Una nova ricostruzione del "De poetis" di Suetonio by Ettore Paratore

Review by: Hollis R. Upson

Classical Philology, Vol. 44, No. 2 (Apr., 1949), pp. 137-138
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/267492 .
Accessed: 07/12/2011 14:01

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Classical Philology.

http://www.jstor.org
 BOOK REVIEWS
lived within a century of its occurrence, as
well as by Diodorus, Plutarch, Dionysius of
Halicarnassus, and a host of other Greek and
Roman writers. Professor Dorjahn, however,
shows us that the sources do not tell so clear or
consistent a story as is commonly supposed.
Xenophon's Hellenica, the most extensive con-
temporary narrative source, confuses the se-
quence of events and omits much pertinent in-
formation, while the others for various reasons
contain such diversities of statement that only
by long and careful study can the truth be
sifted from them. It is true that much new
light has been shed upon the Amnesty of 403
by the Aristotelian Constitution of Athens; but,
of the three leading modern studies on the
subject prior to the present one, two were writ-
ten before this invaluable treatise had been re-
discovered, while the third was published be-
fore adequate use could be made of the new in-
formation which the Constitution of Athens af-
forded.
Political Foregiveness in Old Athens opens
with an introduction in which the author shows
that the Amnesty of 403 was one of six similar
measures adopted by the Athenian state over
a period stretching from the days of Solon
(594B.C.) to the Battle of Chaeronea(338B.C.).
It was therefore entirely in line with the Athe-
nian tradition of mildness in the treatment of
political offenders. The author treats the Am-
nesty of 403 under the following five chapter
headings: (1) "Its Date"; (2) "Its Makers and
the Manner of Its Institution"; (3) "Its
Terms"; (4) "The Means by Which It Was
Enforced"; and (5) "Its Effects and the Ex-
tent to Which It Was Observed."
As a result of his examination of the evi-
dence, Professor Dorjahn concludes that the
amnesty was proclaimed in 403, as a prelimi-
nary to the restoration of the Athenian de-
mocracy. It took the form of a trilateral agree-
ment, to which the parties were the exiled
Athenian democrats, the oligarchic faction
which had supported the Thirty, and the Spar-
tan King Pausanias. Probably it was later rati-
fied by an oath taken by the whole Athenian
people; and in 401, after the capture of Eleusis,
was extended to include the oligarchic exiles
who wished to return to the city. A-nanalysis
137
of the sources leads the author to conclude
that, by its terms, informers could not be
prosecuted for their past misdeeds, that con-
fiscated property was to be restored, that ac-
tions to recover money were permissible, while
suits to recover damages were prohibited. At a
candidate's 6OKLtMao-ia his previous conduct
under the Thirty might be used to disqualify
him, while in an ordinary lawsuit similar ma-
terial might be used as character evidence.
Murder charges could be lodged only against
those who had slain with their own hands.
Later on, it was found necessary to implement
this agreement by a law which allowed a per-
son who had been sued contrary to the amnesty
to enter a special plea (7rapaypa/x) to bar fur-
ther action. However, public opinion was, as a
rule, strongly in favor of maintaining the agree-
ment intact. As a whole, it was loyally ob-
served, although there were both direct and in-
direct attacks upon it.
Professor Dorjahn's literary style is good, in
spite of the necessity of quoting his sources in
the original Greek or Latin. He is sparing of
technical terminology and writes good, clear
English sentences. The reasoning is lucid and
logical, and he avoids extreme conclusions. In
one or two places he even admits his inability
to decide questions finally on the basis of exist-
ing evidence-a practice which lends his read-
ers confidence in accepting his other conclu-
sions. Only one apparent slip was noted. On
page 2 the author quotes Andocides as stating
that Xerxes was king of Persia at the time of
the Battle of Marathon. In the selection quoted
in footnote 6, Andocides does not mention
Xerxes, but only "the King."
The format of the book is excellent, but it is
without an index. A serviceable list of classical
authors dealing with the subject is furnished,
with a table of passages quoted.
C. E. VAN SICKLE
Ohio Wesleyan University
Una nova ricostruzione del "De poetis" di Sue-
tonio. By ETToRE PARATORE. Rome: Casa
Editrice Gismondi, 1946. Pp. 304. Lire 550.
Despite the prefatory remarks of the au-
thor, who is professor of Latin literature on the
 138 BOOK REVIEWS
Faculty of Magistry of the University of Tu-
rin, this book has the air of a sustained polemic
against a work' by Augusto Rostagni, profes-
sor of Latin literature on the Faculty of Litera-
ture and Philosophy of the same university.
The atmosphere of controversy is intensified
by the fact that Paratore cites in his Preface an
article2 published in 1946 by Rostagni in which
he criticized the philological conclusions and
method displayed by Paratore in a book on
Virgil,3 published by the latter in 1945, in
which he touched on the subject of Roman
biography.
In the present volume Paratore sets forth
in an Introduction, five chapters, and 443
footnotes his views concerning various m:tae
poetarum and the philological methods and
conclusions of Rostagni. His differences of
opinion are limned with a pen dipped in the
same acid as that used by A. E. Housman in
his edition of Manilius, and his main conclu-
sions, in order of presentation, are as follows:
Whereas Rostagni thinks that the Vita Lucani
attributed to Vacca was written between the
years A.D. 68 and 81 by a Spanish compaesano
of Lucan, Paratore argues a much later com-
pilation of indefinite date, from considerations
of language, context, and style. Rostagni holds
Probus responsible for a substantial part of the
Vita Borgiana of Lucretius, while Paratore
thinks it Suetonian (with interpolations), as he
does also the Vita Persii, assigned by Rostagni
to Probus. Again, in contradiction to Ro-
stagni, Paratore maintains that the Vita Ver-
gilii attributed to Probus is later than Dona-
tus, on whose tradition it depends. He is also of
the opinion that the Vita Donatiana of Virgil,
usually attributed to Suetonius, is not wholly
his but contains interpolations made by Do-
natus. In passing, he thinks that the Vita Ber-
nensis of Virgil, generally considered a com-
pilation made during the Carolingian age,
shows traces of being older than the Life at-
tributed to Probus. Lastly, the Vita Tibulli is
a late compilation, containing medieval char-
1 Suetonio: "De poetis" e biografi minori: Restitu-
zione e commento di Augusto Rostagni (Turin, 1944).
2 A. Rostagni, "Elementi autoblograflci nell'
epopea (dai greci a! latini)," Belfagor, I (1946), 73-79,
esp. 78, n. 3.
3 E. Paratore, Virgilio (Rome, 1945).
acteristics, and is not by Suetonius, as Ro-
stagni avers.
There is a good deal of pertinence in some
of Paratore's criticisms, but it is well to remem-
ber that certainty is hard to come by in inves-
tigations of this kind, all the more since con-
clusions based on considerations of style, lan-
guage, and context may well remain matters of
opinion. The internal relations of the various
vitae of a poet are likely to be most complicated
and dubious (notably so where vitae Vergili-
anae are concerned), and a study of the manu-
script tradition of the vita in question is often
most useful in making doubtful probabilities
more certain.
Besides the biographies of the Roman poets,
the author touches on a variety of other topics
connected with Suetonius, Virgil, and the
scholiastic tradition in general. Not all this
abundance of material is easy to get at: e.g.,
one footnote (No. 41 of chap. iv) runs through
pages 140-47 inclusive, occupying all but two
lines of each page with the exception of page
146, where the main text disappears altogether!
This book should be read in company with
that of Rostagni, of which it is a lively coun-
terpart; it is an addition to the more volcanic
literature of classical philology, which in Turin
apparently emits a considerable amount of
flame in addition to the usual smoke. The vol-
ume is unbound, well printed, with some mis-
prints; it contains a good index of passages
cited, and an index nominum et rerum. It con-
cludes with a note summarizing five additional
works pertaining to the author's subject which
were published during the war and came to his
notice only after the book had gone to press.
HOLLISR. UPSON
Boston, Massachusetts
Nach innen oder nach aussen? Zum geographi-
schen Sprachgebrauchder Romer. By ERIK
WISTRAND. ("Gdteborgs H6gskolas Ars-
skrift," Vol. LII, No. 1.) G6teborg: Wetter-
gren and Kerbers Forlag, 1946. Pp. 50.
Kr. 2.50.
The recent arrival in Massachusetts from
foreign parts is likely to talk of going "up to
Maine" for the summer. He soon will be told