat (Wiesbaden, 1987) pp. 62-140; Cornell, Beginnings, pp. 342-4, 370,. For manubial temples, see A. Ziolkowski, The Temples cif Mid-Republican Rome and their Historical and Topographical Context (Rome, 1992) esp. pp. 238-44. For the late fourth-century origin of the funeral oration see Kierdorf, pp. 95-105. On the importance of the late fourth century as the formative period for aristocratic self-display in art and architecture, see T. Holscher, "Die Anfange rornischer Reprasentationskunst," MDAIR 85 (1978) pp. 352-4, with Holkeskamp, pp. 204-40.

154

VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF VIRTUS

expect the forms of self-representation employed by the assertive and bellicose patrician-plebeian nobility to have regularly included images of aristocrats on horseback. But the limited information we have about early honorific statues indicates that this was not the case. On the contrary, the evidence points to a dearth not only of images of mounted warrior, but of equestrian representations in general. For the period from the beginning of the Republic to the outbreak of the Hannibalic War, nineteen honorific public statues in Rome are recorded, sixteen or seventeen of which have a good claim to being authentic. 32 Yet of these only three, two granted on the same occasion, were equestrian - those honoring of the consuls L. Furius Camillus and C. Maenius in 338, and Q. Marcius Tremulus in 306. In commenting on the statues of 338, Livy states that equestrian statues in the Forum were a rare honor in those days (8.13.9).33 This is surprising, because the late fourth century was a time when high office was held repeatedly by a small number of men with martial reputations and when one would have expected there to have been relatively few institutional constraints on aristocratic displays of military glory.34 The equestrian statues in question were awarded by public decrees in recognition of extraordinary achievements. The first two honored the consuls of 338 for ending the great war with the Latins, commemorating what was at the time Rome's greatest military victory, and one of the pivotal events in Roman history, as contemporaries would have recognized. 35 32

33

34

35

For references, see O. Vessberg, Studien zur Kunstgeschichte der romischen Republik (Stockhohn, 1941) pp. 13-26; G. Lahusen, Untersuchungen zur Ehrenstatue in Rom (Rome, 1983). For the authenticity of many of the notices, see Holscher, MDAIR 85 (1978): pp. 338-40, and M. Sehhneyer, Stadtromische Ehrenstatuen der republikanischen Zeit (Stuttagrt, 1999) pp. II-141; contra A. Wallace-Hadrill, "Roman arches and Greek honours: the language of power at Rome," PCPhS 36 (1990) pp. 148-81, esp. 171-2. The earlier equestrian statue of Cloelia, or Valeria, is generally rejected, see Holscher, MDAIR 85 (1978) pp. 332-3; Ogilvie, Commentary, pp. 267-8; Sehhneyer, pp. 98-101. For the authenticity of the equestrian statues of 338 and 306, see Sehhneyer, pp. 48-60, and S. P. Oakley, A Commentary on Livy Books VI-X, II (Oxford, 1997) pp. 533-5. According to Comel!, Beginnings, pp. 370-2, political dominance was in the hands of "a handful of talented and charismatic individuals who shared senior magistracies among themselves." Cf. Holkeskamp, Entstehung, pp. 126-40, andR. Develin, Practice of Politics at Rome, 366--167 B.C. (Brussels, 1985) pp. 105-18. For the victories, see Liv. 8.13.5-9; on the statues, Liv. 8.13.9; Plin. NH 34.20,23; and Eutropius 2.7.3, who placed the statues in rostris. Cf. Bergemann, p. 156, L9; E. Papi, "Equus: C. Maenius," LTUR, 2 (1995) p. 229; Sehhneyer, pp. 48-57. For these and the

155

ROMAN MANLINESS

In hindsight, the achievement of Marcius Tremulus, whose equestrian statue was erected in front of the Temple of Castor in the Forum, 36 does not seem to compare to that of Maenius and Camillus. But to contemporaries, Marcius' rapid defeat of the rebellious Hernici, only 60 kilo meters easy march from Rome at Anagnia, averted the crisis not only of a Samnite invasion ofLatium, but also of a rebellion of the Latins, whom the Romans had defeated only thirty-two years earlier. 37 Most of the third century is very poorly documented and the next recorded equestrian statues in Rome date to the Hannibalic War. Sometime during this war, an equestrian statue on the Capitol was dedicated to honor the youthful heroics of a certain Aemilius Lepidus. 38 In 209, Q. Fabius Maximus Cunctator erected an equestrian statue of himself on the Capitol. 39 We next hear of a gilded equestrian statue of M'. Acilius Glabrio erected by his son in 18 I in the Temple of Pietas. Like Fabius' statue this was privately erected, as opposed to being decreed by the senate or people. 40 What evidence there is for the following years, suggests that equestrian statues remained rare in

36

37

38

39

40

statue of 306 being public, not private dedications, see Sehlmeyer, pp. 49 and 58, contra Wallace-Hadrill, PCPhS 36 (1990) pp. 148-81. Liv. 9.43.22; Cic. Phi!. 6.13; Plin. NH 34.23; cf. Bergemann, p. 156 L1O; Papi, "Equus: Q. Marci Tremuli," LTUR, 2, p. 229; Sehlmeyer, pp. 57-60. Cf. Liv. 9.43.22; Plin. NH 34.23; Cic. Phi!. 6.13. Livy's statement (9.43.1-4) that the rebellion in 306 was perceived as a crisis, is ignored in conventional views about the Second Samnite War being essentially won by 312, e.g., Cornell, Beginnings, pp. 354-5. But the Samnite raid into Latium in 315, on which see Cornell, pp. 353-4, must have left the Latins unsetded. Satricum had gone over to the Sarnnites in 319, Liv. 9.16.10. Val. Max. 3.1.1, with RRC 419/1; certainly M. Aemilius Lepidus (coss. 187 and 175, cen. 179), and probably a public dedication; contra Wallace-Hadrill, PCPhS 36 (1990) p. 170. See Crawford, RRC, I, p. 444; T. Robert Broughton, "M. Aemilius Lepidus: His Youthful Career," in Studia Pompeiana & Classica in Honor of Wi!helmina EJashemski II ed. R. I. Curtis (New Rochelle, 1988) pp. 13-23; and Sehlmeyer, pp. 142 -3. Plut. Fab. 22.8; Bergemann, p. 157 LI2; Papi, "Equus: Q. Fabius Maximus Verrucosus Cunctator," LTUR, 2, p. 229; Sehlmeyer, pp. 125-6. Liv. 40.34.5-6, Val. Max. 2.5.1. Bergemann, pp. 157-8 L14. Cf. E. Papi, "Equus: M'. Acilius Glabrio," LTUR, 2, p. 224; Sehlmeyer, pp. 148-50. The statues atop the arch built by Scipio Africanus in 190 mentioned by Livy (37.3.7), cum signis septem auratis et equis duo bus - "with seven gold statues and two horses," - were not equestrian. The word equus, in Livy and general Latin usage, means a statue of a horse, not of a horse and rider, for which the Latin is statua equestris, see TLL 5, equus IIb (1931-53) col. 738.

VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF VIRTUS

Rome until the late Republic. This is all the more striking because by 158 the honorific statues erected in the Roman Forum had reached such a number that the censors of that year removed all that were not authorized by the senate and people. 4' Given the deficient nature of the literary record, it is of course possible that there were more equestrian statues in Rome, perhaps many more, that simply are unrecorded. From 292 to 218, and again after 167, we are without Livy's continuous narrative. Moreover, even where Livy's full account is extant, it does not record every equestrian statue, neglecting to mention that of Fabius Maximus and of the youthful Aemilius LepidusY But another kind of evidence, superior in some ways to the literary record, corroborates the pattern of rare equestrian images. In the record of Roman republican coinage, the sequence of which is virtually continuous from c. 280, there are, with the exception of the Dioscuri, divine patrons of the Roman state cavalry and quintessential state type, no representations of mounted warrior until in or shortly after 129 (RRC 25911),43 after which equestrian reverse types, as well as equestrian statues, became increasingly common. In 129, a law was passed that excluded senators from the eighteen centuries that constituted Roman's official state cavalry. As will be argued, the dates of the law and the coin types are not coincidental. 44 That ambivalence, or aversion, toward the equestrian image was regarded as traditional in the late Republic is shown by Cicero's 41

42

43

44

Plin. NH 34.30-31; see Sehlmeyer, pp. I52-4. The statue on the Capitol ofQ. Marcius Rex, praetor of I44, (ClL XVI 5) was almost certainly not equestrian; see Bergemann, p. I5, on inscriptions specifYing statue types, contra Crawford, RRC, I, p. 449. The togate equestrian statue represented atop an aqueduct on a denarius (RRC 425) minted by a Marcius Philippus in either 56, the date favored by C. Hersh, A. Walker, "The Mesagne Hoard," ANSMusN 29 (I984) I03-34, or in 57, Crawford's date, is probably that of Q. Marcius Tremulus; see Bergemann, p. I56 and 170 LIO, M6; Sehlmeyer, pp. 58-60, cf. Lahusen, p. 58; Papi, "Equus: Q. Marci Tremuli," LTUR, 2, pp. 229-30. For late republican conflation of references to different time periods on a single reverse type, see Flower, p. 85. For examples, see RRC 242,243,262,263,346/3 & 4. But note that Livy does not mention the non-equestrian statue of Sp. Carvilius; on which see Plin. 34.43, and Sehlmeyer, pp. II3-16. The only exception is the non-military rider in games - desultor - in the years 217-I5 (RRC 39/5). Cf. RRC 297; RRC 340ir; RRC 346; RRC 408; and RRC 454/4; all associated with the ludi Romani or ludi Apollinares. The coin of 2II-2IO (RRC 98Ah), was minted outside of Rome in Lucania. See later, Chapter VIII.

157

ROMAN MANLINESS

comment in 43 about a bronze statue on foot - pedestris - voted by the senate for the recently deceased Ser. SulpiciusRufus. In a speech Cicero explained that Sulpicius would have been opposed to an equestrian statue because, "to a remarkable degree Servius was devoted to ancestral restraint and he opposed the arrogance of the present age." mirifice enim Servius maiorum continentiam diligebat, huius saecoli insolentiam vituperat. The association of equestrian statues with arrogance is also seen in a speech of the same year in which Cicero castigated the "unbelievable shamelessness" of Lucius Antonius for having his equestrian statue erected in the Roman Forum. 45 On a different occasion Cicero himself supported senatorial decrees to erect equestrian statues to M. Aemilius Lepidus and to Octavian. But for this he was roundly criticized by M. Brutus, in the same terms that Cicero himself had used in reference to equestrian statues. Brutus wrote that Cicero was "immoderate and unrestrained when voting for honors," faults that Cicero virtually admitted. 46 Given what will be shown to be the central importance of horsemanship in elite Roman warfare, and the comparative frequency of the equestrian image in other ancient societies where the aristocracy went to war on horseback, a traditional republican ambivalence toward the equestrian image is something of a paradox. 47 But it is mirrored by another seeming paradox. The Roman republican attitude toward virtus itself was also ambivalent. 45

46

47

For the statue to Sulpicius Rufus, see Cic. Phil. 9.13; on that ofL. Antonius, Phi!. 6.13. Note also Cicero's comment on the gilded statue of Verres, erected in 71 near the Temple ofVulcan (2 Verr.2.150). See Ad Brut. 23 (SB 25)3. Cicero's defense was feeble: "Nothing at that time seemed immoderate," (Ad Brut. 23.7). For the criticism of the statue for Lepidus, Ad Brut. 23.9. Cf. classical Athens, where equestrian representations were relatively common; 1. G. Spence, The Cavalry ojClassical Greece (Oxford, 1993) appendices 1,2 and 3, pp. 231-71.

v THE BOUNDARIES OF MANLINESS

For no other people have such power over their sons as we Romans do. Gaius, Institutes In considering how virtus functioned as the ideal of Roman manliness, it is important to know not only the ways in which the term was used, but also how it was not used, to determine, so to speak, the boundaries of ideal manliness, and to understand how these were related to the patterns of Roman republican culture and society. Was virtus, for example, credited to women, to children, to non-Roman men and to slaves? Did virtus denote the sole standard of Roman masculine behavior? If not, what was the relationship between it and others?

I.

VIRTUS, SLAVES, AND FOREIGNERS

The biological status of a Roman male slave could be designated by the word homo, but a male slave was not a man in that sense that the Latin word vir denotes. Regularly referred to as puer - boy - , a slave was also not capable of possessing virtus. I On being manumitted the slave of a Roman citizen gained not only freedom, but also the Roman citizenship, although both freedom and citizenship came with serious disabilities. Citizenship should have made the freed slave into a vir, but

I

For vir and homo, see earlier Introduction, n. 6. On the use of homo for a slave, see Santoro L'Hoir, p. 202, n. 4. In comedy the attribution of virtus to slaves is highly ironic, with the telling exception of Tyndarus in Plautus' Captivi, see earlier Chapter 1.

159

ROMAN MANLINESS

this does not seem to have been the case. Although a Roman citizen an ex-slave carried the special appellation of libertinus - freedman (libertus to his ex-master - patronus). Moreover, in the late-third century, and probably after, freedmen were referred to as servi - slaves -, a practice that continued into the late Republic, usually but not always as an insult. Because manumissions are known to have been relatively common in Rome since the mid-third century, and probably earlier, there must have been considerable numbers of freedmen. The motivations for manumission, of course, varied greatly, but the economic and other practical interests of the master were paramount. A slave's character would have been a consideration for some masters, but the quality of a good slave, and a good freedman, was fides not virtus. 2 An exception to all this are the volunteer slaves - volones - who fought in the legions in exchange for a chance to win their freedom. The use of armed slaves in war was naturally extremely rare, and all that we know of the volones concerns those who served in the dark days of the Hannibalic War. Livy reports on the activities of these volones in the years from 216 to 214. In the latter year they were all granted their freedom after demonstrating virtus in a critical battle. The liminal position of the volones is evident, however, in the choice offered to them before that battle. Mter two years of faithfully fighting for Rome, they were either to display the virtus of a Roman citizen in combat or die like slaves on the cross. 3 Nor did all Romans agree that even a former slave could possess virtus, as witnessed by an incident in 46, in which the general, Metellus Scipio, refused to award the military decoration of the golden armband to a brave cavalryman, on the grounds that it would defile military honor to so decorate an ex-slave. Mter publicly humiliating the man, Scipio awarded him an armband of silver (Val. Max. 8.14.5). The Roman attitude toward the virtus of non-Romans was somewhat different. The awarding of the Roman citizenship by en. Pompeius Strabo in 89 to Spanish cavalrymen virtutis causa, seems 2

3

On the motivations for manumission, see Treggiari, Roman Freedmen, pp. II-20; for the disabilities and obligations of a libertinus, pp. 37-86; on the use of servus, pp. 265-6. Enlistment of volones - Liv. 22.57.II-I2; their training - Liv. 23.35.6-9; demonstration of virtus in batde - Liv. 24.14.6-7, 16.6, Front. Strat. 4.7.24. 160

THE BOUNDARIES OF MANLINESS

similar to the case of the volones, in that both gained the status for courage displayed in battle. But the ambiguity of a slave's position is not found in that of the non-Roman, because it was allowed that the latter could possess virtus independently of the promise of Roman citizenship. Rome's enemies were credited with virtus by Ennius (to Pyrrhus), and by the annalist Claudius Qaudrigarius (to a monomachist Gaul), and according to Polybius, the Roman general Q. Fulvius Nobilior made much of the 6:v8pEia (virtus) of the Celtiberians of Spain. In Caesar's De bello Gallico, the Gallic enemy is credited with virtus more often than are Romans. 4 The important thing to note about enemies of Rome who posses virtus is that they could lose it in battle - fail the test, so to speak - and that for many the consequence was slavery. In this sense, non-Romans were the opposite of Roman slaves in regard to virtus. 2.

VIRTUS AND WOMEN

The characteristic virtue of women in Rome was pudicitia - "modesty" or "chastity"5 In republican Latin virtus is rarely attributed to women, no doubt because of its etymological affinities to vir.6 In pre-Classical Latin virtus is so used only once, by Plautus in Amphitruo, where, however, the usage effects a comic sexual role reversal. Jupiter, disguised as Amphitruo, attempts to soothe the deceived and unjustly accused wife Alcumena. In doing so Jupiter assumes the part, and uses the diction, of a submissive woman, e.g., oro obsecro - "I beseech and implore" - he says (Amph. 923), while the indignant Alcumena is made to adopt the

4

On both the Ennius passage and Quadrig. frag. lOb HRR, p. 208 see earlier Chapter I; on the Celtiberians, Polyb. 35.4.2. For Caesar's Commentaries, see subsequently Chapter IX. The virtus of anon-Roman disappears as soon as he becomes an enemy of Rome, but this has more to do with a particular author's views about virtus, than with an overall Roman attitude; contra W V. Harris, "Can Enemies too Be Brave. A Question about the Roman Representation of the Other," in cittadino, 10 staniero, il barbaro fra integrazione ed emarginazione nell' antichita. Serta Antiqua et mediaevalina VII. Atti del I incontro Internazionale di Storia antica (Genova 22-24 maggio 2003) (Rome, 2005) forthcoming. On losing virtus in contests, see subsequently Chapter IX. On pudicitia see, e.g., Plaut. Amph. 839; Stich. 99-101; Ter. Adel. 345-6; cf the rhetorical contrast between it and virtus at Liv. 10.23.7-8. So S. Laconi, Virtus: Studio semantico e religioso dalle origini al Basso Impero (Cagliari, 1988) pp. 18-9·

n

5

6

161

ROMAN MANLINESS

role of an aggressive male. 7 It is as such that Alcumena claims virtus for herself, followed by a pronouncement of the Roman divorce formula.

Amph. 925

Ego istaec feci verba virtute inrita; nunc, quando factis me impudicis abstini, ab impudicis dictis avorti volo. valeas, tibi habeas res tuas, reddas meas. iuben mi ire comites? ... I have made these words invalid by my virtus; now that I have separated myself from unchaste deeds, I wish to be kept from unchaste words. Good-bye, keep your own property and return mine. Do you order your attendants to go with me?

The strangeness of hearing virtus, and the divorce formula, tibi habeas res tuas, reddas meas, spoken by a woman is apparent in Jupiter's immediate response: "Are you crazy?" - Sanan est? - he asks Alcumena. Alcumena's claim to virtus would have raised the eyebrows of the Roman audience, as well as eliciting a laugh. 8 That the attribution of virtus to a woman was seen as incongruous is suggested by the use of the word fortitudo - courage - in a fragment of the comic writer L. Afranius (b. c. ISO), Disperii, perturbata sum, iam flaccet fortitudo. - "I was ruined, I have been thrown into confusion, already courage flags." (corn. 65, Ribb.). The feminine ending of the verb perturbata shows thatfortitudo is used of a woman. Fortitudo is very rare in pre-Classical Latin, and rare altogether outside of philosophical or other works where it is used to translate the Greek virtue 6:v5pEia. Its use here seems to have been to avoid the awkwardness of ascribing virtus to a woman. 9 In Latin of the late Republic, virtus is ascribed to women on only a handful of occasions. In a speech delivered in 80 (Pro Roscio 7

8

9

On distinctively female Latin speech, see, e.g., Donatus, Commentum Terenti, Bun. 656, 1,952, and Rec. 824, and for further references and discussion, M. E. Gilleland, "Female Speech in Greek and Latin," AJPh I01 (1980) pp. 180-3. For full argument and references, see McDonnell, AJAR 8 (1983) [=1986] pp. 54-80, esp. pp. 65-6, contra Treggiari, Roman Marriage, p. 444. Alcumena is not always dignified and topsy-turvydom is an essential feature ofPlautine comedy, especially Amphitruo. So Eisenhut, JIR, pp. 41-2; see also Laconi, p. 19. Onfortitudo see earlier Chapter I, Section 6.

r62

THE BOUNDARIES OF MANLINESS

Amerino 27), Cicero speaks of the virtus,jides, and diligentia of Caecilia Metella. Here virtus clearly means courage, since Metella displayed it by rescuing a man who is being pursued by assassins. In two letters, one to his wife Terentia, the other to his friend Atticus, written while he was separated from his family by civil war, Cicero refers to the virtus of his daughter Tullia. cuius summa virtute et singulari humanitate graviore etiam sum dolore adfectus nostra factum esse neglegentia ut longe alia in fortuna esset atque eius pi etas ac dignitas postulabat. because of her consummate virtus and singular kindness, I have also been visited by grave anguish, that it happened because of my neglect that she is in very different circumstances than are due to her filial respect and position. Fam. 14. II (SB 166) 2 and cuius quidem virtus rnirifica. quo modo ilia fert publicam cladem, quo modo domestic as tricas! Whose virtus is indeed wonderful, the way in which she bears public disaster and private difficulties! Att. 10.8 (SB 199) 9 In both passages, virtus probably refers to the bravery that Tullia exhibited in Rome while her father was absent and his political opponents held power, but in the second, the meaning is extended to cover private concerns also. Such unqualified attributions are unusual, however. When virtus is used of a woman it is more common for its meaning to be signaled by another word. Writing from exile in 58 to his wife Terentia, Cicero praises her virtus. Et litteris multorum et sermone omnium perfertur ad me incredibilem tuam virtutem et fortitudinem esse teque nec anirni neque corporis laboribus defatigari. me rniserum! te ista virtute, fide, probitate, humanitate in tantas aerumnas propter me incidisse. It is reported to me by the letters of many and by the conversation of all that your virtus and courage are unbelievable, and that you are not discouraged by

ROMAN MANLINESS

hardships either of spirit or of body. Wretched me! That you with your virtu5, faithfulness, honesty, and kindness, have fallen into such troubles because of me."

Fam.

14.1

(SB 8)

1

This is one of only two occurrences of fortitudo in Cicero's letters, and its function is similar to that in the Afranius fragment. But here, instead of employingfortitudo as a subsitute for virtus, Cicero uses it to gloss the meaning of the latter word. In the first attribution a courageous meaning is signaled by fortitudo, and in the second the meaning "virtue" is suggested by the presence of other words - fides, probitas, and humanitas - that have ethical denotations. Similarly, Horace explicates an unusual attribution and meaning of virtus, when in describing the virtuous women of the Scythians and Getae, he glosses a woman's virtus with the word castitas - "chastity." dos est magna parentium virtus et metuens alterius viri, certo foedere castitas et peccare nefas, aut pretium est mori. The great dowry of parents is virtu5 and, apprehensive of another man, chastity firmly contracted that wrong doing is a crime, and worthy of death. Carm. 3.24.21-24

When no such qualification is present, however, a woman's virtus usually carries the meaning of courage. For example, in the long late republican obituary inscription dedicated by a husband in honor of his wife (the so-called Laudatio Turiae), virtus is attributed to the deceased woman three times. In describing how the wife risked her own life by pleading for her husband's during the proscriptions of 43, the inscription states: quod ut conarere virtus tua te hortabatur. which your virtu5 urged you to attempt. 6a

THE BOUNDARIES OF MANLINESS

and Quid hac virtute efficaciu[s], praebere Caesari clementia[e locum et cum cu-]stodia spiritus mei not[a]re inportunam crudelitatem [Lepidi egregia tua] patientia? What could be more effective than the virtu5 you displayed? You managed to give Caesar an opportunity to display his clemency, and not only to preserve my life but also to brand Lepidus' insolent cruelty by your admirable endurance. "

Because the references of virtus are to the woman's brave actions in saving the life of her husband (the inscription describes the physical abuse she received on the orders ofLepidus), courage is its meaning. 10 The meaning of the plural is less clear, when later in the inscription the wife's virtutes are celebrated: in te quidem minime a[dmiJranda conlata virtutibu[s tuis reliquis, ... J - "but in you there is nothing to wonder at compared with your other virtutes, ... " (30a) - but "braves deeds" seem preferable to "virtues." In other references to a woman's virtus in the Latin of the earlyimperial period, the courageous meaning predominates. II Virtus in its ethical sense is attributed to women more frequently in inscriptions of the imperial period. 12 3. VIRTUS AND SEXUALITY Recent scholarship has made the sensible point that in any society there is not one, but a variety of masculinities. In any particular society there is likely to be a dominant, or "hegemonic masculinity," exercised by 10

II

ClL VI 1527 = lLS 8393. The text and translation (slightly modified) is that of E. Wistrand, The So-Called Laudatio Turiae (Lund 1976) pp. 24-7. See also N. Horsfall, "Some Problems in the 'Laudatio Turiae'," BlCS 30 (1983) pp. 85-98, who noted that the sentiments expressed were "profoundly conservative," 92. For the brutal treatment the wife received from Lepidus, see section II. Ov. Pont. 3.1.94 (note the military metaphor in the preceding lines); Val. Max. 3.2.2; Vell. Pat. 2.26.3. In later Silver Age Latin, a woman's virtus could denote her courage or her feminine "virtues," but the attribution remained rare, see Stat. Theb. 12.177; Plin. Bp. 8.5.1; lLS 8394 (Laudatio Muriae); ClL VI 317II; Eisenhut, VR, pp. 109-9, 169, 185, 210-11.

12

Contra Barton, p. 40. On inscriptions of the imperial period, see Laconi, pp. 20-21.

16 5

ROMAN MANLINESS

an economic, social, and political elite. This may also be paradigmatic, emulated and supported by men outside of the elite. But there will also be "subordinate masculinities," often deemed by the dominant group as inadequate or inferior in one way or another.I3 Studies of ancient Roman masculinity have tended to present a single type, hegemonic by implication, which is explicated by comparison with various kinds ofbehavior that deviate from and perhaps challenge it. The evidence cited is usually either oratorical or theoretical in nature; both of which present problems for an analysis of Roman masculinity. 14 These studies are agreed that masculinities they have identified were elite, public, involved social performance, competition, the constant scrutiny and judgement of others, and issues of sexuality.I5 Sexuality has received particular attention, which is wholly warranted. In ancient Roman culture, many of the lines and tensions between hegemonic and subordinate masculinities revolved around issues of sexuality, and this corresponds to what research on contemporary cultures have found, where a central element of hegemonic masculinity is a reputation for sexual prowess. 16

A. Cornwall, N. Lindisfarne, "Dislocating Masculinity; Gender, Power and Anthropology," in Dislocating Masculinity: Comparative Ethnographies, eds. A. Cornwall, N. Lindisfarne (London, New York, 1994) pp. II-47, cf. 1-4; Connell, pp. 76-86. Some masculinities may be more or less equipollent, but choice is usually limited, sometimes drastically, because masculinities invariably reflect power relationships. 14 C. Edwards, The Politics of Immorality in Ancient Rome (Cambridge, 1993) pp. 63-97; M. Gleason, Making Men, Sophists and Self-Presentation in Ancient Rome (Princeton, 1995) esp. pp. 56-81. To its credit, C. A. William's Roman Homosexuality: Ideologies ofMasculinity in Classical Antiquity (Oxford, 1999) employed various kinds of evidence. See also A. Corbeill, "Dining Deviants in Roman Political Invective," in Roman Sexualities, eds. J. P. Hallett, M. B. Skiner (Princeton, 1997) pp. 99-123; "Political Movement; Walking and Ideology in Republican Rome," in The Roman Gaze, Vision, Power, and the Body, ed. D. Fredick, (Baltimore, London, 2002) pp. 182-215; reprinted in Nature Embodied, Gesture in Ancient Rome (Princeton, 2004), pp. 107-39. 15 All these characteristics correspond with conclusions of studies of masculinity in contemporary cultures, some of which were used as models. Particularly influential has been M. Herzfeld, The Poetics ofManhood (Princeton, 1985) with its emphasis on performance, esp. pp. 10-II; cf. D. Wray, Catullus and the Poetics ofRoman Manhood (Cambridge, 2001) pp. 59-63. 16 Sexual prowess - Gilmore, pp. 12; 14, 16, 137-41. Gilmore's study is valuable for the evidence cited. For a critique of his method and conclusions, however, see Cornwall and Lindisfarne, pp. 27-8, and P. Loizos, "A Broken Mirror; Masculine Sexuality in Greek Ethnography," in Dislocating Masculinity, pp. 66-81; and Connell, pp. 32-3. I)

r66

THE BOUNDARIES OF MANLINESS

The high social value placed on virtus, together with the fact that women, children, and slaves were excluded from it, shows that it represented a "hegemonic masculinity." But what is odd about virtus is that there is no apparent connection between it and male sexuality, even where one might be expected. In the poems of Catullus, for example, where the relationship of sexuality and masculinity is a central issue, virtus occurs only six times and never refers to male sexuality, but always to the martial courage of a hero. 17 When Horace states how his own virtus will cause grief for a faithless woman,

o dolitura mea multum virtute N eaera! nam si quid in Flacco viri est, non feret adsiduas potiori te dare noctes et quaeret iratus parem,

o Neaera, you will be much grieved by my virtus! If there is anything of a man in Flaccus, he will not allow you to give uninterrupted nights to one more favored, but angry he will seek a fitting mate. Bpod.

15. II

the word stands for the moral courage he must exercise to end the relationship, and not for his sexuality.18 Not to possess virtus did not imply that one was "not a man" in the sense that wearing a loose tunic or scratching one's head with one finger might. That virtus does not have a sexual denotation is all the more striking for the fact that vir and other words related to it regularly designate male sexual activities. Vir is often used to mean husband, and virilitas often denotes the sexual and procreative aspects of masculinity. Occasionally virilitas carries a non-sexual meaning, such as when it describes how Roman virility would be adversely affected by permanent theaters in the city. But ordinarily the word has a sexual meaning, referring to male sexual characteristics, sexual maturity, and commonly to testicles or

17

18

Five of the six occurrences are found in poem 64; see Eisenhut, VR, pp. 43-4. For masculinity in Catullus, see M. B. Skinner, "Ego Mulier: The Construction of Male Sexuality in Catullus," Helios 20 (1983) pp. 107-30 = Roman Sexualities, pp. 129-50. So Eisenhut, VR, pp. 98-9, who associates virtus here with constantia.

ROMAN MANLINESS

the penis. Virilitas, however, is a rarer word with far less ideological importance than virtus. 19 4. FATHERHOOD, FAMILY, AND WEALTH - VIRTUS AND PRIVATE LIFE The other central element to hegemonic masculinities found in many cultures is the ability to beget, provide for, and protect a family.20 For the ancient Romans too, family, children, and patrimony were paramount concerns. But again, the hegemonic masculinity represented by virtus had no associations with these concerns. As we have seen, there is no such connection in the Scipionic elogia, and no reason, either in the text of his laudatio or in the usages of virtus, for supposing that L. Caecilius Metel1us' fathering of numerous children was regarded as an aspect of virtus. 21 Not only did virtus lack a sexual or procreative denotation, but throughout republican Latin it is rarely found in a domestic or private context at all. Even in Roman comedy, where the dramatic context is almost entirely private, in over eighty occurrences virtus is found in what can be considered a private context only twenty-two times. Of these, the great majority deal with the theme of youthful pleasure presented in various stock dramatic situations, which were derived from Greek New Comedy: virtue versus pleasure (Plaut. Most. 33, 139); fathers and sons (Naev. corn. 92-3 Ribb. = Tarent. 12 Marmorale = 90-1 ROL; Plaut. Baeeh. 1084a, Trin. 336-7, Ter. Heaut. 207); friendship (Plaut. Trin. 643, 648, 650, Ter. Adel. 442, Heaut. 56); and companionship (Plaut. Mil. 619, 650, 739, True. 741).22 Outside of comedy, in the literature of the republican period virtus is found again in a private context only in the works of Cicero, but 19

20

21 22

For virilitas meaning virility, see Val. Max. 2.4.2; Tac. Ann. 6.31.14; Mart. Bp. 9.5.5; B.Alex. 70.6.2; Gell. NA 9.4.15, with]. N. Adam, The Latin Sexual Vocabulary (London, 1982) pp. 69-70. In Greek the word for manliness and bravery, av8pEla, is to be distinguished from the regular anatomical term appTjv (apcrTjv) - "the male sex" -, but could be used to denote penis, as by Artemidorus ofEphesus (1.45). Children and family - Gilmore, p. 15-16, 31, 41-8, 63, 84-6, 102-4, II2, 124, 132; Hertzfeld, pp. 54-5,270-1. See earlier Chapter Ill. For the text ORF 4 6.2 = Plin. NH 139-40. See earlier Chapter Ill. At Plaut. Rud. 321, and Ter. Adel. 176, virtus is used ironically of pimps; cf. Plaut. Poen. 1328, and see previously, pp. 132-5. At Plaut. Bacch. 673, Pseud. 724, and Ter. Adel. 256, virtus denotes various types of ability, see earlier.

r68

THE BOUNDARIES OF MANLINESS

here too the usage is neither general nor unambiguous. In his letters, Cicero sometimes mentions a family member's virtus in what seems a domestic context, but on examination the word turns out to have a quasi-public reference. We have seen that when he praises the virtus of his wife and daughter the reference often refers to the courage the women displayed in the face of political enemies while Cicero was absent. As in the so-called Laudatio Turiae, a woman displays virtus in the absence of the male head of the family. Cicero refers to his own virtus in a letter written from exile in 58 to his wife Terentia. Pudet

enim me uxori [mae] optimae, suavissimis liberis virtutem et diligentiam non praestitisse. - "I am ashamed that I did not excel in virtus and care for the best of wives and the sweetest of children." (Fam. 14.3 [SE 9] 2. Although diligentia - "attentiveness" - may be construed as a domestic virtue of a father in regard to his family, in this instance virtus refers to the political courage Cicero should have displayed in his dealings with Caesar and Pompey, as is clear from the previous sentence: Meum fuit c1Jicium ... vel diligentia et copiis resistere vel cadere fortiter - "It was my duty ... to resist with care and resources, or to fall bravely." Similar is Cicero's praise of the virtus of his brother Quintus in a letter of 57 to Atticus: Quintum fratrem insigni pietate, virtute, fide, praeditum sic amo ut debeo. - "My brother Quintus is a paragon of affection, virtus, and loyalty, I love him as I ought" (Att. 4.1. [SE 73] 8). Pietas and fides are conventional to fraternal praise, but the reference of virtus is quasi-public in nature. For although private matters are mentioned in the previous sentence, Cicero states that he will not discuss them in his correspondence - praeterea sunt quaedam domestica quae litteris non committo. Quintus' virtus almost certainly refers to his bravery in the face of political and physical attacks by Clodius. 23 Interestingly, it is only when Cicero discusses the relationship of fathers and sons that a truly private sense of virtus is apparent. Here the usages of virtus fall into conventional patterns, and, significantly, parallels to the father-son trope familiar from comedy are frequent. In the same letter in which Cicero praises the virtus of his wife, he also comments on the effect of his own exile on his son, and employs

23

Cf. Att. 3.8 (SB 53).3. The reference of quaedam domestica is probably to Terentia, see Shackle ton Bailey, Cicer05 Letters to Atticus, vol. n, p. 169.

ROMAN MANLINESS

the conventional virtus - fortuna pairing when he writes that young Cicero needs only mediocri virtute opus est et mediacri fortuna, ut cetera consequatur- "a little virtus and a little luck, and other things will follow" (Fam. 14.1 [SB 8] 5). But the relationship of a father to his son's virtus is described by Cicero in De 1ficiis, a work he dedicated to his son in the following way: Optima autem hereditas a patribus traditur liberis omnique patrimonio praestantior gloria virtutis rerumque gestarum. - "The best inheritance handed down from father to son, more important than any inherited property, is the glory derived from virtus and noteworthy accomplishments." (Off. 1.121).24 Something of this attitude can be seen in Cicero's use of virtus when congratulating his friend Ser. Sulpicius on the ability and outstanding dedication that the latter's son had displayed. Here virtus denotes a moral and probably private quality: magnamque cum ex ingenio eius singularique studio tum ex virtute et probitate voluptatem capio - "I take great pleasure not only in his ability and outstanding dedication, but also in his virtus and moral uprightness" (Fam. 13.27 [SB 293] 4). A closer parallel between Cicero's use of virtus in praising sons to their fathers and the father-son tropes found in Roman comedy can be seen in a letter to P. Sittius, a wealthy equestrian from Nuceria, which Cicero ends with praise that explicitly connects the virtue of the son to that of the father. De tuo autem filio vereor ne, si nihil ad te scripserim, debitum eius virtuti videar testimonium non dedisse, sin autem omnia quae sentio perscripserim, ne refricem meis litteris desiderium ac dolorem tuum. sed tamen prudentissime facies si illius pietatem, virtutem, industriam, ubicumque eris, tuam esse, tecum esse duces ... quam ob rem et illius eximia virtus summusque in te amor magnae tibi consolationi debet esse ... Ego et memoria nostrae veteris amicitiae et virtute atque observantia fili tui monitus nullo loco deero neque ad consolandam neque levandam fortunam tuam. Concerning your son, I fear that if I should write nothing to you, I would seem not to have given the tribute to his virtus which it deserves, but if I should write out in full everything I think:, that I would rekindle with my letters your desire and your sorrow. Nevertheless, you would act most prudently, if you would consider that respect, virtus and industry of his,

24

For the Romanness of the sentiment, see Dyck, Commentary, pp. 294-5.

THE BOUNDARIES OF MANLINESS

wherever you will be, to be your own and to be with you ... Because of this, both his outstanding virtus and his enormous love for you ought to be a great consolation to you, ... I have been reminded both by the memory of our old friendship, and by the virtus and respectful attention of your son, that in no circumstance will I fail either to console or to support your fortune. Fam. 5.17 (SB 23) 4-5

The relationship of Cicero's use of private virtus to the tropes of Roman comedy is explicitly made in an oration. To defend the reckless youth of his client, Cicero in Pro Caelio makes repeated reference to the problematic relationship of youth to virtue. But these sentiments are introduced by a comparison of two types of fathers, one severe, the other tolerant, which Cicero illustrates with lines from the comic playwrights Caecilius and Terence. 25 Thereupon follow occurrences of virtus in phrases that recall the tropes of Roman comedy. Multa enim nobis blandimenta natura ipsa genuit quibus sopita virtus coniveret interdum; multas vias adulescentiae lubricas ostendit ... For nature itself has produced many allurements because of which virtus, having been sleepy, relaxes for a time; she has put before youth many slippery roads. Cael. 41 · .. cum adulescentiae cupiditates defervissent, eximiae virtutes firmata iam aetate exstiterunt. · .. after the passions of youth have cooled off, outstanding virtutes have stood out when mature age has been established. Cael. 43 and later, at the end of the speech, · .. in adulescentia vero tamquam in herbis significant quae virtutis maturitas et quantae fruges industriae sint futurae · .. in youth just as in plants, they show signs of what maturity of virtus, and how great the fruits of industry there will be. Cael·76

25

Cael. 37-8. See K. A. Geffcken, Comedy in the Pro Caelio (Leiden, 1973) esp. pp. 22-3, and 44-7.

17 1

ROMAN MANLINESS

... aut hune nunc primum floreseentem firmata iam stirpe virtutis ... . . . or this one, now in the first flower, the root of virtus having already been established ... Cael. 79; ef. Cie. Clu. 39; 2 Verr. 3.3.

The rare use of virtus in a private or domestic context, therefore, seems to have been influenced by the narrowly ethical sense of the word that is found in Roman comedy, which was derived from uses of 6:pETT]. 26 Virtus, then, was a distinctly public value in republican Rome. In the private world of Roman comedy uses of virtus in a private context are surprisingly rare and tend to occur in a limited number of stock dramatic situations. In later, non-comedic literature, virtus is found in a purely private sense almost exclusively as a filial characteristic. Only once does Cicero write of his own virtus in relation to his fatherly duties, and there the reference is to the consequences of his lack of courage in public life. The essentially public character of virtus has been often noted, but it is usually explained in political terms, as a reflection of the Roman Republic and the values of the aristocrats who controlled it.27 While there is certainly truth in this, it is only part of the story. A fundamental element in the creation of any system of communal values is the family, and if ancient Roman culture was distinctive in that the concept that embodied its ideal of manliness was largely excluded from the domestic sphere, an explanation is needed. In the domestic sphere, control over sexuality, procreation, spouse, children, and property are functions of patriarchy, that is the authority of the male head of a household. Patriarchy per se, has not received much attention in discussions of ancient Roman masculinity. But no one would deny that in ancient Rome patriarchy was a hegemonic masculinity, although its nature is much discussed. Patriarchy, however, was not related to virtus, and virtus itself represented a hegemonic masculinity. Recent studies of other cultures have identified tensions between the hegemonic masculinity of patriarchy and subordinate kinds of masculinity fashioned by men who were excluded from the former by economic

26

27

On the effects of neologisms in drama, see earlier Chapter Ill. E.g., Holkeskarnp, Entstehung, p. 228 ff.

THE BOUNDARIES OF MANLINESS

or social factors. 28 In ancient Rome, however, patriarchy, although unusually strong and enduring, was not the only hegemonic masculinity. It was precisely because of the peculiarly strong and enduring nature of Roman patriarchal power that an alternative form of manhood was not only fashioned, but institutionalized. The institution was the res publica. 5. MAN AND BOY - PATRIA POTESTAS AND VIRTUS

According to ancient legal and historical sources, the central institution of the Roman family was "paternal power" - patria potestas. This resided in the paterfamilias, generally the oldest living male in the agnatic line (the male line of succession), and was exercised over all members of the familia - wife, sons and unmarried daughters, the children of sons, great-grandchildren through the male line. In strict law, only the paterfamilias could own property. All others in the familia, no matter what their age, could neither sell, receive, or inherit; anything they might acquire would belong to the paterfamilias. The consent of the paterfamilias was needed for those under his power to marry or divorce, and he could force them to divorce. In addition, the paterfamilias had the ability to sell sons, daughters and agnatic grandchildren into slavery, and to surrender sons into bondage, as well as the right oflife and death (vitae necisque potestas) over all these. Persons in potestate remained so for as long as the paterfamilias lived. When he died his sons would form their own families of which each would be paterfamilas. 29 Patria potestas was recognized by the Romans themselves, and by others, as being both virtually unique among peoples, and distinctively Roman. 30

28

29

30

See A. Shepard, Meanings of Manhood in Early Modern England (Oxford, 2003) esp. pp·3-II . The powers of the paterfamilias are outlined in standard works on Roman law; see, M. Kaser, Das romische Privatrecht I (Munich, I955) pp. 290-9; J. E. Gardner, Women in Roman Law and Society (London, I986) Chapter 2. For a detailed treatment see E. Sachers "patria potestas," RE XXII. I (I953) cols. I046-I75. For the power of the pateifi:zmilias over his children's divorce, see Treggiari, Marriage, pp. 44I-6, 459-61. For women requiring consent of fathers to divorce, see McDonnell, AJAH 8 (I983) pp. 54-80. Gaius, Instit. 1. 55, quoted at the beginning of the chapter. See also Instit. 1.I89; Dion. Hal. 2.26.I-3 and Sext. Emp. Pyr. 3.2II emphasizing the superiority of patria potestas over Greek family structure.

173

ROMAN MANLINESS

The extensive nature of paternal power in Roman law has, usually been explained as a reflection of, or a development from, an extended or joint Roman family, within which lived, under the same roof, several generations comprising the father, his wife, his sons and unmarried daughters, and the wives and children of his sons. At what period such a family structure was prevalent enough to have exerted a formative influence on Roman legal and social concepts is problematic, but it need not be pushed back into the fog of regal or archaic Rome. Extended families of this type existed among the senatorial elite of the late Republic, which suggests that it was relatively common not very much earlier. 31 How might the extended patriarchal family have affected the Roman concept of manliness? Given the extensive and remarkable powers that the pateifamilias exercised over sons, it is not surprising that it was, and is, a commonplace to compare the status of a Roman son to that of a slave. 32 Although having a certain formal validity, the comparison is essentially misleading, for in all periods of Roman history the gulfbetween freedom and slavery was enormous and fundamental. Even within the confines ofpatria potestas, a Roman son had far more capabilities than a slave; a son could marry and have legitimate heirs. Moreover, in both attitude and conduct Romans maintained sharp distinctions between sons and slaves. 33 Although rarely stressed, a more apt comparison, and one that sheds more light on the nature of a son's status within the familia, is that between a Roman son - filiuifamilias - and daughter - filiqfamilias. For within the Roman familia the legal positions of a son and daughter were essentially the same. Like a son, a daughter under patria potestas See Plut. Cato Mai. 24.1-7; Aem. 5.6,28.9; Val. Max. 4.4.8; Plut. Cras. 1.I; Cic. Plane. 29; Cael. I8; cf. Treggiari, Roman Marriage, p. I4. Recent scholarship has tended to deny the social significance of patria potestas, and the very existence of an extended patriarchal Roman family, see esp. R. P. Saller, Patriarchy, property and death in the Roman family (Cambridge, I994) esp. Chapters I and 2. But the argument, certainly in regard to the republican senatorial elite, is flawed. 32 E.g., Sex. Emp. Pyr. 3.2II, cf. Dion. Hal. 2.27.1; Kaser, pp. 248, 296-7; Nicholas, Introduction, p. 66; A. Watson, Roman Private Low around 200 BC (Edinburgh, I97I) p. SI; L. Amirante, "Sulla schiavitu nella Roma antica," Lobeo 28 (I98I) pp. 26-33. 33 For the difference in legal status and capacity, see Gaius, Instit. 9; J. F. Gardner, Being a Roman Citizen (London, New York, I993) pp. 12-I4. Saller, Patriarchy, pp. I33-53, has demonstrated the great differences in the ways in which sons and slaves were disciplined. 3'

174

THE BOUNDARIES OF MANLINESS

could own no property of her own and could be sold into slavery and even killed. 34 But although they shared similar legal positions under the control of the pateifamilias, the statuses of Roman sons and daughters were nevertheless significantly different. Similarities and differences between sons and daughters within the familia, as well as the peculiar Roman attitude toward manliness, can be clearly seen in the Roman system of nomenclature. Aristocratic men usually had three names. In the name Publius Cornelius Scipio, for example, the praenomen or personal name is Publius, the nomen or nomen gentilidum, Cornelius, signaling the gens or clan to which the man belonged, and the cognomen, Scipio, designated the particular branch or subdivision of that gens. First-born sons were usually named after their fathers by taking his praenomen, and other sons were distinguished from one another by a different praenomen. A first son might be called Publius Cornelius Scipio, a second son Lucius Cornelius Scipio, a third Gnaius Cornelius Scipio. 35 Roman daughters were named very differently. In the republican period at least, they had no distinguishing name, but only the feminine form of their family's nomen. All daughters of P. Cornelius Scipio were named Cornelia. Within the family, daughters seem to have been distinguished from one another by calling them simply maior and minor - older and younger -, or if there were more than two, prima, secunda, and tertia - daughter number one, two, and three. Although Roman daughters were certainly valued by their relatives as individuals, nonetheless within the familia a Roman woman lacked an individual identity in a sense that her brothers, with their personal names, did not. The procedure of naming boys and girls differed little, however. Girls were named eight days after birth, whereas boys received the tria nomina on the ninth day after birth. 36 This is how children were named in the best documented periods, but it does not seem to have always been the case. An anonymous work on Roman names quotes the legal expert

34

35

36

But daughters, it seems, could be put into bondage (noxal surrender); see Watson, Roman Private Law, p. 29, n. 5; Rome of the XII Tables (Princeton, 1975) pp. 44-5. See B. Salway, "What's in a Name? A Survey of Roman Onomastic Practice," JRS 84 (1994) pp. 124-45, esp. pp. 125-6. Festus, p. 107 L, and Plut. Quaest. Rom. I02(288C), and Macr. Sat. 1.16.36. T. Wiedemann, Adults and Children in the Roman Empire (London, 1989) p. II3.

175

ROMAN MANLINESS

Q. Mucius Scaevola (COS. 95) as stating that "personal names were once not conferred on boys before they put on the toga of manhood, and not on girls before they married. "37 It is difficult to determine at what period this practice had been in effect. Scaevola refers to it vaguely as before his time. The reference to girls taking a praenomen is problematic, because it is debated whether Roman women ever used the praenomen. If not an error, Scaevola's statement about women's praenomina might place the practice earlier than c. 350. 38 But there is no reason to doubt Scaevola's statement in reference to boys. The giving of a name to a young man entering into manhood is a phenomenon common to many societies, found in the legends of the Irish heroes Cuchulainn and Finn,39 and practiced among the Blackfoot Indians, where a boy was given a new name when he went on his first war party; as well as in in China. 40 In Rome, evidence for the practice continuing into the imperial period was found by MommsenY The significance of this antique practice of not giving boys the praenomen before they took the toga of manhood becomes clear when we consider that within the Roman family the praenomen was the only way to distinguish one brother from another. Moreover, in a threegenerational extended family, in which all the sons of the pateifamilas 37

38

39

40

4'

Auctor de Nominibus, 3; see Valerii Maximi foctorum et dictorum memorabilium, ed. G. Kempf (Stuttgart, I888) p. 589. Salway, jRS 84 (I994) p. I25, suggested the date. For the controversy, see 1. Kajanto, "Women's Nomenclature," in L'onomastique latine, ed., N. Duval (Paris, I977) pp. I4850, and "Women's Praenornina Reconsidered," Arctos 7 (I972) pp. I3-30, against G. Bonfante, "Il nome della donna nella Roma arcaica," RAL 35 (I980) pp. 3-IO. Cf. L.-R. Menager, "Systemes onomastiques, structures familiales et classes sociales dans le monde greco-romaine," SDHI46 (I980) pp. I46-235. Cuchulainn was originally named Setantae, see Daniel F. Melia, "Parallel Versions of The Boyhood Deeds of Cuchulainn," in Oral Literature, Seven Essays, ed., J. J. Duggan (New York, I975) pp. 25-40; Finn originally Deirnne,Joseph F. Nagy, The Wisdom of the Outlaw, The Boyhood Deeds of Finn in Gaelic Narrative Tradition (Berkeley, I9 85) pp. I22-5. I owe this information to Robin Stacey. See C. Wissler, "Blackfoot Social Life," Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, vol. 7 (I912) pp. I7 and 30. In China, up until the end of the empire in I9II, a baby name was given at birth, sometimes with or without a formal name (women often never got past the baby name). If a boy did not have a formal ming name at birth, he got one when he became of school age, whether or not he went to school. I owe this information to Steven Harrell. T. Mommsen, "Die rornischen Eigennamen," R. Forschungen (Berlin, I864) pp. I-68, esp. pp. 30-I; see also O. Salornies, Die romischen Vornamen (Ekenas, I987) pp. 62-5.

THE BOUNDARIES OF MANLINESS

had their own children living under the same roof, the praenomen was the only way to distinguish not only brothers, but all male cousins as well, because all would have had the same nomen and cognomen. This means that at whatever period the practice Scaevola described was in effect, a Roman son was in precisely the same situation as his sisters. Having no praenomen until he assumed the toga of manhood, he would be nominally indistinguishable from any of his brothers or male cousins who were not yet adults. He was, in terms of nomenclature, not a true individual, but like his sisters, only a fraction of the patriarchal Roman family.4 2 In this context, the taking of the toga of manhood assumed enormous importance. The ancient Romans used various schemes to reckon the male life-span, but the oldest and most basic was the threefold division. Childhood - pueritia - lasted until the age of about seventeen; adulthood - iuventa - from then to the age of forty-six; old age - senecta - was over forty-six years. 43 The division was based on military need, because seventeen was the age at which young men normally began military service. The transition from childhood to manhood was a formal rite of passage marked by a religious ceremony and, as was so often in ancient Rome, was signaled by a change in dress .. On becoming men, Roman youths doffed the accouterments of childhood, the toga praetexta and the bulla, and put on the garment of manhood, the toga virilis. During the republican period, this rite of passage occurred when the pateifamilias deemed the youth mature enough to fight in the army.44 Significantly, taking the toga virilis comprised two ceremonies. One was familial and presided over by the pateifamilias. This involved the actual donning of the adult Roman citizen's

For the phrase, see M. 1. Finley, "The Silent Women of Rome," in Aspects of Antiquity (New York, I 96 8) p. I3I. Distinguishing brothers, and within an extended family, cousins without praenomina was probably done with nicknames, on which see, H. Petersen, "The Numeral Praenomina of the Romans," TAPA 93 (1962) pp. 347-54; Salomies, pp. II-20; and 1. Kajanto, The Latin Cognomina (Helsinki, I965) pp. 20, 63-9; Salway, JRS 84 (I994) p. I27· 43 GelL NA IO.28; cf. Wiedemann, p. II3. For various other systems of Roman lifespan division and an analysis of terrns and usage, see E. Eyben, "Die Einteilung des menschlichen Lebens in Riimischen Altertums," RhM u6 (1973) pp. I50--90. 44 Isidore, Etym. 9.3.26. The old military nature of the toga virilis ceremony is made plain by Tacitus, Cer. I3. I. 42

177

ROMAN MANLINESS

toga. The other ceremony was public and took place at a festival called the Liberalia, which was observed on March 17. This consisted of a procession through the city into the forum - ductio in forum - that ended at the Capitol where the young man was enrolled among the new citizens. 45 In ancient Rome, therefore, the rite of passage from boyhood to manhood was also a passage from the private sphere of the familia, to the public sphere of the res publica. In the old days, so long as a Roman male was a child, he remained without a personal name, and in this sense was in the same position as a woman. Even after the antique practice had ended, and boys were given the praenomen nine days after birth, sons and daughters, as long as they were children, continued to dress alike, wearing the bordered toga - toga praetexta. A son would adopt the toga virilis, when he became a man and a citizen, but in terms of powers and capacities within the private context of the familia, a Roman son continued in a woman-like status until the death of the pateifamilias, and within the familia, according to law, a woman was a perpetual child. 46 In the familia the only true man was the pateifamilias. The common subservience to the pateifamilias that all members, both male and female, of the familia experienced, helps explain the relative equality that Roman women traditionally enjoyed in private life. One aspect of this has been commented on by Andrew WallaceHadrill. Unlike the Greek house, where space was segregated according to gender, and there were specific women's and men's rooms, the Roman domus was not gender specific, and men and women shared the same spaces. 47 This practice indicates not so much the elevated status 45

46

47

On these ceremonies, see P. Ginestet, Les organisations de lajeunesse dans l'Occident Romain (Brussels, 1991) pp. 57-8; H. H. Scullard, Festivals and Ceremonies of the Roman Republic (London, 1981) pp. 91-2; and]. Marquardt, Das Privatleben der Romer 2 (Leipzig, 1886) pp. 124-5. For the place of this rite of passage in the religious and social life of early Rome, see M. Torelli, Lavinio e Roma (Rome, 1984) pp. 23-74. For the perceived similarity between Roman women and boys; see ORPI 8.172 (= Gel!. 1.23); cf. Macr. Sat. 1.6.19-25, Polyb. 3.20.3, and see]. P. Hallett, Fathers and Daughters in Roman Society: U0men in the Elite Family (Princeton, 1984) pp. 8-lO; Watson, The Law of Persons, pp. 146--'7. On children's dress, see H. Gabelmann, "Romische Kinder in Toga Praetexta," JDAI lOO (1985) pp. 497-551, esp. pp. 517-23. See A. Wallace-Hadrill, "Engendering the Roman House," in I Claudia: U0men in Ancient Rome, eds. D. E. E. Kleiner, S. B. Matheson (New Haven, 1996) pp. lO4-15; and Houses and Society in Pompeii and Herculaneum (Princeton, 1994) esp. pp. 8-lO.

THE BOUNDARIES OF MANLINESS

of Roman women, as the fact that within the familia women shared the same respected, but subordinate status with all males other than the pateifamilias. The situation among Greeks was different. Being independent of their fathers, young adult Greek males shared a common status with them, that women did not. But Roman males in potestate had more in common with their sisters. 48 The movement of a Roman son from the private role of the filiusfamilias, to the public sphere of the citizen also explains much about the peculiar dynamic of the Roman father-son relationship. Richard Saller has shown that in the late Republic and high Empire, mutual affection and respect between parents and children, fathers and sons included, was the norm.49 There is evidence that in an earlier period, and within the traditional family, the role of Roman fathers was to be very close to their sons, at least until they reached adulthood. Plutarch records that in earlier times Roman fathers never dined away from home without their sons so long as the sons were still children, and in his biography of the elder Cato, Plutarch relates how that upholder of Roman tradition forsook all business, except his public duties, to be at the washing and dressing of his infant son. Cato also personally supervised his son's education. 50 Moreover, the sources for the well-attested old taboo against fathers and sons bathing together state that it applied only to grown sons - pubes - which implies that before reaching adulthood Roman sons did bath with their fathers. 51 In the domestic sphere, male status was a matter of power, resting on control over family members. A Roman son under the power of the pateifamilias, whatever his age, had the powerless status of a woman or a child within the private sphere. But unlike his sisters, a Roman

48

49

50

51

Others factors contributing to the status ofRoman woman are husbands being frequently away on military campaigns, see S. Treggiari, "Women in Roman Society," in I Claudia, pp. n6-25, esp. p. 120, and perhaps Etruscan influences. Saller, Patriarchy, pp. I02-153. For daughters, see Hallet, Fathers and Daughters, with S. Treggiari, CR 37 (1986) pp. 102-5. Fathers dining with young sons - Plut. Quaes. Rom. 33 (272C); Cato and his son - Plut. Cat. Mai. 20-4-9. Cf. Cic. Off. 1.121; 3.121, and Att. 15.13 [SB 416] 6, and see Astin, Cato, pp. 332-42. Prohibition against bathing with adult sons - Val. Max. 2.1.7; Cic. De or. 2.224; cf. Cic. Clu. 141; Plut. Quaes. Rom. 40(274B); cf. M. Bettirn, Antropologia e Cultura Romana (Rome, 1986) pp. 22-4.

179

ROMAN MANLINESS

son could escape the private world of the familia by assuming a public identity as a Roman citizen. In a social sense this was the purpose of the res publica, to counter balance the extraordinary nature of patria potestas by making a son in potestate into a vir. In the public sphere of the res publica, a son was not only free to act, but was in fact regarded as the equal of his pateifamiliasY This is the reason why in pre-classical Latin virtus was used predominantly in a public rather than a private or domestic context. Moreover, during the republican period, most Roman men served the res publica as soldiers; indeed, the ability to fight for the state was the criterion on which a Roman boy was judged ready to become a man. It was because such a high proportion of Roman citizens served in the army, and because Rome was at war so frequently, that the primary meaning of virtus in republican Latin is martial courage. 53 Restricted by the peculiar institution of patria potestas, young Roman men could demonstrate their manliness only outside the familia as citizens in the service of the Republic, principally in war. Without reference to the transition from familia to res publica, the Roman concept of manliness is impossible to understand; conversely, knowledge of the relationship between patria potestas and virtus provides another prospective on that notoriously difficult to define institution, the Roman Republic. 52

53

Pomp. Dig. 1.6.9. Cf. Jolowicz, Nicholas, p. II9, and Gardner, Citizen, p. 82. A woman in a manus marriage did escape the potestas of her father, but only to fall under that of her husband or of his father. The annual average of Roman citizens under arms from 200 to 168 was over 47,000, over 30,000 from 168 to 91. For the period from 218-201, the number was over twice as high, see Brunt, fM, p. 416-34; cf. K. Hopkins, Conquerors and Slaves (Cambridge, 1978) p. 32-5. For the fourth and third centuries, see S. Oakley, "The Conquest of Italy," pp. 28--9. Poor Roman citizens were largely excluded from military service and the decision-making process of the Republic; C. Nicolet, The World of the Citizen in Republican Rome (Berkeley, 1990) pp. 93-5, 57-60, 153-69. But their numbers should not be overestimated, see M. Rosenstein, "Marriage and Manpower in the Hannibalic War: Assidui, Proletarii and Livy 24.18.7-8," Historia 51 (2002) 163-91, contra Brunt, fM, pp. 64-6, 417-20.

180

VI

MANLINESS IN REPUBLICAN ROME

And amongst the passions, courage, ... inclineth men to private revenges, and sometimes to endeavor the unsettling of the public peace. Thomas Hobbes

I.

TEACHING MANLINESS

Throughout the republican period, Roman citizens served the res publica primarily as soldiers. Although upper-class Romans might also hold magistracies, these could only be obtained after years of military service. Unsurprisingly, then, a principal feature of Roman male education during most of the Republic was preparing the young to fight and to display their manliness in battle. This seems to have begun at home. Among the things that Cato is said to have taught his son were the skills of throwing a javelin, fighting in armor, and riding, and it is reasonable to suppose that Roman sons had by tradition received some type of military training from their fathers before taking the toga virilis. I Because this kind of training, and the displays of virtus it was preparation for, required physical strength, Roman manliness, although not associated with sexuality, was certainly dependent on a male anatomical characteristic. The indoctrination of young Romans into the ways of war began early. Growing up in the ancestral house the son of a Roman noble

I

Even after paternal instruction had probably ceased, we find Cicero praising his son's accomplishment in the very skills that Cato had taught his son (Off. 2.45). On Cato, see Plut. Cato Mai. 20.6, cf. Harris, WIRR, pp. 14-15, 19. ISI

ROMAN MANLINESS

would be surrounded by reminders of martial glory. In addition to the various figurative commemoratives of ancestral martial achievements, the aristocratic domus was decorated with the spoils of victory, among them the weapons and armor of enemies slain by ancestors.2 Moreover, if, as Plutarch writes, in early times Roman fathers never dined away from home without their young sons, then sons would have frequently heard about the martial deeds celebrated in the carmina convivalia. 3 Although we are badly informed about the behavior of non-elite Romans, there is little reason to think that in regard to preparation for war the actions and attitudes of non-elite fathers toward their sons differed greatly from those of their upper-class fellow Romans. In the homes of non-elite citizens who served in the legions, weapons must have been commonplace. Because the types of armor and weapons that a Roman citizen used, as well as the unit of the army he fought in, were determined by his declared wealth, in the early and middle Republic citizens almost certainly maintained their own armor and weapons, which they presented to the censors for inspection. 4 Until the late Republic, Roman soldiers were themselves responsible for providing, or at least paying for, their own weapons and armor,5 and because these were expensive, the soldier would surely have kept his military equipment with him at home after a campaign. This is supported by archaeological evidence that shows that by far the majority of Roman republican helmets are found in civilian rather than military

2

3

4

5

Plut. C. Gracch. 15.1; Liv. 10.7.9; 38.43.10; Prop. 4.11.29-32; Plin. NH 35.6-7; Suet. Nero. 38.2; cf. T. P. Wiseman, "Conspicui postes tectaque digna deo," in L'Urbs, espace urbain et histoire (Rome, 1987) pp. 394-413, esp. pp. 394-6; Flower, Ancestral Masks, p. 41, and on ancestral imagines, Flower, passim. For the martial nature of the carmina convivalia and for references, see earlier Chapter I Section 5. For the social function of martial banquet songs, see 0. Murray, "War and the Symposium," in W J. Slater, ed., Dining in a Classical Context (Ann Arbor, 1991) pp. 83-103. For father and sons dining out together, see Chapter V previously. Mommsen, R. Staatsr., III.2 3 , pp. 396-7. The degree to which Romans soldiers purchased their own armor, or were equipped by the state at their own expense is a vexed question. The critical text is Polyb. 6.39. IS, see A. Watson, "The Pay of the Roman Army," Historia 7 (1958) pp. lI3-20, esp. p. lI8; J. Harmand, L'armee et le soldat Rome de 107 50 av. notre ere (paris, 1967) pp. 1956; Nicolet, World of the Citizen, p. lIS. For the relationship of Roman census rating, weapons and unit, see Nicolet, pp. 52-3.

a

a

MANLINESS IN REPUBLICAN ROME

contexts. 6 In such homes, where weapons and armor were present, peasant fathers, like their elite counterparts, would undoubtedly have instructed their sons in the use of weapons with which they were practiced. In addition, hunting, which was closely associated with military training, was an activity that Romans of all classes seem to have engaged in to one degree or another.7 Like elite Romans, ordinary citizens who had won military honor decorated their homes with the spoils of defeated enemies. 8 We also can assume that in non-elite houses the winter hearth would be the center for war stories told by fathers, older brothers, and uncles returned from campaigns. Such tales would have served the same educational function as the banquet songs did among the Roman elite, and would, no doubt, have related the same events commemorated at the banquets. 9 In a sense, the purpose of public institutions such as the aristocratic funeral, the funeral speech, and public speeches in general, with their ubiquitous references to examples of aristocratic martial prowess, together with public statues and manubial buildings, was to impose an elite version of the past, with the aristocratic ancestors as the principal actors, on the rest of the citizens. Mter taking the toga virilis and becoming a man and a citizen, a young Roman was an iuventus for one year, during which time he underwent an apprenticeship - tirocinium - receiving military training and serving as a reserve soldier. For the elite, public military training was conducted on the Campus Martius. IQ Because evidence for

6

7

8 9

10

See J. Paddock, "Some Changes in the Manufacture and Supply of Roman Bronze Helmets in the Late Republic and Early Empire," in The Production and Distribution if Roman Military Equipment, ed. M. C. Bishop (Oxford, 1985) pp. 142-59, esp. pp. 143-4. In the early Empire, soldiers turned in weapons on discharge (Tac. Hist. 2.67); a function of a professional army and possibly of the Lex Iulia de vi publica; see Paddock, p. 145. C. M. C. Green, "Did the Romans Hunt?" CLAnt 15 (1996) pp. 222-260, esp. p. 226 on the communal hunt as military training among the non-elite. Polyb. 6.39. IQ; Liv. 23.23.6; cf. Flower, p. 41. On peasant story-telling as a vehicle for transmitting social values from generation to generation, see J. Fentress, C. Wickham, Social Memory (Oxford, 1992) pp. 92-II4, esp. pp. 9 2 -4. Campus Martius - Nicolet, World of the Citizen, pp. 95-6. For the imperial period, see M. Kleijwegt, Ancient Youth (Amsterdam, I99I) pp. IQ9-II5, P. Ginestet, Les organisations de la Jeunesse dans l'Occident Romain (Brussels, 1991) pp. 57-8, and M. Jaczynowska, Les Associations de la Jeunesse romaine sous le Haut-Empire (Warsaw, 1978) esp. pp. 48-66.

ROMAN MANLINESS

the tirocinium comes entirely from the late Republic, the young ages at which some aristocrats are known to have participated in battle in the middle Republic suggest that in earlier times the public training received after donning the toga virilis was perhaps less formal. I I In any case, long before becoming soldiers young men had received indoctrination in manliness and in the social importance of martial achievement from Roman public institutions. In addition to participating in public religious celebrations where Romans who had won decorations for valor were prominent, the young would observe numbers of impressive public ceremonies devoted in large measure to extolling martial virtus. At the public funeral of a Roman aristocrat, persons wearing the masks and the garments and symbols of office of deceased ancestors paraded through the streets of Rome accompanied by musicians, dancers, and professional mourners. The procession ended in the Roman Forum, where a relative would pronounce the funeral speech - laudatio funebris - in praise of the deceased and of his ancestors. According to Polybius, our main source, the entire purpose and the principal effect of the funeral procession was to encourage young men to strive to achieve a public reputation for valor. 12 Young Romans would also observe the extraordinary pomp of the triumph, where a victorious general, adorned with royal and perhaps divine attributes, and accompanied by his troops, captives, and booty, rode in a fourhorse chariot through the city of Rome up to the temple of Jupiter on the Capitol, where he sacrificed. 13 More regular were the military honors awarded by censors at a public ceremony every five years, and the annual display on July 17 of the martial status of the Roman aristocracy in the cavalry parade through the city, the transvectio equitum. In addition to such institutions that were specifically designed to praise martial virtus, there were also public games and performances in which martial values were heavily stressed. Once a Roman had become a citizen and a soldier, the incentives for performing feats of virtus increased. For infantrymen and elite Romans II

12

1J

See Marquardt, pp. 133-4. Polyb. 6.53-54.3, Flower, Ancestor Masks, pp. 91-158 and earlier Chapter 1. On the triumph see L. Bonfante Warren, "Roman Triumph and Etruscan Kings: The Changing Face of the Triumph," JRS 60 (1970) pp. 49-66; H. S. Versnel, Triumphus (Leiden, 1970).

MANLINESS IN REPUBLICAN ROME

alike, martial bravery was encouraged both by material benefits, in the form of booty and confiscated enemy land, derived from military victory, and by an elaborate system of battle decorations. Along with the decorations went public praise in camp and life-long honor at home. The salience of such honors is illustrated by the fact that at religious processions in Rome the only decorations allowed to be worn by any Roman were those won for bravery in battle. I4 But among elite Romans there was additional incentive for displaying virtus. For a reputation for martial prowess and military competence was the best way to be elected to high office, because the citizens who elected a Roman magistrate were the same men who fought under him in Rome's legions. IS But elite displays of virtus assumed a form different from those of ordinary citizens. The distinction between the ways in which elite and non-elite Romans demonstrated their manliness was critical to maintenance of political power under the Republic.

2.

ARISTOCRATS AND HORSES

The place of the cavalry in early Rome is a difficult and controversial topic. That it was militarily and politically important at the beginning of the Republic is attested by the story of its role in the Roman victory at Lake Regillus, by the tradition of the epiphany of Castor and Pollux soon after that battle, and by the adoption of the two gods as patron deities of the Roman equites. Most decisive is the dedication of the temple to Castor and Pollux in the Roman Forum. Literary evidence places its dedication in 483, and recent excavations have dated its

I4

IS

See above all Harris, VVIRR, pp. 9-68, 75-104, 264. For confiscated land in Italy, see Brunt, IM, pp. 29-33; S. Oakley, "The Roman Conquest ofItaly," in War and Society in the Roman World, eds. J. Rich, G. Shipley London, New York, 1993) pp. 18-22; on booty see 1. Shatzman, "The Roman General's Authority over Booty," Historia 21 (1972) pp. 177-205; 1. Shatzman, Senatorial Wealth and Roman Politics (Brussels, 1975) pp. 63-70; 75-92, 93-104; and Nicolet, TMJrld of the Citizen, pp. 117-21. For decorations and honors see Polyb. 6. 39.1-II, with Walbank, Commentary, I ad loc.; and Maxfield, esp. pp. 55-100. Nicolet, World of the Citizen, pp. 108-9, 123-5 and Harris, Vf/IRR, pp. 17-41. Although military defeats for a Roman commander need not result in political setbacks, it overstates the case to say they were without serious political consequences, contra Rosenstein, Imperatores Vieti, pp. 9-53.

r85

ROMAN MANLINESS

foundations to the early- to mid-fifth century.I6 The military function of early Roman cavalry is problematic, however. Wolfgang Helbig's theory was that the early Roman cavalry comprised mounted hoplites, who employed horses as a conveyance to the battlefield, but who dismounted and fought on foot. The theory has been criticized primarily on the basis of the literary tradition. I7 But the sources for so early a period are bound to be muddled, and the strength of Helbig's argument lies elsewhere. The archaeological evidence he adduced for mounted hoplites remains impressive and has been strengthened by additional new evidence. I8 Whatever the precise nature of the early Roman cavalry, Arnaldo Momigliano was surely right to insist that cavalry was of secondary importance in the late-sixth and fifthcenturies, and that the Roman aristocrats who overthrew the monarchy were land-owning barons whose power rested on bands of client infantrymen. 19 We know from a variety of sources that true cavalry - that is, mounted warriors who fought from horseback - was introduced at Rome no earlier than the second half of the fourth century. The anonymous work known as the Ineditum vaticanum states that in the early period, Roman military strength depended almost entirely on infantry, and that cavalry became important only with the Samnite Wars, which began in 343. 20 The reliability of this text is problematic,

16

17

18

19 20

Battle - Liv. 2.19.3-20.13,2.21.3-4; Dion. Hal. 6.2.3-22.3; for other sources, see MRR, I, pp. IO-II, for the year 499. For the epiphany, see Dion. Hal. 6.13.1-3, Ov. Fast. 1. 706-8, Plut. Cor. 3. For the temples' dedication, see Liv. 2.42.5, and 1. Nielsen, J. Zahl, Acta Arch. 56 (1985) pp. 1-29, p. esp. 14, for its fifth-century foundations. W Helbig, "Contribution al'histoire de l'equitatus romain," Compt. Rend. del'Acad. des Insc. et Belles Lettres II (1904) pp. 202-12, "Die Equites als berittene Hopliten,"Abhand. d. bayer Akademie Wissenschaft 23 (1905) pp. 267-17. Accepted with some modifications by H. Hill, The Roman Middle Class (Oxford, 1952) pp. 2-3; De Martino, pp 35 (1980) pp. 143-60; criticized by E. Meyer, Kleine Schriften II (Halle, 1924) pp. 274-8, and J. Wiesner, Klio 18 (1943) pp. 45-IOO. For the tactical advantages of mounted hoplites, see P A. L. Greenhalgh, Early Greek Waifare (Cambridge, 1973) pp. 76-<), 99-IOO. See M. Torelli, "Tre studi di storia etrusco DArch 8 (1974-5) pp. 15-17; cf. C. Saulnier, L'armee et la guerre dam le monde etrusco-romaine (VIlle-IVe s) (Paris, 1980) pp. 109 ff., II7 ff. A. Mornigliano, "Procum Patricum," JRS 56 (1966) pp. 18-24, esp. pp. 21-3. H. von Arnim, Hermes 27 (1892) pp. II8-30; FGrH 839,F 1.3 (11, 19-22), with an English translation in Cornell, Beginnings of Rome, p. 170. For the historicity of the First Samnite War (343-1) see M. T. Frederiksen, Campania (Hertford, 1984) p. 182 ff.

r86

MANLINESS IN REPUBLICAN ROME

but its dating of the introduction of cavalry is supported by other evidence. In was in the time of the Samnite Wars that the Roman state seems to have introduced a tax to support the state cavalry - the stipendium triplex. 21 In addition, the importance of the Roman cavalry received new ceremonial recognition in 304. Each year on July 15, on the same day as the festival day of Castor and Pollux/2 the 1,800 Romans who had the distinction of having been awarded a horse paid for by the state - equites equo publico -, paraded on their mounts before the Roman people. This equestrian parade - transvectio equitum - began outside the city on the Via Appia, proceeded through the Porta Capena to the temple of Castor in the Forum, then on to the Capitol. An eyewitness from a later period commented on the magnificence of the spectacle, in which each rider wore full military attire, as if coming from battle as well as an olive crown and whatever decorations he had been rewarded for valor.23 That it was watched by great numbers of Romans is suggested by the fact that the route it followed along the Via Appia was paved (first in 296, and again in 189), and later covered with a colonnade. It is likely that the intention of the latter, at least in part, was to shade spectators from the summer sun. 24 Sources differ as to when and by whom the transvectio was instituted, some associating its origin with the Roman victory at Lake Regillus and the dedication of the temple of Castor in the earlyfifth century, others crediting it to the actions of Q. Fabius Maximus Rullianus' censorship in 304. Although the procession almost certainly originated in the archaic period, some important innovation associated with Fabius Rullianus clearly occurred in the late-fourth

21

22

2J

24

See C. Nicolet, L'ordre equestre a l'epoque republicaine (313-43 av. J-C.) I (Paris, 1966) pp. 35-42, for the date. Liv. 2.42.5. All survivingfasti however record January 27 for Castor and Pollux. But St. Weinstock, "Rbrnische Reiterparade," Studi e materiali di storia della religioni 13 (1937) pp. 10-24 has convincingly argued for January 27 as the date of the rededication of the temple by Tiberius in A.D. 6. Dion. Hal. 6.13.4-5. Olive crowns were worn at the transvectio as they were at an ovatio, Plin. NH 15.19. For the precise route and the problems involved, see the discussion in Chapter VII. Ziolkowski, p. 298. For the paving of the Via Appia from the Temple of Mars to the Porta Capena, see Liv. 10.23.12; and 38.28.3; on the colonnade Qv. Fast. 6.191-2, with Richardson, Dictionary, s.v. Via Tecta (2).

ROMAN MANLINESS

century.2 5 Stefan Weinstock provided the most plausible explanation by cogently arguing that as censor in 304, Fabius not only reformed the state cavalry by changing the qualification for holding the public horse from birth and wealth to physical fitness, but also transformed the transvectio equitum from what had originally been a religious ceremony connected with the patrician cult of Castor and Pollux, into a military review. Closely linked to the yearly festival of Castor and Pollux, the transvectio was almost certainly an annual event. When the censors were in office (originally every four years, after 209 every five), it was probably at the transvectio that they publicly inspected the qualificationsof Roman equites. In 304, Fabius Rullianus provided state supervision over those who served in the cavalry and also incorporated it in a regular and grand public ceremony that encouraged esprit de corps among, and bestowed great prestige on, the reconstituted cavalry of the emerging patrician-plebeian nobility. A clearer indication of the new importance of the Roman cavalry is difficult to imagine. 26 A change to mounted combat also fits well with the historical circumstances of the mid-fourth century. It was at this time that Rome began to develop closer contacts with Campania, which was famous for its cavalry.2 7 The Romans ftrst made an alliance with the Campanians in 343, but contacts between the Roman and Campanian aristocracies must have gone back a decade or so earlier. Campanian aristocrats then provided cavalry support for Rome in the great war with the 25

26

27

Fabius Rullianus is credited with instituting the transvectio at Liv. 9.46.15; Val. Max. 2.2.9; and De vir. ill. 32.3. But Dionysius ofHalicarnassus 6.13.4-5, and Plutarch, Pomp. 13, state that the parade was founded early in connection with the vowing of the temple of Castor, and there are good reasons for believing them; see Momigliano, JRS 56 (1966) p. 22 and R. M. Ogilvie, "Some Cults of Early Rome," Hommages aMarcel Renard, ii Collection Latomus (Brussels, 1969) pp. 566-72. See Weinstock, Studi e materiali 13 (1937) pp. 10-24; cf. R. E. A. Palmer, The Archaic Community of the Romans (Cambridge, 1970) p. 260. Cf. A. Alfoldi, Der frilhriimische Reiteradel und seine Ehrenabzeichen (1952) p. III fr. and E. Meyer, Riimisches Staat und Staatsgedanke' (Zurich, Stuttgart, 1961) pp. 81-4. Contra T. P. Wiseman, Historia 19 (1970) 67-71; cf. Wiseman "The God of the Lupercal," JRS 85 (1995) pp. 1-22, esp. pp. 10-13. For state review of the cavalry in Athens, by the Boule, see Ath. Pol. 49.1, with Spence, p. 58. See Liv. 23.46.1I; Lucilius, XV 5 C = 506-8M = 51I-I3 ROL = 51I-I3 K; M. W Frederiksen, "Carnpanian Cavalry: A Question of Origins," DArch 2 (1968) pp. 3-31; Frederiksen, Campania, p. 146; cf. A. Hyland, Equus: The Horse in the Roman World (London, 1990) pp. 40, 74, and 17·

r88

MANLINESS IN REPUBLICAN ROME

Latins (340-338). As a reward the Campanian cavalry received some form of the Roman citizenship, and commemorated the grant with an honorary dedication at the Temple of Castor in the Roman Forum. 28 Because Campania produced good horses, this alliance would have provided the Romans with superior mounts. The heightened importance of cavalry coincides with an important tactical change in Rome that also seems to have taken place in the mid-fourth century. The evidence is from the accounts of aristocratic duels, monomachies, preserved in Livy and in the annalistic fragments. Although the importance of monomachies as such for elite Romans has been examined, their value as evidence for the manner in which Romans fought has been largely overlooked, primarily because their reliability has been doubted. 29 It has long been recognized that the descriptions of motivations and maneuvers in fifth- and fourthcerttury Roman battles found in Livy, Dionysius ofHalicarnassus, and other ancient authors have little historical value. Nor is this surprising in light of numerous studies that have shown that oral traditions do not accurately preserve these kinds of details from accounts of battles. 30 But the manner in which combat was conducted - on foot, horseback, or chariot - especially in the case of single combat, is another matter. These kinds of details are likely to be remembered in oral tradition. 3I In addition, at the time in which these duels occurred, new

28

29

)0

)1

On the alliance, see Fredericksen, Campania, pp. 182-93. For the dedication, Liv. 8. II. I314. When the Campaniam connection began is disputed, see F. Miinzer, Romische Adelsparteien und Adelsfomilien (Stuttgart, 1920) p. 58, against K. J. Beloch, Romische Geschichte (Leipzig, 1926) pp. 338-9; L. R. Taylor, The Voting Districts of the Roman Republic (Rome, 1960) p. 180, n. 33; and Frederiksen, Campania, p. 231. Some kind of connection before 340 seems certain however. The importance - Harris, WIRR, p. 39, n. I; S. P. Oakley, "Single Combat in the Roman Republic," CQ 35 (1985) pp. 392-410; see also A. Feldherr, Spectacle and Society in Livy's History (Berkeley, 1998) pp. 92-1II. The fifth and fourth century battles described in Livy, and in Dionysius ofHalicarnassus, are literary set pieces closely based on Greek models; see Ogilvie, Commentary, pp. 285-7, 577, cf. J. Keegan, The Face of Battle (New York, 1976) pp. 36-46, 62---'70. For the inability of "oral tradition" preserving details of Roman political history, see J. von Ungern-Sternberg, "Uberlegungen zur friihen romischen Uberlieferung im Lichte der Oral-Tradition-Forschung," in Vergangenheit in mundlicher Oberlieferung (Coll. Rauricum, I) eds., J. von Ungern-Sternberg & H. J. Reinau (Stuttgart, 1988) pp. 237-65. A classic example is the use of chariots in Homeric warfare on which see J. K. Anderson, "Greek Chariot-borne and Mounted Infantry;" AJA 79 (1975) pp. 175-87, contra

ROMAN MANLINESS

political motivations for preserving such stories were emerging among the Romans. The mid-fourth to the early-third centuries was the period when a new governing class, the patrician-plebeian nobility, was being formed in Rome, and with it came increased competition for high office and command. 32 This in turn led to an increased emphasis on self-aggrandizement, and to the creation of those institutions that Roman aristocrats of the Republic would use to advance their political fortunes and those of their families. The practice of generals building public temples paid for by the spoils of victory - manubiae -, the aristocratic funeral eulogy - laudatio Junebris -, and aristocratic self-representation in art and architecture, all had their origins in the late-fourth century. 33 Because aristocratic self-display and selfaggrandizement were based primarily on military reputation, there was every incentive not only to preserve the stories of heroic single combat, but also to transform what were originally family traditions into the official state traditions, which was in fact the purpose of an institution such as the public funeral eulogy. 34 Stories of single combat will have begun as family traditions that could have been preserved by any number of contemporary Roman practices. Descriptions of battles seem to have been part of aristocratic funeral eulogies delivered in the Roman Forum35 and of the banquet songs - carmina convivalia - mentioned by the elder Cato, which celebrated "the praiseworthy martial deeds of famous men." Most scholars believe that that the carmina convivalia were a living Greenhalgh. This is not to say that the descriptions of such duels in the literary sources were not worked up; see A. H. McDonald,JRS 47 (1957) pp. 158-9. 32 The patterns of competition varied between 366 and 342, and 321 and 295; see Holkeskamp, Entstehung, pp. 62-140; Cornell, Beginnings, pp. 342-4, 370-7. 33 On manubial temples, see Ziolkowski, esp. pp. 238-44. For the origin of the laudatio fonebris, see Kierdorf, pp. 95-105. For late-fourth century aristocratic self-display, see Holscher, MDAIR 85 (1978) 352-4, and Holkeskamp, Entstehung, pp. 204-40. 34- On the transformation of gentile traditions into official traditions in the late-fourth century, note the transfer of the cult of Hercules from the Potitii and Pinarii to the state in 312 ( Liv. 1. 7.12; 9.29.9 ff.). In classical Athens public speeches preserved aristocratic family traditions as an official tradition, but they came to be subordinated to the community interest, see R. Thomas, Oral Tradition and Written Records in Classical Athens (Cambridge, 1989) p. 117 ff. 130-44, 196-9. 35 Jer. Ep. 77.2; Kierdorf, pp. 19-20; Wheeler, Historia 37 (1988) p. 187. 190

MANLINESS IN REPUBLICAN ROME

institution in the late-fourth century, but there are reasons for thinking that the practice continued into a later time. In attempting to define the period during which the banquet songs were practiced, scholars have placed great weight on Cicero's statement that the songs were sung "many generations before Cato's time" (multis saeculis ante suam aetatem, Brut. 75). But ancient writers in general, and Cicero in particular, were sometimes imprecise with chronological designations, applying vague phrases such as "many years ago" to periods of time spanning only a decade. Because Cato died in 149, Cicero's phrase could easily mean that the banquet songs continued to be sung into the early-third century.36 Even after the songs went out of fashion, the stories of aristocratic bravery will have continued to be told at banquets in other forms. Such stories could also have been passed down in less formal circumstances. In his essay on old age, Cicero has the elder Cato say that he was told stories dating from the Pyrrhic War by his elders, who as boys had themselves heard them from old men. 37 Another vehicle for the oral transmission of the stories was the choral dirges (neniae), which according to Varro continued to be sung in front of the house of the deceased "down to the time of the Punic War." In addition, we know from a fragment of Plautus that wailing women praiftcae - keened about the bravery of deceased warriors. 38 Familial traditions about martial exploits could also have been disseminated by professional story-tellers, who worked in various public venues

At ND 2.61 Cicero referred to an eleven year span as multis ante annis , and at Ac. 2.1, a period of ten years is described as permultos annos; see Pease, p. 695. See N. Zorzetti, "The Carmina Convivalia," in ed. O. Murray, Sympotica (Oxford, 1990) pp. 289-307 and F. Coarelli, "Vino e Ideologia nel!a Roma Arcaica," in In Vino Veritas eds. 0. Murray, M. Tecusan (Oxford, 1995) pp. 204-7. See A. Momigliano,JRS 47 (1957) 104-14 = Secondo contributo alla storia degli classici (Rome, I960) pp. 83-87, for late-fourth century practice. For ancient references, see earlier Chapter I n. 105. 37 Cic. Sen. 43. Plutarch, Cato Mai. 25.3, described Cato as the host of banquets at which conversation included much praise of brave and honorable men; see T. P. Wiseman,JRS 79 (I9 89) pp. I29-37 Historiography and Imagination (Exeter, 1994) p. 32. 38 Neniae - Varro, De vita populo Romani, frag. no Riposati. Varro (Ling. 7.70) also quoted the Plautine line on a praefica singing about the bravery - virtus - of the deceased. On dirges see Wiseman,JRS 79 (I989) pp. I29-37, esp. p. I33 fr. = Historiography and Imagination (Exeter, I994) pp. 23-36. For the distinction between neniae and what the praeficae sung, see Kiersdorf, pp. 96-I05. 36

ROMAN MANLINESS

including /udi, and by dramatic performances. 39 All these forms of transmission would have made the oral traditions containing details about monomachies available to the earliest Roman historians, who wrote around 200. 40 The stories of duels found in Livy and other authors, therefore, contain valuable evidence for the fighting habits of elite Romans of the fourth century. What these stories tell is of great interest. Of the twenty-five-odd recorded historical monomachies of the republican period, fifteen give the manner of combat. Of these eleven are equestrian, but, significantly, only one equestrian duel occurred before the mid-fourth centuryY A closer examination of the stories is revealing. In either 367 or 36r, the elder T. Manlius Torquatus defeated his Gallic opponent on foot; a generation later, in 340, his homonymous son fought a duel with a Latin from horseback. The last recorded monomachy fought on foot was that of M. Valerius Corvus in 349Y Mter this date, all recorded aristocratic Roman monomachists were cavalrymen, and indeed, in general combat upper-class Romans are almost always presented as fighting from horseback. 43 The chronological correspondence to the other indications for the introduction of cavalry is too close to be coincidental. The change from Roman aristocrats fighting duels on foot to fighting from horseback can be dated to the generation between the 360s and the 340s.

39

40 41

42

43

For story-tellers see T. P. Wiseman, jRS 79 (1989) pp. 129-37, esp. p. 133 fr. = Historiography and Imagination (Exeter, 1994) pp. 23-36, and on dramatic performances, Historiography, pp. 1-22. See Cic. Sen. 43 with Cornell, Beginnings, p. 356. Oakley, CQ 35 (1985) pp. 392-410. The exception is A. Cornelius Cossus, who in either 437 or 426 won the spolia opima as a mounted warrior; see M. McDonnell, "Aristocratic Competition, Horses, and the Spolia Opima Once Again," in A Tall Order: Religion, Law, Society, and Imperialism in the Ancient T%rld (Essay in honor of William V Harris), eds. J.-J. Aubert, Z.Varhelyi (Leiden, 2005) pp. 145-68. For Manlius Torquatus senior, Claudius Quadrigarius, frag. 10 HRR; Liv. 7.9.6-10.4; Dion. Hal. 14.12; Zon. 7.24; for Torquatus Junior - Liv. 8.7.1-22; App. Sam. 3; Dio, 7.35.2; Zon. 7.26; for Valerius Corvus, Liv. 7.26.1-10; Dion. Hal. 15.1.1-4; Zon. 7.25; Quadrigarius, frag. 12 HRR). See also Oakley, Commentary, n, pp. II325, and on Torquatus, pp. 125-48; Torquatus Jr., pp. 436-51; and on Valerius, pp. 237-48. Caesar ordering his officers to dismount in order the share the danger and encourage the legions is an exception that proves the rule; BC 1.25.1. Note that Caesar always represents himself fighting on foot, see later Chapter IX. 192

MANLINESS IN REPUBLICAN ROME

This corresponds with economic and social changes that affected the Roman aristocracy earlier in the fourth century. It has been suggested that substantial new wealth in the form of slaves and metal, gained from victories in the late-fifth century, brought about a qualitative change in the lives of Roman aristocratic life of the fourth century. This new wealth would have allowed Roman aristocrats, plebeian and patrician both, to pay less personal attention to their estates and more to public life, in particular to competition over military glory. But increased wealth also helps explain the shift to mounted combat. For it would have paid for good horses, and just as importantly, would have given fourth-century aristocrats the leisure required to master the new and more prestigious form of combat. 44 For mounted combat on stirrupless horses was a difficult skill that required, among other things, a great deal of practice. Just how difficult can be seen from the fate of the consul of 299, T. Manlius, who died in cavalry exercises after being thrown from his horse while attempting a turn at full gallop. 45 In order to acquire the considerable skill needed to engage in mounted combat, upper-class Romans must have spent a good amount of time practicing horsemanship. The ability to ride and fight in formation would have required more practice still. Martial equestrian training must have become an important element of elite education, and the institutionalizing of such training can be seen in various equestrian activities that were likely established or reorganized in the late-fourth and early-third centuries. Just as the transvectio equitum had been transformed from a religious ceremony into a military review in 304, so it is likely that this period also saw the lusus Troiae changed from an archaic religious ritual that centered around dancing hoplites, to a ceremony comprising equestrian drills and mock mounted combat. 46 It is also

44

45

46

Harris, "Roman Warfare," in Staat und Staatlichkeit in der friihen riimishcen Repuhlik, ed. W Eder (Stuttgart, 1990) pp. 503-4. On the leisure time required for equestrian training, see Spence, p. 78. Liv. IO.n.I. For other equestrian accidents see, e.g., Suet. Aug. 43.2; Liv. Per. 97.3, with McDonnell, "Aristocratic Competition," pp. 161-2. On equestrian training, see Hyland, pp. 1I3-2I, and K. R. Dixon, P. Southern, The Roman Cavalry (London, 1992) pp. 1I3, 1I8, and 132-4. On Roman saddles, BG, IV. 4, with Hyland, pp. 190-1, and McDonnell, "Aristocratic Competition," p. 162, n. 49. The 1115115 Troiae are regularly referred to as an ancient institution, Dio 43.23.6, Suet. Aug. 43.2. Plut. Cat. Min. 3 refers to a Suilan revival, St. Weinstock, Divus Julius (Oxford,

193

ROMAN MANLINESS

likely that it was in this period that the desultores, acrobatic riders who performed in the circus, began to be drawn from noble youths. 47 Before the mid-fourth century, wealthier Romans may have used horses as conveyance to and from the battlefield, commanders may have been mounted while supervising their troops, and on occasion a Roman may have engaged in mounted single combat. But it is only in the 340S that young Roman aristocrats began to regularly demonstrate virtus by equestrian single combat, and that change necessarily entailed a change in the ways in which upper-class Romans trained and lived. The new centrality of horsemanship in warfare, however, signaled not only a change in the way of life of elite Romans, but also a more general one in Roman society. For the expense of buying and maintaining horses, and the youthful training and continuing practice required to use horses in war, must have fostered a camaraderie among upper-class Romans, as well as emphasizing economic and social distinctions between the Roman citizenry and its ruling class. 48 This, in turn, would have been a significant factor in establishing and solidifYing the bonds among the emerging patrician-plebeian nobility, which by the end of the fourth century was a mounted aristocracy. The selfconscious equestrian status of this new Roman nobility is well demonstrated by late-fourth century Romano-Campanian silver coins, that display on the obverse the helmeted head of the war god Mars, and on the reverse a horse's head. 49 The elevated status and solidarity of horsemen received public reinforcement in the spectacle of young

I97I) p. 88. Servius, Ad Aen. 5.602, refers to the lusus as a "pyrrhic," and in Seneca's description at Troades 78 I the word salto is used. For the religious nature of the Troiae, see e.g., Plut. Cat. Min. 3, and Latte, RR, pp. II5-6. 47 See Liv. 44.9-4; Suet. Iul. 39.2; Aug. 43.2. See H. Bloch, CRAI (I989) pp. 5I-3, contra J.-P. Thuillier, "Les desultores de l'Italie antique," pp. 33-51, in the same volume. Note that Roman cavalry tactics often included jumping off and then remounting the horse; see McCall, pp. 69-'72. 4 8 See McCall, pp. 6 and 82-3. In Athens, cavalrymen were perceived as young, wealthy, aristocratic, and arrogant, see Spence, pp. 202-29; cf. Wiseman, jRS 85 (I995) pp. I22. For camaraderie, cf. N. Rosenstein, "Republican Rome," in War and Society in the Ancient and Medieval Worlds, eds. K. Raaflaub, N. Rosenstein (Cambridge, Mass. I999) pp. 204-5. 49 Crawford, RRC, I3, for the date, see M. H. Crawford, Coinage and Money under the Roman Republic (London, I985) p. 29. See also RRC I5 (Apollo head/galloping horse); cf. T. P. Wiseman, Remus, A Roman Myth (Cambridge, I995) pp. I56-7.

194

MANLINESS IN REPUBLICAN ROME

upper-class riders in the lusus Troiae, and as desultores. Most important, however, was the annual parade of cavalrymen riding in the transvectio equitum, whose significance for and to the Roman senatorial class cannot be overestimated. 50

3. INSTITUTIONAL CONSTRAINTS ON DISPLAYS OF MANLINESS

During the republican period the Romans were both bellicose and militarily successful. Going to war virtually every year, the armies of the Republic conquered first their Latin neighbors, then all Italy, and finally, in a period of a little over a century, most of the Mediterranean world. But the Roman Republic faced a dilemma that is endemic in all militaristic societies: how to encourage the aggressive qualities that make good soldiers and at the same time control them so that the military would not disrupt the state. Aggressive characteristics essential to virtus were managed by a combination of discipline and rewards. We have seen the varied and elaborate ways in which martial excellence was encouraged in both the public and private spheres. The aggressive qualities of virtus that were potentially dangerous to social order were controlled among ordinary soldiers primarily by harsh punishment. It was not only breaches of military discipline such as desertion and neglect of duty that were punished by execution conducted in public spaces either in the camp or in the city of Rome itself, but disobedience and sexual offenses alsoY Disciplining elite Romans, especially aristocrats, was another matter. Upper-class junior officers who were insubordinate or negligent may have been expelled from the theater of war, made to suffer public 50

For the social distinctions associated with cavalry, see Frederiksen, Campania, p. 146. For the social cohesion of the Athenian cavalry class, see Spence, pp. 180-230, 81, 77-8, and 185-6. On the great expense of horses in the Roman world, see Hyland, p. 31, cf. Spence, pp. 183. On upper-class Romans riding since youth, see Hyland, pp. 45 and Ill.

51

Polyb. 6.34.12; 6.37-8; with Walbank, Commentary, I, ad loc.; Nicolet, World of the Citizen, pp. 106-9. For public executions in the city, see Liv. Per. Oxy. 55. In general, see F. Hinard, "Spectacle des executions et espace urbain," in L'Urbs: espace urbain et histoire, CEFR 98 (Rome, 1987), pp. lIl-25, esp. pp. Il3-19. On decimation, see Polyb. 6.37-8, with Walbank, Commentary, I, ad loc. for further references.

I95

ROMAN MANLINESS

humiliations, on rare occasions even flogged and reduced to the ranks, but only under special circumstances were they executed. 52 To some degree, it must have been class solidarity that tempered the aggression of the members of the ruling senatorial order. But as the traditions of the Republic emphasized, an ambitious aristocrat with a reputation for martial prowess could threaten the state, and the annals of Rome recorded a number of military heroes who were executed for attempting to seize power. In the early Republic, Spurius Cassius, a man who had held the consulship three times and had triumphed twice, was executed for attempting to seize regal power. A century later, M. Manlius Capitolinus, an aristocrat who had displayed outstanding valor as a warrior - he is said to have been twice victorious in single combat before he was seventeen years old, to have had twenty-three wounds on his body, and to have received over 40 decorations for valor - was also executed for attempting to establish himself as king. 53 When the Republic eventually did fall, it was to military dynasts like Marius, Pompey, and Caesar who, while claiming to exemplifY Roman virtu5, wrested control of the armies and the state from the senate. But before its demise the Roman Republic functioned with great success for over three centuries. How was the aggressive martial nature of the Roman aristocracy controlled? The government of the Roman Republic was an aristocracy of birth and merit, in which political leadership resided in a group of noble families, whose members had to compete and demonstrate their worthiness in order to be elected by the Roman people to office and command. As the system worked, power was divided among noble families in order to prevent anyone of them from achieving preeminence that might threaten the ruling group. The Republic had been founded with the overthrow of a monarchy, and its institutions were

52

53

Contra Nicolet, World of the Citizen, p. I09. For expulsion from a province - Val. Max. 2.7.3; public humiliations - Val. Max. 2.7.9; Front. Strat. 4.1.1; flogging and reduction to ranks - VaL Max. 2.7.4, Front. Strat. 4.1.30-31, Zon. 8.14; cf.]. Suolahti, The Junior Officers of the Roman Army in the Republican Period (Helsinki, 1955) p. ID. In general, see the chapters on De disciplina militari at Val. Max. 2.7 and Front. Strat. 4.1, respectively. Sp. Cassius in 485 - Val. Max. 2.3 .lb; Dion. Hal. 8.77-9; Liv. 2.41.10-12 with Ogilvie, Commentary, pp. 337-9; M. Manlius in 384 - Plin. NH 7. I03-4; Liv. 6.11.2-20.12, with Oakley, Commentary, I, pp. 493-565; Plut. Cam. 36.5-7. Val. Max. 6.3.1.

MANLINESS IN REPUBLICAN ROME

designed to prevent the re-establishment of one-man rule. Under the Republic the civic and military authority, which had once been exercised by the king, was separated and parceled out to magistrates, who were elected annually in pairs, the principle of collegiality serving as a check on the abuse of power. There were also rules regulating when these offices could be held, which developed into a hierarchical system, the cursus honorum, enforced first by tradition, later by statute, requiring that magistracies be held in ascending order of power and importance. The critical power of military command (imperium) held by the highest magistrates - consuls and praetors, and in emergencies dictators - was limited to men of experience, whose capabilities and ambitions had been scrutinized. Moreover, during their year of office magistrates were guided by the advice and decrees of the senate, a body comprising ex-magistrates that by the late-fourth century had come to represent the collective will of the aristocracy, and to which magistrates returned as ordinary members after their year in office. 54 As secular power was divided and managed, so was religious power. Under the monarchy the relationship between the community and the divine seemed to have been controlled by the king and by priests of specific deities, the most important of which were the high priest of Jupiter, Flamen Dialis, and the high priest of Mars, Flamen Martialis. Under the Republic the preeminent religious powers once held by the king and high priests seems to have been transferred to boards or colleges of priests, that were not connected to the cults of particular deities, but that comprised members who were experts in, and managers of, the various methods of communication between the community and the gods. The three principal priestly colleges were the augurs, experts in divination, the decemviri sacris faciundis, who supervised the Sibylline Books and the few other oracular texts recognized at Rome,

54

The constraints on activities of aristocrats both in and out of war by the political institutions of the Roman Republic were given classic treatment by Mommsen. On regal elements - R. Staatsr. P pp. 212-15; H. 13 pp. 3-17; collegiality - IP pp. 27-61; cursus honorum - P pp. 468-577, esp. pp. 536-8; also A. E. Astin, The Lex Anna/is before Sulla, Collection Latomus 32 (Brussels, 1958), and later; on imperium - R. Staatsr. P pp. 8-22, II6-36; on the senate - P pp. 209-II; HI. IP passim; also P. Willems, Le Senat de la Repub/ique romaine, H (Louvain, 1883) pp. 121--'712, and M. Bonnefond-Coudry, Le Senat de la Repub/ique romaine (Rome, 1989) pp. 593-606.

197

ROMAN MANLINESS

and the pontiffs, who exercised a form of general supervision over the religious life of the Romans, and who might have been responsible for organizing, over a period of time, the various and diverse cults of Rome into a religious system that suited the requirements of the aristocratic Republic. Members of these priestly colleges, especially of the colleges of augurs and pontiffs, were drawn from the best senatorial families, and individual members of the colleges pursued full political and military careers like other Roman aristocrats. Aristocratic families were normally limited to one member in any particular college, and it was very unusual for a Roman to be a member of more than one college. In this way religious power was divided and shared. By means of these priestly colleges the relationship between the Roman community and the supernatural was also controlled by the collective will of the various noble families that constituted the ruling senatorial order. 55 Over time some of the constraints that Roman religion imposed on the conduct of commanders in the field waned. For example, the complex ritual procedures to ensure that the gods favored the Romans in war, and which was carried out by the college of priests called fetiales,5 6 became impractical as Rome's wars took its armies further afield. Sometime, probably in 281/0, the fetial priests were replaced by secular ambassadors and by a streamlined procedure that diminished the power of the people and senate, since the decision over whether or not the enemy had satisfied the Roman conditions was made on the spot by the ambassadors. 57

ss See J. A. North, "Religion in Republican Rome," CAH 2 7.2 (Cambridge, I989) pp. 573--624, esp. pp. 582-90. On change from regal to republican structure, see Latte, RR, pp. I95-2I2 and M. Beard, J. North, S. Price, Religions of Rome I (Cambridge, I998) pp. 54-'72. On augurs, Wissowa, RKR, pp. 450-6I; J. Linderski, "The Augural Law;" ANRW II.I6.3 (Berlin, New York, I986) pp. 2I46-3I2. For the decemviri sacris faciundis, Wissowa, pp. 46I-9; and for pontiffs, pp. 430-50. See, on the composition of the colleges, G. L. Szernler, The Priests of the Roman Republic (Brussels, I972). See also J. H. Vanggaard, The Flamen (Copenhagen, I988). 56 For the procedure, see Liv. 1. 24.4-9, 32.5-I3, with Ogilvie, Commentary, ad loc, cf. Dion. Hal. 2.72. On fetial priests, see A. Watson, International Law in Archaic Rome: lMlr and Religion (Baltimore, I993) pp. I-9, 20-30. 57 See Harris, WIRR, pp. I66-75; J. W Rich, Declaring War in the Roman Republic in the Period of Transmarine Expansion (Brussels, I976) pp. 56-rr8; Watson, International Law, pp. 54-6I . Another example is pullaria auguria - the ritual feeding of sacred chickens - ; on which see Cic. ND 2.9, Div. 2.77; Mornrnsen, R. Staatsr. P p. 87, n. 6; and Linderski,

MANLINESS IN REPUBLICAN ROME

But if Roman religion lost some of its control over the conduct of a Roman commander in war, it maintained restrictions over honors and benefits that might be gained by victory. The most famous Roman ceremony of military success is of course the triumph. For one day the victorious general, wearing regal or divine accouterments, was permitted to exercise his military authority within the sacred boundaries of the city - the pomerium. But triumphs were subject to rules. Only a magistrate with imperium, and fighting with his own auspices, could qualify for the honor. Other criteria might also be invoked. The victory had to be judged significant, and at some date, probably the early-second century, the figure of 5 ,000 enemy dead was required. It might also be required that the victorious army be present in Rome. Most important, the decision to grant a triumph was, under normal circumstances, made by the senate, and it is clearly the case that some deserving generals were denied the honor for political reasons. 58 So the political benefit that a triumph might confer on an individual Roman aristocrat was normally controlled by his senatorial peers. Although triumphs were by no means commonplace honors, neither were they extraordinary. Triumphs were rewards for successful generalship, and Rome had many successful generals. Far more impressive were displays ofpersonal valor, virtus, by Roman commanders. But the prestige gained from such displays was also controlled at Rome. Without question the ultimate heroic act is voluntary self-sacrifice in battle. The phenomenon of a group of warriors, or more dramatically, a single warrior, deliberately seeking a heroic death among the enemy in order to win divine assurance of victory is known in many cultures; in most the sacrifices are performed by young men. 59 The

58

59

ANRW, II.16.3, p. 2156. For the decline of augural power over magistrates, see Wissowa, RKR, p. 532. Senatorial approval was not a sine qua non, but the senate had considerable power; see J. S. Richardson, "The Triumph, the Praetor and the Senate," JRS 65 (1975) pp. 50-63, esp. pp. 58-62; R. Develin, "Tradition and the Development of Triumphal Regulations in Rome," Klio 60 (1978) pp. 429-38; T. Corey Brennan, "Triumphus in Monte Albano," in Transitions to Empire, Essays in Greco-Roman History, 36{)-146 B.c., in honorofE, Badian, eds. R. W Wallace, E. M. Harris (Norman and London, 1996) pp. 315-37; Mommsen, R.Staatsr. P pp. 126-36. H. S. Versnel, "Self-Sacrifice, Compensation, and the Anonymous Gods," in La Sacrifice dans l'antiquite (Geneva, 1981) p. 141. The practice existed among Italic peoples with

199

ROMAN MANLINESS

practice is, in fact, found in Rome in the legend of Horatius at the bridge, which, in its earliest form as told by Polybius, has the seriously wounded young hero perish in the Tiber, sacrificing himself in order to save Rome. It is only a later version, canonized by Livy, that has Horatius survive. 60 The story of Horatius' sacrifice is placed in the early years of the Republic. As the Republic developed the right to perform this type of self-sacrifice, called devotio, it came to be"restricted to magistrates with imperium. In a crisis, when a Roman defeat seemed imminent, a general could ensure victory with a devotio whereby he vowed to sacrifice himself and the enemy army to the gods of the underworld in exchange for a Roman victory. With a pontiff assisting, the general performed the ritual, then, with the army looking on, mounted his horse and charged into the enemy ranks, buying victory with his death. Significantly, aside from the normal hero's funeral on the battlefield, the dead general seemed to have received no special honors.61 More important, the general who had performed the devotio had to die. If by some chance a general who had devoted himself survived the battle, he was deemed imp ius, and was unable ever again to perform a religious sacrifice and thereby debarred from holding future public office (Liv. 8.10.13). So any political benefit the heroic devotio conferred was nullified. Dead heroes pose no threat. Devotio was naturally very rare; it seems to have been performed only twice. 62

60

61

62

whom the Romans fought, see Livy 9.40,22.9.10; Dion. Hal. 1.16. For devotio among the ancient Iberians, see Val. Max 2.6.II; Dio. 53.20. Polyb. 6.55.1-4; Liv. 2.lO; cf. Dion. Hal. 5.23.ff. where Hortatius lives but is seriously wounded; see Ogilvie, Commentary, pp. 258-9 and Walbank, Commentary, I, pp. 74 0 -1. For the procedure, see Liv. 8.9.4-12. The language of the formula is perhaps an antiquarian construction; see Skutsch, Annals, p. 355 and Feldherr, p. 87. For only magistrates with imperium, see Liv. 8.lO.II; Cic. ND 2.lO. A general could also devote a common soldier rather than himself; Liv. 8.lO. II-I2. On devotio see Wissowa, RE 5.1 (1903) pp. 277-80; H. S. Versnel, "Two Types of Devotio," Mnemosyne 229 (1976) pp. 365-4lO; and Feldherr, pp. 85-92. By P. Decius Mus at Veseris in 340, see MRR, I, p. 135; Miinzer, "Decius" 15," RE IV.2 (1901) cols. 2279-81 and by his homonymous son in 295, see MRR, I, p. 177; and "Decius 16," RE IV.2, cols. 2281-4. The devotio of 295 is historical; that of 340 has been doubted, see Mommsen, Romische Geschichte5 1.1 (Berlin, 1868) p. 359, note; K. J. Beloch, Romische Geschichte (Berlin, Leipzig, 1926) pp. 373-4; andE. Pais, Storia di Roma3 (Rome, 1928) pp. 198-201. A third devotio by a homonymous grandson (MRR, I, p. 192) 200

MANLINESS IN REPUBLICAN ROME

A less hazardous method of displaying personal valor is to slay an enemy in single combat. It was the custom in ancient Greece to hang the arms of the slain opponent on a frame and dedicate them to a deity.6 3 But at Rome the ceremonial dedication of such spoils was confined to arms taken from a slain enemy commander, the spolia opima. The highest form of spolia opima (there were three kinds in all, prima, secunda, and tertia) were given to Jupiter Feretrius, and could be dedicated only by a Roman leader, fighting under his own command, who had killed and despoiled an enemy leader. 64 These prima spolia opima were extremely rare, almost as rare as the necessarily fatal devotio. In all Roman history they had been dedicated only three times: first by Ramulus, the city's legendary founder; a second time in either 437, 428, or 426 by A. Cornelius Cossus; and for the last time in 222 by M. Claudius Marcellus. 65 But why was a military honor that carried truly exceptional prestige, not dedicated more frequently by the highly competitive and bellicose aristocracy of the Republic? The oddity of this seems to have crossed the mind of Livy, who, in commending on Ramulus' dedication, wrote "Through so many years and through so many wars, the spolia opima was gained only twice afterwards. "66 The answer to this question is clearly not, as had once been maintained, because single combat was itself rare among the Romans. Nor are recent, radical solutions any more appealing. 67 The answer can be found in the nature of the res publica, where access to high office and supreme command of armies was restricted

6)

64

65

66

67

is very dubious, see T. J. Cornell, CQ 38 (1987) pp. 514-16. But if the consul of 279 did survive a devotio, he cannot have been suffect consul in 265 (contra l'v1RR, I, p. 202, n. 2), because he would not have been permitted to perform a public sacrifice. See G. Charles-Picard, Les Trophees romains (Paris, 1957) pp. 16-100. Liv. 4.20.6; Prop. 4.10; Fest. 204 and 206 L, and see McDonnell, "Aristocratic Competition," pp. 146-8. For the veracity of the tradition of only three dedications, and the problems with Cornelius Cossus, see McDonnell, "Aristocratic Competition," p. 15I, n.22. Liv. I. 10.7. For the superiority of the spolia opima over the triumph as a mark of distinction and public adulation, see Liv. 4. 20. Oakley, CQ 35 (I985) p. 398, followed by Rich, Chiron 26 (I996) 123-4, suggested more than three dedications; H. 1. Flower, "The Tradition of the Spolia Opima: M. Claudius Marcellus and Augustus," ClAnt I9 (2000) pp. 34-64, that there was only one dedication, invented by Marcellus in 222! For criticisms, see McDonnell, "Aristocratic Competition," pp. I52-3. 201

ROMAN MANLINESS

by age. By the early-second century, nummum age requirements thirty-nine for the praetorship, forty-two for the consulship - had been established by law. 68 But qualifications for holding elective office are certainly older - the requirement of ten years of military service before standing for the lowest of elective offices that Polybius writes of (6.19.4) was not a second-century innovation. 69 Laws governing access to high office and commands are reported to have been enacted as early as the fourth century, and that some such rules were in effect early (enforced by law or custom, or a combination of the two) is suggested by the pattern of office-holding discernible for the third and fourth centuries. From what can be gathered, in the period after 287 few men held the consulship before the age of thirty-five, the praetorship before age thirty-two. 7o In the fourth century also, few seem to have held either the consulship or praetorship before they had reached thirty-two years of age,71 It was the age at which Romans normally held high office and independent command that made the spolia opima so rare. Elite Romans had been going into battle on horseback since the mid-fourth century. But because they had no stirrups, and until the late Republic, no proper saddles,7 2 maintaining their mount cannot have been easy. In combat the difficulty would have been extreme. 73 This is the reason why we hear so much about Roman horsemen taking serious,

68

69 70

7I

The lex Villia Annalis, which may also have established a compulsory two-year interval between high offices, was passed in 180; see Astin, Lex Annalis, passim. See Astin, Lex Annalis, p. 45; Harris, WIRR, p. II. See R. Develin, Patterns in Office Holding, 366-49 B.C. (Brussels, 1979) pp. 63-80. The few exceptions, listed by McDonnell, "Aristocratic Competition," p. 154 n. 34, are attributable to the exigencies of military crises. The fourth century regulations were contained in two sets of laws, the Licinio-Sextian laws of 367, see MRR, I, pp. "3-4, and the Lex Genucia of 342, Liv. 7.42.1-2; Zon. 7.25.9. See Develin, pp. 60-3. Possible exceptions are listed by McDonnell, "Aristocratic Competition," p. 155, n. 35. The fourth century, "long-careers" are treated by McDonnell, pp. 155-6. In the period from 366-287, there are no marked differences in the ages at which the first consulships and first praetorships were held, Develin, p.63.

72

See McCall, p. 47, Hyland, pp. '90-" and by McDonnell, "Aristocratic Competition," p. 162, n. 49.

73

This is one reason why mounting and dismounting from galloping horses was practiced by Roman youths in equestrian games; see McCall, pp. 69--'72. On the difficulty of maintaining one seat on stirrup-less mounts, see Hyland, Equus, pp. '30-1. 202

MANLINESS IN REPUBLICAN ROME

sometimes fatal, falls. In the two descriptions of cavalry duels found in Livy's narrative of the Hannabalic War found at 23.46.12-47 and 25.18.4-5, respectively, emphasis is placed on equestrian skill and on the difficulty of mounted combat. In the second of these, between the Roman T. Quinctius Crispinus and the Campanian Badius, the latter is unseated and falls from his horse. So also Scipio Aemilianus was knocked from his horse in an equestrian duel he fought in Spain in 151.74 Being thrown from one's horse was a common occurrence. This is also why almost all recorded mounted monomachists were young men who did not hold high office. 75 Equestrian combat on stirrup-less and saddle-less ho.rses required not only skill and practice, but strength and agility as well. In societies where such horsemanship was practiced in war and hunting, it was done by young men, and usually ceased in a man's mid to late 30s.76 Romans too seemed to have ceased to actively participate in equestrian combat at about this age. The emperor Augustus granted the right of "returning their (public) horse to Roman equites more than thirty-five years old who did not wish to keep them," and it is likely that here Augustus was following precedent, and that thirty-five was the age at which Romans could, by tradition, retire respectably from fighting as members of the Roman cavalry.77 If thirty-five was the age at which it was respectable

74

75

76

77

Aemilianus, miraculously, landed on his feet and managed to kill his opponent, see Polyb. 35.5; Liv. Per. 48; App. Iber. 48, with Walbank, Commentary, Ill, p. 648. It is very unlikely that the single combat described at Polyb. frag. 6 (Biittner-Wobst, IV, p. 514), refers to Aemilianus, because he had seen cavalry action at Pydna in I68 (Liv. 44.33.I-; Plut. Aem. 22.3; De vir. ill. 58.I; cf. Diod. 30.22; Cic. Rep. 1.23). I owe this point to Ernst Badian. Aemilianus was, at thirty-three or thirty-four years old (see Astin, Scipio Aemilianu5, pp. I2 and 340), somewhatlong in the tooth for single mounted combat. On Liv. 23-46.I2-47 and 25.I8-4-5, see McDonnell, "Aristocratic Competition," pp. I58-61. This is true for those about whom we have such information: Horatius; L. Siccius Denatus; A. Postumius Tubertus; T. Manlius Torquatus; M. Valerius Corvus; T. Manlius Torquatus; Claudius Asellus; Q. Occius Achilles; C. Marius. On these see Oakley, CQ 35 (I985) pp. 392-4IO, and add the two youthfulmonomachies ofM. Manlius Capitolinus (plin. NH 7.28.I03-4), which Oakley did not record. Among the plains Indians of North America, for example, warriors tended to be young men, who ceased to participate in battles and buffalo hunting in their late 30S; see McDonnell, "Aristocratic Competition," p. I63, n. 53 for references. Suet. Aug. 38.3; cf. Dio 56.23.2. On Augustus and precedent, see RC 8, and 6; Suet. Aug. 34. See McDonnell, "Aristocratic Competition," pp. I63-4. That physical 203

ROMAN MANLINESS

to retire from active equestrian duty, then it was surely an age at which it was unwise to risk single combat. Most men over thirty-five lacked the strength and agility that stirrup-less and saddle-less horsemanship required, and most consuls and praetors, therefore, were too old to be confident about defeating an opponent in single combat that would be fought on horseback. The enormous prestige conferred by dedication of the spolia opima was constrained by the system that effectively prohibited young men from holding supreme command. But for the young, even in the public sphere of war where they could be men, displays of virtus were constrained and controlled. The glory that a young Roman could win through victory in single combat was subject to direct magisterial control. Before any Roman could accept a challenge to single combat he had to receive permission from his general. The procedure and language for asking permission is almost formulaic, - extra ordinem in provocantem hostem pugnare - "permission to fight out of the ranks an enemy who had challenged" and failure to do so was a capital offense. 78 The ideological importance of this requirement is reflected in the recurring theme of heroic but insubordinate sons being executed by their magistrate fathers. In 431, the dictator A. Postumius Tubertus is said to have put his son to death for breaking ranks and seeking military glory in single combat. 79 In 340, the consul T. Manlius Torquatus, himself a heroic monomachist in his youth, executed his son for slaying an enemy in single combat without authorization (Liv. 8.7.19; Val. Max. 2.7.6). The theme is found in a somewhat different form in the story ofL. Papirius Cursor, dictator in 325, who, on being compelled to leave his army and return to Rome, ordered his magister equitum, the young Q. Fabius Rullianus, not to engage the enemy. The dashing young officer disobeyed and won a great victory, but nearly forfeited his life for his disobedience (Liv 8.30.3-35). The parallel, in some instances explicitly made, between

78

79

condition was a traditional criterion in determining who could hold the public horse is seen in the story of Cato and the fat man, L. Veturius; see Plut. Cat. Mai. 4.3; ORF" 8.78, and earlier, Chapter I. Liv. 23.47.1; 25.18.12. Q. Occius slips out of camp to avoid having to ask his commander Val. Max. 3.2.21. See Oakley, CQ 35 (1985) p. 406. Feldherr's suggestion, p. 96, n. 47, that the topos is Livy's invention in far-fetched. Liv. 4.29.5 f., Diod. Sic. 12.64, GelL NA, 17.21.17, 12.6.4; Val. Max. 2.7.6. 20 4

MANLINESS IN REPUBLICAN ROME

these tales of youthful insubordination and the story of L. Brutus, deposer of Rome's last king and founder of the Republic, who as consul executed his sons for attempting to restore the monarchy by military force, establishes an· ideological connection between heroic insubordination and fear of kingship or tyranny. 80 The great glory gained by victory in single combat was a potential threat to libertas and the Republic. The ethos of republican elite warfare, therefore, required that this highest manifestation of virtus be performed only with the permission of a magistrate, and only by men too young to gain immediate political benefit from the achievement. Displays of aristocratic virtus were restricted in order to insure the preservation of the Republic. 80

Liv. 2.3-5; 8.34.2-3; Dion. Hal. 5.8; Plut. Publ. 3.3, and 6; Val.Max. 5.8.1; Polyb. 6·54·

20 5

VII

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

a

Behold Marcel1us, carrying the highest spoils, strides conspicuously, victor, towering over other men. Vergil

I.

MANLINESS AND POLITICS

Over the course of the second century, the practices and institutions that moderated the competitive and aggressive behavior of the Roman aristocracy came to be challenged and in the end overthrown along with the Republic itself. The story of the fall of the Roman Republic is highly complex and controversial, but there is little question that Rome's unprecedented military expansion in the fifty years following the defeat of Hannibal was a major factor. In addition to bringing about general economic and social changes in Roman Italy, continued conquests greatly increased the opportunities for the Roman senatorial elite to acquire wealth and military glory. I The result was accelerated competition in elections to high office and command, and ambitious politicians competing to advertise their status and achievements in ways that were both traditional and innovative. All of which combined to create a new kind of politics in second-century Rome that traditionalminded senators abhorred, took action against, but also participated in to one degree or another. All of this is a well known story. 2

I

2

For discussions of various aspects of the phenomenon see Hopkins; Harris, WIRR, esp. Chapters I and 11. See A. E. Astin, CAlP VIII, pp. 174-80, 188-94, and Seipia Aemilianus, p. 339. 206

DIVINE VIRIVS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

In analyzing these new methods of achieving political success, historians have conventionally looked back to P. Cornelius Scipio Africanus as the man who set the pattern others were to follow. 3 Although many of the extraordinary actions and honors attributed to Scipio have been shown to be legendary and unhistorical, it is clear that he did engage in numbers of non-traditional activities, and that these increased his popularity. Scipio's political success rested on his military achievements, and his victory over Hannibal in 201 won him an unprecedented level of popular adulation. But Scipio also claimed to have been, at times, divinely inspired, particularly by dreams. 4 He courted and won public support by staging games in Rome in 206 and with an extravagant triumph in 201. 5 Scipio also openly espoused aspects of Greek culture. While in Syracuse, he frequented the gymnasium, wore Greek clothing, and behaved as a Greek, for which he was criticized by some of his peers.6 In addition, Scipio received extravagant praise in the laudatory poetry of his contemporary Ennius, who devoted an entire poem, entitled Scipio, to the undertaking. 7 On exaInination, however, in most of these activities Scipio had been anticipated by the great military hero of the previous generation, M. Claudius Marcellus. Marcellus was one of the greatest generals of Roman history, five times consul, triumphator, conqueror of Syracuse, and opponent ofHannibal. But in studies of Roman republican politics the career of Marcellus tends to be glossed over, eclipsed by that ofScipio Africanus. Part of the reason has to do with historical

J

4

5

6

For example, C. J. Class en, "Gottmenschenturn in der rornischen Republik," Das Gymnasium 70 (I963) pp. 3I2-228, esp. pp. 3IS-2I; Gruen, Studies, p. I33; and M. Beard, J. North, S. Price, Religions if Rome I (Cambridge, I998) pp. 84-7; cf. Harris, WIRR, P·27· Liv. 28 S6.I-ro; Polyb. ro.4.I-S; Liv. 26.I9.4-S, with F. W Walbank, "The Scipionic Legend," PCPhS I93 (I967) pp. S4-69. On the elements of the Scipio legend see R. M. Hayward, Studies on Scipio Africanus (Baltimore, I933) pp. 9-29, and Commentary, IU, pp. I9I-6. On the games, vowed after the suppression of a mutiny in Spain, see Liv. 28.28.I4; in 206 Scipio also fulfilled a vow by sacriflcing roo oxen on the Capitol; Liv. 28.28.8. On the triumph, see Liv. 30.45.3; App. Lib. 66. For Scipio's Greek behavior in Syracuse, see Liv. 29.I9.II-20.I; Val. Max. 3.6.I; Plut.

Cat. Mai. 3.7. 7

See Cic. Arch. 22; Hor. Carm. 4.8.IS-20. For the fragments ROL, I, pp. 394-8 = Vahlen, Vczria I-I4; and other praise ofScipio, ROL, I, Epig., pp. 298-40I = Vahlen, Vczria, IS-24. 20 7

ROMAN MANLINESS

circumstances. In 208, Marcellus died in an ambush set by Hannibal, the man whom Scipio would defeat six years later in his great victory at Zama. But another reason for the neglect of Marcellus is to be found in the historical tradition. Polybius, whose extant work is central for our knowledge of Roman affairs in the period from the First through the Second Punic Wars, and whose general history was critical in the formation of later historical traditions about the middle Republic, was closely associated with the family of the Cornelii Scipiones, for whose benefit his writings display a clear and consistent bias against Marcellus and his descendants. But in addition to Polybius, Rome's first historian, Q. Fabius Pictor, whose work was fundamental for the Roman historical tradition, also seems to have had reason for hostility toward Marcellus, as he was a kinsman and contemporary of Q. Fabius Maximus, Marcellus' great rival (Plut. Fah. 18.3). But Marcellus' career was unusually outstanding, and at least one of Marcellus' achievements was extraordinary.8 At the battle of Clastidium in 222, when he was consul and at least forty-six years old, Marcellus accepted the challenge of, and then killed in a mounted single combat, the Gallic king Viridumarus. By doing so he earned the right to dedicate the spolia opima, an honor previously won by only two other Romans, A. Cornelius Cossus and Romulus himself. In the same battle, Marcellus also vowed a temple to Honos and Virtus. 9 Modern accounts of the changing dynamics of Roman politics sometimes note, then usually pass over, the great glory that Marcellus gained by dedicating the spolia opima, and the vowing of the temple to Honos and Virtus most often has no place in the story at all. But Marcellus' vow marked the first time that Roman manliness had been officially

8

A recent and noteworthy exception to the general neglect ofMarc ellus is Harriet Flower, see CIAnt 34-64, and "Memories of Marc ellus," in Formen romischer Geschichtsschreibung von den Anfangen bis Livius, eds. E. Eigler, U. Gotter, N. Luraghi, U. Walter (Darmstadt, 2003) pp. 39-52. Marcellus' thirty-nine victories were the most by any Roman general before Julius Caesar, Plin., NH 7.92. As a young man he had won the coveted corona

civica, Plut. Marc. 9

2.2.

For the vowing of the temple, see later. For Marcellus' defeat ofVirdumarus (or Britomartus) at Clastidium, see Plut. Marc. 7-8; Rom. r6.7-8; Comp. Pelop. Marc. 1.2, and MRR, I, p. 233 for the many other texts. Marcellus is said to have been over 60 in 208, Plut. Marc. 28.3. On the requirements and reasons for the rarity of the spolia opima see earlier Chapter V and McDonnell, "Aristocratic Competition." 208

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

recognized as divine. Intimately connected to the spolia opima, the cult to divine Virtus would politicize Roman manliness, and would play a central role in a career and program that made Marcellus a controversial figure in his own time, and a pivotal figure in history of the transition from the middle to the late Republic. Marc ellus , achievement at Clastidium, and the manner in which he chose to commemorate it, set a precedent for the way in which later Roman military leaders would compete for prestige and power. But to understand Marcellus' relationship to divine Virtus, and why he choose to couple Honos and Virtus and vow a temple to two deities, it is necessary to examine the phenomenon of Roman cults dedicated to abstract concepts such as Virtus and Honos.

2.

ABSTRACT DEITIES AND DIVINE VIRTUS

The nature, antiquity, and origins of Roman "abstract" deities are difficult issues; even the name is problematic. IQ From very early times the Romans recognized an amazingly varied number of divine powers or spirits - numina - that controlled and embodied specific functions. So Robigus (or Robigo) was the divine power that protected crops from blight - robigo in Latin - and Flora was the power that controlled flowering - jlorens. Whatever the relationship of these archaic "specialty gods" was to abstract deities such as Salus - "Safety" -, Victoria - "Victory"-, Spes - "Hope" -, and Mens - "Intelligence,"II it is clear on chronological grounds alone that cults ha no ring the latter, which proliferated in Rome from the period of the Samnite Wars to the War with Antiochus (c. 324 to 190), were influenced

IQ

II

Fears, "Cults of the Virtues," ANRW, II, 17.2, pp. 827--948, esp. 830-3, rightly objected to the terms "personification" and "abstract," because the divine forces in question were thought of as concrete entities. But "virtues" is no better. I use "abstract" for want of a better term. Fears, pp. 827--948, provided a full bibliography. On these Sondergotter, see Var. R. 1.1.6; and Serv. G. 1.21. Their nature and number is highly controversial; see G. Wissowa, "Echte und falsche 'Sondergotter' in der romischen Religion," Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur romischen Religions und Stadtgeschichte (Munich, I904) pp. 304-26; K. Latte, "Uber eine Eigentumlichkeit der italischen Gottesvorstellung," Archiv fur ReligionwissenschaJi 24 (I924-7) pp. 244-58; G. Dumezil, ARR, vol. I, pp. 32-46; G. Radke, Die Gotter Altitaliens (Munich, I979) pp. 7-38; Fears, pp. 387-8. On the antiquity of Fortuna, see Champeaux, Fortuna I, pp. 446-79. 20 9

ROMAN MANLINESS

by, but not in all cases modeled on, Greek abstract divinities such as ' - "V·lctory"-, ' 0I-l0VOIO ' A' N lKT] - "C oncord" -, an d ulKT] - "J." ustlce -, which were central to Hellenistic political ideology. The introduction of state cults to abstract deities at Rome coincided with Roman military expansion and fulfilled the new ideological requirements of an imperial state operating in the context of Hellenistic world politics. 12 Temples to abstract divinities were vowed by Roman magistrates in various ways. 13 Some were vowed on the directive of the senate, often after consultation of the Sibylline Books. I4 More often such temples were vowed by magistrates in the field at moments of crisis, usually in battles, in the expectation of concrete assistance. IS The form of the vow is given by Livy in relating the words of the general Ap. Claudius Caecus asking the assistance of the deity Bellona in a battle in 296. Bel/ona, si hodie nobis victoriam duis, ast ego tibi templum voveo. "Bel1ona, if you give victory to us today, then I vow a temple to you." (Liv. IO.I9.I7). The nature of the vow is a bargain, do ut des - "I give so that you may give" - formally like a legal contract. I6 These abstract deities were thought of as specific powers that granted specific benefits. Although Cicero's treatment of Roman abstract deities in Book II of De natura deorum is laced with Stoicism, his emphasis on the specific practical power - vis and utilitas - that each deity held and conferred agrees with other evidence about these divinities and should be accepted as a statement of the Roman point of view. 17 That the

12

IJ

'4

15

16

17

So Fears, pp. 846-69. On the cessation of borrowing and adaptation in Roman religion, see J. A. North, PBSR 44 (1976) pp. 1-12. For the temples, see Axtell, passim. For the circumstances in which the various cults were vowed, K. Latte, RRG, pp. 233-42 and Fears, p. 848. On magistrates' vows, see Ziolkowski, pp. 195-8; and E. M. Orlin, Temples, Religion, and Politics in the Roman Republic (Leiden, 1997) pp. 35-75. The Sibylline Books often called for a cult to foreign, Greek deities such as Aesculapius and Magna Mater, but see Orlin, pp. 93-105, who argnes against an exclusive connection between the Sibylline Books and the introduction of Greek cultic practices. Temples to abstract deities certainly vowed in war are those to Salus in 302, Bellona in 296 Spes during the First Punic War, and Pietas in 191, see Latte, RRG, pp. 234-9. On the contractual nature of Roman religion and its implications, see Liv. 22.10 with A. D. Nock, HTR 32 (1939) p. 83 f. (= Essays on Religion and Antiquity, p. 481 f.), and North, PBSR 44 (1976) pp. 5-6. For the language of such vows, see F. V Hickson, Roman Prayer Language, Livy and the Aeneid of Virgil (Stuttgart, 1993) pp. 98-102. Cic. ND 2.60, with the comment of Fears, p. 833. 2IO

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

Romans conceived of the specific power in question as being bestowed on humans by the divine quality itself, was explicitly stated by Varro. Ita Virtus, quae dat virtutem, Honor, qui honorem, Concordia, quae concordiam, Victoria, quae dat victoriam. For it is the divinity Virtus who gives courage, the divinity Honos who gives honor, divine Concordia who gives concord, and divine Victoria who gives victory. Varro, apud Aug. CD 4.24, frag. r89 18

How the divine quality or power, once bestowed, worked and affected the human beneficiary is obscure. The evidence is meager, but what there is points in some instances to physical or spiritual possession.1 9 Be that as it may, it is certain that the Romans regarded deified abstract qualities such as Mens, Honos, and Virtus as powers independent of humans that bestowed their favors on particular individuals or groups of individuals. That divine Virtus was regarded as specifically martial quality or power should not be doubted. Eisenhut's assertion to the contrary, and his claim that war was only one of many fields over which Virtus presided, contradicts all surviving evidence. 2o Two of the three republican coins that display the image of divine Virtus have military overtones, and the numerous Virtus coins from the imperial period are all overtly martial in character. The image of the deity shown on the coins is itself that of a helmeted armed amazon. 21 Every reference we have to the persons and activities associated with the cult to divine Virtus the Claudii Marcelli, Scipio Aemilianus, Marius, and Pompey, the altar to Virtus dedicated in 43-, points to a martial deity.22 References to divine Virtus in literary texts are often difficult to identifY, because the 18

19 20 21

22

B. Cardauns, M. Terrentius Varro Antiquitates Rerum Divinarum, vols I and II, (Weisbaden, 1976) = frag. 91, R. Agabd, M. Terrentii Varronis Antiquitatum Rerum Divinarum Libri I, XIV, Xv, XVI (Leipzig, 1898, repr. NY, 1975). The definition of virtus given by Augustine at CD 4.21 = frag. 95 Agabd, is not from Varro, see Cardauns, voL II, p. 216. Note the use of the word penes at Plaut. Amph. 653 and cf. Stat. Theb. 10.632-6. W Eisenhut, "virtus als gottliche Gestalt," RE SuppL XIV (1974) cols. 896--910. On the republican virtus coins, see earlier Chapter IV. Eisenhut's interpretation of RRC 403, RE SuppL XlV, coL 901, line 61 fr., overemphasized Honos to the exclusion of Virtus. On all these see the discussion in Section 5 of this chapter. 2II

ROMAN MANLINESS

ancient Romans did not use capital letters to denote deities. But when the reference is explicit, and when the context allows a determination, the martial nature of devine Virtus is clear. 23 The only possible support of Eis enhut's interpretation of divine Virtus as a deity whose function was broad-ranging rather than specifically martial is his analysis of the meaning of the word virtus, and, as we have seen, the major weakness of Eisenhut's study is precisely that it seriously underrated the martial meaning of virtus in pre-Classical Latin. There is, in fact, no basis for denying that divine Virtus was from first to last a deity of war. 3. VIRTUS AND HONOS

The earliest evidence for divine Virtus is perhaps a late fourth century Praenestine cista on which is seen a figure whose iconography matches that of later representations of Virtus, but who is identified with the legend Veritus (elL XIV 4106).24 But the earliest secure evidence for a public cult and temple refers to that of Honos and Virtus at the Porta Capena, which Marcellus first vowed at the battle of Clastidium in 222.25 The circumstances and inspiration for Marcellus' original vow to Honos and Virtus are obscure, principally because Livy's book covering 222 does not survive. But because vows made by generals in battle followed the contractual do ut des formula, and in making such vows it was necessary to state the correct name of the deity, Marcellus must have called on Honos and Virtus at Clastidium. 26 There is perhaps 2J 24

See earlier Chapter I. The name and the goddess may also be present on a late-fourth century Praenestine mirror; see D. Rebuffat-Emmanuel, "Un probleme d'epigraphie italique: l'enigme de rit," L' ltalie preromaine et la Rome republicaine, Melanges offerts Jacques Huergon (Paris, 1976) 863-76. There are two imperial inscriptions from Etruria honoring the cult ofVirtus; ClL XI 3205 = lLS 4948 from Nepet, and ClL XI 29II = lLS 3796 from Visentium; also an imperial inscription from Tarracina, ClL X 8260 = lLS 5051, records ludi Honoris [et Virtutis. But all of these almost certainly refer to the Roman cult. Liv. 27.25.7-10; renewed after the captured of the city ofSyracuse in either 212 or 2II, Liv. 27.25.7-10, cf. 29.II,13; Val. Max 1.1.8. Contra Eisenhut, RE, Suppl. XlV, 897-8, and E. Rawson, "Religion and Politics in the Late Second Century BC," Phoenix 28 (1974) p. = Roman Culture, p. 162, n. 87, who missed the Valerius Maximus passage. Neither at Cic. 2 Verr. 4.120-3 nor at Plut. Marc. 28. I is it said that Marcellus vowed the temple at Syracuse. For the contractual nature of the vow, see earlier. For calling on the proper name, see E. Norden, Agnostos Theos (Leipzig, Berlin, 1913) pp. 144-5.

a

25

26

212

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

a reference to this in Frontinus' description of Marcellus' winning of the spolia opima, where he states that before Marcellus charged into battle he prayed to gods - precatus deos in medias hostes irrupit. Because the other texts that narrate Marcellus' winning the spolia opima state that Marcellus vowed the spoils to Jupiter Feretrius, the other gods referred to by Frontinus would presumably be Honos and Virtus. 27 The odd aspect of Marc ellus , action was his decision to vow a temple to two deities; it would later occasion religious objection. This is especially puzzling since a temple to Honos already existed, having been vowed and dedicated only eleven years earlier by Q. Fabius Maximus Verrucosus (the later Cunctator) after his victory over the Ligurians in 233. 28 Various explanations have been proposed for the unusual double vow. Some have held that Marcellus was simply following established tradition. Conceptually, the relationship between virtus and ha nos is straightforward enough. In Roman culture, demonstrations of prowess in battle - virtus - were rewarded by election to public office and the prestige the office conferred, both of which were denoted by honos. But this is different from a religious cultic relationship, and that Virtus and Honos had been connected in cult before Marcellus' vow is doubtful. Cicero at De legibus 2.58, reports the existence of an archaic temple to Honos near the Porta Collina, and a dedicatory inscription discovered near that site has been dated to the third century, M. (vel A.)

27

28

Front. Strat. 4.5.4; cf. Val.Max. 3.2.5; Liv. Per. 20; Plut. Marc. 6; Floms. 2-4. Contra Ziolkowski, p. 255. In his account of the battle Plutarch, Marc. 6.6, mentions a gesture of reverence - lTP0<JEKVVll<JEV - made to the sun. But he states that Marcellus did this to mask the inauspicious bolting and turning of his horse. No other source connects Marcellus to a cult of the sun. Note also a lacuna at a critical point in Plutarch's text, on which see Marc. 6.12 in K. Ziegler's Teubner edition Plutarchus Vitae Parallelae II.2 (Leipzig, 1968). Cic. ND 2.61. For Fabius' Ligurian War and triumph see MRR I, p. 224. See L. PietilaCastren, Magnificentia publica (Helsinki, 1987) pp. 49-51. L. Richardson, AJA 82 (1978) p. 244, argued on the basis of Cic. ND 2.61, vides Virtutis templum, vides Honoris a M. Marcello renovatum, quod mullis ante annis erat bello Ligustico a Q. Maxumo dedicatum, that the temple of Ho nos as well as the transvectio should be credited to Rullianus, because the phrase multis ante annis - "many years before," - does not fit the eleven years between Fabius Vermcosus' dedication in 233 and the battle of Clastidium in 222. J. B. Mayor, M. Tulli Ciceronis De Natura Deorum (Cambridge, 1885) ad loc., emended to non mullis; cf. D. Palomi, "Honos et Virtus, Aedes," LTUR, 3, p. 31. But the emendation and the re-attribution are unnecessary. See Pease, p. 695, citing Cic. Ac. 2.1, where a period of ten years is described as permulti anni. 21 3

ROMAN MANLINESS

Bico1eio(s) V(ibi) 1. Honore donom dedet mereto (lLLRP 157=ClL VI 30913).29 Another inscription mentioning a statue to Virtus was found in the same vicinity, ... ]m Virtute de ea sum(ma) rest[itum quam . .. Jius T(h)eseus Virtuti d(ono) [de(derat)J (ClL VI 31061). This has prompted some to assume a third century cultic association between Honos and Virtus at the Porta Collina. But the orthography of the second inscription (Virtuti rather than Virtutei) excludes such an early date, and consequently vitiates it as the evidence for a cultic connection between Honos and Virtus before 222. 30 Others have explained Marcellus' dual vow by reference to Greek practice. Rufus Fears argued that since the cult to Honos was worshipped according to Greek ritual rather than Roman, Fabius must have been directed to vow the temple by the Sibylline Books, because, Fears claimed, cults prescribed by the oracular books were generally worshipped graeco ritu. 31 Fear added that Fabius was later involved in the dedications of other temples that were prescribed by the Sibylline books - Venus Erycina and Mens. He concluded that Fabius had modeled his cult to Honos on the Greek concept EVKAEla - "Glory" -, and further that in Honos and Virtus Marcellus sought to imitate the well-known Greek association between 6:PE'TT] - "excellence" - and 'TIIJT] - "esteem" or "office."3 2 But Greek inspiration for the Roman cult to either Honos or Virtus is unlikely and unnecessary. An injunction from the Sibylline Books does not prove Greek origin of a cult. In 217, the books directed, along with temples to Mens and Venus Erycina, a vow to Mars and games to Jupiter, neither of them a Greek god. In addition a good

29

JO

J1

J2

A. Degrassi, ILLRP Imagines (Berlin, 1957) p. 77. See also PA, p. 258, for the date of this temple. Contra Eisenhut, RE, SuppL XlV, coL 897, line 39 f. CIL VI 31061 is on display in the Terme Museum in Rome, and looks to be of the second century. For the ritual for Honos, see Plut. Ques.Rom. 13 (266F), and for further evidence Wissowa, RKR p. 151; cf. Pietila-Castren, p. 50. For the connection between the Sibylline books and worshipgraeco ritu, Varro, Ling. 7.88; Liv. 25.12.13; Cic. Leg. 2.21, and Radke, Cotter Altitaliens, p. 46; but see Orlin, pp. 93-105 and). Scheid, "Graeco ritu. A typically Roman way ofhonoring the gods," HSCP 97 (1995) pp. 15-34. Fears, "The Cult of Virtues," p. 859. For the cults to Venus Erycina and Mens, see Liv. 22.9.7-II. The temple of Venus Erycina was vowed by Fabius, that to Mens by T. Otacilius, Liv. 22.10.10. 214

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CL.AUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

case has also been made against Greek inspiration for the cult of Mens, and Venus Erycina was a Punic deity of Sicily. 33 Because Cicero states that Fabius' vow to build a temple to Honos had been made in war, it is hard to see how he could have been directed by the Libri Sibyllini. 34 Futhermore, if Fabius had modeled his cult to Honos on EVKAElO or some other Greek concept, it would presuppose an established correspondence between honos and the Greek term. But that would make the puzzlement that Plutarch later expressed over how best to translate honos into Greek difficult to account for.35 We do not know whether in the cult to Virtus sacrifices followed Roman or Greek rites, but because Marcellus vowed his temple in battle, an injunction from the Sibylline Books seems very unlikely. Nor are Greek models and 6:pETT] required to explain why a Roman general would vow a martial cult to the concept of virtus. The explanation for Marcellus' vowing a temple to the two deities Honos and Virtus should not be sought in alleged borrowing from Greek culture, but in the political-religious institutions of mid-republican Rome. When Marcellus made his vow in 222, the cult of Honos was already part of a long-standing and important Roman political-religious institution. The foundation and feast day of Ho nos was July 17,36 two days after both the annual feast for Castor and Pollux, divine patrons of the Roman cavalry, and the parade of the Roman cavalry, the transvectio equitum were held. In the parade, Roman horsemen rode into the

33

34

35

36

For Mens being non-Greek see M. Mello, Mens Bona, ricerca sull'origine e sullo sviluppo del culto. Collana di studi greci, vol. 46 (Naples, 1968) pp. 33-77, and Orlin, p. I02, contra Wissowa, RKR, p. 259. On the nature of Venus Erycina see Orlin, p. 99. For the circumstances under which the Sibylline books were consulted, see Wissowa, RKR, p. 534 ff; G. J. Szemler The Priests if the Roman Republic Collection Latomus, vol. 127 (Bruxelles, 1972) p. 27; and Orlin, pp. 85-97. For the martial nature of the cult of Honos see E. Samler, "Honos," RE VII!. 2, cols. 2292-4; Wissowa, "Honos," Myth.Lex. 1.2 cols. 2707--<); and E. Saglo, "Honos," Daremberg-Saglio, vol. 3, I cols. 247-8. Plut. Ques.Rom. 13 (266F) wondered whether honos should be translated by Tl~" or 86~a - "good opinion." This is the day given on the fasti Antiates (Degrassi, Inscrip. Ital. 13.2, pp. 483-4.) HONORI. The calendar ofPhilocalus records for May 29, Honos et Virtus Zinza (the last word is unexplained); see Mommsen elL I 2 319, Degrassi, 462. But because Dio Cassius 54.18.2 states that in the year 17 the feast day of Ho nos and Virtus was moved to its present day, Weinstock,JRS 51 (1961) p. 2II, has argued plausibly that Augustus changed the date to coincide with the beginning of the Secular Games on June I. 215

ROMAN MANLINESS

Forum and to the Temple of Castor. 37 Moreover, the temple of Ho nos itself figured in the ceremony of the parade. The best source for the transvectio equitum, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, states that it began at the temple of Mars located about two kilometers outside of the Porta Capena on the Via Appia, in a grove where the army assembled before going to war. It then proceeded into the city and, by an unspecified route, to the temple of Castor in the Forum, and then on to the Capitop8 But a later source's (De viris illustribus 32.3), says that the transvectio started at the temple of Ho nos, which was situated just outside the Porta Capena. Dionysius' account is preferable, but reference to the temple of Honos suggests a ceremonial connection between it and the parade, which is supported by the coincidence of the feast days. The transvectio equitum then began at the temple of Mars outside the city on the Via Appia, and after the dedication of the temple of Honos in 233, it paused there before entering the city through the Porta Capena. The temple of Honos, therefore, played an important role in the annual religious celebrations honoring the Roman cavalry. More than that, the events of July 17 also honored the services of the family of the patrician Fabii Maximii to the Roman cavalry and to Rome itself. 39 Q. Fabius Maximus Verrucosus, the man who vowed and dedicated the temple of Ho nos in 233, was the great-grandson of Q. Fabius Maximus Rullianus, the censor of 304 who had reorganized the Roman cavalry and reformed the transvectio equitum. 40 So the temple of Honos had close associations with the Roman cavalry, with the political-religious ceremonies that honored it, and with the family of the Fabii Maximi. Marcellus' victory at Clastidium was a cavalry engagement in which the Romans fought against a far larger force of Gauls, a people famed for their prowess as horsemen. It was, according to Plutarch,

37

38 39

4-0

Liv. 9.46.15, Val. Max. 2.2.9, Plin. NH 15.19; De vir. ill. 32.3. See Weinstock, Studi e materiali 13 (1937) pp. IO-24, Ill. For the feast day of Castor and Pollux on July IS, see Liv. 2.42.5, with Weinstock, Studi e materiali 13 (1937) p. 18 fr, and Chapter VI earlier. Dion. Hal. Rom.Ant. 6.13.4 and for the location of the temple of Mars, see PA, p. 327. For the position of the temple (ad portam) being outside of the city gate, see Ziolkowski, pp. 58--9, contra Richardson, Dictionary, p. 244. For the connection between the route of the transvectio and the location of the temple of Honos, Ziolkowski, pp. 292, 298. See earlier Chapter VI. 216

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

the greatest cavalry victory in Roman history.4 I Moreover, at Clastidium Marcellus had won the extraordinary honor of dedicating the spolia opima by slaying the enemy leader in single mounted combat. Clastidium was, therefore, a monument to both the prowess of the Roman cavalry, and the equestrian valor of the Roman commander. Given the fact that upper-class Romans had been going into battle on horseback since the mid-fourth century, and that the preeminent way for young aristocrats to display their manly courage was in mounted single combat, it is not surprising that Marcellus chose to celebrate his victory with a temple to divine Virtus. But it is the cultic associations that divine Honos had with ceremonies honoring the Roman cavalry that explains, at least in part, why Marcellus took the unusual step of vowing a temple not only to Virtus, but also to Honos, and apparently planning to fulfill the vow by some kind of rebuilding of the existing temple of Ho nos. In vowing a temple to Honos and Virtus Marcellus was associating his great cavalry victory and his own extraordinary equestrian martial prowess with deities, both established and new, that had recognized connections with horsemanship and the Roman cavalry.4 2 It is nevertheless remarkable that the temple that Marcellus vowed already existed. An important but seldom asked question is how Marcellus' vow was viewed by the man who had dedicated the original temple to Honos, Q. Fabius Maximus Verrucosus, who in 222 was one of the most powerful members of the senatorial aristocracy. 43 Over the last twenty-five years a major advance in our understanding of ancient Roman religion has been the demonstration of the

41

42

43

Plut. Marc. 6-7, esp. 7-4; Comp. Pelop. Marc. I.2; Polyb. 2.34.8-9. For an analysis of the battle, see McCall, pp. 57-8. The connection between Marcellus' temple to Honos and Virtus and the transvectio equitum is strengthened by an inscription recording a dedication to Mars made by Marcellus as consul - Martei M. Claudius Mj consol dedit - discovered on the Via Appia in the vicinity of the temple of Mars where the transvectio began (lLLRP 2I8 = ClL VI 474)· Richardson, AJA 82 (I978) p. 244, saw the problem: "But it is unusual, if not unthinkable, for one to rebuild a temple properly belonging to the other while the other was still alive." Fabius had been consul twice, in 233 and 228, censor in 230, and was an augur; see MRR, I pp. 224, 227-8, and 202, respectively. He may also have been interrex in 222 and dictator in 22I, see MRR, I, pp. 233-4. 217

ROMAN MANLINESS

close relationship and interdependence between religion and politics. Manubial temples such as those vowed by Fabius and Marcellus were political as well as religious entities. Their purpose was to serve as permanent public monuments to the military accomplishments of the general who dedicated them, which explains why many of them were situated along the route of the triumph where crowds would assemble. Moreover, the temples were not only monuments to the man who vowed and dedicated them, but also to his descendants. For the descendants of a te~ple's founder were to some degree responsible for the maintenance of the building. That most did this eagerly can be seen in the numerous instances in which Roman aristocrats associated themselves with the ancestral monuments through adornment, renovation, or the erection of another monument of the same kind. For example, a familial connection between the family of the Fulvii Flacci and Fortuna is attested by family members who made dedications to that deity in 264 and again in 173. The temple ofJupiter Libertas dedicated by Ti. Sempronius Gracchus in 238 was adorned with a painting of the battle of Beneven tum by the founder's son in 214. In 148, the homonymous grandson of the great Marcellus erected statues of himself, his father, and his grandfather in or near the temple of Honos and Virtus. Around 57, Q. Fabius Maximus restored the Fabian Arch in the Roman Forum that had been erected by his grandfather in 121 and, in 54, L. Aemilius Paullus restored the ancestral Basilica Aemilia founded by his ancestor in 179. 44 This was precisely the pattern that Q. Fabius Maximus was following when he dedicated his temple to Honos in 233. By placing his temple just outside the Porta Capena on the route of the transvectio equitum, and by dedicating the temple onJuly 17, Fabius, in traditional Roman fashion, was positioning his own martial glory in the context

44

See Beard, North, Price, I, p. 88. For the Fulvii and Fortuna, see Champeaux, Fortuna, p. 263, n. 68. For Jupiter Libertas and the Sempronii Gracchi, Liv. 24.16.19; Fest. 121. For the Claudii Marcelli, see Ascon. In Pis. II C; Strab. 3.4.13; and later. The restoration of the Fornix Fabianus is mentioned by Cicero, vat. 28, and see CIL VI 1303, 1304, 31593; cf. Richardson, Dictionary, p. 154. On the restoration of the Basilica Aemilia see Cic. Att. 4.16[SB 89]8, and for its foundation by both censors of 179, M. Fulvius Nobilior and M. Aemilius Lepidus, see PA, p. 72. Cf. Hor. Carm. 3.6.1-4; Suet. Aug. 29.2; Res Gestae 20, with Beard, North, Price, I, pp. 117-26, 197-201.

218

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

of that of his great ancestor, Fabius Rullianus, who had established the importance of the transvectio in 304. He was also ensuring that his own and his ancestors' glory would continue to benefit his descendants. But by connecting himself and his glory with the temple of Honos and Virtus, M. Claudius Marcellus was surely interfering with Fabius' intentions. As we will see, after his vow and the eventual dedication of the dual temple of Ho nos and Virtus, that temple would be forever associated with Marcellus' name and with those of his descendants. In effect, Marcellus' vow attempted to usurp a traditional and important cultic and political connection between the Roman cavalry and the patrician family of the Fabii Maximi. 45 This cannot have endeared Marcellus to his older contemporary Fabius Maximus. Because Livy's and any other full account of the events of 222 and the following years are lacking, we do not know what repercussions Marc ellus , vow occasioned. When the surviving manuscripts of Livy resume, the history is concentrating on the events of the Hannibalic War, and in Livy's narrative of these events personal political rivalries tend to be overshadowed by the great military crisis. But the fact that the dedication of the temple to Honos and Virtus was delayed for fourteen years after the initial vow, and that when Marcellus did attempt to dedicate it he was obstructed by the college of pontiffs, suggests powerful interests were opposed to Marcellus' temple. There is reason to think that the delay and the obstruction were related, and that Fabius had a hand in both. 46 The temple to Honos and Virtus was vowed for the first time at Clastidium in 222. Because it had not yet been built a decade later when he captured the city of Syracuse, Marcellus renewed the vow at that time.47 It was not until 208, however, that Marcellus finally

45

46 47

For political competition in temple building within particular areas of Rome, see the suggestive comments of E. Curti, "From Concordia to the Quirinal," in Religion in Archaic and Republican Rome and Italy, eds. E. Bispham, C. Smith (Edinburgh, 2000) pp. 77-<)1, about the late-fourth-century and early-third-century temples on the Quirinal. The monuments of Marc ell us and his descendents were concentrated near the Porta Capena. In addition to his temple to Honos and Virtus, and his consular dedication to Mars on the Via Appia, Marcellus also made a dedication on the Esquiline commemorating his capture of the city ofEnna ILIRP 295. As suggested long ago by Pais, Fasti, pp. n8- I 9. See earlier, n. 27. 219

ROMAN MANLINESS

attempted to dedicate it. His reasons for making the dedication in that year are not stated in the sources, but after the capture of Syracuse in 212, or 2II, and his successful Italian campaigns in 210 and 209, Marcellus no doubt felt his position as consul in 208 was strong. In the event the dedication was stopped by the pontiffs, who objected that a single temple could not properly house two deities, (unless the deities happened to be inseparable gods - dei certi -, which Honos and Virtus were apparently not). The objection was based on the perceived difficulties in determining which of the two gods should receive the propitiatory offering in case of an adverse prodigy.4 8 Marcellus reacted with anger and was forced to hastily build a separate temple to Virtus adjoining that of Honos, which he seems to have renovated in some way. He never lived to carry out the dedication however. Marcellus was killed in battle shortly after the pontiff's decision, and it was not until 205 that his son dedicated the temple to Virtus. 49 Modern scholars have generally given credence to the pontifical decision against a single temple being based on the fact that Honos and Virtus were not dei certi,5 0 but the circumstances surrounding the vowing and dedication of the temple to Honos and Virtus are peculiar. Why, for instance, did Marcellus wait fourteen years after his initial vow to attempt to dedicate his temple? The delay is extraordinary; most temples were dedicated within four years ofbeing vowed. SI In the years

48

49

50

51

Liv. 27.25.7-9; Val. Max. 1.1.8; Plut. Marc. 28. Dumezil, AAR, n, p. 399. For dei incerti see Serv. Aen. 2.141, and A. vonDomaszewski, "Dei certi und dei incerti," Abhandlungen zur romische Religion (Leipzig and Berlin, 1904) pp. 154--'70. Plut. Marc. 28.2. Ita addita Virtutis aedes adproperato opere - "So a temple ofVirtus was added." Liv. 27.25.9; more loosely, vides {templumJ Honoris a M. Marcello renovatum- "you see the temple of Honos renovated by Marcellus." Cic. ND 2.61; ut Marcellus separatis aedibus Honoris ac Virtutis simulacra statueret - "so that Marcellus placed images of Honos and Virtus in separate temples." Val. Max. 1.1.8. We are specially told that Marcellus objected strongly to the pontiffs' decision and was upset by it, Plut. Marc. 28.1; Liv. 27.25.7. For the dedication by Marcellus' son of the temple of Virtus, see Liv. 29.11.3. Wissowa, RKR, p. 149. See Orlin, p. 154. Long intervals between vow and dedication are rare and generally confmed to the fourth and early third centuries - Quirinus vowed in 325, delayed 32 years (Liv. 8.30-36; cf. IO.46.7; Val. Max. 2.7.8; 3.3.9; cf. Plin. NH7.213), see Ziolkowski, pp. 139-44, 240-2; Salus vowed in 3II, delayed nine years (Liv. 9.43.25; IO.L9); and Victoria vowed in 305, perhaps delayed for eleven years (Liv. 10.33.9; 9.Io-rr), see Ziolkowski, pp. 172-6. These delays can be explained by the desire of the dedicators to hold regular magistracies when both vowing and dedicating their temples, a practice not 220

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

between 222 and 208 Marcellus held consular office twice, in 214 and 210, and could have dedicated the temple in either year, but did not. It has been suggested that Marcellus delayed because he lacked the resources to build the temple. But the evidence speaks against this. Other temples had been built from the proce~eds of victories in regions considerably less prosperous than northern Italy where Marcellus had campaigned in 222 - for example, Fabius' temple of Ho nos in 233 after his campaign in Liguria, and in 231, Papirius Maso's temple ofFons after his not very successful campaign in Corsica. Moreover, from the spoils of his victory in 222, in which the Gallic center ofMediolanum had been taken, Marcellus sent a golden bowl to Delphi and other fine dedications to numerous allies. It is very unlikely, therefore, that Marcellus lacked the funds to build the temple;5 2 he certainly did not after he had captured Syracuse. 53 It has also been opined that as Rome's best general Marcellus was preoccupied with campaigning. 54 But then it must be asked why the senate did not take steps to have the temple prepared for the dedication. In 217, the praetor appointed magistrates - duumviri aedi locandae - to contract for the temple of Concord that had been vowed only two years earlier, because the delay in the dedication of the temple had caused

52

53

54

uniformly adhered to afterwards; see Ziolkowski, p. 240, n. 204, and Orlin, p. 147. The dedication of the temple of Pietas was put off for ten years (Liv. 40.34.4-6; Val. Max. 2.5. I), most likely because its dedicator, M'. Acilius Glabrio, had run afoul of powerful men in the senate soon after the temple was contracted for (Liv. 37.57.12-58. I). For Fabius, see previously, n. 28. For Maso's temple, see Cic. ND 3.52; his the campaign, Zon. 8.18.14. See Ziolkowski, pp. 247--9 for more examples and discussion. For Gallic northern Italy, from which great amounts of booty were taken from 200 to 191, being considerably richer than Liguria, see W V. Harris, CAH 2 VIII, p. 109; Frank, Economic Survey of Ancient Rome I, pp. 128-p. So rightly Richardson, AJA 82 (1978) p. 243. For the dedication and gifts after Clastidium, see Plut. Marc. 8.6, Liv. 24.21.9. Lack offunds is favored by Pietila-Castren, pp. 55-6, and Gruen, Culture, p. 100; cf. PA, pp. 258--9. (plut. Marc. 28.1 does not however imply that the spoils of 222 were insufficient). M. Aberson's suggestion, Temples votifs et butin de guerre dans la Rome republicaine (Geneva, 1994) pp. 146-8, of a rule restricting funding for a temple to the booty acquired in the battle where it was vowed has no support in the texts and explains little. Ziolkowski's claim, p. 252, that Marcel1us was religiously neglectful and indifferent misinterprets Cic. Div. 2.77, and misunderstands the Roman attitude toward divination; see J. North, CAH 2 , VII.2, p. 623. For Marcel1us' reverence for the gods, see Val. Max. 1. 1. 8. Pietila-Castren, pp. 55-6. 221

ROMAN MANLINESS

religious concerns. 55 That the far longer delay in fulfilling Marcellus' vow to dedicate a temple to Honos and Virtus caused no such religious concern is very curious, particularly because during that period Rome suffered three disastrous defeats at the Trebia in 218, at Trasimene in 217, and at Cannae in 216. If there was ever a time when the senate should have been concerned over the Republic being endangered by an unfulfilled vow, it was then. Why and how Marcellus' temple was delayed requires explanation. An answer can be seen in Livy's account of the reaction Marcellus encountered when he did attempt the dedication. Cum bello Gallico ad Clastidium aedem Honori et Virtuti vovisset, dedicatio eius a pontificibus impediebatur- "Although he had vowed the temple to Honos and Virtus in the Gallic War at Clastidium, its dedication was being obstructed by the pontiffs." (Liv. 27.25.7). Livy's use of the imperfect tense suggests that the obstructing had been going on for some time before 208. The authority that the senate had over a vow made by a general in the field, as well as the obligation that such a vow placed on the senate and the res publica to see that it was fulfilled, are cloudy and debated issues. 56 But although the senate obstructing and delaying the dedication of a vowed temple would certainly have been unusual, in the case of Marc ellus , it would have been in response to a unique circumstance in which the vow was to dedicate a temple that not only already existed, but that had been built only eleven years earlier by a man who was still living. If both the delay of and the objection to the dedication of the temple to Honos and Virtus were the result of powerful senatorial opposition, it is reasonable that the cause should be the umbrage toward Marcellus' vow felt by Fabius, who in 208 was a leading member of the college of pontiffs. 57 At what point after Marcellus' initial vow 55

56

57

Liv. 22.33.7-8. For the problem over the year of Manlius' praetorship, see MRR, I, p. 240, n. 4. On the office and function of duumviri aedi locandae, see Orlin, pp. 141-58. Mommsen, R. Staatsr. HP p. 1062, denied that a general's vow was binding on the state and is followed with modifications by Orlin, pp. 35-6, 45-62. Ziolkowski, pp. 195-8, 235-6, 252, argued that it was. Pais, Fasti, pp. U8-19; P. Gros, "Les statues de Syracuse et les 'dieux' de Tarente," REL 57 (1979) pp. 85-u4. Political friendship between Marcellus and Fabius is a prosopographical fantasy that is surprisingly still current, see J. Briscoe, CAH 2 VIII (Cambridge 1989) p. 70, and Flower, CIAnt 19 (2000) pp. 34-64, esp. p. 39. It originated with 222

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

pontifical doubts were first raised, we cannot knOw. 58 Fabius Maximus became a pontiff in 216, but he had been a leading political and religious figure in Rome for a decade before that and could have certainly used his influence against what many senators must have regarded as high-handed behavior by Marcellus in attempting to usurp the Fabian connection to Honos. In fact, longstanding enmity between Fabius and Marcellus caused by the latter's temple to Honos and Virtus clears up much about a tradition that placed the two men at odds during the Hannibalic War. 59 Despite Livy's tendency to patriotically gloss over the faults and quarrels of successful Roman military leaders in times of national crisis, there are clear indications that during the Hannibalic War strong disagreement and rivalry existed between Q. Fabius Maximus and M. Claudius Marcellus. For one thing, they differed fundamentally over how the war with Hannibal should be conducted. Although in the dark days after Cannae, Marcellus cooperated with Fabius, from early in the war he had favored a more aggressive strategy and was openly critical of the damage that the Fabian policy had wrought on Rome and Italy. When commanding independently ofFabius, Marcellus would match his words with action by repeated engagements with Hannibal. 60 But

58

59

60

Miinzer's strange interpretation of the consular elections for 2I5 and 2I4, RAA, p. 74, and was demolished by Linderski, ANRW, II I6.3, pp. 2I68-'72. On the matter, see M. McDonnell, "Roman Aesthetics and the Spoils of Syracuse," in Representations of War in Ancient Rome, eds. S. Dillon, K. E. Welch (Cambridge, 2005) pp. 79-ro6, n. 45. Hostility between Fabius and Marcellus cannot have begun much before 222. Marcellus became an augur at the time of his aedileship (plut. Marc. 2), in 226 at the latest (MRR, I, p. 230). Fabius had been an augur since 265 (MRR, I, p. 202). An inimicus of an augur could not be co-opted into the college at that time (Cic. Fam. 3·Io[SB 73]9). Marcellus' younger half, or adoptive brother, T. Otacilius Crassus, had also married a niece of Fabius Maximus, almost certainly before 222 (Plut. Marc. 2.I; Liv. 24.8.rr, and Miinzer, RAA, pp. 73-4.) Miinzer, "Claudius (220)," RE III (I899) cols. 2740-I, rejected rivalry as a function of a later tradition that contrasted the two men as the "shield and sword of Rome" respectively, attributed by Plutarch to Poseidonius (E-K frags. 259-60 = Marc. 9.4; Fab. I9.3). But, on the contrary, Poseidonius seems to have been a source for Plutarch's presentation of the strategic disagreements between the Marcellus and Fabius as complementary (Fab. I9.3); this fitting a Plutarchian theme, see A Wardman, Plutarch's Lives (Berkeley, I974) pp. 27-8. Plutarch is the principal source for the strategic disagreements between the two men (Marc. 24.2, Camp. Pelop.-Marc. 1.6-7, Mar. I9SD). But these are apparent, ifsuppressed, in Livy's account of Marcellus and Fabius capturing Casilinurn in 2I4 (24.I9). For the 223

ROMAN MANLINESS

there is evidence of more between the two men than disagreement over strategy. During a period when Marcellus was besieging and winning glory at Syracuse and Fabius held no elective office or command (213-212), Marcellus suffered a number of affronts at the hands of his eneInies in the senate. One incident involved the Roman survivors of Cannae, who had fought bravely under Marcellus' command in Sicily. Marcellus wrote to the senate on their behalf, requesting that they be perInitted to return to Italy as a reward for their valor. The senate's reply was curt and insulting - Rome had no need of cowards to defend it, and the veterans could not return to Italy. That this was, and was meant to be, a personal affront is shown by the facts that it both angered and offended Marcellus, and that on his return to Rome, he made a point of reprimanding the senate for its decision (Liv. 25.5.10-7.5; Plut. Marc. 12.2-5). Although the sources do not name the senators behind the hostile response, at the time of the incident the influence of Fabius, who had been censor and dictator, had held the consulship four times, and was a member of both pontifical and augural colleges, was without match in the senate. Moreover, since Fabius held no office or command, he would have been spending a good part of his time and energies in Rome. Syracuse fell to Marcellus in either autumn of 212 or early 211. 61 In military terms the fall of Syracuse was not only of critical strategic

61

campaigns in 215 and 214, see G. De Sanctis, Storia dei Romani,2 III 2 (Florence, 1968) pp. 241-52; andJ. F. Lazenby, Hannibal's JIIlilr (Warrninster, 1978) pp. 93-'7, 10I-2. On differences between Marcellus and Fabius, see J. E. A. Crake, "Roman Politics from 215 to 209 B.C.," Phoenix 17 (1963) pp. 123-30, esp. pp. 124-5. For the sources for Plutarch's Marcellus, see B. Scardigli, Die Riimerbiographien Plutarchs. Bin Forschungsbericht (Munich, 1979) pp. 38-42. R. Flaceliere, Plutarque Vies IV (paris, 1966) pp. 181-6, made a strong argument for close adherence to the narratives of Polybius and Livy. Less persuasive is the case for Poseidonius as a major source; contra M. Miihl, Poseidonius und der plutarchische Marcellus (Berlin, 1925) with review by Miinzer, Gnomon I (1925) pp. 96-100; cf. J. Malitz, Die Historien des Poseidonius (Munich, 1983) p. 362. Poseidonius seemed to have been the principal source for Plutarch's positive assessments of Marcellus' campaigns in Sicily. Plutarch's positive divergences from Livy's account of Marc ellus' activities in Italy are from some annalistic source, either Coleius Antipater or Valerius Antias, directly or through a non-Livian intermediary. Liv. 25.23.1 dates the fall of Syracuse in 212. DeSanctis, III 2, pp. 331-4, objected and dated it to early 2II, so too Eckstein, Senate and General, p. 157. For a defense of the Livian date, see Walbank, Commentary, n, pp. 6-8, and Lazenby, p. II5. 224

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

importance, but was also an extraordinary operational achievement against what was arguably the best defended city in the Mediterranean world. It has been called" one of the great feats of arms in antiquity. "62 Yet when Marcellus requested a triumph in 2II, he was refused by the senate and offered the lesser honor of celebrating an ovatio. In protest, Marcellus chose to revive the victory ceremony of triumphing on the Alban Mount, and then celebrated his ovatio in Rome on the following day in magnificent fashion. 63 The reason given for the refusal of the triumph was that Marcellus' army had remained in Sicily, and that he had not ended the war there (Liv. 26.21.3-4; Plut. Marc. 22.1; De vir. ill. 45). But the criteria were arbitrary and politically motivated. Marcellus had, in fact, been ordered by the senate to leave his army in Sicily. As for the objection that fighting in Sicily continued after Marcellus' departure, the fighting in southern Italy was by no means ended by Fabius' capture of Tarentum in 209, yet the senate would see fit to grant him a triumph. 64 Plutarch specifically states the decision to deny Marcellus a triumph was caused by the envy of his enemies in the senate (Plut. Marc. 22.r). At the time Marcellus was completing his capture ofSyracuse and requesting his triumph, Fabius was present and dominant in the senate. That during the siege of Syracuse Marcellus had renewed his vow to build a temple to Honos and Virtus would have been added incentive, if any were needed, for Fabius to injure Marcellus by seeing to it that a well-deserved triumph was denied him. 62

63

64

So Eckstein, Senate and General, p. 170. On the siege of Syracuse, see Liv. 24.33.939; 25·5· IO-7·4; 25.23-31; Polyb. 8.3; De Sanctis, III 2, pp. 267-76, 286-89, 294-99; Lazenby, pp. 106-8, II5-19; and Eckstein, Senate and General, pp. 157-61. On the strategic importance ofSyracuse, see M. 1. Finley, Ancient Sicily (Totowa, N], 1979) p. II8; Lazenby, pp. I06, II5. For the city's fortifications, see A. W Lawrence, "Archimedes and the Design of the Euryalus Fort," jHS 66 (1946) pp. 99-I07; F E. Winter, "The Chronology of the Euryalus Fortress at Syracuse," AjA 67 (1963) pp. 363-87. Liv. 26.21.6; Plut. Marc. 22.1. Gruen's case against the significance of Marc ellus' display of the spoils ofSyracuse, Culture, pp. 84-94, is to be rejected; see McDonnell, "Roman Aesthetics," pp. 84-8. On the triumph on the Alban Mount as a protest, see Brennan, pp. 315-37. On the ovatio as a lesser honor see Plut. Marc. 22.2-5; G. Rohde, "Ovatio," RE XVIII (1942) cols. 1890-1903, and Brennan, pp. 315-37, esp. p. 324. For the senate ordering Marcellus to leave his army in Sicily, Liv. 26.21.2; Eckstein, Senate and General, pp. 169-70, made the comparison to Fabius' triumph. For the arbitrary and political grounds for granting or denying triumphs, see J. S. Richardson,jRS 65 (1975) 61-2; Versnel, Triumphus, p. 167, and Brennan, pp. 317-20. 225

ROMAN MANLINESS

The glory of conquering Syracuse propelled Marcellus to his fourth consulship in 210 (Liv. 26.22.2-14), but it also increased the hostility of his senatorial enemies. No sooner did Marcellus enter office, then envoys from Sicily arrived in Rome to complain before the senate that he had committed crimes against Syracuse, a city allied to Rome. The accounts of both Livy and Plutarch that the Sicilian envoys had been put up to the job by Marcellus' enemies are certainly correct. 6s It is an incident in 209, when after three years without office or command, Fabius was returned to the consulship and, consequently, to center stage in the historical accounts, that explicitly implicate him in rivalry and hostility with Marcellus. 66 As consul in that year, Fabius concentrated his efforts on recapturing the city of Tarentum. He also successfully entreated Marcellus, who was proconsul, to divert Hannibal (at considerable cost to his military reputation) in a bloody campaign at Canusium, allowing Fabius to attack Tarentum unhindered. 67 Marcellus' cooperation may have been motivated by patriotism, as it seems to have been in 215 and 214, or he may have thought that by occupying Hannibal and allowing Fabius to reap the glory of capturing Tarentum, he would soften opposition to the dedication of his temple, in which case he was disappointed. Tarentum was betrayed to Fabius and then sacked with considerable slaughter; some said to make it appear to have been taken by storm. 68 Fabius was awarded a triumph and brought back to Rome Tarentum's wealth, 30,000 of its enslaved citizens, together with great numbers of statues and paintings. He used some of the latter for personal aggrandizement, placing a colossal statue of Hercules, the mythical ancestor

65

66

67

68

PIut. Marc. 23. Livy names two of them - M. Cornelius Cethegus (26.26.5-II), and T. Manlius Torquatus - and says that the latter spoke for a great part of the senate (26.29-32). Eckstein, Senate and General, pp. 144-69, concluded that Marcellus had done nothing illegal in Sicily. Fabius' election to the consulship of 209 seemed to have involved political intrigue. The events leading up to the elections for 209 are complex. Liv. 27.12.2; Plut. Marc. 25.2; De Sanctis, III 2, pp. 455-6. According to Livy, 27.12.2-3, Fabius had begged - coram abtestatus - for Marcellus' help, thinking that the recapture of Tarentum would force Hannibal to withdraw from Italy; cf. Plut. Fab. 23.1. Liv. 27.15.9-16.6; Plut. Fab. 22.5; and for other sources MRR, I, p. 285. See also De Sanctis, III 2 pp. 456-58 and Lazenby, pp. 175-6.

226

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

of the Fabii, on the Capitol together with an equestrian statue of himself. But although the booty of Fabius' triumph was great, it was not as impressive as that which Marcellus had displayed in his ovatio in 2II, to which it was compared. 69 The display of Greek art from Syracuse presented at Rome by Marcellus is said to have won him adulation from the Roman people. But it was sharply criticized by older Romans for making the Roman people idle and less warlike. In addition, Marcellus was rebuked for confiscating statues from temples in Syracuse - "for leading not only men, but gods in his victory procession." The sentiment is echoed in the claim, recorded by Livy, that the spoils of Syracuse engendered a destructive admiration for Greek art that led Romans to covet and despoil works of art that were both sacred and profane. 70 That Fabius was behind the second criticism is shown by the conspicuous absence of divine images in his triumph, which earned him the approval of older Romans. For on being asked at Tarentum what he wanted to do with the colossal statues of the gods that decorated the captured city, Fabius is said to have pointedly refused to plunder the city's cult statues with the quip: "Let us leave their angry gods for the Tarentines." The remark, and Fabius' decision not to display divine images in his triumph (the statue of Hercules was no doubt placed on the Capitol sometime later), served to discredit Marcellus' more difficult and important achievement in capturing Syracuse. 71 There is then evidence for an on-going rivalry and enmity between Marcellus and Fabius, and the likelihood that it originated in the resentment Fabius felt over Marcellus' vowing a temple to Honos and Virtus is supported by the pontiff's blocking its dedication in 208,

69

70

71

Liv. 27.16.7; Plut. Fah. 22.5; Plin. NH 34.40; Strab. 6.31 (278C); cf. ChapterIV Section 4. Plut. Marc. 21.3-5; Fah. 22.5; Liv. 27.16.7; and criticism of Marcellus' display of Greek art at Livy at 25.40.1-3. Marcellus was, in fact, scrupulous about not appropriating the public art ofSyracuse for his own use, as even Polybius, 9.10.13, conceded. See Cic. 2 Verr. 1.55; 4.121; Rep. 1.21; PIut. Marc. 30.5; and Liv. 26.31.9; and cf. Cato, ORF4 8.98, and 224. See Liv. 27.16.8; Plut. Marc. 21.3-4; Fah. 22.5; Rom. Apophth Fah. (195F). So rightly Gruen, Culture, pp. 101-2, contraJ.-L. Ferrary, Philhellel1isme et Imperialisme (Paris, 1988) pp. 573-4, who denied the authenticity of Fabius' remark, wrongly; see Gros, REL 57 (1979) p. 10 and McDonnell, "Roman Aesthetics," n. 59 and 61.

227

ROMAN MANLINESS

when Fabius was a member of that college. Marcellus' response was not only anger, but retaliation against the man who, in all probability, was responsible. For while Marcellus was consul in 208, Fabius' command was pointedly not continued. 72 Marcellus would die in that year, but Fabius would never hold office again. Fabius' rancor toward Marcellus would continue to be felt however. For the events of the Hannibalic War were recorded by Fabius Pictor, the kinsman and contemporary of Fabius Maximus. If it is to Pictor that we owe the emphasis in the surviving tradition on the courage and wisdom of Fabius Maximus, then we can assume that Rome's first historian presented an unfavorable portrayal of Marcellus. 73

4. BREAKING THE CONSTRAINTS M. Claudius Marcellus' politics were unusually aggressive even for a Roman aristocrat. Testimony to his audacity in religion and politics are, as we have seen, his attempt to overshadow the cultic connections of the Fabii to Honos and the Roman cavalry, and, as Jersy Linderski has shown, to bring about a major political change by having himself elected as the second of two plebeian consuls in 215.74 But these were not the only instances of his self-assertive innovations. From a noble, but not particularly distinguished plebeian family, Marcellus pursued an independent career based on popular support.75 He

72

73

74 75

Noted by Taylor, AJP 73 (I952) p. 304. Most other commanders were prorogued that year; see Liv. 27.22-4-10, and MRR, I, pp. 29I-2. For Fabius Pictor and the positive portrayal ofFabius Maximus Cunctator, see E. Badian, "The Early Historians," in The Latin Historians, ed. T. A. Dorey (London, I966) p. 5. Aside from being his kinsman, Pictor seems to have participated in Maximus' campaign in Liguria in 233, see Fabius Pictor, frag. 24 HRR. Polybius' clearly biased account of Marcellus is the origin of much of the hostility seen in the extent sources, but many negative evaluations found in Livy, and hence in Plutarch, should be attributed to the hostility of the family tradition of the Fabii, see Scardigli, pp. 40- I, and in particular to Fabius Maximus. Linderski, ANRW, II I6.3, pp. 2I68-72. Marcellus was not a novus homo, either in fact or in his approach to politics. His greatgrandfather (first of the plebeian Claudii) and grandfather held the consulship in 33I and 287, respectively; neither of them was especially notable; see Miinzer, "Claudius (2I8) and (2I9)," RE III (I899) cols. 2737-8. 228

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

acquired it, however, not in the manner of a C. Flaminius, by means of anti-senatorial legislation, but by combining the traditional appeal to martial prowess with an array of other popular measures. As a young man in the First Punic War, he had earned a reputation and honors for courage by engaging in single combat and by heroically saving the life of his half-brother, T. Otalcilius Crassus and winning the corona civica. But his advancement was by no means rapid. He was over forty when elected aedile in 226, after which he soon became praetor, and then, in his mid-to-late forties, consul in 222. As consul he achieved unsurpassable martial glory with the spolia opima. 76 In the war with Hannibal, Marcellus won popular support by favoring a strategy more aggressive than that ofFabius Maximus, and by victories in the field. 77 But Marcellus' great popularity, and the enmity between him and other senators, were not the result of superior military accomplishments alone, but also of the innovative ways in which he proclaimed these accomplishments. His use of the spoils of Syracuse is the best documented and clearest example. 78 76

77

78

Aedile in 226, praetor in 224 at the latest; see Plut. Marc. 2, and MRR, I, pp. 229 and 231. There is no reason to suppose that as consul in 222, Marcellus was cooperating with the senate's desire to continue the war against the already defeated Insubres, as argued by R. Stewart, Public Office in Early Rome (Ann Arbor, 1998) pp. 85-6, following a suggestion by Eckstein, Senate and General, p. 17. On the contrary, Polybius (2.24.1) states that the consuls Marcellus and Scipio pursued the war, and Plutarch (Marc. 6.2) reports that the senate was inclined toward peace with the Insubres, and that Marcellus sought popular support to continue the war. Liv. 23.30.19, 31.7 & 13; Plut. Marc. 24.2-4; Rom. Apophth. Fab. (195D); Camp. Pelop.Marc. 1.6-7. Although some of Marc ellus' victories in the Hannibalic War are exaggerated, fictitious even, his successes against Hannibal should not all be dismissed as the inventions ofValerius Antias and Posidonius. The influence ofPolybius' anti-Marcellus, pro-Scipio bias should be considered. It is unnecessary to attribute stories about Marcellus' "philhellenism" to Poseidonius, see S. C. R. Swain, "Hellenic Culture and the Roman Heroes ofPlutarch,"JHS no (1990) pp. I26-45, reprinted inB. Scardigli, ed. Essays on Plutarch's Lives (Oxford, 1995) pp. 22964, esp. pp. 256-9, or to Plutarch himself, contra Swain. Recent scholarship has identified elements and themes in the biographies that are Plutarch's own. But although he could misinterpret, exclude, or simplify Roman politics, Plutarch was not mendacious, see C. B. R. Pelling, "Plutarch and Roman Politics," in 1. S. Moxon, J. D. Smart, and A. J. Woodman, eds. Past Perspectives, Studies in Greek and Roman Historical Writing (Cambridge 1986) pp. 159-87, reprinted in Scardigli (1995) pp. 319-56, and "Truth and Fiction in Plutarch's Lives," in D. A. Russell, ed. Antonine Literature (Oxford, 1990) pp. 19-52. A man who was familiar enough with Greek culture to be able to pun in Greek (on (Ja~~0Kal, see Polyb. 8.6.6) could surely have learned (while in Sicily) to appreciate 229

ROMAN MANLINESS

The works of art from Syracuse that Marcellus displayed in his ovatio are described as extraordinary in their abundance (as great as Carthage could have yielded) and in their quality. Mterwards, Marcellus used some of them to adorn Rome, Italy, and even Greek sanctuaries. But the best of the art was intended for and eventually did decorate his temple of Ho nos and Virtus, which became a kind of museum visited by tourists. 79 The statues and paintings are said to have made a great impression on contemporaries - in terms of their numbers and their caliber, the Romans had never seen anything like them - and to have won Marcellus popular acclaim, which was their intent. 80 Marcellus reacted to the popular approval by speaking of his pride in having taught the Romans, who had been unacquainted with the beauties and wonders of Greek art, to honor and admire them. 8r Honor and admire them they did, and henceforth, a senator who would provide the Roman people with public art was rewarded with their favor. The impact of Marcellus' use of the art of Syracuse can be judged by the number of triumphators who followed his example; the first being his rival Fabius. 82

79

80

8r

82

Greek art, and more to the point, to have seen the political uses to which it could be put. Plutarch does not write of Marcellus' TW10Ela, but that Marcellus was enthusiastic for Greek education and literature (Marc. 1.2-3). It is only in the concluding assertion about Marcellus' wish to devote himself to study - TTp6ev~os ex<JKi'i<Jat KO! ~oeeJV - that we can perhaps see Plutarch's editorializing; see Pelling, "Truth and Fiction," p. 37. Liv. 25.3LII, 40.1-3; Plut. Marc. 19. 3; 21.1; Cic. 2 Verr. 4.120; Polyb. 9.IO. Polyb. 9.IO.2, 13 is malicious. According to Plutarch (Marc. 21.1), Marcellus took the greater part and the most beautiful of the art works. On the public display of the art in Rome and Italy, see Cic. 2 Verr. 1.55; 4.121; cf. Plut. Marc. 30.5; Liv. 26.31.9. On placing of art in the temple of Ho nos and Virtus, see Liv. 25.40.3; Cic. 2 Verr. 1.55,4.121. Plut. Marc. 21.3. See McDonnell, "Roman Aesthetics," pp. 92-I05; contra Gruen, Culture, pp. 84--94. Plut. Marc. 21.5. Ferrary, PhilhelUnisme, pp. 575-6, rejected Marcellus' boast out of hand, as reflecting the attitudes of PIu tarch and his source, Posidonius. But 2II was not the fIrst time Marcellus had exploited his patronage of Greek culture, cf. De Sanctis, III 2, p. 460, n. 50, and the discussion that follows here. Gruen, Culture, pp. 99-IOO, saw it as part of the anti-Marcellus tradition, because he thought it would have insulted contemporary Romans. But Plutarch states that Marcellus made the remark to Greeks, and contrasts it to the criticisms of Marcellus - ov ~iJv ex"}.."}..&.; it was clearly meant to be positive, so Gros, REL 57 (1979) pp. IOI-2. Displays of Greek art graced the triumphs of Fabius (previous n. 69); Flamininus (Liv. 34.16.17, 52.4-5); Scipio Asiagenus (Plin. NH 33.148; 35.22; Liv. 39.22.10); Fulvius Nobilior (polyb. 21.30.9; Liv 38.9.13, 43.5; 39.5.15); Aemilius Paullus (Liv. 45.33.5-6, 39.5); Metellus Macedonicus (Veil. Pat. 1.11.3-4; Plin. NH 34.64; Cic. 2 Verr. 4.126); 230

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

Marcellus' ideas about the political uses of public art clearly drew on a Hellenistic model that should be located in the court ofHiero 11. As a young man Marcellus had fought in Sicily, and he had perhaps governed the island as praetor of the Roman province. The impression made on him is apparent in some of the ways he proclaimed his military successes. 83 It is recorded that after the victory at Clastidium, Marcellus sent fine spoils to Hiero in Syracuse, which were probably dedicated in the temple of Olympian Zeus. Later, after he had captured Syracuse, he sent some of its statues and painting as dedications to the sanctuary of Athena at Lindos on Rhodes, and to that of the Kabeiroi (the Great Gods) on Samothrace, well known in Rome at the time. 84 In sending these victory dedications, Marcellus was following the pattern of Hellenistic rulers, although the dedication to the Kabeiroi was probably also influenced by the popular identification of these gods with Castor and Pollux, with whom Marcellus' temple of Ho nos and Virtus had cultic connections. 85 Marcellus also built a gymnasium at Catana in Sicily, and was in turn honored with a festival in Sicily, the Marcellia, and with a statue in the senate house at Syracuse. 86 All these dedications and honors would have been well-advertised in Rome, and were designed to augment Marcellus' prestige there.

8J

84

85

86

Murnmius (Liv. Per. 52); and Scipio Aemilianus (later, pp. 472-3). See G. Zinserling, "Studien zu den Historiendarstellungen der romischen Republik," Wissenscluifiliche Zeitschrift der Friedrich-Schiller-Universitiit 9 (1959-60) pp. 401-8, and Gruen, Culture, pp. 104-29. For publicly displayed art as an expression of popular participation in the res publica and in the fruits of its victories; see McDonnell, "Roman Aesthetics." For Marcellus in Sicily, see Plut. Marc. 2. He was praetor c. 224, see MRR, I, p. 231. His province is unknown. On third-century contacts between Rome and the Aegean, see R. E. A. Palmer, Rome and Carthage at Peace (Stuttgart, 1997) p. 51, and note the bilingual inscription dedication to Athena Lindos by 1. Folius dated to between 300 and 250 (ILI.RP 245). Spoils of Clastidium - Plut. Marc. 8.6, cf. Liv. 24.21.9; dedications at Rhodes and Samothrace - Plut. Marc. 30-4-5. The cult of the Great Gods at Samothrace was patronized by Hellenistic royalty since the middle of the third century; see S. G. Cole, Theoi Megaloi: The Cult of the Great Gods at Samothrace (Leiden, 1984) pp. 21-5. For the popular identification at Rome of the Samothracian gods with both the penates and Castor and Pollux, see Cole, pp. 1-2 and 100-102. But Marcellus' victory at Syracuse was not naval, contra Cole, p. 87. Gymnasium - Plut. Marc. 30.4; Marcellia - Cic. 2 Verr. 2.51; 4.151 cf. Plut. Marc. 23.7; statue - Cic. 2 Verr. 2.50. For Marcellus' settlement of Sicily after his victory, and its importance, see Eckstein, Senate and General, pp. 156-'17. 231

ROMAN MANLINESS

Another of Marcellus' innovations in advertising his military achievements may be seen in the dramatic depiction of his greatest victory that was given in the fabula praetexta of en. Naevius entitled Clastidium. Unlike other Latin plays that were modeled on Greek originals,fabulae praetextae were about Roman subjects, either legendary or historical. Naevius seems to have invented the genre and his Clastidium was the first Latin play about a historical subject. 87 The alternative name by which the play was known in antiquity, Marcellus, shows that its subject was that man's heroic duel, and it is possible, even likely that the character of Marcellus appeared in it. 88 That the effect and intent of Naevius' play was to glorify Marcellus above others seems beyond question. It is difficult to think of a Roman military honor that was more emphatically individual in nature than the spolia opima, and a play about the winning of that honor would surely have been a direct tribute to the man who accomplished the great deed. 89 Although the occasion when Clastidium was first staged is not known, it is likely that the idea for a drama celebrating the battle in which he won the spolia opima originated with Marcellus himself.9 0 A triumphal venue for the play is reasonable. The extraordinary nature of Marcellus' triumph in 222, coupled as it was with his dedication

87

88

89

90

Although not based on Greek originals, the fabula praetexta was an adaptation of a Greek cultural institution. On the fabula praetexta, see N. Zorzetti, La pretesta e il teatro latino arcaico (Naples, 1980), and H. I. Flower, "Fabulae Praetextae in Context," CQ 45 (1995) PP·17 0 -9 0 . Cicero, Rep. 4.10, does not say that living Romans were never presented on stage; see Flower, CQ 45 (1995) pp. 177-8; S. M. Goldberg, Epic in Republican Rome (New York, 1995) p. 33· So rightly Flower, CQ 45 (1995) pp. 170-90, eps. p. 185, n. 95. The contention that Clastidium was as much a commemoration of a communal victory as it was of Marc ellus' personal accomplishment is to be rejected. Gruen Studies, pp. 93-4, rested his argument in part on his denial that Naevius was a client of Marcellus. The question is beside the point. Naevius was no more or less a client than was Ennius. Goldberg's claim, Epic, pp. 32-3, that Clastidium was not "explicitly topical," is without foundation. The few surviving lines refer to a military leader returning home and to someone celebrating vitulantes - something. Romulus on stage with Marcellus would not have detracted from the latter's glory, quite the contrary. The transfer of the shrine to the Camenae from the grove of Numa on the Caelian to the temple of Ho nos and Virtus is perhaps testimony to Marcellus' connection to drama; see Serv. Ad Aen. 1.8; Plin. NH 35.66; and Richardson, Dictionary, "Camenae," pp. 63-4. For the Camenae, see Skutsch, pp. 649-50. 23 2

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

of the spolia opima, make it a likely occasion for the innovation of a drama about a contemporary Roman hero. 91 Alternatively, the unusual circumstances of the celebration of Marcellus' victory over Syracuse in 2II, with an Alban triumph on one day, followed by an ovatio on the next, might also have provided the occasion for a drama recalling Marcellus' great deed of 222. It is also possible that Clastidium was first performed after Marcellus' death, at the dedication of his temple by his son in 205. 92 If so, it is still reasonable to see Marcellus' influence, since he had planned to dedicate the temple himself in 208 and, most likely, had also planned any public entertainment that would accompany it. An innovation such as the first Jabula praetexta is unlikely to have been introduced by Marcellus' son, who in 205 had relatively little political prestige. 93 By augmenting his reputation for martial prowess through the use of cultural institutions that were either themselves Greek in nature, or that were borrowed from Greek practices, Marcellus was breaking new ground. The tradition of public art and the political benefits its presentation conferred began with Marcellus' displays of the spoils of Syracuse, and he should receive full credit for the innovation. By displaying works of art, he added a new element to the political capital that Roman leaders had traditionally gained through triumphs and manubial temples. 94

Zorzetti, La pretesta, pp. 58-87, argued for the triumph as the regular venue for praetextae, and there is no strong reason to deny that Clastidium was performed for Marcellus' triumph in 222. Gruen, 196, favored a date close to 222, Studies, p. 94, but rejected a triumphal venue only because the first recorded dramatic performance of any kind at a triumph took place in 145, Studies, p. 196. Flower's objection, CQ 45 (1995) pp. 181- 4, that fabulae praetextae about victory would reduplicate the triumphal procession, is strained. 9 2 Flower's position CQ 45 (1995) pp. 181-4· The idea that Clastidium was performed at Marcellus' funeral in 208 was refuted by Flower, CQ 45 (1995) pp. 177-9, 183-4. 93 In 205 the younger Marcellus had perhaps been appointed a duumvir aedi dedicandae by the senate; he held no elective office, see Orlin, p. 170, for discussion. For the dedication of the temple, see Liv. 29. II . 13 . 94 For the tradition of public art, note Cicero's statement about the Roman people's love of magnificentia publica (Mur. 76); and his remark at 2 Verr. 4.126. See also M. Agrippa's opinion that all paintings and statues should be public (plin. NH 35. 26). Pliny's contrasting the private art ofNero's Domus Aurea to Vespasian's having paintings done in the temple of Ho nos and Virtus (NH 35. 120) draws on the same tradition. 91

233

ROMAN MANLINESS

In the competItIve and traditional world of Roman politics, the winning of public support through displays of works of art aroused strong opposition. But in addition to being a clash between philhellene and conservative cultural attitudes, the opposition was also about the political use of Greek art.95 A generation after Marcellus the elder Cato would harshly criticize those who employed statues and paintings for political advancement. It is unlikely that Cato was the first to make the criticism. 96 Staging a play like Clastidium, in which a contemporary figure was praised and perhaps appeared as a character, was equally innovative and untraditional. That it also evoked opposition is suggested again from the strong criticism the elder Cato would later express against M. Fulvius Nobilior for taking along to his siege of Ambracia Ennius, who then wrote a praetexta entitled Ambracia, as well as from Cicero's statement about general approbation in earlier times against praising or criticizing contemporaries in drama. 97 Vowing a temple to Virtus should be seen as another of Marcellus' aggressive innovations that went beyond accepted aristocratic limits. As we have seen, the attitude of the senatorial aristocracy toward martial virtus was ambivalent. While it was regarded as the clearest and most prestigious way to demonstrate manliness, the very prestige it conferred made displays of virtus potentially dangerous. Institutional constraints, both religious and political, were developed to limit both displays of virtus, and the glory that such displays bestowed. In winning the spolia

95

96

97

McDonnell, "Roman Aesthetics," pp. 88-92. Gros' idea, REL 57 (I979) pp. 85-II4, that Fabius was the leader of traditionalist opposition to Marcellus' display of Greek art (Fabius followed his rival's example), and Ferrary's, Philhellenisme, pp. 573-5, that no such opposition existed, are both too narrow in that they interpret the incident in solely ideological terms, ignoring the political. Cato, De Signis et Tabulis - "Concerning Statues and Paintings," - ORF4 8.94, honorem emptitavere, malefacta benefactis non redemptitavere - "they repeatedly purchased public office, and repeatedly did not expiate their bad deeds with good ones." Gruen, Culture, p. II2, was wrong to dismiss the fragment as obscure in meaning. The title, given to the speech by grammarians, clearly indicates its principal subject. For the identification of this fragment with the title, see Scullard, Roman Politics2 , p. 260; cf Astin, Cato, p. 76. Cic. Rep. 4.I2; ORP 8.I48-5I; Cic. Arch. 27; and Astin, Cato, pp. I6, 73-4. Goldberg, Epic, p. II3-4, asserted that providing Fulvius with "good press" was not any part of Ennius' design. A conclusion certainly not true for Ambracia, and probably not for Annales either. For Ambracia see ROL, I, fabulae, frag. 374-8 = Vahlen, 386-92, and Annales, 388-99 S = ROL, I Ann. 384--'7. Ennius also wrote a poem entitled Scipio.

234

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

opima, Marcellus broke those constraints by demonstrating a kind of martial prowess that other Romans of his political status could not match. Marcellus' vow to dedicate a temple to Virtus symbolized the extraordinary degree of martial prowess that he displayed in winning the spolia opima. It also lay claim to the special favor of a quality that epitomized the ideal of manly behavior for all Roman citizens. For the vow implied that Marcellus exercised and perhaps "possessed" a degree of martial prowess beyond that of other Romans. As a political act, Marcellus' temple was not only an offense to the Fabii Maximi, but also a challenge to the entire senatorial class, because it elevated the virtus of Marc ellus to an unequalled and unacceptable level. Marcellus' innovations provided a model for ambitious Romans of succeeding generations, the earliest of whom, Scipio Mricanus, shared Marcellus' fate in being attacked by his senatorial peers for going beyond the limits of self-aggrandizement acceptable to the Roman aristocracy.9 8

5. MARCELLUS' SUCCESSORS

That the cult to Virtus was regarded as a challenge to the senatorial aristocracy is suggested by its subsequent history. In his book on Roman religion, Georges Dumezil wrote that divine Virtus and its cultic partner Honos "did not play an important role in the religious thought of the Romans. "99 The statement requires qualification and explanation. Although it is true that for most of the Republic, divine Virtus was not central to the Roman state religion, the divinity did become prominent in the imperial period, when it is frequently found on coins and on important state reliefs. Significantly, in the imperial period the official function of divine Virtus was as the attribute, or divine associate, of the emperor, or as the patron of soldiers who owed their allegiance to the emperor. roo From early in the Principate the emperor held a virtual 98

99 lOO

Cf. Harris, WIRR, p. 27. Flower, CIAnt 19 (2000) pp. 38-41, emphasized MarcelIus' skill at self-advertisement and the opposition it provoked. She also conveniently provided a list of Marc ellus' memorials, "Memories of Marc ell us," pp. 41-3. Dumezil, ARR, n, p. 400. The emperor was "the embodiment of the military virtus of the Roman state." J. B. Campbell, The Emperor and the Romal1 Army: 31 BC-AD 235 (Oxford, 1984) p. 6. For the ubiquity of Virtus on the imperial coinage, see earlier Chapter IV.

235

ROMAN MANLINESS

monopoly on martial glory, from which most of the senatorial aristocracy was effectively cut off. This close association of divine Virtus with the overarching martial prowess attributed to the one man Virtus Augusti - is revealing; like much else about the Principate it had its origin in the Republic. Beginning with Marcellus, all those known to have been associated with divine Virtus during the Republic were men who in one fashion or another attempted to overcome traditional aristocratic restrictions on glory and power by emphasizing their extraordinary martial prowess. Marcellus' method of gaining commands and political power by combining a superior military reputation with popular appeal based on Greek cultural displays was taken up by ambitious Romans of succeeding generations. ID1 Few, however, made overt claims to the patronage of divine Virtus. P. Cornelius Scipio Africanus may have been the first Roman to have been granted a triumph specifically for his virtus andfelicitas, and an inscription from Delos dated to 188 celebrates his 6:pETT) and EVCYE~Eia. But other than an attribution of divina virtus to him by two late-republican authors, there is little evidence that divine Virtus played a role in Scipio's career and program. It is probable that Scipio avoided overt associations with Virtus because during his lifetime that deity remained identified with Marcellus. 102 That Scipio and his supporters were sensitive and defensive about Marcellus' career and especially his dedication of the spolia opima, is suggested by Polybius' praise of Scipio for having risked his life in a cavalry engagement as a young man, but for not being rash enough to place his life in danger when he was a general; a cut at Marcellus, who consistently received harsh criticism from Polybius, and whose achievement at Clastidium was pointedly omitted in Polybius' account of the Gallic campaign of 222. 103

101 I02

10l

See Gruen, Culture, pp. I04-29 , and earlier n. 82. On virtus and Scipio, see Weinstock, DivusJulius, p. 230. On the triumph, see Cic. Fin. 4.22 and the discussion on felicitas earlier in Chapter n Section 2. For the inscription, which is formulaic, see SIC 617. The attribution of divina virtus was made by two late-republican authors, C. Oppius and Iulius Hyginus, Gell. NA 6.1. For praise of Scipio, see Polyb. IO.2-10.5.8; cf. Liv. 21.46.7-IO, and see Walbank, Commentary n, pp. 198-9. On the campaign of 222, see Polyb. I.34.15.

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

The first Roman after Marcellus known to have pursued a connection with Honos and Virtus is his homonymous grandson. Three times consul and twice a triumphator, this M. Claudius Marcellus erected statues and an inscription in or near the temple of Virtus in honor of his illustrious grandfather, his father, and himself. This was probably done after his Spanish campaign of 152-51 from which he returned with a great deal of booty. r04 Like his grandfather, this Marcellus' fame and career were built on an outstanding military reputation. He had held praetorian and proconsular command in Spain in 169 and 168, and had triumphed after consulships in 166 and 155. r05 And like his grandfather, he also challenged aristocratic restrictions on power and glory. For Marcellus used his military reputation to secure an illegal third consulship in 152. Serious reverses had been suffered in Nearer Spain in the previous year, and Marcellus was selected to command because of his outstanding military accomplishments. His candidacy, however, was in direct violation of the Lex Annalis that forbade a second consulship within a ten-year period. r06 It is not certain whether Marcellus' election was accomplished by special legislation or by popular pressure, but it was clearly regarded as threatening by the senatorial aristocracy. Shortly after Marcellus' third consulship a law was passed which forbade a second consulship. Cato spoke in favor of the law and the senatorial position. r07 The career of the next figure known to have been associated with divine Virtus not only employed a martial reputation to surmount aristocratic constraints on power and glory, but sought to displace the Claudii Marcelli as the patrons of the divine Virtus. It is clear from Polybius' description of his youth that P. Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus had decided early to pursue a non-traditional path to fame and office.

104

105

106

107

For the dedication, see Ascon. In Pis. lIC; on the booty see, Strabo 3 -4.3. See MRR, I, on these years for the sources, and Miinzer, "Claudius 225," RE (1899) cols. 275-60. See Astin, Lex Annalis, p. 19, n. 5, and Scipio Aemilianus, p. 38. See ORP 8 185-6 for the fragments of Cato's speech. On the law see Scullard, Roman Politics2 , p. 234. Astin, Calo, p. 120, reasonably connected Cato's speech to Plut. Cat. Mai. 8.8 f. For the significance of the illegal election, see Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, pp. 37-40.

237

ROMAN MANLINESS

His amazingly successful and in part illegal early career was built on a policy of public display designed to win popularity rather than on the conventional forms of Roman politics. Aemilianus was a philhellene, but more importantly he was intent on building a reputation as a man of the highest martial courage. 108 Polybius clearly states that Aemilianus volunteered to serve in the unpopular and dangerous Spanish war in ISI in order to establish a reputation for bravery.109 In relating this incident, however, Polybius makes the slanderous charge that M. Claudius Marcellus, who had commanded and triumphed in Spain, had ended the war with a treaty because he was a coward. The accusation almost certainly originated with Polybius' friend Aemilianus, and should be seen as part of a program to discredit Marcellus, the greatest general of his day, and the man who was associated with divine Virtus. IIO During the fighting in Spain Aemilianus displayed military skill and leadership, but most of all virtus. His most notable deed was the slaying of a barbarian in single combat. At thirty-three years, he was old for this and was considered rash. But his superior equestrian skills, gained in the hunt and demonstrated in the duel, made Aemilianus well suited for this preeminent display of virtus. He may have won a form of the spolia opima. III On returning to Rome, Aemilianus was a military hero. He immediately volunteered for the more popular campaign against Carthage, and during the difficult fighting there again displayed leadership and courage. He won the rare and coveted corona obsidionalis - "the siege crown" - for rescuing some cohorts cut off in battle. II2 Carthage had not yet fallen when Aemilianus returned to Rome, nominally to run 108

109

lID

III

II2

Polybius' account of the virtues of Aemilianus conforms to the standard Hellenic virtues, see 31.25.2,31.25.9; 31.28.II and 31.29.1. Polybius' statement at 35.4.4-14 that of all the young Roman nobles in 151 only Aemilianus had the courage to volunteer for service in the Spanish war can hardly have been written for a Roman audience of contemporaries or their sons. Polyb. 35.4.13; Liv. Per. 48, with Walbank, Commentary, Ill, p. 647 and Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, pp. 45-6. For the charge against Marcellus, see Polyb. 35.4.3, with Walbank, Commentary, Ill, p.647· On the secunda spolia opima, see Florus 1.33.II-12, previously in Chapter VI, note 74, and McDonnell, "Aristocratic Competition," pp. 147-8. See Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, pp. 62-3, for all this. On the great prestige attached to the corona obsidionalis, see Maxfield, pp. 67-9.

DIVINE VIRTUS - M. CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS AND ROMAN POLITICS

for the aedileship of 147. In what must have been a carefully engineered demonstration, that verged on a popular riot, Aemilianus, although ineligible because of age and lack of previous office, was elected consul by popular demand. The presiding consul and the senate objected strenuously, but were forced to grant him special exemption from the laws. In another extraordinary procedure the command at Carthage was assigned to Aemilianus by the people rather than by the customary lot. II3 Aemilianus went on to capture Carthage and become the greatest general of his age, the second Africanus. But his handling of the spoils of Carthage is telling. Before deciding what he would take for his triumph, Aemilianus invited representatives of the Greek cities of Sicily to inspect the spoils and depart with what works of art they determined had been taken from them over the centuries by the Carthaginians. II4 The generous gesture made a great impact, and was meant as a contrast with the treatment that some of the Greek cities of Sicily had received from Marcellus during the Second Punic War. II5 Aemilianus kept enough of the booty for his triumph, which was graced with the statues and votive offering of Carthage, to be described as the most remarkable ever. In terms of the art displayed, it was probably the most impressive since Marcellus had exhibited the spoils of Syracuse in 2II. II6 It was at the time of his Carthaginian triumph that Aemilianus dedicated a shrine to Virtus. II7 Mter Scipio Aemilianus other politically ambitious and militarily successful Romans associated themselves with divine Virtus - Marius,

IlJ Il4

IIj

II6 II7

App. Lib. II2, Liv. Per. 50 and SI, and Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, pp. 61-9. Agrigentum, Gela, Himere, Tyndaris, and Segeste are known to have recovered items. App. Lib. 133; Diod. Sic. 32.25; Liv. Per. 52; Cic. 2 Verr. LII; 2.85-6; 4.72-4, 80 & 93; 5.184. For full references see Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, p. 76, n. 4· The same type of gesture, for the same reason, had been made by the elder Africanus in 205, when he returned to Sicilian Greeks property they had lost in the war waged by Marcellus; Liv. 29.1.15-18. Ferrary, Philhellenisme, pp. 578-82; cf. Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, pp. 76-<). App. Lib. 135; cf. Livy's comment (25.3I.II) on captured Syracuse. Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, p. 79, was correct to date the dedication of Aemilianus' shrine to Virtus to the time of his Carthaginian triumph in 146; see Plut. Fort. Rom. 5(316B). Rom. Apophth. Scip. Min. (200B). Plutarch designates Scipio as Numanticus, but this is probably to distinguish him from Scipio Maior in what is a list of military men. On the problem, see Weinstock, DivusJulius, p. 231, n. 2, and the Teubner text, loco cit.

239

ROMAN MANLINESS

Pompey, and Caesar. But late republican politics were fundamentally altered by the Gracchan crisis, which divided the Roman ruling class and created new ways in which the power of the senate would be challenged. The late Republic also saw a fundamental change in the relationship between Roman generals and the soldiers they commanded, and as post-Gracchan popularis politics provided new opportunities to be exploited in the Comitium and Forum, the politicized post-Marian army created an alternate manner in which military leaders could portray their special connection with divine Virtus that differed from the heroic model that had been established by Marcellus.

VIII

VIRTUS CONTESTED

Marius was seen in the front line doing the things he had just advised, for he was inferior to no one in physical conditioning, and superior to all in boldness. Plutarch

Seven times consul, celebrant of two triumphs, savior ofItaly, and dedicator of a temple to Honos and Virtus, C. Marius was the quintessential man of virtus in that he used his extraordinary military reputation to challenge the power of the Roman senate. But Marius' martial achievements, and his special relationship to divine Virtus, were depicted in a manner different from the model established by Marcellus and followed by Scipio Aemilianus. Rather than a heroic rider who overcomes an enemy in single combat, Marius was portrayed as a commander who fights on foot, shoulder to shoulder with his men, and who, when offered a challenge to single combat, declines it. I Moreover, unlike Marcellus, who augmented popularity won by a military reputation with Greek cultural displays, or Aemilianus, who was a philhellene, Marius presented himself as a staunch opponent of Hellenism. The different portrayals reflect fundamental military, political, and cultural changes that occurred in Roman society during the second century, the same changes that also transformed the Roman concept of manliness.

I

Plut. Mar. 25.2; Front. Strat. 4.7.5 Marius is reported to have been victorious in mounted single combat when a young man at Numantia; Plut. Mar. 3.2.

ROMAN MANLINESS

I.

THE EXPERIENCE OF WAR

The nature of the military experience of the Roman citizen changed dramatically during the course of the second century. The change was effected by complex processes, the details of which are themselves difficult to follow, especially with the loss ofLivy's narrative after 167. It is possible, however, to gauge some of the ways in which military experience was altered by reference to certain institutional changes that are somewhat easier to trace. For the common citizen with enough property to qualifY for it, military service became progressively more burdensome over the course of the second century, and then rarer as the Roman infantry was transformed from a civilian militia to a professionalized army. Unfortunately, we can catch only a glimpse of the transition. But by the mid-second century, when military service outside ofItaly became the norm, the citizen-soldiers' experience of warfare had become altered fundamentally, since for many this meant years of continuous service away from home. By the end of the second century, the Roman army was itself a changed institution, more uniform in terms of equipment, fighting units, and function, and with the majority of soldiers recruited from a poorer segment of society. The military experience of the common soldier was also politicized, as different attitudes toward discipline and recompense developed, especially during times of civil war, when the army played a larger and more direct role in politics. 2 Institutional changes that affected the experience of war among the Roman elite were less comprehensive, but no less significant. The major such change was the decline in the office of military tribune. Once prestigious enough to be sometimes held by ex-consuls, over the period from c. 150 to 100, the importance of the military tribunate waned as subordinate positions of command were entrusted to experienced men who served as legates, and as young men from senatorial 2

The best analysis of the political attitudes of soldiers of the late Republic remains P A. Brunt, "The Army and the Land in the Roman Revolution," in The Fall cif the Roman Republic and Related Essays (Oxford, 1988) pp. 240-80, esp p. 257 ff. For military training, see Horsmann, pp. 6-41, 51-2. In general, see L. Keppie, The Making cif the Roman Army (London, 1984) pp. 1-79; A. Lintott, CAH'IX (1994) pp. 36-9. E. Gabba, Esercito e societa nella tarda repubblica Romana (Florence, 1973) pp. 1-5 = Republican Rome, the Army and the Allies, trans. P J. Cuff (Berkeley, 1976) pp. 1-69.

VIRTUS.CONTESTED

families forsook it in favor of junior civilian offices. The end of the process of decline can be seen in Caesar's disparaging remarks in the early 50S about military tribunes with no military experience panicking while on campaign with him in Gaul. 3 A concomitant change that is even more difficult to trace, affected the senatorial order only. The traditional requirement for political office of ten years military service could be evaded by the 120S, and by the time of Cicero it had lapsed entirely. 4 Aside from an occasional notice in a literary work, we are generally too ill informed to say much about how transformations in the Roman army affected the experiences of Roman legionary soldiers, other than that until the very end of the second century their service tended to be longer and less attractive. But information about the Roman upper classes presents the possibility of tracing the relationship between institutional changes and the military experiences and attitudes of the elite. In searching for attitudes and experiences concerning war, an obvious place to begin is the record of military successes and failures. For a half century after the defeat of Hannibal, Roman arms had been triumphant. But beginning in the mid-150s, Rome began to meet with frequent military reverses. Setbacks and serious defeats in Spain occurred repeatedly through the decades of the 150S, 140s, and 130S. In addition, in 149 the large-scale siege of Carthage had been stymied, and in the following year a Roman army with its commander was lost in Macedonia. A decade later, Roman generals were defeated in a Sicilian slave revolt in 135-34, and in 130 a proconsul lost his army and his life fighting in the province of Asia. 5 After a hiatus,

J

4

5

Caes. BC I 39.2. On the office of military tribune, see Suolahti, The Junior Officers, pp. 29-141, Wiseman, New Men, pp. 143-53, and Harris, WlRR, p. 13. Sulla was military tribune after he held the quaestorship, Plut. Sui. 4. I; cf. Sail. B196. I, with the comment of Harris, WlRR, p. 257. See also Keppie, pp. 39-40. Cic. Font. 42-3, in the early 60S. L. Licinius Crassus (cos. 95), who should have served in the army during the 120S, almost certainly did not; see Cic. De or. 2.365; Harris, WlRR, pp. 12 and 257. For the traditional requirements, see Polyb. 6.19.5 and earlier Chapter VI. Defeats in Spain at the hands of the Lusitani and Celtiberi are recorded for the years 154, 153,151,147,146,145,142,141,140,138,136, and 135; see MRR, I for these years, and DeSanctis, Storia dei Romani IV I, pp. 466-85, and IV 3 (Florence, 1964) pp. 222-57; also

243

ROMAN MANLINESS

serious military problems arose again, this time principally along the northern borders of Roman hegemony. In I19 a Roman governor was defeated and killed in Macedonia. There followed from I14 on a series of military disasters first along the Danube, later in southern Gaul, in which Roman armies were routed and consuls killed. The culmination came in 105, when two consular armies were annihilated at Arausio, leaving Italy open to invasion by the victorious German tribes. Add to these the defeat and death of a Roman general in Spain in I13 or I12, the incompetence and corruption of senatorial generals fighting in Numidia against Jugurtha from III to I09, and reverses in a slave revolt in Sicily in 104 to 102. 6 Certainly the Romans had many victories in the years from 150 to I05, but it was the defeats that marked a major change from the previous half century, and the defeats had serious political consequences. The military setbacks in Spain occasioned popular demonstrations against the levying of soldiers in 151, a scenario that was repeated in 138. Also affected was the behavior of some upper-class Romans. In order to avoid serving in Spain, elite young Romans in 151 not only declined to stand for the office of military tribune, but also refused service after being nominated as military legates by the consuls? In addition, lack of success in the field had a direct and important effect on senatorial politics. Failures by Roman commanders to secure victories in Spain and North Africa permitted M. Claudius Marcellus in 152, and Scipio Aemilianus in 147 and again in 134, to be elected to the consulship in abrogation of laws that restricted eligibility for that office. These instances set a precedent for the five successive consulships (I04-100)

6

7

Harris. CAH 2 VIII (1989) pp. 131-7, and p. 159 on Carthage in 149. For the Macedonian defeat, see E. Will, Histoire politique du monde helTenistique 2 (Nancy, 1967) pp. 326-8, and 352-6 on the defeat in Asia in 130; also Kallet-Marx, Hegemony, p. 109. On the slave revolt in Sicily, see Bradley, Slavery and Rebellion, pp. 140-1, with T. Corey Brennan, RFIC 121 (1993) pp. 153-84, and A. Keaveney, Klio 80 (1998) pp. 73-82 on the dates. See the references listed in MRR for the years ll9, II4-ll3, III to 107, 105, and 104-2; see also Lintott, CAlP, IX, pp. 20-37. For the war with Jugnrtha, see R. Syrne, Sallust (Berkeley, 1964) pp. 138-56, and on the reverse in the Second Sicilian Slave War, Bradley, Slavery and Rebellion, pp. 66-82. For the incidents of 151, see Polyb. 35.4.3-6, with Walbank, Commentary, p. 641, and MRR, I, pp. 455-6. For 138, see Cic. Leg. 3.20; Liv. Per. 55. On actions of the plebeian tribunes in these years, see L. R. Taylor,JRS 52 (1962) pp. 19-27.

244

VIRTUS CONTESTED

held by Marius in the face of the crisis following the Roman defeat at Arausio. 8 Causes for the lack of success in Roman arms are complex. Declining numbers of citizens who could meet the financial requirement for military service was a factor. 9 But repeated reports of major defeats, and of the ambush and capture of Roman armies with their commanders, point to deficiencies in leadership. IQ It is reasonable to see a relationship between failures in military leadership and the changes in the institutions by which the Roman elite received its military training the decline in the military tribunate, and the eventual abandonment of the military service requirement to stand for political office. What might the underlying causes of these related phenomena have been? To answer the question we must look once again at the nature of the military service of upper-class Romans. Since the mid-fourth-century, elite Romans had been going to war on horseback as members of the Roman cavalry. Except for the years when they might serve as . commanders of allied troops - praifecti - or as military tribunes, or, if of the senatorial order, enter on the offices of the cursus honorum, Roman horsemen could continue to serve with the cavalry for as long as they were physically able. As we have seen, thirty-five seems to have been the age at which the public horse could be returned honorably, and presumably most Romans ceased riding with the cavalry at about that age. Such Romans continued to take part in war as horsemen, but not as part of the Roman cavalry. This pattern of service changed over the course of the second century, when Roman horsemen were replaced by units of non-Roman auxiliaries as the tactical cavalry unit in the Roman army. Again, the process is obscure. We know that by the latter part of the third-century Roman equestrian units were being augmented by allied Italian and non-Italian cavalry. But Roman citizen cavalrymen were still fighting 8

9

10

For the election of 152, see Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, pp. 37-40; on 147, pp. 61-9; on 134, pp. 183-4. On Marius, see the discussion that follows. Contra J W Rich, "The Supposed Roman Manpower Shortage of the Late Second Century B.e," Historia 32 (1983) pp. 287-331; see M. H. Crawford, 'fl1e Roman Repuhlic' (Cambridge, MA, 1993) p. 227 on App. BC I II (44-5); see also Brunt, IM, pp. 75---'7, 39 1-441,625-99. Serious defeats and/or ambushes are recorded for 154, 146, 140, 138; see MRR for the years in question.

245

ROMAN MANLINESS

as a unit when Livy's narrative breaks off in 167, and they are noted as having fought, but also to have mutinied, in Spain in 140. 1I In Polybius' description of the Roman army, citizen cavalry is a regular part of it (6.20.6). It is difficult to be sure about the period Polybius is writing about, but placing it much later than 150 is hazardous. I2 In 102, a unit of Roman cavalry disgraced itselfby defeat and desertion at the battle of the Athesis River in northeast Italy against the Cimbri. I3 Certainly in Caesar's well-documented campaigns in Gaul (58-50), the Roman cavalry was entirely made up of non-Roman auxiliaries, while upper-class Romans, who were still mounted, served only as officers. I4 Precisely when the Roman citizen cavalry came to an end is a debated point, but one not as important as the process that caused it. IS Over the course of the second century, the decision to use nonRoman auxiliary, in whole or in part, in place of citizen cavalry was a Roman commander's to make. But that decision would have been based in large part on the effectiveness of citizen cavalry, and that in turn depended on the preparedness and ability of elite young Romans as horsemen. A decline in that preparedness is indicated as early as the 16os, when Cato complained about the decadence of Rome's elite youth, and Polybius implied they were neglecting military training. I6 SO too Polybius' contrasting of the young Scipio Aemilianus' preparing for war as a mounted hunter, to the devotion of his contemporaries II

I2

IJ

I4

I5

I6

Dio, 21.78. Note that in 180 the Roman cavalry had performed exceptionally well in Spain, see Liv. 40.40.4-II. Contra McCall, p. 100. See Walbank, Commentary I, pp. 292-7, 656. Roman cavalry is mentioned in accounts of the Jugurthine War (rII-106), but it is difficult to know if they were still fighting as a unit, see McCall, pp. 100-1. Val Max. 5.8.4; see Gelzer, Nobilitiit, pp. 8-9 = Roman Nobility, pp. II-I2. A terminus post quem cannot be established in the mid 90S, since the critical passage, Suet. Gramm. 9, is ambiguous; contra McCall, p. 101. On Caesar's cavalry see McCall, p. I or -2, where he also argues cogendy that the large force of Roman citizen cavalry that fought for Pompey at Pharsalus in 48 was exceptional. Some date the end to the late second century and Marius, others to the period of the Social War (90-88); see McCall, pp. 102-8; B. Kiibler, "Equites Romani," RE VI (1907) coL 281; Hill, pp. 26-7. On the post-Marian cavalry, see Harmand, pp. 46-51; CL Nicolet, "Armee et Societe a Rome sous la Republique: a prop os de l'Ordre equestre," in Problemes de la guerre aRome, ed. J.-P. Brisson (Paris, 1969) pp. 9-r69, esp. p. 129 fr. It is not necessary to posit a new tactical need, or a general shortage of military manpower, to explain the change, contra McCall, pp. 103-4. Polyb. 31.25. 3-7; 31.29.8-II, and below, pp. 259-60. Cf. Polyb. 35.4.3-6, on the incident Of151, discussed earlier on p. 238.

VIRTUS CONTESTED

to legal cases and the Forum (31.29.8), suggests that the time elite young Romans spent practicing individual horsemanship, and training together as a tactical unit, had declined noticeableably by the 160s. 17 The process was self-perpetuating. At whatever period upper-class Romans thought they were no longer expected to fulfill the role of cavalry in battle, they no longer needed to put in the long hours of practice that proficiency in stirrup-less horsemanship requires. That L. Licinius Crassus seems to have been able to avoid cavalry service altogether in the 120S, implies that the process that led to the end of citizen cavalry was well advanced, if not completed, by that time. The implications of this process are important. The decline of the tactical use of the Roman cavalry not only affected, and was affected by, the time and energy elite young Romans spent on non-military pursuits, but it also significantly changed the way they prepared for and experienced war. Describing the military education of T. Quinctius Flamininus in the late-third century, Plutarch wrote that at that time, "young men straight-away from the beginning were taught how to command by serving in the army." (Flam. 1-4; cf. Plin. Ep. 8.14.5). With the cavalry's decline, however, the upper-class Roman's first experience of war would no longer be as part of the elite mounted unit, but as a member of a retinue attached to a general's staffthe contubernium - where he would listen to opinions expressed at staff meetings, and observe officers and soldiers in battle. In such circumstances, war was experienced primarily from an officer's perspective, and elite Romans learned about war in a more passive manner. Certainly, some young Romans would continue to establish martial reputations as mounted warriors - Scipio Aemilianus and Marius are two famous examples - but this would now be the choice of an individual, rather than the responsibility of a social group.18 The esprit de corps that training and fighting as an elite military unit engenders in its members was lost.

17

18

See Polyb. 31.29.8, with Walbank, Commentary, III, pp. 512-4, and Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, pp. 26-7. For the place of salutations, courts, and patronage among the senatorial aristocracy, see Gelzer, Nobilitiit, pp. 56-70 = Roman Nobility, pp. 7o-ro6. For the contubernium in the post-Marian army, see Harmand, L'Armee, pp. 383-85; McCall, pp. 112-3. On the general's staff meeting - consilium - see Goldsworthy, Roman Army, pp. 131-3.

247

ROMAN MANLINESS

2.

EQUITES EQUO PUBLICO

The tribunate of Ti. Gracchus in 133 brought an end to political consensus within the senatorial order more through a series of miscalculations than by design. Although one wonders how the waning of common cavalry service and the esprit de corps that went with it might have contributed to the lack of consensus displayed by the senatorial order in the face of the crisis of that year. But the program that C. Gracchus and his associates began to put together shortly after Tiberius' death was a planned and concerted challenge to the senate's political authority.1 9 That authority rested, to no small degree, on the prestige associated with the senatorial order's traditional status of military leadership. One might expect a well-planned challenge to senatorial power to include some form of attack on the collective martial reputation of the senatorial order, on its virtus, - something that C. Marius later did with great success. It is somewhat surprising, therefore, that nothing of the kind is to be found in the relatively full, if confused, reports of C. Gracchus' carefully thought-out political strategy. Lacking a significant military reputation, C. Gracchus could not have anticipated Marius' tactic of denigrating the senate's martial prowess by comparing it to his own, and the information we have about Gaius' program tends to concentrate on him alone and on the years of his tribunates (123-122).20 But it would be odd if a politician as sagacious as C. Gracchus would have missed an opportunity to attack what was at the time a major vulnerability of his opponents. In fact, evidence does exist for a highly significant plan to undermine the collective military reputation of the senatorial order. It is reflected in the numismatic record, and it concerns the traditional republican I9

See E. Badian, "Tiberius Gracchus and the Beginning of the Roman Revolution,"

ANRW I (Berlin, New York, 1972) pp. 668-731; D. Stockton, The Gracchi (Oxford, 1979) esp. pp. lIS and 167-8 on C. Gracchus' challenge to senatorial power. The comments of Crawford, The Roman RepubliC> pp. I20-I, on publicani and equites jurors miss the point. It is not a matter of how many equestrians were publicani, but of the latter's 20

influence. We might have a different picture if the historical tradition were not so heavily optimate in character, or if we possessed more than one fragment (ORP 40.1) of the speeches of Gaius' ally, M. Fulvius Flaccus, an outstanding general. On the concentration of the surviving accounts, see Stockton, p. 87. Gaius did defend his extended military service, see ORP 48.123 = Plut. C. Gracc. 2.6.

VIRTUS CONTESTED

ambivalence about the image intimately connected with virtu5, that of the mounted warrior.21 Until the 180s, Roman coinage was dominated by a relatively small number of "public " or "state" types, depicting either deities or symbols that were emblematic of the Roman state - such as Jupiter in a victory chariot, the Dioscuri, or a ship's prow - that were repeated with little variation. By the 180s increased political competition seemed to have led moneyers to introduce types bearing symbols or emblems referring to their own ancestors and families. 22 Experimentation with such "private," or better "family" types went on for some forty years, but suddenly in the early 130S, the position of moneyer became popular with members of noble senatorial families. At the same time, reverse types began to change from year to year, and their ancestral references became much more explicit and frequent, with images of historical figures appearing as reverse types in c. 137, 135, and 134 (RRC 234, 242, and 243, respectively). T. P. Wiseman and Michael Crawford rightly pointed to politics as the determining factor for this important change, in particular, the need for electoral advertising on coins after the Lex Gabinia of 139 introduced the secret ballot in elections. 23 What is surprising, however, is that in a society where military achievement, both personal and ancestral, was regarded as the best qualification for holding public office, there was initially no representation of an ancestor as a warrior on the coins. As we have seen, since the mid-fourth century, the Roman senatorial elite had fought and won military glory as cavalrymen, yet the only mounted warriors to appear on Roman coinage were the 21 22

2J

On which see earlier Chapter IV. For public and private types see Crawford, RRC, 11, pp. 713-28. Symbols or abbreviations of the monetary magistrate's name begin to appear in the early second-century and become standard by about 170, Crawford, RRC, 11, p. 725. Crawford, RRC, 11, pp. 728-9, and Wiseman, New Men, pp. 4-5, 148-9, and 204. The attempt by A. Meadows and J. Williams, "Moneta and the Monuments: Coinage and Politics in Republican Rome," JRS 91 (2001) pp. 27-49, to substitute for a political explanation a "commemorative" one, in which the innovative ancestral reverses are one more example of how noble families monumentalized their ancestors, ignores the rapidly changing nature of Roman politics in the 150S and 140S, as well as failing to provide an adequate explanation for why, what was in their own words "a paradigm shift," should have occurred when it did. The Roman nobility has been monumentalizing its ancestors since the late fourth century.

249

ROMAN MANLiNESS

4. Dioscuri. Reverse type. Denarius, c. 206-200 B.C. (RRC 128). Courtesy of American Numismatic Society

Dioscuri, [Fig. 0,] patrons of the Romans state cavahy , symbol of the collectIve virtus of the Roman elite, a quintessentially state type 24 This changed with a reverse type of a mounted warrior charging into battle on a denarius minted by l\!larcius Philippus in I29 Of soon after (RRC 25911)25 [Fig. 5]. I/Jhoever the 1110unted figure on 24

25

The only exception is a coin of c. 21I-2IO with a horseman as a reverse type (R<'
VIRTUS CONTESTED

5. Mounted warrior. Reverse type. Denarius, I29 B.C. (RRC 259). Courtesy of American Numismatic Society

the reverse is supposed to represent, it is not a deity, but the first m.ortal to be depicted on a Roman coin as a n1.ounted warrior, and a clear assertion of ancestral senatorial virtus. 26 Shortly after, in either 128 or 127, a reverse type depicting a battle between two mounted warriors was coined by C. Servilius (RRC 2641I) [Fig. 6]' The type celebrated the moneyer's famous ancestor, M. Servilius Pulex Geminus, who was consul in 202, and who was reputed to have slain 23 men in single combat. 27 After a determined reversion to traditional state types beginning around 126 and lasting about ten years (most likely the

26

278 & 279 - 121 B.C.; RRC 280 - 120 B.C.; RRC 281 & 27I - II9 B.C.; RRC 282 lIB B.C. In order to maintain Crawford's year of 129 B.C. for RRC 259, it is necessary to posit more years to single issues than did Crawford in the period between 128 and I25, and betvveen 128 and lI8. But fewer single issues in these periods would down date RRC 259 by only a few years. For the hoard evidence, see D. Backend01f, Riil'nische JII!iil1zschdtze des zweitel1 und as ten Jahrhunderts v. Chr. vom italienischel1 Festland (Berlin, I998) esp. Table E. I thank William Metcalf for his expert assistance in these matters. Crawford, RRC, 1. p. 285, thought this figure is perhaps one of the Dioscuri. But the

27

unusual helmet is different from anything seen on Castor and Pollux - not similar to the hehnet in Daremberg-Saglio, II (F-G) Col. 1448, contra Crawford - and a general similarity to earlier numismatic representations of the Dioscuri is to be expected in what was the first coin to represent a non-divine mounted warrior. For other proposed identifications, see H. A. Grueber, Coins oJ the Roman Republic in the British JVIuseum I (London, 19IO) p. 175, n. 2 and W Kubitschek, Studien zu ]'V[iinzen del' riimischen Republik (Vienna, 19II) pp. 7-8. An equestrian statue was erected to Q. Marcius Philippus at Olympia in I69; Siedentopf, p. 102, and ef. MRR, I, pp. 413-23. Crawford's date is 127; for I2S see earlier n. 27. On Servilius Pulex, see Plin. NH7.103. 25I

ROMAN MANLINESS

6. Mounted warriors. Reverse type. Denarius 128 or 127 B.C. (RRC 264!r). Courtesy of American Numismatic Society

result of senatorial action to regulate the choice of coins types),28 a new period of strident self-advertisement was inaugurated in II6 or IIS, when the moneyer M. Sergius Silus struck a reverse showing a one-handed horseman carrying a sword and a human head (RRC 286) [Fig. 7]. The coin comn1.emorated the moneyer's ancestor, M. Sergius Silus, a famous equestrian monomachist (Plin. NH 7. 1045)· Shortly after, in either II4 or II3, Mn. Aemilius Lepidus issued a coin depicting the equestrian statue honoring the youthful heroics of his ancestor during the Hannibalic War (RRC 291). In II3 or II2, a coin struck by L. Marcius Philippus (RRC 293/r) displays a reverse type of a rider (not an equestrian statue) carrying a laurel branch. The attribute denotes a triumphator, and the reference is almost certainly to the moneyer's ancestor, Q. Marcius Tremulus, whose victory over the Hernici in 306 earned him an equestrian statue. 29 In the same year (or perhaps in u6), L. Manlius Torquatus minted a coin whose reverse depicts a mounted warrior charging into battle

28

For the reversion to state (public) types during these years, see Crawford, RRC, n, p. 729; the Narbo issue of II8 B.C. (RRC 282) is anomalous. During the years 128 to 126, however, themes of ancestral victory continued to appear as reverse types; see RRC 263, 269·

20

On RRC 293 /r, not representing a statue, see Sehlmeyer, pp. 182-3. The togate equestrian statue of Q. Marcius Tremulus is probably to be seen on the denarius of either 56 or 57 (RRC 425/r); see earlier Chapter IV, n. 41.

VIRTUS CONTESTED

7. Mounted warrior. Reverse type. Denarius II6 or IIS B.C. (RRC 286). Courtesy of American Numismatic Society

(RRC, 295), an allusion to his monomachist ancestor, T. Manlius Torquatus. 3o The sudden introduction in 129 or shortly after of reverse types depicting the moneyer's ancestor as a mounted warrior is a striking innovation and requires explanation. Looking again to contemporary political events, Crawford suggested that the change should be associated with a law mentioned in Cicero's De re publica, and which is dated to 129. In a discussion of the benefits of the traditional Roman voting system, the protagonist ofCicero's dialogue, Scipio Aemilianus says: nimis multis iam stulte hanc utilitatem tolli cupientibus, qui nOiJam largitionem quaerunt aliquo plebiscita reddendorum equorum. - "Too many now stupidly desiring to abolish this useful (system) seek a new kind of bribe with some plebeian law for returning the horses." (Cic. Rep. 4.2). This plebiscitum equorum reddendorum has generally and correctly been understood as a measure that mandated that 300 odd Roman senators, and men elected to office who would soon become senators, return the public horse that was granted at public expense to the 1,800 Romans selected by the censors to be members of Rome's traditional

30

Crawford, RRC 29S, and p. 308, rejected this identification, but see below. H. B. Mattingly, "The Management of the Roman Republican Mint," Anl1ali, Istituto Italiano di numismatico 29 (1982) pp. 9-46, esp. p. 41, argues that RRC 295 was a joint issue with RRC 286, which is dated by Crawford to lI6 or lIS.

253

ROMAN MANLINESS

state cavalry.3 1 That the measure became law should not be doubted, because in the well-documented period of the late Republic there is no reference to a senator being a member of the equestrian order.3 2 The law created for the first time a legal distinction between senators and equestrians, and its date, in addition to Scipio's negative description of it as - nova largitio - "a new type of bribe," shows that it was sponsored by the supporters of the Gracchan reforms and directed against senatorial opposition to those reforms. 33 One aim of the plebiscitum equorum reddendorum was certainly to win the support of wealthy nonsenators for the Gracchan program. Whether it should be interpreted as designed to permanently divide Rome's elite into separate senatorial and equestrian orders, and pave the way for C. Gracchus' later jury legislation, or as a more limited political maneuver to win the support of 300 new equestrian voters for the Gracchan cause, is debatable. 34 But viewed from the senatorial perspective, it was without doubt a grave affront. Before the law was passed many senators held the public horse, some of them continuing to hold it well beyond the age at which they could be effective cavalrymen. 35 The act or even the threat by a censor of taking the equus publicus away from an individual senator constituted a public humiliation and was a form of political

31

32

33

34

35

Crawford, RRC, I, p. 285. For the dramatic date of Cicero's dialogue, see Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, p. 245. E. Badian, Publicans and Sinners (Ithaca, 1972) pp. 56-7, argued strongly that the measure was passed late in 129, contra Nicolet, L'Ordre equestre, I, pp. 513-15. Nicolet, L'Ordre equestre, I, p. 104, contra Stockton, pp. 93-4. The number of persons in the eighteen centuries who held the public horse is disputed; Nicolet, pp. II3-21, argued for 2,400; most scholars think there were 1,800 equites equo publico, see Hill, The Roman Middle Class, pp. 42-3. On Dion. Hal. 6.13-4-5, see Nicolet, pp. 212-3. After 129, excluded senators presumably voted in the centuries of the first class. What effect they had on the voting patterns of these centuries is a nice question. Mommsen, R. Staatsr. np pp. 505-6; A. Stein, Der romische Ritterstand (Munich, 1927) pp. 1-4; Nicolet, L'Ordre equestre, I, pp. 103-1II. For the pejorative meaning of largitio see, M. McDonnell, Hermes II8 (1990) pp. 62-4. Badian, Publicans, pp. 56-57, gave the broad interpretation; T. P. Wiseman the narrow one, Historia 19 (1970) pp. 78-9 = Roman Studies, p. 69 and Phoenix 27 (1973) pp. 191-2 = Roman Studies, pp. 76---"7. At the batde of Cannae many high-ranking senators, who must have been equites equo publico, fought (Liv. 22.49.16-17). In 204 both censors held public horses; one of them was over 50 (Liv. 29. 37.8-10; Val. Max. 2.9.6; 7.2.60); see Nicolet, L'Ordre equestre, I, pp. 75-6, and Stein, p. 2.

254

VIRTUS CONTESTED

attack. 36 The censors of 204, who were political enemies, attempted to deprive one another of his public horse, and Cato was accused of waging a political vendetta when, as censor in 184, he took the public horse from Lucius Scipio. 37 Senators prized the public horse for two reasons. First, it allowed them to vote in the prestigious eighteen equestrian centuries;3 8 second, and perhaps more importantly, it permitted them to participate in the spectacle of the transvectio equitum, the importance of which is under-appreciated. For centuries, senators had been part of the spectacle of the eighteen centuries of cavalrymen parading "as if coming from war" along the Via Appia and into the city, to lavish sacrifices at the temple of Castor in the Forum and then on the Capitol. 39 The transvectio equitum was ancient Rome's most important regular military spectacle, its purpose being to reaffirm the martial role of the upper classes, its collective virtus. To be an eques equo publico and to ride in the annual cavalry parade, conveyed status and political advantage. The gravity of the affront carried in the plebiscitum equorum reddendorum of 129 is clear. If being deprived of the public horse by a censor was an insult to the standing and honor of an individual senator, then a law that excluded all senators from participation in the transvectio equitum was a blow directed at the prestige of the entire senatorial order. Moreover, the blow was directed at the senate's most venerated, but at that time, vulnerable asset, its martial prestige. By 129 the military record of the senate had been tarnished by twenty years of setbacks in Spain, difficulty in putting down a slave revolt in Sicily, and by 36

37

38

39

Traditionally, probably since 304, censors had the right to compel an individual to return the equus publicus for various reasons, some involving ignominy, others not. But in ancient Rome physical incapacity was often connected to moral defects, see Gell. NA 4.I2.2; 6.22.I-4; and ORF4 8.72-82. In general see Mommsen, R. Staatsr. IP pp. 398-400, and Nicolet, L' Ordre equestre, I, pp. 83-8. As Plutarch (Cat. Mai. I8.I) specifically states about Cato; contra Astin, Cato, pp. 8I and 324. Lucius Scipio was perhaps 46 years old at the time, see Nicolet, L'Ordre equestre, I, pp. 75-6. For the censors of 204, see Liv. 29.37.8-ro; Val. Max. 2.9.6; 7.2.60. Liv. 39.I9.4 refers to a non-senator. On the composition and voting sequences of the sex suffragia of equites equo publico, see Mommsen, R. Staatsr. np, p. 245 n. 4; p. 254, n. 4; Hill, pp. I5-6; A. Momigliano, "Procum Patricum," jRS 56 (I966) pp. I6-24 = Quarto contributo alla storia degli studi classici (Rome, I969) pp. 377--94. On the transvectio, see earlier Chapter VI Section 2.

255

ROMAN MANLINESS

the recent defeat and death of a proconsul in the new province of Asia. 40 More pointedly, by the last third of the second century the Roman cavalry was changing from a tactical unit comprising upperclass Romans, to one composed of non-Roman auxiliaries. Given the nature of this attack on the senate's prestige, it is not surprising that senators reacted with a public and symbolic reassertion of the senatorial order's connection to the Roman equestrian martial tradition by advertising ancestral equestrian exploits on the reverses of coins in 129, 128 or 127, perhaps in II6, II4-II3, and II3-II2. SO urgent was the need to emphasize the senatorial association with the cavalry that T. Manlius Torquatus, who according to literary sources fought his duel with the Gaul on foot, was misrepresented as a mounted warrior on the coin of his moneyer descendant L. Manlius Torquatus (RRC 295).4' It was the serious challenge to the senate's old but vulnerable status as Rome's equestrian leaders in war posed by the plebiscitum equorum reddendorum of 129 that over~ame traditional senatorial reticence about representing aristocrats as mounted warriors. By the turn of the second century the exclusion of senators from the eighteen centuries of the equites equo publico had become an accepted reality. By this time also, the Roman elite had probably ceased to serve as Rome's cavalry. With those issues largely settled, the urgency of emphasizing the equestrian martial status of the senatorial order passed, and equestrian coin types became sporadic for a timeY But as

40

41

42

See the discussion earlier in this Chapter. That when Cicero was writing senators had not participated in the transvectio equitum for three generations accounts for his neglect of the plebiscitum equorum reddendorum being an affront to the senate and his emphasis on it as a nova largitio. RRC 295, and p. 308, where Crawford denies the reference because, according to Livy, the battle was fought on foot; cf. Mattingly, "Management," p. 41. But given that a torque is depicted on the obverse of the coin, the reference must be to the monomachy with the Gaul, see earlier Chapter V. A reference to the executed younger Manlius Torquatus is very unlikely. From I02 until 97, reverse types were dominated by references to the victories of Marius over the Germans, most of which are traditional state or "public" victory types, see RRC 322,323, 324, 328, 332, and 333, with Crawford, RRC, n, pp. 629 and 730. Non-traditional exceptions are the reverse type of IO!, showing Marius as triumphator in a chariot (RRC 326), a coin of IOO showing a battle on foot (RRC 327), and the first Honos and Virtus reverse issued in IOO (RRC 329), on which see earlier Chapter IV.

VIRTUS CONTESTED

the military experiences of the Roman elite changed, so did its attitudes towards war. It was precisely at this time that the requirement of ten years of military service for holding public office waned. The consequences were twofold. On the one hand, Roman nobles who had little or no military experience certainly did not think of themselves as less manly for it. What happened, inevitably, was that elite Romans began to rethink and to redefine what manliness - virtus meant. On the other hand, ambitious Romans who were so inclined, eagerly pursued military service, becoming military specialists, so to speak, though not necessarily to the exclusion of other pursuits and accomplishments. The ominous side of the latter development is reflected in the coinage of the late 80S, a time of civil war and dictatorship, when the image of the mounted warrior appears again as reverse types on two coins issued by supporters ofSulla. A denarius coined by P. Crepusius in 82 (RRC 361) displays a horseman brandishing a spear, and an equestrian battle scene is the reverse type of a coin struck sometime between 82 and 80 by the Sullan C. Servilius (RRC 370). It was also at this time, probably in 82, that a gilded equestrian statue of the dictator Sulla was erected on the Rostra, which was depicted on a coin minted in 80 (RRC 381).43 Perhaps as the result of a Sullan measure designed to control coin types, no equestrian reverse types appear on the coinage of the 70S and 60S, although coins with the images of Honos and Virtus (RRC 403) and Virtus (RRC 401) respectively were issued sometime between 71 and 65, perhaps with reference to Pompey.44 But the equestrian 43

44

For C. Servilus as a Sullan, see Crawford, RRC, I, p. 388. That RRC 370 and 36I have the same obverse type (head of Apollo), suggests that the otherwise unknown P. Crepusius, whose other issue (RRC 360) has Venus on the obverse, was also a supporter of Sulla; see Crawford, RRC, I, p. 732. For Sulla's statue, see Cic. Phi!. 9.6.13; App. BC I.97 (36), aud Bergemann, p. I59, LI9, for further references. The reverse of RRC 370 is a reissue of RRC 265. Though most of the 80S coin types were devoted to victory during Social War - RRC 344/3 & 4, 345/ I & 2; and to factional appeals to deities and traditional symbols - RRC 348, 350a, 352, 357, 358, 359, 360. See Crawford, RRC, n, pp. 73I-3· A Sullan measure was suggested by Wiseman, New Men, pp. I48---9, cf. Mattingly, "Management," p. I3. RRC 403 is dated to 68 by Hersh and Walker, ANSMusN 29 (I984) pp. I03-34, to 70 by Crawford; RRC 40I to 65 by of Hersh and Walker, to 7I by Crawford; see earlier Chapter IV. For possible reference to Pompey, see subsequently Chapter IX. The coinage of the 60S is otherwise unremarkable, with few military themes

257

ROMAN MANLINESS

image became almost commonplace in the 50S, when republican government and republican constraints on political competition and self-aggrandizement were breaking down. Coins with equestrian reverse types were issued by M. Aemilius Lepidus (RRC 4191r) in either 58 (Hersh and Walker) or 61 (Crawford), by L. Marcius Philippus (RRC 425) in either 56 (Hersh and Walker), or 57 (Crawford), and by P. Fonteius Capio in 55 (RCC 429). It was in the 50S that Cicero remarked that Q. Caecilius Metellus Scipio was erecting gilded equestrian statues of his ancestors all over the Capitol. It was probably also at this time that Pompey's equestrian statue on the Rostra was set up, close to that of Sulla. 45 Civil war and dictatorship worked against republican constraint again in the 40s. In 47, a coin was minted by A. Licinius Nerva (RRC 4541r&2) showing a galloping horsema,n triumphantly dragging a naked captive by the hair, surely referring to Caesar's Gallic victories. Caesar, following the example ofPompey, had his own equestrian statue erected on the Rostra (certainly after the latter's death). He placed another in front of the temple of Venus Genetrix in his Forum. 46 In the chaos and war following Caesar's assassination, equestrian statues and reverse types proliferated. In 43, equestrian statues of M. Aemilius Lepidus, C. Octavian, and perhaps two of L. Antonius, brother of the triumvir, were erected in the Roman Forum. 47 From 43 to 41, Octavian's coin types were dominated by the image of his equestrian statues. In the imperial era, equestrian reserve types, together with martial virtu5, were synonymous with the emperor.4 8

45

46

47

48

other than one struck in 62 (RRC 415). Cicero wrote that a gilded equestrian statue of Verres was erected in 71,2 Verr. 2 150, and Bergemann, p. 158, L15 for further references. Gilded statues of Met ellus Scipio - Cic. At!. 6.1 [SB II5] 17. Pompey's statue - Veil. Pat. 2.61.3. Military themes abound on the coins of the 50S, many of which refer to Pompey; see RRC 422,423, 427/r, 438, and 426/3 & 4, with Crawford, RRC, n, p. 734-5. On Caesar's statue on the Rostra, see Veil. Pat. 2.61.3. For the statue in the Forum, see later Chapter IX. Other references to Caesar's campaigns in Gaul appear on the coins of 48 and 47; RRC 448, 450, 452, 453. Of the coinage between 49 and 44, see Crawford, RRC n, p. 736. Lepidus - Cic. Phi!. 5.40-41; Bergemann, p. 161, L24; E. Papi, "Equus: M. Aemilius Lepidus," LTUR 2, p. 224. Octavian- Cic. Ad Brut. 23 (1.15).3; Veil. Pat. 2.61.3; App. BC 3.51 (209); Dio 46.29.2. L. Antorllus - Cic. Phi!. 6.12-13, with Coarelli, Foro Romal1o 2, pp. 3IO-II, Bergemann, p. 160, L23, and Papi, "Equus, L AntOrllUS," LTUR 2, p. 225. Octavian's coins from 43 - RRC 490/r; 42 - 497/r; 41 - RRC 51812. A coin minted by Octavian in the east between 31 and 29 shows him on a galloping horse, nude to

VIRTUS CONTESTED

3. CULTURAL CHANGE AND HELLENISM

The waning of the Roman citizen cavalry occurred at a time when a variety of new opportunities for elite self-display were emerging. Certainly advocacy and legal expertise had long been important to Roman political life, and the public and competitive nature of the former assured that success in it especially brought prestige. But the status of public speaking and law just as certainly increased over the course of the second century as a result of the great economic, political, and cultural changes that were occurring. Growing wealth also changed the standard of political success in Rome. The cost of running for and holding public office increased enormously during this period. Oratory, law, and ever more lavish public display and private luxury increasingly became alternatives to a military reputation as a source of prestige and standing. 49 One consequence of the growing prestige of non-martial venues for elite competition, and of the concomitant decline of the Roman cavalry, was that the focus of the virile activities embodied by the term virtus began to shift to accommodate altered experiences, interests, and skills of some elite Romans. But the shift was perceived by certain influential Romans as a threat to Rome's military tradition, and there is good evidence, some of it contemporary, to show that some connected it to decadent activities they associated with Hellenic culture - that is time, energy, and money spent on eating, drinking, love affairs, and literature. In his discussion of the virtues of his friend Scipio Aemilianus, Polybius describes the dissolute habits of the elite Roman youth of the mid-r60s. No doubt, Polybius exaggerates the faults of other elite Romans, and of Roman society in general, in order to elevate the virtues ofScipio, but the terms of his critique are telling nonetheless. He writes that most youths in Rome had given themselves over to pederasty, or to courtesans, or to musical entertainment

49

the waist (BMC I Augustus, 594). For discussion see Bergemann, pp. 161-3, L25; Papi, "Equus: Octavianus," LTUR 2, pp. 230-1; and Zanker, Images, pp. 37-8. For senatorial involvement in the development of law, or jurisprudence, during the second half of the second century, see B. W Frier, The Rise of the RomanJurists (princeton, 1985) pp. 140-5, 155-71; and R. A. Bauman, Lawyers in Roman Politics (Munich, 1983) pp. 312-423. The increasing sophistication and prestige of Roman rhetoric over the course of the second century is the subject of Cicero's Brutus.

259

ROMAN MANLINESS

and banqueting. Polybius specifically relates these activities to Greek influences by describing Roman youths as "in the war with Perseus having been quickly carried away with the licentiousness - EVXEpEla of the Greeks in this regard." (Polyb. 31.25-4-5). That contemporary Romans shared Polybius' stated concerns is shown by a public speech of the elder Cato, quoted by Polybius, in which it was said that the Republic is in danger when the price of delicacies and good looking boys is greater than that of a farm and the slave to work it. Nor is there warrant to doubt that Romans in general connected such activities with Greeks, since in the popular plays of Plautus the derisive words pergraecari and congraecari, which literally mean "to behave like a Greek," were used to denote excessive drinking, eating, and lovemaking. 50 Polybius attributes the origin of such behavior, which he says was rife at the time he was writing (c. 150), to two causes: extravagance caused by the wealth that poured into Rome from the conquest of Macedon in 168, and the complacency about their military superiority that Romans felt after the fall of the kingdom of Macedonia. "They thought their universal dominion was now secured beyond dispute," states Polybius (31.25.6). But not all Romans were complacent about what was thought of as a decline in manliness. General concern over the standards of military preparedness is evident in the Roman decision to embark on war with the Dalmatians in 157. Again, the testimony of the contemporary witness Polybius is telling. He writes that one of the principal reasons why the senate decided on the war was because "they did not want the men of Italy to become effeminate Cm061lAVVw6at - in any way because of the long period of peace." (32.13. 6 ).5' Much of the evidence for the Roman fear of the softening effects of Greek culture on military standards centers around the actions and words of the elder Cato, and it can be shown from his own writings 50

jI

For example, Plaut. AlIost. 22; cf. Festus, "pergraecare," p. 235L. The general connection in the Roman mind between luxury and Greeks was demonstrated by J. Griffin, "Augustan Poetry and the Life of Luxury," in Latin Poetry and Roman Life (Chapel Hill, I986) pp. 5I3. On pergraecari and like terms, see McDonnell, "Roman Aesthetics," pp. 8I-2, contra Gruen, Studies, pp. 152-'7. Polybius gives the period of peace as 12 years. In fact, there were wars in this period, albeit not m.~or ones; see Walbank, Commentary, Ill, p. 535, and Astin, Scipio Aemilianus p. n8, cf. pp. ,,8 and II7. 260

VIRTUS CONTESTED

that Cato was concerned about the military preparedness of the elite who rode in Rome's cavalry. 52 As censor in 184, he made a proposal about the Roman cavalry that seems to have called for an increase in the number of Romans holding the public horse from 1,800 to 2,200 men. Cato's concern over the state of the Roman cavalry is also evident in his revocation of the public horse from the eques L. Veturius, because the man was too fat to ride in the Roman cavalry, as well as in his sarcastic quip that at one time men had paid more for their horses than for their cooks. 53 It is certainly the case that Cato connected the decline in the martial ethos of the Roman elite with what he perceived as the deleterious effects of some aspects of Hellenism. 54 Cato's concerns were practical, and it is important to note that what worried him most about the enthusiasm of young Romans for the speeches that the Greek philosopher Carneades delivered in Rome in 155 was not that Roman youths would devote their time and energy to abstract thinking, but that "the young would prize a reputation based on speaking rather than on martial deeds."55 Cato was himself a great orator, and public speaking was a traditional and important aspect of Roman political life, but not to

For the problem in identifYing Cato's own attitudes and opinions in the extant sources, especially Plutarch's biography and Cicero's dialogue De senectute; see Astin, Cato, pp. 29S-3 01. 53 ORPI 8.8S-6 has been interpreted variously; see P. Fraccaro, "Ricerche storiche e letterarie sulla censura del 1841r83," Studi Storici per l'Antichita Classica IV (19II) pp. 1139 = Opuscula I (pavia, 19S6) pp. 417-s08; Hill, pp. 42-3; Scullard, Roman Politics'", p. 262; Nicolet, L'Ordre equestre, pp. IIS-S. L. Veturius - ORPI8.72-82. Horses and cooks quip - Gell. NA 11.2.S. For Cato's general concern over the decline in military standards, see Plut. Cat. Mai. 4.3 and 22.S; cf. Astin, Cato, pp. 96---'7, and 176---'7. 54 Contra Gruen, Culture, pp. 66---'7S. To be sure, Cato was not hostile to all things Greek, and his "selective anti-Hellenism" was not systematic, but he was a politician, not a philosopher. There is in fact an explicit connection between criticism of luxuria and Hellenism in Cato's extant works. The highly trained and priced gourmet chefs that he complained about were introduced to Rome as a Greek practice; J C. B. Lowe, "Cooks in Plautus," CIAnt (198S) pp. 72-I02. See McDonnell, "Roman Aesthetics," p. 82 n. 16, and Astin, Cato, p. n8. 55 01 VEOI Tilv bI! TO? i\EyEIV 56~av aya1T11cywCYI 1100i\i\ov Tr;s emc TCDV epywv Ka! TWV CYTpaTElwv, (plut. Cat. Mai. 22.4). Most sources, Gell. NA 6.14.10-II; Cic. Rep. 3.9; Plin. NH 7.II2; Quin. Inst. 21.1.3S, state that in 1SS, young Romans were interested in the skill (or sophistry) in making an argument, not in philosophy. The latter is mentioned only at Cic. De or. 2.15S, and Plut. Cat. Mai. 23.1; the latter an exuberant comment, cf. 22.3. See J-L. Ferrary, "Le Discours de Philus (Ciceron, De Re Publica III 8-3!) 52

ROMAN MANLINESS

the exclusion of martial training and accomplishments. Cato's concern about the new prestige given to skill in public speaking also echoes the words of Polybius about Scipio Aemilianus preparing for war by riding in the hunt, while other young Romans spent all their time in the Forum. Nor was Cato alone in opposition to certain aspects of Greek culture. Scipio Aemilianus, who had received a Greek style education, and who was engaged and conversant with Greek culture, nevertheless as censor in 142 attacked the conduct of a contemporary, P. Sulpicius Galus, in terms that associated over-refinement and effeminate behavior with Greek practice. nam qui cotidie unguentatus adversus speculum ornetur, cuius supercilia radantur, qui barba vulsa feminibusque subvulsis ambulet, qui in conviviis adulescentulus cum amatore cum chiridota tunica inferior accubuerit, qui non modo vinosus, sed virosus quoque sit, eurnne quisquam dubitet, quin idem fecerit, quod cinaedi facere solent? For the sort of person who having been perfumed daily, would be adorned in front of a mirror, whose eyebrows would be shaved who would stroll about with his beard plucked and his thighs shaved, who as a youth with his boy-friend and with his long-sleeved tunic (chiridota tunica) would recline in a corner at banquets, who would be not only a wine-lover, but a manlover, would anyone doubt that he has done the same thing that catarnites are accustomed to do? ORF4 21.I7 = Gell. 6.I2.5 In a culture where visuals signs, especially apparel, served to indicate critical distinctions of status and power, Aemilianus' choice of a Greek word, chiridota, to describe a garment associated with effeminacy is certainly significant; he could just as well have used the Latin term for the offending garment - tunica manicata. 56 A more general hostility toward aspects of Greek culture was also manifested in official acts of the senate that in 161 authorized a praetor

56

et la philosphie de Carneade," REL 55 (r977) pp. r28-56. The influence of Crates of Mallos in r68 was on Roman scholars, not public men, Suet. De gram. 2. Contra A. Corbeill, Controlling Laughter (Princeton, r996) p. r61. Note that Cicero used the Latin term tunica manicata when attacking opponents; Cat. 2.22; Clod. frag. 22. For Scipio Aemilianus' concern for military efficiency, see Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, pp. II7-r8. For apparel as symbols, see earlier Chapter IV.

VIRTUS CONTESTED

to see to it that no philosophers and rhetoricians resided in Rome, and that issued a decree, probably in :154, expelling two Epicurean philosophers from the city. 57 All these concerns were real, and their seriousness and sincerity should not be doubted. But whatever concerns individual Romans, or even the majority of influential senators had about the deleterious effects of Hellenism on the martial spirit of young Romans, they did not constitute a general political or ideological division. That did not happen until the late-second century, at which time a significant change occurred in the overall level of the Hellenization of the Roman elite, and in the reaction to it. The Hellenization of Roman republican society is a large and difficult subject, and the ways in which Hellenism was accepted or rejected at Rome were necessarily complex. As a category, Hellenism represents a wide array of cultural forms and of patterns of behavior, and reaction to them naturally varied according to the particular aspect of Greek culture under consideration, as well as to individual preferences and experiences. 58 As we have seen in the case of Scipio Aemilianus, even the attitude of an individual Roman senator of the mid-second century toward Greek culture might not be consistent. Most important is that the attitudes of upper-class Romans to Greek culture changed over time. A century of intensive Hellenization and cultural change could not but have altered the attitudes and values of Romans. At the end of the third century M. Claudius Marcellus had admired Greek culture, and was proud to have introduced Greek art to the Roman people, but in education and outlook he was a man who adhered to Roman tradition; he epitomized that tradition. By the mid-second century Scipio Aemilianus had received a Greek education and was fully conversant with Greek culture, yet he also based his public life and career on traditional Roman values, where martial accomplishments were supreme. 59 It is not until the generation of Roman nobles born between c. 160 and 150, men such as Ti. and C. Gracchus, Q. Mucius 57

58

59

For the expulsion of 161, see Suet. Gram. 25; for the Epicureans, Athen. 547, with Gruen, Studies, p. 171-8. It is noteworthy that the ability to speak Greek well does not necessarily imply a knowledge or even sympathy with Greek culture; see Adarns, Bilingualism, pp. 12-3, 229-50. How the language was learned is a critical consideration; see earlier Chapter n, n. 40. See Earl, MPTR, pp. 36-40, "Scipio was interested and trained in Greek studies, yet in his public life he based his actions on Roman tradition" p. 39.

ROMAN MANLINESS

Scaevola, P. Rutilius Rufus, Q. Caecilius Metellus Numidicus, and Q. Lutatius Catulus, that we find a critical mass of influential senators who had internalized Hellenism to a degree that earlier generations had not. It is difficult to imagine Metellus Numidicus or Catulus making a public speech attacking effeminacy by singling out a specifically Greek type of apparel, as Scipio Aemilianus had done as censor in 142. It was this generation of Roman nobles, which governed the Republic in the last decades of the second century, that first proclaimed openly its Hellenic tastes and attitudes, and that in doing so had a critical impact on Roman politics as well as culture. 60 In the competitive world of Roman politics, such cultural assertions would not go unchallenged. Among other targets of the satires of the cultivated late second century equestrian poet C. Lucilius were the Hellenic pretensions of some of his senatorial contemporaries. But Lucilius was intimate with the inner circles of power at Rome, and his criticisms of individuals, however scathing, threatened neither the refined Hellenism nor the political power of the senatorial oligarchy.6r In creating satire as a vehicle for attacking individuals who affected certain types of objectionable behavior, Lucilius was continuing in a poetic form what Roman politicians had done in public speeches. In earlier times, Cato had assailed particular Roman senators for their Greek pretensions, and had railed against the deleterious effects that aspects of Hellenic culture were having on the martial spirit of the young; Scipio Aemilianus did the same thing. But neither of them, nor anyone else in their generations, had attacked the Roman nobility as a whole for its Hellenic refinement; nor did Lucilius. 62 That would

60

6r

62

Contra Gruen, Culture, pp. 227-48, who overestimated the Hellenism of earlier generations; see Rawson, "Roman Tradition and the Greek World,"CAlf' VIII, pp. 422-'76. Rawson in turn, Intellectual Life, pp. 4-'7, undervalued the Hellenism of the generation of the Gracchi and Catulus. For Lucilius' attacks on Albucius and on Hellenic pretensions in general, see frgs. II 19C = 88-94M = 87-93 ROL = 89-9SK; II 1SC = 84-8SM = 84-8S ROL = 747SL; I 12 and 14C = 1S-17M = 14-1S ROL = 16-18K. For activities associated with Hellenism in Rome - catarnites and hermaphrodites - frgs. I 19C = 32M = 33 ROL = 30K; XXX 89C = IOS8M =I048 ROL = 994K. Gruen, Culture, pp. 272-317, has a good discussion ofLucilius' life and social standing. Cato's misgivings about Hellenic attitudes and manners were genuine, but he did not attack the nobility as a group; see later Chapter X on novi homines.

VIRTUS CONTESTED

be done by a man who was neither a poet nor an insider. It was C. Marius who politicized the ideological division between contrasting Roman and Greek ways of life.

4. THE NEW MAN OF VIRTUS

C. Marius was born into a wealthy family about 157 in the village of Cereatae in the territory of Arpinum. 63 Like many new men, he began his career in the military, first attracting attention in 134 in the Numantian campaign,6 4 where, serving as a cavalryman, he won decorations for bravery and, like his commander Scipio Aemilianus before him, killed an enemy in single combat. 65 His martial reputation gained him unanimous election to the office of military tribune, and some years later, between 123 and 12 I, the office of quaestor. 66 Up to this point Marius' career followed a pattern that was normal for new men, but as a plebeian tribune in II9 he took an independent stance by proposing and seeing to the passage of a popular electoral reform law. His actions alienated his noble patrons, the Caecilii Metelli, and as a consequence, Marius suffered political setbacks. But he managed to recover, barely, was elected praetor, and commanded successfully in Further Spain. 67 His military reputation, a marriage connection with the noble family of the Iulii Caesares, and a reconciliation with the Metelli, enabled Marius to be selected as senior legate by Q. Caecilius Metellus, who as consul of 109 had been assigned the difficult Jugurthine war in

63

64

65 66

67

See T. F. Carney, A Biography of Marius (Chicago, 1970) p. 8. On his traditional Roman education, see Plut. Mar. 2.1-2; 3.1; Sal!. BI 63.3; Carney, pp. 8-12, and E. Badian, "Marius and the Nobles," Durham University Journal 25 (1963-4) pp. 141-3. Plut. Mar. 3.2; cf. Sal!. BI 63.3, with G. M. Paul, A Historical Commentary on Sallust's Bellum Jugurtinum (Trowbridge, 1984) p. 168--9 and R. J. Evans, Gaius Marius, A Political Biography (Pretoria, 1994) pp. 27-8. Plut. Mar. 3.2 and Carney, Biography, p. 15. Opinions vary about when and where Marius served as military tribune and as quaestor; see Badian, "Marius," p. 144, Evans, pp. 20-30, 34-5, Carney, Biography, pp. 17-8, and Paul, pp. 169-'70, and MRR, I, p. 52I. Setbacks - Plut. Mar. 4-5; Cic. Plane. 51; Val. Max. 6.9.14; Carney, Biography, p. 20; and Badian, "Marius," p. 145. For the recovery, see Plut. Mar. 6.1-2; Val. Max. 6.9.14. On the prestigious command in Hispania Ulterior, where Marius learned to combat guerrilla warfare, see Plut. Mar. 6.1; Evans, p. 54; Badian, "Marius," p. 146; J. S. Richardson, Hispania (Cambridge, 1986) p. 192, and MRR I, p. 535, n. 3.

ROMAN MANLINESS

Numidia. 68 Marius served with great distinction from I09 tOI08, then again asserted his independence, this time successfully. Ambition, an outstanding military record, and popularis politics raised Marius to the consulship of I 07, against the determined opposition of the nobles. He attacked the nobility for military inexperience and incompetence, and following the precedent set by Scipio Aemilianus, engineered a popular vote that transferred the command war in Numidia to himself.69 By waiving whatever property qualification for military service that still existed, and accepting landless volunteers into his army, Marius managed to recruit a force large enough to overcome the guerrilla tactics employed by the enemy. All of this won him the hatred of the senatorial establishment. 70 The delivery of the promised victory over Jugurtha in IO 5, and the crisis created by the disastrous defeat of two Roman armies by German tribes at Arausio in the same year, led to Marius' election to an unprecedented five successive consulships (104-IOO). His total destruction of the Teutones and Cimbri in 102 and 101, respectively, caused him to be acclaimed as the hero who had saved Italy, and one of the great military figures of Roman history. He celebrated a great triumph, and with the spoils of his victory built a temple to Honos and Virtus. 71 Marius' career exemplifies that of Roman politicians who employed popular support won by military exploits to gain extraordinary and illegal commands in the face of senatorial opposition. Like the earlier For Marius' position as Metellus' senior legate, see Plut. Mar. 7; Diod. 34.38; Sail. Bl 46-63, with Evans, pp. 62-3, and Badian, "Marius," p. 146. For the marriage to Julia, see Plut. Mar. 6.2. Carney, Biography, p. 24, dated it to lIO; Badian, "Marius," p. 146, to 112; Evans, pp. 60-1, to between lI3 and lIO. 69 For the importance of his military reputation for consulship .of 107, see Sail. Bl65.5; 73·5 f.; 85; Plut. Mar. 9. For the plebiscitum transferring the command see MRR, I, p. 550, and Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, pp. 67-8 and 183, for the precedent. 7 0 For Marius' recruitmeut reform, see Sail. Bl 86.2; Plut. Mar. 9.1; Val. Max. 2.3.1; Gell. NA 16.10.9-15; Flor. 1.36.13. Brunt, lM, p. 430, underestimated its significance. Metellus had been a competent general, whose conduct of the war against Jugurtha was dictated by military considerations - insufficient troops for a guerrilla war; see M. Holroyd, "The Jugurthine War: was Marius or Metellus the real victor?" JRS 18 (1929) pp. I-20, 13. Marius recognized the problem and in 107 had acted to solve it. For Marius' enemies, see Cic. Mur. 17; SuI!. 23; Prov. cons. 19. 71 For Marius' subsequent· reputation, see T. F Carney, "The Picture of C. Marius in Valerius Maximus," RhM 105 (1962) p. 300 and Cic. 2 Verr. 5.25. The temple is discussed subsequently. 68

266

VTRTUS CONTESTED

Romans associated with divine Virtus - the two Claudii Marcelli, and Scipio Aemilianus - Marius had used his martial reputation to challenge the senatorial establishment. But the manner in which Marius, the homo novus, associated himself with Virtus was different, in that it was non-heroic and anti-Hellenic.7 2 Little information survives about Marius' relationship to divine Virtus, this despite a biography by Plutarch, and a monograph by Sallust about half of which is devoted to Marius' exploits. The reason is that both authors, as well as others whose opinions about Marius survive, were heavily influenced by an optimate historiographical tradition that was vehemently hostile to him.73 What is known is that in dedicating his temple to Honos and Virtus Marius, like the elder Marcellus, encountered the opposition of the senatorial religious establishment. It is the opposition to Marius' temple that provides a key to understanding how the military and cultural changes that occurred during the latter half of the second century affected Roman attitudes toward manliness. 5. MARIUS AND THE GODS

Comparatively little is known about Marius' relationship to the divine. Like many Romans of his time and status, he made claims to divine guidance and assistance. 74 His reliance on omens is documented in a number of notices, the great majority of which can be shown to be derived from pro-Marian traditions. 75 It is also apparent that Marius 72

73

74

75

The "new man's" claim to virtus followed the traditional martial ethos of the aristocracy. Marius was the first to emphasize his own martial virtus in attacking a nobility that lacked it. Cicero modified the strategy; see later Chapter X. True even of Plutarch's life. On the problem of tendentious sources, see A. Passerini, "Caio Mario come uomo politico," Athenaeum I2 (I934) pp. I 0-44, I09-43, 257-97, 348-80; E. Badian, "Waiting for Sulla," jRS 52 (I962) pp. 47-61 = Studies in Greek and Roman History (Oxford, I964) pp. 206-34; Scardigli, Romerbiographien, pp. 74-88. For surveys of the scholarship on Marius, see E. Badian, Historia I I (I962) pp. I97-245, esp. pp. 2I4-23; E. Gabba, "Mario e Silla," ANRWI. I (Berlin, NY, I972) pp. 764-805. Cicero, for example, claimed to have had divine assistance in the crisis of 63: Cat. 2.29; 3.I8, 22; Sui/. 86; and notably, Att. 1.I6 [SB I6) 6; cf. Beard, in M. Beard and M. Crawford, Rome in the Late Republic (London, I985) p. 32. Favorable omens followed by Marius are recorded at Plut. Mar. 36.5-6; App. BC 1.6 (274); Cic. Div. 1.I06, Cic. ug. 1.1.I; Plut. Mar. 8.4; SaIl. BI 63.I; 64.1. Plut. Mar. I7.3-6; Val. Max. 1.3.4; Diod. Sic. 36.I3; Plut. Mar. 38.5-6; Val. Max. 1.5.5; Plut. Mar. 40.6-7. For Marius as an expert interpreter of omens, see Val. Max. 1.5.5. On most of

ROMAN MANLINESS

fashioned an innovative political-religious program introduced at the time of his great German victories.7 6 But a coherent picture of Mar ius' attitude toward, and uses of religion is lacking, largely because surviving ancient texts, following a predominantly hostile tradition, have little say about the subject. It is possible, however, to discern something more of the ways in which Marius represented his relationship to religion and the divine through indirect references, many of them preserved in the anti-Marian tradition. Marius' claims to the support of various gods can be seen, for example, in the evidence of rivalries with his opponents over divine favor. 77 In addition to the evidence for rivalries, Marius' claims of divine support can also be detected in his enemies' attacks. Long ago Alfredo Passerini showed how greatly the surviving texts that are hostile to Marius were affected by contemporary political point-counterpoint charges aimed at undermining his prestige. So Marius, a general who was famous as a stern disciplinarian, was accused by his enemies of undermining the discipline of Metellus' army, and a man whose fame rested on his martial accomplishments, was denied any military achievements in the contemporary writings of his enemies, Catulus, Sulla, and Rutilius Rufus. 78 It is reasonable to suppose that optimate writers also directed this kind of partisan attack at Marius' religious postures, and in fact such charges are preserved in a number of sources. It is well-established that Plutarch's narrative of the Roman victory over the Cimbri at Vercellae in lOI was hostile to Marius, following

76

77

78

these incidents being derived from pro-Marian sources, see Passerini, pp. 24-31, 35-7. In addition to such stories, there is evidence that Marius was regarded as possessing divine power bestowed on him by a deity. On Marius' program, see St. Weinstock, "Victor and Invictus," HTR 50 (1957) p. 224; Divus julius, pp. 92, 177-8; Classen, Gymnasium 70 (1963) p. 238; Richard, MERF 77 (1965) p. 79· For rivalry between Marius and the Metelli over Magna Mater, see M. Gwyn Morgan, "Villa Publica and Magna Mater," Klio· 55 (1973) pp. 215-45, esp. p. 241-5; Marius and Sulla over Victoria, see Weinstock, HTR 50 (1957) 224-5; Marians and Snllans over Apollo and Venus, see T. J. Luce, "Political Propaganda on Roman republican Coins: circa 92-82 B.C.," AjA 72 (1968) pp. 25-39. For such rivalry between Cicero and Cornelius Lentulus in 63, see Cic. Cat. 3.9; 4·2; Sall. BC 47; with U. Heibges, "Religion and Rhetoric in Cicero's Speeches," Latomus 28 (1969) pp. 833-49, 845. Undermining discipline - Sall. BI 64.5; 92.2; Diod. Sic. 35.38; Marius the disciplinarianPlut. Mar. 13.1; 14.1-5; 16.1-3; cf. PInt. Cras. 2.10; with Passerini, pp. 26-7. No military achievements - Carney, Biography, p. 3, and later in this chapter.

268

VIRTUS CONTESTED

optimate accounts that credited the victory to Marius' co~commander, the proconsul Q. Lutatius Catulus. 79 Plutarch (Mar. 26.2) relates that before the battle both generals, Catulus and Marius, made vows to the gods. The information on Catulus' vow is specific. He made a vow to Fortuna huiusce diei - "Fortune of the present day" - to whdm he later dedicated a temple in Rome. 80 About Marius' vow Plutarch's optimate sources were characteristically vague. They record only that Marius sacrificed a hecatomb "to the gods," after which itjs stated that Marius cried out, "Victory is mine." (Plut. Mar. 26.2). But since Marius later dedicated a temple to Honos and Virtus in honor of his German victories,· his vow was almost certainly to this cultic pair. 81 Immediately after describing the two vows, however, Plutarch goes on to write: "When the attack had begun, according to the account of Sulla, an event indicating [divine] wrath happened to Marius" YEVOI. U§VllS 8E TijS e<j>68ov lTpaYl-lo VEI-lEO"llTOV lTo6Elv TOV MaplOv 01 TIEpi 2.1/AAOV 100TopoVO"l. Plutarch (26.3) describes how, blinded by the dust of battle, Marius led his army right past the enemy. The Cimbri then attacked the army of Catulus and were defeated by it. 82 Moreover, following Sulla's account, Plutarch attributes the Cimbric attack on Catulus' army, and the subsequent glory of Catulus' victory, to divine intervention, to fortune - alTO TVx.llS - the very deity, Fortuna huiusce diei, to whom Catulus had made a vow before the battle and to whom he would dedicate a temple. So according to Sulla, in the

79

80

81

82

Passerini, 42-43; Valgiglio, Vita di Mario, p. 125, n. 5, and R. G. Lewis, "Catulus and the Cimbri, IQ2 B.C.," Hermes 102 (1974) pp. 90-IQ9; the last gives a too favorable account of Catulus' generalship. All such accounts ultimately depended on Catulus' own liber de consulatu et rebus gestis suis, Peter, HHR I pp. 191-204, frags. 1-3. Ka6IEpW(JElV TTtV TVx1)V TfjS TtI-II§paS EKE1V1)S. (plut. Mar. 26.2). For the temple see MRR, I, 572, and later in this chapter. For Marius' temple and the spoils of the German victory, see CIL Pp. 195, n. 18. There is no mention of Marius making a vow before his victory over the Teutoni and Ambrones at Aquae Sextiae in 102. Marius' vow was not to Magna Mater, contra T. R. S. Broughton, Historia 2 (1953-54) p. 2Il and J. Van Ooteghem, Caius Marius (Brussels, 1964) p. 254, whose temple was rebuilt after III by a Metellus (Ovid, Past. 4.347-8), either Nurnidicus, Richardson, Dictionary, p. 242 or Caprarius (cos. 133), M. Gwyn Morgan, Klio 55 (1973) pp. 215-45. Plut. Mar. 26.3. For how Marius' tactics at Vercellae allowed Catulus, whose army held the center, to claim the victory, see K. Volkl, "Zum talctischen Verlauf der Schlacht bei Vercellae (IQ1 v. chr.)," RhM 97 (1954) pp. 82-9.

ROMAN MANLINESS

battle ofVercellae a divine power had favored Catulus and had given him victory, while Marius was rebuffed by a deity that was angry with him. The same tradition made its way into the works of Lucan and Augustine .... Non ille favore / Numinis, ingenti superum protectus ab ira, "that man was not shielded by divine favor, rather by the very great anger of the gods," (Bellum civile 2.85-6). Lucan writes of Marius. Augustine writes that even though Marius was devoted to the gods, they had been angry with him, and that he had been among those whom the gods hated. 83 Augustine almost certainly found this characterization in the work of either Sallust or Livy, who were his principal sources for the period of Marius and Sulla. 84 In the late Republic the portrayal of political opponents as hated by the gods was not uncommon. 8s That his political enemies made such charges suggests that Marius' claims to have divine support were well-presented and effective. But what was the basis for the charges that the gods were angry with Marius? In Cicero's speeches, the accusation that an opponent is an enemy of the gods is always substantiated by a specific allegation. Verres was the enemy of everything sacred and holy because he plundered temples (2 Verr. 4.75; 5.184-9; 4.71-2); the Catilinarian conspirators because they planned to burn down temples (Cat. 1.12, 33; 4.24); Antony because he falsified auspices (Phil. 3.9; 5.7).86 Marius also must have been accused of some crime to have provoked the gods'

8)

..• Non parum est quod fatentur etiam non von propitiis diis suis posse accidere homini istam temporalem, quam ninnis diligunt, tantum felicitatem et posse homines, sicut fuit Marius, salute viribus, opibus honoribus, dignitate longaevitate cumulari et peifrui diis iratis . ... quos oderunt.

(CD 11.23). The characterization occurs in a conventional contrast between M. Atilius Regulus and Marius (see Cic. Pis. 43 and Parad. Stoic. 2.16). The latter is not Juvenal's Marius Priscus (I. 49); see A. de Veer, "Perfrui diis iratis (De civ. Dei, L. 11, 23)," Revue des etudes augustiniennes 1(1955) p. 402. 84 For Augustinus' sources, see H. Hagendahl, Augustine and the Latin Classics 11 (Goteborg, 1967) pp. 631-49 and 664-5. That the characterization of Marius was not invented by Augustine himself, is strongly suggested by the form of his argument in chapter 23; cf. his argument about Sulla in chapter 24. 8s For example, Cn. Pomponius, Asc. 79 Clark, with Badian, Historia 18 (1969) pp. 474-5. Cicero made the accusation against his opponents more than once, see Beard in M. Beard and M. Crawford, pp. 32-3; Heibges, Latomus 28 (1969) pp. 833-49. 86 See Beard in M. Beard and M. Crawford, p. 32; and Heibges, Latomus 28 (1969): pp. 833-49. Cicero charged that Verres, the conspirators of 63, and Antony were all enemies of the gods.

VIRTUS CONTESTED

anger. The specific charge against him is not beyond recovery, and, as willbe seen, it has important implications for the controversy over the nature of virtus.

6. COMPETING DEFINITIONS OF MANLINESS

In a passage in Plutarch's biography of Mar ius, taken from the history of Rutilius Rufus (Mar. 28.5 = HRR F 188), Metellus Numidicus, who has just before been called a man of true virtue - apETT]V ai\1l6fl (Mar. 28.4), is contrasted to the immoral Marius, who, it says, had defeated Numidicus for the consulship of 100 by bribing voters. 87 Immediately following, the hateful deeds of Marius' sixth consulship are enumerated. Marius is accused of having shared in the crimes of Saturninus (Mar. 29. I); then the story of how Marius deceitfully tricked Numidicus into taking an oath that led to the latter's exile is related at length (Mar. 29.2-8). The extreme criticism of Marius he is said to have been an accomplice to Saturninus' murder of A. Nunnius - and the detailed emphasis placed on Numidicus, whose words are twice quoted (Mar. 29.6 & 8), make it highly probable that in chapter 29 Plutarch continued to follow Rutilius as his source. There are additional reasons for thinking this is so. Plutarch's criticism of Marius in chapter 29 is highlighted with an ethical comparison between him and Numidicus that centers around the notion of virtue. Numidicus, the steadfast man - j3Ej3atOV av8pcxis said to have agreed with Pindar that "truth is the source of great virtue." Marius, however, is accused of having regarded "lying as a part ofvirtue and ability. ,,88 Marius' reputation for deceit was widespread,8 9 and the accusation certainly originated as anti-Marian polemic, probably entering the literature with Rutilius Rufus. But the idea that someone would regard "lying as a part of virtue" is very odd and deserves 87

88

89

Plut. Mar. 28.5; cf. Liv. Per. 69. That the Metellus referred to here is Numidicus was demonstrated by E. Badian, "The Death of Saturninus," Chiron 14 (1984) pp. 101-47, 122; see also T. R. S. Broughton, "Candidates defeated in Roman Elections: Some Roman Also-Rans," TrAPhilS 81.4 (philadelphia, 1991) p. 9. mhos ~EV yap Eis O:PETf\S Ka! 8ElVOTllTOS ~Epi8a TO \jJEvcracr6m TI6E~EVOS ... 0:l\ij6Elav 6:pX1lv ~Ey6:l\l1S O:pETf\S KaTCx niv8apov. Plut. Mar. 29.3. Liv. Per. 80; App. BC 1.30 (29). Even Cicero repeats that Marius used lying and abandoned good faith and justice (Off. 3.79). On this aspect of Marius, see Passerini, 257-68.

ROMAN MANLINESS

attention. 90 In fact, a similar accusation is found in Dio Cassius, who consistently used sources hostile to Marius. Here an ironic antithesis between Marius' deceit and his reputation for virtue is presented. Of Marius, it is said: "He dared with great readiness to say anything, to promise anything, to lie about anything, and to swear falsely about anything from wruch he hoped to gain an advantage, [but] ... because of his extraordinary cunning and luck, a benefit he experienced in the absolute highest degree, he even acquired a reputation for virtue. "91 The question is, what kind of virtue was Marius reputed to have had? From beginning to end Marius' success and fame was based on his reputation for martial prowess. He early career and rise to power depended on his martial reputation, and with the defeat of the Teutoni and Cimbri Marius became one of the great military figures of Roman history. Marius was the quintessential man of martial virtus (see Cic. 2 Verr. 5.25; Imp. Pom. 47; Cat. 4.21; Balb. 46; Prov. Cons. 32; Rab. 29). Moreover, in his attacks on the Roman nobility martial virtus played a central part. Although never a "popular" politician in the manner of C. Gracchus or L. Appuleius Saturninus (Marius' foray as a popular politician as plebeian tribune in 119 had decidedly negative results), Marius' spectacular success is impossible outside of the context provided by post-Gracchan popularis politics. 92 In his election to the consulship of 107 he played a popularis card by attacking the nobility. But it is the manner in which Marius attacked the old Roman nobility that is significant, not only because it illustrates the existence of a serious ideological division within the Roman Republic, but also because it shows that a central aspect of that division was conflicting ideas about the nature of Roman manliness - virtus. The texts agree that in campaigning for the consulship of 107, and in speeches he gave

90

91

92

The idea did not, however, escape the notice ofTacitus, who employed it ironically at Ann·4·7I. Kat yap EiTrEiv TI Kat tllTOOXEcr6m Kai \jJEvcracr6m Kat E1TllOpKiicrm, EV 0 TIAEOVEKTTjcrE1V fjA1TlSEV, hOl~6TaTa ET6A~a ... EK TE yap Tiis TIEP1TEXVTjcrEWS Kat EK Tfis TVxTlS, 1i TIapemav Ta TIpha 6:ya6i;j ExpTjcraTo, KaiapETfis 56~av EKTTjcraTo. (Dio, Bk 26. 89.2.). Behind the military reputation was also great personal wealth and the support of equestrian order, see earney, Biography, pp. I9-26.

VIRTUS CONTESTED

shortly after his election, Marius delivered blistering attacks on the indolence, luxury, and military incompetence of the Roman nobility (see Sall. BI73.7; Plut. Mar. 9.2-4). One such speech is reproduced by Sallust in Chapter 85 of the Bellum Iugurthinum. Whether or not this speech was modeled on the words actually spoken by Marius in 107 is a moot point. It certainly underlines the qualities and characteristics that were central to Marius' political career. 93 In the speech, Marius proclaims his own martial ability -,- virtus - by comparing it to the inexperience and incompetence of his noble opponents. The stress on the enmity of the optimate nobility toward him has a clear basis in the events of Mar ius' career. But it is the particular way in which Sallust has Marius attack his noble .opponents that is telling. Marius contrasts his own hard-won military experience with the Hellenic over-refinement of his noble enemies, whom, he says, attempted to learn about war by reading Greek military manuals - Graecorum militaria praecepta legere (BI 85.12). Then Marius goes on to say that "what they have learned from books, I have learned from soldiering" - quae illi litteris, ea ego militando didici (BI 85.13). That this line of attack was associated with the historical Marius is shown by reference to it in Cicero's speech Pro Balbo, which was delivered in 56. Here Cicero asks the jury to imagine the presence of the long-dead Marius, who is made to contrast his own military experience and accomplishments to merely reading about war. Cicero has Marius say: "that he had been schooled as a soldier in campaigns, and as a legate in wars, that ifhe had read about wars as great as those that he had actually fought and ended ... he would have been able to learn thoroughly and to understand all the rules of war" - se stipendiis, se legationibus bellicis eruditum, se, si tanta bella

legisset, quanta gessit et confecit ... omnia iura belli perdiscere ac nosse potuisse (Balb. 47 for reading legisset cf. Imp. Pom 28; cf. Sall. BI85.12-13). This anti-Hellenic public stance of Marius is well-attested, and the contrast between Greek refinement and Roman martial valor is

93

T. F. Carney, "Once again Marius' speech after election in 108 B.C.," SO 35 (1959) pp. 63-70, esp. p. 66, n. I; also Passerini, 20-2; A. La Penna, "Aspetti e conflitti della cultura latina dai Graccru a Silla," DArch (1971) pp. 193-2II, esp. p. 2IO; and Paul, p. 207, contra Syme, Sallust, p. 169, n. 31; Koestermann, C. Sallustius, p. 293; and Evans, pp. 7 1-3. A careful reading of the speech in Sallust reveals that in it, virtus is throughout a martial quality; see later, Chapter X, Section 3.

273

ROMAN MANLINESS

ever-present. Plutarch, for example, records that Marius scorned Greek letters as the literature of a conquered people. Sallust has Marius say that Greek literature has not helped its. teachers to possess virtu5 (Bl 85.32). At Greek performances (athletic, musical, dramatic, or all three) that were part of the games he staged in connection with his vow to Honos and Virtus, it was reported that no sooner did Marius take a seat than he dramatically got up and left. 94 How sincere Marius' professions of antipathy toward Greek culture were, and the degree to which Marius was himselfHellenized, are beside the point. 95 What is important and incontestable is that there was an audience for it. It was such anti-Greek rhetoric, combined with his own martial accomplishments, that propelled Marius to extraordinary political success in the face of fierce noble opposition. Virtus was a central element in Marius' general public image. When defining the particular qualities possessed by some of Rome's great generals - Fabius Cunctator and the two Scipios - Cicero singles out Marius for virtus. 96 But as we have seen, the meaning of virtus was being affected by Greek influences, in particular by semantic borrowing from 6:pETT]. With a concept as central to Roman society as was virtus, such a phenomenon reflects not only semantic changes, but also changes in values. Like the two, Claudii Marcelli and Scipio Aemilianus before him, Marius associated himself with divine Virtus through a dedication to the divinity. Marius' noble enemies reacted against both the association and against the temple he vowed. But surviving evidence of their reaction suggests that what was being contested in the pro and anti Hellenic ideological battle that Marius and 94

95

96

Plut. Mar. 2.2. Gruen, Culture, p. 269, rejected the story as evidence for Marius' antiGreek public stance because he held that a disdainful departure would be an insult to the audience. But Plutarch includes the story in a series of examples of Marius' antiHellenic attitude. The Greek performances would have been only a part of games that also included Roman spectacles, which Marius no doubt made a point of attending and enjoying. For Marius' anti-Greek public image, see Plut. Mar. 2.2; Sall. BI63.3; 85.I2-I3; Cic. Arch. I9; Val. Max. 2.2.3e. Marius' stance as the New Dionysos after his German victories was part of his religious program, and Greek religious innovations had a long history at Rome and were not regarded as an aspect of elite Greek culture, contra Gruen, Culture, pp. 267-8. That Marius actually knew a fair amount of Greek was shown by Carney, Biography, pp. Io-I4; see too Gruen, Culture, pp. 268-9. For Marius' subsequent reputation, see Carney; RhM p. 300.

274

VIR7US CONTESTED

his opponents were waging was the meaning of virtus itself - what it meant to be a man in Rome. Evidence for an ideological and political contest between Marius' traditional martial virtus, and the Hellenized virtus of his optimate enemies survives in two areas - public oratory and temple architecture. Marius financed his temple to Honos and Virtus with the spoils of his German victories. But Marius built more than a temple. Texts consistently refer to his building as Mariana monumenta - the Marian monuments. 97 The temple of Ho nos and Virtus was the centerpiece of an architectural complex that also included an older temple to Febris, trophies from the Jugurthine and German victories, and, a bit later, probably Marius' house as well. We know from Cicero that Marius' temple to Honos and Virtus was large enough to accommodate a meeting of the senate, but nothing remains of it or of the larger complex. Its location, however, has been persuasively placed close to the Roman Forum, somewhere on the Velia. 98 That Marius' temple, like his attack on the nobility, was the subject of political contention is revealed by a detail preserved in the work of Festus. In a notice on the meaning of the word summissiorem, we are told that "Marius' temple of Honos and Virtus was lower than other temples so that it would not be an obstruction to the taking of the public auspices, and so that the augurs might not order its demolition."99 The Festus passage has been interpreted, certainly correctly, to mean that the original plan was to build a temple of the canonical Italic type with a high podium, such as, for example, the preserved republican temple at Cora IOO [Fig. 8 (a) (b) (c)]. The altered, lower design, 97

9B

99

100

Val. Max. 2.5.6; 4.4.8; Vitruvius 3.2.5; and regularly by Cicero, Sest. II6, Plane. 78, Div. I.59, 2.140. From spoils of German victory - elL Fp. 195, n. 18. Richardson, AJA 82 (1978) pp. 242-3, located the temple and complex on the site later occupied by the temples of Antoninus and Faustina, and the so-called temple of Romulus; F. Coarelli, nforo romano, Periodo areaico (Rome, 1986) p. ID3, in the vicinity of the Arch ofTitus; cf. Palombi, LTUR 2, pp. 33-5. For the senate meeting in Marius' temple, see Cic. Sest. II6, Plane. 78, Div. I.59, 2.140. summissiorem aliis aedem Honoris et Virtutis C. Marius fecit, ne, si forte offieeret auspiciis publicis, augures eam demoliri cogerent. (Festus 466-8 L). For other example of augurs keeping free from obstructions the prospectus from the temple, see Cic. Off. 3.66; cf. Val. Max. 8.2.1; and Linderski, "The Augural Law," ANRW, n. 16.3, pp. 2146-312, and 2158. Gros, MtHangesJ Heurgon (Rome, 1976) pp. 399 and 407--9; Richardson, AJA 82 (1978) P·243·

275

ROMAN MANLINESS

J A 8. Republican Tempe at Cora: (a) plan; (b) fa<;:ade elevation; (c) side elevation. (P Brandizzi Vittucci, Cora. Forma Italiae, regio I, volume 5. fig. 141. Rome. De Luca, 1968)

however, did not detract from the grand appearance of Mar ius' temple. Vitruvius later gave extravagant praise to the temple and its architect, C. Mucius, stating that if only the temple had been constructed of marble, it would have been in the very first rank of buildings. Ior IOI

ut haberet, quemadmodum ab arte subtilitatem, sic ab magnijicentia et inpensis auctoritatem, in primis et summis operibus nominaretur. 7 praef. 17. In calling it a "modest temple," Rawson,

VIRTUSCONTESTED

B 8. (continued)

Because Marius was expert in augury, it has been suggested that the decision to build the temple lower than planned originated with him,

Phoenix 28 (1974): p. 206 = Roman Culture, p. 162, anachronistically misinterpreted Vitruvius, who wrote from the perspective of the Augustan "city ofmarble," see P Gros, "Les premieres generations d'architectes hellenistiques it Rome," in L' Italie preromaine et la Rome republicaine: Melanges offerts dj Heurgon (Rome, 1976) pp. 387-4IO, esp. p. 408.

277

ROMAN MANLINESS

c

)

,

_os ,.,t

8. (continued)

but this is unlikely. 102 Festus' reference to the possibility of demolition clearly indicates that the original plan to build a high temple was public knowledge. But if Mucius' original design for the temple would have created an obvious obstruction to the augural sight line, surely Marius, with his knowledge of augury, would have noticed the problem and have conveyed it to his architect before the plans were made public. 102

So Richardson, AJA 82 (1978) p. 242. Although expert in interpreting signs, Marius did not become a member of the college of augurs until 98.

V1RTUS CONTESTED

The obstruction posed by the temple cannot have been obvious, and the objection to its height must have been a matter of interpretation, in fact a threat made by political enemies that the astute Marius and his talented architect managed to literally step under. The augural objection was, as Passerini saw, another attempt by the nobility to suppress the glory of their hated enemy. IQ3 The episode is similar to the religious objection raised against M. Claudius Marcellus' first temple to Virtus. An ideological aspect to the contention that arose over Marius' temple is evidenced in a remarkable passage of De architectua, where Vitruvius presents Marius' temple of Ho nos and Virtus as his example of a temple with a closed back wall - sine postico - , a quintessentially Italic type of temple. Juxtaposed by Vitruvius to Marius' temple is that of Jupiter Stator in the Porticus of Metellus, which serves as his example of a Greek peripteral temple. As Pierre Gros and others have pointed out in regard to the temple of Jupiter Stator, it is remarkable that Vitruvius would use a Roman temple to exemplifY what is a quintessentially Greek temple type; he could have used the Parthenon or any number of other Greek temples. I04 Built between 146 and 143 by Metellus Macedonicus to commemorate his victory over the Achaeans, the temple of Jupiter Stator was Rome's first marble temple. I05 Together with Lysippus' famous equestrian group, brought to Rome by Metellus, and the Porticus Metelli he built to house them, the pentelic marble temple of Jupiter was part of a building complex that was explicitly Greek in character. The temple was designed by Hermodorus of Salamis, the last of the great eastern Greek architects, who introduced the canonical eastern Ionic Greek temple to Rome and who during the last half of the second century continued

IOJ 104

IOS

Passerini, 5I; cf. Rawson, Phoenix 28 (I974) p. 206 = Roman Culture, p. I62. Vitro 3.2.5, with P. Gros, "Hermodorus et Vitruve," MEFRA 85 (I973) pp. I37-6I, esp. I44, where the necessity of retaining the reading ofVitruvius is argued, despite the representation of the temple of Jupiter Stator ad Circum as sine postico on the Severan marble plan; See also, Gros, Vitruve, De L'Architecture, livre!II (paris, I990) p. 86. Veil. Pat. 1.I1.5, andM. GwynMorgan, "The Portico ofMet ellus: A Reconsideration," Hermes 99 (I97I) pp. 480-505; A. Viscogliosi, "Iuppiter Stator, Aedes ad Circum," LTUR 3, pp. I57-9·

279

ROMAN MANLINESS

to design a series of distinctively Greek buildings for the Hellenizing Roman nobility. I06 The Hellenized architectural tastes of some of the Roman nobility were not without critics, however. The source that tells us that Jupiter Stator was the first marble temple in Rome, also follows a tradition that is critical of Metellus for introducing luxuria by using marble as a building material for a temple: "The same person [Metellus] was the first of all to have built a temple of marble among these very monuments, and was the originator of this grandeur, or is it luxuriance." 10 7 In light of this criticism, Vitruvius' juxtaposing ofHermodorus' marble temple of Jupiter Stator with the non-marble temple of Honos and Virtus designed by Mucius suggests a further contrast. It is clear from the way in which he is mentioned by Vitruvius that C. Mucius was a recognized name in architectural history. Although his precise social status is disputed, his position as one of the first great Italian architects is not. l08 So it was to a noted Italian architect that Marius turned for the design of a temple that would commemorate the greatest achievement of his career. Moreover, Mucius' original design had called for a high podium, the finished temple was sine postico, and, to Virtuvius' disappointment, not of marble - all elements characteristic of traditional Etrusco-Italic temples. I09 Marius' temple to Honos and Virtus seems to have been designed as a conspicuously Italic contrast to the Greek temple types favored by his noble opponents. But at the battle ofVercellae two temples had been vowed. In addition to Marius, Catulus had vowed a temple to Fortuna huiusce diei.

ra6

107

ra8

109

Gros, Melanges J Heurgon, pp. 387-4IO, esp. pp. 394-408; and F. Coarelli, ''L'ara di Dornizio Enobarbo' e la cultura artistica in Roma nel II secolo a.c.," DArch 2 (1968) pp. 302-68. On the Lysippan turmaAlexandri, see Veil. Pat. I.1I.5; cf. Cic. 2 Verr.4.126. See also J. C. Anderson, jr., Roman Architecture and Society (Baltimore and London, 1997) pp. 17- 1 9. Veil. Pat. I.1I.5; cf. 2.I.2, withGwyn Morgan, Hermes 99 (1971) pp. 484-5, and Gros, Melanges J Heurgon, p. 392, on Veileius' comment reflecting a tradition. See Anderson, pp. 24-6; Miinzer, "Mucius (4)," RE XVI (1935), cols. 414-5, cf. Palombi, LTUR 3, pp. 33-5, and Rawson, Intellectual Life, pp. 23 and 190. See A. Boethius, J. B. Ward-Perkins, Etruscan and Roman Architecture (Baltimore, 1970) pp. 31-2 and 35-7 on sine postico temples; pp. 42-3 on high podium temples; and 132-3; cf. Gros, MEFRA 85 (1973) p. 155. 280

VIRTUS CONTESTED

Shortly after the victory, probably soon after they had celebrated ajoint triumph, Catulus turned against Marius by claiming that credit for the great victory over the Cimbri was his alone (certainly not true). But if Marius' temple to Honos and Virtus had a cultural message, so did that of Catulusby providing specific counterpoints to Marius' temple and to Marius' claim to victory at Vercellae. The ideological counterbalance between a temple to Virtus and one to Fortuna is clear enough, IIO but it was also pointed because, as we have seen, the virtus - fortuna contrast was essentially Greek and literary in nature, based as it was on the 6:PETT] - TVXll trope. III The counterpoising ofa temple of Fortuna to one of Virtus, therefore, was itself an expression of a Greek cultural ideal against a native Roman one and no one was more suitable to draw the contrast than Q. Lutatius Catulus. One of the best educated and most Hellenized Romans of his generation, Catulus was learned in Greek philosophy and poetry, and his sophisticated adaptations of the homo erotic poetry of Callimachus into Latin, as well as the love poems he addressed to the youth Roscius, were well-known. II2 In addition, Catulus underscored the Hellenic nature of his temple to Fortuna huiusce diei, and its contrast to Marius' temple to Honos and Virtus, by making the former a repository for Greek works of art. Catulus took care that the spoils of his German victory - spolia Cimbricia - were displayed elsewhere, in a portico on the Palatine that seems to have been built specifically for that purpose. II3

lID

III

1I2

IIJ

Noted by F. Hinard, "Sur une autre forme de l'opposition entre virtus et fortuna," Kentron 3 (1987) pp. 17-20, and M. Rogo, "Catulus et les infortunes de la Virtus," Kentron 5 (1989) pp. 151-60. See earlier Chapter n, pp. 96-II4. Poems, Catulus, frags. I & 2 (Courtney, pp. 70-77). On Catulus, see H. Bardon, "Q. Lutatius Catulus et son 'cercle litteraire'," Etudes Classiques IS (1950) pp. 145-64. On the sophistication of his adaptations, see A. Perutelli, Frustula Poetarum (Bologna, 2002) pp. 31-58. Courtney, The Fragmentary Latin Poets, p. 75, was right to comment: "The willingness of a member of the highest aristocracy to toss off imitations of Hellenistic sentimental erotic poetry (homosexual at that) is a new phenomenon in Roman culture at this time." Contra Williams, Roman Homosexuality, p. 65. For the display of the Cimbric spoils in the porticus Catuli, see Val. Max. 6.3.IC; Cic. Dom. I02, and II4, with Coarelli, Campo Marzio (Rome, 1997) p. 276. On the Greek works of art at Catulus' Temple of Fortuna, see Cic. 2 Verr. 4.I26. Pliny, NH 34.54, with Coarelli, pp. 276-7.

n

28r

ROMAN MANLINESS

-l- ___ .!. ___ "

~.'!

•

__~_.,! __ ~ ___ .~._~ __ ~__ ~_"_ , ~_~~!:_~ ... •

•

•

•

'!"-u

9. State Plan, L' area sacra dello Largo Argentina, Rome. (E Coarelli, et alii, L' area sacra di Largo Argentina. Studi e materiali di musei e enti communali di Roma. tav. xxvii. Rome 1981; after G. Marchetti-Longhi, L'area sacra del Largo Argentina. Instituto poligrafico dell Stato. Rome. Libreria dello Stato, 1960)

But there was also an architectural aspect to the ideological counterpoint. The identification ofCatulus' temple ofFortuna with the round temple - Temple B - in the Area Sacra di Largo Argentina is universally accepted II4 [Fig. 9] The round shape of this "tholos" building is a distinctively Greek architectural form and would have been recognized as such by Catulus' contemporaries II5 [Fig. ra]. The temple of Fortuna huiusce diei was a "Greek" temple with a difference, however. For although it was round and was peripteral, it was not of marble. In addition, it had a high podium, and with its porch and stairway it was axial, all features foreign to Greek tholoi, but characteristic of II4-

II5

The identifIcation ofCatulus' temple was made by P. Boyance, "Aedes Catuli," MEFRA 57 (1940) pp. 64-71; with Varro, Rust. 3.5.12. See also Richardson, Dictionary, p. 156, and Gras, "Fortuna huiusce diei," LTUR 2, pp. 269-70; cf. MRR I, 572. On Greek tholos buildings, sacral and non-sacral, see F. Seiler, Die griechische Tholos (Mainz-arn-Rhein, 1986), and G. Roux, in J. M. McCredie et alii, Samothrace 7, The Rotunda ofArsinoe (Princeton, 1992) pp. 177-213, where the use of the former as venues for displays of statuary is stressed. 282

VIRTUS CONTESTED

10. Elevations and plans of (from left to right) the Tholos in the Sanctuary of Athena Pronaia at Delphi; the Philippeion at Olympia; the Tholos at Epidauros. (E Seiler,

E Die griechische Yholos. Untersuchungen zur Entwicklung, Typologie und Funktiol1 kunstmiissiger RUl1dbauten. Abb. 80. Mainz-am-Rhein. P. von Zabern, 1986)

Italic temples [Fig. II]. Catulus, probably the most fully Hellenized man of his generation, had not simply placed a "Greek" temple in the middle of Rome as had Roman nobles of an earlier generation. He had adapted and modified a Greek architectural form to accommodate a new sophisticated Romano-Hellenic aesthetic. u6 Catulus' II6

Gros, Melanges] Heurgon, p. 407-8; cf. Palombi, LTUR 3, pp. 33-4. On the Severan Marble Plan the aedes Herculis Musarum ofM. Fulvius Nobilior, cos. 189, censor 179, is round with an axial staircase, see Coarelli, Campo Marzio, p. 477. But it is different from Temple B (contra Coarelli) and from any known Greek sacral tholoi, in that it lacks columns. Greek round public buildings that lacked exterior columns were secular rather than sacral in function (Roux, pp. 184-6; Seiler, pp. 33-5). Coarelli, Campo Marzio, p. 478, reconstructed the aedes Herculis Musarum as resembling Hadrian's Pantheon, but the archaeological precedent he cited (p. 480) is a bath in Sicily. There is, in fact, no way to know whether the Marble Plan represents the early-second-century structure or a restoration. The identification of the temple in literary sources is controversial. According to one, by B. Olinder, Porticus Octavia in drco Flaminio, pp. 57-65, this temple of Herculis was restored by Sulla (Ovid. Fasti 6. 209-12). According to another, by Coarelli, Campo Marzio, pp. 452-84, it was restored in 29 (Suet. Aug. 29.8). IfAgrippa's

ROMAN MANLINESS

II. Frontal, axial view of Temple B in L'area sacra della Largo Argentina, Rome. Courtesy of Fototeca Unione IOII

round temple to Fortuna should be seen as an architectural analog to his Latin renderings of Greek homo erotic poetry. Taken together, Marius' building program and his public attacks on Greek learning and luxury fit well with what is known about Pantheon, begun in 27, was a roLlnd structure, as is argued by M. WilsonJones, Principles of Roman Architecture (New Haven, 2000) pp. I79-82, then the similarity between it and the aedes Herculisl\i[usarum as, presented on the Marble Plan, might be because both were designed in the same period.

VIRTUS CONTESTED

his political enemies. The men with whom Marius had his bitterest quarrels, the core of his enemies among the nobility, were all noted philhellenes. In addition to Catulus, there were P. Rutilius Rufus, and Q. Caecilius Metellus Numidicus. II7 L. Cornelius Sulla also had a thorough education and deep knowledge of Greek literature. IIB Metellus Numidicus, however, was reputed to be a man who put his Greek philosophical studies into practice. He was noted as a man of integrity and principle, devoted to truth and virtue, in comparison to whom Marius was said to cut a poor figure. II9 It is a speech given by Metellus Numidicus that provides the link between Marius' anti-Greek public posture, his religious program, and his enemies' charge that he was hated by the gods. It also illustrates the place that virtus occupied in the cultural debate of the late-second century. The censorial speech, De ducendis uxoribus - "On Getting Married" - survives in only two fragments preserved and commented on by Aulus Gellius. Their significance has been overlooked principally because the fragments and the speech have been almost universally wrongly dated and misattributed. Gellius' unequivocal attribution of the fragments to Metellus Numidicus was long regarded as a mistake for Q. Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus, who as censor in 131-30 delivered a speech on the same subject. But a careful look at Gellius' words, and at the political background of Numidicus' censorship, demonstrates that Gellius' attribution is correct, and that the fragments are from Numidicus' speech. 120 Numidicus became censor along with his cousin C. Caecilius Metellus Caprarius in 102. The censorship was tumultuous. As censor, Numidicus tried, and was prevented by his colleague, to expel from

II7 IIB

II9

120

Plut. Mar. 9-4. For Marius' many enemies see Cic. Sui/. 23; Prov. cons. 19. Rutilius - Cic. Brut. II4; Off. 3. lO; ND 3.80; Sulla - Sail. Bl 95.3; Latin literature as well. Plut. Mar. 29.5. For his integrity, see VaL Max. 2. lO. I. Gellius, who knew Numidicus' works well, compared him to philosophers (NA I.6.7; 7.1I.1-2). Cicero (Sest. 37, Plane. 89) was characteristically critical ofNurnidicus' principled intransigence. M. McDonnell, "The Speech of Numidicus at Gellius, NA I.6," AJPh lO8 (1987) pp. 81-98. The objection of L. Holford-Strevens, Aulus Gellius (1988) pp. 227-8 is specious; see E. Badian, "Which Metellus," AJAH 13 (1988) [19971 pp. 106-12, where the attribution of the fragments to Numidicus is said to have been "proved beyond reasonable doubt."; cf. Treggiari, Roman Marriage, p. 205, n. I.

ROMAN MANLINESS

the senate his political enemies Saturninus and Glaucia. He engendered a bitter political feud by compelling an eques named Furius to .return his public horse, and caused violent rioting by refusing to recognize L. Equitius as the son of Ti. Gracchus. 121 Given such events, it must have required most of the censors' eighteen-month term to complete their duties. Because censors entered office in April, the censorship of the two Metelli, Numidicus and Caprarius, almost certainly extended into the early fall of 101, but must have been completed in time for Metellus to have presented himself as a candidate for the consulship of 100. Censorial speeches were common - Cato is thought to have given over twenty. But a censor's most important speech was associated with the final act of his censorship, the lustrum. Prior to performing the ritual - lustratio populi - the censor would call a contio, where the speech was given. 122 Because Metellus' speech became famous, it is reasonable to think that it was delivered in an important venue, and that the words that Gellius quotes are from the valedictory speech of the censorship, which Numidicus delivered in association with the lustrum. As we will see, Numidicus' words provide additional reason for thinking that his censorial speech was delivered in fall 101, the time of Marius' great triumph. The victory at Vercellae occurred on July 30 of 101, and the triumph would have followed in the fall. 123 As a conciliatory gesture, Marius had generously agreed to celebrate ajoint triumph with Catulus, but the latter, bitter that his glory was so completely overshadowed, turned against Marius soon after. 124 IfMetellus' speech was given just before the lustrum, it would have coincided 121

122

12)

124

Saturinus and Glaucia - Cic. Sest. 101; App. BC 1.28 (I26-7); Furius - Dio 28.95.2; Equitius - Cic. Sest. IOI; Val. Max. 9.7.I-2. Censors enter office in April - Mommsen, R. Staatsr. JP p. 352; contio - Varro, Ling. 6.93; cf. McDonnell, AJP 108 (I987) p. 88, n. 26. So E. Badian, "The Death of Saturninus," Chiron I4 (I984) pp. IOI-47, I2I, n. 46, who places it in September or early October. Plutarch, Mar. 26.9, gives the date of the battle. On the joint triumph see Plut. Mar. 27.10; Cic. Tuse. 5.56. E. Badian, "Norbanus and Caepio," Historia 6 (I957) pp. 3I9-36, esp. pp. 322-4 = Studies, pp. 34-70, esp. pp. 37-<), presented a strong argument for thinking that Catulus had owed his consulship to Marius' support; in which case his rapid defection would represent even greater ingratitude, see Carney, "Cicero's Picture of Marius," WS 73 (I960) pp. 83-I22, esp. pp. 94-5·

286

VIRTUS CONTESTED

with the public controversy that was beginning between Marius and Catulus over credit for the Cimbric victory, and with the upcorning and bitterly contested consular elections of 100, in which Nurnidicus himself opposed Marius, as well as with all the extraordinary acclamations and honors that Marius received as savior of Italy, and with Marius' announcement that he would dedicate a temple to Honos and Virtus. The title of Metellus' speech was De ducendis uxoribus, and like the earlier censorial speech on the subject it was motivated by concern over shortages of military manpower. But in 107 Marius had come upon a solution to this problem, when he accepted proletarian volunteers into his army. It was a solution that had led directly to his victory in the Jugurthine War, and from there to the commands and victories over the Germans. The dilectus of 107 had also created the need to provide proletarian veterans with land. This had been the subject of a violent political struggle in 103, in which the optimates had been bested by Marius' agent Saturninus. In late 101, optimates would not only have been painfully aware of the political consequences of Mar ius , solutions to the manpower shortage, but would be anxious to prevent their repetition in 100. I25 In his speech, Metellus urged a traditional solution to the manpower problem - Romans should marry and produce children -, but given the contentious political atmosphere in which the speech seems to have been delivered, he would have also used the opportunity to attack the policy of his bitter enemy. It is in the second excerpt quoted by Gellius that topical references to Marius and his temple can be found. Di immortales plurimum possunt; sed non plus velle nobis debent quam parentes. At parentes, si pergunt liberi errare, bonis exheredant. Quid ergo nos immortalibus dissimilius exspectemus, nisi malis rationibus finem facimus? Is demum deos propitios esse aecum est, qui sibi adversarii non sunt. DU immortales virtutem adprobare, non adhibere debent. The immortal gods have the greatest power, but they should not be better disposed to us than our parents are. But parents, if their children continue to do wrong, disinherit them. What different then should we expect from the immortal gods, unless we end these evil policies? It is just that the gods

125

On all this see McDonnell, AJPh ro8 (1987) esp. pp. 90-2.

ROMAN· MANLINESS

are well-disposed to those who are not opposed to them: The gods ought to approve virtue, not bestow it. 126 Gell. NA 1.6.8 = ORP I8 4

Here Numidicus treats the relationship between the gods and virtus, a subject strikingly appropriate at a time when a temple had recently been vowed to divine Virtus. He begins by addressing the power of the gods and what men should expect ofit. Comparing the gods to parents, he says men should not expect more from them than from their parents. As parents disinherit children who continually do wrong, so the gods turn away from those who follow evil practices. The sentiment fits well with what we have seen was the optimate view of the contested victory at Vercellae. The Marian version had it that before battle with the Cimbri, Marius had sought the aid of divine Virtus by vowing a temple, and he had been given a resounding victory. The temple to Honos and Virtus was recognition and proclamation of that divine support. But Marius' divine support and victory were both denied by his enemies. As Sulla later wrote, the god (or the gods) had turned away from Marius at Vercellae, showing anger by misleading his army, and giving the victory to Catulus, who was favored by Fortuna (Plut. Mar. 26.3). After describing the nature of the gods' favor, Numidicus turns to virtus, telling his audience that virtus is a quality that the gods ought to approve (di immortales adprobare . .. debent). The rather abrupt transition from divine favor to virtus makes perfect sense if the reference is to the temple of Honos and Virtus. The optimate position was that the gods did not favor Marius, and that his claim to virtus could not be accepted by the gods because his deceitful conduct had made him hated by them. Marius' reputation as a man of virtus, according to his opponents, rested on a series of stolen victories - the Numidian

126

The text is C. Hosius' Teubner. In strict grammar the reflexive pronoun sibi in the penultimate sentence should refer to the subj ect of the verb in its own clause, in which case qui sibi adversarii non sunt would mean, "who are not their own enemies." But since deos is the virtual subject of the main clause (indeed the gods are the primary subject of the entire passage), and since in preclassical Latin the pronouns is and se are frequently interchangeable - e.g., ORP 8.58 = Gell. NA 1O.3.I4, with the comment ofCourtney, Archaic Latin, p. 87, and the other examples he refers to on p. I59 -, it is best to construe sibi as referring to deos.

288

VIRTUS CONTESTED

victory had been stolen from Metellus; true credit for ending that war had been robbed from Sulla who had captured Jugurtha; and Marius was presently stealing the Cimbric victory from Catulus. As Rutilius later wrote, in reality the virtus of Marius consisted oflying. But it is the seemingly obscure concluding sentiment that "The gods ought to approve virtus, not bestow it." - Dii immortales virtutem adpro bare, non adhibere debent - that provides the key to the ideological conflict between Marius and his philhellenic adversaries. What is being contrasted here, and in the entire passage, are two opposing notions about manly excellence, virtus - one Roman, the other Greek. The Roman quality that Marius claimed, and the cult he patronized, was martial in nature. Marius' association with Virtus was in recognition of his extraordinary martial prowess, and was in the tradition of earlier Romans connected with divine Virtus. It is to be recalled that this traditional martial view of virtus does not necessarily have an ethical denotation - it was contrasted with an ethical ideal by Ennius, and later by Caesar. It was this notion of virtus that Numidicus and his philhellene associates challenged. The Greek word for virtue was apETij, a decidedly ethical concept, and virtus was the standard Latin word used to translate it. 12 7 As can be seen from the reference to malis rationibus, in his speech, Numidicus presents virtus as an ethical quality. The distinction Numidicus draws between "approving" and "bestowing" virtus reflects another aspect of the contrast between Greek and Roman ideas about virtue. Although apETij is sometimes described as being possessed by gods or sought from the gods, in Greek popular thought, literature, and rhetoric, apETij above all represented the innate excellence of a human, counterpoised to or complemented by some extra-human power, most commonly fortune - TVXT). Furthermore, although personified in literature, apETij never received an official public cult. 128 The Roman view was very different. Virtus had been recognized as a deity with a state cult since 205, and was conceived of as a deity that bestowed its power on individuals - ita Virtus, quae dat virtutem (Varro, frag. 189 Cardauns, apud Aug. CD 4.24). 12 7

uB

See previous Chapter Ill. On the nature of apETT], which had no public cult, see previous Chapter 1I, Section 2.

ROMAN MANLINESS

The virtus of Marius was a martial value, in essence social rather than ethical, and it was regarded as a divine entity that bestowed its power on its favorites. Numidicus' ethical virtus, and his statement about the gods approving not bestowing what is an innate human quality, expresses a Greek view that is not only opposed to Marius' temple and to the older dedications to Virtus, but one that seeks to redefine the traditional Roman concept of manliness to fit the more Hellenized and less martial experiences and values of the men who dominated the senatorial establishment in the late-second century.

7. VIRTUS AND THE LEGACY OF MARIUS

Numidicus' contrasting of traditional martial Roman virtus to a Hellenized ethical conception of the term was not forgotten; it would be used again by a historian writing of the Republic's end. I29 But the cultural conflict that provided the context did not last beyond Marius and his contemporaries. One reason for this was the cultural change that occurred in the generation after Numidicus and Marius. The large-scale immigration to Italy of illustrious Greek scholars and teachers fleeing the Mithridatic Wars exposed greater numbers of upper-class Romans to first-class Greek learning and instruction, and created what has been aptly termed a flowering of intellectual and artistic life. Thoroughly Hellenized Latin authors such as Cicero and Caesar, and Lucretius and Catullus, displayed a new self-assurance with which to challenge Greek cultural superiority. I30 But that is only one side of the story. The political success of Mar ius had taught the Roman nobility the lesson that their confidence in public affirmations of Hellenism was misplaced. Philhellenic senators of the following generation were careful to conceal from the public the extent of their Greek

I29

I3 0

Sail. BC 54. In fact, the only way to understand SaIlust's use of virtus is to interpret it in light of this contrast; see later Chapter X. Cicero, for example, asserted that Latin was equal to or even superior to Greek; Tusc. 1.1-4; Fin. LIO-II; ND 1.8. Caesar eschews Greek words in his Commentarii, and called for pure Latin in his De analogia; see Rawson, Intellectual Life, pp. 122-3. For Greek intellectuals fleeing the Mithridatic Wars as causing a cultural turning point, see Rawson, pp. 7-IO.

VIRTIlS CONTESTED

erudition. 131 The Hellenized last generation of republican senators might act, and speak, and dress like Greeks, but they did so in the villas and resorts of Campania, while in the Roman Forum they attacked one another for that very behavior. Marius' political lesson had deepened the gulfbetween the public and private lives of senators of the late Republic. 13 2 If for these reasons the overt anti-Greek element that Marius had introduced into traditional Roman virtus was no longer the focus of cultural and political debate, another aspect of Marian virtus had more lasting political importance. It seems certain that by Marius' day elite young men no longer provided Rome with its cavalry, and the nature of the Roman legions had certainly changed, becoming more professionalized and politicized, and thereby altering the relationship between soldiers and generals. The popular politician Marius adapted to these changes by de-emphasizing the traditional heroic aspect that had been embodied by young Roman cavalrymen engaging in single combat, and by portraying the commander favored by divine Virtus as one who shared both the dangers and hardships of his soldiers. Although reputed to have fought a mounted duel when a young man, as a commander Marius is said to have refused a challenge to single combat. Instead he was depicted as accompanying and leading his men in the use of the weapons of the common foot soldier javelin, sword, and shield. 133 Marius'identification with his soldiers included an interest in and sympathy with their daily experiences. The degree of innovation in the army reforms attributed to Marius is debated; but credit for having introduced them was clearly part of 131

132

133

So the orators M. Antonius and L. Licinius Crassus (both born around I40), Cic. De or. 2.4; but here Cicero may be attributing his own practices to Crassus and Antonius, as he probably does at De or. I.I2I and perhaps I.I90; see A. D. Leeman, H. Pinkster, H. L. W Nalson, M. Tullius Cicero De Oratore Libri Ill, Kommentar, voL 2 (Heidelberg, I985) p. I93, and A. S. Wilkins, Cicero De Oratore I-Ill (Oxford I892, repr. London, 2002) p. 228. For Cicero himself in his speeches, see e.g., 2 Verr. 4.4-5, I3,94. The exception, as was often the case, was Pompey; on whose Hellenism, see Chapter IX. Cicero's avoidance of Greek words in his speeches, but frequent use of them in his letters, especially the less formal letters, on which see L. P. Wilkinson, "Cicero," in Cambridge History cif Classical Literature, p. 242, is one example of the divide between public and private. The subj ect is complex and deserves further study. Plut. Mar. 20.6, quoted at the beginning of this chapter. On the challenge and the youthful monomachy, see previously n. I.

ROMAN MANLINESS

his public image. 134 Marius also shared the legionary soldiers' labors and hardships, eating their food and sleeping on their simple beds. Of Marius' behavior as legate in the JugurthineWar Plutarch writes: "He made display of every kind of bravery, and although the war brought many hardships, he neither shunned any great labor, nor disdained any that were small." (Mar. 7. 1-2). The portrait of Marius is of the general as commilitio - "fellow-soldier" - , which was the military side of Mar ius' popular politics. 135 As the commander of soldiers who were looking increasingly to their generals rather than to the Republic for leadership and rewards, Marius created solidarity between general and soldier by stressing virtus militum - "prowess of the soldiers" - as well as that of the general- virtus imperatoris. Reference to this was made years later, when in encouraging his soldiers to remember Marius' great victories over the Germans, Caesar singles out for praise the army no less than its general. Cum Cimbris et Teutonis a Caio Mario pulsis non minorem laudem exercitus quam ipse imperator meritus videbatur - "When the Cimbri and the Teutoni were defeated by Gaius Marius, the army seemed to deserve no less praise than the general himself." (BC 1.40.5). Marius had provided an alternative to the traditional manner in which Roman generals had portrayed their extraordinary martial prowess, their virtus. Both the heroic and the Marian manners were on display in the public images of the two great generals of the late Republic, Pompey and Caesar, respectively.

IJ4

'J5

Reforms credited to Marius, see PIut. Mar. 13.1-2; 25.1; Plin. NH IO.16; Festus 1345L; Keppie, pp. 63-8; A. Lintott, CAH IX, pp. 37-9; J. P. Roth, The Logistics of the Roman Army at VV<1r (264 BC-AD 235) (Leiden, 1999) pp. 71-6. On the importance of the commander as commilitio in the imperial period, see Campbell, pp. 32-9·

IX

VIRTUS IMPERATORIS

He longed for a great co=and, an army, and a new war, where his virtus could shine. Sailust on Julius Caesar

I.

VIRTUS IN THE LATE REPUBLIC

Writing about the waning years of the Republic, Sailust declared that in his time there were two Romans who displayed great virtus, Caesar and Cato (Sail. BC 53.6). The pairing must have surprised contemporaries, and was intended to. During the Republic's last decades it was Pompey who epitOInized Roman martial prowess, and he would have been Caesar's expected partner as a man of virtus. I Sailust's pairing, however, betrays more than a deep antipathy toward Cn. Pompeius Magnus. In contrasting Caesar and Cato, one a military man, the other decidedly not, Sailust was recasting the debate over the nature of Roman manliness that had been conducted by Marius and his philhellenic adversaries. By the late Republic the influences of semantic borrowing from 6:PETf] on virtus had been fully integrated, and the Latin word's range of meanings was full. In the Latin of this period the virtus - fortuna pairing is ubiquitous, and the contrast between virtus and vitium or I

Cf. Ver. Aen. 6.826-35. On the surprising nature of the comparison, see H. Last, "Sallust and Caesar in the Bellum Catilinae," Melanges offerts ilJ Marouzeau (paris 1948) pp. 3656. Intentional neglect of Cicero is a possibility, but by this point in Bel/urn Catilinae Sallust's treatment of Cicero was already clear.

293

ROMAN MANLINESS

voluptas - "vice" or "pleasure" - is also very common. 2 Rarer is the application of the word to animals and inanimate objects, found usually in a direct borrowing from a Greek model. 3 In Latin rhetorical and philosophical works virtus is regularly employed to convey both technical and ethical usages of apETT] , and virtus is often found as a unified, all-embracing value in non-philosophical as well as philosophical works. 4 But the courageous, especially the martial meaning of virtus remained common and distinct. Catullus, somewhat surprisingly, uses virtus exclusively to denote the physical prowess of Greek heroes. 5 The meanings of virtus in late republican Latin were varied, and in regard to its most common and basic usage as the quality of a man, complex. In writing about the essential elements of friendship, Cicero could state that an ethical usage of virtus is its meaning in colloquial speech, while his contemporary Caesar, in using the word to denote prowess in war, contrasted it to ethical qualities. 6 It was the ambiguity in the meaning of virtus in regard to its ethical content that provided the basis for a redefinition of Roman manliness, and it is the Commentaries of Caesar, the speeches of Cicero, and the histories of Sallust that best exemplifY the ways in which the traditional martial connotations of Roman manliness were employed, manipulated, and redefmed to fit 2

J

4

5

6

The virtus-:fortuna pairing is particularly common in the biographies ofCornelius Nepos, e.g., Eum. 1.I, Reg. 2.3, reflecting the dominance of the 6:PETT] - TVXll theme in Greek biography; see K. Ziegler, "Tyche," RE VHA (I948) col. I663-5; I663; Eisenhut, VR, p. 46---'7; and Sarsila Virtus, p. 77. For opposition of virtutes and vitia reflecting the 6:PETT]i]80vT] dichotomy, see, e.g., Nepos, Ale. I,I, II,4; Epam. I,2-4; Dion. 6.2 (the father and son theme familiar from New Comedy). Virtute pedumque at Lucretius 5.966 is clearly taken from lTo8wv OPETT]V (Horn. n. 20.4II), and the virtus of lions at (Luer. 5.858, 863) translates 6:v8pElo of Greek fables; see B. E. Parry, Aesopica (Urbana, I952), fab. Grae. 284. The anonymous author of the commentary on Caesar's African campaign, De bello Africo, writes ofthe virtus of elephants (72.4). For other brave elephants, see Plin. NH 8.II-I2; Curt. 8.I3.17. For Cicera' use of virtus as an all-embracing value, see later, Chapter X, Section 2. The ethical concerns that dominated Greek biography comes through clearly in Cornelius Nepos' uses of virtus, see D. R. Stuart, Epochs of Greek and Roman Biography (Berkeley, I928) p. I2I, andE. M.Jenkinson, "Nepos," in Latin Biography, ed. T. A. Dorey (London, I967) pp. I-I5. Virtus has an ethical connotation at Ale. II,4; Thras. I,I; Cato. 2.4, a martial meaning at Milt. 2.2; Dat. 2.I; Lys. I,2; Reg. I,4. The two meanings overlap at Hann. 1.2; Tim. I,I; and Ale. 7.3. Virtus occurs at 64.5I, 2I8, 323, 348, 357 and 68.90, five of the six times in poem 64. It is used in the singular only at 64.215; see V P. McCarren, A Critical Concordance to Catullus (Leiden, I977); cf. Eisenhut, VR, pp. 43-44· Cic. Amic. 2I, and earlier, Intra. Caes. BC 3.59-60.2.

294

VlRTIlS lMPERATORIS

the directions in which the Roman world was moving - from Republic to Principate.

2.

THE VIRTUS OF POMPEY

When in 55 Pompey inaugurated his great theater complex as a monument to his conquests, he dedicated at the top of the cavea a number of shrines - one to Venus Victrix, one to Felicitas, one to Victoria, one to Honos, and one to Virtus. 7 In associating himself with numbers of deities, Pompey was following the examples of earlier Romans, who in the late-second and early-first centuries had increasingly made claims and competed for the patronage of more than one deity. 8 But Pompey was doing more than that. Mter his eastern campaigns (6662), he presented himself as the greatest conqueror in Rome's history, and with the dedications in his theater he lay claim to divine patrons that had been associated, some traditionally, some more recently, with earlier Roman conquerors. In Felicitas and Venus, Pompey identified himself with qualities associated with Sulla, fighting for whose cause Pompey had first established his military reputation. 9 In that case, the dedications to Honos and to Virtus might be seen as a reference to the other great general of the previous generation, C. Marius. The career of Pompey, in which he employed his reputation for extraordinary military prowess to repeatedly acquire great commands (many of them in contravention of law), certainly followed the pattern of earlier Romans who patronized divine Virtus, Marius included. But although he at times flirted with popular politics, Pompey never identified himself with Marius or his cause; most of his early successes were achieved with victories over Marians. IfPompey presented himself as a man ofVirtus, as he surely did, it was not on the pattern of Marius, 7

8

9

ClL F 324; cf. Suet. Claud. 21.1. For a shrine to Victoria, see Gell. NA. 10.1.7. On the theater, see Richardson, Dictionary, "Theatrum Pompeii," pp. 383-5. Earlier Romans had tended to look to a single deity as a primary patron; on the change see T. J. Luce, AJA 72 (1968) pp. 25-39, and on Marius and Sulla, earlier, Chapter VIII, Section 5. For Sulla and Felicitas, see Plut. Sui. 34.2; Vell. Pat. 2.27.5; Plin. NH 22.12; App. BC 1.97 (451). On Sulla's association with Venus, Plut. Sui. 34.2-3; App. BC. 1.91 (422). In general, see Balsdon,JRS 41 (1951) pp. 1-10; Weinstock, DivusJulius, pp. 16-17, 81, II4; and Keaveney, "Sulla and the Gods," pp. 44--'79.

295

ROMAN MANLINESS

but rather on the older model that had been established by Marcellus and followed by Scipio Aemilianus. Pompey decided early to portray the extraordinary martial prowess that he claimed in the heroic mode. At the age of twenty-five he was hailed as Magnus by his army and later by Sulla. Although Pompey did not use the title in official documents until he took up a command in Spain in 77, that it was meant to identity him as the Roman Alexander is amply documented and beyond doubt. IO Alexander was famous for leading his armies on horseback, and the equestrian image of Alexander as the heroic rider charging into battle was known in Italy and in Rome. II This was the model that Pompey followed. But the public image of Pompey was drawing on Roman sources as well as Greek ones, as is apparent in his portrait. I2 That Pompey also emulated the Marcellan model of the heroic man of virtus is evident from accounts of his behavior in battle. In his first command in the Civil War in 83, Pompey is reported to have engaged and killed a Gaul in single mounted combat. The monomachy occurred in a battle where Pompey's forces were heavily outnumbered, and Pompey, leading his cavalry, is said to have picked out the most prominent of the Gallic horsemen to attack. Pompey's heroic act led to a Roman victory. The parallel with Marcellus' deed at Clastidium is patent (cf. Plut. Pomp. 7.1-2 to Marc. 7). Pompey is credited with another monomachy later, in his campaigns against King Mithridates, when he is said have slain the king's brother, Cosis, in a mounted engagement. I3 On only one Sallust, Hist. III 88M and Plutarch, Pomp. 2.2 remain obstacles to any argument that Pompey did not identifY himself with Alexander, for which see D. J. Martin, "Did Pompey Engage in imitatio Alexandri," in Studies in LAtin Literature and History IX (Brussels, 1998) pp. 23-51. It is rash to assume that the Romans first attributed the tide Magnus to Alexander, simply because the earliest attestation is Plautus, Most. 775-6. See Plut. Pomp. 2.1-2; Weinstock, Divus Julius, pp. 37-9; and O. Weippert, Alexander Imitatio und Riimische Politik in republikanischen Zeit (Augsburg, 1972). 11 On Alexander as heroic rider, see von Roques de Maumont, pp. 21--9; and W B. Kaiser, JDAI77 (1962) pp. 227-39, esp. pp. 235-7. 12 On which see the comments ofZanker, Images, pp. 9-11. IJ Plut. Pomp. 35.2-3; Plut. Pomp. 19.2. These stories probably originated with Theophanes ofMitylene, who accompanied Pompey and wrote a flattering history of his campaigns, see FGrH Iill, 919 and Plut. Pomp. 46.1. On Theophanes, Pompey, and Alexander imitation, see Rawson, Intellectual Life, pp. 108--9.

10

VIRTUS IMPERATORIS

occasion, when his army was in particular need of training, is Pompey represented in the "Marian" manner as drilling with his men as a foot soldier. Immediately after, however, he is said to have participated in a cavalry drill, and here, as in other descriptions of his military exercising, emphasis is on Pompey's skill as a mounted warrior, a figure associated in the Roman imagination with heroic virtus. 14 Pompey also followed the Marcellan model of virtus by presenting himself as a friend and patron of Greek culture, who added to the beauty of Rome and to the pleasures of its citizens with public displays of Greek art won by his martial prowess. While visiting Rhodes he made a very public display of paying homage to the great polymath Posidonius, as well as of listening to and patronizing Rhodian orators. When in Athens he did the same for philosophers. IS The building for which Pompey was famous, Rome's first permanent stone theater, was a celebration of Greek culture adapted to Roman tastes. A Greek architectural form that was modified by the Romans, the theater was the venue for a Greek cultural institution. The games that celebrated the dedication ofPompey's theater included Greek athletic and musical competitions, as well as a Roman beast hunt. The art that decorated both theater and adjoining porticus was of Greek workmanship and largely Greek in theme. In the tradition of Marcellus' display of the art ofSyracuse, Pompey's great theater complex, with its watered gardens that were decorated with sculpture and paintings, was a gift to the Roman people, who used it for various purposes, most related to relaxation and pleasure. 16

14

15

16

Plut. Pomp. 64.2. Significantly, the weapon Pompey is said to have thrown with more force and accuracy than young men was the cavalryman's javelin - CxKovTlcriJa - not the legionary soldier's pilum - vcrcros - that Marius is said to have fought with at Plut. Mar. 20.5, quoted in the heading of Chapter VIII. Cf. Plut. Pomp. 41.3, exercising on horseback at Petra. Posidonius - Strab. 11.1.6; Plin. NH 7.II2; orators and philosophers - Plut. Pomp. 4 2 .4-5. On Pompey as phillhellene, see Rawson, Intellectual Life, pp. I04-6. That Pompey's theater (Plut. Pomp. 42.4) was a phillrellenic gesture was suggested by Rawson, Intellectual Life, pp. I04-5, and fully demonstrated by tire essay of A. L. Kuttner, "Culture and History at Pompey's Museum," TAPA 129 (1999) pp. 343-'73. For Greek contests at the dedication ofPompey's theater, see Plut. Pomp. 52.4; Cic. Fam. 7.1 (SE 24) 2-3.

297

ROMAN MANLINESS

In addition to winning popularity with displays of Greek culture, being portrayed as a heroic warrior in batde, and dedicating a shrine to divine Virtus, Pompey's public reputation was that of a man of virtus. In his speeches, Cicero ascribes virtus more frequendy to Pompey than to any other individual, and the overwhelming majority of references are martial. Moreover, in the encomium to Pompey in his speech De imperio en. Pompei, delivered in 66, Cicero twice connects him with divina virtus. I7 The phrase has been dismissed as mere rhetoric because it is joined with the adjective incredibilis - "unbelievable." But that to an ancient Roman audience the collocation divina virtus would have evoked the cult is likely for a number of reasons. First, it is relatively uncommon, occurring only eleven times in Cicero's orations, and each time denoting the martial quality associated with the cult. Second, although it is difficult to demonstrate that every instance of Cicero's use of divina virtus is a reference to the cult, both because the Romans did not employ capital letters to denote the names of deities, and because the contexts in which the phrase occurs are often inexplicit, Cicero's usage in one speech is telling. In the Fourteenth Philippic, where divina virtus occurs three times, it is mentioned in connection with an altar to Virtus - ara virtutis - that Cicero proposes as an honor to the soldiers who died in batde. I8 Finally, all the references to divina

17

18

For the martial virtus of Pompey, see Imp. Pom. IO, 20, 27, 30, 33, 42, 45, 61, 62; (Earl, PTS, p. 36, n. 2, was wrong to state that virtus is inexplicit in this speech.) Cat. 2.rr; 4.21; Sest. 67; Hay. resp. 49; Prov. cons. 31; Balb. 9, IO, 13, 15, 16; Leg. agr. 2.3, 2.51, 52 and Dom. 16. At Pis. 27 and 35 the virtus ofPompey has no immediate reference, but at Pis. 16 it is associated with Pompey's "victory over all nations," and at Pis. 34 virtus is connected to the invincible Pompey (Pompeius invictissimus). Similarly at Mil. 73, Pompey's virtus has no immediate context, but at Mil. 66 his virtus is courageous and at Mil. 79 it is connected to Pompey's conquests. For divina virtus - Imp.Pom. 33 and 36. Cic. Phil. 14.34, cf. 14. 33 and 38. Earl, PTS p. 37, for example, dismissed divina, along with singularis and incredibilis as rhetorical. But the combination of each of them with virtus is more limited than Earl implied. Merguet gave thirteen and one half columns of his index of the speeches to virtus. Singularis (which itself has four and one half columns) is joined to virtus eleven times, six of them in descriptions of Pompey, all but one of which occur in De imperio Pompei. Incredibi!is (which has three columns in Merguet) is combined with virtus only seven times. Divina has only one and one half columns; divina Virtus occurs eleven times - Imp. Pom. 33, 36 (pompey), Prov. cons. 32 (Marius), Phil. 3.3; 13.19 (Octavian as imperator), Phi!. IO.II (Decimus Brutus as imperator), Phi!. 13.44 (plancus as imperator), Phi!. 14.33, 36, 38, to the legions. At Marc. 26 the reference is

VIRTUS IMPERATORIS

virtus were made in speeches that were delivered only a short distance from a temple to divine Virtus. 19 The extent to which Pompey was identified as the man of virtus in Rome is clearest, however, from a famous incident related in a letter of Cicero describing Pompey's hostile reception in the theater in 59. At a stage performance at the Ludi Apollinares, the tragic actor Diphilus cleverly exploited a well-known aspect of Pompey's public image in attacking him without mentioning his name. Dipihilus simply punned on his title "the Great" by exclaiming to the audience, nostra miseria tu es magnus. - "You are great because of our misery." Instantly recognizing the reference to Pompey, the crowd demanded that Diphilus repeat the line again and again, Cicero informed Atticus (Att. 2.19 [SE 39] 3). That was the Greek aspect ofPompey's reputation. What is overlooked, however, is that Cicero wrote that Diphilus continued his attack on Pompey by reciting other lines as well. eandem virtutem istam veniet tempus cum graviter gemes - "The time will come when you bitterly resent that same virtus" - said Diphilus, and the reaction of the crowd was the same. Just as it had responded to the word magnus, the theater audience again, without mention of his name, recognized virtus as a defining quality ofPompey, and shouted their approval of the line (Att. 2.19 [SE 39] 3).20 For two decades Pompey was Rome's greatest general and its preeminent man of virtus. The connection ofPompey in the public mind with virtus not only explains Cicero's frequent ascription of the quality to him, but make it likely that Sallust's statement in Bellum Catilinae, made just before the comparison between Cato and Caesar, that, multis

19

20

probably to the virtus of the victorious Caesar, and the divina virtus attributed to Milo at Mil. 99 occurs in a context in which Cicero attempts to present his client as a general who has defended the state. For the importance of Ciceronian references to temples, see A. Vasaly, Representations: images of the world in Ciceronian oratory (Berkeley, I993), pp. 34-5; Millar, Crowd, pp. 42-4. It is also possible that the Calenus - Cordus coin displaying Honos and Virtus (RRC 403) of either 68 or 70 (see earlier Chapter IV), in some way refers to Pompey. Most of the arguments cited by Hollstein, pp. I29-32, are strained, but Pompey was married, from c. 80 to 62, to Mucia, a sister of the probable moneyer, P. Mucius Scaevola. Pompey in 72 had erected a trophy in the Pyrenees to celebrate victories in Spain; he was consul in 70; was maneuvering for imperium against both the pirates and Mithridates in 68; and in 66 and 65 had won great victories in the east.

299

ROMAN MANLINESS

tempestatibus haud sane quisquam Romae virtute magnus fuit. - "for a long time there was no one in Rome who was great in respect to virtus" (BC 53.5), was a cut at Pompey.21 Pompey's status as Rome's man of virtus also explains why in his Commentaries, Caesar, who rarely attributes virtus to any Roman aristocrat, marks out for praise the virtus ofPompey.

3. VIRTUS AND CAESAR'S COMMENTARIES

Of an old patrician family, C. Julius Caesar, unlike Pompey, followed a consistently popular course in politics, presenting himself from the beginning as Marius' political heir. In 69 at the funeral of his aunt, the widow of Marius, Caesar showed the images of the great general, breaking a ban on their display that had been imposed by Sulla. Four years later as aedile he re-erected on the Capital the trophies of Mar ius' victories over the Germans, which Sulla had taken down some eighteen years earlier. 22 Although Caesar never attempted to hide that he was thoroughly conversant with Greek culture, much less attack it, neither did he adopt the public stance of philhellene by surrounding himself with Greek scholars and literary men, or by making a show of his friendship with eminent Greek intellectuals. The public displays he put on as aedile, staged on a famously grand scale, seem to have been Roman rather than Greek in nature. 23 In addition, Caesar's public 21

22

23

For the reading and interpretation of the previous words, see J. Linderski, "Effete Rome: Saliust, Cat. 53.5," Mnem. 53 (1999) pp. 257-65. It is unlikely that the cut was aimed at Cicero, see Syme, Sallust, pp. 105-II, and II3. Marius' imagines - Plut. Caes. 5.1-2; trophies of Marius - Plut. Caes. 6.1-2; Suet. Iul. II. In 70 Caesar supported the motion to restore power to tribunes of the plebeians (Suet. Iul. 5). For Caesar's continued popularis stance see, for the year 63, Cic. Cat. 4.9, and in 49, Caes. BC I. 7 .2-3, For the consistent nature of Caesar's public career, see T. P Wiseman, "The publication of De Bello Gallico," in Julius Caesar as Ariful Reporter, eds., Welch and Powell, pp. 1-<). For Caesar's legislation as dictator, see Z. Yavetz, Caesar and his Public Image (London, 1983) pp. 58-184. On Caesar's public entertainment as aedile, see Plut. Caes. 5.5, where TTEp{ TE eEOTpO might, but does not necessarily, refer to Greek dramas. In either case, these are mentioned together with processions, public banquets, and most spectacularly 320 pairs of gladiators (Plin. NH 33.53; Suet. Iul. 10.1-2). For Caesar's lack of public contact with Greek intellectuals, see Rawson, Intellectual Life, pp. 109-10. but see Suet. Iul. 48. I. In private life Caesar certainly had Greek interests and personal connections, and while in Gaul he established political connections with Greek leaders, but his public image eschewed 300

VIRTUS IMPERATORIS

image as a general harkened back to that of Marius, as we will see. Yet despite these Marian connections, there is no known association of Caesar to divine Virtus, at least not until well into his dictatorship. At that time, moreover, Caesar seemed to have muted his connection with Marius in favor of a pattern of presentation and behavior associated with the heroic mode of virtus and with men like Marcellus, Scipio Aemilianus, and Pompey. The story of Caesar's relationship to virtus is complex. Fortunately we have the means to analyze it, for unlike Pompey, who relied on others to construct his public image as the ideal commander, Caesar did the job himself. An examination of Caesar's use of virtus in his Commentarii will reveal not only why, while presenting himself as the summus imperator in the manner of Marius, Caesar chose to steadfastly avoid any association with virtus, but also that in the military and political culture of the late Republic, the favor of divine Virtus was the object of competition. The meaning of virtus in the Commentaries is predictably consistent, almost always denoting martial prowess or courage. The influence of Greek ideas and 6:pETT) on Caesar's use of virtus is rare and wholly conventional. Occasionally he combines, sometimes contrasts, virtus andfortuna (BC V 34.2, BC 3.73.5, BC 2.30.2), and the virtus-vitium contrast appears at BC 3 .38.5; but by the mid-first century these tropes had been standard in Latin for some time. 24 Two occurrences are unusual in that virtus does not denote an aggressive martial quality, but correspond to Cicero's definition of the term in Tusculan Disputations as "great scorn for death and pain" - maxima mortis dolorisque contemptio. (Tusc. 2.43). Caesar has the Gallic leader Critognatus refer to virtus in this sense when he urges his men to withstand the deprivation of a blockade, animi est ista mollitia, non virtus, ... qui se ultro morti offerant, facilius reperiuntur quam qui dolorem patienter ferant, - "This is cowardice, not virtus, ... those who would willingly expose themselves to death are found more easily than those who would bear pain patiently."

24

Hellenic sympathies until after Pharsalus. See G. Dobesch, "Caesar und Hellenismus," in Diorthoseis, Beitriige zur Geschichte des Hellenismus und zum Nachleben Alexanders des Grossen, ed. R. Kinsky (Munich, Leipzig, 2004) pp. ro8-252, especially p. 162 fr. Cf. Caesar's per virtutem in pugna belli fortunam experiri - "to test the fortune of war by courage in battle" (BC 2.30.2) to Enn. Ann. 186-7 S.

301

ROMAN MANLINESS

(BC VII 77.5). The same sense may also be seen in the description of that quality with which Roman soldiers, by continuous rowing, made heavy transport ships equal the speed of war ships (BC V 8-4). In regard to this Caesar writes, qua in re admodum fuit militum virtus laudanda - "in which endeavor the virtus of the soldiers should be greatly praised." This recalls the virtus of certain Plautine slaves who are willing to endure a whipping to further their designs.25 An ethical connotation to virtus can perhaps be seen in Caesar's description of the Nervii, who are said to have thought that imported luxuries would cause their virtus to be lost (BC 11. 15.4). But virtus here is a martial quality that is enervated by soft living, a favorite Caesarian trope used also of the Germans and the Helvetians, and familiar in earlier Latin from the elder Cato's attack on culinary extravagances in his speech against the repeal of the Lex Orchia26 In general, Caesar's uses of virtus conform to the way the word is employed in the now familiar story of Raucillus and Egus, the two Allobrogiah brothers whose unethical behavior Caesar excused because of their martial virtus (BC 3.59.1-60.2).27 In the Commentaries virtus is credited in the great majority of cases to common soldiers. In De bello civili, attributions are usually restricted to soldiers fighting on Caesar's side, but in De bello Callico they are about evenly divided between Roman legionaries and their Gallic opponents. 28 Attributing virtus to the enemy served a number of purposes.

25

26

27

28

Asin. 323 and Per. 268; on which see earlier Chapter I, Section 2. Contra Eisenhut, VR, p. 45; cf. BC 2.15.4, where sol/ertia and virtus are complementary but distinct qualities, cf. BC VII 22.1. For the military associations of labor, see Combes, pp. 256-8. On the virtus of Q. Cicero, see below. Cf. BC I 36.7 on the Germans, and on the Helvetians BC I 1.4. For Cato see ORP 8.141, 146, and above Chapter I, Section 5. See previously Introduction. When Ariovistus boasts of his virtutes to Caesar (BC I.44. I), the sole instance of the plural in the Commentaries, it means "deeds of courage," cf. BC I 44.2-4. If virtutes here is ironic, so Eisenhut, VR, p. 44, it is because Ariovistus claimed that his military activities were defensive (BC I 44.2-3). In regard to Romans in De bello civili, with the exception of one ironic ascription of virtus to the senate (1.6.1), it is only Caesar's soldiers or centurions who are credited with virtus, a total ofI8 times. In the same work virtus is attributed to Caesar's opponents at 2.6.1, 1.58.2, and 59.2, and at 3.4.4, and see below. In De bello Callico, I-VII virtus is attributed to Gauls 31 times, to Germans five, and to Roman soldiers and centurions a total of 28 times, sometimes to individuals, but only five times to Roman officers.

302

VIR1US IMPERATORIS

In the opening chapters of Book One of the Gallic Commentaries, Caesar can no better demonstrate the threat the Helvetians pose than by emphasizing their virtus, Qua de causa He/vetii quoque reliquos Gallos virtute praecedunt, ---- "for that reason the Helvetians also surpass the other Gauls in virtus."(BG I I .4). Later in the same book, Ariovistus informs Caesar what it is that makes the Germans so formidable. [CaesaremJ intellecturum quid invicti Germani, exercitatissimi in armis, qui inter annos XlIII tectum non subissent, virtute possent. - "Caesar would learn what unconquered Germans, practiced to perfection in arms, who for fourteen years had not taken shelter under a roof, could do with their virtus.)) (BG 136.7). By exalting the valor of his opponents Caesar not only magnified his own victories, but also provided justification for his aggressive actions. But the importance of virtus goes beyond that. In the Commentaries, battles and campaigns are presented as contests in virtus. This is especially so in De bello Gallico, where virtus is attributed to both Caesar's soldiers and to the enemy. Some Gallic peoples, as some units of the Roman army, possess more virtus than others. Battle is a contest to determine whose virtus is superior, with both Caesar and his Gallic counterparts testing the virtus of their own men as well as that of the enemy. Sometimes a Gallic people's reputation for virtus proves to have been exaggerated and in defeat virtus may be lost. 29 In Caesar's writings the virtus of soldiers is a central and indispensable element in victory. There are, however, factors that can neutralize it, and clear limits are set to what virtus can accomplish by itself. Gallic virtus is often rendered ineffective by recklessness: ... temeritas - quae maxime illi hominum generi est innata, - " ... which was the greatest natural characteristic of that race of men," according to Caesar. (BG VII 42.2; cf. III 10.3). This is what Labienus exploited when he defeated a

Sarsila, Virtus, p. 72, claimed that in Caesar's works the soldiers' virtus was the result of training. But this is contradicted by the frequent imputation of virtus to Gallic soldiers. 29 Virtus of Gauls - BG I 2.2; I 13.5-6; II 4.5; III 21.1; of the Roman army - BG VI 40.5. Virtus attributed to both sides - VII So. Tested by Caesar - II S.5; by VercingetorixVII 36.4; exaggerated - II 24. 4; I 40'S; lost - II 15-4-5; cf. II 27.2. See 1. Rawlings, "Caesar's portrayal of Gauls as warriors," in Welch and Powell, pp. 171-92, at 17S-9; and J. E. Lendon, "The Rhetoric of Combat: Greek Theory and Roman Culture in Julius Caesar's Battle Descriptions," Cl Ant IS (1999) pp. 273-329, 310-13.

303

ROMAN MANLINESS

larger force of the Treveri in 53 .... sperans temeritate eorum fore aliquam dimicandi facultatem, - " ... hoping there would be some opportunity for fighting because of their recklessness." (BC VI 7-4). Recklessness could also undo the virtus of Roman soldiers. When at the siege of Gergovia some units ignored orders in carrying out what proved to be a disastrous attack, Caesar reprimanded their recklessness and passion - temeritas cupiditasque (VII 52.1) - for supposing that they could capture the town by virtus alone. Caesar characterized these men as UNruly and arrogant because they thought they knew more than their general about victory and the consequence of a military maneuver (VII 52.3-4). In a soldier, Caesar wanted restraint and self-controlmodestia et continentia - as much as he did virtus. 30 But recklessness could also be displayed by a Roman commander. It was the recklessness and bad judgment of the legate Q. Titurius Sabinus that forced his soldiers, abandoned by fortune and their leader, to rely only on virtus. In the end, competent Gallic leadership and their own commander's failings left the Romans, in Caesar's words, nec virtuti locus relinquebatur - "with no place for virtus," and they were annihilated. 31 On occasion, virtus militum might rescue a Roman army from a situation caused by the incompetence of a commander (BC III 5), but usually unless the soldiers' virtus was guided by their general, the result was a setback or defeat, whereas if virtus was properly directed, defeat was avoided. 32 It is for the general to make decisions and see to the

)0

)I

)2

Note that when Caesar concedes that in carrying out the unordered attack the men displayed courage, he avoids using virtus, preferring the term animi magnitudo - "greatness of spirit" - quanto opere eorum animi magnitudiinem admiraretur. (VII 52.3). It is only when he goes on to state the positive qualities he desired in a soldier, that Caesar mentions virtus, coupled with and qualifying animi magnitudo. VII. 52.4. BC V 35.4, with Lendon, 307. For the Roman soldiers having to rely on virtus alone, see BC V 34.2. Caesar speaks of the culpa et temeritas of Sabinus at V 52.6. On Sabinus' end, see V 28-37.2, with K. Welch, "Caesar and his officers in the Gallic War Commentaries," 95-6, in Welch and Powell. So rightly Lendon, 307, and Rawlings, "Caesar's portrayal of Gauls as warriors, pp 17191, esp. p. 180, in Welch and Powell. Setback - Caesar disobeyed at Gergovia, BC VII 50-52; defeats - Sabinus, BC V 34-35; Curio, BC 2.40-2. Curio, unlike Sabinus, is not criticized explicitly, but his portrait is ambivalent, containing distinct elements of hubris; see D. Rasmussen, Caesars Commentarii: Stil und Stilwandel am Beispiel der direkten Rede (Gottingen, 1963) pp. 106-13, esp. pp. lII-12, and G. O. Rowe, TAPA 98 (1967) pp. 406--9. Defeat avoided - VII 19.4-6.

VIRTUS IMPERATORIS

safety of the army; good soldiers trust in their own virtus and in the diligentia of their commander. 33 Throughout the Commentarii qualities regularly associated with the technical or intellectual aspects of generalship (ratio - "planning" -; consilium - "judgment" -; diligentia - "diligence" -; and scientia "expert knowledge" - ) might sometimes complement viftus, but they are always clearly distinguished from it and are often contrasted with it. 34 This distinction can be seen in the challenge Caesar posed to his centurions, aut cur de sua virtute aut de ipsius diligentia desperarent? - "why did they despair about their virtus or about his [Caesar's] diligence?" (BC I 40-4) and in the few instances in which virtus is ascribed to aristocratic officers, as when Caesar describes the military tribune C. Volusenus as vir et consilii magni et virtutis - "a man of great judgment and virtus" (BC Ill. 5 2). In such cases, virtus denotes either physical prowess or the courage to fight rather than surrender in the face of defeat or death. Certainly the virtus that Labienus displayed in a daring escape from a siege is courageous. Of Labienus, Caesar writes, tantis subito difficultatibus obiectis ab animi virtute auxilium petendum videbat. "with such great difficulties suddenly thrown up, he saw that he must seek help from the virtus of his spirit." (BC VII 59.6). The animus-virtus collocation here is unique in the Caesarian corpus and seems to lend a personal nuance with emphasis on aggressiveness and emotion. 35 But it clearly does not refer to any of the technical aspects of generalship,

J3

34

35

BC I 40.4. Diligentia is often attributed to Caesar, VI 34.3 & 7; VII 32.6; cf. 11 28.2; also to Q. Cicero, in obeying Caesar, VI 36. I; to Labienus, V 58. I; to Vercingetorix, VII 4.9; VII 29·6, and to Gauls, VII 65.3; see Welch, p. 89. Contrasted to virtus at BC I l3.6, 40.8, VII 22.l; 29.2, and BC 1.58.2, 3.73.5. For diligentia, see BC III 21.3, VII 4.9, 32.5; scientia, BC 11 20.3, III 8.l, 23.5, VII 57.3. Other such qualities associated with generalship are distinct complements to virtus at BC 140.4; III 5.2; IV 21.7; VI 35.4; BC 2.21.1. For these qualities and generalship, see Combes, pp. 224-7. For Cicero's very different treatment ofvirtus see Imp. Pom. 29-35 and later Chapter X. So Eisenhut, VR, p. 45, commented on the range of "courageous" virtus displayed at BC VII 59.6, but was wrong to imply that the virtus ofLabienus represented a new usage. He correctly noted the difference between the meanings of animi virtus at BC VII 59.6 and at SalL BC 1.4 , where it is contrasted to vis corporis, as it is at Cic. Sull. 34, Phi!. l4.4, Imp. Pom. 64. But Decimus Laberius' use of animi virtus (com. l2l Ribb.) does not mean Tuchtigkeit des Ceistes; it is closer to Labienus' at BC VII 59.6, as is the animi virtus of Mar ius at Cic. Quinc. 20.

305

ROMAN MANLINESS

but rather to a daring self-assurance and resolve in the face of danger. 36 The only instance where virtus might be interpreted as something other than martial courage occurs at BC V 48.7, when Caesar sends a message to the besieged Q. Cicero urging him to uphold the virtus that he had previously displayed - hortatur, ut pristinam virtutem retineat. Caesar here refers to the beginning of this siege, when Cicero did exhibit diligentia by supervising night and day the defenses of the Roman camp - ne nocturnum quidem sibi tempus ad quietem relinquebat (BC V 40.7). But the pristina virtus Caesar mentions is almost certainly a reference to the resolve Cicero had displayed when, in response to the enemy's offer of surrender and safe passage, he said, non esse consuetudinem populi Romani ullam accipere ab hoste armato condicionem - "it is not the custom of the Roman people to entertain any condition from armed enemies," (BC V 41.7-8). Cicero' virtus is courageous, as was the overall conduct of the Roman resistance that Caesar later characterized with virtus: ex his omnibus iudicat rebus, quanto cum periculo et quanta cum virtute res sint administratae. Ciceronem pro eius merito legionemque conlaudat. From all these things he judges the degree to which the events were conducted with danger and with virtus. He commends Cicero according to his merit and he commends the legion.

But Caesar's usage here is also unusual in that virtus refers to a quality not normally associated with it, the resolve not to accept defeat. Caesar apparently had a difficult time determining how to credit Quintus with virtus at all. 37 36

37

If there is a contrast between the martial prowess of the Bellovaci, and the quality that Labienus displayed, it is between the virtus that all the Bellovaci were famous for (VII 59.5), and the more personal kind of courageous resolve of Labienus, for which there is precedent in earlier Latin; see, e.g., Plaut. Capt. 4IO-II and Per. 268, with the comments in Chapter I, Section 2. In a letter to M. Cicero, Caesar expressed a different opinion of his brother Quintus - "neque," inquit, "pro eauto ae diligente se eastris continuit." Charistius, Grammatici Latini I. I26 Kiel,. quoted by Welch in Welch and Powell, pp. 97-8. See also Rosenstein, Imperatores Vieti. pp. I34-5.

306

VIRTUS IMPERATORIS

When applied to commanders virtus does not, therefore, denote generalship in the sense of tactical or strategic expertise. 38 Here again is a discrepancy between the usage of Caesar and all earlier writers on the one side, and on the other that of Cicero, who in his speech on Pompey's command treated consilium - "judgment" - and industria "purposeful activity" - , together with celeritas - "speed" - , and Jortitudo - "courage" - , as aspects of virtus, or, as he said, virtutes imperatori"ae, quae vulgo existimantur, - "what are commonly regarded as the commander's virtues." 39 If the use of tactics and superior technology was not associated by Caesar with virtus, it was nevertheless one of the principal ways in which the good commander guided his army. These qualities of a good commander were denoted by various Latin terms - consilium, scientia, ratio - , attributed by Caesar to both Romans and non-Romans, and often contrasted to virtus. Sometimes the advantages of technology and skill can be made to yield to virtus, as when in 56 the use of grappling hooks by Caesar's men forced skilled Venetian sailors into hand-to-hand fighting, and again when Massilian sailors in 49 had to abandon the skill of their helmsmen and their stratagems and contest the battle with virtus. 40 But virtus could also be thwarted by stratagems, in which case the general of the bested soldiers minimizes the loss by disparaging those stratagems. For example, the Romans lost at Gergovia, says Caesar, not for lack of virtus, but because they fought on unfavorable ground (BC VII 53. I; cf. BC 140.8). At the Roman attack on Avaricum, Caesar claims that the Gauls used strategies of various kinds against the extraordinary virtus of his men. Mter the town was taken, Vercingetorix used the same argument in stating that the Romans had won not because of virtus in battle, but with superior 38

39

40

Rosenstem, Imperatores Vieti. pp. 107-52, was right to distinguish virtus from tactical or strategic competence; contra Goldsworthy, Roman Army, p. 164-5; "Instinctive genius: The depiction of Caesar the general," pp. 193-219, esp. pp. 201-2, in Welch and Powell. Cic. Imp. Pom. 29. For Greek rhetorical influences on the Cicero passage, see Combes, pp. 237-39· BC III 14.2-15; BC 1.58.2; Rawlings, pp. 178-9; Lendon, 308; and see the analysis ofB. Erickson, "Falling Masts, Rising Masters: The Ethnography of Virtue in Caesar's Account of the Veneti," AJPh 123 (2002) pp. 601-22, where, however, the contrast between virtus and malacia is pushed too hard.

ROMAN MANLINESS

military technology and knowledge of siegecraft.41 Sometimes the contrast between stratagems and virtus could be put quite contemptuously (significantly by those who lacked the former), as when the Helvetians say to Caesar that "they had learned from their fathers and ancestors to fight with virtus rather than with tricks or to depend on treachery." (BC I I3.6). That there is a degree of inconsistency in the ways in which Caesar employs the virtus-stratagem contrast is true, but it should not be overstated. The primary distinction between virtus and strategy in the writing of Caesar is predicated not on differences between Greek and Roman attitudes and theories about warfare,4 2 but on the fundamental distinction Caesar draws between the role of soldiers as opposed to that of the commander, who possesses knowledge of strategy, but to whom virtus is rarely attributed. In Caesar's works the named individuals credited with virtus are usually Caesar's supporters - various pro-Roman Gallic nobles and a number of Romans centurions (BC 3.9I.I; BC VI 40.7-8; cf. VI 38.I-4; 11 25.I) - , although in one case Caesar marks out the commander of a regiment of Macedonians fighting for Pompey, one Rhascypolis, as possessing outstanding virtus (BC 3.4.4).43 But virtus is attributed by Caesar to only three of his Roman officers, and only two of high rank, the three being, as we have seen, the military tribune C. Volusenus (BC III 5.2), and the legates Q. Cicero (V 48.6) and T. Labienus (VII 59.6). Here the popularis tone of the Commentaries is patent, and different from that of the later non-Caesarian Commentaries. 44 What is most surprising, 4'

42

43

44

BC VII 29.2. Caesar on Gallic stratagems - Singulari militum nostrorum virtuti comilia cuiusque modi Callorum occurrebant. BC VII 22. I; cf. VII 22.2, and III 2 1.3, with Rawling, p. 179 and Lendon, 309. Contra, Lendon, 304-6, 309, who overstates the "hostility" of the Greek military tradition toward bravery. Pro-Roman Gallic nobles are assigned virtus at BC I 47-4, IV 21.7, V 25.2, BC 3.59.I, 3.60.I, centurions at BC V 52.4, 44.3-4, VI 40.7-8, BC 2.21.I, 3·91.I, 99·3. At BC 3.59.I, and 60.I, virtus is assigned to our Gallic friends Raucillus and Egus. For the tone, see Wiseman, in Welch and Powell, pp. 2-3. See BC I 47.4 on the virtus of C. Valerius Procillus, a Romanized GauL On Caesar's general treatment of his officers in De bello Callico, see Welch, pp. 85-I09. The non-Caesarian Commentaries generally use virtus only in its martial sense. In Book VIII, Hirtius gives far more prominence to the independent actions of legati (Welch, 88), and unlike Caesar he assigns virtus to

308

VIRTUS IMPERATORIS

however, is that in the Commentaries virtus is not attributed to Caesar himself.45 Like Marius, Caesar in his Commentaries is portrayed as a nonheroic general, who commands his army by directing it with superior judgment, encouraging it by observing and judging its conduct, rescu:' ing it from danger, and when necessary,' fighting alongside its soldiers. If the battles between Romans and Gauls are contests in virtus, it is Caesar who is the judge. The link between the army's display of virtus and Caesar's role as its judge is sO essential that in his absence soldiers are told to imagine he is present: Labienus rnilites cohortatus, ut suae pristinae virtutis et tot secundissimorum proeliorum retinerent memoriam atque ipsum Caesarem, cuius ductu saepenumero hostes superassent, praesentem adesse existimarent. Labienus encouraged the soldiers to remember their former virtus and their great successes in' battle, and that they imagine that Caesar himself, under whose leadership they had so very often conquered the enemy, was present. BC VII 62.2 46

Usually however, Caesar's presence is necessary for Roman success. Rarely does the Roman army achieve victory with anyone other than Caesar in command, and it is Caesar's regular role to rescue a Roman army from a siege, or from a province in rebellion. 47 Caesar, however, is almost never shown participating in combat, and on the two occasions in the Commentaries when he is, he is not depicted as an Alexander or Marcellus heroically leading the charge into battle on horseback, quite the opposite. Like all Roman generals

45

46

47

a non-Roman enemy leader (VIII 45.2). The authors of De bello Hispaniensi, De bello Alexandrino. and De bello Africa follow Caesar in De bello civili in restricting virtus to Caesar's supporters and denying it to opponents. Surprising because the general impression given by the Commentaries is that Caesar's virtus is their theme, see J. P. V D. Balsdon, CR (1954) p. 52. Cf. BC VI 8.4; HI 14.8-9; BC 3.91.2-4, 99.2-3. Virtus could also be judged by other soldiers (BC VII 80.5), and by officers (BC I 52.1). See Lendon, p. 310-14; Welch, p. 92; Goldsworthy, "Instinctive Genius," pp. 205-9. For Caesar's rescues, BC V 40-52; VI 36-42; VII 6-13. Rare exceptions as independent commanders who are victorious are P. Licinius Crassus at BC III 20-27, and Labienus at V 58, and VI 7-8; both for political reasons, see below.

309

ROMAN·MANLINESS

Caesar certainly did command from horseback,4 8 but when he wished to portray himself in combat he explicitly and pointedly presented himself as fighting on foot. At the battle of the Sambre River, when his army was being overrun by the Nervii, Caesar is seen rescuing the situation by taking up the weapon of the legionary soldier and engaging the enemy alongside his men, as Marius was said to have done before him. ab novissimis uni militi detracto, quod ipse eo sine scuta venerat, in primam aciem processit, ... - "taking a shield from a soldier in the rear rank, because he had arrived without his own shield, he advanced into the front line, ... " (BC 11 25.2).49 In the only other instance where Caesar presents himself fighting, he is described as not only dismounting and sending his own horse away, but as ordering his officers to do the same. Caesar primum suo, deinde omnium ex conspectu remotis equis, ut aequato omnium periculo spem fugae tolleret, cohortatus suos proelium commisit. - "Starting with his own, Caesar had everyone's horse removed from view, so with danger equal for everyone, he would take away the hope of flight. Mter encouraging his men, he joined battle." (BC I 25. 1).5 0 That this manner of portraying the general in combat was a considered aspect of Caesar's self-representation is evident from the fact that when he is depicted as engaged in combat by the anonymous author of the Commentary on the African campaign, Caesar is shown charging into battle on horseback. Quod postquam Caesar intellexit incitatis militum animis resisti nullo modo posse, signa Felicitatis dato, equo admisso in hostem inter principes ire contendit. - "Mter he 48

49

50

On Caesar, see Goldsworthy, "Instinctive Genius," p. 207, and on mounted generals commanding and encouraging their soldiers, see Liv. 34.15.4 (Cato); SalL BI98.1-3 (Marius); Plut. Sui. 29.5 (Suila), with Goldsworthy, pp. 205-7. Cf. Plut. Caes. 20.5. For Marins, see Plut. Mar. 20.5, quoted in the heading of Chapter VIII. Note that in a grave crisis the competent legate, L. Aurunculeius Cotta, fights with his soldiers, BC V 33.3. Different from this is Caesar's attempt to stop his men's flight by grabbing the legionary standard (BC 3 .69.4), a topos attributed to many others; see Goldsworthy, "Instinctive Genius," pp. 208-IO. Cf. App. BC. 2.I04, where Caesar picking up a soldier's shield exposes himself to danger; an act also attributed to Sulla, (plut. Sui. 21.2). Cf. Alexander's behavior against the Malli, Arr. 6.7.5-6; Curt. 9.4.305.19, with A. B. Bosworth, Conquest and Empire (Cambridge, 1988) pp. 136--7. Cf. Plut. Caes. 18.2. In the crisis at the batde of Munda in 45, Caesar is reported to have both jumped offhis horse and to have taken a weapon from a legionary; Veil. Pat. 2·55·3-4; App. BC 2.I04 (432-3); Plut. Caes. 56.2; Flor. 2.13; Dio 43.37-4-5; Frontin. Strat. 2.8.13; Polyaen. 8.23.16. At BC I 53.5, Caesar is depicted on horseback pursuing the defeated enemy, but he does not fight.

310

VIRTUS IMPERATORIS

realized that because the spirit of his soldiers was so aroused it was not possible to stop them, after givingfelicitas as the battle cry, and giving his horse full rein, he hastened to go into the front line of the enemy."

(BAfr. 83.1).5' Caesar's portrait of himself as the summus imperator who accompanies, guides, observes, and rescues his army, and his insistence on the distinction between the commander and the fighting man, each having their separate and distinct functions, is conscious and consistent, and in contrast to the heroic model. The distinction between general and soldier had been employed tendentiously by Polybius in his portrait of Scipio Africanus, which is in pointed contrast to what he wrote about Marcellus. 52 But Caesar's picture of the army and general forrning an almost organic unit is emphatic and different. This non-heroic manner of representation the summus imperator was an alternative way of representing his virtus. It probably originated with Marius; at least he seems to have been the first Roman to exploit its political advantages. It is the image of the Roman army that is seen later in the representation ofTrajan on his column. 53 Because both Marius and Trajan were famous for their virtus, there can have been nothing inappropriate about representing the virtus of the commander in this non-heroic manner. Yet in the Commentaries virtus is not attributed to Caesar, except in one, curious instance, when it is sarcastically credited to him by an enemy, who then denies it (BC I 13.5-6). Caesar's otherwise Goldsworthy, Roman Army, pp. 154-63, and "Instinctive Genius," p. 209, insufficiently distinguishes the difference between those who are portrayed as taking an active role by supervising and encouraging soldiers (e.g., Tac. Ann. 1.51.7-8; Jos. Bl 5.3II-16), from those who heroically lead them into battle (Tac. Ann. 2.20.6-21; Jos. Bl 3 -487). Cf. Trajan on his column (S. Settis, La Colonna Traiana [Turin, 1988] p. 286, se. xxiv, p. 292, sc. xxiv, p. 354, sc. lxiii, p. 378, sc. lxxii, p. 449, sc. civ), to Trajan on the Great Frieze and on his coins (A.-M. Leander Touati, The Great Trajanic Frieze [Stockholm, 1987] pp. 20-5, pIs. 3 and II, and BMC, rn, Trajan, 245, 833-9, 900-'7). 52 Note that Polybius does not criticize Philopoemen, nor anyone else except Marcellus, for risking their lives in battle, see Eckstein, Moral Vision, pp. 34-6. 53 Part of the image is the general as commilitio, on which see Carnpbell, pp. 32---g. The close relationship of Caesar and his soldiers is often commented on. The most insightful treatment, disturbingly so, is that of J. Vogt, "Caesar und seine Soldaten," Neue Jahr. Antike u. deut. Bildung 3 (1940) pp. 120-35, repr. in Der Altsprachliche Unterricht 7 (1955) pp. 53-'73. The parallels between Caesar in his Commentaries and Trajan on his column are precise and deserving of study. S'

3I I

ROMAN MANLINESS

studious avoidance of an explicit association of himself with a quality of such importance to the image of Roman military leadership is very odd and to be explained by politics. 54 That the overall intent of Caesar's Commentaries is political hardly needs saying. But it has also been shown that within the general pattern of the narrative, specific episodes or emphases are related to and determined by particular events in the changing political background to Caesar's campaigns. For example, the unusual prominence that the legate P. Licinius Crassus receives in Book III by leading a successful campaign independently of Caesar (see esp. III 21.1), was surely designed as a compliment that would further Caesar's strategy in reconciling the legate's father, M. Licinius Crassus, with Pompey in the political crisis in 56. Similarly, the prominence that Caesar gives to his legates, especially Q. Cicero and Labienus, in Books VI and VII, is attributable in large part to· Caesar's need to win and maintain the support of important Romans in the political crisis that began to heat up in 53. 55 Politics will also have affected Caesar's self-presentation. He was the heir of C. Marius, but while campaigning in Gaul he was also the political ally of Cn. Pompeius Magnus. Caesar chose to portray himself in the non-heroic manner in part because of his relationship to Marius, but also because the heroic model of the summus imperator had already been taken up by Pompey. The portrait of Caesar in the Gallic Commentaries was certainly constructed to rival the military reputation ofPompey, but it was done with deference and care. 56 At the time that Caesar was campaigning and composing his Commentaries, Pompey was not only the Roman Alexander, but also Rome's 54

55

56

At BC I 52.1 it is not Caesar's virtus. but that of his legates and quaestor that is referred to; cf. BC I 5.3; II ILL Note that in Caesar's one mention of Mar ius (BC 1.40.4-5), no reference is made of his virtus; instead the close connection between army and general, and the distinctive characteristic of each - virtus for the army, diligentia for the general is emp hasized. For the political connections, see Welch, pp. 91-3, 97, lOO. Welch, pp. 85-6. Welch, p. 91, n. 21, also stated that in the speech at BC I.40, Caesar claimed many of the same virtues that Cicero attributed to Pompey at Imp. Pom. 2748. In fact, in his speech Caesar mentions only two, innocentia and Jelicitas, although in the rest of the Commentaries Caesar does demonstrate others credited to Pompy auctoritas, felicitas, celeritas, consilium, but significantly not virtus. On Cicero's speech, see ChapterX.

3I2

VIRTUS IMPERATORIS

preeminent man of virtus. Caesar's eschewal of an association with virtus was a recognition of that status, dictated by a political alliance. This is made clear by Caesar's treatment of Pompey in the Commentaries. Pompey is mentioned twice in De bello Callico, both times in complimentary terms. In De bello civili, he is of course treated with hostility. As we have seen, it is rare for Caesar to credit virtus to a Roman aristocrat, but it is rarer still for him to use virtus in a nonmilitary, political context. Caesar does so only twice, both times in connection with Pompey. Pompey is mentioned for the first time in the Gallic Commentaries at the beginning of Book VI, when Caesar relates how in preparing for an approaching Gallic uprising in 53, he requested that Pompey call up and send soldiers to him from Italy. Pompey's immediate compliance elicited typically brief, but nonetheless significant praise from Caesar: Pompeius et rei p. et amicitiae tribuisset . .. - "Pompey showed his regard both for the Republic and for our friendship, ... " (BC, VI 1.4). The second reference to Pompey occurs in the beginning of Book VII, where Caesar tells how the civic unrest in Rome and Italy caused by the murder of the popular leader P. Clodius in 52 compelled him to remain in Italy, and how this encouraged the great Gallic rebellion of that year. After describing the rebellion's origins and spread - the wiping out of a Roman trading settlement at Cenabum (Orleans) and the rising of numerous Gallic peoples -, together with the inability of the Roman army to check the rebellion without him, Caesar writes: His rebus in Italiam Caesari nuntiatis, cum iam ille urbanas res virtute Cn. Pompei commodiorem in statum pervenisse intellegeret, in Transalpinam Galliam profectus est. When these things [rebellion in Gaul] had been reported to Caesar in Italy, since he had already understood that the situation in the city had become more favorable because of the virtus of Gnaius Pompey, he set out for Transalpine Gaul. BC VII 6.1 57

57

For Pompey's attitudes and actions in 52, see Ascon. In Mil. pp. 34 -4IC, Syme, RR, pp. 39-40 and Gruen, Last Generation, pp. 453-5. Welch, p. 102, n. 66, was wrong to see Caesar's attribution of virtus to Pompey here as ironic. As we will see, when Caesar' wished to be ironic, he was patently so,

31 3

ROMAN MANLINESS

According to Caesar, it was his having to delay in Italy because of a political crisis in Rome that allowed the Gauls to mount the great rebellion. He credits his ability to go to Gaul, and to rescue it for Rome, to Pompey's handling of that crisis and to Pompey's virtus, the quality for which he was famous. In Rome, after quelling the sedition that followed Clodius' murder, Pompey had, in the face of strong political pressures, carried out a measure that served Caesar's interests by securing the conviction and exile of Clodius' killer, T. Annius Milo. Pompey's virtus denotes the political courage, the resolve to carry out a measure against strong opposition. As we have seen, the use of virtus in a political context had precedent, and is of course common in Cicero's works, but other than this passage and one other also involving Pompey, the word is never so used by Caesar. The second passage in which Caesar associates Pompey with virtus occurs in De bello civili, and is very different. In the opening chapters of the Commentary, in a defense of his invasion ofItaly, Caesar describes how his enemies in Rome manipulated the situation in early 49 to leave him no choice but to lead his army across the Rubicon. He describes how they intimidated senators into voting against Caesar's interests and, according to Caesar, against peace: sic vocibus consulis,

terrore praesentis exercitus, minis amicorum Pompei plerique compulsi inviti et coacti Scipionis sententiam sequuntur. - "thus most [senators], forced by the words of the consul, by the fear of the army that was present, by the threats of the friends ofPompey, reluctant and coerced, follow the decision of Scipio." (BC 1.2.6; cf. 3.5 and 5.1-2). Caesar writes of Rome filled with Pompey's soldiers, his enemies' enthusiasm for war, the measures they took against peace, and the senate formally declaring him an enemy of the Republic (BC 1.3-5). He describes how on the following day the senate met outside of the city, so Pompey could address it. He then relates the words with which Pompey congratulated the cowed senators: [Pompeius1senatus virtutem constantiamque conlaudat. Pompey praises the virtu5 and steadfastness of the senate. BC 1.6.1

Here again virtus means political resolve, but this time it is employed with the heaviest irony, no small part of which was the use of the word 314

VIRTUS IMPERATORIS

by Pompey, who in the ensuing war would lose his reputation for virtus to Caesar. 58 That Caesar's public image changed in the years after his victory over Pompey is certain. Because of the uneven and often tendentious nature of the sources, the method, degree, and intention of the change have been the subject oflong-standing and intense debate. 59 Like Pompey before him, Caesar the dictator followed the pattern established in the late second century of claiming the special favor of numerous deities. Some of these, like Clementia, seem to have been new with Caesar. Most, however, were not, and in patronizing Victoria and Venus, Caesar was laying claim to deities that had been connected with earlier Roman military leaders - Marius, Sulla, and most importantly Pompey. 60 That Caesar was in this sense replacing the man he defeated at Pharsalus is also apparent in his taking up a number of extraordinary privileges that had been granted to Pompey, such as the wearing of triumphal regalia when attending the circus - in 45 Caesar was permitted to wear triumphal dress at games and at sacrifices -, and the wearing of a laurel crown in the theater - it was decreed that Caesar could wear it at all times and places. 61 Caesar also followed the model ofPompey, and of Marc ellus , in the new emphasis he placed on Greek art and culture. As dictator he put large numbers of Greek art works on public display, and works of art were included in the gardens he willed to the Roman People. He also 58

59

60

6r

Note the irony Caesar places in Lentulus' speech at BC I .1.2, si audacter acfortiter sententias dicere velint - "if they [the senators] should be willing to speak their thoughts boldly and vigorously. " The debate centers around whether or not Caesar had, or had intended to, establish a monarchy and what kind of monarchy it might have been. Yavetz, Caesar, pp. I-57, provides a learned account of the various scholarly positions on the issue; see also the essays in Caesar against Liberty? Perspectives on his Autocracy, eds. F. Cairns, F. Fantham (Cambridge, 2003). On Clementia Caesaris, see Weinstock, Divus Julius, pp. 233-43; on the connections of Victoria to Marius, Sulla, Pompey, and Caesar, Weinstock, pp. 91-I03. Sulla patronized Venus Felix; Pompey Venus Victrix, and Caesar Venus Genetrix. Caesar also had ancestral connections to Venus, see Weinstock, pp. 80--90, esp. pp. 83-6. On Marius and Sulla, see earlier Chapter VIII, Section 5. Pompey's privileges - Dio 37.21.4; VeIl. Pat. 2.40.4; Cic. Att. 1.18 [SE 18]6 (L. Aernilius Paullus was granted the same privilege in 167); Caesar's - Dio 43.43.1, 44.4.2; App. BC 2.I06 (440-43); Suet. Iul. 45.2; with Weinstock, DivusJulius, pp. 36-40, 108, and 270-71.

ROMAN MANLINESS

planned a public Greek and Latin library in emulation of the great Hellenistic royal capitals. 62 In contrast to the public entertainment Caesar had staged as aedile in 65, where Roman rather than Greek style entertainment was emphasized, as dictator he is said to put on various kinds of spectacles, among which were plays staged in the wards throughout the entire city which were performed by actors of every language, Greek certainly one of them. He also built Rome's first stadium - a quintessentially Greek building type -; a temporary structure in the Campus Martius, where Greek athletic contests were held for three days.6 3 In addition, after Pompey's defeat and death, Caesar's associations with Greek writers and intellectuals became more frequent and more public. To honor Theopompus, the mythographer who had worked for him in Rome in 45, Caesar freed that man's native city of Cnidos from taxes. He also seems to have given the Roman citizenship to both Theopompus and his son Arternidorus, as well as to doctors and teachers living in Rome, a high proportion of whom would have been Greeks. Caesar also had public contacts with Greek intellectuals while in Alexandria, where he is said to have listened to philosophers dispute, and showed particular favor to the Peripatetic philosopher Ariston. He also seems to have brought back to Rome from Alexandria the astronomer Sosigenes, probably to help his reform of the Roman calendar. 64 Explicit evidence for a connection of Caesar with divine Virtus is slim, but considered in the context of other honors and privileges granted to him, what evidence there is suggests that Caesar did attempt to replace his defeated rival as the favorite of divine Virtus. 65 The only direct evidence for the connection is the name of one, possibly two Caeasarian colonies, one at Itucci called Virtus Iulia, the other at Cirta

62

63

64

65

Public art - Plin. NH 35.26; 37.II. Library-Suet. Iul. 44.2; Rawson, Intellectual Life, pp. 1I3-4· Suet. Iul. 39.1-3, and on Caesar's largess in general, Yavetz, Caesar, pp. 166---'7. Theopompus and son Artemidorus, prominent Cnidians close to Caesar - Strab. 14.2.15 (C 656); Plut. Caes. 48.1, 65.1; Cic. Att. 13.7 (SB 314); App. BC 2.1I6. Doctors and teachers - Suet. Iul. 42.1-2. On all this see Rawson, Intellectual Life, pp. 1I1-I2. Most of the evidence was assembled by Weinstock, DivusJulius, pp. 232-3, who, however, confused divine Virtus with one of the four canonical virtues, on which see below Epilogue.

316

VlRTUS lMPERATORIS

called Colonia Iulia Iuvenalis Honoris et Virtutis. 66 But the general connection between Caesar and divine Virtus is corroboration by two extraordinary honors that Caesar received shortly before his assassination. In late 45 or early 44, the senate decreed that on his return from the Alban Mount, where as consul and dictator he had celebrated the Feriae Latinae, Caesar should celebrate an ovatio. 67 During anovatio, the general entered the city either on foot or riding a horse, and in the procession cavalrymen wore olive crowns, just as they did when they rode in the transvectio equitum, which, as we have seen, had close cultic connections to the cult and temple of Honos and Virtus. 68 Although purely honorary and unconnected with any of his victories, Caesar's ovatio was recorded in the triumphal Fasti as an ovatio ex Monte Albano. The only other time an ovatio had occurred in conjunction with a ceremony on the Alban Mount was in 2II, when Marcellus celebrated a triumph there and an ovatio in the city on the following day. 69 Because Marcellus had been on the Alban Mount for a triumph, while Caesar was there for the annual Latin Festivals, a connection between the two may seem tenuous, but for another extraordinary honor Caesar received at about the same time. Probably in conjunction with the ovatio, or at most a few months after it, the senate decreed that Caesar could dedicate the spolia opima. Like the ovatio this was purely honorary, since Caesar had not slain an enemy commander in battle, and 66 Colony at Itucci in Spain-Piin. NH 3.12; at Cirta-lLS 6857 = elL VIII 7041; elL VIII 6951; lLS 2933 = elL VIII 7095; and for coins of Honos et Virtus from Cirta, see elL VIII, supp!. p. 1849; and M. Grant, From lmperium to Auctoritas (Cambridge, 1946) pp. 178-80. The epigraphical evidence is principally third century A.D.; the coins date from the late - first century B. c. The colony at Cirta may be Augustan rather than Caesarian, however; so F. Vittinghoff, Romische Kolonisation und Biirgerrechtspolitik unter Caesar und Augustus (Wiesbaden, 1952) pp. II2-13; cf. Weinstock, Divus julius, p. 233, 67

68

69

n·4· Suet. lul. 79.1; Dio 44.4.3; Weinstock, Divusjulius, pp. 319, 323, 326. The chronology is problematic. Dio Cassius lists the ovatio, along with many other honors in 44, but states that they did not all fall in that year (44-4.1). On the issue, see Weinstock, p. 270, n. 2. For olive crowns, see Dion. Hal. 6.13.4; Plin. NH 15.19. On the tmnsvectio equitum and Honos and Virtus, see earlier Chapter VII, Section 3. The tradition as to whether the general walked or rode is very confused, but the traditional garb associated with the ovatio - trabea and olive crown - speaks for a tradition of riding on horseback; contra Weinstock, Divus julius, p. 326-'7. Caesar's ovatio - F. Trium. p. 87, 567; Weinstock, Divusjulius, p. 326, n. 6. On Marceilus, see, Liv. 26.21.6; Plut. Marc. 22.1, and earlier Chapter VII, Section 3.

31 7

ROMAN MANLINESS

like the ovatio, it points to a conscious association with M. Claudius Marcellus, dedicator of the spolia opima, founder of the cult to Virtus, and man of virtus par excellence. 70 The best evidence for Caesar remodeling his public image to that of the heroic man of virtus is his use of equestrian statues. Sometime after 48 an equestrian statue of Caesar was erected on the Rostra alongside those of Sulla and Pompey. Clearly this was meant to place Caesar on a heroic status equal to that of the other twO. 71 But most significant is the equestrian statue placed in Caesar's Forum, in front of his temple of Venus Genetrix, both of which were dedicated in September of 46. Like Pompey's Theater, Caesar's Forum and the temple were decorated with Greek works of art.7 2 The equestrian statue was one of Alexander made by Lysippus and perhaps taken by Caesar from Alexandria. Before it was situated as the center-piece of Caesar's Forum, however, Alexander's head was replaced by a portrait head of Caesar himself, a patent indication that Pompey the Great had been displaced by his conqueror. 73 Precisely what Caesar would have done with the image of the man of virtus had he lived cannot be known. But in the last years of his life he seemed to have been moving away from the non-heroic, Marian image, which he had cultivated earlier in his career and in his Commentaries, and toward the image that was associated with Marcellus, Scipio Aemilianus, and Pompey. Or perhaps, having no rivals in 70

71

72

73

Spolia opima-Dio. 44.4.3. Doubted by Syme, HSCP 64 (1959) p. 80, n. 85, but needlessly, see Weinstock, Divus Julius, p. 233, n. 1. Again the chronology is a problem. Dio records the ovatio right after the spolia opima. M. Gelzer, Caesar, Politician and Statesman (Cambridge, MA, 1969) p. 315, placed both in late 45; Weinstock separated them. Veil. Pat. 2.61.3. For the ideological meaning of an equestrian statue on the Rostra, see Chapters IV and VIII. On the statue of Octavian placed there in 43, see subsequently, Epilogue. Nymphs, called Appiades, by the scultor Stephanos decorated fountains in front of the temple, Ov. Ars, I 81-2, III 451-2; cf. E. Nash, Pictorial Dictionary if Ancient Rome I (New York, 1961) p. 33. Inside the temple were paintings of Ajax and Medea by Timomachus of Byzantium, Plin. NH 7.126; 35. 26, 136. For the date of the dedications of the Forum and temple, see Dio 43.22.2-3. See also C. Morselli, "Forum Iulium," LTUR, 2, pp. 299-206, and P. Gros, LTUR, 2, pp. 306-7. For the equestrian statue in Forum Iulium, see Dio 37.54.2, Suet. Iul. 61, Plin. NH 8.155. For Alexander's portrait changed to that of Caesar, see Stat. Si/v. 1.1.84-6. See Bergemann, p. 160, n. 226, F. Coarelli, "Alessandro, i Licinii e Lanuvio," Revixit Ars (Rome, 1996) p. 415, n. 141, contra Richardson, Dictionary, "Equus Caesaris," p. 144.

31 8

VIRTUS IMPERATORIS

martial glory, he was planning to exploit both the heroic and nonheroic aspects of virtus together; in this he would have anticipated later Roman emperors. 74 The use and development by Pompey and Caesar of the different types of military imagery associated with divine Virtus is important not only for understanding the last decades of the Republic, but also for tracing the republican precedents for the military image of the emperors under the Principate. But this was only one aspect of the public discourse over Roman manliness in the Republic's last years. The non-martial, ethical virtus that had been championed by the Hellenized nobility of the late second century did not disappear because of Marius , successful opposition to it. On the contrary, it became more prominent, but not as a contrast to the martial virtus of soldier, general, and cult. The last generation of elite Romans living under the Republic were, as a group, more Hellenized than their fathers had been. 75 But senators, having learned from the lessons of Mar ius , career, muted their Hellenism in public. Senators disposed toward "Hellenic" interests and activities that might be attacked in the forum, simply practiced them in their private villas. Nor did the great military leaders of the age anchor their careers in attacks on the Greek decadence of senatorial peers. They did not have to, because the senate offered little competition and few effective obstacles to their ambitions; besides which, they were fully Hellenized themselves. In the Republic's last years the distinctions between ethical and martial virtus were taken up neither by generals or nobles, but by new men whose reputations rested not on the sword, but on the stilus. 74

75

The best example is again Trajan. For the combination of the two manners see G. Koeppel, "Roman Historical Representations, ANRWII,12.1, pp. 507-35, pp. 513-17. See Rawson, Intellectual Life, esp. pp. 7-IO.

319

x MANLINESS REDEFINED

When virtu5 was shattered, and proud men fell wretchedly, faces in the dust. Horace on the batde ofPharsalus

I.

VIRTUS AND THE NEW MAN

In the writings of Sallust, and especially of Cicero, a persistent opposition is drawn between nobilis and homo novus. I The nobleman is said to exercise prestige and political power as a birthright, whereas the new man who aspires to high office must rely solely on his virtus. Drawing on the works of these two authors, Joseph Vogt took the figures of the elder Cato, Marius, and Cicero, and constructed an ideal type of homo novus, one without distinguished ancestors who gained public recognition and office by publicly attacking the inherited privilege and position of a complacent and indolent aristocracy. Vogt claimed this type valid for most of the Republic, and his thesis has won the acceptance of some distinguished scholars.2 But examination of all the evidence, placing the attitudes of Sallust and Cicero I

2

The meaings of both terms are problematic; see M. Gelzer, Die Nobilitiit = The Roman Nobility, P. A. Brunt, "Nobilitas and Novitas,']RS 72 (1982) pp. 1-17; decisively answered by D. R. Shackleton Bailey, "Nobiles and Novi Reconsidered," AJPh 107 (1986) pp. 255-60. J. Vogt, Homo Novus, Bin Typus des romischen Republik (Stuttgart 1926) followed by, among others, H. Strasbuger, "novus homo,"RE XVILI (1937) cols. 1223-28, esp. col. 1226, and Wiseman, New Men, pp. 107-16. This despite some early and trenchant criticisms by W Schur, "Homo Novus, Ein Beitrag zur Sozialgeschichte der sinkenden Republik," BJ 134 (1929) pp. 54-66.

320

MANLINESS REDEFINED

in their proper context, shows that Vogt's picture is valid only for the late Republic. There is, in fact, no good evidence that any new man before Marius attacked the Roman nobility as a group for military incompetence, decadence or anything else, and before Cicero almost all attested republican homines novi rose to prominence on the basis of their military reputations. It is this that explains any traditional association between the new man and virtus. On the basis of what evidence exists, it certainly appears that the careers of the early-third-century "new men" Sp. Carvilius, C. Fabricius Luscinus, M'. Curius Dentatus, and Ti. Coruncanius included distinguished military accomplishments. 3 Nor is there evidence that any of these men ever attacked political opponents on the grounds of nobilitas. An attack on the nobility, in fact, is at odds with what we are told was a common characteristic of these men's careers - a close and lasting alliance with a patrician. Fabricius, Coruncanius, and Cur ius all were close to Q. Aemilius Papus. Carvilius shared his two consulships with L. Papirius Cursor; Curius, each of his three consulships with a Cornelius. 4 It seems inconceivable that these early third century homines novi, if that is what they were called, would denigrate the nobilitas of opponents, given their connections to men who were themselves nobiles. The same pattern is apparent in the career of prominent new men of the first half of the second century, all of whom made their marks as soldiers, and had patrician patrons. C. Laelius was the close associate ofScipio Africanus, and his career was that of a vir militaris from first to last. 5 The earliest recorded activities of M' . Acilius Glabrio, as plebeian tribune in 201, are political in nature, almost certainly as an agent of Scipio, but his crushing of a slave revolt as praetor in 196, and the

J

4

5

See MRR I for the years, 293-2, 290, 284-282, 280-78, 274, and 272; and Mlinzer's entries, "Coruncanius (3)," RE IV (1901) cols. 1663-5; "Curius (9)," RE IV (1901) cols. 1841-5; and "Fabricius (9)," RE VI (1909) cols. 1931-8. Fabricius' atttack on P. Valerius Laevinus was for military incompetence (Plut. Pyrrh. 18.1; apophth. Fabr. I (I94F)); on P. Cornelius Rufinus for his morals (Cic. De or. 2.268; Quin. 12.1.43; Gell. 4.8.1-8; Dio, 8.32-3). Curius' altercation with the interrex Ap. Claudius turned on the patrician-plebeian issue (Cic. Brut. 55 and De vir. ill. 34.3). On Fabricius, Coruncanius, Curius, and Aemilius Papus, see Cic. Amic. 39. For the sources on Carvilius and Papirius, see MRR, I, pp. 180 and 197. See Munzer, "Laeilius (2)," RE XII. I (1925) cols. 400-404.

321

ROMAN MANLINESS

triumph he celebrated for his victory over Antiochus in 191, suggests a military background. 6 The career of Cn. Octavius also follows a pattern of military ability plus the patronage of distinguished nobles. Curule aedile in perhaps 172, praetor in 168, and consul in 165, he almost certainly enjoyed the strong support of the Aemilii and the Scipiones.7 A successful commander and a naval specialist like his father, as praetor and propraetor in 168-167, Octavius worked closely with L. Aemilius Paullus in the war against Perseus, and celebrated a naval triumph for his victories. 8 A different and more complex case is that of the late-third-century new man, C. Terentius Varro, who was consul in 216. Extant sources deride him for military inexperience, and for incompetence and cowardice at Cannae. 9 The same tradition that is critical ofVarro's military record also portrays him as a fierce enemy of the nobiles, and of being opposed by them to a man in turn. But traces exist of a more favorable tradition that records contemporary praise for Varro's courage and resolution in the wake of the defeat.lo The obvious bias directed against Varro because of Cannae casts some doubt on the portrait of him as a man who made his career by openly opposing the nobility. If the portrait is accepted, it is best to see Varro in the company of the independent and singular popular politics of his contemporary, C. Flaminius, rather than an example of a traditional type of republican novus homo. I ! 6

7

8

9

10

II

See MRR, I, pp. 320, 335, 352 and 357. It is likely that Glabrio came to Scipio's attention during military service in the HannibaJic War. Cn. Octavius as novus homo, Cic. Off. 1.I38, Phil. 9.4; Miinzer, "Octavius (17)," RE XVII.2 (I937) cols. I8IO-I4. On his miliary service, MRR, I, pp. 428 and 434. His father had served with L. Aemilius Paullus during the HannibaJic War, Front. Strat. 4.5.7, and with Scipio Africanus (Liv. 30.27.9,41.6-7; App. Lib. 4I-44). See D. e. Earl, "M. Octavius," Latomus I9 (I960) p. 661. See Liv. 44.I9.4, 21.3, 22.I6, 35.8, 35.13; 45.6.12, 28.8, 29.3 andAstin, Sdpio Aemilianus, p.87· Varro is called a homo novus at Liv. 22.34.7. On the hostility towards him, see Liv. 22.34·2-4, 38.6; Polyb. 3 .lIo.3; App. Han. 17; Dio, 15.24, with Scullard, Roman Politics2 , PP·5 I -3· See Front. Strat. 4.5.6; Liv. 22.61.I4; with Miinzer, "Terentius (83)," RE V A.I (I934) cols. 680--<)0, esp. 688; and Scullard, Roman Politics2 , p. 52. Varro is reported to have supported M. Minucius Rufus' appointment as dictator in 2I7 (Liv. 22.25). On Flaminius, see Z. Yavetz, "The Policy ofe. Flaminius and the Plebisdtum Claudianum," Athenaeum 40 (1962) pp. 325-43.

32 2

MANLINESS REDEFINED

Any evaluation of the place of the novus homo in the politics of the middle Republic must rely heavily on the long career and varied accomplishments of M. Porcius Cato. Cato's considerable military reputation, however, has been generally undervalued by modern scholarship.12 As a young man, Cato won a reputation as an outstanding local advocate, but he was also known for his bravery in battle, and he is said to have been most concerned with the latter.13 As consul in 195, Cato received an important and difficult command in Spain, where he won victories for which he celebrated a triumph. In 194-193, he served as legate in wars against the Boii and Ligurians, and his bold tactics at Thermopylae in 191 won him glory.14 In his speeches and writings Cato praised the bravery of his ancestors, held up the great general Curius Dentatus as a model, and boasted of his own martial exploits both as a young soldier and as a mature commander. He also wrote a book on military theory and practice. If in his works Cato ever wrote of his own virtus, he would certainly have been referring to his military reputation. IS Cato also had a close relationship with a member of the nobility. He and the patrician L. Valerius Flaccus shared the consulship in 195, were military tribunes together in 191, were both unsuccessful candidates for the censorship in 189, and were censors together in 184-183. As censor, Cato appointed his friend and colleague princeps senatus. 16 Cato is also said to have married Licinia because of her noble birth, and later he married his son to an Aemilia. I? These are not the actions of a man 12

13

14

15

16

17

See, e.g., Harris, WIRR, p. 22, n. 4. But Cicero lists Cato among the great military heroes of Roman history, see Rep. 1.1, Tusc. LIlO, Mur. 17. Cf. Liv. 39.40-5-10. Plut. Cat Mai. 1.6. On Cato's early military reputation, see Plut. Cat. Mai. 1.5-7; Liv. 39-40.6; Nepos Cat. 1.2; and Astin, Cato, pp. 5-7. For his accomplishments, see the relevant years in MRR 1. On his later reputation as a commander, see Cic. De or. 3.135, Rep. 2.1, Brut. 65, 294; Nepos Cat. 3.1; Liv. 39.40.6; Sen. Bp. 87.10; Plin. NH7.1OO; Quint. 12.II.23; Front. Ad varum imp. 2.1.20 = Haines II 150; with Astin, Cato, pp. 29-50 and 54-9, for a discussion of Cato's generalship. For the predominantly martial associations of virtus in Cato's time, see earlier Chapter I, Section 5. On Cato's ancestors and Curius, see Plut. Cat. Mai. 1.1; 2.1-2. On Cato's military handbook, see Astin, p. 184, and H. Jordan, M. Catonis praeter librum de re rustica qaue extant (Leipzig, 1860) pp. 80-2. See the relevant years in MRR, 1. On Valerius and the young Cato, see Plut. Cat. Mai. 3.1-4, with Astin, Cato, pp. 9-10 and 23, and 79. Marriage - Plut. Cat. Mai. 20.2; son's marriage - Plut. Cat. Mai. 20.12, 24.2; Aem. 5.6, 21.1; Cic. Sen. 15; and Vell. 2.4.22 and 2.8.1; see also Astin, Cato, p. 57.

ROMAN. MANLINESS

who made his political career as an enemy of the nobility. If the political speeches of Cato were frequently made against individual nobiles, this shows only the degree to which that group dominated Roman politics, not that Cato the new man was waging a crusade against the nobility as such. I8 Cato was clearly proud of his municipal origin,I9 and no doubt he was attacked by some for his lack of aristocratic ancestors. 20 But the claim made by Plutarch and Livy that almost all the nobles conspired together to prevent Cato from becoming censor in 184 is surely an exaggeration, derived from the not surprising fact that all of Cato's rivals for the censorship of that year happened to be nobles. 21 Plutarch writes that the opposition to Cato's candidacy was motivated as much by fear of a strict censorship as anything else, and Livy specifically states that Cato was not opposed because he was a novus homo. 22 Even if his opponents did attack Cato for, among other things, his novitas, there is no evidence that he retaliated by attacking their nobilitas. In the reports ofCato's canvassing for the censorship, there is no mention of his attacking the nobility.2 3 18 19

20

21

22

23

Contra Earl, MPTR, p. 45. See Astin, Cato, p. 66-8. For Cato on his ancestors, see Plut. Cat. Mai. I.2 and ORF4 8 I73. For the non-Roman material in the Origines, see Nepos Cat. 3; Orig. Ill. 8 & 9 (Chassignet) = frag. 73, 76 HRR; on Sabine mores, Orig. II. 22 (Chassignet) = frag. 5I HRR. On the opposition to Cato, see Liv. 39-40.I-3 and 41. I-2; Plut. Cat. Mai. I6.3. For the sources of PIutarch's life, see Scardigli, Romerbiographien Plutarchs, pp. 43-5I. Livy was an important source, esp. for Cato's censorship, see R. Flaceliere, Plutarque V (Paris, I969), pp. 55-6I. For Livy's sources on Cato, see H. Triinkle, Cato in der vierten und fiinften Dekade des Livius (Mainz, I 97 I) . Note that only once, early in his career, did Cicero claim that Cato had to struggle against the prejudice of the nobiles (2 Verr. 5.82). More often his point is that in Cato's time no such prejudice existed (e.g., Mur. 17 and Sull. 23). Plutarch's story of a speech attacking "the great Scipio" in which Cato complains about the well-born refusing to recognize the virtue of a man like himself (Cat. Mai. II.I-2), is confused and probably bogus; see P. Fraccaro, Opuscula I, p. I58, n. ID3, and cf. Plut. Cat. Mai. IO.4, on which see earlier Chapter I, Section 5. Liv. 39.41.2; Plut. Cat. Mai. I6.3. The other known candidates were L. Scipio and P. Scipio Nasica, L. Furius Purpurio, M. Fulvius Nobilior, Cn. Manlius Vulso, Ti. Sempronius Longus, and M. Sempronius Tuditanus, Liv. 39.40.2-3. Liv. 39.41.2; Plut. Cat. Mai. I6.4. As censor Cato was as severe on the non-senatorial classes as on his peers, see Liv. 39.42-43; Plut. Cat. Mai. 17-I9; Nepos, Cat. 2.3; ORF4 8.72-82, and Astin, Cato, pp. 79-ID3. Publicani - Liv. 39.44.7 If.; Plut. Cat. Mai. I9.I f; Plut. Flam. I9.6 f.; and E. Badian, Publicans and Sinners (Ithica, I972) pp. 35-8. On the censorship in general, see Astin, Ca to, pp. 324-8. See Plut. Cat. Mai. I6.4-6; Liv. 39.41.3-4. During canvassing, Cato made speeches on behalf ofValerius Flaccus, Plut. Cat. Mai. I6.5.

324

MANLINESS REDEFINED

The only evidence for explicitly anti-aristocratic sentiments or activities on Cato's part is found in Livy's encomium (unusual ill this author) of Cato, where he writes, nec facile dixeris, utrum magis presserit eum nobilitas, an ille agitaverit nobilitatem. - "nor could you easily say whether the· nobility exerted more pressure on him, or he more assailed the nobility." (39.40.9). This, however, is a rhetorical summary of Cato's contentious political career, and reflects late republican views of him, quite likely the tendentious ways in which Cicero sometimes spoke ofCato.24 On consideration, Cato's career does not fit the model proposed by Vogt. Cato's political ascent depended to a considerable degree on his outstanding military reputation, and there is no reason to think either that it was founded on open attacks on Rome's nobility, or that he pursued such a line in his later years. Interesting and significant details are known about a homo novus of the mid-second century, Q. Pompeius. His early career is obscure, but the generally harsh scholarly opinion of his generalship might infer that this new man's career was without a basis in military accomplishments.25 Negative evaluations ofPompeius' military abilities, however, are based almost exclusively on the reports of his proconsular command in Spain from 141-139, and there is no good evidence that Pompeius suffered a defeat in these years. 26 The bias of the major sources for this campaign can be discerned both in internal inconsistencies, and by comparison with surviving elements of a more favorable tradition. 27 24

25

26

27

Possibly through Cornelius Nepos, nam et in complures nobiles animadvertit, - "for he attacked numerous nobles," (Cato. 2.3). Cf. Livy's words at 39.40.9 to Cic. 2 Verr·5.180, and see Astin, Cato, pp. 66-7. For other indications of Ciceronian influence on Livy's encomium of Cato, cf. 39.40.4-5 with Mur. 30, and see Cl. Nicolet, "Consul Togatus," REL 38 (1960) p. 262. Similarly rhetorical is Plutarch's summary sketch of Cato's career at Compt. Arist-Cat. I.3, where Cato is said to have been a poor man who worked with his hands. See P. Fraccaro, "Ricerche storiche e letterarie sulla censura del 184ir83 (M. Porcio Catone L. Valerio Flacco)," Opuscula I, pp. 417-509. A. Schulten, CAH ' , 8, p. 320; D. C. Earl, Tiberius Gracchus, A Study in Politics (Brussels, 1963) p. 99. Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, p. I25, is more moderate in his criticism. But Cicero called Pompeius a Jortissimus vir, in the company of Curius and Cato (Mur. 1617). Pompeius a novus homo - Cic. Font. 23, Mur. 16-17,2 Verr. 5·18I. See H. Simon, Rams Kriege in Spanien, 154-133 v. Chr. (1962) p. 80, and A. E. Astin, Historia 13 (1964) p. 245 ff.; contra MRR, I, p. 473· The principal source for the campaign, App. Ih. 77, is clearly biased. Compare it with Diod. 33.17 and Liv. Per. 54. These sources tend to merge Pompeius' activities with the very different circumstances ofC. Hostilius Mancinus' surrender to the Numantines

32 5

ROMAN MANLINESS

Pompeius' principal failing in this campaign seems to have been his inability to capture the city of Numanti a, a formidable task. If Pompeius' military abilities were slandered, it is not difficult to understand why. He had advanced as far as the praetorship (probably in 144) as the protege of Scipio Aemilianus. It was his notorious betrayal of Aemilianus' close friend C. Laelius that gained Pompeius the consulship of 141, and with it powerful enemies, chief among them his former patron. 28 Pompeius' career flourished nonetheless, extraordinarily so for a new man. After his election to the consulship, his command in Spain was extended for 140-139, and in 131 he was elected censor. Pompeius' remarkable success after an audacious break with his patron marks a new stage in the history of the homo novus, and in some ways his career presages that of Marius. But there are significant differences. A fine public speaker and a even better campaigner, Pompeius lacked Marius' martial reputation, though it is unlikely that he was without military experience and ability. Furthermore, there is no evidence that Pompeius ever attacked the nobility as a group.29 The watershed in the history of the homo novus occurs with Marius, who combined the new opportunities offered by post-Gracchan popu/aris politics, with a reputation for outstanding martial virtus, and, for the first time, openly attacked the nobility for military incompetence, indolence, and decadence,. all of which he

28

29

in 137; see Floms 1.34.3, and cf. App. lb. 79, with lb. 80, and Plut. Ti. Gracch. 5.5 fr. Mancinus attempted to blame his debacle on Pompeius' alleged previous mishandling of the army; see App. lb. 83. For further sources on the Mancinus affair, see MRR, I, pp. 484-'7. On the election for 141, see Plut. apophth. Scip min. 8 (200C); Cic. Amic. 77. For the obstacles Pompeius overcame, see Cic. 2 Verr. 5.181. He was charged and acquitted of repetundae in 138, see Cic. Font. 23; Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, pp. 128-33, and F. Miltner, "Pompeius (12)," RE XXI.2 (1952) cols. 2056-58. In 136, Aemilianus and Laelius engineered a motion calling for Pompeius to be turned over to the Numantines; he narrowly escaped Mancinus' fate, App. lb. 79 and 83; Cic. Rep. 3.28, Fin. 2.54, Off. 3.109. Oratorical ability - Cic. Brut. 96. Personal style of canvassing - P. Rutilius Rufus, frag. 7 HRR. Note that in Cicero's list of demegogues at Acad. pr. 2.13, Pompeius is in the company of Scipio Africanus. Pompeius later made a violent attack on Ti. Gracchus, Plut. Ti. Gracch. 14.2. Pompeius' political success after his break with a noble patron suggests powerful support, see RE XXI.2 cols. 2056-58, and Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, pp. 85 and 122. Earl, Tiberius Gracchus, p. 100, noted the parallel between Pompeius and Marius.

326

MANLINESS REDEFINED

associated with the philhellenism of the late second-century Roman nobility. 30 The four named new men after Marius are a varied lot. C. Flavius Fimbria is a shadowy figure, his background and accomplishments being largely unrecorded. Consul in 104 with Marius, he was probably swept into office on latter's popularis tide. He is reputed to have been something of a legal expert and an effective public speaker, but has no military commands or deeds to his credit. Because he was later prosecuted for repetundae, he must have governed a province, but his activities are unknown, lost in the glare of Marius' brilliant German victories. If Fimbria was a new man without military experience, he would be the first to have reached the consulship before Cicero. 31 The same cannot be said about the new man T. Didius. Mter his praetorship, Didius received a consular command in Macedonia (100 or 99), where he defeated the Scordisci and earned a triumph. From 97-93 he waged a series of difficult, dangerous, and brutal campaigns in Spain for which he celebrated a second triumph in 93.32 His political career - plebeian tribune in 103, praetor in 100 or 99, consul in 98 - points to a continuing connection with the Metelli. 33 The new man C. Coelius Caldus was plebeian tribune in 107, consul in 94. His early career is obscure, but his later commands argue for a military background. Caldus was chosen for a difficult pro consular command in Spain (perhaps in 98) and seems in 93 to have fought in

JO

JI

J2

JJ

For Marius' career, and for the philhellenism of the late second century Roman nobility, see earlier, Chapter VIII. Fimbria a homo novus - Cic. Plane. 12, cf. Brut. 129, 2 Verr. 5.I81. For the sources on Fimbria in ID4, see MRR, I, p. 558. The fact that he was later prosecuted for repetundae by M. Aernilius Scaurus, and that his sons became prominent Marian supporters (Cic. Font. 24 and Val. Max. 8.5.2), points to Marius' support in I04. But note that the formal charge of repetendae was brought against Fimbria by M. Gratidius, Marius' brother-inlaw; Cic. Brut. I68. For Fimbria's associations, see Miinzer, "Flavius (87)," RE Vl.2 (I909) cols. 2598-9, and Badian, Foreign Clientelae, p. 201. For his knowledge of the law and his oratorical style, see Cic. Brut. I29. For the sources, see MRR, II, pp. 7 and I5. The date of the command in Macedonia is problematic, see MRR, 11, p. 3, n. 11. He defended the Metellan ally, Q. Caepio in ID3, and co-authored the Lex Caeeilia Didia in 98, see Cic. De or. 2.197. For his career, see Miinzer "Didius (5)," RE V.I (1905) cols. 407-ID; Wiseman, New Men, No. I56; and Badian, Studies, p. 69. On Didius a novus homo - CiG. Mur. 17.

32 7

ROMAN MANLINESS

Transalpine Gaul, where he defeated the Saliuvii.34 As tribune he had sponsored popular measures, but by 94 he had moved to the optimate camp.35 The novus homo L. Quinctius' position as M. Licinius Crassus' cavalry commander in the war against Spartacus in 71 clearly suggests a man of military experience. L. Quinctius was nearly fifty years old when he became plebeian tribune in 74. His career was that of a popularis who pressed for anti-optimate measures in 74, supported Cotta's jury legislation in 70 and, as praetor in 68, attacked the optimate general Lucullus. He may have owed his election to the praetorship to Crass us , support. 36 The best documented career of a homo novus is of course that of Cicero, and his lack of military experience and reputation are wellknown. By skillfully combining equestrian support and popular causes he climbed the cursus honorum to the consulship (see Cic. Font. passim., Comm. pet. passim, and 2 Verr. 2.181). Cicero's assiduous courting of selected young nobiles, and his need to have Atticus work hard to win over other members of the nobility, show that he lacked the firm aristocratic support that had taken most earlier homines novi to Rome's highest office. 37 Judging from what we can know of homines novi who are named as such, their careers followed a characteristic pattern. 38 Until the post-Gracchan period, there is a close and lasting relationship with at

34

35

36

37

38

Cicero called him an indifferent orator, De or. I.Il7 and Brut. 165. On the praetorship, see MRR, n, p. 3, n. 2, and on the victory over the Saluvii, Liv. Per. 73, and Badian, Studies, pp. 90-I. As argued by Badian, Studies, pp. 93-5. For the sources, see MRR, I, p. 551, n, p. 12 and Miinzer, "Coelius (12)," RE IVl (1901) cols. 195-6; Wiseman, New Men, No. 127. Coelius is termed homo novus at Cic. Mur. 17, De or. 2.55, 117, and Comm. pet. lI. Quinctius a homo novus - Cic. Clu. Ill; Wiseman, New Men, No. 351. For his command in 71, see Front. Strat. 2.5.23; Plut. Cras. lI.4. He was of the right age to have won a martial reputation during the wars of the 80S. For his politics, see MRR n pp. I03, 125 and 138 and H. Grundel, "Quinctius (12)," RE XXIV (1963) cols. I002-5. On Cicero's relationship with young nobiles, presumably his students, see Comm. pet. 3, 6, 50; cf. Cic. Att. I.l (SB IO) 4. The request for Atticus' help in securing the doubtful support of the nobles occurs at Att. I.2 (SB Il) 2. Comm. pet. 4 shows that Cicero needed, but did not have noble support. There were many more who were the first of their family to hold public office in Rome than there are individuals named homines novi in the sources. Identification depends on how the term is defined. For differing definition and identifications, see Wiseman, New Men, p. I, following Strasburger, RE XVII. I cols. 1223-7 (for criticisms see Nicolet,

32 8

MANLINESS REDEFINED

least one Roman nobilis that seemed to have been essential to success, and there is no evidence for open attacks on the nobility as a group. A change in the nature of the homo novus, together with all Roman politics, was caused by the the Gracchan crisis of 133 - 12 I. Mterward the Roman aristocracy was split and soon the nobility was put on the defensive. Marius attained the consulship with equestrian and popular support, and managed to remain largely independent of, and safe from the nobiles because of a military crisis. 39 In the post-Sullan era, Cicero spoke of the consulate as a noble bastion, which the new man had to take by assault (Leg. agr. 2.3f., 2 Verr. 5.182 f.). In the earlier phases of his career, popularis politics had provided Cicero with the means of effectively attacking the nobility, albeit carefully. Such an attack was necessary because, unlike Cato or Laelius, Cicero had lacked strong and consistent noble patronage that would take them to high office. The second characteristic of the homo novus is that they entered politics on the basis of a military reputation. Some new men, like Coruncanius and Cato, might have been famous for excellence in other fields, but they too had established their initial reputations principally as soldiers. A longstanding connection between new men and the military is perfectly consistent with the Roman martial ethos. This does not, however, mean that virtus was in any sense the prerogative of new men. The martial excellence that virtus denoted was a quality prized by all Romans citizens, and one that Romans nobles sought to demonstrate and advertise, which is precisely why a reputation for virtus was the best way for a new man to make his entry into the senate. The new man's claim of virtus mimicked that of the established nobleman. 40

39

40

L'onomastique, p. 55 and L'ordre I, pp. 253, 256, n, p. xii, n. 3); Brunt,jRS 72 (1982) pp. 6-9· The absence of homines novi before Marius in the last third of the second century, and the acclaim which Marius received in being elected consul in 107, argues for a reaction against new men after the Gracchan crisis; so M. Dondin-Payne, "Homo Novus: un slogan de Caton a Cesar?," Historia 30 (1981) pp. 22-81, 37. Evidence points to a longstanding ideological and sociological foundation for the connection between military experience and reputation and entry into the senate, see Nicolet, "Armee et Societe a Rome sous la Republique," pp. 9-169, esp. p. 129 If. If there was a quality that had a particular association with new men, it was not virtus, but Jortuna.

32 9

ROMAN MANLINESS

If the martial virtus of Roman tradition was not a quality exclusive to the homo nDVUS, but one that was shared by all members of the ruling class, then what was the basis of the opposition between the new man's virtus and the aristocrats' nobilitas found so frequently in Cicero's works?4 1 The answer lies in the meaning of virtus as used by Cicero. The virtus claimed by Marius, the undefeated general whose life was spent in the camp, was martial in nature, and when Marius the new man attacked the nobiles for being deficient in virtus, it was their lack of military experience and accomplishments that he referred to. As we will see, when Cicero discusses the virtus of past homines novi, he almost always is referring to their military achievements (2 Verr. 4.8r; 5.r80-2; 5 ·3r; Mur. r7; Sull. 24; Balb. r8-r9). But Cicero himself, unlike Marius and virtually all other earlier new men, was without significant military experience and lacked a reputation for martial prowess. So when the new man Cicero contrasted his own merits and abilities to nobilitas, he could hardly reprimand the nobles for what he himselflacked. When contrasted to nobilitas by Cicero, virtus almost always has the meaning of general excellence, ability, or merit, and it sometimes comprises a wide range of other qualities and abilities - laboy, industria, Jrugalitas, sapientia, ete. Such a general meaning of virtus, as we have seen, is rarely found in surviving pre-Classical Latin, and the use of virtus or virtutes as a general or all-embracing term under which other qualities are subsumed, was based on the analogy of the common usage of 6:PET~ or 6:pEToiY But just as the virtus that Cicero claims for himself as a new man is dependent on meanings borrowed from 6:pET~, so too the

4'

42

Dondin-Payre, Historia 30 (I98I) 29-31. Earl, PTS, pp. 36-9 and MPTR, Chap. n, treated well the Ciceronian redefrnition of virtus and nobilitas, but followed Vogt in misrepresenting the elder Cato's attitude toward the nobility. That virtus had no real place in the novus-nobilis contrast is suggested by Comm. pet. 9, where it is admitted that one of Cicero's noble rivals in 63, Catilina, had virtus (clearly not an ethical quality), because he was fearless. For Cicero's use ofvirtus in the novus-nobilis dichotomy, see 2 Verr. 3.7-8; 2 Verr.5.I808I; Sest. I36; Clu. 67; Mur. I7; Leg. agr. 2.3. Vogt, p. I3, n. I4, compared Cicero's words in his consular speech at Leg. agr. 3.3-5 to the speech of Marius at Sall. BI 85. But in Cicero's remarks on his own accomplishm.ent as a new man, virtus occurs only once, while it is found eight times and it has a military reference throughout the speech Sallust gives to Marius; see below. For the influence of O:PETT] on virtus as an ethical concept, see earlier Chapter In, Section 3, as the primary virtue, see Section 4, and as an innate quality, see earlier Chapter n, Section 2.

33 0

MANLINESS REDEFINED

form of his contrast between new man and nobleman itself reflects a common Greek trope. The contrast between innate ability and noble birth has a long history in Greek rhetoric, where it was commonly represented by the pairing of O:PETrl and EVYEVElO - "noble birth." In fourth-century Athenian rhetoric, where it is most frequently found, the relationship is usually complementary. One suspects that if the speeches of fIfth-century Athenian popular leaders such as Cleon, Hyperbolus, or Cleophon had survived, the opposition of these two qualities would be more common. But the way in which they are treated in surviving speeches shows that in the Greek rhetorical arsenal the O:PETrlEVYEVElO pairing functioned as a subset of the O:PETrl-TVXTl dichotomy. Isocrates, for example, in a speech in praise of the mythical king of Egypt Busiris (whose father was Poseidon, and whose maternal grandfather was Zeus), writes of high birth as a gift of fortune - TVXTl and stresses that the virtuous man supplements this gift with deeds dependent on his innate ability - O:pETrl. TIEP! I-lEv OVV T11S BovCYipl8oS EUYEVEios Tis OUK av 8vV1l6Eill po8iws EiTIElv ... rvxwv 810 TOIOllTWV lTpoyovwv OUK ElT! TOIlTOlS j.lOVOlS I-lEY , E
The parallel to Cicero's trope is clear. As used by Cicero, the virtus nobilitas, (or bonum genus - "good birth") contrast is a variation of the virtus-Jortuna dichotomy, which as we have seen was modeled on

O:PETrl-TVXTl· That Cicero was drawing on Greek terms when he drew a contrast between the native ability and industry that was his own virtus, and 43

See also !soc. 16.29-38 and I.7-8 (the last should be compared to Cic. Sest. 136). Cf. Dem. 6I.9-1O, 31-2; Aeschin. 2.157, 3.46. At Rhet. Her. 3.13 virtus and bonum genus are contrasted in what is a Greek rhetorical top os, ab externis rebus; cf. Rhet. Her. 2.25. For nobilitas as the gift of fortune opposed to the merit (virtus) of the new man, see Cic. 2 Verr. 4.80-I.

33 1

ROMAN MANLINESS

the nobilitas of a Roman blue blood is evidenced in a letter of 50 addressed to Ap. Claudius Pulcher. In the letter, Cicero protests against the injustice of the nobleman's arrogance toward the new man. In his remarks to Appius, Cicero, not surprisingly, uses virtus in the sense of 6:pETTj. But when he urges Appius to investigate the question of what nobilitas is, Cicero, somewhat unexpectedly, does not refer him to the words of Cato or to any other Latin author. Instead he recommends that Appius read the work of Athenodorus of Tarsus, DEpi EVyEvEiaS. quaeso, etiamne tu has ineptias, homo mea sententia summa prudentia, multa etiam doctrina, plurimo rerum usu, addo urbanitatem, quae est virtus ut Stoici rectissime putant? ullam Appietatem aut Lentulitatem valere apud me plus quam ornamenta virtutis existimas? ... tu si aliter existimas, nihil errabis si paulo diligentius, ut quid sit EvyevElo [quid sit nobilitas] intellegas, Athenodorus, Sandonis filius, quid de his rebus dicat attenderis. I ask, in reference to these absurdities, do you also, a man who in my opinion has the highest understanding, also great learning, and extensive experience of practical matters, and I add sophistication, which is a virtue as the Stoics rightly hold, do you think that being an Appius or a Lentulus is in any way more valued by me than the distinctions of virtus? ... If you think otherwise, you will not go wrong if, in order to understand what high birth is, and what nobility is, you were to study with a little more care what is said about these matters by Athenodorus, son of Sando. Fam. 3.7 (SB 7 1 ) 5

In a public speech Cicero the orator might justify the merit of his own innate ability over noble birth by appealing to the Roman tradition and to virtus, but he knew better than to make such a claim to a nobleman who was intimately familiar with that tradition. 44

2.

IMPERATOR TOGATUS - CICERO'S CLAIM TO VIRTUS

By combining a deep knowledge of and sensibility for Greek language and literature, with a cultural self-confidence that was determined to demonstrate that Latin could render sophisticated ideas and rhetorical 44

Ap. Claudius Pulcher was an educated man (Cic. Brut. 267); he dedicated a book on augury to Cicero, see (Fam. 3-4 (SB 67) r; 3·9 (SB 72) 3; 3·II (SB 74) 4· On Fam. 3.7 (SB 7r) 5, see Shackleton Bailey, ad loc., p. 372. For Athenodorus, see J. v. Arnin, RE II (r896) coL 2045 and Cichorius, Romische Studien, pp. 279-82.

33 2

MANLINESS REDEFINED

forms without the aid of Greek terms, Cicero greatly expanded the range and flexibility of his native language. He was, to be sure, preceded by a generation of Latin authors who were also philhellenes striving for pure Latin diction - pura oratio. 45 But what little of their work survives, together with the judgments of both contemporary and later authors, assure that Cicero's contributions to the development of the Latin language were profound. 46 Not surprisingly, Cicero's writings also had an important impact on the meaning and usage of virtus. Although committed as much by an established tradition, as by want of a better term to translate the use of 6:pETT) as a Greek cultural ideal with virtus, Cicero's contribution in adapting Latin to Greek ideas was the systematic way he went about establishing the correspondence between a Greek term and the Latin word used to render it.47 In Cicero's time the semantic range of virtus was complex and odd. On the one hand, many usages derived or strongly influenced by 6:PETT) had been fully integrated into the language of those who read Cicero's treatises, as well as of those who listened to his speeches. When in a speech Cicero employed virtus specifically to convey the ethical integrity associated with the tenets of a Greek philosophical doctrine, or when he used it as a conventional compliment with vaguely ethical connotations, a broad sector of the Roman population certainly understood him. But this usage is clearly different from that found in Caesar's Commentaries. If the native martial and Hellenized ethical meanings of virtus were no longer competing ideals of Roman manliness that were publicly debated as they had been in the days of 45

46

47

On the cultural self confidence shared by Cicero's generation, see E. Fantham, Roman Literary Culture (Baltimore, 1996) pp. 47-54; on pura oratio, Buchner, Rom. Lit. pp. 142 ff. For Lucilius' criticism of the intermixing of Greek and Latin, see n 15C = 84-5 M = 84-5 ROL = 74-5 K, and earlier Chapter n. See the comments of E. Rawson, "Lucius Crassus and Cicero: The Formation of a Statesman," PCPhS ns 17 (1971) p. 75 = Roman Culture, p. 16. On the originality of Cicero's linguistic contributions, see L. P. Wilkinson, "Cicero and the Relationship of Oratory and Literature," in Cambridge History of Classical Literature 11, Latin Literature, pp. 230-67; M. von Albrecht, A History of Roman Literature I (Leiden, 1997) pp. 535-50. Cicero did try and reject other words for the generic term for the virtues: frugalitas, Tusc. 3.16; honestas, Fin. 2.45.8. For a discussion, see Eisenhut, VR, pp. 64-5. For complaints about inaccurate contemporary renderings of Greek philosophical terms into Latin, see Cic. Fam. 15.19 (SB 216) 2; cf. Fam 15.16 (SB 215); cf. Eisenhut, VR, p. 61.

333

ROMAN MANLINESS

Marius and Metellus Nurnidicus, the distinction between them was nevertheless still alive. The striking difference in the usage of virtus by Cicero and Caesar reflects a conscious rhetorical choice by both authors, but also larger social and political contradictions that were current in a period of transition from Republic to Principate. Cicero's influence on the use of virtus is most obvious in his theoretical writings, which were modeled to one degree or another on Greek works. 48 Throughout his philosophical works Cicero employs virtus to translate 6:pETf} as it was commonly used by Greek philosophical schools to denote the supreme ethical concept that was also the generic term for the various virtues. 49 That this usage was not native to Latin is implied by its relative rarity outside of Cicero's philosophical writings, and by Cicero's use of the word fortitudo, which occurs sixty-seven times in the philosophical works, where it is employed specifically to translate av5pEia where virtus is rendering 6:PETf}. In Cicero's speeches fortitudo occurs only nine times. In seven of these, the word echoes the philosophical usage in being used to either avoid confusion with virtus when the latter has a broad ethical meaning, or in being joined with other virtues of the canon. 50 In Cicero's letters fortitudo is found twice, once as a conscious echo offortis in the figura etymologica, itaque

hoc etiam fortiorem me puto quam te ipsum, praeceptorem fortitudinis ... "I think: then that I am even braver than you who are my teacher in courage ... ". (Ad Fam. 5.13 [SE 201] 3), and a second time to qualify the unusual ascription of virtus to a woman. The absence of fortitudo in other works of classical Latin is even more striking. SI 48

49

50

51

The most comprehensive study of the subject is Gerhard Liebers' Virtus bei Cicero (Dresden 1942), which is especially good on the philosophical usages. For criticism, see Eisenhut, VR, p. 58, n. 151 and p. 63. On the philosophical and rhetorical treatises, see Eisenhut, VR, pp. 57-76. See Eisenhut, VR, pp. 64-'71. On ethical virtus, and on virtus as the generic term for the virtues, see Chapter Ill, Sections 3 and 4. At 2 Verr. 2.192; Imp. Pom. 29; Cat. 1.29,2,25; Red. sen. '9; Balb. II3; Sest. 86, II3; Phil. 13.6. At all but Cat. 1.29 and Sest. II3,Jortitudo is used to distinguish ethical virtus; see H. Merguet, Lexikon zu den Reden den Cicero (Jena, 1884-'7), where seven columns are given to fortis. Cic. Fam. 14.1 (SB 8) I, discussed in Chapter V, Section 2. In the letters fortis is found 95 times,fortiter 27 times; W A. Oldfather, H. V Carter, K. M. Abbott, Index verborum Ciceronis epistularum (Urbana, 1938). Onfortitudo in general, see earlier Chapter I, Section 6, and Eisenhut, VR, p. 42-3.

334

MANLINESS REDEFINED

The influence of apETT] is also seen in Cicero's use of the technical language of rhetorical theory and practice, where, following the practice found in other Latin technical genres - agriculture and architecture -, virtus is used to translate apETT]Y Because both Cicero's rhetorical works and the contemporary Rhetorica ad Herennium were modeled on Greek sources, it is difficult to know to what degree the appearance in them of what were by the first-century conventional tropes derived from Greek figures using apETT] - the contrast of virtus withJortuna (e.g., Rhet. Her. 4.27; De or. 2.342); with vitia (e.g., Rhet. Her. 3.13-14; De or. 2.35, Orat. 118); and with nobilitas or bonum genus (e.g., Rhet. Her. 3.13,2.25; De or. 2.342-3) -was derived from tropes found in the Greek originals. 53 Oratory and the orator naturally occupy a central role in Cicero's rhetorical works, and it is in these that he links political eloquence to virtus. He probably followed L. Licinius Crassus in this and certainly looked back to the Greek tradition where the association of apETT] with rhetorical skill was old and commonplace. The statement at De oratore 3.55 that eloquence is one of the principal virtues - summae virtutes -, for instance, repeats a claim that goes back to fifth-century Athens. At De oratore 1.83, Cicero makes the extravagant assertion that only the orator possesses true virtus, and at 3.136 argues that the true orator must possess all the virtues (cf. Orat. 33.8); both are Greek ideas. 54 Significantly, however, Cicero was reluctant to openly claim virtus for the orator, and rarely attributes it to individuals on the basis of their oratorical ability alone (explicitly only to Ser. Sulpicius Galba [cos. 144] at Brutus 91). Virtus is most important, however, in Cicero's political writings (both the treatises and speeches). It is frequently asserted that Cicero's See earlier Chapter ll, Section I. Cicero's discomfort with such usages suggests that they were foreigu to Latin. To translate the technical rhetorical phrase 6:pETa\ Tf\S AE~EWS "virtues ofphrasing"-, Cicero normally uses ornamenta sententiarum (Orat. 136.1, 8I.2.3, 83.3.5; Part. 47-4.5). But once, in an early work, he uses virtus to translate the term (Opt. gen. 23). In later works, however, he qualified them as quasi virtutes (Orat. 139). 53 See Eisenhut, VR., pp. 71-6; and K. M. Abbott, W Oldfather, H. V Canter, et al., Index verborum in Ciceronis Rhetorica necnon incerti auctoris libros ad Herennium (Urbana, Ill., 1964). 54 For the association of eloquence and 6:PETT] in the Greek tradition, and for Crassus' seeming attribution of virtus and gloria to the orator and lawyer, see earlier Chapter Ill, on the Greek tradition. On virtus in Cicero's rhetorical works, cf. Eisenhut, VR., pp. 71-3. 52

335

ROMAN MANLINESS

use of virtus in De re publica and De legibus as the broad ranging, ethically centered quality of the princeps, reflects a traditional use of virtus as a political ideal. 55 But occurrences of virtus in a political context in preClassical Latin are relatively rare, and there is little reason to think that virtus traditionally functioned as a central political concept. 56 Cicero's use of virtus in these political treatises varies, drawing on both the martial meaning of virtus, and on meanings derived from 6:pETT] as it is commonly found in Greek political theory; it is also tendentious. The use to which Cicero puts the prestige of martial virtus can be seen in the surviving portion of the prologue of De re publica. It was Cicero's habit to support discussions of Greek theories and ideas with appeals to Roman examples. It is significant that the text opens with references to great Roman generals, the heroes of the Punic wars, C. Duilius, A. Atilius, L. Metellus, the two Scipiones, Fabius Maximus, Claudius Marcellus, and Scipio Africanus. Mter these M. Cato is invoked for his industria et virtus. Cicero then proceeds to a general statement in which virtus is contrasted to voluptas - "pleasure:" tantam esse necessitatem virtutis generi hominum a natura tantumque amorem ad communem salutem defendendam datum, ut ea vis omnia blandimenta voluptatis otique vicerit. so great a need for virtu5 has been given to mankind by nature, and so great a passion for defending the common safety, that this force has conquered all the charms of pleasure and leisure." Rep.

1.1

This is followed by a definition of virtus as not merely a skill - ars -, but a quality whose essence is in use and activity. Nec vera habere virtutem satis est quasi artem aliquam nisi utare; etsi ars quidem cum ea non utare scientia tamen ipsa teneri potest, virtus in usu sui tota posita est. Nor is it enough to possess virtu5 as if it were some skill, unless you use it. For a skill, even when not used, can nevertheless be retained by knowledge of it alone, virtu5 depends entirely on its use. Rep. 55

56

1.2

See K. Biichner, "Der Eingang von Ciceros Staat," Hommages ilJean Bayet, Collection Latomus 70 (Brussels, 1964) p. 134; and Eisenhut, l/R, pp. 58, 61-2. See earlier Chapter IH, Section 5.

MANLINESS REDEFINED

By beginning his discussion with a reference to Rome's great military heroes, Cicero associates the political virtus that is his subject with the great prestige that martial virtus traditionally held at Rome. The manner in which Cato the novus homo is introduced is clearly designed to recall Cicero himself. M. vero Catoni homini ignoto et novo, quo omnes qui isdem rebus studemus quasi exemplari ad industriam virtutemque ducimur. - "All of us who desire these same things are led to hard work and virtus, as though by example, by a man truly unknown and new, Marcus Cato." (Rep. 1.1). But the figure of Cato also serves as a bridge from the martial virtus of Rome's great military heroes, to Cicero's discussion of Greek political ideas (the formal transition is at 1.2, Nec vero habere virtutem . .. ), and Cato is the perfect transitional figure. Like Duilius, Fabius, Marcellus, and the others mentioned by Cicero, Cato had a reputation for martial virtus, but he was also famous for championing virtus against voluptas. Cato's concern over voluptas was twofold. He objected to it as a threat to the martial spirit of the Romans, and he thought that it contributed to the greed and malfeasance of Roman office holders. 57 Cicero's use of the virtus-voluptas dichotomy in the prologue of De re publica is different, however, and is part of an argument for the active political life taken from Greek polemic. Traditional martial virtus was obviously an active quality, but Cicero's insistence on the active nature of virtus in De re publica does not draw on Roman tradition. On the contrary, Cicero's emphasis on the active political nature of virtus echoes a central tenet of Peripatetic teaching. The Greek sources for De re publica are problematic, and it seems unlikely that Cicero used a single model, certainly not one that survives, but the influence of Aristotle on the prologue is strong. 58 Aristotle's idea that 6:PETT], particularly political 6:pETT], is characterized by xpfjalS - "use" or "usefulness" - rather than E~IS - "possession" -, marked his opposition to a

57

58

For Cato's use of virtus, see earlier Chapter I, Section 5; for his military reputation, see previously. For the much debated sources of De re publica, see P. L. Schmidt, "Ciceros 'De re publica': Die Forschung der letzten funf Dezennien," ANRW I 4 (Berlin-New York, I973) pp. 30 7-I4·

337

ROMAN MANLINESS

fundamental doctrine of the old Academy,59 as did his association of apETT] and EPYOV - "work" -, which corresponds to Cicero's virtus et industria. 60 The chief difference between Aristotle's ideas on apE7T] and those expressed on virtus in the prologue of De re publica, is that the Greek was seeking a philosophical reconciliation between "action" 1Tpa~lS - and "contemplation" - 6Ewpia, (Pol. 1325B 16-28). Cicero, on the other hand, was interested in a rhetorical dichotomy to serve his polemic against the inactive, non-political life; hence the sharp antithesis between virtus and ars. There is no reason to think that Cicero's polemic against the life of retirement and contemplation reflects traditional Roman ideas about virtus. As with so much else in De re publica, it was an adaptation of the tenets of Greek philosophy, in particular anti-Epicurean polemic, and was employed by Cicero to address an issue that was not traditional, but peculiar to the late Republic - th~ withdrawal of senators from public life. In the second century the targets of the elder Cato had been public officials who misused their office, not elite Romans who refused to participate in politics. It was Cato's homonymous great grandson who attacked the

piscinarii. 61 In the rest of De re publica instances of political virtus correspond closely to Greek ideas on apE7T]. The proposition that the state should be directed by men who possess virtus, (Rep. 1.12 and 1.33) echoes Platonic and Aristotelian thought (PI. Leg. 690B-C; Aristot. Pol. I284A 10, 1325B 14-20, 1328A 38). The argument against democracy based

59

60

61

See Aristot. Pol. I325A 20 ff.; BN I09SA 6 ff., I09SB 31 ff., II29B 3; Mag. mor. IIS5A 9-13. Cf. Cic. Fin. 2.19, and ND LIIO, with A. R. Dyck, Cicero, De Natura Deorum (Cambridge, 2003) p. 192, and Pease, I, p. 496, for further references. For the position of the Academics, see Speusippus, frag. 57 Lang (= Clem. Alex. Strom. 2.22) and Xenocrates, frag. 77 Heinze = (Clem. Alex. Strom. 2.22); with A. Grilli, I proemi del De re publica di Cicerone (Brescia, 1971) pp. 27-47 Also see Eisenhut, VR, pp. 5S-9, n. 152. See Aristot. Bth. Bum. I2I9a 6, and Grilli, pp. 29-30. The oldest examples of the industriavirtus combination are found in a military context, see earlier Chapter Ill, Section 4. cf. Plaut. Pseud. 5SL At ND LIIO.I2 Cicero invokes virtus aetuosa to rebut Epicurean doctrine, cf. ND LIIO.I2, and Plato Leg. 690B-C, 70SD; Aristot. Pol. I284A 10-17, I325B "4-30, I32SA 3S. K. Buchner, M. Tullius Cieero, De Re Publica, Kommentar (Heidelberg, I9S4) p. So, noted the differences between Cicero arguments for virtus and Aristotle on apETT], but ignoring any possible anti-Epicurean Hellenistic source, wrongly concluded that Cicero's politically active virtus must be the traditional Roman concept.

MANLINESS REDEFINED

on the notion that virtue is possessed only by the few (Rep. 1.51-2), repeats well-known Greek ideas (e.g., PI. Leg. 690A f.), and the discussion of natural law and imperialism (Rep. 3. IS) seems to have been taken from the ideas of the philosopher Carneades. Occasionally Cicero does refer to native Roman virtu5, as in the story ofRomulus ascending to heaven because of his virtu5. quibus quidem Romulum tenebris etiamsi natura ad humanum exitum abripuit, virtus tamen in caelum dicitur sustulisse. for even if nature, in fact, snatched Romulus in darkness away to his death, nevertheless it is said that virtu5 carried him up into heaven.

Rep.

1.25

This probably repeats an old Roman legend, the reference of virtu5 is certainly to that ofRomulus' military renown. 62 It is also appropriate that it is in Book V, which seemed to have included a survey of early Roman history, where Cicero describes the nature of Roman virtu5 as physical courage, quae virtus fortitudo vocatur; in qua est magnitudo animi, mortis dolorisque magna contemptio. This virtu5 is called courage that consists of greatness of spirit and utter contempt for pain and death.

The same pattern of dependence on Greek sources and on apE"Ti] is found in De legibu5, where virtu5 occurs sixteen times. 64 The correlation to apE"Ti] is particularly clear when at De legibu5 1-45, Cicero comments

62

63

64

On Ramulus, see Liv. I.10; Plut. Rom. 16.4-'7; Dion. Hal., Rom ant. 2.33.2-34; Act. trium; Ennius, Ann. 7 I S. The absence of virtus in the notice about Ramulus at Tusc. I.27-8 is probably explained by the mention ofJeminae at I.27; contra Eisenhut, VR, pp. 68--9. Cf. Tusc. 2.43. For the nature of Book 5, see Rep. 5.1, 3, 7. At Leg. 2.58, concerning burial regulation in the XII Tables, see Chapter I, Section I. Virtus carries a political sense in the story of M. Aemilius Scaurus praising Cicero's grandfather at Leg. 3.36. Otherwise as used in De legibus, virtus consistently represents well-attested philosophical usages of apETi].

339

ROMAN MANLINESS

that the application of virtus to a tree or horse is a misuse of the Latin word. 65 That the influence of 6:pETT] and the occurrence of the ethical, Hellenic senses of virtus is pronounced in Cicero's theoretical works is to be expected, modeled as they were on Greek originals. Nor is it surprising to find the same phenomenon, along with a fair amount of Greek, in some of Cicero's letters, usually those addressed to highly cultured correspondents. 66 But because the audience of the speeches comprised a broader spectrum of the Roman population, the frequent appearance of such uses of virtus in them is more instructive, and it is in the speeches that Cicero's treatment of virtus is most creative. Virtus displays a wide variety of meanings in the speeches. But it is not the case, as some have held, that in most instances its employment is incidental, indiscriminate, or merely conventional. 67 Cicero sometimes ascribes virtus as a passing compliment to well-known public figures like Q. Hortensius Hortalus (Imp. Pom. SI), Q. Caecilius Metellus Celer (Cael. 34), and M. Calpurnius Bibulus (Dom. 39). Although these references are inexplicit, that they carry an ethical connotation is implied by Cicero's obvious good opinion of the men, as well as his statement at De amicitia 2 I that in conventional usage virtus denotes

On the passage, see earlier Chapter n, Section I. and Liebers, p. 140. For the Greek, especially Stoic, nature of virtus in this work, see Kenter, Cicero De legibus, pp. ID7, 125, 182, 185, 194, 196,225-6,230; cf. A. R. Dyck, A Commentary on Cicero, De Legibus (Ann Arbor, 2004) pp. 135-6, 192-6, 200-205. For a discussion of the problems of the Greek sources for De legibus, see E. Rawson, "The Interpretation ofCicero's 'De Legibus'," ANRWI 4, pp. 340-2, and Dyck, pp. 12-15. 66 In the letters virtus appears with the widest variety of meanings. It denotes courage (Fam. 4.9 [SB 231] 3; 14.1 [SB 8] I) and is commonly a martial quality (Fam. 9.14 [SB 326]4; ID.8 [SB 371]6; Iu8 [SB 397]2; 12.10 [SB 425] 3). It translates 6:PET11 in philosophical contexts (Fam. 15.19 [SB 216] 2; 3.7 [SB 71] 5) and shows the influence of 6:PET11 in referring to the canonical virtues (Fam. 15.5 [SB Ill] I; 12.24 [SB 361] 3). It is found in familiar tropes derived ultimately from 6:pETr" when it is contrasted to voluptas (Aft. 5.20 [SB Il3] 6), vitium (Fam. 14.4 [SB 6] 5), andJortuna (Fam. 5.18 [SB 51] I; 10.3 [SB 355] 2). Most often, however, virtus has a general reference and, as in the speeches, it is frequently used as a conventional compliment (e.g., Fam. 2·3 [SB 47] 2; 2·5 [SB 49] 2; 4.9 [SB 231] 3; 5.17 [SB 23] 5; 6.1 [SB 242] 4; 13.28 [SB 294] 2; 13.78 [SB 275] I). See W A. Oldfather, H. V. Canter, K. M. Abbott, Index verborum Ciceronis epistularum (Urbana, Ill. , 1938). 67 Earl, PTS, pp. 37-8. The various meanings of virtus found in the speeches follow no discernible chronological pattern, see Eisenhut, VR, p. 62, n. 161. 65

34 0

MANLINESS REDEFINED

the quality of the good public man. 68 Cicero also uses virtus when he wishes to emphasize the good character of persons who were not well known in Rome, or to compliment jurors, in which case its ethical sense is made explicit. In the Verrines, for example, virtus, combined with integritas - "probity" -, innocentia - "integrity -, continentia "restraint" -, and fides - "trust" -, is frequently attributed to Cicero's Sicilian witnesses, whose high morals are contrasted to the baseness of the defendant C. Verres and of his accomplices. 69 When Cicero attributes virtus to a person important to the subject of his speech, however, he is usually more specific about what the word refers to. That in doing so he sometimes qualifies virtus with adjectives, such as singularis - "remarkable," - or, eximia - "outstanding" -, does not make the reference itself inexplicit. 70 In the eighth Philippic, for example, Cicero calls the virtus of Octavian astonishing admirabilis -, but it is clearly the martial quality of a general that he refers to (Phil. 3.8).7' In his orations, the particular meaning of virtus that Cicero chooses to emphasize is determined by the circumstances and the requirements of his argument. 72 In speeches where the subject is primarily military, such as De imperio Pompeii, Pro Balbo and the Phi lippies, virtus is martial in nature and occurs frequently. In Pro Cluentio, where the defendant is accused of poisoning, and in the speech against L. Calpurnius Piso, where that man's alleged Epicurean debaucheres are attacked, and in Pro Caelio, where Cicero's client's dissolute youth 68

69

70

71

72

At Amic. 2I Cicero gives as examples the Paulas, Catones, Galos, Scipiones, Philos. See Imp. Pom. 68 for the virtus ofC. Cassius; Mil. 24 for that ofL. Aemilius Paullus; Clu. u8 for the virtus of Cn. Lentulus; and Caecin. 77 for the virtus of C. Aquilius. 2 Verr. 2.83; 5.I28; 2 Verr. 2.23, I02; 2 Verr. 2.I56; 3.56, 60, 93, 204; 4.38, 50; 5.20 and compare 2 Verr. 3.8. See also Rab. 8 on the virtus ofC. Curtius. For the virtus of jurors, see 2 Verr. 1.2; 1.3. Earl, PTS, p. 37, argued that the use of strong adjectives indicates a debasement in the force of virtus. But the diminished force of a word is not the same thing as an inexplicit reference. In fact only eximia seems to have had a special relationship with virtus in Cicero's works; it is joined to virtus more frequently than to any other noun in the speeches (fifteen times). Singularis occupies four and one half columns in Merguet's index, but is joined to virtus only eleven times, and six of these are in reference to Pompey, all but one occurring in De impero Pompeii, where virtus is common. On divina virtus and Pompey, see earlier Chapter IX. Earl, PTS, p. 36, n. 2, cited this passage as an example of an inexplicit usage. So Liebers, pp. I62-5, argued this with reference to Pro Archia, Pro Murena, Pro Caelio, and In Pisonem.

34 I

ROMAN MANLINESS

must be explained, the meaning of virtus is ethical and it occurs somewhat less frequently.73 Cicero also plays on the two senses of the word. Through most of Pro Murena it is the martial virtus of Cicero's client, L. Licinius Murena (or that of his father) that is praised - "martial virtus stands before all others" says Cicero (Mur. 22; also 12, 18,22, 32, 33; but cf. Mur. 30). But one ofMurena's prosecutors was M. Porcius Cato the younger, noted for his adherence to Stocism and as man of uncompromising principle, qualities that Cicero playfully mocks. finxit enim te ipsa natura ad honestatem, gravitatem, temperantiam, magnitudinem animi, iustitiam, ad omnis denique virtutes magnum hominem et excelsum. accessit istuc doctrina non moderata nec mitis sed, ut mihi videtur, paulo asperior et durior quam aut veritas aut natura patitur. Nature itself made you a great and lofty man in regard to integrity, earnestness, temperance, high-mindedness, and justice, in short - omnes virtutes - all the virtues. To which was added a doctrine neither moderate nor mild, but one that seems to me a little more harsh and hard than either reality or nature can endure. Mur.60

Cicero portrays Cato as the almost perfect man of Stoic virtue. M. Catoni, homini in omni virtute exeellenti - "to Marcus Cato a man preeminent in every virtue," (Mur. 54); and ... non tu quidem vir melior esses neefortior nee temperantior nee iustior, - neque enim esse potes. - " ... for you would indeed not be a better, nor braver man, nor a more temperate man, nor a more just man, - for that in fact is not possible" (Mur. 64). The implicit contrast between the rigid ethical nature of Stoic virtus, and the martial virtus of the military man Murena praised earlier in the speech, puts an edge on the jibes directed at Cato, who was without a military reputation. Cicero also uses virtus as the generic term for the virtues in his orations. Dependence on 6:pETT] is clearest in explicit references to Greek philosophical doctrine, as at Pro Murena 60, 63, and 66, or where Cicero specifically names the four cardinal virtutes: aequitas "fairness" -, temperantia - "temperance" -, fortitudo - "courage" -, 73

The ethical meaning is demonstrated by the frequent pairing of virtus with pudoy, integritas, fides; see, e.g., Clu. I33, I65, 200. Cicero uses the philosophical idea of genera virtutis at Cael. 40, see Eisenhut, VR, pp. 59-60. Cicero also uses virtus in the apETTj - ij50vTj topos at Cael. 4I, 43, 76, 79, and Clu. 39 and 2 Verr. 3.2. See earlier Chapter rn, Section 3.

34 2

MANLINESS REDEFINED

prudentia - "understanding" -, or variants of these. 74 But Cicero also put the philosophical subdivision of virtue trope to new uses. As in all ofCicero's speeches, the overwhelming majority of references to Pompey's virtus in are martial in De imperio en. Pompei. 75 But at one point in this panegyric to Pompey, Cicero presents martial virtus as one of the four constitutent elements of the summus imperator, together with scientia rei militaris - "knowledge of warfare" -, auctoritas - "prestige" -, and Jelicitas. He elaborates further by introducing what he calls virtutes imperatoriae - "virtues of a commander" -, designating them as lahor"toil" -; Jortitudo - "courage" -; industria - "purposeful activity" -; celeritas - "speed" - and consilium - ''judgment'' (Imp. Pom. 29). All of the four were otherwise regarded as aspects of generalship, and industria and lahor had traditional Roman associations with virtus. But the presence of the rare Jortitudo shows that the delineation of the various virtutes of the perfect general mirrors the treatment of virtus in Cicero's philosophical essays. Futhermore, Cicero maintains a clear distinction between subdivision of martial virtus he sets out here, and the ethical associations that virtus normally carries in the trope. A little further on in the oration, he links virtus with a number of decidedly ethical qualities, among them innocentia - "integrity" -; temperantia - "temperance" -;jides - "trust" -; and humanitas - "humane disposition," but he does not call these virtutes, they are rather, administrae comitesque virtutis - "the assistants and companions of virtus" (Imp. Pom. 36).76 When virtus is used in speeches where politics is an important issue, either the ethical or the courageous meaning of virtus can be stressed, again depending on the nature of the case. In Pro Plancio, the defendant 74

75 76

Also Plane. 78, 80; Font. 28, and Eisenhut, VR, p. 62, n. 161. On Mur. 23, see Eisenhut, P·59· See earlier Chapter IX. At the end of the speech Cicero distinguishes martial virtus from ethical virtutes, "and in this Asiatic war waged against a king, fellow citizens, not only is that martial virtus required, which is remarkable in Gnaius Pompey, but other virtutes of the mind, great and numerous, are required." These animi virtutes are pudor - "propriety"-; temperantia - "temperance"-, and moderatio - "moderation" (Imp. Pom. 64). Shortly after Cicero invokes the apETTj-KoKlo trope, in contasting the virtutes ofPompey to the vitia of others (Imp. Pom. 67). There is nothing like this subdivision of virtus in Caesar's commentaries. For Greek influences on parts of this speech, see Combes, pp. 237-9, and Eisenhut, VR, pp. 59-60. Cicero generally avoided using the plural virtutes, to mean "brave deeds," preferringfortitudines, see Eisenhut, VR, p. 68.

343

ROMAN MANLINESS

is accused of electoral corruption - ambitus. Consequently political virtus has the ethical connotations that it had displayed in the virtus-ambitus dichotomy since the mid-second century.77 But when a political situation involved violence, virtus means courage, though not without ethical associations (e.g., Mil. 30, 34, 66,81,95). Unlike Caesar, however, Cicero regularly mixes the ethical and courageous senses of the word. This is very clear in Pro Sestio, where in discussions of politics virtus often has ethical associations (Sest. 136, 137, 138 and 143), but where the violent acts of Milo and Sestius are treated as displays of courageous virtus (Sest. 86, 88, 92, 93, 95). In this speech Cicero merges the two meanings in the person of Cato, whose virtus is ethical when it is qualified by gravitas - "earnestness" -, and integritas "probity" - at Pro Sestio 60, but courageous when it refers to the brave resolution Cato displayed in the face of physical assaults while imposing his veto as plebeian tribune in 62.7 8 Sometimes the courageous virtus displayed in political confrontations is embellished by suggesting that it is martial in nature. In De haruspicum responso, Cicero compares Milo's intention of killing Clodius to Scipio Aemilianus' capture and destruction of Carthage, and in Pro Milone the street brawl in which Clodius was actually killed is described as a military campaign.79 The technique of describing res urbanae in military terms is a hallmark of Cicero's political oratory. Cicero's greatest challenge, and greatest success in his treatment of virtus, however, occurred in his self-presentation and his creation of the ideology of the non-military new man. Although public speaking and knowledge of civil law were traditionally regarded as the path to fame and honor at Rome, they stood far behind military success in terms of public prestige (Mur. 22-3). Yet Cicero's spectacular success in politics was built exclusively on his reputation as a public speaker and advocate. This was not entirely unprecedented. In the previous generation L. Licinius Crassus, highly cultivated and Hellenized, one of the greatest of Latin orators, and Cicero's model in more ways than one, was both consul and censor (in 95 and 92, respectively). He was elected to these 77

78

79

See esp. Plane. 9, 30, 78, 80. For the ambitio-virtus dichotomy, see earlier Chapter IH, Section 5. Sest. 62. See Plut. Cat. Min. 27-8 for a full description of the incident. Mil. 53, 56, and 76. For a more dispassionate description of Clodius' death, see Ascon. Mil. 27-28C.

344

MANLINESS REDEFINED

offices principally because of rus ability as a public speaker; he had generally shunned military commands. 80 But unlike Cicero, Crassus was from an eminently noble family. For a new man who lacked both a military reputation and the strong support of a great noble family, it was unprecedented to reach to the heights of office and power that Cicero acrueved on the basis of an oratorical reputation alone. The closest Cicero comes to saying otherwise is when in Pro Murena 24 he states that "there is notrung strange ifbecause of their ability to speak even men who are not nobles have often won the consulship." But significantly he provides no names, an.d when earlier in the speech he had given a list of homines novi, they were all viri militares. 81 The great majority of new men that Cicero mentions had military backgrounds. Whatever other accomplishments they could claim, virtually all had begun their careers as outstanding soldiers.82 It was because of his outstanding military reputation that an earlier new man from Arpinum had overcome the nobility with his virtus and gained glory. But virtus, together with Roman culture, had been transformed over the course of the second century. Greek influences had expanded its denotations well beyond what were traditional. By the century's end the meaning of virtus, and of Roman manliness, were publicly 80

8r

82

The longest period Crassus is said to have been absent from the Forum was during his quaestorship (Cic. De or. 2.365). His one attempt to claim martial glory ended in humiliation, when his request for a triumph for defeating a band of Alpine thieves was vetoed with a scathing remark by his consular colleague, Q. Scaevola, see Cic. Inv. 2.IIl; Pis. 62; Ascon. Pis. 15C. For Crassus' non-military career, see Harris, WIRR, p. 257. For Crassus' tendentious use of virtus, see earlier Chapter Ill. Crassus studied Greek rhetoric in his youth (Cic. De or. I. 134-47), and read philosophy with Greek professors in Greece and Asia (De or. I.47, 2.365), cf. Val. Max. 3.7.6. For the relationship of Cicero and Crassus, see Rawson, "Lucius Crassus and Cicero," in Roman Culture, pp. 16-33, esp. p. 25 If., and Fantharn, The Roman World of Cieero's De Oratore, pp. 26-4 8. Mur. 24; contrasting oratory to jurisprudence. The new men listed are Curius, Cato, Q. Pompeius, Marius, Didius, and Coelius (Mur. 17). Their military backgrounds were discussed earlier. Of those mentioned at Mur. 17,2 Verr. 5.ISO, and Phil. 9.4, only Fimbria seem to have lacked a military reputation, as pointed out earlier. At 2 Verr. 5.31 military promotion is won by courage not birth - virtute . .. non genere, and at Balb. IS-I9 the martial virtus which earned the Roman citizenship is treated. At Plane. 20 the virtus of Cato seems non-courageous, in omni virtute principe, but he is here joined by T. Coruncanius, the Fulvii, C. Servilius Ahala and P. Scipio Nasica, viri fortes who are credited with virtus at Cat. I.3 and Phil. S.I3 for killing would-be tyrants.

345

ROMAN MANLINESS

contested in the political struggles between Marius and his well-born, philhellenic adversaries. This was Cicero's inheritance and his opportunity. With great ambition but no taste for soldiering, he used his unequaled familiarity with the Greek rhetorical tradition, and his wide knowledge of Roman history, to reshape virtus into the essential element of the Roman new man, not only by denying its exclusively aristocratic character {that seems to have had been done by Marius), but by extending its references beyond the martial sphere to include himself. The reshaping was done with care. Cicero always drew a distinction between virtus and eloquence, as can be seen in a self appraisal from Pro Cluentio. semper equidem magno cum metu inClplO dicere; quotienscumque dico, totiens mihi videor in iudicium venire non ingeni solum sed etiam virtutis atque offici, ne aut id profiteri videar quod non possim, quod est impudentiae, aut non id efficere quod possim, quod est aut perfidiae aut neglegentiae. I for one always begin to speak with great fear. For whenever I speak, each time I seem to be on trial not only in regard to ability - ingenium -, but also virtus and duty, lest I seem to undertake something I cannot accomplish, which is impudence, or not to accomplish what I am capable of, which is either dishonesty or neglect. Clu. 51

Here virtus, coupled with officium - "duty" -, has ethical denotations, while oratorical ability is designated, as usual with Cicero, with the ethically neutral word ingenium - "ability. "83 Cicero also avoided claiming virtus for himself as an orator per se. 84 When explaining to an aristocratic adversary how his activities as an advocate had brought him glory, Cicero mentions virtus: eadem igitur, Cassi, via munita Laterensi est, idem virtutis cursus ad gloriam, - "for the same safe road is there for Laterensus, Cassius, the same path of virtus to glory," (Plane. 67). But he does not attribute virtus directly to himself as orator, but speaks rather of the "path of virtus" that led to his oratorical success and, hence, his renown. As is clear from the remark made just before, that 8J

84

ef. Balb. 54, where the ingenium of the orator is contrasted to the virtus of the warrior. He rarely attributed virtus to persons on the basis of oratorical ability alone.

MANLINESS REDEFINED

path consisted of working hard while others enjoyed leisure, in other words industria (Plane. 66). The relationship between industria and virtus played an important part in Cicero's the ideology of the new man, but it also had strong military associations. 85 Even in his attempt to elevate oratory, and himself, by claiming that the orator and the general together are the pillars of the state, the distinction between virtus and the orator's skill - ars oratoris - is carefully maintained. Duae sint artes quae possint locare homines in amplissimo gradu dignitatis, una imperatoris, altera oratoris boni. Ab hoc enim pacis ornamenta retinentur, ab ilio belli pericula repelluntur.... Sed nunc de studiis ad honorem appositis, non de insita cuiusque virtute disputo. There are therefore two skills that can place men in the most prestigious rank of public esteem: one of the general, the other of the good speaker. The embellishments of peace are maintained by the one, the dangers of war are kept off by the other.... But now I am arguing about activities suitable for public office, not about the innate virtus of each person. Mur.3 086

If he could not openly make a claim to virtus on the basis of his skill as a public speaker, as a political parvenu Cicero still needed to present himself as a man who possessed virtus. He did this in two ways. He employed the ethical, Hellenic denotations that virtus had acquired from apETT] by defining it not as oratorical ability, or even including such ability in it, but more broadly as a general innate excellence, with distinct ethical overtones, used to its fullest to achieve glory. Then drawing on the Greek apETT]-EvyeVElO dichotomy, he opposed this to the noble birth that was bestowed by fortune. 87 He did not, however, categorically deny virtus to the nobles, nor did he tax them with having abandoned the virtus of their forefathers, as Marius had done. He claimed rather that the benefits of the virtus displayed by their ancestors in war were not restricted to the nobles, but were the inheritance of all Romans, new men as well as noblemen. Both tactics 8S

86

87

See Plaut. Pseud. 58 I and above Chapter Ill, Section 3, and on the late republican ideology of the homo novus, see earlier in this Chapter. See also Mur. 24; De or. I.20; and Off. I.74-'75, and Nicolet, REL 38 (1960) pp. 236-63, esp. pp. 248-SI. Discussed earlier in this chapter.

347

ROMAN MANLINESS

are found in one of the Verrine Orations m Cicero's treatment of Scipio Africanus. Non est querendum in hac civitate, quae propter virtutem omnibus nationibus imperat, virtutem plurimum posse. Sit apud alios imago P. Africani, ornentur alii mortui virtute ac nomine; There should be no complaint that in this state, which rules over all nations because of virtus, that virtus has the greatest influence. The ancestral portrait of Africanus should belong to others also. Others should be honored by the virtus and name of the deceased. 2 Verr. 4.8r

Cicero explicitly says that Scipio's virtus is martial, verum etiam P Africani, viri fortissimi, rerum gestarum gloriam, memoriam virtutis, monumenta victoriae, ... - "in truth even the glory of the accomplishments, the memory of the virtus, the trophies of the victory of that bravest of men, Publicus Africanus, ... " (2 Verr. 4.78).88 But in this speech, he adds an ethical dimension to the martial virtus of Scipio, and associates himself with it, by claiming to follow Scipio's example in his treatment of the Sicilian provincials by demonstrating aequitas - "justice" -, industria - "diligence" -, temperantia - "temperance" -, and difensio miserorum, odium improborum - "protection of the wretched, hatred of the dishonest" (2 very. 4.81). Cicero's great success in being elected to office shows, among other things, that his reshaping of virtus by emphasizing its broad, ethical denotations was effective. But there were limits to how a high reputation for a general ethical type of virtus could carry a man. As Cicero said more than once, it was a martial reputation that counted most in Rome. Cicero's appropriation of virtus must be set in its political 88

Whenever Cicero praises the virtus of great Romans of the past, he almost always names Rome's great military heroes: Scipio Africanus Maior - I Verr. 1.155; 2. 4.78, 80; Imp. Pom. 47; Leg. agr. 1.5; Cat. 4.21; Plane. 60; vat. 28. M. Claudius Marcellus - I Verr. 1.55, 135; 2 Verr. 2.3; 5.84; Imp. Pom. 47; Plane. 60. L. Aemilius Paullus - I Verr. 1.55; Leg. agr. 1.5; Cat. 4.21; vat. 28. Q. Fabius Maximus - Imp. Pom. 47; Plane. 60; vat. 28. Flarnininus - I Verr. 1. 55; Leg. Agr. 1. 5. Scipio Aemilianus - Phi!. 9.18. C. Marius - 2 Verr. 5.25; Imp. Pom. 47; Cat. 4.21; Balb. 46; Prov. cons. 32; Rab. 29. Non-martial virtus is rarely ascribed to Romans of the past: to L. Piso Frugi at Font. 39; to M. Aemilius Scaurus at Font. 74; to Q. Lutatius Catulus at Rab. 26; and to Scipio Aemilianus, C. Laelius, L. Furius, and M. Cato at Arch. 15.

MANLINESS REDEFINED

and social context. The first century was a time when a greater number of elite Romans than ever before were familiar with Greek culture. 89 This was certainly so for the senatorial class, which, as we have seen, had undergone significant changes not only in regard to Hellenization, but also to military experience and the enthusiasm for it.9 0 But it was also the time when the Republic was dominated, more than ever before, by great individuals, whose prestige and power were derived from outstanding, or extraordinary military accomplishments. Through most of Cicero's public life the greatest of these military leader~ was Pompey, one of whose principal attributes was the favor of divine Virtus. Anyone who sought a position ofleadership in Rome would have to compete with the towering martial virtus of Pompey. For Cicero no less than Caesar, that was the standard of virtus against which his own would ultimately be measured. When the opportunity presented itself, Cicero would seek to gain for himself the highest prestige traditionally reserved for the man of military virtus. He would do this by clouding the distinction between the martial and non-martial references of the term. Opportunity arrived in 63 with conspiracy of Catiline. Before his consulship Cicero touted his own virtus as the innate quality of the new man opposed to fortune's gift of high birth, but in 63 this changed. In his fine study of the Ciceronian political slogan consul togatus - "non-military consul" -, Claude Nicolet demonstrated Cicero's strategy of appropriating to his merit for investigating, exposing, and arresting the Catilinarian conspirators in the city of Rome, the glory that heretofore had been reserved for Roman military victories, and of elevating himself to the level ofPompey.9 1 The strategy was based, to a great degree, on Cicero's skillful manipulation of virtus.

89

90

91

In large measure because of the presence in Italy of Greek intellectual refugees from the Mithridatic Wars, see Rawson, Intellectual Life, pp. 7-9· See earlier Chapter VIII. Nicolet, REL 38 (1960) pp. 236-63, esp. 251. Cicero seems to have first published the Catilinarians soon after his consulship. The text we have reflect revisions he made c. 60, see W C. McDermott, "Cicero's Publication of his Consular Orations," Philologus 16 (1972) pp. 277-84. The later revisions do not affect the arguments made here. The text cited is that ofT. Maslowski, Leipzig, 2003.

349

ROMAN MANLINESS

Cicero's strategy began tentatively in the Second Catilinarian, delivered to the people on November 9, when he says that foreign enemies had been defeated by the virtus of Pompey, but that he would be the leader in a dangerous war that threatened Rome at home. nulla est enim natio quam pertimescamus, nullus rex qui bellum populo Romano facere possit; omnia sunt externa unius virtute terra marique pacata: domesticum bellum manet, intus insidiae sunt, intus inclusum periculum est, intus est hostis; cum luxuria nobis, cum amentia, cum scelere certandum est. huic ego me bello ducem profiteor, Quirites; For there is no people that we should fear, no king able to make war against the Roman people. Every foreign land has been subdued both on land and on sea by the virtus of one man. But a civil war continues. The plots, danger, and enemy are all within the city. We must fight against licentiousness, madness, and vice. For this war I declare myself your leader fellow citizens; Cat.2.II

In this speech, as always, Pompey's virtus is that of the general, but here, without openly claiming it, Cicero associates himself with both martial and ethical virtus by announcing that the war that he would lead is not against the armed barbarian, but against decadence, madness, and vice itself. The association between martial and ethical virtus is further emphasized in Cicero's description of his consulship as a war between every kind of vice and the canonical list of ethical virtues - aequitas, temperantia, fortitudo, prudentia, virtutes omnes (Cat. 2.25; cf. Plane. 78, 80; Font. 28; Mur. 23; and Imp. Pom. 29, 64). Later in the speech Cicero introduces the term imperator togatus - "civilian commander" in describing himself as the leader who suppresses a terrible civil war:

bellum intestinum ac domesticum post hominum memoriam crudelissimum et maximum me uno togato duce et imperatore sedetur. - "the most savage and greatest civil war in human memory is abated by one civilian leader and commander, myself." (Cat. 2.28). Cicero is less tentative in the third Catilinarian delivered again to the people almost a month later on December 3. In it he boasts repeatedly that as consul togatus he had saved the Republic without recourse to arms or bloodshed. 92 But at the same time he magnifies the prestige of

92

Cat. 3.23; a continuing theme, see Sest. 47, and Nicolet, REL 38 (1960) p. 243.

35 0

MANLINESS REDEFINED

his accomplishment by associating it with the rewards of the military conqueror. The events of 63 are again described as the most terrible of wars: in hoc autem uno post hominum memoriam maximo crudelissimoque bello, ... - "In this particular war, however, the greatest and most savage within the memory of men, ... " (Cat. 3.25), and the awards, which Cicero claims he more than merited, but knew he would not receive, are those of the triumphant general, the prizes of martial virtus: Quibus pro tantis rebus, Quirites, nullum ego a vobis praemium virtutis, nullum insigne honoris, nullum monumentum laudis postulabo ... In animis ego vestris omnis triumphos meos, omnia ornamenta honoris, monumenta gloriae, laudis insignia condi et conlocari volo. For such great accomplishments, citizens, I will ask from you no prize for

virtus, no badge ofhonor, no trophy of praise, ... I want all my triumphs, all my decorations of honor, my trophies of glory, and badges of praise to be preserved and lodged in your minds. Cat. 3.26

In fact, the awards that Cicero did receive were those traditionally associated with martial virtus and granted only for military success. Cicero was the first Roman to be granted the honor of a supplicatio state sacrifices to the gods to honor a military victory - without having defeated an army in the field, and he received the traditional decree of thanks from the senate that praised his virtus, and which Cicero quoted: Primum mihi gratiae verbis amplissimis aguntur, quod virtute, consilio, providentia mea res publica maximis periculis sit liberata. - "First I was richly thanked because the Republic was saved from the greatest danger by my virtus, judgment, and foresight" (Cat. 3.14). It was even proposed, but not granted, that Cicero should receive the highly prestigious corona civica. 93 Mter boasting about the prizes for martial prowess that he should receive, Cicero immediately places himself on the same level as Pompey, whom he had called the greatest general in Roman

93

Cat. 3.15, 23; Sull. 8S; and Pis. 6; also App. BC 2.7 (24-5). For the high caliber of martial bravery required the corona dvica, see GelL NA 5.6.13-14; Plin. NH 16.12-13; and Maxfield, p. 70.

351

ROMAN MANLINESS

history. Pompey had expanded Rome's empire, and Cicero had saved the home and seat of that empire. · .. unoque tempore in hac re publica duos civis exstitisse quorum alter finis vestri imperi non terrae sed caeli regionibus terminaret, alter huivs imperi domicilium sedisque servaret. · .. and at one time two men have been conspicuous in this Republic, one of them has placed the borders of your empire at the limits not of the earth but of heaven, the other has saved the home and seat of this empire. Cat. 3.26. (ef. Cat. 3.25)

The speech ends with Cicero stating that the Republic was safe because of his virtus: Denique ita me in re publica tractabo ut meminerim semper quae gesserim, curemque ut ea virtute non casu gesta esse videantur. In short, I will continue to work for the Republic in such away that I will always remember what I have done, and I will see to it that those accomplishments appear to have been done not by accident, but by virtus. Cat. 3.29

In the fourth oration, delivered on December 5 at the meeting of the senate to decide the fate of the captured senatorial conspirators, Cicero begins by referring back to the senate's official recognition that it was his virtus that had uncovered the conspiracy: · .. primum quod mihi gratias egistis singularibus verbis et mea virtute atque diligentia perditorum hominum coniurationem patefactam esse decrevistis, · .. first because you gave thanks to me with unusual words and resolved that because of my virtus and attentiveness a conspiracy of depraved men has been uncovered, Cat. 4.5

But in the peroration, Cicero claims that his deeds as consul are unique, comparable, even superior, to anything done in the past: ceteris enim

semper bene gesta, mihi uni conservata re publica gratulationem decrevistis. "For you have proclaimed a public thanksgiving for others when the Republic was well managed, to me alone after it was saved" (Cat. 4.20). He goes on directly to name some of Rome's greatest military 352

MANLINESS REDEFINED

heroes: the two Scipiones, Aemilius Paullus, Marius, and Pompey, men of preeminent virtus: sit Scipio clams illecuius consilio atque virtute Hannibal in Africam redire atque Italia decedere coactus est; ornetur alter eximia laude Africanus qui duas urbis huic imperio infestissimas, Carthaginem Numantiamque, delevit; habeatur vir egregius Paulus ille cuius currum rex potent,issimus quondam et nobilissimus Perses honestavit; sit aeterna gloria Marius qui bis Italiam obsidione et metu servitutis liberavit; anteponatur omnibus Pompeius cuius res gestae atque virtutes isdem quibus solis cursus regionibus ac terminis continentur: Let that Scipio by whose intelligence and virtus Hannibal was forced to return to Africa and to leave Italy be celebrated, and let the other Africanus who destroyed those two cities that most threatened this empire, Carthage and Numantia, be honored with special praise, and let that Paulus be preeminent among men, Paulus whose triumphal chariot was adorned by Perseus, once the most powerful and famous king, and let Marius who twice freed Italy from siege and fear of servitude, live on with immortal glory, and more highly than all others let Pompey be esteemed, whose accomplishments and courageous deeds are reckoned by the course of the sun from its original position to its end.

Cat.

4.21

The speech ends with martial and ethical virtus joined as Cicero exclaims that he is in an unending war with Romans who are morally bankrupt: qua re mihi cum perditis civibus aeternum bellum susceptum esse video. - "From this I see, that an unending war has been waged by me against depraved citizens." (Cat. 4.22). By identifying his success in discovering and suppressing the conspiracy of Catiline with the glories traditionally granted to victorious generals, Cicero sought to gain a political status rivaling that of the great military heroes of Rome's past, and ofPompey, the contemporary general favored by divine Virtus. For the rest of his career Cicero would refer to the events of his consulship as a war, and would compare his success with the greatest of Rome's military victories, even to the point of comparing his sacrifice in 63 to the devotio of P. Decius MuS. 94 That virtus had a considerable role in this self-glorification is

94

Sest. 48; cf. Sull. 83; Sest. n6; Dom. 97; Areh. 28-30; Plane. 67; Mil. 89 and esp. Off 1.74, and 77-78. Cicero also seemed to have described the acclaim he received on the evening

353

ROMAN MANLINESS

attested by the fact that the word occurs three times in the meager fragments that survive from De consulato suo, Cicero's epic poem about his consulship (De consulatu meo, frag. 10, lines 67 and 76, p. 162, and frag. n, p. 171 [Courtney]). As with so much else in Latin, Cicero's treatment of virtus had great effect on how the word would be later used. But his attempt to reshape virtus into his ,own political slogan by combining its martial and ethical denotations was met with suspicion and scorn. For daring to compare himself to the Roman Alexander, Cicero gained only Pompey's cold resentment. 95 What that resentment entailed can be seen in a letter that Cicero wrote to Pompey in April of 62. In it he respectfully complains because Pompey had made no mention of Cicero's achievements as consul when he had last written to him. But in proudly relating to Pompey the words of the senate's decree of thanks, part of which he had quoted in the third Catilinarian, virtus is conspicuously absent, Cicero having substituted the phrase animi magnitudo . ... cum veneris, tanto consilio tantoque animi magnitudine a me gesta esse cognosces ... - ... "when you arrive you will understand these things were accomplished by me with such great judgment and strength of spirit ... " (Fam. 5.7 (SB 3) 3. 96 The skeptical and hostile reception to Cicero the new man placing himself in the company of Rome's great conquerors is striking in the scornful attack of his critics. It is his virtus that is mocked. Ora te, Romule Arpinas, qui egregia tua virtute omnis Paulos, Fabios, Scipiones superasti. I pray to you, Romulus of Arpinum, who with your outstanding virtu5 surpass all, the Pauli, the Fabii, and the Scipios. In M. Tullium Ciceronem invecta, 4.7. 97

95

96 97

of December 5 as a triumph-like procession in the memoirs, written in Greek about 63, which were the major source for Plutarch in chapter IO-23 of his biography ofCicero; see O. Lendle, "vnolJvlllJo TIEP! Ti'\S vnoTElos," Hermes 95 (1967) pp. 90-109. Plutarch noted, Cicero's excessive self-glorification in books and speeches. Pompey had desired a special command in Italy to deal with Catiline's army, and was also resentful over Cicero's lack of support as well as his effective handling of the crisis. On the motion for a special command, made in early 62, see Plut. Cic. 23.4; and Cic. Cf. Cat. 3.14, with C. Habicht, Cicero the Politician (Baltimore, 198) pp. 39-41. The Invective Against Cicero is controversial. The attribution to Sailust, although accepted by Quintilian, Inst. 4 1.68; 93.89, is almost certainly to be rejected. It is probably also

354

MANLINESS REDEFINED

Lacking a real military reputation and the real power that accompanied it, Cicero was humbled, and in the end his cause and his life went down to men who controlled armies. During the last century and a half of the Republic's existence, Romans with outstanding military reputations had followed the example of M. Claudius Marcellus, and challenged the authority of the senate. Before the Roman people they had set themselves above their senatorial peers by deifying and claiming the special favor of the quality that both defined Roman manhood and was regarded as responsible for Roman greatness. Cicero's fate, together with the fate of Rome, was in the hands of men who were the true favorites of divina virtus, men who exercised their manliness in war. At the Republic's height, Ennius had written of Rome's greatest glory, the bravery of its men, that it is as boundless as the heavens: Fortis Romani [sunt] tamquam caelus profundus. The Romans are as brave as the sky is boundless."

Ann. 559 S.9 8

In the Republic's last decade, Caesar is said to have threatened not only his political enemies, but the heavens themselves with virtus of his soldiers. an me deleto non animum advertebatis habere legiones populum Romanum quae non solum vobis obsistere, sed etiam caelum diruere possent? quarum laudibus est virtute ... Or did you not realize that with me gone the Roman people would have legions that could not only oppose you, but could tear down the heavens. It is by their glorious deeds, by their virtus ...

B. Hisp. 42.7

98

not contemporary; see Syme, Sallust, pp. 314-18, who credits it to the rhetorical schools in the time of Augustus. Even so, it would reflect common criticisms of Cicero, derived from his contemporary enemies. Both sources of the fragment, Nonius and Charisius, give the reading quamquam, which Skutsch (p. 705) retains as being "probably sound." He notes, however, that because Nonius and Charisius probably used the same source, there is no obstacle to reading Baehrens's tamquam, which seems preferable to me.

355

ROMAN MANLINESS

3. THE DUAL NATURE OF VIRTUS IN SALLUST

C. Sallustius Crisp us was the Republic's last historian and its downfall was his theme. As a historian he has shortcomings, among them muddled chronology, inattention to detail, and a tendency to moralize. The last has as much to do with Sallust's own and the general Roman view of historical causation, as it does with Sallust's rhetorical style. 99 But Sallust's two monographs, Bellum Catilinae and Bellum Iugurthinum, together with the fragments of the Historiae, provide the only surviving contemporary analysis of the fall of the Republic and, as such, are invaluable. It is natural that in the works of a historian who presented the decline of the Roman Republic as an emphatically moral process, virtus is often used with an ethical meaning. But Sallust's ideas about virtus are more complex and original than he is usually given credit for. In fact, Sallust presents two different kinds of virtus. Usages of virtus that are clearly ethical are found almost exclusively in prologues, digressions, and in certain speeches. Martial virtus, however, is confined to narrative sections of the monographs and to those parts of prologues and speeches that treat the early history of Rome. Not only is there a distinction in what parts of Sallust's monographs the two meanings of virtus occur, but the meanings themselves are kept distinct. Although in the narratives, martial virtus on occasion carries an ethical connotation, it is more often ascribed to military men whose overall behavior is ethically dubious. It is also rare that Sallust follows Cicero in crediting both ethical and military (or courageous) virtus to a single person. The result is, on the one hand, historical narratives in which martial virtus, if not openly contrasted to ethical behavior, has either a tangential association with it, or more often, no association at all. On the other hand, in prologues, digressions, and some speeches virtus occurs in an ethical sense that seems almost unrelated to the way the word is used in the narratives. roD 99

roo

For shortcomings, see Syme, Sallust, pp. 69-8r, r42-9, 248, and P. C. McGushin, Sallustius Crispus Bellum Catilinae: A Commentary (Leiden, 1977) pp. 296-7. Millar's criticisms of Sallust for "glib moralizing" and "somewhat overripe prose," Crowd, pp. 73 and 52 respectively, are surprising in a study based on a close and careful reading of Cicero's orations. On the general relationship between prologues and narratives in Sallust's works, see the subsequent discussion.

MANLINESS REDEFINED

This apparent contradiction has produced complicated and confused theories about Sallust's use of virtus, and about his historical thought in general, or the charge that Sallust is guilty of muddled thinking. But if viewed against the background of the dual meaning of virtus one martial and Roman, the other influenced by Greek ethical ideas and in the light of the divergent manners in which the term was used by the two finest prose stylist of the previous generation - Cicero and Caesar - Sallustian virtus can be seen as part of a critical reconsideration of Roman tradition that is central to Sallust's explanation of decline, and as the one remedy that this pessimistic historian holds out for the future. Virtus occurs twenty-eight times in Bel/um Catilinae; twelve times with a military meaning. In that part of the prologue where Sal1ust sketches the early history of Rome (Chapters 6-13), virtus occurs, with one exception, only in the context of foreign affairs, where it has a martial meaning. So it is in Sal1ust's sketch of early Roman affairs under the kings, when the threat posed by foreign enemies and met with arms is warded of by virtus. At Romani domi militiaeque intenti festinare parare, alius alium hortari, hostibus obviam ire, libertatem patriam parentisque armis tegere. Post ubi pericula virtute propulerant, sociis atque amicis auxilia portabant magisque dandis quam accipiundis beneficiis arnicitias parabant. Imperium legitumum, nomen imperi regium habebant. But the Romans, both at home and in war, proceeded in earnest, prepared, encouraged one another, met the enemy, protected their liberty, fatherland, and parents with arms. Mter, when they had repelled the dangers by their virtus, they carried help to their allies and friends and brought about alliances by giving rather than accepting benefits. They had a government based on law, although the name of the government was monarchy. BC 6.5-6 '0'

Only once in his summary of early Roman history, when he alludes to the overthrow of the monarchy and establishment of the Republic,

101

Following chiastic arrangement, militiae in the first line quoted corresponds to wars and foreign affairs, while domi refers to law and monarchy, and to the description of the senate and the institution of the Republic that follow. The text used is L. D. Reynolds' aCT I991.

357

ROMAN MANLINESS

does Sallust employ virtus with an ethical meaning and in reference to politics not war: Nam regibus boni quam mali suspectiores sunt semperque iis aliena virtus forrnidulosa est. To kings good men are more suspect than bad, and to them the virtus of another is always terrifying.

The correspondence between boni and virtus imparts an ethical sense to the latter, but Sallust here is certainly alluding to Brutus, Collatinus, and the others who displayed courageous as well as ethical virtus in overthrowing the last Tarquin. Sallust proceeds to describe the positive consequences that liberty and the Republic had on the Romans. These are entirely military in nature, and his reference to virtus is self-evidently martial: Igitur talibus viris non labor insolitus, non locus ullus asper aut arduos erat, non armatus hostis forrnidulosus: virtus omnia domuerat. To such men therefore no work was strange, no place at all harsh or difficult, no armed enemy was terrifying: virtus had overcome all. BC7·5

The excursus on early Rome is interrupted by a digression on the relationship of fame and fortune. Taking up a theme from Cato's Origines, Sallust compares the military fame of the Athenians to that of the Romans, finding the former excessive and attributing it to the greatness of Athenian literary talent. Like Cato, he employs virtus in the comparison and as with Cato its meaning is martial. I02 Sed quia provenere ibi scriptorum magna ingenia, per terrarum orbem Atheniensium facta pro maxurnis celebrantur. Ita eorum qui fecere virtus tanta habetur quantum earn verbis potuere extollere praeclara ingenia. But because of the great ability of the writers produced there, the deeds of the Athenians are celebrated as the greatest throughout the world. So the

102

See Cato, Orig. IV. 7a (Chassignet) Chapter I, Section 5.

=

83 HRR

=

3. 4, 7a FRH and see earlier

MANLINESS REDEFINED

virtus of the men who did these things is thought as great as the outstanding abilities have been able to praise it with words. BC 8.3

In the summary of the almost ideal condition of the Republic before things began to go wrong given in Chapter 9, Sallust uses the traditional Roman antithesis between civilian and military affairs - domi militaeque - (employed earlier at BC 6.5): Igitur domi militaeque boni mores colebantur; - "and so at home and at war good practices were cultivated" - (BC 9.r). He returns to it at the summary's end by stating that it was two qualities that had safeguarded the Republic: ... audacia in bello, ubi pax evenerat aequitate, ... - " ... boldness in war, and justice when peace had been concluded, ... " (BC 9.3). In between, he lists what these good practices were, and includes a reference to virtus: Iurgia discordias simultates cum hostibus exercebant, cives cum civibus de virtute certabant. In suppliciis deorum magnifici, domi parci, in amicos fideles erant. They pursued quarrels, dissensions, and feuds with enemies, citizens vied with citizens over virtus. They were sumptuous in offering to the gods, frugal at home, loyal to friends. BC 9.2-3

That the domi militaeque antithesis is continued with words meaning civic dispute or unrest - iurgia, discordia, and simultates - on one side, and military virtus on the other, is indicated by the continuation of the antithesis in the following clause - suppliciis deoruml domi - and by the military context in which the combination of virtus and certamen was used shortly before: virtus omnia domuerat. Sed gloriae maxumum certamen inter ipsos erat. - "virtus had overcome all; and the greatest competition for glory was among themselves" (BC 7.5). 103 The role of virtus in Rome's early history as presented in the prologue of Bellum Catilinae is, therefore, almost always martial. It is not, however, completely without an ethical denotation. As we have seen, virtus has an ethical reference in the bonil mali contrast at 103

Polyb. 6.46.7 is closer than Isoc. 4.79, cf. K. Vretska, C. Sallustius Crispus De Catilinae coniuratione, I (Heldelberg, 1976) p. 69. Sallust in fact plays with the top os by juxtaposing iurgia, discordia, and simultates with their civic associations and hostis, a word usually used of a foreign enemy, and civis and virtus.

359

ROMAN MANLINESS

BC 7.2. Again in Chapter 9, where Sallust presents as one of the old Romans' good practices their competition in virtus - cives cum civibus de virtute certabant - he also draws an ethical contrast between civic harmony and greed: ... concordia maxuma, minuma avaritia erat; " ... there was the greatest concord and the least greed" (BC 9.1). Just before declaring the prevalence of martial virtus in old Rome in Chapter 7, Sallust had described the passion of young men of those days for handsome weapons and war horses over prostitutes and parties, ... magisque in decoris armis et militaribus equis quam in scortis atque conviviis lubidinem habebant (BC 7.4). This is the old trope about the enervating effects of luxury on the military spirit. Observed in Caesar's De bello Gallico, it goes back to the elder Cato, whose words Sallust paraphrases when he contrasts war horses to prostitutes. In this trope, however, whatever ethical denotation virtus might have is derived from its martial nature. !O4 In the more generally concise prologue of Bellum lugurthinum historical references are brief. In them also virtus is clearly martial in nature. Describing how in the past the ancestral masks of noble Roman families fired the spirits of Romans to virtus: ... quom maiorum imagines intuerentur, vehementissume sibi animum ad virtutem adcendi, Saliust uses two of Rome's greatest military heroes, Q. Fabius Maximus Cunctator, and P. Cornelius Scipio Africanus, as his examples (B14.5-6). The meaning of virtus is also patently martial when, in the introduction to his narrative of Numidian affairs, Saliust states that the great Scipio Africanus won his surname because of his virtus: ... quoi postea Africano cognomen ex virtute fuit, ... (Bl 5 -4). In the narrative sections of Saliust's monographs the meaning of virtus is also predominantly martial, and most often without discernible ethical connotations. This is perhaps insignificant when virtus is credited to ordinary soldiers, as it frequently is in Bellum lugurthinum, or to unnamed groups or persons.!05 But martial virtus is also attributed

104

105

Cato's remark is at Gell. NA II .2.5; cf. Polyb. 31.25.5 and see earlier Chapter VIII. For Cato's contrast between martial virtus and enervating luxury, see ORF4 8.141, 146, and earlier Chapter I, Section 5. cf. Caes. BC 11.2,36.7; II 15.4, and earlier. In Bel/um Iugurthinum, virtus occurs most frequendy in military contexts. Of the 45 occurrences of virtus in Bel/um Iugurthinum, 39 clearly denote a martial quality, often appearing as virtus militum - "the valor of soldiers;" see BI 23.1,49.2, 52.2, 6, 58.3,

MANLINESS REDEFINED

by Sallust to individuals who have prominent roles in his story, and it is in these instances that the nature of virtus in the narrative sections of both Bellum Iugurthinum and Bellum Catilinae is best examined. Particularly instructive, because it helps define the ethical boundaries of Sallust's use of martial virtus, is its relationship to the great Sallustian enemies of Rome, L. Sergius Catilina andJugurtha. Although virtus is not attributed to Catiline, it is to his followers. Early in the narrative of Bellum Catilinae, Catiline speaks of the virtus of his fellow conspirators: Ni virtus fides que vostra spectata mihi forent, nequiquam opportuna res cecidisset. If your virtus and loyalty were not seen by me, this advantageous occasion would have occurred in vain. BC 20.2

It is a martial quality he praises. This is made clear when in the next sentence he characterizes his followers as brave and loyal, saying, Sed quia multis et magnis tempestatibus vos cognoviJortisfidosque mihi, ... - "But since in many very dangerous situations I discovered that you are brave and loyal to me, ... " (BC 20.3). Later in the same speech Catiline again refers to the virtus of his followers, calling them the bravest men.

Quae quo usque tandem patiemini, 0 fortissumi viri? Nonne emori per virtutem praestat quam vitam miseram atque inhonestam, ubi alienae superbiae ludibrio fueris, per deducus amittere? ... How long will you bear this, bravest of men? Is it not preferable to die using your virtus, than to shamefully lose a life contemptible and without honor? ... BC 20.9

When, just before the final battle, in his farewell address to his doomed soldiers, Catiline repeatedly praises their virtus it is obviously a martial quality. Conpertum ego habeo, milites, verba virtutem non addere, ... I know from experience, soldiers, that words do not impart virtu5, ... " BC 58.1 62.I, 74.I, 87.3, 97.5, ro6·3, II4·2. Non-soldier citizens - togati - are also credited with virtus (Br 21.2, 26.I), but while they are defending the besieged city ofCirta.

ROMAN MANLINESS

Quo audacius adgredimini memores pristinae virtutis. Attack more confidently, remembering your former virtus. BC 58.12

Animus aetas virtus vostra me hortantur, ... Quod si virtuti vostrae fortuna inviderit, cavete inulti animam amittatis, .. . [Your] spirit, youth, and virtus hearten me, ... but if fortune is jealous of your virtus, beware of giving up your lives unavenged, ... BC 58.19-21

Despite the serious and somber tones of these speeches, it is usually held that in both virtus is employed ironically, because Catiline is the speaker. Catiline's use of virtus is said to be an example of the degradation oflanguage, the semantic and moral inversion, that Sallust alludes to at various times in Bellum Catilinae, most famously in the speech of the younger Cato before the senate. lam pridem equidem nos vera vocabula rerum amisimus: ... - "For in truth we have lost the true name for things long ago: ... " - (BC 52.n), seemingly based on the famous passage at Thucydides 3.82-4. These words have been used as the basis for the ironic interpretation of the virtus of the conspirators, but a closer look at the diction of Cato's speech places this interpretation in doubt. 106 Immediately after reference to lost meanings, Sallust has Cato give some examples of semantic inversion; ... quia bona aliena largiri liberalitas, malarum rerum audacia fortitudo vocatu r" ... - " ... the giving away of the property of others is called generosity, audacity in evil undertakings is called courage, ... " (BC 52.n). The choice offortitudo here rather than virtus is striking and significant. Fortitudo is used very rarely by Sallust, being found only three times in the surviving works. 10 7 Its use here suggests that Sallust has gone out of his way to exclude virtus from the lingusitic and moral corruption that he has Cato complain about. 106

107

Ironic interpretation by Earl's PTS, pp. 93-5; Poschl, p. 27; R. Syme, Sallust (Berkeley, 1964) p. 68; Eisenhut, VR, pp. 52-3; and T. F. Scanlan, "Reflexivity and Irony in Sallust's Historiae," in C. Deroux, Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History IX (Brussels, 1998) pp. 186-224. For other Sallustian references to the corruption oflangauge, see BC 10.4, 38.3, Hist. II2 M. For Thucydidean influences on this passage and on Sallust in general, see P. Perrochat, Les modeles grecs de Salluste (Paris, 1949) esp. p. 17. Fortitudo occurs here, again in Cato's speech in reference to the monomachy of the younger Manlius Torquatus at BC 52.3!, and at Hist. inc. 22 M, imbecilla estJortitudo, dum pendet; cf. Ep. 2.9.1.

MANLINESS REDEFINED

Consequently, any arguments made for ironic usages of virtus in Bellum Catilinae, or in any of Sallust's writings, that are based on reference to Sallust' remarks on the corruption oflanguage at BC 52.I!, are questionable. Sallustian virtus is never totally devoid of moral content, and Catiline, although brave, is himself too corrupt to possess it himself. But Catiline's attribution of virtus to his followers is not ironic; it is ambiguous at most. In Bellum Iugurthinum Sallust ascribes virtus to Jugurtha numerous times, which has caused difficulty for those who interpret Sallustian virtus as a unified political-ethical concept. I08 At BI 6.2, old king Micipsa is described as, ... existumans virtutem Iugurthae regno suo gloriae fore. - " ... thinking that the virtus ofJugurtha would be a glory to his kingdom." The reference is to the young Jugurtha's accomplishments, described as excellence in riding, running, throwing, and the hunt (BI 6. I), all of which have strong martial associations in the Roman tradition as preparation for soldiering. Recognizing his potential as a leader, but fearing him as a threat to his grandsons, Micipsa sends Jugurtha to serve under Scipio Aernilianus at Numantia. There, Sallust writes, Jugurtha excelled in martial exploits, and he is repeatedly credited with virtus that is entirely martial in nature (at BI7.2; 8.1; 9.2-3; 10.2; 10.8). Subsequently in the narrative, whenever Jugurtha's virtus is mentioned, either by himself or by his supporters, it always refers to his youthful exploits at Numantia. So the senatorial supporters of the king's ambassadors: " ... Iugurthae virtutem extollere laudibus; - "exalt the virtus of Jugurtha with praises;" (BI 15.2). There may be some ambiguity here, but that virtus has a martial meaning can be safely inferred from the previous paragraph, where the king's envoys tell the senators that "Jugurtha asked the senate to judge him as he had been known at Numantia;" (BI 15.1). Ambiguity is clearly present when, in defending himself to envoys of the senate, Jugurtha claims that, r08

For example: "Theoretically, this concept would find no difficulty in including Jugurtha." Earl, PTS, p. 6I. Earl attempted to mitigate the problem by placing the corruption of Jugurtha late, at the murder of Hiempsal (Br II.3, mistakenly cited as 15.3 by Earl), and thereby having only two instances ofJugurthine virtus (IS .2, and 22.2) to explain away. In fact, Jugurtha is corrupted early in the narrative at Br 8. I. Eisenhut, VR, pp. 52-54, correctly observed that Jugurtha displayed virtus only so long as he was friendly to Rome.

ROMAN MANLINESS

virtute, non malitia P Scipioni, summo viro, placuisse; - "it was by virtus, not wickedness that he had pleased that great man Publius Scipio;" (Bl22.2). The contrast with malitia gives virtus an ethical sense, but again the reference harkens back to Numantia and martial virtus. The ambiguity plays on the two senses of virtus. When Jugurtha takes up arms against Rome he ceases to possess virtus. Like Caesar, Sallust does not attribute virtus to non-Roman leaders when they are enemies. When forced to fight Jugurtha could still display outstanding bravery, (see, e.g., Bl 51.5 if.), but because his preferred method of combating the Romans, with cunning, deceit, and bribes, is the antitheses of traditional Roman martial virtus, he no longer possesses the quality. 109 Two other major characters in Bellum lugurthinum are credited with virtus - Q. Caecilius Metellus and C. Marius. Sallust's portrayal of them naturally does not approach the villainous pictures he draws of Jugurtha and Catiline, but neither are Metellus or Marius made out to be virtuous men. Throughout his work Sallust presents Metellus as an outstanding general, and it is as such that he writes of his virtus: ut seque et exercitum more maiorum gereret, in advorso loco victor tamen virtute fuisset. that he conducted himself and the army according to the ancestral tradition, and in an unfavorable position, nevertheless was victor, because of his virtus. Bl55·1

So too in Sallust's description of Metellus' renown at a time when he had completed what was a successful campaign, virtus can only refer to his military accomplishments: Quoi quamquam virtus, gloria atque alia optanda bonis superabant, ... For although he possessed virtus, gloria, and others things desired in good men in abundance, ...

In a letter of king Bocchus, the quality ascribed to Metellus that will bring down the Jugurtha is certainly martial in nature: 10 9

See Ennius, Ann. 183-7 = 90-197 S, with the comments in Chapter I, Section 4, earlier. For instances ofJugurtha's deceit, see B126, 36.2, 38.1-2; bribery, 29.1-3,33.2-34,38.3.

MANLINESS REDEFINED

Iugurthae exitium adesse, ceterum suane an Metelli virtute periret, id modo agitari. Jugurtha's demise had arrived, for the rest only this was to be considered, whether he would die as a result of their virtus or that of Metellus. BI70·S Marius was famous for his martial virtu5, to whose deified entity he had dedicated a temple in commemoration of his great victories over the Germans. This is the Marius that Saliust portrays, and general references to his virtu5 certainly denote his great and growing military reputation: Praeterea seditiosi magistratus volgum exagitare, Metellum omnibus contionibus capitis arcessere, Mari virtutem in maius celebrare. In addition seditious magistrates were stirring up the common people, and at every public meeting were charging Metellus with a capital offense, and praising the virtus of Marius excessively. BIns · .. magnus et clarus antea, maior atque clarior haberi coepit. Omnia non bene consulta in virtutem trahebantur: ... · .. great and famous already, he began to be considered greater and more famous. Everything not well-planned was ascribed to his virtus: ... BI 92.1 - 2 In the speech that Sallust gives to Marius the new man in Chapter 85,

virtu5 is central to the attack on the nobility, which is characterized by idleness and arrogance - ignavia et 5uperbia (Bl 85.1). At the time the speech is delivered, Marius had just been elected to the consulship on the basis of his military reputation, and the task he had been chosen for, and was preparing to embark on, was war. At the beginning of the speech Marius contrasts himself to the nobles who can rely on, among other things, the brave deeds of their ancestors - maiorum fortia facta (Bl 85.4), and says: · .. mihi spes omnes in memet sitae, quas necesse est virtute et innocentia tutari;

· .. all hopes for me are situated in me, and it is necessary that they be protected by virtus and integrity; BI8S·4

ROMAN MANLINESS

Innocentia is an ethical term, but one with strong military associations. It was regarded as a quality necessary in a general by both Caesar and Cicero, and does not alter the military nature of a general's virtus. lIO Later in the speech Marius claims that his own and, in fact, all nobility stems from virtus: Quod si iure me despiciunt, faciant item maioribus suis, quibus, uti mihi, ex virtute nobilitas coepit. Because if they disdain me justly, let them do the same to their ancestors, for whom, as for me, nobility originated from virtus. BI85·I7

The proposition rests on the earlier description of his military background (BI 85.13) and his statement that, ... sed fortissumum quemque generosissimum; - "the most nobly-born man is the bravest man" (BI 85.15). Virtus here is certainly martial. Similarly, Marius charges that the nobles are men, · .. qui divorsissumas res pariter expectant, ignaviae voluptatem et praemia virtutis. · .. who have an equal expectation of the most different consequences: the pleasure of idleness and the rewards of virtus. BI85. 2 0

The rewards spoken of are those properly gained by what Marius had done in war: ... ergo invideant labori, innocentiae, periculis etiam meis, quoniam per haec ilium cepi. - " ... therefore, let them attack my hard work, my honesty, even my dangers, since I gained it [office] through these." (BI85.I8). Labor, like innocentia, was commonly and traditionally linked with martial virtus. III Again charging that the access that nobles have to high office is a function only of the deeds of their ancestors, Marius complains, · .. quod ex aliena virtute sibi adrogant, id mihi ex mea non concedunt.

lIO

III

For innoceniia as a military virtue, see Caes. BC I 40.I2, Cic. Imp. Pom. 36, and Combes, Imperator, p. 228. Laboy occurs in a military context in Ennius, Ann. 326-8S; see earlier Chapter I, Section 4.

MANLINESS REDEFINED

... What they claim for themselves from someone else's virtus, they do not concede to me because of my own. BI85.25

The reference is to ancestral martial deeds - eorum fortia facta - (Bl 85.21, cf. 85.4). Mter exclaiming that the honors and scars he had acquired in war would substitute for the ancestral portraits he lacked (Bl 85.29-30), Marius defends the military life he has led by denigrating the Hellenic refinement and literary sophistication that the nobles had cultivated, and claiming that, Non sunt conposita verba mea: parvi id facio. Ipsa se virtus satis ostendit; ... Neque litteras Graecas didici: parum placebat easdiscere, quippe quae ad virtutem doctoribus nihil profuerant. My words are not well organized: I do not think this is important. Virtus displays itself well enough; ... Nor did I study Greek literature, it pleased me little to learn it, since it did not direct learned men to virtus. BI85.31

That virtus here denotes a martial quality and not an ethical ideal is shown by what Marius says he had learned: "to strike the enemy, to stand guard, to fear nothing except a disgraceful reputation, to bear the winter and the summer equally, to rest on the ground," (Bl85.33). Marius returns to his allegation that the nobles' claim to office and honor rests solely on their ancestors' achievements (Bl 85 .37), and then declares that: Maiores eorum omnia quae licebat illis reliquere, divitias, imagines, memoriam sui praeclaram; virtutem non reliquere, neque poterant: ea sola neque datur dono neque accipitur. Their ancestors bequeathed to them everything that is allowed, wealth, masks, their brilliant record; they did not bequeath virtus to them and they could not have: this alone cannot be bequeathed or received as a gift. BI85·38

The repeated earlier reference to the brave deeds - fortia facta - of nobles' ancestors (Bl 85-4 and 21), together with the comments that Marius makes a little further on, "that good men should have glory rather than wealth: that arms not [expensive] furniture are honorable"

ROMAN MANLINESS

(Bl 85.40) -leaves no doubt that it is martial prowess that cannot be inherited. Marius' speech concludes with the words, Plura dicerem, Quirites, si timidis virtutem verba adderent; nam strenuis abunde dictum puto. I would say more, citizens, if words could impart virtus to the fearful. I think enough has been said for the spirited. BI 85.50

The general tenor of Marius' argument, plus the mention of battles, victory, and booty just before (Bl 85 -48), demonstrates the martial sense of virtu5 in the last words of the speech. Whatever ethical element there might be in the attack on the nobles, virtu5 is not a part of it. Nor is it true that virtu5 functions as a political value, beyond the fact that a reputation for martial valor was the high road to office. Throughout this speech the virtus of Mar ius, and all reference to virtu5, are martial. Martial virtus then predominates in Sallust's narrative, in most of his speeches, and in the historical sections of the prologues. In all of these it is consistently represented as the quality of brave men, especially of soldiers, and its ethical associations are marginal. But in long sections of the prologues of both Bel/urn Catilinae and Bel/urn lugurthinurn virtus is different. Of the non-martial uses of virtus in Bel/urn Catilinae nine are found in the prologue, three in the speeches of Caesar and Cato, and four in Sallust's own comments that follow these speeches. In Bel/urn lugurthinurn, non-martial virtus is confined to the prologue. That there are various thematic links between Sallustian prologues and narratives is undeniable. But it is also the case that the martial virtus found in the narratives is quite distinct from the ethical sense the word carries in the prologues, and the contrast between the ways in which virtus is used in one and the other is Sallust's point. II2 Sallust's prologues have two purposes. They provide the apology for taking up the pen that was II2

For thematic links between prologues and narratives, see F. Egermann, "Die Proi:imien zu den Werken des Sallust," SAWW214 3 (1932) pp. 16-23; S. Pantzerhielm Thomas, "The Prologues of Sallust," Sym.Ost. 16 (1936) pp. 142-3; and McGushin, Bel/um Catilinae, pp. 293-5. For ethical virtus in Sallust, Pi:ischl, Grundwerte, p. 12 if.; Earl, PTS, K. Biichner, Sal/ust (Heidelberg 1960) p. II7; and Eisenhut, VR., pp. 48-57, esp.

p·5 2 .

MANLINESS REDEFINED

required of all Roman public men, IIJ and they set out the principles on which the narrative will turn. An examination of the argument presented in the prologues shows that the apologetic service to which Sallust put virtus in them was strongly affected by Hellenic ideas, and that the ethical denotations of 6:pETT] influenced Sallust's programmatic pronouncements on virtus in prologues and digressions. Greek influence on the prologues, and on Sallust's use of virtus in general, has been denied, most notably by Viktor Poschl and D.e. Earl, who found no inconsistency in Sallust's uses of the term, and who held that Sallustian virtus is throughout a political and ethical concept that is virtually identical with the traditional Roman concept. Poschl insisted on the almost total synonymy between traditional and Sallustian virtus, which he described as a political concept, minimally affected by 6:pETT], and manifested in action rather than ideal. II4 Earl differed from Poschl principally in stressing the expansion of the old aristocratic and hereditary nature of virtus by the new man Sallust, who, he said, connected it to ingenium. Earl provided a definition, broad and formulaic, of virtus as "the functioning of ingenium - "innate talent" - to achieve egregia facinora - "illustrious deeds" by the exercise of bonae artes - "good qualities" -, which, according to Earl, applied throughout Sallust's writings. The definition has little to recommend it. II5 The argument that the ethical meaning virtus carries in parts of the prologues reflects traditional Roman virtus is not well-founded either. Poschl misinterpreted virtus in pre-Classical Latin and in Marius' speech at BC 85. II6 Earl's argument rested on his theory of virtus traditionally being an essentially ethical-political concept, broadranging in its denotations that subsumes other Roman values. But

II3 II4

IIS

II6

Cf. Cato Orig. frag. I, 2, 3 HRR = 3. I, I a, and 2 FRH, and Poschl, pp. 27-37. Poschl, pp. 17-26, 46 if. Eisenhut, VR, pp. 48-57, followed Poschl, but admitted, p. 55, that in the prologues virtus shows Greek influences. Definition - Earl, PTS, pp. ll, Ill; - critique - W W Batstone, "Intellectual Conflict and Mimesis in Sallust's Bellum Catilinae," in Conflict, Antithesis, and the Ancient Historian, ed. J. W Allison (Columbus, 1990) p. 192, n. 23. Poschl, p. 22 and p. 46 if. Poschl was of course right to see virtus as an active quality in Sallust, but, as with Cicero's De re publica, an association between virtus and political activity is derived from Greek political theory, not traditional usages of virtus. See earlier in this chapter.

ROMAN MANLINESS

Earl's "virtus complex" of ideas and values turns out to be 6:pETT] in a toga. Like Cicero and other Romans of the time, Sallust used Greek ideas, often in the form of rhetorical commonplaces, to give intellectual force and respectability to his arguments. Most of the ideas presented in the prologues originated in Greek popular philosophy and ultimately reflect the tenets of one or more philosophical schools. II7 That such ideas were familiar to Sallust's audience, and that the conclusions he draws from them were compatible with contemporary Roman values, demonstrates the degree· to which elite Romans of the late Republic were Hellenized, not that the figures or ideas are traditionally Roman. IIS In addition to misconstruing the Hellenic nature of many of the ideas presented in the prologues, Poschl and Earl, and those who have followed them, failed to appreciate the frequency with which Sallust presents virtus as a non-ethical, non-political, but martial concept, and that it is this usage that appears almost exclusively in the narrative sections of his works. The result was a failure to adequately explain a fundamental difficulty in Sallust's use of virtus, i.e., the attribution of virtus to individuals whose characters and reputations are at odds with the ethical denotation that the term exhibits in the prologues. An examination of virtus in the prologues reveals the precise ways in which Sallust used ideas traditionally associated with 6:pETT] to expand the references of the Latin word, and thereby to promote his apologetic and programmatic purposes. Bellum Catilinae opens by stating that it is natural for man to seek fame, but that it is the intellect animus - commanding the body that should direct the quest - animi imperio, corporis servitio magis utimur (BC 1.2). Virtus is then identified with reputation won by mental ability (intellect commanding the body): 1I7

lIB

Attempts to identifY a single source for the philosophical ideas in the prologues have proved futile. They have, however, clearly demonstrated the Greek provenance of the ideas. For a survey of the scholarship, see McGushin, Bel/um Catilinae, pp. 293-5. Buchner, Sal/ust, p. 43I, gave a list of Greek parallels, also see the commentary of Vretska on the prologue of BC. The great importance given to gloria in the prologues, e.g., BC I.2.9, BI 2.2, certainly reflects a native Roman value. But many Greek philosophers took a favorable view of Ev5o~ia, even the Stoics had compromised on it, see Panzerhielm Thomas, 155-9·

37 0

MANLINESS REDEFINED

... nam divitiarum et formae gloria fluxa atque fragilis est, virtus dara aeternaque habetur. ... for the glory of wealth and beauty are fleeting and fragile, while virtus is a distinguished and eternal possession. BC 1.4 The high value placed on gloria conforms to traditional Roman attitudes, but the form of the argument is taken directly from Greek ideas on man and fame, and the lines on the superiority of virtus to wealth or beauty repeat almost verbatim a Greek commonplace on O:PETi]. II9 The argument then shifts abruptly to the value of mental excellence m war: Sed diu magnum inter mortalis certamen fuit vine corporis an virtute animi res militaris magis procederet. But for a long time there has been a great dispute among men whether military affairs succeeded more because of bodily strength or virtus of the mind. BC 1.5 Again an old Greek debate is being presented. 120 But by introducing virtus into a discussion of the relative merits of intellectual and physical abilities in war, Sallust draws on the traditional prestige accorded to martial virtus at Rome, thereby advancing his apologetic argument. The abruptness of the transition to military matters supports this. There immediately follows a disquisition on political evolution (BC 2.1-2) that is modeled on Thucydides' "archaeology" (1.13 f.). But Sallust also presents the evolution of his definition of virtus as an intellectual quality by tracing mental virtus - animi virtus - from war (BC 1.5), to peace: Quod si re gum atque imperatorum animi virtus in pace ita ut in bello valeret, aequabilius atque constantius sese res humanae haberent.

II9

120

Solon, frag. 4.IO f. (West); see also Isoc.1.5; 4.48,76; and cf. Perrochet, p. 69. For the Greek provenance of the argument, see Vretska, I, pp. 29-46. In its Greek form, however, O:pETTJ does not appear, the form of the dichotomy being \jivXTJ, or vovs, as opposed to aWlJo. See Xen. Cyr. 3.3.19; also Euripides, frag. 200 (Nauck TGF 2 = Polyb. 1.35.4). Thuc. 1.144.4 has YVWlJl1; Diod. 29.19 ValS; see Vretska, I, pp. 47-8.

37 1

ROMAN MANLINESS

Because if the mental virtus of kings and generals were as strong in peace as it was in war, the human condition would be more regular and unchanging. BC 2.3 '2'

He then presents a highly unconventional connection of virtus to the full range of human endeavors: Quae homines arant navigant aedificant, virtuti omnia parent. The things men farm, sail, build, all are subject to virtus." BC 2.7 '22

Mter remarking that a life of indolence is contrary to nature because it makes the mind subject to the body, Sallust takes the short step to the association of virtus with forensic and literary activities: Pulchrum est bene facere rei publicae, etiam bene dicere haud absurdum est; vel pace vel bello clarum fieri licet; et qui fecere et qui facta aliorum scripsere multi laudantur. It is noble to perform a good deed for the Republic, it is certainly not unsuitable to speak well either; it is possible to become famous in peace or in war; and both those who have done things and those who have written about the deeds of others are often praised. BC 3.I

In both his theoretical works and in his speeches Cicero had attempted to garner for the orator the rewards and prestige traditionally reserved for the general, but Roman tradition was against it. Sallust acknowledges the traditional superiority of martial virtus, but implies a connection between the man of words and the man of deeds by stating how difficult the historian's profession is. Ac mihi quidem, tamet~i

haudquaquam par gloria sequitur scriptorem et auctorem rerum, tamen in primis 121

122

Poschl, p. I9, n. I, uncharacteristically saw a Greek idea here, citing Polyb. IO.36.5. But the Polybian passage matches what SaIlust goes on to write, nam imperium facile iis artibus retinetur, quibus initio partum est (2.4), better than his sentence on animi virtus. Arist. Pol. I324B-I325AI5 is somewhat closer. There is no precedent in Latin for the connection of virtus to maritime commerce or to architecture. Vretska, I, p. 75, thought the ideas were Roman and pointed to Cato, Agr. 3.2, et rei et virtuti et gloria erit, but Cato's usage is itself unconventional, tendentious, and apologetic. See earlier Chapter I, Section 5.

37 2

MANLINESS REDEFINED

arduom videtur res gestas scribere: ... - As for me, even though the glory that attends the writer and the author of deeds is in no way equal, nevertheless it seems that writing history is especially difficult: ... " (BC 3.2). He then concludes with a definition of the historian's task as the recording of traditional martial virtus: ... ubi de magna virtute atque gloria bonorum memo res, .. . when you record the great virtu5 and glory of good men, .. . BC 3.2'2 3

The object of Sallust's identification of virtus as an intellectual faculty at the beginning of the prologue was to equate the historian's task res gestas 5cribere - with the renown traditionally won by serving the state in war. 124 The same argument is given, more confidently and economically, in the prologue of Bel/um lugurthinum, which opens with the virtus Jortuna trope (Bl I. 1). '2 5 Then comes the identification of virtus with

animus. Sed dux atque imperator vitae mortalium animus est; qui, ubi ad gloriam virtutis via grassatur, abunde pollens potensque et darus est neque fortuna eget, ... But the mind is the leader and commander of the life of mortals which when it marches to glory on the road of virtu5, is amply strong and capable, and also famous, and does not require fortune, ...

After more philosophical commonplaces and a bitter remark on contemporary politics in which virtus has a political reference - ... quoniam neque virtuti hono5 datur, ... - "since office is not given for virtus ... " 123

I24

I25

126

On Cicero, see above, pp. 393-407. For Ciceronian influences on Sallust, BC 3.1 f., see Vretska, I, pp. 85-6. For the Roman nature of the virtus Sallust associates with writing history, see Eisenhut, VR, p. 56. For other indications of self-confidence in the BI prologue, see Syme, Sallust, pp. I28, 2I5-6, 273, quoting BI4.8. The phrase, adgloriam virtute viagrassatur, looks Roman enough, but cf. Isoc. I.5. The military metaphor, dux atque imperator vitae, is perhaps significant.

373

ROMAN MANLINESS

(BI 3 . I), Sallust proceeds directly to an explicit identification of virtus with the writing of history. Ceterum ex aliis negotiis quae ingenio exercentur in primis magno usui est memoria rerum gestarum. Quoius de virtute quia multi dixere, praetereundum puto, simul ne per insolentiam quis existumet memet studium meum laudando extollere. But of those activities that use the intellect, history is of the greatest use. I think I should not dwell on this however, both because many men have spoken of its virtus already, and so that no one might think that out of arrogance I exaggerate by praising my own vocation. Bl4·1-2

By insisting on the intellectual nature of virtus, Sallust is able to marshal traditional support for his claim that the historian serves the state. But for Sallust, history has a moral purpose, and in sections of his prologues he gives to virtus a strong ethical coloring that is central to the high theme of his works and to his view of Rome's decline. This ethical element is closely tied to political uses of virtus. Virtus had been used in a political sense since at least the mid-second century when it is found contrasted to ambitio. The usage has an ethical connotation, which, as we have seen, the martial meaning of virtus often lacks and reflects to some degree borrowing from 6:pETT]. 127 In Sallust's works, political virtus carries the same ethical coloring, contrasted to ambitio and to a host of other vices of one kind or another. 128 These ethical-political uses of virtus occuring in prologues, Sallustian digressions, and in the speech of Cato should be taken as Sallust's own pronouncements on virtus. 129

127

128

12 9

Virtus lambitio at Plaut. Amph. 75-8; Titinius, com. II Ribb.; Lucilius I 12 and 14C = II9-20M = II95-5 ROL = II27K. See Chapter Ill, Section 5. Contrasted to ambitio (BC II. I-2, 52.22); audacia (BC 3.3);jraus (BI 3.1); vis (BI3.2); divitiae et sumptus, Jurtim and latrocinium (BI 4.7-8, BC I2.I); luxus atque desidia (BC 53-4-5); luxuria et avaritia (BC 52.22). Virtus is coupled with modestia, decor, severitas, and pudor (BC 54.5-6); with industria, iustum imperium (BC 52.2I), and is an attribute of boni rather than of mali (BC 7.2). In the contrast to audacia at BC 3.3, the schema is pudorlavaritia, abstinentiallargitio, see Vretska, I, pp. IDO-3. The correspondence between the ideas expressed in the speech of Cato at BC 52, and Sallust's own in the prologues and digressions was argued by E. Skard, "Sallust als Politiker," Sym.Osl. 9 (I930) p. 69 fr. and noted by Poschl, pp. ID fr., Earl, PTS,

374

MANLINESS REDEFINED

This distinction between the ethical virtus of the prologues and the martial virtus of the narratives corresponds to the old distinction found in Ennius' lines about virtus and justice, and mirrors that of contemporary usage seen in the difference between Caesar's unethical martial virtus at De bello civili 3.60. I and the ethical meaning that the word normally has in Cicero's works. Unlike Cicero, however, Sallust does not attempt to conflate the two meanings, but generally maintains the distinction and argues that martial virtus, commonly thought to be responsible for Rome's imperial greatness, had become pernicious in the late Republic. This view appears in Sallust's theory of Roman decline in which the critical event is the destruction of Carthage. I30 Here Sallust does not attribute the greatness of earlier Rome to ethical superiority, but to something very different, ... non amor iustitiae, sed stante Carthagine metus pacis injidaefuit- " ... not a desire forjustice, but, while Carthage stood, fear of a treacherous peace" (Hist. III M). I3 I Nor does he deny the existence of vice in early Rome, claiming only that it was minimal, concordia maxuma, minuma avaritia erat (BC 9.1; cf. Hist. III M). The virtus on which Rome was founded and grew was that which protected her from foreign aggression. Sallust' examples of Romans of old who possessed virtus are two of its greatest military heroes, Fabius Maximus and Scipio Africanus. I32 When all external threats had been eliminated, the very qualities that had once preserved and magnified Rome led to its ruin. Martial virtus, lacking a foreign enemy, was vented in domestic unrest and finally in civil war (BC 10.2; cf. Hist. 112 M, and BC 9.2). Gloria, which had been laudable in foreign wars, was now identified with power and tyranny - potentia and dominatio - at home. What had been

13 0

131

13 2

pp. 97--98, and Syme, Sal/ust, pp. 2II-I2. For a survey of opinions, see McGushin, Bel/um Catilinae, pp. 309-3II. Note Biichner, Sal/ust, p. 203. BC 9.1-3 and BI41.2. For the tradition on 146, see M. Gelzer, "Nasicas Widerspruch gegen die Zerstorung Kathagos," Philologus 86 (1931) pp. 261-99. The text is Maurenbrecher's (c. Sal/usti Crispi Historiarum Reliquiae [Leipzig, 1893]) whose reading of the text is supported by Clausen, AJPh 68 (1947) pp. 300-1, cf. Syrne, Sal/ust, p. 182, n. 20; and R. Funari, C. Sal/usti Crispi Historiarum Fragmenta I (Amsterdam, 1996) p. 30. BC 6.4-5, and see BC 7.6, and 9.2. For Fabius and Scipio see BI4.5-6, 5.4.

375

ROMAN MANLINESS

won by bravery abroad was now looted by crime; empire becomes synonymous with injustice and virtus itself declined. Postquam divitiae honori esse coepere et eas gloria imperium potentia sequebatur, hebescere virtus, ... After riches began to be counted as honor, and glory, command, and power followed them, virtus was blunted, ... BC 12.1; see BC 12.5, and B141.2; cf. BC 7.6 on early Rome

Sallust diagnosed the problem as spiritual, ethical, and intellectual, a defect in animus, the quality that he consistently identified with virtus in the prologues and digressions. tanta vis morbi atque uti tabes plerosque civium animos invaserat - "so great was the strength of the sickness and as a disease it had entered the majority of the minds of citizens." (BC 36.5); fuere tamen fives qui seque remque publicam obstinatis animis perditum irent - "nevertheless there were citizens who with determined minds sought to bring about the destruction of themselves and of the Republic" (BC 36.4). I33 Martial courage was insufficient to protect Rome from new dangers posed by peace and wealth. But in the late Republic not only was martial virtus an insufficient protection for the Republic, it was threatening to it. Since the time of Marius Rome was dominated by a succession of men who gained and held power on the basis of military commands and reputations. Some of them extravagantly proclaimed their virtus; all embodied the traditional Roman concept. These men were treated variously by Sallust; some were excoriated, others praised for their merits. But Sallust had decided that the ambitions of each had led, ultimately and inevitably, to civil war and the loss ofliberty, and he criticized not only the men, but the value they stood for. If the Republic was to survive, a different kind of virtus would be required. I34

IJJ

1]4

Cf. the disturbed state of mind (aliena mens) which affected the conspirators and the plebs. (BC 37.I); also Bl 41.3, and BC 12.2, 13·3, IO.4, Bl4·7· Hostility toward Pompey in the Historiae (Syme, Sal/ust, p. 2I2, called it "obsessive malice") is best seen at Hist. II 98 M, cf. Syme, pp. 201-2. Sallust's judgment of Luculius, to judge from the testimony of PIutarch (Luc. 33 = Hist. V la M) is negative. On Sulia, see Hist. I 54-61 M; BC I1.4 f.; and Syme, pp. 179-82. For Sallust'sjudgments on Marius and Caesar, see later.

MANLINESS REDEFINED

Without the two distinct meanings of virtus, it is difficult to explain how Sallust could claim that before the destruction of Carthage Rome was dominated by virtus, but that as soon as mctus Punicus was removed, virtus declined. As Earl commented, "If Rome was kept in a state of virtus merely by the existence of an external threat and if the state of virtus automatically came to an end with the removal of the threat, this can hardly be regarded as true virtus. True virtus, in Sallust's sense or in any other, should surely be independent of external compulsions. "I35 But physical prowess or courage, especially of the martial variety, can depend on external threats, as the Romans were fully aware (cf. Polyb. 32.13.6-8). Sallust would argue for a self-sufficient, ethical type of virtus, but to do so he had to criticize traditional martial virtus. In Bellum Iugurthinum the inadequacy of traditional martial virtus is shown in portraits of individuals who are said to possess the quality. Each is easily corrupted because his virtus is ethically deficient. Jugurtha, endowed by nature and molded by military training, is the model of bravery at Numantia, but succumbs immediately to ambitio. In Sallust's generally favorable presentation of Metellus, this commander exhibits virtus in war, but is ethically flawed. Quoi quamquam virtus,

gloria atque alia optanda bonis superabant, tamen inerat contemptor animus et superbia, commune nobilitatis malum - "Although virtus, glory, and other qualities desired by good men were abundantly present in him, nevertheless there was also present a contemptuous mind and pride, a fault common among the nobility" (BI 64.1). For Sallust, superbia is a serious ethical defect (see BI 5.1,41.3, BC 2.5, 6.7, 10.4, 12.2), and superbia causes Metellus not only to lose his command but, according to Sallust, to act against Rome's interest by conducting the war with malicious inactivity once he learns of Marius' succession to the Numidian command. The attribution of military virtus to Metellus is not without irony, because it was ethical virtus for which he was famous and which had been contrasted to the martial virtus of Mar ius. But Sallust's treatment of Metellus is insidious. The virtues that Metellus famously exhibited while in exile, and for which he was lauded in optimate circles, constantia - "resolution" - and gravitas - "dignity" -, Sallust

IJ5

Earl, PTS, pp. 5I-2.

377

ROMAN MANLINESS

pointedly denies him, ... vir egregius in aliis artibus nimis molliter aegritudinem pati - "a man outstanding in other qualities, he was unduly weak in enduring sorrow" (BI 82.2).136 Sallust's Marius is naturally an outstanding military man, but, as has been recognized, the portrait is essentially that of "a crafty intriguer, a blatant demagogue," and Sallust alludes to the civil war that Marius' behavior and example would contribute to. 137 Sallust's case against martial virtus is perhaps plainest in Bellum Catilinae. In his speech to the senate, Cato, after censoring the selfishness, indolence, and luxury of his peers, explicitly denies that it was martial prowess that made Rome great. 138 Nolite existumare maiores nostros armis rem publicam ex parva magnam fecisse. Si ita esset, multo pulcherrumam earn nos haberemus, quippe sociorum atque civium, praeterea armorum atque equorum maior copia nobis quam illis est. Sed alia fuere quae illos magnos fecere, quae nobis nulla sunt: domi industria, foris ius turn imperium, animus in consulendo lib er, neque delicto neque lubidini obnoxius. Do not suppose that our ancestors turned the Republic from small to great through arms. If this were true we would have the most excellent state [now]: for thenumber of our allies and citizens are greater than theirs, in addition so are our supply of arms and horses. But there are other things that made them gre'at and that are missing in us: diligence at home, lawful rule abroad, in council a free mind subject neither to wrongdoing nor desire. BC

1J6

1J7

1J8

52.19-21

The charge that Metellus delayed the war, ... tempus procedere, et ex Metelli voluntate bellum intactum trahi. - "time passed and according to Metellus' wish, the war was delayed unaffected." (BI 83.3; cf., 83.1), is probably slanderous, since Metellus' actions seem to have been dictated by military considerations; see M, Holroyd,JRS 18 (1928) p. 6; E. Koestermann, C. Sallustius Crispus Bellum Iugurthinum (Heidelberg, 1971) p. 287-90, and Earl, PTS, pp. 75-6. On the attribution of ethical virtus to Metellus, see earlier Chapter VIII, Section 6. Demagogue - Syme, Sallust, p. 62. Commenting on Marius' levy ofr07, Sallust writes at BI 86.3, that indigent soldiers were advantageous to a man seeking power. For the anachronism of Sallust's charge see Gabba, Esercito, p. 39 fr. = Republican Rome, pp. 16 fr.; Also see BI 63, and Syme, Sallust, pp. 163 and 176 fr. For the progressive corruption ofJugurtha, Metellus, and Marius, and, Sulla in BI, see D. S. Levene, "Sallust's Jugurtha: An 'Historical Fragment' ," JRS 82 (1992) pp. 53-'7°, esp. pp. 59-64. The theme is taken from Dem. Phi!. 3.40; see Perrochat, p. 76.

MANLINESS REDEFINED

The logic is fragile but the point clear: ethical, not martial qualities were responsible for Roman greatness. But this proposition required argument. To reinforce it, Sailust has Cato give virtus an ethical definition in terms of good and bad by saying that "there is no distinction between good men and bad; ambition holds ail the rewards of virtus" -

inter bonos et malos discrimen nullum; omnia virtutis praemia ambitio possidet. (BC 52.22). The parallels between Cato's speech here and Sallust's own earlier analysis suggest that close correspondence between Cato's words and Sallust's opinions. 139 Sailust himself speaks on the subject when introducing his famous comparison of Caesar and Cato, expounding on virtus as the basis of Roman power.

Ac mihi multa agitanti constabat paucorum civium egregiam virtutem cuncta patravisse, eoque factum uti divitias paupertas, mulritudinem paucitas superaret. by much thinking it became apparent to me that the outstanding virtus of a few citizens had accomplished everything, because of this it happened that poverty conquered wealth, and the few, the many. BC 53-4

But in the previous sentence, Sallust denies the superiority of Roman arms, ... gloria belli Gallos ante Romanos fuisse - ". . . the Gauls stand before the Romans in the glory of war" (BC 53.3); an odd and unique opinion among republican Latin authors.14 0 Consequently, the virtus that Sallust claims as the basis for Roman greatness is a civic and ethical

IJ9

140

Cf. esp. BC. II and 12 and see Earl, PTS, pp. 97-8; A. Drurnmond. Law, Politics and Power. Sal/ust and the Execution cif the Catiliinarian Conspirators (Stutttgart, 1995) p. 74; R. Sklenar, "La Repuhlique des Signes: Caesar, Cato, and the Language of Sallustian Morality," TAPA I28 (1998) pp. 205-20; D. S. Levine, "Sallust's Catiline and Cato the Censor," CQ 50 (2000) pp. 170-91, esp. pp. 182-3. Sklenar, 206-II, also pointed out parallels between Sallust's ideas and Caesar's speech (BC SI). Especially odd after Caesar's recent conquests; see Koestermann, p. 387. BI II4.2 is closer to the conventional Roman attitude on the Gauls; cf. Cic. Prov. cons. 32-3, and Cic. Har. resp. 19.

379

ROMAN MANLINESS

quality, not a military one. Then comes the comparison: Sed memoria mea ingenti virtute, divorsis moribus fuere viri duo, M. Cato et C. Caesar. But in my time there were two men with outstanding virtus, but differing conduct, Marcus Cato and Gaius Caesar. BC 53.6

The old arguments for Sallust's synkrisis favoring Caesar can be safely set aside, since they all fall back on the resurrection of what Syme called "the phantom of the party pamphleteer."I4I Nor do more recent attempts to represent an ironic Sallust, who is critical of both men, stand up to scrutiny.1 4 2 In the comparison between Caesar and Cato there are numerous indications of Sallust's disillusionment with the former. The attribution to Caesar of munificentia (BC 54.2), a Sallustian word decidedly negative in connotation, is criticism hardly veiled, and references to Cato "having won glory by not resorting to bribery," and to his dignitas (BC 54.3-4), each, in its way, calls into '4' Syme, Sal/ust, p. u6. For the old arguments, see E. Schwartz, "Die Berichte iiber

142

die Catilinarische Verschworung," Hermes 32 (1897) pp. 555-608; O. Seel, Sal/ust von den BrieFen ad Caesarem zur Coniuratio Catilinae (Leipzig - Berlin, 1933) pp. 43-6; W Schur, Sal/ust als Historiker (Stuttgart, 1934), p. 200; E. Lofstedt, Roman Literary Portraits (Oxford, 1958) p. 98 - ail based either on dubious assumptions about Sailust's relationship to Caesar, or on the objection that ifSailust had meant to criticize Caesar, he would have done so more directly. But writing under the triumvirs, Sailust would be circumspect when criticizing divus Iulius; see B. Shirnron, "Caesar's Place in Sailust's Political Thought," Athenaeum 45 (1967) 335-45, who also answered the doubts of A. La Penna, "L'interpretazione Sailustiana della congiura di Catilina," SIFC 31 (1959) pp. 1-66, 127-68; cf. McGushin, Bel/um Catilinae, pp. 309-311. See W W Batstone, "The Antithesis of Virtue: Sailust's Synkrisis and the Crisis of the Late Republic," Cl. Ant. 7 (1988) pp. 1-29. Batstone was right to see conflicting "virtues," in the passage, but because his analysis is almost entirely limited to the works of Sailust, he imagined a "gap" in meaning that has to be filled by the reader with argumenta ex silentio. There is no gap for the reader who knows how the meanings of virtus had developed. For Batstone the nature of the conflict over virtus, as well as the crisis of the Roman Republic, was not moral, but epistemological in nature - traditional virtues of action versus the ways in which these were understood and judged - a conclusion that reflects concerns of the late twentieth century more than those of the late Republic, and that is grounded in a connection between virtus and the corruption of language that Sailust seems to have taken pains to avoid; see the earlier comments on Sailust's use offortitudo at BC 52.11.

MANLINESS REDEFINED

question qualities to which Caesar had laid claim. I43 In addition, there are disturbing parallels between Sallust's description of Caesar here, and well-known descriptions of Catiline by Cicero and by Sallust himself. 144 In analyzing the synkrisis it is important to note that after the initial reference to the virtus of both men, the word occurs again only once, and in a military context. The various qualities attributed to Caesar and Cato respectively are not said to be virtutes, or to be aspects of virtus; they are rather mores divorsi. If not "virtues," the qualities that Caesar is said to exhibit: benificia, munificentia, mansuetudis, misericordia, facilitas - "services, munificence, mildness, compassion, affability" together with his propensity "to be attentive to the affairs of friends, and to neglect his own, to deny nothing that is worthy of giving," were all important and highly regarded Roman social values. They were also political catchwords. In the civil war of 49, Caesar's misericordia was proclaimed, along with his liberalitas - "generosity." But such positive attributes were also open to different and partisan interpretations, and there were corresponding negative attributions. In the political vocabulary of the late Republic, good men - one's political allies - practiced liberalitas, bad men, in doing exactly the same thing, largitio - "bribery. "145 The qualities, or mores, Sallust attributes to

'43

Rightly Batstone, pp. 18, 20-22, but there is little that is problematic about Cato's integritas vitae, or his dignitas; Cato's electoral defeats occurred in a corrupt Republic. The collocation Caesar magnus (BC 54. 2) is a reference to Pompey, no favorite of Sallust. Elsewhere Sallust attributes munificentia to Jugurtha (Bl 7.7); uses it to describe the perfidious dealings of Sulla, where it is equated with largitio (Bl ro3 .5-6), and has it praised by Bocchus, a king exhibiting fides Punica (Bl IIO.5); contra Batstone 12, n. 6.

'44

'45

Cf. Sall. BC 54.2-4 to Cicero's words on Catiline at Cael. 13; cf. Comm. pet. 9. For parallels between Sallust's descriptions of Catiline and Caesar within Bellum Catilinae, some more convincing than others, see Shirnron, 341-2; cf. on Caesar, BC 54.4 (laborare, vigilare) to BC 5. I, 3 on Catiline, Batstone, 24. See also Sallust's description of Catiline in battle at BC 60.4, to Caesar's description of himself at BC 11. 25.2, with Vretska, 11 p. 683-4; not yet, I think, a trope. Cf. Cic. Att. 4.17. [SB 91] 4 to Cic. Fam. 10.8 [SB 371]. 3. For discussion and further examples, see McDonnell, Hermes II8 (1990) pp. 62-3; cf. Syme, Sallust, pp. 117,2545. For Caesar's propaganda of 49, see Cic. Att. 9c (SB 74c), and G. B. Townend, "c. Oppius onJulius Caesar," AJPh ro8 (1987) PP.325-42. Laborare and vigilare (BC 54.4) have old associations with martial virtus.

ROMAN MANLINESS

Caesar are moral standards, but standards dependent on social actions and judgments. As such they were capable of being, and regularly were, employed and regarded with varying degrees of cynicism. The qualities of Cato, however, integritas vitae, severitas, constantia, modestia, decor - "a blameless life, austerity, steadfastness, restraint, propriety" are, as presented by Sallust, very different. They are absolute ethical standards that are based on an individual's sense of right and wrong, not to be easily subverted. I4 6 On its face the entire comparison seems perplexing, since for all his greatness no one could seriously credit Caesar with the type of ethical excellence that Cato was famous for, and which Sallust associates with virtus in prologues and digressions. The fame of the conqueror of Gaul rested on his military accomplishments, and this is precisely what Sallust asserts. After listing his other outstanding characteristics, Sallust writes of Caesar and of his virtus: ... sibi magnum imperium, exercitum, bellum novom exoptabat ubi virtus enitescere posset - "He longed for a great command, an army, and a new war, where his virtus could shine" (BC 54.4). The repetiton of virtus in a martial context is emphatic, and there is nothing ethical about it. It is the martial quality that Caesar himself writes of in his Commentaries, and it depends on externals. Caesar needed a war to show it. Elsewhere, Sallust's opinion of the lust for a command - cupido imperii - is clear. Related to ambitio and aviditas it is, together with the desire for money, the basis of all evils. Igitur primo pecuniae, deinde imperi cupido crevit: ea quasi materies omnium malorum Juere - "Therefore, the lust for money first, then for command grew: these provided, as it were, the occasion for all evils" (BC 10.3). I47 Cato, on the other hand, had no military reputation, but both during his life, and especially after his "Socratic" death, he enjoyed a reputation as the philosopher-statesman, the perfect Stoic, the epitome of virtue. It is not Cicero's Cato that Sallust pictures here, but 146

147

Syme, Sallust, pp. II5-'?, and the classic Chapter XI in The Roman Revolution on "political catchwords." In addition, Caesar's hellum novom would recall the charge Cato's had made that Caesar's Gallic conquest was a bellum iniustum. Cato had proposed that Caesar be surrendered to the Germans; see Suet. Iul. 24.3, Plut. Cat. Min. 51.I-5, App. Celt. 18.2; cf. Cato's iustum imperium at BC 52.21 to hellum novom.

MANLINESS REDEFINED

rather the man whose principled suicide at Utica made him an ethical hero. 148 For Sallust his civic and private virtus approaches the ideal. At Catoni studium modestiae, decoris, sed maxume severitatis erat; non divitiis cum divite neque factione cum factioso, sed cum strenuo virtute, cum modesto pudore, cum innocente abstinentia certabat; esse quam videri bonus malebat: ita, quo minus petebat gloriam, eo magis ilium adsequebatur. But Cato was devoted to restraint, propriety, but most of all to austerity; he did not contend in wealth with the wealthy nor in political connections with the well-connected, but in virtus with the energetic, in restraint with the disciplined, in integrity with the blameless; he wished to be rather than to seem good: therefore the less he sought glory, the more it followed

him. BC 54.5-6

The comparison between Caesar and Cato is comprehensible only if it contrasts not only two very different men with very different dispositions, but two equally different senses of virtus - one courageous, martial, and public; the other ethical, civic, and private. These conform to the dual meaning, one native Roman, the other influenced by 6:pETij, that has been traced from the late-"third century and that survived into the classical period. 149 In his writings, Sallust either ignored or subverted the political slogans that had served the great generals of the late Republic. Clementia,Jelicitas, and, auctoritas, are absent; dignitas and pietas have teeth. ISO Virtus too was a powerful political slogan, not the virtus ofCicero the new man, nor that of popular philosophy, but virtus imperatoris, virtus militum, the martial virtus of Roman tradition. 14 8

149

15 0

So rightly Syme, Sal/ust, pp. II4-6; McGushin, p. 310; cf. Suet. Iul. 19. For Cato's death, see Plut. Cat. Min. 67-72; on his reputation for ethical virtus, Cic. Phi!. 13.30; Brut. 18; Sest. 60, Att. 2.1 [SB 21]. 8; Veil. Pat. 2.35.2, where diis proprior shows that this is not divine Virtus, nor courageous, but an ethical ideal, conta Eisenhut, RE supp. 14, col. 903. He was no soldier. The most Plutarch can say about Cato's tenure as a commander (plut. Cat. Min. 8-II, esp. 9.3 if.) is that he was honest and just. Last, "Sallust and Caesar," pp. 365-6, commenting on the synkrisis, "This is indeed so surprising that the Bellurn Catilinae must remain something of a mystery until it is explained." The astute A. R. Hands, in his review of Earl's PTS in ]RS 52 (1962) p. 275, pointed to the solution: " ... or is the concept of virtus, here at least, somewhat ambivalent, after all - Caesar representing its more dynamic aspect, Cato an aspect nearer, though not equated with, the O:PETT) of Greek philosophy?" See Syme, Sal/ust, pp. 256-57.

ROMAN MANLINESS

Sallust rejected it by calling for a different standard for public life with ethical considerations being paramount. "To be rather than to appear good": a noble sentiment and Sallust's highest praise, but taken from Greek tragedy, and as foreign to the tradition of native Roman virtus as it is to the great generals of the late Republic who exploited that tradition. 151 The Republic that Sallust knew was the child of the civil war between Marius and Sulla, reared under the hand ofSulla the dictator. Sallust had witnessed its corruption by Pompey's illegal commands and threats of violence. As imperator, Caesar had seemed more hopeful, but in the end his dictatorship had solved little, and on his death civil war and military autocracy continued. Sallust concluded that civil war and autocracy were, in fact, the legacy of martial virtus in the late Republic, and so he called for a different, more ethical kind of Roman manliness. I52 His call was answered, after a fashion. With the Principate, military glory and martial virtus were monopolized by the emperors, while the emasculated Roman nobility was left to cultivate a private, Hellenic type of virtus. The failure of both is the subject of Tacitus' Annals. 151

152

Sallust's words are a paraphrase of Aesch. Sept. 592, OV yap 50KElV O:PICHOS cr.AA Elva! 6EAEI. Cf. Cic. Sest. 6. See Vretska, n, p. 636, for other parallels. In this he will have been followed by Lucan, who as Caesar marches on Rome, has the ghosts of both Sulla and Marius appear in the city (BC 1. 580-3). For Lucan on Cato, see, e.g., BC 2.242-5, and 1. 126-9.

EPILOGUE - ROMAN MANLINESS AND THE PRINCIPATE

The impact of war accelerates many processes in the development of a language, ... First and most palpable, the enrichment of vocabulary novelties and the new words to describe them. But change may go deeper and further. Ronald Syme

In January of 27, the senate and people of Rome honored Augustus with a golden shield displayed in the senate house on which were inscribed the words virtus, clementia, iustitia, and pietas. When joined with qualities such as these virtus, as we have seen, corresponded to, and was modeled on, the Greek term 6:pETT), and as such was regarded as an all-embracing, predominantly ethical concept that subsumed other cardinal virtues; hence the shield was called clipeus virtutis - "the shield of virtue." I In itself, the usage was not unusual. For despite the fact that Caesar could still contrast martial virtus with ethical behavior, the ethical sense of virtus was general in late-republican Latin usage. In Latin of the imperial era, virtus would continue to display a wide semantic range, where both the military and ethical senses of virtus would be regular, but where there would be no evidence of opposition between the two. 2 Under the Principate, a single author, writing in I

2

For the clipeus virtutis, see RG 34.2; Dio 53.3-16, Suet. Aug. 7.2, 40; cf. ClL IX 58rr (= lLS 82); BMC I 321-2, 336-7; Weinstock, DivusJulius, pI. 18. The best discussion of the clipeus virtutis is that of A. Wallace Hadrill, "The Emperor and his Virtues," Historia 30 (1981) pp. 298-323. Usage is often determined by genre. Martial virtus figures prominently in Livy's Ab urbe condita and in the works of Tacitus (Eisenhut, VR., pp. 77-80, 174-82), as well as in VergiI's Aeneid (Eisenhut, VR., pp. 120-26), and the epic poems of Valerius Flaccus,

ROMAN MANLINESS

a single genre, could use both the martial and ethical meanings of virtus frequently and naturally.3 What was new and significant about the clipeus virtutis is the presence of an ethical sense of virtus on a public monument, and it was the official uses to which Augustus and his successors put virtus that signal the changes that the traditionally public concept of Roman manliness would undergo as a function of the Republic's demise. When in 27 Octavian restored the Republic to the senate and people, he not only assumed the new name of Augustus, but also began to take on a new public image. At the same time he was awarded the shield of virtue, Augustus received two other great honors: laurels wreaths were placed on the door posts of his house, and the corona civica was affixed over its doorway. All three were traditional emblems of martial prowess and military victory at Rome, but the four words inscribed on the shield made it something more. The listing on an honorific shield of the non-military virtues of clementia, iustitia, and pietas, together with the ambiguous sense that virtus would have in such a context, transformed the honorific shield, which had been a token of esteem reserved for the warrior and general, into a reward for the statesman. 4 As a topos adapted from Greek panegyric, the categorizing of virtuous qualities of a political leader was familiar in Latin rhetoric and literature, but this was the first time that it had been used as an official recognition. 5 Moreover, the official use of the topos was

J

4

5

Silius Italicus, and Statius (Eisenhut, VR, pp. I63-72). In the philosophical works of Seneca, an ethical sense predominates (Eisenhut, VR, pp. I36-52). See e.g., Veil. Pat. 2.26.2; 2.22.4; 2.35.2, cf. Tac. Ann. I6.21.I; Tac. Ag. 1.I; Hist. 1.52.2; Ann. 6.51.3; Plin. Ep. 2.20.I2. " •.. the shield, which was a frequent military decoration for bravery, was now transferred into a reward for the virtues of the statesman." Weinstock, Divus Juli us, p. 229. For shields given as military awards, see Liv. 9.4o.I6; Plin. NH 35.12-I4; ILS 253I; 27I3. Honorific shields were also known in the Greek world, see Wallace Hadrill, Historia 30 (I 9 8 I) pp. 298-323, 306, n. 42. At what period political virtues such as pietas, moderatio, iustitia and virtus began to be credited to Roman leaders is disputed. Weinstock, Divus Julius, p. I82, following M. Pohlenz, Hermes 59 (I924) pp. I57-89, favored the time of Caesar; E. Kornemann, Klio 3I (I938) pp. 83-9I, that of Augustus; E. Gabba, Athenaeum 38 (I960) pp. 175-225, for that of Sulla. There was no Caesarian precedent for the clipeus virtutis, however, see]. P. V. D. Balsdon, "Dionysius on Romulus: A Political Pamphlet?" JRS 6I (I97I) pp. I8-27; Wallace-Hadrill, Historia 30 (I98r) p. 305; contra Weinstock, pp. 228-59. Cato's use of the four virtues in a speech, Cic. Att. 7.2 (SB 125) 7, was that of a self-conscious Stoic.

EPILOGUE - ROMAN MANLINESS AND THE PRINCIPATE

also derived from a Greek model, the precedent for the clipeus virtutis being public decrees honoring Hellenistic kings. 6 In fact, the recasting of public virtus seen on the clipeus virtutis marks the beginning of the metamorphosis by which Augustus moved away from his earlier public image as a heroic military leader to that of princeps senatus, the first senator of a restored Republic. 7 Under the Principate, public recognition of martial virtus became the virtual monopoly of the emperor, his family, and of the trusted generals and Roman soldiers whom the emperor controlled. 8 But Augustus and his Julio-Claudian successors employed martial virtus cautiously. After 29, Augustus was rarely portrayed as an equestrian, and the use of the image remained rare, and for the most part commemorative, under other Julio-Claudians emperors. 9 The associations of heroic martial virtus would certainly be exploited by later emperors, and from the Flavian period on the image of the galloping rider would 6

7

8

9

Wallace-Hadrill, Historia 30 (I98I) p. 306. See Zanker, Images, pp. 92-IOO. Syme wrote, "It was the avowed purpose of that statesman to suggest and demonstrate a sharp line of division in his career between the two periods, ... " RR, p. 2. Augustus, of course, did not eschew military glory; see Res Gestae 3-4,25-33The last Roman outside of the imperial family to celebrate a triumph, L. Cornelius Balbus, did so in 19; see R. J. A. Talbert, The Senate of Imperial Rome (princeton, 1984) pp. 362-3. On Augustus' control of the army and its commanders, see K. Raafiaub, "Die Militarreformen des Augustus und die politische Problematik des friihen Printipats," in Saeculum Augustum I: Herrschcift und Gesellschaft, ed. G. Binder (Darmstadt, 1987, originally 1982) pp. 246-307, esp. p. 259 ff. On Octavian's use of the equestrian image from 43 to 4I, see Zanker, Images, pp. 37-8. It reappears on a coin minted in the east between 31 and 29 (BMC I Augustus, 594). Mter this, it occurs only on coins of 17-16 (BMC I Augustus, pp. 14-15, 75-76, 82-5; RIC P, 68, n. 362, tab 7), and again in 9-8 (BMC I p. 435). The only evidence of the association of the equestrian image with other living Julio-Claudian emperors are equestrian statues atop triumphal arches honoring Claudius (BMC I 164, 168-9, 17I; RIC I 125,II, 13-16, with Bergemann, Kat. L 28 pp. 163-4; Kat. M. 34-42, p. 172), and Neronian decursio coin types (BMC I, Nero, 141-55, 3II-318, RIC 2 pp. 162, 175, 177, 180, 184). Commemorative equestrian statues and coin types honored Agrippa (BMC I Augustus, p. 25, 122-3; RIC 2 73, 412, with Papi, LTUR 2 "equus," pp. 2245); Augustus' grandson C. Caesar (BMC I Augustus, 498; cf. BMC, Republic, Gaul, p. 443, 22I); Germanicus (Suet. Claud. 1.3, BMCI 178, 95-99, 9I, 187-9I); the emperor Tiberius' son Drusus (CIL VI 31200, cf. PIR2 I 22I); Nero and Drusus, the brothers of Caligula (BMCI 152, 44, 157, 70); andL. Volusius Saturninus (W. Eck, "Die familiae der Volusii Saturnini in neuen Inschriften aus Lucus Feroniae," Hermes lOO [I972] pp. 46I84). C. Brun,JRA IO (I997) p. 349, was wrong to claim that equestrian statues of senators were common in Rome under the Principate.

ROMAN MANLINESS

be the prime symbol of the emperor's virtus. IO But by that time much about virtus had changed, not only in usage, but also in regard to the political and social realities that govern usage. The political importance that a dynastic autocracy gave to imperial women, unimaginable under the Republic, affected the traditional ideal of Roman manliness in both regards. Not only could an Augustan poet extol the pudicitia of an emperor's wife by praising her virtus, but early in the Principate the daughters and wives of the imperial family were permitted to participate in triumphs. II But more basic was the way in which the old republican ideal of manliness was altered by structural changes introduced with the Principate. A society in which military service had been an essential duty of both elite and non-elite citizens, was replaced by one in which the state was defended by men who were full-time professional soldiers. In addition, these men were stationed in the provinces, the majority on the frontiers, where most of Rome's wars were fought under the Principate. I2 As fewer and fewer Italian men performed military service, and as senators were increasingly cut off from military service and glory, a gulf was created between the civilian and military sides of Roman society, which had profound effects on the relationship between the Roman state and its citizens, the great majority of whom had no experience with war.I3 Since the beginning there had been an essential connection between virtus and the res publica. With the

10

II

12

I)

On a coin of Galba in A.D. 68, and common under the Flavians and subsequent emperors, associated with the legend VIRTUS, VIRTUS AUG ruSTI, see earlier Chapter IV, Section 4. See Tac. Ann. 2.41.4, and Dio 60.22.2, with M. B. Flory, "The Integration of Women into the Roman Triumph," Historia 47 (1998) pp. 489--94. See avid on Livia, Pont. 3.1.II5; cf. Hor. Carm. 3.24.21-24, discussed earlier Chapter V, Section 2. The exception was civil war, during which, however, civilians regarded soldiers as alien; see, eg., Tac. Hist. 3.83, cf. Campbell, pp. 365-67. For structural changes in Roman society after Augustus, see T. Cornell, "The end of Roman imperial expansion," in War and Society in the Roman World, eds., J. Rich, G. Shipley (London, New York, 1993) pp. 138-70, esp. pp. 164-8, cf. Rosenstein, "Republican Rome," p. 211. The structural changes were rooted in developments of the late Republic. Continuity is, however, somewhat overemphasized by Corneli, cf. Raaflaub, "Militarformen," pp. 275-6. For the opportunities for senatorial military glory, see Talbert, pp. 362-70, 425-30. On the changing composition of the Roman legions, see G. Forni, Reclutamento delle Legioni da Augusto a Diocleziano (Rome, 1953).

n

388

EPILOGUE - ROMAN MANLINESS AND THE PRINCIPATE

transition from Republic to Principate the nature of the Roman citizenship was fundamentally changed. 14 It was inevitable that Roman manliness would change along with it. '4

Mommsen described the political aspect of the change as from an active citizenship of participation and voting, to a merely passive one oflegal rights. For changes in language associated with the change from Republic to Principate, see R. Syme, "History and Language at Rome," Roman Papers Ill, ed. A. R. Birley (Oxford, 1984) pp. 953-61.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

TEXTS CONSULTED

Agahd, R. M. Terenti VClrronis Antiquitatum rerum divinarum Libri I, XlV, Xv, XVI. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1898. Reprinted New York. Arno Press, 1975. Andre, J. Pline L'Ancien, Histoire Naturelle, Livre XXI. Paris. Belles Lettres, 1969. Austin, C. Comicorum Graecorum Jragmenta: In papyris reperta. Berlin, New York. W de Gruyter, 1973. Austin, R. G. M. Tulli Ciceronis pro M. Caelio aratio. Third edition. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1960. Beck, H., U. Walter. Die Friihen Romischen Historiker 1. Darmstadt. Wissenschaflliche Buchgesellschaft, 2001. Boeckh, A., et alii. Corpus inscriptionum Graecarum. Berlin. G. Reimer, 1828-'77. Briscoe, J. Titi Livi ab urbe condita libri XLI-XLV. Stuttgart. B. G. Teubner, 1986. Biittner-Wobst, T. Polybii historiae. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1889-1905. Cagnat, R., et alii. Inscriptiones Graecae ad res Romanas pertinentes. Paris. E. Leroux, 1901-27·

Cardauns, B. M. Terentius VClrro Antiquitates rerum divinarum: Two volumes. Mainz. Akadernie der Wissenschaften und der Litteratur, Mainz. Wiesbaden, 1976.

Charpin, E Lucilius Satires. Three volumes. Paris. Belles Lettres, 1978-199I. Chassignet, M. Caton, Les Origines (fragments). Paris. Belles Lettres, 1986. Christenson, D. M. Plautus Amphitruo. Cambridge. Cambridge Press, 2000. Cichorius, C. Untersuchungen zu Lucilius. Berlin. Weidmann, 1908. Clark, A. c., W Peterson, M. Tulli Ciceronis orationes. Six volumes. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1905-18. Courtney, E. The Fragmentary Latin Poets. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1993. Crawford, M., et alii. Roman Statutes. Two volumes. London. Bulletin of the Institiute of Classical Studies, School ofAdvanced Study. University of London, 1996.

Degrassi, A. Inscriptiones Italiae. 23.

1.

Rome. La Libreria dello stato, 1947.

391

BIBLIOGRAPHY

_ _ _ Inscriptiones Latinae liberae rei publicae. Two volumes. Florence. La Nuova Italica, 1957, 1963. Dessau, H. Inscriptiones Latinae selectae. Three volumes. Berlin. Weidmann, 18921916

Dittenberger, W Orientis Craed inscriptiones selectae. Two volumes. Leipzig. S. Hirzel, 1903. Reprinted Hildesheim, Zurich, New York. G. Olms, 1986. _ _ _ Sylloge inscriptiones Craecarum. Four volumes. Third edition. Leipzig. S. Hirzel, 1915-24. Douglas, A. E. M. Tulli Ciceronis Brutus. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1966. _ _ _ Cicero, Tusculan Disputations, 11 and V. Warrninster. Aris & Phillips, 1990. Durrbach F., et alii. Inscriptions de DEios. Paris. H. Champion, 1926-. Flaceliere, R. Plutarque Vies IV. Paris. Les Belles Lettres, 1966. Frey,J.-B. Corpus inscriptionum Iudaicarum. Rome. Pontifical Institute of Christian Archaeology, 1936-52. Funari, R. C. Sallusti Crispi historiarum fragmenta. Two volumes. Amsterdam. A. M. Hakkert, 1996. Gabba, E. Appiani Bellorum civilium liber primus. Florence. La Nuova Italica, 1958. Geffcken, J. Criechische Epigramme. Heidelberg. C. Winter, 1916. Gros, P. Vitruve, De L' architecture, livre Ill. Paris. Les Belles Lettres, 1990. Handley, E. W The Dyskolos of Menander. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1965. Hering, W C. Iulii Caesaris commentarii rerum gestarum, volume I. Bellum Callicum. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1987. Hosius, C. A. Cellii Noctium atticarum libri XX. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1903. Jocelyn, H. D. The Tragedies of Ennius; the Fragments. Edited with introduction and commentary. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1967. Jordan, H. M. Catonis praeter librum de re rustica quae extant. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1860.

Kassel, R., C. Austin. Poetae comici Craeci. Eight volumes. Berlin, New York. W de Gruyter, 1983-200I. Kasten, H. M. Tullius Cicero oratio pro Murena. Leipzig. T. G. Teubner, 1961. Kaster, Robert A. Suetonius, De grammaticis et rhetoribus. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1995. Kauer, R., W M. Lindsay, 0. Skutsch, P. Terenti Afri comoediae. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1958. Klotz, A. C. Iulii Caesaris commentarii. Volumes 2 and 3. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1927·

Kock, T. Comicorum Atticorum fragmenta. Three volumes. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1880-1888. Reprinted Utrecht. HES, 1976. Korte, A. Menander ex papyris et membranis vetustissimis. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1910.

_ _ _ , A. Thierfelder. Menandri quae supersunt. Third edition. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1957-9. 392

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Krenkel, W Caius Lucilius. Satiren. Lateinisch und Deutsch. Leiden. E.

J.

Brill,

I97°.

Le?, F. Plauti Comoediae. Two volumes. Berlin. Weidmann, I895-6. Lindsay, W M. Sexti Pompei Festi de verborum significatu quae supersunt cum Pauli epitome. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, I913. Malcovati, H. Oratorum Romanorum fragmenta liberae rei publicae. Fourth edition. Paravia. Turin, 1967. Marmorale, E. V. Naevius poeta, introduzione bibliografia testo dei frammenti. Second Edition. Florence. La Nuova Italica, 1950. Marshall, P. K. A. Gellii Noctes atticae. Two volumes. Oxford. Oxford University Press, I968. Maslowski, T. M. Tullius Cicero scripta quae manserunt omnia. fase. 22. Oratio Pro P. Sestio. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, I986. _ _ _ M. Tullius Cicero scripta quae manserunt omnia. fasc. 17. Orationes in L. Catilinam quattuor. Monico, Leipzig, K. G. Saur, 2003. Marx, F. C. Lucili carminum reliquiae. Two volumes. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, I904-5·

___ Plautus Rudens, text, kommentar. Abhandlungen der Philologischehistorischen klasse der Sachsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. nr. 5, volume 38. Leipzig, 1928. Maurach, G. Plauti Poenulus. Heidelberg. C. Winter, 1975. Maurenbrecher, B. C. Sallusti Crispi Historiarum reliquiae. Two volumes. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1893. Mayhoff, C. C. Plini Secundi Naturalis historiae libri XXXVII. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1892-98. Mayor, J. B. M. Tulli Ciceronis De natura deorum. Volume three. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1885. Mazzarino, A. M. Catonis De agri cultura. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1982. McDonald, A. H. Titi Livi ab urbe condita libri XXXI-XXXV. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1965. Moreschini, C. M. Tullius Cicero de finibus bonorum et malorum. Monaco, Leipzig. K. G. Saur, 2005. Moretti, L. Inscriptiones Graecae urbis Romae. Rome. Studi pubblicati dall'Istituto italiano per la storia antica, I968. Nauck, A. Tragicorum Graecorumfragmenta. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, I856. Noy, D. Jewish Inscriptions of Uistern Europe. Two volumes. I, Italy, Spain, Gaul. Cambridge 1993. 11, The City of Rome. Cambridge. Cambridge Press, I995. Ogilvie, R. M. Titi Livi ab urbe condita libri 1- V. Oxford. Oxford University PreSs, I965·

Olechowska, E. M. Tullius Cicero orationes pro Cn. Plancio, pro C. Rabirio Postumo. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1981. Page, D. L. Further Greek Epigrams. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1981. 393

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Pais, E. Fasti triumphales populi Romani. Rome. A. Nardecchia, 1920. Pease, A. S. M. Tulli Ciceronis De divinatione libro duo. Urbana. University ofIlinois Press, 1920-23. _ _ _ M. Tulli Ciceronis De natura deorum. Two volumes. Cambridge, Mass. Harvard University Press, 1955. Perrin, B. Plutarch's Lives. Eleven volumes. London, Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press. 1914-26. Peter, H. W G. Historicorum Romanorum reliquiae. Two volumes. Second edition. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1906-14. Reynolds, L. D. Catilina, Iugurtha, Historiarum fragmenta selecta C. Sallusti Crispi. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1991. Ribbeck, O. Scaenicae Romanorum poesis fragmenta. Third edition. Two volumes. Volume I Tragicorum fragmenta. Volume 2 Comicorvm fragmenta. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1897-98. Reprinted Hildesheim. G. Olms, 1962. _ _ _ Die romische Tragodie im Zeitalter der Republik. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1875. Reprinted Hildesheim. G. Olms, 1968. Riposati, B. M. Terenti Vclrronis De vita populi Romani. Milan. Societi editrice "Vita e pensiero," 1939. Rothstein, M. Die Elegien des Sextus Propertius. Second edition. Berlin. Weidmann, 1924. Reprinted New York, London. Garland, 1979. Rotondi, G. Leges publicae populi Romani. Milan. Societa editrice libraria, 1912. Reprinted Hildesheim. G. Olms, 1966. Shackleton Bailey, D. R. Cicero's Letters to Atticus. Six volumes. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1965-'7. _ _ _ Cicero: Epistulae ad Familiares. Two volumes. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1977. _ _ _ Cicero: Epistulae ad Quintum Fratem et M. Brutum. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1980. _ _ _ Cicero Philippics. Chapel Hill, London. University of North Carolina Press, 1986. _ _ _ Horatius opera. Stuttgart. B. G. Teubner, 1985. Skutsch, O. The Annals of Q. Ennius. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1985. Snel1, B., R. Kannicht, S. L. Radt. Tragicorum Graecorumfragmenta. Five volumes. Gottingen. Vanderhoek & Ruprecht, 1971-86. Strzelecki, W Cn. Naevii Belli Punid carminis quae supersunt. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1964.

Supplementum epigraphicum Graecum. Usener, H. Epicurea. Leipzig. G. B. Teubner, 1887. Reprinted Dubuque, Iowa. W G. Brown, 1967? Vahlen, J. Ennianae poesis reliquiae. Second edition. Berlin. B. G. Teubner, 1928. Reprinted Amsterdam. A. M. Hakkert, 1967. Van Straaten, P. Panetii Rhodii fragmenta. Leiden. E. J. Brill, 1966. 394

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Walters, C. E, R. S. Conway. Titi Livi ab urbe condita libri VI-X, libri XXI-XXV, libri XXVI-XXX. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1919, 1929, 1935. Walsh, P. G. Titi Livi ab urbe condita libri XXXVI-XL. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1999. Walzing, J. P. Tertullien, Apolgetique. Paris. Les Belles Lettres, 1934. Warmington, E. H. Remains of Old Latin. Revised edition. Four volumes. Cambridge, Mass., London. Harvard University Press, 1979. Winterbottom, M. De officiis, M. Tulli Ciceronis. Oxford, New York. Oxford University Press, 1994. Wistrand, E. The So-Called Laudatio Turiae. G6tesborg. Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, 1976. Ziegler, K. M. Tullius Cicero de re publica librorum sex quae manserunt. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1915. SECONDARY LITERATURE, COMMENTARIES, CONCORDANCES, AND WORKS OF REFERENCE

Adams, J. N., M. Janse, S. Swain. Editors. Bilingualism in ancient society: language contact and the written word. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 2002. Adams, J. N. The Latin Sexual Vocabulary. London. Duckworth, 1982. ___ Bilingualism and the Latin Language. Cambridge, New York. Cambridge University Press, 2003. Adkins, A. W H. Merit and Responsibility: A Study in Ancient Greek Values. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1960. ___ Moral Values and Political Behavior in Ancient Greece from Homer to the End of the Fifth Century. New York. Norton, 1972. AIfcildi, A. "Der friihromische Reiteradel und seine Ehrenabzeichen," Deutsche Beitriige zur Altertumswissenschcift 2. Baden-Baden 1952. pp. 36-53. Allison,J. W Editor. Conflict, Antithesis, and the Ancient Historian. Columbus. Ohio University Press, 1990. Alston, R. "Arms and the man. Soldiers, masculinity and power in Republican and Imperial Rome," in Foxhall, Salmon. When men were men. 1998. pp. 205223·

Aly, W "aretalogoi," RE, suppl. VI. 1935, repr. 1960. 15. Anderson, J. C. jr. Roman Architecture and Society. Baltimore, London. Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997. Astin, A. E. The Lex Annalis bifore Sulla. Brussels. Collection Latomus 32, 1958. _ _ _ "The Roman Commander in Hispania Ulterior in 142 B.c.," Historia 13 (1964) pp. 245-54· ___ Scipio Aemilianus. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1967. ___ Cato the Censor. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1978. _ _ _ "Roman Government and Politics, 200-134 B.C.,"CAH2 VIII. (1989) pp. 163-96. 395

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aubert,J.J., Z. V:irhelyi. Editors. A Tall Order: Religion, law, society, and imperialism in the ancient world (Essays in honor of William V. Harris). Leiden, New York. E. J. Brill, 2005. Axtell, H. L. The Deification of Abstract Ideas in Roman Literature and Inscriptions. Chicago 1907. Badian, E. Foreign Clientelae (264-70 B. G.). Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1958. _ _ _ "Waiting for Sulla," JRS 52 (1962) pp. 47-61. Reprinted in Studies in Greek and Roman History, pp. 206-34. _ _ _ "Marius and the Nobles," Durham University Journal 25 (1963-4) pp. 141-3. _ _ _ Studies in Greek and Roman History. Oxford. B. Blackwell, 1964. _ _ _ "The Early Historians," in Dorey. The Latin Historians. 1966. pp. 1-38. _ _ _ "Quaestiones Variae," Historia 18 (1969) pp. 465-75. _ _ _ Publicans and Sinners. Ithaca, New York. Cornell University Press, 1972. _ _ _ "The Death ofSaturninus," Chiron 14 (1984) pp. 101-47. _ _ _ "The Consuls, 179-49 BC," Chiron 20 (1990) pp. 371-413. _ _ _ "novus homo," OCIY 1996. pp. 1051-2. _ _ _ "Which Metellus," AJAH 13 (1988 = 1997) pp. 106-II2. Bagnall, R. S., W V. Harris. Editors. Studies in Roman Law in Memory of A. Arthur Schiller. Leiden, New York. E. J. Brill, 1986. Baltrusch, E. Regimen morum. Munich. C. H. Beck, 1989. Bardon, H. "Q. Lutatius Catulus et son 'cercle litteraire'," Etudes Classiques 18 (1950) pp. 145-64. Batstone, W W "The Antithesis of Virtue: Sallust's Synkrisis and the Crisis of the Late Republic," Cl. Ant. 7 (1988) pp. 1-29. _ _ _ "Intellectual Conflict and Mimesis in Sallust's Bellum Catilinae," III Allison, Conflict, Antithesis, and the Ancient Historian. 1990. pp. II2-p. Bauman, R. A. Lawyers in Roman Politics. Munich. C. H. Beck, 1983. Beard, M., M. Crawford, Rome in the Late Republic. Ithaca. Cornell University Press, 1985. _ _ _ . "Priesthood in the Roman Republic," in Beard, North. Pagan Priest. 1984· pp. 19-48. _ _ _ J. North. Editors. Pagan Priests: Religion and Power in the Ancient World. London. Duckworth, 1994. - - - J . North, S. Price, Religions of Rome. 1. Cambridge. CambridgeUniversity Press, 1998. Beare, W "When Did Livius Andronicus Come to Rome?" CQ 34 (1940) pp. II-19· _ _ _ The Roman Stage. Third edition. New York. Barnes and Noble, 1965. Beloch, K. J. Die Beviilkerung der griechisch-riimischen 1#lt. Leipzig. Dunker & Humbolt, 1886. _ _ _ Riimische Geschichte. Berlin. W de Gruyter, 1926.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bergemann, J. R0'?1ische Reiterstatuen. Mainz am Rhein. P. von Zabern, 1990. Bernstein, E Ludi publici: Unsuchungen zur Enstehung und Entwichlung der Ojfentlichen Spiele im republikanischen Rom. Stuttgart. E Steiner, 1998. Betz, W "Zur Erforschung des 'inneren Lehngut'," International Congress of Linguists 5, pp. 33-5 Brugge 1939. Bibauw, J. Editor. Hommages a Marcel Renard. Two volumes. Brussels. Collection Latomus 102, 1969. Bishop, M. C. Editor. The Production and Distribution ofRoman Military Equipment. BAR international series, 275. Oxford 1985. Bispham, E., C. Smith. Editors. Religion in Archaic and Republican Rome and Italy. Edinburgh. Edinburgh University Press, 2000. Bonfante, G. "Etruscan Words in Latin," VVOrd 36 (1985) pp. 203-10. _ _ _ "Vir e vis," RAL 41 (1987) pp. 197-8. Bonfante Warren, L "Roman Triumph and Etruscan Kings: The Changing Face of the Triumph," JRS 60 (1970) pp. 49-66. Bonfante, L Etruscan Dress. Baltimore. Johns Hopkins University Press, 1975. - - - "Roman Costumes," ANRW I 4. (1973) pp. 584-614· _ _ _ "Nudity as a Costume in Classical Art," AJA 93 (1989) pp. 543-'70. Bonnefond-Coudry, M. Le Senat de la Republique romaine. Rome. Ecole Franc;aise de Rome, 1989. Boscherini, S. Lingua e scienza greca nel "De agricultura" di Catone. Ricerche di storia della lingua latina 8. Rome. Edizioni dell'Ateneo, 1970. Boyance, P. "Aedes Catuli," MEFRA 57 (1940) pp. 64-'7!. _ _ _ "La connaissance du grec a Rome," REL 34 (1956) pp. lII-3!. _ _ _ "La main de Fides," in Renard, Schilling. Hommages aJean Bayet 1. 1964. pp. 101-13 Boyd S., S. Latomaa. "Fishman's Theory of Diglossia and Bilingualism," in Extra, Verhoeven. Bilingialism and Migration. 1999· pp. 303-24. Bradley, K. R. Slave and Masters in the Roman Empire. Brussels. Collection Latomus, 1984. ___ Slavery and Rebellion in the Roman World 140 BC-70 BC. Bloomington. Indiana University Press, I9'89. ___ Slavery and Society at Rome. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1994· Brennan, T. C. "The Commanders in the First Slave War," RFIC 121 (1993) pp. 153-84. _ _ _ "Triumphus in Monte Albano," in Wallace, Harris, Transitions to Empire. 1996. pp. 315-37. Briscoe, J. A. "The Second Punic War," CAH 2 VIII (1989) pp. 44-80. Brisson, J.-P. Editor. Problemes de la guerre a Rome. Civilisatons et Societes 12. Paris. Mouton, 1969. Brotherton, B. E. M. The Vocabulary of Intrigue in Roman Comedy. Menasha, Wisconsin. G. Banton, 1926. 397

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brougton, T. R. S. The Magistrates of the Roman Republic. Two volumes. New York. Philological Monographs of the American Philological Association 15.1-2, 1951-2. Reprinted Cleveland, 1968, with third volume, Chico 198486. _ _ _ "Notes on Roman Magistrates," Historia 2 (1953-54) pp. 209-213. _ _ _ "Candidates defeated in Roman Elections: Some Roman Also-RailS," TrAPhilS 81.4. (philadelphia, 1991) p. 9. _ _ _ "M. Aemilius Lepidus: His Youthful Career," in Curtis. Studia Pompeiana & Classica in Honor cif Wilhelmina E Jashemski II (1989) pp. 13-23. Brunt, P. A. "The Equites in the Late Republic," in Trade and Politics in the Ancient World (Second International Conference of Economic History, Paris, 1962). The Hague. Paris, 1965. pp. 117-49. Reprinted in The Fall cif the Roman Republic and Related Essays. pp. 144-93. _ _ _ "The Army and the Land in the Roman Revolution," JRS 52 (1962) pp. 69-86. Reprinted in The Fall cif the Roman Republic and Related Essays. pp. 240- 80 . _ _ _ Italian Manpower 225 B.G-A.D. 14. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1971. _ _ _ "Nobilitas and Novitas," JRS 72 (1982) pp. 1-17. ___ The Fall cif the Roman Republic and Related Essays. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1988. _ _ _ "Philosophy and Roman Religion," in Griffin, Barnes. Philosophia Togata. 1989. pp. 176-<)8. Buchner, K. "Altromische und Horazische virtus," Die Antike 15 (1939) pp. 14564. Reprinted in K. Buchner Studien zur romischen Literatur III Horaz. Weisbaden. 1962. pp. 1-22, and in Oppermann, 1967, pp. 376-99. _ _ _ Humanitas Romana. Heidelberg. C. Winter, 1957. _ _ _ Romische Literaturgeschichte. Stuttgart. A. Kroner, 1957. _ _ _ Sallust. Heidelburg. C. Winter, 1960. _ _ _ Studien zur romischen Literatur 3 Horaz. Wiesbaden. F. Steiner, 1962. _ _ _ "Der Eingang von Ciceros Staat," in Renard, Schilling. Hommages Jean Bayet (1964) pp. 134-53. ___ M. Tullius Cicero, De re publica, Kommentar. Heidelberg. C. Winter, 1984. Callebat, L. "La prose du De Architectura de Virtruve," ANRW II 30.1. (1982) pp. 69 6-7 22 . Cambiano, G. et alii. Editors. Lo spazio literario della Grecia antiqua. 1.2. Rome. Salerno editrice, 1993. Cambridge Ancient History. First edition. Volume eight, "Rome and the Mediterranean." Editors. S. A. Cook, F. E. Adcock, M. P. Charlesworth. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1928. Cambridge Ancient History. Second Edition. Volume seven, 2. "The Rise of Rome to 220 B. c." Editors. F. W Walbank, A. E. Astin, M. Frederiksen, R. M. Ogilvie. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1989. Volume eight, "Rome

a

BIBLIOGRAPHY

and the Mediterranean." Editors .. A. E. Astin, E W Walbank:, M. Frederiksen, R. M. Ogilvie. 1989. Volume nine, "The Last Age of the Roman Republic." Editors. J. A. Crook, A. Lintott, E. Rawson, 1994. Carawan, E. M. "The Tragic History of Marcellus and Livy's Characterization," C] 80 (1985) pp. 131-41. Carney,1'. E "Cicero's Picture of Marius," WS 73 (1960) pp. 83-122. _ _ _ "The Picture of C. Marius in Valerius Maximus," RhM 105 (1962) pp. 289-337· ___ A Biography if c. Marius. second edition. Chicago. Argonaut, 1970. Cecchi, S. "La propaganda di prestigio a favore d'Atene nelle tragedia greca," Dioniso 34 (1960) pp. 143-64· Champeaux, J. Fortuna. Recherches sur le cult de la Fortune cl Rome et dans le monde romain des origines cl la mort de Cesar. Two volumes. Rome. Collection de l'Ecole Franyaise de Rome, 64 I, 1982. 64.6, 1987. _ _ _ "'Fortuna' et le vocabulaire de la farnille de 'fortuna' chez Plaute et Terence," RPh 56 (1982) pp. 57-71. Charles-Picard, G. Les trophees romains, contributions cl l'histoire de la religion et de l'art triomphal de Rome. Paris. E. deBoccard, 1957. Cichorius, C. Romische Studien, historisches epigraphisches literaturgeschichtliches aus vier jahrhunderten Roms. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1922. Classen, C. J. "Gottrnenschentum in der roInischen Republik," Das Gymnasium 70 (1963) pp. 312-28. Coarelli, E "L' 'ara di DoInizio Enobarbo' e la cultura artistic a in Roma nel II secolo a.c.," DArch 2 (1968) pp. 302-68. ___, E Zevi, "11 sepolcro degli Scipioni," in Roma medio repubblicana. 1977. pp. 234-39 ___ "11 sepolcro degli Scipioni," DArch 6 (1972) pp. 36-106. ___ nforo Romano. Two volumes. Rome. Quasar, 1983, 1885. ___ n campo Marzio. Rome. Quasar, 1997. _ _ _ "Vino e Ideologia nella Roma Arcaica," in Murray, Tecusan, In Vino Veritas. 1995 pp. 204-7. ___ Revixit Ars. Rome. Quasar, 1996. _ _ _ "Fornix Scipionis," LTUR 2 (1995) pp. 266-7. Cohen, S. J. D., E. S. Frerichs. Editors. Diasporas in Antiquity. Atlanta. Scholars Press, 1993. Combes, R. Imperator, recherches sur l'emploi et signification du titre d'imperator dans la Rome republicaine. Paris. Publications de la Faculte des lettres et sciences humaines de Universite de Montpelier. 26, 1966. Cormell, R. W Masculinities. Berkeley, Los Angeles. University of California Press, 1995. Corbeill, A. Controlling Laughter. Princeton. Princeton University Press, 1996. _ _ _ "Dining Deviants in Roman Political Invective," in Hallett, Skiner, Roman Sexualities. 1997· pp. 99-123. 399

BIBLIOGRAPHY

_ _ _ "Political Movement; Walking and Ideology in Republican Rome," in Fredrick, The Roman Gaze, Vision, Power, and the Body. 2002. pp. 18221S· _ _ _ Nature Embodied,Gesture in Ancient Rome. Princeton. Princeton University Press, 2004. Corbett,J. H. "Rome and the Gauls 28S-280 B.C.," Historia 20 (1971) pp. 6S664· Cornell, T. J., K. Lomas. Editors. Urban Society in Roman Italy. New York. St. Martin's Press, 1995. _ _ _ Editors. Gender and Ethnicity in Ancient Italy. London. Accordia Reseach Institute, University of London, 1997. Cornell, T. J. "Ennius, Annals VI: A Reply," CQ 38 (1987) pp. 514-16. _ _ _ "The end of Roman imperial expansion," in Rich, Shipley, JiVcJr and Society in the Roman TMlrld. 1993. pp. 138-70. _ _ _ The Beginnings of Rome. London. New York. Routledge, 1995. Cornwall, A., Lindisfarne, N. "Dislocating Masculinity, Gender, P6wer and Anthropology," in A. Cornwall, N. Lindisfarne. Editors. Dislocating Masculinity: Comparative Ethnographies. London, New York. Routledge, 1994. Courtriey, E. Musa Lapidaria, A Selection ofLatin Verse Inscriptions. Atlanta. Scholars Press,199S. _ _ _ Archaic Latin Prose. Atlanta. Scholars Press, 1999. Crake, J. E. A. "Roman Politics from 21S to 209 B.C.," Phoenix 17 (1963) pp. 123-30. Crawford, M. H. Roman Republican Coinage. Two volumes. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1974. _ _ _ Coinage and Money under the Roman Republic. Berkeley, Los Angeles. University of California Press, 1985. _ _ _ The Roman Republic. Second edition. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press, 1992. Curti, E. "From Concordia to the Quirinal," in Bispham, Smith. Religion in Archaic and Republican Rome and Italy. 2000. pp. 77--f)1. Curtis, R. 1. Editor. Studia Pompeiana & Classica in Honor of Wilhe/mina F. Jashemski. Two Volumes. New Rochelle, New York. A. D. Caratzas, 1988. Dalvaux, G. "c. Pison, alias C. Oppius, source de Plutarque," Latomus So (1991) pp. 88--f)1. Delaruelle, L. "Les Souvenirs d'oeuvres plastiques dans la revue des heros au livre VI de l'Eneide," RA 21 (1913) pp. IS3-'7. Della Corte, F. Da Sarsina a Roma. Florence. La Nuova Italia, 1967. _ _ _ "Stoiker undEpikureer in Plautus' Komodien," in Reinhardt, Sallmann. Musa iocosa. 1974. pp. 80--f)4. Deroux, C. Editor. Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History Volume Ill. Brussels. Collection Latomus 180, 1983. Volume JX. Brussells. Collection Latomus, 1998.

400

BIBLIOGRAPHY

De Sanctis, G. Storia dei Romani. Four volumes. Third edition. Turin, Florence. Fratelli Bocca, 1907-1965. de Veer, A. "Perfi:ui diis iratis (De civ. Dei, L. n, 23)," Revue des etudes augustiniennes I (1955) 402-10. Develin, R. "Religion and Politics at Rome during the Third Century BC," The Journal of Religious History 10 (1978) pp. 3.,-19. _ _ _ "Tradition and the Development of Triumphal Regulations in Rome," Klio 60 (1978) pp. 429-38. ___ Patterns in Office Holding, 366-49 B. C. Brussels. Collection Latomus, 1979· ___ Practice of Politics at Rome, 366-167 B. C. Brussels. Collection Latomus 188, 1985· de Vries, J. "Language Maintenance and Shift: Problems of Measurement," in Fase, Jaspaert, Kroonp, Maintenance and Lass of Minority Languages. 1992. pp. 2II fr. Dillard, J. L. Black English, Its History and Usage in the United States. New York. Randon House, 1972. ___ Lexicon of Black English. New York. Seabury Press, 1977. Dillon, S., K. E. Welch. Editors. Representing VVczr in Ancient Rome. Cambridge, New York. Cambridge University Press, 2006. Dixon, K. R., P. Southern. The Roman Cavalry. London. Batsford, 1992. Dobesch, G. "Caesar und Hellenismus," in Kinsky, Diorthoseis. 2004. pp. ro8252. Domaszewski, von, A. "Dei certi und dei incerti," in Abhandlungen zur riimischen Religion. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1909. Reprinted New York. Arno Press, 1975· pp. 154-170 . Dondin-Payre, M. "Homo Novus: Un slogan de Caton a Cesar?" Historia 30 (1981) pp. 22-8r. Dorey, T. A., D. R. Dudley. Editors. Roman Drama. London. Routledge & K. Paul, 1965. Dorey, T. A. Editor. The Latin Historians. New York. Basic Books, 1966. _ _ _ Editor. Latin Biography. London. Routledge & K. P;lul, 1967. Dover, K. J. Greek Popular Morality in the Time of Plato and Aristotle. Berkeley, Los Angeles. University of California Press, 1974. Drexler, H. "Die Komposition von Terenz Adelphen und Plautus Rudens," Philologus suppl. 26 2. Leipzig 1934. _ _ _ "Honos," Romanitas 3 (1961) 135-157. Reprinted in Oppermann. Riimische Wertbegrijfe. 1967. pp. 446-67. _ _ _ "Gloria," Helikon 2 (1969) pp. 3-36. Drummond, A. Law, Politics and Power. Sallust and the Execution of the Catilinarian Conspirators. Stuttgart. E Steiner, 1995. Dumezil, G. Archaic Roman Religion. Two volumes. Translated by Phillip Krapp. Chicago, London. University of Chicago Press, 1970.

40 1

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Dumont,J. Chr. "La strategie de l'esclave Plautinien," REL 44 (1966) pp. 203-12. Duva, N., H.-G. Pflaum. Editors. L'onomastique latine. Paris. Centre national de la recherche, 1977. Dyck, A. R. "On the Composition and Sources of Cicero De officiis 1.50-58," CSCA 12 (1979) pp. 77-84. _ _ _ "On Panaetius' Conception of MEyai\o\.flvxia," Mus.Hel. 38 (1981) pp. 53-6 1. _ _ _ A Commentary on Cicero, De Officiis. Ann Arbor. University of Michigan Press, 1996. _ _ _ A Commentary on Cicero, De Legibus. Ann Arbor. University of Michigan Press, 2004. Earl, D. C. "Political Terminology in Plautus," Historia 9 (1960) pp. 235-43. _ _ _ "M. Octavius," Latomus 19 (1960) pp. 657-69. _ _ _ The Political Thought of Sallust. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1961. _ _ _ "Terence and Roman Politics," Historia II (1962) pp. 469-85. _ _ _ Tiberius Gracchus, A Study in Politics. Brussels. Collection Latomus. 1963. _ _ _ The Moral and Political Tradition of Rome. Ithaca. Cornell University Press. 1967· Eckstein, A. M. Senate and General, Individual Decision Making and Roman Foreign Policy, 264-194 B. C. Berkeley, Los Angeles. University of California Press, 1987. _ _ _ Moral Vision in the Histories of Polybius. Berkeley, Los Angeles. University of California Press, 1995. Eder, W Editor. Staat und Staatlichkeit in der friihen romischen Republik. Stuttgart. Steiner, 1990. Egermann, F. "Die Proomien zu den Werken des Sallust," Sitzungsberichte der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaft in Wien, philosophische historische klasse. 214 3. Vienna 1932. Ehler, W "Triumphus," RE VIIA. (1939) cols. 493-5II. Eigler, E., U. Gotter, N. Luraghi, U. Walter. Editors. Formen romischer Geschichtsschreibung von den Anfangen bis Livius. Darrnstadt. 2003. Eisenhut, W Virtus Romana. Jhre Stellung im romischen Mkrtsystem. Studia et Testimonia Antiqua 13. Munich. W Fink, 1973. _ _ _ "Virtus als gottliche Gestalt," RE suppl. XIV (1974) cols. 896-910. Erickson, B. "Falling Masts, Rising Masters: The Ethnography of Virtue in Caesar's Account of the Veneti," AJPh 123 (2002) pp. 601-22. Erkell, H. Augustus, Felicitas, Fortuna. Lateinische VVOrtstudien. Gotesborg. Elanders boktryckeri aktiebolag, 1952. Ernout, A., A. Meillet. Dictionnaire etymologique de la langue latine. Fourth edition. Paris. C. Klincksieck, 1967. Ernout, A. "Les elements etrusques du vocabulaire latin," BSL 30 (1930) p. 104· _ _ _ Aspects du vocabulaire latin. Etudes et commentaires, volume 18. Paris 1954·

402

BIBLIOGRAPHY

___ Philologica H. Etudes et commentaires 26. Paris. C. Klincksieck, 1957. Ernst, J., et alii. Editors. Melanges de philologie, de litterature et d'historie anciennes, offerts aJ. Marouzeau. Paris. Les Belles Lettres, 1948. Evans, R. J. Gaius Marius, A Political Biography. Pretoria. University of South Africa Press, 1994. Extra, G., Verhoeven, L. Editors. Bilingualism and Migration. Berlin, New York. W de Gruyter, 1999. Eyben, E. "Die Einteilung des menschlichen Lebens in rornischen Altertums," RhM Il6 (1973) pp. 150--90. Fantham, E. "Terence, Diphilus and Menander," Philologus Il2 (1968) pp. 196215. ___ Comparative Studies in Republican Latin Imagery. Toronto. University of Toronto Press, 1972. _ _ _ "Philemon's Thesaurus as a Dramatisation of Peripatetic Ethics," Hermes !O5 (1977) pp. 406-21. ___ Roman Literary Culture. Baltimore, London. Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996. ___ The Roman lMJrld of Cicero s De Oratore. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 2004· Fase, W, K. Jaspaert, S. Kroon. Editors. Maintenance and Loss ofMinority Languages. Studies in Bilingualism, I. Amsterdam, Philadelphia. J. Benjarnins, 1992. Fears, J. R. "The Cult of Virtues and Imperial Ideology," in ANRW H 17.2 (1981 ) pp. 827-948. _ _ _ "The Theology of Victory at Rome: Approaches and Problems," in ANRW rr 17.2 (1981) pp. 736-826. Feldherr, A. Spectacle and Society in Livys History. Berkeley, Los Angeles. University of California Press, 1998. Fentress, J., C. Wickham. Social Memory. Oxford. B. Blacwell, 1992. Ferrary, J.-L. "Le Discours de Philus (Ciceron, De Re Publica rrr 8-31) et la philosphie de Carneade," REL 55 (1977) pp. 128-56. ___ Philhellenisme et Imperialisme. Rome. Ecole franc;aise de Rome, 1988. Fiebiger, H. 0., "Corona," RE IV (1901) cols. 1636-43. Finley, M. 1. "The Silent Women of Rome," in Aspects of Antiquity: Discoveries and Controversies. New York. Viking Press, 1968. pp. 129-:-42. ___ Ancient Sicily. Revised edition. London. Chatto & Windus, 1979. Fishman, J. A. Language Loyalty in the United States. The Hague 1966. Reprinted New York 1978. ___ The Sociology of Language. New York. Arno Press, 1972. _ _ _ Editor. Advances in the Study of Societal Multilingualism. I I - I l l . The Hague, Paris, New York. Mouton, 1978. _ _ _ The Rise and Fall of the Ethnic Revival. Berlin, New York. Mouton, 1985. Flores, E. Latinita arcaica e produzione linguistica. Naples. Liguori, 1978. 40 3

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Flory, M. B. "The Integration of Women into the Roman Triumph," Historia 47 (199 8) pp. 489-94· Flower, H. 1. Aristocratic Masks and Aristocratic Power in Roman Culture. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1996. - - - , "Fabulae Praetextae in Context," CQ 45 (1995) pp. 170-90. _ _ _ , "The Tradition of the Spolia Opima: M. Claudius Marcellus and Augustus," CIAnt 19 (2000) pp. 34-64. _ _ _ , "Memories of Marcellus," in Eigler, Gotter, Luraghi, Walter. Formen riimischer Geschichtsschreibung von den Anfiingen bis Livius. 2003. pp. 39-52. _ _ _ , Editor. The Cambridge Companion to the Roman Republic. Cambridge and New York. Cambridge University Press, 2004. Foxhall, L., J. Salmon. Editors. When men were men. Masculinity, power and identity in classical antiquity. London, New York. Routledge, 1998. Fraccaro, P. "Catoniana," Studi Storici per l'antichita classica 3 (19IO) 241-85. Reprinted in Opuscula I, pp. 227-56 _ _ _ "Ricerche storiche e letterarie sulla censura del 184ir83," Studi Storici per l'antichita classica 4 (19II) 1-137· Reprinted in Opuscula I, pp. 417-508 _ _ _ Opuscula. Three volumes. Pavia. Athenaeum, 1956. Reprinted Como. New Press, 1978. Fraenkel, E. "Zur Geschichte der Wortes Fides," RMPh 71 (1916) 187-199. Reprinted in Kleine Betriige zur klassischen Philologie I. Rome 1964. pp. 15-26. _ _ _ "Fides," in Thesaurus linguae Latinae. 6. 1912-26. pp. 661-69I. _ _ _ Plautinisches im Plautus. Berlin. Weidmann, 1922. _ _ _ "Naevius," RE VI (1935) cols. 622-640. _ _ _ Elementi Plautini in Plauto. Translated by Franco Munari. Il pensiero storico, 41. Florence. La Nuova Italia, 1960. Francken, C. M. "De Poenuli Plautinae Compositione" Mnemosyne 4 (1876) pp. 169-75. Frank, T. Life and Literature in the Roman Republic. Berkeley 1930. Reprinted 1965. _ _ _ An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome. Volume one. Baltimore. Johns Hopkins University Press, 1933. Reprinted New York. Octagon Press, 1975. Frederiksen, M. W "Campanian Cavalry: A question of origins," DArch. 2 (1968) pp. 3-3I. _ _ _ Campania. London. British School in Rome, 1984. Fredrick, D. Editor. The Roman Gaze, Vision, Power, and the Body. Baltimore, London. Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002. Friedrich, W H. "Zur altlatinischen Dichtung," Hermes 76 (1941) pp. II3-35. Frier, B. W The Rise of the Roman Jurists. Princeton. Princeton University Press, 1985. Fuchs, H. "Zu zwei Szenen der Mostellaria," MusHel6 (1949) pp. I05-26. Gabba, E. Esercito e societa nella tarda repubblica romana. Florence. La Nuova Italia, 1973 = Republican Rome, the Army and the Allies. Translated by P. J. Cuff. Berkeley, Los Angeles. University of California Press, 1976.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

_ _ _ "Mario e Silla,"ANRW I I (1972) pp. 764-805. Gage, J. "La Theologie de la victoire imperiale," Revue Historique 171 (1933) pp. 1-4 2 . Garbarino, G. "Evoluzione semantica dei termini sapiens e sapientia nei secoli III e 11 a.c.," Atti della Academia delle scienze di Torino, classe di scienze morali, storiche e filologiche. lOO (1965-6) pp. 254-84. _ _ _ Roma e la filosofia greca dalle origini alia fine del 11 secolo a. C. Turin. G. B. Paravia, 1973. Gardner, J. F. Being a Roman Citizen. London, New York. Routledge, 1993. _ _ _ Women in Roman Law and Society. London. Cromrn Helm, 1986. Geffcken, K. A. Comedy in the Pro Caelio. Leiden. E. J. Brill. 1973. Gelzer, M. Die Nobilitiit der romischen Republik. Berlin. B. G. Teubner, 1912. _ _ _ "Nasicas Widerspruch gegen die Zerstorung Kathagos," Philologus 86 (1931) pp. 261-99· - - - "Porcius (9)," RE XII I (1953) cols. 108-45. _ _ _ Caesar, Politician and Statesman. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press, 1969. ___ The Roman Nobility. Translated by Robin Seager. Oxford. B. Blackwell, 1969. _ _ _ Review ofScullard, Roman Politics, Historia I (1950) pp. 634-42. Genovese, E. D. RollJordan Roll, The World the Slaves Made. New York. Pantheon Books, 1974. Genzmer, J. Der 'AmphitYUo' des Plautus und sein griechisches Original. Dissertation. Keil. University Microfilms 1956. Gesche, H. "Die Reiterstatuen der Aemilier und Marcier," Jahrbuchfur Numismatik und Geldgeschichte 18 (1968) pp. 25-42. Ghilli, L. Plutarco, vite parallele, Pelopida-Marcellonote. Milan. Rizzoli, 1998. Giles, H., N. Coupland. Language: Contexts and Consequences. Pacific Grove, CA. Open University Press, 1991. Gilleland, M. E. Linguistic Differentiation of Character Types and Sex in the Comedies of Plautus and Terence. Dissertation. University of Virginia 1979· _ _ _ "Female Speech in Greek and Latin," AJPh lOI (1980) pp. 180-3. Gilrnore, D. D. Manhood in the Making. New Haven, London. Yale University Press, 1990. Gjerstad et alii. Les origines de la Republique romaine. Fondation Hardt. Etretiens sur l'Antiquite classique. Geneva. Vandouvers-Genesa, 1967. Glare, P. G. W Editor. Oxford Latin Dictionary. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1968-82. Gleason, M. Making Men, Sophists and Self-Presentation in Ancient Rome. Princeton. Princeton University Press, 1995. Gnauk, R. Die Bedeutung des Marius und Cato maiorfur Cicero. Berlin. E. Ebering, 1936.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Goette, H. R. Studien zu romischen Togadarstellungen. Mainz am Rhein, P. von Zabern, 1990. Goldberg, S. M. UnderStanding Tefefltt. Princetoh. Princeton Uriivetsity Press, 1986. _ _ _ Epic in Republican Rome. New York. Oxford Uriiversity Press, 1995. Golden, M. "Pais, Child and Slave," L'Antiquite Classique 54 (1985) pp. 91104· Goldsworthy, A. K. The Roman Army at Mftlr 100 BC-AD 200. Oxford. Oxford Uriiversity Press, 1996. _ _ _ "Instinctive Geriius: The depiction of Caesar the general," in Welch, Powell,Julius Caesar as Ariful Reporter. 1998. pp. 193-219. Gorler, W "Zum virtus-Fragment des Lucilius und zur Geschichte der stoischen . Giiterlehre," Hermes II2 (1984) pp. 445-68. Gratwick, A. S. "Early Republic," in Kenny, Clausen, Cambridge History if Classical Literature. 1982. pp. 60-17I. ___ "A Mattter Of Substance: Cato's Preface to the De Agri Cultura," Mnemosyne 54 (2002) pp. 41-72. Green, C. M. "Did the Romans Hunt?" ClAnt 15 (1996) pp. 222-60. Greene, W C. Moim: Fate, Good, and Evil in Greek Thought. Cambridge, MA. Harvard Uriiversity Press, 1957. Griffin, J. Latin Poets and Roman Life. Chapel Hill. Uriiversity of North Carolina Press, 1986. Gros, P. "Hermodorus et Vitruve," MEFRA 85 (1973) pp. 137-61. _ _ _ "Les premieres generations d' architectes helleriistique aRome," in L'Italie preromaine et la Rome republicaine: melanges offerts cl J Heurgon. Rome. Ecole Franyaise de Rome, 1976. pp. 387-410. _ _ _ "Les statues de Syracuse et les 'dieux' de Tarente," REL 57 (1979) pp. 85-II 4· Grosjean, F. Life with Two Languages. Cambridge, MA. Harvard Uriiversity Press, 1982. Grueber, H. A. Coins if the Roman Republic in the British Museum. Three volumes. London. British Museum, 19IO. Gruen, E. S. Roman Politics and the Criminal Courts, 14~78 B. C. Cambridge, Mass. Harvard Uriiversity Press, 1968. _ _ _ The Last Generation if the Roman Republic. Berkeley, Los Angeles. Uriiversity of Califorriia Press, 1974. Reprinted, 1995. _ _ _ "Greek TIiCJTIS" and Romanfides," Athenaeum 60 (1982) pp. 50-68. _ _ _ Studies in Greek Culture and Roman Policy. Leiden, New York. E. J. Brill, 1990. _ _ _ Culture and National Identity in Republican Rome. Ithaca. Cornell Uriiversity Press, 1992. Gundaker, G. Signs if Diaspora, Diaspora if Signs. New York. Oxford Uriiversiry Press, 1998. 406

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Habicht, C. Gottmenschentum und griechische Stadte. Munich. C. H. Beck, 1956. _ _ _ Cicero the Politician. Baltimore. Johns Hopkins University Press, 1990. Hackens, T., R. Weiller. Editors. Actes du geme congres international de Numismatique Berne. septembre 1979. Louvain-La-Neuve, Luxembourg. Assocation internationale des numismates professionnels, 1982. Hagendahl, H. Augustine and the Latin Classics 11. Stockholm. Almqvist & Wiksell, 1967. Hagerstrom, A. Der romische Obligationsbegriff im Licht der allgemeinen romischen Rechsanschauung. Uppsala. Almqvist & Wiksell, 1927-41. Halkin, L. E. "La parodie d'une demande de triomphe dans l'Amphitryon," L'Antiquite Classique 17 (1948) pp. 297-304. _ _ _ La supplication d' action des graces chez les Romains. Paris. Les Belles Lettres, 1953· Hailet, J. P., M. B. Skinner. Editors, Roman Sexualities. Princeton. Princeton University Press, 1997. Hailett, J. P. Fathers and Daughters in Roman Society: VV!Jmen in the Elite Family. Princeton. Princeton University Press, 1984. Hamberg, P. G. Studies in Roman Imperial Art. Uppsala. Almqvist & Wiksell, 1945. Hamblenne, P. "Cura ut vir sis ... ou une (vir(tus) peu morale," Latomus 43 (1984) pp. 369-88. Hamers, J. E, M. H. A. Blanc. Editors. Bilinguality and Bilingualism. Cambridge, New York. Cambridge University Press, 1989. Handley, E. W Menander and Plautus: A Study in Comparisons. London. H. K. Lewis, 1968. _ _ _ "Recent Papyrus Finds: Menander," BICS 26 (1979) pp. 81-7. Hanell, K. Das altromische eponyme Amt. Lund. C. W K. Gleerup, 1946. Hansen, M. H. "The Battle Exhortation in Ancient Historiography," Historia 42 (1993) pp. 161-80. Hardy, E. G. The Catilinarian Conspiracy in its Context: A Re-Study of the Evidence. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1924. Harmand, J. L'Armee et le soldat Rome de 107 50 av. notre ere. Paris. A. J. Picard et Cie, 1967. Harris, W V Rome in Etruria and Umbria. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1971. _ _ _ VVtlr and Imperialism in Republican Rome, 327-70 B. C. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1979. _ _ _ "The Roman Father's Power of Life and Death," in Bagnall, Harris, Studies in Roman Law in Memory of A. Arthur Schiller. 1986. pp. 81-95. _ _ _ "Roman Warfare in the Economic and Social Context of the Fourth Century B.C.," in Eder, Staat und Staatlichkeit in der friihen romischen Republik 1990. pp. 503-4. _ _ _ "Roman Expansion in the West," CAH 2 VIII. 1989. pp. 107-62.

a

a

_ _ _ Restraining Rage: the Ideology of Anger-Control in Classical Antiquity. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press, 2002.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

_ _ _ "Readings in the Narrative Literature of Roman Courage," in Dillon, Welch, Representing War in Ancient Rome. 2006. _ _ _ "Can Enemies Too Be Brave? A Question About the Roman Representation of the Other," in M. E Petraccia, Editor n cittadino, 10 straniero, il barbaro fra integrazione ed emarginazione neWantichita. Serta Antigua et mediaevalia VII. Rome. G. Bretschneider, 2006. Harrison, S. J. "Augustus, the Poets, and the Spolia Opima," CQ 39 (1989) pp. 4°8-14. Haugen, E. "The Analysis of Linguistic Borrowing," Language 26 (1950) pp. 210-31. ___ The Norweigen Language in American: A Study of Bilingual. Behavior. Philadelphia. University of Pennsylvania Press, 1953. ___ Bilingualism in the Amercians: A bibliography and research guide. University of Alabama Press, 1956. _ _ _ "Bilingualism, Language Contact and Immigrant Languages in the United States. A Research Report 1956-1970," in Fishman, Advances in the Study of Societal Multilingualism. I. 1978. pp. I - Ill. Heibges, U. "Religion and Rhetoric in Cicero's Speeches," Latomus 28 (1969) pp. 833-49· Heinze, R. "Fides," Hermes 64 (1929) pp. 140-166. Reprinted in Vom Geist des Romertums. 1939. pp. 59-81. _ _ _ "Zur romischen Moral," in Meister, Die Tugenden der Romer. 1930. Reprinted in Vom Geist des Romertums. 1939. pp. 59-81. Reprinted in Oppermann, Romische Wertbegriffe. 1967. pp. 6-19. ___ Vom Geist des Romertums. Stuttgart. 1939. Reprinted Stuttgart. B. G. Teubner, 1960. Helbig, W "Contribution a l'histoire de l'equitatus romain," Compt. Rend. del'Acad. des Insc. et Belles Lettres II (1904) pp. 202-12. _ _ _ "Die Equites als berittene Hopliten," Abhand. d. bayer AkademieWissenschcift 23 (1905) pp. 267-317. _ _ _ . "Die Castores als Schutzgotter des romischen Equitatus," Hermes 40 (1905) pp. 101-15· Hellegouarc'h, J. Le vocabulaire latin des relations et les partis politiques sous la republique. Publications de la Faculte des lettres et sciences humaines de Universite de Lille 11. Paris 1963. Helm, R. "Porcius (9)," RE XII I (1953) cols. 145-65. Herescu, N. 1. "Les traces des epigrammes militaires dans le 'Miles gloriosus' de Plaute," Revue Beige de Philologie et d'Histoire 37 (1959) pp. 45-51. Hersh, C. A. "Notes on the Chronology and Interpretation of the Roman Republican Coinage," NC 17 (1977) pp. 19-37. Hersh, c., Walker, A. "The Mesagne Hoard," ANSMN 29 (1984) pp. 103-34. Hertzfeld, M. The Poetics ofManhood. Princeton. Princeton University Press, 1985. Heurgon, J. Lucilius. Paris 1959· 4 08

BIBLIOGRAPHY

___ L'Italie preromaine et la Rome republicaine: melanges offerts ii]acques Huergon. Rome. Ecole Franc;aise de Rome, 1976. Hickson, E V. Roman Prayer Language, Livy and the Aeneid of Virgil. Stuttgart. B. G. Teubner,1993. Hild, J. A. "Virtus," in Dictionnaire des antiquites grecques et romaines d' apres les textes et les monuments. Editors C. V. Daremberg, Edm. Saglio. 5,926-7. Paris 1917. Hill, H. "Equites and Celeres," CP 33 (1938) pp. 283-90. ___ The Roman Middle Class. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1952. Hinard, E "Sur une autre forme de l'opposition entre virtus etfortuna," Kentron 3 (1987) pp. 17-20 . _ _ _ "Spectacle des executions et espace urbain," in L'Urbs: espace urbain et histoire. 1987. pp. lII-25. Hine, H. M. "Livy'sJudgment on Marius," LCM 3 (1978) pp. 83--9I. Hines, S. L. The Metaphorical Use cif Mythological and Historical Allusions in Plautus. Dissertation. University of Minnesota, 1973. Hi::ilkeskamp, K.-J. Die Entstehung der Nobiltiit Studien zur sozialen und politischen Geschichte der romischen Republik in 4 ]hdt. v. Chr. Stuttgart. E Steiner, 1987. _ _ _ "Conquest, Competition and Consensus," Historia 42 (1993) pp. 12-39· Holloway,J. E., W K. Vass, The African Heritage cifAmerican English. Bloomington. Indiana University Press, 1993. Hollstein, W Die stadtromische Miinzpriigung der ]ahre 78-50 v. Chr. zwischen politischer Aktualitiit und Familienthematik. Tuduv. Munich, 1993. Holroyd, M. "The Jugurthine War: Was Marius or Metellus the Real Victor?" ]RS 18 (1929) pp. 1-20. Hi::ilscher, T. "Die Anfange ri::imischer Reprasentationskunst," MDAIR 85 (1978) pp. 315-57 _ _ _ "Die Bedeutung der Miinzen fur das Verstandnis der politischen Reprasentationskunst der spaten ri::imischen Republik." in Hackens, Weiller. Actes du geme congres international de Numismatique Berne. septembre 1979. Volumes 1. 1982. pp. 269-82. ___ Staatsdenkmal und Publikum. Xenia 9. Konstanz. Universitats Verlag Konstanz, 1984. Hope, T. E. Lexical Borrowing in the Romance Languages. A Critical Study cifltalianisms in French and Gallicisms in Italianfrom 1100-1900. Two volumes. New York. New York University Press, 197I. Hopkins, K. Conquerors and Slaves. Sociological Studies in Roman History 1. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1978. ___ Death and Renewal, Sociological Studies in Roman History. 2. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1983. Hornblower, S., A. Spawforth, Oxford Classical Dictionary. Third Edition. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1996. Horsfall, N. "Some Problems of Titulature in Roman Literary History," BICS 28 (1981) p. 104.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

- __ "Laudatio Funebris, review ofKierdorf," CR 32 (I982) pp. 36-8. _ _ _ "Some Problems in the 'Laudatio Turiae'," BICS 30 (I983) pp. 85-98. - - - "Virgil and Marcellus' Education," CQ 39 (1989) pp. 266-7. _ _ _ "Roma," in Cambiano, La spazio letterario della Grecia antiqua. 1993. pp. 791-822. _ _ _ La Cultura della plebs Romana. Repertoris i materials per a l' estudi del M6n Classic 2. Barcelona 1996. _ _ _ "The Cultural Horizons of the Plebs Romana," i\1AAR XLI. Editors M. Bell and C. Bruzelius. Ann Arbor. University of Michigan Press 1996. pp.100-I9· Horsmann, G. Untersuchungen zur militiiischen Ausbildung im republikanischen und kaiserzeitlichen Rom. Boppard am Rhein. H. Bolt, I99I. Hough, J. N. The Composition of the Pseudolus of Plautus. Lancaster, Pa. Lancaster Press, I93I. - - - "The Use of Greek Words in Plautus," AJPh 55 (1934) pp. 346-64. Hunter, R. "Philemon, Plautus, and the Trinummus," MusHei38 (1980) pp. 21830. Hyland, A. Equus: The Horse in the Roman World. London. Batsford, 1990. Jachmann, G. Editor. Charites: Friedrich Leo zum sechzigsten Geburtstag dargebracht. Berlin. Weidmann, I9II. _ _ _ Plautinisches und Attisches. Berlin. Weidmann, 1931. Jaeger, W Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture. Three volumes. Translated G. Highet. Second edition. New York. Oxford University Press, 1939-45. Janson, . T. Mechanisms of Language Change in Latin. Stockholm. Almqvist & Wiksell, 1979. Janzer, B. Historische Untersuchungen zu Redensfragmenten des M Porcius Cato. Wiirzburg-Aumiihle. K. Triltsch, 1937. Jenkinson, E. M., "Nepos, an introduction to Latin biography," in Dorey (1967) pp. I-IS· Jocelyn, H. D. "The Roman Nobility and the Religion of the Roman State," Journal of Religious History 4 (1966) pp. 89-104. _ _ _ "Imperator histricus," YCS 21 (1969) 97-123. _ _ _ "Chrysalus and the Fall ofTroy, Plautus, Bacchides 925-978," HSCP 73 (1969) pp. 135-52. Jolowicz, H. F., B. Nicholas, Historical Introduction to the Study ofRoman Law. Third edition. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1972. Kaimio, J. The Romans and the Greek Language. Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 64. Helsinki. Societas Scientiarum Fennica, 1979. Kajanto, I. God and Fate in Livy. Annales Universitatis Turkuensis, ser. B, 64. Turku, 1957. _ _ _ The Latin Cognomina. Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 26.2. Helsinki. Societas Scientiarum Fennica, 1965. - - - "Women's Praenomina Reconsidered," Arctos 7 (1972) pp. 13-30. 4IO

BIBLIOGRAPHY

_ _ _ "Women's Nomenclature," in Duva, Pflaum. L'onomastique latine. 1977. pp. 148-50. _ _ _ "Fortuna," ANRW Il 17.1 (1981) pp. 502-58. Kaser, M. Das romische Privatrecht. I Munich. C. H. Beck, 1955. _ _ _ Das romische Zivilprozessrecht. Munich. C H. Beck, 1966. Keaveney, A. "Three Roman Chronological Problems (141-132 B. C)," Klio 80 (1998) pp. 66-90. _ _ _ "Sulla and the Gods," in Deroux. Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History Ill. 1983· pp. 44-79. Keegan, J. The Face of Battle. New York. Viking Press, 1976. Kennedy, G. The Art ofRhetoricin the Roman World, 300 B. G.-A.D. 300. Princeton. Princeton University Press, 1972. Kenney, E. J., W V. Clausen. Editors. The Cambridge History of Classical Literature, II Latin Literature. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1987. Kenter, L. P. M. Tullius Cicero De Legibus. A Commentary Book 1. Translated by Margie Leenheer-Braid. Amsterdam. A. M. Hakkert, 1972. Keppie, L. J. E The Making of the Roman Army from Republic to Empire. Totowa, N. J. Barnes & Noble Books, 1984. Kiefer, A. Aretalogische Studien. Leipzig. R. Noske, 1929. Kierdorf, W Laudatio Funebris. Meisenheim am Glan. Hain, 1979. Kinsky, B. Editor. Diorthaseis. Beitriige zur Geschichte des Hellenismus und zum Nachleben Alexanders des Grossen. Munich, Leipzig. K. G. Saur, 2004. Kleiner, D. E. E., S. B. Matheson. Editors. I Claudia: Women in Ancient Rome. New Haven. Yale University Press, 1996. Klima, U. Untersuchungen zu dem Begr!ff Sapientia von der republikanischen Zeit bis Tacitus. Bonn. R. Habelt, 1971. Klose, E Die Bedeutung von honos und honestus. Breslau. H. Eschenhagen, 1933· Kloss, H. "German-American Language Maintenance Efforts," in Fishman, Language Loyalty in the United States. 1978. pp. 206-52. Klotz, A. "Die Quellen der Plutarchischen Lebensbeschreibung des Marcellus," RhM 83 (1934) pp. 300-3. _ _ _ "Uber die Stellung des Cassius Dio unter den Quellen zur Geschichte des zweiten punischen Krieges," RhM 85 (1936) pp. 68-n6. _ _ _ Livius und seine Vorgiinger. Leipzig, Berlin. B. G. Teubner, 1940-44. Knoche, U. "Der rornische Ruhmesgedanke," Philologus 89 (1934) pp. I02-24. Reprinted in Vom Selbstverstiindnis der Romer. 1962. _ _ _ "Magnitudo Anirni," Philologus suppl. 27.3 (1935). Reprinted in Vom Selbstverstiindniss der Romer. 1962.

_ _ _ "Der Beginn des rornischen Sittenverfalls," in Vom Selbstverstiindnis der Romer. 1962. pp. I04--Q7. _ _ _ Von Selbstverstiindnis der Romer. Gymnasium, Zeitschrift fur Kultur der Antike und humanistische Bildung. 2. Heidelberg. C Winter, 1962.

4 II

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Knorr, M. Das griechische Vorbild der Mostellaria des Plautus. Coburg. A. Rossteutschen, 1934. Korfinacher, W C. "Grecizing' in Lucilian Satire," Cl 30 (1934-5) p. 45. Koestermann, E. C. Sallustius Crispus, Bellurn Iugurthinum. Heidelberg. C. Winter, 1971. Koster, S. "Neues virtus-Denken bei Lucilius," in Neukam. Begegnungen mit Neuem und Altem. 1981. pp. 5-26. Kramer, H. J. Arete bei Platon und Aristoteies, zum T#sen und zur Geschichte der platonischen Ontologie. Heidelberg. C. Winter, 1959. Kronasser, H. Handbuch der Semasiologie. Heidelberg. C. Winter, 1952. Krostenko, B. A. Cicero, Catul/us, and the Language of Social Peiformance. Chicago, London. University of Chicago Press, 2001. Kiibler, B. "Equites Romani," RE VII (1907) cols. 272-312. Kiihner, R., C. Stegmann, A. Thierfelder. Auifiihrliche Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache. Two volumes. Fourth edition. Munich. M. Hueber, 1962 . Kuttner, A. L.. "Culture and History at Pompey's Museum," TAPA 129 (1999) pp. 343-73· Ladewig, H. G. T. "Plautinische Studien," Philologus 17 (1861) pp. 248-69. Lahusen, G. Untersuchungen zur Ehrenstatue in Rom. Rome. G. Bretschneider, 1983· Landgraf, G. Kommentar zu Ciceros Rede Pro Sex. Roscio Amerino. Second edition. Leipzig, Berlin. B. G. Teubner, 1914. Langen, P. Plautinische Studien. Berlin. S. Calvery, 1886. Langslow, D. R. "Approaching Bilingualism in Corpus Languages," in Adams, Janse, Swain. Bilingualism in Ancient Societies. 2002. pp. 23-51. La Penna, A. "L'interpretazione Sallustiana della congiura di Catilina," SIFC 31 (1959) pp. 1-66, 127-68. _ _ _ "Aspetti e conflitti della cultura latina dai Gracchi a Silla," DArch (1971) pp. 193-2II. Laqueur, R. "Uber das Wesen der rornischen Triumph," Hermes 44 (1909) pp. 215-36. La Regina, A. "L'elogia di Scipione Barbato," DArch 2 (1968) pp. 173-90. Larfeld, W Griechische Epigraphik. Three volumes. Handbuch der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft. Munich. C. H. Beck, 1914. Last, H. "Sallust and Caesar in the Bellum Catilinae," in Ernst. Melanges offerts J Marouzeau. 1948. pp. 355-69· Latte, K. "Uber eine Eigentumlichkeit der italischen Gottesvorstellung," Archiv fur Religionwissenschaft 24 (1924-27) pp. 244-58. ___ Romische Religionsgeschichte. Handbuch der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft. Munich. C. H. Beck, 1960. Lattimore, R. Themes in Greek and Roman Epitaphs. Urbana, Il. University of Illinois Press, 1942.

a

412

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Lausberg, H. Handbuch der literarischen Rhetorik. Two volumes. Munich. M. Heuber, 1960. Lawrence, A. W "Archimedes and the Design of the Euryalus Fort," jHS 66 (1946) pp. 99-107: Lazenby, J. F. Hannibal's War. Warminster. Aris and Phillios, 1978. Lerevre, E., Stark, G. Vogt-Spira, Plautus barbarus: Sechs Kapitel zur Originalitatdes Plautus. Tubingen. G. Narr, 1991. - - , - "Plautus-Studien IV," Hermes II2 (1984) pp. 30-53. ___ Plautus und Philemon. Tubingen. G. Narr, 1995. ___ Plautus' Pseudolus. Tubingen. G. Narr, 1997. ___ Panaitios' und Ciceros. 1Jlichtenlehre: vom philosophischen Traktat zum politischen Lehrbuch. Stuttgart. F. Steiner, 2001. Le Grand, Ph. E. Daos; tableau de la comedie grecque pendant la periode dite nouvelle. Lyon. A. Rey, 19IO. Lemosse, M. "Les elements techniques de l'ancien triomphe romain et le probleme de son origine," ANRW I 2 (1972) pp. 442-53. Lenaghan, J. 0. A Commentary on Cicero's Oration De Haruspicum Responso. The Hague. Mouton, 1969. Lendle, O. "Vitruv als Ubersetzer aus dem Griechischen," in Muller, Sier, Werner. Zum Umgang mit fremdem Sprachen in der griechisch-romischen Antike. 1992. pp. 189-200. Lendon, J. E. Empire of honour: The art ofgovernment in the Roman world. Oxford, New York. Oxford University Press, 1997. _ _ _ "The Rhetoric of Combat: Greek Theory and Roman Culture in Julius Caesar's Battle Descriptions," CIAnt 18 (1999) pp. 273-329. Leo, F. "Lectiones Plautinae," Hermes 18 (1883) pp. 558-87. ___ Plautinische Forschungen zur Kritik und Geschichte der Komodie. Second edition. Berlin. Weidmann, 1912. ___ Geschichte der romischen Literatur 1: Die archaische Literatur. Volume one. Berlin. Weidmann, 1913. Reprinted Darmstadt. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1967. Levene, D. S. Religion in Livy. Leiden, New York. E. J. Brill, 1993. _ _ _ "Sallust's Catiline and Cato the Censor," CQ 50 (2000) pp. 170-91. Levi, M. A. "Auspico, imperio, ductu, felicitate," Rendiconti dell' Istituto Lombardo, Class di lettere, scienze, morali e storiche 71.1 (1938) pp. IOO-18. Liddell, H. G., R. Scott, H. S., Jones, P G. W Glare. Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1940. Liebers, G. Virtus bei Cicero. Dresden. M. Dittert, 1942. Linderski,J. "The Augural Law," ANRW 11 16.3 (1986) pp. 2146-312. ___ Roman Questions: Selected papers ofjerzy Linderski. Heidelberg, Stuttgart. F. Steiner, 1995. Lintott, A. "The Capitoline Dedications to Jupiter and the Roman People," ZPE 30 (1978) pp. I37-44· 4 13

BIBLIOGRAPHY

_ _ _ "The Roman Empire and its Problems in the Late Second Century," CAH 2 IX (1994) pp. r6-39. Lodge, G. Lexicon Plautinum. Two volumes. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1924-33. LofStadt, E. Syntactica: Studien und Beitrage zur historischen Syntax des Lateins. Two volumes. Lund. C. W K. Gleerup, 1942. Loizos, P "A Broken Mirror; Masculine Sexuality in Greek Ethnography," in Cornwall, Lindisfarne. Dislocating Masculinity, 1994. pp. 66-81. Lomas, K. Rome and the ~stern Greeks 350 BC-AD 200. London, New York. Routledge, 1993. _ _ _ "Urban Elites and cultural definition: Romanization in southern Italy," in Cornell, Lomas, Urban Sodety in Roman Italy. 1995. pp. 107-20. Lowe, J. c. B. "Cooks in Plautus," ClAnt (1985) pp. 72-102. Luce, T. J. "Political Propaganda on Roman Republican Coins: circa 92-82 B.C.," AJA 72 (1968) pp. 25-39. Ludwig, J. Quae fuerit vods :4PET~ vis ac natura ante Demosthenis exitum. Dissertation. Leipzig. R. Noske Bornensis, 1906. MacCary, W T. Servus Gloriosus: A Study if Military Imagery in Plautus. Ph.D. Dissertation. Stanford University 1968. _ _ _ "Menander's Old Men," TAPA 102 (1971) pp. 303-35. MacDowell, D. "ARETE and Generosity," Mnemosyne 16 (1963) pp. 127-34. MacMullen, R. "The Unromanized in Rome," in Cohen, Frerichs, Diasporas in Antiquity. 1993· pp. 47-64. Malitz, J. Die Historien des Poseidonius. Munich. C. H. Beck, 1983. Maltby, R. "The Distribution of Greek Loan-Words in Terence," CQ 35 (1985) pp. IIO-23· _ _ _ "The Distribution of Greek Loan-words in Plautus," Papers if the Leeds International Latin Seminar 8 (1995) pp. 31-69. Mariage, A. "Difilo cornico," SIFC IS (1907) p. 508 fr. Mariotti, I. Studi Luciliani. Florence. La Nuova Italia, 1960. Marquardt, J. Das Privatleben der Romer. Two volumes. Second edition. Leipzig. R. Hirzel, 1886. Marrou, H.-I. Histoire de l'education dans l'Antiquite. Paris. Edition du Seuil, 1948. Marshall, A. J. "Symbols and Showmanship in Roman Public Life: the Fasces," Phoenix 38 (1984) pp. 120-41. Martin, D. J. "Did Pompey Engage in imitatio Alexandri," in Deroux. Studies in Latin Literature and History IX. 1998. pp. 23-51. Martin, R. Recherches sur les agronomes latins et leurs conceptions economique et sodales. Paris. Les Belles Lettres, 197I. Mattingly, H., E. A. Sydenham, C. H. V Sutherland, R. Carson, Roman Imperial Coinage. Ten volumes London. Spink. 1936-94. Mattingly, H. Coins if the Roman Empire in the British Museum. Five volumes. London. British Museum, 1923-.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

_ _ _ "The Roman Virtues," RTR 30 (1937) pp. I03-lI7. Mattingly, H. B. "The First Period of Plautine Revival," Latomus 19 (1960) pp. 23 0- 252. _ _ _ "The Management of the Roman Republican Mint," Annali, Istituto Italiano di numismatico 29 (1982) pp. 9-46. Mauersberger, A. Polybios Lexicon. Berlin. Akademie Verlag, 1956. Maxfield, V A. The Military Decorations of the Roman Army. Berkeley, Los Angeles. University of California Press, 1981. McCa1l, J. B. The Cavalry of the Roman Republic. London, New York. Routledge, 2001. McCarren, V P. A Critical Concordance to Catullus. Leiden. E. J. Brill, 1977. McCarthy, K. Slaves, Masters, and the Art ofAuthority in Plautine Comedy. Princeton. Princeton University Press, 2000. McCredie, J. M., G. Roux, S. S. Shaw, J. Kurtich. Samothace 7, The Rotunda of Arsinoe. Princeton. Princeton University Press, 1992. McDermott, W C. "Cicero's Publication of his Consular Orations," Philologus 16 (1972) pp. 277-84. McDonnell, M. "Divorce Initiated by Women in Rome: The Plautine Evidence," AJAR 8 (1983) [= 1986] pp. 54-80. _ _ _ "Ambitus and Plautus' Amphitruo 65-81," AJPh I07 (1986) pp. 564-76. _ _ _ "The Speech ofNumidicus at Gellius, NA 1.6," AJPh 108 (1987) pp. 819 8.

_ _ _ "Borrowing to Bribe Soldiers," Rermes lI8 (1990) pp. 55-66. _ _ _ Review of Corn ell. The Beginnings of Rome, CP 92 (1997) pp. 202-7. _ _ _ "Un Ba1lo in Maschera: Processions, Portraits, and Emotions," JRA 12 (1999) pp. 541-52. _ _ _ "Roman Aesthetics and the Spoils of Syracuse," in Dillon, Welch. Representing IMIr in Ancient Rome. 2006. pp. 79-105. _ _ _ "Aristocratic Competition, Horses, and the Spolia Opima Again," in Aubert, Varhelyi. A Tall Order. 2005. pp. 145-68. _ _ _ "Roman Men and Greek Virtue," in Rosen, Sluiter, Manliness and Courage in Classical Antiquity. 2002. pp. 235-61. McGlynn, P. Lexicon Terentianum. Two volumes. London. Blackie, 1963-'7. McGushin, P. C. Sallustius Crispus Bellum Catilinae, A Commentary. Mnemosyne suppl. 45. Leiden, New York. E. J. Brill, 1977. _ _ _ Sallust The histories translated with introduction and commentary. Oxford, New York. Oxford University Press, 1992-4. Meadows, A., Williams, J. "Moneta and the Monuments: Coinage and Politics in Republican Rome," JRS 91 (2001) pp. 27-49. Meillet, A. Esquisse d'une histoire de la langue latine. Paris. 1928. Reprinted Paris. 1966 . Meister, K. Die Tugenden der Romer. Heidelberger Universitatreden lI. Heidelberger. C. Winter, 1930. 4 15

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Melior, R. eEA PWMH: The TMlrship of the Goddess Roma in the Greek TMlrld. Gottingen. Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 1975. Menager, L.-R. "Systemes onomastiques, structures familiales et classes sociales dans le monde greco-romaine," SDHI46 (1980) pp. 146-235. Meyer, E. Kleine Schriften. Volume I. Second edition. Halle. Niemeyer, 1924. _ _ _ Riimischer Staat und Staatsgedanke. Zurich. Artemis-Verlag, 1948. Second edition. 1961. Middelmann, E Griechische ffilt und Sprache in Plautus' Komiidien. Munich. Bochum-Langendreer, Druck: H. Poppinghaus, 1938. Millar, E "The Political Character of the Classical Roman Republic, 200151 B. c.," JRS 74 (1984) pp. 1-19. _ _ _ "Politics, Persuasion and the People before the Social War (150--90 B.C.)," JRS 76 (1986) pp. 1-II. _ _ _ "Political Power in Mid-Republican Rome: Curia or Comitium?" JRS 79 (1989) pp. 138-50. _ _ _ The Crowd in the Late Roman Republic. Ann Arbor. University of Michigan Press, 1998. Momigliano, A. "Perizonius, Niebuhr and the Character of the Early Roman Tradition," JRS 47 (1957) pp. 104-14. Reprinted in Secondo contributo alia storia degli studidassici e del mondo antico. 1960. pp. 83-87. _ _ _ Secondo contributo alia storia degli studi classici. Rome. 1960. _ _ _ "Procum Patricum," JRS 56 (1966) pp. 16-24. Reprinted in Quarto contributo alia storia degli studi classici. Rome. 1969. pp. 377-94. _ _ _ "Osservazioni sulla distinzione fra patrizi e plebei," in Gjerstad. Les origines de la Republique romaine. 1967. pp. 199-20I. Momrnsen, T. "Die romischen Eigennamen," in Riimische Forschungen. Volume one. Berlin. Weidmann, 1864. pp. 3-68. _ _ _ Riimisches Straatsrecht. Three volumes. Third edition. Leipzig. S. Hirzil, 1887-8. Reprinted Graz. 1969. Momrnsen, Riimische Geschichte" II. Berlin. Weidmann, 1916. Moore, T. J. Artistry and Ideology: Livy's Vocabulary of Virtue. Frankfurt am Main. Athenaum, 1989. Mord, J.-P. "The Transformation of Italy, 330-133 B. c.: The Evidence of Archaeology,': CAH 2 VIII. 1989. pp. 477-516. Morgan, M. G. "The Portico ofMetelius: A Reconsideration," Hermes 99 (1971) pp. 480-505. _ _ _ "The Defeat of L. Metelius Denter at Arretium," CQ 66 (1972) pp. 309-35· - - - "Villa Publica and Magna Mater," Klio 55 (1973) pp. 215-45. _ _ _ "The Introduction of the Aqua Marcia into Rome," Philologus 41 (1978) pp. 24-58. Morley, N. Metropolis and Hinterland. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1996.

4 16

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Morstein-Marx, R. Mass Oratory and Political Power in the Late Roman Republic. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 2004. Moxon, 1. S., ]. D. Smart, A.]. Woodman. Editors. Past Perspectives: Studies in Greek and Roman Historical Writing. Cambridge. Cambridge. University Press, 1986. Miihl, M. Poseidonius und der plutarchische Marcellus. Berlin. Ebering, 1925. _ _ _ "Zur Entstehungszeit der Historien der Ephoros," Klio 29 (1936) pp. 111-13· Miiller, C. W, K. Sier, ]. Werner. Zum Umgang mit fremdem Sprachen in der griechisch-romischen Antike. Stuttgart. F. Steiner, 1992. Miiller-Seidel,1. "Q. Fabius Maximus Cunctator und die Konsulwahlen," RhM 96 (1953) pp. 241-81. Miinzer, F. Romische Adelsparteien und Adelifamilien. Stuttgart. ]. B. Melzler, 1920. Murray, 0., M. Tecusan. Editors. In Vino Veritas. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1995. Murray, 0. "War and the Symposium," in Slater, Dining in a Classical Context. 1991. pp. 83-103. Musyken, P. "Three Processes of Borrowing: Borrowability Revisited," in Extra, Verhoeven, Bilingualism and Migration. 1999. pp. 229-41. Nachmanson, E. "Zu den Motiv formeln der griechischen Ehreninschriften," Branos 11 (1911) pp. 184-9. N eukam, P. Begegnungen mit Neuem und Altem. Dialog Schule-Wissenschaft, Klassische Sprachen und Literaturen 15. Munich. Bayerischer SchulbuchVerlag, 1981. Nicolas, C. Utraque lingua. Le calque semantique: Domaine greco-Iatin. Louvain. Peeters, 1996. Nicolet, C. "Consul Togatus: Remarques sur le vocabulaire politique de Ciceron et de Tite-Live," REL 38 (1960) pp. 236-63. ___ L'ordre equestre Cl I'epoque republicaine (313-43 av. ]-C.). I. Paris. E. deBoccard, 1966. _ _ _ "Armee et societe a Rome sous la republique: a propos de l'ordre equestre," in Brisson. Problemes de la guerre Cl Rome. 1969. pp. 117-56. _ _ _ "L'onomastique des classes dirigeantes sous la Republique," in Duva, Pflaum. L'onomastique latine. 1977. pp. 45-61. ___ The World of the Citizen in Republican Rome. Translated by P. S. Falla. Berkeley, Los Angeles. University of California Press, 1990. Nielsen, 1.,]. Zahl, "The Temple of Castor and Pollox on the Forum Romanum," Acta Arch. 56 (1985) pp. 1-29. Nilsson, M. P. Geschichte der griechischen Religion. Two volumes. Second Edition. Munich C. H. Beck, 1955, 1961. Nock, A. D. "L:YNNAOL: SEOL:" HSCP 41 (1930) pp. 1-62. Reprinted in Stewart, Arthur Darby Nock, Essays on Religion and World. 1. 1972. pp. 202-51.

4 17

BIBLIOGRAPHY

_ _ _ "A Feature ofRoman Religion," HTR 32 (1939) pp. 83--96. Reprinted in Stewart. Arthur Darby Nock, Essays on Religion and World. 11. 1972. pp. 481-92. _ _ _ Arthur Darby Nock, Essays on Religion and the Ancient World. Two volumes. Editor. Z. Stewart. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press, 1972. Norden, E. Agnostos Theos. Leipzig, Berlin. B. G. Teubner, 1913. Reprinted Stuttgart. B. G. Teubner, 1956. ___ P. Vergilius Maro Aeneis Buch VI. Ninth edition. Leipzig, Berlin. B. G. Teubner, 1927. Reprinted Stutttgart. B. G. Teubner, 1995. North, H. E "Canons and Hierarchies of the Cardinal Virtues in Greek and Latin Literature," in Wallach The Classical Tradition, Literary and Historical Studies in Honor of Harry Caplan. 1966. pp. 168-83. North, J A. "Conservatism and Change in Roman Religion," PBSR 44 (1976) pp. 1-12. _ _ _ "Politics and Aristocrats in Republican Rome," CP 85 (1990) pp. 277-87. _ _ _ "Religion in Republican Rome," CAH 2 VII. 21989. pp. 573-624. Notier, J and H. Schatz, "From One-Word Switch to Loan: A Comparison Between Language Pairs," Multilingua II (1992) pp. 173--94. Oakley, S. P. "Single Combat in the Roman Republic," CQ 35 (1985) pp. 392410. _ _ _ "The Roman Conquest ofItaly," in Rich, Shipley, VVilr and Society in the Roman World. 1993. pp. 18-22. _ _ _ A Commentary on Livy Books VI-X Two volumes. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1997-8. Ogilvie, R. M. A Commentary on Livy, Books 1-5. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1965. _ _ _ "Some Cults of Early Rome," in Bibauw. Hommages a Marcel Renard 1969. pp. 566-72. O'Hara, J J True Names- Vergil and the Alexandrian Tradition of Etymological Wordplay. Ann Arbor. University of Michigan Press, 1996. Oppermann, H. Editor. Romische Wertbegr!ffe. Wege der Forschung 34. Darmstadt. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1967. Orlin, E. M. Temples, Religion, and Politics in the Roman Republic. Leiden. E. J Brill, 1997. Pais, R. Storia di Roma. Two volumes. Third edition. Rome. Casa editrice "optimam," 1926-28. Palmer, R. E. A. The Archaic Community of the Romans. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1970. _ _ _ Rome and Carthage at Peace. Stuttgart. E Steiner, 1997. Palombi, D. "Honos et Virtus, Aedes," in LTUR 2,1996. pp. 31-3. _ _ _ "Honos et Virtus, Aedes Mariana," in LTUR 2,1996. pp. 33-5. Pantzerhielm Thomas, S. "The Prologues of Sallust," Sym.Ost. 16 (1936) pp. 142-43.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Papi, E. "Equus: M'. Acilius Glabrio," in LTUR, 2, 1996. p. 224. _ _ _ "Equus: M. Aemilius Lepidus," LTUR, 2, 1996. p. 224. - __ "Equus, L Antonius," LTUR, 2, 1996. p. 225. _ _ _ "Equus: Q. Fabius Maximus Verrucosus Cunctator," LTUR, 2, 1996. p.229· _ _ _ "Equus: C. Maenius," LTUR, 2, 1996 p. 229. - __ "Equus: Q. Marcius Tremulus," LTUR, 2, 1996. pp. 229-30. _ _ _ "Equus: Octavianus," LTUR, 2, 1996. pp. 230-I. Parry, B. E. Aesopica. Urbana Ill. 1952. Passerini, A. "Caio Mario come uomo politico," Athenaeum 12 (1934) pp. 10-44, 109-143,257-97,348-80. ___ "11 concetto antico di Fortuna," Philologus 90 (1935) pp. 90-7. - - - "Epigrafica Mariana," Athenaeum ns 17 (1939) pp. 70-3. Paul, G. M. A Historical Commentary on Sallust's Bellum ]ugurtinum. Liverpool. E Cairns, 1984. Paul, H. Prinzipien der Sprachgeschicte. Eigth edition. Tiibingen. Niemeyer, 1968. Pedech, P. La methode historique de Polybe. Paris. Societe d' edition. Les Belles Lettres, 1964. Perna, R. Uoriginalita de Plauto. Bari. Leonardo da Vinci editrice, 1955. Perrochat, P. Les modeles grecs de Salluste. Paris. Les Belles Lettres, 1949. Philips, J. E. "Alcumena in the Amphitrio ofPlautus," C] 80 (1985) pp. 121-6. Picard, Ch. "La guerrier blesse de l'agora des Italiens a Delos," BCH 56 (1932) pp. 491-53 0 . Piers on, D. Negroes in Brazil, A Study ofRace Contact in Bahia. Chicago. University of Chicago Press, 1942. Reprinted Carbondale. South Illinois University Press, 1967. Pietila-Castre, L. Magnificentia publica: The Victory Monuments of the Roman Generals in the Era of the Punic lMlrs. Helsinki. Societas Scientiarum Fennica, 19 87. Piwonka, M. P. Lucilius und Kallimachos. Frankfort am Main. V Klostermann, 1949· Platner, S. B., and T. Ashby. A Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1929. Pohlenz, M. Die Stoa; Geschichte einer geistigen Bewegung. Two volumes. Gottingen. Vandenhoeck, Ruprecht, 1948-49. Poplack, S., D. Sankoff, C. Miller. "The Social Correlates and Linguistic Processes of Lexical Borrowing and Assimilation," Linguistics 26 (1988) pp. 47104· Poschl, V Grundwerte romischer Staatsgesinnung in den Geschichtswerken des Sallust. Berlin. W de Gruyter, 1940. Preller, L., H. Jordan. Romische Mythologie. Two volumes. Third edition. Berlin. Weidmann,1881-83. Price, S. R. E Rituals and Power. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1984. 419

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Pulju, T "Vir and Homo in Cicero's Pro Milone," LACUS Forum I9 (I994) pp. 567-74. Raaflaub, K., N. Rosenstein. Editors. War and Society in the Ancient and Medieval Worlds. Cambridge, MA, London. Harvard University Press, I999. Raaflaub, K. A. Editor. Social Struggles in Archaic Rome. Berkeley. University of California Press, I986. _ _ _ "Die Militarreformen des Augustus und die politische Problematik des friihen Prinzipats," in Binder. Saeculum Augustum I: Herrschafl und Gesellschqft. I987· pp. 246-307, Radke, G. Die Gotter Altitaliens. Munich. Aschendorff, I979. _ _ _ "Beobachtungen zur Elogium auf L. Cornelius Barbarus," RhM I34 (I99I) pp. 70-2. Ramage, E. S. Urbanitas. Norman. University of Oklahoma Press, I973. Raschke, W J. "The Early Books of Lucilius," jRS 69 (I979) pp. 78-89. - - - "The Virtue ofLucilius," Latomus 49 (I990) pp. 352-69. Rasmussen, D. Caesars Commentarii: Stil und Stilwandel am Beispiel der direkten Rede. Gottingen. Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, I963. Rawlings, L. "Caesar's portrayal of Gauls as warriors," in Welch, Powell, julius Caesar as Ariful Reporter. I998. pp. I7I--92. Rawson, B., P. Weaver. Editors. The Roman Family in Italy. Oxford. Oxford University Press, I997. Rawson, E. "Lucius Crassus and Cicero: The Formation of a Statesman," PCPhS ns I7 (I97I) pp. 75-88. Reprinted in Rawson, Roman Culture and Society. pp. I6-33· - - - "TheInterpretation ofCicero's 'De Legibus'," ANRW I 4· I973· pp. 33456. Reprinted in Rawson, Roman Culture and Society. pp. I25-48 _ _ _ "Religion and Politics in the Late Second Century B.C," Phoenix 28 (I974) pp. I93-2 I2. Reprinted in Roman Culture and Society. pp. I49-68. _ _ _ "Caesar's Heritage: Hellenistic Kings and their Roman Equals," jRS 65 (I975) pp. I48-59. Reprinted in Roman Culture and Society. pp. I69-88. ___ "L. Cornelius Sisenna and the Early First Century BC," CQ 29 (I979) pp. 327-46. Reprinted in Roman Culture and Society. pp. 363-88. _ _ _ "Chariot-Racing in the Roman Republic." PRSR 49 (I98I) pp. I-I6. Reprinted in Roman Culture and Society. pp. 389-407. _ _ _ Intellectual Life in the Late Roman Republic. London. Duckworth, I985. _ _ _ "Saliust on the Eighties," CQ 27 (I987) pp. I63-80. Reprinted in Roman Culture and Society. pp. 546-69. _ _ _ "Roman Tradition and the Greek World," in CAH 2 VIII I989. pp. 4 22-76. _ _ _ Roman Culture and Society. Oxford. Oxford University Press, I99I. Rebuffat-Emmanuel, D. "Un probleme d'epigraphie Italique: l'enigmede rit," in Heurgon. L'Italie preromaine et la Rome republicaine: Melanges offerts jacques Huergon. I976. pp. 863-76:

a

4 20

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Reinach, S. "Les aretalogues dans l'antiquite," in BCH 9 (I885) pp. 257-65. Reprinted in Cultes, mythes et religions. Volume three. Paris. E. Leroux, I908. pp. 293-30I. Reinhardt, u., K. Sallmann. Editors. Musa iocosa. Arbeiten aber Humor und Witz, Komik und Komiidie der Antike. Andreas Thieifelder zur 70 Geburtstag. Hildesheim, New York. G. alms, I974. Reiter, S. "i'\PETT] und der Titel von Philos 'Legatio'," in Epitymbion Heinrich Swoboda dargebracht. Reichenberg I927. pp. 228-237. Renard, M., R. Schilling. Editors. Hommages c:l Jean Bayet. Brussels. Collection Latomus 70, I964. Rich, J. W, A. Wallace-Hadrill. Editors. City and Country in the Ancient World. London, New York, Routledge, I99I. Rich, J. W, G. Shipley. Editors, U1czr and Society in the Roman World. London, New York. Routledge, I993. Rich, J. W Declaring War in the Roman Republic in the Period of Transmarine Expansion. Brussels. Collection Latomus, I976. _ _ _ "The Supposed Roman Manpower Shortage of the Late Second Century B.C," Historia 32 (I983) pp. 287-33I. _ _ _ "Augustus and the spolia opima," Ch iron 26 (I996) pp. 85-I27. Richard, J.-Cl. "La Victoire de Marius," MEFRA 77 (I965) pp. 69-86. Richardson, E. H. "The Etruscan Origins of Early Roman Sculpture," .MAAR 2I (I953) pp. 77-I24· Richardson, J. S. "The Triumph, the Praetor and the Senate," JRS 65 (I975) pp. 50 - 63. ___ Hispaniae, Spain and the Development of Roman Imperialism 21~82 BC. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, I986. Richardson, L. jr. "Honos et Virtus and the Sacra Via," AJA 82 (I978) pp. 240-7· ___ A New Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome. Baltimore. Johns Hopkins University Press, I992. Riposati, B. Studi sui "Topica" di Cicerone. Milan. Societi editrice "Vita e pensiero," I947. Ritschl, E Parerga zu Plautus und Terenz. Leipzig. Weidmann, I845. ___ Opuscula Philologica. Volume two. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, I868. Robert, L. Hellenica XI-XII. Paris. Andriene Maisonneuve, I960. Rohde, G. "Ovatio," RE XVIII.2 (I942) cols. I898-9. Rogo, M. "Catulus et les infortunes de la Virtus," Kentron 5 (I989) pp. I5I-60. Rollin, J. P. Untersuchungen zu Rechtifragen riimischer Bildnisse. Bonn. R. Habelt, I979· Roloff, H. Maiores bei Cicero. Gottingen. Universitat Leipzig, I938. Roma medio repubblicana, Aspetti culturali di Roma e del Lazio nei secoli IV & III a. C. (Exhibition catalogue). Rome. L'Erma di Bretschneider, I973. Reprinted, I977· 42I

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Roques de Maumont, von, H. Antike Reitestandbilder. Berlin. W de Gruyter, 1958. Roscher, W H. Editor. Auifiihrliches Lexikon der griechischen und romischen Mythologie. Seven volumes. Leipzig. Teubner, 1884-37. Rosen, R. M., I. Sluiter. Editors. Andreia, Studies in Manliness and Courage in Classical Antiquity. Leiden, Boston. E. J. Brill, 2003. Rosenstein, N. Imperatores Victi. Miliary Difeat and Aristocratic Competition in the Middle and LAte Republic. Berkeley, Los Angeles. University of Caliornia Press, 199 0 . _ _ _ "Roman Republic," in Raaflaub, Rosenstein. Hitlr and Society in the Ancient and Medieval Worlds. 1999. pp. 193-216. _ _ _ "Marriage and Manpower in the Hannibalic War: Assidui, Proletarii and Livy 24.18.7-8," Historia 51 (2002) pp. 163-9I. Roth,J. P. The Logistics of the Roman Army at Hitlr (264 BC-AD 235). Leiden, New York. E. J. Brill, 1999. Roux, G. in McCredie. Samothace, The Rotunda of Arsinoe. 1992. pp. 92-23. Riipke, J. Domi Militiae: die religiose Konstruktion des Krieges in Rom. Stuttgart. F. Steiner, 1990. Sachers, E. "patria potestas." RE XXII. I (1953) cols. I046-175. Saglio, Edm. "Honos," in Dictionnaire des antiquites grecques et romaines d'apres les texts et les monuments. edited by Ch. V Daremberg, Edm. Saglio, 3. I. cols. 247-248. Paris 1889. Saller, R. P. Patriarchy, property and death in the Romanfamily. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1994. Salmon, E. T. Samnium and the Samnites. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1967. Salomies, 0. Die romischen Vornamen. Helsenki. Societas Scientiarum Fennica, 1987. Salway, B. "What's in a Name? A Survey of Roman Onomastic Practice," ]RS 84 (1994) pp. 124-45. Samler, E. "Honos," RE VIII.2 (1913) cols. 2292-4. Santoro L'Hoir, F. The Rhetoric of Gender Terms, 'Man', 'Woman', and the Portrayal of Character in LAtin Prose. Leiden, New York. E. J. Brill, 1992. Sarsila, J. Some Aspects of the Concept of Virtus in Roman Literature until Livy. Studia PhilologicaJyvaskylaensia 16. Jyvaskyla. University ofJyvaskyla, 1982. Saylor, C. "Amphitryon: The Play on Virtus," in Deroux. Studies in LAtin Literature and Roman History IX. 1998. pp. 5-22. Schaaf, L. Der Miles gloriosus des Plautus und sein griechisches Original. Studia et Testimonia Antiqua 18. Munich. W Fink, 1977. Scardigli, B. Die Romerbiographien Plutarchs. Ein Forschungsbericht. Munich. Beck, 1979· _ _ _ Editor. Essays on Plutarch's Lives. Oxford. Oxford University Press 1995· 422

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Schottlaender, R. "Die Komische Figur des Padagogen bei Plautus," Das Altertums 19 (1973) pp. 23J~40. Schubart, W "Das hellenistische Konigsideal nadi Inschriften und Papyri," Archiv Jur Papyruiforschung 12 (1937) pp. 1-26. Schulz, F. Classical Roman Law. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1951. Schur, W "Homo novus. Ein Beitrag zur Sozialgeschichte der sinkenden Republik," BonnerJahrbucher 134 (1929) pp. 54-66. ___ Sallust als Historiker. Stuttgart. W Kohlhammer, 1934. Schutter, K. H. E. Quibus annis comoediae Plautinae primum actae sint quaeritur. Groningen. DeWaal, 1952. Schwartz, E. "Die Berichte iiber die Catilinarische Verschworung," Hermes 32 (1897) pp. 555-608. ___ Ethik der Griechen. Stuttgart. K. F. Koeler, 1951. Scott, R. T., A. R. Scott. Editors. Eius virtutis studiosi: Classical and Post-Classical Studies in Memory oJ E E. Brown. Washington. National Gallery of Art, 1993. Scullard, H. H. Roman Politics 220-150 B. C. Second edition. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1973. ___ Festivals and Ceremonies cif the Roman Republic. London. Thames and Hudson, 1981. Seager, R. Pompey A Political Biography. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1979. Seaman, W M. "The Understanding of Greek by Plautus' Audience," CJ 50 (1954) pp. II5- I 9· _ _ _ "Plautine Terms for Greek and Roman Things," Glotta 34 (1955) pp. 139-52. Sebasta, J. L., L. Bonfante. Editors. The World cif Roman Costume. Madison. University of Wisconsin Press, I993. Sehlmeyer, M. Stadtromische Ehrenstatuen der republikanischen Zeit. Stuttgart. F. Steiner, I999. Seel, O. Sallust von den Briifen ad Caesarem zur Coniuratio Catilinae. Leipzig, Berlin. B. G. Teubner, 1930. Segal, E. Roman Laughter. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press, 1968. - - - "Perch€! Amphitruo," Dioniso 46 (I975) pp. 254-67. Seiler, F. Die griechische Tholos. Untersuchungen zur Entwicklung, Typologie und Funktion kunstmiissiger Rundbauten. Mainz-am-Rhein. P. von Zabern, 1986. Shackleton Bailey, D. R. "Nobiles and Novi Reconsidered," AJPh 107 (1986) pp. 255-60. Shatzman, I. "The Roman General's Authority over Booty," Historia 21 (1972) pp. I77-20 5· ___ Senatorial vvealth and Roman Politics. Brussels. Collection Latomus, 1975. Shepard, A. Meanings cif Manhood in Early Modern England. Oxford, New York. Oxford University Press, 2003. Sherwin-White, A. N. The Roman Citizenship. Second edition. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1973.

42 3

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Shimron, B. "Caesar's Place in Sallust's Political Thought," Athenaeum 45 (1967) pp. 335-45· Shipp, G. P "Greek in Plautus," WS 66 (1953) pp. I05-II2. Siedentopf, H. B. Das hellenistische Reiterdenkmal. Waldsassen Bayern. Stiflland, 1968 . Skard, E. "Sallust als Politiker," Sym. Oslo 9 (1930) pp. 69-95. _ _ _ "Zwei religios-politische Begriffe: Euergetes-Concordia," Norske Videnskaps-Akademi, Oslo, Avhandlinger, hist.-filo. klasse (1931) nr. 2, pp. 43-4· Skinner, M. B. "Ego Mulier: The Construction of Male Sexuality in Catullus," Helios 20 (1983) pp. 107-30. Reprinted in Hallet, Skinner, Roman Sexualities, 1997. pp. 129-50. Sklenar, R. "La Republique des Signes: Caesar, Cato, and the Language of Sallustian Morality," TAPA 128 (1998) pp. 205-20. Smith, R. E. The Aristocratic Epoch in Latin Literature. Todd Memorial Lecture. Sydney. Australasian Medical Publishing Company, 1947· _ _ _ Service in the Post-Marian Army. Manchester. Manchester University Press, 1958. Smith, R. R. R. Hellenistic Royal Portraits. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1988. _ _ _ Aphrodisias I, The Monument of C. Julius Zoilos. Mainz. P von Zabern, 1993· Solin, H. Beitriige zur Kenntnis der griechischen Personennnamen in Rom. Helsinki. Societas Scientiarum Fennica, 1971. _ _ _ Die griechischen Personennamen in Rom. Two volumes. Berlin, New York. W. de Gruyter, 1982, 2003. Spence, 1. G. The Cavalry of Classical Greece. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1993· Spitzer, L. "Confusion Schmosschen," Journal of English and German Philology 51 (1952) pp. 226-33Stark, R. "Catos Rede de lustri sui felicitate," RhM 96 (1953) pp. 184-7. Stein, A. Der romische Ritterstand. Munich. C. H. Beck, 1927. Steinby, E. M. Editor. Lexicon Topographicum Urbis Romae. Six volumes. Rome. Quasar, 1993-2000. Stern, G. Meaning and Change of Meaning. Goteborgs Hogskolas Arsskrift 38. Goteborg. Elanders boktyckeri aktiebolag, 1932. Stewart, R. Public Office in Early Rome. Ann Arbor. University of Michigan Press, 1998. Stockton, D. The Gracchi. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1979. Stone, S. "The Toga: From National to Ceremonial Costume," In Sebasta, Bonfante. The World of Roman Costume. 1993· pp. 13-45· Strasberger, H. "Novus homo," RE XVII (1937) cols. 1223-28. _ _ _ "Der Scipionenkreis," Hermes 94 (1966) pp. 60-72.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Strawecka, K. "Spuren der philosophische virtus in den Komodien von Plautus," Eos 57 (1967-1968) pp. 2lI-18. Stuart, D. R. Epochs in Greek and Roman Biography. Berkeley. University of California Press, 1928. Sturtevant, E. H. "Concerning the Influence of Greek on Vulgar Latin," TAPA 56 (1925) pp. 9-14· Sumner, G. V The Orators in Cicero's Brutus: Prosopography and Chronology. Toronto. University of Toronto Press, 1973. Suolahti, J The Junior Officers of the Roman Army in the Republican Period. Helsinki. Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, 1955. Sutherland, C. H. V, R. A. G. Carson. Roman Imperial Coinage. Volume one. Revised edition. London. Spink, 1984. Swain, S. C. R. "Hellenic Culture and the Roman Heroes of PIutarch," JHS lIO (1990) pp. 126-45. Reprinted in Scardigli. 1995. pp. 229-64. Sydenham, E. A. The Coinage of the Roman Republic. Revised edition. London. Sprink, 1952. Syme, R. The Roman Revolution. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1939. _ _ _ "Seianus on the Aventine," Hermes 84 (1956) pp. 262-5. ___ Tacitus. Two volumes. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1958. ___ Sallust. Berkeley, Los Angeles 1964. _ _ _ "History and Language at Rome," Roman Papers Ill. Editor A. R. Birley. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1984. pp. 953-6r. Szemler, G. L. The Priests of the Roman Republic. Brussels. Collection Latomus, 1972. Taeger, F. Review of R. M. Hayward, Studies on Scipio Africanus, Philologische Wochenschrift 53 (1933) pp. 93 0-36. Taylor, L. R. Review ofScullard, Roman Politics. AJPh 73 (1952) pp. 302-6. ___ The Voting Districts of the Roman Republic. Rome. American Academy in Rome, 1960. _ _ _ "Forerunners of the Gracchi," JRS 52 (1962) pp. 19-27. Temporini, H., W Haas, Aufstieg und Niedergang der romishcen vvrlt. Berlin, New York. W de Gruyter, 1972-96. Terzaghi, N. Lucilio. Turin. L'Erma, 1934. Reprinted Rome. L'Erma di Bretschneider, 1970. Thesaurus Linguae Latinae. Volumes 1-10. Leipzig. B. G. Teubner, 1900-. Thomas, R. Oral Tradition and Written Records in Classical Athens. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1989. Thuillier, J-P. "Les desultores de l'Italie antique," CRAI (1989) pp. 33-51. Tibiletti, G. "Lo sviluppo dellatifondo in Italia dall' epoca graccana al principio dell'impero," Relazione del X Congresso Internazionale de Scienze Storiche II (1955) pp. 235-92. Tierney, J J "The Miles Gloriosus and New Comedy," Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 49 (1943) pp. 167-85. 42 5

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Till, R. La lingua di Catone. Traduzione e note supplementari di C. de Meo. Rome. Edizione dell'Ateneo, 1968. Originally published as Die Sprache Catos. Leipzig. Dieterich, 1935. Toher, M. "The Tenth Table and the Conflict of the Orders," in Raaflaub. Social Struggles in Archaic Rome. 1986. pp. 301-26. Torelli, M. "Tre studi di storia etrusca," DArch 8 (1974-5) pp. 3-78. _ _ _ Lavinio e Roma: riti iniziatici e matrimonio tra archeologia e storia. Rome. Quasar, 1984. _ _ _ "Regiae d'Etruria e del Lazio e immaginario figurato del potere," in Scott, Scott. Eius virtutis studiosi: Classical and Post-Classical Studies in Memory if RE. Brown 1993. pp. 85-II2. Tosi, A. "The Notion of Community in Language Maintenance," in Extra, Verhoeven, Bilingualism and Migration. 1999. pp. 325-43. Townend, G. B. "c. Oppius onJulius Caesar," AjPh 108 (1987) pp. 325-42. Toynbee, A.J. Hannibal's Legacy, the Hannibalic War's Effects on Roman Life. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1965. Traina, A. Vortit barbare, Le traduzioni poetiche da Livio Andronico a Cicerone. Rome. Edizione dell'Ateneo, 1970. Treggiari, S. Roman Freedmen during the Late Republic. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1969. _ _ _ Roman Marriage. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1991. _ _ _ "Women in Roman Society," in Kleiner, Matheson, I Claudia: VVcimen in Ancient Rome. 1996. pp. II6-25 Tuchnaendler, I. De vocabulis graecis in linguam Latinam translatis. Dissertation. Berlin, 1876. Ungern-Sternberg von, J., H.-J. Reinau. Editors. Vergangenheit in mundlicher Uberlieferung. Stuttgart. B. G. Teubner, 1988. L' Urbs, espace urbain et histoire: Ier siecZe av. J -C. - III e siecle ap. J - C. CEER 98. Rome, Ecole Fran<;aise de Rome, 1987. Valgiglio, E. Plutarco, Vita di Mario. Florence. La Nuova Italia, 1956. _ _ _ Plutarco, Vita di Silla. Turin 1967. Vanderbroeck, P. J. J. "Homo novus again," Chiron 16 (1986) pp. 239-42. Vanggaard,J. H. The Flamen: A Study in the History and Sociology ifRoman Religion. Copenhagen. Museum Tusculanum Press, 1988. Van Omme, A. N. Virtus, een semantiese Studie. Utrecht. Kemink en zoun, 1946. Van Ooteghem, J. Lucius Licinius Lucullus. Brussels. Namur, Secretariat des publications, Facultes universitaires, 1959. _ _ _ Caius Marius. Brussels. Palais Academies, 1964. Van Sickle, J. "The Elogia of the Cornelii Scipiones and the Origin of Epigram at Rome," AjPh ro8 (1987) pp. 41-55. Vansina, J. Oral Tradition as History. Madison. University of Wisconsin Press, 1985. 42 6

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Van Straaten, M. Panetius, sa vie, ses rerits et sa doctrine, avec une edition des fragments. Amsterdam. H. J. Paris, 1946. Vasaly, A. Representations: Images of the World in Ciceronian Oratory. Berkeley, Los Angeles. University of California Press, 1993. Vernant, J. -P., et alii. La Sacrifice dans I' antiquite. Fondation Hardt. Entretiens sur l'antiquite classique 27. Geneva. Vandouvers-Genesa, 1981. Versnel, H. S. Triumphus. An Inquiry into the Origin, Development and Meaning of the Roman Triumph. Leiden. E. J. Brill, 1970. _ _ _ "Two Types of Devotio," Mnemosyne 229 (1976) pp. 365-410. _ _ _ "Self-Sacrifice, Compensation, and the Anonymous Gods," in Vernant. La Sacrifice dans l'antiquite. 1981. p. 135-85. Viscogliosi, A. "Iuppiter Stator, Aedes ad Circum," LTVR 3 (1996) pp. 157-9· Vogel, G. "praeda," RE XXII I (1953) cols. 1200-13. Vogt, J. Homo novus: Bin Typus der romischen Republik. Stuttgart. W Kohlhammer, 1926. _ _ _ "VorHiufer des Optimus Princeps," Hermes 68 (1933) pp. 84-92. _ _ _ "Caesar und seine Soldaten," NeueJahrbucherfur Antike und deutsche Bildung 3 (1940) pp. 120-35. Reprinted in Der Altsprachliche Unterricht 7 (1955) pp. 53-73Volkl, K. "Zum taktischen Verlauf der Schlacht bei Vercellae (101 v. chr.)," RhM 97 (1954) pp. 82-9· Volkmann, H. "Valerius (137)," RE VIIA.2 (1948) cols. 2413-18. Volkmann H. Die Massenversklavungen der Binwohner eroberter Stiidte in der hellenistisch-romischen Zeit. Wiesbaden. E Steiner, 1961. VoIsinii e la dodecapoli etrusca, Annali della fondazione per il museo "Claudio Faina" 11. Orvieto 1985. Von' Arnim, H. EA., Stoicorum veterum fragmenta. Four volumes. Leipzig B.G. Toubner, 1903-5. V retska, K, C. V retska. Oratorum Romanorum fragmenta liberae rei publicae. II. Index verborum. Turin. G. B. Paravia, 79. Vretska, K. C. Sallustius Crisp us De Catilinae coniuratione. Volume one. Heidelberg. C. Winter, 1976. Wachter, R. Altlateinische Inschriften. Sprachliche und epigraphische Untersuchungen zu den Dokumenten bis etwa 150 v. Ch. Bern. P. Lang, 1987. Wagenvoort, H. Roman Dynamism, Studies in Ancient Roman Thought, Language, and Custom. Oxford 1947. _ _ _ "Felicitas imperatoria," Mnemosyne ser. 4. 7 (1954) pp. 300-22. Walbank, E W A Historical Commentary on Polybius. Three volumes. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1957-79. ___ Speeches in Greek Historians. Oxford. B. Blackwell, 1965. _ _ _ "The Scipio Legend," PCPhS 193 (1967) pp. 54-69. ___ Polybius. Berkeley, Los Angeles. University of California Press, 1972.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Walde A., J. B. Hofina=, Lateinisches etymologisches Warterbuch. Third edition. Heidelberg I938. Wallace, L. Editor. The Classical Tradition, Literary and Historical Studies in Honor of Harry Caplan. Ithaca. Cornell University Press, I966. Wallace, R. W, E. M. Harris. Editors, Transitions to Empire, Essays in Grew-Roman History, 360-146 B. c., in honor of E. Badian. Norman, London. University of Oklahoma Press, I996. Wallace-Hadrill, A. "The Emperor and his Virtues," Historia 30 (I98I) pp. 29832 4. _ _ _ "Roman arches and Greek honours: The language of power at Rome," PCPhS ns 36 (I990) pp. I48-81. _ _ _ "Elites and trade in the Roman town," in Rich, Wallace-Hadrill, City and Country in the Ancient World. I991. pp. 24I-72. _ _ _ Houses and Society in Pompeii and Herculaneum. Princeton. Princeton University Press, I994. _ _ _ "Engendering the Roman House," in Kleiner, Matheson, I Claudia: Women in Ancient Rome. I996. pp. I04-I5. Walters, J. "Soldiers and Whores in a Pseduo-Quintilian Declamation," in Cornell, Lomas, Gender and Ethnicity in Ancient Italy. I997· pp. I09-I4. Watson, A. The Law of Persons in the Late Republic. Oxford. Oxford University Press, I967. _ _ _ Roman Private Law around 200 BC. Edinburgh. Edinburgh University Press, I971. Webster, T. B. L. Studies in later Greek Comedy. Second Edition. Manchester. Manchester University Press, I970. _ _ _ An Introduction to Menander. Manchester. Manchester University Press, I974· Wehrli, F. Die Schule der Aristotles, Texte und Kommentar, Volume four. Demetrios von Phaleron. Second edition. Basil. B. Schwabe, I948. Weinreich, 0. Stifung und Kultsatzungen eines Privatheiligtums in Philadelphia in Lydien. Heidelberg. C. Winter, I9I9. Weinreich, U. Languages in Contact: Findings and Problems. New York. Linguistic Circle of New York, I953. Weinstock, St., "Neptunus," RE XVI (I933) cols. 2514-35. _ _ _ "Romische Reiterparade," Studi e materiali di storia delle religioni I3 (I937) pp. IO-24· _ _ _ "Victor and Invictus," HTR 50 (I957) pp. 2II-47. _ _ _ DivusJulius. Oxford. Oxford University Press, I971. Weippert, 0. Alexander Imitatio und Ramische Politik in republikanischen Zeit. Augsburg I972. Weise, 0. Die griechischen Warter in der lateinischen Sprache. Leipzig. S. Hirzel, I882. Reprinted Leipzig. Zentral-Antiquariat der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik, I964.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Wiesner, J. "Reiter und Ritter in altesten Rom," Klio 18 (1943) pp. 45-100. Welch, K., A. Powell. Editors. Julius Caesar as Ariful Reporter. London. Duckworth, Swansea, Classical Press of Wales, 1998. Wernicke, K. "ApETT]," RE II (1896) cols. 13-15. Wheeler, E. L. "Sapiens and Stratagems," Historia 37 (1988) pp. 166--95. Wieacker, E "Die XII Tafeln in ihrem Jahrhundert," in Gjerstad. Les Origins de la republique romaine. 1967. pp. 291-359. Wiedemann, T. Adults and Children in the Roman Empire. London. Routledge, 1989. Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, von, U. Sappho und Simonides, Untersuchungen aber griechische Lyriker. Berlin. Weidmann, 1913. ___ Der Glaube der Hellenen. Two volumes.; Berlin. Weidmann, 1931-32. Reprinted Basil. B. Schwabe, 1959. Wilkinson, L. P. "Cicero and the Relationship of Oratory and Literature," in Kenny,.Clausen, Cambridge History of Classical Literature. 1982. pp. 230-67. Will, E. Histoire politique du monde hellenistique. Two volumes. Nancy. Faculte des lettres et des sciences humaines, 1966-7. Willems, P. Le Senat de la Republique romaine. Two volumes. Louvain 1883. Williams, C. A. Roman Homosexuality: Ideologies ofMasculinity in Classical Antiquity. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1999. Williams, G. "Evidence for Plautus' Workmanship in the Miles Gloriosus," Hermes 86 (1958) pp. 79-105. Williams, R. D. "The Sixth Book of the Aeneid," Greece and Rome II (1964) pp. 48-63. Wilson, G. L. "Hidatsa Horse and Dog Culture," Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History IS, 2 (1924) pp. 153-4, 170-1. Winter, E E. "The Chronology of the Euryalus Fortress at Syracuse," AJA 67 (1963) pp. 363-87. Wiseman, T. P. "The Definition of 'Eques Romanus' in the Late Republic and Early Empire," Historia 19(1970) pp. 67-83. Reprinted in Roman Studies, Literary and Historical. 1987. pp. 57-83. _._ _ . New Men in the Roman Senate 139 B.G.-14 A.D. Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1971. _ _ _ "Monuments and the Roman annalists," in Moxon, Smart, Woodman, Past Perspectives: Studies in Greek and Roman Historical Writing. 1986. pp. 87-100. Reprinted in Wiseman, Historiography and Imagination. 1994. pp. 37-48. _ _ _ "Conspicui postes tectaque digna deo," in L'Urbs, espace urbain et histoire. 1987. pp. 394-413, ___ Roman Studies, Literary and Historical. Liverpool. E Cairns, 1987. _ _ _ "Roman Legend and Oral Tradition," JRS 79 (1989) pp. 129-37. Reprinted in Historiography and Imagination. 1994. p. 32. ___ Historiography and Imagination. Exeter. University of Exeter Press, 1994.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

_ _ _ "The God of the Lupercal," JRS 85 (1995) pp. 1-22. _ _ _ Remus, A Roman Myth. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 1995. _ _ _ "The publication of De Bello Gallico," in Welch and Powell,Julius Caesar as Ariful Reporter. 1998. pp. 1-9. Wissowa, G., W Kroll, K. MitteIhaus, K. Ziegler. Paulys Realencyclopiidie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft. 83 volumes. Stuttgart. J. B. Metzler, 18931978. Wissowa, G. "Honos," in Ausjuhrliches Lexikon der griechischen und romischen Mythologie. 11, cols. 2707-9. Editor W H. Roscher. Leipzig, Berlin 188690 .

_ _ _ Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur romischen Religion und Stadtgeschichte. Munich. C. H. Beck, 1904. _ _ _ "Echte und falsche 'Sondergotter' in der rornischen Religion," in Wissowa, Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur romischen Religions und Stadtgeschichte. 1904. pp. 304-26. _ _ _ Religion und Kultus der Romer. Second edition. Handbuch der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft. Munich. C. H. Beck, 1912. _ _ _ "Virtus," in Roscher. Ausjuhrliches Lexikon der griechischen und romischen Mythologie. Volume 6. 1824-37. pp. 336-47· Wolf, A. "aretalogie," RE suppl. VI (1935) cols. 13-15. Wray, D. Catullus and the Poetics ofRoman Manhood. Cambridge. University Press, 200I. Wright, J. Dancing in Chains: The Stylistic Unity of the Comoedia Palliata. Papers and Monographs of the American Academy in Rome 25. Rome 1974. Wuilleurnier, P. Tarente des origines la conquete romaine. Paris. E. de Boccard, 1939. Yavetz, Z. Caesar and his Public Image. London. Thames & Hudson, 1983. First published as Caesar in der iifJentlichen Meinung. Dusseldorf. Druste, 1979· Zagagi, N. Tradition and Originality in Plautus: Studies of the amatory motifS in Plautine Comedy Hypomnemeta, 62. Gottingen. Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 1980. Zanker, P. The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus. Translated by A. Shapiro. Ann Arbor 1988. First published as Augustus und die Macht der Bilder. Munich. C. H. Beck, 1987. Zevi, E "Considerazioni sull'elogio di Scipione Barbato," Studi miscellanie del seminario di archeologia e storia dell' arte greca e romana dell' universita di Roma. 15 (1968-9) pp. 65,3· _ _ _ Stud. Etr. 71 (1973) pp. 508-9. _ _ _ "Sepulcrum Scipionum," in LTIJR 4 (1999) p. 85· Ziegler, K. "Tyche," RE VII 2 (1948) cols. 1643-96. Zieske, L. Felicitas, eine f;Vortuntersuchung. Hamburger Philologische Studien 23. Hamburg. H. Buske, 1972.

a

43 0

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Zinserling, G. "Studien zu den Historiendarstellungen der romischen Republik," Wissenschqftliche Zeitschrift 'der Friedrich-Schiller-Univetsitat 9 (1959~0) pp. 401-48. Ziolkowski, A. The Temples of Mid-Republican Rome and their Historical and Topographical Context. Rome. L'Erma diBretschneider, 1992. Zorzetti, N. La pretesta e il teatro latino arcaico. Naples. Liguori, 1980. _ _ _ "The Carmina Convivalia," in Murray, Tecusan, Sympotica. 1990. pp. 289-3 0 7. Zwierlein,o. Zur Kritik und Exegese des Plautus. I: Poenulus und Curculio. Stuttgart. F. Steiner, 1990. ___ Zur Kritik und Exegese des Plautus. II: Miles Gloriosus. Stuttgart. F. Steiner, 1991.

43 1

INDEX LOCORUM

I. TEXTS

ANAXANDRIDES

ACCIUS, L.

Comoediae (PCG)

Tragoediae (Ribbeck, TRF) Armorum iudicium frag. 106-8 (ROL) =

illC. illC.

(Ribbeck): P.47 frag. 156: p. 48, ll. 101; p. 85, p. 92, ll. 70

frag. 60: p. 92, ll. 70; p. 109, p. II4, ll. 32; p. II6, ll. 40 frag. 71: p. II3, ll. 29

52-54

Comoediae (PCG) frag.22: p. II4,

41;

p. 133, ll.

101; p. 73,

ll.

101

ll.

3

ll.

ll.

40;

32; p. II6,

88

In M. Tullium Ciceronem invecta 4·7: p. 354

Telephus

ANONYMOUS IAMBLICHI (DIELS-KRANZ)

frag.619-20: p. 48,

ll.

101; p. 85,

frag. 89,P. 400 ANTHOLOGIA PALATINA

ll·4 1

7.253: p. 87; p. 91.

AESCHlNES

2.157: p. 331, ll. 43 2.169-170: p. 133, ll. 88 3·46: p. 331, ll. 43

ll. 29; p. II6 frag. 210: p. 76, ll. 14 frag. 226: p. 100; p. II6,

59 2 : p. 384 AFRANIUS, L.

Comoediae (Ribbeck, CRF) frag. 65: p. 60; p. 162

ANTIPHON

Tragoedia (TrGF) frag. 2: p. II3,

ALCMAN (DIELS)

43

ALEXIS

ll.

29

ll.

29

APOLLONIDAS

Comoediae (PCG) frag. 103: p. II4, 40 frag. 267: p. 100,

ll.

Tragoedia (TrGF) frag. 2: p. II3,

32; p. II6,

APPIANUS

ll.

ll.

BC 1.6: p. 267, ll. 75 1.II: 245, ll. 9

99

ANANIMENES OF LAMPSACUS

Frag. 31, IIb5: p. 88,

(FGH 72) ll.

65; p. 92,

Comoediae (PCG) frag. 80: p. 87, ll. 51 frag. 202: p. 101, ll. 101 frag.208: p. 101, ll. 101; p. II3,

Sept.

ll.

ll.

ANTIPHANES

AESCHYLUS

frag.44: p. 85,

ll.

ANONYMOUS

Nyctegresi frag. 492: p. 48,

16;

ANAXILAS ll.

Neoptolemus frag. 473: p. 48,

ll.

55

433

ll.

38

ll.

69

INDEX LOCORUM

(cont.)

1.14: p. 143, ll. 2 1.28: p. 285, ll. 121 1.30: p. 271, ll. 89 1.91: p. 294, ll. 9 1.9T p. 257, ll. 43; p. 294, ll. 9 2.6: p. I, ll. 3 2·7: p. 351, ll. 93 2.104: p. 310, llll. 49-50 2.106: p. 315, ll. 61 2.lI6: p. 316, ll. 64 3.51: p. 258, ll. 77 Celt. 18.2: p. 382, ll. 147 Han. 17: p. 322 , ll. 9

1099A 3If.: p. 137, ll. 99 lIOIA 6: p. 87, ll. 5 lI06A 15: p. 75, ll. 9 lI07 B 22-30: p. 137, ll. 99 I12oA: p. 101, ll. 101 I120B I7f.: p. 89, ll. 69; p. 100, ll. 98 lI22A: p. 137, ll. 99 lI22B 29-lI23A: p. 137, ll. 99 lI29B J: p. 338, ll. 59 II29B 29: p. 7, ll. 17 II45A 25-2T p. 85, ll. 46 II55A 23-32: p. 137, ll. 99 II63B 5-8: p. 137, ll. 99 II78B 10-15: p. 86, ll. 46 Phys. I95A 3I-I98B 10: p. 89, ll. 60

lb.

Pol.

APPIANUS

48: 77: 79: 83:

p. 203, ll. 74 p. 325, ll. 27

1284A 10: p. 338 1284A IO-IT p. 338, ll. 61 I324B-I325A: p. 372, ll. 121: p. 338, ll·59 I325A 20ff.: p. 338, ll. 59 I325B 14-20: p. 338 I325B 16-28: p. 338 I32 8A 38: p. 338

p. 326, ll. 27; p. 336, ll. 28

p. 326, ll. 27

Lib. 13: p. 20, ll. 24 41-44: p. 322, ll. 7 66: p. 207, ll. 5 112: p. 239, ll. lI3 133: p. 239, llll. lI4 & lI6 Sam. 3: p. 192 , ll. 42

ARRIANUS, FLAVIUS

Anabasis 6. 7.5-6: p. 310, ll. 49 ASCONIUS, Q. PEDIANUS (CLARK)

In Mil. 34-41: p. 313, ll·57 27-28 : p. 344, ll·79 In Pis. II: p. 218, ll. 44; p. 237, ll. 104

APVLEIUS, L.

Flor. 16. 63-64: p. lI5, ll. 34 I67ff.: p. lI5, ll. 34 Met. 1.10: p. 73, ll. 3; p. 99, ll. 96

ATHENAEUS

20ID: p. 86, ll.48 696A: p. 86, ll. 47 547A: p. 263, ll. 57

ARCHILOCHUS

frag. 8: p. 85, ll. 43 ARISTOPHANES

Pax

AUCTOR AD HERENNIUM

Passim: p. 61, ll. 137 2.25: p. 331, ll. 43; p. 335 3.13: p. 331, ll. 43; p. 335 4.27: p. 335

1320-1: p. 100, ll. 99 Ran. 1027 ARISTOTLE

Mag. mor.

AUCTOR DE NOMINIBUS (KEMPF)

lI85A 9-B: p. 338, ll. 59

EN

3: P·175 AUGUSTINUS, AURELIUS

CD

1039A 6: p. 338, ll. 59 1097B 10-12: p. 137, ll. 99 1098A 6: p. 338, ll. 59

2.23: p. 270, ll. 83 4.24: p. 90; p. 2II; p. 289

434

INDEX LOCORUM

3·91.1: P·308 3.91.2-4: p. 309, n. 46 3 ·91.3: p. 308 , n. 43 3.99.2-3: p. 309, n. 46 3 ·99: p. 66, n. 152 BG I 1.2: p. 315, n. 58; p. 360, n. I04 I 1-4: p. 302, n. 26; p. 303 12.2: p. 303, n. 29 12.5: p. 61, n. 137 15.3: p. 312, n. 54 I 13 ·5: p. 59, n. 133 I 13.5-6: p. 303, n. 29; p. 3II I 13·6: p. 305, n. 34; p. 308 125.1: p. 3IO; p. 66, n. 152; p. 192, n·43 I 36.T p. 302, n. 26; p. 303 I 39.2: p. 243, n. 3 I 39-40: p. 62, n. 141 I 40: p. 312, n. 56 I 40.4: p. 305; p. 312, n. 54 140.5: P·292 140.8: p. 292; p. 303, n. 29; p. 305, n. 34;P. 307 140.12: p. 366, n. lIO 144.1: p. 302, n. 27 I 44.2-4: p. 302, n. 27 147-4: p. 308, nn. 43 & 44 I 52.1: p. 309, n. 46; p. 312, n. 54 153.5: p. 3IO, n. 50 11 4.5: p. 303, n. 29 11 5.2: p. 308 11 8.5: p. 303, n. 29 11 IS ·4: p. 302 11 15.4-5: p. 303, n. 50 11 20.3: p. 305, n. 34 11 21.1: p. 312 11 21.3: p. 305, n. 34 11 24-4: p. 303, n. 29 11 25.1: p. 66, n. 153; p. 300 11 25.2: p. 310; p. 381, n. 144 11 27.2: p. 303, n. 29 11 28.2: p. 305, n. 33 III 5: p. 305 III 5.2: p. 305 III 8.1: p. 305, n. 33 III 10.3: p. 303 III 14.2-15: p. 307, n. 40 III 14.8-9: p. 309, n. 46

AUGUSTUS

Res gestae 1.6: p. 209, n. II 3-4: p. 387, n. 7 II: p. 90, n. 63 20: p. 218, n. 44 25-33: p. 387, n. 7 34.2: p. 385, n. I BACCHYLIDES

9.13: p. I09, n. 13 13.175-81: p. 86, n. 47 BATON

Comoediae (PCG) frag. 3: p. 121, n. SI frag. 5: p. 121, n. 52 CAESAR, C. lULIUS

Carmina (Courtney) frag. I (p. 153): p. 76, n. 13 Commentarii BC 1.2: p. 315, n. 58 1.2.6: p. 314 1.3·5: P·314 1.5. 1- 2: p. 314 1.6.1: p. 302, n. 28; p. 314 1.7.2: p. 300, n. 22 1.46-4: p. 66, n. 152 1.58.2: p. 302, n. 28; p. 304, n. 41 1.59.2: p. 302, n. 28; p. 305, n. 34 2.6.1: p. 302, n. 28 2.15.4: p. 302, n. 25 2.21.1: p. 305, n. 34; p. 308, n. 43 2.30.2: p. 301 2·40.2: p. 304, n. 32 3.4.4: p. 308; p. 302, n. 28 3·16·4: p. 59, n. 133 3.26.1: p. 59, n. 133 3.38.5: P·3 01 3.59.1: p. 308, n. 43 3.59. 1-3: p. 7; p. 8 3.59.1-60.2: P·3 02 3.59.3-60.2: p. 294, n. 6 3.60.1: p. 8; p. 308, n. 43; p. 375 3.60.2: p. 8, n. 19 3.69.4: p. 8; p. 3IO, n. 49 3.73·5: p. 301; p. 305, n. 34 3.91: p. 66, n. 152

435

INDEX LOCORUM

CAESAR, C. IULIUS

(cont.)

11120-27> p. 309, ll. 47 HI 21.1: p. 303, ll. 29; p. 312 III 21 T p. 308, ll. 41 IV 2: p. 56, ll. 121 IV 21.T p. 308, ll. 43 V 8.4: P.302 V 25.2: p. 308, ll. 43 V 28-37: p. 304, ll. 31 V 33.3: p. 310, ll. 49 V 34.2: p. 301; p. 304, ll. 38 V 35.4: p. 304, ll. 38 V 35.5: p. 304, ll. 32 V 35.6-T p. 66, ll. 152 V 40-52: p. 309; ll. 47 V 40.T P.306 V 41: p. 67; p. 68 V 41.7-8: p. 306 V 44: p. 66, ll. 152 V 44.3-4: p. 308, ll. 43 V 48.6: p. 308 V 48.7: p. 306 V 52: p. 67; p. 68 V 52.3-4: p. 306 V 52.4: p. 308, ll. 43 V 52.6: p. 304, ll. 31 V 58: p. 309, ll. 47 V 58.1: p. 305, ll. 33 VI 1.4: p. 313 VI 7-8: p. 309, ll. 47 VI 7.4: p. 304 VI 8.4: p. 309, ll. 46 VI 14: p. 254, ll. 39 VI 34.3: p. 305, ll. 33 VI 34.4: p. 305, ll. 34 VI 34.7: p. 305, ll. 33 VI 36-42: p. 309, ll. 47 VI 36.1: p. 305, ll. 33 VI 38: p. 66, ll. 152 VI 38.1-4: p. 308 VI 39.1: p.68 VI 39.4: p. 68 VI 39.8: p. 68 VI 39.10: p.68 VI 40.5: p. 303, ll. 29 VI 40.7: p. 66, ll. 152 VI 40.7-8: p. 308 VI 77.s: p. 62, ll. 141 VII 4.9: p. 305, llll. 33-4

VII 5.1: p. 59, ll. 133 VII 6.1: P.3I3 VII 6-13: p. 309, ll. 47 VII 19.4-6: p. 304, ll. 32 VII 22.1: p. 302, ll. 25; p. 305, ll. 34; p. 308, ll. 41 VII 22.2: p. 308, ll. 41 VII 29.2: p. 305, ll. 34; p. 308, ll. 41 VII 29.6: p. 305, ll. 33 VII 32.5: p. 305, ll. 33 VII 36.4: p. 303, ll. 29 VII 42.2: p. 303 VII 47.7: p. 66, ll. 152 VII 50-52: p. 304, n. 32 VII 50T p. 66, ll. 152 VII 50.4-6: p. 66, ll. 152 VII 52.1: p. 65, ll. 151; p. 304 VII 52.3-4: p. 304 VII 53.1: P.307 VII 57·3: p. 305, ll. 34 VII 59.5: p. 306, ll. 36 VII 59.6: p. 305; p. 308 VII 62.2: p. 309 VII 65.3: p. 305, ll. 33 VII 77.5: p. 25, ll. 39; p. 62, ll. 141; p. 302 VII 80: p. 303, ll. 29 VII 80.5: p. 309, ll. 46 Book VIII (see Hirtius) PSEUDO-CAESAR

De bello Africo passim: p. 308, ll. 44 83.1: P·3 II 72-4: p. 294, ll. 3

De bello Alexandrino passim: p. 308, ll. 44 70.6.2: p. 167, ll. 19

De bello Hispaniensi passim: p. 308, ll. 44 42.7: p. 355 CALLIMACHUS

Hymni 94-96: p. 86, ll. 46 CARCINUS

Tragoediae (TrGF) frag. 4: p. II3, ll. 29 CATO, M. PORCIUS

De agricultura (Mazzarillo) prae. 2: p. 57; p. 58

43 6

INDEX LOCORUM

prae. 3: p. 130, ll. 70 1.2: p. 56,ll. 112; p. 73, ll. 5; p. 74 3·2:P· 56; p. 57; p. 58; p. 130, ll. 70; p. 372, ll. 122 33.1: p. 75, ll. I I 36: p. 75, ll. I I 43.2: p. 75, ll. Il

frag. 129: p. 52; p. 61, ll.139 frag. 141: p. 55 frag. 146: p. 55 frag. 156-8: p. 567, ll. 120! Ad Marcum jilium (Jordall) frag. 6, p. 78: p. 58, ll. 127 CATULLUS, C. VALERIUS

Orationes (ORF) 8·17: p. 55, ll. Il9 8.22: p. 59, ll. 132 8.58: p. 45, ll. 93; P.'287, ll. 126 8.72-82: p. 255, ll. 36; p. 324, ll.22 8.78: p. 56, ll. 120; p. 203, ll·77 8.83: p. 59, ll. 132 8.85-6: p. 261, ll. 53 8.94: p. 234, ll. 96 8·9T p. 45, ll. 93 8.98: p. 227, ll. 70 8.128-35: p. 132 8.141: p. 55; p. IlO, ll. Il9; p. 302, ll. 26;p. 360,ll. 104 8.146: p. 55; p. IlO, ll. Il9; p. 302, ll. 26;p. 360, ll. 104 8.148-51: p. 234, ll. 97 8.172: p. 178, ll. 46 8.173: p. 324, ll. 19 8.185-6: p. 237, ll. I07 8.224: p. 227, ll. 70

Carmina 64: P·167; p. 294, ll. 5 64.214: p. 294, ll. 5 68: p. 294, ll. 5 CATULUS, Q. LUTATIUS

Carmina (Courtlley) frag. I (p. 70): p. 281, ll. Il2 frag. 2 (pp. 76-7): p. 281, ll.Il2 CHAIREMON

Tragoediae (TrGF) frag.2: p. 87, ll. 51 CICERO, M. TULLIUS

Carmina De consulatu suo, (Courtlley) frag. IO: p. 354 frag. Il: p. 354

Epistulae Ad Brut. 23 (SE 25) 3: p. 158, ll. 46; p. 258, ll·47 23 (SE 25) IO: p. 109, ll. 14

Att.

Origines (HRR)

1.1 (SE IO) 4: p. 328, ll. 37 1.2 (SE Il) 2: p. 328, ll. 37 1.16 (SE 16) 6: p. 267, ll. 74 1.18 (SE 18) 6: p. 315, ll. 61 2.1 (SE 21) 8: p. 382, ll. 148 2.19 (SE 39) 3: P·299 3.8 (SE 53) 3: p. 169, ll. 23 4.1 (SE 73) 8: p. 169 4.16 (SE 89) 8: p. 218, ll. 44 4.17 (SE 19) 4: p. 171; p. 342, ll. 73 p. 381, ll. 145 5.20 (SE Il3) 6: p. 340, ll. 66 6.1 (SE Il5) 17: p. 258, ll. 45 7.2 (SE 125) 7: p. 386, ll. 5 9C (SE 74c): p. 381, ll. 145 IO.8 (SE 199) 9: p. 163 12.21 (SE 260) I: p ..1, ll. 3 13.7 (SE 314): p. 316, ll. 64

frag. I: p. 369, ll. Il7 frag. 2: p. 369, ll. Il7 frag. 3: p. 369, ll. Il7 frag. IT p. 55, ll. Il 9 frag. 51: p. 55, ll. Il9; p. 324, ll. 19 frag. 58: p. 53; p. 54 frag. 73: p. 324, ll. 19 frag.76: p. 55, ll. Il9; p. 324, ll. 19 frag. 78: p. 56, ll. 120 frag. 83: p. 50; p. 51; p. 52; p. 54 frag. Il4-5: p. 56, ll. 20 frag. Il8: p, 51 frag. 122: p. 56, ll. 120 frag. 126--'7: p. 56, ll. 120

437

INDEX LOCORUM

CICERO, M. TULLIUS

(cont.)

Fam. 1.7 (SB 18) 8: p. I09, n. 14 2.3 (SB 47) 2: p. 340, n. 66 2.5 (SB 49) 2: p. 340, n. 66 3.4 (SB 67) I: p. 332, n. 44 3.7 (SB 71) 5: p. 332; p. 340, n. 66 3·9 (SB 72) 3: p. 332, n. 44 3·IO (SB 73) 9: p. 223, n. 58 3·Il (SB 74) 4: p. 332, n. 44 4·9 (SB 231) 3: p. 340, n. 66 5·7 (SB 3) 3: P·354 5·13 (SB 201) 3: P.334 5.17 (SB 23) 4-5: p. 170; p. 340, n. 66 5.Ii! (SB 51) I: p. 169 6.1 (SB 242) 4: p. 340, n. 66 7.1 (SB 24) 2-3: p. 297, n. 16 9.14 (SB 326) 4: p. 340, n. 66 IO.3 (SB 355) 2: p. 340, n. 66 10.8 (SB 371) 3: p. 381, n. 145 10.8 (SB 371) 6: p. 340, n. 66 11.18 (SB 397) 2: p. 340, n. 66 12.IO (SB 425) 3: p. 340, n. 66 12.24 (SB 361) 3: p. 360, n. 44 13.27 (SB 293) 4: p. 170 13.28 (SB 294) 2: p. 340, n. 66 13.78 (SB 275) I: p. 340, n. 66 14.1 (SB 8) I: p. 163; p. 334, n. 51; p. 340, n. 66 14.1 (SB 8) 5: p. 169 14·3 (SB 9) 2: p. 169 14.4 (SB 6) 5: p. 169 14. Il (SB 166) 2: p. 163 15.5 (SB Ill) I: p. 340, n. 66 15.16 (SB 215): p. 333, n. 47 15.19 (SB 216) 2: p. 333, n. 47; p. 340, n. 66

Orationes Arch. 15: p. 348, n.88 19: p. 274, n. 95 22: p. 207, n. 7 27: p. 234, n. 97 28-30: p. 353, n. 94

Balb. 9: p. 298, n. 17 IO: p. 298, n. 17 13: p. 298, n. 17; p. 334, n. 50

IS: p. 298, n. 17 16: p. 29i!, n. 17 18-19: p. 330; p. 345, n. 82 46: P·273 47: p. 273 54: p. 134; p. 346, n. 83; p. 348, n. 88 Il3: p. 334, n. 50

Caedn. 77: p. 341, n. 68

Cael. 13:P· 381, n. 144 18: p. 173, n. 31 34: p. 340 37-38: p. 171, n. 25 40: p. 342, n. 73 41: p. 171; p. 342, n. 43: p. 17 1; p. 342, n. 76: p. 171; p. 342, n. 79: p. 171; p. 342, n.

73 73 73 73

Cat. 1.3: p. 345, n. 82 1.12: P.270 1.29: p. 334, n. 50 1.33: P·270 2.Il: p. 298, n. 17; p. 350 2.22: p. 262, n. 56 2.25: p. 129; p. 334, n. 50; p. 350 2.28: p. 350 2.29: p. 267, n. 74 3.14: p. 351; p. 354, n. 96 3.15: p. 96, n. 88; p. 351, n. 93 3.18: p. 267, n. 74 3.22: p. 267, n. 74 3.23: p. 350, n. 92 3.25: p. 350, n. 92 3·26: p. 351; p. 352 3.29: p. 352 4.2: p. 268, n. 78 4·5: p. 352 4· 9: p. 300, n. 22 4.19: p. 96, n. 87; p. 352 4.20: p. 298, n. 17; p. 348, n. 88 4.21: p. 2, n. 4; p. 272; p. 353 4.22 : p. 353 4.24: P·270 Clod. frag. 22: p. 262, n. 56 Clu. 39: p. 171; p. 342, n. 73

INDEX LOCORUM

51: p. 346 67: p. 330, n. 42 Ill: p. 328, n. 36 II8: p. 341, n. 68 133: p. 342, n. 73 141: p. 179, n. 51 165: p. 342, n. 73 200: p. 342, n. 73

64: p. 303, n. 35; p. 343, n. 76; p. 350 67: p. 343, n. 76 68: p. 341, n. 68

Leg. agr. 1.5: p. 348, n. 88 2·3: p. 298, n. 17; p. 329; p. 330, n·42 2.51: p. 298, n. 17 2.52: p. 298, n. 17 3.3: p. 350, n. 42

Deiot. 8: p. 145, n. II 12: p. 58, n. 130 26: p. 130, n. 78

Marc. 26: p. 298, n. 18 Mil. 6: p. 94, n. 77 24: p. 341, n. 68 30: p. 344 33: p. 298, n. 17 34: p. 344 36: p. 298, n. 17 66: p. 298, n. 17; p. 344 73: p. 29 8, n. 17 79: p. 298, n. 17 81: p. 344 89: p. 353, n. 94 95: p. 344 99: p. 299, n. 18 Mur. 2: p. 345, n. 82 12: p. 342 16-7: p. 94, n. 77; p. 325, n. 25; p. 328, n. 35;p. 330, n. 42 17: p. 266, n. 70; p. 323, n. 12; p. 324,n. 20;p. 327, n. 33;P. 330; p. 342; p. 345, nn. 81 & 82 18: p. 342 18-19: p. 33 0 22: p. 342; p. 344 23: p. 129, n. 75; p. 359 24: p. 345, n. 81; p. 347, n. 86 30: p. 129; p. 325, n. 24; p. 342; p. 347 32: p. 342 33: p·342 54: p. 343 60: p. 129, n. 75; p. 342 63: p. 129, n. 75; p. 342 64: P·34 2 66: p. 129, n. 75; p. 342 76: p. 233, n. 94

Dom. 16: p. 94, n. 77 39: p. 340 97: p. 340; p. 353, n. 94 102: p. 281, n. II3 II4: p. 281, n. II3

Font. 23: p. 129, n. 75; p. 325, n. 25; p. 326, n. 28 24: p. 327, n. 3 28: p. 243, n. 74; p. 350 39: p. 348, n. 88 42-3: p. 243, n. 4 74: p. 348, n. 88

Hay. resp. 6-7: p. 34, n. 79 19: p. 379, n. 140 23: p. 96, n. 88 49: p. 298, n. 17

Imp. Pom. 10: p. 94, n. 77 p. 298, n. 17 20: p. 298, n. 17 27: p. 58, n. 130; p. 298, n. 17 28: P.273 29: p. 307, n. 39; p. 339, n. 50; p. 342; p. 350 29-34: p. 305, n. 34 30: p. 298, n. 17 33: p. 298, nn. 17 & 18 36: p. 298, nn. 17 & 18; p. 343; p. 366, n. lIO 42: p. 298, n. 17 45: p. 298, n. 17 47= p. 272; p. 348, n. 88 51: p. 123, n. 57; p. 340 61: p. 298, n. 17 62: p. 298, n. 17

439

INDEX LOCORUM

CICERO, M. TULLIUS

(cont.)

Phi!. 3.3: p. 298, n. 18 3.9: P·270 3.8: p. 341 3.9: P·270 3.19; p. 298, n. 18 4. 13: P·3 5·7: P·27 0 5.40-41: p. 258, 47 5·41: P·94 6.12-13: p. 258, n. 48 6.13: p. 158, n. 45 8.13: p. 156, n. 36; p. 345, n. 82 9·4: p. 257, n. 43; p. 322 , n. 7; p. 345, n.82 9.13: p. 94, n. 81; p. 158 9.18: p. 388, n. 88 10.10: p. 298, n. 18 II.18: p. 58, n. 130 13.6: p. 334, n. 50 13.24: p. 123, n. 57 13.30: p. 382, n. 148 13.44: p. 298, n. 18 13 ·49: p. 121, n. 57 14.4: p. 305, n. 35 14· II : p. 94, n. 77 14.28 : p. 94, n. 77 14.31: p. 58, n. 130 14.33: p. 298, n. 18 14.34: p. 298, n. 18 14.36: p. 298, n. 18 14·37: p. 94, n. 77 14.38: p. 298, n. 18

Pis. 6: p. 351, n. 93 16: p. 298, n. 17 27: p. 298, n. 17 34: P·29 8, n. 17 35: p. 298, n. 17 43: p. 270 , n. 83 44: p. 58, n. 21

Plane. 9: P·344 12: p. 73, n. 4; p. 327. n. 31 13: p. 96, n. 86 29: p. 173, n. 31 30: p. 344, n. 77 51: p. 265, n. 67

440

p. 123, n. 57 p. 58, n. 130; p. 348, n. 88 p. 347 p. 346; p. 353 ,n. 94 p. 129, n. 75; p. 275, nn. 97 & 98; p. 343, n. 74;P· 344, n. 77;P· 350 80: p. 129, n. 75; p. 343, n. 74; p. 344, n. 77;P· 350 Prov. Cons. Quir. 19: p. 266, n. 70; p. 284, n. 117; p. 379, n. 140 31: p. 289, n. 17 32: p. 272; p. 298, n. 18; p. 348, n. 8 Quir. 20: p. 305, n. 35 Rab. 8: p. 341, n. 69 26: p. 348, n. 88 29: P.272 Red. pop. 16: p. 58, n. 130 19: p. 334, n. 50 24: p. 145, n. II Red. sen. 5: p. 58, n. 130 19: p. 334, n. 50 24: p. 145, n. II Q. Rose. 7: p. 123, n. 57 27: p. 162; p. 163 Ses. 6: p. 384, n. 151 37: p. 258, n. II9 47: p. 35 0 , n. 9 2 4 8: p. 353, n. 94 60: p. 344; p. 382, n. 148 62: p. 354, n. 95 67: p. 298, n. 17 86: p. 334, n. 50; p. 344 88: p. 344 92 : P·344 93: p. 73, n. 4; p. 344 95: p. 344 101: p. 285, n. 121 II3: p. 334, n. 50 II6: p. 275, nn. 97 & 98; p. 353, n. 94 136: p. 330, n. 42; p. 331, n. 43; p. 344 58: 60: 66: 67: 78:

INDEX LOCORUM

4·80-1: p. 239, n. II4; p. 331, n. 43 4. 81 : p. 330; p. 348 4.93: p. 239, n. II4 4.120: p. 230, n. 79 4.120-3: p. 212, n. 25 4.121: p. 227, n. 70; p. 230, n. 79 4.126: p. 230, n. 82; p. 233, n. 94; p. 279, n. I06; p. 281, n. II3 4.151: p. 231, n. 86 5.3: p. 152, n. 26 5.25: p. 272; p. 348, n. 88 5.31: p. 330; p. 341, n. 82; p. 345, n. 82 5.70: p. 341, n. 69 5.82: p. 324, n. 20 5.128: p. 341, n. 69; p. 348, n. 88 5.180: p. 325, n. 24 5. 180- 1: P·33 0 5.180-2: p. 330; p. 345, n. 82 5.181: p. 31; p. 325, n. 25; p. 326, n. 28;p. 327, n. 3I;P. 328 5. 182: p. 329 5.184: p. 239, n. II4 5.I84-9: P·270

I3T p·344 138: p. 344 143: p. 58, n. 130; p. 344

Sull. 23: 24: 34: 83: 85: 86:

p. p. p. p. p. p.

266, n. 70; p. 324, n .. 90 330 305, n. 35 94, n. 77; p. 353, n. 94 351, n. 93 267, n. 74

vat. 28: p. 96, n. 86; p. 218, n. 44; p. 348, n. 88 I

Verr. 1.135: p. 348, n. 88 1.155: p. 348, n. 88

2

Verr. 1.2: p. 341, n. 69 1.3: p. 341, n. 69 1.II: p. 239, n. II4 1.55: p. 227, n. 70; p. 230, n. 79 2.3: p. 348, n. 88 2.23: p. 341, n. 69 2.31: p. 345, n. 82 2.50: p. 231, n. 86 2.51: p. 231, n. 86 2.83: p. 341, n. 69 2.85-6: p. 239, n. II4 2.102: p. 341, n. 69 2.150: p. 158, n. 45 2.156: p. 341, n. 69 2.181: p.328 2.192: p. 334, n. 50 3.2: p. 342, n. 73 3.7-8.2: p. 330, n. 42 3.8: p. 341, n. 69 3 ·56: p. 341.n. 69 3.60: p. 341, n. 69 3 ·93: p. 341, n. 69 3.204: p. 341, n. 69 4-4-5: p. 290, n. 131 4.8: p. 3, n. 8 4.4-5: p. 290, n. 131 4.38: p. 341, n. 69 4.50: p. 341, n. 69 4.71-2: p. 270 4.72-4: p. 239, n. II4 4.75: p.270 4.7 8: p. 348

Philosophica Acad. pr. 2.13: p. 326, n. 29 2.140: p. II4, n. 30

Amic. 20: p. 9, n. 23 2I: p. 294, nn. 3 & 6; p. 340; p. 341, n. 68 39: p. 3II 77: p. 326, n. 28

Div. 1.59: p. 275, nn. 97 & 98 1.I06: p. 267, n. 75 2·7T p. 221, n. 53 2.140: p. 275, nn. 97 & 98 Fin. 1.IO-II: p. 290, n. I30 1.61: p. II4, n. 30 2.19: p. 338, n. 59 2.54: p. 326, n. 28 2.69: p. II4, n. 30 2. II2: p. 123, n. 57 3.20: p. 126, n. 66 3 ·49: p. II4, n. 30 4.22: p. 94; p. 326, n. I02

441

INDEX LOCORUM

CICERO, M. TULLIUS (cont.) 4.59: p. 123, ll. 57 5·93: p. 123, ll. 57 Leg. 1.1.1: p. 267, ll. 75 1.45: p. 74; p. 339 2.21: p. 214, ll. 31 2.58: p. 213; p. 339, ll. 64 2.60: P.I3 3.36: p. 244; ll. 7; p. 350, ll. 42 ND 1.8: p. 290, ll. 130 LID: p. 338, nn. 359-61 2·9: p. 128, ll. 73 2.10: p. 200, ll. 61 2.60: p. 90, ll. 62; p. 2ID, ll. 17 2.79: p. 86, ll. 46; p. 95, ll. 82; p. 191, ll. 36 3.52: p. 221, ll. 52 3.38[.: p. 95, ll. 82 3.80: p. 284, ll. lI8

1.25: p. 339 1.33: p. 338 1.51-52: p. 339 2.1: p. 323, ll. 14; p. 337 3·T p. 339, ll. 63 3.9: p. 261, ll. 55 3·18: P.339 3.28: p. 326, ll. 28 4.2: p.253 4.12: p. 234, ll. 97 5·1: p. 339, ll. 63 5·9: p. 339 Sen. 15: p. 323, ll. 17 43: P·I9 I

Tusc. 1.3: p. SI, ll. ID5 1.1-4: p. 290, ll. 130 1. lIO: p. 323, ll. 12 2.lI: p. 91, ll. 65 2-43: p. 24; p. 25, ll. 38; p. 72; p. 73, ll. 4; p. 339, ll. 63 3·I6-IT p. 62, ll. 146; p. 134, ll. 90 3 ·37: p. 123, ll. 57 4.36: p. 134, ll. 90 4.64: p. 25, ll. 38 5.56: p. 286, ll. 124 5.28: p. 123, ll. 57

Off. 1.21: p. 134, ll. 89 1.46: p. 123, ll. 57 1.57-58: p. 127 1.62: p. 7, ll. 17 1.74: p. 134, ll. 89; p. 353, ll. 94 1.74-'75: p. 347, ll. 86 1.76-78: p. 94; p. 134, ll. 89; p. 353 1.90: p. 58, ll. 130 1.I2I: p. 170; p. 179, ll. 50 1.138: p. 322, ll. 7 2.18: p. 126 2-45: p. 186, ll. I 2.61: p. 220, ll. 49 3.10: p. 284, ll. lI8 3.66: p. 275, ll. 99 3 ·79: p. 271, ll. 89 3.ID9: p. 326, ll. 28 3.121: p. 179, ll. 50 3.139: p. 121, ll. 53

Rhetorica Brut. 18: p. 382, ll. 148 55: p. 321 , ll. 4 65: p. 323, ll. 14 69: p. 53, ll. lI2 75: p. SI, ll. ID5; p. 191 76: p. SI, ll. ID5; p. 191 84: p. 19, ll.I9 91: P·335 96: p. 326, ll. 29 lI4: p. 284, ll. lI8 129: p. 327, ll. 31 165: p. 328, ll. 43 168: p. 327, ll. 31 23 2 : P·75 235: P·75 255-6: p. 134, ll. 89 261: p. 8, ll. 21 267: p. 332, ll. 44 294: p. 324, ll. 14

Parad. stoic. 2.16: p. 270, ll. 83

Rep. 1.1: p. 323, ll. 12; p. 336; p. 337 1.2: p. 336; p. 337 1.I2: p. 338 1.21: p. 227, ll. 70 1.23: p. 203, ll. 74

442

INDEX LOCORUM

De or. 1.20: p. 374, n. 86 1.48: p. 75 1.83: p. 335 1.117: p. 328, n. 34 1.134: p. 19, n. 19 2.4: p. 290, n. 131 2·35: p. 335 2·55: p. 328, n. 35 2.197: p. 327, n. 33 2.224: p. 179, n. 51 2.225: p. 132; p. 133; p. 134 2.268: p. Ill, n. 23; p. 321, n. 4 2.326: p. 75 2.341- 2: p. 92 ; p. 93 2·365: p. 345, n. 80 3·55: p. 134, n. 89 3·135: p. 323, n. 14 3·170: p·75 Inv. 1.94: p. 94, n. 77 Op. gent. 23: p. 76, n. 13

(ORF) 66·45: p. 132; p. 133; p. 134

CRASSUS, L. LICINIUS

DAMOXENUS

Comoediae (PCG) frag. 2: p. 121, n. 51 frag. 16: p. 100, n. 98 DEMOSTHENES

3.40: p. 378, n. 138 4·4S: p. 100, n. 99 18.287: p. 30, n. 51; p. 109, n. 12; p. 12 3, n. 57 19.148: p. 108, n. II; p. 109, n. 13 40.2: p. 100, n. 99 43.84: p. 137, n. 99 60.2: p. II3, n. 31 60.19-20: p. 87, n. 50 61.9-10: p. 87, n. 50; p. 331, n. 43 61.31-2: p. 87, n. 50; p. 331, n. 43 DE VIRIS ILLUSTRIBUS

32.3: p. 188, n. 25; p. 216, n. 37; p. 321, n. 4 45: p.225 58.1: p. 203, n. 74

Orat. 33·8: p. 335 81.2: p. 335, n. 52 83.3: p. 335, n. 52 136.1: p. 335, n. 52 139: p. 335, n. I Part. 47·4·5: p. 335, n. 52

DIO (CASSIUS)

7.35.2: p. 192, n. 42 8.32-3: p. 321, n. 4 15.24: p. 322, n. 9 17.58: p. 78, n. 21 21.78: p. 246, n. II 26.89.2: p. 272, n. 91 28.95.2: p. 285, n. 121 37.21.4: p. 315, n. 61 37.36: p. I, n. 3 37.43.2-4: p. 354, n. 95 37.54.2: p. 318, n. 73 43.22.2-3: p. 318, n. 73 43.23.6: p. 193, n. 46 43.37·4: p. 310, n. 50 43.43.1: p.3I5,n.61 44.4.2: p. 315, n. 61 44.4·3: p. 317, n. 67; p. 318, n·70 46.29.2: p. 258, n. 47 53.3-16: p. 385, n. I 53.20: p. 200, n. 59 54.18.2: p. 215, n. 36 56.23.2: p. 203, n. 77 60.22.2: p. 388, n. II

Top. 7 6 : P·97

(?) Comm. Pet. 3: p. 328 , n. 37 9: p. 328, n. 37 II: p. 134, n. 90; p. 328, n. 35

CICERO, Q. TULLIUS

COLUMELLA, L. IUNIUS MODERATUS

Rust. 1.4.1: p. 75, n. 12 COMICORUM GRAECORUM FRAGMENTA

(CAl') 122: p. 109, n. 16 126: p. II3, n. 29 163: p. II3, n. 29 190: p. II3, n. 29 195: p. II3, n. 29 1286: p. II3, n. 29; p. 114, n. 32

INCERTA

frag. frag. frag. frag. frag. frag.

443

INDEX LOCORUM

DIODORUS SICULUS

11.11.3: p. 92, ll. 68; p. 109, ll. 12 12.64: p. 204, ll. 79 I3.21.4-5: p. 88, ll. 55 I4.21.4: p. 88, ll. 55 I6.1.6: p. 88, ll. 54 I7·38.5: p. 88, ll. 54 I9.9.4: p. 77, ll. I8 23.2-4: p. 88, ll. 55 23.9.4: p. 78, ll. 2I 23.I9.20: p. 78, ll. 21 24.6: p. 88, ll. 55 27.5--6: p. 88, ll. 55 29.I9: p. 37I, ll. I20 30.22: p. 203, ll. 34 32.25: p. 239, ll. II4 33.I7: p. 325, ll. 27 35.38: p. 268, ll. 78 36.1O.I: p. I52, ll. 26 36.13: p. 267, ll. 75 DI0GENES LAERTIUS

5.27: p. 86, ll. 47 5.43: p. 88, ll. 53 5.4T p. 88, ll. 53 7.105: p. 126, ll. 86

DIPHILUS

Comoediae (PCG) frag. 107: p. 87, ll. 5I DONATUS, AELlUS

Ter. Phorm. 84I: p. 89, ll. 61 ENNIUS, Q.

Annales (Skutsch) frag. 71: p. 339, ll. 62 frag. I83-90: p. 45; p. 52, ll. 108 frag. 186--'7: p. 63, ll. I35; p. 85, ll. 4I;p. 30I,ll. 24;P. 364, ll. I09 frag. 2II-I2: p. II2, ll. 27 frag. 233: p. 9I, ll. 65 frag. 326-8: p. 44; p. 63; p. I30, ll. 70; p. 366, ll. III frag. 382: p. 30, ll. 50 frag. 388-99: p. 234, ll. 97 frag. 435-6: p. 44, ll. 90 frag. 562: p. 44, ll. 87; p. 6I, ll. I38 frag. 599: p. 355 frag. 605: p. 44; p. 353; p. 354 varia I-4: (Vahlell): p. 207, ll. 7 varia I4-24 (Vahlell): p. 207, ll. 7 Fabulae praetextae (Ribbeck, TRF)

Ambracia

DIOGENES SINOPENSlS

Tragoediae (TrGF) frag. 3: p. II3, ll. 29 frag. 3: p. 89, ll. 57

frag. 374-78: p. 234, ll. 97

Tragoediae Qocelyn) Hector Iytra frag. 155-6: p. 6; p. 48; p. 61, ll. I38 frag. I66: p. 9I, ll. 65

DIONYSIUS HALICARNASSUS

Ant. Rom. 1.4: p. 88, ll. 55 1. I6: p. 200, ll. 59 2.26.I-3: p. I73, ll. 30 2.27·I: p. 174, ll. 32 2.33-34: p. 339, ll. 62 5.8: p. 205, ll. 80 5.23: p. 200, ll. 60 6.2.3-22.3: p. I86, ll. I6 6.I3.I-3: p. I86, ll. I6 6.I3.4: p. 317, ll. 68; p. I87, ll. 23; p. 2I6, ll. 38 6.I3.4-5: p. I88, ll. 25; p. 234, ll. 32 8·77·9: p. I96, ll. 53 I4.I2: p. I92, ll. 42 I5.1.I-4: p. I92, ll. 42

Phoenix frag.254: p. 47 EPICURUS

Epistulae (Useller) Ad Herod. III (I34): p. 87, ll. 5I Ep. coni. 8 (II6): p. I2I, ll. 53 Ep. coni. 26 (I63): p. I2I, ll. 53 EURIPIDES

Autolycus frag. 282, II. 23-8: p. I33, ll. 88 frag. 557: p. II9, ll. 47

Cyc. 603--6: p. 87,ll. 49

Hec. 488-9I: p. 87, ll. 49

Phoen. 94: p. II9, ll. 47

444

INDEX LOCORUM

Troad.

GAIUS

Instit.

1009: p. 87, ll. 49 frag. 901: p. 87, ll. 49 frag. 20 (Naauk): p. 371, ll. 120

I.55: p. 173, ll. 30 I.189: p. 173, ll. 30 GELLIUS, AULUS

NA I.6·7: p. 285, ll. Il9 I.6.8: p. 287; p. 288; p. 289 2.26.7: p. lO6, ll. I 4.5.5: p. lO6, ll. I 4·8.1: p. Ill, ll. 23; p. 321, ll. 4 4.9.12: p. 53, ll. IlO 4.I2·2: p. 255, ll. 36 5·6.13: p. 351, ll. 93 6.1: p. 236, ll. 102 6.12.5: p. 262 6.14.Io-n: p. 261, ll. 55 6.22.1-4: p. 255, ll. 36 7.1I.1-2: p. 285, ll. Il9 9.4.15: p. 167, ll. 19 lO·I.7: p. 295, ll. 7 10.3.14: p. 287, ll. I26 lO.I5: p. 37, ll. 70 10.27·3: p. 144, ll. 70; p. 177, ll·43 lO.28: p. 177, ll. 43 Il.2.5: p. 261, ll. 53 12.6·4: p. 204, ll. 79 16.I.l: p. 55, ll. Il9 16.IO.9-15: p. 266, ll. 70 17.2 I. 17: p. 204, ll. 79 GRACCHUS, c. SEMPRONIUS (ORF) 48.44.1-5: p. 140; p. 141 48.123: p. 248, ll. 20

EUTROPIUS

2·7·3: p. 155, ll. 35 FESTUS, SEX. POMPEIUS (LINDSAY)

De Verborum significatu lOT p. 175, ll. 36 121: p. 2I8, ll. 44 134-5: p. 291, ll. 124 204: p. 201, ll. 64 206: p. 201, ll .. 64 235: p. 260, ll. 50 466-8: p. 275, ll. 99 FLORUS, L. ANNAEUS

I.I8: p. 50, ll. 103 I.33.Il-2: p. 238, ll. III I.34: p. 326, ll. 27 I.36.13: p. 266, ll. 70 2.4: p. 213, ll. 27 2.6.2: p. 152, ll. 21 2.I2: p. 2, ll. 5 2.13: p. 310, ll. 50 FRONTINUS, SEX. IULIUS

Strat. I.5.15: p. 50, ll. lO3 2·4.6: p. 148, ll. 15 2.5.23: p. 328, ll. 36 2.8.13: p. 3lO,ll. 50 3·6.4: p. 78, ll. 19; p. 213, ll.27 4.I.1: p. 196, ll. 52 4·I.30-1: p. 196, ll. 52 4.5.6: p. 322, ll. lO 4.5.T p. 32 2, ll. 7 4.5.10: p. 50, ll. lO7 4.7.5: p. 160, ll. 1 4.7.24: p. 160, ll. 3 FRONTO, M. CORNELIUS

HEGISIPPUS

Comoediae (PCG) frag.2: p. 121, ll. 52 HERODOTUS

I.26.8: p. 85, ll. 43 3.I06: p. 75, ll. 9 HESIOD

Ad Caesarem 4.3.2: p. 53, ll. IlO FULVIUS FLACCUS, M. (ORF) 40.1: p. 248, ll. 20

Op. 289-93: p. 86, ll. 47 HIRTIUS, Q.

De Bello Gallico VIII passim: p. 308, ll. 44 VIII 45.2: p. 54; p. 308,

FURIUS ANTIAS, A. (COURTNEY)

frag. 3: p. 45; p. 46; p. 60, ll.I35

ll·44

445

INDEX LOCORUM

HOMER

LACTANTIUS, L. CAELIUS

fl.

De mort. pers. 1.6:. P.99 2·5: p. 99

9.498: p. 85, ll. 44 20·4II: p. 294, ll. 3 23.276: p. 75, ll. 9

Div. inst.

Od.

1.3·3: P·99 2.17.2: P·99 4. 13. 16: P·99 6·5.2: p. 125, ll. 63 LAUDATIO TURIAE = CIL VI 1527 = 8393: p. 164; p. 165

18.251-2: p. 104 19.124: p. 104 HORATIUS FLACCUS, Q.

Ars. 55 fr.: p. 53, nn. IIO & II2

Carm.

LIVIUS ANDRONICUS

Tragoediae (Ribbeck, TRF) Aiax Mastigophorus fug. 16-17: p. 48, nn. 99 & 100

3.6.1-4: p. 218, ll. 44 3.24.21-24: p. 160; p. 388, ll. 16 4.8.15-20: p. 207, ll. 7 4.15.26-32: p. 51, ll. 105

LIVIUS, T.

AUC

Bpod. 15.II: p. 167

Serm. 2.3.60-61: p. 106,

ll.

4

lNEDITUM VATICANUM (FGRH

19-22: p. 186,

ll.

20

ll.

44

839,

F

ISIDORUS

Btym. 9.3.26: p. 177,

ILS

IS0CRATES

Orationes 1.5: p. 373, ll. 126 1.5-8: p. II4, ll. 313; p. 371, ll. II9 1.7-8: p. 331, ll. 43 4.48: p. 371, ll. II9 4·76: p. 371, ll. II9 4.91: p. 87, ll. 50 9.46: p. II3, ll. 31 11.10: p. 87, ll. 50; p. 331 II.23: p. II4, ll. 31 16.29: p. 331, ll. 43 JEROME

Bp. 772: p. 190, n. 35 JOSEPHUS, FLAVIUS

BI 3.487: p. 3II, ll. 51 5.3II-16: p. 3II, ll. 51

1.3)

1.7.12: p. 190, ll. 34 1. 10: p. 339, ll. 62 1.10.7: p. 200, ll. 6 1.12: p. 25, ll. 34 1.20.7: p. 96, ll. 88 1.21.4: p. 145, ll. II 1.24.4--9: p. 198, ll. 56 1.32.5-13: p. 198, ll. 56 2.3-5: p. 205, ll. 80 2.10: p. 200, ll. 60 2.12: p. 25, ll. 39 2.19.3-20.13: p. 186, ll. 16 2.21.3-4: p. 186, ll. 16 2.41.10-12: p. 196, ll. 53 2.42.5: p. 186, ll. 16; p. 187, 4.20: p. 206, ll. 66 4.20.6: p. 201, ll. 64 6.11.2-20.12: p. 196, ll. 53 6.16.4: p. 143, ll. 2 6.27.1: p. 14, ll. 77 6.42.12: p. 96, ll. 88 7.9.6-10-4: p. 192, ll. 42 7.26.1-10: p. 192, ll. 42 7.42.1-2: p. 202, ll. 70 8.7.1-22: p. 192, ll. 42 8.7.19: p. 204 8.9.4-12: p. 200, ll. 61 8.1O.II: p. 200, ll. 61 8.10.II-12: p. 200, ll. 61 8.10.13: p.200 8.11.13-14: p. 189, ll. 28 8.13.5--9: p. 155, ll. 35

ll.

22

INDEX LOCORUM

8.13·9: p. 155 8.13.lI: p. 96, n. 87 8.30.3-36: p. 204; p. 220, n. 51 8·31.1: p. 73, n. I 8·31.2: p. 94, n. 77 8.34.2-3: p. 205, n. 80 8.37.9: p. 143, n. 2 9.6.13: p. 73, n. I 9.IO-lI: p. 220, n. 51 9.16.10: p. 156, n. 37 9.18.I2: p. 92, n. 71 9·29·9f.: p. 190, n. 34 9.40: p. 200, n. 59 9·40.16: p. 380, n. 4 9.43.1-4: p. 156, n. 37 9.43.22: p. 156, n. 36 9-43.25: p. 220, n. 51 9.46.15: p. 188, n. 25; p. 216, n. 37 10.1.9: p. 220, n. 55 10.7.9: p. 182, n. 2 10.11.1: p. 193, n. 45 1O.19.IT p.21O 10.23.7-8: p. 161, n. 5 1O.23·I2: p. 187, n. 24 10.33.9: p. 220, n. 51 10.43.25: p. 220, n. 51 1O.46.T p. 220, n. 51 21.46.7-10: p. 236, n. 103 22.1: p.225 22.9.7-lI: p. 214, n. 32 22.9.10: p. 200, n. 59 22.10: p. 210, n. 16; p. 214, n. 32 22.25: p. 322, n. II 22.29.2: p. 92, n. 71 22.33.7-8: p. 222, n. 55 22.34.2-4: p. 322, n. 9 22·34·7: p. 322, n. 9 22.38.6: p. 322, n. 9 22.49. 16-17: p. 254, n. 35 22.58.3: p. 73, n. I; p. 94, n. 77 22.60.lI: p. 50, n. 103 22.61.14: p. 322, n. 10 23.9.3: p. 145, n. II 23.23.6: p. 183, n. 8 23.23.7---9.3: p. 145, n. lI; p. 183, n. 8 23.30.19: p. 229, n. 77 23·31.7: p. 229, n. 77 23.31.13: p. 229, n. 77 23.35.6-9: p. lIO, n. 3

447

23.46.u: p. 188, n. 27 23.46.12-47: p. 203, n. 34 23.47.1: p. 204, n. 78 24.3.1: p. 78, n. 19 24.8.lI: p. 223, n. 58; p. 224, n. 61 24.14.6-7: p. 169, n. 3 24.16.6: p. 160, n. 3 24.16.18: p. 144 24.16.19: p. 218, n. 44 24·21.9: p. 226, n. 53; p. 231, n. 85 24·]2·9: p. 144 24.33.9-39: p. 225, n. 62 24.38.2: p. 96, n. 87 25.5.10-7.4: p. 225, n. 62 25.5.10-7.5: p.224 25.7.lI: p. 78, n. 19 25.12.13: p. 214, n. 31 25.18.4-5: P·203 25.18.12: p. 204, n. 78 25.23.1: p. 224, n. 61 25.23-31: p. 225, n. 62 25.3I.lI: p. 230, n. 79; p. 239, n. lI6 25-40.1-3: p. 227, n. 70; p. 230, n. 79 25-40.3: p. 230, n. 79 26.19.4-5: p. 207, n. 7 26.21.2: p. 225, n. 64 26.21.3-4: p. 225 26.21.6: p. 225, n. 63; p. 226; p. 317, n.69 26.22.2-14: p. 225, n. 67; p. 226 26.26.5-lI: p. 226, n. 65 26.29-32: p. 226, n. 65 26·31.9: p. 227, n. 70; p. 230, n. 79 27.9.2: p. 77, n. 18 27.12.2: p. 226, n. 67 27.12.2-3: p. 226, n. 67 27.15.9-16.6: p. 226, n. 68 27.16.T p. 79, n. 23; p. 227, nn. 69 &7 0 27.16.8: p. 227, n. 71 27.22-4-10: p. 228, n. 73 27.25.7: p. 220, n. 49; p. 222 27.25.7-9: p. 220, nn. 48 & 49 27.25.7-10: p. 212, n. 25 27·25.9: p. 220, n. 49 27.33·9: p. 73, n. I 27.38.10: p. 78, n. 19 28.5.18: p. 78, n. 21 28.7.4: p. 78, n. 21

INDEX LOCORUM

LIVIUS, T.

(cont.)

28·9·7: p. 94, ll. 78 28.9.8: p. 96, ll. 88 28.1I.9: p. 78, ll. 19; p. 79, ll. 22 28.28.8: p. 207, ll. 5 28.28.14: p. 207, ll. 5 28·56.1-10: p. 207, ll. 4 29·1I.13: p. 2II, ll. 25; p. 220, ll. 49; p. 233, ll. 93 29.19·II-20.1: p. 207, ll. 6 29.27: p. 200, ll. 24 29.37. 8- 10 : p. 254, ll. 35; p. 255, ll. 37 29.II5-18: p. 239, ll. II5 30 . 12. 12 : p. 94, ll. 77 30.27.9: p. 322, ll. 7 30.45·3: p. 207, ll. 5 3I.8.2: p. 93, ll. 74 34· 15 ·4: p. 310, ll. 48 34.16.1T p. 230, ll. 82 34.52.4-5: p. 230, ll. 82 37.3.7: p. 156, ll. 40 37.5I.12-58.1: p. 221, ll. 51 38.9.13: p. 230, ll. 82 38.28.3: p. 187, ll. 24 38.38·T p. 94, ll. 77 38-43.5: p. 230, ll. 82 38.48.7: p. 73, ll. I; p. 93, ll. 74 39.5.15: p. 230, ll. 82 39.19.4: p. 255, ll. 37 39.22.10: p. 230, ll. 82 39.32·4: p. 73, ll. I 39-40.1-3: p. 324, ll. 20 39.40.1-5: p. 325, ll. 24 39.40-45.10: p. 323, ll. 12 39·40.6: p. 323, nn. 13 & 14 39.40 .9: p. 325 39.4I.1-2: p. 324, ll. 20 39.4I.2: p. 324, ll. 21 39·4I.3-4: p. 324, ll. 23 39.41-2: p. 324, ll. 22 39·44.T p. 324, ll. 22 4°.34.5-6: p. 156, ll. 40; p. 220, ll·51 40.40.4-II: p. 246, ll. II 4I.4. I: p. 61, ll. 137 41.6-7: p. 322, ll. 7 4I.28.8: p. 94, ll. 78 42 .47.5: p. 73, n. 3 44·9-4: p. 194, ll. 47

44.19.4: p. 322, ll. 8 44.2I.3: p. 322, ll. 8 44.22.16: p. 322, ll. 8 44.35.8: p. 322, ll. 8 44.35.13: p. 322, ll. 8 45.6.12: p. 322, ll. 8 45.23.1: p. 96, ll. 87 45.28.8: p. 322, ll. 8 45.29.3: p. 322, ll. 8 45.33.5-6: p. 230, ll. 82 Per. 20: p. 213, ll. 22 Per. 48: p. 203, ll. 24; p. 238, ll. 109 Per. 50: p. 239, ll. II3 Per. 51: p. 239, ll. II3 Per. 52: p. 230, ll. 82; p. 239, ll. 164 Per. 54: p. 325, ll. 17 Per. 55: p. 244, ll. 7 Per. 69: p. 271, ll. 87 Per. 73: p. 378, ll. 34 Per. 80: p. 276, ll. 89 Per. 97.3: p. 193, ll. 43 LUCANUS, M. ANNAEUS

BC I. 126--9: p. 384, ll. 152 I.580-3: p. 384, ll. 152 2.85-6: p. 27° 2.242-5: p. 384, ll. 152 LUCILIUS, C. (CHARPIN)

frag. I 12 & 14C: p. 264, ll. 61 frag. I 19: p. 264, ll. 61 frag. II 15C: p. 264, ll. 62; p. 333, ll·45 frgs. II 19C: p. 264, ll. 61 frag. V 27: p. 123, ll. 60 frag. XV 5: p. 188, ll. 27 frag. XVI I: P.74 frag. XXVII 30: p. 124, ll. 60; p. 127, ll·7° frag. XXX frag. XXX frag. XXX frag. H 23: frag. H 35:

12: p. 124, ll. 60 13: p. 124, ll. 60 89C: p. 264, ll. 61 pp. 124-8; p. 132, ll. 85 p. 140

LUCRETIUS CARUS, T.

RN I.830-3: p. 106, ll. 2 5.858-63: p. 72, ll. 2; p. 294, ll. 3 5 ·966: p. 294, ll. 3

INDEX LOCORUM

LYCURGUS

LeOc. 48: p. 87, ll. so; p. 91, Leoc. lIO: p. 137, ll. 99

MOSCHION ll.

Tragoediae (TrGF) frag. 9: p. 87, ll. SI

6S

LYSIAS

13.63: p. 100, n. 99

NAEVIUS, CN.

Bell. Pun. 1.10: p. 130, n. 70 Comoediae (Ribbeck, CRF) frag. 7S-9: p. II6, n. 40 frag. 83-84: p. lI6, n. 40 frag. 92-3: p. II6; p. 168 frag. lO8-IO: p. 30, n. SO Fabulae praetextae Clastidium frag. I (ROL 11, p. 136): p. 232, ll. 89

MACROBIUS, AMBROSIUS THEODOSIUS

Sat. L6.19-2S: p. 178, n. 46 1.16.36: p. 17S, n. 36 MARTIALIS, M. VALERIUS

Bp. 9.S.S: p. 162, n. 19 MENANDER COMICUS

Aspis 147-8: p. 87, n. SI 716: p. 89, n. 60 717: p. 89, n. 60 718: p. 89, n. 60 Dysk. 27Sff.: p. 89, n. 60 79T p. lOO, n. 98; p. IO!, n. lOI Geor. 1-6: p. lOO, n. 98 Kon. 13-4: p. 87, ll. SI jragmenta (PCG) frag.2s6: p. 87, n. SI frag. 301: p. II3, n. 29 frag. 372: p. 87, n. SI frag. 380: p. 87, ll. SI frag.4IT p. 87, n. SI frag.682: p. 87, ll. SI frag. 68T p. 89, n. 60 frag. 709: p. 89, n. 60 frag. 716: p. II3, n. 29 frag. 846: p. 89, n. 60 frag. 8S2: p. 87, n. SI frag. 8S3: p. 87, ll. SI frag. lO83 (CAF): p. 89, n. 60

NEPOS, CORNEUUS

Alc. 1.1: p. 294, n. 2 7·3: p. 294, n. 4 11.4: p. 294, nll. 2 & 4 Cato. 1.2: p. 323, n. 13 2·3: p. 324, n. 22; p. 32S, n. 24 2·4: p. 294, n. 4 3: p. 32 4, n. 19 3.1: p. 323, n. 14 Dat. 2.1: p. 294, n. 4 Dion. 6.2: p. 294, n. 2 Bpam. 1.2-4: p. 294, n. 2 Bum. 1.1: p. 88, ll. SI; p. 294, n. 2 Hann. 1.2: p. 294, n. 4 Lys. 1.1: p. 88, ll. SI; p. 94, n. 77 1.2: p. 294, n. 4 Milt. 2.2: p. 294, n. 4 Reg. 1·4: p. 294, ll. 4 2·3: p. 73, n. I; p. 294, n. 2

MENANDER RHETOR

Rltet. graec. 3.443.13: p. 98, n. 92 METELLUS, L. CAECILIUS (ORF) 6.2: p. 131; p. 168, n. 21 METELLUS, Q. CAECIUUS NUMIDICUS

(ORF)

18.4: p. 287; p. 288; p. 289

Til11. 1.1: p. 294, n. 4 Thras. 1.1: p. 294, n. 4

MlNUCIUS FELIX, M.

32 .4: p. 99

449

INDEX LOCORUM

frag. 125: p. 89, ll. 60 frag. 137: p. 89, ll. 60 frag. 178: p. IOO, ll. 98

NEW TESTAMENT

Matt. 7.22: p. 99, ll. 96 24.24: p. 99, ll. 96 I

2·9: p. 99, 2

PHILO JUDAEUS

Pet.

De spec. leg. 1.209: p. 99, ll. 95 1.308: p. 99, ll. 95 De vit. contemp. 26: p. 99, ll. 95

95

ll.

Pet. 1.3ff.: p. 99,

ll.

95

NI CO STRATUS

Comoediae (PCG) frag. 31: p. 87, ll. 51

PHILOSTRATOS

Vita soph. 1.25.II: p. 87,

OVIDIUS NASO, P.

Ars.

16: p. 7,

181-2: p. 318, ll. 72 III 451-2: p. 318, ll. 72

48

17

Nem.

ll.

3; p. 75,

ll.

12 12

ll.

ll.

PINDAR

Met. 14·357: p. 73, ll·96 15.205: p. 75, 15.20T p. 75,

ll.

PHOCYDIDES

ll.

1.32: p. IOl, ll. 101 3·74-75: p. 129, ll. 77 6.24: p. 85, ll. 43

12; p. 99,

O. 7.89: p. I09, ll. 13 12.1-2: p. 85, ll. 43

Fast. 1.706-8: p. 186, ll. 16 3.535: p. IOl, ll. 4 6.191-2: p. 187, ll. 24 6.219-22: p. 283, ll. II6

PLATO

Ap. 18A: p. 109, ll.18

Pant.

ll.

13; p. IIO,

Gor.

3.1.94: p. 165, ll. II J.3.LI5: p. 388, ll. I I

519A: p. 121, ll. 53 Leg. 631B-D: p. 86, ll. 46 690B-C: p. 338 708D: p. 338, ll. 61 709B-C: p. 87, ll. 50 772: p. 75, ll. 9

PACUVIUS, M.

Tragoediae (Rib beck, TRF) Armorum iudicium frag. 23-24: p. 48, ll. IOl Dulorestes frag. 146: p. 48, ll. IOl; p. 124,

Prot. 324B: p. 121, ll. 33 329E: p. 6, ll. 15 353B-C: p. 75, ll. 9

60 frag. 174: p. 60 ll.

Rep.

PANAETIUS (VAN STRAATEN)

frag. 68: p. 128,

ll.

348D: p. 7, ll. 17

73

Ti.

PAUSANIUS

6.3.12: p. 78, ll. 19 9.16.1: p. IOO, ll. 98

25E-26E: p. 87,

50

Amph.

PHILEMON

Comoediae (PCG) frag. 23 (CAF): p. 26, frag. 56: p. 89, ll. 60 frag. 74: p. II3, ll. 29 frag. II6: p. 89, ll. 60

ll.

PLAUTUS, T. MACCIUS

ll.

42: p. 19; p. 20 75: p. 17, ll. 13; p. 38, ll. 71; p. 63, ll. 145 75-6: p. 21, ll. 27; p. 139; p. 374,' ll. 127

41

45 0

INDEX LOCORUM

75-8: p. 138; p. 139 131: p. 6?, n. 135 191: p. 16, n. 12; p. 17; p. 63, n. 145 212: p. 16, n. 12; p. 18; p. 62; p. 73,

416: p. 60, n. 135 494-5: p. 1I7 673: p. I07 673-5: p. 1I0, n. 18 892: p. 20, n. 23 I072-3:P· 45, n·72 I076-77: p. 1I7 1084-85: p. 1I7; p. 131, n. 80; p. 168 Capt. 67-8: p. 20, n. 25 229-30: p. 29 287: p. 59, n. 132 324: P·95 410: p. 28; p. 29; p. 132, n. 80 680: p. 29; p. 306, n. 36 681: P.29 682: p. 1I0, n. 1I9 687-8: p. 29;P· 30 689-90: p. 130, n. 70 690: p. 29; p. 1I0, n. 19 691: P.30 691-4: p. 30 768: p. 23, n. 32 922: p. 96, n. 88 997: p. 30; p. 96, n. 88; p. 108, n. 12; p. 123, n. 57 998-IOOO: p. 31 1025: p. 31 Cas. 87-88: p.21 88: p. 17, n. 13; p. 38, n. 71; p. 63, n. 133; p. 135; p. 138 626: p. 59, n. 132

n. 4 214: p. 18 250: p. 60, n. 135 252: p. 17, n. 16 260: p. 16, n. 12; p. 17; p. 63, n. 145 367: p. 59, n. 132 534: p. 16, n. 12; p. 17, n. 13; p. 17, n. 16 624-53: p. 31; p. 32 648-9: p. 16, n. 12; p. 17, n. 16; p. 32; p. 63, n. 135 652-3: p. 17, n. 16; p. 131; p. 261, n. 19; p. 325 839: p. 161, n. 5 9 2 5: p. 73 925-9: p. 162

Asin. 14-15: p. 20 226,: p. 109, n. 16 226-9: p. 121, n. 52 276-7: p.26 285: p. 26 289: p. 60, n. 135 297-305: p.26 309-14: p. 26 316: p.26 318: p.26 323: p. 26; p. 253; p. 302, n. 5 545: p. 23, n. 31 547: p. 72, n. 2; p. 73, n. 5 554-9: p. 23; p. 24 556: p. 16, n. 12; p. 17, n. 13; p. 63, n. 135; p. 73, n. 4 556, : P·23 558: p. 23; p. 24; p. 135, n. 95; p. 13 8 72T p. 89, n. 60

Cist. 197: p. 38, n. 71 197-8: p. 135; p. 138 198: p. 17, n. 13; p. 20; p. 21; p. 63, n.I35 Cur. 179: p. 16, n. 12; p. 17, n. 13; p. 18, n. 18; p. 63, n. 133; p. 130, n. 70 292: p. 83, n. 38 Epid. I06: p. 16, n. 12; p. 17, n. 16; p. 63, n.I35 381: p. 16, n. 12; p. 17, n. 13; p. 18; p. 63, n. 107 442: p. 16, n. 12; p. 17, n. 16; p. 63, n. 135

Aul. 166: p. 22, n. 29; p. 95 167: p. 60, n. 135 760: p. 83, n. 36

Bacch. 66f.: p. I09, n. 16 426: p. 1I9, n. 77

45 1

INDEX LOCORUM

PLAUTUS, T. MACCIUS

(cont.)

144: p. 130, ll. 70; p. 131, ll. 80 150-5: p. Il9, ll. 47 151-2: p. Il9 In: p. 73, ll. 5; p. 104 186: p. 109, ll. 16; p. 121, ll. 52 188-89: p. 109, ll. 16; p. 121, ll. 52 194: p. 109, ll. 16; p. 121, ll. 52 409: p. 59, ll. 132 775-6: p. 296, ll. 60

445: p. 16, ll. 12; p. 17, ll. 16 580: p. 96, ll. 88

Men. 3S: p. 60, ll. 135

Mer. 61-'79·: p. 1I3, ll. 33 303: p. 109, ll. 16 313: p. 59, ll. 132 383: p. 39, ll. 76

Per.

Mil. 6: p. 60, ll. 135 9-12: p. 85, ll. 4I;p. 9I;P· 96 II: p. 91, ll. 64 12: p. 16, ll. 12; p. 17, llll. 13 & 16; p. 63, ll. 135 32: p. 16, ll. 12; p. 17, ll. 13; p. 17, ll. 16; p. 63, ll. 135 5T p. 16, ll. 12; p. 17, ll. 13; p. 63, ll. 135; p. 130, ll. 70 189: p. 59, ll. 132 464: p. 59, ll. 132 58T p. Il2, ll. 26 619: p. 30,ll. 5I;P. I07;P. I08,ll. 12; p. 129, ll. 57; p. 131, ll. 83; p. 168 649: p. 107; p. 131, ll. 83; p. 135; P·I3 8 650: p. 168 676 : P·95 728 : p. 73, ll. 5; p. 76 738: p. 107; p. 108; p. 109, ll. 14; p. 123, ll. 57 739: p. 168 743: p. 108, ll. Il 750: p. 108, ll. I I 1027: p. 16, ll. 12; p. 17, ll. 16; p. 130, ll·70 1042: p. 17, ll. 13; p. 63, ll. 135; p. 73, ll. 5 12Il: p. 109, ll. 14 132T p. 39; p. 17, ll. 15

Most. 20-24: p. 120;p. 122;p. 260, ll. 522 33: p. 109, ll. 14; p. 120 63-5: p. 120 84-157: p. 120, ll. 50 91-156: p. Il9 139-44: p. 1I8

45 2

173: p. 109 251: p. 23, ll. 31 264: p. 27, ll. 44 268-9: p. 27;P. 302,ll. 25 323: p. 302, ll. 25; p. 306, ll. 36 390: p. 22, ll. 29; p. 95 549-60: p. Il2, ll. 27 753: p. 23, ll. 31

Poen. 306-'7: p. 39, ll. 25 800: p. 83, ll. 36 1321-28: p. 85, ll. 41; p. 91

Pseud. 44T p. 109, ll. 16; p. 121, ll. 52 532: p. 16, ll. 12; p. 17, ll. 13; p. 18, ll. 18; p. 63, ll. 133 581-2: p. 22; p. 54; p. 63, ll. 135; p. 130, ll. 70;P. 347, ll. 85 588-9: p.22 589-90: p. 23;P· 54 678: p. 89, ll. 60 680: p. 89, ll. 60 721-6: p. 107 724-6: p. 1I0, ll. 18 737-8: p. 1I2, ll. 26 742: p. 83, ll. 38

Rud. 13-30: p. 122, ll. 55 32: p. 122 43: p. 77, ll. 15 47-8: p. 122, ll. 55 82: p. 20, ll. 25 185-8T p. 100, ll. 99 318-19: p. 122 ]21: p. 121; p. 122; p. 131, ll. 83; p. 168, ll. 22 529: p. 83, ll. 38

INDEX LOCORUM

St.

7·I03: p. 251, n. 27 7.126: p. 318, n. 72 7. 130: p. 3, n. 9 7.139-40: p. 59, n. 130 7.213: p. 220, n. 51 8.II-12: p. 294, n. 3 8. 139-40: p. 131 8.155: p. 318, n. 73 IO.I6: p. 291, n. 134 16.12-13: p. 351, n. 93 15.19: p. 187, n. 23; p. 216, n. 37; p. 317, n. 68 21.7: p. 13; p. 14 22.6-8: p. 67, n. 157 22.12: p. 295, n. 9 33.148: p. 130, n. 82 33 ·53: p. 300, n. 23 34.20: p. 155, n. 35 34.23: p. 156, n. 36 34·30-1: p. 157, n. 41 34.43: p. 157, n. 42 34.64: p. 230, n. 82 34·7T p. 86, n. 47; p. 143, n. 3 35.6,: p. 182, n. 2 35·12-14: p. 386, n. 4 35.22: p. 230, n. 82 35.26: p. 233, n. 94; p. 316, n. 62; p. 318, n. 72 35.66: p. 232, n. 90 35.70: p. 86, n. 47 35.136: p. 318, n. 72 35·13T p. 86, n. 47 37.II: p. 316, n. 62

99-IOI: p. 161, n. 5 123-5: p. II2, n. 26 Trin. 18-19: p. II5, n. 34 223-31: p. II9, n. 46 283: p. 39, n. 75 336-7: p. 131, n. 83; p. 168 33T p. II5, n. 37 346 : p. 95 355: p. 95 361-64: p. 89, n. 60 418-9: p. 83, n. 36 642-51: p. 136; p. 137; p. 138 643: p. 130, n. 70; p. 136; p. 137 648-50: p. 136; p. 137; p. 138 650-51: p. 136; p. 137; p. 138 I03I: p. 83, n. 38

True. 74,5: p. 20, n. 25 78a: p. II2, n. 26 I06: p. 16, n. 12; p. 17, n. 13; p. 18, n. 18; p. 63, n. 135 482-6: p. 19, n. 21 483: p. 19 491-2: p. 19 493-6: p. 18; p. 130, n. 70; p. 135, n·95 494-5: p. 61, n. 139 603: p. 60, n. 135 734£.: p. I09, n. 16 734-8: p. 121, n. 52 735-8: p. I09 740-I: p. I09 741: p. I07; p. 168 PLINIUS SECUNDUS, c. CAECILIUS

PLUTARCH

Vitae Aem. 5.6: p. 173, n. 31; p. 323, n. I 21.1: p. 323, n. 177 22·3: p. 203, n. 74

(MINOR)

Epistulae 2.20.12: p. 386, n. 3 8.5.1: p. 165, n. II 8.14·5: p. 247 PLINIUS SECUNDUS,

c.

Arist. 1.5: p. IOI, n. IOI

Caes.

(MAIOR)

NH

5.1-2: p. 300, n. 22 5·5: p. 300, n. 23 6.1-2: p. 300, n. 22 18.2: p. 3IO, n. 50 20·5: p. 3IO, n. 49 41 ·4: p. 45, n. 93; p. 450, n. 93

3.12: p. 317, n. 66 6.31: p. 227, n. 69 7·IOO: p. 323, n. 14 7.112: p. 261, n. 55; p. 297, n.I5

453

INDEX LOCORUM

(cont.) 48.1: p. 316, n. 64 56.2: p. 3IO, n. 50 65.1: p. 316, n. 64 Cam. 36.5-6: p. 196, n. 53 Cat. mai. 1.1: p. 323, n. 15 1.2: p. 324, n. 19 1.5: p. 323, n. 13 1.6: p. 323, n. 13 2.1-2: p. 323, n. 15 3.1-4: p. 323, n. 16 3.7: p. 207, n. 6; p. 261, n·53 4.3: p. 56, n. I20; p. 203, n. 77; p. 261, n. 53 4.22.5: p. 55, n. II9 8.8ff.: p. 237, n. I07 9.6: p. 56, n. 120 IO·4: p. 52; p. 320, n. 20 11.1-2: p. 324, n. 20 16·3: p. 324 16.4: p. 324, n. 22 16·5: p. 324, n. 23 17-8: p. 324, n. 22 18.1: p. 255, n. 37 19.1: p. 324, n. 22 20.3: p. 323, n. 17 20.4-9: p. 179, n. 50 20.6: p. 181, n. I 20.12: p. 323, n. 17 21.5: p. 58, n. 129 21.8: p. 54, n. 13 22·3: p. 191, n. 37 22.4: p. 261, n. 55 23.1: p. 261, n. 55 23.5: p. 56, n. I20; p. 260, nn. 53 & 55 24.1-7: p. 173, n. 31 24.2: p. 323, n. 17 Comp. Arist. - Cat. 1.3: p. 325, n. 24 Cat. min. 3: p. 194, n. 46 8-II: p. 383, n. 148 26.2-28.6: p. 354, n. 95 51.1-5: p. 382, n. 147 67-72: p. 382,n. 148

Cic. 20-1: p. I, n. 3 24·3: p. 354, n. 95 Cor. 3: p. 186, n. 16 Gras. 1.1: p. 173, n. 31 2.IO: p. 268, n. 78 11.4: p. 328, n. 36

PLUTARCH

Fah. 18.3: p. 208; p. 226, n. 68; p. 227, nn. 69 & 71 19.3: p. 223, n. 59 22.5: p. 226, n. 68; p. 222, n. 70 22.8: p. 156, n. 39 23.1: p. 226, n. 67 Flam. 1.4: P·247 19.6: p. 324, n. 22

Gracch. C. 2.6: p. 248, n. 20 15.1: p. 182, n. 2

Gracch. Ti. 5.5: p. 326 , n. 27 14.2: p. 326, n. 29

Marc. 1.2-3: p. 229, n. 78; p. 231, n. 83 2: p. 223, n. 58; p. 229, n. 76 2.1: p. 223, n. 58 6: p. 213, n. 27 6.2: p. 229, n. 76 6-7: p. 217, n. 41 7: P·296 7-8: p. 208, n. 9 8.6: p. 221, n. 53; p. 231, n. 85 9.4: p. 223, n. 59 12.2-5: p. 224 19·3: p. 230, n. 79 22.1: p. 228, n. 63; p. 230, n. 79; p. 317, n. 69 21.3: p. 230, n. 80 21.3-4: p. 227, n. 71 21.3-5: p. 227, n. 70 21.5: p. 230, n. 80 22.2-5: p. 225, n. 63 23: p. 226, n. 65 23 ·7: p. 231, n. 86 24.2: p. 223, n. 60 24.2-4: p. 229, n. 77

454

INDEX LOCORUM

25.2: p. 226, n. 67 28: p. 220, n. 48 28.I: p. 2I2, n. 25; p. 220, nn. 49 & 53 28.2: p. 220, n. 49 28·3: p. 208, n. 9 30.4: p. 23I, n. 86 30.4-5: p. 23I, n. 85 30.5: p. 227, n. 70; p. 230, n. 79

29.2-8: P.27I 29.3: p. 27I, n. 88 29.5: p. 285, n. II9 29.6: P·27I 29.8: p. 27I 38.5-6: p. 267, n. 75 40.6--'7: p. 287, n. 75 41.3: p. 297, n. I4 42.4: p. 297, n. I6 42.4-5: p. 297, n. IS 52.4: p. 297, n. I6 64.2: p. 297, n. I4

Camp. Pe/op. - Marc. 1.2: p. 208, n. 9; p. 217, n. 4I 1.6--'7: p. 223, n. 60; p. 229, n. 77 Mar. 2.I-2: p. 265, n. 63 2.2: p. 274, nn. 94 & 95 3·1: p. 265, n. 63 3.2: p. 24I, n. I; p. 265, nn. 64 & 65 3.4-5: p. 265, n. 67

Phi!. ID.8: p. 40, n. 79

Pomp. 2.I-2: p. 296, n. ID 2.2: p. 296, n. ID 7.I-2: P·296 I3.3-5: p. I88, n. 25 I9.2: p. 296, n. I3 35·2-3: p. 296, n. I3 41.3: p. 297, n. I4 42.4: p. 297, n. I6 42.4-5: p. 297, n. IS 46.I: p. 296, n. I3 52.4: p. 297, n. I6 64.2: p. 297, n. I4

4-5: p. 265, n. 67 6.I: p. 265, n. 67 6.2: p. 266, n. 68 7: p. 266, n. 68 7.I-2: p. 29I 8·4: p. 267, n. 75 9: p. 266, n. 69 9·I: p. 266, n. 70 9.2-4: p. 272 9·4: p. 284, n. II7 I3.I: p. 268, n. 78 I3.I-2: p. 29I, n. I34 I4.I-5: p 268, n. 78 I6.I-3: p. 268, n. 78 I7·3-6: p. 267, n. 75 20.4: p. I48, n. IS 20·5: p. 297, n. I4; p. 3IO, n. 49 20.6: p. 29I, n. I53 21.I: p. I48, n. IS 23.2: p. 24I, n. I 25.I: p. 29I, n. I34 25.2: p. 24I, n. I 26.2: P.269 26.3: P.269 26.9: p. 286, n. I23 27.IO: p. 286, n. I24 28.4: P.27I 28.5: P.27I 28.6: P.27I 28.8: P.27I 29.I: P.27I

Publ. 3.3: p. 205, n. 80

Pyrrh. I8.I: p. ]2I, n. 4

Rom. I6.4--'7: p. 339, n. 62 I6.7-8: p. 208, n. 9 SuI. 4· I : p. 243, n. 3 21.2: p. 3IO, n. 49 29.5: p. 3ID, n. 48 34·2: p. 295, n. 9 34.2-3: p. 295, n. 9

Moralia Rom. Apophth. Fab. (I95D): p. 223, n. 60; p. 229, n. 77 (I95F): p. 227, n. 7I Rom. Apophth. Fabr. (I94F):

Rom. Apophth. Sdp. min. (200B): p. 239, n. II7 (200C): p. 326, n. 28

455

INDEX LOCORUM

(cont.) De fort. Rom.

6.52.II: p. 64 6·53-4: p. 142 6.54: p. 205, n. 80 6·54·3: p.64 6.55.1-4: p. 64; p. 65; p. 200, n. 60 6.55. 2: p. 65 6.56: p. 218, n. 73 8.3: p. 225, n. 62 8.8.6: p. 229, n. 78 8.II.l: p. 88, n. 55 9.IO.l: p. 123, n. 57; p. 230, n. 79 9.10.13: p. 227, n. 70; p. 230, n. 79 9.39.2: p. 77, n. 18 10.2-IO.5: p. 236, n. 103 IO·4.1-5: p. 207, n. 4 IO·5·8: p. IOO, n. 99 10.11.7: p. 20, n. 24 IO.II.8: p. 69 IO.13·3-5: P·70 IO.13.10: p·70 IO·17·6-16: p. 77, n. 18 IO.19.9: p. 79, n. 22 IO.36.5: p. 372, n. 121 IO-40.6-9: p. 88, n. 55 11.4.8: p. 78, n. 21 15.14.5: P·70 15.21.3: p. 89, n. 60 18.18.5: p. 88, n. 55 21.17.1: p.66 21.30.9: p. 230, n. 82 23.12.3: p. 88, n. 55 26.9: p. 286, n. 123 27.8.8: p. 66 27.IO: p. 286, n. 124 29.21: p. 88, n. 51; p. roo, n·9 8 31.23.II-12: p. 137, n. 101 31.24.5: p. 137, n. IOl 31.25.2: p. 237, n. 108 31.25.3-7: p. 246, n. 16 31.24.5: p. 137, n. IOl 31.25.4-5: p. 260 31.25.5: p. 360, n. I04 31.25.6: p.260 31.25.9: p. 237, n. 108 31.25·IO: p. 88, n. 55 31.26.9: p. IOl 31.27.II: p. IOl, n. I02

PLUTARCH

5 (316B): p. 239, n. II7

De stoic. 15 (I040F): p. II4, n. 30

Ques. Rom. 13 (266F): p. 214, n. 31; p. 215, n. 35 33 (272C): p. 179, n. 50 40 (274B): p. 179, n. 51 I02 (288C): p. 175, n. 36 POLYAENUS

Strategica 8.IO.2: p. 148, n. 15 8.23.16: p. 310, n. 50 POLYBIUS

Historiae 1.6. 7: p. 78, n. 19 1.17·II-12: p. 65 1.24.1: p. 78, n. 21 1.24.II: p. 78, n. 21 1.34.15: p. 236, n. 103 1.37.4: p. 89, n. 60 1.39.13: p. 78, n. 21 1.63.9: p. 88, n. 51 2.7.1-3: p. 89, n. 60 2.24.1: p. 229, n. 76 2.34.8-9: p. 217, n. 41 3.20.3: p. 178, n. 46 3·64· II : p. 69 3.75.8: p.66 3·84·7-IO: p.65 3.I08.6-T p. 70, n. 162 3·I09·5: p. 70 3.IIO.3: p.322,n.9 6.19·4: p. 37, n. 69; p. 200 6.19·5: p. 243, n. 4 6.23.12: p. 148, n. 16 6.24·9: p. 65 6.34.12: p. 195, n. 51 6·37-38: p. 65; p. 195, n. 51 6.39.1: p. 68; p. 137, n. I02 6·39.1-II: p. 185, n. 14 6.39.8: p. 68 6.39·9: p. 137, n. I02 6.39.IO: p. 68; p. 183, n. 8 6.43-4-44.8: p. 88, n. 55 6-46·T p. 359, n. I03; p. 184, n. 12 6.52·T p. 66; p. 67

45 6

INDEX LOCORUM

31.28.II: p. 237, n. lO8 31.29.1: p. 237, n. 108 31.29.8: p. 247, n. 17 31.29.8-II: p. 246, n. 16 ]2.13.6: p. 260 32.13.6-8: p·377 35.4.2: p. 161, n. 4 35·4·3-6: p. 244, n. 7; p. 246, n.16 35.4.4-13: p. 237, n. 108 35.4.13: p. 238, nn. 109 & lOO 35·5: p. 205, n. 74 35·5·1-2: P·70 frag.6 (Buttner-Wobst): p.203, n. 74

SALLUSTIUS CRISPUS, C.

BC 1.2: p. 370, n. II8 1.2·9: p. 370, n. 18; p. 371 1.4: p. 371 1.5: p. 37 1 2.1-2: p. 371 2·3: p. 372 2.4: p. 372, n. 121 2·5: p. 374 2·7: p. 372 3.1: p. 372; p. 373, n. 123 3.2: p. 373 3.3: p. 60, n. 134; p. 374, n. 128 5.1: p. 381, n. 144 6.4-5: p. 375, n. 1]2 6·5: p. 60, n. 134; p. 359 6.5-6: p. 357 6·7: p. 37 7.2: p. 358; p. 360; p. 374, n. 128 7·4: P·3 60 7·5: p. 358; p. 359 7.6: p. 375, n. 132; p. 376 8·3: p. 359 9. 1: p. 359; p. 360; p. 375 9.1-3: p. 375, n. 130 9.2: p. 375 9. 2-3: p. 359 9·3: p. 60, n. 134; p. 359 10.2: p. 375 lOT p. 382 10·4: p. 362, n. lO6; p. 376, n. 133; p. 377 II: p. 379, n. 139 11.1-2: p. 374, n. 128 12: p. 379, n. 139 12.1: p. 376, n. 133; p. 374, n. 128 12.2: p. 376, n. 133; p. 377 12·5: p. 376 13·3: p. 376, n. 133 20.2: p. 61, n. 141; p. 361 20·3: P·361 20.9: p. 361 36.4: p. 376 36 .5: p. 376 37.1: p. 376, n. 133 38.3: p. 362, n. lO6 47: p. 268, n. 77

POMPONIUS, SEX.

Dig. 1.6.9: p. 179, n. 52 POSIDONIUS (EDELSTEIN, KIDD)

frag. 259: p. 223, n. 59 frag. 260: p. 223, n. 59 PROPERTIUS, SEX.

Elegiae 3. 17.20 : p. 97; p. 9 8 4.lO: p. 201, n. 64 4.II.29-32: p. 182, n. 2 QUADRIGARIUS, Q. CLAUDIUS

(HRR)

frag. T p. 48; p. 63, n. 133 frag. lOb: p. 49 frag. 10: p. 73, n. I; p. 191, n. 42 frag. 12: p. 192, n. 42 frag. 48--9: p. 73, n. 3 frag. 61: p. 60, n. 135 inc. frag. 12: p. 192, n. 42 QUINTILIANUS, M. FABIUS

Inst. 1.lO.2: p. 51, n. lO5 4·1.68: p. 354, n. 97 9·3·89: p. 354, n. 97 12·1.43: p·321,n·4 12.11.23: p. 323, n. II4 21.1.35: p. 261, n. 55 RUFUS, Q. CURTIUS

8.13.17: p. 294, n. 3 9-4.30-5.19: p. 3lO, n. 49 RUFUS, P. RUTILIUS (HRR) frag. 188: p. 271

457

INDEX LOCORUM

c. (cont.) 51: p. I, ll. 3 5I.3T p. 60, ll. 134 5I.42: p. 2, ll. 4; p. 61, ll. 37 52: p. 374, ll. 129 52.2-26: p. I, ll. 3 52.lI: p. 61, ll. 137; p. 362; p. 363; p. 380, ll. 142 52.19-21: P·378 52.21: p. 374, ll. 128; p. 382, ll. 147 52.22: p. 2, ll. 4; p. 374, ll. 128; p. 379 52.31: p. 61, ll. 137; p. 362, ll. I07 53.2: p. 3, ll. 8 53 ·3: p. 379 53·4: p. 379 53.4-5: p. 374, ll. 128 53.5: P·3 00 53.6: p. 52, ll. I06; p. 293; p. 380 54: p. 290, ll. 129 54.2: p. 380; p. 381, ll. 143 54.2-4: p. 381, ll. 144 54.3-4: p. 380 54.4: P·382 54·5-6: p. 374, ll. 128; p. 383 54.6: p. 52, ll. I06 58.1: P·36I 58.2: p. 60, ll. 134 58.12: p. 361; p. 362 58.15: p. 60, ll. 134 58.17: p. 60, ll. 134 58.19-21: p. 361 60.4: p. 130, ll. 70; p. 381, ll. 144 6I.I-2: p. 65, ll. 150 6I.T p. 130, ll. 70

SALLUSTIUS CRISPUS,

El I.I: P.373 I.3: p. 373 2.2: p. 370, ll. lI8 3.1: p. 374, ll. 128 3.2: p. 265, ll. 65; p. 374, ll. 128 4. 1- 2 : p. 374 4.5-6: p. 143, ll. 3; p. 360; p. 375, ll.I32 4.T p. 376, ll. 133 4.7-8: p. 374, ll. 128 4.8: p. 373, ll. 125 5. 1 : P·377 5.4: p. 369; p. 375, ll. 132 6.1: P.363

45 8

6.2: p. 363 7·2: P·363 7.7: p. 381, ll. 143 8.1: P.363 9. 2 -3: p. 363 IO.2: p. 363 10.8: p. 363 II.3: p. 363, ll. I08 15·1: P.363 15.2: p. 363 2I.2: p. 361, ll. 105 22.2: p. 363, ll. I08; p. 364 23.1: p. 360, ll. 105 26.1: p. 361, ll. 105 26.3: p. 364, ll. I09 29.1-3: p. 364, ll. I09 33.2-34.38.3: p. 364, ll. 109 36.2: p. 364, ll. 109 4I.2: p. 375, ll. 130; p. 376 4I.3: p. 376, ll. 133; p. 377 46-63: p. 266, ll. 68 49.2: p. 360, ll. I05 5I.5: p. 364 52.2: p. 360, ll. I05 52.6: p. 360, ll. 105 55. 1 : P·3 64 58.3: p. 360, ll. I05 62.1: p. 360, ll. I05 63: p. 378, ll. 137 63.1: p. 267, ll. 75 63.3: p. 215, ll. 64; p. 274, ll. 95 64.1: p. 267, ll. 75; p. 364; P·377 64.5: p. 266, ll. 69; p. 268, ll. 78 70.5: p. 365 73 ·5: p. 266, ll. 69; p. 365 73.7: P·27 2 74.1: p. 360, ll. I05 82.2: p. 378 83.1: p. 378, ll. 136 83.3: p. 378, ll. 136 85: p. 266, ll. 69; p. 330, ll. 42 85·1: P.365 85.4: p. 365; p. 367 85. 12- 13: p. 273; p. 274 85.13: P·273;P·366 85.15: p. 273; p. 366 85.17: P·366

INDEX LOCORUM

85.18: P·366 85.20: p. 366 85·21: p. 367 85.25: P·367 85.29-3 0: p. 367 85.31-2: p. 367 85 ·33: p. 367 85 ·37: p. 367 85·38: p. 367; p. 368 85-40: p. 368 85.48: p. 368 85.50: P.368 86.2: p. 266, n. 70 86·3: p. 378, n. 137 87.3: p. 360, n. I05 92.1-2: p. 365 92.2: p. 268, n. 78 95.3: p. 284, n. II8 95·4: p. 94, n. 77 96.1: p. 243, n. 3 97·5: p. 360, n. I05 98.1-3: p. 3IO, n. 48 103.5-6: p. 381, n. 143 106.3: p. 360, n. 105 IIO.5: p. 38r, n. 143 II4·2: p. 360, n. I05; p. 379

Hist. (Maurenbrecher) I II M: P.375 I 12 M: p. 362, n. 106; p. 375 I 54-61 M: p. 376, n. 134 II 98 M: p. 376, n. 134 III 88 M: p. 296, n. IO V IO M: p. 376, n. 134 inc. 22 M: p. 61, n. 137; p. 362,

Is. 42.8.I2: p. 99, n. 95 43.21 : p. 99, n. 95 63·7: p. 99, n. 95 SERVIUS GRAMMATICUS, MAURUS HONORATUS

Ad Aen. I.8: p. 232, n. 90 5.602: p. 194, n. 46 2.141: p. 220, n. 48 9.80: p. 13 G. I.2I: p. 209, n. II SEXTUS EMPIRICUS

Adv. phys. 152-177: p. 86, n. 46

Pyr. 3 .2II: p. 173, n. 30; p. 174, n·3 2 SIMONIDES (POETAE MELICI GRAECI)

frag. 37: p. 86, n. 47 (HRR) frag. I08: p. 49, n. I02 frag. II4: p. 59, n. 132 frag. I20: p. 43, n. 85; p. 49;

SISENNA, 1. CORNELIUS

p. 50 SOLON (WEST)

frag. 4.IO ff: p. 371, n. II9 SOPHOCLES

Aias 550: p. 92, n. 70

Ant. II58: p. 87, n. 49

OT 977-9T p. 87, n. 49 frag. 12: p. 91, n. 65

n. I07 SCIPIO AEMILIANUS, P. CORNELIUS

2I.I7: p. 262

(ORF)

SPEUSIPPUS

frag. 57 (Lang n. 50

SENECA, 1. ANNAEUS RHETOR

Contro. 7.I.I7: p. 106, n. I

STATIUS, P. PAPINIUS

Si/v.

SENECA, 1. ANNAEUS

Ep. 87·IO: p. 323, n. 14 89.14: p. 126, n. 86

I.I.84-6: p. 318, n. 73 I.2.I72: p. I06, n. 4

Theb.

Troad.

IO.6p-36: p. 2II, n. 19 I2.I7T p. 165, n. II

781: p. 194, n. 46 SEPTUAGINT

= 77 Taran):

STOBAEUS

Hh. 3·3: p. 99, n. 95

Flor. 6:66: p. II4, n. 30

459

p. 338,

INDEX LOCORUM

STOICORUM VETERUM FRAGMENTA

3.124-26: p. 126, n. 66 3.686: p. IOI, n. IOI STRABO

3.4.3: p. 237, n. I04 3 ·4· 13: p. 218, n. 44 6.31: p. 227, n. 69 II. I.6: p. 297, n. 15 14.2.15: p. 316, n. 64 17.I.17: p. 98, n. 92 SUETONIUS, C. TRANQUILLUS

Vitae Iul. IO.I-2: p. 300, n. 23 II: p. 300, n. 22 14: p. I, n. 3 19: p. 382, n. 148 24·3: p. 382, n. 147 39.1: p. 316, n. 63 39·3: p. 194, n. 47 42.1-2: p. 316, n. 64 44.2: p. 316, n. 62 45.2: p. 315, n. 61 48.1: p. 300, n. 33 61: p. 318, n. 73 79.I:P· 317, n. 67

Aug. 7.2: p. 385, n. I 29.2: p. 218, n. 44 29.8: p. 283, n. II6 38.3: p. 203, n. 77 40: p. 193, n. 43; p. 194, n. 46; p. 194, n. 47 43.2: p. 193, n. 43; p. 194, n. 47 Claud. 2I.I: p. 295, n. 7

Nero. 38.2: p. 182, n. 2 Galb. 13: p. I06, n. 4

De grammatiCis 2: p. 261, n. 55 9: p. 246, n. 13 25: p. 263, n. 25 TAClTUS, CORNELIUS

Agr. I.I: p. 386, n. 3

Ann. I.5I.7-8: p. 3II, n. 51 I.59·4: p. 143 2.20.6-21: p. 3II, n. 51 2.4I.4: p. 388, n. II 6·3I. 14: p. 167, n. 19 6.5I.3: p. 386, n. 3 16.2I.I: p. 386, n. 3

Germ. 13.1: p. 177, n. 44

Hist. I.52.2: p. 386, n. 3 I.54: p. 143, n. II 3.83: p. 388, n. 12 TERENTIUS AFER, P.

Adel. 6-II: p. 122, n. 56 80: p. II4, n. 33 104-5: p. 121, n. 51 155-96: p. 122 176: p. 30, n. 5; p. I2I; p. 168, n. 22 257: p. I07; p. I09, n. 14 345: p. 161, n. 5 438-42: p. 131, n. 80 535-6: p. 99; p. IOO 809f.: p. 121, n. 51 833f.: p. 121, n. 51 345: p. 161, n. 5 866£.: p. 121, n. 51 88If.: p. 121, n. 51 And. 217: p. 59, n. 132

Eun. 261-5: p. 121, n. 52 776-8: p. 17, n. 15; p. 63, n. 155 778: p. 17 994: p. 59, n. 132 I090: p. 17, n. 15

Heauton. 56: p. 168 20I-IO: p. II3, n. 33 207: p. II8, n. 43; p. 168 313: p. 59, n. 133 Hec. 56: p. 168 2°3: p. I09, n. II6; p. 121, n. 52

Phor. 33-34: p. 17, n. 15

INDEX LOCORUM

frag. 197-9: p. 7, ll. 135

55: p. 39, ll. 75 134: p. 59, ll. 133 182: p. 59, ll. 132 203: p. 91, ll. 65 324-5: p.60 841: p. 89, ll. 61

ll.

18; p. 46; p. 63,

TURPILIUS, SEX.

Comoediae (Ribb. CRF) frag. T p. 124, ll. 60 frag. 144: p. IO 8, p. II

TERTULLIANUS, Q. SEPTIMIUS FLORENS

Apolog.

VALERIUS MAXIMUS

Facta et dicta memorabilia 1.1.8: p. 212; p. 221, 1.3·4: p. 267, ll. 75

18.5. 16 : P·99

Adv. lud. 9·3: p. 99, n. 96

De praescr. haer.

THEOCRITUS ll.

46

THEOGNIS

frag. 147: p. 6 THEOPHRANES OF MITYLENE (FGRH

lIB)

ll·70

frag. 919: p. 296, n. 13 THUCYDIDES

1. 13 ff.: p. 37T 1. 144.4: p. 371, n. 120 2.42.2: p. 30, n. 51; p. I09, ll. 12; p. II4, ll. 31; p. 123, ll. 57 3·58: p. I09, ll. 13 3.84.4: p. 362 6.16.1: p. 137, ll. 99 TITINIUS

Comoediae (Ribb. CRF) frag. II: p. 139; p. 140; p. 374,

ll.

127

TRAGICORUM GRAECORUM FRAGMENTA INCERTA (TRGF)

frag. frag. frag. frag. frag. frag. frag. p.

53

1.5·5: p. 213, ll. 75; p. 220, ll. 48; p. 220, ll. 49 2·1.7: p. 179, ll. 51 2.1.IO: P.5I 2.2·3e: p. 274, ll. 95 2.2.9: p. 188, ll. 25; p. 216, ll. 33 2.3.1: p. 196, ll. 53; p. 266,

13 ·4: p. 99, n. 96 44·6: p. 99, n. 96 17·135[.: p. 86,

ll.

327: p. II3, n. 29 346: p. II3, n. 29 126 (CAF): p. II3, n. 29 163 (CAF): p. II3, ll. 29 190 (CAF): p. II3, n. 29 195 (CAF): p. II3, ll. 29 1286 (CAF): p. II3, ll. 29; II4, ll. 32

TRAGICORUM ROMANORUM FRAGMENTA INCERTA (RIBBECK, TRF)

frag. 30-31: p. 7, ll. 18; p. 46; p. 63, ll. 135 frag. 52-54 = Accius, frag. I06-8 (ROL): P.47 frag. II6: p. 48, ll. IOI

2.4.2: p. 167, ll. 19 2.5.1: p. 156, ll. 40; p. 221, ll. 51 2.5.6: p. 275, ll. 97 2.6.II: p. 200, ll. 59 2.7.3: p. 196, ll. 52; p. 204 2·7-4: p. 204, ll. 79 2.7.6: p. 204, ll. 7 2.7.8: p. 220, ll. 51 2·7·9: p. 196, ll. 32; p. 254, ll. 35 2·9·6: p. 255, ll. 37 2.IO.l: p. 285, ll. II9 3·1.1: p. 156, ll. 38 3.2.2: p. 165, ll. II 3.2·5: p. 213, ll. 27 3.2.21: p. 204, ll. 78 3.3 ·9: p. 220, ll. 51 3.6.1: p. 207, ll. 6; p. 281, ll. II3 4-4.8: p. 173, ll. 31; p. 275, ll. 97 5.8.1: p. 205, ll. 80 5.8·4: p. 246, ll. 13 6.2. ext. 3: p. 94, ll. 77 6.3.IC: p. 196, ll. 53; p. 281, ll. II3 6.9.14: p. 265, ll. 67 7.2.]: p. 53, ll. II 7.2.60: p. 254, ll. 35; p. 255, n. 37 8.2.1: p. 275, ll. 99 8.5.2: p. 327, ll. 31 8.14.5: p. 160 9.7.1-2: p. 285, ll. 121

INDEX LOCORUM

VARRO, M. TERENTIUS

De lingua Latina 5.73: 6.93: 7.70: 7.88:

p. p. p. p.

72 , ll. I 286, n. 122 191, ll. 38 214, n. 31

De re rustica 1.1.6: p. 209, ll. lI; p. 289 3.5.12: p. 281, ll. lI4 De rerum div. (Cardaulls) frag. 189: p. 90;P. 211; p. 289 De vita pop. Rom. (Riposati) frag. 84: p. 51, n. I05 frag. lIO: p. 191, n. 38 frag. 189: p. 90 VELLEIUS, c. PATERCULUS

Hist. R. 1.11.3-4: p. 230, n. 82 1.11.5: p. 279, llll. I05 & 106; p. 280, ll. I07 2.1.2: p. 280, n. 107 2.4.22: p. 323, ll. 17 2.8.1: p. 323, ll. 17 2.18.3: p.6I,ll.37 2.22.4: p. 386, ll. 3 2.26.2: p. 382, n. 148; p. 386, ll. 3 2.26.3: p. 165, ll. II 2.27·5: p. 295, ll. 9 2.35.2: p. 386, ll. 3 2.40.4: p. 315, n. 61 2.55,]: p. 3IO, ll. 150 2.61.3: p. 258, llll. 45, 46 & 47; p. 318, ll. 71 VERGILIUS MARO, P.

Aen. 2·390-1: p. 73, ll. 3 6.756-859: p. 152 ; p. 153 6.826-35: p. 293, n. I 6.857-8: p. 153 10. 641: p. 123, ll. 60 lI.2T P.44 VITRUVIUS POLLIO

De Arch. 1.2.1--9: p. 97, ll. 90 1.2·5: p. 97 3.2 .5: p. 275, ll. 97; p. 279, ll. I04 7 praef. IT p. 276, ll. IOI

XENOCRATES (HEINZE)

frag.7T p. 338, ll. 59 XENOPHON

An. 1.4·8: p. 109, ll. 13

Cyr. 3.3.19: 3.3.50: 8.1.21: 13 . 1-3:

p. p. p. p.

371, n. 120 19, n. 20 123, ll. 57 12 I, ll. 53

Hier. 7.9: p. 109, ll. 2

Mem. 2.2.20-34: p. lI3, ll. 31 2.1.22-34: p. 86, ll. 47; p. 137, ll. 99 3.9.1-5: p. lIO, ll. 18

Sym. 3.4: p. 6, ll. 15 ZENODOTUS

Tragoediae (TrGF) frag. I: p. lI3, ll. 29 ZONORAS

7.24: p. 192, ll. 42 7·25: p. 192, ll. 42 7.25.9: p. 202, ll. 70 7.26: p. 192, ll. 42 8.6: p. 78, ll. 19 8.14: p. 196, ll. 52 8.18: p. 221, n. 52 8.37: p. 78. ll. 19

11. INSCRIPTIONS CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM GRAECARUM

ClG 11 2786: p. 86, ll. 48 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM LATINARUM

ClL P 319: p. 215, ll. 36 ClLP6-7 = lLLRP309: P.33; p. 34; p. 35; p. 130, ll. 70

ClL P IO = lLLRP 3lI: p. 35; p. 36; p. 37;P· 38;P· 130, ll. 70

ClL P II = lLIRP 312: p. 35; p. 36; p. 37; p. 38

CILP15 = lLIRP 316: p. 38; p. 39 ClL Pp. 195, llO. 18: p. 269, ll. 81; p. 275, ll. 97

ClL P 324: p. 94; p. 245, ll. 7 ClL P 384 = lLLRP 357: p. 42 ClL P 589: p. 41, ll. 81

INDEX LOCORUM

elL P 626 = lLLRP 122: p. 94, ll. 38 elL p 709 = lLS 8888 = ILLRP 515: p. 43 elL P 725 = lLS 31 = ILLRP 174: p. 41 elL P 743 = lLLRP 372: P.40 elL 12 1531 = lLLRP 136: p. 96, ll. 8 elL III 7241 = lLLRP 343 = IDel. 2489: p. 41;p. 42,ll. 82 elL VI 18 = lLS 3851: p. ID2 elL VI 317II = lLS 8394 (Laudatio Muriae): p. 165, ll. II elL VI 474 = lLLRP 218: p.217, ll·42 elL VI 1303: p. 218, ll. 44 elL VI 1304: p. 218, ll. 44 elL VI 1527 = lLS 8393 (Laudatio Turiae): p. 164; p. 165 elL VI 29758 = JlEW 2 616 = eij I 72: p. ID2, ll. ID3 elL VI 30913 = lLLRP 15T p. 214, ll. ID3 elL VI 3ID61: p.214 elL VI 31593: p. 218, ll. 44 elL VIII 6951: p. 317, ll. 66 elL VIII 7041 = lLS 6857: p. 317, ll. 66 elL VIII 7095 = lLS 2933: P.317, ll.66 elL VIII, suppl. p. 1849: p. 317, ll.66 elL IX 58II = lLS 82: p. 385, ll. I elL X 8260 = lLS 5051: p. 212, ll. 24 elL XI 29II = lLS 3796: p. 212, ll. 24 elL XI 3205 = lLS 4948: p.212, ll. 24 elL XIV 4106: p. 212 elL XVI 5: p. 157, ll. 41 CORPUS OF JEWISH INSCRIPTIONS

I 72 = JlWE 2.616 = elL VI 29758: p. I02, ll. ID3 1206 = JlWE 2.21T p. ID3, ll. 107 1224 = JlWE 2.379: p. ID3, ll. I07 1229 = JlWE 2.204: p. 103, ll. 107 1373 = JIWE 2. 15T p. ID3, ll. I07 I 523 = JIWE 2.577: p. ID3, ll. I07

EPIGRAMMATA GRAECA EX LAPIDIBUS CONLECTA

489·4: p.89 INSCRIPTIONS DE DELOS

2489 = elL III 7241 = lLLRP 343: P·4 1 699E : P·42 INSCRIPTIONES GRAECAE

lG II 142b: p. 98, ll. 92 lG IV. 950: p. 102, ll. I04 lG IV. 954 = Syll. IIP II68: p. I02, ll. ID4

lG XI 4 1299: p. 98, ll. 93 lG XIV 966, ll. 5-6: p. ID2, ll. ID4 INSCRIPTIONES GRAECAE AD RES ROMANAS PERTINENTES

lGRRP I 38: p. ID2, ll. ID4 INSCRIPTIONES ITALICAE

13.2 = (fosti Antiates): p. 215, ll. 36 13.2: p. 215, ll. 36 INSCRIPTIONES LATINAE LIBERAE REI PUBLICAE

lLLRP 122 = elL P 626: p. 94, ll·78 lLLRP 136 = elL P 1531: P.96, ll. 88 lLLRP 157 = elL VI 30913: p.214 lLLRP 174 = elL P 725 = lLS 31: P·4 1 lLLRP 218 = elL VI 74T p.217, ll·42 lLLRP 245: p. 231, ll. 84 lLLRP 295: p. 219, ll. 45 lLLRP 309 = elL F 6--'7: P.33; p. 34; p. 35; p. 130 , ll. 70 lLLRP 319: p. 78, ll. 21 lLLRP 3II = elL F ID: p. 35; p. 36; p. 37; p. 38; p. 13 0 , ll. 70 lLLRP 312 = elL P II: p. 35; p. 36; p. 37;P· 38 lLLRP 316 = elL P 15: p. 38; p. 39 lLLRP 319: p. 78, ll. 21 lLLRP 343 = elL III 7241 = IDel. 2489: P·41 lLLRP 357 = elL P 384: p. 42 lLLRP 372 = elL P 743: P.40 lLLRP 515 = elL F 709 = lLS 8888: P.43

INDEX LOCORUM

INSCRIPTIONBS LATINAE SELECTAE

lLS 31 = ClL F725 = lLLRP 174: P·4 1 lLS 385 = ClL VI 18: p. ID2 lLS 2531: p. 386, ll. 4 lLS 2713: p. 386, ll. 4 lLS 2933 = ClL VIII 7095: p. 317, ll. 66 lLS 3796 = ClL XI 29II: p. 212, ll. 24 lLS 3851 = ClL VI 18: p. I; p. ID2 lLS3851 = ClL IX 58II: P·3 85, ll. I lLS 5051 = ClL X 8260: p. 212, ll.24 lLS 4948 = ClL XI 3205: p. 212, ll. 24 lLS 6857 = ClL VIII 7074: p. 317, ll. 66 lLS 8393 = ClL VI 1527 (Laudatio Turiae): p. 164; p. 165 lLS 8394 = ClL VI 317II (Laudatio Muriae): p. 165, ll. II lLS 8888 = ClL F 709 = lLLRP 515: P·43 JEWISH INSCRIPTIONS OF WESTERN EUROPE

= CIJI 373: p. ID3, ll. ID7 JlWE 2.204 = CIJ1229: p. ID3, ll. ID7 JlWE 2.217 = CIJ1206: p. ID3, ll. ID7 JlWE 2.379 = CIJ 1224: p. 103, ll. ID7 JIWE2·577 = CIJI 523: p. ID3, ll. ID7 JIWE 2.616 = CIJ I 172 = ClL VI 29758: p. ID2, ll. ID3 JlWE 2.157

SUPPLEMENTUM EPIGRAPHICUM GRAECUM

SEC XV 603-12: p.41, ll.81 SYLLOGE INSCRIPTIONUM GRAECARUM

= lC IV 954: p. ID2, ll. ID4 lIP II72: p. 98, ll. 92

lIP II68

Ill. COINS RRC 13: p. RRC 15: p. RRC 38/6: RRC 39/5:

194, ll. 49 194, ll. 49 p. 144, ll. 5 p. 157, ll. 43; p. 250,

ll. 24

RRC 60hA: p. 144 RRC 98A2: p. 157, ll. 43; p. 250, ll. 24

RRC 108h: p. 144 RRC 128: P.250 RRC 234: p. 249; p. 250, ll. 24 RRC 242: p. 157, ll. 41; p. 249 RRC 243: p. 157, ll. 41; p. 249 RRC 258: p. 250, ll. 25 RRC 259h: p. 157; p. 250; p. 250, ll. 25; p. 251

RRC 261: p. 249, ll. 25 RRC 262: p. 157, ll. 41 RRC 263: p. 157, ll. 41; p. 252, ll. 28 RRC 263-4: p. 250, ll. 25 RRC 264h: p. 251; p. 252 RRC 265: p. 257, ll. 43 RRC 266: p. 250, ll. 25 RRC 267: p. 250, ll. 25 RRC 268: p. 250, ll. 25 RRC 269: p. 250, ll. 25; p. 252, ll. 28 RRC 270: p. 250, ll. 25 RRC 271: p. 250, ll. 25 RRC 275: p. 250, ll. 25 RRC 276: p. 250, ll. 25 RRC 277: p. 250, ll. 25 RRC 278: p. 250, ll. 25 RRC 279: p. 250, ll. 25 RRC 280: p. 250, ll. 25 RRC 281: p. 250, ll. 25 RRC 282: p. 250, ll. 25; p. 252, ll. 28 RRC 285/6: p. 144 RRC 286: p. 253 RRC 291: P.252 RRC 286: p. 252; p. 253, ll. 30 RRC 292: p. 148, ll. 16 RRC 293h: p. 252; p. 252, ll. 29 RRC 295: p. 253, ll. 30; p. 256; p. 256, ll. 42

RRC 297: p. 157, ll. 43; p. 250, ll. 24

RRC 306: p. 144 RRC 308: p. 144, ll. 5

INDEX LOCORUM

RRC 309: p. 148, ll. 16 RRC 322: p. 256, ll. 42 RRC 323: p. 256, ll. 42 RRC 326: p. 256, ll. 42 RRC 321' p. 256, ll. 42 RRC 329: p. 147; p. 151; p. 256, ll. 42 RRC 333: p. 256, ll. 42 RRC 33712: p. 144, ll. 5 RRC 3401r: p. 157, ll. 43; p. 250, ll.24 RRC 343: p. 144, ll. 5 RRC 344/3 & 4: p. 257, ll. 43 RRC 3451r & 2: p. 257, ll. 43 RRC 346: p. 250, ll. 24 RRC 346/3: p. 157, ll. 41 RRC 348/6: p. 144; p. 257, ll. 43 RRC 350: p. 257, ll. 43 RRC 352: p. 257, ll. 43 RRC 357: p. 257, ll. 43 RRC 358: p. 257, ll. 43 RRC 359: p. 257, ll. 43 RRC 360: p. 257, ll. 43 RRC 361: p. 257; p. 257, ll. 43 RRC 370: p. 257; p. 257, ll. 43 RRC 380: p. 148, ll. 16 RRC 381: p. 148, ll. 16; p. 257 RRC 391.3: p. 144 RRC 401: p. 144, ll. 5; p. 147; p. 147, ll. 144; p. 151; p. 154, ll. 30; p. 257;P· 257,ll. 47 RRC 403: p. 144, ll. 5; p. 146; p. 147, ll. 14; p. 152, ll. 26; p. 2II, ll. 21; p. 257;P' 257,ll. 47;P· 299, ll. 29 RRC 408: p. 157, ll. 43; p. 250, ll. 24 RRC 415: p. 144, ll. 5 RRC 419: p. 258 RRC 422: p. 258, ll. 45 RRC 423: p. 258, ll. 45 RRC 425: p. 157, ll. 41; p. 252, ll. 29; p. 258 RRC 4271r: p. 258, ll. 45 RRC 426/3 & 4: p. 258, ll. 45 RRC 42812: p. 144, ll. 5 RRC 429: p. 258 RRC 434: p. 148, ll. 16 RRC 435: p. 148, ll. 16 RRC 439: p. 154, ll. 30 RRC 440: p. 144, ll. 5 RRC 448: p. 258, ll. 46

RRC 450: p. 258, ll. 46 RRC 452: p. 258, ll. 46 RRC 453: p. 258, ll. 46 RRC 454: p. 144, ll. 5 RRC 4541r & 2: p. 258 RRC 454/4: p. 157, ll. 43 RRC 47312: p. 144, ll. 5 RRC 473/3: p. 144, ll. 5 RRC 480/6: P·I45 RRC 480124: p. 145 RRC 4851r: p. 144, ll. 7 RRC 490/r: p. 258, ll. 48 RRC 494/rO: p. 145 RRC 494/41: p. 145 RRC 497/r: p. 258, ll. 48 RRC 51812: p. 258, ll. 48 RRC 545/5: p. 250, ll. 24 BMC Greek Coins-Italy: p. 365; p. 149, ll. 17 BMC I Augustus, 49: p. 152, n. 26 BMC I Augustus, 75-6: p. 387, n. 9 BMC I Augustus, 82-6: p. 387, ll. 9 BMC I Augustus, 91' p. 144, n. 6 BMC I Augustus, 122-3: p. 387, ll. 9 BMC I Augustus, 321-1: p. 385, n. I BMC I Augustus, 336-7: p. 385, n. I BMC I Augustus, 498: p. 387, n. 9 BMC I Augustus, 594: p. 258, n. 48; p. 387, n. 9 BMC I Augustus, 603: p. 144. ll. 6 BMC I Claudius, 91: p. 387, n. 9 BMC I Claudius, 95-99: p. 387, n. 9 BMC I Claudius, 164: p. 387, ll. 9 BMC I Claudius, 168-9: p. 387, n. 9 BMC I Claudius, 171: p. 387, n. 9 BMC I Claudius, 178: p. 387, n. 9 BMCI Claudius, 187--91: p. 387, n. 9 BMC I Nero, 142-55: p. 151, n. 24; p. 387, n. 9 BMC I Nero, 3II-I8: p. 387, n. 9 BMC I Civil War, 64--9: p. 145, n. 10 BMC I Galba. 50: p. 145, n. 10 BMC I Galba, 120: p. 144, n. 7 BMC I Galba, 215: p. 150, n. 10 BMC I Vitellius, 2: p. 145, ll. 10 BMC I Vitellius, 86-7: p. 145, n. 10 BMC I Vitellius, 103-4: p. 145, n. la

INDEX LOCORUM

Ill. COINS (cont.) BMC I Vitellius, II3-I7: p. 145,

BMC II Vespasian, 369: p. 146, n. 13 BMC II Vespasian, 414-16: p. 146, n. 13

BMC II Vespasian, 603: p. 144, n. 7 BMC II Vespasian, 686: p. 151, n. 24 BMC II Domitian, 451: p. ISO, n. 23 BMC III Nerva, 4-6: p. 146, n. 12 BMC III Nerva, 7-8: p. 146, n. 12 BMC III Nerva, 86: p. 146, n. 12 BMC III Nerva, 95: p. 146, n. 12 BMC III Nerva, 99: p. 146, n. 12 BMC III Trajan, 245 ff. : p. 151, n.25

1495-7: p. 146, n. 12

BMC IV Commodus, 90: p. ISO, n. 20 BMC IV Commodus, 168: p. ISO, n. 20

BMC IV Commodus, 480: p. ISO, n. 20

BMC IV Commodus, 562: p. ISO, n. 20 BMC V Wars of Succession, 316: p. ISO, n. 23

BMC V Wars of Succession, 327: p. ISO, n. 23

BMCIIl Trajan, 833-41: p.I5I, n.25

BMC V Wars of Succession, 4II: p. ISO, n. 23

BMC III Hadrian, 5-8: p. 146, n. 13 BMC III Hadrian, 774: p. ISO, n. 20 BMC III Hadrian, 1259-62: p. 151, n.24

BMC V Septimius Severus, 65: p. 145,n. 10

BMC V Septimius Severus, 142: p. ISO, n. 20

BMC III Hadrian, 1312-14: p. 151, n.24

BMC V Septimius Severus, 340: p. ISO, n. 20

BMC IV Antoninus Pius, II90--9I: p. 145,n.

IQ

BMC IV Marcus Aurelius & Lucius Verus, 7--9: p. 146, n. 13

BMC IV Marcus Aurelius, 567: p. ISO, n. 23

BMC V Septimius Severus, 349: p. 145, n.

IQ

BMC V Septimius Severus, 374: p. ISO, n. 19

BMC V Septimius Severus, 523: p. ISO, n. 19

BMC IV Marcus Aurelius, IQ

BMC IV Marcus Aurelius, 1427: p. ISO, n. 23

1431: p. ISO, n. 23

BMC IV Marcus Aurelius,

n. 10

1395-7: p. 145, n.

BMC IV Marcus Aurelius,

BMC V Septimius, Caracalla, Geta, 176: p. 151, n. 25

BMC V Septimius, Caracalla, Geta, 858: p. 151, n. 25

GENERAL INDEX

abstract deities divine Virtus and, 2 II - 12 benefits and favors from, 209-II nature of, 209-II "specialty gods" and, 209 Roman temples to, 209 Varro on, 90, 2II, 289 M'. Acilius Glabrio (consul 19I), 156, 321-2 M. Aemilius Lepidus (moneyer 14-3), 252 M. Aemilius Lepidus (consul 187) equestrian statue of, 156, 252 reverse coin type of, 252 M. Aemilius Lepidus (moneyer 61 or 58), 258 M. Aemilius Lepidus (consul 46) equestrian statue of, 158, 258 Q. Aemilius Papus (dictator 32 I), 32 I L. Aemilius Paullus (consul219), speech of, 69--'70 L. Aemilius Paullus (consul 182), 322 L. Aemilius Paullus (consul 50), 218

Aeneid catalogue of heroes , 152-3 age cavalry service and, 203-4 high office and, 202 6:vSPE1c( as a canonical virtue, 129 inscriptions in, 40-I translated by virtus, 40-1 translated by fortitudo, 6I, 129, 334 amazon,

as personification of Roma, 149

as personification of Virtus, 146-9 animus usages of, 60 virtus v., 60 Antiphanes, (comic playwright), IOO financial generosity and, I 00-I L. Antonius (consul 4I) equestrian statue of, 158 M. Antonius (consul 99), in Cicero's De oratore, 92-3 M. Antonius (consul 44), 270 M'. Aquilius (consul IOI), 151 M'. Aquilius, (moneyer 65 or 7I), 147, 151 architecture Hellenized, 279-83 of temples, 275--9 6:pETI'l aretologies and, 98, lOO broad semantic range of, 74-5 canonical virtues and, 120-30 combined with TVXll, 85, 87-9 contrasted to EVYEVEIC(, 331-2 contrasted to i}Sov1'\, II4-22 contrasted to TVXll, 87 ethical meaning of, IIO-28 fertility ofland and, 74-5 financial generosity and, IOO-I innate human excellence and, 87 martial meaning of, II3 of gods, 85,98-9, IOI-2 aristocracy, Roman constraints on, 195-205 economic, social changes of, 193

GENERAL INDEX

aristocracy, Roman (cont.) esprit de corps among, 194,247 horsemanship and, 192-5 Aristotle influence on Cicero's De re publica, 337-8

army. See also military virtus of, 17-18,291-2, 302-4 art public, 230-1 as booty, 229-30 audacia usages of, 59-60 virtus v., 60 S. Aurelius Augustinus, on Marius, 270 Augustine - see S. Aurelius Augustinus Augustus, 203, 385-'7 clipeus virtutis for, 385-7 new public image of, 386 Badius (Campanian horseman), 203 banquet songs, 51, 182, 190-1 bilingualism code-mixing in, I02-3 Greek-speaking slaves and, 77-83 semantic calque and, 77-84 biography virtuslortuna relationship and, 92, 294 brothers, 169 brothers and sisters, 174-80 Caecilia Metella, 162-3 L. Caecilius Metellus L. (consul 251), 63 laudatio of, 131, 168 C. Caecilius Metellus Caprarius (consul II3), 285 Q. Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus (consul 143) censorial speech by, 285 Q. Caecilius Metellus Numidicus (consul 109), 265, 271, 285-6 censorial speech de ducendis uxoribus by, 28 5-9 his exile, 271 his philhellenism, 284-5 reputation of, 271, 285, 337 treatment by Sallust, 364-5, 377-8 Q. Caedicius (tribunus militum), 50-I, 91

C. Caelius Rufus (praetor 48), 171 Caesar. See C. Iulius Caesar calque, see semantic calque Campanian cavalry, 188 canonical virtues, 128-34 carmina convivalia. See banquet songs Carneades, 261, 339 Sp. Carvilius Maximus (consul 293), 321 Sp. Cassius (consul 502), 196 Castor and Pollux 185, 187-9 Honos and, 152 on coins, 144, 157 temple of, 75, 80, 120, 152, 186-7 transvectio equitum and, 152 Catiline. See L. Sergius Catilina Cato. See M. Porcius Cato Catullus, See C. Valerius Catullus cavalry, Roman. See also citizen cavalry age and, 202-4 aristocracy and, 193-5, 247-8 Campania and, 188 early hoplite, 186 economic, social changes and, 193-5 esprit de corps, 188, 194,247 Formation of nobiles and, 194 Honos and, 216 introduction of, 186-95 monomachies and, 192-3 non-Roman auxiliaries in, 245-7 retirement from, 203 tax for, 187 training for, 193-4 Virtus and, 216-17 centurions Caesar's portrayal of, 65-6, 305 Polybius on, 65 virtus and, 65-6 Christian Latin virtus in, 98-9 citizen cavalry effectiveness of, 245-6 decline of, 245-7 citizenship manliness and, 178-80 slaves and, 159-60 virtus and, 160, 179-80, 388-9 Clastidium, 231 battle of, 208, 212-13, 216-17, 21 9

GENERAL INDEX

Clastidium - (fabula praetexta), 231-4 venue for, 232-3 M. Claudius Marcellus (consul 222), 147, 151-3,201, 207-9,216-17, 21 9-35,239,241,267,274,279, 296-7, 309, 315-18, 355 Caesar and, 309, 317-18 Clastidium and, 216-17, 231-3 criticism of, 227, 233-4 Fabius Maximus Verrucosus v. 219, 223-8 Greek culture and, 229-30, 263 Honos and Virtus and, 208, 217, 219 influence of, 233, 235-40, 296-7, 317-8, 355 as mounted monomachist, 153, 204, 208, 217,228,232 opposition to, 219, 222-6, 234-5 ovatio of, 225, 229 Polybius on, 208, 236 Pompey and, 296-7 public art and, 229, 233-4 self-assertive innovations of, 226-35 spolia opima and, 152,208,234,245 Syracuse sack of, 224-5 Syracuse, spoils of, 227, 229, 233 temple to Honos and Virtus vowed, 212-13,225 dedication delayed, 2 I 9-2 3 triumph on Alban Mount, 225 triumph denied, 225 victory dedications by, 231 Virtus, to relationship, 213 M. Claudius Marcellus (consul 166), discrediting of, 238 Honos and Virtus and, 236 Polybius on, 238 Ap. Claudius Pulcher (consul 54), 332 Q. Claudius Quadrigarius (historian), 48-9, 161 clipeus virtutis, 385-7 clothing as visual symbol, 142 code-Switching, lO2-3 C. Coelius Caldus (consul 94), 327 coins, 253 of deified Virtus, 147-9 deities on, 143--9, 249 Dioscuri on, 144, 157, 249-50

equestrian reverse type, 150-4, 250-3, 256-8 Honos and Virtus, 146-'7, 257 politics and, 249, 257-8 "private" types of, 143, 249 self-advertisement on, 249-52 symbolic images on, 143, 250 Virtus Augusti, 149-51 comedy. See New Comedy; Roman comedy

Commentarii Caesar in, 309-12 common soldiers and, 302-4 generalship in, 305 intent of, 312 Pompey in, 313-15 virtus in, 333

concordia, 145-6 on coins, 145 visual symbol of, 146 Cornelii Scipiones elogia of, 33--9 A. Cornelius Cossus (consul 428), 201, 208 P. Cornelius Lentulus Marcellinus (moneyer lOO), 8, 147, 151 Cornelius Nepos virtusjortuna collocation and, 92, 293-4 P. Cornelius Rufinus (consul 290), III L. Cornelius Scipio, elogium of, 35-8 P. Cornelius Scipio, elogium of, 35-8 P. Cornelius Scipio, Aemilianus, (consul 147),36,70,125,203, 2Il, 363 alter to Virtus, 239 Carthage and, 238-9 censorial speech of, 262 Greek culture and, 262-3 monomachyof,23 8 Polybius on, 259 spolia opima and, 238 P. Cornelius Scipio Africanus (consul 205), 20,36,207-8,236, 3Il, 321, 336, 360, 375 Cicero's treatment of, 348 fe/idtas and, 94 Marcellus and, 236 Polybius' treatment of, 208, 236 speech at New Carthage, 69-'70 virtus and, 236

GENERAL INDEX

L. Cornelius Scipio Barbatus (consul 328), 33-4, 140 Cn. Cornelius Scipio Hispanus (praetor 139), 38-9 L. Cornelius Sisenna (historian), 49-50 L. Cornelius Sulla (consul 83) equestrian reverse type of, 257 equestrian statue of, 257 his commentarii, 269-70, 288 his Hellenism, 284 corona civica, 208, 229, 351 Ti. Coruncanius (consul 280), 321 courage, 6. See also martial courage; physical courage aggressive v. defensive, 17-18, 62--'71 animus and, 60, 305 audacia and, 59 centurions and, 65-6, 305 death and, 29-31 defeat and, 67 discipline v., 65, 304 fortitudo as, 60-1, 128, 162-4,343, 362 knowledge of warfare v., 128-9, 162, 334 leadership and, 69-71, 304-6 "moral," 62 physical, 62-7 Roman standards and, 62 technology v., 307-8 women and, 164 P. Crepusius (moneyer 82), 257 Critognatus (Gallic leader), 301 cults, Greek abstract deities to, 209-IO, 214 6:PETll and, 85-6 TVXTl and, 87-9 culture, Greek, see Hellenism M'. Curius Dentatus (consul 290), 32I, 32 3

daughters, I63, I74-6, I79 P. Decius Mus (consul 340), 200 P. Decius Mus (consul 312), 200 deities. See also abstract deities Caesar and, 3I5 Honos as, 2I3-I5, 269 on coins, 143 manliness and, 84, 95, 97-IOO

Virtus as, I9-20, 90, 2II-I5, 234-40, 288-9 devotio, 199-205 T. Didius (consul 98), 327 Dio Cassius on Marius, 27I-2 Dioscuri. See Castor and Pollux Diphilus (comic playwright), I22-3 Diphilus (tragic actor), 299 drama, Roman war, gods in, 20-1 Earl,

ne.

virtus complex and, 4, 8, I29-30 virtus as political value and, I35-8 definition of virtus, 369 education, I8 I-4 non-elite, I82-3 martial equestrian, I85 Eisenhut, Werner on divine virtus, 20, I85, 21I-I2 emperor equestrian reserve types, I49-50, 258, 387-8

virtus and, 235, 387 Q. Ennius, 6, 85-1I0, I32, I6I, 207 Ambracia - (fabula praetexta), 234 Annales, 43-6, 85 military themes of, 43-5 tragedies of, 6, 47 virtusjortuna collocation and, 85 enslavement, 77-82 equestrian image. See also horses on coins, 52, I49, 250-3, 257-8 honorific public statues and, 155--'7, 257-8 senatorial aversion to, I57-8, 256 symbol of virtus as, I49-54 equites equo publico, I87, 203, 248, 253-6 ethical virtus in Cicero, 8-9, I68-72, 333-4 Greek influences on, 1I1-19, I23, 125 in Lucilius, I24-8 in Naevius, 1I4, 1I6 Sallustand, 356-7, 368-9, 374-4, 382-4 in Terence, II4, 122-3

Fabii Maximi cult of Honos and, 215-19 Roman cavalry and, 2I7, 2I9

47 0

GENERAL INDEX

transvectio equitum and, 216, 218--9 Q. Fabius Maximus Rullianus (consul 322), 187-8, 204, 216, 219 Q. Fabius Maximus Verrucosus (consul 233),208-14, 213,216,223,225-7, 336 , 375 equestrian statue of, 156, 213, 227 Marcellus v., 208, 223-4, 226-8 opposition to temple of Honos and Virtus, 222-3 temple dedication by, 218 Tarentum, sack of, 225-7 temple of Ho nos, 120,213-19 transvectio equitum and, 215-6, 218--9 Q. Fabius Pictor (historian), 208, 228 C. Fabricius Luscinus (consul 282), I l l , 321 fabulae praetextae, 231-4 fomilia, 172-80 daughters in, 174-5, 178 fathers and, 174 manliness and, 174 nomenclature of, 174-77 patria potestas in, 172-4 res publica and, 179 of Romans v. Greeks, 178 sons in, 174-80 sons v. daughters in, 178-80 virtus and, 168-80 women's identity in, 175, 178 family. see familia farming military consideration of, 58 fatherhood virtus and, 168 felicitas, 93-5, 144 as divine, 94, 144, 295 on coins, 144 virtus and, 93-5

Cicero's use of, 334, 343 as canonical virtue, 128 as translation for av5pELa, 129-30, 162, 334 Sallust and, 362 women and, 162, 164 fortuna, 84-93 as deity, 89 combined with virtus, 84-5, 90-3 new men and, 329, n-4o in Plautus, 89-90 relationship to 'TlJXll, 50, 85, 87--90 Romano-Hellenic aesthetic of, 90, 281 temples to, 218, 280 Fortuna Huiusce Diei (temple of), 269, 280-3 Q. Fufius Calenus (consul 47), 147 Q. Fulvius Nobilior (consul 189), 161,234 L. Furius Camillus (consul 338), 155 funerals batde descriptions at, 190 public reputation and, 64, 183-4 purpose of, 64, 183 A. Furius Antias, 46

fides on coins, 145-6 filiafamilias, 138, 174-5 filius fomilias, 174-80 C. Flaminius (consul 223), 228, 322 C. Flavius Fimbria (consul 140), 327 P. Fonteius Capio (moneyer 55), 258 Foreigners virtus and, 93 fortitudo, 60-1

47 I

Gaius (jurist), 173 Gauls Caesar on, 302-4, 307-8 Sallust on, 379 gods. See deities Greek language borrowing from, 74-7, 84-5, 89--92, 97- 109 canonical virtues in, 128-34 ethical virtus in, uO-28 influence of, 108 virtute deum, influence on, 95-102 Hannibalic War, 78, 208, 219, 222-3, 229 Fabius v. Marcellus and, 229 Hellenism cultural change and, 259-65 deleterious effects of, 259-63 internalization of, 263-4 Hermodorus (Greek architect), 279 Hiero n, 126, 230-1 Hellenization, 259-65 Hercules Musarum (temple of), 283, n.u6

GENERAL INDEX

homo novus. See new man Honos cavalry and, 215-6 temple of, 213-17 transvectio equitum and, 215-6, 218-9 Varro on, 2 II honos virtus and, 46, 213 Honos and Virtus (temple of Marc ellus) , 212, 230

dedication of, 236-7 delay in dedication, 219-22, 230 opposition of Fabius to, 219, 222-3, 225, 227

opposition of senate to, 219, 222, 224, 227, 234-5

political significance of, 234-5 relationship to cavalry, 216-17 vowing of, 148,208-9,212-3,215,217, 219-20,222,225,227

Honos and Virtus (temple of Mar ius) , 42, 266

augural objection to, 275-9 dedication of, 241, 266-7 ideological significance of, 279-80 games associated with, 273-4 monumenta Mariana and, 275 plan of, 275-80 vowing of, 269-70 Horace - see Q. Horatius Flaccus Horatius Codes, 64, 200 Q. Horatius Flaccus uses of virtus, 164, 166 horses. See also cavalry, Roman; equestrian image Roman aristocracy and, 185-95 senate and, 253-5 virtus and, 164, 167 C. Hostilius Mancinus (consul 137), 67 immigrants, U.S., 81-2 bilingualism and, 8 1-2 code-switching and, 8I semantic borrowing of, 81 inscriptions, Latin, 33-43 bilingual, 40-2 virtus in, 33-43, 102-3 Isocrates on apnTj-EvYEVElO:, 331

C. Iulius Caesar (consul 59), I, 7 army and, 309-12 Cato v., 379-83 centurions and, 65-6, 305, 308 Claudius Marcellus and, 317-8 in combat, 309-II officers and, 304-6, 308 common soldiers and, 302-3 equestrian statue of, 318 Greek culture and, 300-1, 315-6 as Marius' political heir, 300-1 martial virtus of, 382 ovatio of, 317 Pompeyand, 300, 312-15 public image of, 300, 315-19 self-presentation in commentarii, 309-15 spolia opima and, 317-8 treatment by Sallust, 293, 380-3 Virtus and, 316-8 virtus-stratagem contrast and, 307-8 virtus, uses 4, 7-8, 301-14 C. Iulius Caesar Octavianus, See Augustus L. Iunius Brutus (consul 509).'204-5 M. Iunius Brutus (praetor 44), 158 Jugurtha, 266, 288, 361, 374 ambitio of, 377 Sallust on, 263-4, 377 virtus of, 363-4 Jugurthine War, 265--6, 287 Jupiter Stator temple of, 279 T. Labienus (legatus 58-49), 303, 305, 308 virtus of, 308 C. Laelius (consul 190), 321 C. Laelius (consul 140), 326 Latin Cicero's contributions to, 332-3 neologisms in, 52-3, 105-'7 semantic borrowing and, 72-4, 76-'7, 79-84, 105-7, II2-13 virtusjortuna collocation in, 51, 85, 90-3, II3, 184

laudatio junebris, 168 Laudatio Turiae, 164-5, 169 liberalia, 177 L. Licinius Murena (consul 62), 342 A. Licinius Nerva (moneyer 47),258

472

GENERAL INDEX

L. Licinius Crassus (consul 95), 1]2-4, 247 influence on Cicero, 335 speech against Brutus, 131-4 virtus qualities and, 132-3' M. Licinius Crassus (consul 70), 312 P. Licinius Crassus (legatus 57-7), 312 T. Livius, 61, n.137, 385, n.2 citizen cavalry on, 245-6 equestrian statues on, 155-7 Hannibalic War on, 219, 222 monomachies on, 189-92 spolia opima on, 20 Livius Andronicus, 46, 48 Livy - see T. Livius loan synonym. See semantic calque loan-shift. See semantic calque C. Lucilius, 74, 123-8, 140, 264 Greek influence on, 128 Panaetius and, 125-8 virtus qualities and, 123-8

lusus Troiae, 193

Q. Lutatius Catulus (consul 102), 166, 264, 269, 294 batde ofVercellae and, 269-70, 280, 286, 288 Hellenic influence, 281 Marius v., 264-5, 280, 284, 286, 288 philhellrnism of, 281-4 poetry of, 281, 283 temple to Fortuna Huiusce Diei, 154-7, 158, 269, 280-3 T. Maccius Plautus, 16, 82, 99-100, 103-10 ethical virtus in, IIO, II3-23 fortuna in, 89 Greek words in, 82-3 Greek literacy motifS in, II3-22 linguistic borrowing by, 82-3, 99-101, II2 martial virtus in, 16-28, 96 military imaging and slaves, 22-4 physical courage in, 24-31 prologues of, 19-22, 138-9 virtusJortuna in, 91 virtute deum in, 73, 95, 99-100 C. Maenius (consul·338), 155 manhood, see also masculinities, 10, 172 manliness, 10

changes in, 386 competing definitions of, 272-4, 287-9 demonstration of, 184-5, 189-90, 192-3, 199-201 family and, 172-8 Latin term for, 2 martial ideal of, 43,59-71, 179-85, 246-7, 255-6, 259-62 patriarchal family, 172-4 private aspects of, 168-73, 177-80 procreation and, 168-72 politics and, 206-9,234-41, 248-58, 270-92, 295-300, 312-19, 344-55 res publica and, 172, 178-80 sexuality and, 165-7 structural changes and, 388-9 teaching of, 181-5 L. Manlius Torquatus (moneyer II3), 252-3,256 T. Manlius Torquatus (consul 347), 49, 192, 204, 253, 256 T. Manlius Torquatus (consul 299), 193 T. Manlius Torquatus (praefectus, 341), 192, 204 M. Manlius Capitolinus (consul 392), 48, 196 manubial temples, 190, 218-19 manurnission, 79, 81, 159-68 monumenta Mariana, see Honos and Virtus Marcellus. See M. Claudius Marcellus (Consul 222) Marcellus - (fabula praetexta) -, 232 L. Marcius Philippus (consul 91), 252, 25 8 L. Marcius Philippus (moneyer 57 or 56), 25 8 Q. Marcius Philippus (moneyer 129), 250 Q. Marcius Tremulus (consul 306), 155-6, 252 C. Marius (consul 107), 41-2, 151, 2II, 265-80, 295 anti-Hellenic stance of, 241, 265, 267, 273-4, 28 3-4 battle ofVercellae, and, 268-70, 280, 286, 288 Caesar and, 292,300-1,310-12 career of, 265-6, 272, 273,274,286 deceit v. virtue of, 271-2

473

GENERAL INDEX

C. Marius (cont.) enemies' attacks on, 268-72, 278-9, 288-9 as "fellow-soldier," 241, 291 Honos and Virtus temple and, 275 ideological aspects of temple, 279-80 legacy of, 290-2 martial reputation of, 265-7, 271-2, 274 military shortages and, 287 as new man, 265-7, 320 political enemies of, 274, 284-8 public non-heroic image of, 241, 291-2 religious objections to temple, 275, 277-9 Roman nobility and, 272-3 Sallust on, 272-3, 365-6, 378 virtus and, 266-7, 270, 272-4, 289, 291- 2 Mars on coins, 194 temple of, 216 martial courage displays of, 204-5 in Ennius, 43---7 in inscriptions, 33-43 in middle republic, 59-71 in Plautus, 17-24 of new men, 329-30 martial virtus, 44 in Caesar, 301-12 Cicero and, 341-3, 348-54 emperor and, 258 under Principate, 387-8 Sallust and, 356-8, 375-82 Masculinities, 165-6, 172 civic, 178-80 hegemonic, 165-6, 168, 172 patriarchic, 172-4, 178-80 public v. private, 177-80 military. See also army monomachies commanders in, 69-71, 245---7, 304-7 common soldier and, 64-71, 242, 303-4, 307-9 education and, 68, 181-5, 247 extraordinary courage and, 68 honors of, 68, 184 manpower shortages in, 245, 266, 287 new man and, 329-30 under Principate, 387-8 setbacks, 243-4

stratagems v. virtus and, 307-8 transformation of, 242-3, 245-7,388-9 military tribune decline of, 242-3 Q. Minucius Thermus (consul 193), 53 monomachies age and, 203-4 controls over, 204-5 mounted, 192 on foot, 192 oral tradition of, 189-92 mos, 17 mounted combat difficulty of, 193, 202-4 training for, 193-4 mounted warrior, 149-54, 157,251,252, 253 M. Claudius Marcellus as, 153 Caesar as, 258, 318 coins, on, 149-54, 157, 250-3, 257-8 emperors as, 258, 387-8 equestrian statues as, 155---7 literature, in, 152-3 Pompey as, 258, 296-7 Scipio Aemilianus as, 23 senatorial aversion to, 157-8 virtus and, 149-54 C. Mucius (architect), 275, 280 Q. Mucius Scaevola (consul 95), 25, 147, 175, 264 Q. Mucius Scaevola (moneyer 71 or 65), 147 Cn. Naevius, II4

Clastidium - (fabula praetexta) -, 231-2 neniae, 191 Neptune, 19-20 New Comedy (Greek) common motifs in, 108-9, II3-4, n8-9 ethical meaning of apETT] in, II3 fathers and sons in, II4-5 moral corruption in, II5-2 I, 136-7 parodies in, I04, n.I09, 120-2 proper uses of wealth in, IOO, II6-7 TVXll in, 87, 89, 100 virtue v. pleasure dichotomy in, II4-8, II9, 136-7 young men's ethical development and, II4, II8-21

474

GENERAL INDEX

new man Cato as, 323-5, 337 characteristics of, 328-9 Cicero as, 328-32, 337, 344-5, 347--9, 354 fortuna and, 329, n.40 Gracchan crisis and, 272, 326, 329 ideal type of, 320-2 I marial virtus of, 265-7, 329 Marius as, 265-7, 365-8 military background of, 329, 345 nobility and, 321-28, 365-8 non-military virtus of, 330-2, 337, 344, 347-9 virtus of, 320-22 New Testament virtus in, 99 nobilitas v. virtus, 330-32 nobility Cato and, 323-5 Cicero and, 328-32, 347-8 Marius and, 265-7 new man and, 321-28, 365-8 nomenclature novitas - see new man Octavian - see Augustus Cn. Octavius (consul 165), 322 oral tradition, 189-92 ovatio, 225, 317 M. Pacuvius (Roman playwright), 46, 48, 60, 78 Panaetius influences on Lucilius, 125 L. Papirius Cursor (consul 326), 204, 321 paterfamilias, 172-4 masculinity, and, 172-80 power of, 172-3

patria potestas and virtus, 172-80 patrician-plebian nobility emergence of, 154, 190, 194-5 importance of cavalry to, 193-5 self-aggrandizement and, 190-1 patriarchy, 172-3 Philemon (Greek comic playwright), U4, u6, 120 plebiscitum equorum reddendorum, 157, 253-6

C. Plinius Secundus on Twelve Tables, 12-14 Plutarch Marcellus, on, 223, nn.39-60, 229, n·78 Marius, on, 267-9, 271-2 political virtus, 134-41, 344. See also virtus politics coinage and, 250-8 manliness and, 206--9, 234-5 military defeats and, 244 public art and, 227, 229-31, 233, 239 religion and, 215-7 virtus and, 138-41 Polybius, 64, 68--9, 184 aggressive v. defensive courage and, 65-6 centurions, on, 65-6 commander v. soldiers and, 69-70 funerals, Roman, on, 184 Hellenism, on, 259-60 ideal behavior on, 68 Marcellus (consul 222), on, 208 military discipline, on, 65 military service, on, 202 Roman parsimony on, 101, u6 Scipio Aemilianus, on, 203, 237-8, 246-7 Scipio Africanus, on, 69-70, 236 speeches in, 69 TVXT) in, 88 users of apETl], 75 young Romans, on, 137,259-60 Cn. Pompeius Magnus (consul 70), 2U, 257,293 Caesar on, 313 - 15 Cicero on, 298-301 Greek culture and, 297 martial prowess of, 293, 296 monomachist, as, 296-'7 mounted warrior, on, 296-'7 public image of, 296, 298, 299 Virtus and, 94, 295, 349 virtus of, 298-300 Cn. Pompeius Strabo (consul 89), 43, 60 Q. Pompeius (consul 141), enemies of, 326 military abilities of, 325 as new man, 325-'7

475

GENERAL INDEX

Pompey, see Cn. Pompeius Magnus C. Poplicius Bibulus, inscription of, 42 population (Rome), 79 porticus Catuli, 281 porticus Metelli, 279 M. Porcius Cato (consul 195), 50--9, 72, 179 agricultural treatise by, 56--9 banquet songs, on, 190-1 Carneades on, 261-2 cavalry reform and, 261 treatment by Cicero, 336-7 children, on, 179 cultural changes and, 260 ethical standards of, 381 ethical virtus and, 55 -6, II 0 Hellenism and, 260-2 luxury and, 246, 260 martial reputation of, 323, 329 military training and, 18 I as new man, 323-5, 337 nobility and, 323-5 opposition to Hellenism, 146-9 Origines, 50-1 profit and, 56-7 public art, politics and, 233-4 public horse and, 255 speeches of, 53-6 verbal innovations of, 52-3 virtus ofland, 74 virtusjortuna collocation and, 50, 85, 91-2 voluptas and, 55 M. Porcius Cato (the younger) (practor 54), I, 293 Caesar v., 379-84 treatment by Cicero, 342 treatment by Sallust, 362, 378-84 virtus of, 293, 342, 382-4 A. Posturnius Tubertus, 204 praeficae (wailing women), 191 praenomen, 174-6 boys and, 175-6 women and, 175 Principate ethical virtus in, 385-6 imperial women and, 388 manliness changed in, 388--9 martial virtus in, 385-7

military under, 388 private life virtus and, 168-72 public speaking martial training v., 259, 261-2, 328, 330, 335 pudicitia, 161, 388 Publilius Syrus, 64 virtusjortuna collocation and, 92 Punic Wars slaves and, 78 Pyrrhic War slaves and, 77-8 L. Quinctius (practor 68), 328 T. Quinctius Crispinus (Roman monomachist), 203 T. Quinctius Flarnininus (consul 198), 247

Raucillus and Egus (Gallic commanders), 7-8, 302, 308, n·43 Reinach, Salomon, 98 religion politics and, 217-9 powers of, 197-200 res publica, see also Roman Republic public sphere of, 172-80 service to, 17 8-8 0 social purpose of, 179-80 Roman comedy, 15-6 clever slaves and virtus in, 22-4 ethical virtus in, I I 0-2 3 Greek influences on, 83, 99-IOI martial virtus in, 17-24 prologues of, 19-22, 138, 139, n. I 06 virtus, private context of, 33, 168, 170-2 Roman Republic cultural change in, 259-65 governmental structure of, 196-8, 201-2 military changes in, 185-95,242-8 officeholding, age and, 201-2 patria potestas, virtus and, 172, 177-80 public speaking, law and, 259, 261-2, 321,323,328-36 religious power in, 197-200 Romans attitude toword defeat, 66--'7 batde formation of, 64-6

GENERAL INDEX

discipline v. courage and, 64-5 enslavement by, 77-9 family and, 168-72 father-son relationship of, 178-80 Hellenism and, 259-65 hierarchy and, 142 masculinities of, 165-80 military success of, 195, 244 military setbacks, 243-5 patriarchy and, 172-80 religiosity of, 127-8 sons and daughters and, 174-8 visual signs and, 142-3 Rome (city of) equestrian statues in, 155-8, 257-8 Greek slaves in, 72-82 Greek - speaking population in, 77, 79-84 honorific public statues in, 153-8 neighborhoods in, 84 population of, 79 Romulus, 201, 208, 232, n.89 Roma (divinity), 149 P. Rutilius Rufus (consul I05), 264, 268, 27 1, 28 4 treatment of Marius, 268-71 treatment of Metellus N umidicus, 271 Sallust. See C. Sallustius Crispus C. Sallustius Crispus, I, 293, 384 Caesar on, 293, 379-83 Catiline on, 361-3 Cato on, 293, 379-83 ethical virtus and, 356-'7, 368-75, 381-4 fortitudo, 362-3 Greek influences on, 365-8, 377-8, 382 Jugurtha, on, 363-4, 377 Marius, on, 365-8, 377-8, 382 martial virtus and, 356-68, 370, 376-8 intellectual virtus and, 37 1-3 Metellus, on, 364, 377-8 political slogans and, 381, 383 political virtus and, 374 prologues of, 357-60, 368-74 Republic's fall and, 356, 375-9, 383-4 virtus on, 374 Samnite Wars cavalry and, 38, 186-7

semantic borrowing popular theater and, I05-7 semantic calque, 73, 76-'7, II2 bilingualism and, 77, 79-84 code-switching and, I02-3 immigrants and, 81-2 mechanisms for, I06-'7 New world slaves and, 80-1 semantic shifts reasons for, 73-5 C. Sempronius Gracchus, (tribunus pleb is 123),248,254,263,284 speech on lex Aufelia, 140-1 Ji. Sempronius Gracchus (tribunus plebis 133), 248, 263 senate equestrian image and, 154-8 C. Gracchus and, 248, 254 Marcellus v., 224 Marius' challenge to, 241 public horses and, 253-56 transvectio equitum and, 255-6 L. Sergius Catilina (praetor 68), 349, 361 conspiracy of, 1-2, 349-54 followers of, 361-3 Sallust on, 361-3 M. Sergius Silus (praetor 197), 252 M. Sergius Silus (moneyer II6), 252 M. Servilius Pulex Geminus (consul 202), 25 1 C. Servilius (moneyer I28 or 127), 251 C. Servius (moneyer 82 or 80), 257 sexuality, 165-'7 masculinity and, 165-6 virtus and, 165-'7 virilitas and, 167 Sex. Propertius, 97-8 use of virtus, 133-4 single combat, see monomachies P. Sittius (equestrian friend of Cicero), 170 slaves citizenship and, 159 Greek-speaking, 77--9 language mixing and, 79-84 manumission of, 80-1, 159 military metaphors in comedy and, 22-4 non-Romans v., 161 sons v., 174 virtus and, 159-60 in war, 160

477

GENERAL INDEX

Socrates

6:PETT] as an ethical standard and, III soldiers, see also army, military in Polybius, 69-'71 speeches. See also orations titles of, 132 spolia opima, 148, 153, 208 qualifications for, 201-2 rareness of, 201 statues with bilingual inscriptions, 40-2 equestrian 155-8, 257-8 P. Sulpicius Galus, 262 Ser. Sulpicius Rufus (consul 51), 158, 170 Syracuse, 207, 219-20, 231 art of, 227, 229-30 sack of, 224-6 strategic importance of, 224-5 Tarentum sack of, 122, 125 slaves from, 77-8 temples, Roman to abstract deities, 210 architecture of, 275-83 dedications of, 218, 219, 222 delay of dedications, 220-2 descendents and, 218 Fortuna Huiusce Diei, 154-7, 158 Hercules Musarum, 283, n.1l6 Honos, 120, 121 Honos and Virtus, (Marcellus), ll9, 121, 122, 123 Honos and Virtus, (Marius), 152, 153, 154 Italic, 275-9 Jupiter Stator in Circo, 279-80 manubial temples, 218 round, 279-83 vows of, 210, 234 Terentia (daughter ofCicero), 163-4, 169 P. Terentius Mer, 60, 99, 122 ethical virtus and, ll4 virtuslortuna collocation and, 85 virtutes, usage by, 131 C. Terentius Varro (consul 216), 67, 322 M. Terentius Varro (author) on abstract deities, 90, 2ll, 289

theater semantic borrowing and, 105-7 tirocinium, 183-4 Titinius (playwright), 139 Q. Titurius Sabinus (legatus 58-54), 304 toga virilis, 175-8, 183-4 tragedy, (Roman) Greek influence on, 46, 47 military themes and, 43-6 virtus in, 46-8 transvectio equitum, 184, 187-8 importance of, 193-5 relationship to Castor and Pollux, 187-8, 215--9, 255 relationship to temple to Honos, 215-16, 218-19 relationship to Fabius Maximus Rullianus, 187-8, 216, 218-9 relationship to plebiscitum equorum reddendorum, 255-6 triumph ceremony of, 199 Marcellus, denial of, 225 Tullia (daughter of Cicero), 163 M. Tullius Cicero (consul 63), I, 13, 24, 59, 72, 74, 110, 133-5, 270, 290, 294, 320-1, 344-5, 355, 357, 372 abstract deities, on, 210 altar to Virtus, on, 298 brothers, on, 169 canonical virtues, 8, 129, 334-5, 342-3, 35 0 catilinarian orations, 350-4 critics of, 354-5 equestrian statues, on, 157-8,258 fathers and sons, on, 169-71 fortitudo, user of, 61, n.137, 163-4, 334, 343 Honos and Virtus, on, 213 Latin and, 332-3 Marius, on, 273, 353 New man, as, 328--9 New man and virtus, on, 344-5 nobiles v. new man on, 320 private life and family, on, 336-40, 343-4 Pompey, on, 298-9, 343, 350 redefining of virtus, 330-2, 336-'7, 346-54

GENERAL INDEX

Scipio Africanus, on, 94, 336, 348, 353 Verrine orations, 34I, 348---9 virtus, courageous, on, 24 virtus, ethical on, 8---9, 33I-4, 336--'7, 340-3, 347-8, 350-3 virtus and jelicitas, on, 94, 335 virtus and fortuna, on, 92-3, 33I, 335 virtus of gods, on, 97-8 virtus and industria, on, 336--'7, 343, 347 virtus martial, 330, 337, 339, 342-3, 345, 348-5 2 virtus v. nobilitas, 330-2, 347 virtus,of orator, I33-4, 335, 346-7 virtus, political, 335-40, 345-4 virtus, technical usages of, 75, 335 virtus, usages in speeches, 34I-2 virtus and women, I62-4 M. Tullius Cicero (son of Cicero) , 67, I69, 306, 308 Q. Tullius Cicero (brother of Cicero), I69, 306-8, 3I2 TVX1) combined with 6:PETT'j, 85, 87, 92 divinity as, 87-8 fickle, 87 influences on fortuna, 89---90 Twelve Tables virtus in, I2-I4

C. Valerius Catullus, I66--'7 M. Valerius Corvus (consul 348), I92 L. Valerius Flaccus (consul I95), 323 Venus Victrix, 94, 295 Vercellae battle of, 268--'70, 280,286, 288 Vercingetorix, 307 Vergil, I3 on Marcellus, I52-3 L. Veturius, 26I

vir male sexual activities and, I67 meanings of, 2, 10, 25 virilitas, I67 Virtus (divine) abstract deities and, 209-I2 altars to, 2II, 238-9, 298 as armed amazon, I46-9 Caesar and, 239, 3I6---9

M. Claudius Marcellus (consul 222), and, I48, 208-9, 2II-2, 2I7-23, 225, 227, 234-5, 240, 267, 3I8 M. Claudius Marcellus (consul I66), and, 2II, 236-8, 267 on coins, I47 emperor and, I49-5I, 27I, 3I9, 385-8 equestrian associations of, I49-54, 2I5---9 Honos and, I48, 2II-28, 236-7, 24I, 266,269,275,295, 3I7 image of mounted warrior and, I49-54 C. Marius and, 2II, 239, 24I, 266, 269,273,275,279-8I,286,288---9, 295 as martial deity, I9-20, I48, I5I, 2II, 235 political significance of, 10, 2I9, 234-4I, 274---9 Pompey and, 2II, 239, 295, 3I8-I9 Roma and, I49 shrine to, 295 Scipio Aemilianus and, 37---9, 267 virtus. See also ethical virtus; martial virtus; political virtus as all-embracing value, 4, 8, I28-34, 330 , 34I-3, 348, 370 ancestral, senatorial, 22, 35, 38---9, I47-8, I82-4,236-7, 250-6, 348, 365-8 Caesar's conception of, 7-8, 30I-I2 canonical "virtues" and, I28-34, 34I-3 in Christian Latin, 98---9, I 0 3 Cicero's influence on, 334-54 commanders and, I7-I8, 22, 34, 304--'7 as conventional compliment, 340 cultural change and, 259, 287---9 definitions of, 2, 24--'7, 72, 287---9, 369, 383 diligentia v., 69-70, 305, 307 disciplina and, 65, 304 divitiae and, 45, 6I early Latin inscriptions in, 33-43 equestrian image and, I49-58 equestrian monomachies and, I92-5 equestrian statues and, I55-8, 257-8 ethical meanings of, 4, 9, 29, 55-6, IIO, II4-28 , I40-I, 287---9, 293-5, 302, 330, 333, 340-3, 346-7, 356 , 374, 378---9, 38I-6

479

GENERAL INDEX

virtus (cont.) fatum and, 93 felidtas and, 93-5 as fertility ofland, 74-5 foreign enemies and, 3, 45,161,302 jortuna v., 84-93 "general excellence," as, 74-6, 105, I07-IO Greek influence and, 5, 9, 72-141, 288-9, 293, 345 honos and, 35-8, 42, 46, 136 as human excellence, I05, 107-10 ideological debate over, 233, 270-4 ignavia v., 6 I incentives for, 68, 184-5 innateness of, 84, 90-1 institutional constraints on, 71, 195-215, 234 intellectual nature of, 370-4, 376 in late Republic, 293-5 Marius and, 270, 273, 288-\)1, 353 martial, aggressive, 17,49,62,66,70-1 martial courage as, 16,24-31,62, II3, 140-1, 162-5, 169, 301-2, 344 martial, meanings, 5, 12, 17-24, 31-56, 62-3,160-1,298-9,3 02- II , 321 -8, 329-3 0 , 339, 341-4, 348, 357-68 , 375-7, 382, 384-5, 387-9 martial, defensive, 18, 62, 66, 68 military decorations and, 68 as "moral courage," 62

mounted warrior and, 149-54 new man and, 265-7, 320-32 nobilitas v., 320-1, 330-2 nobility and, 329, 347-8, 365-8 opposites of, 61, 70-1 oratory and, 19, 133-4, 344, 346-7 patria potestas and, 172-80 physical courage and, 31, 134-41, 312- 14, 331 political association of, 335-40, 343-4, 374 as political value, 335-40 Pompey and, 297-300, 313-4, 343, 349-50, 353-4 under Principate, 385-7 private life and, 168-72 profits and, 56-9

public celebration of, 183-4 public v. private context of, 168-80 res publica and, II, 159-61, 172, 177-80, 388-9 Roman ambivalence toward, 158, 195 scientia v., 70-1, 305-8 semantic borrowing and, 76-84, IOI-9, 128, 141 semantic extension of, 72-6, 84 semantic range of, 3-4, 12,76, I05, 141 sexuality and, 165-7 slaves and, 159-60 soldiers and, 44, 68-71, 302-4 stratagems v., 307-8 subdividing of, 128-34 vitium v., 55, 3D! voluptas v., 55, 336-7 women and, 161-5 virtus{ortuna collocation 84-93, 301 linguistic borrowing of, 90-4 relationship to 6:PETTj-TVXTj, 85-93 virtute deum, 95-I04 code-mixing and, 103 as colloquialism, IOI-3 Greek source of, 98-I03 wealth and, 95, IOO-1 virtute jormae, 103 virtutes, 129 as brave deeds, 39, 51 canonical virtues and, 51, 128-34 visual signs, 142-3 clasped hands as, 145-6 on coins, 143-6 identification of, 145-6 of virtus, 149-54 Vitruvius, 97, 279 De architectua, 279-80 on Q. Mucius, 275-80 on temple ofJupiter Stator, 275-9 on temple of Honos and Virtus uses of virtus 97 volones, 160 C. Volusenus (tribunus militum), 305, 30 8 war experience of, 242-7

GENERAL INDEX

horsemanship in, 185-95 institutional changes and, 186--'7, 193-5, 242-3,245-7 preparation for, 18 I -4, 247 wealth apET'll, proper use of, IOO-1 virtute deum and, 95, I01, 168 women 161-5, 175-6, 178

Cicero and, 162-3 courage and, 163-5 in family, 178 fortitudo and, 162-4 imperial, 388 nomenclature and, 175 political power of, II, 388 virtus and, 161-5

MYLES McDoNNELL

is Visiting Associate

Professor at Brooklyn College, The City University of New York. Director of the Classical Summer School of the American Academy in Rome (2003-2005), where he is also a Fellow, he has contributed to the Journal of Roman Archaeology and Journal of Hellenic Studies.

Jacket illustration: Capitoline Brutus. Musei Capitolini, Rome, Italy. Photo Credit: Scala / Art Resource, NY

Jacket design by Holly Johnson Printed in the United States ofAmerica