HADRIANUS

HADRIANVS. P.MONTS.ROCA III

ORIENTALIA MONTSERRATENSIA, 5

JUAN GIL ‐ SOFÍA TORALLAS TOVAR

HADRIANVS
P. MONTS.ROCA III

CONSEJO SUPERIOR DE INVESTIGACIONES CIENTÍFICAS
PUBLICACIONS DE L’ABADIA DE MONTSERRAT
2010
PÁGINA LEGAL
ANTONIO TOVAR
MAGISTRO DILECTISSIMO
AMICO COLLEGA
AVO NEPTIS
ANIMO GRATO
DICABANT
TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACIO ................................................................................... 9
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................... 11

I. THE MONTSERRAT CODEX MISCELLANEUS .................... 15
(Inv. nos. 126‐178, 292, 338)
Palaeographical aspects of the codex 21
Origins of the codex 22

II. LINGUISTIC DESCRIPTION OF THE TEXT …………………. 31
Phonetics 32
Morphology 34
Syntax 35
Lexical observations 37
Palaeographic remarks 40

III. THE PLOT OF HADRIANVS: HISTORICAL ANALYSIS …….. 43
The main characters 59

IV. LITERARY REMARKS ON THE TALE OF HADRIAN ………. 69

V. HADRIAN IN LITERATURE: MYTH AND REALITY …………. 75
The Sententiae Hadriani 77
The Vita Secundi and the Altercatio Hadriani
cum Epicteto 88
The apocryphal Epistles 95
The date of the tale of Hadrian 98
Embedding the legend of Hadrian in Trajan’s 99

VI. EDITION OF THE HADRIANVS…………………………… 103

VII. INDEX OF LATIN WORDS ………………………………. 123

BIBLIOGRAPHY.......................................................................... 131
PLATES....................................................................................... 141

PREFACIO

En este volumen, Juan Gil y Sofía Torallas Tovar ofrecen
la transcripción, la traducción y el comentario a un papiro
latino del siglo IV procedente del fondo P. Monts.Roca. El
contenido de la obra, en parte legendario, relata algunos viajes
del emperador Hadriano. Fruto de un trabajo altamente
especializado, este libro sigue la línea marcada por los
volúmenes precedentes de la colección Orientalia
Montserratensia. Este es el quinto ejemplar de esta colección y
manifiesta, por tanto, la continuidad del proyecto inicial. Año
tras año, en efecto, se publican regularmente nuevas
investigaciones, alternando los estudios papirológicos del fondo
Roca‐Puig con la edición de los catálogos de libros manuscritos
en lenguas orientales, provenientes del fondo Bonaventura
Ubach. Según estaba previsto, la colección Orientalia
Montserratensia sigue ofreciendo al público el importante
patrimonio histórico oriental que los monjes de Montserrat han
recibido y que conservan con responsabilidad y atención.
En el año 2006 se inició esta colección, Orientalia
Montserratensia, con un interesante estudio sobre una serie de
términos griegos, testimonio de los orígenes de la estenografía
griega. El título de la obra es To the Origins of Greek Stenography.
Los autores la Dra. Sofía Torallas Tovar y el Prof. Klaas A.
Worp establecieron, con este trabajo conjunto, un nivel
elevadísimo de la colección, que ha marcado la pauta de la
investigación y la publicación para el resto de los P.Monts.Roca.
Este primer volumen, poco después de su publicación, fue
juzgado muy positivamente por la crítica internacional de la
ciencia papirológica.
En 2007 aparece el segundo volumen de la colección,
obra personal de la Dra. Sofía Torallas Tovar. Lleva por título
Biblica Coptica Montserratensia. Se trata de un estudio centrado
en los papiros coptos de tema bíblico, pertenecientes siempre al
fondo P.Monts.Roca. Una investigación particularmente
importante para establecer la tradición textual de los diversos
libros de la Biblia. El tercer volumen, impreso en 2008, contiene
el catálogo de los manuscritos hebreos, conservados en la
Biblioteca del Monasterio y provenientes del fondo
Bonaventura Ubach. La publicación es obra del Dr. Francisco
Javier del Barco, hebraísta y especialista en manuscritos
bíblicos. El título describe su contenido, Catálogo de manuscritos
hebreos de la Biblioteca de Montserrat. Al año siguiente aparece el
cuarto volumen impreso en 2009. Contiene el catálogo de los
manuscritos árabes del mismo fondo Buenaventura Ubach,
Catálogo de los manuscritos árabes de la Biblioteca de Montserrat, un
estudio de la Dra. Amalia Zomeño, experta en derecho islámico,
en documentación y paleografía árabe.
Todos estos trabajos de investigación y de publicación
han sido posibles gracias a la colaboración que existe entre el
antiguo Instituto de Filología del Consejo Superior de
Investigaciones Científicas ‐ actualmente Instituto de Lenguas y
Culturas del Mediterráneo y Oriente Próximo, dirigido por la
Dra. María Teresa Ortega Monasterio ‐ y la Abadía de
Montserrat, colaboración sellada con un convenio entre ambas
instituciones. El altísimo nivel científico de los mencionados
especialistas, investigadores del CSIC, y su intensa dedicación
al estudio de los fondos orientales de Montserrat permiten
llevar a cabo el proyecto cultural de ofrecer al público un
importante patrimonio antiguo que hace honor a nuestro país.
Merecen en este contexto un profundo reconocimiento
los dos personajes que, en el siglo pasado, reunieron tanta
riqueza patrimonial en la Abadía de Montserrat. En realidad, su
gran obra de coleccionistas ha dado la posibilidad de
emprender la presente labor de investigación. Su enorme
esfuerzo exige, como consecuencia, la difusión de los materiales
que pacientemente ellos habían acumulado. A este fin responde
la colección Orientalia Montserratensia. En realidad, los dos
coleccionistas se complementan mutuamente: el orientalista y
exégeta P. Buenaventura Ubach, conocedor del mundo y de las
lenguas semíticas y el papirólogo Dr. Ramón Roca‐Puig,
experto en lenguas clásicas.
No puedo terminar sin dedicar un merecido
agradecimiento a la Fundación Abadía de Montserrat 2025 por su
eficaz gestión, y una particular gratitud por el apoyo de la
Compañía Reale Seguros, sin cuya generosa ayuda no sería
posible la publicación de la colección Orientalia Montserratensia.

Pius‐Ramón Tragán
Scriptorium Biblicum et Orientale

INTRODUCTION

In this publication we present a short Latin tale in prose
preserved in the Codex Miscellaneus from the Roca‐Puig
papyrological collection at the Abbey of Montserrat. This is the
only work from this codex which remained so far unpublished.
It is a remarkable product against the background of Egypt as a
country where the high classes still aimed at having a bilingual
education in the two high class languages of the Empire.
The main character of this text is the emperor Hadrian
(AD 117‐138). In it we can follow the emperor’s relationship
with a sinister character, Raecius Varus. Unfortunately our
papyrus, a unique copy of the tale, is in a much corrupted state
and often offers inextricable and nonsensical readings, due to
an adulterated and careless tradition of the text. Moreover, the
end of the story has been deliberately or unconsciously cut off
and closed with an otherwise beautiful colophon: a tabula ansata
that does not counterbalance the literary loss with its artistic
value.
In this work we present a complete diplomatic
transcription of the text of the papyrus with a critical apparatus,
a reconstruction of the correct Latin text and a translation,
necessarily temptative in some difficult passages. In the six
introductory chapters attention is paid to the composition of the
Codex Miscellaneus (Chapter I), including its origins and the
circumstances of its purchase, the linguistic phenomena
(Chapter II), the historical background (Chapter III), the literary
12
analysis (Chapter IV) and the literary background (Chapter V)

of the tale. We hope to have provided a first but broad
approach to a so far unknown text, which, in spite of being a
low literary product, raises many interesting questions, both as
a historical and as a literary source.
We would like to thank many people who contributed,
directly or indirectly, to our work in this volume. In particular,
Father Pius Tragan, director of the Scriptorium Biblicum et
Orientale, always made great efforts to facilitate our work in
every aspect. Father Josep Massot, director of Publicacions
Abadia de Montserrat also showed great interest in the
publication of this book and paid thorough and attentive care to
its printing. Of course we thank the Abbot, Father Josep Soler,
and the whole Benedictine community and Library staff at
Montserrat for their generosity and collaboration. We cannot
forget the director of the Fundació Abadia de Montserrat 2025,
Josep Sinca, who continuously expressed his faith in the
papyrological project and supported our work financially. We
are also especially indebted to Reale for their substantial
contribution to this book series and to our research project.
Finally, we record with gratitude the names of a number
of scholars for their most helpful contributions to various parts
of this work: Prof. Klaas A. Worp (Leiden Universiteit), Prof.
Clifford Ando (University of Chicago), Prof. Alain Bresson
(University of Chicago) and Prof. A. Caballos (University of
Seville). The audience at the Department of Classics at the
University of Chicago, at the Department of Greek and Latin at
The Ohio State University and at the Department of Classics at
the University of La Laguna (Tenerife) also provided very
helpful clues for our research in the seminars we offered during
the last two years. To all of them, our warmest thanks in the
hope that they will enjoy reading this book.
13
We dedicate this book to the memory of Antonio Tovar,
with whom we both share bonds of love and friendship, in
commemoration of the centenary of his birth in 1911. He is in
our souls and in our hearts.

I
THE MONTSERRAT CODEX MISCELLANEUS
(Inv. nos. 126‐178, 292, 338)

Since the Tale about the Emperor Hadrian is the last work
edited in the now well known Codex Miscellaneus of
Montserrat, we consider it an appropriate circumstance to go
back to the problem of the origins of this book as a whole. A
full account of it has already been provided in the first
volume of this series, 1 and thus we will recall some of its
main features only briefly, and will then return to the
question of origins and the possible assignation of this codex
to a monastic library from Upper Egypt.
Dr. Ramón Roca‐Puig (1906‐2001) bought in Cairo in
the 1950s a number of papyrus fragments which turned out
to belong to a fourth century codex of exceptional interest. In
1973, he acquired through an exchange with the Bodmer
Foundation additional fragments also belonging to this
codex; 2 these are now inv. nos. 134‐135. Later on, an
1 S. Torallas Tovar – K.A. Worp, To the Origins of Greek Stenography.
P.Monts.Roca. I, Barcelona, 2006: 15‐24, which we partly reproduce here
for the reader’s convenience.
2 For the exchange affair with Kasser and Braun, see R. Roca‐Puig, Ciceró.
Catilinàries, Barcelona, 1977: xii‐xiii.
16 JUAN GIL – SOFÍA TORALLAS TOVAR
additional fragment of the same codex showed up in the
collection of Duke University (inv. no. 798), 3 having been
edited by W.H. Willis (1963); this was given in Roca‐Puig’s
files an imaginary inventory number 129.
This papyrus codex consists of a single quire, of which
twenty six out of originally at least twenty eight bifolia are
preserved. 4 Eighteen bifolia are virtually complete. The
codex bears the inventory numbers 128‐178, 292 and 338 in
the Roca‐Puig papyrus collection at Montserrat (called
P.Monts.Roca). The size of each folium is ca. H. 12,3 x W. 11,4
cm; 5 a bifolium, therefore, is ca. 23 cm wide. 6 The pages have
a rather trapezoidal shape, since their height diminishes
3 P.Rob. inv. no. 201, edited by W. H. Willis, “A Papyrus Fragment of
Cicero”, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological
Association, 94 (1963) 321‐327. The fragment was bought in Cairo in 1955,
exactly the same year Roca‐Puig acquired the codex (see below). For a
complete description and photograph of this papyrus fragment, see, in
addition to the reproduction in Roca‐Puig’s publication, the Duke
papyrus collection website: http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu.
4 This practice is the common procedure in early codices. See F. G.
Kenyon, The Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri: Descriptions and Texts of Twelve
Manuscripts on Papyrus of the Greek Bible, London, 1933: vol. 1, 10‐11. H.
Ibscher, “Der Codex,” Jahrbuch der Einbandkunst, 4 (1937) 3‐15, claims that
all papyrus codices up to the third century are single‐quire codices, and it
was from the fourth century on that they started to be composed in more
than one quire. It is, however, taken also as a sign that the codex comes
from a school environment; cf. J. Van Haelst in A. Carlini (ed.), Papyrus
Bodmer XXXVIII. Erma Il pastore (Ia‐IIIa visione), Cologny‐Genève, 1991:
108, n. 10. For a full survey of the subject, see J. M. Robinson, “The future
of Papyrus Codicology”, in R. M. Wilson (ed.), The Future of Coptic
Studies, Leiden, 1978: 23‐70; and also E. G. Turner, The Typology of the
Early Codex, Philadelphia, 1977: 51‐55, 61.
5 This is Turner’s group 10; see The Typology, 22.
6 The codex was dismembered and the folia are now preserved separately
between glasses.
HADRIANVS 17
slightly from the centre of the bifolia towards the outer edge
of each folium.
The bifolia, originally folded vertically in the centre,
were sewn together with two double stitches. Some
remnants of the string are preserved, as well as pieces of
parchment, which had been inserted between the papyrus
leaves and the string for purposes of reinforcement. The
pages face each other showing vertical against horizontal
fibres. The vertical fibres appear on the outer side of the first
preserved folium (page 1 of the codex), the horizontal fibres
appearing in the inner side of the folium (page 2). This order
continues until the centre of the codex, inv. no. 153‐154,
where one finds two pages, 56‐57, showing both horizontal
fibres. After that the order of fibres changes to horizontal
alternating with vertical fibres. 7
The general content of the codex is as follows:
A: Inv. no. 128↓‐149↓, pp. 5‐47 of the codex (Latin): R. Roca‐
Puig, Ciceró. Catilinàries, Barcelona, 1977.
B: Inv. no. 149→‐153→, pp. 48‐56 of the codex (Latin): R.
Roca‐Puig, Himne a la Verge Maria, Barcelona, 19652.
C: Inv. no. 154→, p. 57 of the codex: Drawing of a
mythological episode, R. Roca‐Puig, “Quatre papirs
inedits”, R. Roca‐Puig i la ciència dels papirs, Algerri,
1989: 139‐169, text no. 4: “Dibuix d’argument mitològic
(part del còdex miscellani de Barcelona)”: “Figura d’un
Hèrcules que, havent occit Diomedes, llença el seu cap
a un animal ferèstec.”
D: Inv. no. 154↓‐157↓, pp. 58‐64 of the codex (Greek): R. Roca‐
Puig, Anàfora de Barcelona i altres pregàries (Missa del segle
7 This is perfectly typical in single‐quire codices; cf. Turner, The Typology,
58‐60 and 65.
IV), Barcelona, 19942, 19993 (these editions are in fact

identical).
E: Inv. no. 158→‐161→ (the other ↓ side of Inv. no. 161 is
blank), pp. 65‐71 [72] of the codex (Latin): R. Roca‐Puig,
Alcestis. Hexàmetres Llatins, Barcelona, 1982. 8
F: Inv. no. 162→‐165↓, pp. 73‐80 of the codex (Latin): Tale
about the Emperor Hadrian.
G: Inv. no. 166→‐178↓, pp. 81‐106 of the codex (Greek):
Wordlist. S. Torallas Tovar – K.A. Worp, To the Origins
of Greek Stenography, Barcelona, 2006.
Inv. nos. 179‐181 are assigned to non‐existent papyri.
Probably Roca‐Puig introduced these numbers in order to
balance the inv. nos. 126‐127, reserved by him for the first
two missing folia of the codex. At least two folia are missing
from the beginning of the codex (pp. 1‐4) and one more (pp.
7‐8) after the first preserved page (pp. 5‐6). At the end of the
codex, given the average length of the six individual word
lists in the last section, G, we calculate that one more folium
is missing with the page containing the last entries of the
sixth sub‐list. 9
The binding features dimensions of H. 12,3 x W. 11,7
cm. The outside material is low quality parchment, which is
at present in very brittle condition. Its hair side is on the
outer side of the binding. The inside material of the binding
consists of various layers of papyrus used for padding the
parchment of the binding. This papyrus‐padding material
still shows traces of writing and has been affected by worms.
Furthermore, four stripes of leather knotted on the inner side
8 See also M. Marcovich, Alcestis Barcinonensis: text and commentary,

Leiden‐New York: E. J. Brill, 1988.
9 For further calculations on this, see Torallas Tovar – Worp, To the
Origins, 19‐20.
HADRIANVS 19
of one cover of the binding have been preserved, while the
other cover has only two such knots preserved; there are two
more holes in the parchment of this cover which might have
been made for holding two more knots, establishing a
symmetry between the two covers of the binding. These
knots are drawn through the parchment and the padding
inside, and they are probably meant to keep the padding
material in place.
The successive sections of the codex feature a different
page lay‐out which is described individually as follows:
Section A (Inv. nos. 128↓‐149↓, pp. 5‐47 of the codex):
Each page contains one column of 22 lines of text,
featuring the dimensions H. 9,7 x W. 8,5 cm. The margins are
often missing and are difficult to reconstruct. These margins,
as far as extant, measure, regardless of recto and verso: at the
top: ca. 0,5 cm; at the bottom: ca. 1 cm; at the left hand side:
ca. 1 cm; at the right hand side: ca. 0,4 cm.
After the end of the text itself a colophon follows in the
shape of a tabula ansata, decorated with Coptic crosses on
each ansa. The inscription in the centre of the tabula reads:
“filiciter dorotheo”. Underneath the tabula stands an extra line:
“utere [f]elix doroth[ee]”. For further details we refer to the
editio princeps.
Section B (Inv. nos. 149→‐153→, pp. 48‐56 of the codex):
Each page contains one column of 16 lines of text,
featuring the dimensions H. 10,5 x W. 8 cm. The margins are:
at the top: ca. 0,8 cm; at the bottom: ca. 0,5 cm; at the left
hand side ca. 1,1 cm; and at the right hand side the margin is
often missing. At the beginning of each paragraph occurs an
ekthesis of ca. 0,5 cm, providing space for one or two letters.
For further details we refer to the editio princeps.
Section C (Inv. no. 154→, p. 57 of the codex):
This section presents only the drawing of a
mythological episode.
Section D (Inv. no. 154↓‐157↓, pp. 58‐64 of the codex):
Each page contains one column of 26‐28 lines of text,
featuring the dimensions H. 10 x W. 8,5 cm. The margins are:
hand side: ca. 0,5 cm; at the right hand side: ca. 0,5 cm.
Each of the various parts of this section is closed off
with an individual colophon.
Section E (Inv. no. 158→‐161→, pp. 65‐71 of the codex; the ↓
side of inv. no. 161, p. 72, is blank):
featuring the dimensions H. 10,2 x W. 9 cm. The margins are:
hand side: ca. 0,5 cm; at the right hand side: ca. 0,3 cm.
Section F (Inv. no. 162→‐165↓, pp. 73‐80 of the codex):
featuring the dimensions H. 10,2 x W. 8,5 cm. The margins
are: at the top: ca. 1 cm; at the bottom: ca. 1 cm; at the left
hand side: ca. 1 cm; at the right hand side: ca. 0,5 cm.
After the end of the text there is an elaborate colophon
in the shape of a tabula ansata, as in section A. The central
part reads, again, “filiciter .. | dorotheo”. On top of the tabula
ansata, one reads “επαγαθω”, i.e. “ἐπ᾽ἀγαθῷ”, the Greek
equivalent of Latin feliciter.
HADRIANVS 21
Sections A and F, therefore, are related to each other in
so far as they are dedicated to the same person, Dorotheus.
This person is otherwise unknown to us. 10
Section G (Inv. no. 166→‐178↓, pp. 81‐106 of the codex):
Each of the 26 pages contains three columns of, on
average, thirty two lines/entries. Often these columns begin
progressively to the left, according to Maas’s law. 11

Palaeographical aspects of the codex
As mentioned, the Montserrat codex features texts both
in Latin and Greek. The handwriting in all texts is a regular
cursive, datable to the second half of the fourth century. In
spite of variations in the size of the writing and in the page
layout from one text to another, we can conclude that one
single hand is responsible for both the Greek and Latin
texts. 12
The Greek hand of the codex can be described as a
small, quickly written cursive, roughly bilinear (the vertical
strokes of β, κ, ι, ρ, υ often reach below the lower line), and
slightly sloping to the right. There are often ligatures of ει,
αυ, αι, γε, επ, ελ, θω, λλ, etc. Last letters of the words
10 For further discussion of this matter, see R. Roca‐Puig, Ciceró, 92‐95.
There is a number of well known monks and bishops of that period
named Dorotheus, but we do not have enough information to identify
any of them here with accuracy. See below 28‐29.
11 See P. J. Parsons – E. G. Turner, Greek Manuscripts of the Ancient World2,
London, 1987: 6.
12 A. Wouters, The Chester Beatty Codex AC 1499. A Graeco‐Latin Lexicon on
the Pauline Epistles and a Greek Grammar, Louvain, 1988: 18, n. 49, notes
that almost all editors of Graeco‐Latin papyri have pointed out the
resemblance between both hands. There are however cases when
differences are so striking that two scribes are considered to have been at
work.
sometimes project into the intercolumnar space, but not

systematically. Accents and spiritus have not been written.
Occasionally, there is diaeresis on ι and υ.
The Latin hand is not calligraphic either. The Latin
hand of the part containing Cicero’s Catilinarian orations is
probably the same hand, though it is written slightly smaller
than the Hadrian section of the codex. It can be described as
an upright mixed writing, featuring uncial and cursive
elements. Lowe calls it “early half uncial.” 13

Origins of the codex
The origin of the codex is not completely clear. Roca‐
Puig reports that he was told that the codex came from
Southern Egypt, but this information cannot be taken as
certain.
One may wonder who was interested in possessing a
codex with such a variety of works: pagan Latin literature,
Christian liturgical texts, both in Greek and Latin, and a
word list which undoubtedly proves an interest in Classical
Greek literature in general. Unfortunately, the cover of the
codex does not contain any indication of its owner or scribe.
Nor is there much information to be found within the codex
itself. The only reference to an owner appears in the
colophons of two of the sections, whom we will consider
later.
The hand has been dated by E. A. Lowe, Codices latini antiquiores: a
13
palaeographical guide to Latin manuscripts prior to the ninth century, Suppl.,
Oxford, 1971: no. 1683. Lowe already pointed to the resemblance of the
Montserrat codex (in Lowe, Suppl. 1782) with Chester Beatty AC 1499,
though he dated this one to the end of the fifth century, and preferred to
date the Montserrat text to the end of the fourth century.
HADRIANVS 23
Two documents from Roca‐Puig’s personal papers may
contribute to clarifying this matter and at least give a clue to
where and how the codex originated (see plates IX‐XI). Both
are handwritten by Father Sylvestre Chaleur, Director of the
Institut Copte in Cairo at that time. Both were written in the
summer of 1955, when, apparently, this Father Chaleur
visited the city of Barcelona and delivered the papyri to Roca
personally:
À bord du bateau le 8 août
55
Mon cher Abbé,
Je dois débarquer à Dunkerque et
me rendre de suite à Barcelona ou je compte me trouver
le 26 août pour vous parler de ces fameux manuscrits.
Je dis fameux parce que je le crois sincèrement.
Les pages des psaumes grecs étant rendus,
je n’ai pas voulu vous dire: il n’y a rien à faire. 14 Et je
me suis mis en chasse avec le Dr Aziz. 15
J’ai trouvé 2 manuscrits magnifiques.
Le 1er: un Codex complet et signé du IIIe environ avec
3 dessins. Deux dessins représentant la croix égyptienne
ce que signifie de la période de transition – IIIe siècle environ
et une page avec un dessin bien fait, représentant une femme
ou un homme, je ne me souviens plus, tenant une tête, en bas
14 In two other previous letters (July 1955) from the Superior of the
Church of Saint Mark in Cairo and Father S. Chaleur, Roca‐Puig is
informed that his “precious parcel” had gone missing. He was expecting
the delivery of some papyri (Psalms and Jeremiah) which he had
purchased, and the messenger disappeared with them. Both letters
deplore the behaviour of some of the intermediaries in the antiquities
market in Cairo.
15 This is probably Prof. Aziz Suryal Atiyah (University of Utah), who
also set his eyes on part of this material. See J. M. Robinson, “The
Pachomian Monastic Library at the Chester Beatty Library and the
Bibliothèque Bodmer,” Manuscripts of the Middle East 5 (1990‐1991) 26‐40:
esp. 29.
un dragon. À la fin du codex une liste de plusieurs feuillets
de noms. Ce codex en papyrus, grec archaïque est contenu
dans une couverture (comme celle d’un livre) en peau et 4
morceaux de cuir très petits. À l’intérieur de la peau pour
renforcer la couverture se trouve un autre manuscrit qu’il
faudra étudier (plus ancien, important). Il provient (ce manuscrit) /
du couvent de St Pacôme et lui est certainement contemporain.
Vous savez que ce qui était rédigé dans le couvent de St Pacôme
était rédigé en grec et non en copte. Ce qui était alors la
langue des intellectuels. Serait‐il un manuscrit fait par Théodore
le disciple de Pacôme? En tout cas je le crois très important.
Le 2e: est un biblos très important également. Il y a 4 colonnes
de textes les uns à coté des autres. Je n’ai pas voulu le dérouler
(serait‐ce un synoptique?)
(c’est un rouleau celui‐ci) de peur de le briser. Le Dr Aziz a dit
qu’il est très très intéressant [Ces manuscrits ont été achetés pour
vous après votre requête].
Passons maintenant au coté pratique.
Apres réception de votre lettre, devant partir le lendemain, j’ai
pu après de grandes difficultés me faire avancer l’argent.
Il n’était pas encore arrivé. Aussi la personne que vous connaissez
a conservé les 2 manuscrits que j’ai emballé, enfermé dans une
boite en fer, enveloppé de papier et à votre nom. En réception
de l’argent, il remettra comme vous l’avez demandé le paquet
au P. Remiro, 16 afin de le remettre à la personne qui doit vous
le faire parvenir. J’attends donc confirmations – et c’est
pour cela que je viens à Barcelone – de la réception de l’argent
pour vous dire: voilà votre paquet‐
À bientôt, donc, cher Abbé et croyez moi bien à
vous in Xos
P. Sylvester Chaleur

A few days later, the same Father S. Chaleur issued in
Barcelona the following receipt for the purchase of the Codex
Father Zacharias Remiro belonged to the Franciscan Missions and the

16
church of Saint Mark in Cairo. He is mentioned in other letters in the
personal archive of Roca‐Puig.
HADRIANVS 25
Miscellaneus and a Coptic roll, probably belonging to the

same find. 17

Reçu du Patronat St Luc Evangéliste de Barcelona, Amigo
61, 1e, 2ª, la somme de 132.000 pesetas sois 1200 LE
pour l’acquisition d’un manuscrit grec et un manuscrit
copte: par l’intermédiaire de M. Pablo Sendrós 18 et le P. Ramón Roca‐
Puig.
1) Le manuscrit grec du IIIe siècle selon toute probabilité
venant du monastère de St Pacôme. Il a 90 (?) feuilles environ,
couvert de parchemin dans lequel se trouve un texte
grec plus ancien – texte littéraire
2) Le deuxième, rouleau copte 4 colonnes
Barcelone, le 24 août 1955
P. Sylvester Chaleur

The content of these documents brings us to a question
posed above. Although it is not a single‐quire codex, we may
point out the remarkable similarity between our codex and
the Chester Beatty codex AC 1499, 19 not only codicologically,
but also paleographically and with regard to the
miscellaneous and scholarly character of the contents of the
codex. This similarity, together with the information given in
Roca‐Puig’s documents, brings us to a question already
raised by Robinson: 20 did the Montserrat codex belong to the
17 This magnificent piece is a papyrus roll over one metre long, containing
a letter written in Sahidic Coptic, though still unpublished. It is P. Monts.
Roca inv. no. 14.
18 Mr. Sendrós was Roca‐Puig’s Maecenas. He was a wealthy merchant of
Barcelona.
19 The palaeographical similarity has already been mentioned in note 13.
The Chester Beatty codex was edited by A. Wouters, The Chester Beatty
Codex AC 1499, a Graecolatin Lexicon on the Pauline Epistles and a Greek
Grammar, Leuven‐Paris, 1988.
20 See Robinson, “The Pachomian Monastic Library.” He has also
published a complete description of his reconstruction in W. Brashear,

Dishna papers? We will not engage with the question

whether the Dishna papers were a Pachomian monastic
library; instead, we will consider the circumstances of the
discovery itself, and whether the origins of the Montserrat
codex may be gleaned from the same finding and may be
connected with pieces in other collections. 21
The name “Dishna papers” identifies a hoard of codices
and other papyrus documents found in the Thebaid in 1952,
very close to Atripe (White Monastery) and the supposed site
where Pbow, the headquarters of the Pachomian order, was
placed. The Dishna papers were originally believed to be the
remains of the Pachomian Monastic Library, buried in the
seventh century. Found by local inhabitants in 1952 in an
earthen vessel, the codices were first bought by a gold dealer
in Dishna, who sold most of what he had to Phocion J. Tano,
a well known antiquarian in Cairo. The greatest part was
purchased by Martin Bodmer and Sir Chester Beatty. James
Robinson reconstructed the hoard, listing the codices and the
W.‐P. Funk, J. M. Robinson and R. Smith, The Chester Beatty Codex AC.
1390: Mathematical School Exercises in Greek and John 10: 7‐13: 38 in
Subachmimic, Louvain‐Paris, 1990: 3‐32.
21 Against Robinson’s claims that this was a monastic library, R. Cribiore,
Gymnastics of the Mind: Greek Education in Hellenistic and Roman

Egypt, Princeton‐Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2001: 200, and fn. 74,
says that this hoard must have belonged to a Christian school of
advanced learning. Contra Robinson, see also the opinion of A.
Blanchard, “Sur le milieu d’origine du papyrus Bodmer de Ménandre”,
Chronique d’Égypte 66 (1991) 211‐20. J.‐L. Fournet, “Une éthopée de Caïn
dans le codex des Visions de la Fondation Bodmer,“ ZPE 92 (1992) 253‐
66. R. Kasser, “Status quaestionis 1988 sulla presunta origine dei cosidetti
Papiri Bodmer“, Aegyptus 68 (1988) 191‐194. Kasser R., “Lazare conté en
un Lyco‐diospolitain d’aspect fort étrange (Jean 10,7–13,38)“ in
Christianisme d’Egypte, Cahiers de la bibliothèque copte 9, Louvain, 1995 : 21‐
47, esp. 28, n. 37.
HADRIANVS 27
places where they are currently preserved. 22 Most of them

are Bodmer and Chester Beatty codices.
On the one hand, besides the Biblical and Christian
material (liturgical and homiletical) to be expected in a
monastic library, there is an important presence of Classical
literature: Homer (including scholia), Menander,
Thucydides, Achilles Tatius. There is also documentary
material and school texts including exercises in grammar,
lexicography and mathematics. There are texts in three
different languages: Latin, Greek and Coptic (in several
dialects). And there is more than one miscellaneous codex.
Some evidence may support the assumption that the
Montserrat codex comes from the same hoard. On the one
hand, there are formal similarities not only between our
codex and especially the Chester Beatty AC 1499, but also
with other codices claimed to belong to the Dishna papers.
The contents of our codex seem to fit also in the general
trend of the 37 units mentioned by Robinson.
On the other hand, the fact that fragments of the
Montserrat codex were scattered in collections which were
acquired at the same time and from the same dealer points
also to the same conclusion. 23
Finally, we have found the name of the main dealer,
Phocion J. Tano, in Roca‐Puig’s personal documents. It is
difficult, however, to trace the payments mentioned in these
22 Robinson, The Chester Beatty Codex AC. 1390, 6‐8.
23 As mentioned above, Roca‐Puig exchanged a fragment of Menander’s
Samia (P.Barc. inv. 45) for a fragment of Cicero with Bodmer. Menander’s
Samia, is notably also one of the Dishna codices: Bodmer XXV, IV, XXVI +
PCol. inv. 904 = PKöln 3 + PRob. 38 + Roca’s fragment. There is one more
fragment of Cicero in the Duke collection, as mentioned above. It was
found, moreover, between the leaves of the Crøsby codex, Willis, “A
Papyrus Fragment of Cicero,” 324.
handwritten notes and correlate them to actual papyri. In the
papers studied by Robinson to reconstruct the hoard, a
“Spanish priest” was mentioned, probably Roca‐Puig, as a
purchaser in 1966; also the name Josep OʹCallaghan, the
founder of the Palau Ribes collection, together with his
passport number, was recorded as a person interested in
looking at papers. 24 Both Spanish collectors were building
their collections at the same time.
Other minor details may also relate the codex to this
hoard. As mentioned above, the codex does not contain any
notice of a scribe or owner. The only reference of a personal
name is found in the colophons. In section A after the end of
the text itself a colophon follows in the shape of a tabula
ansata, decorated with Coptic crosses on each ansa. The
inscription in the centre of the tabula reads: “filiciter dorotheo”.
Underneath the tabula stands an extra line: “utere [f]elix
doroth[ee]”. After the end of the text of the Hadrian section,
there is an elaborate colophon in the shape of a tabula ansata,
like in section A. The central part reads, again, “filiciter .. |
dorotheo”. On top of the tabula ansata, one reads “επαγαθω,”
i.e. “ἐπ᾽ἀγαθῷ,” Greek for Latin feliciter. The expression
utere felix is very common in Late Antiquity to refer to the
person who receives the codex, rather than the scribe. 25
It is difficult to tell who this Dorotheus could have
been. Being a common name in Christian circles, there is a
good number of priests and bishops by this name in the
24 J. M. Robinson, “The Pachomian Monastic Library” 29‐30. If this
“Spanish priest” buying papyri in 1966 was Roca‐Puig, it definitely does
not refer to the purchase of the Montserrat codex, which, as shown
above, was acquired in 1955.
25 See for examples, J. Gil, “Epigraphica,” Cuadernos de Filología Clásica, XI
(1976) 550‐51.
HADRIANVS 29
fourth century. The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire 26
mentions a number of Dorothei (vol. I 269‐270; vol. II 377‐9).
Of these we may refer especially to Dorotheus 6 (vol. II 377),
recipient of Shenoute’s 9th epistle, 27 where he is addressed as
ⲇⲱⲣⲟⲑⲉⲟⲥ ⲡϩⲏⲅⲉⲙⲱⲛ. He was perhaps the praeses of the
Thebaid. Now, Shenoute’s monastic institution in the
Thebaid was very near to the place where the hoard was
presumably found: this is the closest we can get to
identifying this person. The Dorotheus found in Bodmer’s
Codex des visions was not the actual scribe of the text of the
visions, and has to be rejected as a possible match to
Montserrat’s Dorotheus. 28
26 Edited by A. H. M. Jones, J. R. Martindale and J. Morris, Cambridge:
University Press, 1971‐1992.
27 The text of Epistle 9 is in CSCO II 4 23‐24. Shenoute was the head of an
important monastic institution in Atripe, close to Panopolis/Achmim,

from the end of the fourth to the beginning of the fifth century.
28 On this Dorotheus, see André Hurst, Olivier Reverdin, Jean Rudhardt,
Papyrus Bodmer XXIX. Vision de Dorothéos, appendice, description et

datation du Codex des visions par Rodolphe Kasser et Guglielmo
Cavallo, Cologny‐Genève: Fondation Martin Bodmer, 1984: 43‐49. See
also A.H.M. Kessels and P.W. Van der Horst, “The Vision of Dorotheus
(Pap. Bodmer 29), edited with introduction, translation and notes,”
Vigiliae Christianae 41 (1987) 313‐359, esp. 315‐6.

II
LINGUISTIC DESCRIPTION OF THE TEXT

Hadrianus does not deliver any great innovation to the
field of linguistics. It seems nevertheless useful to survey the
most prominent features of the text’s language in order to
provide the reader with the facility not only for
understanding the irregularities of this often complicated
text, but also for reconstructing it.

Spelling
Some archaic spellings are preserved, such as 6.1
uoltis, undoubtedly due to the fact that it was taught at
school not to use the same character with two differentiated
values (vocalic and consonantic). 1
The etymological spelling prevails in 6.17 conscribti,
1.17; 4.1 circumir‐/set (not circui‐) and in the reconstructed
7.15 adque; in 7.7 exestimabis (for exist‐) can be explained as an
analogical correction, using the vocalism of the simple form
of the verb aestimo. Normally we find the phonetic spelling of
groups ‐mp and ‐nt‐, except for 5.4 inperante and 6.16‐17
dicemtem; this is also the case of 1.16 optinuisset, against the
already mentioned 6.17 conscribti.
1 Cf. F. Solmsen, Studien zur lateinische Lautgeschichte, Strassburg, 1894: 39‐
40.; V. Väänänen, Le latin vulgaire des inscriptions pompéiennes, Berlin3,
1966: 28.
One finds etymological reconstructions for –x‐, as –cs‐
(4.11 inspecsisse) or –xs‐ (5.14 exfiguum for exs‐; but 6.3
exugium for exiguum [i.e., exigua]).
The h is often omitted (1.1 aduc) or added
indiscriminately (2.3 baue for aue; 2 3.4‐5 Hauliui for Aelius).

Phonetics
The ‐i‐ in the final syllable is often mistaken with ‐e‐:
2.6 agnosces; 5.13 uidetes. In one instance ipsĕ and ipsī (6.9) are
used interchangeably, as Agrippinensǐs (4.14) instead of
Agrippinensēs. The same phenomenon of vowel opening can
be found in an unstressed medial syllable: 3.14 restituete.
The o is closed before r: thus we get urbis for orbis
(1.17; 4.17), which can also be explained as a lexical mistake. 3
The toneless ‐u‐ opens in ‐o‐: 1.5 nebolonem (perhaps
also due to the vacilation between the suffixes ‐ŏlus/‐ŭlus).
In final position, u is mixed up with o: 1.1 Hadrianos (a
case of Hellenism? Cf. below Morphology); 2.2 quibos
(although it can be due to a nivelation of inflectional endings:
frenos quibos); 3.15 illod; 5.5 genos; 8.7 malos. The opposite, ‐u
for ‐o, in 2.17 homu.
2 In Conrad Celtes’ codex of Hermeneumata one finds habe and habete, by
influence of habeo. A.C. Dionisotti, “From Ausoniusʹ Schooldays? A
Schoolbook and Its Relatives,” Journal of Roman Studies 72 (1982) 94. In
Egeria one finds ten instances of hostium, and only three of ostium, a
difference which P. Geyer (“Zu Silviae peregrinatio ad loca sancta,”
Archiv für lateinische Lexikographie und Grammatik 9 (1892) 300; see also Ed.
Wölfflin, “Über die Latinität der Peregrinatio ad loca sancta,“ Archiv für
lateinische Lexikographie und Grammatik 4 [1887] 260) explains as a
Gallicism (franc. ‘huis’), with the agreement of E. Löfstedt, Philologisches
Kommentar zur Peregrinatio Aetheriae, Uppsala, 1911: 94; the h‐ can be
better attributed to an influence of hostia.
3 Cf. ThLL IX 2, c. 906, 66ff.
HADRIANVS 33
The diphthong ae monophthonged in e at a very early
stage; 4 here we find it in 2.15; 3.2; 5.4 Cesar (but 5.1; 5.6; 5.10;
5.13; 6. 6 Caesar); 3.10 pretereo, 3.20 pretereuntem; 4.13 preuto
(for praesto); 5.5 pretare (for praestare); 6.5 presentium; 8.2
presentem; 8.1 seculi. By contrast, we get the ultracorrected
forms 2.15 scaelus (possible influence of caelum). Adverbs in ‐
ē feature an ultracorrected desinence ‐ae (3.6 publicae), 5 also to
be found in forms in ‐ĕ: 1.20 ibiquae; 3.14 itaquae.
Two consecutive vowels of the same quality are often
simplified: 6 1.16; 6.13 petit (for petiit); 2.6 tum (for tuum).
An example of assimilation ē – ī > i – i can be found in
8.14 filiciter. 7
Often u and b are mistaken 8 : 1.6 accusabit; 1.7
behenarium; 1.14 nobem; 6.3 bidetur; 6.18 probincias, 7.1
circummibi; 8.10 sedonabit, but 1.7‐8 prouare. The case of bit
(5.1; 5.13; 6.2) for uit (= ait) is remarkable.
The final ‐m was hardly pronounced, and often is
added erroneously (1.4 litem; 2.1 comitatum; 4.10 operam
4 M. Leumann, Lateinische Laut‐ und Formenlehre, München, 1977: 67‐68;

Väänänen, Le latin vulgaire, 23‐25.
5 Cf. J. Gil, “Sobre la Expositio totius mundi et gentium”, in S. Kiss et alii
(eds.), Latin et langues romanes. Études de linguistique offertes à József
Herman à l’occasion de son 80ème anniversaire, Tübingen, 2005: 354.
6 Leumann, Lateinische, 119ff.; Väänänen, Le latin vulgaire, 39‐40.
7 The forms filix and filiciter are attested in Pompei (Väänänen, Le latin
vulgaire, 20). The Latin adverb corresponds to the Greek ἐπˀἀγαθῷ (also
in Diui Hadriani sententiae, 13, where Eduard Böcking, Corpus iuris Romani
anteiustiniani, Bonn 1841 [reprint Aalan Scientia, 1987] I, 195‐214, adds
erroneously feliciter <in bono> based on Greek ἐπˀἀγαθῷ).
8 See Leumann, Lateinische, 159; Väänänen, Le latin vulgaire, 50‐52; B.
Löfstedt, Studien über die Sprache der langobardischen Gesetze, Stockholm‐

Göteborg‐Uppsala, 1961: 149ff.
publicam; 5.6, 8 imperatorem, 6. 3 exugium; 6.18 pacem; 7.13

urbem) or equally omitted (4.15 qua). 9
The pronunciation of the final voiceless dental stop is
also weak, and it often dissappears (4.11 inspecsisse for
inspexisset); thus a and ad are mixed up (3.15). 10
Both x and s are frequently neutralized in final
position: 7.11 ueras for uerax. 11
There is assimilation in sandhi ‐mn‐ > ‐nn‐ (1.14
decennobem) and ‐nm‐ > ‐mm‐ (7.13 immente). 12
Geminated consonants are often simplified: 13 2.10
accusasem, 4.1 circumiset (if not to be corrected to circumiret);
4.2 Agripine, 4.5 Agripinensibus (but 4.14 Agrippinensis, cf. 7.2;
7.14). The opposite case, ultracorrected double consonant, is
seen in 7.1 circummibi. Reditus (for redditus in 4.19; 5.16‐17;
7.3; 8.4) is probably analogical of reditus.
In the cluster ‐nt‐ there is a case of sonorization in ‐nd‐:
Amantinus (4.15), but 6.1; 7.19 Amandinus, although it can
also be explained as influenced by Amandus and Amandius. It
is also to be remarked that in late Greek the same
sonorization –nt‐ > ‐nd‐ occurs.

Morphology
There is perhaps a Greek form in 1.1; 2.2 Hadrianos
(not to be compared to 8.7 malos). The strange form
9 Leumann, Lateinische, 225‐26; Väänänen, Le latin vulgaire, 70; Löfstedt,

Studien über die Sprache, 306.
10 Leumann, Lateinische, 228‐29; Väänänen, Le latin vulgaire, 70‐71; B.
Löfstedt, Studien über die Sprache, 134.
11 For this reason, in Pompei nugas seems to be nugax (cf. Petronius, Sat.
52, 4) rather than an accusative plural, in spite of Väänänen, Le latin
vulgaire, 116.
12 Cf. Väänänen, Le latin vulgaire, 66.
13 Väänänen, Le latin vulgaire, 58‐61; Löfstedt, Studien über die Sprache, 165.
HADRIANVS 35
Agrippinos (7.14) possibly presents an equally strange Greek

desinence ‐νου.
The spelling comitatum (2.1) is apparently a dative
comitatu; but the alternative form senatui appears in 3.5.
The fluctuation of gender in 2.2 frenos (for frena) is
routine. 14 More interesting is the case of reditum, normally
referred to by a neuter relative (4.19 reditum... quid; 5.16‐
17 reditum... quod; 7.3‐4 reditum… quid; 8.4‐5 reditus… quod); it
can be explained as an analogic neuter of aditum, since aditus
in Late Antiquity turned into neuter, perhaps due to the
influence of adytum (cf. Formulae Wisigothicae, 20, 73 nec
nostris aditum manebit haeredibus ullum [J. Gil, Miscellanea
Wisigothica, Sevilla, 1972: 93], Albar. Vit. Eulog. 6, 7 ne aditum
eis nocendi daretur in amplius [J. Gil, Corpus scriptorum
Muzarabicorum, Madrid, 1973: I 334]).
Often the desinences are wrongly nivelled by
attraction of case: 15 1.4‐5 punum Hadrianum for ‐no ‐num; 1.16‐
17 senato populoque.

Syntax
The “forensic” genitive is often substituted by an
infinitive clause: instead of accusauit ueneficii one finds in 1.6‐
7 accusauit... esse uenenarium; this means that in 2.9‐10 te
uenenarium... accusassem an infinitive –esse‐ should be
supplied. The construction is strange. There are only three
more cases in ThLL: 16 one in Rhet. ad Herennium (II 43 ut si
quis, cum accusetur ambitu magistratum petisse) and two in
Tacitus (Annales IV 22, 3 Numantina..., accusata iniecisse
14 Cf. ThLL VI 1, c. 1290, 65ff.
15 E. Löfstedt, Late Latin, Oslo, 1959: 19 gives some examples of this
nivelation but interpreting it as syntactical phenomena.
16 Cf. ThLL I, c. 352, 23. There are examples of the regular construction in
ThLL I, c. 351, 32‐33; 352, 80‐82.; for accusare ueneficii cf. ThLL I, c. 64.
carminibus et ueneficiis uecordiam marito, insons iudicatur; XIV

18, 1 motus senatu et Pedius Blaesus, accusantibus Cyrenensibus
uiolatum ab eo thesaurum Aesculapii). We believe that this is
due to Greek influence: a construction loan based on the
Greek αἰτιᾶσθαι, constructed both with genitive and with
infinitive clauses (cf. both constructions in Herodotus V 27:
τοὺς μὲν λιποστρατίης ἐπὶ Σκύθας αἰτιώμενος, τοὺς δὲ
σίνεσθαι τὸν Δαρείου στρατὸν ἀπὸ Σκυθέων ὀπίσω
ἀνακομιζόμενον).
A possible case of genitive for dative 17 is that of 2.20‐
21 restituo te prioris dignitatis tuae (for dignitati tuae).
A prepositional construction appears instead of a
dative: ad amicos ait (6.6‐7), instead of amicis.
Prepositions are often constructed with the wrong
case: 1.7 in eo (for in eum), 4.3 ab eos, 6.18 in pacem.
18
The verb gaudere appears with accusative in 8.3 dona...
gauderemus, although it can be explained as a mistake for
dono.
The prepositional construction alternates with the
absolute construction, when the preverb already expresses
the idea of the preposition: 3.13‐14 intret in curiam in contrast
with 6.13‐14 curiam... introisset. 19
Verbal syntax is poor. The author generally resorts to
coordination, mostly with et, the particle that survives in
17 Cf. J. B. Hoffmann ‐ A. Szantyr, Lateinische Syntax und Stylistik,
München, 1965: 87‐88; D. Norberg, Beiträge zur spätlateinische Syntax,
Uppsala, 1944: 34‐35; Löfstedt, Late Latin, 126‐128.
18 Already at Pompei, cf. Hoffmann‐Szantyr, Lateinische Syntax, 215;
Väänänen, Le latin vulgaire, 120‐122; D. Norberg, Syntaktische Forschungen
auf dem Gebiete des Spätlateins und des frühes Mittellateins, Uppsala‐Leipzig,
1943: 31‐32; H. Ahlquist, Studien zur spätlateinischen Mulomedicina
Chironis, Uppsala, 1909: 3‐5.
19 For the absolute contruction, cf. ThLL VII, 1, c. 1487, 14ss. and Löfstedt,
Philologisches Kommentar, 339.
HADRIANVS 37
Romance languages; once there is a single case of atque: 7.15,
but one finds also ‐que: 1.20; cumque: 4.13 and in the phrasal
expression a senatu populoque Romano: 1.17. Neque is also
attested: 2.10; 5.15. As in the vulgar language, et can be
redundant at the beginning of the sentence (4. 12). 20
Subordinated clauses follow very simple patterns. The
most frequent nexus by far is cum (2.9; 3.7; 3.17; 4.10, 13; 6.8;
mostly in the expression qui cum: 1.7, 13, 16, 18, 22; 4.3; 6.13);
dum (1.1; 3.9) is equivalent to cum (4.1); the most frequent
causal conjunction is quia (7.9; correlated to quare in question‐
answer: 5.10‐11) and quod (2.13), but quoniam never appears.
It is remarkable that the conditional si is always followed by
the indefinite pronoun quis (4.15; 5.18; 6.11). The only final
conjunction is ne (2.14), with a completive function in 3.16
(also standing before quis). The consecutive correlation sic...
ut is used in 3.10, 12. One finds also tamquam (7.10‐11). Of the
conjunctions introducing indirect interrogatives numquid
(5.14) is the only one appearing, if the text is sound. The
completive ut, depending always on petere (1.17; 5.8), is
omited in 6.4 (petimus mittas); quod is used for a completive
sentence probably in 6.2. There is a case of accusative plus
infinitive and gerundive (7.7 mittendum), the latter being ‒ as
observed by E. Löfstedt 21 ‒ not used much in popular
discourse.

20 Hoffmann‐Szantyr, Lateinische Syntax, 482; W. A. Baehrens, Beiträge zur
lateinischen Syntax, Philologus, Supplementband XII, Doppelheft 2,
Leipzig, 1912: 426‐428.
21 Philologisches Kommentar, 157.
Lexical observations
In late Latin the forms in ‐arius 22 and ‐(t)orius 23 , both
adjectival and nominal, develop progressively. In this text,
which presents a small number of adjectives, one finds
aduersarius, uenenarius (1.7; 2.9), which in Imperial times
replaces ueneficus (uenenarius was the form used by
Trimalchio in Petr. Sat. 39, 11); executoria, if our conjecture is
right, only appears (according to ThLL V 2, c. 1846, 7ss.) in
Augustinus, Contra Petilium III 25, 29 quidquid uel iudiciaria
uel executoria potestate… fecerunt. The case of the term paganus
(1.1) is interesting: it seems still to connote its old civic
value, 24 meaning ‘private’, and not the later meaning ‘pagan’
(which would lead us to interpret from our text that the
Emperor Hadrian had once converted to Christianity); but in
the awkward Latinity of this text absolute certainty is not to
be expected. The expression usuris dodrantibus (3.15) is a
hapax. If usurae quincunces (five‐twelfths of one hundred) are
an interest rate of 5%, usurae dodrantes (nine‐twelfths of one
hundred) represent an interest rate of 9%. In vulgar Latin,
ciuitas (4.1‐2, cf. REW 1959) appears in the place of urbs 25 and
epistola (fr. ‘épître’) in the place of litterae (but here we find a
case of litterae: 3.3). 26 The expression simulata mente (2.4) is
also vulgar. The pronouns is and ille are used, but not iste. As
in the Peregrinatio, one finds alia die for altera die (7.15). 27
It is remarkable that post is used as a preposition: 6.13
and twice in the phrasal expression post excessum (1.11‐12;
22 Väänänen, Le latin vulgaire, 91; Löfstedt, Studien über die Sprache, 298.
23 Väänänen, Le latin vulgaire, 95.
24 Cf. Löfstedt, Late Latin, 76ff.
25 Löfstedt, Philologisches Kommentar, 174.
26 S. Mariner, “El latín de la Península Ibérica: léxico,” Enciclopedia
lingüística hispánica, Madrid, 1960: 226.
27 According to Löfstedt, Philologisches Kommentar, 145, this is an
ultracorrection.
HADRIANVS 39
5.7), but never as an adverb; in the same capacity operates
deinde (1.11, 14; 3.3), also found in Romance (esp. port.
‘dende’, cf. REW 2525). Few of the other prepositions are
attested in this text: a, ad, apud, de, in; others like ob, propter,
sub, etc. do not appear at all. The adverb modo (3.9) appears
with the meaning ‘now.’
Verbs with a higher style disappear: ait (used in all
tenses; the scribe often writes abit for ait [2.15; 6.7; 6.10; 8.1]
due to the graphic mistake of a for u [uit for ait]) replaces
inquit, 28 as also reperire is replaced by inuenire (1.20). 29 One
must notice the absolute use of suscipere (1.12, 15) and
obtinere (1.16) for suscipere, obtinere imperium (obtinere as
intransitive usually has a different value in Latin). Alleuauit
se (8.7) is to be compared to a Romance vulgar form (fr. ‘se
léver’, it. ‘levarsi’, cf. REW 5000); but the construction, well
documented in Vulgar Latin (cf. Peregr. 31, 2) is already
found in Sen. Contr. X 4, 2 ita frangatur, ut humo se alleuari non
possit; Quintus Curtius III 12, 12 tum demum Darei mater
adleuari se passa est; Silius Italicus XIV 481 transigitur ualida
medius, dum se alleuat, alni cuspide. Deportare (1.9; 2.11‐12; 3.9)
for relegare belongs to the Imperial lexicon: it is already used
by Tacitus. It is however important to notice that legal texts
distinguish between the two verbs (cf. Dig. XLVIII 19, 4
relegati siue in insulam deportati). The ´deportatus´ would lose
citizenship and all posessions, while the ´relegatus´ would
not (Dig. XLVIII 19, 17; 22, 6, 1. 7, 4. 14‐15). Acclamare (7.8) is
used, as in the Historia Augusta, with the specialized sense of
introducing in direct speech the Senate’s acclamations. The
verb most used is peto, with the meaning ‘to ask for’ (1.16;
3.16; 4.14, 18; 5.7, 14‐15, 15, 18; 6.4); only once is it used with
the meaning ´to address’ (6.13). The verbs proficisci (1.19) and
peruenire (7.14) are still in use. As is also common in the
historians, attigit means ‘he arrived’ (1.19; 4.2).
A strange compound is 1.17 incircumiret, perhaps only
a mistake for circumiret; one has to take into account the
frequence of cases of ‘Dekomposita’ in the vulgar and late
Latin, as persubire, praedefinire or preadnuntiare. 30 A similar
case is 7.6 repromittere, with the meaning ‘to promise,’ instead
of ‘to promise again.’
The poor ability of the writer in Latin leads him to
repeat over and over the same expressions: 4.19‐5.2
reditum…quid fisco tuo inferebamus… Quantum… fisco meo
inferebatis? 5.16‐18 reditum…quod fisco meo inferebatis; 7.3‐5
reditum quid fisco meo inferebatis; 4.15 si qua uultis; 5.18‐6.1 si
quod uoltis; 6.11 si quod uultis. This reiteration, however, is
very typical of colloquial style (see below chapter IV).
Palaeographic remarks
The scribe of the Hadrianus was extremely careless
and untidy. He often interchanged the following characters:
a for u: 1.18 terraram for terrarum; 2.12 gruui for graui;
4.4 uit for ait (cf. abit in 2.15; 6.7; 6.10; 8.1); 6. 3 tum exugium
for tam exigua; 7.8 ucclamauit for accl‐; 7.10‐11 tumquam for
tamquam; 7.16 aliu for alia; probably 6.5 presentium for
praesentia.
a for o: 3.16‐17 namen for nomen; 4.12 uacari for uocari.
i for s: 3.4‐5 Hauliui for Aelius.
o for a: 1.13 Troianus for Tra‐ (it can also be explained
as an influence of Troia).
o for e: 3.12 noscio for nescio.
o for b: 5.7 uo for ab.
o for p: 1.10 orobare for pro‐.
30
Cf. Löfstedt, Philologisches Kommentar, 92; S. Lundström, Neue Studien
zur lateinischen Irenäusübersetzungen, Lund, 1948: 74‐79.
HADRIANVS 41
b for u: 7.10 moribit for monuit; 8.2 uolbit for uoluit.
b for h: 2.3 baue for haue.
c for a: 2.7 cite for ait.
d for o: 6. 13‐14 interdisset for introisset.
f for s: 5.14 exfiguum for exsiguum.
h for n: 1.7 behenarium; 2.7 memihi; 2.8 memihisse; 5.13
hon for non.
m for n: 5. 11 mindum for nondum.
u for n: 3.7 Verbam for Nerbam; 1.11; 5.3; and, on the
contrary, 8.6 annorum for aureorum (cf. also 8.10 annusa).
r for h: 1.2 uerebatur for uehebatur.
re for n: 7.13 ageres for agens.
ri for n: 7.10 moribit for monuit.
r for s: 7.10 epirbam for epistolam; 8.10 sedonauit for red‐.
Some of these mistakes (a for u; r for s; ri for n, f for s)
can only be explained if we suppose that the scribe was
copying from a model written in cursive.
Finally, it is worth pointing out the remarkable
ligature of ed found in redigi (8.12) and concedo (5.16).

III
THE PLOT OF HADRIANVS: HISTORICAL ANALYSIS

The story begins with events which take place during
Hadrian’s youth. These events, which are otherwise
unattested, revolve around Hadrian’s turbulent conflicts
with Cosconius and Raecius Varus. The conflict with the
former involved a fight in which he threw a punch on
Hadrian during a legal suit. The latter adversary accused the
future emperor of an attempt at poisoning him during the
reign of Nerva (97‐98), 1 an accusation undoubtedly aiming at
the sentence of capital punishment as stipulated by the lex
Cornelia de sicariis et ueneficis. 2 Fortunately for Hadrian,
1 There is hardly any evidence about Hadrian’s life in Hispania as a
youth. An avid hunter, he probably belonged to a collegium of young men
of noble family in Italica. These young men were generally known for
their disorderly conduct, which perhaps provided the reason, or at least
opportunity, for the accusations in the text as it stands. A more
appropriate setting for this episode would be in a later period of his life,
when in 94 Hadrian was one of the uigintiviri in charge of the
adjudication of lawsuits in Rome. On this see A. R. Birley, Hadrian: the
Restless Emperor, London, 1997: 23‐26 and 29.
2 G. Rotondi, Leges publicae Populi Romani, Milano, 1912 (reimp.
Hildesheim 1990): 357ff. Paulus says, Lex Cornelia poenam deportationis

infligit eis qui hominem occiderint eiusque rei causa furtiue faciendi cum telo
fuerint, et qui uenenum hominis necandi causa habuerint, uendiderint,
parauerint falsumue testimonium dixerint, quo quis periret, mortisue causam
praestiterint. Ob quae omnia facinora in honestiores poena capitis uindicari
placuit; humiliores uero aut in crucem tolluntur aut bestiis subiciuntur (Sent. V
Raecius Varus could not prove his accusation and was

condemned to exile on an island while his possessions were
confiscated. 3
The total value of Raecius Varus’ possessions
properties (1.10), which was equivalent to the tribute paid by
the Agrippinenses (5.3; 8.6, 10), is stated in the Montserrat text
in four different and corrupt readings:
1.10 SS DCCC ANNORVM OCTO MILIVM
5.3 ANNORVM SS DCCC OCTO MILIVM
8.6 ANNORVM SS DCCC
8.10 ANNVSA SS DCCC
It is obvious that annorum (and the even more
incorrect annusa) is corrupt. Roca‐Puig suggested in his
personal notes to emend nummorum, but even this
improvement lacks precision. We posit aureorum, although a
problem remains since the specification SS (i.e. HS, sestertii)
in relation to aurei (100 sestertii; 1000 in the times of
Justinian) is unusual. Notably, the number is stated twice, in
cipher and in letter, in order to be made clear. 4
There are still more problems in the text due to the
carelessness of the scribe. The island where Raecius Varus
23, 1 = Mosaycarum et Romanarum legum collatio, I 2 and VIII 4). In Dig.
XLVIII 19, 28 9: Venenarii capite puniendi sunt aut, si dignitatis respectu
(respectum cod. Y edd.) agi oportuerit, deportandi. According to Hadrian,
someone committing negligent homicide can be acquitted; however,
attempted murder should be punished (Dig. XLVIII 8, 1, 2).
3 As happened to Flaccus, according to Philo, Flac. 151. In a crimen laesae
maiestatis, the accused would lose all of his belongings: Tacitus, Annales,
3, 50, 6; 3, 68, 2; 4, 21, 5.
4 Justinian (de conc. Dig. 13) required only that the sums of money should
be written not per specialia sigla numerorum…, sed per litterarum
consequentiam.
HADRIANVS 45

was exiled is mentioned as Lycaonia. But this strange name

is not a mistake, as we had previously thought. 5
In fact, the Tiberine island was called insula Lycaonia
already in the fifth century, since we have evidence of
Christian martyrs who died under torture on this island:
Hippolytus, Hadria, Paulinus, Neon, Maria, Eusebius and
Marcellus. There is also evidence that there was a jail on its
soil, where the prefect of Gallia, Arvandus, suffered
imprisonment in 469. 6
Tenth‐century documents, the Liber Pontificalis (from
the end of the eleventh or beginning of the twelfth century),
and descriptions of Rome from the twelfth century onward
also refer to the Tiberine island as insula Lycaonia. 7 This
enigmatic appellation has no clear origin, although we think
that it derives from the same name of the province Lycaonia
rather than the mythological king Lycaon.
Among the hagiographical legends related to the
insula Lycaonia, it is worth highlighting that of Saint Eugenia,
5 The geographical mistakes are common: Anticyra, the town in Phocide,
was considered an island by learned authors such as Pliny (N.H. XXV 52)
and Aulus Gellius (Noct. Att., XVII 15, 6), perhaps based on an
ambiguous verse by Horace: Verum ambitiosus et audax: nauiget Anticyram
(Serm. II 3, 166).
6 Sidonius Apollinar, Ep. I 7, 12 in insulam coniectus est serpentis Epidauri,
ubi usque ad inimicorum dolorem deuenustatus et a rebus humanis ueluti
uomitu fortunae nauseantis exsputus nunc ex uetere senatus consulto Tiberiano
triginta dierum uitam post sententiam trahit, uncum et Gemonias et laqueum
per horas turbulenti carnificis horrescens (cf. M. Besnier, L’île Tibérine dans
l’Antiquité, Paris, 1902: 67‐69).
7 Cf. Besnier, L’île Tibérine, 77‐79. From the twelfth century on, the island
acquired some attention due to the fact that the remains of the apostle
Bartholomew were transferred there: Ipsa vero insula habet similitudinem
Nauis, dictaque fuit olim Insula Lycaonis (Franciscus Schott, Itinerarii Italiae,
Germaniaeque libri IIII, Cologne, 1620: 183).
a narrative replete with Roman and Oriental topoi, one which
could pass for a conventional adventure novel: a wellcomed
Western parallel to the Oriental Hadrianus. The Latin passio
must have been produced before the fifth century, i.e. more
or less contemporary to the latest version of our tale, since
Alcimus Avitus and Sidonius Apollinaris already knew it.
The beginning of the complicated plot is set in Egypt.
Eugenia, daughter of Philippus, the pagan prefect of
Alexandria, dresses herself like a man and converts to
Christianity together with her eunuch slaves Protus and
Hyacinthus. She then joins a monastery, where, after the
death of the abbot, she is unanimously proclaimed head of
the community. But her beauty soon places her in a difficult
situation, when a matron from Alexandria, Melanthia, falls in
love with her. Rejected by Eugenia, the matron vengefully
accuses her of harassment before the prefect, the father of
Eugenia. Caught in this intractable situation, Eugenia tears
her garment and unveils her true gender and her identity to
her father. Philippus at that point promptly converts to the
Christian faith, and as a result is dismissed from his office
and put to death by a sicarius. His body was buried in Nitria,
where Eugenia, after the ἀναγνώρισις, would found a
nunnery. After the death of Philippus, the family moves to
Rome, where again the complex development of events
brings Eugenia to the attention of Nicetius, the prefect of
Rome under the Emperor Gallienus (258). Forced to sacrifice
to Diana, Eugenia instead prays to the Lord, who sends an
earthquake to destroy the temple of the goddess: Haec in
insula Licaonia gesta sunt coram omnibus. 8
Passio Eugeniae et comitum (A. Fábrega Grau, Pasionario hispánico,

8
Madrid, 1955: II, 97).
HADRIANVS 47

The plot of this Vita, set alternately in Egypt and in
Rome, gained great popularity in Late Antiquity. In
Visigothic Hispania Saint Eugenia was celebrated on
December 27th, 9 and a special mass as well as prayers 10 and
hymns 11 were dedicated to her. 12
As we have seen, one of the last episodes of the passio
took place on the insula Lycaonia. However, the insula
Lycaonia in our Hadrianus had the role of other islands, like
Gyaros, Seriphus or Planasia, 13 as a place of ostracism and
confinement in Roman criminal jurisprudence. Through
these geographical and cultural loci, East and West
exchanged their ‘mythologies’: while Egypt was for
westerners the utopic land of extreme Christian faith, where
a woman of unparalleled holiness could become the abbot of
a monastery of men, correlatively, for the author of
Hadrianus, the insula Lycaonia became an utopic place of
confinement set very far away from Rome. Moreover, the
name of Lycaonia already had a particularly sad reputation
for Christians familiar with the well known episode of Acts
14, 6, in which the apostles Peter and Barnabus fled from
Lycaonia to avoid persecution.
9 Cf. M. Férotin, Le Liber ordinum en usage dans l’Eglise visigothique et
mozarabe d’Espagne, Paris, 1904: 492‐93. Cf. C. García Rodríguez, El culto
de los santos en la España romana y visigoda, Madrid, 1966: 171‐73.
10 Oracional visigodo, 337 (ed. José Vives, Barcelona, 1946: 112).
11 Clemens Blume, Hymnodia Gothica. Die mozarabischen Hymnen des alt‐
spanischen Ritus (Analecta hymnica Medii Aevi, XXVII), Leipzig, 1897: no.
111 (162‐163) and 112 (164‐67). The last one must be dated to the
Mozarabic period.
12 M. Férotin, Le “Liber Mozarabicus sacramentorum” et les manuscrits
mozarabes, Paris, 1912: 60‐64, 810‐11. It is striking that in the first mass
Eugenia and Melanthia are compared to Adam and Eve.
13 Cf. Juvenal, Sat. X 170 Gyarae clusus scopulis paruaque Seripho (and
Mayor ad. loc.) and for Planasia, Tacitus, Annales I 3, 4.
Following the accounts of these legal disputes in

Hadrian’s younger years, the nineteen years of Trajan’s
reign, decisive years for Hadrian’s attainment of power, are
ignored by the anonymous author. The events of the
biography resume when Hadrian, having just occupied the
throne, embarks on a journey through the known world,
which ultimately brings him to the island where Raecius
Varus was living in exile. The author of the story does not
comment on the fact that Hadrian, having been acclaimed
emperor by Trajan’s army, took a great deal of time before
returning to Rome for the purpose of establishing his
imperial position with the armies on his side.
The storyteller explains how Hadrian ended up on the
island where Raecius Varus appears and daringly reminds
the emperor of the unsuccessful accusation he had levied in
the past. This sudden confrontation is peculiar for a number
of reasons. For one, a relegatus, as Varus was, could not
remain in a city where the emperor would travel through,
according to Callistratus. 14 On the other hand, Varus’
external appearance, bearded and with long, unkempt hair,
conforms to the literary device of the ἀναγνώρισις. But
τρέφειν πώγωνα is the most visible sign of devotion to
philosophy. 15 Among the philosophical schools, the beard
Dig. 48.22.18.
14
The sapiens barba, a typical sign of the Stoic quack (Horace, Serm. I 3,
15
133; 4, 133; II 3, 35), later became a symbol of Cynic philosophers (cf. A.P.
XI 154, 3; 410, 1; Diogenes Laertius, VI 13; 102). Domitian ordered
Apollonius of Tyana to shave his beard and have his hair cut in order to
humiliate him (Philostratus, Vit. Apoll. VII 34). The beard however was in
general a symbol of the philosophers (cf. Lucian, Pseudolog. 26, 27; Hist.
consc. 17; Eun. 8, 9; Demon. 13; Fug. 31; Symp. 28; Tim. 54; merc. cond. 12,
25, 33, 40; Iupp. trag. 16; A.P. 155, 3; 157, 3; 430, 1; see Tatian, Ad Graec. 25,
1: κόμην <τε> ἐπιειμένοι πολλὴν πωγωνοτροφοῦσιν ὄνυχας θηρίων
περιφέροντες καὶ λέγοντες μὲν δεῖσθαι μηδενός, κατὰ δὲ τὸν Πρωτέα
HADRIANVS 49

together with the knapsack characterizes the Cynics, the

‘bearded goats.’ 16 Arrogance (ἀναίδεια) and boldness
(αὐθάδεια) in the presence of kings and emperors are also
characteristic of the Cynic: Diogenes was an example
followed by not a small number of self‐styled philosophers.
It is tempting to assume that Raecius Varus had joined the
most socially extreme philosophical trend of the time. This
explains the audacity with which he confronts the emperor,
who apparently did not recognize him.
The scene is reminiscent of scenes from other stories,
such as the biographies of Apollonius of Tyana, 17 Secundus, 18
Peregrinus 19 or, mutatis mutandis, the Christian martyrs. In
fact, Raecius Varus not only boasts of his past actions – viz.
his lawsuit against the emperor – but he compounds his
insolence by claiming et id et scias, me grauiter torqueri, quod te
imperantem uideo (2.12). Undoubtedly this would not have
been an effective rhetorical method for obtaining the good
will of the princeps, in contrast, for example, to Furnius’
words – according to Seneca 20 – Hanc unam, Caesar, habeo
σκυτοδέψου μὲν χρῄζοντες διὰ τὴν πήραν) and even poets (Horace,
Ars, 198; A.P. 156, 1).
16 A.P. XI 158, 8.
17 Philostratus, Vit. Apoll. VII 32ss.
18 See below p.
19 Lucianus, De morte Peregrini, 18: Ἐκεῖθεν δὲ οὕτω παρεσκευασμένος
ἐπὶ Ἰταλίας ἔπλευσεν καὶ ἀποβὰς τῆς νεὼς εὐθὺς ἐλοιδορεῖτο πᾶσι,
καὶ μάλιστα τῷ βασιλεῖ, πρᾳότατον αὐτὸν καὶ ἡμερώτατον εἰδώς,
ὥστε ἀσφαλῶς ἐτόλμα· Lucian himself presents a cynic philosopher
daring to accuse a proconsul of being a homosexual (Demonax 50). For
this reason he called the cynics κρακτικοί, ‘croakers’ (Symp. 12). Before
him, other philosophers from the same school had dared to face the
emperors: Isidor to Nero (Suetonius, Nero, 39, 3) and Demetrius to
Domitian (Suetonius, Vesp. 13).
20
Ben. 2, 15, 1ff.
iniuriam tuam: effecisti, ut et uiuerem et morerer ingratus, which,
though seemingly an outburst of angry emotion, were
intended as a compliment to Julius Caesar.
As the story proceeds, Hadrian does not recognise his
enemy, even though the prodigious memory, memoria ingens,
of the emperor was proverbial. 21 And so, in our text, the
reproach of Raecius Varus seems justified when he accuses
the emperor of pretending not to know the identity of one
who was exiled because of him.
The meeting had an unexpected outcome, since the
emperor, in his magnanimity, pardoned the exiled Raecius
Varus and restored him to his curial powers in the Senate.
Hadrian in this case acted in a different way than an emperor
like Claudius: neminem exulum nisi ex senatus auctoritate
restituit (Suetonius, Claud. 12, 1).
The imperial act of clemency had, however, further
important implications. For Raecius Varus, pardon meant he
would have to endure face to face meetings with the emperor
continuously. A clue can be found in Marcus Aurelius’
reaction, when he heard the death of Avidius Cassius: doluit
ereptam sibi esse occasionem misericordiae, cum diceret se uiuum
illum uoluisse capere, ut illi exprobraret beneficia sua eumque
seruaret. 22 A form of punishment for the ungrateful is to be
reminded for the rest of his life of the favours he received. 23
21 SHA, Hadrian. 20, 6.
22 SHA, Auid. Cass. 8, 1. Cf. Cassius Dio, LXXI 28, 1: ὅτι ὁ Μᾶρκος
Ἀντωνῖνος τοσοῦτον ἤχθετο τῷ τοῦ Κασσίου ὀλέθρῳ ὥστε
ἀποκεφαλισθέντος οὐδὲ τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ ἰδεῖν ὑπέμεινεν, ἀλλὰ
πρὶν πλησιάσαι τοὺς αὐτόχειρας ταφῆναί που ἐκέλευσεν. Exc. Val. 305
(p. 717).
23 Manius Lepidus said so about Tiberius, probably with irony: saepe
audiui principem nostrum conquerentem, si quis sumpta morte misericordiam

eius praeuenisset (Tacitus, Annales III 50, 2). Life as a punishment is a topos
in the school of the rhetor (cf. Seneca, Controu. X 5, 17).
HADRIANVS 51

In the following section, the tale takes us, abruptly, on
a trip to Cologne, which had been elevated to the status of
Colonia Claudia Ara Agrippinensium by Claudius in AD 50.
This city, apart from being an important juncture for land
and river communications, became in the second century a
flourishing emporium thanks to its agriculture and
industries in ceramics, glass fabrics and metalwork. 24
Hadrian actually visited Germania while he was emperor, 25
although there is no epigraphic evidence for his visit paid to
Cologne. He knew this city well since the times of Trajan’s
Germanic campaigns, and it was precisely Hadrian who
brought Trajan, who was settled in Cologne, the news of his
appointment as emperor in AD 98. 26
Twenty three years later, in 121/2, Hadrian returned to
Germania and placed his headquarters at Moguntiacum
(Mainz). As A.R. Birley argues, 27 the emperor probably
would have preferred to reside in Cologne, where his friend
A. Platorius Nepos, governor of Germania Inferior, lived. But
Moguntiacum was a more suitable position for the control of
the frontier. Consequently and against the emperor’s wishes,
24 Cf. the exhaustive work of W. Eck, Köln in römischer Zeit. Geschichte einer
Stadt im Rahmen des Imperium Romanum, Köln, 2004: 415ff. Evidence of the
exportation of ceramics from Cologne can be found in Britain and on the
coast that runs from the mouth of the Skalda to Boulogne‐sur‐Mer.
26 Eutropius, VIII 2, 1 imperator… apud Agrippinam in Galliis factus est.
According to SHA, Hadrian. 2, 5‐6, Julius Servianus, his brother‐in‐law,
tried to prevent Hadrian from travelling by sabotaging his vehicle, in
order to be the first to arrive with the news of the election of Trajan as the
new emperor.
27 Hadrian: The Restless Emperor, 115. This visit paid by the emperor to
Cologne is strangely not even mentioned by W. Eck in his study Köln in
römischer Zeit. See also T. E. Fraser, Hadrian as a Builder and Benefactor in
the Western Provinces, BAR International Series 1484, Oxford, 2006: 65‐8.
Cologne was the end, and not the beginning, of Hadrian’s
trip through the country before moving to Britannia.
Our papyrus does not give any details of this trip. The
emperor appears without prior announcement in Cologne.
The city, proud of the aduentus Augusti, receives him in great
celebration: columns adorned, torches burning, 28 filling the
emperor with astonishment, as if he did not know the city
from long before. Another mistake of our storyteller is that
he calls the city Colonia Agrippinae, when the usual name in
literary texts is Colonia Agrippina or Colonia Agrippinensium.
It is also an intriguing question that the city is
described as misera, when the terrible internal wars after
Nero’s death had long been over (68‐70). Perhaps this tale is
referring instead to the heavy taxes weighing on the
inhabitants, who would greatly benefit from the emperor’s
generosity and magnanimity.
In Cologne, the emperor probably resided in the
praetorium, 29 where Trajan had also placed his headquarters;
from there he visited the basilica and the atrium, mentioned in
the text. The architectural nature of the atrium is a difficult
question. There were in Rome buildings thus named (atrium
Libertatis, Mineruae, Vestae among others), but it is not
immediately evident what the function of this type of
building in Cologne could have been. One has to take into
account the fact that the text is corrupt and presents atrum,
which could also be emended as theatrum. But this conjecture
28 Cf. Pacatus, Paneg. Theod. 37, 4 Quid ego referam pro moenibus suis festum
liberae nobilitatis occursum, conspicuos ueste niuea senatores, reuerendos
municipali purpura flamines, insignes apicibus sacerdotes? Quid portas
uirentibus sertis coronatas? Quid aulaeis undantes plateas accensisque funalibus
auctum diem?
29 With its extensions it occupied four insulae or blocks; cf. W. Eck, Köln in
römischer Zeit, 358, 368.
HADRIANVS 53

poses a different problem, since there is no evidence of a

theatre ever existing in the city of Cologne. In any case, the
structure of the basilica was limited on the south by the
praetorium, which today is recognisable along the modern
Hohe Strasse, where it forms one of the sides of a great
square. 30 And it was there where Hadrian summoned the
principals of the city, instead of using a more convenient and
intimate place for a meeting with the highest magistrates.
From the basilica Hadrian could at the same time greet the
populus in the square, the most suitable space for public
gatherings in Cologne. 31
The greater number of inhabitants of Cologne
belonged to the Germanic tribe of the Ubii. The rest of the
population was comprised of soldiers and their families,
traders, artisans, and workers of all professions who came
from numerous points of geographical origin to a city with a
prospering economy. Before long they would prefer to be
addressed as Agrippinenses, 32 as they are called by the author.
Among the magistrates summoned there was a princeps,
honorific titulature used in some inscriptions, 33 called
Amantinus Saturninus. Two soldiers based in Cologne are
attested with the same cognomen: Claudius Saturninus and
Publius Vettius Saturninus, both veterans of the legio I
Minervia; 34 but neither of them, nor the other Saturnini
30 According to Eck, Köln in römischer Zeit, 370, this huge square was not
the city forum.
31 Eck, Köln in römischer Zeit, 372.
32 Tacitus, Germ. 28; Hist. IV 28. On the variegated origins of Cologne’s
population, cf. W. Eck, Köln in römischer Zeit, 273ff.
33 Cf. ThLL X 2, c. 1281, 2ff.
34 Eck, Köln in römischer Zeit, 705. The inscription says: CIL XIII 8189 D(is)
M(anibus) / [C]laudio Saturnino / [ue]t(erano leg(ionis) I Primini / [¿ius?].
known through epigraphy, seem to be this princeps. 35 The

praenomen is even more problematic: Amantia is the name of
a city in Ilyria, whose inhabitants were called Amantini.36
This could be the origin of the name in our text, Amantinus,
written twice as Amandinus (probably the lectio facilior). There
is however another rare Latin name Amantinius documented
in Florence, considered Etruscan (from amθni) by W.
Schulze. 37 In light of this, it is hard to decide if the true form
of the name can be elicited at all. On the one hand, our
knowledge is fragmentary and scarce, and on the other, the
text itself is not reliable.
Furthermore, it is not clear whether the princeps
Saturninus and his colleagues were pure Romans or
Germanic in origin and Romanized in the melting pot of the
Renanian city. The first option seems preferable, but there is
an assertion put in Raecius Varus’ mouth which leads to a
reasonable doubt: he calls the Agrippinenses hostes publici
(8.9), and who else but the Vbii could be public enemies of
the Romans?
As the narrative progresses, a lively dialogue opens
up between Amantinus and Hadrian in the form of a colloque
35 Thanks to the epigraphical archive of inscriptions from Cologne,
generously provided to us by Prof. Caballos Rufino, we have been able to
complete the prosopographical study: AE 1956, 243 Deae Fo[rtunae
Respi]cienti M(arcus) C... / Saturninu[s] ex uot[o]; CIL XIII 8168 Castori /
Saturninus tr(ierarchus). Also attested are Saturninius Lupulus (CIL XIII
8189) and Lucius Saturninius Victor (RSK 89).
36 Cf. Tomaschek, RE, s.v. ‘Amantia’ and ‘Amantini.’
37 Zur Geschichte lateinischer Eigennamen, Weidmann, reimpr. 1966: 121. A
certain Memnonius Amandus is attested in the epigraphy of Cologne (AE
1974: 444).
HADRIANVS 55

à deux, a narrative feature common to ancient biographies. 38
The conversation is spoken in Latin, the chief language at
Cologne. 39 And for the second time in the text Hadrian
manifests his φιλανθρωπία, as he offers to grant the
Colonenses whatever they wish. 40 The princeps understanda‐
bly is asked for the remission of a heavy tribute long
imposed by Vespasian, who had even raised taxes on urine
(probably the uectigal foricarii known from other texts). 41
It is difficult, however, to identify this particular
tribute, since the scribe wrote it in four different ways:
4.19 REDITVM RIPEREMSE LVMINIS
5.16 REDITVM REPERENI FILVMINIS
7.3 REDITVM RIPERENSIS FLVMINOS
8.4 REDITVS VRBI PERENIS FLVMINIS
There are two possible interpretations of these corrupt
forms:
38 For example, cf. the dialogue between Alexander and the Brahmans.
This episode appears in the three Greek recensions of the Alexander
Romance at 3.5ff., and in γ also at 2.35a.
39 Cf. Eck, Köln in römischer Zeit, 285ff.
40 An interesting parallel to the offer of the princeps in IV 14‐15
Agrippinenses, a me petite +da+ liberalitatem, si quam uultis, is in a paragraph
of Maximinus rescriptum recently found in an inscription in Kusbaba (the
ancient Colbasa, on the road from Antalya to Burdur), published by
Stephen Mitchell, “Maximinus and the Christians in A.D. 312,” Journal of
Roman Studies 78 (1988) 108; we have altered some of the punctuation and
have supplemented the text in several places: ut autem sciretis in quantum
petitio ues[tra] nobis esset accepta, en sine ullo decreto ullisque precibus
spontanea uoluntate nos[tro iu]sto beniuolo animo dicationi uestrae permittimus
ut, qualemcumque [munificentia]m uolueritis pro istiusmodi uestro religioso
proposito petere, [iam nun]c [p]o<s>c[atis ac pos]tuletis, eandem sine ulla
recrastinatione scilicet impetraturi ([h]oc [iam agatis et] Mitchell). It is
tempting to read [liberalitate]m instead of [munificentia]m.
41 Suetonius, Vesp. 23, 3.
a) reditum perennis fluminis. In this case, the perenne flumen 42
could refer to a waterway from Nettersheim to the wall of
Cologne, one of the longest built for the water supplies of a
Roman city (98,7 km); most of such lines would have run
underground. It is conceivable, even without evidence, that
the building of this grand structure was paid for by the
emperor, who could have imposed a special tax to alleviate
the burden on the treasury. 43
b) reditum ripariensem or ripensem (although it is written ‐per‐
and not ‐par‐ or ‐pen‐ in all four instances) perhaps refers to a
tax similar to the medieval ripaticum or ripagium. The main
problem this interpretation involves is that there is no
evidence for such a tribute during the imperial period, since
in CIL III 751, publicum portorii Illyrici et ripae Thraciae, the
expression ripa Thracia seems to mean Moesia inferior.
However, this interpretation is in our opinion the most
plausible.
42 For the expression perenne flumen, cf. Pliny, Ep. V 6, 11 cuncta…
perennibus riuis nutriuntur, and Livy, V 30, 7 terra… ingenito umore egens
uix ad perennes suffecit amnes; according to Ulpian (Dig. XLIII 12, 1, 2),
perenne est quod semper fluat. According to SHA, Hadrian. 20, 5, the
emperor aquarum ductus etiam infinitos hoc nomine [sc. suo] nuncupauit.
43 Cf. Eck, Köln in römischer Zeit, 362‐64. Eck does not agree that there ever
was imperial funding, concluding: “Denkbar wäre auch eine

Finanzierung durch die Stadt selbst. Ob man dabei freilich einen
wesentlichen Beitrag aller Bürger der Kolonie durch Hand‐ und
Spanndienste annehmen sollte, ist eher zu zweifeln. Denn dazu waren
die Baustelle zum grössten Teil viel zu weit von den Siedlungen entfernt,
zudem konnten an den eizelnen Baulosen, die man nachwiesen kann,
nicht allzu viel Leute gleichzeitig arbeiten; ein Massenaufgebot hätte also
keinen Sinn ergeben. Zudem musste der Grossteil der Arbeit, speziell die
Herstellung der Lehrgerüste, die Maurer‐ und Verputzarbeiten durch
geschulte Kräfte erfolgen. In diesem Fall könnte man vermuten, dass die
Leitung durch Umlagen auf die Bewohner der Gesammtgemeinde
bezahlt wurde.”
HADRIANVS 57

There is no evidence in the papyri for the remission of
a tax, but there is some evidence for the agrarian reform and
the decree for a revision of the terms of rental by Hadrian in
the first years of his reign. 44 These acts are in line with his
general remission of taxes of AD 118, which demonstrated
his magnanimity, but reduced drastically the imperial
revenues. 45 This indulgence was most welcome in Egypt
after two low Niles (P.Ryl. II 82, AD 113) and the trouble
caused by military skirmishes with the Jews in previous
years. 46 Evidence of this reform appears in papyri in
formulae such as “in accordance with the indulgence of our
lord Hadrian Caesar” (P.Ryl. II 96). Essentially, Hadrian
revised the taxes on land which was no longer being
cultivated, and removed those plots, the ἀνύπαρκτα, from
the taxation lists; the tax on the existing plots was reassessed
on the produce they yielded. 47
More evidence for this area can be found in some
papyri containing copies of an imperial edict from AD 136
issued by Hadrian, granting leniency in the payment of rents
because of insufficient inundation of the Nile in the present
44 See on this W. D. Gray, “New Light from Egypt on the Early Reign of
Hadrian,” The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures, 40, 1
(1923) 14‐29.
45 On bestowal of revenues and grain, see Mary T. Boatwright, Hadrian
and the Cities of the Roman Empire, Princeton, 2000: 88‐94.
46 Some monographic studies on the Jewish revolt are A. Fuks, “The
Jewish Revolt in Egypt (A.D. 115‐117) in the light of the papyri,” Aegyptus
33 (1953) 131‐58; M. Pucci Ben Zeev, La rivolta ebraica al tempo di Traiano,
Pisa 1981; ibid. “La rivolta ebraica in Egitto (115‐117 d.C.) nella
storiografia antica,” Aegyptus 62 (1982) 195‐217; ibid. “CPJ II 158, 435 e la
rivolta ebraica al tempo di Traiano,” Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und
Epigraphik 51 (1983) 95‐103.
47 On this, see Gray, “New Light from Egypt,” 22‐24.
and previous years. 48 Hadrian then allowed the peasants to

pay the φόρος ἀργυρικός in different instalments: “the
money tax due for this year shall be distributed to the
inhabitants of the Thebaid who probably are most heavily
impaired by scarcity of resources in five annual payments, to
those from the Heptanomia in four, to those from the Delta
in three, the mode of paying per semester being allowed
those wishing to do so, under the condition that the limits of
the time granted remain for those from the Thebaid five
years, for those from the Heptanomia four years, for those
from the Delta three years.”
It has to be remembered here that the flooding of the
Nile was a main concern taken into account in tax‐collecting
from Egypt. The ‘nilometer’ was a device which served to
anticipate whether the inundation was going to be full, and
consequently whether the crops were going to be good; taxes
then were fixed accordingly. 49
Accordingly, it is tempting to suppose that the tax
remission granted to the Agrippinenses is merely a literary
echo of analogous remissions bestowed to the Egyptians.
Saturninus made a second petition for Hadrian: to
have a consular sent to them to act as a governor and as an
intermediary between the citizens and the emperor. This also
runs contrary to the historical facts as we have them.
Cologne was already managed by a legatus Augusti pro
praetore, and no further governor was needed to raise the
needs, complaints and wishes of the Agrippinenses before
the emperor.
48 P.Oslo 78 (= FIRA I, 81; 433‐5). Copies of the same text are P.Heid. 396,
SB III 6944A and SB III 6944B.
49 See D. Bonneau, Le fisc et le Nil. Incidences des irregularités de la crue du
Nil sur la fiscalité foncière dans l’Égypte grecque et romaine, Paris, 1972.
HADRIANVS 59

Having returned to Rome from Cologne, as the story

continues, the emperor fulfilled the wishes of Amantinus
and sent as a consular his old nemesis, Raecius Varus, with
the enthusiastic approval of the Senate.
But as soon as he set foot in Cologne, Raecius Varus
manifested his total opposition to the decree of the emperor,
declaring null and void the remission granted by Hadrian. It
is at this point, when the Ringkomposition seems to be
reaching a fitting conclusion, that the scribe ceases his
transcription, perhaps due to damage in the original
manuscript, some of its pages having gone amiss, or perhaps
due to the scribe’s own laziness. As we will see, the reaction
of the emperor and a punishment for the ungrateful senator
are to be expected in the last –and lost– part of the story.
To sum up, though we have done our best to follow
Hadrian’s movements during his stay at Cologne on the
basis of the evidence provided by the papyrus, nothing in
this trip, unfortunaley, seems to reflect a real historical fact.

The main characters

Except for their appearance in the biography of
Hadrian, the remaining characters in this story are otherwise
unknown to us. There is no other historical evidence to flesh
out these character portrayals of Raecius Varus Romulus,
Cosconius Gallus or Amantinus Saturninus. However,
prosopographical analysis can deliver some historical
background to the account, a rather comfortable surprise
after the forgery we have just denounced.
Reccius is undoubtedly a false spelling for Raecius,

with an analogical geminate by analogy with Accius. 50
Cicero 51 refers to a Roman, L. Raecius, who had business in
Panhormus. There is also a Q. Raecius Q. f. Cl. Rufus, buried
in Iader (Zara, in Illyria), who was a soldier under Titus and
Trajan. 52 This name, not frequent in the Roman Empire, is
well attested in Hispania, though, interestingly enough, only
in Tarraco.
The first place in our list of Raecii is occupied by a M.
Raecius Taurus, who lived in AD 69, and is known to us by
the inscriptions of the fratres Aruales. 53 He is kin, perhaps the
son, or even the adoptive son, 54 of Raecius Tauri M. f. Gal.
50 A parallel example for this doublet is Μαίκιος / Μάκκιος (see a
pertinent discussion in A. S. F. Gow and D. Page, The Greek Anthology. The
Garland of Philip, Cambridge, 1968: II 310).
51 Verr. II 5, 161. Raecius is a conjecture by Halm (Recio R, Retio SD, Pretio
πδ).
52 CIL III 1597.
53 Cf. Nagl, RE IV A 1, 1914: s.v. ‘Raecius’ nο. 9, c. 40, 61ff. A. Caballos
Rufino, Los senadores hispanos y la romanización de Hispania (siglos I‐III),
Sevilla, 1990: no. 155.
54 The inference ‐ “unzweifelhaft” according to G. Alföldy, Die römischen
Inschriften von Tarraco, Madrider Forschungen X, Berlin, 1975 (quoted RIT
from now on) 79 ‐ that Raecius Gallus was adopted is based on two facts:
a) Tauri is a later addition to the inscription; b) he held the two first
priesthoods (the flaminatus), reserved, according to some authors, for a
second or third rank provincial functionary. This hypothesis is accepted
by J. M. Roddaz, “Hispania pacata: les empereurs et les Espagnes aux
deux premiers siècles de l’Empire,” Hispania terris omnibus felicior. Atti del
Convegno Internazionale, Cividale del Friuli, 2001: 218. Against this theory,
both F. J. Navarro, “El retorno a las ciudades de la aristocracia romana.
Los senadores hispanos,” in Rodríguez Neila‐Navarro (eds.), Elites y
promoción social en la Hispania Romana, Pamplona 1999: 167‐199) and Eva
Tobalina Oráa, in J. M. Roldán (dir.), Diccionario Akal de la Antigüedad
hispana, Madrid, 2006: s.v. Raecius, 791‐92) consider him a natural son. F.
des Boscs‐Plateaux, Un parti hispanique à Rome? Ascension des élites
HADRIANVS 61

Gallus, tribunus militum under Galba (69), 55 flamen perpetuus

of Vespasian in Tarraco, flamen of Hispania Citerior, quaestor
in Baetica (73/74 or 74/75), tribunus plebis, praetor (78 or 79)
and sodalis Augustalis. 56
Under his protection we find a considerable number
of people who were eager to make a municipal career by
dedicating themselves to the cult of the emperor: M. Raecius
Montanus, seuir Augustalis and father of C. Raecius Iulianus, 57
M. Raecius Priuatus, seuir Augustalis, father of Raecia
Liciniana, 58 Raecia Irene, wife of C. Caecilius Augustalis 59 and
mother of C. Caecilius Potitus 60 and probably also a Raecius
Apollinaris. 61 This momentous concentration of Raecii in
Tarraco leads us to believe that our Raecius was in fact a
member of the Tarraconensian Raecii, who belonged to the
circle of Licinius Sura. The quarrel explained at the
beginning of the tale could be the result of some kind of
rivalry among the Hispanienses, as mentioned above. 62 All
hispaniques et pouvoir politique d’Auguste à Hadrien (27 av. J.‐C.‐138 ap. J.‐
C.), Madrid, 2005: 447, leaves the question open.
55 Against P. le Roux’s opinion – that M. Raecius Gallus had been a
tribune in a legion not officially recognised – G. Alföldi thinks that he
was so in the legio VII Galbiana or the VI uictrix, or alternatively he was at
Galba’s service to carry out special missions (“Hispanien und das
römische Heer. Bemerkungen zu Patrick le Roux: L’armée romaine et
l’organisation des provinces ibériques d’Auguste à l’invasion de 409,” Gerion 3,
1985: 394‐95).
56 RIT 145; ILER 1301 = 6052. Cf. W. Eck, ‘Raecius Gallus,’ RE Suppl. Bd.
XIV, 1974: 581‐82.
57 CIL II 4304; RIT 426; ILER 5572.
58 RIT 425; ILER 6316.
59 RIT 468; ILER 4418.
60 RIT 387; ILER 4328.
61 RIT 469 (in the inscription only aecio ap is to be read).
62 Julius Servianus, Hadrian’s brother‐in‐law, was hostile towards him
and tried to create enmity between him and the Emperor Trajan (SHA,
this is possible and even probable. His cognomen Romulus is
also consistent with Hispanic onomastics: e.g. D. Cutius
Balbinus M. Cornelius Potitus L. Attius Iunianus Romulus, a
Hispaniensis from Hadrian’s era, related to the family Maesia
Rustica, and thus related to Hadrian himself. 63 In Barbate
there is evidence of another prominent person who, at the
end of the second century AD or the beginning of the third,
grandly entitles himself as M. Valerius Romulus Timotheus
Vinuleianus Vinuleius Gallus. 64
Let us turn now from the antagonist to the protagonist
of the story. As already stated, this emperor is acclaimed for
his clementia and liberalitas, virtues worthy of praise,
especially in connection with an emperor. 65 The author of the
Historia Augusta, more encomiastic to the emperor than
Cassius Dio, also highlights these qualities in Hadrian.
Aelius Spartianus emphasizes the emperor’s studium
clementiae, 66 when he refers to an anecdote which features
numerous details shared in common with the episode of
Hadrian’s pardon of Raecius Varus: Quos in priuata uita
Hadrian. 2, 6; see above n. 29). At the end of his life, Servianus, who was
at some point considered by Hadrian to succeed him (SHA, Hadrian. 23,
2), was compelled to commit suicide, when he was around 90 years old
(SHA, Hadrian. 15, 8; 23, 8; 25, 8).
63 CIL II 1172, 1173; CILA II 15.
64 CIL II 1924.
65 Cf. Seneca, Ben. 3 7, 4 liberalitatem clementiae adiecit; 5 9, 2 nec liberalis est,
qui sibi donat, nec clemens, qui sibi ignoscit ; Quintus Curtius Rufus, 10 5, 28
liberalitas saepe maiora tribuentis quam a dis petuntur, clementia in deuictos;
Suetonius, Nero 10, 1 neque liberalitatis neque clementiae, neque comitatis
quidem exhibendae ullam occasionem omisit.
HADRIANVS 63

inimicos habuit, imperator tantum neglexit, ita ut uni, quem

capitalem habuerat, factus imperator diceret ‘euasisti’. 67
Eutropius 68 is less generous in his praise of the
emperor, his restraint in keeping with senatorial tradition:
non magnam clementiae gloriam habuit. Clementia, as the main
virtue to be cultivated in governors, 69 appears in several coin
series minted under Hadrian. 70
Other emperors also advertised their clementia and
indulgentia, like Antoninus Pius and Commodus. 71
Constantine was even addressed as tua clementia. 72
On the other hand, Hadrian’s liberalitas 73 and general
magnanimity are reflected in his remission of tributes; the
granting of the tax by Hadrian to the Agrippinenses receives
67 SHA, Hadrian. 17, 1. The exact opposite can be read in Cassius Dio
(LXIX 4, 3) when he refers to the capital punishment of Apollodorus:
αὐτοκρατηρεύσας οὖν τότε ἐμνησικάκησεν. On Hadrian’s
suspiciousness, cf. R. Syme, Tacitus, Oxford, 1963: I, 246.
68 Breu. VIII 7, 2.
69 SHA, Aurel. 44, 1. Marcus Aurelius shared the view: non enim quicquam
est quod imperatorem Romanum melius commendet gentibus quam clementia

(SHA, Auid. Cass. 11, 5). For Trajan, cf. Pliny, Paneg. 89, 1.
70 Cf. H. Mattingly, Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum,
London, 1968: III, 304, 309, etc. (Index V, 609‐10).
71 Cf. Mattingly, Coins, IV, 305, 621, 646, 648, 656; and 320, 324 resp. SHA,
Anton. Pius, 13, 3.
72 SHA, Ael. 2, 2; Ant. Heliog. 34, 4; 35, 3. According to the historian,
Constantine wanted to imitate Marcus Aurelius in his life and in his
clementia (SHA, Ant. Phil. 19, 12).
73 The pairing of liberalitas and liberalis appears once again in Hadrian’s
life in the Historia Augusta (7, 8; 14, 11; 10, 1; 17, 7; 21, 9). On the
emperors’ liberalitas, cf. ThLL VII.2, c. 1298, 33ss.; Trajan’s was praised in
an inscription in Rome from AD 103 (CIL VI 955; ILS 286), and Antoninus
Pius, Marcus Aurelius and Commodus in the coin inscriptions in aurei,
denarii and sestertii (cf. Mattingly, Coins, IV, 33, cf. 79, 119, 151, 178, 272ss.,
283, 308, 362; for Marcus Aurelius cf. ibidem, 477, 583, 587, 640, 643, 659,
665; for Commodus cf. ibidem, 757, 758, 826).
confirmation both in the anonymous author of the SHA

(tributa multis remisit) 74 and in Cassius Dio (πολλοῖς πολλά,
καὶ δήμοις καὶ ἰδιώταις καὶ βουλευταῖς καὶ ἱππεῦσι,
χαρίσασθαι, οὐδὲ γὰρ ἀνέμενεν αἰτηθῆναι τι, ἀλλὰ πάνυ
πάντα πρὸ τὴν ἑκάστην χρείαν ἐποίει). 75
A famous inscription from Rome, erected in AD 118,
perpetuates Hadrian’s remission of a huge sum of money to
the city – 900 million sestertii – so that non praesentes modo
ciues suos, sed et posteros eorum praestitit hac liberalitate
securos. 76
Ostia also praised his indulgentia and liberalitas. In the
lex metallis dicta prices on wells are fixed secundum
liberalitatem sacratissimi imp(eratoris) Hadriani Aug(usti), 77 and
in one other inscription there is an expression of gratefulness
ob libe]ralitates pub[licas… erg]a prou[inciam] Hispaniam
Baeticam. 78 Liberalitas seems to be the most recurrent virtue
mentioned in coin inscriptions under Hadrian, 79 in contrast
with the austere coinage under Trajan, which features only
74 SHA, Hadrian. 21, 7, cf. 6, 5 aurum coronarium Italiae remisit, in prouinciis
minuit; 7, 6 ad colligendam... gratiam nihil praetermittens infinitam pecuniam,
quae fisco debebatur, priuatis debitoribus in urbe atque Italia, in prouinciis uero
etiam ex reliquis ingentes summas remisit; 21, 12 a Mesopotamenis non exegit
tributum, quod Traianus imposuit. Eusebius made a similar statement
(Syncellus and Armenian version: Chron. II, 164 n Schoene).
75 LXIX 5, 1; cf. 8, 12; 16, 2.
76 On these fiscal measures of AD 117/8, see above and Boatwright,
Hadrian and the cities, 88‐94; CIL VI 967; Wilmanns, 938; ILS 309. On the
basis of this inscription the miliarium published by J. F. Masdeu (Historia
crítica de España y de la cultura española en todo género, Madrid, 1788: V, 297,
no. 248) was re‐elaborated.
77 FIRA I, no. 104, 2: 500.
78 ILS 318.
79 Cf. Mattingly, Coins, III, 275ff., 305, etc. (Index V, 622).
HADRIANVS 65

the lemma optimus princeps, often accompanied by mention

of military actions and victories and welfare initiatives. 80
The influence of imperial propaganda is clearly
reflected in other passages of our text, as, for instance, in
Saturninus’ praise of the saeculi felicitas reigning in the
Roman Empire (8.1). This expression has to be compared
with coin inscriptions such as felicitas saeculi and temporum
felicitas stamped under Hadrian 81 and his successors on the
throne, whether good principes like Antoninus Pius 82 and
Marcus Aurelius, 83 or tyrannical rulers like Commodus.84
Another Hadrianean coin announces the saeculum aureum, 85
which presupposes the existence of a truly Saturnius
imperator (5.9, 10).
Cities were said to live in complete happiness (laetas:
6.19) under his reign; likewise, coins were struck under
Antoninus Pius proclaiming the world’s happiness: Laetitiae
publicae. 86
The emperor is understood to be a god, one who
appears to mortals in a kind of epiphany (deum praesentem:
8.2). These are the main lines of the fashioning of Augustus’
character, when the emperor was proclaimed to be a vicar of
Jupiter on earth. And it is precisely as ‘Jupiter’ that Hadrian
was called by Amantinus Saturninus in the text under
consideration here (4.17). This propaganda and its literary
80 Praised by Pliny Paneg. 38, 2ff.
81 Cf. Mattingly, Coins, III, 478. The felicitas temporum was already praised
under the reign of Nerva by Tacitus (Agricola, 3 1).
82 Cf. Mattingly, Coins, IV, 145, 150, 161; and 97, 299 resp.
83 Cf. Mattingly, Coins, IV, 403, 534‐35; and 386, 536 resp.
84 Cf. Mattingly, Coins, IV, 719, 722, 799, 806, 807, 828; and 828, 844 resp.
85 Cf. Mattingly, Coins, III, 278.
86 Cf. Mattingly, Coins, IV, 159ff., 372; for Commodus, cf. ibidem, 769, 815
and SHA, Comm. 14, 3. Under the reign of Probus, the imperial
advertising machine foretold of an aureum saeculum (SHA, Prob. 23, 2).
expression came to be used in a rather formulaic way during
the Later Roman Empire. 87
Another of the virtues celebrated in the papyrus is
that he is satisfied with his own possessions and does not
covet those of others (V.12 qui suo tantum contentus esset, non
de alieno), a phrase common in the writings of moralists, 88
and a commendable quality for a governor also attributed to
Titus, 89 Trajan 90 and Antoninus Pius. 91 Our papyrus
describes the emperor as a man of kindness and candour,
one who asks permission from the Senate to inspect the
provinces first hand; immediately on his return, he delivers
an account of his findings. However, this apparently cordial
relationship between Hadrian and the Senate 92 must be
87 Praesens deus (or praesens numen) was a frequent expression among
panegyrists in praise of Constantine and Maximinus, cf. Paneg. X 2, 1 te
praesentem intuemur deum; XI 10, 5 non opinione traditus sed conspicuus et
praesens Iuppiter comminus inuocari; XII 5, 5 qui non praesenti numini tuo
uerum etiam nuntiato nomini cedere debuissent. An example in Augustan
times is Horace, Ep. II 1, 15‐16 praesenti tibi maturos largimur honores
iurandasque tuum per numen ponimus aras (cf. Brink ad loc.).
88 The closest and earliest example is suo contentus in Ennius, Ann. 245
Vahlen. Cf. Seneca, Clem. 1 20, 3 non est magni animi qui de alieno liberalis
est. The expression de suo contentus has a proverbial flavour (cf. in
Spanish the saying “Ése es rico de vero que con lo suyo está contento”,
quoted by G. Correas, Vocabulario de refranes y frases proverbiales, Madrid,
1924: 207).
89 Abstinuit alieno ut si quis umquam (Suetonius, Tit. 7, 3). The same
historiographer praised also the abstinentia of the succesors of Domitian
(Dom. 23, 2).
90 Cf. Pliny, Paneg. 27, 3 Quocirca nihil magis in tota tua liberalitate
laudauerim quam quod congiarium das de tuo, alimenta de tuo.
91 Portrayed as alieni abstinens in SHA, Ant. Pius, 2, 1.
92 Cf. Cassius Dio LXIX 2, 1; 7, 1; 15, 2; SHA, Hadrian. 6 1‐2; 8, 6‐7; Anton.
Pius, 5, 1; Eutropius, Breu. VIII 7, 3; Aurelius Victor, Caes. 15, 13.
HADRIANVS 67

revised in light of the Senate’s actions after his death, and its
persistent rejection of the deification of the emperor. 93
Hadrian travelled through the known world, and this
characteristic activity of the emperor is also underscored in
our papyrus by the repetition of the verb circumire (1.17; 7.1;
the choice of this word is neither casual nor pointless: cf.
Eutropius, Breu. 7, 1 orbem Romanum circumiit; SHA, Hadrian.
13, 10 circumiens... prouincias). Moreover, when his presence
and his universal power are mentioned, twice is made
reference to the orbis terrarum (1.17; 4.17; cf. SHA, Hadrian. 19,
8), i.e. the oikoumene that is constituted by the Mediterranean
and Britain. This expression is also found in a coin
inscription: restitutori orbis terrarum. 94 And the Historia
Augusta 95 stresses the impulse given by Hadrian on tenendae
per orbem terrarum paci.
In summary, Hadrian is featured in this text as an
emperor beyond reproach: cum summa benignitate iustissimus,
as a Roman inscription praises him. 96 This is not exactly the
portrait given by other historiographers.

93 Cf. Cassius Dio LXIX 23, 3; SHA, Hadrian. 27, 1; Ant. Pius, 5, 1.
94 Cf. Mattingly, Coins, III, 418, 421.
95 Hadrian. 5,1.
96 CIL VI 1001; Wilmanns, 943.

IV
LITERARY REMARKS ON THE TALE OF HADRIAN

The text of Hadrianus can be described as a series of
anecdotes, with the Emperor as the main character. The
briefness of this tale may invite comparison with the fabulae
Milesiae, but these short stories were narrated as
entertainment for the reader (laetaberis, as Apuleius
announces at the beginning of his Metamorphoses) rather than
as a sourcebook for moral instruction. The most suitable
genre for comparison, to our mind, is that of collected short
stories written with the purpose of delectare et prodesse by
authors of the second century, such as Pliny the Younger and
certain of his epistles (e.g. VII 27), Aulus Gellius and his
Noctes Atticae (he himself calls these short stories historiae at
XV 22) and Valerius Maximus and his Memorabilia.
The structure of Hadrianus is clearly comparable to
that of popular folktales: 1 a chain of action punctuated by
adventures and unexpected incidents (basic characteristics of
the ancient novel) which puts the main characters in a series
of incongruous situations. Moreover, motifs from folk‐
literature are identifiable in this narrative, as we will point
out in the following analysis.
1 On this topic, see V. Propp, Morphologie du conte, suivi de Les
transformations des contes merveilleux, Paris, 1965, as a main author in the
field, as well as the essay by E. Meletinski “L’étude structurale et
typologique du conte,” included in the above mentioned book, 201‐254.
68 JUAN GIL ‐ SOFÍA TORALLAS TOVAR
The tale extols two moral qualities in Hadrian,

clementia and liberalitas, which are exemplified by way of two
apologues (exempla in Seneca), noteworthy for their narrative
technique: the antagonistic character of the first part of the
story becomes the main character in the second part. The
same technique is found in a Biblical parable (Matt. 18,21‐35)
remarkably similar to Hadrianus in both content and moral
message. In the Biblical text, the king, moved by piety,
exonerates his servant from a debt of 10,000 talents. This
servant, as he is leaving the palace, meets a fellow servant
who owed him a hundred denarii; seizing him, he begins to
choke him, saying, ‘Pay what you owe.’ Without a trace of
pity, the ungrateful servant puts his poor companion in
prison until he pays the debt. The king, upon learning of this,
is upset by this behaviour, and summons him: ‘You wicked
servant! I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with
me. And should not you have had mercy on your fellow
servant, as I had mercy on you?’ In anger the king delivers
him to the jailers. 2
The connection of both parts of Hadrianus is evident,
even in minor details. The total value of the property
confiscated by Varus is equal to the tribute that the Emperor
has repealed from the Agrippinenses. It is obvious that we
find here the purpose of establishing the antithesis – though
it is obscured by the truncated end of the story – between the
generosity of the Emperor, who understands the need in
which his subjects are and condones the taxes, and the
2 The same teaching is found in the Spanish popular saying, “Ni pidas a
quien pidió, ni sirvas a quien sirvió.” The motif of ungratefulness occurs
often in animal tales; cf. S. Thompson, The Types of the Folktale, Helsinki,
1964: type no. 155, the ungrateful serpent returned to captivity. A man
rescues a serpent (or a bear) who in return seeks to kill the rescuer. The
fox as judge advises the man to put the serpent back in captivity.
HADRIANVS 69
ungratefulness and greediness of Varus, who even accuses

the Emperor of insania because of his extreme liberalitas.
The missing ending probably presented the
punishment to this greediness and ungratefulness as a moral
teaching, as we find in the Biblical example (‘So also my
heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not
forgive your brother from your heart,’ Matt. 18, 25). 3
The setting of Hadrianus is well structured in its chain
of events. Exercises in rhetoric offer a parallel to this well
balanced Ringkomposition. In the same way as Raecius
Varus’ fortune is turned upside down, some mythological
διηγήματα –unfortunately no historical διηγήματα are
preserved– have an unexpected ending with a complete
change in the central character’s fate: Penthesilea, defeated
by Achilles, immune to her weapons, succeeds in subduing
the hero with the power of love; 4 Narcissus, who viewed
love with contempt, finally falls in love with himself. 5 In the
same way as the plot of Hadrianus is based on the opposition
between Hadrian and Varus, there is in the διηγήματα an
attempt at establishing a clear contrast between the two
central characters: a god loves Aphrodite, but the goddess
loves a mortal, Adonis; 6 or a dramatic correspondence of
emotional conduct: Thisbe commits suicide to conceal her
3 S. Thompson, Motif‐index of folk‐literature: a classification of narrative

elements in folktales, ballads, myths, fables, mediaeval romances, exempla,
fabliaux, jestbooks, and local legends, Bloomington, 1955‐58, encodes the
motif as J1172.3 ‘ungrateful animal returns to captivity’ or as Q281
‘ingratitude punished’ (vol. 5, 213‐14).
4 Nicolaos, II 12 (ed. Ch. Walz, Rhetores Graeci [reimpr. Osnabrück. 1968],
I, 272).
5 Nicephorus Basilaca, II 14 (p. 440 Walz).
6 Antonius, II (p. 61 Walz).
pregnancy, and Pyramus, when he finds out her dead, kills
himself. 7
Among other important elements typical of the
structure and narrative of popular tales is the ἀναγνώρισις
of Raecius Varus, who, like Odysseus, becomes
unrecognisable with his long hair and beard –probably due
to Stoic influence, as we have seen. In a similar way, the
Macedonians did not hail Nearchus, dirty and long‐haired,
when he returned successfully from his long journey across
the Indian Ocean. 8
This technique, typical of Greek comedy, would
become a main element of the novel and hagiographic
narrations. The return of the philosopher or the saint to his
home where he is not immediately recognised by his family,
until he voluntarily unveils his identity, is one of the literary
resources used to show the virtue of the perfect man, such as
the philosopher Secundus. 9 In the case of Hadrianus,
however, the humble appearance of Raecius Varus has
nothing to do with his moral qualities. 10 He has the unkempt
appearance of an exile on an island or of an Stoic, but his
disguise is the key to introducing a pivotal dialogue between
himself and the Emperor.
7 Nicolaus, II 9 (p. 271 Walz).
8 Cf. Arrianus, Ind. 34.7. For a study on the return of the hero in Homer,
see B. B. Powell, “Narrative Pattern in the Homeric Tale of Menelaus,”
Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, 101
(1970) 419‐431.
9 This is also a folk motif, encoded by Thompson, Motif‐index, K1815.1.1
(vol. 4, 432).
10 See, however, above pp. 48‐49 on the appearance of the philosopher.
Education can also change a character’s appearance, as can be seen by the
story of Sosipatra, who, after being raised and educated by a group of
elders, was not recognised by her own father (Eunapius, Vit. soph. 468).
HADRIANVS 71
The clear link between our text and folktale narratives
is also noticed in its style. Folktale is typically written in
simple prose, close to colloquial speech. This imitation of
common speech is reflected in the frequent recourse to
dialogue and the reiteration of formulaic expressions, with
the purpose of distinguishing a character: deportatus ... in
insulam Licaoniam (1,8; 2,11; 3,8) highlights the negative
qualities of the antagonist, Varus, and reminds the reader of
his deplorable condition.
On the other hand, the exclamation amici, amici (4,4;
6,7) clearly indicates the affability of the Emperor Hadrian, 11
surrounded by a friendly comitatus: the escort of the
ἄριστοι. 12 As in Homeric formulas, the epithet is repeated
over and over to characterize a person: Saturninus princeps
eorum (4,16; 6,2; 7,18).
In spite of the colloquial, simple style of the text, some
rethorical ornamentation may be noted. A known topos
appears in cum ipse <qui> timeantur petant quem timeant: the
governor fears the people, who also fear him. 13 It is the
11 Gemination originates in affective language. It is used mostly in
vocatives, as here (cf. Hoffmann, Lat. Umgangsprache, 58‐59; Hoffmann‐
Szantyr, 808‐809.). This was also the way the kind Titus used to address
his comitatus: amici, diem perdidi (Suetonius, Tit. 8, 1).
12 Cassius Dio LXIX 7, 3 and SHA, Hadrian. 8, 1 optumos quosque de senatu
in contubernium imperatoriae maiestatis adsciuit; 18, 1 in consilio habuit non
amicos suos aut comites solum, sed iuris consultos. This is the escort which
later sources called cohors amicorum (Ausonius, Grat. Act. 16), in analogy
with the comitive of companions of Alexander the Great (Quintus
Curtius, VI 2, 11; 7, 17).
13 Antithesis between the active and the passive is one of the oldest
stylistic resources: ὀλλύντων τε καὶ ὀλλυμένων (Il. IV 451, VIII 65, XI 83,
cf. Sophocles, Ant. 751, ἥδ᾿ οὖν θανεῖται καὶ θανοῦσ᾿ ὀλεῖ τινα;
Euripides, Bacch. 960, λήψῃ δʹ ἴσως σφᾶς, ἢν σὺ μὴ ληφθῇς πάρος; 1050,
σῴζοντες, ὡς ὁρῷμεν οὐχ ὁρώμενοι; El. 1310, καὶ σʹ ἀπολείψω σοῦ
λειπόμενος. Diodorus Siculus XI 67, 5, μισών καὶ μισούμενος; Lucian,
paradox expressed by the mimographers (Laber. 126 Ribbeck
[Macr. Sat. II 7, 4] Necesse est multos timeat, quem multi timent;
Publilius Syrus, 338 Multos timere debet, quem multi timent), by
Seneca (Ep. CV 4 qui timetur, timet; Ag. 72‐73 metui cupiunt
metuique timent), by Tacitus (Dial. 13, 4 Nam Crispus iste et
Marcellus… quid habent in sua fortuna concupiscendum? Quod
timent aut quod timentur?), 14 by Claudianus (De IV Cons. Hon.
290 qui terret plus ille timet) and, pace Wölfflinii, 15 by the
common source (Pliny the Elder) 16 to Tacitus, Hist. I 81 cum
Symp. 19, παίων καὶ παιόμενος; Zenobius, Cent. I 35, Αἱροῦντες

ᾑρήμεθα, where Leutsch‐Schneidewin (Paroemiographi, I, 13) compare
Aeschylus, Ag. 338. This feature is one of the predilect stylistic devices of
Heliodorus, Aethiop. I 30, ὀλλύντων τε καὶ ὀλλυμένων (a clear Homeric
echo); II 5, 4, ἀπατῶ σε καὶ ἀπατῶμαι τὸ μέρος, III 3, 7, ἔφερέ τε καὶ
ἐφέρετο γαυρούμενος; III 19, 2, ἀδικοῦσα καὶ οὐκ ἠδικημένη; V 11, 1,
εἶδέ τε καὶ ὤφθη; V 32, 3, Καὶ ἦν οἰμωγὴ μία ξύλοις λίθοις κρατῆρσι
δαλοῖς τραπέζαις βαλλόντων καὶ βαλλομένων; VII 26, ἐξῆλθεν ὁ
Θεαγένης φιληθείς, οὐ μὴν αὐτός γε φιλήσας. In Latin the
contraposition perdere/perire is frequent from Plautus (As. 244 nisi illud
perdo argentum, pereundumst mihi, Bach. 1049 quod perdundumst properem
perdere, Capt. 537 utinam te di prius perderent quam periisti e patria tua,
Persius, 738 nisi ego illun<c> hominem perdo, perii, Truc. 951 perde et peri]),
Petr. 59, 2 qui uincitur, uincit.
14 Cicero had a different approach, Pro Marc. 20 non enim tua ulla culpa est,
si te aliqui timuerunt, contraque summa laus, quod minime timendum fuisse
senserunt.
15 In his learned article “Plinius und Cluvius Rufus,” Archiv für lateinische
Lexikographie und Grammatik 12.3 (1901) 345‐354.
16 Thus H. Nissen, “Die Historien des Plinius,” Rheinisches Museum, 26
(1871) 497‐548, H. Peter, Die Quellen Plutarchs in den Biographien der Römer,
Halle, 1865: 28ff. and Ph. Fabia, Les sources de Tacite dans les Histoires et les
Annales, Paris, 1898: 41‐42, esp. 199ff., a book qualified as “erudite but
doctrinaire” by R. Syme, Tacitus, Oxford, 1958: I, 178, n. 4, who otherwise
prefers to leave unmentioned the name of the analyst who guided the
Roman historian).
HADRIANVS 73
timeret Otho, timebatur, and Plutarch, Galba, 3, 30 φοβούμενος
γὰρ ὑπὲρ τῶν ἀνδρῶν αὐτὸς ἦν φοβερὸς ἐκείνοις.
The sententia survived in Late Antiquity (Nazar. Paneg.
Const. 18.2 Tu tamen, imperator, cum tantam belli molem uideres,
nil magis timuisti quam ne timereris; cf. Sidonius Apollinar, Ep.
I, 2 [p. 4, 8] timet timeri) and became also popular in the
Middle Ages. It appears in a hexametric fragment of an
anonymous author included by John of Salisbury in his
Polycraticus, IV 1 (p. 232, 24) quisque 17 timet quibus ipse timori
est, and in the adagio (an iambic trimeter) timet timentes, qui
suis dure imperat. 18 The Marquis of Santillana included among
his moral maxims: “¿quien reservará al temido de temer?” 19
The same penchant for antithesis appears in 3.16ss. ne
quis illi nomen accusatoris opponat cum ego accusatus sim et
taceam.
It is remarkable that in a text as short as the tale of
Hadrian, we find the insertion of the letter addressed to the
Senate. But, after all, it is no wonder: apocryphal
epistolography was already in fashion, a literary resource
which gave authority to texts, as can be confirmed in the
Historia Augusta. The typical heading of a letter (Imperator
17 To complete the verse should be supplied <unus> quisque.
18 No. 31425c in H. Walther, Proverbiae sententiaeque Latinitatis Medii Aevi,
Göttingen, 1963‐9.
19 “Who will save the feared from fearing?” In Proverbios utilísimos del
ilustre caballero D. Iñigo López de Mendoza, marqués de Santillana, Madrid,
1787, nº 2 p. 6. The adage was recalled by Gomes Eanes de Azurara in his
Crónica do conde D. Duarte de Meneses, ed. L. King, Lisboa, 1978, cap. LI (p.
151): “quanto cada huum mais tijnha mais temia, ca, como disse aquelle
docto marques de Santilhana em huuns prouerbios que fez, ‘Quem
reserua al temido de temer?’”
Caesar Traianus Hadrianus Augustus) 20 and the salutation

formula in official correspondence are lacking here: Si uos et
filii uestri ualetis, bene est; ego ualeo. 21

20 Thus opens the brief letter addressed by Hadrian to the fratres Aruales,
read on 7th February 120 AD (CIL VI 2080, 25‐26), or the letter to Poppilius
Theonymus (Dessau, ILS 7784; Riccobono, FIRA, 431).
21 Cf. Cassius Dio, LXIX 14, 3.

V
HADRIAN IN LITERATURE: MYTH AND REALITY

This tale is by no means the first text in which the
emperor Hadrian has been portrayed fictionally in antiquity.
The story on the papyrus Montserratensis features a surprising
parallel with three other compositions written in the
environment of the schoolroom: the Ἁδριανοῦ ἀποφάσεις or
Hadriani sententiae, the Altercatio Hadriani cum Epicteto, and the
Vita Secundi.
It is an intriguing question that Hadrian was chosen as
the main character for these works, whose literary aspirations
did not reach beyond elementary education. In fact, Hadrian
was not an emperor particularly admired or esteemed by the
senatorial class. His contemporary writers did not rate him
either, portraying him as a talented competitor, and an erudite
man with a ready opinion in all matters, 1 a boring pedant who,
for instance, when legalizing the birth of a baby after a ten
month pregnancy, spouted platitudes from philosophers and
physicians to support his decree. 2 The destruction of Jerusalem
brought him the enmity of the Jews, condemned to Diaspora,
1 Hadrian’s interest in grammar is evident in his passion for etymologies –
albeit false – as when he derived monumentum from munimentum (Dig. XI 7,
37, 1).
2 Aulus Gellius, Noct. Att. III 16, 12. Hadrian had an interest in these natural
wonders. He once summoned from Alexandria a woman who had given
birth to quadruplets, to be able to examine her on the Palatine (Dig. V 4, 3).

although he may have received some compensatory recognition
on the part of Christians. 3 To sum up, Hadrian was well on his
way to historical oblivion, or at least to having his posthumous
fame diminished, 4 especially in comparison to the glory of
Trajan, always beyond debate.
Instead we find here, in these modest compositions, the
idea of a just and temperate governor, one worthy of the
Golden Age. This notable inconsistency with the other historical
records may perhaps be explained by the wide popularity of
the emperor among society’s lower echelons, who preserved
the memory of Hadrian’s rightness over the centuries,
especially throughout the Oriental part of the Empire, 5 in the
Greek‐speaking provinces. This fact in itself is not strange, if we
take into account the emperor’s inclination towards Hellenism;
in fact he received in the West the derisive appellation
Graeculus. 6
3 In Medieval chronicles Hadrian was normally portrayed as a persecutor of
Christians. According to Vincent of Beauvais (Spec. Hist.), many notable
Christians were tortured: Quirinus, Hermes, Evencius, Theodolus, Sixtus,
Pelegrinus, Taurinus, Serapia, Sabina, Eustachius, Faustinus, Iobita and
Calocaerius, Sophia and her three daughters, and Maria.
4 The exception appears to be the author of the biography of Hadrian in the
Historia Augusta. But his true opinion about the emperor is transmitted in
Seu. 21, 3 and Pesc. Nig. 12, 1; at Ant. Heliog. 7, 8‐9, he deplores the emperorʹs
furor and insania (cf. Hadrian. 23, 7ss.), which would have brought death to
many senators were it not for the courageous prudence of Antoninus Pius
(cf. Hadrian. 24, 4; 9, 25, 8; Anton. Pius 2, 5).
5 Except in Egypt, if we can believe in the authenticity of the letter quoted by
the Historia Augusta (Quadr. Tyr. 8), considered false by most scholars (cf. M.
Schanz – C. Hosius, Geschichte der römischen Litteratur, München, 1904: III, 9:
§ 507, 8): it is an invective against the inhabitants of Egypt, where nobody is
saved, including Christians, Jews, pagans, who are all accused of
worshipping the one god of Money.
HADRIANVS
Ἁδριάνος προτέρων προφερέστερος ἡγεμονέων: such

was the praise for Hadrian in an anonymous epigram, 7
composed to celebrate the fact that the emperor had placed the
books written by the physician Marcellus in Rome’s public
library. Philostratus 8 defined him as ἐπιτηδειότατος τῶν
πάλαι βασιλέων γενόμενος ἀρετὰς αὐξῆσαι, and in another
passage he extols him in the account of the emperor’s debate on
equal grounds with Favorinus, a person he could very well
have had killed if he had wished to. 9

The Sententiae Hadriani 10

This is a collection of anecdotes with the emperor as the
main character. He receives petitions and claims, to which he
responds with just and inventive solutions. 11
7 A.P. VII 158, 4.
8 Vit. soph. 25, 530
9 Vit. soph. 8, 489.
10 First edited by H. Estienne, Glossaria duo, è situ vetustatis eruta : ad utriusque
linguae cognitionem & locupletationem perutilia : item, De Atticae linguae seu
dialecti idiomatis, Geneva, 1573: c. 299ff. We have also used the edition by
Eduard Böcking (Corpus iuris Romani anteiustiniani, Bonn 1841 [reprint Aalan
Scientia, 1987] I, 194‐214) and G. Goetz (Corpus glossariorum Latinorum, III,
31‐37). Unfortunately, the booklet by G. Goetz, Index Scholarum hibernarum,
Jena, 1892‐93, was not accessible to us.
11 Ralph W. Mathisen, “Adnotatio and petitio: the emperorʹs favor and special
exceptions in the early Byzantine Empire,” in D. Feissel, J. Gascou, La pétition
à Byzance. Centre de Recherche dʹHistoire et Civilisation de Byzance,
Monographies 14, Paris, 2004: 23–32. He argues that in the later empire an
adnotatio (a memo, opinion, or instruction) was a similar direct reply by
emperors that granted exceptions to customary legal procedures and
conferred special privileges. Since so few actual adnotationes survive,
Mathisen analyzes instead the laws stipulating their use collected in the
Theodosian Code. He concludes that an adnotatio “became the primary
means whereby citizens could personally benefit from the emperor’s favor.”

Although none of these anecdotes resembles the plot of

our tale (the most similar are two which deal with exiled
citizens), it is useful nonetheless, in our opinion, to present here
a short summary of their content and style, and to grasp the
difficulties of a minor –and now almost forgotten‐ literary
product which has been transmitted in a very poor textual
tradition.

1. A man requests access to the army. Hadrian asks him: “In
which rank do you wish to be placed?”; “Praetorian”; “How tall
are you?”; “Five and a half feet”; 12 “Then, enter the urban army,
and if you are a good soldier, on the third year you will reach
the Praetorian guard.” 13

2. A man asks the emperor to punish one of his freedmen, who
had been condemned by the Prefect of the Aerarium to forced
See also on this, A. J. B. Sirk, “A decision of the Emperor Hadrian,” Journal of
Legal History, 16.3 (1995) 318‐327.
12 It is ca. 150 cm. According to Hadrian’s question, a minimum height was
required to be a praetorian.
13 It is difficult to understand the moral lesson in this story. Probably
Hadrian refers with irony to the amount of time that can pass while the
recruit grows. One should take into account the fact that Nero dreamed of
creating a new phalanx of soldiers taller than six feet (Suetonius, Nero, 19, 2):
our candidate is half a foot shorter. If we accept Estienneʹs reading (βαθμῷ),
the interpretation varies: from the last row, the soldier would move on to the
third row. In fact, in the personal guard of Friedrich Wilhelm of Prussia, “le
premier rang de sa compagnie était composé d’hommes dont le plus petit
avait sept pieds de haut“ (Voltaire, Œuvres Completes de Voltaire, vol. I. Vie de
Voltaire, Paris, 1831: 223). On the double sense of pes is based the pun of the
poor soldier suffering from podagra, who from five or six feet in height
ended up standing on only two sick feet: Quinque pedes habui, quod numquam
nego negauit. / Nunc mihi uix duo sunt; inopem me copia fecit (Anth. Lat. 93, 2‐3).
HADRIANVS
labour in the quarries on the basis of the Lex Aelia Sentia, 14 and
demands him, moreover, to compel his freedman to deliver the
ration that he just received. Hadrian rebukes him: “Why are
you trying to destroy and take the portion away from a man on
whom you already have taken revenge? Are you not
ashamed?”

3. A sick and impoverished father complains that his son does
not take care of him or feed him, after he had spent a whole
fortune on him. Hadrian blames the young man: “Protect your
father, since that is why he engendered you, 15 and see that he
does not complain about you again before me.”

4. Someone submits a memorandum to Hadrian denouncing
that many usurers where asking for abusive rates of interest:
they would take 100 denarii from a loan of 1000 on the day of
the delivery of the money 16 and required a rate of interest of
one per cent on top of that. 17 Hadrian responds: “The illustrious
prefect will examine the matter and keep me informed.” 18

14 The Lex Aelia Sentia, established in 4 BC to regulate manumissions, gave
the patron the actio ingrati to act against the ingratitude of the freedman. See
G. Rotondi, Leges publicae Populi Romani, Milano 1912 (repr. Hildesheim
1966): 455‐56.
15 Children are obliged to take care of their parents in their old age (“the
second childhood,” δὶς παῖδες οἱ γέροντες) in the same way parents took
care of them as children.
16 We follow Cujas, Goldast and Böckingʹs corrections. The text reads: “for
100 denarii, in a period of 100 days, they apply a rate of 100.”
17 I.e. 1% a month or 12% annually.
18 Another reading: “Keep me informed.”

5. A man complains that in spite of having enough wealth to be
a horseman, he was never granted the “public horse” 19 for
which he had applied two years before. Moreover, the prefect
had exiled him from his municipality for a year due to an
accusation forged against him by some slaves. Hadrian
answers: “One who claims a public horse, must be an
irreproachable horseman. You have to give proof of that in the
future by your own life.”

6. A man demands to be allowed to recall his father from exile.
“Who sent him on exile?” “The prefect.” Hadrian replies: “Let
me take a look at the documents and come and see me again
later.” 20

7. A man complains that his freedmen are taking advantage of
him, that they are occupying his shops and doing business with
his money, and he is getting nothing from them. The lawyer of
the freedmen claimed in their defence that they had given him a
denarius long ago, and they were willing to give him more if he
allowed them to continue with the business. Hadrian responds:
“See that this man never complains again; as for him, he must
have common sense.” 21

8. A man complains in a memorandum that his father’s
possessions were confiscated and that he was not granted the
rank of decurion for which he had applied. Hadrian asks him:
“When did your father suffer the confiscation?”; “Ten years
19 An inscription from Hispania from the age of Hadrian (CIL II 4269; ILER
1329) highlights the liberalitates of M. Fabius Paulinus, who had received a
“public horse” from the emperor.
20 Again it is difficult to understand the moral lesson. Perhaps Hadrian
wanted to reward the youth for his courage.
21 Other variants: “and you, have common sense.”
HADRIANVS
ago”; “Why did you not complain earlier to the prefect? If we
start revoking sentences promulgated, fair and unfair, this
would become a never‐ending story. You have failed to
yourself.”

9. Urbicus explains that Primitivus wanted to manumit a slave
of his ward, 22 and Restituta, 23 her mother, had prevented it.
This was not convenient for the orphan girl, because Primitivus
had been administering and wasting her possessions. Hadrian
asks the age of the orphan. The lawyer 24 replies that she is ten
years old. Hadrian sentences that with such a name the slave
should not be manumitted.” 25

10. A woman complains that a man has taken a ration away
from her son. He claims that the son is his, and thus the ration
belongs to him. She says that she was born Roman. Although
the marriage contract was written down, the wedding never
took place. He denies it, but he is unable to produce any proof
of his fatherhood. Hadrian summons the boy to his presence
and asks him with whom he lives. The child says <that he lives
with his mother>. 26 The emperor then confronts the man and
says: “Shameless man, return the ration, since it does not
belong to you.”

22 The text says “his own slave,” but the context says that it is the slave of his
pupil.
23 The Graeco‐Latin text features a vulgar form, with haplography, Restuta.
24 It must be Urbicus.
25 It must be a pun on the name of Restituta and the verb restituere.
26 The addition is by Böcking.

11. A woman complains about the curator 27 of her son, who for
three years had neglected to provide him food, and on that day
he had even snatched the ration from him. Hadrian summons
the accused. When he asks when he had been appointed as
curator and what he has provided to the pupil, he excuses
himself by saying that he shares the care for the child with
someone who is absent, and that he cannot take care of him by
himself. Hadrian interrupts him saying, “You have been
appointed curator and you are causing this child to starve? As
much as you can, feed him.”

12. A man confronts Hadrian: “Sir, my children have been
recruited as soldiers.” “For good,” replies the emperor. “But
they are ignorant and I am afraid they will cause trouble and I
will remain alone.” “Do not fear, they are soldiers in times of
peace.” “Allow me to follow them and be their servant, so I can
control them.” “By no means will the gods allow that you serve
your own children. Take the vine staff 28 and be their centurion.”

13. When Hadrian was giving out donatives to the soldiers, an
old mother asks, “I pray you, emperor, that you make my son
give me a ration, since he is neglecting me.” The son argues, “I
do not recognize this woman as my mother.” Hadrian
reprimands the ungrateful son, saying: “If you do not recognize
your mother, then I do not recognize you as a Roman citizen.”
27 Marcus Aurelius dedicated special attention to the figure of the curator: de
curatoribus uero, cum ante non nisi ex lege Laetoria uel propter lasciuiam uel
propter dementiam darentur, ita statuit, ut omnes adulti [i.e. under 25] curatores
acciperent non redditis causis (SHA, M. Anton. Phil. 10, 12).
28 The uitis, or vine staff, is the symbol of power of the centurion; the man
can control his sons, not as a servant, but as a master. According to SHA,
Hadrian. 10, 6, it was a guiding principle of the emperor: nulli uitem nisi
robusto et bonae famae daret.
HADRIANVS
The Sententiae show evident parallels with our text. First,
they glorify Hadrian. Second, they provide short episodes
which could easily be extended in a rhetorical exercise (a
controuersia or a suasoria) and, consequently, become a product
similar to our Montserrat text. Third, the moral contents have
special relevance, and therefore are considered appropriate
material for school: “They are useful for everyone, and thus
should be read and learned by heart.” 29 It should be noticed
that the same is said of Aesop’s fables: “They are very useful in
everyday life.” 30
In the Sententiae there is an exaltation of parents, a
condemnation of the ungratefulness of children (3, 13), of the
greediness of usurers and tycoons (4), and praise for the
common sense and justice of the emperor.
Not seldom reference is made to the rations given by the
emperor (congiarium or ἐπίδοσις) to the Roman citizens: this
innovative measure was started by Trajan and continued by
Hadrian. As can be seen in the few examples above, it was
abused in periods of hunger and misery, and provided space
for complaints represented in the Sententiae.
The relationship between the patron and the freedmen
(2, 7) or the tutor and the pupils (9, 11) is also a topic often
found in the Sententiae. Ungratefulness is a frequent topic in
controuersiae, as seen in the heading of three of the elder
Seneca’s controuersiae, “Children shall take care of their parents,
lest they be put in chains.” 31
The Sententiae are part of an interesting miscellany of
Greek texts provided with an interlinear Latin translation, the
Ἑρμενεύματα or Translations, erroneously ascribed to the
29 Sent. 31 a 6ff.
30 Hermen. 39 b 56ff. Goetz.
31 I 1; I 7; VII 4; cf. Quintilianus, Decl. 5; 16, 5.

fourth century grammarian Dositheus by Cujas, basing his

attribution on the fact that they were placed after Dositheus’
Grammar in the Codex Sangallensis 902. However, this
arrangement of contents occurs only in this particular codex.
The Ἑρμενεύματα contain the following works (citations
according to Goetzʹs edition, based on the tenth century Codex
Leidensis Voss. Gr. Q. 7): 32
1. An alphabetic Graeco‐Latin glossary (pp. 3‐7, 59).
2. Thematic Greco‐Latin vocabularies: gods, temples, food,
colours, etc. (pp. 8, 19‐30, 48).
3. Greco‐Latin miscellanies (according to Böcking, the third
book of the Ἑρμενεύματα), 33 in six parts:
a) Sententiae Hadriani (pp. 31, 24‐37, 15), followed by a letter
from the emperor to his mother (pp. 37, 16‐59) and the
description of the punishment imposed on a parricide (pp. 37,
60‐38, 29). 34
b) Excerpta of Aesopʹs fables (the deer and its horns, the mouse
and the lion, the mice and the cat, etc. [pp. 40, 3‐47, 57]). 35
c) A short treatise on manumissions (pp. 48, 46‐56, 27).
d) Extracts from Hyginiusʹ Genealogy (pp. 57, 5‐60, 20).
32 A. C. Dionisotti, “From Ausoniusʹ Schooldays? A Schoolbook and its
Relatives,” Journal of Roman Studies 72 (1982) 83‐125: esp. 86, after a survey of
all codices, proves that the tradition of the Hermeneumata had eight different
recensions.
33 In spite of Böcking, this is the title of the conversation on everyday life:
Incipit Hermeneumata, id est, libri XIII, de conuersatione cotidiana (69, 39 Goetz).
Goetz tried to reconstruct the original through the texts edited by H.
Estienne. Dionisotti (“From Ausonius’ Schooldays?,” 90) argued against it
on reasoned grounds.
34 This ancient law could have been cited by Hadrian, when he condemned
the parricide to be thrown to the beasts (cf. Dig. XLVIII 9, 9).
35 This recension is preserved in a text on tabulae ceratae from Palmyra; cf. O.
Crusius, “Fabeln des Babrius auf Wachstafeln aus Palmyra,” Philologus 53
(1894) 228‐52.
HADRIANVS
e) Summary of the Trojan War (pp. 60, 21‐69. 38).
f) Conversation exercises about everyday life (pp. 69, 39‐72,
45). 36
All this material, collected by an anonymous compiler,
did not have necessarily one author only. Even the chronology
is probably not uniform. However, there is an interesting
annotation by the compiler of the Ἑρμενεύματα, or, to be more
precise, the transcriber of the Florilegium Hyginianum, in which
he dates the copy of the Genealogy he is extracting to the third
day of the Ides of September under the consulate of Maximus
and Aper (11th September 207 AD). 37
Our author or compiler is a grammarian, devoted to
finding and adapting school texts for children, 38 including some
with forensic content since many of these children would need
36 Cf. Schanz‐Hosius, Geschichte, §§ 597, 7 (III, 8‐9); 836 (IV.1, 179).
37 Maximo et Apro consulibus tertio Id. Septembr. Ygini Genealogiam omnibus
notam descripsi (56, 30ff. Goetz). Dionisotti (“From Ausonius’ Schooldays?,”
89) is inclined to think that the date is an interpolation. Although her thesis
is not convincing, she is right in saying that μετέγραψα/descripsi does not
mean “I translated.”
38 According to Bücheler (Kleine Schriften, II, 142), the grammarian sometimes
translated Latin texts into Greek and vice versa, so that the exercises were
addressed both to the student of Latin (30, 23 Goetz) and of Greek (283, 37;
285, 12). In the case of Dositheus Hermeneumata, Böcking was probably right
when he supposed that the user was a Greek child. In the same line Goetz
says, “der Grundstock des Lehrbuchs, zumal in den capitula, auf
griechischen Einfluss hinweist, ist längst erkannt worden. So erinnert
manches an Pollux” (RE, s.v. ‘Dositheos’ 8, c. 1606). Dionisotti (“From
Ausonius’ Schooldays?,” 91) on the other hand, thinks that the exercises
originate from a Western school, since in the East Latin was not studied and
all the manuscripts are from the West. But the papyrus Montserratensis
argues completely against this theory, as it is a testimony of bilingualism in
a school in the East. And the translator of the Hermeneumata of Celtes,
published by Dionisotti, was most likely a Greek (“From Ausonius’
Schooldays?,” 96).

preparation for the school of the Rhetor. As for dating, however
approximate, it should be assumed that the whole compilation
predates only slightly that third century date.
In fact, the juridical aspect of Hadrian’s character was
highlighted by the great jurists from the beginning of the third
century. Callistratus quoted often the sentences given by the
emperor to various cities of Asia Minor. 39 Also Ulpian was
interested in his responsa, as proven by his frequent references
to Hadrianean dictamina in the fragments of his works
preserved in the Digest and the Comparison of the Mosaic and
For example, cf. Dig. V 1, 37; XXII 5, 3, 1 and 3‐4; XLVII, 14, 1; XLVIII 8, 14;
39
15, 6; 19, 13 and 35; XLIX 14, 2, 1 y 4; L 6, 8.
HADRIANVS
Roman Law. 40 One of his responsa is especially interesting for us
for its novelty. 41 It is the following.
Among the youth in the province of Baetica, where
Hadrian was born, there was practiced a rather dangerous habit
of tossing people in a blanket for fun. 42 At one banquet, a
certain Claudius was tossed into the air and was not caught in
time by Marius Evaristus’ sagum, with the result that he hit his
head badly in the ground and died five days later. Although
40 Some examples are: Dig. I 6, 2 (on the matron Umbricia, who was exiled
for abuse of her slaves); V 3, 5, 1 (rescriptum to Trebius Sergianus on the
claims he had to an inheritance from Aelius Asiaticus; cf. V 3, 20, 6ss.); XXVII
8, 1, 8 (against the magistrate appointed to control the tutors); XXIX 5, 28
(slaves should not place their own salvation over that of their masters); XXIX
6, 1 (against the will‐hunter, who prevents any change on wills); XXXIV 1, 4
(children should be fed until they are 18 and girls until 14); XXXVII 19, 5
(any action brought against pupils should wait until they become of age,
unless the cause is clear); XXXVIII 2, 8 (a son in a family can be the patron of
a slave manumitted by the same family); XLVII 11, 6, 2 (exile to an island of
a man who used false measures in the market); XLVII, 14, 1 = Coll. 13 3, 2
(on the punishment on abigeat or cattle‐theft: reply sent to the council of
Baetica); XLVII 21, 2 (on the punishment of those who move land
boundaries); XLVIII 8, 1 (ban on castration); XLVIII 16, 14 (if a pupil dies, the
tutor is not forced to continue any sue that he had started in his name);
XXLVIII 18, 1, 1 (letter to Sennius Sabinus on the torture of slaves); XLVIII
20, 6 (on pannicularia, ‘clothes worn by the accused in prison, not surpassing
the value of five aurei’). Aulus Gellius quoted his discourse De Italicensibus,
in which he distinguished between colonia and municipium (Noct. Att. XVI 13,
4ss.). On Hadrianʹs responsa preserved in juridical literature, cf. P. A.
Alexander, “Letters and Speeches of the Emperor Hadrian,” Harvard Studies
in Classical Philology 49 (1938) 141‐77: 151‐153.
41 Coll. I 11.1 (developing the argument) = Dig. XLVIII 8, 4, 1 (simple register
of the approval by the emperor).
42 The habit was observed also in Rome (cf. Martial, Ep. I 3, 8; Suetonius,
Otho 2). In his commentary to the epigram of Martial quoted above L.
Ramírez de Prado wrote: “hodieque Hispani id faciunt, vocantque mantear”
(M. Valerii Martialis Epigrammatum libri XV, Paris, 1607: 39).

this had not been done with malice, the proconsul Egnatius
Taurinus decided to exile Evaristus in order to prevent these
injurious practices of uncontrolled youths. Hadrian supported
the decision.
The story of the unfortunate Claudius, the exile of
Evaristus, the sorrow of his mother and his girlfriend, his
adventures before returning from exile, all of this is good
material for rhetorical exercises or for an episode of a novel. 43
The paradigmatic value of this story becomes evident in the fact
that a man sent into exile for five years for involuntary
homicide (imprudentis caedis damnatus) is the main character of
some of the elder Seneca’s controversiae. 44 The relevance in
school of the Hadriani Sententiae, no matter if they were
authentic 45 or false, is best understood in this way.
The author thought that the plot, its juridical aspect and
the final apophthegma would catch the attention of the student
and teach him to observe a virtuous life by noble examples.
The Sententiae were mainly aimed at the teaching of Latin
and Greek, just as the Montserrat codex probably was a
43 We cannot refrain from quoting the tossing episode in Cervantes, Don
Quichotte, I 17 (I, 184 ed. F. Rico, Barcelona, 1998).
44 IV 3; VI 2 The commentarists indicate that unintended homicide is only
punished by Greek law, but here we have an exception. In rhetorical
treatises the topic of the exiled is only mentioned superficially (cf. Aristotle,
Rhet. II 8, 1386 a 9; Cicero, de inv. I 109; Quintilianus, Inst. VI 1, 18‐19).
45 A.A. Schiller defended its authenticity, seeing in the Sententiae “decisions
of Hadrian deriving from in transitu hearings,” filed in a stenographic
register (“Vindication of a Repudiated Text ‘Sententiae et epistolae
Hadriani’,” Atti del Secondo Congresso Internazionale della Società italiana di
Storia del Diritto, Florencia, 1971, II, 717‐27). Schiller (723, n. 34) called
attention to the existence of the ἀντίγραφα τῶν ὑπομνημάτων of Hadrian,
known through CIL III 411 (and the subscription of Antoninus Pius in the
same inscription: sententiam diui patris mei, si quid pro sententia dixit, describere
tibi permitto).
HADRIANVS
selection of school texts, including Ciceroʹs Catilinarian Orations,
which were probably also translated into Greek, 46 and other
short works, either moralizing in purpose, like the Alcestis and
the Hadrianus, or purely technical, like the Wordlist. 47 In all
cases we are situated in elementary school, the ludus litterarius
of a grammaticus.

The Vita Secundi and the Altercatio Hadriani cum Epicteto

Two more short works are also related to our Hadrianus.
The Vita Secundi has a bipartite structure, the first part being a
sort of biography of the philosopher, designed to explain why
he keeps silent, and the second part containing a series of
twenty questions and answers.
I. In the first part Secundus 48 appears as a silent
philosopher, and the reason he took silence is explained by his
life story. As a child he was sent by his parents to study abroad.
While still at school he received the news of his fatherʹs death,
precisely at the moment he was learning that “every woman is
a prostitute, the chaste one is only she who has escaped notice”
46 Cf. M. Laistner in his introduction to the Glossary of Philoxenus (Glossaria
Latina iussu Academiae Britannicae edita, Paris, 1926: II, 133).
47 Recently edited by S. Torallas and K. A. Worp, To the Origins of Greek
Stenography, Barcelona, 2006.
48 Secundus can be identified as the master of Herodes Atticus (cf.
Philostratus, Vit. soph. I 26, Suda s.u. Σεκοῦνδος; RE s.v. Secundus nº 16;
Münscher, RE s.v. Herodes Attikos, c. 924, 31ff.). On this matter, see L. W.
Daly, Altercatio Hadriani Augusti et Epicteti philosophi, Urbana, The University
of Illinois Press, 1939: 48ff. and B. Perry, Secundus the Silent Philosopher. The
Greek Life of Secundus Critically Edited and Restored so far as possible together
with Translations of the Greek and Oriental Versions, the Latin and the Oriental
Texts, and a Study of the Tradition, Philological Monographs Published by the
American Philological Association XXII, New York, 1964.

(πᾶσα γυνὴ πόρνη, ἡ δὲ λαθοῦσα σώφρων). 49 When he had

reached manhood he returned home disguised as a Cynic
philosopher, carrying a staff and a leather sack, having let his
hair and beard grow. Since nobody recognised him, not even
his own mother, he decided to verify whether the dictum about
women was true or false. He offered six aurei to the
maidservant of his mother if she could arrange a meeting with
her. The promise of a payment of fifty aurei was enough to
convince the lady. She had him enter secretly in her room and
had dinner with him. She expected to have carnal intercourse
with the stranger, but instead Secundus put his arms around
her and peacefully fell asleep looking at the breasts that had
suckled him. Morning came, and the youth rose up and
prepared to leave, when his mother stopped him and asked if
he had done this only in order to convict her. He replied, “No,
lady mother, it is not right that I defile the place where I came
from” (οὐχί, κυρία μῆτηρ, οὐ γὰρ δίκαιόν ἐστιν ὅπερ ἐξῆλθον
μιᾶναι). He then revealed his identity and left. The lady was
utterly ashamed and hanged herself. 50 Secundus then
considered that his tongue had been the cause of his mother’s
death, so he decided to remain silent until the moment of his
death as a vow to punish loquacity, not in accordance with
Pythagoric training for the acquisition of knowledge.
II. The second part starts with Hadrian’s arrival at
Athens, where he heard about Secundus, since “no good thing
escaped his notice,” and summoned him. He tried by all means
to make him break his silence, including flattery: “Secundus,
you were right in keeping silent before my arrival, since you
49 See Perry, Secundus, 68‐69, for parallels for this sentence, which greatly
surpasses Semonides’ and Juvenal’s misogyny. According to Perry, it could
have influenced the Arabian Nights in this and other cases.
50 Compare the similar case of the mythical Phaedra, a woman driven to
suicide by her shame.
HADRIANVS
had no listener more distinguished than yourself”; and even

compulsion: “I demand it from you, bring forth your eloquence
at the highest level of its quality.”
But Secundus remained silent, not showing any fear of
the emperor, who then resorted to force and asked a tribune to
make him talk. But the tribune said, “It is possible to persuade
lions, leopards and other beasts to speak with human voices,
but not a philosopher against his will.” Secundus was finally
taken to the Piraeus to be put to death, but Hadrian ordered the
soldier to try and get a word from him on the way. If he
pronounced one word, he would be beheaded, otherwise he
would be summoned back to the emperor unharmed. The silent
philosopher passed the test too. The emperor admired his
strength of conviction, and asked him to talk through his hands,
by way of writing on a tablet.
He started with a long discourse in which he claimed to
be just a man who had suffered many misfortunes. He
reminded the emperor that he was neither richer than Croesus,
nor more powerful than Agamemnon, nor braver than
Alexander, more audacious than Hercules, fiercer than the
Cyclops, shrewder than Odysseus, nor handsomer than
Achilles.
He then proceeded to answer Hadrian’s questions. After
reading them, the emperor ordered that the philosopher’s
books be deposited in the sacred library. This game of questions
and answers 51 was very much to the emperor’s liking,
according to the Historia Augusta (Hadrian. 20, 1‐2): In conloquiis
etiam humillimorum ciuilissimus fuit, detestans eos qui sibi hanc
uoluptatem humanitatis quasi seruantes fastigium principis
inuiderent. Apud Alexandriam in Musio multas quaestiones
51 A method as old as Socratic μαιευτική. See Daly, Altercatio Hadriani, 20‐44.

professoribus proposuit et propositas ipse dissoluit . In this instance,
however, it is Hadrian himself who provides the answers.
This fascinating text, Vita Secundi, dated by Perry
probably to the last half of the second century AD, 52 features
some parallels with our text. In both texts there is a character
who goes unrecognised (Hadr. I (162r) 20‐21: inuenit Raecium
Varum comam et barbam habentem, quem nemo poterat agnoscere =
Sec. 68, 8‐9: τὴν κεφαλὴν καὶ τὸν πώγωνα ἀναθρέψας ...
μηδενὸς τῶν οἰκείων αὐτὸν γνωρίζοντος, μηδὲ τῆς ἰδίας
μητρός).
The meeting with the emperor is a highly dramatic
dialogue; both the philosopher and Raecius Varus are in mortal
danger until finally Hadrian saves their lives.
There is even similarity in the diction (incircumire orbem
terrarum and γυρεύειν κόσμον) in the case of Hadr. I (162r) 16‐
18: petiit a senatu populoque Romano ut incircumiret orbem terrarum
= Sec. 76, 17‐18: μὴ λέγε ὅτι τὸν κόσμον ἐγύρευσας μόνος.
Perry claims that the resistance of Secundus can be
compared to that of the Christian martyrs or the so‐called
pagan martyrs of Alexandria: the philosopher is ready to die
before breaking his vow in the same way a Christian prefers
death than to sacrifice to the gods.
In the Hadrianus there is an obstinate character ready to
die, but the story does not deliver a clear moral lesson from his
impending death. Varus is not wise, indeed appearing rather
insane. This can be explained as a result of the second/third
century fashion of telling stories about the meetings of the
emperor with extravagant characters, as an echo of anecdotes
Secundus the Silent Philosopher, 1. The date of the Vita is attested by the fact
52
that a long fragment is preserved in a papyrus (P .Ross. Georg. I 17) dated by
Tischendorf to the second century (Notitiae editionis Codicis Bibliorum
Sinaitici, Leipzig, 1860: 69‐73) and by G. Zereteli to the third (Papyri russischer
und georgischer Sammlungen, Tbilisi, 1925: 1.105‐14).
HADRIANVS
based on real facts. The emperor liked to hold discussions with
all kinds of people.
The Vita Secundi became extraordinarily popular in late
antiquity, and was soon translated into different languages:
Armenian (7th‐8th c.), Syriac, Arabic (9th c.) and Ethiopian
(through the Arabic version), and Latin (12th c.). As with the
Hadrianus, the old Greek text of the Vita Secundi “must have
been so damaged in many places as to be unintelligible.” 53
The popularity of this short work influenced the
hagiographic legends. The life of Saint Alexios in Rome,
produced in the fifth century, is modelled on Secundus’ Life.
Alexios, son of Euphemianos, received a first class education
with the best teachers, but he heard the calling of religion and
left his home. After a long period of time on the island Laodicea
he returned home and was not recognised by his father. Ever
since this moment he remained silent, 54 confessing his identity
and his adventures at the end of his life in writing. 55
The theme of misogyny and the episode of the licentious
behaviour of Secundus’ mother are missing from the saint’s life
story, but there are clear parallels in the return home, the
unrecognisable appearance of the main character and the
lifetime of silence.

53 Perry, Secundus, 29.
54 There is some incongruity in the passion of Alexios: uiuens in silentio (§13)
does not fit with his behaviour at the end of his life: vocavit prepositum suum
et dixit ad eum: “Affer mici, domine mi, pugilarem et cirographum, quia opus est
mici” (§14).
55 A Latin version of the Greek life story was preserved in Spanish codices;
cf. A. Fábrega Grau, Pasionario hispánico, Madrid‐Barcelona, 1955, II,365‐370;
F. M. Esteves Pereira, “Légende grecque de lʹhomme de Dieu Saint Alexis,”
Analecta Bollandiana 19 (1900) 243‐253.

Another text related to the Vita Secundi is also a school
text, the Altercatio Hadriani cum Epicteto. 56 This piece is devoid of
a novelesque introduction as in the Vita, perhaps due to an
accident in the textual transmission. The reader is faced
immediately with a series of questions posed by Hadrian and
answers provided by Epictetus. The aim of the exercise is to
reach the perfect definition of various concepts. Evidently it has
its roots in the school of rhetoric, where the pupils had to rival
in crafting the most distilled and exact definition. Secundus’
answers were infused with symbolism, and were relatively long
in comparison to Epictetus’ replies which were often limited to
a simple sentence.
Many of his answers recall popular wisdom: comparison
between sleep and death (53), already in Homer (Il. XIV 231; cf.
XVI 454, 672, 682); the best life is the shortest (21), an old saying
found in Theognis (425‐428) and Sophocles (O.C. 1225‐27); life is
sweet to some, bitter to others (20), as in Publilius Syrus (485 o
uita misero longa, felici breuis!). The definition of the letter as an
unspeaking messenger echoes of Plato’s polemic against
writing. 57
The concept of love as a disease of the idle heart (59:
otiosi pectoris molestia) is already in Stobaeus, Flor. 64, 29
attributed to Theophrastus; but Daly 58 rightly remarks that the
way of referring to it in Stobaeus is “not a quotation from any
56 It was first published by J. Albertus Fabricius (Bibliotheca Graeca, XIII,
Hamburg, 1726: 557‐564) in the edition by Fr. Lindebrog. We here use the
text by W. Suchier based on eleven manuscripts, the second part of Dalyʹs
study: Die altercatio Hadriani Augusti et Epicteti philosophi nebst einigen
verwandten Texten, quoted above.
57 Cf. Luis Gil, “El logos vivo y la letra muerta. En torno a la valoración de la
obra escrita en la Antigüedad,” Emerita, 27 (1959) 239‐268.
58 Altercatio, 74.
HADRIANVS
of the works of Theophrastus, but an anecdote, told in the style
of the popular collections.”
Of the two hexameters in the Altercatio, one is a
commonplace in funerary inscriptions, 59 the other also likely a
proverb. 60 Other sententiae with popular colour are: 18, what do
the king and the beggar have in common? To be born and to
die; 61 45, the stars are the destiny of mankind; 62, the king
cannot bear a partner in power. 62
In sum, far from deep philosophical insight, this
Epictetus provides the reader with a bunch of more or less
brilliant dicta, an anthology of conversational sayings. Again,
this belongs to the world of the pagan schoolroom. The
Altercatio still refers to gladiatorial games (9, what is a
gladiator? A blameless killer), speaks of gods (Venus [56‐58],
Neptunus [51] and Ceres [46]), and mentions pagan rituals. 63 It
defines Rome as fons imperii orbis terrarum, “the source of the
empire of the earth” and the “consecration of eternal peace”
[67] far away from the barbarian invasions. There is no visible
influence of Christianity. All of this seems to point to a date no
later than the fourth century, and probably earlier. The choice
59 CLE 455, 20‐21; 1490.
60 This was first noticed by P. Burman the Younger (Anthologia veterum
Latinorum epigrammatum et poematum, I, 66 [Amsterdam, 1769: I, 40]), who
corrected picta est and nam quos to correct the metre. F. Bücheler,
“Coniectanea,” Rheinisches Museum 36 (1881) 329‐30 (= Kleine Schriften
[reimpr. Osnabrück, 1965] II, 410‐11) restored the dystichs: Mala ut in
arboribus pendent, sic corpora nostra / aut mature cadunt aut cito acerba ruunt,
and Nuda Venus, nudi pueri pinguntur amores: / exibit nudus, cui dea nuda placet.
61 Cf. A. Otto, Die Sprichwörter und sprichwörtlichen Redensarten der Römer,
Leipzig, 1890 (Hildesheim: Olms Verlag, 1965): 1142 and 1194.
62 Cf. Lucan, Pharsalia I 92‐93 (a dictum applied to the Spanish medieval
monarchs by Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada, De rebus Hispaniae, VI 14).
63 Nos. 11‐12 show how dead bodies should be prepared by crowning the
head and tying up the big toes.

of Hadrian as the interrogator in this dialogue would be due to
his popularity in third century school texts. The choice of
Epictetus seems to be explainable as the lectio facilior, since in
other recensions of the Altercatio 64 one finds instead Secundus, a
lesser known philosopher.

The apocryphal Epistles

In Antiquity the private lives of the famous and
influential, both men and women, were the source of enormous
general interest. One of the more popular methods of exposure
to the literate public was in fact forged letters which unveiled
their secrets: a literary invention to serve the same purpose as
today’s gossip magazines. The personal life of Hadrian was of
course no exception, readily becoming the subject of apocrypha.
Thanks to a papyrus from Egypt 65 we know about one
such ‘letter’ of Hadrian to Antoninus, his successor on the
imperial throne. The letter, written in Greek, contains the
confessions of the emperor, close to death, where he admits not
feeling any bodily pain, or having lost his mind. He says that he
has lived twice as long as his father and for as long as his
mother, who died at sixty. Some scholars have considered this
text as genuine, 66 but its authenticity remains dubious.
64 Vincent of Beauvais, in his Speculum historiale (X, cap. 71 [ed. Cologne,
1494, f. 124r]), reports a series of Answers of Secundus the Philosopher to
Hadrian: exactly the same ones attributed to Epictetus.
65 P.Fay. 19.
66 As this is not the adequate place to go deeply into this question, we limit
ourselves to refer to Alexander, “Letters and Speeches,” 170ff.; Birley,
Hadrian, 10. More sceptical was F. Bücheler, Kleine Schriften, III, 278‐279
(epistulam quasi indicem rerum gestarum Antonino misit, saltem misisse creditus
est iam ante quam secundum a Chr. saeculum pervenit ad finem). The latest
approach, that of J. Bollansée, “P.Fay. 19, Hadrianʹs Memoirs, and Imperial
HADRIANVS
The emperor would not have written these personal

feelings in an official letter of farewell, even less likely in Greek.
When he was addressed by Plotina, Trajan’s wife, about the
Roman citizenship of Epicurus’ diadochus, she wrote in Latin,
the common language; also in Latin was the emperor alleged to
have said farewell in his ‘animula uagula blandula.’ 67
However, Philostratus had access to a testament
regarding the administration of the empire (αἱ ὑπὲρ βασιλείας
διαθήκαι) in which Hadrian, claiming as his own a deed by
Polemon, saved the rhetor from Antoninus’ wrath. 68 The text is
quoted in Greek, but this does not mean that the original was
also in this language.
In any case, this papyrus again presents the same setting
as the other texts presented here. Hadrian is the main character
of a school exercise, where a student has copied a text written
previously by the teacher.
Epistolary Autobiography,” Ancient society, 25 (1994) 279‐302, cautiously

concludes that there is a good chance that this is the beginning of Hadrian’s
autobiography.
67 SHA, Hadrian. 25, 9 (Fragmenta poetarum Latinorum, 136 Morel). However,
as would be typical of a devout philhellene, Hadrian also produced poems
in Greek. The Anthologia Palatina collects an appeal to Zeus at Mount Cassius
to give the victory to Trajan in Parthia (VI 332); an encomium to
Archilochus, a poet who could have excelled Homer if he had written an
epic poem (VII 674); a reply to a grammarian, who was starving and almost
dead by paralysis (ξηρός, cf. Lucian, Tox. 24, in the sense that siccus had in
Later Latin) and was begging him for support: the emperor retorted that he
was deceiving both Phaeton and Pluto, since he was still seeing the former
(i.e. the sun) and not going to commune with the latter (IX 137); and yet one
more epigram on the different destiny of the descendants of Hector and
Achilles (IX 387) has been attributed to Hadrian or Germanicus.
68 The strong character of Antoninus is portrayed by Philostratus, Vit. soph. 5,
571 when the emperor shouted at the rhetor Alexander, who had called for
his attention in an improper way.

A similar situation is to be found in a ‘letter’ addressed

by the emperor to his dearest and most honoured mother,
Domitia Paulina, again in Greek, which is preserved after the
Sententiae Hadriani. In the letter, the emperor asks his mother to
join him after her bath, together with his ʹdaughtersʹ – only one
daughter is known, Paulina – to celebrate his birthday (on the
24th January); his wife, Sabina, will not attend, but she has sent
a gift.
The use of a vulgar expression like οἶδας, or late
vocabulary like ἐνωρότερον instead of πρωιαίτερον, coupled
with the allusion to more than one sister, are enough to suggest
that this is a forgery, written in the format of an invitation to a
banquet, a common document in the papyri from Egypt.

The date of the tale of Hadrian

It is quite difficult to assign a certain date to the
composition of the tale of Hadrian. The plot, though mostly
fictional, could contain perhaps some historical information –
the trip of Hadrian to Cologne, the character of Varus –. The
Latin language, if very poor and simple, is devoid of those
vulgar expressions which would characterize fourth century
texts as, for example, the Peregrinatio Egeriae. But Language is
definitely not a robust indication to support the dating of the
work. Finally, the genre – tale or folk‐tale –, is a minor literary
category, and in this case serves a renewed interest in the figure
of this emperor, as well as other minor works reviewed in
chapter V, such as the Sententiae Hadriani, the Altercatio Hadriani
cum Epicteto and the Vita Secundi.
The similarities featured by these works suggest that
they were produced most certainly not by the same author, but
at least within the same approximate period, the end of the
second and beginning of the third century.
HADRIANVS
Our tale poses one more problem. The frequent lacunae

and incoherence, and especially the truncated end, indicate that
we are before a copy of the original composition or, even more
likely, an extract of a longer piece. The clearest example of the
text’s incoherence is in 6, 14, where two different scenes are
linked without real continuity: when Hadrian enters the curia
he surprisingly finds Varus wisely giving his opinion on a
certain matter, and immediately the Emperor pronounces his
discourse in the presence of the senators. There is a missing link
between the two scenes, as we would expect a full description
of this new encounter between the Emperor and his antagonist.
It is clear that there has been an epitomist at work, who
proceeded negligent of the lacunae and incoherence generated
by his abbreviations. This copy is dated palaeographically and
codicologically to the fourth century, but the original and
longer version must have been produced at a much earlier time,
probably at the end of the second century or the beginning of
the third century. It is impossible, however, to ascertain a date
for the late epitomatist.

Embedding the legend of Hadrian in Trajan’s

Finally, we shall turn to an aspect that, although already
mentioned above, deserves further consideration from a
comparative point of view. It is true that our tale shows how
the figure of the Emperor Hadrian acquired a legendary halo,
which increasingly dignified the personality of the emperor.
Trajan too was posthumously idealized, to the point of
becoming the optimus princeps, as praised by Pliny the Younger,
albeit his fame in medieval times based on an imaginary
episode.
Both emperors coming from Hispania, heir one to the
other, they were inevitably bound and their traditions

ultimately mixed up. It is not surprising that episodes originally
ascribed to one or the other exchanged protagonists.
The fame of Trajan’s justitia, proverbial through the
Middle Ages, is based on an exemplary episode: in it, a woman
addresses the Emperor right before he is leaving for war in a
claim to justice for the murder of her son. The Emperor rebuffs
her, saying he will attend her claim when he returns. The
woman then insists, “And if you die in battle, what shall I do?”
When he heard these words, Trajan stepped down from his
horse, summoned the accused and condemned the culprits, and
moreover, he ordered an economic compensation to be granted
to the poor mother. This episode brought the emperor a very
positive public image, which even made him worthy of
Gregorius Magnus’ prayers to rescue him from Hell.
Similarly, Hadrian is the protagonist of a parallel
episode. 69 Cassius Dio 70 described how a woman submitted a
petition to the emperor. He answered rudely that he did not
have time for it. “Then do not be an emperor,” replied the
woman. Hadrian at that point decided to reconsider his
69 Alonso Chacón already noticed the parallelism in both stories. Defending
the veracity of the Trajanean legend, he concluded that Trajanʹs good deed
was mistakenly ascribed to Hadrian (Historia ceu verissima à calumnijs
multorum vindicata, quae refert M. Vlpii Trajani August. animam precibus divi
Gregorii à tartareis cruciatibus ereptam, Venecia, 1583: 4r‐4v: “Fateor hoc
tempore Hadriani contingere potuisse, verum suspicor errore Dionis vel
Xiphilini factum, ut quod de Traiano Augusto legerant, vel audierant, id
totum ad Hadrianum attinere inanimadversione crediderint, quod solet non
raro historicis contingere”). Gaston Paris (“La légende de Trajan,” Mélanges
de l’École des Hautes Études, XXXV (1878) 288ff.) brought the comparaison to
an anecdote about Saladin. He considered that the story of Hadrian, ascribed
to Trajan, found support in a relief from Trajan’s forum, where a feminine
figure is prostrated in front of the Emperor on horseback. This hypothesis
was already formulated by D. Comparetti (Virgilio nel Medio Evo, ed. G.
Pasquali, Florence, 1955: II, 72).
70 LXIX, 6, 3.
HADRIANVS
decision, went back and dictated justice. This episode is

evidently related to that of Trajan. Moreover, it brings to mind
the Sententiae Hadriani presented above, in which Hadrian
appears as the guardian of the rights of the weak, especially the
widows.
Another example is the remission of tributes, so
characteristic of Hadrianean policy and his populist initiatives.
This fame was later ascribed entirely to Trajan. There is an
example of this in Ausonius, 71 who equalled Trajan with
Antoninus Pius in their clementia, omitting Hadrian, a truly
unfair omission.
Conversely, Trajan was a friendlier emperor than
Hadrian. He even trusted Licinius Sura when many voices
accused him of treason. 72 Although Hadrian had the profile of
an intellectual full of pride of himself, less prone to low
comradeship and sodality, typical of military environments, the
tale in our papyrus presents an emperor who regularly confides
his thoughts to his companions. Nevertheless, of course, there is
hardly enough evidence to say any more about the kind of
relationship during this trip of the emperor with his escort,
more likely to be composed of servants than of friends.

Summing up, Trajan’s fame ended up in some way
absorbing Hadrian’s. The strongest reason is Pliny the
Younger’s praise of Trajan. He was the source for later imperial
panegyrists. Consciously or unconsciously, they followed the
model established by Pliny, a compulsory reading for all young
aspirants to rhetor. And such was the fortune of Trajan, extolled
by Pliny, that his fame prevailed and survived until the Middle
Ages. Unfortunately, Hadrian did not have the same luck. His
71 Gratiarum actio, 16.
72 Cassius Dio, LXVIII 15, 32.

glory, still alive when our tale was written, progressively faded
away.

VII
EDITION OF THE HADRIANUS

Editionis nostrae rationem, quam duo abhinc annos
coeptam, postea inuite procrastinatam, denuo iteratis curis
resumptam et nunc demum feliciter absolutam manibus uoluis,
amice lector, in modum praefatiunculae paucis exponere
aequum est. Sescentis mendis libellum cuius patrocinium
susceperamus scribae incuria scatere primo obtutu patuit. In his
erroribus corrigendis haud parum nos iuuerunt plagulae
chartaceae quas cl. presbyter R. Roca Puig scripsit cum primus
laborem edendi opusculum tam misellum quam difficillimum
incohasset, quem laborem morte praeuentus ad calcem
perducere non potuit. Omnes igitur eius coniecturas
collegimus, perpendimus et quae palmariae uel uerisimiliores
uisae sunt publici iuris facere decreuimus, quod et uiri docti et
de papyris optime meriti sacra memoria poscebat et non
ingratum fore lectoribus speramus. In sensu huius noui et
necopinati Hadriani eliciendo, enucleando, emendando
quantum nosmet ipsi ipsi pro uirili –et, mecastor, pro feminina‐
parte insudauerimus uix dici potest; num aliquid diligentia
nostra profecerit alii uiderint. Quis edendi modus potior esset
diu quaerentibus haec tandem nobis sententia sedit, Hadriani
historiam fabularem bis in lucem mittere, primum fideliter
descriptam ut ueram imaginem textus papyracei uerbis
tantummodo distinctis redderet, dein puram, putam et
perpurgatam quoad eius fieri posset cum uersione Anglica
exhibere; id neminem credimus nobis iure succensurum. In
apparatu quem uocant criticum breuitati consulentes tantum
lectiones emendatas uel que nobis emendandae uidebantur

recepimus, quisquiliis ortographicis obiter correctis. Ne frustra
moles in inmensum cresceret, nomina in haec compendia
redigere placuit:
GT Gil‐Torallas
RP Roca‐Puig
Vale, lector, et erroribus nostris, si non largiter peccauimus, qua
es beneuolentia ignosce.
HADRIANVS 105
I (162r)
hadrianos imperator dum aduc paganus
esset duos habuit inimicos cosconium
gallum et reccium uararum cosconius gal
lus etiam in litem priuata punum hadri
5 anum percussit et nebolonem dixit rec
cius autem urrus accusabit hadrianum
esse behenarium qui cum in eo nihil pro
uare potuisset legibus in insulam licroni
am deportatus est cuius bona nerua impe
10 rator fisco suo inferri iussit id est ss dccc
annorum octo milium deinde post exces
sum neruae suscepit imperator marcus ul
pius troianus qui cum et ipse imperasset
annorum decennobem excessit deinde
15 suscepit imperator publius aelius hadria
nus qui cum optinuisset petit a senato
populoque romano et incircumiret urbis
terraram qui cum in prima expeditione
sua proficisceretur attigit liconiam
20 ibiquae inuenit reccium uarum coma
m et barbam habentem, quem nemo pote
rat agnoscere qui cum inmiscuisset

I 1 Hadrianus // adhuc 3 Raecium // uararum] i. e explosa dittographia Varum 4
litem] i.e. lite // punum] i. e. pugno GT (cf. Dig. IX 2, 22 mulier pugno… percussa,
Vulg. Ex. 21, 18 percusserit proximum suum pugno) 5 nebulonem 6 Vrrum] i. e.
Varum // accusauit 7 uenenarium // in eo] i. e. in eum GT 7‐8 probare 8‐9 Licroniam]
alibi Licaoniam legitur 11 annorum] i. e. aureorum GT, nummorum (nummum potius
expectaueris) RP // milium] i. e. milia GT 13 Troianus] i. e. Traianus 14 annorum] i. e.
annos GT // decem nouem 16 obtinuisset // petiit // senatu 17 et] ut GT // urbis] orbem
GT 18 terrarum 20 ibique // Raecium

II (162v)
se comitatum eius retinemsi mularum
frenos quibos hadrianos uerebatur his
uerbis caesarem salutauit hadriane baue
caesar simulata mente sic ait quis es qui me
5 salutasti s uarus pumulus reccium
uarum accusatorem tum non agnosces
caesar cite non memihi uarus romulus
meministi sed te memihisse non fines
nam cum te uenenuarium apud neruam
10 imperator accusasem neque orobare potu
issem legibus in insulam Licaoniam depor
tatus sum et id et scias, me gruuideru tor
queri quod te imperantem uideo iube ne
itaque ante conspectum tuum duci ne tan
15 tum scaelus uideam cesar abit nihil in
conueniens moribus tuis quam dicere et
fatere perseuerasti homu stultissime
quod aliquando duo senatores camore
inter se haberunt hoc ad nouum princi
20 pem pertinere non debet restituo te ita
que prioris dignitatis tuae et uide me impe

II 1 comitatum] i. e. comitatu uel ‐tui // retinemsi] i. e. retinens RP 2 quibus //
Hadrianus // uerebatur] i. e. uehebatur RP 3 baue] i. e. haue RP 5 salutasti] fort.
legendum salutas? Tum // s corruptum; fort. r (i.e. Raecius) // Pumulus] i. e. Romulus
GT // Raecium 6 tuum // agnoscis 7 cite] i. e. ait GT // memihi] i. e. memini GT 8 non
ante meminisse transp. censent GT // meminisse // fines] fingis GT 9 uenenarium 10
imperator] i.e. imperatorem // accusassem // probare 12 et hic id quod etiam ualet,
quamuis ut conicere possis // gruuideru] i. e. grauiter RP 13 ne] in promptu erat emendare
me, sed ea tam minima emendatione sensus non minime claudicaret, nam Raecius ante
Hadriani conspectum ductus diu uidere imperatorem cogeretur, quod minime uolebat; olim
ne iterum… ducar temptabamus; Raecius tamen sponte non ui coactus se Hadriano obtulit.
Rebus aequo examine libratis lacuna potius statuenda nobis nunc uidetur 14 duci] educi RP;
at tum a conspectu (cf. ThLL IV c, 491, 20ss.) pro ante conspectum exspectaueris 15
scelus // Caesar // abit] i. e. ait RP 16 quam mendosum, nisi magis ante inconueniens
suppleas 17 fatere] i. e. facere GT // homo 18 camore corruptum; an clamoris (tum gen.
quem uocant partitiuus e quod penderet)? 18 habuerunt 21 forsan priori dignitati
scribendum
HADRIANVS 107
III (163r)
rantem et diu cruciare uarus romulus
sed me talem quis recipit in curiam cesar u
it litterae meae scilicet deinde dictauit
ad senatum epistulam talem publius hauli
5 ui hadrianum senatui salutem dicit memi
ni me publicae accusatum esse a reccio uaro
apud ueruam imperatorem qui cum in me
nihil probare potuisset legibus in insulam
licaoniam deportatus est cum ego modo dum
10 pretereo sic eum stantem et trementem
uidi tamquam uitae nescius suae cogita
que noscio qua miseratione ut iratus impera
tor aduersarium meum miserer intret in
curiam itaquae restituete illi bona sua
15 cum usuris dodrantibus et illod ad uibus
petit imperator uester ne quis ill[[am]]i nam
en accusatoris opponat cum ego accusatus
sim et taceam quam grauem enim poe
nam sustinuit aduersarius meus qui me
20 hac pretereuntem expectauit tradidit
illi epistulam et remisit ad senatum

III 2 recipiet RP // Caesar 2‐3 uit] i. e. ait RP 3‐4 hauliui] i. e. Aelius RP //
hadrianum] i. e. Hadrianus RP 6 publice // Raecio 7 ueruam] i. e. Neruam RP 9 cum]
i. e. quam GT 10 praetereo 11‐12 cogitaque] cogitaret GT, sed fort. aliquot uerba (ut puta
necem sibi inferre ita) ob homoeoteleuton exciderunt 12 nescio // qua miseratione] quam
miser actionem dubitanter GT; fort. nescio qua miseratione cum miserer in figura
etymologica coniungendum, dum ut expedias 14 itaque // restituite 15 illud // ad uibus] i.
e. a uobis GT, nam de a ciuibus uix cogitandum 16 illi 16‐17 namen] i. e. nomen GT

IV (163v)
ipse autem dum circumiset aliquas ci
uitates, attigit coloniam agripine mse
ram qui cum honorificust ab eos exceptus
esset ad amicos uit amici amici quam fal
5 sa opinio de agripinensibus apud italicos
nostros quam laeti quam boni omnibus
nos expecerunt patriam illori bum
decorauerunt columnas uestibus ini
duerunt et dies luminibus accensis
10 duplicauerunt et cum operam publica
m eorum inspecsisse in atrum et basi
licam et principes eorum ad se uacari
iussit cumque preuto fuissent sic
ait agrippinensis inei petite da liberati
15 tatem si qua uultis tunc amantinus
saturninus princeps eorum sic ait
iuppiter rector urbis totius terrarum
unacium petimus quodam nobis
reditum riperemse luminis quid

IV 1 circumiret (uel –isset) 2 Agrippinae 2‐3 mseram] i. e. miseram GT 3
honorificust] i. e. honorifice RP, sed fortasse altior menda patet // eos] i. e. eis RP 4 uit] i.
e. ait RP 5 Agrippinensibus 6 post boni deest nomen aliquod cum omnibus
coniunctum: bonis, honoribus uel quid simile, nisi bonis ominibus corrigere malis; <in>
omnibus RP 7 expecerunt] i. e. exceperunt RP // illori bum corruptum; floribus uel
Vbiorum RP; an illorum bene? 8‐9 induerunt 9 dies in diem fort. corrigendus, nam
aduentus imperatoris uno die concelebratur 11 Inspecsisse] i. e. inspexisset RP // atrum]
atrium RP; olim theatrum nobis arridebat (cf. C.D. LXIX, 10, 1 ἐποίει δὲ καὶ θέατρα),
sed in Colonia Agrippina nullum theatri uestigium exstat; at mendacium commentari nullum
scrupulum iniecisset audaci auctori nostro 12 eorum] Vbiorum magis speciose quam uere
RP // uacari] i. e. uocari RP 13 preuto] i. e. praesto RP 14 Agrippinenses // inei] a me
dubitanter GT // da mendosum; fort. dem legendum 14‐15 liberalitatem 15 quam //
Amantinus] Amandinus infra 6.1, 7.19 16 eorum] Vbiorum RP 17 urbis] i.e. orbis 18
unacium corruptum; an unum a te? uix unanimes // quodam] i. e. quoddam; uix quod
des 19 redditum // riparense // fluminis // quid] i. e. quod
HADRIANVS 109
V (164r)
fisco tuo inferebamuli caesar bit quan
tum ex quid fisco meo inferabatis satur
ninus respondit annorum SS dccc octo mi
lium cesar bit et quo primo inperante hoc
5 genos tributi pretare testis saturninum ft
imperatorem flauio uespasiano caesar ait
et post excessum uespasiani petistis uou ali
quo imperatorem ut hoc genus tributi uobis
remitarem saturninum imperatorem
10 sim domine caesar quare saturni seu impe
ratorem quia mindum dederat naturae
principem qui suo tantum contentus
esset, hon de alieno caesar bit uidetes
ergo numquid exfiguum est quod peti
15 tis neque nos primes petimus uestrae
cum cessere uidear concedo uobis redi
tum repereni filuminis quod fisco meo
inferabatis et petite adhuc aliquod si quod

V 1 inferebamuli] i.e. inferebamus // bit] i.e. ait 2 ex] i. e. et RP // inferebatis 3
annorum] aureorum GT 4 milium] i. e. milia GT // bit] i. e. ait 5 genus // pretare]
praestare RP // testis corruptum; cepistis R‐P (pro incepistis); an coacti estis (cf. Iuu. 3,
188 praestare tributa... cogimur)? // Saturninum] i. e. Saturninus // ft] i. e. ait GT 6
imperatore 7 petiistis // uou] i. e. ab GT 8 imperatorem] i.e. imperatore 9 remitarem] i.
e. remitteret RP // Saturninum] i. e. Saturnium GT 10 sim corruptum; fort. poscerem //
Saturni seu] i. e. Saturnium GT; Saturnii aeui olim placuit 11 mindum] i. e. nondum GT
// naturae] i.e. natura 13 hon] i.e. non // bit] i. e. ait // uidetis 14 exfiguum] i. e.
exiguum GT 15‐16 primes petimus uestrae cum cessere uidear locus conclamatus
Oedipode coniectore eget; multa temptauimus, nulla correctio placuit 16‐17 redditum 17
repereni] i. e. riparense // fluminis 18 inferebatis
VI (164v)
uoltis tunc amandinus saturni
nus princeps eorum sic bit quat eorum
dies tuti tum exugium esse bidetur
lergitio petimus mittas nobis et con
5 sularem cuius presentium subinde
aures tuae interpallentur caesar ad
amicos abit amici amici nouum exem
plum uidetis cum ipse timeantur
petant quem timeant respiciens ad
10 saturninum sic abit mittam uobis
et consularem si quod uultis et
post `paućum temporis tempum interrbis
et romae petit curiam qui cum in
terdisset animum aduertit co
15 tra se r[[ut curiam]]accium uarum
prudentem et sententiam dicem
tem patres conscribti probincias
uestras laetas et in pacem florentes

VI 1 Amantinus (cf. 4.15) 2 bit] i. e. ait //quat] i. e. quod 3 tum] tam GT // exugium] i.
e. exigua GT // uidetur 4 lergitio] i. e. largitio GT 5 presentium] i. e. praesentia 6
interpellentur 7 abit] i. e. ait 9 ipse] i. e. ipsi GT // <qui> post timeantur add. censent GT
// fort. timentur 10 abit] i. e. ait 11 quod] i. e. quem 12 paucum // tempum in spatium
corr. GT // interrbis] iter urbis GT 13 et del GT // petiit 13‐14 interdisset] introisset GT ;
de indixisset uix cogitandum 15 Raccium] i.e. Raecium // post Varum excidit stantem uel
aliud participium, tum quod Varum in curia sententiam contra Hadrianum dixisse absonum
uidetur tum quod non est quo et referatur; praepositio contra uim localem hic habet 16‐17
dicentem 17 conscripti // prouincias 18 pace

HADRIANVS 111
VII (165r)
circummibi nulli non colonia uel mu
nicipia aliquid muneris dedi agrippsae
sensibus quoque redonaui reditum
riperensis fluminos quid fisco meo in
5 ferabatur et consu`lárem petentibus
repromisi itaque si uobis uidetur rec
cium earum mittendum exestimabis
senatus ucclamauit o`p´timum optimus
dignus dignus quia tui est tradidit illi
10 epirbam excreuoriam et moribit tum
quam pater filium ueras esto uera iudi
ca ter et im mente habeo licaoniam ac
cepta urbem epistula inter ageres
per dies peruenit coloniam agrippinos
15 adque aliu die nihil prius interogare
curauit nam quid abimus hadria
num muneris imperassent tunc
amandinus saturninum princeps

VII 1 circumiui // colonia] i.e. coloniae 2 municipia] i. e. municipio 2‐3
Agrippsaesensibus] i. e. Agrippinensibus // redditum 4 riperensis fluminos] i. e.
riparense fluminis // quid] i. e. quod 4‐5 inferebatur 5 consularem 6‐7 Raecium 7
earum] i. e. Varum // exestimabis] i. e. existimabitis GT 8 acclamauit // optimum 9
primum dignus] i. e. dignum GT 10 epirbam] i. e. epistolam GT // excreuoriam] i. e.
executoriam GT // moribit] i. e. monuit GT 10‐11 tumquam] i. e. tamquam 11 ueras] i.
e. uerax RP 11‐12 iudicater] i. e. iudicato GT // in // habeo] i. e. habeto GT 13 urbem
redundare uidetur, nisi putes inscium magistellum aliquot uerba omisisse (uerbi gratia
accepta epistula urbem reliquit uel quid simile) // inter ageres] i. e. iter agens GT 14
numerus dierum librarii oscitantia omissus est // agrippinos] i. e. Agrippinae 15 atque //
aliu] i. e. alia // interrogare 16 nam] i. e. quam GT, nam de numquid uix cogitandum //
abimus] i. e. ab imp(eratore) GT 16‐17 hadrianum] Hadriano 17 imperassent] i. e.
impetrassent (de hac communi menda cf. ThLL VII.1, c. 582, 84; exemplis ibi collatis adde
Val. Max. IV 7, 1 (p. 208, 3 Kempff), VIII 3, 3 (p. 379, 9); SHA, Maxim. 3, 6) 18
Amantinus (cf. 4.15) // Saturninum] i. e. Saturninus

VIII (165r)
eorum sic abit seculi felicitas
uolbitus ut deum presentem uide
remus et donam ei gauderemus nam
scias eum redonasse nobis reditus
5 urbi perenis fluminis uo quod fisco ei
us inferabamus id eat annorum ss dccc
sed homo malos audiuit alleuauit se et
fes ait item hadrianum nescio qua demen
qua repletus facile hostibus publicis
10 annusa ss dccc sedonabit iussit pre
catorem uenire et hasta posita reloca
ri iussit et fisco redigi.
ΕΠΑΓΑΘΩ
Filiciter
Dorotheo

VIII 1 abit] i. e. ait // saeculi 2 uolbitus] i. e. uoluit RP // praesentem 3 donam] aut
dono aut dona scribendum // ei] i. e. eius GT; dei RP 4 redditus // urbi perenis] i. e.
riperense // uo ex sequenti quod, ut uidetur, huc illapsum del. GT 6 inferebamus // eat] i.
e. est // annorum] aureorum GT 7 malus // ante audiuit addendum esse <ut> suspicamur
8 quid in fes lateat ingenue fatemur nos nescire; frendens, festinans uel quid simile conicere
possis // item corruptum; fort. imp (i. e. imperator) 8‐9 demenqua] i. e. dementia GT //
Hadrianus 10 annusa] i. e. aureorum GT // redonabit 10‐11 precatorem] i.e.
praeconem GT

HADRIANVS 113

TEXT

I. /162r/ Hadrianus imperator, dum adhuc paganus esset, duos
habuit inimicos, Cosconium Gallum et Raecium Varum.
Cosconius Gallus etiam in lite priuata pugno Hadrianum
percussit et nebulonem dixit. Raecius autem Varus accusauit
Hadrianum esse uenenarium; qui cum in eo nihil probare
potuisset, legibus in insulam Lycaoniam deportatus est, cuius
bona Nerua imperator fisco suo inferri iussit, id est, SS DCCC
aureorum octo milia. Deinde post excessum Neruae suscepit
imperator Marcus Vlpius Traianus; qui cum et ipse imperasset
annos decem nouem, excessit. Deinde suscepit imperator
Publius Aelius Hadrianus. Qui cum obtinuisset, petiit a senatu
populoque Romano ut incircumiret orbem terrarum. Qui cum
in prima expeditione sua proficisceretur, attigit Lycaoniam
ibique inuenit Raecium Varum comam et barbam habentem,
quem nemo poterat agnoscere. Qui cum inmiscuisset II. /162v/
se comitatu eius, retinens mularum frenos quibus Hadrianus
uehebatur, his uerbis Caesarem salutauit. ‘Hadriane, aue.’
Caesar simulata mente sic ait: ‘Quis es qui me salutasti?’ †S†
Varus Romulus: ‘Raecium Varum accusatorem tuum non
agnoscis?’ Caesar ait: ‘Non memini.’ Varus Romulus:
‘Meministi, sed te <non> meminisse [non] fingis. Nam cum te
uenenarium apud Neruam imperatorem accusassem neque
probare potuissem, legibus in insulam Lycaoniam deportatus
sum; et id et scias, me grauiter torqueri, quod te imperantem
uideo. Iube ne itaque *** ante conspectum tuum duci, ne
tantum scelus uideam.’ Caesar ait: ‘Nihil inconueniens moribus
tuis quam dicere et facere perseuerasti, homo stultissime. Quod
aliquando duo senatores †camore† inter se habuerunt, hoc ad
nouum principem pertinere non debet. Restituo te itaque

prioris dignitatis tuae: et uide me impe‐ III. /163r/‐antem et diu
cruciare.’ Varus Romulus: ‘Sed me talem quis recipit in
curiam?’ Caesar ait: ‘Litterae meae scilicet.’ Deinde dictauit ad
senatum epistulam talem: ‘Publius Aelius Hadrianus senatui
salutem dicit. Memini me publice accusatum esse a Raecio Varo
apud Neruam imperatorem; qui cum in me nihil probare
potuisset, legibus in insulam Lycaoniam deportatus est. Quam
ego modo dum praetereo, sic eum stantem et trementem uidi
tamquam uitae nescius suae cogitaret nescio quam miser
actionem, ut iratus imperator aduersarium meum miserer:
intret in curiam. Itaque restituite illi bona sua cum usuris
dodrantibus. Et illud a uobis petit imperator uester, ne quis illi
nomen accusatoris opponat, cum ego accusatus sim et taceam.
Quam grauem enim poenam sustinuit aduersarius meus, qui
me hac praetereuntem expectauit!.’ Tradidit illi epistulam et
remisit ad senatum. IV. /163v/ Ipse autem dum circumisset
aliquas ciuitates, attigit Coloniam Agrippinae miseram. Qui
cum honorifice ab eis exceptus esset, ad amicos ait: ‘Amici,
amici, quam falsa opinio de Agrippinensibus apud Italicos
nostros! Quam laeti, quam boni <bonis> omnibus nos
exceperunt! Patriam †illori bum† decorauerunt, columnas
uestibus induerunt et diem luminibus accensis duplicauerunt.’
Et cum opera publica eorum inspexisset, id est, atrium et
basilicam, et principes eorum ad se uocari iussit. Cumque
praesto fuissent, sic ait: ‘Agrippinenses, a me petite †da†
liberalitatem, si quam uultis.’ Tunc Amantinus Saturninus
princeps eorum sic ait: ‘Iuppiter, rector orbis totius terrarum,
†unacium† petimus quoddam nobis redditum riparense
fluminis quod V. /164r/ fisco tuo inferebamus.’ Caesar ait:
‘Quantum et quid fisco meo inferebatis?’ Saturninus respondit:
‘Aureorum SS DCCC octo milia.’ Caesar ait: ‘Et quo primo
inperante hoc genus tributi praestare †testis†?’ Saturninus ait:
‘Imperatore Flauio Vespasiano.’ Caesar ait: ‘Et post excessum
Vespasiani petistis ab aliquo imperatore ut hoc genus tributi
HADRIANVS 115
uobis remitteret?’ ‘Saturnium imperatorem †sim†, domine.’

Caesar: ‘Quare Saturnium imperatorem?’ ‘Quia nondum
dederat natura principem qui suo tantum contentus esset, non
de alieno.’ Caesar ait: ‘Videtis ergo numquid exiguum est quod
petitis, neque nos †primes† petimus †uestrae cum cessere†
uidear. Concedo uobis redditum riparense fluminis quod fisco
meo inferebatis. Et petite adhuc aliquod, si quod VI. /164v/
uultis.’ Tunc Amantinus Saturninus princeps eorum sic ait:
‘Quod eorum dies tuti tam exigua esse uidetur largitio?
Petimus mittas nobis et consularem, cuius praesentia subinde
aures tuae interpellentur.’ Caesar ad amicos ait: ‘Amici, amici,
nouum exemplum uidetis, cum ipsi <qui> timeantur petant
quem timeant.’ Respiciens ad Saturninum sic ait: ‘Mittam uobis
et consularem, si quem uultis.’ Et post paucum temporis
spatium iter urbis Romae petit. Curiam qui cum introisset,
animum aduertit contra se Raecium Varum <stantem>
prudentem et sententiam dicentem. * * * ‘Patres conscripti,
prouincias uestras laetas et in pace florentes VII. /165r/
circumiui, nulli non coloniae uel municipio aliquid muneris
dedi. Agrippinensibus quoque redonaui redditum riparense
fluminis quod fisco meo inferebatur et consularem petentibus
repromisi. Itaque, si uobis uidetur, Raecium Varum mittendum
existimabitis.’ Senatus acclamauit: ‘Optimum optimus, dignum
dignus, quia tui est.’ Tradidit illi epistolam executoriam et
monuit tamquam pater filium: ‘Verax esto, uera iudicato et in
mente habeto Lycaoniam.’ Accepta [urbem] epistula iter agens
per dies * * * peruenit Coloniam Agrippinae atque alia die nihil
prius interrogare curauit quam quid ab imperatore Hadriano
muneris impetrassent. Tunc Amantinus Saturninus princeps
VIII. /165v/ eorum sic ait: ‘Saeculi felicitas uoluit ut deum
praesentem uideremus et dono eius gauderemus. Nam scias
eum redonasse nobis redditum riparense fluminis [uo] quod
fisco eius inferebamus, id est, aureorum SS DCCC.’ Sed homo
malus <ut> audiuit alleuauit se et †fes† ait: ‘†Item† Hadrianus
nescio qua dementia repletus facile hostibus publicis aureorum
SS dccc redonabit.’ Iussit praeconem uenire et hasta posita

relocari iussit et fisco redigi.
ΕΠΑΓΑΘΩ
Filiciter
Dorotheo

HADRIANVS 117

TRANSLATION

I. /162r/ When the Emperor Hadrian was still a private person,
he had two enemies: Cosconius Gallus and Raecius Varus.
Cosconius Gallus even hit him and called him ‘scoundrel’ in a
private suit. On the other hand, Raecius Varus accused him of
being a poisoner. 1 Since he could not prove anything against
him, he was exiled by law 2 to the island of Lycaonia; 3 the
emperor Nerva ordered that his possessions be confiscated 4 , in
the amount of 8.000 aurei. 5
After the death of Nerva the emperor Marcus Ulpius
Traianus governed, and died after nineteen years of rule. 6 Next
1 Under this lawsuit there were plenty of trials in antiquity. The grammarian
Moschus, for example, was defended by Asinius Pollio and Torquatus, a
friend of Horace (Porphyrio ad Hor. Ep. II 5, 9). The most famous case was
that of Cn. Piso, who was accused of having killed Germanicus with poison
(19 a. C.); Tacitus refers to Locusta, the sorcerer who prepared the poison
offered to Claudius mixed with boletus (Ann. XII 66, 4), the poison which
killed Britannicus (Ann. XIII 15, 4; Suetonius, Nero 33, 2) and, the one that
Nero asked for when he was abandoned by everyone (Suetonius, Nero 47, 1).
Drusus was also killed this way (Ann. IV 8, 1; 10‐11).
2 Cf. Paulus: qui per calumniam iniuriae actionem instituit extra ordinem punitur:
omnes enim calumniatores exilii uel insulae relegatione aut ordinis amissione puniri
placuit (Sent. V 4, 11).
3 See above pp. 44‐48.
4 A relegatus in insulam was allowed to keep his property if it was not
confiscated by the emperor.
5 See above p. 44.
6 The author rounds down the number. The emperor ruled 19 years and 5
months according to Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. IV 3, 1); according to Prosperus,
Epitome 542: 19 years and 7 months (Th. Mommsen, MGH. Chronica Minora,
Berlin, 1892: I, 419) and the Chronica Gallica 611, 343: 18 years and 6 months
Publius Aelius Hadrianus governed. When he had occupied the
throne, he asked the Senate and the Roman people to let him
travel the world. In his first trip he arrived in Lycaonia and
there met Raecius Varus, who had such long hair and beard 7
that nobody could recognise him. He interfered II. /162v/ with
in Hadrian’s escort and held the bridles to stop the mules 8
which were carrying Hadrian. Then he greeted Caesar saying
these words: “Hadrian, hail!” Caesar answered circumspectly:
“Who are you who are greeting me?” Varus Romulus: “Do you
not recognise your accuser, Raecius Varus?.” Caesar replied: “I
do not remember him.” Varus Romulus: “You do remember,
but you pretend not to remember. Because I accused you of
being a poisoner, but I could not provide evidence of it, I was
exiled by law to the island of Lycaonia. You have to know that I
am tormented by the sight of you as an emperor. 9 Give orders
(Mommsen, Chronica Minora, I, 640), according to Eutropius (Breu. VIII 5, 2)
he ruled 19 years, 6 months and 15 days. The Chronographus anni CCCLIIII
assigns 19 years, 4 months and 27 days (Mommsen, Chronica Minora, I, 146,
22); less precisely, Aurelius Victor (Caes. 13, 11) gives him “almost 20 years.”
7 In his physical appearance, and probably against his will, Raecius Varus
emulated Hadrian, the first bearded emperor. On this see pp. 48‐49.
8 These are the mulae raedariae mentioned by Varro (rust. III 17, 7); the ones
used by Clodius and his enemy Milo (Cicero, Pro Mil. 55 and 28ff. resp.).
Maecenas and his escort travelled in raedae drawn by mules in their trip to
Brundisium in 38 A. D. (Horace, Serm. I 5, 47 and 86); also Horace states that
this was the usual transport in short and long trips (Serm. II 6, 42‐43). Later
on, other ways of transportation were more in fashion: the essedum or esseda
used by Mark Anthony (Cicero, Phil. II 24; see also, for Imperial times,
Suetonius, Claud. 33, 2; Galba 6, 3; 18, 1) and the carruca (cf. Suetonius, Nero
30, 3), used as much as the raeda in times of Alexander Severus: carrucas
Romae et raedas senatoribus omnibus ut argentatas haberent permisit (SHA, Alex.
Seu. 43, 1). Cf. Paulus: carruca cum iunctura legata mulae quoque legantur, non
mulio (Sent. III 6, 91).
9 See above p. 49.
HADRIANVS 119
therefore that *** I be driven away from you, 10 in order that I do
not see such a crime.” Caesar replied to him: “You, the most
ignorant of men, do you still insist on not saying or doing
anything which does not fit your habits? The quarrel which
took place long ago between two senators must not trouble the
new elected emperor. Hence I restore you in your previous
dignity. Watch me as an emperor III. /163r/ and be tormented
for a long time.” Varus Romulus: “And who will receive me in
the Curia in my condition?” 11 Caesar said: “My letter.” And he
dictated a letter to the Senate in the following terms: “Publius
Aelius Hadrianus salutes the Senate. I remember I was publicly
accused in the presence of the Emperor Nerva by Raecius
Varus. He could not provide evidence against me and he was
exiled by law to the island of Lycaonia. Now when I visited this
island I noticed he was in such condition and shuddered that
the unfortunate man did not know what to do. 12 For this
reason, I, the emperor, pitied my enemy: let him enter the
Curia. Restore him his possessions with an interest of nine
percent. And your emperor also asks you not to call him the
‘accuser,’ since I was the accused and I keep silent. A severe
punishment my adversary suffered when he saw me passing
by!” He delivered the letter and sent him to the Senate.
IV. /163v/ After visiting some cities, the emperor arrived
in the unfortunate colony of Agrippina. Since he received an
honoured welcome he said to his companions: “My friends,
what a false opinion of the Agrippinians we have in Italy! How
joyfully and kind‐heartedly they welcomed us! 13 They adorned
10 The translation is conjectural. The correction iube me itaque ante conspectum
tuum duci seems incongruent: one would expect iube me itaque a conspectu tuo
educi, according to Roca‐Puig, but we think it is preferable to accept a lacuna.
11 Cf. Paulus (Sent. I 13, 4 = Dig. L 1, 22, 4), senator ordine motus ad originalem
patriam, nisi hoc specialiter impetrauerit, non restituitur.
12 Again the translation is conjectural.
13 The Latin text has an omnibus which cannot be translated. There must have
been a word lost, like honoribus. Other option is cum bonis omnibus.
their country, they hanged draperies on the columns and they
repeated daytime by lighting torches.” After inspecting the
public works, the atrium and the basilica, he ordered that the
foremost of the city appear before him. When they came to him
he said: “Agrippinians, ask me any favour you wish.” Then
Amantinus Saturninus, the foremost of them all, said: Jupiter, 14
ruler of the earth, we ask you to condone the river tax 15 V.
/164r/ we paid to your treasury.” Caesar said: “How much and
what did you make in tribute to the treasury?” Saturninus
answered: “8.000 aurei.” Caesar asked: “Under which emperor
did you start paying this tax?” Saturninus: “Under the Emperor
Flavius Vespasian.” Then Caesar said: “After the death of
Vespasian, did you not ask any emperor to condone the
tribute?” “It was a Saturnian emperor.” 16 Caesar asked: “Why a
Saturnian emperor?” Because nature has not yet produced an
emperor who would be satisfied with his own possessions and
not with everybody else’s” 17 . Caesar said then: “See, then, you
are demanding something very small, we do not demand your
... 18 I grant you the river tax that you paid to our treasury. Ask
anything else if you so VI. /164v/ wish.” Then Amantinus
Secundinus, the foremost of them, said: “Do you consider it a
small grant that our days be insured? We ask one more thing
14 Typically the oblique cases of Iuppiter are used to address the emperor: in
Ovid (cf. A. E. Housman, “Ovid, Ibis 512 and Tristia III 6 8,” Classical
Quarterly 9 (1915) 37‐38 [= The Classical Papers, III, 912]). This case is an
exception.
15 On redditum neuter, see p. 35. For the tax, see pp. 55‐56.
16 The translation is again conjectural. Imperator Saturnius to designate the
emperor, just as imperator Herculius, was used in the times of Maximian (Pan.
VII 2, 5).
17 Historically the thought is reversed: human condition does not improve,
as proven by the myth of the ages of mankind, which presupposes
progressive deterioration. Here instead, nature progresses towards the
production of a perfect emperor and the Golden Age, which in Hesiod’s
pessimistic conception was gone forever.
18 It is impossible to reconstruct any coherent text.
HADRIANVS 121
from you: send us a consular 19 through whom our petitions will
reach your ears.” Caesar said: “My friends! See a new example
of how men who are feared ask for someone to fear.” Then he
turned to Saturninus and said: “I will send you a consular, if
you so wish.” After a short period of time, he returned to the
city of Rome. When he entered the curia he saw Raecius Varus
<standing> in front of him and proffering a prudent opinion. 20
“Conscript Fathers, I have travelled through your provinces, 21
which flourish in joy and at peace, VII. /165r/ and there is no
colony or municipality where I have not granted some favour. I
condoned the river tax paid by the Agrippinians to the treasury
and I promised to send a consular at their request. Hence, if you
judge it appropriate, you will consider that the consular Raecius
Varus be sent to them.” The Senate claimed: “The best to the
best, the worthy to the worthy, because he is yours.” 22 He gave
him an executive letter and he counselled him like a father to a
son. “Be honest, judge impartially and always bear in mind
Lycaonia.” Once he received the letter he arrived at Colonia
Agrippina in *** days. The following day he did not care to ask
anything other than whether they had obtained any favour
from the emperor Hadrian. Then, Amantinus Secundinus, their
foremost, VIII. /165v/ said: “The good fortune of our times let us
behold a god and receive his gift. Know that he condoned the
river tax that we paid to the treasury, in the amount of 8.000
aurei.” When he heard this, the cruel man stood up and said: “I
do not know what kind of insanity took hold of Hadrian that he
19 A consular is someone who has been a consul. If Hadrian sends Raecius
Varus to Colonia, it can be inferred that he had held a consulate at some
point. However, he does not appear in the fasti consulares.
20 It is remarkable that the following speech does not feature Raecius Varus’
opinion, as expected, but it is uttered by the emperor.
21 This deference to the Senate is unusual, since some provinces did belong
to the Senate, others to the emperor.
22 In our opinion, a verb like eligere or mittere is elided. It should be
understood optimus optimum eligis or mittis.
condoned 8.000 aurei to these public enemies.” Afterwards he

summoned a herald, ordered that they be auctioned and
returned to the treasury.”

VII
INDEX OF LATIN WORDS

a I 16, III 6, IV 3 13, V I, 2), cite (II 7), ft (V 5), uit (III
†abimus (ab imp?) VII 16 2, IV 4)
abit (ait) II 15, VI 7, 10, VIII 1 alieno V 13
accensis VI 9 aliquando II 18
†accepta VII 12 aliquas IV 1; aliquid VII 2; aliquo V
accusabit (‐uit) I 6, accusasem (‐ss) 7; aliquod V 18
II 10; accusatum III 6, accusatus III aliu (alia) VII 15
17 alleuauit VIII 7
accusatorem II 6, accusatoris III 17 amandinus VI 1, VII 18, IV 15
ad II 19, III 15, III 21, III 4, IV 12, IV amici IV 4, VI 7, VI 7, amicos IV 4,
4, VI 6, VI 9 VI 7
adhuc V 18, aduc I 1 animum VI 14
adque (‐tq‐) VII 15 annorum (aureorum?) I 11, I 14, V
aduersarium III 13, aduersarius III 3, VIII 6; annusa VIII 10
19 ante II 14
aduertit VI 14 apud II 9, III 7, IV 5
aelius I 15; hauliui (aelius) III 4 atrum (atrium?) IV 11
†ageres (agens?) VII 13 attigit I 19, IV 2
agnoscere I 22; agnosces (‐is) II 6 audiuit VIII 7
agripine (‐ippinae) IV 2; aures VI 6
agrippinos (‐nae) VII 14 autem I 6, IV 1
agripinensibus (‐pp‐) IV 5, barbam I 21
agrippinensis (‐es) IV 14, basilicam IV 11
agrippsaesensibus (‐ippin‐) VII 2 baue (ha‐) II 3
ait II 4, IV 14, IV 16, V 6, VIII 8 ; cf. behenarium (uen‐) I 7
abit (II 15, VI 7, 10, VIII 1), bit (V 4, bidetur (ui‐) VI 3
bit (ait) V 4, 13, V I, 2

bona I 9, III 14, IV 6 deum VIII 2
†bum IV 7 dicemtem (‐nt‐) VI 16‐17, dicere II
caesar II 3, II 7, V 10, V 13, V 6, V I, 16, dicit III 5, dixit I 5
VI 6, caesarem II 3, cesar II 15, III 2, dictauit III 3
V 4 die VII 15, dies VI 3, VI 9, VII 14
†camore II 18 dignitatis II 21
†cessere V 16 dignus VII 9 bis
circumiset (‐isset) IV 1, circummibi diu III 1
(‐iui) VII 1 dodrantibus III 15
cite (ait) II 7 domine V 10
ciuitates IV 1 donam (‐na aut –no)VIII 3
cogita III 11 duci II 14
colonia VII 1, coloniam IV 2, VII 14 dum I 1, III 9, IV 1
columnas IV 8 duo II 18, duos I 2
comam I 20 duplicauerunt IV 10
comitatum (‐tu) II 1 earum VII 7
concedo V 16 eat VIII 6
conscribti (‐pt‐) VI 17 ego III 17, III 9
conspectum II 14 ei VIII 3, eius II 1, VIII 5, eo I 7,
consu`lárem VII 5, consularem VI eorum IV 12, IV 16, VI 2, VI 2, VIII
11, VI 4 1, eos IV 3, eum III 10, VIII 4
contentus V 12 enim III 18
conueniens II 16 epistula VII 13, epistulam III 21, III
cosconium I 2, cosconius I 3 4; epirbam (epistol‐) VII 10
contra VI 14 ergo V 14
cruciare III 1 et I 13, I 17, I 21, I 3, I 5, II 12, II 12,
cum I 13, I 16, I 18, I 22, I 7, II 9, III II 16, II 21, III 1, III 10, III 15, III 18,
15, III 17, III 7, III 9, IV 10, IV 3, V III 21, IV 10, IV 11, IV 12, V 18, V 4,
16, VI 12, VI 13, VI 8; cumque IV 13 V 7, VI 11, VI 11, VI 13, VI 16, VI
curauit VII 16 18, VI 4, VI 9, VII 10, VII 12, VII 5,
curiam III 2, 14 curiam VI 13, 15 VIII 11, VIII 12, VIII 3, VIII 7
da IV 14; dederat V 11, dedi VII 2 etiam I 4
de IV 5, V 13 ex V 2
debet II 20 exceptus IV 3; expecerunt (‐cep‐)
decennobem I 14 IV 7
decorauerunt IV 8 excessit I 14
deinde I 11, I 14, III 3 excessum I 11, V 7
demenqua (‐tia) VIII 8 excreuoriam (execut‐) VII 10
deportatus I 9, II 11, III 9 exemplum VI 7
HADRIANVS 125
exestimabis (‐istimabiti‐) VII 7 hostibus VIII 9
exfiguum (ex‐) V 14 ; exugium VI 3 ibiquae I 20
expecerunt (–cep‐) IV 7 id I 10, II 12, VIII 6
expectauit III 20 ill[[am]]i III 16, illi III 14, III 21, VII
expeditione I 18 9, illod (‐ud) III 15; illori (‐rum) IV
facile VIII 9 7
falsa IV 4 imperantem II 13, 21, imperasset I
fatere (fac‐) II 17 13; inperante V 4
felicitas VIII 1 imperassent (impetr‐) VII 17
†fes VIII 8 imperator I 1, I 12, I 15, I 9, II 10, III
filium VII 11 12, III 16, imperatorem III 7, V 10,
fines (fingis?)II 8 V 6, V 8, V 9
fisco I 10, V 17, V 2, VII 4, VIII 12, in I 18, I 4, I 7, I 8, II 11, II 15, III 13,
VIII 5, V 1 III 2, III 7, III 8, IV 11, VI 18, im VII
flauio V 6 12
florentes VI 18 incircumiret I 17
fluminis VIII 5, fluminos (‐nis) VII †inei IV 14
4, filuminis (flum‐)V 17, luminis inferabamus VIII 6, inferabatis V
(flum‐) IV 19 18, V 2, inferabatur VII 4,
frenos II 2 inferebamuli (‐mus) V I; inferri I 10
ft (ait?) V 5 iniduerunt (ind‐) VI 9
fuissent IV 13 IV 8
gallum I 3, gallus I 3 inimicos I 2
gauderemus VIII 3 inmiscuisset I 22
genos (‐us) V 5, genus V 8 inspecsisse (‐xisset) IV 11
grauem III 18, gruuideru insulam I 8, II 11, III 8
(grauiter?) II 12 inter II 19, VII 13
habentem I 21, habeo (‐eto) VII 12, interdisset (intro‐) VI 13
haberunt (habu‐) II 19, habuit I 2 interogare (‐rr‐) VII 15
his II 2, hoc II 19, V 4, V 8; hac III interpallentur (‐pell‐) VI 6
20 interrbis (iter urbis?) VI 12
hadriane II 3, hadrianos (‐nus) I 1, intret III 13
II 2, hadrianum I 4, I 6, III 5, VII 16, inuenit I 20
VIII 8, hadrianus I 15 ipse I 13, IV 1, VI 8
hasta VIII 11 iratus III 12
hauliui (aelius) III 4 italicos IV 5
homo VIII 7, homu (‐mo) II 17 itaque II 14, II 20, VII 6; itaquae (‐
hon (non) V 13 que) III 14
honorificust (‐ce) IV 3 item VIII 8

iudica VII 11 namen (no‐) III 16
iuppiter IV 17 naturae V 11
iube II 13, iussit I 10, IV 13, VIII 10, ne II 13, II 14, III 16
VIII 12 nebolonem (‐bul‐) I 5
laetas VI 18, laeti IV 6 nemo I 21
legibus I 8, II 11, III 8 neque II 10, V 15
lergitio (larg‐) VI 4 nerua I 9, neruae I 12, neruam II 9;
liberatitatem (‐alita‐) IV 14‐15 ueruam (ner‐) III 7
licaoniam (Lyc‐) II 11, III 9, VII 12, nescio VIII 8; noscio (nes‐) III 12
liconiam I 19, licroniam I 8 nescius III 11
litem I 4 nihil I 7, II 15, III 8, VII 15
litterae III 3 nobis IV 18, VI 4, VIII 4, nos IV 7, V
luminibus VI 9, 15
luminis (flum‐) IV 19 non II 20, II 6, II 7, II 8, VII 1; hon
malos (‐lus) VIII 7 (non) V 13
marcus I 12 nostros IV 6
me II 12, II 21, II 4, III 19, III 2, III 6, nouum II 19, VI 7
III 7 nulli VII 1
meae III 3, meo V 17, V 2, VII 4, numquid V 14
meorum IV 11, meum III 13, meus o`p´timum VII 8, optimus VII 8
III 19 octo I 11, V 3
memihi (‐ni) II 7, memihisse (‐ni‐) omnibus IV 6
II 8, memini III 5, meministi II 8 operam IV 10
mente II 4, VII 12 opinio IV 5
milium I 11,V 3 opponat III 17
mindum (non‐) V 11 optinuisset I 16
miseratione III 12 orobare (pro‐) II 10
miserer III 13 pacem VI 18
mittam VI 10, mittas VI 4, paganus I 1
mittendum VII 7 pater VII 11, patres VI 17
modo III 9 patriam IV 7
moribit (‐nu‐) VII 10 ‘pau’cum VI 12
moribus II 16 per VII 14
mseram (mis‐) IV 2 percussit I 5
mularum II 1 perseuerasti II 17
muneris VII 17, VII 2 pertinere II 20
municipia (‐io) VII 1 peruenit VII 14
nam II 9, VIII 3 petant VI 9, petimus IV 18, V 15, VI
nam (quam) VII 16 4, petistis V 7, petentibus VII 5,
HADRIANVS 127
petit I 16, III 16, VI 13, petite IV 14, II 13, II 18, V 14, V 17, V 18, VI 11,
V 18, petitis V 14 VIII 5, quibos (‐bus) II 2; cuius I 9,
poenam III 18 VI 5
populo I 17 quantum V I
posita VIII 11 quare V 10
post I 11, V 7, VI 12 quat (quod?) VI 2
poterat I 21, potuissem II 10, ‐que: cumque IV 13, populoque I
potuisset I 8, III 8 17
precatorem VIII 10 †que III 12
presentem (praes‐) VIII 2 quia V 11, VII 9
presentium (praesentia) VI 5 quodam IV 18
pretare (praest‐?) V 5 quoque VII 3
pretereo (prae‐) III 10, reccio (raec‐) III 6, reccium I 20, I 3,
pretereuntem (prae‐) III 20 VII 6, II 5, reccius I 5; raccium VI
preuto (praes‐?) IV 13 15
prima I 18, primo V 4 recipit III 2
†primes V 15 rector IV 17
princeps IV 16, VI 2, VII 18, redigi VIII 12
principem II 19, V 12, principes IV reditum (‐dd‐) IV 19, V 16, VII 3,
12 reditus (‐dd‐) VIII 4
prioris (‐ri ?) II 21 redonasse VIII 4, redonaui VII 3;
priuata I 4 sedonabit (re‐) VIII 10
prius VII 15 relocari VIII 11
probare III 8, prouare (prob‐) I 7; remisit III 21, remitarem (‐‐tte‐) V 9
orobare (prob‐) II 10 repereni V 17; cf. riperemse
probincias (prou‐) VI 17 repletus VIII 9
profisceretur (‐ficis‐) I 19 repromisi VII 6
prudentem VI 16 respiciens VI 9
publica IV 10, publicis VIII 9; respondit V 3
publicae (‐ce) III 6 restituete (‐tui‐) III 14, restituo II 20
publius I 15, III 4 retinemsi (‐ens) II 1
pumulus II 5 ; cf. romulus riperemse (riparen‐?) IV 19,
punum (pugno) I 4 riperensis VII 4; repereni V 17;
qua III 12, IV 15, VIII 8, quam II 16, urbiperenis VIII 5
III 18, IV 4, IV 6, IV 6, quem I 21, romae VI 13
VI 9, qui I 13, I 16, I 18, I 22, I 7, II romano I 17
4, III 19, III 7, IV 3, V 12, VI 13, romulus II 7, III 1; pumulus (rom‐)
quid IV 19, V 2, VII 16, VII 4, quis II 5
II 4, III 16, III 2, quo V 4, V 8, quod salutasti II 5, salutauit II 3

salutem III 5 ter VII 12
saturniseu (saturnium?) V 10 terrarum IV 17; terraram (‐rum) I
saturninum V 5, V 9, VI 10, VII 18, 18
saturninus IV 16, V 2, VI 1 †testis V 5
scaelus (sce‐) II 15 timeant VI 9, timeantur VI 8
scias II 12, VIII 4 torqueri II 12
scilicet III 3 totius IV 17
se II 1, II 19, IV 12, VI 15, VIII 7 tradidit III 20, VII 9
seculi (saec‐) VIII 1 trementem III 10
sed II 8, III 1, VIII 7 tributi V 5, V 8
sedonabit (red‐) VIII 10 troianus (traia‐) I 13
senato (‐tu) I 16, senatui III 5, tuae II 21, VI 6, tui VII 9, tuis II 16,
senatum III 21, III 4, senatus VII 8 tuo V I, tuum II 14; tum (tuum) II 6
senatores II 18 tum VI 3
sententiam VI 16 tumquam (tam‐) VII 10
seu V 10 tunc IV 15, VI 1, VII 17
si IV 15, V 18, VI 11, VII 6 tuti VI 3
sic II 4, III 10, IV 13, IV 16, VI 10, VI uacari (uoc‐) IV 12
2, VIII 1 uararum (uarum) I 3, uaro III 6,
sim III 18, V 10, sum II 12; es II 4; uarum I 20, II 5, VI 15, uarus II 5, II
esse I 7, III 6, VI 3, esset I 2, IV 4, V 7, III 1; urrus (uar‐) I 6
13, est I 10, I 9, III 9, V 14, VII 9, ucclamauit (accl‐) VII 8
esto VII 11 uel VII 1
simulata II 4 uenenuarium (uenena‐) II 9;
stantem III 10 behenarium (uenen‐) I 7
stultissime II 17 uenire VIII 11
sua I 19, III 14, suae III 11, suo I 10, uera VII 11
V 12 ueras (‐rax) VII 11
subinde VI 5 uerbis II 2
suscepit I 12, I 15 uerebatur (ueh‐) II 2
sustinuit III 19 ueruam (ner‐) III 7
taceam III 18 uespasiani V 7, uespasiano V 6
talem III 2, III 4 uester III 16, uestrae V 15, uestras
tamquam III 11; tumquam (tam‐) VI 18
VII 10 uestibus IV 8
tantum II 14, V 12 uibus III 15
te II 13, II 20, II 8, II 9, uide II 21, VIII 2, uideam II 15,
temporis VI 12, tempum (‐us) VI uideo II 13, uidetes (‐tis) V 13,
12
HADRIANVS 129
uidetis VI 8, ), uidi III 11; uidear V
16, uidetur VII 6 (bidetur VI 3)
uit (ait) III 2, IV 4
uitae III 11
ulpius I 12
†unacium IV 18
†uo VIII 5
uobis V 16, VI 10, VII 6, V 8
uolbitus (uoluit) VIII 2
uoltis VI 1, uultis IV 15, VI 11;
uolbitus (uoluit) VIII 2
†uou V 7
urbem VII 13
urbiperenis VIII 5, cf. riperemse
urbis (orb‐) I 17, IV 17
usuris III 15
ut III 12, V 8, VIII 2

HADRIANUS

Cargado por

Información del documento

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

HADRIANUS

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

analysis (Chapter IV) and the literary background (Chapter V)

IV), Barcelona, 19942, 19993 (these editions are in fact

8 See also M. Marcovich, Alcestis Barcinonensis: text and commentary,

sometimes project into the intercolumnar space, but not

Father Zacharias Remiro belonged to the Franciscan Missions and the

Miscellaneus and a Coptic roll, probably belonging to the

published a complete description of his reconstruction in W. Brashear,

Dishna papers? We will not engage with the question

Gymnastics of the Mind: Greek Education in Hellenistic and Roman

places where they are currently preserved. 22 Most of them

important monastic institution in Atripe, close to Panopolis/Achmim,

Papyrus Bodmer XXIX. Vision de Dorothéos, appendice, description et

4 M. Leumann, Lateinische Laut‐ und Formenlehre, München, 1977: 67‐68;

Löfstedt, Studien über die Sprache der langobardischen Gesetze, Stockholm‐

publicam; 5.6, 8 imperatorem, 6. 3 exugium; 6.18 pacem; 7.13

9 Leumann, Lateinische, 225‐26; Väänänen, Le latin vulgaire, 70; Löfstedt,

Agrippinos (7.14) possibly presents an equally strange Greek

carminibus et ueneficiis uecordiam marito, insons iudicatur; XIV

Hildesheim 1990): 357ff. Paulus says, Lex Cornelia poenam deportationis

Raecius Varus could not prove his accusation and was

was exiled is mentioned as Lycaonia. But this strange name

Passio Eugeniae et comitum (A. Fábrega Grau, Pasionario hispánico,

Following the accounts of these legal disputes in

together with the knapsack characterizes the Cynics, the

audiui principem nostrum conquerentem, si quis sumpta morte misericordiam

poses a different problem, since there is no evidence of a

known through epigraphy, seem to be this princeps. 35 The

was imperial funding, concluding: “Denkbar wäre auch eine

and previous years. 48 Hadrian then allowed the peasants to

Having returned to Rome from Cologne, as the story

Reccius is undoubtedly a false spelling for Raecius,

Gallus, tribunus militum under Galba (69), 55 flamen perpetuus

62 Julius Servianus, Hadrian’s brother‐in‐law, was hostile towards him

inimicos habuit, imperator tantum neglexit, ita ut uni, quem

est quod imperatorem Romanum melius commendet gentibus quam clementia

confirmation both in the anonymous author of the SHA

the lemma optimus princeps, often accompanied by mention

The tale extols two moral qualities in Hadrian,

ungratefulness and greediness of Varus, who even accuses

3 S. Thompson, Motif‐index of folk‐literature: a classification of narrative

Symp. 19, παίων καὶ παιόμενος; Zenobius, Cent. I 35, Αἱροῦντες

Caesar Traianus Hadrianus Augustus) 20 and the salutation

Ἁδριάνος προτέρων προφερέστερος ἡγεμονέων: such

Although none of these anecdotes resembles the plot of

fourth century grammarian Dositheus by Cujas, basing his

(πᾶσα γυνὴ πόρνη, ἡ δὲ λαθοῦσα σώφρων). 49 When he had

had no listener more distinguished than yourself”; and even

The emperor would not have written these personal

Epistolary Autobiography,” Ancient society, 25 (1994) 279‐302, cautiously

A similar situation is to be found in a ‘letter’ addressed

Our tale poses one more problem. The frequent lacunae

decision, went back and dictated justice. This episode is

lectiones emendatas uel que nobis emendandae uidebantur

nouum principem pertinere non debet. Restituo te itaque

uobis remitteret?’ ‘Saturnium imperatorem †sim†, domine.’

SS dccc redonabit.’ Iussit praeconem uenire et hasta posita

condoned 8.000 aurei to these public enemies.” Afterwards he

También podría gustarte