PREFACE. TH HE main object of this volume is historical. Though I hope that I have not neglected important points of textual and grammatical criticism, my chief desire has been to illustrate the work of Suetonius by putting before the reader, as fully as space would permit, the materials which exist for constructing the history of the life and times of Augustus, and which expand and explain the necessarily brief and summarised statements in the Biography itself. I have therefore quoted freely from Dio and other writers, and have printed in an appendix the entire Monumentum Ancyranum (as emended and restored by Mommsen), with dates and slight marginal indications of subject-matter, which I hope may render it more readily available. To this I have subjoined a few other inscriptions illustrating special points in the Emperor's life, in addition to a considerable number transcribed in the notes. I feel, on looking back on my work, that I may at times have sacrificed to this object of historical illustration some critical discussions on text or language, such as might justly have been expected. For Suetonius, like all good writers, has a strongly marked individuality of style, and his own peculiar method of manipulating word-forms and constructions. It is not safe criticism to class all such as accounted for by the usage of the 'silver age,' that is, after all, a usage other than that of Caesar and Cicero. Suetonius differs as much in style from such writers as Velleius, Florus, Pliny, as he does from either Caesar or Cicero. Idiosyncrasy has as much to do with it as date. It is easy to exaggerate the difference itself. Caesar's vocabulary, writing as he does on a narrow range of subject, is a singularly limited one. Cicero, except in his more private letters, aimed at a literary purism which must have been remote from the common practice of the day either in colloquial or written language. The admission into literature of words in common use constitutes a large part of the difference, such, for instance, as the fondness for the frequentative forms like pensare (c. 25), pensitare (c. 66), grassare (c. 67), taxare (cc. 4, 41), and of such irregularly formed compounds as inobservantia (c. 76) and praecipitium (c. 79). Again, of the long list drawn out by P. Bagge of words used by Suetonius which are not used by Cicero and Caesar, or only in a slightly different sense, a considerable number can be shewn by the practice of Vergil, Horace, Nepos and Livy to have been current at and soon after the end of the Republic. Such are appellatio c. 100, austrinus c. 81, avius c. 96, cerritus c. 87, cessare c. 42, conflare c. 52, sedile c. 43, subtexere c. 68, titulus c. 31, and others. In another class of words Suetonius has gone back to the colloquialisms of an earlier age, as is shewn by the usage of Plautus and Terence. Such are adapertus c. 53, condormire c. 98, aquilus c. 79, invitare se c. 77. Some new words or usages are naturally the result of new things, or a new view of things. Such are actus c. 78, contubernium c. 89, exauctorare c. 24, extemporalis c. 84, ieiunum servare c. 76, missilia c. 98, notare c. 64, praecognoscere c. 97, publicare cc. 29, 100, missio cc. 17, 45, recensus c. 49, breviarium cc. 28, 101, prosa (prorsa oratio) c. 85. In constructions he is fond of using the present and perfect subjunctive (for vividness) instead of the imperfect or pluperfect, as in edant c. 55, exigant c. 49, observata sit c. 94, fugatae sint c. 16; and after verbs of exhorting or commanding he prefers the construction without ut, as monet imitetur c. 3; and usually puts a subjunctive after ante... quam, prius...quam, though the clause is not in any way oblique, see cc. 4, 101; so pridie quam...committeret c. 96. He omits the preposition in with words conveying a well-understood locative sense, such as continenti c. 16, regione (followed by genitive) cc. 7, 41, municipalibus agris c. 13. For quippe qui he often uses ut qui cc. 30, 66, 72; for an non he has an c. 94; for an sometimes anne c. 69; for illico he uses coram c. 27; for ex adverso he uses contra cc. 44, 94; citra has the sense of ante or sine cc. 24, 43, 66. He is fond of the conjunctions sed et cc. 38, 45, 57, 70, 89, 93; and of sed or sed quidem for kai тaûтa, cc. 16, 29, 68, 92, 98; tanquam and quasi with subjunctive express the ground of an action without necessarily any suggestion of unreality, cc. 6, 7, 10, 14. Speaking more generally the points to be observed in his style are (1) its brevity. This is not the epigrammatic brevity of Tacitus, that master of the unexpected, who seeks to impress his reader by surprising him. Suetonius is not thinking of startling his readers: his brevity comes from a wish to express much with the least possible expenditure of words. It is business-like statement that he is seeking, not ornament or brilliancy. (2) Allied to this is his inconcinnitas, his rejection of the 'periodic' style. His sentences are not elaborated or arranged with a careful eye to the balance of clauses, order of words, or intricate combination. To express clearly what he has to say is the limit of his ambition. For rhythmical prose he has either no ear or no patience. (3) Thirdly, he is participiorum amantissimus. This too is a peculiarity which arises partly from the desire of brevity, but partly also from a perhaps conscious imitation of Greek models. These hints may serve as indications as to what to observe in reading Suetonius. He is not a great artist in language; but he is a considerable grammarian, and his peculiarities are not the result of carelessness, but rather of scholastic precision. The earliest Editions of Suetonius appeared in Rome (1470) and Venice (1471). The principal Editions since are those of Erasmus (1518), I. Casaubon (Geneva 1595, Paris 1610), J. G. Graevius (Utrecht 1672, 1691, 1703), S. Pitiscus (Utrecht 1690, Louvain 1714), P. Burman (Amsterdam 1730), J. H. Bremi (Zurich 1820), C. G. Baumgarten-Crusius (Leipzig 1816), C. H. Hase (Paris 1828). The text in this volume is mainly that of C. L. Roth (Leipzig 1890). I have found the edition of Pitiscus, which contains the notes of the older editions, very useful, especially in regard to the legal writers. The standard edition is still that of Baumgarten-Crusius; and nothing, as far as I am aware, has been done for Suetonius in England. For discussions of the style and diction of Suetonius the following will be found useful: H. R. Thimm de usu atque elocutione C. Suetonii Tranquilli, Königsberg 1867. P. Bagge de elocutione C. Suetonii Tranquilli, Upsala 1875. Aêm. Trachmann de conjunctionum causalium apud Gaium Suetonium Tranquillum usu, Halle 1886. R. Düpow de C. Suetonii Tranquilli consuetudine sermonis quaestiones, Iena 1895. For the life of Augustus: J. C. Dietrich Historia Augusti, Greisen 1666. L. de Tillemont Histoire des Empereurs, Venice 1732. W. Drumann Geschichte Roms, Vol. 4, pp. 245-302. Egger Examen critique des historiens anciens de la vie et du règne d'Auguste, Paris 1844. G. C. Hieronymi de Octavii Imperatoris moribus, Hamburg 1820. M. A. Weichert Imperatoris Augusti Scriptorum reliquiae, Grima 1841. M. Beulé Auguste et sa famille et ses amis, Paris 1868. Merivale History of the Romans under the Empire, London, 1865. |