Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

1

ing the imputation of conferring military commands at the suggestion of an actor, especially when the actor's influence had been removed; nor would his resentment be lessened if Juvenal had deliberately republished, with an application to his own reign, what had been originally directed against the earlier Paris, the favourite of Nero. A wider question suggests itself here. Did Juvenal begin to write under Nero, and to publish under Domitian, while the revised edition of his works was interrupted by death, perhaps in Trajan's reign?

That some such revised edition was attempted is probable, from the statement of one old biographer, that a considerable interva! elapsed betweer: the original composition of the lines on Paris, and their reappearance in the Seventh Satire; from the remark of another, that he enlarged (ampliavit) his satires in exile; and from the curious circumstance that there are MSS. in which the Sixteenth Satire, a mere fragment is placed before the Fifteenth. Obviously, copyists must have changed the order which Juvenal intended, in order that all the satires might appear to be finished, except the last; perhaps also those who doubted the genuineness of the fragment may have wished to propagate their suspicions by relegating it to a sort of Appendix. If Juvenal was in the habit of retouching his compositions, it is obviously unsafe to infer the date of a satire from single lines; for in such a laboured style innumerable additions and insertions would be possible, which would improve the brilliancy of the general effect, without impairing its unity. Hence we cannot build much upon the following list of passages.

In 1. 47, VIII. 120, Juvenal mentions the exile and rapacity of Marius Priscus, who was condemned for oppression in proconsular Africa, A. D. 100, which is the latest date that we can fix with certainty.

In vi. 502, there is an allusion to the successive layers of curls, which cannot be traced on the imperial busts, our only authority, higher than the reign of Trajan; but (ib. 385) a musician is mentioned, who was already famous when Mar;

a

tial published his Fourth Book, comparatively early under Domitian.

In xir. 80, there is an allusion to the inner basin of the Portus Augusti, which was not completed, according to the Scholia, till Trajan, though the general construction of the harbour was due to Claudius; and the Scholiast may have confused the harbour at Centum Cellae, now Civita Vecchia, with that at Portus.

Moreover, as the information about Trajan is introduced to give an erroneous sense to rursum, we are scarcely bound to believe that the interioratuti stagna sinus had been enclosed as a separate basin when Juvenal wrote.

In vitr. 51, there is an ambiguous passage, that would suit the latter part of Trajan's reign, or the early part of Vespasian's, almost equally well or ill. The reference to the eagles, which control the conquered Batavian, would be most in place immediately after the revolt of Civilis. On the other hand, Vespasian never sent an expedition to the Euphrates; and it would be an unpleasant inaccuracy to couple the achievements of Cerealis and Corbulo: unless, indeed, Juvenal may mean to refer to the danger of the eastern frontier, in the troubles after Nero's death. On the whole, the earlier date seems best; as to mention nothing further than the Euphrates would have been a very poor compliment to Trajan, if his reign was intended.

In xIII. 27, there is a yet more ambiguous appeal to the age of a friend, who was sixty years old when Juvenal wrote, and was born when Fonteius was consul. This excites our hopes of being able to fix the date of at least one whole satire; but unfortunately one Fonteius was consul A. D. 12, another A. D. 59, yet another A. D. 67. Lipsius and Professor Ramsay prefer the earliest date; most other authorities adopt the second.

In xv. 27, we have to choose in the same way between one Junius, who was consul A. D. 84; another, who was consul A. D. 119; and a Juncus whose other names may have been Sextus Julius, who was consul on the ides of October A. D.

127, as is proved by an inscription found in Sardinia, published by the Archæological Society of Rome, Vol. VI. p. 231: it is a grant of citizenship to those who had served 26 years in the fleet of Ravenna and to their families, and is dated by the year of Hadrian's reign and by the consulship of Juncus and Severus.

The first date is objected to, because Paris was dead, and because a Juvenal was resident in Rome, and intimate with Martial, when the latter published his Seventh Book (circa A. D. 93). The first objection is answered above. In reply to the second, it would be sufficient to say that there is no reason for supposing that the exile lasted longer than six months, the usual period for which such commands were conferred; though it is hardly necessary to identify the friend of Martial with the Satirist.

It seems at first sight as if there could be little doubt aboạt the date of the Fourth Satire: we assume that it must have been written after Domitian's death, while Crispinus was still alive to insult respectable opinion. On reflection perhaps we shall see reason to qualify both these assumptions. It is really as hard to apply the wonderfully spirited opening of the Satire to a favourite who had fallen as to a favourite who was dead. Taking the first twenty or thirty lines alone as they stand, we should certainly suppose that they were the introduction to a very audacious lampoon on a reigning sovereign and on a favourite still in power. We really do not know enough to set aside this prima facie probability; moreover the main incident of the poem is of a kind which a satirist might certainly be expected to seize while it was fresh instead of waiting for twelve years till the scandal had got cold. There is no reason to put the council of the Turbot later than 89 A. D., which is the latest point at which we can suppose that Cornelius Fuscus, the praetorian prefect, was alive in Italy to attend it. There is much that is tempting in the supposition that the first draft of the Fourth Satire is Juvenal's revenge on his return from his Egyptian exile. Such a lampoon might have had a clandestine circulation when Domitian had left for the Dacian frontier, if not before, and the burlesque epic solemnity of 37 sqq. would be all the more amusing applied to a living contemporary. On the other hand, the present form of the Satire may be later than the death of Crispinus. The last five lines which imply the death of Domitian might be detached; but it is hardly possible to mutilate the description of the proceres, and this as we have it must be later than 95 A.D., the date of the execution of the younger Acilius Glabrio, only a year at most before the death of Domitian. It is difficult to fix the date at which Domitian made himself conspicuous as the guardian of the morals of the vestals; we may assume that they were made aware of their liabilities as soon as he did so: the first two victims of the pontifex maximus were allowed to kill themselves above ground, the third was put to death with the antiquarian formalities, A. D. 89 or 91.

The only indication of the date of the Fifth Satire is to be found in vv. 107–110, which must belong to the generation after Nero; bụt too much weight must not be given to them, as 106—113 might be removed without injury, perhaps with advantage, as an unnecessary after-thought of the poet, who was afraid that he had not brought out his real opinion of Virro.

The date of the Seventh Satire must be determined by our selection of the Caesar who is hailed at the beginning as the solitary patron of the Muses. It is scarcely necessary to exclude Hadrian, on the ground that Trajan had done nothing to afflict the Nine; for the contrast is not between the liberality of one emperor and the illiberality of another, but between imperial patronage and public indifference. On the other hand, there is nothing in the satire that can be construed into a reference to what had passed under Trajan, or was passing under Hadrian, whereas the allusions to Domitian's reign are frequent.

We have references to the poverty of Saleius satirized by Martial (IV. 3. 6), to the recitations of Statius, which probably began with the First Book of the Thebaid (which is said to have been completed A.D. 94, after twelve years' labour); and the mention of his Agave proves that the Paris of the com

pleted satire must be Domitian's favourite. In spite of this, however, most editors waver between Trajan and Hadrian, inclining to the former, though it would be much more reasonable to treat Trajan's reign than Domitian's as a period of literary decline. The Scholiast, who did not share their zeal for the purity and independence of Juvenal's literary conscience, says, with naïve absurdity, "Neronem palpat."

It is chiefly in the First and Eighth Satires that we find plausible grounds for suspecting allusions to the reign of Nero, which have furnished such a plentiful harvest of conjectures to annotators, from the Scholiast downwards. Madvig (in his Opuscula Academica, I. 29–63, II. 167—205) has effectually refuted the excesses of this tradition; but he has not condescended to examine whether it is wholly destitute of foundation. Of course, every one would admit that a note like this on

Qui bona. prae.: propter equos hoc dicit et Neronem tangit,is a mere conjecture, neither very acute, nor very probable; but notes like those on 1. 33–35, seem to embody in a blundering way a real ancient tradition. The reader shall judge :" Delalor amici. Heliodorum significat delatorem

... Heliodorum dicit Stoicum philosophum, qui L. Junium Silanum, discipulum suum, cum argueretur conjurationis, inficiatum domesticam delationem etiam testimonio oppressit. Alii filosophum Trajani dicunt, qui Baream senatorem detulit et damnavit. Nonnulli Demetrium causidicum dicunt, qui multos Neroni detulit. Soranum Baream Celer filosophus, magister ipsius, scelere delationis occidit, et ipse postea sub Vespasiano ob hoc ipsum, Musonio Rufo accusante, damnatus est. . . . . Massa morio fuisse dicitur et Carus nanus, Latinus vero actor mimicus. Hi omnes Neronis fuerunt liberti et deliciae Augusti. Latinus autem mimus quasi conscius adulterii Messalinae uxori Neronis, ab ipso occisus est. Massa autem et Carus Heliodoro deferente occisi sunt: cujus futuram delationem ita timebant ut ei munera

I. 59,

« PredošláPokračovať »