8/12/2019 Sickle Elogia

1/15

THE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELII SCIPIONES AND THEORIGIN OF EPIGRAM AT ROMEModern discussion of the elogia of the Scipios began just over a

century ago. In the view that then prevailed, the elogia were preciousexemplars of native Latin literature and Roman national poetry as yetuntinged by Greek influence. But Eduard Wolfflin, in two incisive arti-cles (1890, 1892), redated the earliest inscriptions and attributed themto poets who were purveyors of Greek literary culture at Rome, Enniusand Pacuvius. Wolfflin's attributions, however, found little acceptanceand his chronology, too, came under attack. Most recently the chronol-ogy has been placed on a more credible basis by Degrassi, La Regina,Zevi and Coarelli, who have clarified the historical and cultural circum-stances to which the elogia belong. But progress has come at the cost ofblurring the status of the elogia themselves. They have yet to be creditedwith their full part in the import of the monument. Properly integratedwith their context, the elogia emerge as significant documents of thenew Hellenism in mid-republican Rome.

Even before we look at the texts, their milieu suggests interest inthe Hellenistic world. As Zevi has emphasized, the Via Appia tangiblyrepresents Roman ambition to expand towards southern Italy and be-yond,1 and he infers that the choice of Appius Claudius's new road asthe site for a family sepulcher must have had a politico-cultural import.Confirmation may be found, suggests Coarelli, in the fact that otherleading gentes of the period, the Metelli, the Servilii and the Atilii, alllocated their sepulchers along the new way to the South.2 The verse elo-gium of an Atilius affords the only direct parallel to the Scipionic elogiaand the funeral laudation of a Caecilius Metellus shares themes, as weshall see in a moment.

Turning now to the sepulcher, its contents were dominated by thesarcophagus of L. Scipio Barbatus (cos. 298), placed at the head of thecentral aisle and alone endowed with decoration. Elegantly conceived inthe form of a great altar, with triglyphs and rosettes in metopes acrossthe facade, and with ionic scrolls on the ends of the cover, it lacks con-

'Zevi 1968.73.2Coarelli 1972.39, citing Cicero, Tusc. 1.7.13, An tu egressus porta Capena cumCalatini, Scipionum, Seruiliorum, Metellorum sepulchra uides, miseros putas illos?AmericanJournalof Philology 108 (1987) 41-55 ? 1987 by The Johns HopkinsUniversityPress

THE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELII SCIPIONES AND THEORIGIN OF EPIGRAM AT ROMEModern discussion of the elogia of the Scipios began just over a

century ago. In the view that then prevailed, the elogia were preciousexemplars of native Latin literature and Roman national poetry as yetuntinged by Greek influence. But Eduard Wolfflin, in two incisive arti-cles (1890, 1892), redated the earliest inscriptions and attributed themto poets who were purveyors of Greek literary culture at Rome, Enniusand Pacuvius. Wolfflin's attributions, however, found little acceptanceand his chronology, too, came under attack. Most recently the chronol-ogy has been placed on a more credible basis by Degrassi, La Regina,Zevi and Coarelli, who have clarified the historical and cultural circum-stances to which the elogia belong. But progress has come at the cost ofblurring the status of the elogia themselves. They have yet to be creditedwith their full part in the import of the monument. Properly integratedwith their context, the elogia emerge as significant documents of thenew Hellenism in mid-republican Rome.

Even before we look at the texts, their milieu suggests interest inthe Hellenistic world. As Zevi has emphasized, the Via Appia tangiblyrepresents Roman ambition to expand towards southern Italy and be-yond,1 and he infers that the choice of Appius Claudius's new road asthe site for a family sepulcher must have had a politico-cultural import.Confirmation may be found, suggests Coarelli, in the fact that otherleading gentes of the period, the Metelli, the Servilii and the Atilii, alllocated their sepulchers along the new way to the South.2 The verse elo-gium of an Atilius affords the only direct parallel to the Scipionic elogiaand the funeral laudation of a Caecilius Metellus shares themes, as weshall see in a moment.

Turning now to the sepulcher, its contents were dominated by thesarcophagus of L. Scipio Barbatus (cos. 298), placed at the head of thecentral aisle and alone endowed with decoration. Elegantly conceived inthe form of a great altar, with triglyphs and rosettes in metopes acrossthe facade, and with ionic scrolls on the ends of the cover, it lacks con-

'Zevi 1968.73.2Coarelli 1972.39, citing Cicero, Tusc. 1.7.13, An tu egressus porta Capena cumCalatini, Scipionum, Seruiliorum, Metellorum sepulchra uides, miseros putas illos?AmericanJournalof Philology 108 (1987) 41-55 ? 1987 by The Johns HopkinsUniversityPress

THE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELII SCIPIONES AND THEORIGIN OF EPIGRAM AT ROMEModern discussion of the elogia of the Scipios began just over a

century ago. In the view that then prevailed, the elogia were preciousexemplars of native Latin literature and Roman national poetry as yetuntinged by Greek influence. But Eduard Wolfflin, in two incisive arti-cles (1890, 1892), redated the earliest inscriptions and attributed themto poets who were purveyors of Greek literary culture at Rome, Enniusand Pacuvius. Wolfflin's attributions, however, found little acceptanceand his chronology, too, came under attack. Most recently the chronol-ogy has been placed on a more credible basis by Degrassi, La Regina,Zevi and Coarelli, who have clarified the historical and cultural circum-stances to which the elogia belong. But progress has come at the cost ofblurring the status of the elogia themselves. They have yet to be creditedwith their full part in the import of the monument. Properly integratedwith their context, the elogia emerge as significant documents of thenew Hellenism in mid-republican Rome.

Even before we look at the texts, their milieu suggests interest inthe Hellenistic world. As Zevi has emphasized, the Via Appia tangiblyrepresents Roman ambition to expand towards southern Italy and be-yond,1 and he infers that the choice of Appius Claudius's new road asthe site for a family sepulcher must have had a politico-cultural import.Confirmation may be found, suggests Coarelli, in the fact that otherleading gentes of the period, the Metelli, the Servilii and the Atilii, alllocated their sepulchers along the new way to the South.2 The verse elo-gium of an Atilius affords the only direct parallel to the Scipionic elogiaand the funeral laudation of a Caecilius Metellus shares themes, as weshall see in a moment.

Turning now to the sepulcher, its contents were dominated by thesarcophagus of L. Scipio Barbatus (cos. 298), placed at the head of thecentral aisle and alone endowed with decoration. Elegantly conceived inthe form of a great altar, with triglyphs and rosettes in metopes acrossthe facade, and with ionic scrolls on the ends of the cover, it lacks con-

'Zevi 1968.73.2Coarelli 1972.39, citing Cicero, Tusc. 1.7.13, An tu egressus porta Capena cumCalatini, Scipionum, Seruiliorum, Metellorum sepulchra uides, miseros putas illos?AmericanJournalof Philology 108 (1987) 41-55 ? 1987 by The Johns HopkinsUniversityPress

THE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELII SCIPIONES AND THEORIGIN OF EPIGRAM AT ROMEModern discussion of the elogia of the Scipios began just over a

century ago. In the view that then prevailed, the elogia were preciousexemplars of native Latin literature and Roman national poetry as yetuntinged by Greek influence. But Eduard Wolfflin, in two incisive arti-cles (1890, 1892), redated the earliest inscriptions and attributed themto poets who were purveyors of Greek literary culture at Rome, Enniusand Pacuvius. Wolfflin's attributions, however, found little acceptanceand his chronology, too, came under attack. Most recently the chronol-ogy has been placed on a more credible basis by Degrassi, La Regina,Zevi and Coarelli, who have clarified the historical and cultural circum-stances to which the elogia belong. But progress has come at the cost ofblurring the status of the elogia themselves. They have yet to be creditedwith their full part in the import of the monument. Properly integratedwith their context, the elogia emerge as significant documents of thenew Hellenism in mid-republican Rome.

Even before we look at the texts, their milieu suggests interest inthe Hellenistic world. As Zevi has emphasized, the Via Appia tangiblyrepresents Roman ambition to expand towards southern Italy and be-yond,1 and he infers that the choice of Appius Claudius's new road asthe site for a family sepulcher must have had a politico-cultural import.Confirmation may be found, suggests Coarelli, in the fact that otherleading gentes of the period, the Metelli, the Servilii and the Atilii, alllocated their sepulchers along the new way to the South.2 The verse elo-gium of an Atilius affords the only direct parallel to the Scipionic elogiaand the funeral laudation of a Caecilius Metellus shares themes, as weshall see in a moment.

Turning now to the sepulcher, its contents were dominated by thesarcophagus of L. Scipio Barbatus (cos. 298), placed at the head of thecentral aisle and alone endowed with decoration. Elegantly conceived inthe form of a great altar, with triglyphs and rosettes in metopes acrossthe facade, and with ionic scrolls on the ends of the cover, it lacks con-

'Zevi 1968.73.2Coarelli 1972.39, citing Cicero, Tusc. 1.7.13, An tu egressus porta Capena cumCalatini, Scipionum, Seruiliorum, Metellorum sepulchra uides, miseros putas illos?AmericanJournalof Philology 108 (1987) 41-55 ? 1987 by The Johns HopkinsUniversityPress

THE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELII SCIPIONES AND THEORIGIN OF EPIGRAM AT ROMEModern discussion of the elogia of the Scipios began just over a

century ago. In the view that then prevailed, the elogia were preciousexemplars of native Latin literature and Roman national poetry as yetuntinged by Greek influence. But Eduard Wolfflin, in two incisive arti-cles (1890, 1892), redated the earliest inscriptions and attributed themto poets who were purveyors of Greek literary culture at Rome, Enniusand Pacuvius. Wolfflin's attributions, however, found little acceptanceand his chronology, too, came under attack. Most recently the chronol-ogy has been placed on a more credible basis by Degrassi, La Regina,Zevi and Coarelli, who have clarified the historical and cultural circum-stances to which the elogia belong. But progress has come at the cost ofblurring the status of the elogia themselves. They have yet to be creditedwith their full part in the import of the monument. Properly integratedwith their context, the elogia emerge as significant documents of thenew Hellenism in mid-republican Rome.

Even before we look at the texts, their milieu suggests interest inthe Hellenistic world. As Zevi has emphasized, the Via Appia tangiblyrepresents Roman ambition to expand towards southern Italy and be-yond,1 and he infers that the choice of Appius Claudius's new road asthe site for a family sepulcher must have had a politico-cultural import.Confirmation may be found, suggests Coarelli, in the fact that otherleading gentes of the period, the Metelli, the Servilii and the Atilii, alllocated their sepulchers along the new way to the South.2 The verse elo-gium of an Atilius affords the only direct parallel to the Scipionic elogiaand the funeral laudation of a Caecilius Metellus shares themes, as weshall see in a moment.

Turning now to the sepulcher, its contents were dominated by thesarcophagus of L. Scipio Barbatus (cos. 298), placed at the head of thecentral aisle and alone endowed with decoration. Elegantly conceived inthe form of a great altar, with triglyphs and rosettes in metopes acrossthe facade, and with ionic scrolls on the ends of the cover, it lacks con-

'Zevi 1968.73.2Coarelli 1972.39, citing Cicero, Tusc. 1.7.13, An tu egressus porta Capena cumCalatini, Scipionum, Seruiliorum, Metellorum sepulchra uides, miseros putas illos?AmericanJournalof Philology 108 (1987) 41-55 ? 1987 by The Johns HopkinsUniversityPress

THE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELII SCIPIONES AND THEORIGIN OF EPIGRAM AT ROMEModern discussion of the elogia of the Scipios began just over a

century ago. In the view that then prevailed, the elogia were preciousexemplars of native Latin literature and Roman national poetry as yetuntinged by Greek influence. But Eduard Wolfflin, in two incisive arti-cles (1890, 1892), redated the earliest inscriptions and attributed themto poets who were purveyors of Greek literary culture at Rome, Enniusand Pacuvius. Wolfflin's attributions, however, found little acceptanceand his chronology, too, came under attack. Most recently the chronol-ogy has been placed on a more credible basis by Degrassi, La Regina,Zevi and Coarelli, who have clarified the historical and cultural circum-stances to which the elogia belong. But progress has come at the cost ofblurring the status of the elogia themselves. They have yet to be creditedwith their full part in the import of the monument. Properly integratedwith their context, the elogia emerge as significant documents of thenew Hellenism in mid-republican Rome.

Even before we look at the texts, their milieu suggests interest inthe Hellenistic world. As Zevi has emphasized, the Via Appia tangiblyrepresents Roman ambition to expand towards southern Italy and be-yond,1 and he infers that the choice of Appius Claudius's new road asthe site for a family sepulcher must have had a politico-cultural import.Confirmation may be found, suggests Coarelli, in the fact that otherleading gentes of the period, the Metelli, the Servilii and the Atilii, alllocated their sepulchers along the new way to the South.2 The verse elo-gium of an Atilius affords the only direct parallel to the Scipionic elogiaand the funeral laudation of a Caecilius Metellus shares themes, as weshall see in a moment.

Turning now to the sepulcher, its contents were dominated by thesarcophagus of L. Scipio Barbatus (cos. 298), placed at the head of thecentral aisle and alone endowed with decoration. Elegantly conceived inthe form of a great altar, with triglyphs and rosettes in metopes acrossthe facade, and with ionic scrolls on the ends of the cover, it lacks con-

'Zevi 1968.73.2Coarelli 1972.39, citing Cicero, Tusc. 1.7.13, An tu egressus porta Capena cumCalatini, Scipionum, Seruiliorum, Metellorum sepulchra uides, miseros putas illos?AmericanJournalof Philology 108 (1987) 41-55 ? 1987 by The Johns HopkinsUniversityPress

This content downloaded from 161.116.184.231 on Tue, 8 Apr 2014 12:40:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

8/12/2019 Sickle Elogia

2/15

JON VAN SICKLEON VAN SICKLEON VAN SICKLEON VAN SICKLEON VAN SICKLEON VAN SICKLE

temporary parallels in Rome or Latium and Etruria but has been com-pared to a series of small altars found in Sicily and even in some respectsto the great altar of Hieron from Syracuse: it represents, in Zevi's view, amarked turning point in the cultural interests of at least part of the Ro-man nobility.3 The new form conveys, too, an ideological departure:4 itreplaces the model of the house, which suggested traditional Romanveneration for the head of the family, with the altar that is characteris-tic of heroic shrines in the Hellenistic world following the achievementsof Alexander. Already then before we begin to consider the inscriptionswe have reason to expect cultural innovation and the impact of the Hel-lenistic world.

Four elogia in Saturnian verse and one in elegiacs have emergedfrom the sepulcher. Two of these provoke the major controversy. Al-though they commemorate father and son, Scipio Barbatus and FiliusBarbati, the elogium of the son is universally recognized as older in bothlettering and language.5 That of the father was inserted following anerased inscription; indeed, more economically than ceremoniously, ittakes up in the middle of the line where the erased inscription ended(El. 2). These peculiar circumstances were what prompted Wolfflin toargue that both elogia must be later than their respective burials. Point-ing to what he identified as Greek elements in their.language andthemes, he inferred that the two must have been added under the influ-ence of Scipio Africanus at the height of his power, in a burst of familypride following his victory at Zama.6 From here Wolfflin went on todismiss the belief that this was a purely Roman poetry and to argue forthe attribution to specific Hellenizing poets.Yet Wolfflin's idea of Ennius writing a kind of antiquarian impos-ture in Saturnians did not persuade.7 Nor does there seem finally to begood reason to deny that the elogium of the son is contemporary with hisburial, sometime in the third quarter of the third century.8 Now restudy

3Zevi 1973.238.4Ibid.5See TEXTS at end, El. 1.6Wolfflin 1890.122.7 Die Zuteilung der elogia an Ennius und Pacuvius .. steht auf schwachen Fus-sen : Schanz-Hosius 19352.40. Nor have attempts convinced to downdate the father's

ornately monumental sarcophagus even to the next century, Zevi 1973.234, in part be-cause its unique form fits the centrality of its position in the sepulcher and its monolithictype fits earlier rather than later in the series of sarcophagi.

8Degrassi 19652 ad loc, but already Leo 1913.46.

temporary parallels in Rome or Latium and Etruria but has been com-pared to a series of small altars found in Sicily and even in some respectsto the great altar of Hieron from Syracuse: it represents, in Zevi's view, amarked turning point in the cultural interests of at least part of the Ro-man nobility.3 The new form conveys, too, an ideological departure:4 itreplaces the model of the house, which suggested traditional Romanveneration for the head of the family, with the altar that is characteris-tic of heroic shrines in the Hellenistic world following the achievementsof Alexander. Already then before we begin to consider the inscriptionswe have reason to expect cultural innovation and the impact of the Hel-lenistic world.

Four elogia in Saturnian verse and one in elegiacs have emergedfrom the sepulcher. Two of these provoke the major controversy. Al-though they commemorate father and son, Scipio Barbatus and FiliusBarbati, the elogium of the son is universally recognized as older in bothlettering and language.5 That of the father was inserted following anerased inscription; indeed, more economically than ceremoniously, ittakes up in the middle of the line where the erased inscription ended(El. 2). These peculiar circumstances were what prompted Wolfflin toargue that both elogia must be later than their respective burials. Point-ing to what he identified as Greek elements in their.language andthemes, he inferred that the two must have been added under the influ-ence of Scipio Africanus at the height of his power, in a burst of familypride following his victory at Zama.6 From here Wolfflin went on todismiss the belief that this was a purely Roman poetry and to argue forthe attribution to specific Hellenizing poets.Yet Wolfflin's idea of Ennius writing a kind of antiquarian impos-ture in Saturnians did not persuade.7 Nor does there seem finally to begood reason to deny that the elogium of the son is contemporary with hisburial, sometime in the third quarter of the third century.8 Now restudy

3Zevi 1973.238.4Ibid.5See TEXTS at end, El. 1.6Wolfflin 1890.122.7 Die Zuteilung der elogia an Ennius und Pacuvius .. steht auf schwachen Fus-sen : Schanz-Hosius 19352.40. Nor have attempts convinced to downdate the father's

ornately monumental sarcophagus even to the next century, Zevi 1973.234, in part be-cause its unique form fits the centrality of its position in the sepulcher and its monolithictype fits earlier rather than later in the series of sarcophagi.

8Degrassi 19652 ad loc, but already Leo 1913.46.

temporary parallels in Rome or Latium and Etruria but has been com-pared to a series of small altars found in Sicily and even in some respectsto the great altar of Hieron from Syracuse: it represents, in Zevi's view, amarked turning point in the cultural interests of at least part of the Ro-man nobility.3 The new form conveys, too, an ideological departure:4 itreplaces the model of the house, which suggested traditional Romanveneration for the head of the family, with the altar that is characteris-tic of heroic shrines in the Hellenistic world following the achievementsof Alexander. Already then before we begin to consider the inscriptionswe have reason to expect cultural innovation and the impact of the Hel-lenistic world.

Four elogia in Saturnian verse and one in elegiacs have emergedfrom the sepulcher. Two of these provoke the major controversy. Al-though they commemorate father and son, Scipio Barbatus and FiliusBarbati, the elogium of the son is universally recognized as older in bothlettering and language.5 That of the father was inserted following anerased inscription; indeed, more economically than ceremoniously, ittakes up in the middle of the line where the erased inscription ended(El. 2). These peculiar circumstances were what prompted Wolfflin toargue that both elogia must be later than their respective burials. Point-ing to what he identified as Greek elements in their.language andthemes, he inferred that the two must have been added under the influ-ence of Scipio Africanus at the height of his power, in a burst of familypride following his victory at Zama.6 From here Wolfflin went on todismiss the belief that this was a purely Roman poetry and to argue forthe attribution to specific Hellenizing poets.Yet Wolfflin's idea of Ennius writing a kind of antiquarian impos-ture in Saturnians did not persuade.7 Nor does there seem finally to begood reason to deny that the elogium of the son is contemporary with hisburial, sometime in the third quarter of the third century.8 Now restudy

3Zevi 1973.238.4Ibid.5See TEXTS at end, El. 1.6Wolfflin 1890.122.7 Die Zuteilung der elogia an Ennius und Pacuvius .. steht auf schwachen Fus-sen : Schanz-Hosius 19352.40. Nor have attempts convinced to downdate the father's

ornately monumental sarcophagus even to the next century, Zevi 1973.234, in part be-cause its unique form fits the centrality of its position in the sepulcher and its monolithictype fits earlier rather than later in the series of sarcophagi.

8Degrassi 19652 ad loc, but already Leo 1913.46.

temporary parallels in Rome or Latium and Etruria but has been com-pared to a series of small altars found in Sicily and even in some respectsto the great altar of Hieron from Syracuse: it represents, in Zevi's view, amarked turning point in the cultural interests of at least part of the Ro-man nobility.3 The new form conveys, too, an ideological departure:4 itreplaces the model of the house, which suggested traditional Romanveneration for the head of the family, with the altar that is characteris-tic of heroic shrines in the Hellenistic world following the achievementsof Alexander. Already then before we begin to consider the inscriptionswe have reason to expect cultural innovation and the impact of the Hel-lenistic world.

Four elogia in Saturnian verse and one in elegiacs have emergedfrom the sepulcher. Two of these provoke the major controversy. Al-though they commemorate father and son, Scipio Barbatus and FiliusBarbati, the elogium of the son is universally recognized as older in bothlettering and language.5 That of the father was inserted following anerased inscription; indeed, more economically than ceremoniously, ittakes up in the middle of the line where the erased inscription ended(El. 2). These peculiar circumstances were what prompted Wolfflin toargue that both elogia must be later than their respective burials. Point-ing to what he identified as Greek elements in their.language andthemes, he inferred that the two must have been added under the influ-ence of Scipio Africanus at the height of his power, in a burst of familypride following his victory at Zama.6 From here Wolfflin went on todismiss the belief that this was a purely Roman poetry and to argue forthe attribution to specific Hellenizing poets.Yet Wolfflin's idea of Ennius writing a kind of antiquarian impos-ture in Saturnians did not persuade.7 Nor does there seem finally to begood reason to deny that the elogium of the son is contemporary with hisburial, sometime in the third quarter of the third century.8 Now restudy

3Zevi 1973.238.4Ibid.5See TEXTS at end, El. 1.6Wolfflin 1890.122.7 Die Zuteilung der elogia an Ennius und Pacuvius .. steht auf schwachen Fus-sen : Schanz-Hosius 19352.40. Nor have attempts convinced to downdate the father's

ornately monumental sarcophagus even to the next century, Zevi 1973.234, in part be-cause its unique form fits the centrality of its position in the sepulcher and its monolithictype fits earlier rather than later in the series of sarcophagi.

8Degrassi 19652 ad loc, but already Leo 1913.46.

temporary parallels in Rome or Latium and Etruria but has been com-pared to a series of small altars found in Sicily and even in some respectsto the great altar of Hieron from Syracuse: it represents, in Zevi's view, amarked turning point in the cultural interests of at least part of the Ro-man nobility.3 The new form conveys, too, an ideological departure:4 itreplaces the model of the house, which suggested traditional Romanveneration for the head of the family, with the altar that is characteris-tic of heroic shrines in the Hellenistic world following the achievementsof Alexander. Already then before we begin to consider the inscriptionswe have reason to expect cultural innovation and the impact of the Hel-lenistic world.

Four elogia in Saturnian verse and one in elegiacs have emergedfrom the sepulcher. Two of these provoke the major controversy. Al-though they commemorate father and son, Scipio Barbatus and FiliusBarbati, the elogium of the son is universally recognized as older in bothlettering and language.5 That of the father was inserted following anerased inscription; indeed, more economically than ceremoniously, ittakes up in the middle of the line where the erased inscription ended(El. 2). These peculiar circumstances were what prompted Wolfflin toargue that both elogia must be later than their respective burials. Point-ing to what he identified as Greek elements in their.language andthemes, he inferred that the two must have been added under the influ-ence of Scipio Africanus at the height of his power, in a burst of familypride following his victory at Zama.6 From here Wolfflin went on todismiss the belief that this was a purely Roman poetry and to argue forthe attribution to specific Hellenizing poets.Yet Wolfflin's idea of Ennius writing a kind of antiquarian impos-ture in Saturnians did not persuade.7 Nor does there seem finally to begood reason to deny that the elogium of the son is contemporary with hisburial, sometime in the third quarter of the third century.8 Now restudy

3Zevi 1973.238.4Ibid.5See TEXTS at end, El. 1.6Wolfflin 1890.122.7 Die Zuteilung der elogia an Ennius und Pacuvius .. steht auf schwachen Fus-sen : Schanz-Hosius 19352.40. Nor have attempts convinced to downdate the father's

ornately monumental sarcophagus even to the next century, Zevi 1973.234, in part be-cause its unique form fits the centrality of its position in the sepulcher and its monolithictype fits earlier rather than later in the series of sarcophagi.

8Degrassi 19652 ad loc, but already Leo 1913.46.

temporary parallels in Rome or Latium and Etruria but has been com-pared to a series of small altars found in Sicily and even in some respectsto the great altar of Hieron from Syracuse: it represents, in Zevi's view, amarked turning point in the cultural interests of at least part of the Ro-man nobility.3 The new form conveys, too, an ideological departure:4 itreplaces the model of the house, which suggested traditional Romanveneration for the head of the family, with the altar that is characteris-tic of heroic shrines in the Hellenistic world following the achievementsof Alexander. Already then before we begin to consider the inscriptionswe have reason to expect cultural innovation and the impact of the Hel-lenistic world.

Four elogia in Saturnian verse and one in elegiacs have emergedfrom the sepulcher. Two of these provoke the major controversy. Al-though they commemorate father and son, Scipio Barbatus and FiliusBarbati, the elogium of the son is universally recognized as older in bothlettering and language.5 That of the father was inserted following anerased inscription; indeed, more economically than ceremoniously, ittakes up in the middle of the line where the erased inscription ended(El. 2). These peculiar circumstances were what prompted Wolfflin toargue that both elogia must be later than their respective burials. Point-ing to what he identified as Greek elements in their.language andthemes, he inferred that the two must have been added under the influ-ence of Scipio Africanus at the height of his power, in a burst of familypride following his victory at Zama.6 From here Wolfflin went on todismiss the belief that this was a purely Roman poetry and to argue forthe attribution to specific Hellenizing poets.Yet Wolfflin's idea of Ennius writing a kind of antiquarian impos-ture in Saturnians did not persuade.7 Nor does there seem finally to begood reason to deny that the elogium of the son is contemporary with hisburial, sometime in the third quarter of the third century.8 Now restudy

3Zevi 1973.238.4Ibid.5See TEXTS at end, El. 1.6Wolfflin 1890.122.7 Die Zuteilung der elogia an Ennius und Pacuvius .. steht auf schwachen Fus-sen : Schanz-Hosius 19352.40. Nor have attempts convinced to downdate the father's

ornately monumental sarcophagus even to the next century, Zevi 1973.234, in part be-cause its unique form fits the centrality of its position in the sepulcher and its monolithictype fits earlier rather than later in the series of sarcophagi.

8Degrassi 19652 ad loc, but already Leo 1913.46.

4222222

This content downloaded from 161.116.184.231 on Tue, 8 Apr 2014 12:40:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

8/12/2019 Sickle Elogia

3/15

THE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELLII SCIPIONESHE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELLII SCIPIONESHE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELLII SCIPIONESHE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELLII SCIPIONESHE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELLII SCIPIONESHE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELLII SCIPIONES

of the entire complex, reckoning with the nature of materials and theiremployment in these and other sarcophagi, with placement within thesepulcher, with the changing use of types of stone also at other sites,together with details of language and lettering, has produced an orderlyaccount of chronology.9 The way is clear, then, to consider the culturalimport of the elogia in context.One set of inferences has been offered by the most recent elucida-tors. Incidentally to his main concern with conflicting traditions aboutthe gesta of Scipio Barbatus, La Regina suggested an hypothesis aboutthe nature and status of the elogia:'0

Nulla vieta infatti di pensare che questi epitaffi altro non siano che latrascrizione di alcuni dei brani piu significativi dei veri e propri elogifunebri recitati in occasione della morte dei due personaggi. Cio giustifi-cherebbe, tra l'altro, la parzialita delle gesta elencate rispetto a quellerealmente compiute. E' vero che la critica filologica ha tentato di indivi-duare nei due testi i riflessi di un raffinamento formale dovuto alla fiori-tura del saturnio letterario, al punto di suggerire l'attribuzione dell'elogiodi Barbato a Livio Andronico o a Nevio. 1 Questa tesi viene pero compro-

9Following Coarelli 1972.38-62: (numbers refer to the texts printed at the end ofthe article) Ca 270: Scipio Barbatus (cos. 298), sarcophagus carved from a single block ofpeperino into the form of a hero's altar, with the original (presumably non-metrical)inscription, which was subsequently erased.1) ca 240-30: Filius Barbati (cos. 259), unadorned sarcophagus, also carved froma single block of peperino, inscribed with the earliest surviving verse elogium, andwith painted titulus on the cover.2) ca 200: Scipio Barbatus, Saturnian verse inscription crowded in following theerasure of the presumed original, and with contemporary painted titulus on thecover.3) ca 180-70: L. Scipio, short lived great-great grandson of Barbatus, unadornedsarcophagus carved from a single block of Gabine stone, inscribed with an originalelogium in Saturnian verse.4) ca 180-62: P. Scipio, probably great-great-grandson of Barbatus, secondcousin to L. Scipio, and the feeble son of Scipio Africanus, unadorned sarcopha-gus composed of slabs of Gabine stone, with original inscription in Saturnians towhich an initial verse was later added.5) ca 130: Cn. Scipio Hispanus (pr. 139), longer-lived brother of L. Scipio, in anew section of the sepulcher, unadorned sarcophagus composed of slabs of Aniotufa, but the front composed of two slabs of peperino and inscribed with the of-fices and two elegiac distichs.l0La Regina 1968.175-76.'Citing Leo 1905.5, 12, 33, 79; and Wolfflin's candidates were Ennius and Pacu-vius, reported above.

of the entire complex, reckoning with the nature of materials and theiremployment in these and other sarcophagi, with placement within thesepulcher, with the changing use of types of stone also at other sites,together with details of language and lettering, has produced an orderlyaccount of chronology.9 The way is clear, then, to consider the culturalimport of the elogia in context.One set of inferences has been offered by the most recent elucida-tors. Incidentally to his main concern with conflicting traditions aboutthe gesta of Scipio Barbatus, La Regina suggested an hypothesis aboutthe nature and status of the elogia:'0

Nulla vieta infatti di pensare che questi epitaffi altro non siano che latrascrizione di alcuni dei brani piu significativi dei veri e propri elogifunebri recitati in occasione della morte dei due personaggi. Cio giustifi-cherebbe, tra l'altro, la parzialita delle gesta elencate rispetto a quellerealmente compiute. E' vero che la critica filologica ha tentato di indivi-duare nei due testi i riflessi di un raffinamento formale dovuto alla fiori-tura del saturnio letterario, al punto di suggerire l'attribuzione dell'elogiodi Barbato a Livio Andronico o a Nevio. 1 Questa tesi viene pero compro-

9Following Coarelli 1972.38-62: (numbers refer to the texts printed at the end ofthe article) Ca 270: Scipio Barbatus (cos. 298), sarcophagus carved from a single block ofpeperino into the form of a hero's altar, with the original (presumably non-metrical)inscription, which was subsequently erased.1) ca 240-30: Filius Barbati (cos. 259), unadorned sarcophagus, also carved froma single block of peperino, inscribed with the earliest surviving verse elogium, andwith painted titulus on the cover.2) ca 200: Scipio Barbatus, Saturnian verse inscription crowded in following theerasure of the presumed original, and with contemporary painted titulus on thecover.3) ca 180-70: L. Scipio, short lived great-great grandson of Barbatus, unadornedsarcophagus carved from a single block of Gabine stone, inscribed with an originalelogium in Saturnian verse.4) ca 180-62: P. Scipio, probably great-great-grandson of Barbatus, secondcousin to L. Scipio, and the feeble son of Scipio Africanus, unadorned sarcopha-gus composed of slabs of Gabine stone, with original inscription in Saturnians towhich an initial verse was later added.5) ca 130: Cn. Scipio Hispanus (pr. 139), longer-lived brother of L. Scipio, in anew section of the sepulcher, unadorned sarcophagus composed of slabs of Aniotufa, but the front composed of two slabs of peperino and inscribed with the of-fices and two elegiac distichs.l0La Regina 1968.175-76.'Citing Leo 1905.5, 12, 33, 79; and Wolfflin's candidates were Ennius and Pacu-vius, reported above.

of the entire complex, reckoning with the nature of materials and theiremployment in these and other sarcophagi, with placement within thesepulcher, with the changing use of types of stone also at other sites,together with details of language and lettering, has produced an orderlyaccount of chronology.9 The way is clear, then, to consider the culturalimport of the elogia in context.One set of inferences has been offered by the most recent elucida-tors. Incidentally to his main concern with conflicting traditions aboutthe gesta of Scipio Barbatus, La Regina suggested an hypothesis aboutthe nature and status of the elogia:'0

Nulla vieta infatti di pensare che questi epitaffi altro non siano che latrascrizione di alcuni dei brani piu significativi dei veri e propri elogifunebri recitati in occasione della morte dei due personaggi. Cio giustifi-cherebbe, tra l'altro, la parzialita delle gesta elencate rispetto a quellerealmente compiute. E' vero che la critica filologica ha tentato di indivi-duare nei due testi i riflessi di un raffinamento formale dovuto alla fiori-tura del saturnio letterario, al punto di suggerire l'attribuzione dell'elogiodi Barbato a Livio Andronico o a Nevio. 1 Questa tesi viene pero compro-

9Following Coarelli 1972.38-62: (numbers refer to the texts printed at the end ofthe article) Ca 270: Scipio Barbatus (cos. 298), sarcophagus carved from a single block ofpeperino into the form of a hero's altar, with the original (presumably non-metrical)inscription, which was subsequently erased.1) ca 240-30: Filius Barbati (cos. 259), unadorned sarcophagus, also carved froma single block of peperino, inscribed with the earliest surviving verse elogium, andwith painted titulus on the cover.2) ca 200: Scipio Barbatus, Saturnian verse inscription crowded in following theerasure of the presumed original, and with contemporary painted titulus on thecover.3) ca 180-70: L. Scipio, short lived great-great grandson of Barbatus, unadornedsarcophagus carved from a single block of Gabine stone, inscribed with an originalelogium in Saturnian verse.4) ca 180-62: P. Scipio, probably great-great-grandson of Barbatus, secondcousin to L. Scipio, and the feeble son of Scipio Africanus, unadorned sarcopha-gus composed of slabs of Gabine stone, with original inscription in Saturnians towhich an initial verse was later added.5) ca 130: Cn. Scipio Hispanus (pr. 139), longer-lived brother of L. Scipio, in anew section of the sepulcher, unadorned sarcophagus composed of slabs of Aniotufa, but the front composed of two slabs of peperino and inscribed with the of-fices and two elegiac distichs.l0La Regina 1968.175-76.'Citing Leo 1905.5, 12, 33, 79; and Wolfflin's candidates were Ennius and Pacu-vius, reported above.

of the entire complex, reckoning with the nature of materials and theiremployment in these and other sarcophagi, with placement within thesepulcher, with the changing use of types of stone also at other sites,together with details of language and lettering, has produced an orderlyaccount of chronology.9 The way is clear, then, to consider the culturalimport of the elogia in context.One set of inferences has been offered by the most recent elucida-tors. Incidentally to his main concern with conflicting traditions aboutthe gesta of Scipio Barbatus, La Regina suggested an hypothesis aboutthe nature and status of the elogia:'0

Nulla vieta infatti di pensare che questi epitaffi altro non siano che latrascrizione di alcuni dei brani piu significativi dei veri e propri elogifunebri recitati in occasione della morte dei due personaggi. Cio giustifi-cherebbe, tra l'altro, la parzialita delle gesta elencate rispetto a quellerealmente compiute. E' vero che la critica filologica ha tentato di indivi-duare nei due testi i riflessi di un raffinamento formale dovuto alla fiori-tura del saturnio letterario, al punto di suggerire l'attribuzione dell'elogiodi Barbato a Livio Andronico o a Nevio. 1 Questa tesi viene pero compro-

9Following Coarelli 1972.38-62: (numbers refer to the texts printed at the end ofthe article) Ca 270: Scipio Barbatus (cos. 298), sarcophagus carved from a single block ofpeperino into the form of a hero's altar, with the original (presumably non-metrical)inscription, which was subsequently erased.1) ca 240-30: Filius Barbati (cos. 259), unadorned sarcophagus, also carved froma single block of peperino, inscribed with the earliest surviving verse elogium, andwith painted titulus on the cover.2) ca 200: Scipio Barbatus, Saturnian verse inscription crowded in following theerasure of the presumed original, and with contemporary painted titulus on thecover.3) ca 180-70: L. Scipio, short lived great-great grandson of Barbatus, unadornedsarcophagus carved from a single block of Gabine stone, inscribed with an originalelogium in Saturnian verse.4) ca 180-62: P. Scipio, probably great-great-grandson of Barbatus, secondcousin to L. Scipio, and the feeble son of Scipio Africanus, unadorned sarcopha-gus composed of slabs of Gabine stone, with original inscription in Saturnians towhich an initial verse was later added.5) ca 130: Cn. Scipio Hispanus (pr. 139), longer-lived brother of L. Scipio, in anew section of the sepulcher, unadorned sarcophagus composed of slabs of Aniotufa, but the front composed of two slabs of peperino and inscribed with the of-fices and two elegiac distichs.l0La Regina 1968.175-76.'Citing Leo 1905.5, 12, 33, 79; and Wolfflin's candidates were Ennius and Pacu-vius, reported above.

of the entire complex, reckoning with the nature of materials and theiremployment in these and other sarcophagi, with placement within thesepulcher, with the changing use of types of stone also at other sites,together with details of language and lettering, has produced an orderlyaccount of chronology.9 The way is clear, then, to consider the culturalimport of the elogia in context.One set of inferences has been offered by the most recent elucida-tors. Incidentally to his main concern with conflicting traditions aboutthe gesta of Scipio Barbatus, La Regina suggested an hypothesis aboutthe nature and status of the elogia:'0

Nulla vieta infatti di pensare che questi epitaffi altro non siano che latrascrizione di alcuni dei brani piu significativi dei veri e propri elogifunebri recitati in occasione della morte dei due personaggi. Cio giustifi-cherebbe, tra l'altro, la parzialita delle gesta elencate rispetto a quellerealmente compiute. E' vero che la critica filologica ha tentato di indivi-duare nei due testi i riflessi di un raffinamento formale dovuto alla fiori-tura del saturnio letterario, al punto di suggerire l'attribuzione dell'elogiodi Barbato a Livio Andronico o a Nevio. 1 Questa tesi viene pero compro-

9Following Coarelli 1972.38-62: (numbers refer to the texts printed at the end ofthe article) Ca 270: Scipio Barbatus (cos. 298), sarcophagus carved from a single block ofpeperino into the form of a hero's altar, with the original (presumably non-metrical)inscription, which was subsequently erased.1) ca 240-30: Filius Barbati (cos. 259), unadorned sarcophagus, also carved froma single block of peperino, inscribed with the earliest surviving verse elogium, andwith painted titulus on the cover.2) ca 200: Scipio Barbatus, Saturnian verse inscription crowded in following theerasure of the presumed original, and with contemporary painted titulus on thecover.3) ca 180-70: L. Scipio, short lived great-great grandson of Barbatus, unadornedsarcophagus carved from a single block of Gabine stone, inscribed with an originalelogium in Saturnian verse.4) ca 180-62: P. Scipio, probably great-great-grandson of Barbatus, secondcousin to L. Scipio, and the feeble son of Scipio Africanus, unadorned sarcopha-gus composed of slabs of Gabine stone, with original inscription in Saturnians towhich an initial verse was later added.5) ca 130: Cn. Scipio Hispanus (pr. 139), longer-lived brother of L. Scipio, in anew section of the sepulcher, unadorned sarcophagus composed of slabs of Aniotufa, but the front composed of two slabs of peperino and inscribed with the of-fices and two elegiac distichs.l0La Regina 1968.175-76.'Citing Leo 1905.5, 12, 33, 79; and Wolfflin's candidates were Ennius and Pacu-vius, reported above.

of the entire complex, reckoning with the nature of materials and theiremployment in these and other sarcophagi, with placement within thesepulcher, with the changing use of types of stone also at other sites,together with details of language and lettering, has produced an orderlyaccount of chronology.9 The way is clear, then, to consider the culturalimport of the elogia in context.One set of inferences has been offered by the most recent elucida-tors. Incidentally to his main concern with conflicting traditions aboutthe gesta of Scipio Barbatus, La Regina suggested an hypothesis aboutthe nature and status of the elogia:'0

Nulla vieta infatti di pensare che questi epitaffi altro non siano che latrascrizione di alcuni dei brani piu significativi dei veri e propri elogifunebri recitati in occasione della morte dei due personaggi. Cio giustifi-cherebbe, tra l'altro, la parzialita delle gesta elencate rispetto a quellerealmente compiute. E' vero che la critica filologica ha tentato di indivi-duare nei due testi i riflessi di un raffinamento formale dovuto alla fiori-tura del saturnio letterario, al punto di suggerire l'attribuzione dell'elogiodi Barbato a Livio Andronico o a Nevio. 1 Questa tesi viene pero compro-

9Following Coarelli 1972.38-62: (numbers refer to the texts printed at the end ofthe article) Ca 270: Scipio Barbatus (cos. 298), sarcophagus carved from a single block ofpeperino into the form of a hero's altar, with the original (presumably non-metrical)inscription, which was subsequently erased.1) ca 240-30: Filius Barbati (cos. 259), unadorned sarcophagus, also carved froma single block of peperino, inscribed with the earliest surviving verse elogium, andwith painted titulus on the cover.2) ca 200: Scipio Barbatus, Saturnian verse inscription crowded in following theerasure of the presumed original, and with contemporary painted titulus on thecover.3) ca 180-70: L. Scipio, short lived great-great grandson of Barbatus, unadornedsarcophagus carved from a single block of Gabine stone, inscribed with an originalelogium in Saturnian verse.4) ca 180-62: P. Scipio, probably great-great-grandson of Barbatus, secondcousin to L. Scipio, and the feeble son of Scipio Africanus, unadorned sarcopha-gus composed of slabs of Gabine stone, with original inscription in Saturnians towhich an initial verse was later added.5) ca 130: Cn. Scipio Hispanus (pr. 139), longer-lived brother of L. Scipio, in anew section of the sepulcher, unadorned sarcophagus composed of slabs of Aniotufa, but the front composed of two slabs of peperino and inscribed with the of-fices and two elegiac distichs.l0La Regina 1968.175-76.'Citing Leo 1905.5, 12, 33, 79; and Wolfflin's candidates were Ennius and Pacu-vius, reported above.

4333333

This content downloaded from 161.116.184.231 on Tue, 8 Apr 2014 12:40:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

8/12/2019 Sickle Elogia

4/15

JON VAN SICKLEON VAN SICKLEON VAN SICKLEON VAN SICKLEON VAN SICKLEON VAN SICKLE

messa dalla simmetria costruttiva delle due iscrizioni, per cui la seconda echiaramente modellata sull'altra, che a sua volta doveva rispecchiare unoschema piuttosto diffuso ....

La Regina goes on to speak of l'accostamento di versi estratti da uncanto funebre ben piu lungo e ricco di elementi narrativi.In the wake of La Regina, Zevi went so far as to suggest that theanomaly of the second inscription on Barbatus' monument might beexplained by supposing that the poem in its original form had beencomposed at the time of Barbatus' death and inscribed only much laterwhen commemorative elogia became fashionable.12 Zevi also inferredthat in the elogia of Barbatus and his son the address to the citizenry,

apud uos, would be difficult to explain se non si amette la reale pre-senza di un pubblico, non composto di spettatori passivi, ma proprio dacoloro che avevano eletto il defunto alle publiche magistrature ; and heconcluded returning to La Regina: le iscrizioni scipioniche, almeno lepiui antiche, vanno viste come excerpta dai piu lunghi carmi di lodepubblicamente recitati durante la pompa funeraria. '3

Proposed and elaborated in this form, however, the excerpt theoryslights two considerations: (1) what the sources (admittedly scatteredand scanty) allow us to reconstruct about the role of specialized lan-guage in aristocratic funerals and the novelty of the elogia with respectall of these types, (2) the internal (formal and material) evidence of theelogia themselves as a cultural product in their own right.The special language of funerals falls into two domains, one maleand the other female. In the male domain, a close relative delivers aprose eulogy from the rostra to the citizenry in the forum.14 The speechrecounts the virtues and the accomplishments of the dead man and of

'2Zevi 1970.66.13Idem67. Coarelli 1972.97 summarizes and accepts: Quanto alla fonte da cuiesso poteva essere tratto, non ho difficolta alcuna ad accettare la tesi espressa recente-mente, che debba trattarsi di una parte dell'elogio funebre di Barbato, certamente an-cora conservato negli archivi della famiglia, in una data in fondo di solo settant'annicirca posteriore alla morte del personaggio.14Polybius6.53-54. A collection of testimonia and fragments of such orations ap-

pears in Kierdorf 1980.137-49, who considers questionable the evidence for the four in-stances before 221 B.C., when Q. Caecilius Metellus praised his Father, L. Caecilius Me-tellus. The whole question of change of custom through time, with praise song perhapsgiving rise to orations, which then usurp the woman's role, lies beyond our concern here:see Kierdorf 1980.96-111. But testimonia here are given in their original contexts tofacilitate evaluation of their relative weight.

messa dalla simmetria costruttiva delle due iscrizioni, per cui la seconda echiaramente modellata sull'altra, che a sua volta doveva rispecchiare unoschema piuttosto diffuso ....

La Regina goes on to speak of l'accostamento di versi estratti da uncanto funebre ben piu lungo e ricco di elementi narrativi.In the wake of La Regina, Zevi went so far as to suggest that theanomaly of the second inscription on Barbatus' monument might beexplained by supposing that the poem in its original form had beencomposed at the time of Barbatus' death and inscribed only much laterwhen commemorative elogia became fashionable.12 Zevi also inferredthat in the elogia of Barbatus and his son the address to the citizenry,

apud uos, would be difficult to explain se non si amette la reale pre-senza di un pubblico, non composto di spettatori passivi, ma proprio dacoloro che avevano eletto il defunto alle publiche magistrature ; and heconcluded returning to La Regina: le iscrizioni scipioniche, almeno lepiui antiche, vanno viste come excerpta dai piu lunghi carmi di lodepubblicamente recitati durante la pompa funeraria. '3

Proposed and elaborated in this form, however, the excerpt theoryslights two considerations: (1) what the sources (admittedly scatteredand scanty) allow us to reconstruct about the role of specialized lan-guage in aristocratic funerals and the novelty of the elogia with respectall of these types, (2) the internal (formal and material) evidence of theelogia themselves as a cultural product in their own right.The special language of funerals falls into two domains, one maleand the other female. In the male domain, a close relative delivers aprose eulogy from the rostra to the citizenry in the forum.14 The speechrecounts the virtues and the accomplishments of the dead man and of

'2Zevi 1970.66.13Idem67. Coarelli 1972.97 summarizes and accepts: Quanto alla fonte da cuiesso poteva essere tratto, non ho difficolta alcuna ad accettare la tesi espressa recente-mente, che debba trattarsi di una parte dell'elogio funebre di Barbato, certamente an-cora conservato negli archivi della famiglia, in una data in fondo di solo settant'annicirca posteriore alla morte del personaggio.14Polybius6.53-54. A collection of testimonia and fragments of such orations ap-

pears in Kierdorf 1980.137-49, who considers questionable the evidence for the four in-stances before 221 B.C., when Q. Caecilius Metellus praised his Father, L. Caecilius Me-tellus. The whole question of change of custom through time, with praise song perhapsgiving rise to orations, which then usurp the woman's role, lies beyond our concern here:see Kierdorf 1980.96-111. But testimonia here are given in their original contexts tofacilitate evaluation of their relative weight.

messa dalla simmetria costruttiva delle due iscrizioni, per cui la seconda echiaramente modellata sull'altra, che a sua volta doveva rispecchiare unoschema piuttosto diffuso ....

La Regina goes on to speak of l'accostamento di versi estratti da uncanto funebre ben piu lungo e ricco di elementi narrativi.In the wake of La Regina, Zevi went so far as to suggest that theanomaly of the second inscription on Barbatus' monument might beexplained by supposing that the poem in its original form had beencomposed at the time of Barbatus' death and inscribed only much laterwhen commemorative elogia became fashionable.12 Zevi also inferredthat in the elogia of Barbatus and his son the address to the citizenry,

apud uos, would be difficult to explain se non si amette la reale pre-senza di un pubblico, non composto di spettatori passivi, ma proprio dacoloro che avevano eletto il defunto alle publiche magistrature ; and heconcluded returning to La Regina: le iscrizioni scipioniche, almeno lepiui antiche, vanno viste come excerpta dai piu lunghi carmi di lodepubblicamente recitati durante la pompa funeraria. '3

Proposed and elaborated in this form, however, the excerpt theoryslights two considerations: (1) what the sources (admittedly scatteredand scanty) allow us to reconstruct about the role of specialized lan-guage in aristocratic funerals and the novelty of the elogia with respectall of these types, (2) the internal (formal and material) evidence of theelogia themselves as a cultural product in their own right.The special language of funerals falls into two domains, one maleand the other female. In the male domain, a close relative delivers aprose eulogy from the rostra to the citizenry in the forum.14 The speechrecounts the virtues and the accomplishments of the dead man and of

'2Zevi 1970.66.13Idem67. Coarelli 1972.97 summarizes and accepts: Quanto alla fonte da cuiesso poteva essere tratto, non ho difficolta alcuna ad accettare la tesi espressa recente-mente, che debba trattarsi di una parte dell'elogio funebre di Barbato, certamente an-cora conservato negli archivi della famiglia, in una data in fondo di solo settant'annicirca posteriore alla morte del personaggio.14Polybius6.53-54. A collection of testimonia and fragments of such orations ap-

pears in Kierdorf 1980.137-49, who considers questionable the evidence for the four in-stances before 221 B.C., when Q. Caecilius Metellus praised his Father, L. Caecilius Me-tellus. The whole question of change of custom through time, with praise song perhapsgiving rise to orations, which then usurp the woman's role, lies beyond our concern here:see Kierdorf 1980.96-111. But testimonia here are given in their original contexts tofacilitate evaluation of their relative weight.

messa dalla simmetria costruttiva delle due iscrizioni, per cui la seconda echiaramente modellata sull'altra, che a sua volta doveva rispecchiare unoschema piuttosto diffuso ....

La Regina goes on to speak of l'accostamento di versi estratti da uncanto funebre ben piu lungo e ricco di elementi narrativi.In the wake of La Regina, Zevi went so far as to suggest that theanomaly of the second inscription on Barbatus' monument might beexplained by supposing that the poem in its original form had beencomposed at the time of Barbatus' death and inscribed only much laterwhen commemorative elogia became fashionable.12 Zevi also inferredthat in the elogia of Barbatus and his son the address to the citizenry,

apud uos, would be difficult to explain se non si amette la reale pre-senza di un pubblico, non composto di spettatori passivi, ma proprio dacoloro che avevano eletto il defunto alle publiche magistrature ; and heconcluded returning to La Regina: le iscrizioni scipioniche, almeno lepiui antiche, vanno viste come excerpta dai piu lunghi carmi di lodepubblicamente recitati durante la pompa funeraria. '3

Proposed and elaborated in this form, however, the excerpt theoryslights two considerations: (1) what the sources (admittedly scatteredand scanty) allow us to reconstruct about the role of specialized lan-guage in aristocratic funerals and the novelty of the elogia with respectall of these types, (2) the internal (formal and material) evidence of theelogia themselves as a cultural product in their own right.The special language of funerals falls into two domains, one maleand the other female. In the male domain, a close relative delivers aprose eulogy from the rostra to the citizenry in the forum.14 The speechrecounts the virtues and the accomplishments of the dead man and of

'2Zevi 1970.66.13Idem67. Coarelli 1972.97 summarizes and accepts: Quanto alla fonte da cuiesso poteva essere tratto, non ho difficolta alcuna ad accettare la tesi espressa recente-mente, che debba trattarsi di una parte dell'elogio funebre di Barbato, certamente an-cora conservato negli archivi della famiglia, in una data in fondo di solo settant'annicirca posteriore alla morte del personaggio.14Polybius6.53-54. A collection of testimonia and fragments of such orations ap-

pears in Kierdorf 1980.137-49, who considers questionable the evidence for the four in-stances before 221 B.C., when Q. Caecilius Metellus praised his Father, L. Caecilius Me-tellus. The whole question of change of custom through time, with praise song perhapsgiving rise to orations, which then usurp the woman's role, lies beyond our concern here:see Kierdorf 1980.96-111. But testimonia here are given in their original contexts tofacilitate evaluation of their relative weight.

messa dalla simmetria costruttiva delle due iscrizioni, per cui la seconda echiaramente modellata sull'altra, che a sua volta doveva rispecchiare unoschema piuttosto diffuso ....

La Regina goes on to speak of l'accostamento di versi estratti da uncanto funebre ben piu lungo e ricco di elementi narrativi.In the wake of La Regina, Zevi went so far as to suggest that theanomaly of the second inscription on Barbatus' monument might beexplained by supposing that the poem in its original form had beencomposed at the time of Barbatus' death and inscribed only much laterwhen commemorative elogia became fashionable.12 Zevi also inferredthat in the elogia of Barbatus and his son the address to the citizenry,

apud uos, would be difficult to explain se non si amette la reale pre-senza di un pubblico, non composto di spettatori passivi, ma proprio dacoloro che avevano eletto il defunto alle publiche magistrature ; and heconcluded returning to La Regina: le iscrizioni scipioniche, almeno lepiui antiche, vanno viste come excerpta dai piu lunghi carmi di lodepubblicamente recitati durante la pompa funeraria. '3

Proposed and elaborated in this form, however, the excerpt theoryslights two considerations: (1) what the sources (admittedly scatteredand scanty) allow us to reconstruct about the role of specialized lan-guage in aristocratic funerals and the novelty of the elogia with respectall of these types, (2) the internal (formal and material) evidence of theelogia themselves as a cultural product in their own right.The special language of funerals falls into two domains, one maleand the other female. In the male domain, a close relative delivers aprose eulogy from the rostra to the citizenry in the forum.14 The speechrecounts the virtues and the accomplishments of the dead man and of

'2Zevi 1970.66.13Idem67. Coarelli 1972.97 summarizes and accepts: Quanto alla fonte da cuiesso poteva essere tratto, non ho difficolta alcuna ad accettare la tesi espressa recente-mente, che debba trattarsi di una parte dell'elogio funebre di Barbato, certamente an-cora conservato negli archivi della famiglia, in una data in fondo di solo settant'annicirca posteriore alla morte del personaggio.14Polybius6.53-54. A collection of testimonia and fragments of such orations ap-

pears in Kierdorf 1980.137-49, who considers questionable the evidence for the four in-stances before 221 B.C., when Q. Caecilius Metellus praised his Father, L. Caecilius Me-tellus. The whole question of change of custom through time, with praise song perhapsgiving rise to orations, which then usurp the woman's role, lies beyond our concern here:see Kierdorf 1980.96-111. But testimonia here are given in their original contexts tofacilitate evaluation of their relative weight.

messa dalla simmetria costruttiva delle due iscrizioni, per cui la seconda echiaramente modellata sull'altra, che a sua volta doveva rispecchiare unoschema piuttosto diffuso ....

La Regina goes on to speak of l'accostamento di versi estratti da uncanto funebre ben piu lungo e ricco di elementi narrativi.In the wake of La Regina, Zevi went so far as to suggest that theanomaly of the second inscription on Barbatus' monument might beexplained by supposing that the poem in its original form had beencomposed at the time of Barbatus' death and inscribed only much laterwhen commemorative elogia became fashionable.12 Zevi also inferredthat in the elogia of Barbatus and his son the address to the citizenry,

apud uos, would be difficult to explain se non si amette la reale pre-senza di un pubblico, non composto di spettatori passivi, ma proprio dacoloro che avevano eletto il defunto alle publiche magistrature ; and heconcluded returning to La Regina: le iscrizioni scipioniche, almeno lepiui antiche, vanno viste come excerpta dai piu lunghi carmi di lodepubblicamente recitati durante la pompa funeraria. '3

Proposed and elaborated in this form, however, the excerpt theoryslights two considerations: (1) what the sources (admittedly scatteredand scanty) allow us to reconstruct about the role of specialized lan-guage in aristocratic funerals and the novelty of the elogia with respectall of these types, (2) the internal (formal and material) evidence of theelogia themselves as a cultural product in their own right.The special language of funerals falls into two domains, one maleand the other female. In the male domain, a close relative delivers aprose eulogy from the rostra to the citizenry in the forum.14 The speechrecounts the virtues and the accomplishments of the dead man and of

'2Zevi 1970.66.13Idem67. Coarelli 1972.97 summarizes and accepts: Quanto alla fonte da cuiesso poteva essere tratto, non ho difficolta alcuna ad accettare la tesi espressa recente-mente, che debba trattarsi di una parte dell'elogio funebre di Barbato, certamente an-cora conservato negli archivi della famiglia, in una data in fondo di solo settant'annicirca posteriore alla morte del personaggio.14Polybius6.53-54. A collection of testimonia and fragments of such orations ap-

pears in Kierdorf 1980.137-49, who considers questionable the evidence for the four in-stances before 221 B.C., when Q. Caecilius Metellus praised his Father, L. Caecilius Me-tellus. The whole question of change of custom through time, with praise song perhapsgiving rise to orations, which then usurp the woman's role, lies beyond our concern here:see Kierdorf 1980.96-111. But testimonia here are given in their original contexts tofacilitate evaluation of their relative weight.

4444444

This content downloaded from 161.116.184.231 on Tue, 8 Apr 2014 12:40:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

8/12/2019 Sickle Elogia

5/15

THE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELLII SCIPIONESHE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELLII SCIPIONESHE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELLII SCIPIONESHE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELLII SCIPIONESHE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELLII SCIPIONESHE ELOGIA OF THE CORNELLII SCIPIONES

his distinguished ancestors, who are represented by their masks, whichwere donned by persons dressed in the garb appropriate to the rank ofeach dead man. Copies of these formal praise orations, contiones, werepreserved and treasured in archives by aristocratic families, althoughthe written records by no means guaranteed freedom from exaggerationand stereotype.5In the other domain, we hear of women hired to lament andpraise, praeficae. 6 They set an example and lead the mourning for theentire funeral,l7 from in front of the dead man's dwelling,18 through thefuneral procession,19 as far as the place of cremation.20 Their perfor-mance entails not only lamentation but also weeping and tearing ofhair.21 No texts of what they sang survive; but songs of mourning are

'SCicero, Brutus 15.62. . . non nullae mortuorum laudationes. .. .et herculeseae quidem exstant: ipsae enim familiae sua quasi ornamenta ac monumenta servabantet ad usum, si quis eiusdem generis occidisset, et ad memoriam laudum domesticarum etad inlustrandam nobilitatem suam. Quamquam his laudationibus historia nostra rerumnostrarum est facta mendosior. Multa enim scripta sunt in eis quae facta non sunt: falsitriumphi, plures consulatus. . .Both praise and lament are documented by Varro, L. L. 7.70 (Gotz, Scholl): inTruculento (495) 'sine uirtute argutum ciuem mihi habeam pro pr(a)efica,' (praefica)dicta, ut Aurelius (= A. Opillus, ca end II century. Funaioli p. 90) scribit, mulier abluco quae conduceretur, quae ante domum mortui laudis eius caneret. hoc factitatumAristoteles scribit in libro qui (in)scribitur nomima barbarika (604 Rose.), quibus testi-monium est, quod tritum (Lindsay) est, N(a)evii (fr. com. 129 R): 'haec quidem hercle,opinor, praefica est, nam mortuum collaudat.' Claudius (= Servius C1., died ca 60 B.c.,acquainted with Cicero. Funaioli p. 98) scribit: 'quae praeficeretur ancillis, quemadmo-dum lamentarentur, praefica est dicta.' utrumque ostendit a praefectione praeficamdictam.

'7Festus(Paul.) 329 (249-50), Glossaria Latina IV (Pirie, Lindsay): praeficae di-cuntur mulieres ad lamentandum mortuum conductae quae dant ceteris modumplangendi, quasi in hoc ipsum praefectae. Naevius (fr. com. 129 R)'haec quidem [me]-hercle opinor praefica est, [quae] sic mortuum collaudat. '; cf. Servius Claudius (pre-vious note), praeficeretur ancillis, quemadmodum lamentarentur. ; also Servius, Aen.6.216: . .. populi circumstantis corona, quae tamdiu stabat respondens fletibus praefi-cae, id est principi planctuum.'8 Ante domum mortui in Varro. L. L. 7.70, just cited.Gloss. Philox. PR 78 praefica: he prb tes klines en te ekphorai koptomene, thre-noidbs ep'ekphorai.20Servius,Aen. 6.216, just cited.21Seethe Lucilius quoted here by Nonius Marcellus (Lindsay 1903) p. 92 (66, 67M): praeficae dicebantur aput ueteres quae adhiberi solent funeri, mercede conductae,ut et flerent et fortia facta laudarent. Plautus in Frivolaria (84), 'superabo omnis argu-tando praeficas.' Idem Truculento [II.6.14: 'habeam pro] praefica, quae alios col-laudare, eapse [sese] uero non potest.' Lucilius lib. xii [954f Marx]: 'mercede quae con-

his distinguished ancestors, who are represented by their masks, whichwere donned by persons dressed in the garb appropriate to the rank ofeach dead man. Copies of these formal praise orations, contiones, werepreserved and treasured in archives by aristocratic families, althoughthe written records by no means guaranteed freedom from exaggerationand stereotype.5In the other domain, we hear of women hired to lament andpraise, praeficae. 6 They set an example and lead the mourning for theentire funeral,l7 from in front of the dead man's dwelling,18 through thefuneral procession,19 as far as the place of cremation.20 Their perfor-mance entails not only lamentation but also weeping and tearing ofhair.21 No texts of what they sang survive; but songs of mourning are

'SCicero, Brutus 15.62. . . non nullae mortuorum laudationes. .. .et herculeseae quidem exstant: ipsae enim familiae sua quasi ornamenta ac monumenta servabantet ad usum, si quis eiusdem generis occidisset, et ad memoriam laudum domesticarum etad inlustrandam nobilitatem suam. Quamquam his laudationibus historia nostra rerumnostrarum est facta mendosior. Multa enim scripta sunt in eis quae facta non sunt: falsitriumphi, plures consulatus. . .Both praise and lament are documented by Varro, L. L. 7.70 (Gotz, Scholl): inTruculento (495) 'sine uirtute argutum ciuem mihi habeam pro pr(a)efica,' (praefica)dicta, ut Aurelius (= A. Opillus, ca end II century. Funaioli p. 90) scribit, mulier abluco quae conduceretur, quae ante domum mortui laudis eius caneret. hoc factitatumAristoteles scribit in libro qui (in)scribitur nomima barbarika (604 Rose.), quibus testi-monium est, quod tritum (Lindsay) est, N(a)evii (fr. com. 129 R): 'haec quidem hercle,opinor, praefica est, nam mortuum collaudat.' Claudius (= Servius C1., died ca 60 B.c.,acquainted with Cicero. Funaioli p. 98) scribit: 'quae praeficeretur ancillis, quemadmo-dum lamentarentur, praefica est dicta.' utrumque ostendit a praefectione praeficamdictam.

'7Festus(Paul.) 329 (249-50), Glossaria Latina IV (Pirie, Lindsay): praeficae di-cuntur mulieres ad lamentandum mortuum conductae quae dant ceteris modumplangendi, quasi in hoc ipsum praefectae. Naevius (fr. com. 129 R)'haec quidem [me]-hercle opinor praefica est, [quae] sic mortuum collaudat. '; cf. Servius Claudius (pre-vious note), praeficeretur ancillis, quemadmodum lamentarentur. ; also Servius, Aen.6.216: . .. populi circumstantis corona, quae tamdiu stabat respondens fletibus praefi-cae, id est principi planctuum.'8 Ante domum mortui in Varro. L. L. 7.70, just cited.Gloss. Philox. PR 78 praefica: he prb tes klines en te ekphorai koptomene, thre-noidbs ep'ekphorai.20Servius,Aen. 6.216, just cited.21Seethe Lucilius quoted here by Nonius Marcellus (Lindsay 1903) p. 92 (66, 67M): praeficae dicebantur aput ueteres quae adhiberi solent funeri, mercede conductae,ut et flerent et fortia facta laudarent. Plautus in Frivolaria (84), 'superabo omnis argu-tando praeficas.' Idem Truculento [II.6.14: 'habeam pro] praefica, quae alios col-laudare, eapse [sese] uero non potest.' Lucilius lib. xii [954f Marx]: 'mercede quae con-

his distinguished ancestors, who are represented by their masks, whichwere donned by persons dressed in the garb appropriate to the rank ofeach dead man. Copies of these formal praise orations, contiones, werepreserved and treasured in archives by aristocratic families, althoughthe written records by no means guaranteed freedom from exaggerationand stereotype.5In the other domain, we hear of women hired to lament andpraise, praeficae. 6 They set an example and lead the mourning for theentire funeral,l7 from in front of the dead man's dwelling,18 through thefuneral procession,19 as far as the place of cremation.20 Their perfor-mance entails not only lamentation but also weeping and tearing ofhair.21 No texts of what they sang survive; but songs of mourning are

'SCicero, Brutus 15.62. . . non nullae mortuorum laudationes. .. .et herculeseae quidem exstant: ipsae enim familiae sua quasi ornamenta ac monumenta servabantet ad usum, si quis eiusdem generis occidisset, et ad memoriam laudum domesticarum etad inlustrandam nobilitatem suam. Quamquam his laudationibus historia nostra rerumnostrarum est facta mendosior. Multa enim scripta sunt in eis quae facta non sunt: falsitriumphi, plures consulatus. . .Both praise and lament are documented by Varro, L. L. 7.70 (Gotz, Scholl): inTruculento (495) 'sine uirtute argutum ciuem mihi habeam pro pr(a)efica,' (praefica)dicta, ut Aurelius (= A. Opillus, ca end II century. Funaioli p. 90) scribit, mulier abluco quae conduceretur, quae ante domum mortui laudis eius caneret. hoc factitatumAristoteles scribit in libro qui (in)scribitur nomima barbarika (604 Rose.), quibus testi-monium est, quod tritum (Lindsay) est, N(a)evii (fr. com. 129 R): 'haec quidem hercle,opinor, praefica est, nam mortuum collaudat.' Claudius (= Servius C1., died ca 60 B.c.,acquainted with Cicero. Funaioli p. 98) scribit: 'quae praeficeretur ancillis, quemadmo-dum lamentarentur, praefica est dicta.' utrumque ostendit a praefectione praeficamdictam.

'7Festus(Paul.) 329 (249-50), Glossaria Latina IV (Pirie, Lindsay): praeficae di-cuntur mulieres ad lamentandum mortuum conductae quae dant ceteris modumplangendi, quasi in hoc ipsum praefectae. Naevius (fr. com. 129 R)'haec quidem [me]-hercle opinor praefica est, [quae] sic mortuum collaudat. '; cf. Servius Claudius (pre-vious note), praeficeretur ancillis, quemadmodum lamentarentur. ; also Servius, Aen.6.216: . .. populi circumstantis corona, quae tamdiu stabat respondens fletibus praefi-cae, id est principi planctuum.'8 Ante domum mortui in Varro. L. L. 7.70, just cited.Gloss. Philox. PR 78 praefica: he prb tes klines en te ekphorai koptomene, thre-noidbs ep'ekphorai.20Servius,Aen. 6.216, just cited.21Seethe Lucilius quoted here by Nonius Marcellus (Lindsay 1903) p. 92 (66, 67M): praeficae dicebantur aput ueteres quae adhiberi solent funeri, mercede conductae,ut et flerent et fortia facta laudarent. Plautus in Frivolaria (84), 'superabo omnis argu-tando praeficas.' Idem Truculento [II.6.14: 'habeam pro] praefica, quae alios col-laudare, eapse [sese] uero non potest.' Lucilius lib. xii [954f Marx]: 'mercede quae con-

his distinguished ancestors, who are represented by their masks, whichwere donned by persons dressed in the garb appropriate to the rank ofeach dead man. Copies of these formal praise orations, contiones, werepreserved and treasured in archives by aristocratic families, althoughthe written records by no means guaranteed freedom from exaggerationand stereotype.5In the other domain, we hear of women hired to lament andpraise, praeficae. 6 They set an example and lead the mourning for theentire funeral,l7 from in front of the dead man's dwelling,18 through thefuneral procession,19 as far as the place of cremation.20 Their perfor-mance entails not only lamentation but also weeping and tearing ofhair.21 No texts of what they sang survive; but songs of mourning are

'SCicero, Brutus 15.62. . . non nullae mortuorum laudationes. .. .et herculeseae quidem exstant: ipsae enim familiae sua quasi ornamenta ac monumenta servabantet ad usum, si quis eiusdem generis occidisset, et ad memoriam laudum domesticarum etad inlustrandam nobilitatem suam. Quamquam his laudationibus historia nostra rerumnostrarum est facta mendosior. Multa enim scripta sunt in eis quae facta non sunt: falsitriumphi, plures consulatus. . .Both praise and lament are documented by Varro, L. L. 7.70 (Gotz, Scholl): inTruculento (495) 'sine uirtute argutum ciuem mihi habeam pro pr(a)efica,' (praefica)dicta, ut Aurelius (= A. Opillus, ca end II century. Funaioli p. 90) scribit, mulier abluco quae conduceretur, quae ante domum mortui laudis eius caneret. hoc factitatumAristoteles scribit in libro qui (in)scribitur nomima barbarika (604 Rose.), quibus testi-monium est, quod tritum (Lindsay) est, N(a)evii (fr. com. 129 R): 'haec quidem hercle,opinor, praefica est, nam mortuum collaudat.' Claudius (= Servius C1., died ca 60 B.c.,acquainted with Cicero. Funaioli p. 98) scribit: 'quae praeficeretur ancillis, quemadmo-dum lamentarentur, praefica est dicta.' utrumque ostendit a praefectione praeficamdictam.

'7Festus(Paul.) 329 (249-50), Glossaria Latina IV (Pirie, Lindsay): praeficae di-cuntur mulieres ad lamentandum mortuum conductae quae dant ceteris modumplangendi, quasi in hoc ipsum praefectae. Naevius (fr. com. 129 R)'haec quidem [me]-hercle opinor praefica est, [quae] sic mortuum collaudat. '; cf. Servius Claudius (pre-vious note), praeficeretur ancillis, quemadmodum lamentarentur. ; also Servius, Aen.6.216: . .. populi circumstantis corona, quae tamdiu stabat respondens fletibus praefi-cae, id est principi planctuum.'8 Ante domum mortui in Varro. L. L. 7.70, just cited.Gloss. Philox. PR 78 praefica: he prb tes klines en te ekphorai koptomene, thre-noidbs ep'ekphorai.20Servius,Aen. 6.216, just cited.21Seethe Lucilius quoted here by Nonius Marcellus (Lindsay 1903) p. 92 (66, 67M): praeficae dicebantur aput ueteres quae adhiberi solent funeri, mercede conductae,ut et flerent et fortia facta laudarent. Plautus in Frivolaria (84), 'superabo omnis argu-tando praeficas.' Idem Truculento [II.6.14: 'habeam pro] praefica, quae alios col-laudare, eapse [sese] uero non potest.' Lucilius lib. xii [954f Marx]: 'mercede quae con-

his distinguished ancestors, who are represented by their masks, whichwere donned by persons dressed in the garb appropriate to the rank ofeach dead man. Copies of these formal praise orations, contiones, werepreserved and treasured in archives by aristocratic families, althoughthe written records by no means guaranteed freedom from exaggerationand stereotype.5In the other domain, we hear of women hired to lament andpraise, praeficae. 6 They set an example and lead the mourning for theentire funeral,l7 from in front of the dead man's dwelling,18 through thefuneral procession,19 as far as the place of cremation.20 Their perfor-mance entails not only lamentation but also weeping and tearing ofhair.21 No texts of what they sang survive; but songs of mourning are

'SCicero, Brutus 15.62. . . non nullae mortuorum laudationes. .. .et herculeseae quidem exstant: ipsae enim familiae sua quasi ornamenta ac monumenta servabantet ad usum, si quis eiusdem generis occidisset, et ad memoriam laudum domesticarum etad inlustrandam nobilitatem suam. Quamquam his laudationibus historia nostra rerumnostrarum est facta mendosior. Multa enim scripta sunt in eis quae facta non sunt: falsitriumphi, plures consulatus. . .Both praise and lament are documented by Varro, L. L. 7.70 (Gotz, Scholl): inTruculento (495) 'sine uirtute argutum ciuem mihi habeam pro pr(a)efica,' (praefica)dicta, ut Aurelius (= A. Opillus, ca end II century. Funaioli p. 90) scribit, mulier abluco quae conduceretur, quae ante domum mortui laudis eius caneret. hoc factitatumAristoteles scribit in libro qui (in)scribitur nomima barbarika (604 Rose.), quibus testi-monium est, quod tritum (Lindsay) est, N(a)evii (fr. com. 129 R): 'haec quidem hercle,opinor, praefica est, nam mortuum collaudat.' Claudius (= Servius C1., died ca 60 B.c.,acquainted with Cicero. Funaioli p. 98) scribit: 'quae praeficeretur ancillis, quemadmo-dum lamentarentur, praefica est dicta.' utrumque ostendit a praefectione praeficamdictam.

'7Festus(Paul.) 329 (249-50), Glossaria Latina IV (Pirie, Lindsay): praeficae di-cuntur mulieres ad lamentandum mortuum conductae quae dant ceteris modumplangendi, quasi in hoc ipsum praefectae. Naevius (fr. com. 129 R)'haec quidem [me]-hercle opinor praefica est, [quae] sic mortuum collaudat. '; cf. Servius Claudius (pre-vious note), praeficeretur ancillis, quemadmodum lamentarentur. ; also Servius, Aen.6.216: . .. populi circumstantis corona, quae tamdiu stabat respondens fletibus praefi-cae, id est principi planctuum.'8 Ante domum mortui in Varro. L. L. 7.70, just cited.Gloss. Philox. PR 78 praefica: he prb tes klines en te ekphorai koptomene, thre-noidbs ep'ekphorai.20Servius,Aen. 6.216, just cited.21Seethe Lucilius quoted here by Nonius Marcellus (Lindsay 1903) p. 92 (66, 67M): praeficae dicebantur aput ueteres quae adhiberi solent funeri, mercede conductae,ut et flerent et fortia facta laudarent. Plautus in Frivolaria (84), 'superabo omnis argu-tando praeficas.' Idem Truculento [II.6.14: 'habeam pro] praefica, quae alios col-laudare, eapse [sese] uero non potest.' Lucilius lib. xii [954f Marx]: 'mercede quae con-

his distinguished ancestors, who are represented by their masks, whichwere donned by persons dressed in the garb appropriate to the rank ofeach dead man. Copies of these formal praise orations, contiones, werepreserved and treasured in archives by aristocratic families, althoughthe written records by no means guaranteed freedom from exaggerationand stereotype.5In the other domain, we hear of women hired to lament andpraise, praeficae. 6 They set an example and lead the mourning for theentire funeral,l7 from in front of the dead man's dwelling,18 through thefuneral procession,19 as far as the place of cremation.20 Their perfor-mance entails not only lamentation but also weeping and tearing ofhair.21 No texts of what they sang survive; but songs of mourning are

'SCicero, Brutus 15.62. . . non nullae mortuorum laudationes. .. .et herculeseae quidem exstant: ipsae enim familiae sua quasi ornamenta ac monumenta servabantet ad usum, si quis eiusdem generis occidisset, et ad memoriam laudum domesticarum etad inlustrandam nobilitatem suam. Quamquam his laudationibus historia nostra rerumnostrarum est facta mendosior. Multa enim scripta sunt in eis quae facta non sunt: falsitriumphi, plures consulatus. . .Both praise and lament are documented by Varro, L. L. 7.70 (Gotz, Scholl): inTruculento (495) 'sine uirtute argutum ciuem mihi habeam pro pr(a)efica,' (praefica)dicta, ut Aurelius (= A. Opillus, ca end II century. Funaioli p. 90) scribit, mulier abluco quae conduceretur, quae ante domum mortui laudis eius caneret. hoc factitatumAristoteles scribit in libro qui (in)scribitur nomima barbarika (604 Rose.), quibus testi-monium est, quod tritum (Lindsay) est, N(a)evii (fr. com. 129 R): 'haec quidem hercle,opinor, praefica est, nam mortuum collaudat.' Claudius (= Servius C1., died ca 60 B.c.,acquainted with Cicero. Funaioli p. 98) scribit: 'quae praeficeretur ancillis, quemadmo-dum lamentarentur, praefica est dicta.' utrumque ostendit a praefectione praeficamdictam.

'7Festus(Paul.) 329 (249-50), Glossaria Latina IV (Pirie, Lindsay): praeficae di-cuntur mulieres ad lamentandum mortuum conductae quae dant ceteris modumplangendi, quasi in hoc ipsum praefectae. Naevius (fr. com. 129 R)'haec quidem [me]-hercle opinor praefica est, [quae] sic mortuum collaudat. '; cf. Servius Claudius (pre-vious note), praeficeretur ancillis, quemadmodum lamentarentur. ; also Servius, Aen.6.216: . .. populi circumstantis corona, quae tamdiu stabat respondens fletibus praefi-cae, id est principi planctuum.'8 Ante domum mortui in Varro. L. L. 7.70, just cited.Gloss. Philox. PR 78 praefica: he prb tes klines en te ekphorai koptomene, thre-noidbs ep'ekphorai.20Servius,Aen. 6.216, just cited.21Seethe Lucilius quoted here by Nonius Marcellus (Lindsay 1903) p. 92 (66, 67M): praeficae dicebantur aput ueteres quae adhiberi solent funeri, mercede conductae,ut et flerent et fortia facta laudarent. Plautus in Frivolaria (84), 'superabo omnis argu-tando praeficas.' Idem Truculento [II.6.14: 'habeam pro] praefica, quae alios col-laudare, eapse [sese] uero non potest.' Lucilius lib. xii [954f Marx]: 'mercede quae con-

4555555

This content downloaded from 161.116.184.231 on Tue, 8 Apr 2014 12:40:35 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

8/12/2019 Sickle Elogia

6/15

JON VAN SICKLEON VAN SICKLEON VAN SICKLEON VAN SICKLEON VAN SICKLEON VAN SICKLE

mentioned, the neniae,22 cantus lugubres, as Cicero calls them;23 andthe fact that the performer was hired led Leo to infer that their contentmust have been purely conventional.24 His view is supported by the se-mantic range of the word nenia, which includes form and function,song, lamentation, but also a reflection on content, silly things, rub-bish. 25 The latter senses suggest a standardized, repetitious and largely

generic content rather than specific reference to actual offices anddeeds. Such a tradition of verbal and gestural formulas seems likely tohave been handed down by example, visually and orally,26 perhaps thenthrough the women attached to the shrine of Libitina, from which thefemale singers were hired.27

Alongside the picture of generic lamentation, diverse sources alsospeak of praise delivered by the praefica.28 Again, the songs do not sur-vive, but examples of women's funerary praise in other cultures would

ductae flent alieno in funere, praeficae multo et capillos scindunt et clamant magis.'Varro de Vita Populi Romani lib. iiii, 'dein naeniam cantari solitam ad tibias et fideseorumque [ludias his]tricas cursitassent. haec mulier uocitata olim praefica usque adpoenicum bellum'. [eorum qui ludis tricas curitassent, Bucheler]

22Nonius Marcellus (145 M): nenia ineptum et inconditum carmen, quod a con-ducta muliere quae praefica diceretur, is, quibus propinqui non essent, mortuis exhi-beretur. Varro de Vita Populi Romani lib iv 'ibi a muliere quae optuma uoce esset per-quam laudari dein neniam cantari solitam ad tibias et fides. ' Festus (p. 154 L.):Naenia est (carmen, quod in funere laudandi> gratia can(tatur ad tibiam), cited byKierdorf 1980.96.23Cicero de leg. 2.62 Reliqua sunt in more: funus ut indicatur si quid ludorum,dominusque funeris utatur accenso atque lictoribus, honoratorum uirorum laudes incontione memorentur, easque etiam [et] cantus ad tibicinem prosequatur, cui nomenneniae, quo uocabulo etiam (apud) Graecos cantus lugubres nominantur.24Leo 1913.18. The interplay of convention and individuality in funeral lamentreceives careful discussion in de Martino 1975.207-209. Herescu 1947.75 suggests thatthemes and order, and something of the expressive means of lament and praise, may beinferred from Catullus 3, the lament for the dead sparrow.250LD, de Martino 1975.314.26de Martino 1975.208 cites Jeremiah 9.20 for evidence of oral transmission oflament tradition from women to women in another culture.

27 mulierab luco quae conduceretur, so Varro, L. L. 7.70 quoted above. Thepraefica is one of the functionaries, libitinarii, who carry out the practical work of thefuneral: RE 22.2 (1954) 1347, most probably slaves, RE 13.1 (1926) 113.28For xample, Naevius (fr. com. 129 R) haec quidem [me]hercle opinor praeficaest, [quae] sic mortuum collaudat. Plautus, Truculentus [II.6.14: habeam pro]praefica, quae alios collaudare, eapse [sese] uero non potest. Aurelius (Funaioli p. 90)mulier ab luco quae conduceretur, quae ante domum mortui laudis eius caneret. Cf.then Nonius Marcellus, p. 92 (66, 67 M): ut et flerent et fortia facta laudarent.

mentioned, the neniae,22 cantus lugubres, as Cicero calls them;23 andthe fact that the performer was hired led Leo to infer that their contentmust have been purely conventional.24 His view is supported by the se-mantic range of the word nenia, which includes form and function,song, lamentation, but also a reflection on content, silly things, rub-bish. 25 The latter senses suggest a standardized, repetitious and largely

generic content rather than specific reference to actual offices anddeeds. Such a tradition of verbal and gestural formulas seems likely tohave been handed down by example, visually and orally,26 perhaps thenthrough the women attached to the shrine of Libitina, from which thefemale singers were hired.27

Alongside the picture of generic lamentation, diverse sources alsospeak of praise delivered by the praefica.28 Again, the songs do not sur-vive, but examples of women's funerary praise in other cultures would

ductae flent alieno in funere, praeficae multo et capillos scindunt et clamant magis.'Varro de Vita Populi Romani lib. iiii, 'dein naeniam cantari solitam ad tibias et fideseorumque [ludias his]tricas cursitassent. haec mulier uocitata olim praefica usque adpoenicum bellum'. [eorum qui ludis tricas curitassent, Bucheler]

22Nonius Marcellus (145 M): nenia ineptum et inconditum carmen, quod a con-ducta muliere quae praefica diceretur, is, quibus propinqui non essent, mortuis exhi-beretur. Varro de Vita Populi Romani lib iv 'ibi a muliere quae optuma uoce esset per-quam laudari dein neniam cantari solitam ad tibias et fides. ' Festus (p. 154 L.):Naenia est (carmen, quod in funere laudandi> gratia can(tatur ad tibiam), cited byKierdorf 1980.96.23Cicero de leg. 2.62 Reliqua sunt in more: funus ut indicatur si quid ludorum,dominusque funeris utatur accenso atque lictoribus, honoratorum uirorum laudes incontione memorentur, easque etiam [et] cantus ad tibicinem prosequatur, cui nomenneniae, quo uocabulo etiam (apud) Graecos cantus lugubres nominantur.24Leo 1913.18. The interplay of convention and individuality in funeral lamentreceives careful discussion in de Martino 1975.207-209. Herescu 1947.75 suggests thatthemes and order, and something of the expressive means of lament and praise, may beinferred from Catullus 3, the lament for the dead sparrow.250LD, de Martino 1975.314.26de Martino 1975.208 cites Jeremiah 9.20 for evidence of