Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:13:02.384Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Personal Names in Annals I–VI

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2012

Ronald Syme
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Names of persons in the Codex Mediceus prior exhibit familiar corruptions, and many of the necessary corrections were easily made. The cogent evidence was often external—the same character appeared elsewhere in Tacitus, or in some other writer, and inscriptions might certify the orthography of a name or even permit the identification of an individual. None the less, there were, and there are, traps and uncertainties. First, an inoffensive or unimpeachable name need not be correct. Nobody would have suspected ‘Livius’ (Ann. II, 30, I—twice) : only later passages (IV, 13, 2; 28, I) showed that the person referred to was in fact Vibius Serenus. And ‘Vescularius Atticus” (Ann. VI, 10, 2) would stand but for ‘Vescularius Flaccus ’ (II, 28, I). Secondly, the rarity (genuine or only fancied) of a name has often been allowed to impugn it. On the contrary, if a gentilicium is uncommon, or even unique, that is no ground for discomfort. The nomenclature of Italy is startling, fantastic and myriad in its manifestations. The Annals of Tacitus display names which, deceptively familiar from their occurrence in a classical text, are yet of a rarity to adorn an onomatological aviary.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 39 , Issue 1-2 , November 1949 , pp. 6 - 18
Copyright
Copyright © Ronald Syme 1949. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

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 common types of corruption were neatly classified and discussed by G. Andresen, ‘Korrumpierte Eigennamen bei Tacitus,’ Woch. für cl. Phil.1915, 1097 ff.; 1121 ff.

2 Thus Fisher, ‘Latinus’ (Ann. IV, 71, I); Köstermann, ‘Curtius’ (ib. 27, 2) and ‘Publicum’ (Hist. Iv, 10, I).

3 Schulten, A., ‘Italische Namen und Stämme,’ Klio II (1902), 167 ffGoogle Scholar. and 440 ff.; III (1903), 235 ff.

4 W. Schulze in his monumental work (‘Zur Geschichte lateinischer Eigennamen’, Gött. Abh., phil.-hist. Klasse, N.F. V, 5, 1904 : referred to in the following observations as LE) did not realize until it was too late the importance of establishing the regional distribution of names in ‘-ienus’. He was therefore compelled to employ the material as published by Conway—whose methods he describes as ‘crude and superficial’. Compare his remarks, ‘Conway's Gedanke, das Namenmaterial in die Stoffsammlung für die italischen Dialekte aufzunehmen, ist ausgezeichnet, aber seine Ausführung ist doch allzu roh und ausserlich. Leider habe ich versäumt, rechtzeitig die Frage nach der Verbreitung des Suffixes -ienus in meine Untersuchung einzubeziehen und muss nun das Material benutzen, wie es bei Conway dargeboten wird’ (LE 104).

5 Andresen's new edition (1913) of Halm's Teubner text of the Annals registered many improvements on the previous edition of Halm (1883), among them rectifications of proper names; cf. also his article referred to above, p. 6, n. I. Of some three hundred changes of all kinds, about one-half were a return to the readings of the Codex.

6 For a brief hint about M. Lepidus, see Rom. Rev (1939), 433.

7 Cf. Rom. Rev. (1939), 360 ff.; 456.

8 If some have been overlooked, the scattered and unsystematic publication of epigraphic material can take a part of the blame.

9 Namely those of E. Köstermann (Teubner, 1934, replacing Halm-Andresen5, 1913); M. Lenchantin de Gubernatis (Regia Academia Italica, 1940); H. Fuchs (Editiones Helveticae, 1946). For observations on the last of these, cf. JRS XXXVIII (1948),122 ff. Lenchantin's text is provided with a complete and admirable apparatus. The present inquiry has been conducted independently of Fabia's Onomasticon Taciteum (1900), and, for the sake of brevity, makes no reference to that work.