Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:22:53.356Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Theme of Liberty in the Agricola of Tacitus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

W. Llebeschuetz
W. Llebeschuetz
Affiliation:
Department of Classics, University of Leicester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Agricola of Tacitus differs from other surviving biographies of antiquity. It exhibits some features more characteristic of an oration, yet the preface and composition of the biography as a whole recall Sallust's Iugurtha and Catiline. Then, the central biographical section of the work is interrupted by an excursus on the geography and peoples of Britain, and an historical outline of the Roman occupation of the island. It has been argued that the style of these chapters would be more appropriate to history than to biography, and this same historical style recurs in the pair of commanders' speeches which precede the account of the battle of Mons Graupius.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , May 1966 , pp. 126 - 139
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1966

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

page 126 note 1 Edition of Furneaux, H. revised by J. G. C.Anderson (Oxford, 1922)Google Scholar. Referred to as Furneaux-Anderson. See also Taciti de vita Agricolae, edition and notes of Forni, J. (Rome, 1962).Google Scholar

page 126 note 2 e.g. the biographies of Plutarch or Suetonius or the Euagoras of Isocrates or the Agesilaus of Xenophon. Cf. Leo, F., Die grieschisch-römische Biographic (1901)Google Scholar; Stuart, D. R., Epochs of Greek and Roman biography (Berkeley, Calif., 1928).Google Scholar

page 126 note 3 Thus already in 1866 Hübner, E., ‘Zu Tacitus Agricola’, Hermes i (1866), 438–48Google Scholar, argued that it was a published funeral oration. Gudeman, A., edition of the Agricola and the Germania, revised version, 1928, pp. 311–22, argues that it follows rules of aGoogle Scholar

page 126 note 4 Furneaux-Anderson, , op. cit., pp. Ixxxi–ii, with references to older literature.Google Scholar

page 126 note 5 Agr. 10–17Google Scholar; literature: Furneaux-Anderson, , op. cit., p. xxiii.Google Scholar

page 126 note 6 Agr. 45Google Scholar. Cf. fragment of funeral speech of Metellus, L. Caecilius, Plin. N.H. 7. 43Google Scholar; Cic, . de Orat. 3Google Scholar. 3. 12; ad Fam. 4. 5Google Scholar. 5. 1; E. Hübner, op. cit., see above, n. 3.

page 126 note 7 Polybius 10. 21, and 8. 10; Nepos, , Pelop. 1.Google Scholar

page 126 note 8 Agr. 4. 5: ‘ … quod est difficillimum, ex sapientia modum’.Google Scholar

page 126 note 9 Ibid. 5. 1: ‘diligenti ac moderate duci’.

page 126 note 10 Ibid. 6. 3: ‘quiete et otio transiit’.

page 127 note 1 Ibid. 8. 3. Cf. Richmond, I., ‘Gnaeus Iulius Agricola’, J.R.S. xxxiv (1944), 36.Google Scholar

page 127 note 2 Ibid. 9. 5: ‘ne famam quidem, cui saepe etiam boni indulgent, ostentanda virtute aut per artem quaesivit’.

page 127 note 3 Ibid. 18. 7: ‘dissimulatione famae famam auxit’. Also, ibid. 39.

page 127 note 4 Ibid. 22. 4: ‘nee Agricola umquam per alios gesta avidus intercepit’; ibid. 41. 1: ‘causa periculi non … querela laesi cuiusquam’.

page 127 note 5 Cf. Büchner, K., Tacitus: die Historischen Versuche, Agricola, Germania, Dialogus (Stuttgart, 1955), pp. 73–74.Google Scholar

page 127 note 6 Agr. 42Google Scholar. 4 ff.: ‘ … moderatione tamen prudentiaque Agricolae leniebatur, quia non contumacia neque inani iactatione libertatis famam fatumque provocabat. Sciant quibus moris est inlicita mirari, posse etiam sub malis principibus magnos viros esse, obsequiumque ac modestiam, si industria ac vigor adsint, eo laudis excedere, quo plerique per abrupta, sed in nullum rei publicae usum ambitiosa morte inclaruerunt'. See Furneaux-Anderson, , op. cit., pp. 151–2 and xxx; also below, p. 129, nn. 2–3.Google Scholar

page 128 note 1 Paratore, E., Tacito (Milan), 99Google Scholar; Forni, , op. cit., p. 126Google Scholar, n. 1, p. 239; Walker, B., The Annals of Tacitus (Manchester, 1951), pp. 229–30.Google Scholar

page 128 note 2 Syme, R., Tacitus (Oxford, 1958), PP. 555–61Google Scholar Ch. Wirszubski, , Libertas (Cambridge, 1950), pp. 138–50.Google Scholar

page 128 note 3 Plin, . ep. 5Google Scholar. 5. 3 (Gaius Fannius); ibid. 8. 12. 4 (Titinius Capito).

page 128 note 4 Syme, , op. cit., p. 92. Pliny had close personal links with this group and their memory was evidently greatly revered in his circle; cf. epp. 3. 16; 6. 29; 7. 19; 8. 22; 3. 11; 4. 21; 9. 13; 1. 5; 1. 15; 2. 1854. 22; 6. 14.Google Scholar

page 128 note 5 Ann, . 16. 22Google Scholar. Thrasea's biography of Cato Minor: Plutarch, , Cato Minor 25Google Scholar. Juvenal, 5Google Scholar. 36–37: ‘quale coronati Thrasea Helvidiusque bibebant/Brutorum et Cassi natalibus’.

page 128 note 6 Syme, , op. cit., p. 93Google Scholar on Titinius Capito, and Plin, . ep. 2. 17.Google Scholar

page 128 note 7 Cf. below, p. 131. On Tacitus' treatment, see Syme, , op. cit., pp. 555–61Google Scholar; also Walker, B., The Annals of Tacitus, pp. 229–31. This author has an interesting comparison with Tacitus' view of Caratacus and Boudicca.Google Scholar

page 128 note 8 Ann, . 14. 49Google Scholar: ‘ … Thrasea sueta firmitudine animi et ne gloria intercideret’; 16. 26: ‘Rusticus Arulenus, flagrans iuvenis et cupidine laudis’; Hist. 4. 6: ‘Helvidius Priscus: erant quibus adpetentior famae videretur’.Google Scholar

page 128 note 9 Ann, . 14. 49Google Scholar: Thrasea obtained commutation of a death sentence—but this was later brought up against him, Ann, . 16. 21Google Scholar; Ann, . 14. 12Google Scholar: ‘Thrasea Paetus … sibi causam periculi fecit, ceteris libertatis initium non praebuit’; Hist. 4. 9: (under Vespasian) ‘eam sententiam modestissimus quisque silentio, deinde oblivio transmisit: fuere qui et meminissent’.Google Scholar

page 128 note 10 Ann, . 13. 49Google Scholar: futility of Thrasea's interventions on behalf of libertas senatoria pointed out ironically by showing that Thrasea would not risk speaking on issues that mattered; Ann, . 16. 21–22Google Scholar: prosecutor's speech shows how Thrasea's every demonstration was remembered against him; Hist. 4. 8Google Scholar: the evil (Ann, . 16. 28Google Scholar) Eprius Marcellus: ‘quo modo pessimis imperatoribus sine finem dominationem, ita quamvis egregiis modum libertatis placere’; ibid. 43: ‘… relinquimus tibi senatum tuum, regna praesente Caesare'. Cf. the warning given to Pliny in similar circumstances: ep. 9. 13. 10: ‘notabilem te futuris principibus fecisti’.

page 129 note 1 Arulenus Rusticus and Herennius Senecio: Agr. 2. 1Google Scholar and ibid. 45. 1; also Helvidius Priscus the younger, ibid. 45. 1.

page 129 note 2 Is the reference wider than the conduct of the opposition group ? See Wirzsubski, C., op. cit., pp. 149–50Google Scholar. In Agr. 42. 4Google Scholar ff. inani iactatione libertatis seems to refer specifically to the group, whose practice of libertas was famous, e.g. Ann, . 16. 22Google Scholar; ibid. 24; Hist. 4. 5Google Scholar. contumacia was used by his opponents to describe Thrasea's attitude, Ann, . 16. 22Google Scholar and 16. 22. ‘per abrupta … ambitiosa morte inclaruerunt’, could also describe men who were executed for more active resistance than was practised by the group, but it is parallel to the clause ‘quia non contumacia … fama fatumque provocabat’, (cf. Lepidus', , verdict Ann. 4Google Scholar. 20) and in the latter clause active resisters are evidently not meant. Also the question of resistance to tyranny has hardly (perhaps 40. 3) been raised in the Agricola.

It is of course possible that there were numerous ostentatious and provocative, but not actively revolutionary, opponents of the emperors outside the group, and that these are meant. But this is unlikely, contumacia was too dangerous. Surely a man like Thrasea was famous precisely because he dared do what many thought. Both Thrasea (Ann, . 16. 25Google Scholar) and Helvidius, (Hist. 4Google Scholar. 6) were urged by followers to be more uncompromising. But it was they and not the followers who were to win the glory and the penalty; cf. also Ann, . 16. 22 on admirers.Google Scholar

To sum up: the language of the passage is sufficiently vague not to exclude wider interpretation altogether but the indications point at the opposition group.

page 129 note 3 inlicita, ‘forbidden’, in the sense ‘not approved by the emperor’, as in Ann, . 6. 8Google Scholar. 22: ‘abditos principis sensus et si quid occultius parat exquirere inlicitum anceps’. Furneaux-Anderson, , op. cit., p. 151Google Scholar, cite Ann, . 3. 27Google Scholar. 6, honoris inlicitos, but this might mean ‘contrary to the constitution’, which was strictly true of none of the actions reported by Tacitus or even the extreme rudeness of Helvidius, in Suet. Vesp. 15Google Scholar. Dio 66. 12 goes further, but see Syme, , op. cit., p. 551Google Scholar; Wirszubski, , op. cit., pp. 148–9.Google Scholar

page 129 note 4 For discussions of this question see Furneaux-Anderson, , op. cit., pp. xxviiiGoogle Scholar ff., Syme, , op. cit., pp. 24–26.Google Scholar

page 129 note 5 Cf. Furneaux-Anderson, , op. cit., p. xxxi.Google Scholar

page 129 note 6 Dio 68. 1. Aquillius Regulus (cf. Hist. 4. 42Google Scholar, Syme, , op. cit., pp. 1012)Google Scholar fears prosecution by Pliny: Plin, . ep. 1. 5Google Scholar. Detailed account of attempt to avenge the younger Helvidius Priscus: ibid. 9. 13; 9. 13. 21, leniency to senators. The Praetorian Guard insisted on punishment of Domitian's murderers, Dio 68. 3. On the situation see Syme, , op. cit. pp. 7 and 77–78.Google Scholar

page 129 note 7 See Syme, op. cit., pp. 3–6Google Scholar (under Nerva), ibid., pp. 50–54 (under Trajan), abo Appendix 14. Also ibid., p. 101 and Dial. 8 for the formidable position of two notorious Neronian delatores under the ‘good’, Vespasian.

page 129 note 8 Syme, , op. cit., p. 2.Google Scholar

page 129 note 9 Ibid., pp. 33–35.

page 130 note 1 Cf. Cicero, , ad Fam. 4Google Scholar. 14. 1: ‘sin autem in eo dignitas est, si quod sentias, aut re efficere possis aut denique libera oratione defendere non vestigium ullum est reliquum nobis dignitatis'. On the republican tradition of dignitas and its incompatibility with otium see references in index of Ch. Wirszubski, op. cit.

page 130 note 2 Cf. Nepos, Atticus. Atticus', principle of keeping out of all political controversy and partisanships enabled him to survive the age of civil wars. But unlike Agricola he kept clear of public service too.

page 130 note 3 Ann, . 3. 55Google Scholar. Cf. Syme, , op. cit., p. 339Google Scholar; Verg, . Geor. 2Google Scholar. 174; Tac, . Hist. 1Google Scholar. 3. 3. Other arguments based on historical determination of custom, Ann, . 3. 34Google Scholar, 12. 6 (a dishonourable cause), 2. 33, with Tacitus', comment: ‘sub nominibus honestis confessio vitiorum’.

page 131 note 1 Dial. 41; translation of Peterson, W. in the Loeb series, London, 1914.Google Scholar

page 131 note 2 Pliny felt obliged to point out how nearly he himself became a victim, ep0. 3. 11.

page 131 note 3 Agr. 45. 3Google Scholar: ‘ … constans ep libens fatum excepisti, tamquam pro virili portione innocentiam principi donares'. Also ibid. 43.4: ‘tam caeca et corrupta mens (of Domitian) … ut nesciret a bono patre non scribi heredem nisi malum principem'. Another example of Domitian being ‘acquitted’, by a victim, Plin, . ep. 4. 11. 13.Google Scholar

page 131 note 4 On Tacitus’, technique see Schwinge, E. R., ‘Festinata triors’, Rheinisches Museum, cxvi (1963), 363–78.Google Scholar

page 131 note 5 Furneaux-Anderson, on Agr. 2Google Scholar. 2, ‘conscientiam generis humani’, quote Ann, . 4. 35Google Scholar. 6: ‘praesenti potentia credunt extingui posse etiam sequentis aevi memoriam’.

page 131 note 6 In this case the fact that Vespasian would not allow retaliation except against scapegoats selected for their insignificance, ibid. 44; cf. above, p. 129, notes 4 and 7.

page 132 note 1 Ann, . 16. 21Google Scholar: ‘ … Nero virtutem ipsam exscindere concupivit interfecto Thrasea Paeto et Barea Sorano'. The trial and death are described very fully; cf. Syme, , op. cit., p. 561, n. 8.Google Scholar

page 132 note 2 Hist. 2. 38Google Scholar: ‘ … sed ubi subacto orbe et aemulis urbibus regibusve excisis securas opes concupiscere vacuum fuit … ’. But the idea seems less important than in Sallust.

page 132 note 3 Cf. Ann, . 4. 32Google Scholar: ‘nobis in arto et inglorius labor’, and Walker, B., op. cit., pp. 200–3.Google Scholar

page 132 note 4 Cf. p. 130, n. 3 above. The fact that Tacitus reports three debates on related topics suggests that he was not sure about the answer; cf. Ann, . 2. 33; 3. 33–34; 3. 52–55.Google Scholar

page 132 note 5 e.g. Dial. 41: ‘Quid enim opus est longis in senatu sententiis, cum optimi cito consentiant? Quid multis apud populum contionibus, cum de republica non imperiti et multi deliberent sed sapientissimus et unus ?’, Cf. Syme, , op. cit., p. 220.Google Scholar

page 132 note 6 The following paragraphs are based on Büchner, K., lsquo;Das Proemium zum Agricola des Tacitus’, Wiener Studien, lxix (1956), pp. 321–41Google Scholar, which demonstrates a close parallel in structure and argument between chapters 1 and 3.

page 132 note 7 When did the good age end ? According to the Agricola, presumably later than the time of Rutilius and Scaurus. According to Ann, . 3. 28Google Scholar, in Pompeius', third consulate—or after the Twelve Tables? According to Hist. 2. 38, perhaps after the destruction of Carthage. One suspects that as an historian Tacitus could not assign a critical point in time.Google Scholar

page 132 note 8 Agr. 1. 4Google Scholar. Here and elsewhere I have made much use of the translation of die Agricola of H. Mattingly. ‘Venia opus fuit’, is taken by Furneaux-Anderson to refer to the time of writing, as in a letter, with reference to Ann, . 4. 5. 6: ‘persequi incertum fuit’; 3. 65: ‘exsequi haud institui’.Google Scholar

page 133 note 1 The hostility is not only the emperor's but society's as a whole. Individuals believe that accounts of crimes of others are intended to refer to themselves: Ann, . 4. 33Google Scholar. This was an age when criticism was conveyed obliquely as by Maternus in his play, Dial. 3. On the ‘indulgence’, see below, n. 4.

page 133 note 2 Agr. 3. 1Google Scholar; cf. Syme, , op. cit., p. 7.Google Scholar

page 133 note 3 Not to mention the check to military achievement by military commanders resulting from a fact known to ‘good’, as well as ‘bad’, emperors: ‘ducis boni imperatoriam virtutem esse’, (Agr. 39).

page 133 note 4 Agr. 3. 3Google Scholar. Cf. Pliny, , ep. 9Google Scholar. 13. 16; Büchner, , op. cit. p. 132Google Scholar, n. 6, above, pp. 324–5, cites examples from law-court practice; Dial. 10; Hist. 4. 42Google Scholar; the technique: Cic, . de Or. 2. 49. 202.Google Scholar

page 134 note 1 ‘Nos Maurici Rusticique visus foedavit’; so Furneaux-Anderson, but see their note with reference to marginal ‘Mauricum Rusticumque divisimus’. K. Büchner. op. cit., n. 28, reads ‘nos Maurici Rusticique visus … perfudit’, with reference to the use of ambiuntur in Germ. 17. 16.

page 134 note 2 Wirszubski, , op. cit., p. 166.Google Scholar

page 134 note 3 Agr. 4. 1Google Scholar. In spite of occasional criticisms of ‘ostentatious deaths’—e.g. Ann, . 15. 71Google Scholar: ‘veniam … vanitate exitus corrupit’—Tacitus accepted that in the absence of other opportunities a man could be judged by the way he died. See Schunck, P., ‘Studien zur Darstellung des Endes von Galba, Otho, und Vitellius in den Historien des Tacitus’, Symbolae Osloenses, fasc. xxxix, 1964, 38–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 134 note 4 Memmius Regulus: Ann, . 14. 47Google Scholar; Furius Camillus: ibid. 2. 52; Frontinus, Julius: Agr. 17Google Scholar. 2; Lepidus, M.: Ann. 4Google Scholar. 20 (rather an exceptional man); Piso, L.: Ann. 6Google Scholar. 10. 3–5; Volusius, L.: Ann. 13Google Scholar. 30. Cf. Wirszubski, , op. cit., p. 166.Google Scholar

page 134 note 5 Dial. 3 and 41. Cf. praise of Pomponius Secundus: Ann. 12. 28Google Scholar. 2; Syme, , op. cit., PP. 338–9.Google Scholar

page 134 note 6 Cf. Hist. 3. 51: ‘ … tanto acrior apud maiores sicut virtutibus gloria, ita flagitiis paenitentia fuit’.Google Scholar

page 134 note 7 Syme, , op. cit., p. 29.Google Scholar

page 135 note 1 e.g. Agr. 10, allegedly new information about the north of Britain.

page 135 note 2 Agr. 12. 6Google Scholar: ‘pretium victoriae’, against Strabo 4. 5. 3. Note that giving up of Britain had been considered: Suet, . Nero 18Google Scholar. Agricola's conquests were partly surrendered, Hist. 1. 2: ‘perdomita Britannia et statim missa’.Google Scholar

page 135 note 3 e.g. character and grievances of Britons explain Agricola's administration; so Agr. 13: ‘ … impigre obeunt si iniuriae absint’; ibid. 19 Agricola eliminates iniuriae.

page 135 note 4 Hence the sketchiness of information in some respects compared with Caesar or Strabo. On Roman geographical descriptions: Syme, , op. cit., p. 126. Sallust although once proconsul of Africa did not use personally gained information for his excursus, Iug. 17.Google Scholar

page 135 note 5 Tac, . Ger. 2–4Google Scholar origin, ibid. 6 ff. customs, starting with military customs. Similarly Caesar, B.G. 5. 12. 1–2 origins of Britons, ibid. 14 customs. Ammianus on Gauls: 15. 9. 1 origins, ibid. 15. 12. customs. For Gauls and Germans Caesar describes customs only, B.G. 6. 11 ff. Sall. lug. 17–19 has only origins of peoples and cities of Africa. Strabo 4. 5. 2 deals only with customs of Britons.

page 135 note 6 ferocia, cf. Traub, H. W., ‘Tacitus', use of ferocia’, T.A.P.A. lxxxiv (1953), 250–61Google Scholar; on this passage and Agr. 37. 6Google Scholar: ibid. p. 252.

page 136 note 1 Hist. 1. 16: ‘imperaturus es hominibus qui nee totam servitutem pati possunt nee totam libertatem’.Google Scholar

page 136 note 2 See above, p. 126, n. 9.

page 137 note 1 Cf. debate of Arminius and Flavus, Ann, . 2. 9–10Google Scholar; speech of Arminius, ibid. 2. 15; Caratacus, ibid. 12. 34 and 37.

page 137 note 2 Civilis, , Hist. 4Google Scholar. 14, ibid. 17, ibid. 32.

page 137 note 3 Notice disparagement of Percennius and discrediting of his arguments, Ann, . 1. 16Google Scholar. On this see Auerbach, E., Mimesis (Anchor Book edition, 1957). P. 32.Google Scholar

page 137 note 4 e.g. Agr. 13. 3Google Scholar; ironical comment on decision not to conquer Britain: ‘consilium id divus Augustus vocabat, Tiberius praeceptum'. Ibid. 16, sneers at peaceful governor. Ann, . 4. 32Google Scholar: ‘ … nobis in arto et inglorius labor, immota quippe aut modice lacessita pax … princeps proferendi imperii incuriosus erat’; ibid. 38, ‘Iulius Classicianus … Suetonio discors, bonum publicum privatum simultatibus impediebat’, on attempts to obtain more humane methods of pacification. Cf. also Agricola's view, Agr. 35: ‘ingens victoriae decus citra Romanum sanguinem bellandi'. The tactics of keeping legions in reserve were also employed by Trajan on his Dacian campaign, see Richmond, I., op. cit. p. 127Google Scholar n. 1, p. 43. Cf. also the callousness of Ger. 33 ‘ … seu favore quodam erga nos deorum: nam ne spectaculo quidem proelii invidere super sexaginta milia non armis telisque Romanis, sed quod magnificentius est, oblectationi oculisque ceciderunt’.

page 138 note 1 Ann, . 13. 55Google Scholar, request: ‘ne vastitatem et solitudinem mallent quam amicos populos’; their fate: ibid. 56: ‘ … errore longo hospites, egeni, hostes in alieno quod iuventutis erat caeduntur, imbellis aetas in praedam divisaest’.

page 138 note 2 Ibid. 54: ‘captis caesisve qui pervicacius restiterant'.

page 138 note 3 Cf. Ger. 28.

page 138 note 4 Ann, . 2. 2Google Scholar ff. Other accounts of failures of princes educated at Rome, ibid. 9. 16; 12. 11, 29–30; 14. 26.

page 138 note 5 libertas among Germans, : Ger. 11, 21, 25, 28, 44, an exception 45; their morals, 18 ff.; the most difficult enemies of the Romans, 37: ‘quippe regno Arsacis acrior est Germanorum libertas’.Google Scholar

page 138 note 6 Cf. speeches in Sallust lug. 14 and 24.

page 138 note 7 Hist. 4. 68Google Scholar. 6: ‘ … cuncta magnis imperiis obiectari solita’;. Originated by Carneades? Cic. Rep., ed. Müller, C. F. W., Teubner, 3Google Scholar. 12. 21 from Lact. Inst. Div. 5. 16Google Scholar. 2–4; Rep. 3. 14Google Scholar, ibid. 15. Used in resistance to Rome: Sallust, , Hist., ep. Mith. 17–21Google Scholar. Freedom fight of barbarians: Caesar, B.G. 7. 77 (speech of Critognatus). See Fuchs, H., Der geistige Widerstand gegen Rom in der antiken Welt (Berlin, 1938), pp. 17 and 47.Google Scholar

page 139 note 1 Quits and otium among barbarians: Agr. 21, ‘ut … quieti et otio per voluptates adsuescerent’; ibid. n. 5: ‘mox segnitia cum otio intravit amissa virtute pariter ac libertate’;. Among Romans, Dial. 41: ‘quoniam nemo eodem tempore adsequi potest magnam famam et magnam quietem …’. Tyrants enforce quies or otium on individuals: Agr. 6. 3; 42. 2. Cf. Ann, . 1. 2. 6; 12. 12. 2.Google Scholar

page 139 note 2 Agr. 31. 4: ‘virtus porro ac ferocia subiectorum ingrata imperantibus’; 41. 1: ‘infensus virtutibus princeps’.Google Scholar

page 139 note 3 Cf. Agr. 31. 3–4Google Scholar with Agr. 44. 5: ‘Domitianus non iam per intervalla … rem publicam exhausit’.Google Scholar

page 139 note 4 Agr. 24. 3Google Scholar: ‘ … et velut e conspectu libertas tolleretur’. Similarly Britons consider sight of servitium infectious, ibid. 30. 3. Cf. at Rome, : Agr. 2Google Scholar. 2 and 39. 3.

page 139 note 5 See above, p. 136, n. 1.