PA 6Z71 C2A3 1920 LAUS PISONIS A THESIS PHESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF CORNELL UNTVEHSITY FOR THE DEGREE OP DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY GLADYS MARTIN 1917 PA 1 9^ a DATE DUE M^yiAi 1^^ - ' £>^-^ — — mT^» -tewTRY LOAl* ^ .jBl^ kr ^tm^ is^iraB*"*! 1 1 1 GAYLORD ,i.^»i(,«."> ----- , PRINTEOINU.S. J - ,y Cornell University Library PA 6271.C2A3 1920 Laus Pisonis ... 3 1924 026 499 057 Cornell University Library The original of tliis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924026499057 LAUS PISONIS A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF CORNELL UNIVERSITT FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY By GLADYS MARTIN 1917 L l\A'«\:i\4^ (T The author is sincerely grateful to Professor C. E. Bennett, of Cornell University, for his interest and generous assistance during the preparation of this thesis. INTRODUCTION Manuscripts and Editions The editio princeps of the Laus Pisonis was published by J. Sichard in his edition of Ovid, Basel 1527, vol. 2, pp. 546-549. According to his statement in the preface of this edition he made use of a manuscript in the monastery of Lorsch, at Mannheim, and in this old manuscript the poem was attributed to Vergil: 'ne vero sine coroUario aliquo ad te veniret, adiecimus vulgatis omnium editionibus ex vetustissimis codicibus, quibus sumus ex bibliotheca Laurissana usi, fragmenta quaedam Ovidii ex libris opinor Epigrammaton, sic enim a Prisciano citantur, atque elegantissimum carmen incerti quidem autoris, sed quod extra controversiam sit vetustissimi alicuius: siquidem ad Pisonem id est scriptumi, eum opinor, ad quem et Horatii ars poetica extat; quod quamuis ab Ovidii dictione nonnihU abhorreat, et in vetusto codice falso erat Maroni ascrip- tum, iudicavimus tamen dignum, ut inter Ovidiana locum sortirettu" atque hoc demimi pacto ab interitu vindicaretur'. In 1556 Hadrianus Jimius edited the poem, in his Animadversor. Libri sex, with the help of a certain codex Atrebatensis in which the title was given : Lticani poema ad Calpurnium Pisonem ex libro Catalecton. Verses 72-83, according to Sichard's arrangement, were placed at the end of the poem in the edition of Jimius. Of the codex Atrebatensis, used by Junius, and of the Lorsch manuscript, used by Sichard, we have no further history. A late codex Varsaviensis was collated by 3 Martyni-Laguna and his notes were added to the Wemsdori edition.' But Martyni-Laguna himself, according to Wemsdorf (p. 860) recognized that this manuscript was of httle worth: 'adhibuit praeterea excerpta ex libro chartaceo manu scripto, in bibHotheca quadam Varsaviensi reperto, qui partem Catalectorum Ovidii, quae Goldastus edidit, in iisque carmen ad Pisonem, nullo auctoris nomine adscripto, continebat: cui quidetn ipse vir doctus parum tribuit, quod recentem admodtmi et inscite scriptum esse vidit'. This codex appears to have followed largely the text of Sichard, though it has the verse arrangement of the codex Atrebatensis. In those cases where its readings differ from the traditional readings they are for the most part corrupt. E. Baehrens^ mentions a manuscript of the i6th cen- tury which was examined by him and condemned as of no worth, the poem being taken, as in the codex Var- saviensis, from the editions of Jimius and Sichard: 'neque qui integrum carmen continent codices Var- saviensis chartaceus a Martyni-Lagima conlatus et Marucellianus A. CLVI saeculi XVI a me inspectus ullum habent pretium, utpote e Sichardi Jimiique editionibus descripti'. From the text established by Sichard and Junius the poem was published in various editions of Ovid, Lucan, and Vergil. Jos. Scaliger edited the poem in his Puhlii Virgilii Maronis Appendix, 1573, under the title M. Annaei Lucani ad Calpurnium Pisonem Pane- guricum. He states that the title fotmd in his manu- script was Lucani Catalecton De Laude Pisonis^. He 'P. L. M. vol. 4. pp. 861-868. 'P. L. M. vol. I. p. 224. 'Appendix p. 545. 4 does not indicate this manuscript by name but speaks of it now as scheda calamo exarata, now as manuscriptum, and now as codex} Since his text follows that of Jtmius, which was radically different from the Sichard text, it appears that he used either the codex Atreba- tensis or a copy of the same. Of later editions the most important are the following : J. Ch. Wemsdorf, Poetae Lot. Min. vol. 4, Altenburg 1785; J- Held, Incerii Auctoris ad Calpurn. Pison. Carmen, Breslau 1831; C. Beck, Statii ad Calpurn. Pison. Poemation, Ansbach 1835; N. E. Lemaire, Poetae Lat. Min., Paris 1824; C. F. Weber, Incerti Auctoris Carmen Panegyricum in Calpurn. Pison., Marburg 1859; E. Baehrens, Poetae Lat. Min. vol. i, 1879. To C. F. Weber we are indebted for perhaps the most extensive work done upon the Lau^ Pisonis. He has included in his edition not only a full critical appara- tus, based upon the readings of the various editions, but has taken up in the prolegomena a discussion of the problems connected with the poem as well as a history of MSS., so far as then known, and of editions. He has also published in the Indices Lectionum, Marb. 1860/61, a discussion of some of the difficult passages in the first half of the poem. In his edition Weber followed the text of Sichard as being the original source. He admitted, however, that the genuine antiquity of the poem might be doubted for a number of reasons, among them the fact that it existed in no old manuscript : 'et profecto si quis id agat, ut panegyricum nostrum non antiquitus, sed recens scriptum demonstret, me sibi accedentem habet et compluria ad sententiam suam confirmandam invenerit . . . denique MSS. dubi- ■Appendix pp. 545-6. tationem de antiquitate panegyrici excitare possunt, quum neque supersit nobis MS., quo panegyricus con- tinetur, neque pro certo stet carmen in codice vetustis- simo vel certe membranaceo unquam exaratum fuisse'. But since Weber's publication an almost indisputable argument for the antiquity of the poem has been gained by the discovery of excerpts of it in two Paris MSS. which, it is agreed, are not later than the 13th century. This has helped greatly to throw light upon the textual history of the Laus Pisonis and has made possible a more exhaustive study of it. The critical edition of Baehrens, Poetae Lat. Min. vol. i, contains a collation of the poem as it is found in the MSS. These MSS., which are numbered as Parisinus- Thuaneus 7647 and Parisinus-Nostradamensis 17903 (Notre Dame 188), are florilegia containing excerpts from a number of classical authors. Of our poem they contain: w. 1-13; 26-31; 37-40; 44-67; 77-80; 84-90; 94-145; 147-151; 155-170; 173; 176-184; 188-189; 209-261. The MS. Parisinus-Nostradamen- sis 17903 has been assigned to the first half of the 13th century, by competent critics.' The Laus Pisonis was first discovered in this MS. by K. L. Roth and a colla- tion was made with the Weber text. This collation was published by Wolfflin, Philol. 1861, pp. 340-344, from the records of Roth after his decease. A description of both MSS. is given by G. Meyncke in Rhein. Mus. 1870, p. 369. According to his opinion, MS. 7647 [is about half a century older than MS. 17903, and thus belongs to the end of the 12th or beginning of the 13th centiiry. MS. 7647 also has the original or older readings more frequently than MS. 17903, though the two MSS. are •Wolfflm, PUlol. i86i, p. 342. 6 apparently of common origin. In both MSS. excerpts from the Culex and the Aetna precede the Laus Pisonis. At the top of the page upon which the Laus Pisonis is found in MS. 7647, there stood Lvtcanus in catalecton. As a result of the top of the page being damaged it now reads, fol. 113a, . . . anus incatalecton, fol. 113b, Luc . . . in catalecton} Relation of the Codex Atrebatensis to the Paris MSS. At the beginning of the poem in both MSS. there stands this verse from the Ciris, 'nihil est quod texitur ordine longum' (v. 339). It is noteworthy that Scaliger comments upon the fact that this verse stood at the beginning of the poem in his MS. From this he inferred that the beginning of the poem was lacking:^ 'videtur autem initiitm huic poematio deesse. Nam ita in manuscripto incipit. — nihil est, quod texas ordine, longum.' The title given by Junius and Scaliger as found in their MS. or MSS. is similar to that found in the Paris MSS., Lucanus in catalecton. But further than this the text established by Junius, and followed by Scaliger, is almost identical with that of our Paris MSS. The difference between the text of Jtinius and that of the editio princeps was so great that Wemsdorf' came to the conclusion that we had represented in our editions two recensions of the poem, while Weber* rightly divined that we had really a double family of MSS. as the source •Baehrens, P. L. M. vol. i. p. 223; Meyncke, Rhein. Mus. 1870, p. 378. 'Appendix, p. 546. »P. L. M. vol. 4. p. 47. 'Proleg. p. 19. 7 of our text. One family is now represented by the Paris MSS. and the text of Junius, the other by the editio princeps. Out of the many instances in which the Paris MSS. differ from the text of Sichard, by far the larger proportion are supported by the reading of Junius."^ Junius placed w. 72-83, according to Sichard's arrangement, at the end of the poem, while in the flori- legia w. 77-80 are found at the end, w. 68-77 and 80-83 being omitted. From these various points of agreement, which are too important to be mere coincidences, it is evident that Junius and Scaliger must have used a MS. similar to the one from which the excerpts were made. It has- been suggested by Wolfiflirf that the MS. used by Junius was nothing more than a florilegium of the same sort as the Paris florilegia. In favor of this may be mentioned the fact that the text of Junius follows that of the excerpts in several cases where the excerpts after' omitting a few verses begin anew with a wording which differs slightly from the text of Sichard, and which might possibly have been arranged to cover the omis- sion.' So also in favor of this theory may be cited the presence of the verse from the Ciris at the beginning of the poem in the MS. used by Scaliger. In the case of an excerpt this might be accounted for in the following fashion : such excerpts were probably made from a MS . containing the complete works of the various authors- with the selections to be copied by the scribe noted on 'See tables below. ^Philol. 1861, p. 342. *v. 26 tamen etsi, Paris MSS., nee enim si, Sichard; v. 37 quaegue patrwm claros quondam, Paris MSS., sed quae Pisonum claros^ Sichard; v. 173 ipse fidem movisse ferox, Paris MSS., sic movissei fides saevus, Sichard. the margin;' since excerpts from the Culex and the Aetna precede the Laus Pisonis in the Paris MSS. it might appear that excerpts from the Ciris also were to be included but that in some way through the careless- ness of the scribe only this one verse survived. The verse is not the complete hexameter but only so much as forms a complete thought." I am inclined to think it possible that the explanation given by Wemsdorf,^ though not based upon a knowledge of the Paris excerpt, is the correct one, 'sed merum hoc glossema est librarii, qui hoc hemistichium in Ciri Virgiliana, ubi versu 339 extat, legerat, et quod respondere sententiae primi versus reperiebat, commodum putabat superscribere'. Thus the verse might have arisen in the archetype of this family of MSS. Baehrens has expressed the opinion that the codex Atrebatensis used by Junius was actually Par. 7647 or a copy of it.' This he deduces from the fact that there are corrections in the margin of this fiorilegium by some hand of the i6th century and that Junius almost always follows these corrections where they differ from the reading of the first hand in both fiorilegia. But these corrections are in most cases necessary corrections, taken from the reading of Sichard. Such corrections would naturally be made by Junius, in editing the poem, and also by the i6th century scribe. As a proof of the fact that Junius could not have used the MSS. which we have in our possession to-day I cite the reading of V. s 2 . This verse was incomplete in the text of Sichard, being marked with an asterisk, but other editions, not excluding those of Jimius and Scaliger, have the impos- 'See Meyncke, Rhein. Mus. 1870, p. 374. sp. L. M. vol. 4, p. 46. 'P. L. M. vol. I, p. 224. 9 sible reading torquet in auras. The Paris MSS. alone offer what is apparently the original reading succutit arte. If Junius and Scaliger had had this reading at their command they would not have retained the mean- ingless torquet in auras. In about seven instances Junius appears to have a reading which is not found in the Sichard text or the Paris MSS. These are: v. 36 vigente; v. 69 reticente; v. 79 et Aedonia; v. 126 munerat; v. i&2flectis; v. 228 feral; v. 261 aestas (v. 113 diligis, v. 170 otia, v. 239 Varium, are minor corrections) . For four of these read- ings we can not tell what the archetype of our Paris MSS. had, since vigente and reticente occur in the verses omitted by the excerpts, while there is a lacuna in the place of the verb munerat, v. 126, and also of flectis, v. 182. But all of these readings except munerat, v. 126, anA. ferat, v. 228, are found in a previous edition, the Lugdunensis secunda, an edition of Ovid published in 1550. This edition, while having, so far as we know, only the text of Sichard as its source, has in at least seven cases corrections of the Sichard text which agree with the reading of the Paris MSS. These are: v. 88 compositisque; v. ipi insigni; v. 126 pudibundos; v. 158 decehunt; v. 213 et hoc (Paris MSS. et hec); v. 238 gestu; V. 242 Horati. The editor was either gifted with an especial talent for emendation or else he had at hand a manuscript of the same family as codex A and the Paris MSS. and of this made use only where the Sichard text was faulty. His corrections of the Sichard text wherever they occur in the verses included in the excerpts are supported by the reading of the excerpts with three exceptions : v. 79 et Pandionia, Paris MSS., et Aedonia, Lug. sec; v. 182 plectis, Paris MSB., flectis. Lug. sec; v. 261 aetas, Paris MSS., aestas, Lug. sec. 10 In two of these cases, w. 79, 261, the reading of the excerpts is corrupt and the Lugdunensis secunda has the better reading. Corrections due to this editor which occur in the verses omitted by the excerpts are vigente, V. 36, and reticente, v. 69. Of these two corrections reticente at least may be accepted as the correct reading. The text of Junius has the same corrections of the Sichard text which the Lugdunensis secunda has, and follows the text of our Paris MSS. It is possible that Junius used an excerpt of the same sort as the Paris MSS. and supplied the omitted verses from the Lugdu- nensis secunda. But we have shown that the Lugdu- nensis secunda itself agrees with the Paris MSS. in a number of instances. Furthermore in the excerpts it is only w. 77-80 (according to Sichard's arrangement) that occur at the end of the poem, while w. 68-77 ^^^ w. 80-83 ^re omitted. If Jttnius had only a similar excerpt, which he supplemented with the text of the Lugdunensis secunda, he must on his own authority have transferred w. 72-77 and w. 80-83 to the end of the poem. It hardly seems probable that Junius would have failed to see the close relation between v. 83 and v. 84 in the arrangement of Sichard. Weber has shown how the transposition of w. 72-83 to the end of the poem might have been brought about in the family of MSS. to which the codex Atrebatensis of Junius belongs. The archetype of this family had 12 verses upon each page, with the exception of the first which had only 1 1 verses in addition to the title. Verses 72-83 would then occur upon the seventh page. The cop3dst may in some way have overlooked this page and have added the omitted verses at the end. This wotdd explain the position of w. 72-83 at the end of the poem in the text of Junius and also the position of w. 7 7-80 at the end of II the poem in the Paris excerpts. We are therefore brought to the conclusion that there are difficulties in the way of assuming that the codex Airebatensis was merely an excerpt, similar to the Paris MSS., and that it is quite possible that it was a MS. containing the complete poem. This MS. was of course a MS. of the same family as that from which the excerpts of the poem were made. Agreement in the Readings of Codex A and the Paris MSS. The number of cases is large in which the codex Airebatensis, as represented by the text of Junius, and the Paris MSS. have the same reading as against an entirely different reading in the editio princeps. The list is as follows : I Codex A. Paris MSS. Sichard V. 10 cui - - - - si V. II nobilitas - gentis honos V. 12 felix - - - - at tu V. 26 tamen etsi - nee enim si V. 27 non periit - occidit et V. 30 hinc contingit - hie continget V. 37 quaeque patrum - sed quae V. 44 tu (quoque) Piso - dura Piso nam V. 45 ducis - tentas V. 46 victor - - - - victus V. 47 iubes - libet V. 48 quam - si V. 62 dulcia - dulci V. 77 sed nee - sic nee V. 88 compositisque - compositusque V. 98 permulcere - • perfulcire 12 Codex A. Paris MSS. Sichard ■V. lOI mstgm - - - insigms V. 113 clientum - - - colentum TT. 126 pudibundos - - - pudibundus V. 128 ista procul lobes - - ipse procul livor V. 140 nee - - - - non V. 142 nee - - - non V. 151 nimbis - - - nubibus V. 158 decebunt - - - docebunt V. 1 59 orbem - - - aevum -^^ 173 ipse fidem movisse r ferox - sic movisse fides -v. 183 et nunc - - - nunc quoque V. 213 et - - - ut V. 221 impulerit {impulerint) - impulerant V. 237 nomina - - - numina V. 238 gestu - - - - caestu V. 239 evexit - - - erexit V. 239 toantis - - - tonantis V. 242 Horatii - - - Arati V. 24s non unquam - nonnumquam Codex A and the Paris MSS. have been cited as agreeing wherever the reading of Codex A is found in either MS. In only three cases in the above list do the Paris MSS. differ from each other. In v. 47 Par. 7647 has iubes, Par. 17903, iubet; v. 113 Par. 7647 clientum, Par. 17903 £olentum; v. 158 Par. 7647 docebunt, Par. 17903 decebunt. Divergences in the Readings of Codex A and the Paris MSS. The number of divergences in the readings of codex A and the Paris MSS. is few in comparison with the number of cases wherein they agree. We must bear in 13 mind the fact that Junius would not follow his MS. absolutely but would adopt other readings where it seemed best. If we had codex A the number of differ- ences would probably be still less. J. Maehly in Fleckeis. Jahrh. 1862, p. 287 has enumerated some of the main differences but his comparison was based only upon the readings of MS. 17903.' MS. 7647 more fre- quently has the original readings and in several instances agrees with codex A where MS. 17903 diverges from it. A list of the cases where the reading of codex A is found in neither MS. is as follows ■? Codex A V. 12 tantis - V. 28 munera V. 38 olim V. 52 torquet in auras V. 58 lingua V. 79 et Aedonia V. 94 hinc V. 95 hinc V. 120 illic . . . mens V. 122 sed lateri nullus V. 131 Mi V. 143 nervo V. 170 securus V. 176 extudit V. 178 arma tuis . . . lacertis Paris MSS. Claris munia omnes succutit arte dextra et Pandionia huic huic illi . . . dom nullus iam lateri et jerro securis exculit, extulit armatos . . . lacertos ^His list, besides being incomplete, is incorrect in the following instances: v. 28 munia A, munera P should be munera A, munia P; so also v. 38 omnis A, olim P should be olim A, omnes P; v. 140 non P should be nee P (according to Baehrens' collation) ; v. 237 nomina is the reading of both A and P. 'Differences which are merely orthographic are not included. 14 Codex A Paris MSS. V. 1 80 captor e - - . raptare V. 188 ludos ... lusus V. 216 meliora . . . maiora V. 228 ferat - - gerat V. 229 dimittere . . . demittere V. 261 aestas - . _ aetas Most of these differences arise from the fact that the reading of the Paris MSS. is either impossible or very poor in comparison with that of the Sichard text. Junius naturally did not follow his codex in such cases. C. Calpurnius Piso The author of the Laus Pisonis has given us few facts, other than the name Calpurnius Piso, by which we may identify the person who is the object of his praises. J. Sichard, editor of the editio princeps, expressed the opinion that the panegyric was addressed to that Piso to whomtheArs Poeticaoi Horace is addressed:' 'siquidem ad Pisonem id est scriptimi, eum opinor, ad quem et Horatiiarspoeticaextat'. This Piso was probably the L. Calpurnius Piso who was consul in 15 B. C. and whose death is recorded in Tacitus, A. 6. 10. But aside from the fact that his military achievements^ would certainly have been praised by the author of the panegyric, the mention of Vergil, Varius, and Horace in v. 230, and following, shows that the poem is to be assigned to a considerably later date than the lifetime of Horace. The name of Maecenas, as we see from v. 248, has become almost proverbial. 'Ovid. Oper. amat. vol. i . praef . sTac. A. 6. 10. IS With regard to the public life of this Piso addressed by OUT poet only one fact is given which might serve as a clue to his identification. This is the mention in w. 68-71 of thegloryof theconsulshipheldbyhim. We have record of a number of the Pisones who were consuls after the time of Augustus, but upon investigation we feel that none can be the Calpumius Piso whom we are seeking. In 27 A. D. a L. Calpumius Piso was consul with M. Licinius Crassus Frugi, and in 57 A. D. another mem- ber of this family, L. Calpumius Piso, was consul with the emperor Nero and was afterwards appointed pro- consul of Africa. Of these Weber^ says : 'neuter talis fuit ut laudes panegyrici nostri mereret; nihil certe praeclari de lis constat' . L. Calpumius Piso Licinianus, who was adopted by the emperor Galba as his son and successor but killed by the soldiers of Otho, is recorded as a youth of great integrity and morality^ He, how- ever, had the name of Calpumius only by adoption, being the son of M. Licinius Crassus Frugi, and was not a consul. C. Beck believed the recipient of the pane- g3rric to be the Calpumius Piso who is mentioned by Pliny, Ep. 5. 17, as displaying such affection toward his brother and who, according to Beck, is to be identified with the Calpumius Piso who was consul under Trajan in III A. D. Since nothing further is known of either Piso, Beck's view has been rightly rejected as having nothing to recommend it. There remains to be considered only one Calpiimius Piso of importance. This is C. Calpumius Piso, leader of the conspiracy against Nero in 65 A. D. It has been established by Wemsdorf' and Weber^, to the general satisfaction of scholars, that it is to him our panegyric 'Proleg. p. 2. 'P. L. M. vol. 4. p. 36. 'Tac. H. I. 14-15. *Proleg. pp. 3-7. 16 is addressed. There is a striking agreement between the description gathered from the panegyric and the description of this Piso as given by Tacitus, A. 15. 48: 'is Calpumio genere ortus ac multas insignesque famiUas patema nobilitate complexus, claro apud volgum rumore erat per virtutem aut species virtutibus similes ; namque facundiam tuendis civibus exercebat, largi- tionem adversum amicos et ignotis quoque, comi ser- mone ac congressu; aderant etiam fortuita, corpus procerum, decora facies'. Here we have mentioned his nobihty of race, his eloquence employed in defending fellow-citizens, his generosity, his gracious speech and address, his handsome countenance. All these are dwelt upon in the panegyric^. Furthermore we have the testimony of the scholiast to Juvenal, Sat. 5. 109, that this Calpumius Piso was exceedingly skilled at the ludus latrunculorum: 'Piso Calpumius, antiqua familia scenico habitu tragoedias actitavit. in latrunculorum lusu tarn perfectus et callidus ut ad eum ludentem con- curreretur. ob haec insinuatus Caio Caesari repente etiam relegatus est, quod consuetudinem pristinae uxoris abductae sibi ab ipso, deinde remissae repetiisse existamabatur. mox sub Claudio restitutus et post consulatum matema hereditate ditatus magnificentissi- mus vixit, meritis sublevare inopes ex utroque ordine solitus, de plebe autem certos quotannis ad equestrem censimi dignitatemque provehere'. In the panegyric there are devoted to Piso's skill at this game 19 verses, a number out of all proportion to the importance of the subject. It is possible that the schoUast may have drawn his knowledge as to this accomplishment of Piso from the panegyric itself; but if so it is evident that he 'Cf. V. 3; V. 40; V. no; V. 129; V. 100. 17 too identified the recipient of the panegjmc with the Calpumius Piso of whom we are speaking. About the history of this Piso quite a little is known. He was deprived of his bride Orestilla by the emperor Caligula in 37 A. D. and two years later was banished.* He was restored by the emperor Claudius, as we learn from the scholiast to Juvenal (quoted above), probably soon after the beginning of his reign. His name appears in the Acta Arvalium for the years 38 and 40, before his banishment, and later at various times up to the year 63 A. D. He was the leader of a formidable conspiracy against Nero in 65 A. D. and upon its discovery opened his veins and died.^ The scholiast to Juvenal also bears witness to the fact that this Calpumius Piso was consul, though his name does not appear in the Fasti. WemsdorP and Weber^ have proposed, with reason, that Piso was a consul suffectus. From the Augustan period down to the last centuries of the empire the consuls did not retain the consulship for a full year but only for a few months. The consuls who entered upon their office at the begin- ning of the year were regarded as consules ordinarii and gave their names to the year. The others, the consules sufecti, were also entered in the Fasti, though at times a name was likely to be passed over and omitted. It seems quite probable that C. Calpumius Piso was a consul suffectus and that in some way his name was dropped from the Fasti. The testimony of the scholiast to Juvenal is in itself to be considered of some weight. The statement of this scholiast as to the restoration of Piso under Claudius is derived from an unknown source, iSuet. Cal. 25; Dio Cass. 49. 8. 'P. L. M. vol. 4. p. 37. 2Tac. A. 14.65; 15. 48-59. 'Proleg. p. 5. 18 but one apparently trustworthy since it fits with the historical evidence which we have. The scholiast's knowledge of the consulship may have been drawn from the same source. The year in which Piso was consul suffectus is of course a matter of conjecture. Wemsdorf accepted the opinion of Onuphrius Panvinius* who placed the consul- ship in the year 45 A. D. Weber'' points out that if Piso entered upon the consulship in this year at the legal age of 43 he would seem somewhat old to be the leader of the conspiracy in 65 A. D. Weber is in favor of the year 57 A. D. in which year L. Calpumius Piso was consul with the emperor Nero. He suggests that C. Calp. Piso took the placeof Nero, as consul suffectus, and that in sharing the consulship with the other Piso his name has gone down to oblivion. If C. Calp. Piso were 43 in this year he would have been 51 at the time of his death in 65 A .D. This explanation of Weber's is ingenious. But we can only say that the exact year in which C. Calptumius Piso was consul must remain in doubt. Date of the Laus Pisonis The date of the Laus Pisonis can clearly be no later than 6s A.D. in which year occurred the death of the C. Calpumius Piso whom we have identified with the greatest probability as being the recipient of the panegyric. With this in view we may accept the conclusion of W. S. Teuffel' who has pointed out that, since the example of Nero is not mentioned among the examples cited in justification of Piso's playing upon the lyre (w. 166- 177), Nero had evidently not yet appeared publicly 'Fasti 2. p. 200. "Proleg. p. 6. iRom. Lit.' vol. 2, p. 280. 19 upon the stage as a musician. This public appearance of Nero's took place in 59 A. D.^ The poem must then have been composed, not necessarily before the begin- ning of Nero's reign, but before the year 59 A. D. The year in which C. Calpumius Piso held the consulship can hardly have been earlier than 45 A. D., and was probably some years later. The poem may be dated as falling approximately within the years 45-59 A. D. Author of the Laus Pisonis We have two manuscript traditions as to the author of the Laus Pisonis. J. Sichard, editor of the editio princeps, testifies that in the MS. from which he edited the poem it was attributed to VergiP. In the manu- script of Junius the poem was entitled Lucani poema ad Calpurnium Pisonem ex libra Catalecton, and similarly in the Paris MS. 7647 the poem was inscribed Lucanus in catalecton? On the groimd of internal evidence the poem can not be assigned to Vergil*. Sichard, recogniz- ing this fact, judged that the poem belonged with cer- tain Ovidian fragments found in the same MS. and published it in his Ovidii opera amatoria. The poem thereafter was published in various editions of Ovid, and, following the publication of Junius, in editions of Lucan. That Ovid can no more be the author than Vergil, is evident from the approximate date of the poem.^ Wemsdorf* has endeavored to prove that the poem should be attributed to Saleius Bassus for the following reasons : (i) the author of the panegjnic was evidently 'See Tac. A. 14. 14-15. *See v. 237. ''See Introd. p. 3. 'See above. 'See Introd. pp. 3 and 7. "P. L. M. vol. 4. pp. 39-45, 72-78 of slender means (v. 255). Saleius Bassus was so widely known as a poverty stricken poet that Juvenal, 7. 80, speaks of him as tenuis Saleius, while Tacitus tells how his wants were relieved by Vespasian, Dial. 9, 'laudavimus nuper ut miram et eximiam Vespasiani liberalitatem, quod quingenta sestertia Basso donasset' ; (2) the poetical talent of Saleius Bassus is highly praised in Tac. Dial. 5,' quis enim nescit neminem mihi coniunc- tiorem esse et usu amicitiae et assiduitate contubemii quam Saleium Basstim, ctmi optimum virum tum abso- lutissimum poetam?' and in Dial. 9, 'quis Saleium nostrum, egregium poetam vel, si hoc honorificentius est, praeclarissimum vatem, deducit aut salutat aut prosequitur?'; the talent revealed by the panegyric is such as to give promise of the poet's becoming absolu- tissimus poeta or praedarissimus votes; (3) the date of Saleius' life falls in the correct period since Quintilian, Inst. 10. I. 90, indicates that in his lifetime Saleius was an old man, and the years of his youth would therefore have been passed in the reign of Claudius. These argroments of Wemsdorf havecarriedno weight. As ! ards the lifetime of Saleius Bassus, the words of Quintilian are obscure and offer no positive evidence: 'vehemens et poeticum ingenitim Saleii Bassi fuit, nee ipsum scnectus maturavit'. This is thought to signify that Bassus died young before his powers were ripened by years rather than that he was an old man at the time of Quintilian. Furthermore we are not justified in identifying our poet with Saleius Bassus merely on the ground of a common poverty. Following the suggestion of Barty and of Ouden- dorp,2 C. Beck' has ascribed the authorship of the Laus Ho Stat. Sil. 5. 2. p. 456. ^adnot. 10. ad Luc. vit. 'Statii ad Calpum. Pison. Poemation. 21 Pisonis to P. Papinius Statius. He contends that what our poet says of his non humilis domus and tenuis fortuna (w. 254-5) agrees with what we know of the home and fortune of Statius. He cites Stat. S. 5.3. 116: 'non tibi deformes obscuri sanguinis ortus nee sine luce genus, quamquam fortuna parentum artiorexpensis'. Juv. 7. 82-7: 'curritur ad vocem iucundam et carmen amicae Thebaidos, lactam ami fecit Statius urbem promisitque diem; tanta dulcedine captos afiScit ille animos, tantaque libidine vulgi auditur; sed cum fregit subsellia versu, esiuit, intactam Paridi nisi vendit Agaven.' For the words of our poet to agree with those of Statius it is necessary to adopt the conjectture non humilis instead of the manuscript reading nos humilis. This conjectural reading seems necessary to the sequence of thought in w. 254-5 } A further point of agreement Beck finds in the mention of Naples in w. 91-2 of the panegjnic. Statius was a native of Naples and fre- quently alludes to his native city and its Euboean origin. But Naples was also a favorite place of residence of SiUus Italicus. On such grounds Beck might just as well identify the panegjnrist with Silius Italicus. Since Naples was distinguished as 'the Greek city' it is natural that it should be cited by our poet as a witness to Piso's fluency in Greek. Although the exact date of the birth of Statius is unknown, his works were published between 92 and 95 A. D. He could hardly be identified with the author of the panegyric who, as a 'See note to v. 254. 22 youth of 19, was entering upon a literary career in the last years of the reign of Claudius or in the first years of Nero's reign. The opinion of Beck has therefore been generally rejected by scholars.* M. Haupt^ first set forth the theory that Calpumius Siculus, author of the Eclogues, was the unknown author of the panegyric. This theory was suggested, as Haupt explains, by the similarity of the language in the Eclogues and the panegyric, and by the fact that the author of the Eclogues is called Calpumius while the panegyric is addressed to Calpvimius: 'sed cum mira- bihs esse videretur versutrai arte plane singulari fac- torum in- bucolicis Calpumii et in laudatione Pisonis similitudo, orationis etiam quaedam in dissimilibus carminum generibus adpareret convenientia, poetam autem iuvenem et pauperem bucolica non minus quam laudatio Pisonis ostenderent, et praeterea mirum esset poetam bucolicum vocari Calpumium, Pisonem qui altero illo carmine laudatur esse C. Calpumium Pisonem, et mihi et prius, quantum memini, Carolo Lachmanno quicum communicaveram quae de artifi- ciosis Calpumii versibus dicere poteram, nata est sus- picio Calpumium bucolicorum scriptorem, scripsisse etiam illam laudationem'. Haupt bases his theory upon the supposition that the author of the panegyric was not only aided in a pecuniary way but adopted by the Calpumius whom he addresses.' When at a later date the Eclogues were published they were inscribed with the adopted name of the poet. The Meliboeus addressed in the Eclogues must then be the Calpumius Piso addressed in the panegyric. Haupt cites certain 'See Lehrs' Quaestiones Epicae p. 305; Haupt, Opus. i. p. 391; Weber, proleg. pp. 12-13. 20pus. I. p. 391. 'See Opus. pp. 391-2- 23 metrical similarities in the panegyric and the Eclogues, which, he thinks, point to identity of authorship. nescio is used with a short o in the panegjrric, v. 252, and this usage is admitted also by Calpumius. Both poets admit the caesura after the fourth trochee, and use elision only infrequently.^ Haupt's theory as to the author of the Laus Pisonis has been accepted and championed by various scholars. Th. Birt,'' on the basis of brief metrical investigations, is inclined to think that the metrical art of the panegjrric agrees with that of the Eclogues, though he concludes with the statement 'tamen ad certtim coniecutura non corroboratur de Calpumio Panegjrrici auctore'. E. Trampe^ finds a similarity between the panegyric and the Eclogues in the use of monosyllabic conjunctions in the third and foTorth arses, and pronounces it as certain that Calpumius is the author of the Laus Pisonis. Schenkl, in his Calpurnii et Nemesiani Bucolica, praef . pp. i-i S, endeavors to support the theory of Haupt with stronger arguments. These arguments are based upon (i) similarity of thought and expression in the Eclogues and panegyric, (2) frequent use of same or similar words, such as contingo and pagina and of adjectives in -bilis, (3) the fact that in the Paris MSS. the excerpts of the Eclogues follow immediately after the panegjrric, (4) similarities in versification. As similar passages, Schenkl compares Pan. v. 46 with Eel. i. 13 and Eel. 6. 35 ; Pan. v. 109 S. with Eel. 4. 33 ; and Pan. v. 233 ff.with Eel. 4. 39 ff. With regard to the versification of Calpur- ^There ar ; in all only 4 elisions in the 261 verses of the pane- gyric, (v. 14, V. 24, V. 81, V. 168) and 10 in the 758 verses of the Eclogues. ''Ad Historian! Hexametri Latini Symbola, p. 63. 'De Lucani Arte Metrica, pp. 47-8, p. 78. 24 nius he notes that there is no ehsion of vowels except short vowels and those always in the first foot of the hexameter. With one exception (Eel. 3. 82) these elisions occur after the first syllable of the first foot. In the panegyric the two examples of elision' are of the same sort, except that in one case a long vowel is elided. Schenkl carries still further the metrical investigations of Birt by fixing the relative order of the panegyric and single eclogues as determined by the frequency of use of the caesura after the third foot of the hexameter, a double caesura after the first and second trochees, etc. These calculations are, however, of negative value in establishing the identity of the two authors. While Schenkl defends Haupt's theory in general, he suggests that Calpumius Siculus, instead of being a poet of different name adopted by Calpumius Piso, was rather the son of a freedman of the Calpumian gens.^ Although the supposition of Haupt has been thus supported and continues to be accepted as probable by some,' such strong arguments have been advanced against it by G. Ferrara in a treatise entitled Calpurnio Siculo e il panegyrico a Calpurnio Pisone that Schenkl himself admits that it must be given up.* Ferrara first takes into consideration the arguments of Haupt and Schenkl. While the author of the panegyric and the author of the Eclogues both admit the caesura after the fourth trochee, the percentage of instances in the pane- grj^c is lower than in any single eclogue. According to ^Schenkl does not include necesse est, v. 14, and credihile est, V. i68. *See praef . p. 9 'See Teuffel, Gesch. derrom. Lit. 1910; Butler, Post-Augustan Poetry, 1909. 'See Berl. Philol. Wochenschr. 1907, Sp. 841. 25 such considerations the panegyric is metrically more perfect than the Eclogues, a conclusion that is directly opposed to Haupt's theory. The Meliboeus of the Eclogues could hardly be C. Calpumius Piso since from Eel. 4. S3 it appears that Meliboeus was an authority on the winds and weather : 'nam tibi non tantum venturos discere nimbos, agricolis qualemque ferat sol aureus ortum, attribueredei'. This does not agree with the knowledge which we have of C. Calpumius Piso, as Haupt^ himself admits, although he excuses tbepoet's statementthus : 'sedpotuit aliquid propter pastoricium carmen dici quod in Pisonem non magnopere quadraret; nam cetera in eum accurate quadrant'. In order to show the extent of the similarity of thought and expression to be found in the Laus Pisonis and the Eclogues, Ferrara cites the following similar passages : Pan. V. 46 sequitur quocumque vocasti Eel. I. 13 quo me cumque vocas, sequor 6. 35 sequiturque vocantem Pan. V. Ill et subito iuvat indulgentia censu Eel. 4. 33 et tua nos alit indulgentia farre Pan. 214 f. quod si digna tua minus est mea pagina laude at voluisse sat est Eel. 4. 14 f. si non valet arte poUta carminis, at certe valeat pietate probari Pan. 234 f. sterili tantum cantasset avena ignotus populis Eel. 4. 45 irrita septena modularer sibila canna •Opus. I. p. 392. 26 Pan. 37 vistira trittmphos Eel. 4. 90 visitraque saepe trittmphos Pan. 248 tereti cantabere versu Eel. 4. 1 52 tereti deeurrent earmina versu To several of these passages Ferrara further eites parallel expressions to be found in Vergil and Ovid, showing that the resemblanees between the passages quoted from the panegyrie and the Eelogues are not sufficient to carry with them the conviction that the author must be one and the same. As for the second argument of Schenkl, which had todo with the occurrence of the same words in the panegyric and the Eelogues, Ferrara notes that there are words used frequently in the Eclogues, such as memini and fateor, which do not occur at all in the panegyric. Adjectives in -bilis are, as Schenkl states, used fre- quently by both authors, but they are especially adapted to dactylic metre and are used frequently by Ovid. By a careful examination of the distribution of dactyls and spondees, and of adjectives and substantives in the hexameter Ferrara demonstrates the fact that there is no agreement in the metrical composition of the panegyric and of the Eclogues. The problem as to the author of the Laus Pisonis is then to-day as far from solution as ever. Owing to the general difference in style between the Laus Pisonis and the Pharsalia little credence has been placed in the attribution of the poem to Lucan by the codex Atreba- tensis and the Paris MS. (7647), although Lucan's right to the title was accepted by Richard Bentley,' Pieter >To Hor. C. 4. 6. 25. 27 Buxman,' and Niklaas Heinsius.'' Justus Lipsius' first raised serious objections to the acceptance of Lucan as author of the panegyric: 'ita in panegyrico illo ad Pisonem, qui hoc aevo scriptus, inserta eadem defensio V. 157: nee pudeat pepulisse lyram, eum pace serena publica securis exultent otia terris. ipse fidem movisse ferox narratur Achilles, quern Ovidio ablatum viri docti tribuunt Lucano. neutri ego. ab Ovidio aetas abiudicat, ab Lucano conditio scribentis, nam ille qui- cumque poeta ignotus fuit, obscura domo fortuna tenui ; et humiUus blanditur Pisoni quam ut decuerit Lucanum. ait ecce v. 241 : tu, Piso, latentem exsere: nos humilis domus, at sincera parentum, sed tenuis fortuna sua caligine celat. at Lucanus certe notus, celeber, per se perque uxorem praedives. adde Senecam patruutn in aula; qui huic humiH et tentii protendere manum potuisset prae Pisone . . . sed nee Statius huius carminis mentionem f acit, cum omnia minima scripta eius recen- seat Silv. 2.7.' Because of such objections it has long been considered improbable that the author of the Laus Pisonis could be the author of the Pharsalia. It seems worth while to me to give a fair consideration to the possibility, however remote, of the fwo being identical. Weber* has summed up the main arguments which may be set forth against this possibility : ( i ) the panegyrist was of humble birth (v. 254), while Lucan was sprung of the noble race of the Annaei; (2) the panegyrist was of slender means (v. 255), while Lucan was rich (Juv. 7. 79) ; (3) no mention of the Laus Pisonis is found in the genethliacon written in honor of Lucan by Statius (S. 2.7) or in Vacca's life iTo Petron. 94. p. 451. «To Tac. A. 14. 14. ^To Ovid A. A. i. 234. ^Proleg. pp. 9-10. 28 of Lucan ; (4) Lucan was of precocious genius and fam- ous for his youthful poems and declamations ; the pane- gjmst, on the other hand, was as yet in obscurity (v. 224) ; (s) the language of the two poets differs. Lucan was, as Quintilian (Inst. 10. i. 90) says, ardens et con- citattis et sententiis clarissimus; the panegyrist may be characterized as lewis et tranquillus. Weber's first argiiment may or may not be true. As a result of the faulty preservation of w. 254-5 in the Sichard text and Paris MSS. it is questionable whether the poet says that his family is humilis or non humilis. The sequence of thought and connection of words seems to demand non humilis.^ J. Held,'' an editor who accepted the author of the poem as tuiknown and had no especial interest in proving or disproving the theories as to its authorship, first noted that the text demanded the change of nos humilis to non humilis. But the poet was undoubtedly in moderate circumstances, since he says, V. 254: 'sed tenuis for tuna sua caligine celat'. He nevertheless insists that it is not money which he seeks but a road to fame : V. 2ig 'nee enim me divites auri imperiosa fames et habendi saeva libido impulerint, sed laudis amor' V. 223 'sublimior ibo si famae mihi pandis iter, si detrahis umbram' V. 253 'tu nanti protende manum : tu Piso latentem exere' In contrast to this evidence it will be well to examine the evidence which we have as to the wealth of Lucan. ^See note to v. 254. ''Incerti Auctoris ad Calpurn. Pison. Carmen 29 At the time when Juvenal wrote his satires, probably between loo and 130 A. D., Lucan was considered to have been a wealthy poet, for Juvenal, 7. 79, cites Lucan as an example of a poet free from the cares of poverty : 'contentus fama iaceat Lucanus in hortis marmoreis'. Tacitus, A. 16. 17, tells us that the father of Lucan, L. Annaeus Mela, sought to find a shorter road to wealth by acting as agent for the imperial revenues: 'Mela, quibus Gallio et Seneca parentibus natus, peti- tione honorum abstinuerat per ambitionem praeposteram ut eques Romanus consularibus potentia aequaretur; simul adquirendae pecuniae brevius iter credebat per procurationes administrandis principis negotiis' . Could it be possible that at the time when Lucan was a youth of 19 his father was as yet only in moderate circum- stances? Lucan married a rich wife, as we learn frbm Statius, S. 2. 7. 85: 'sed taedis genialibus dicabo doctam atque ingenio tuo decoram forma, simplicitate, comitate censu, sanguine, gratia, lepore'. Lucan left property at his death, to which his father laid claim, and this claim resulted ultimately in the destruc- tion of Mela, Tac. A. 16. 17: 'idem Annaeum Lucanum genuerat, grande adiumentum claritudinis. quointer- fecto dum rem familiarem eius acriter requirit, accusa- torem concivit Fabium Romanum, ex intimis Lucani amicis. mixta inter patrem filiumque coniurationis scientia fingitur, adsimilatis Lucani litteris: quas inspectas Nero ferri ad eum iussit, opibus eius inhians. at Mela, quae turn promptissima mortis via, exsolvit venas'. 30 There is indeed no mention of a Laus Pisonis among the works of Lucan enimierated in the life of Vacca': 'extant eius complures et alii, ut Iliacon, Saturnalia, Catachthonion, Silvarum lo, tragoedia Medea imper- fecta, salticae fabulae 14 et epigrammata prosa oratione in Octavium Sagittam et pro eo, de incendio urbis, epistolarum ex Campania, non fastidiendi quidem omnes, tales tamen, ut belli civilis videantur accessio'. But Lucan was a prolific writer for one who lived but little over 25 years. At the Neronia in 60 A. D., when but a youth of 2 1 , he won the prize for Latin verse with his laudes Neronis. Still earlier than this he had written the Iliacon and other poetry, as we learn from Statius, who seems to indicate the order of Lucan's poems, S. 2. 7. 54: 'ac primum teneris adhuc in annis ludes Hectora Thessalosque currus et supplex Priami potentis aurum, et sedes reserabis inferorum; ingratus Nero dulcibus theatris et noster tibi proferetur Orpheus, dices culminibus Remi vagantis infandos domini nocentis ignes, hinc castae titulum decusque Pollae iucunda dabis adlocutione. mox coepta generosior iuventa albos ossibus Italis Philippos et Pharsalica bella detonabis.' Lucan was closely associated with C. Calpumius Piso in the conspiracy against Nero'' and on account of this he was forced to commit suicide in 65 A. D. Piso was a man some years older than Lucan, as there is mention of •Hosius, Lucanus p. 336. "Tac. A. 15. 49, 56, 70. 31 his nuptial banquet in 37 A. D. If Lucan were bom in 39 A. D., as the life of Vacca states, he was 19 in 58 A. D. The terminus ante quern established for the Laus Pisonis is S9 A. D.' The evidence for the authorship of Lucan is thus so uncertain that Weber^ himself is compelled to say: 'quae praeterea prolata sunt argumenta ad demonstran- dum Lucanum panegyric! nostri auctorum non esse vel parvi vel nuUius sunt ponderis. Etenim neque ex argiunento, quod in carmine tractatur, neque ex iuvenili poetae aetate, qui 19 annos natus panegjrricum scrip- sisse vs. 260 sq. fertiu-, Lucanum hoc poemation non composuisse sequitur'. In an endeavor to further the solution of this problem I have collected from the Pharsalia those passages, in so far as I have been able to find them, which seem to show a resemblance to the Laus Pisonis. The similarities to be observed are not so much in thought as in diction. Whether these similarities are sufficient to be of any weight is a matter of doubt. Pan. V. I unde prius coepti surgat mihi carminis ordo quosve canam titulos Luc. 8. 816 5Mrgii miserabile bustum non ullis plentim titulis, non ordine tanto fastorum Pan. V. 9 quid pleni numeroso consule fasti profuerint Luc. 8. 270 plenis Teddere fastis 'See Introd. p. 20. ^Proleg. p. 10. 32 Pan. V. 10 peril omnis in illo gentis honos Luc. 7. 597 hie patriae perit omne decus Pan. V, 19 et prius aethereae moles circtunvaga flammae Luc. 9. 494 ulla nisi aethereae medio velut aequore flammae Pan. V. 27 occidit et virtus Luc. 4. 491 perit dhmta virtus Pan. V. 27 licet exercere iogaiae munia militiae Luc. I. 312 partesque in hella. togatae Pan. V. 30 contingit gloria civis Luc. 10. 284 contingit gloria genti Pan. V. 30 servati contingit gloria civis Luc. I. 358 servati civisreterentemprsLenmaqviercain Pan. V. 35 iam tunc Cicerone iubente laurea facundis, cesserunt arma togatis Luc. 7. 64 Tullius eloquii, cuius sub iure togaque pacificas saevustremuit Catalina securis Luc. I. 122 et victis cedat piratica laurea Gallis Pan. V. 37 claros visura triumphos Luc. I. 12 nullos habitura triumphos Pan. V. 44 laudibus ipsa tuis resonant fora Luc. 8. 734 ut resonent tristi cantu/oro 33 Pan. V. 46 sequitur quocumque vocasti Luc. 7. 815 quocumque tuaxatoTtwiavocabit Pan. V. 49 sic auriga solet Luc. 8. igg non sic moderator equorum Pan. V. 51 rapido permittit hahenas quadrupedi Luc. 2. 500 levis totas accepit feofeeMOs in campum sonipes Pan. V. S3 cervice rotata Luc. 5-172 cervice rotat Pan. V. 58 densaque vibrata iaculari fulmina lingua Luc. 9. 631 stridula fuderunt vibratis sibila Unguis Pan. V. 69 reticente senatu Luc. 7. 782 stringente senatu Pan. V. 70 cum tua bis senos numeraret purpura fasces Luc. 2. 19 nuUos comitata est purpura fasces Pan. V. 72 quodsi iam validae mihi robur mentis inesset Luc. 5. 18 robur inest animis Pan. V. 75 fessa labat mihi pondere cema; Luc. 4. 754 fessa iacet cervix Luc. 2. 204 dubiaque /abawi cervice 34 Pan. V. 76 et tremefacta cadunt succiso poplite membra Luc. 7. 623 dirni membra cadunt Luc. 6. 87 et tremulo medios abrumpit poplite gyros Pan. V. 80 stridula cum rapido faciunt convicia soli Luc. 9. 631 stridula fuderunt vibratis sibila Unguis Pan. V. loi praestringit imagine visus Luc. I. 154 praestringens lumina Qaxaiaa, Luc. 3.38 vani terremur imagine visus Pan. V. 138 ducis opus Luc. 6. 39 ducit opus Pan. V. 145 ipsa vices naturae subit variataque cursus ordinat inversis et frondibus explicat annum Luc. 7. 201 dissimilem certe cunctis, quos explicat, egit Thessalicum natura diem Pan. V. 147 adopertus nubibus aether Luc. 3. 522 et liber nvbibus aether Pan. V. 157 miles erit Luc. 10. 390 miles erit Pan. V. 157 positis toga vestiet armis Luc. I. 60 positis sibi consulat armis Luc. I. 451 positis T&^tv&tis ab armis 35 Pan. V. 158 hunc fora pacatum, bellantem castra decebimt Luc. 9. 199 praetulit arma togae, sed pacem arma- tus amavit Pan. V. 183 scrutaris fedora dextra Luc. 8. SSS quid viscera nostra scrutaris gladio Pan. V. 184 nunc latus adversum necopino per cutis ictu Luc. 8. 618 toj« funestus Achillas perfodit Pan. V. 190 te si forte iuvat studiorum pondere fessum Luc. 5. 354 heu, quantum fortuna umeris iam pondere fessis amolitur onus Pan. V. 197 mille modis acies tua dimicat Luc. 3. 689 mille modes inter leti mors una timori est Pan. V. 198 longo venit ille recessu Luc. 3. 477 quae prius ex longo nocuerunt missa recessu Pan. V. 199 hie se committere Tma.e atuiet Luc. 9. 372 audet in ignotas agmen committere gentes Pan. V. 200 et in praedam venientem decipit hostem Luc. 4. 167 et ad monies tendentenipTaevenit hostem 36 Pan. V. 207 pauco spoliata milite Luc. 4. 254 spoliatus milite multo Pan. V. 213 et hoc veri complectere pignus amoris Luc. 4. 502 tanti quae pignora demus amoris Pan. V. 216 forsan meliora canemns Luc. 9. 865 forsan maiora superstmt Pan. V. 217 et vires dabit ipse favor Luc. I. 66 tu satis ad vires Romana in carmina dandas Pan. V. 23 s ignotus populis Luc. 8. 19 canctis ignotus gentibus Pan. V. 243 decus, in totum merito venerabilis aevum Luc. 7. 588 decus imperii, spes o suprema senatus extremum tanti generis per saecula nomen Pan. V. 249 possumus aetemae nomen committere famae si tamen hoc ulli de se promittere fas est Luc. 9. 980 o sacer et magnus vatum labor, omnia fato eripis et popuUs donas mortalibus aevum. invidia sacrae, Caesar, ne tangere famae nam, si quid Latiis fas est promittere Musis 37 LAUS PISONIS Unde prius coepti surgat mihi carminis ordo quosve canam titulos, dubius feror. hinc tua, Piso, nobilitas veterisque citant sublimia Calpi nomina, Romanas inter fulgentia gentes; hinc tua me virtus rapit et miranda per omnes 5 vita modos: quae, si desset tibi forte creato nobilitas, eadem pro nobilitate fuisset. nam quid imaginibus, quid avitis fulta triumphis atria, quid pleni numeroso consule fasti profuerint, cui vita labat? perit omnis in illo 10 gentis honos, cuius laus est in origine sola, at tu, qui tantis animum natalibus aequas, et partem tituli, non summam, ponis in illis, ipse canendus eris: nam quid memorare necesse est ut domus a Calpo nomen Calpurnia ducat 15 claraque Pisonis tulerit cognomina prima, umida callosa cum pinseret hordea dextra? nee si ctmcta velim breviter decurrere possim; et prius aethereae moles circumvaga fiammae annua bis senis revocabit mensibus astra, 20 quam mihi priscorum titulos operosaque bella contigerit memorare; manus sed bellica patrum armorumque labor veteres docuere Quirites, atque illos cecinere sui per carmina vates. nos quoque pacata Pisbnem laude nitentem 25 38 exaequamus avis, nee enim, si bella quierunt, occidit et virtus: licet exercere togatae munia militiae, licet et sine sanguinis haustu mitia legitime sub iudice bella movere. hinc quoque servati contingit gloria civis, 30 altaque victrices intexunt limina palmae. quin age maiorutn, iuvenis facunde, tuorum scande super titulos et avitae laudis honores armorumque decus praecede forensibus actis. sic etiam magno iam tunc Cicerone iubente 35 laurea facundis, cesserunt arma togatis. sed quae Pisonum claros visura triumphos olim turba vias impleuerat agmine denso, ardua nunc eadem stipat fora, cum tua maestos defensura reos vocem facundia mittit. 40 seu trepidos ad iura decern citat hasta virorum et firmare iubet centeno iudice causas, seu capitale nefas operosa diluis arte, laudibus ipsa tuis resonant fora. tu quoque Piso iudicis aflfectum possessaque pectora ducis 45 victor; sponte sua sequitur quocumque vocasti: flet si flere iubes, gaudet gaudere coactus et te dante capit iudex, quam non habet, iram. sic auriga solet feruentia Thessalus ora mobilibus frenis in aperto flectere campo, 50 qui modo non soltun rapido permittit habenas quadrupedi, sed calce citat, modo succutit arte flexibiles rictus et nunc cervice rotata incipit effusos in gymm carpere cursus. 39 qiiis non attonitus iudex tua respicit ora? 55 quis regit ipse suam, nisi per tua pondera, mentem? nam tu, sive libet pariter cum grandine nimbos densaque vibrata iaculari ftdmina lingua, seu iuvat astrictas in nodum cogere voces et dare subtili vivacia verba catenae, 60 vim Laertiadae, brevitatem vincis Atridae; / dulcia seu mavis liquidoque fluentia cursu verba nee incluso sed aperto pingere flore, inclita Nestorei cedit tibi gratia mellis. nee te, Piso, tamen populo sub iudice sola 65 mirantur fora; sed numerosa laude senatus excipit et meritas reddit tibi curia voces, quis digne referat, qualis tibi luce sub ilia gloria contigerit, qua tu reticente senatu, cum tua bis senos numeraret purpura fasces, 70 Caesareum grato cecinisti pectore numen? quodsi iam validae mihi robur mentis inesset et solidus primos impleret spiritus annos, auderem voces per carmina nostra referre, Piso, tuas : sed f essa labat mihi pondere cervix 75 et tremefacta cadunt succiso poplite membra, sic nee olorinos audet Pandionis ales parva referre sonos nee, si velit improba, possit; sic et aedonia superantur voce cicadae, stridiila cum rapido faciunt convicia soli. 80 quare age, Calliope, posita gravitate forensi, limina Pisonis mecum pete: pltira supersvmt, quae laudare velis inventa penatibus ipsis. 40 hue etiam tota conctirrit ab tirbe iuventus auditura vinim, siquando iudice fesso 85 turbida prolatis tacuerunt iurgia rebus, tunc etenim levibus veluti proludit in armis, compositisque suas exercet litibus artes. quin etiam f acilis Romano profluit ore Graecia, Cecropiaeque sonat gravis aemulus urbi. 90 testis, Acidalia quae condidit alite muros, Euboicam referens facunda Neapolis arcem. qualis, io superi, qualis nitor oris amoenis vocibus! hinc solido fulgore micantia verba implevere locos, hinc exomata figuris 95 advolat excusso velox sententia tomo. magna quidem virtus erat, etsi sola fuisset, eloquio sanctum modo permulcere senatum, exonerare pios modo, nunc onerare nocentesj sed super ista mo vet plenus gravitate serena 100 vultus et insigni praestringit imagine visus. talis inest habitus, qualem nee dieere maestum nee fluidum, laeta sed tetricitate decorum possumus,: ingenitae stat nobilitatis in illo puleher honos et digna suis natalibus ora. 105 additur hue et iusta fides et plena pudoris libertas animusque mala ferrugine purus, ipsaque possesso mens est opulentior auro. quis tua cultorum, iuvenis faeunde, tuorum limina pauper adit, quem non animosa beatum no excipit et subito iuvat indulgentia censu? quodque magis dono fuerit pretiosius omni, 41 diligis ex aequo, nee te fortuna colentum natalesve movent: probitas spectatur in illis. nulla superborum patiuntvtr dicta iocorum, 115 nuUius subitos affert iniuria risus: unus amicitiae summos tenor ambit et imos. rara domus tenuem non aspematur amictun raraque non humilem calcat fastosa clientem; illi casta licet mens et sine crimine constat 120 vita, tamen probitas cum paupertate iacebit; et lateri nuUus comitem cicumdare quaerit, quern dat purus amor, sed quem tulit ii^pia merces ; nee quisquam vero pretium largitur amico, quem regat ex aequo vicibusque regatur ab illo, 125 sed miserum parva stipe f ocilat, ut pudibundos exercere sales inter con vi via possit. ista procul labes, procul haec fortuna refugit, Piso, tuam, venerande, domvun: tu mitis et acri asperitate carens positoque per omnia fastu 130 inter ut aequales tmus numeraris amicos, obseqmumque doces et amorem quaeris aniando. cuncta domus varia cultorum personat arte, cuncta movet studitun ; nee enim tibi dura clientum turba rudisve placet, misero quae freta labore 135 nil nisi stunmoto novit praecedere vulgo; sed virtus numerosa iuvat. tu pronus in omne pectora ducis opus seu te graviora vocarunt seu leviora iuvant. nee enim facundia semper adducta cum fronte placet : nee semper in armis 140 bellica turba manet, nee tota classicus horror 42 nocte dieque gemit, nee semper Gnosius arcu destinat, exempto sed laxat comua nervo, et galea miles caput et latus ense resolvit. ipsa vices natura subit variataque cursus 145 ordinat, inversis et frontibus explicat annum. non semper fluidis adopertus nubibus aether aurea terrificis obcaecat sidera nimbis: cessat hiems, madidos et siccat vere capillos; ver fugit aestates; aestatum terga lacessit 150 pomifer autumnus, nimbis cessurus et undis. ignea qmn etiam superum pater arma recondit et Ganymedeae repetens convivia mensae pocula sumit ea, qua gessit fulmina, dextra. temporibus servire decet: qui tempora certis 155 ponderibus pensavit, eiun si bella vocabunt, miles erit ; si pax, positis toga vestiet armis. hunc fora pacatum, bellantem castra decebunt. felix ilia dies totumque canenda per aeviun, quae tibi, vitales cum primtim traderet auras, 160 contulit innumeras intra tua pectora dotes. mira subest gravitas inter fora, minis omissa . - paulisper gravitate lepos. si carmina forte nectere ludenti iuvit fluitantia versu, Aoniiom facilis deducit pagina carmen; 165 sive chelyn digitis et ebumo verbere pulsas, dulcis ApoUinea sequitur testudine cantus et te credibile est Phoebo didicisse magistro. nee pudeat pepulisse lyram, cum pace serena publica securis exultent otia terris, 170 43 nee pudeat, Phoebea ehelys si ereditur illis pulsari manibus, quibus et contenditur arcus; sie mouisse fides saevus narratur Achilles, quamvis mille rates Priameius ureret heros et gravis obstreperet modulatis bucina nervis: 175 illo dulce melos Nereius extudit heros poUice, terribilis quo Pelias ibat in hostem. arma tuis etiam si forte rotare lacertis inque gradum clausis libiiit consistere membris et vitare simul, simul et captare petentem: 180 mobilitate pediim celeres super orbibus orbes plectis et, obliquis fugientem cursibus urges : et nunc vivaci scrutaris pectora dextra, nunc latus adversvun necopino percutis ictu. nee tibi mobilitas minor est, si forte volantem 185 aut geminare pilam iuvat aut revocare cadentem et non sperato fugientem reddere gestu. haeret in haec populus spectacula, totaque ludos turba repente suos iam sudabunda relinquit. te si forte iuvat studiorum pondere fesstim 190 non languere tamen lususque movere per artem, callidiore modo tabula variatur aperta calculus et vitreo'peraguntur milite bella, ut niveus nigros, nunc et niger alliget albos. sed tibi quis non tergadedit? quis te duce cessit 195 calculus? aut qms non periturus perdidit hostem? mille modis acies tua dimicat : ille petentem dum fugit, ipse rapit; longo venit ille recessu, qui stetit in spectilis; hie se committere rixae 44 audet et in praedam venientem decipit hostem; 200 ancipites subit ille moras similisque ligato obligat ipse duos ; hie ad maiora movetur, ut citus efifracta prorumpat in agmina mandra clausaque deiecto populetur moenia vallo. interea sectis quamvis acerrima surgant 205 proelia militibus, plena tamen ipse phalange aut etiam pauco spoliata milite vincis, et tibi captiva resonat manus utraque turba. sed prius emenso Titan versetur Olympo, quam mea tot laudes decurrere carmina possint. 210 felix et longa iuvenis dignissime vita eximiumque tuae gentis decus, accipe nostri certus et hoc veri complectere pignus amoris. quod si digna tua minus est mea pagina laude, at voluisse sat est: animum, non carmina iacto. 215 tu modo laetus ades : f orsan meliora canemus et vires dabit ipse favor, dabit ipsa feracem spes animum : dighare tuos aperire Penates, hoc solimi petimus. nee enim me divitis auri imperiosa fames et habendi saeva libido 220 impulerint, sed laudis amor, iuvat, optime, tecum degere cumque tuis virtutibus omne per aevum carminibus certare meis: sublimior ibo, si famae mihi pandis iter, si detrahis umbram. abdita quid prodest generosi vena metalli, 225 si cultore caret? qtiid inerti condita portu, si ductoris eget, ratis efificit, omnia quamvis 45 armamenta gerat teretique fluentia malo possit et excusso demittere vela rudente? ipse per Ausonias Aeneia carmina gentes 230 qui sonat, ingenti qui nomine pulsat Olympum Maeoniumque senem Romano provocat ore, forsitan illius nemoris latuisset in umbra, quod canit, et sterili tanttun cantasset avena ignotus populis, si Maecenate careret. 235 qui tamen haud uni patefecit limina vati nee sua Vergilio permisit numina soli: Maecenas tragico quatientem pulpita gestu evexit Varium, Maecenas alta tonantis eruit et populis ostendit nomina Graiis, 240 carmina Romanis etiam resonantia chordis, Ausoniamque chelyn gracilis patefecit Horati. o decus, in totum merito venerabiliS aevum, Pierii tutela chori, quo praeside tuti non tunquam vates inopi timuere senectae ! 245 quod si quis nostris precibus locus, et mea vota si mentem subiere tuam, memorabilis olim tu mihi Maecenas tereti cantabere versu. possumus aetemae nomen committere famae, si tamen hoc uUi de se promittere fas est 250 et deus ultor abest ; superest animosa voluntas ipsaque nescio quid mens excellentius audet. tu nanti protende manum: tu, Piso, latentem exere. non htunilis domus et sincera parentum; sed tenuis fortuna sua caligine celat. 255 46 possuinus impositis caput exonerate tenebris et lucem spectare novam, si quid modo laetus annuls et nostris subscribis, candide, votis. est mihi, crede, meis animus constantior annis, quamvis nunc iuvenile decus mihi pingere malas 260 coeperit et nondum vicesima venerit aestas. 47 NOTES I . SURGAT : thus used of the rise or swell of verse in Ov. Am. I. I. 27, 'sex mihi surgat opus numeris, in quinque residat'. 2 ff. HINC . . . HINC: the poet's attention is invited on the one hand by the famous ancestry of Piso, on the other, by Piso's own worth and example. For the use of Mnc . . . hinc cf. Liv. 3. 55. 6, 'et cum plebem hinc provocatione, hinc tri- bunicio auxilio satis firmassent'. 3. VETERis Calpi: the Calpumii, who from the time of the first Punic war formed one of the most illustrious families of the Roman state, claimed to be descended from Calpus, a son of Numa Pompilius (Plut. Num. 21). Horace addresses the members of this family as Pompilius sanguis, A. P. 292. citant: sc. me. For the figurative use of citare, to summon, cf. Sen. Dial. 9. 13. I, 'ubi vero nullum officium soUemne nos citat, inhibendae actiones'. 5 f. PER OMNES . . . MOD0S:cf. Stat. S. 5. 2. 74, 'pietasque per omnes — dispensata modes'. 6 f. For the sentiment cf. Juv. 8. 20: 'tota licet veteres exornent undique cerae atria, nobilitas sola est atque unica virtus'. 8 f. IMAGINIBUS . . . AVITIS FXJLTA TRIUMPHIS ATRIA: a bold figure, julcio is properly used of the columns which support the -atrium or of the walls which support the atrium (cf. Prop. 3. 2. II; Luc. 5. 516). The wings of the atrium were regularly adorned with imagines, wax masks of the ancestors of the family. During the empire, however, these were extensively replaced in use by imagines clipeatae, bronze and silver portrait medalKons which were affixed to the walls of the house. To such imagines Statius refers in Th. 2. 214: 'laeto regalia coetu atria complentur, species est cemere avorum eomminus et vivis certantia vultibus aera'. It is possible that our poet is thinking of these when he speaks of imaginibus . . . fulta . . . atria. avitis . . . TRIUMPHIS: this may possibly refer to the decoration of the 48 atrium with painted pictures of the members of the family who had been honored with a triumph. With regard to this custom we have the testimony of Festus, (picta, Lind. p. 228) : 'eius rei argumentum est . . . pictum in aede Vertumni, et Consi, quarum in altera M. Pulvius Flaccus, in altera T. Papirius Cursor . triumphantes ita picti sunt'. But avitis fulta triumphis may refer merely to the spoils and trophies of the conqueror which were affixed to the walls or columns of the atrium. Cf. Sil. 6. 434: 'affixi clipei currusque et spicula nota aedibus in parvis magni monumenta triumphi pulsabant oculos'. 9. PLENI NUMEROSO CONSULE FASTI: TBCords filled with the names of many a consul, pleni fasti: similar is Luc. 8. 270 'an Libycae Marium potuere ruinae — erigere in fasces et plenis reddere fastis'. In the passage quoted plenis fastis is equivalent to the records filled with his name. 11. CENTis hongs: the reading of the editio princeps by Sichard. The Paris MSS. have the reading nobilitas. This is to be rejected since nobilitas has been used three times in the preced- ing verses. Furthermore it does not suit the meaning as well as gentishonos. Itisnot a man's no biUty that perishes asWernsdorf points out but rather the honor derived from that nobility. CUIUS LAUS . . : cf. Juv. 8. 74: 'sed te censeri laude tuorum Pontice, noluerim, sic ut nihil ipse futurae laudis agas: miserum est aliorum incumbere famae'. 12. AT TU, QUI . . : similar in thought is Ov. P. 2. 3. I, 'Maxime qui Claris nomen virtutibus aequas — nee sinis ingenium nobilitate premi'. 13. ET PARTEM TiTULi . . : and who dost base a part of thy glory, not the whole, upon it. 15. Calpurnia: in the nom. agreeing with domus; a rare construction with a trans, verb. But cf Ov. M. 15. 96, 'at vetus ilia aetas, cui fecimus aurea nomen'. 16. CLARAQUE . . . COGNOMINA PRIMA: this reading which is that of Sichard, w. 14-16 being omitted in the Paris MSS., is difficult of interpretation. Weber discusses it Ind. Led. Marb. 1 860 — 61 p. 4. prima, he thinks, can not be construed with domus. There was no other gens which had the cognomen of Piso and so we could hardly interpret thus: and it was the first to 49 receive the famous cognomen of Piso. Weber would therefore associate prima in a sort of predicate relation with cognomina, understanding the poet to mean that the first cognomen of the gens Calpurnia was that of Piso. We know that there were other families of the Calpurnian gens with such cognomina as Bestia and Bibulus and even among the Pisones there were those who had the additional cognomen of Prugi. Hence we might inter- pret w. 14-16 as follows: jor what need is there to relate how the home derives its name from Calpus and how it received the famous cognomen of Piso which was its first, etc. Such an interpretation seems somewhat forced. On the other hand prima may very well limit domus if we interpret it as meaning of old, in the early days. For this use of the adjective primus, as equivalent to the adverb antiquitus, or oUm, cf. Verg. A. i. 1, 'arma virumque cano, Troiae qui primus ab oris — Italiam fato profugus Laviniaque venit — litora'; 8. 319 'primus ab aetherio venit Satumus Olympo'. This usage seems to offer the most satisfactory solution of our passage. 17. UMIDA . . . HORDEA: the epithet umida seems un- suitable since it can hardly represent the condition of the barley at the time of grinding. We learn from PUny H. N. 18. 72, that the barley was soaked as one stage in the making of polenta by the Greeks, but the barley was afterwards dried and roasted before grinding in the mills. The ItaHaJis did not even moisten the barley before roasting and grinding, PUn. H. N. 18. 74, 'Italia sine perfusione tostum in subtilem farinam molit'. ScaHger pro- posed to read f umida in the place of umida, 'magis placeret fumida nam prius toirebantur: deinde saxo frangebantur'. More suitable is the emendation horrida proposed by Maehly, Fleckeis. Jahrb. 1863, p. 290: 'Ich denke, zu pinseret, zu callosa dextra, zu hordea passt hesset horrida callosa usw' . pinseret: before mills for grinding grain were invented the grain was pounded in a mor- tar. Cf. Serv. Aen. i. 179, 'et quia apudmaiores nostros moliarum usus non erat, frumenta torrebant et ea in pilas missa pinsebant, et hoc erat genus molendi. unde et pinsores dicti sunt, qui nunc pistores vocantur'. Pliny, H. N. 18. 10, gives the same deriva- tion as our poet for the name Piso, 'cognomina etiam prima inde: Pilumni qui pilum pistrinis invenerat, Pisonis a pisendo'. 18. DECURRERE: this Use of decurrere in the sense of narrating is infrequent. But cf. Stat. S. 5. 3. 149: 'quantus equos pugnasque virum decurrere versu Maeonides' 50 ig. AETHEREAE . . . FLAMMAE: the sun. Lucan uses the same words of the stars, 9. 494,- 'nee sunt discrimina terras — ulla nisi aethereae medio velut aequore flammae'. circumvaga: an adjective infrequent in use. Horace, Epod. 16. 41, uses it of the ocean, which was thought to flow round the earth, 'nos manet Oceanus circumvagus'. 20. ANNUA . . . ASTRA: refers to the risings and settings of the constellations, revocabit: Wernsdorf proposes >-ewDtio6»< as a better reading, citing Tib. 4. i. 113, "centum fecundos Titan renovaverit annos'. But revocabit is appropriate and even more forceful than the proposed reading. Cf. Calp. Eel. 2. 93, 'sed fugit ecce dies revocatque crepuscula vesper'. 21. priscorum: the ancestors of Piso. Thus used as the equivalent of patrum or maiorum, since this limitation of its mean- ing is easily understood from the context, titulos : this word has been used twice already in the preceding verses, vv. 2, 13, and occurs once again in v. 33. 22 f . contigerit memorare . . : a passage which is evi- dently corrupt. The sentence concluding with memorare ends in the feminine penthemimeral caesura, while the sed of the following sentence is postpositive. These licenses we might admit as possi- ble, as the thought of the clause prius . . . quam . . . contigerit seems to be complete with memorare. But the verb of the new sentence, docttere, leaves the meaning incomplete. With it, if it be read, we must supply in thought bellicas res or bellicam artem. Barth proposed the emendation decuere and this has met with the approval of Wemsdorf, Lemaire, and Martyni-Laguna. Martyni-Laguna testifies that decuere was found in the late codtx Varsaviensis. Although the readings of this MS. are for the most part untrustworthy, Weber thinks that in this case decuere is to be approved. He has adopted it in his text which reads: manus sed bellica patrum — armorumque labor veteres decuere Quirites. Maehly {Fleckeis. Jahrb. 1862, p. 290) points out the inconsis- tency in the thought of this, as the patres are themselves the veteres Quirites. We might possibly understand veteres decuere Quirites as meaning were a glory to the citizens oj old, but the meaning is forced. 25 f. The sequenceof thought in these and the preceding verses is as follows : I could not in the course of a year detail the glories of his ancestors. But they were famed for exploits in war and SI were duly praised by the bards of their own time. I too shall exalt Piso with praises equal to those of his forefathers, but it is with praises won in the arts of peace. 25. NOS quoque: in contrast to sai vates, v. 24. pacata . . . LAUDE : pacata is used witli the meaning of the adjective pacalis, belonging to peace, rather than peaceful. Ovid uses the adjective pacatus in a similar fashion, P. i. i. 31, 'adiuvat in beUo pacatae ramus oUvae'. pacata laus is a phrase formed in contrast apparently to bellica laus, which occurs in Cic. Brut. 21. 84; 68. 239. 26. NEC ENIM si: the reading of Sichard. The Paris MSS. after omitting w. 14-26 begin anew here with a slight difference in words, tamen etsi bella quierunt — non periit, etc. 27 f. LICET EXERCERE . . : One may practice the duties oj peaceful pursuits, togatae . . . militiae: a case of oxy- moron. The toga being the dress of peace was the sign of peace Cf. Calp. Eel. 4. 8; pacemque togatam. For militia similarly used of civil pursuits cf. Cic. Mur. 9. 19, 'Servius hie nobiscum banc urbanam militiam respondendi, scribendi, cavendi plenam soUid- tudinis ac stomachi secutus est''. 29. MITIA . . . BELLA: ieZZo is here used of the legal pro- ceedings of the forum. Cf. Ov. Tr. 3. 12. 18: 'cedunt verbosi garrula bella fori'. By the use of such terms as militia, sanguinis haustu, and bella movere a comparison with real warfare is effected. 30. SERVATI . . . civis: the orator gained the glory of sav- ing a citizen when he saved him from being condemned to banish- ment and the loss of civil rights, or even to capital punishment. 31. VICTRICES . . . palmae: there are passages in other writers which refer to the custom of adorning the doorway of the successful pleader with the palm. Cf . Mart. 7.28.5: 'sic fora mirentur, sic te palatia laudent, excolat et geminas plurima palma fores'. Juv. 7. 117: 'rumpe miser tensum iecur, ut tibi lasso figantur virides, scalarum gloria, pahnae'. In warfare the Roman soldier who had the honor of saving a fellow citizen was rewarded with the quercus or civica corona. Cf. Luc. I- 358: 52 'Laelius emeritique gerens insignia doni servati civis referentem praemia quercum'. 33. SCANDE SUPER TiTULOs : rise above the glories, etc. laudis : laus is a favorite word with our poet occurring in all eight times in the 261 hexameters. Cf. w. 11,25, 44, 66, 210, 214, 221. 35. MAGNO . . . Cicerone iubente: the Sichard text offers the impossible reading iuventae but this has been ingeniously altered by Weber to iubente. It has been rightly perceived that our poet in w. 35-6 is referring to Cic. Off. i. 22, 'cedant arma togae concedat laurea laudi'. The whole passage in Off. i. 22 is devoted to the thought which our poet wishes to emphasize, namely that the achievements of peace are even more important than those of war. Cf. such statements as 'sed cum plerique arbitren- tur res belUcas maiores esse quam urbanas, minuenda est haec opinio . . . vere autem si volumus iudicare multae res exstiterunt urbanae maiores clarioresque quam bellicae'. It is clear then that our poet has in mind this passage in which Cicero sums up his belief in the verse, quoted above: "yield, ye arms, to the toga; yield, ye laurels, to civic praises'. Cicero continues as follows: 'ut enim alios omittam, nobis rem publicam guber- nantibus nonne togae arma cesserunt'. From these words as well as the preceding verse our poet has drawn his statement, 'sic etiam magno iam tunc Cicerone iubente — laurea facundis, ces- serunt arma togatis'. iam tunc: iam is explained by Haupt {Opus. 3. 414) as intensifying the temporal force of tunc, the phrase iam tunc differing but little then from the simple tunc. He cites Nemes. Eel. 3. 21, 'iam tunc post sidera caeH — sola Jovem Semele vidit Jovis ora professum'. 36. facundis: concrete for the abstract jacundia. Werns- dorf {Excur. 8) has shown that the verse quoted above from Cic. Off. I. 22, 'cedant arma togae, concedat laurea laudi', was proba- bly known to our poet as 'cedant arma togae, concedat laurea linguae', linguae has some manuscript authority, though not the best, and is parallel to our poet's use oi facundis. 37. SED QUAE Pisonum: the reading of Sichard. The Paris MSS. have, instead, quequs (quaeque) patrum claros quondam, etc. This being also the reading in the editions of Junius and Scaliger, Weber {Ind. Lect. p. 5) has shown the following reasons for reject- ing it: que is not a suitable conjunction since it does not intro- duce a thought closely coimected with the preceding sentence, but S3 one entirely new, patrum might refer to the old Romans in general, and so it would not be clear whether they or the patres Pisones were meant; quondam is unnecessary because of the fol- lowing olim. sed: J. Maehly (Fleckeis. Jahrb. 1862, p. 290) expresses the opinion that sed is without reason at the beginning of this sentence, and proposes that we write sic. But a satisfac- tory explanation of sed has been given by Weber {Ind. Led. p. 6) who explains the sequence of thought as being: 'sed quid te exhortor, ut superes res bellicas maiorum forensibus tuis actis, cum eloquentia tua in foro iam notissima sit; nam populus iam stipat foro, etc; vel: sed iam antecessisti titulos maiorum tuo- rum; nam populus, qui olim impleverat vias, triumphos maiorum tuorum visurus, nunc stipat eadem fora te dicentem auditurus'. VISURA: the fut. act. particip. is used independently to express purpose by the poets and the Post-Augustan writers. For the b^nnings of the independent use of the fut. act. particip. see Landgraf, Archiv, 9. p. 47. 39. ARDUA NUNC EADEM STIPAT FORA: Weber {Ind. Led. p. 6) states that ardua is to be joined with turha, not with fora, and is descriptive of the attentive attitude of the people who stood ereda cervice. He cites Verg. A. 9. 53, where it is said of Tumus on horseback campo sese arduus infert, and Hor. S. i. 2. 89, ardua cervix. This interpretation of ardua with turba seems somewhat forced. It is possible that o?'d«ffl is to be taken with /oca, since/om probably refers to the imperial fora and these, unlike the forum Romanum, were enclosed by walls and colonnades, each forming an architectural unit. Being such, the adjective ardua might be appKed to them as to magnificent and lofty publicbuildings. The forum Julium was begun by Caesar in 54 B. C. and completed by Augustus. Augustus then built the forum A,ugustum which was dedicated in 2 B. C. Later, but probably not within the lifetime ' of otu: poet, there were added the fora of Vespasian, Nerva, and Trajan. The difference in elevation between the imperial fora and forum Romanum could not have been so great that the adjec- tive ardua would be appKed for that reason. 39 f. MAESTOS . . . REOs: cf. Hor. C. 2. I. 13, 'insigne maestis praesidium reis — et consulenti, PoUio, curiae'. 40, DEFENSURA REOS . . . FACUNDIA: cf. the description of C. Piso given by Tacitus, A. 15. 48, 'namque facundiam tuendis civibus exercebat, largitionem adversum amicos, et ignotis quoque 54 comi sermone et congressu'. vocem . . . mittit: for the expression cf. Cic. Sest. 19. 42, 'haec eigo cum viderem . . . vocem pro me ac pro re publica neminem mittere'. 41. TREPiDos: reos is understood. Cf. Ov. F. i. 22: 'quae sit enim culti facundia sensimus oris civica pro trepidis cum tulit arma reis'. DECEM . . . virorum: a court of magistrates who had jurisdiction in civil matters. The ceniummri (cf. v. 42 centeno iudice) were a body of indices before whom civil cases also were tried, the suits which fell especially under their cognizance being actions relating to inheritances. From the time of Augustus the decemviri acted as presiding officers in the centumviral court (Suet. Aug. 36). To this fact our passage bears witness in the words ad iura decern citat hasla virorum . . . centeno iudice. hasta: the spear was the symbol of the centumviri, apparently being set up at their place of meeting. So hasta came to be used as synonomous with the centumviral court. Cf. Suet. Aug. 36, 'ut centumviralem hastam . . . decemviri cogerent'. 42. FiRMARE . . . CAusAs: to prove, to bring forward facts to support their cases, centeno iudice : a poetical expres- sion for centum (viris) iudicibus. The distributives are occa- sionally used by the poets in the place of the cardinal numerals. Cf. Stat. S. 4. 4. 43, 'cessat centeni moderatrix iudicis hasta'. 43. CAPITALE NEFAs: a Crime punishable by death or the loss of civil rights. The thought is that whether Piso exercise his elo- quence in civil or criminal cases the fora resound with his praises. OPEROSA: used for the second time. Cf. v. 21 above, diluis: with capitate nefas means literally to extenuate or do away with a capital crime, the thought impUed being that of refuting a capital charge. Ovid uses diluo, meaning to extenuate, with peccata, R. Am. 695, 'nee peccata refer, ne diluat'. By Cicero the verb is used with crimen of refuting an accusation. Cf. Cic. Brut. 80. 278, 'sic nos summi oratoris vel sanitate vel vitio pro argumento ad diluendum crimen usi sumus'. 44 £E. TU QUOQUE Piso . . : The reading of w. 44-6 is that found in the texts of Junius and Scaliger. This is also the reading of the Paris MSS. except that there is a lacuna between tu and Piso, quogue being inserted in the text in one MS. (7647) and in the margin of the other, guoque is without meaning in the pas- sage. But the reading of Sichard is equally corrupt: ss 'dura Piso, nam iudicis affectum possessaque pectora tentas, victus sponte sua sequitur quocunque vocasti'. Unger {Johns Jahrb. 1836, p. 268) has suggested that dura Piso nam is a mistake of the scribe for tu rapis omnem. Weber has adopted this conjecture, while Baehrens writes dum rapis una. There was evidently a lacuna at the end of v. 44 in the archetype of both families of MSS. 45. affectum: the emotions; perhaps to be contrasted with pectora, the understanding. For affectum . . . ducts cf. Quint. Inst. 9. i. 21, 'iam vero affectus nihil magis ducit'. POSSESSAQUE PECTORA: possessa, perf. pass, partic. of possido. With the thought of. Quint. Inst. 6. 2. 6, 'ita omnen veritatis inquirendae rationem iudex omittit occupatus adfectibus: aestu fertur et velut rapido flumini obsequitur'. 45 f. DUCis victor: a figure drawn from the triumph of a victorious general. The poet is thus describing the feats of elo- quence in terms of war as in w. 27-9 above. 47 f. Similar to these verses in thought is Quint. Inst. 6. 2. 3, 'qui vero iudicem rapere et in quem vellet habitum animi posset perducere, quo dicto flendum irascendum esset, rarus fuit'. Because of this similarity L. Radermacher in his edition of Quin- tilian's Institutio Oratoria has inserted in the text after flendum the word gaudendum. 49. SIC: Piso is as skilled at controlling the emotions of the judge as the Thessalian horseman is at controlling his steed. AURIGA: ordinarily a charioteer, but from the description given in the following verses it is obvious that it must mean here a horseman. This is apparently the only instance of such a use of auriga. The word is derived from aurea (frenum) and ago (cf. Walde El. Wb. and Fest. p. 8. Lind.). It thus denotes merely one who handles the reins. According to the derivation then it is equally applicable to horseman or charioteer, but from its usage in literature, were it not for this one instance, we should judge that it was limited entirely to the charioteer, ferventia . . . ORA: the joaming mouth of his steed. Thessalus: Thessalywas famed for its horses and horsemen. Cf. Prop. 2. 10. 2: 'sed tempus lustrare aliis Helicona choreis et campum Haemonio iam dare tempus equo'. S6 50. FRENis . . . flectere: cf. Hor. C. 3. 7. 25: 'quamvis non alius flectere equum sciens aeque conspicitur gramine Martio'. 51-4. For a similar passage describing the feats of horseman- ship cf. Tib. 3. 7. 91-4: 'aut quis equum celeremque arto compescere freno possit et effusas tardo permittere habenas inque vicem modo derecto contendere passu, seu libeat, curvo brevius convertere gyro'. tardo permittere habenas is to be compared with rapido permittit habenas . . . guadrupedi. Baehrens writes rabido instead of rapido, probably from the feeling that one would not need to give full rein to, and spur on, a fleet horse. But the pictiu-e is that of a rider urging on an already swiftly flying horse. 52. SED CALCE citat: cf. Verg. A. 11. 714, 'quadrupedemque -citum f errata calce fatigat'. modo succutit arte: we are indebted to the Paris MSS. for preserving what is undoubtedly the correct reading here. The verse was incomplete in the text of Sichard, being marked with an asterisk, but later editions have the common reading toj-goei in aut as. This Weber (Ind. Led. p. 7) has endeavored to explain, but in the light now thrown upon the passage by the manuscript reading we need not hesitate to condemn torguet in auras as a poor conjecture, made to fill out the incomplete verse, succutit: sc. habenis : now tightly he reins up the sensitive mouth. The rider at times spurs on his horse to faster and faster endeavors, then jerks him up short and wheels him in various maneuvers. The verb succutio is used, in Lucretius 6. 551, of stones jolting a wagon, in Ovid M. 2. 166, of the bound- ing of a chariot, but a nearer approach to the meaning of this pas- sage is found in Apuleius, Apol. 44, where the word is used to describe the jerking of the head of an epileptic boy, 'iam in media quaestione . . . manus contraxisset, caput succussisset'. The horseman by suddenly drawing tight rein jerks up the head of his horse, arte: cf. arto . . . freno in Tib. 3. 7. 91, quoted above. 53. cervice rotata: cf. Ovid's expression, H. 4'. 79, 'sive ferocis equi luctantia coUa recurvas'. 54. EFFUSOS . . . cursus: cf. Livy 2. 50, effuso cursu. carpere cursus: similar in construction is Stat. Th. i. 311, volatus carpit. Our poet's thought, in gyrum carpere cursus, is expressed in Verg. G. 3. 191, by the simplephrase carpere gyrum. 57 55- QUis NON ATTONiTus . . : what judge does not look with awe upon thy countenance? 56. PER TUA PONDERA: through thy influence, the weight of thy arguments. Cf. Stat. Th. i. 213, 'grave et immutabile Sanctis — pondus adest verbis'. The singular pondus is more usual in this signification. But cf. Cic. De Or. 2. 17. 73, 'onMiium senten- tiarum gravitate, omnium verborum ponderibus est utendum'. 57. PARITER cum: equivalent to una cum (see Hands Tursel- linus4..p. 388). 58. DENSAQUE . . . FULMINA: the adjective densus has here the raeardng frequent, repeated. It is so used with such words as ictus and verher. Cf. Verg. A. 5. 459, densis ictibus, and Stat. Th. 6. 421, densis . . . verberibus. vibrata . . . lin- gua: with impetuous tongue. Maehly (Fleckeis. Jahrb. 1862, p. 291) proposes to read vibranti instead of vibrata, on the basis of the reading vibrati in one of the Paris MSS. (17903). But this MS. also has the incorrect reading fulmine. The participle vibrans is used with lingua of the tongue of a serpent (cf. Verg. A. 2. 211), but so also is vibratus (cf. Luc. 9. 631). Furthermore vibratus from being applied to something that is moved rapidly and forcefully seems to have acquired almost the meaning of impetuous, forceful. Cf. Aus. 413. 5, 'iambe . . . flammis corusci fuhninis vibratior'. 59. astrictas . . . VOCES : astrictus is thus used of speech which is concise. Cf. Cic. Brut. 95. 327, 'verborumque astricta comprehensio', and also 90. 309, 'in dialectica exercebar, quae quasi contracta et astricta eloquentia putanda est', in nodum cogere: to condense. A figurative transfer from such an ex- pression as 'capillos colUgit in nodum' (Ov. Met. 3. 170). Quin- tilian also uses nodus of rhetorical diction. Cf. Inst. 9. 4. 127, 'membratim plerumque narrabimus, aut ipsas periodos maioribus intervallis et velut laxioribus nodis resolvemus'. 60. et DARE . . . VERBA catenae: a Construction modelled upon such a, literal expression as 'daret ut catenis fatale mon- strum' (Hor. C. I. 37. 20). catenae: the reference is to simple, concise discourse where one sentence is vitally linked with another. For the metaphorical use of catena as applied to oratori- S8 cal language, cf. Quint. Inst. 5. 14. 32, 'in catenis ligant et inex- plicabili serie conectunt'. Vv. 57-8 are thus in contrast to vv. 59-60, the former picturing the use of all the verbose and weighty eloquence at an orator's command, the latter, the use of concise and simple diction, none the less powerful. 61. VIM Laertiadae . . : thou dost surpass the force of Ulysses and the brevity of Menelaus. Our poet is describing three kinds of oratory, two of which he has already defined and the third he takes up in the following verses (62-4). Of these three kinds he gives as the great representatives, Ulysses, Menelaus, and Nestor (v. 64). Homer mentions the oratory of Menelaus (II. 3. 214), the force of Ulysses' speech (II. 3. 221), and the sweet- ness of Nestor's tongue (U. i. 249). These three Homeric heroes seem to have furnished stock examples of the different types of oratory. Quintilian, Inst. 12. 10. 64, speaks of them as exemplify- ing three kinds of eloquence: 'nam et Homerus brevem quidem cum iucunditate et propriam, id enim est non deerrare verbis, et carentem supervacuis eloquentiam Menelao dedit, quae sunt virtutes generis illius primi; et ex ore Nestoris dixit dulciorem melle profluere sermonem, qua certe delectatione nihil fingi maius potest; sed summam aggressus in Ulixe facundiam magnitudinem illi iunxit'. Cicero, Brut. 10. 40, mentions two types, the force- ful oratory of Ulysses and the sweet eloquence of Nestor. Gellius 6. 14, defines the three kinds of oratory and cites these same Homeric examples: 'sed ea ipsa genera dicendi iam antiquitus tradita ab Homero sunt tria in tribus: magnificum in Ulixe et ubertum, subtile in Menelao et cohibitum, mixtum moderatum- que in Nestore'. 63. NEC INCLUSO SED APERTO . . . FLORE: ;?oi means the embellishment and ornamentation of speech. It is so used by Cicero and Quintilian. Cf. Cic. De Or. 3. 25. 96, 'ut porro con- spersa sit quasi verborum sententiarumque fioribus'; Brut .17. 66, 'iam vero Origines eius quern florem aut quod eloquentiae non habent'. nee incluso sed apertofiore then means not with restrained but with fiee oranmentation. With incluso we may supply in thought paucis verbis. Cf . Quint. Inst. 8. 3. 68, 'at si aperias baec, quae verbo uno inclusa erant', in which passage we find con- trasted aperias (cf. aperto) and inclusa. pingere: Maehly (Fleckeis. Jahrb. 1862, p. 291) thinks it useless to attempt to explain incluso fiore pingere, since this whole verse seems to him 59 out of keeping with the preceding verse, the one emphasizing ornamental, the other, smoothly flowing language. But orna- mentation is not necessarily opposed to smoothly flowing diction. Maehly would reaAfundere cursu instead of pingere flore and sup- ply rare to take the place of cursu in v. 62. Aside from the fact that such alterations have no manuscript authority, we may urge that Uquidoque fluentia cursu is a more natural expression than liquidogue fluentia rare, pingere flore is also a simple and natural metaphor. For pingere used with flos in literal signification cf. Lucret. 5. 1381 : 'praesertim cum tempestas ridebat et anni tempora pingebant viridantis floribus herbas'. Just as flos is used of the ornamentation of speech so pingere is used of embellishing speech. Cf. Cic. Brut. 37. 141, 'eaque non tam in verbis pingendis habent pondus quam in iUuminandis sententiis'. 64. INCLITA Nestorei . : the famous charm of sweet tongited Nestor yields to thee, mellis: an echo of the Homeric passage (II. i. 249) where words sweeter than honey are said to flow from Nestor's tongue. 65. Piso: is used by the poet with a short o, as also in vv. 75, 129,253. So Ovid uses his cognomen Naso. populo sub iudice : for the anastrophe cf. Tib. i. 3. 49, Jove sub domino, and luce sub ilia, v. 68 below. 66. NUMEROSA laude: cf. V. 9. numeroso consule. 67. REDDiT . . . CURIA VOCES: the curia echoes with the applause thou hast rightly won. curia might also be interpreted as the senate itself and in this case reddit voces would mean merely to bestow applause. But the first interpretation seems best, as avoiding a repetition of the thought in the preceding clause. reddit thus means to echo, give back the applause, voces refers to the shouts of approval bestowed upon the orator. Cicero, De Or. 3. 26. loi, tells us what some of these were: 'quare bene et praeclare, quamvis nobis saepe dicatur: belle et festive, nimium saepe nolo, quamquam ilia ipsa exclamatio : non potest melius, sit velim crebra'. 68. LUCE SUB ILLA: cf. the temporal use of sub in PUn. H. N. 8. 115, 'ideo sub ista die quam maxima invia petunt'. 69. RETICENTE SENATu: the Sichard text has the impossible reading retinente. recinente has been suggested by Unger (Jahns 60 Jahrb. 1836, p. 269) and adopted in the text of Baehrens. But the reading reticente, which is found in the editio Lugdunensis secunda and in the texts of Junius and Scaliger seems preferable. Piso is represented by the poet as delivering an oration and giving thanks to the emperor, reticente denotes the silent attention of the senate. Cf . Ov. P. 4. 4. 35 : 'curia te excipiet, patresque e more vocati intendent aures ad tua verba suas'. 70. BIS SENOS . . . fasces: inasmuch as a consul was preceded by twelve Uctors carrying the fasces it is clear that Piso had been elected consul and this was the occasion of his oration. The election of consuls from the time of Tiberius was in the hands of the senate and the vote of the senate was controlled by the emperor. Calpurnius Piso was probably a consul suffectus (see Introd. p. 18). With this verse cf. Ov. P. 4. 9. 4: 'missaque, di faciant, auroram occurrat ad illam bis senos fasces quae tibi prima dabit'. purpura: cf. Ov. P. 4. 4. 25, 'purpura Pompeium summi velabit honoris'. 71. Caesareum grato . . : Pliny the Younger, when appointed consul suffectus in 100 A. D. delivered an elaborate address in eulogy of Trajan. This panegyric has been preserved. We may infer that it was an oration of similar type which Piso delivered. 72-83. These verses were placed at the end of the poem by Junius and Scaliger and the editors who followed their texts. Wemsdorf was among those who kept this arrangement, though he later expressed his disapproval of it (P. L. M. vol. 5. p. 1470). There can be no doubt that the arrangement of Sichard is correct. The poet has been discussing Piso's eloquence in the courts and in the senate. Peeling his inability to do justice to thiss ubject he breaks off and takes up a consideration of his private life. The word hue of v. 84, which is to be referred to penatibus ipsis of v. 83, has no explanation if v. 84 is read immediately after v. 71. These verses, 72-83, are not only needed in their setting to explain the further development of the poem but if placed at the end leave the poem in an apparently incomplete state. 72. QUOD SI I AM validae . . : with this deprecatory statement compare v. 259, 'est mihi, crede, meis animus con- 61 stantior annis'. The poet, though boasting a mind riper than his years, still feels himself immature. 73. PRIMOS . . . ANNOS: cf. V. 26l. 76. succiso POPLITE: lit. ham-strung. We should expect rather succiduo popUte, as in Ov. M. 10. 458. But with the phrase succiso popUte we may supply velut as Unger (Jahns Jahrb. 1836, p. 276) suggests. 77 f. OLORINOS . . . SONOS: among the ancicnts the swan had a reputation, perhaps largely mythical, for being an especially tuneful bird (cf. Hor. C. 4. 3. 19; Verg. E. 9. 27). Modern scientists distinguish from the tame or mute swan, which is com- monly known, a wild or whistling swan, which is a native of Ice- land and northern Russia and which migrates southward in autumn. It is said to have a musical note. It is possible that some such species gave rise to the ancient beUef. Pandionis ales: the nightingale. The two daughters of Pandion, Procne and Philomela, were changed into a nightingale and a swallow. Pandionis ales might then refer to either the nightingale or the swallow. Unger (Jahns Jahrb. 1836, p. 275) thinks that this passage is taken from Lucretius, 3. 6, where the swallow is con- trasted with the swan, 'quid enim contendat hirundo — cycnis?' But it is better to interpret Pandionis ales as the nightingale because of the comparison between the cicada and the nightingale in the following verses. The poet says: as the nightingale is to the swan, so the cicada is to the nightingale. 78. REFERRE: reproduce, imitate. 79. AEDONIA: this is the reading of the editio Lugdunensis secunda. The Sichard text oflEers et hedionia, which is apparently a corruption of et aedonia. et Pandionia, of the Paris MSS., is probably due to a corrector, aedonia is an adjective formed from aedon. It occurs nowhere else except in v. 47 of Lact. De Phoe- nice, which is thought to be a relatively modern compilation. Though so rare in use aedonia appears to be the correct reading. CICADAE : the shrill toned cicada, or tree-locust, was well known to the ancients. By the Romans its noise seems to have been considered raucous, perhaps, but not entirely displeasing. Cf.Verg.G.3.328: 'et cantu querulae rumpent arbusta cicadae'. Calp. Eel. 5. 56: 'at simul argutae nemus increpuere cicadae'. 62 The Greek poets use it as a simile for sweet sounds (cf. Horn. II. 3. 151 ; Hes. Op. 580, So. 393). So the comparison of the cicada to the nightingale may not be as disparaging as it seems. 80. STMDULA . . . coNViciA: shrill noise or clamor, convicia is thus used of the noise of frogs by Columella, 10. 12, 'perpetitur querulae semper convicia ranae'. rapido . . . soli: the reading of Sichard and the Paris MSS. Baehrens has adopted the conjecture rabido for which there is no need. Cf. Verg. G. I. 92, rapidive potentia solis, where rapidus is used of the hot sun. The noise of the tree-locusts is greatest when the sun is hottest. Cf. Verg. E. 2. 12: 'at mecum raucis, tua dum vestigia lustro, sole sub ardenti resonant arbusta cicadis'. 81. QUARE AGE . . : the poet now exhorts his Muse to leave the subject of the forensic glory of Piso and take up the con- sideration of his private virtues. 84. Huc ETiAM . . : the youths assembled at Piso's home to listen to his oratorical exercises and learn something of his art. 86. TACUERUNT lURGiAr i. e. whenever legal business was Sus- pended for some public holiday, iudice fesso points to the fact that it is the feriae aesiivae which the poet has in mind. These holidays were kept during midsummer when, because of the heat, many wealthy Romans went into the country. On the jeriae vindemiales, which were held toward the close of summer, there was also a cessation of legal business. With verse 86 cf. Stat. S. 4. 4. 39: 'certe iam Latiae non miscent iurgia leges, et pacem piger annus habet, messesque reversae dimisere forum'. Cf . also Plant. Capt. 78 : 'ubi res prolatae sunt, quom rus homines eunt, simul prolatae res sunt nostris dentibus'. 87. TUNC ETENIM . . : for then he practises with the foils as it were, and exercises his art in fictitious suits, levibus . . . IN ARMis : soldiers and gladiators used in their exercises a wooden staff or sword, rudis, to which levibus armis is here equivalent. Cf . Liv. 26. 51 . proludit: cf. the use in Ov. A. A. 3.515, where the rudis is mentioned as the weapon used for practise: 'sic ubi prolusit, rudibus puer ille rehctis, spicula de pharetra promit acuta sua'. 63 88. COMPOSITISQUE . . . LITIBUS: componere litem ordi- narily means to settle a suit, but here to invent or devise a suit. 89 f . These verses are somewhat difficult to interpret satisfac- torily. In Graecia we have a bold expression for Graeca oratio, while as the subject of sonat we must supply Piso. In order to avoid these difficulties Weber (Ind. Led. p. 8) has suggested the reading gratia instead of Graecia, and sonus, instead of sonat, the two nouns thus having a, common verb profluit. The verses would then read: guin etiam jacilis Romano profluit ore gratia Cecropiaeque, sonus gravis aemulus urhi. According to such a reading the poet would praise the charm of Piso's Latin speech and his ability in speaking Greek, as Weber {op. cit. p. 8) explains. Such an emendation would only make the passage more obscure. As Maehly (Fleckeis. Jakrb. 1862, p. 291) has pointed out, gratia would thus seem to be a phenomenon among Roman poets. Graecia profluit is a strong metaphor, but we can hardly say that it is impossible, inasmuch as w. 89-92 are obviously dealing with Piso's fluency in Greek. 90. AEMULUS : used with the dat. in poetry and Post- Augustan prose (see Kiihner-Stegmann, Ausf. lat, Gramm. 2'. p. 437). 91. testis: sc. est. Acidalia . . . aute: the dove of Venus. NeapoUs was a city of Greek origin, being a colony of Cumae. Cumae was founded by colonists from Chalcis in Euboea, and the fleet of these colonists, according to legend, was guided by a dove. Of. Veil. Pat. i. 4, 'nee multo post Chalci- denses, orti, ut praediximus, Atticis Hippocle et Megasthene duci- bus Cumas in Italia condiderunt. huius classis cursum esse direc- tum alii columbae antecedentis volatu ferunt, alii nocturno aeris sono, qualis Cerealibus sacris cieri solet. pars horum civium magno post intervallo Neapolim condidit'. Neapolis seems to have taken over the legend of the dove from its parent city. Statius, who was a native of Neapolis, alludes to it in S. 3. 5. 80: 'Parthenope, cui mite solum trans aequora vectae ipse Dionaea monstravit ApoUo columba'. 92. EuBOicAM referens . . . ARCEM: reproducing the Euboean city. Euboicam arcem refers to Chalcis, not Cumae, as the poet naturally wishes to associate Neapolis with the Greek city. Similarly Statius repeatedly refers to its Chalcidic or Euboean origin (cf. S. i. 2. 263 ; 2. 2. 94; 3. 5. 12). One might 64 infer that it was settled directly by colonists from Chalcis. Strabo (5. p. 246), while calling it a colony of Cumae, states that it received an additional body of Chalcidic and Athenian colonists. The words of Statius and our poet may be accounted for, however, on the ground that it was a colony of the Chalcidic city of Cumae. FACCUND A Ne APOLis : facutida is the emendation of Unger (Jahns Jahrb. 1836, p. 265) iorfoecunda of the Sichard text. Naples was a place of Greek culture where men of letters spent their time in study. Cf. Verg. G. 4. 563: 'illo Vergilium me tempore dulcis alebat Parthenope studiis florentem ignobilis oti'. Martial speaks of it as docta NeapoUs, 5. 78. 14, and so too Columella as docta Parthenope, 10. 134. Wernsdorf (Excur. 9) has expressed the opinion that in w. 90-91 we have special refer- ence to the quinquennial contests at Naples, mentioned by Statius (S. 2. 2. 6; 3. 5. 92; 5. 3. 113), in which poets and orators took part. 93. NiTOR oris: elegance of speech. Cf. Cic. Or. 32. 115- orationis nitor. For os used poetically as oratio or sermo cf. Verg- A. 2. 423, 'atque ora sono discordia signant'. Maehly {Fleckeist Jahrb. 1862, p. 292) interprets the genitive oris as dependent upon vocibus but condemns it as weak and meaningless, as it certainly would be in such connection. 94 f. hinc . . . hinc: = modo . . . modo; a post- classical usage. SOLIDO fulgore micantia verba: words flam- ing with genuine fire. Cf. Quint. Inst. 10.1.2, 'solida atque robusta . . . eloquentia'. 95. IMPLEVERE locos: havc filled, i. e. enrich, the subject. Wernsdorf explains: 'implevere dicit, quia in his locis inest amplificatio et dilatatio argumenti'. locus: a. topic of discus- sion, or division of a subject, figuris: cf. the definition given by Quintilian, Inst. 9. 1.4, 'figura, sicut nomine ipso patet, con- formatio quaedam a communi et primum se oflEerente ratione'. 96. advolat . . . SENTENTIA: the poet has reference to a brief and forceful, yet polished, mode of expression, advolat: sc. to the audience. For the absolute use cf. Sil. 13. 776, 'Croesi mox advolat umbra', excusso . . . tosno: excusso seems to be equivalent merely to agitato, set in motion. We may com- pare its use in Ov. M. 5. 596, 'excussaque bracchia iacto'. The fashioning of words upon the potter's wheel is a metaphor 6S employed by Propertius, 2. 34. 43, 'incipe iam angusto versus indudere tomo', and Horace, A. P. 441, 'male tornatos . . . versus'. Cf. also GeU. 9. 8, 'hanc sententiam memini a Favorino inter ingentes omnium clamores detomatam inclusamque verbis his paucissimis'. 97. ETSi . . . fuisset: a contrary to fact condition with imperfect indicative in the apodosis to show that the conclusion is true independently of the condition. 98. ELOQUIO: cf. Luc. 7. 63, 'Romani maximus auctor — TuUius eloquii'. sanctum . . . senatum: sanctus is a. regular epithet of the Roman senate, permulcere: cf. Hor. Ep. I. 16. 26, 'et his verbis vacuas permulceat aures'. 99. exonerare pigs . . : i. e. free the innocent from false charges and convict the guilty, onerare : to overwhelm, sc. with proofs, or accusations. Cf. Cic. N. D. 3. 3. 8, argumentis onerare iudicem. 100. movet: sc. the audience. loi. INSIGNI . . . imagine: imago = species, prae- STRINGIT . . . visus: dazzles the sight. Weber {Ind. Lect. p. 8) suggests the use of perstringit in the place of ptaestringit: 'Saepius in MSS. commutantur praestringere et perstringere, quae oculorum aciem plus minusve nimio splendore obtusam vel per- cussam significant. Itaque et h. 1. scribendum esse videtur perstringit, quod melius quadrat, laudes Pisonis augens, cuius vultus primum audientes in universum movisse, deinde eorum oculos perculisse atque animos percussisse dicitur; ut. Liv. i. 25. 4 horror ingens spectantes perstringit, et Plin. H. N. 2.16 (18) soKs — ^radii visus perstringere nostros'. The additional force which Weber sees in perstiingit is not sufficient to outweigh the fact that praestringere oculos or aciem oculorum, to which visus is here equivalent, is a regular form of expression (cf. Plaut. M. G. 4, Cic. Vatin. 10. 25). 102. habitus: sc. oris: expression 0/ the face, maestum: stern, severe. 103. fluidum: the adjective is opposed to maestum and apparently means mild or gentle. It is used with mollis of bodies lacking in physical strength in Liv. 34. 47. 5, mollia et fluida corpora, laeta . . . tetricitate: oxymoron. We may render: a pleasant seriousness. The noun tetricitas occurs only 66 here, but the adjective tetricus is used by other writers. Martial applies it to the Pates, 4. 73. 6, 'moverunt tetricas tarn pia vota deas'. Cf. also Liv. i. 18. 4, 'discipUna tetrica ac tristi veterum Sabinorum'. Wernsdorf compares with this passage Sil. 8. 5io: 'laeta viro gravitas ac mentis amabile pondus et sine tristitia virtus, non ille rigoris ingratas laudes nee nubem frontis amabat'. 106. ADDITUR Hue . . : to these characteristics are added an uptight honesty, an independence tempered by restraint, and a disposition free from avarice. 107. ferrugine: iron-rust, i. e. avarice. Wernsdorf would prefer to take it as envy, malice, and cites Hor. S. 1.4. loi where aerugo, copper rust, is used with this signification, 'hie nigrae sucus loliginis, haec est — aerugo mera'. But Horace also uses aerugo of avarice, A. P. 330, 'at haec animos aerugo et cm a peculi — cum semel imbuerit'. That jerrugine is best interpreted as avarice is shown by the following verses, for it is with this that the poet introduces the subject of Piso's generosity. 108. IPSAQUE POSSESSO" . . : he is enriched by his intel- lect more than by the possession of gold. Cf. Ov. Am. 3. 8. 3, 'ingenium quondam fuerat pretiosius auro'. Wernsdorf cites Stat. S. I. 2. 121, 'huic quamvis census dederim largita beatos, — vincit opes animo'. 109. cultorum: clients, cidtor is used only infrequently with this meaning. But cf . Juv. 9. 48, "vos indulgebitis umquam cultori'. luvENis facunde: Weber (Ind. Lect. p. 8) proposes iucunde as more suitable to the passage: 'sed quid quaeso rei est liberalitati et beneficentiae cum facundia? . . . vocabulum est corruptum; lege iucunde et epitheton recte se habet'. There is, however, nothing inconsistent in facunde. The poet has spoken in turn of Piso's eloquence, of his nobility of countenance, his uprightness and independence, his lack of avarice, his rich intellect, iuvenis facunde serves to recall all this and Unk with it the new subject of Piso's generosity, facunde is also a more or less formal mode of addressing Uterary friends (cf. v. 32 above; Ov. Tr. I. 9. 57; Mart. 7. 91. i). iiof. ANIMOSA . . . INDULGENTIA: eager beneficence. The use of animosa in this sense is rare. Cf. Plin. H. N. 10. 83, ani- mosa contentio {avium in cantando); Tac. H. i. 24, animosus corruptor. For the use of indulgentia cf. Calp. Eel. 4, 33, 'tua 67 nos alit indulgentia fane', beatum excipit: a proleptic use of the adjective. The client is poor when Piso receives him into his circle, but he is straightway enriched with generous gifts. The sudden change in his fortunes is thus indicated by beatum and subito censu. Wernsdorf cites Claud. Cons. Olyb. et Prob. 47: 'cernere semper erat, popuUs undare penates adsiduos intrare inopes, remeare beatos'. 112. QUODQUE . . . fuerit: a parenthetical relative clause with potential force, magis . . . pretiosius: a pleonasm found for the most part in early and post-classical Latin (see Kiihner-Stegmann, Ausf. lat. Qramm. 2.^ p. 464). 113. DiLiGis EX aequo: thou dost cherish them alike. Piso shows no favoritism according to the fortunes of his dependents. 115. SUPERBORUM . . . DICTA lOCORUM: the witty thrusts of arrogant jests, superborum is a, transferred epithet. The humble clients of Piso are not forced to endure the insulting jests of an arrogant patron or his friends, dictum has the special signification of a witty saying. Cf. Macr. S. 2. i. 14, 'iocos enim hoc genus veteres nostri dicta dicebant. testis idem Cicero qui in libro epistularum ad Cornelium Nepotem secundo sic ait: itaque nostri, cum omnia, quae dixissemus, dicta, essent, quae facete et breviter et acute locuti essemus, ea proprio nomine appellare dicta voluerunt'. 116. NULLius: obj. gen. 117. UNUS AMICITIAE . . : one circle of friendship em- braces high and low. Martyni-Laguna compares with this Hor. S. I. 9. 49: ' "domus haec nee purior ulla est nee magis his ahena maUs; nil mi ofBcit", inquam, "ditior hie aut est quia doctior; est locus uni cuique suus" '. 118. RARA: the adjective is thus used as the equivalent of the adverb raro. Cf. Ov. M. 11. 766, 'nee Iliacos coetus nisi rarus adibat'. 119. This verse is a mere repetition of the thought of the pre- ceding. FASTOSA : an adjective comparatively rare in use. The ioTva fastuosus occurs in Mart. Cap. 6. 579, and 9. 898. fastosus is an incorrect formation due to the exigencies of metre, according to Schonwerth-Weyman, Archiv 5. p. 207. But in addition to 68 this passage in our poem it is found in Mart. lO. 13. 7; 13. 102. 2, and Petr. 131. 3. 120. iLLi: illic, the reading of Sichard, was rejected by Weber and Beck in favor of the conjectural illi. This conjecture is now supported by the reading of one of the Paris MSS. (17903). Though Weber adopted illi in his text he later proposed illis as better {Ind. Led. p. 9), 'Cur enim client! soli casta mens et vita tribui debet? Citr non et amico? Corrige illis quod ad utrumque cultorem spectat, de quibus postea vs. 122 et vs. 124 sermo est, ad comitem s. clientem et ad amicum quos et antea vs. 1 14 significaverat vv. probitas spectatur in illis'. Weber evidently misinterprets the passage, tenuem amicum and humilem clientem do not refer to two different persons, or classes of persons, but to one and the same person. The poet merely repeats the same idea under diiferent terms. It is the lot of the poor client in general of which he is speaking, mens: this word is lacking in the text of Sichard but is the reading of the old editions. The Paris MSS. read domus, an evident inter- polation. There was probably a. lacuna here in the archetype of all our MSS. Baehrens repeats Wcei to fill the lacuna: illi casta licet, licet et sine crimine constet. 120 f. SINE CRIMINE CONSTET VITA: though his life remain without jaull. For the use of consto cf. Sen. Ben. 4. 2. 3, 'et ego sine virtute nego beatam vitam posse constare'. 121. PROBITAS . . . lACEBiT: tru^ Worth will be held in no esteem. Cf. Ov. F. i. 218, 'dat census honores, — census amicitias; pauper ubique iacet'. CUM paupertate: indicates the condi- tion under which worth will be held in no esteem. For this use of the preposition CMOT see Hands Turs. 2. p. 155. Similar is Cic. Sest. 45. 98, 'id quod est praestantissimum . . . cum digni- tate otium'. 122. et: the conjecture of Santen. The Sichard text reads sed which can hardly be correct since the following statement is not adversative or corrective but an amplification of the preced- ing, nullus iam lateri of the Paris MSS. is an attempt to correct this mistake which existed apparently in the archetype of both famiUes. Various conjectures have been made, though none which removes the difficulty any more satisfactorily than the change of sed to et. Beck has proposed nam, Klussmann, sic {Philol. 1856, p. 591), Weber, si. Weber's suggestion involves considerable change in the interpretation. According to his pro- 69 posal (Ind. Led. pp. 9-10) the clause illi casta licet mens . . . vita must depend upon the preceding verbs, aspernatur and calcat. tamen thus introduces a new statement followed by the conditions si . . . guaerit . . . nee . . . largitur . . . sed . . . focilai: 'Quamobrem ponenda est distinctio minor post V. iacebit et corrigendum si pro sed, quod (S;) in MSS. saepius cum si confunditur, ita ut quae sequuntur ad vs. usque 127, eodem modo inter se coniuncta . . . ab hac particula pen- deant'. Against this ingenious arrangement it may be urged that licet . . . tamen is a natural and frequently used antithesis, and that there is as much inconcinnity in the use of tamen to introduce the statement probitas iacebit as in the use of sed to introduce nullus quaerit. lateri . . . comitem circum- dare: it was the duty of a client to escort his patron when he walked abroad. For this we find such expressions as latus claudere, andlatustegere (]\iv. 3. 131; Hor. S. 2. 5. 18). A similar use of circumdare with lateri may be seen in Liv. 30. 19. 8, 'hinc patre, hinc Catulo lateri circumdatis privato magis quam pubKco decore insignis Romam rediit'. 123. IMPIA merges: the client in return for being present at the salutatio of his patron and accompanying him in public was rewarded with a sportula. This originally consisted of a small basket of food, but later of a small sum of money. Many clients thus earned their living, waiting upon a number of patrons (cf. Mart. 10. 74; 3. 7.) 125. quem regat . . . REGATUR AB ILLO: the Construc- tion is illogical. Occasionally to a relative clause another clause is thus added in which the relative has no place. Cf. Cic. Prov. 28, 'actum est de decern legatis, quos aKi omnino non dabant, ahi exempla quaerebant, alii tempus dififerebant, alii sine uUis ver- borum ornamentis dabant'. regat: the patron was called rex, whence perhaps the use of the verb rego. Cf. Mart. 2. 18, 'qui rex est, regem, Maxime, nori habeat'. ex aequo: not equally as in v. 113 above, but on equal terms, as an equal. Cf. Luc. 8. 232, 'solusque e numero regum telluris eoae — ex aequo me Pafthus adit'. 126. focilat: Weber {Ind. Led. pp. lO-ii) expresses the opinion that this verb is not derived from the same loot a.s Jocillare (or focillari) which has a short vowel in the first syllable and is to be connected •mth jocus. He explains its derivation and meaning 70 thus: 'foculare contra sive quod hoc loco et in Glossar. Lat. Graec. ex Cod. nr. 7692 apud Du Cange T. 3. p. 332 legitur focilare Nonio auctore i. 31. p. 10 est i. q. fovere, nutrire. Additur ter tium V. focio, quod extat cum glossa \j/wij,tfa, adesco, allicio in Supplem. Antiquar. apud Du Cange lam v. focil- landi nostro loco aptum esse apparet, sive significat adescare, allicere, sive nutrire, sustinere. . . . Est enim focilare sive foculare frequentativum quoddam verbi focare in sufExum il. . . . Propria significat focare, quod superest in perfocare, praefocare, suffocare, i. q. fauces aliqua re claudere sive implere, quae actio si repetita esse dicitur, fit frequentativum focilare sive foculare, quod est cibum in os saepius inserere, cibare, faiiifem' . Jocilat evidently means lo support, whether it has, as Weber >;hinks, the literal force of feeding or providing food for a person or whether it is to be associated with focillare, to foster, cherish. PUDiBUNDOs: of which one should be ashamed, i. e. disgraceful. For this passive signification of pudibundus cf . Val. Fl. i . 805, 'date fallaci pudibunda senectae — exitia indecoresque obitus'. 128. ISTA PBOCUL LABEs: the reading of Junius and of the Paris MSS. ipse piocul livor, the reading of Sichard, has been rightly rejected by Wernsdorf, Weber, and Baehrens. The poet is not introducing a new subject but is referring to the conditions which he has just described, as is evident from the words, piocul haec fortuna refugit . . . domum. livor has no connection with the preceding verses and furthermore is not suitable where the subject under discussion is the relation of client and patron. isla labes has reference to the contents of w. 118-23. pROCUL: equivalent to in longinquum, e. g. Liv. 7.5.5, 'procul inde omnibus abire iussis'. haec fortuna: iWi co«dito'oK refers to the shameful treatment of clients just set forth in w. 124-7. To Maehly jortuna does not seem sufficiently explanatory and he proposes ferrugo used with the same meaning as ferrugine v. 107 above {Fleckeis. Jahrb. 1862, p. 292). fortuna is, however, sufficiently qualified by haec. 129. Tu: sees. With regard to the felicitous language of w. 129-32, H. E. Butler, Post-Augustan Poetry, p. 158, says: 'Any great man might be proud to receive such a tribute'. He renders into English thus : 'Mild is thy temper and free from sharp harsh- ness. Thou layest aside thy pride in every act, and among thy 71 friends thou art counted a friend and equal, thou teachest men to follow thee and seekest to be loved by loving'. 131. As similar to the sentiment of this verse Wernsdorf cites Plin. Pan. 2. 4, 'et hoc magis excellit atque eminet, quod unum ille se ex nobis putat nee minus hominem esse quam hominibus praeesse meminit. 132. AMOREM QUAERis AMANDO: cf. Plin. Pan. 85. 3, 'habes amicos, quia amicus ip.se es . . . potest fortasse princeps inique, potest tamen odio esse non nuUis, etiamsi ipse non oderit; amari, nisi ipse amet, non potest'. 133. CDNCTA DOMUS . . : the clients of Piso cultivated various literary arts and assembled in his home to read aloud and discuss their efforts. 134. MOVET studiom: inspires endeavor. Maehly (Pleckeis. Jakrb. 1862, p. 292) proposes jotiei studium on the ground that he knows no passage parallel to movet studium. But cf. Ov. Am. 3. 12. 16, 'ingenium movit sola Corinna meum'. The literary aspirants who frequented Piso's home were inspired tp fresh endeavors, not only through hearing things worthy of emulation but through being heard and approved by their friends. Cf. Ov. Pont. 4. 2. 35: 'excitat auditor studium, laudataque virtus crescit, et immensum gloria calcar habet'. NEC ENIM TiBi DURA . . : thou dost favoi no rough or uncul- tivated throng of clients who, i elying on menial service, know nothing except to go before thee and clear away the people. 136. SUMMOTO . . . VULGO: submovere is properly used of the lictor's duty of clearing away the people to make way for a magistrate (cf. Liv. 3. 48. 3, Hor. C. 2. 16. 10). Piso favored no uncultivated clients who performed for him only the menial service of lictors and had no higher ambitions. 137. SED VIRTUS NUMEROSA . . : but a manijold excellence pleases thee, numerosa, as Wernsdorf notes, has the meaning 0/ many sorts, useful Jor many things. He cites the inscription (Grut. 655- 3) 'corpore in exiguo res numgrosa fui', where res numerosa apparently means having a knowledge of many things, variously accomplished. With this use of virtus numerosa cf. Quint. Inst. 5. 10. 10, numerosius opus, a work of vaiious contents. TU pronus IN OMNE . . : thou dost eagerly apply thyself to every task, 72 great or small. For pronus in the sense of eager, willing cf. Tac. H. I. I, pronis auribus. 139 f. FACUNDIA . . . ADDUCTA CUM FRONTE: Stcm- browed eloquence. 141. CLASsicus horror: . the neuter substantive classicum is used of the trumpet or sound of the trumpet. But in dassicus honor, for classici horror, we have an adjectival use which is unusual. 142. gemit: Martyni-Laguna (Wernsd. P. L. M., vol. 4. p. 864) notes : 'nemo forte dixit classica gemere. millies permutan- tiu- in scriptis fremere et gemere. ethic forte: fremit'. But cf. Claud. 3. 218, 'classica non gemerent'. nec semper Gnosius . . : these words recall Hor. C. 2. 10. 19, 'neque semper arcum tendit Apollo', arcu: the reading of the Paris MSS., while arcus is the reading of Sichard. Weber and Baehrens have adopted arcum unnecessarily, destinare is used by post-Augustan writers of the act of aiming performed by archers and slingers. It may take as object the thing aimed at, or the thing aimed. But the thing aimed is naturally tbe arrow discharged from the bow, not the bow itself. Cf. Veg. Mil. 2. 23, 'sagittis vel certe lapidibus ex fustibalo destinatis,' and Aur. Vict. Caes. 42. 23, 'destinandi sagittas mirp promptus'. It seems best to accept the abl. arcu, used as in Stat. Th. 8. 439, 'Phaedimon lasiden arcu Dircaeus Amyntas — ^destinat'. destinai is then used absolutely but may be interpreted with some such word as sagittas or tela understood. C. Beck (JStatii ad Calpurn. Pison. Poemation) thinks that feras is to be supplied as object, while Unger {Jahns Jahrb. 1836, p. 269) favors arcus, explaining destinare arcus as an inversion similar to sagittas tendere . . . arcu, Hor. C. i. 29. 9. 145 ff. These verses imitate freely Hor. C. 4. 7. I-I2. 145. IPSA VICES . . cf. Hor. C. 4. 7. 3, 'mutat terra vices'. 146. inversis . . . FRONTiBus: the reading of the Sichard text is frondibus. The Paris MSS. unfortunately omit this verse, jrontibus is the plausible conjecture of Martyni- Laguna (Werns. P. L. M. vol. 4. p. 865): 'dispHcet: inversis frondibus. Quaenam sunt frondes inversae? aut ego plane caecutio, aut verum est frontibus, ut diversae anni fades dicantur, respectusque fiat ad Janum. Natura explicat aimum frontibus inversis, i. e. mutatis. Alia frons veris, alia aestatis, alia au- 73 tumni, alia deaique hiemis'. This conjecture has been adopted by Weber and Baehrens. For the expression we may compare versis frontibus, Verg. G. 3. 24. 147. NON SEMPER . . . cf. Hor. C. 2. 9. I, 'non semper imbres nubibus hispidos — manant in agros'. 148. AUREA . . . OBCAECAT siDERA: puts out the eyes of the twinkling stars. Cf. Plant. Men. i8o 'solem vides — satin ut occaecatust prae huius corporis candoribus'. 149. HiEMS: the seasons, which were originally conceived of as women, were personified as men by the later Romans. Such seems to be our poet's conception though it is obscured by the natural gender of hiems. madidos . . . capillos: winter is represented with dripping locks because of the storms and snows of the winter season. For the same reason Ovid pictures him with shaggy and hoary hair. Cf. M. 2. 30, 'at glacialis Hiems canos hirsuta capillos', and M. 15. 212, 'inde senilis hiems tremulo venit horrida passu, — aut spoUata suos, aut, quos habet, alba capillos'. siccatvere: with the returning warmth 0} spring. 150 f. With these verses cf. Hor. C. 4. 7. 9-'l2: 'frigora mitescunt Zephyris, ver proterit aestas interitura simul pomifer Autumnus fruges efiuderit, et mox bruma recurrit iners'. 1 50. TERG A LACESSIT : this expression calls to mind the picture of a victor driving before him his defeated foe. 151. pomifer: cf. Hor. Epod. 2. 17, 'vel cum decorum mitibus pomis caput — autumnus agris extulit'. nimbis: this is the reading of the Paris MSS., while nubibus is the reading of Sichard. Baehrens has adopted nimbus, the conjecture of Barth. This may at first glance seem appropriate, but either nimbis or nubibus serves better to recall w. 147-9 which were the starting point in the poet's cycle and in which it is not glacialis hiems but aquosa hiems that is described, undis: poetical for aguis. Cf. Ov. M. I. 266, 'barba gravis nimbis, canis fluit unda c^pillis'. 1 52 fl. These verses are to be compared for similarity of thought with Calp. Ed. 4. 92: 'ipse polos etiam qui temperat igne geluque luppiter ipse parens, cui tu iam proximus ipse, 74 Caesar, abes, posito paulisper fulmine saepe Cressia rura petit'. 152. recondit: Wemsdorf has proposed reponil. But re- condo is used to describe the sheathing of a sword and is therefore not inappropriate with ignea arma, i. e.fulmina. Observe Ovid's appeal in Tr. 2. 179, 'parce, precor, fuhnenque tuum, fera tela, reconde'. 153. ET Ganymedeae . . : this verse seems to be modelled on Ovid M. i. 165, 'foeda Lycaoniae referens convivia mensae'. 154. EA . . . dextra: Horace vividly terms it ruhente dextra, C. 1.2. 3. 155. TEMPORiBUs servire: to accommodate oneself to the occasion; equivalent to the Greek phrase V^ KmpQ Sov\eieiv', Anth. P. 9. 441. Note the description of Alcibiades given by Nepos, Alcib. i, 'affabilis, blandus, temporibus callidissime serviens'. 156. pensavit: a gnomic perfect, pensare has, like our own word weigh, the secondary meaning to consider. Thus certis ponderihus pensare means to consider carefully. We may keep the figure by rendering as follows: he who weighs each occasion with unerring scales, etc. 157. vestiet: gestiet is the reading of Sichard, but vestiet is found in Paris MS. 7647, and is a much more suitable reading. toga gestiet is so bold a figiu-e that it scarcely forms a parallel to miles etit, while toga vestiet expresses merely the opposite of miles erit and completes the thought in a well balanced way. 158. pacatum, bellantem: a similar juxtaposition of the two words occurs in Liv. 3. 19. 12, 'nescio quo fato magis bellantes quam pacati propitios habemus deos'. 1 59. FELIX ILLA dies : for a similar beginning of the hexameter cf. Verg. Cir. 27, 'felix ille dies, felix et dicitur annus', totumque . . . PER AEVUM : the reading of Sichard. totumgue . . . per orbem is found in the Paris MSS. Either aevum or othem is appropriate. For aevum cf. w. 222, 243. The repetition of words is a noticeable characteristic of the poem. 160. viTALES . . . auras: the breath of life. 162 f. mira subest gra vitas . . : thou hast a wondrous gravity in the Jorum, and a wondrous charm when for a Utile thy 7S gravity is laid aside. Cf. Claud. 17. 247, 'rigidi sed plena pudoris — elucet gravitas fastu iiicunda remoto'. 164. LUDENTi . . . VERSU: light Or playful verse, ludo is thus used of light poetical composition indulged in as a pastime rather than a serious pursuit. Ct. Hor. C. I. 32. 2, 'si quid vacui sub umbra — ^lusimus tecum', fluitantia: smoothly flowing. The adjective is indicative, of the ease and ability with which Piso composed verse, when such was his pleasure. Cf. liquidoque fluentia cursu, v. 62. 165. FACiLis . . . pagina: the ready page, i. e. the page readily, easily runs off poems, deducit: deduce is used figura- tively of spinning out verses. Cf. Hor. Ep. 2. i. 225, 'tenui deducta poemata filo'. 166. chelyn: a Greek word used mostly by post-Augustan writers. Our poet uses it again in w. .171, 242. It occurs as many as 26 times in the works of Statius. eburno verbere : a poetical expression for eburno plectra. Seneca, Troad. 321, uses the verb verbeto of striking the lyre, instead of the more usual pulso, 'levi canoram verberans plectro chelyn'. 167. Apollinea: the music produced upon Piso's lyre being worthy of that of ApoUo, the poet flatteringly calls it Apollo's l3Te. sequitur testudine cantus: Maehly {Fleckeis. Jahrb. 1862, p. 293) thinks that sequitur and the instr. abl. testudine are not to be explained. He proposes regitur, but he thereby alters the meaning of the verse, dulcis cantus is not the song of Piso accompanied by the lyre, but the music evoked from the lyre itself. The meaning is: sweet music (ptoduced) upon Apollo's lyre ensues. A similar 'forced' construction of the abl. may be seen in Claud. 17. 252: 'vel quis non sitiens sermonis mella politi deserat Orpheos blanda testudine cantus?' 168. Phoebo didicisse magistro: cf. Prop. i. 2. 27, 'cum tibi praesertim Phoebus sua carmina donet — Aoniamque libens Calliopea lyram'. 170. exultent: peace runs riot in the land. A forceful expression. 171 f. necpudeat . . . sicreditur: nor be thou ashamed ,hat the lyre of Apollo is thought to be played by those hands by which he bow too is drawn. The thought is : be not ashamed that hands 76 which stretch the bow also play the lyre. The poet expresses this indirectly and figuratively by use of Apollo's example. After citing further the famous example of Achilles he introduces the subject of Piso's dexterity in arms. 171. sicreditur: the si clause is not conditional but equival- ent to a substantive clause — a construction not unusual after verbs of emotion (see Kuhner-Stegmann, Ausf. lat. Gramm. 2* p. 424). 172. contenditur: used in its primary meaning, to stretch out, to stretch tightly. It is so used occasionally by the poets. Cf. Verg. A. 12. 815, 'non ut contenderet arcum'. 173. Achilles: Achilles, when compelled to give up Briseis to Agamemnon, refused to take further part in the war and remained in his tent where he solaced himself with the lyre (Hom. II. 9. 186). Cf. Ov. Tr. 4. I. 15; Stat. S. 4. 4. 35. 174. QUAMVis mille RATES . . : when Hector had suc- ceeded in repelling Ajax the Trojans set fire to the ships of the Greeks (Hom. II. 16. 112-24). Cf. Sen. Troad. 319-21: 'interque caedes Graeciae atque ustas rates segnis iacebat belli et armorum immemor, levi canoram verberans plectro chelyn'. Priameius . . . herds: perhaps an imitation of Ov. a. a. 2. 5, Priameius hospes, which is used of Paris, brother of Hector. Priameius heros occurs in II. Lat. 271, where it too refers to Paris. 175. ET gravis . . : and the hoarse trumpet resounded in opposition to the music of the strings. 176. Nereius . . . herds: a repetition in form of Priameius heros. extudit: similarly elido is used of the pro- duction of melody, Sen. Oedip. 734, 'lituusque adunco — stridulos cantus elisit aere'. 177. terribilis . . . Pehas: the spear of Achilles whose shaft' was cut by Chiron upon Mt. Pelion(Hom. II. 16. 143). The use of Pelias alone for Pelias hasta is unusual. Baehrens, in order to avoid this, adopts the conjecture iverat hasta instead of ihat in hostem. This elucidates Pelias but destroys the force of the rest of the clause. The Paris MSS. confirm the read- ing of Sichard, Pelias ibat in hostem, and there can be little doubt that this is the correct reading. In support of this absolute use oiPelias, Buecheler (iJfeein. Mus. 1881, p.336)cites the Hesychian 77 gloss: HifKlas' TbSbpv^lSlaiTh ^oO'Ax'^^^<<'St<"■ox/l"!l'■T'l/cu^ SiKal ttSk. He compares also the absoluteuse of Libs, Chium, and Appias. If we note the occurrence of IlijXids /ueXii) and IlijXidSa ireKlriv in Horn. 11.20.277, 16. 143 and elsewhere, and of Pefcj /toito in Ov. P. i. 7. 52, 2. 2. 26, Her. 3. 126, M. 13. 109, we must conclude that Pelias may well have come to be used alone of the spear of Achilles. 178 £E A description of a contest with arms follows. Blunted swords may have been used, or perhaps the clava, a weapon for exercising which seems to have partaken of the nature of a foil and was used especially by soldiers and gladiators. Cf . Veg. Mil. I. II. 179. INQUE GRADUM . . . CONSISTERE: to take position, to place oneself in position, gradus is used of the ground or posi- tion taken by a combatant. Lipsius proposed to read inque gradu . . consistere and Wernsdorf has approved the sug- gestion, citing Ov. M. 9. 43, inque gradu stetimus. The ace. with in is, however, conceivable after consistere axiA occurs occasionally, c. g. Caes. B. G. 5. 33. 3, 'ut impedimenta relinquerent atque in orbem consisterent', and Tib. 4. i. (Paneg. in Mess.) loi, 'seu sit opus quadratum acies consistat in agmen'. clausis . . . MEMBRis: a use of claudo which seems to be without parallel. Wernsdorf gives the following explanation: 'clausis membris, i. e. compositis et coercitis intra statum. Quomodo apud Statium Theb. 6. 744, Pollux dicitur, Alcidamanta palaestra exercens, membra eius ad pugnandum composiusse: "ipse deus posuitque manus, et brachia finxit" '- clausis membris obviously refers to the position of the combatant, but it means more than compositis, coercitis. Note the description of the combat between Paris and Menelaus, II. Lat. 294-7: 'tum adversus uterque constitit et galeam galea terit et pede plantam coniungit, stridetque mucro mucrone corusco. corpus coUectum tegitur fulgentibus armis'. The clue to our passage is to be found in corpus coUectum tegitur . . . armis. The body is contracted and covered by the shield when the warrior makesready to attack or be attacked. Cf . Verg. A. 12. 491, 'substitit Aeneas et se coUegit in arma' and A. 10. 412, 'seque in sua coUigit arma'. As commentary to the latter passage Servius writes, 'post scutum se clausit'. The meaning of clausis membris is thus disclosed. The body is held in readiness 78 covered by the shield. For the active use of claudo in this signifi- cation cf. Stat. Th. 4. 350, 'nulli destringere ferrum — impetus, aut umeros clipeo clausisse paterno'. 180. siMUL, siMUL: intended to emphasize the agility of Piso who eludes and almost instantaneously attacks his opponent. captare: used of a successful thrust. Cf. II. Lat. 300, 'utque diu rigido captabant corpora ferro'. 181 f. ORBES PLECTis: descriptive of the circling about of the combatants. Cf. Verg. A. 12. 743, 'et nunc hue, inde hue incertos implicat orbes'. 183. sCRUTARis PECTORA: Wemsdorf explains scrutaris as meaning to search out with the eye a point of attack. But scrutor is used of the actual plunging of the sword into the body, the sword being said to explore the vitals. Cf. Luc. 8. 557, 'quid viscera nostri — scrutaris gladio'. Our poet then uses scrutaris of a thrust which would be fatal were it not a mock combat. Martyni-Laguna considers scrutaris too farfetched for such a con- test. But the language of a real combat is appropriately main- tained. Cf. percutis v. 184. 184. NECOPINO . . . ICTU: cf. Stat. Th. 6. 781, 'ilium rigida arma caventem — avocat ac manibus necopinum interserit ictum'. 185 ff. The description of a ball game which follows is of interest in that it adds to the technical terms found in other writers. The game of ball was considered by the Romans wholesome for body and mind, and was indulged in by men of all ages. Even the emperor Augustus took exercise wi h the pila andfoUiculus (Suet. Aug. 83). Various kinds of balls, such as the harpastum, the Jollis, and the trigon at pilatrigonalis, were used in different games. Wernsdorf {Excur. 10) thinks that our passage is descriptive of a game with the Jollis, a wind bag which was tossed about among a circle of players. Becker, Callus. 3. p. loi, states that in no case can the follis be meant, as it was not caught with the hands. Yet he does not think the game here described can be referred to either the trigon or harpastum. Becker believes that in this passage a striking of the ball backwards and forwards is alluded to, and this he is unwilling to admit as a part of the game of trigon. Mar- quardt {PrivaUeben d. Rofn. p. 843) notes that the author of the Laus Pisonis is not describing a new kind of game but merely using new terms. There is indeed nothing in the passage incon- 79 sistent with the method of playing trigon. Three players stood at the angles of an equilateral triangle, each with a pila trigonalis, and the balls were kept going between the three. The striking of the ball, as weU as catching and throwing, was a part of the game. Cf. Mart. 14. 46: 'si me mobilibus nosti expulsare sinistris, sum tua, tu nescis? rustice, redde pilam'. The expression expulsare, which according to Becker signified no more than throwing the ball, has been generally accepted as mean- ing to strike the ball either back to the sender or sideways to the third player. (See Becker-GoU, Gallus 3. p. 178; Becq de Fouqui^es, Les Jeux des Anciens p. 206; Smith, Did. of Ant. 3. 423). The player who in the course of the game dropped the ball least was probably the winner. 185 f. voLANTEM . . . GEMiNAKE PILAM: to repeat the flight of the ball, i. e. to send back the ball. The ordinary terms for throwing the ball back to the sender are reddere and remittere. But gerrdnare is opposed as a separate action to revocare cadenttem et . . . reddere. It therefore probably means to strike the ball back to the sender. Seneca, Ben. 2. 17, uses repercuiere to describe this stroke, when the ball is struck with the palm of the hand without being first caught and then thrown: 'volo Chry- sippi nostri uti simUitudine de pilae lusu, quam cadere non est dubium aut mittentis vitio aut excipientis; tum cursum suum servat, ubi inter manus utriusque apte ab utroque et iactata et excepta versatur ... si cum exercitato et docto negotium est, audacius pilam mittemus; utcumque enim venerit, manus illam expedita et agilis repercutiet'. The passage quoted makes use also of other technical terms, such as mittere and iactare, to throw the ball, and excipere, to catch the ball, volantem . . . geminare pilam is obviously an unusual expression. We may compare the use of geminare in Luc. 7. 481: 'excepit resonis clamorem vallibus Haemus Peliacisque dedit rursus geminare cavemis'. In this passage geminare probably means to send back, to re-echo, to reverberate. We find repercuiere also used with the meaning to reverberate, resound. Is it possible that our poet has used geminare as the equivalent of repercuiere, seeking an unusual term for a customary expression? 186 REVOCARE cadentem: to recoveT the baU when its fall seems imminent. 80 187. ET NON SPERATO . . : to make a difficult catch and return the ball unexpectedly. 188 f. The ball game, as an exercise which preceded bathing, took place in the palaestra attached to some public bath. 189. I am: actually, even; a.dds to the iorce oi subabunda. In the very midst of their own games and exercises men would leave off in order to watch the skiUful performance of Piso. 190. iuvat: the repeated use of this verb is monotonous. Cf. w. 59, 164, 186, 221. studiorum: the intellectual pursuits upon which the poet has dwelt in the first part of the poem. 191. NON languere: equivalent to mentem molliter recreate. A form of litotes. Since languere means to be idle, inactive, the force of non languere is not to be entirely inactive but to have some light diversion. The poet uses non languere instead of some stronger affirmative expression because the game in which Piso indulges is but a degree removed from the state denoted by languere. tamen: is used with reference to fessum: notwith- standing his tired condition, lususque movere per artem: to wage games of skill, movere is used frequently with bella and, as our poPt describes the game which follows as if it were a battle, he is probably imitating this expression in lusus movere. 192 ff. The description of the ludus latrunculorum in the follow- ing verses forms one of the chief passages to be found in Latin literature regarding this game of the ancients. While Piso's skill at such a game may seem a trivial subject to be dwelt upon in the panegyric, if we are to believe the scholiast to Juvenal, 5. 109, he was indeed so famed for it that people gathered to watch him play : 'in latrunculorum lusu tam perfectus et callidus ut ad eum luden tem concurreretur'. Praise for dexterity in such games was not considered unworthy of the great men of antiquity. P. Mucins Scaevula was likewise famed for his skill in playing ball and duo- decim scripta a game comparable to backgammon (Cic. De Or. !• 501 Quint. Inst. 11. 2. 38). The ludus lattunculorum most resembled modern draughts, or checkers, being played with pawns upon a board divided into squares. Cf. Varr. L. L. 10. 22, 'ad hunc quadruplicem fontem ordines deriguntur bini, uni trans- versi, alteri derecti, ut in tabula solet in qua latrunculis ludunt'. 192. TABULA . . . aperta: the board was called tabula latruncularia. Cf. Sen. Ep. 117. 30, 'nemo, qui ad incendium domus suae currit, tabulam latrunculariam prospicit, ut sciat, quomodo alligatus exeat calculus'. From the expression tabula aperta it has been judged possible by Becq de Fouqui&res {Les Jeux des Anciens, p. 445) that the ancients possessed folding card tables such as those of to-day. But tabula aperta is merely the euivalent, in the terms of this miniature battle, of campo aperto, a. phrase frequently used in descriptions of miUtary combat. variatur: is moved about here and there. 193 calculus: a general name applied to the counter or pawn. It is a pseudo-diminutive of calx, which occurs in Plaut. Poen. 908: Sy. 'profecto ad incitas lenonem rediget, si eas abduxerit'. Mi 'quin priu' disperibit faxo quam unum calcem civerit'. But calx as a name for the pawn is rare, though in the proverbial expression, ad incitas redigere, to reduce to a dead block, calces is to be supplied. Cf. Plaut. Poen. 907 above. As technical names for the pieces used in the ludus latrunculorum we find latrones (Ov. A. A. 3. 357; Mart. 14. 20. i; 7. 72. 8) and latrunculi (Sen. Ep. 106. II; Var. L. L. 10. 22; Plin. 8. 215). Becq de FouquiSres (op. cit. pp. 431-5) is of the opinion that there was a distinction between latrones and latrunculi, the latrones being the superior pieces, the latrunculi, the inferior. We learn from Isid. Orig. 18. 67, that the pawns with which each player was equipped were divided into two classes, each possessing different powers and hence of different values: 'calculi partim ordine moventur, partim vage: ideo alios ordinaries, alios vagos appellant; at vero qui moveri omnino non possunt, incites dicunt'. There were then the two classes, the ordinarii and the vagi. The ordi- narii were moved ordine, square by square in one direction, probably only perpendicularly to th i base of the board Cf . Ov. Tr. 2. 477, 'discolor ut recto grassetur limite miles'; Isid. Orig. 18. 62, 'item calcuU, quod per vias ordinales eant, quasi per calles'. The vagi were moved in any direction, both diagonally and perpendicularly. Becq de Fouqui^res would identify the ordinarii of Isidorus' description with the latrunculi, the vagi with the latrones. He suggests that the full name of the game would have been ludus latronum et latrunculorum. But we do not find mention of both latrones and latrunculi in the same passage, latrones being used by the poets, latrunculi by the prose writers. This implies that latrones was merely a poetical substitution for the 82- unwieldy diminutive latrunculi. latro meant primarily a mer^ cenary, or hired soldier, and is so used by Plautus (cf. M. G. 949). It later acquired the meaning of freebooter, highwayman. Cf. Paul, ex Pest. p. 105 Lind: 'latrones antiqui eos dicebant, qui conducti militabant, iirb t^is \aTp4iat at nunc viarum obsessores dicuntur, quod a latere adoriuntur, vel quod latere insidiantur'- It is probable that the diminutive latrunculi was formed from latro and applied to the pieces of the game before this secondary meaning of latr ' had developed. The poets return to latro for metrical considerations, though they use miles and bellator freely in its stead (cf. vitreo milite below). The idea of freebooting was not, however, unsuited to the nature of the game and Ovid apparently so associates latro when he says, A. A. 2. 207: 'sive latrocinii sub imagine calculus ibit, fac pereat vitreo miles ab hoste tuus!' In the long description of this game given by our poet there is no distinction of names though it is evident that the pawns per- form different functions (cf. v. 198, longo venit ille recessu, etc.). Ov. A. A. 3. 359 offers additional testimony that there were on each side, as Isidorus says, pieces of different values: 'bellatorque sua prensus sine compare bellat'. But we can not accept the conclusion of Becq de Fouquiferes (so also of W. Wayte, Smith, Diet, of Ant.) that latrones and latrun- culi were the names applied to these two different classes (see note to V. 203 below). VITREO . . . milite: the pawns were commonly of glass. Cf. Ov. A. A. 2. 208, quoted above, and Mart. 7. 72. 8, vitreo latrone. Sometimes they were made of ivory; sometimes gems, which may have been imitation jewels of glass, were used. Cf. Juv. 11. 132, 'adeo nulla uncia nobis — est eboris, nee tessellae, nee calculus ex hac — materia'; Mart. 14. 20, 'insidiosorum si ludis bella latronum — gemmeus iste tibi miles et hostis erit'. 194. NIVE0S . . . NIGER: the men on each side were different in color. Cf. Ov. Tr. 2. 477, discolor . . . miles, and Sid. Ep. 8. 12. 5, tabula calculis strata bicoloribus. They may also have been different in shape. Becq de Fouqui^res {op. cit. p. 437) cites Plin. 8. 54. 215 to prove that the counters sometimes took the form of figurines, but the reading icones, upon which he bases his conclusion, is doubtful. He further cites Suet. Ner. 22, 83 a passage doubtful as to interpretation: 'sed cum inter initia imperii eburneis quadrigis cotidie in abaco luderet'. nigros . . . ALBOS: Wernsdorf explains: 'dicit autem albos, quia unus calculus poterat duos discolores alligare'. But the emphasis is not felt upon the plural nor is the thought one white pawn blocks two black ones, etc. as Wernsdorf suggests. The poet merely means that now white checks black, now the black, the white. ALLIGET : a technical term, meaning to check or block the course of the enemy's man, but not necessarily to reduce it to a position from which it could not be extricated. Cf. the passage in Sen. Ep. 117. 30, (quoted above) 'quomodo alligatus exeat calculus'. The object of the game was to reduce to a dead block or take as many of the adversary'spieces as possible. It appears that a man caught between two of his adversaries was lost. Note the description of the Greek iriXeis a game similar to the Indus latrun- culorum, in Pollux. 9. 98 ' Siropriiiiviiiv Si els Sio tup ^ij^ui' kotA ris X^^as, ij T^x^V T^s iraiSias iffri TTepiK-fjypet, 5io ^ij^iav ifioxp^ojv rijv iT€p6xpOVV &V€\€IV . Becq de Fouqui^res {op. cit. p. 442) is of the opinion that a man so caught was lost only in case he could not extricate himself. But the evidence tends to show that merely by being caught between two opponents the pawn was lost. Cf. Mart. 14. 17: 'calculus hac gemino discolor hoste perit'. Ov. A. A. 3. 358: 'unus cum gemino calculus hoste perit, bellatorque sua prensus sine compare bgUat, aemulus et coeptum saepe recurrit iter'. Ov. Tr. 2. 478: 'dim medius gemino calculus hoste perit, ut mare velle sequens sciat et revocare priorem nee tuto fugiens incomitatus eat'. Not only do Ovid and Martial state that a pawn so situated as to be between two enemies is lost, but Ovid lays great emphasis upon the perilous condition of a pawn which is unaccompanied. 195. TE duce: each player was the leader or general of his forces, i. e. the pawns. The military terms are continued through- out in realistic fashion. 196. PERITURUS PERDIDIT HOSTEM: Wayte (Smith, Diet. 0] Ant.) explains thus: 'Piso sacrificed pieces which his opponent could not take without suffering a greater loss', periturus does 84 not, however, necessarily mean that Piso had to sacarifice a piece, but that he was on the point of losii^ it and would have lost it had he not exercised great skill. By an ingenious move he extri- cated himself from danger and at the same time put his opponent in a position where he must sacrifice a man. Such seems to be the best interpretation of the passage. The fut. act. participle is used, not to denote something which was impending and bound to happen, but something which was likely to happen and would have happened under certain conditions (Helm, Quaest. Syntact. de Particip. Usu. p. 77). Cf. Luc. 9. 611, 'ut aspexit perituros fonte reUcto'. 197 ff. ILLE (197) . . . ILLE (198) . . . HIC (199) . . . ILLE (201) . . . HIC (202): In a series of this kind the poets choose their pronouns with great liberty and apparently without regard to symmetry. Cf. Juv. 3. 69, hie . . . hie . . . hie . . . ille . . . hie. For further illustra- tions see Wolfflin, Arehiv 12, p. 245. 198. RAPIT: Maehly {Fleckeis. Jahrb. 1862, p. 293) proposes to read eapit on the analogy of eaptare petentem, v. 180. But rapit seems to be used with especial reference to the tactics of the game. One piece, figuratively speaking, snatches or carries away as his prey (cf. praedam v. 200) the opposing piece when it is caught and must be taken from the board, longo . . . EECEssu: from a distant earner. This pawn has evidently been stationed on one of the back rows of the board. It is probable that the superior pieces, the vagi, occupied the back rows with the inferior ranged before them. They were then moved up as needed to the help of th ;ir subordinates, longus is equivalent to longin- quus. Cf. Luc. 3. 477, 'quae prius ex longo nocuerunt missa recessu'. 200. IN PRAEDAM VENIENTEM: advaneing upon his prey. DECIPIT: foils, circumvents. 201. ANCIPITES . . . moras: One piece undergoes a double attack, mora is apparently the technical term for cheek or attack, similisque ligato: Becq de FouquiSres {op. cit. p. 449) gives a diagram to show how one piece may be en prise of two opposing pieces but by a further move may put two enemies in a dangerous position. Wayte (Smith, Diet, of Ant.) disagrees with this interpretation: 'As we explain it he is not really en prise of two pieces but places himself between them, so that he 8S attacks both, while either could take him if it were not for the other; he is similis ligato but not ligatus; the well-known manoeuvre called the lunette at draughts, and a further point of resemblance with the modem game'. The explanation of Wayte is based upon a move possible in checkers, that of Becq de Fouqui^res, upon the game as he reconstructs it, which bears some resemblance to chess, some to checkers. The comparison with checkers can not be pressed too far since, as we have shown above, in the Itidus latrunculorum a pawn was sacrificed when caught between two opposing counters. This is essentially different from checkers, in which a pawn is taken by jumping. Knowing so little as we do of the rules of the litdus latrunculorum it is useless to try to formulate possible moves. 202. OBLIGAT IPSE DUOS: according to the explanation of Becq de Fouqui&res ancipites subit . . . moras and obligat ipse duos represent two successive moments, the attack and counter attack. But there is but one action denoted. The counter is moved to a position where it is apparently checked by two opposing counters, but it itself while in this position {similis ligato) checks two men. AD maiora movetue: is inspired to greater exploits. 203. EFFRACTA . . . MANDRA: efracta is a simple and obviously correct emendationfor the reading e(/mcto of the Sichard text, mandra is a word difficult of interpretation. It is borrowed from the Greek /uivSpa, a fold or stable, and lives to-day in the Italian mandra (mandria) , a herd or place for herds. In its use in Latin it seems also to have been carried over from the place for th3 herd to the herd itself. Cf. Mart. 5. 22. 7: 'vixque datur longas mulorum rumpere mandras quaeque trahi multo marmora fune vides'. Juv. 3. 237: 'et stantis convicia mandrae eripient somnum Druso, vitulisque marinis'. The scholiast to Juvenal explains mandra as locus in quo porci includuntur. L. Traube {Philol. 54 p. 132) is of the opinion that mandra in Latin was applied exclusively to the sheep fold or flock of sheep, and he would therefore emend the reading porci of the scholiast to pecora. As proof of his opinion he adduces the glossar. Amplonian. 2 (Goetz 5. 309) in which mandra is explained as caula mum, and cites the use of mandra by the Christian writers, as 86 Bede, Mirac. Cuthberti 4. 16, 'discite, pastores, vigiK tutamine mandris — insidias noctis furvosque cavere leones'. We can, however, scarcely understand the passage in Martial, longas mulorum . . . mandras, to be, as he says, merely a witty comparison. The most probable conclusion is that mandra was originally a general word to denote an enlosure for domestic animals, cattle, sheep, or swine, and was then transferred to a herd or drove of animals. Being thus vague in its ordinary use it is naturally uncertain in its application to the ludus latruncu- lorum. That it is a technical word coimected with the game is shown not only by this passage but by Mart. 7. 72. 8: 'sic vincas Noviumque PubUumque mandris et vitreo latrone clauses'. Becq de Fouquiferes (fip. cit. p. 440) explains that the word was applied to a square occupied by a pawn since the pawn in moving to the square transformed it into a sort of redoubt, mandrae might then, he thinks, be applied to a row of pawns though strictly designating the squares thus occupied. To this explana- tion we may make the objection that there is really nothing in the square in which each counter stands which partakes of the nature of a protection or redoubt, and unless otherwise defended the pawn may easily be captured. L. Traube suggests that in mandra' we have a term which is to be explained by comparison with the German Festungsspiel. In this game the board is marked off in the form of a cross, the qtoss being formed by 33 points with connecting lines. One arm of the cross is called the fortress and is defended by two soldiers. The rest of the board is held by 24 men whose duty it is to try to occupy the 9 points forming the fortress. Traube would explain mandra as the designation, in the ludtis latrunculorum, of the fortress occupied by the latrones on each side at the beginning of the game, from which fortress they made their sallies and into which they sought to pen the opposing counters. It is true that the description given in v. 204 in terms of a siege suggests in name at least the Festungs = or Belagerungs- spiel. Yet the evidence of the rest of the passage tends to show that the poet is merely extending his metaphors drawn from mili- tary tactics. We have seen how mandra came to be applied to a herd or drove of animals. It might easily be transferred to a group of pawns. In fact it is apparent that such must be its meaning in effracta mandra. It has been suggested that it was applied especially to the crowd of inferior pawns who were drawn up in front of their superiors (Wernsd. Excur. ii; Becker-Goll, Gallus, p. 471). This is apparently the correct interpretation. In deiecto vallo v. 204 we find the parallel to effracta mandra. The mandra was then something to be compared to a protecting ram- part. This could be nothing else except the rows of inferior pawns. The mandra of each player would therefore include the class called the ordinarii by Isidorus, while the latrones would correspond to the vagi. This explanation of mandra is supported by the passage in Martial, mandris et vitreo latrone clauses, in which the mandrae and latrones are obviously mentioned as two different classes. 204. CLAUSAQUE . . . MOENIA: Maehly {Fkckeis. Jahrb. 1862, p. 293) has failed to grasp the picture presented by clausa moenia and deiecto vallo: 'Auffallend ist ferner v. 204 . . das Epitheton clausa: denn die Mauern umschlieszen doch eher als dasz sie umschlossen oder geschlossen werden — und wodurch soUen sie dieses? Wenn etwa durch den Wall — der aber jetzt nicht mehr existiert, deiectum est — ^so ware dies eine sonderbare Ausdrucksweise: denn das Epitheton musste doch eher den Zustand der moenia nach dem Herunterwerfen des Walles bezeichnen'. On the basis of such reasoning he proposes qtiassa- gue . . . moenia. clausa moenia does not mean, as he thinks, the enclosed walls but the closed walls, i. e. walls with gates closed to hostile approach. The counters of Piso's opponent are represented as an army entrenched within a city whose waUs are closed against attack. Piso's counter, metaphorically speaking, breaks through the outside rampart {deiecto vallo) and penetrates to their very stronghold. For the use of clausa moenia in the description of a city under siege cf. Luc. 3. 373. 205 f . SECTis . . . MILITIBUS : the divided ranks. It is to be assumed that Piso follows up this first counter, which has led the way and split the ranks of the enemy, with other counters, and thereupon battles are fought on every side. 207. AUT ETIAM : the reading of Sichard, though marked with an asterisk. Baehrens writes aut tantum. etiam may be con- strued with pauco spoliata milite to show that Piso wins in any event, either with a full phalanx or even with the loss of a few men. The etiam might lead us to expect the poet to say, even with the loss of many men. This may have lead to the verse being marked in the Sichard text. But our poet would not wish to admit it possible for one of Piso's skill to suffer great losses. Hence etiam pauco . . . milite. 208. ET TiBi CAPTIVA . . : at the end of the game Piso has his hands filled with the pieces which he has captured from his opponent. Thus we see that he who won the most of his opponent's pieces and, conversely, lost the fewest of his own was winner in the ludus latrunculorum. For further evidence cf . Sen. Tranq. 14. 7, 'ludebat latrunculis, cum centurio agmen perituro- rum trahens ilium quoque excitari iuberet. vocatus numeravit calculos et sodali suo: "vide" inquit "ne post mortem meam mentiaris te vicisse"- turn annuens centurioni: "testis" inquit "eris uno me antecedere" '. From Vopisc. Procul. 13. 2 it appears that the winner of the game was called imperator: 'nam cum in quodam convivio ad latrunculos luderetur atque decies imperator, exisset'. resonat: the pawns, being glass, rattle in his hands. 209. EluENSO . . . Olmypo: Olympus is used poetically for the sky, as Verg. E. 6. 86, 'etinvito processit Vesper Olympo'. VERSETUR: would turn itself; a middle use. We may supply retro. The sun having traversed the vault of the sky would turn in its course at the close of the day. The conception is of the sun going back beneath the earth to its starting point. Cf. Lucret. 5. 644: 'tempore item certo roseam natura per oras aetheris auroram differt et lumina pandit, aut quia sol idem, sub terras ille revertens, anticipat caelum radiis accendere temptans'. 213. CERTUs: with confidence. Cf. Verg. A. 9. 96, 'certusque incerta pericula lustret'; Aug. Civ. 19. 14, 'opus habet magisterio divino cui certus obtemperet'. complectere: to accept with favor, cherish. Stronger in force than accipe. Cf. Liv. 34. 58. 3, 'ut et Romanis ius sit . . . amicitias et tueri, quas habeant, et novas complecti'. 214. QUOD SI DiGNA . . : with the thought of w. 214-5 cf. Tib. 4. I. 3: 'at meritas si carmina laudes deficiunt: humilis tantis sim conditor actis, nee tua praeter te chartis intexere quisquam facta queat, dictis ut non maiora supersint. est nobis voluisse satis, nee munera parva respueris'. So also Propertius, 3. 1.6, says: 'in magnis et voluisse sat est'. 89 2i6. TU MODO LAETUS ADES: the poet adroitly invokes the favor of Piso as though he were a god. So Vergil invokes Maecenas, G. 2. 39: "tuque ades inceptumque una decurre laborem, o decus, o famae merito pars maxima nostrae'. 217. VIRES DABIT . . . FAVOR: cf. Lucan's address to Nero, I. 66, 'tu satis ad vires Romana in carmina dandas'. 219. DiviTis AURi: cf. Tib. i. 10. 7, 'divitis hoc vitium est aufi'. 220. IMPERIOSA fames: Overmastering greed. Cf. Verg. A. 3. 57, auri sacra fames. 221. IMPULERINT: impulerant is the reading of Sichard. Wernsdorf suggests that impulerunt should be read, and this con-, jecture is adopted in the text of Baehrens. The Paris MSS., according to Baehrens' collation, offer impiderit, though Roth, who was the first to collate MS. 17903, ascribes to it the reading impulerint {Philol. 1861, p. 344). The latter is probably the correct reading. The imperative dignare (v. 218) supplies a future condition to which impulerint forms the apodosis: ij thou dost deign to open thy home to me, no love 0/ gain will have been my instigator, hut the love o{ fame. Similar paratactic constructions are to be seen in Cic. Tusc. i . 30, 'toUe hanc opinionem, luctum sustuleris'. Or. 232, 'immuta paululum . . . perierit tota res'. The fut. perf. impulerint is used to specify a future result, since the truth of the poet's assertion will become apparent only in case Piso heeds his entreaty, laudis amor: cf. Ov. Tr. 5- 12. 38: 'denique non parvas animo dat gloria vires et fecunda facit pectora laudis amor. 222 f. CUMQUE TUIS VIRTUTIBUS . . . CEETARE: the poet's words are well chosen. If he is favored by Piso he promises to extol the merits of his patron in a way that will do him justice. For the thought cf. Tib. 4. I. 191, 'non te deficient nostrae memorare Camenae'. 223. SUBLIMIOR IBO: these words recall Hor. C. i. i. 36, 'sublimi feriam sidera vertice'. 224. FAMAE . . . PANDis ITER: imitated, according to Schenkl (praef. 7. Calpurnii et Nemesiani Bucolica), by Statius, Th. 12. 812, 'iam certe praesens tibi fama benignum — stravit iter', 90 and this in turn by Nemesianus, Eel. I. 84, 'iamque hie in silvis praesens tibi fama benignum — stravit iter'. 226. cultore: cf. Lucan's use of scrutator, 4. 298: 'non se tam penitus, tarn longe luce relieta — merserit Asturii serutator pallidus auri'. inerti: used to deseribe portu because within the sheltered harbor the waves are more sluggish. The adjective also helps to emphasize the state of inaction of a ship which remains in inerti portu. 228. armamenta: though a general term for the tackle of a ship it frequently excludes the sails, as Caes. B. G. 3. 14. Such seems to be its use here since there is especial mention of the vela (v. 229). 229. et: this conjunction has been deemed superfluous inas- much as que unites the two verbs gerat and possit, and the two ablatives are interpreted as different in kind, and hence not to be connected by et. Maehly (Fleckeis. Jahrb. 1862, p. 293) sets forth this view, explaining that teretigue malo is to be taken with fluentia, excusso rudente with the verb. He proposes two possible emendations, but they have nothing to recommend them. Baehrens writes possit ab excusso dimittere . . . rudenti.. It is the position of the participle fluentia that has lead Maehly and others to interpret malo as dependent upon it, yet such is not necessarily the construction of malo. It is quite possible to inter- pret the two ablatives as of the same kind and rightly connected by et if they are construed with the verb. For this the reading demittere of the Paris MSS. is to be preferred to dimittere of the Sichard text. We may render thus: and can let down from the rounded mast and untied ropes the flowing sails. Mast is thus used loosely for antennae. Cf. Ov. M. II. 477, 'cornuaque in summa locat arbore totaque malo — carbasa deducit'. We are to picture the sail as rolled up and fastened to the mainyard from which it is let down when occasion demands. The ancients appear to have brailed up their sails to reduce the area exposed to the wind. 232. Romano . . . ore: cf. v. 89. 233 f. A charming way of saying that Vergil would have remained in obscurity, nemoris . . . quod canit: refers to the Eclogues of Vergil. Cf. Eel. i. 1-6; 6. 1-8. 237. PERMisiT numina: numina is the reading of Sichard, while the excerpts oflfer the impossible nomina. numina is so 91 unsatisfactory that various emendations have been oflfered. Lachmann (Haupt, Opus. 3. 416) thought that the poet must have written carmina and had reference to Verg. E. 1.9: 'ille meas errare boves, ut cernis, et ipsum ludere quae vellem calamo permisit agresti'. Guido Suster {Riv. di Fil. 19. p. 95-6) suggests the emendation omnia, though he admits that the last syllable of permisit thus loses its length by position. Baehrens writes somnia. Martyni- Laguna (Wernsd. P. L. M. vol. 4. p. 866) would explain numina thus : 'sua numina permisit est simpUciter se permisit'. 238 f. TRAGICO QUATIENTEM PULPITA GESTU . . . VaRIUM : Varum is the reading of the MSS. and of the Sichard edition, but the reference is obviously to Varius, friend of Vergil and Horace (cf. v. 242). Horace tells us that he was recommended to the circle of Maecenas by Vergil and Varius, S. I. 6. 55, 'optimus olim — Vergilius, post hunc Varius, dixere quid essem'. These three celebrated poets are also mentioned together by Martial as being under the patronage of Maecenas, 12. 4. i : 'quod Flacco, Varioque fuit, summoque Maroni Maecenas, atavis regibus ortus eques, gentibus et populis hoc te mihi, Prisce Terenti, fama fuisse loquax chartaque dicet anus'. Varius was not only celebrated for his epic poetry but was renowned as a writer of tragedy. Quintilian, Inst. 10. i. 98, says that his tragedy Thyestes might stand comparison with any of the Greek tragedies. Cf. also Mart. 8. 18. 7, 'et Vario cessit Romani laude cothurni — cum posset tragico fortius ore loqui'. 239 flf. The reading of this passage, which is that found in the Sichard text, appears almost hopeless. But the Paris MSS. support this reading except for toantis, which is evidently a corrup- tion of tonantis, (MS. 17903 also reads alle instead of alta). Various emendations have been proposed. Haupt (Opus. 1 . 406) says that he thought the poet must have reference to C. MeKssus, the freedman of Maecenas who, according to Suetonius, wrote plays of a novel sort which he called trabeataq. Following his suggestion Lachmann proposed the emendation; 'Maecenas apta togatis — emit et popuKs ostendit acumina Gai'. It need hardly be said that our poet would not mention the name of this obscure freedman along with the illustrious names of Vergil, 92 Varius, and Horace. Th. Birt (Rhein. Mus. 1877, p. 417) suggests a transposition of the verses as follows: Maecenas alta tonantis carmina Romanis necdum resonantia chordis emit el populis ostendit nomina Crais Ausoniamgue chelyn grandis patefecit Horati. The whole passage he thinks must concern Horace. He explains the meaning thus: 'Maecenas eruit Graisque populis ostendit nomina eius qui carmina tonat alta necdum Romanis chordis resonantia'. Birt writes necdum instead of etiam, presumably because there is no explanation for etiam according to his arrange- ment. It seems doubtful as to whether a Latin poet would speak of the poems of Horace as Romanis necdum resonantia chordis. Weber has adopted Unger's conjecture ostendit carmina vatis, and thus too the w. Maecenas alta tonantis . . . patefecit Horati are all made to refer to Horace. As Maehly (Fleckeis. Jahrb. 1862, p. 294) points out, it is improbable that the same poet would be characterized in v. 239 as alta tonans and in v. 242 as gracilis. Birt, in order to avoid this difficulty, has replaced gracilis with grandis (see above). Maehly maintains, with reason, (i) that Gratis must be kept since Romanis undoubtedly forms its opposite; (2) that Graiis is not to be joined with populis according to the previous conception but with chordis, which thus brings out the contrast; (3) that nomina must therefore give place to carmina. It is only thus that etiam between Romanis and chordis has its proper signification. Maehly proceeds, how- ever, to say that alia tonans must refer to Varius and that the poems of Greek and Roman sort are to be understood as his poems. Yet the repetition of Maecenas tends to show that a new thought is introduced: Maecenas . . . evexit Varium, Maecenas, etc. Buecheler (Rhein. Mus. 1881, p. 336) thinks that Propertius must have been included among the poets here mentioned and professes to see such reference in the manuscript reading alta tonantis . . . nomina, which he explains as follows: "iam quid Maecenas eruit? alta Tonantis nomina, id est Jovis tutelae Augusti atque imperii Romani, antiqua haec nomina Romana fieri iussit etiam Romanis fidibus resonantia carmina ostenditque Graecis'. He cites the poems in the fourth book of Propertius in which he undertakes to sing of the holy rites and ancient names of places — 'sacra diesque canam et cognomina prisca locorum' 93 4. I. 69). It hardly seems possible that our poet would attempt to make mention of Propertius by alluding to his poems in so indirect and vague a fashion. 239. TONANTis: it is scarcely necessary to consider the read- ings Thoaniis and Toantis found in the editions of Wernsdorf, Scaligef, and others, as they are apparents attempts to make a name out of the reading toantis which is preserved in the excerpts. Wernsdorf proposes sonantis as more suitable than tonantis, but tonantis may be used just as fittingly of the poet's speech. Cf. Prop. 3. 17. 40, 'qualis Pindarico spiritus ore tonat'. 241. RESONANTIA CHORDis: for the dative cf. Hor. S. 1.4. 76, 'suave locus voci resonat conclusus'. 242. AusoNiAMQUE CHELYN: Horace, C. 4. 3. 23, speaks of himself as Romanae fidicen lyrae. gracilis . . . Horati: in the term gracilis there is.certaiiily no disparagement of Horace. It is used rather to bring out the distinction between writers of lyric and epic poetry. Note the description given by GelHus, 6. 14, of that poetry or oratory which was called gracilis: 'et in carmine et in soluta oratione genera dicendi probabilia sunt tria . . . uberi dignitas atque ampUtudo est, gracili venustas et subtilitas'. 243 fif. o DECUS . . : , Wernsdorf understands these words to be addressed to Maecenas but they are more appropriately interpreted as an address to Piso. As a whole w. 243-5 form merely an exclamatory address comparable to Verg. A. 10. 506, 'o dolor atque decus magnum rediture parenti!' 245. INOPI . . . senectae: cf. Verg. G. i. 186, 'inopi metuens formica senectae'. 246. QUOD si: begins a new seijtence. The sequence of thought is: thou art protector of bards; if then there is any room for my entreaties, etc. 247. MEMORABiLis olim: renowned in future ages, the adjec- 1 tive is used proleptically as it expresses the result of tu mihi . . . cantabere. 249 f. Cf. Luc. 9. 980: 'o sacer et magnus vatum labor, omnia fato eripis et populis donas mortalibus aevum'. . 250. SI TAMEN . . : the poet adds a modest restriction to his sweeping statement in v. 249. 94 251. DEUS ultor: apparently a general term used without especial application to any god or goddess. Cf. Tib. i. 8. 72, 'nescius ultorem post caput esse deum'; Sen. Here. Fur. 385, 'sequitur superbos ultor a tergo deus'; Ov. M.' 14. 750, 'quam iam deus ultor agebat'. Ovid also speaks of the dei ultores and men- tions Nemesis as separate from them, M. 14. 693, 'ultoresque deos et pectora dura perosam — Idalien memoremque time Rham- nusidis iram'. 253. NANTi: Martjmi-Laguna proposes the reading vati- But the picture intended to be conveyed is that of an exhausted swimmer, perhaps the victim of a shipwreck, to whom a helping hand is extended. That the thought is almost proverbial is shown by Ovid, Tr. 2. 6. 11, who compares his unfortunate lot to the condition of a shipwrecked sailor with these words: 'nunc mihi naufragio quid prodest discere facto, qua mea debuerit currere cumba via? bracchia da lasso potius prendenda natanti: nee pigeat mento supposuisse manum'. Cf. also Tr. 5. 9. 17: 'naufragiumque meum tumulo spectarit ab alto, nee dederit nanti per freta saeva manum'. 254 f. NGN HUMiLis . . : the Sichard text and Paris MSS. agree in reading nos humilis domus et sincera paientum — sed tenuis fortuna, etc. This reading is obviously incorrect. Weber and Baehrens emend by reading at sincera instead of et sincera and et tenuis instead of sed tenuis. The verses thus read nos humilis domus, at sincera, parentum — et tenuis fortuna sua caligine celat. But the sed of manuscript authority could scarcely be a corruption of et. Fitfthermore the adversative shows that some contrasting statement has preceded. This contrast is effected by the change of nos to nan, the non modifying humilis. non humilis is thus the ' equivalent of nobilis. The poet then says: a parentage of no humble rank, and pure, is mine, but a slender fortune enshrouds me in its mist. 254. domus: sc. est. 255. caligine: similarly used of obscurity in Veil. 2. 36. I, 'Augustus . . . omnibus omnium gentium viris magnitudine sua inducturus caliginem'. celat: sc. me. 95 26o. QUAMVis . . : Maehly (Fleckeis, Jahrb. 1862, p. 289) thinks that there is a logical inconcinnity in this sentence, that we have the concessive clause where we should expect some further reason for the assertion est mihi . . . animus constantior annis. But the sequence of thought is more clearly seen by plac- ing the concessive clause first : though the pride of youth but now begins to cover my cheeks and my twentieth year has not yet arrived, I have a mind riper than my years. BIBLIOGRAPHY Baehrens, E — Poetae Latini Minores, vol. i., 1879. BiRT, Th. — Ad Historian! Hexametri Latini Symbola, Bonn 1876. Ferrara, G. — Calpurnio Siculo e il panegyrico a Calpurnio Pisone, Pavia 1905. Haupt, M. — De Carminibus Bucolicis Calpurnii et Nemesiani, Opus. I. p. 391, Leipzig 1875. Lemaire, N. E. — Poetae Latini Minores, vol. 3., Paris 1824. Maehly, J. — Zur LitteratuT des Panegyricus in Pisonem, Pleckeis. Jahrb. 1862, p. 286. Scaliger, J. — Publii Virgilii Maronis Appendix, Lyons 1573. ScHENKL, H. — Calpurnii et Nemesiani Bucolica, Leipzig 1885. Trampe, E. — De Lucani Arte Metrica, Diss. Beri. 1884. Unger, R. — P. Papinii Statii ad Calpurn. Pison. Poemation, Jahns Jahrb. 1836, p. 261. Weber, C. F. — IncertiAuctoris Carmen Panegyricum in Calpurn. Pison., Marburg 1859. Indices Lectionum, Marburg 1860/61. Wernsdorf, J. Ch. — Poetae Latini Minores, vol. 4., Altenburg 1785- W6LFFLIN, E. — Zu dem Carmen panegyricum in Calpurnium Pisonem, Philol. 1861, p. 340. 97