Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T08:45:53.395Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Notes on Pighius and Valerius Maximus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

D. P. Fowler
Affiliation:
Jesus College, Oxford

Extract

(1) Horace, Janus, and Pighius' Acta

In PBSR 54 (1986), 213–28 Andrew Lintott dusts down the fragments of the Acta Urbana published by S. V. Pighius in 1615 and universally supposed today to be a forgery. Lintott himself, after a most learned discussion, concurs, but one senses a wistful longing for the fragments to be genuine. The purpose of this note is to offer another reason why sadly this is unlikely.

Type
Shorter Notes
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The important passages in the ancient scholia are pseudo-Acron on Epist. 1.1.54 and Serm. 2.3.18: they are clearly guesswork. I can see nothing helpful in Porphyrion on Epist. 1.20.1. Livy 41.27.12, on the activities of Q. Fulvius Flaccus as censor in 174 B.C., mentions contracts for works in some provincial town or towns, including Ianos tres faciendos. We do not even know that these three arches were to be constructed in the same town.

2 Constant, P. in the Gamier edition (Paris, 1935) translates, ‘les autres dieux, nous les avons reçus de la tradition; mais les Césars, c'est nous qui les avons faits dieuxGoogle Scholar: so Faranda, R. in his useful Italian edition (Turin, 1971), ‘gli altri dei li abbiamo accettati da altri, i Cesari li creiamo noi.’Google Scholar It is hard to think of anything less flattering to say to Tiberius.

3 I am grateful for comments to Gian Biagio Conte, Peta Fowler, Robin Nisbet, and anon.