^{page 78 note 2} xiii. 3.

^{page 78 note 3} Suet. Iul. lvi. 7.

^{page 78 note 4} By including Julius Caesar it is not implied that he was or should be regarded as an emperor; but as the founder of the imperial house and one of its most prolific writers, he can hardly be omitted.

^{page 79 note 1} Scholars, said Housman, who dogmatize about lost works must pray that Herculaneum does not disgorge these works themselves and refute the learned gentlemen.

^{page 79 note 2} For references to individual emperors see below, p. 97, n. 5.

^{page 79 note 3} As a specimen of Caesar's legislation we possess substantial fragments of the lex Iulia municipalis (C.I.L. i. 206); but its legal and archaic phraseology suggests that Caesar was not himself the drafter of the law. For a discussion of its authorship see Holmes, T. Rice, The Roman Republic (Oxford, 1923), iii. 553–64.Google Scholar We have lost Caesar's dispatches to the Senate.

^{page 79 note 4} Storia della letteratura latina (Florence, 1950), p. 439.

^{page 79 note 5} Latin Epigraphy (Cambridge, 1927), p. 259. An English edition of Augustus is Caesaris Augusti Res Gestae et Fragmenta, ed. Rogers, R. S. and others (Boston, 1935)Google Scholar; a convenient full edition is that of Enrica(H.) Malcovati, , Imperatoris Caesaris Augusti operum fragmenta (Turin, 1924 and 1937).Google Scholar

^{page 80 note 1} The Antioch version has MCC, which is perhaps what Augustus wrote.

^{page 80 note 2} Suet. Tib. xxiii.

^{page 80 note 3} H.N. iii. 46. This is the view of Detlefsen and Jullian, but several other theories have been propounded.

^{page 80 note 4} Cf. Appian, B.C. v. 130; Suet. Claud. i; Serv. Aen. i. 712; Julian, Epp. 434a.

^{page 80 note 5} Suet. Aug. lxxxiv, lxxxvi.

^{page 81 note 1} Suet. Aug. lviii. 2.

^{page 81 note 2} Schanz-Hosius incorrectly include this in Augustus' Greek correspondence.

^{page 81 note 3} Suet. Aug. lxxxix.

^{page 81 note 4} Id. Tib. lxx, Aug. lxxxvi.

^{page 81 note 5} Id. Tib. xxviii, xxix; Tac. Ann. vi. 6 = Suet. Tib. lxvii. We should note that in the two cases where Tiberius' speeches in Tacitus are quoted entirely in oratio recta they are thus qualified: his ferme verbis, Ann. ii. 38; huiusce modi, iv. 37–38; so too Nero's, sic ferme, xiv. 55–56; but not Claudius' speech (see below), although it is hardly even a paraphrase. Walker, B., The Annals of Tacitus (Manchester, 1952)Google Scholar, App. I, lists speeches and letters in the Annals.

^{page 81 note 6} As to official speech, however, we can dismiss as mostly fiction the reports of interviews by Claudius with representatives of the city of Alexandria, as recorded in Acts of the Pagan Martyrs (pp. 18 ff. Musurillo); one cannot seriously imagine Claudius' opening an interview by saying ‘Isidoras, are you really the son of an actress?’ and Isidoras' retaliating by calling Claudius the cast-off son of the Jewess Salome.

^{page 82 note 1} Tacitus' version (Ann. xi. 24) can hardly be called a clear reproduction, as Miss N. P. Miller maintains (Proc. Class. Assoc. 1 (1953), 18). The text may also be found in Charlesworth, M. P., Documents Illustrating the Reigns of Claudius and Nero (Cambridge, 1939), no. 5, and elsewhere.Google Scholar

^{page 82 note 2} Not quite, as Wellesley, ‘though I pass over’, but ‘to pass over’.

^{page 82 note 3} ŏdi (?) illud palaestricum prodigium.

^{page 82 note 4} C.I.L. v. 5050 = Dessau 206 = Charlesworth, op. cit. [Claudius], no. 4.

^{page 82 note 5} There is a similar lengthy cum-clause in a Latin inscription from Tegea (C.I.L. iii. 7251 = Dessau 214), containing an edict by Claudius; this ‘whereas’ type of edict is common in modern languages too. Grammatical laxity has also been noticed in the speech to the Senate, almost certainly by Claudius, which is fragmentarily preserved in Beri. Pap. 611.

^{page 82 note 6} Bell, H. I., Jews and Christians in Egypt (London, 1924), pp. 23–26Google Scholar = Charles-worth, op. cit. [Claudius], no. 2. For some recent thoughts on it see Bell, H. I., Cults and Creeds in Graeco-Roman Egypt ² (Liverpool, 1953), pp. 43–44.Google Scholar

^{page 83 note 1} II. 73–82. For the threatening close cf. the Nazareth edict (Charlesworth, op. cit., no. 17).

^{page 83 note 2} Dittenberger, Syll. ³, 814 = Charlesworth, op. cit. [Nero], no. 2.

^{page 83 note 3} Pliny, Ep. x. 58. One sentence of a speech of Vespasian's is preserved in C.I.L. xiv. 3608. Titus' speeches recorded by Josephus are not likely to be the originals.

^{page 83 note 4} C.I.L. viii. 2532 and suppl. 18042 = Dessau 2487, 9133–9135a; cf. Barrow, R. H., The Romans (Penguin, 1949), pp. 92–93.Google Scholar For Hadrian's works see especially Alexander, P. J., ‘Letters and Speeches of the Emperor Hadrian’, in Harv. Stud, in Class. Philol. xxxix (1938), 141–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar, with a useful list on pp. 175–7. Alexander is wrong in saying ‘the … speeches were not collected in antiquity’: Charisius in Gramm. Lot. (Keil) i. 222. 21 quotes divus Hadrianus orationum xii.

^{page 84 note 1} Spart. Hadr. xvi. 5 (Script. Hist. Aug.).

^{page 84 note 2} lxxi. 24–26. Cf. also C.I.L. ii, suppl. 6278 = Dessau 9340. We cannot trust as genuine Vulcat. Avid. Cass. xii (Script. Hist. Aug.).

^{page 84 note 3} The full title was probably Commentarii rerum gestarum: Kelsey, F. W., Trans. Am. Phil. Assoc. xxxvi (1905), 211–38.Google ScholarCommentarius corresponds to the Greek ὑπ⋯μνημα (whether Caesar intended it as a translation of ὑπ⋯μνημα is not certain); see SirAdcock, Frank, Caesar as Man of Letters (Cambridge, 1956), pp. 6–18.Google Scholar

^{page 84 note 4} 262; Hendrickson's translation (with one change).

^{page 85 note 1} Iul. lvi.

^{page 85 note 2} Edwards's translation.

^{page 85 note 3} SirAdcock, Frank, op. cit., p. 19Google Scholar, writes: ‘There is in Caesar's writings an element of propaganda, but it is not predominant, and it is not what matters most.’

^{page 85 note 4} But Caesar misrepresents the political situation to some extent in the first book.

^{page 86 note 1} iii. 85.

^{page 86 note 2} Iul. vi; cf. Fowler, W. Warde, Roman Essays and Interpretations (Oxford, 1920), pp. 141–2.Google Scholar

^{page 86 note 3} x. 1. 114.

^{page 86 note 4} Suet. Claud. i. 5 mentions a life of Drusus by Augustus.

^{page 86 note 5} H.N. ii. 93; cf. Serv. Ecl. ix. 46.

^{page 86 note 6} Suet. vit. Hor.

^{page 86 note 7} Translated in the writer's edition of Horace, , Epist. i (p. 7)Google Scholar; but regiatn perhaps means regiam mensam rather than ‘palace’.

^{page 86 note 8} Nonius, pp. 518. 30, 688. 12 Lindsay.

^{page 86 note 9} Tib. lxi. 1.

^{page 86 note 10} Suet. Claud. xli. 2–3.

^{page 87 note 1} Commentary on Sen. Apoc.; Schanz-Hosius, ii, p. 424; Bardon, Les empereurs et les lettres latines, p. 129.

^{page 87 note 2} Suet. Claud. xli. 1. Nevertheless it has been thought that the elder Pliny was indebted to these histories for some of his geographical information.

^{page 87 note 3} Ann. iv. 53.

^{page 87 note 4} Hist. v. 6 ff.

^{page 87 note 5} C.I.L. ix. 5420; Pliny, Ep. x. 58. Suet. Dom. xx says of Domitian, epistulas … alieno formabat ingenio. Cf. Dittenberger, Syll. ³, 821.

^{page 87 note 6} Pliny, Ep. x. 32, cf. 34.

^{page 87 note 7} Ibid., 53; Suet. Iul. lxvii. 2; Aug. xxv. I.

^{page 87 note 8} Pliny, Ep. x. 40.

^{page 87 note 9} Ibid. 10.

^{page 88 note 1} Pliny, Ep. x. 97.

^{page 88 note 2} The grammarian Priscian quotes a short sentence from Book i.

^{page 88 note 3} Spart. Hadr. iii. 11; Julian, Symp. 327b.

^{page 88 note 4} Spart. Hadr. xvi. 1. For the Historia Augusta see Oxf. Class. Dict.; Hadrian's life (‘Spartianus’ may be a pseudonym) belongs to the first, or less unreliable, of the two groups of lives.

^{page 88 note 5} Spart. Hadr. i. 1; Dio lxix. 11.2.

^{page 88 note 6} C.I.L. xiv. 3579.

^{page 88 note 7} Vopisc. Firm, viii (Saturninus). This letter has been thought by many to be spurious, but is well defended by Bardon, , Les empereurs et les lettres latines, pp. 398–400.Google Scholar

^{page 88 note 8} Spart. Hadr. xvi. 6.

^{page 89 note 1} Brut. 262.

^{page 89 note 2} Gell. v. 13. 2; for these and other fragments see Klotz's edition of Caesar (Teubner), vol. iii. Dio Cassius and Appian quote a speech said to have been delivered by Caesar before the battle of Thapsus, but it may well be spurious.

^{page 89 note 3} Some fragments are preserved. The original title must surely have been Anticato, not, as Juvenal and others give it, Anticatones; cf. Bardon, La littérature latine inconnue, i. 279.

^{page 89 note 4} It may therefore be the same as the liber fastorum attributed to him by Comm. Bern, ad Lucanum x. 187.

^{page 89 note 5} Att. ix. 6A, 7C, 13A (quoted below), 16, x. 8B (also quoted).

^{page 89 note 6} Aug. lxxxv.

^{page 90 note 1} Suet. Claud. iv.

^{page 90 note 2} The sense is: if the young Claudius is ‘all there’, why should he not go through the usual cursus honorum? But if he has some psychological deficiency, he must not be allowed to make the imperial house a laughing-stock. ἄρτιος, ⋯λόκληρος are best so written, not in Latin characters.

^{page 90 note 3} N.A. xv. 7. 3.

^{page 90 note 4} Constitutio (Veget. i. 8, i. 27) or Disciplina (Dig. xlix. 16. 12, where a sentence from it is quoted).

^{page 90 note 5} Suet. Claud. xlii. 2.

^{page 90 note 6} p. 82. Although Claudius says that Servius Tullius was called Mastarna in Etruscan, it is doubtful whether he had studied the Etruscan language; his statement itself has been questioned.

^{page 90 note 7} pp. 156–7, 160 van den Hout = i. 126–8, 228 Haines (Loeb).

^{page 90 note 8} Oxf. Class. Dict., s.v. ‘Fronto’.

^{page 91 note 1} pp. 62–63 van den H.= i. 180 Haines.

^{page 91 note 2} In the previous letter he says that he got up at 3 a.m., so 5 a.m. is over- sleeping! The times are subject to a correction of up to 1¼ hours to allow for the season.

^{page 91 note 3} p. 79 van den H.

^{page 91 note 4} p. 6 van den H. The Greek is from the Odyssey.

^{page 91 note 5} See p. 78 above. In connexion with the Oedipus, it is interesting to see that Suetonius elsewhere (Iul. vii. 2) mentions an Oedipus-complex dream of Caesar's.

^{page 91 note 6} Fam. ix. 16. 4.

^{page 92 note 1} Fronto, pp. 209–10 van den H. = ii. 28 Haines; Suet. Iul. lvi. 5.

^{page 92 note 2} Cic. Brut. 253. On the De Analogia see Hendrickson, G. L. in Class. Phil. i (1906), 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 92 note 3} i. 5. 63.

^{page 92 note 4} It is thought by some that these may have been written for, not by, Caesar.

^{page 92 note 5} Suet. Iul. lvi. 5.

^{page 92 note 6} Suet. vit. Ter. Klotz (Teubner ed.) lists three other so-called poetic fragments of Caesar's, but none of these necessarily comes from verse.

^{page 92 note 7} Suet. Aug. lxxxv.

^{page 92 note 8} Baehrens, , Poet. Lat. Min. iv. 122.Google Scholar

^{page 92 note 9} Not, as Ajax himself, on the sword; the sponge served as an eraser. Weichert conjectured that the work alluded to the life and death of Antony.

^{page 93 note 1} Suet. Tib. lxx.

^{page 93 note 2} i. 3, i. 8.

^{page 93 note 3} Suet. Calig. liii. The attribution to him, in Suidas, of a work on rhetoric is almost certainly mistaken.

^{page 93 note 4} Suet. Claud. xli; Tac. Ann. xi. 13–14; Quint, i. 7. 26.

^{page 93 note 5} 14–15; cf. Suet. Aug. lxxi.

^{page 93 note 6} viii. 215–21.

^{page 93 note 7} 89.

^{page 93 note 8} ‘Αλωσις’ Ιλίου, Dio lxii. 18. 1; Suet. Nero xxxviii. 2. Troica, Juv. loc. cit.; schol. Pers. i. 122; Serv. Georg, iii. 36, Aen. v. 370; cf. Tac. Ann. xv. 39. 3.

^{page 94 note 1} N.Q. i. 5 6.

^{page 94 note 2} i. 99.

^{page 94 note 3} Suet. Vitell. xi; sc. liber (probably not dominicum, as Lewis & Short).

^{page 94 note 4} Dio lxii. 29.

^{page 94 note 5} Suet. Tit. iii. 2; Pliny, , H.N. ii. 89.Google Scholar

^{page 94 note 6} Quint, x. 1. 91; Val. Fl. i. 12; Mart. v. 5. 7; cf. Tac. Hist. iv. 96; Suet. Dom. ii. 2.

^{page 94 note 7} Suet. Dom. xviii. 2. It was left to Synesius, bishop of Cyrene (early fifth century a.d.), to write in Greek a work entitled In Praise of Baldness.

^{page 94 note 8} Mart. viii. 70. 7; cf. Pliny, Ep. v. 3. 5.

^{page 94 note 9} Spart. Hadr. xvi. 3–4Google Scholar, xxv. 9. Between lines 3 and 4 of the first poem a line seems to have been lost, beginning latitare per; but Germanos (Rösinger, E., De script. Hist. Aug. comm. crit. (Schweidnitz, 1868), p. 4)Google Scholar and Achivos (Costa, G., Boll, di filol. class. xiii (1907), 254)Google Scholar do not scan. The latest suggestion is Sobaeos (Clausen, W., A.J.P. lxvi (1955), 60–61).Google Scholar

^{page 95 note 1} For renderings of this piece into English and Scots verse see Duff, J. Wight, A Literary History of Rome in the Silver Age (London, 1927), p. 630.Google Scholar A recent article which discusses the poem and some other works of Hadrian's is den Boer, W.'s ‘Religion and Literature in Hadrian's Policy’, in Mnemosyne, S. IV, viii (1955), 123–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 95 note 2} Of his lost works, the title Catachannae (Spart. Hadr. xvi. 2) has provoked discussion.

^{page 96 note 1} He is addressing himself, since the title of the work is Εἰς ⋯αυτόν, ‘to himself’.

^{page 97 note 1} p. 117 van den H. = ii. 138 Haines.

^{page 97 note 2} Dial. xxi.

^{page 97 note 3} Hermes iv (1870), 107.Google Scholar

^{page 97 note 4} The Silver Age of Latin Literature (London, 1920), pp. 176–7.Google Scholar

^{page 97 note 5} To facilitate reference, the following are the categories in which emperors' works, including those of Julius Caesar, are mentioned in this article: Julius, 2–4; Augustus, 1–4; Tiberius, 1, 2, 4; Gaius, 4; Claudius, 1–4; Nero, 1, 4; Vespasian, 2; Titus, 4; Domitian, 2, 4; Nerva, 1, 4; Trajan, 2; Hadrian, 1, 2, 4; Antoninus, 3; Marcus Aurelius, 1, 3, 4; Gordian I and Julian, summary at end.