William A. Johnson
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- May 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780195176407
- eISBN:
- 9780199775545
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195176407.001.0001
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE
Readers and Reading Culture in the High Empire examines the system and culture of reading among the elite in second-century Rome. The focus is on deep sociocultural contextualization for ...
More
Readers and Reading Culture in the High Empire examines the system and culture of reading among the elite in second-century Rome. The focus is on deep sociocultural contextualization for reading events within specific communities, and thus the investigation proceeds in case-study fashion using the principal surviving witnesses. Explored are the communities of Pliny and Tacitus (with a look at Pliny’s teacher, Quintilian) from the time of the emperor Trajan; and from the time of the Antonines, the medical community around Galen, the philological community around Gellius and Fronto (with a look at the curious reading habits of Fronto’s pupil Marcus Aurelius), and the intellectual communities lampooned by the satirist Lucian. Along the way, evidence from the papyri is deployed to help to understand better and more concretely both the mechanics of reading, and the social interactions that surrounded the ancient book. The result is cultural history deeply written, of individual reading communities that differentiate themselves in interesting ways even while in aggregate showing a coherent reading culture with fascinating similarities and contrasts to the reading culture of today.Less
Readers and Reading Culture in the High Empire examines the system and culture of reading among the elite in second-century Rome. The focus is on deep sociocultural contextualization for reading events within specific communities, and thus the investigation proceeds in case-study fashion using the principal surviving witnesses. Explored are the communities of Pliny and Tacitus (with a look at Pliny’s teacher, Quintilian) from the time of the emperor Trajan; and from the time of the Antonines, the medical community around Galen, the philological community around Gellius and Fronto (with a look at the curious reading habits of Fronto’s pupil Marcus Aurelius), and the intellectual communities lampooned by the satirist Lucian. Along the way, evidence from the papyri is deployed to help to understand better and more concretely both the mechanics of reading, and the social interactions that surrounded the ancient book. The result is cultural history deeply written, of individual reading communities that differentiate themselves in interesting ways even while in aggregate showing a coherent reading culture with fascinating similarities and contrasts to the reading culture of today.
William A. Johnson
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- May 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780195176407
- eISBN:
- 9780199775545
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195176407.003.0007
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE
Fronto was the teacher and friend of Marcus Aurelius. Fronto’s Letters show a man intent on constructing literary culture within the context of the contubernium, an ideal of close connection and ...
More
Fronto was the teacher and friend of Marcus Aurelius. Fronto’s Letters show a man intent on constructing literary culture within the context of the contubernium, an ideal of close connection and friendship. His pupil Aurelius, however, shows a strong inclination toward reading habits that privileged the solitary, a set of habits that his contemporaries judged idiosyncratic. The chapter also focuses on the use of excerpts and excerpting in imperial reading culture.Less
Fronto was the teacher and friend of Marcus Aurelius. Fronto’s Letters show a man intent on constructing literary culture within the context of the contubernium, an ideal of close connection and friendship. His pupil Aurelius, however, shows a strong inclination toward reading habits that privileged the solitary, a set of habits that his contemporaries judged idiosyncratic. The chapter also focuses on the use of excerpts and excerpting in imperial reading culture.
Leofranc Holford-Strevens and Amiel Vardi (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2004
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199264827
- eISBN:
- 9780191718403
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199264827.001.0001
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Literary Studies: Classical, Early, and Medieval
This collection of essays on the 2nd-century Roman miscellanist Aulus Gellius, the author of the Attic Nights, is the first multi-author study of his work in any language. It brings together the work ...
More
This collection of essays on the 2nd-century Roman miscellanist Aulus Gellius, the author of the Attic Nights, is the first multi-author study of his work in any language. It brings together the work of established and younger scholars with different specialities and approaches in order to study various facets both of Gellius' intellectual outlook and that of his later readers. The book is dived into three parts. Part I, ‘Contexts and Achievements’, examines the use of Greek by Gellius and other Romans, in particular the leading orator Fronto and Apuleius; the conflicting criteria of Fronto and Gellius for lexical choice outside the standard Latin vocabulary; Gellius' linguistic skills in etymology; his literary skills in narrative; and his relation to Roman antiquarianism. Part II, ‘Ideologies’, considers Gellius' work against the expectations aroused by writing a miscellany and his claim to offer moral education — which proves acceptable once stated in less than absolutist terms — and compares his attitude to intellectuals with that of Apuleius. Part III, ‘Reception’, reviews various aspects of Gellius' literary afterlife down to the 17th century, ranging from medieval florilegia and a baroque-era song, through false ascriptions and lost manuscripts, to his presence in Montaigne and other Renaissance French authors, humanism, and the Scientific Revolution.Less
This collection of essays on the 2nd-century Roman miscellanist Aulus Gellius, the author of the Attic Nights, is the first multi-author study of his work in any language. It brings together the work of established and younger scholars with different specialities and approaches in order to study various facets both of Gellius' intellectual outlook and that of his later readers. The book is dived into three parts. Part I, ‘Contexts and Achievements’, examines the use of Greek by Gellius and other Romans, in particular the leading orator Fronto and Apuleius; the conflicting criteria of Fronto and Gellius for lexical choice outside the standard Latin vocabulary; Gellius' linguistic skills in etymology; his literary skills in narrative; and his relation to Roman antiquarianism. Part II, ‘Ideologies’, considers Gellius' work against the expectations aroused by writing a miscellany and his claim to offer moral education — which proves acceptable once stated in less than absolutist terms — and compares his attitude to intellectuals with that of Apuleius. Part III, ‘Reception’, reviews various aspects of Gellius' literary afterlife down to the 17th century, ranging from medieval florilegia and a baroque-era song, through false ascriptions and lost manuscripts, to his presence in Montaigne and other Renaissance French authors, humanism, and the Scientific Revolution.
Annelise Freisenbruch
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199203956
- eISBN:
- 9780191708244
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199203956.003.0011
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Literary Studies: Classical, Early, and Medieval
This chapter re-evaluates Fronto's letters within the traditions of epistolary scholarship and against the backdrop of a surge of interest in the epistolarity of the letter collections of antiquity. ...
More
This chapter re-evaluates Fronto's letters within the traditions of epistolary scholarship and against the backdrop of a surge of interest in the epistolarity of the letter collections of antiquity. Because Fronto has a valuable role to play in the call for a reassessment of the Roman letter-writing voice and identity, his correspondence with his pupil, emperor-in-the-making Marcus Aurelius, is examined. The recurring narrative of sickness and health that features in over eighty of the extant letters between Fronto and Marcus Aurelius is examined, with a particular emphasis on the ailments of the former. This chapter explores the pressing question of whether Fronto and Marcus Aurelius' letters should be regarded as simply reflecting the trend of their age to open up about one's state of health, or whether there is something more pointed, more calculated about such an epistolary narrative.Less
This chapter re-evaluates Fronto's letters within the traditions of epistolary scholarship and against the backdrop of a surge of interest in the epistolarity of the letter collections of antiquity. Because Fronto has a valuable role to play in the call for a reassessment of the Roman letter-writing voice and identity, his correspondence with his pupil, emperor-in-the-making Marcus Aurelius, is examined. The recurring narrative of sickness and health that features in over eighty of the extant letters between Fronto and Marcus Aurelius is examined, with a particular emphasis on the ailments of the former. This chapter explores the pressing question of whether Fronto and Marcus Aurelius' letters should be regarded as simply reflecting the trend of their age to open up about one's state of health, or whether there is something more pointed, more calculated about such an epistolary narrative.
Roger Rees
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199203956
- eISBN:
- 9780191708244
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199203956.003.0007
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Literary Studies: Classical, Early, and Medieval
This chapter examines letters of reference or recommendations written by Charlesworth, Cicero, Pliny, and Fronto, focusing on how the authors emphasize their own discretion in offering their ...
More
This chapter examines letters of reference or recommendations written by Charlesworth, Cicero, Pliny, and Fronto, focusing on how the authors emphasize their own discretion in offering their evaluation of the subject and how their statements about the subject's merit can be interwoven with praise. The style confirms its vintage, with the formal pairing of substantives and adjectives, the fondness for abstractions and the contrastive ‘but’ and certain details of phrasing, such as ‘I am glad indeed’ or ‘standing in work or games’. It is easy to identify both continuities and changes. Alignment of interests and obligations through triangulation can be seen throughout surviving letters of recommendation and identify them as best textual evidence for the processes of Roman patronage in action.Less
This chapter examines letters of reference or recommendations written by Charlesworth, Cicero, Pliny, and Fronto, focusing on how the authors emphasize their own discretion in offering their evaluation of the subject and how their statements about the subject's merit can be interwoven with praise. The style confirms its vintage, with the formal pairing of substantives and adjectives, the fondness for abstractions and the contrastive ‘but’ and certain details of phrasing, such as ‘I am glad indeed’ or ‘standing in work or games’. It is easy to identify both continuities and changes. Alignment of interests and obligations through triangulation can be seen throughout surviving letters of recommendation and identify them as best textual evidence for the processes of Roman patronage in action.
Simon Swain
- Published in print:
- 2004
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199264827
- eISBN:
- 9780191718403
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199264827.003.0001
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Literary Studies: Classical, Early, and Medieval
Having considered the Romans' relationship with Greek culture from Cicero by way of the Elder Seneca, Quintilian, the Younger Pliny, and Suetonius down to Apuleius, in particular, the implications of ...
More
Having considered the Romans' relationship with Greek culture from Cicero by way of the Elder Seneca, Quintilian, the Younger Pliny, and Suetonius down to Apuleius, in particular, the implications of code-switching and the linguistic annexation that made Greek a resource for the improvement of Latin and a mark of superior Roman education, the chapter turns to the specific cases of Fronto, in whom Greek negotiates social complications (as in the correspondence with Marcus, does the language of love), particularly between superior and inferior, and of Gellius, who is far more relaxed about Greek discourse and ready to admit that Latin cannot always compete, but brings out cases where it does. Moreover, he expects a Roman to be master of the latter, his own language, as well as Greek. Finally, these authors' practice in respect of Greek is compared with those of Tertullian, Aelian, and Ulpian.Less
Having considered the Romans' relationship with Greek culture from Cicero by way of the Elder Seneca, Quintilian, the Younger Pliny, and Suetonius down to Apuleius, in particular, the implications of code-switching and the linguistic annexation that made Greek a resource for the improvement of Latin and a mark of superior Roman education, the chapter turns to the specific cases of Fronto, in whom Greek negotiates social complications (as in the correspondence with Marcus, does the language of love), particularly between superior and inferior, and of Gellius, who is far more relaxed about Greek discourse and ready to admit that Latin cannot always compete, but brings out cases where it does. Moreover, he expects a Roman to be master of the latter, his own language, as well as Greek. Finally, these authors' practice in respect of Greek is compared with those of Tertullian, Aelian, and Ulpian.
Alessandro Garcea and Valeria Lomanto
- Published in print:
- 2004
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199264827
- eISBN:
- 9780191718403
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199264827.003.0002
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Literary Studies: Classical, Early, and Medieval
This chapter considers the linguistic categories ‘Latin’, ‘Greek’, and ‘barbarian’, with particular reference to the debate in Gellius 19.13 over the status in Latin of the word, nanus (dwarf), ...
More
This chapter considers the linguistic categories ‘Latin’, ‘Greek’, and ‘barbarian’, with particular reference to the debate in Gellius 19.13 over the status in Latin of the word, nanus (dwarf), thought barbarian by Fronto but proved Greek by Sulpicius Apollinaris. As such, it is admissible in Latin (where indeed it had been used by Helvius Cinna in relation to ponies); but even if not, use by Fronto would have conferred on it a higher standing than the vulgarisms introduced by Laberius enjoyed. It is demonstrated that grammatical tradition treats Latin as a form of Aeolic Greek, so that Greek loanwords are not intruders as barbarian words are. The chapter also considers the difference between the historical Fronto's approval for Laberius' word-choices and Gellius' own, on the whole unfavourable judgement on them.Less
This chapter considers the linguistic categories ‘Latin’, ‘Greek’, and ‘barbarian’, with particular reference to the debate in Gellius 19.13 over the status in Latin of the word, nanus (dwarf), thought barbarian by Fronto but proved Greek by Sulpicius Apollinaris. As such, it is admissible in Latin (where indeed it had been used by Helvius Cinna in relation to ponies); but even if not, use by Fronto would have conferred on it a higher standing than the vulgarisms introduced by Laberius enjoyed. It is demonstrated that grammatical tradition treats Latin as a form of Aeolic Greek, so that Greek loanwords are not intruders as barbarian words are. The chapter also considers the difference between the historical Fronto's approval for Laberius' word-choices and Gellius' own, on the whole unfavourable judgement on them.
Alan Cameron
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199747276
- eISBN:
- 9780199866212
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199747276.003.0014
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Ancient Religions
This chapter argues that the hundreds of corrected literary papyri from Hellenistic and early imperial times without signed subscriptions suggest that it was not untill the 4th century that they ...
More
This chapter argues that the hundreds of corrected literary papyri from Hellenistic and early imperial times without signed subscriptions suggest that it was not untill the 4th century that they first appeared. Subscriptions in Latin manuscripts earlier than this were surely likewise normally unsigned. With the exception of Statilius Maximus's edition of Cicero, the only Latin subscriptions that can be dated earlier than the 4th century document the work of professional calligraphers, not correctors. What mattered was not who corrected the manuscript, but simply the fact that the job had been done, and that could be discovered from a bare di (orthōthē) or emendavi.Less
This chapter argues that the hundreds of corrected literary papyri from Hellenistic and early imperial times without signed subscriptions suggest that it was not untill the 4th century that they first appeared. Subscriptions in Latin manuscripts earlier than this were surely likewise normally unsigned. With the exception of Statilius Maximus's edition of Cicero, the only Latin subscriptions that can be dated earlier than the 4th century document the work of professional calligraphers, not correctors. What mattered was not who corrected the manuscript, but simply the fact that the job had been done, and that could be discovered from a bare di (orthōthē) or emendavi.
Jon Hall
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- May 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780195329063
- eISBN:
- 9780199870233
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195329063.003.0001
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Literary Studies: Classical, Early, and Medieval
This chapter discusses the social context of letter-writing during the Late Roman Republic, especially among the aristocracy and its concern with social manners. It also examines recent ...
More
This chapter discusses the social context of letter-writing during the Late Roman Republic, especially among the aristocracy and its concern with social manners. It also examines recent sociolinguistic theories of politeness and facework (especially those of Erving Goffman and Brown and Levinson) and sets out the methodology to be applied to the letters of Cicero in the following chapters. In particular it identifies and defines three types of politeness regularly used in his correspondence: the politeness of respect, affiliative politeness, and redressive politeness. It is suggested that these forms of politeness derive in part from the Roman aristocrat's preoccupation with personal status (dignitas) and his need to form temporary political alliances with ambitious rivals. The relevance of these strategies of politeness to the correspondence of Pliny the Younger and Fronto is also addressed.Less
This chapter discusses the social context of letter-writing during the Late Roman Republic, especially among the aristocracy and its concern with social manners. It also examines recent sociolinguistic theories of politeness and facework (especially those of Erving Goffman and Brown and Levinson) and sets out the methodology to be applied to the letters of Cicero in the following chapters. In particular it identifies and defines three types of politeness regularly used in his correspondence: the politeness of respect, affiliative politeness, and redressive politeness. It is suggested that these forms of politeness derive in part from the Roman aristocrat's preoccupation with personal status (dignitas) and his need to form temporary political alliances with ambitious rivals. The relevance of these strategies of politeness to the correspondence of Pliny the Younger and Fronto is also addressed.
Marcus Aurelius and Marcus Cornelius Fronto
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- March 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780226713007
- eISBN:
- 9780226713021
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226713021.001.0001
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Ancient Greek, Roman, and Early Christian Philosophy
In 1815 a manuscript containing one of the long-lost treasures of antiquity was discovered—the letters of Marcus Cornelius Fronto, reputed to have been one of the greatest Roman orators. But this ...
More
In 1815 a manuscript containing one of the long-lost treasures of antiquity was discovered—the letters of Marcus Cornelius Fronto, reputed to have been one of the greatest Roman orators. But this find disappointed many nineteenth-century readers, who had hoped for the letters to convey all of the political drama of Cicero's. That the collection included passionate love letters between Fronto and the future emperor Marcus Aurelius was politely ignored—or concealed. And for almost 200 years these letters have lain hidden in plain sight. This book rescues these letters from obscurity and returns them to the public eye. The story of Marcus and Fronto began in 139 ce, when Fronto was selected to instruct Marcus in rhetoric. Marcus was eighteen then, and by all appearances the pupil and teacher fell in love. Spanning the years in which the relationship flowered and died, these are the only love letters to survive from antiquity—homoerotic or otherwise. The translation reproduces the effusive, slangy style of the young prince and the rhetorical flourishes of his master.Less
In 1815 a manuscript containing one of the long-lost treasures of antiquity was discovered—the letters of Marcus Cornelius Fronto, reputed to have been one of the greatest Roman orators. But this find disappointed many nineteenth-century readers, who had hoped for the letters to convey all of the political drama of Cicero's. That the collection included passionate love letters between Fronto and the future emperor Marcus Aurelius was politely ignored—or concealed. And for almost 200 years these letters have lain hidden in plain sight. This book rescues these letters from obscurity and returns them to the public eye. The story of Marcus and Fronto began in 139 ce, when Fronto was selected to instruct Marcus in rhetoric. Marcus was eighteen then, and by all appearances the pupil and teacher fell in love. Spanning the years in which the relationship flowered and died, these are the only love letters to survive from antiquity—homoerotic or otherwise. The translation reproduces the effusive, slangy style of the young prince and the rhetorical flourishes of his master.
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- March 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780226713007
- eISBN:
- 9780226713021
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226713021.003.0003
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Ancient Greek, Roman, and Early Christian Philosophy
This concordance serves two sets. The general reader may wish to find the letters in this collection in C. R. Haines's Loeb translation, where they can be seen in the context of Marcus Cornelius ...
More
This concordance serves two sets. The general reader may wish to find the letters in this collection in C. R. Haines's Loeb translation, where they can be seen in the context of Marcus Cornelius Fronto's letter collection as a whole. Classicists will want to see the original text, but not every library will own all the main editions of Fronto, and unfortunately they all use different numbering systems, while Edward Champlin's biography of Fronto uses yet another. The concordance should enable readers to find at least one version to compare with this one. The Haines Loeb contains the only complete translation of all the Fronto letters into English. The book/item numbers follow the convention of the ancient edition as transmitted in the manuscripts, in that the collection is divided up into “books” with separate titles, with each item in the book numbered consecutively.Less
This concordance serves two sets. The general reader may wish to find the letters in this collection in C. R. Haines's Loeb translation, where they can be seen in the context of Marcus Cornelius Fronto's letter collection as a whole. Classicists will want to see the original text, but not every library will own all the main editions of Fronto, and unfortunately they all use different numbering systems, while Edward Champlin's biography of Fronto uses yet another. The concordance should enable readers to find at least one version to compare with this one. The Haines Loeb contains the only complete translation of all the Fronto letters into English. The book/item numbers follow the convention of the ancient edition as transmitted in the manuscripts, in that the collection is divided up into “books” with separate titles, with each item in the book numbered consecutively.
Leofranc Holford-Strevens
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- February 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199263196
- eISBN:
- 9780191718878
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199263196.003.0013
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Prose and Writers: Classical, Early, and Medieval
Gellius freely admits Greek words, phrases, and quotations to his text, but generally in relation to Latin. He has much to say about translation from Greek into Latin, and the limits to its ...
More
Gellius freely admits Greek words, phrases, and quotations to his text, but generally in relation to Latin. He has much to say about translation from Greek into Latin, and the limits to its possibility; he also sometimes employs unacknowledged calques of Greek words. A survey of his reading demonstrates the expected knowledge of Homer, and direct acquaintance with Aristophanes' Frogs, Menander's Plocion, Aeschines' In Timarchum, and Demosthenes' De corona; he is also the first author to quote any of the Anacreontea. Knowledge of other poems and speeches may be second-hand. The chapter compares Gellius's Greek reading and interests with those of Fronto, Marcus Aurelius, and Apuleius.Less
Gellius freely admits Greek words, phrases, and quotations to his text, but generally in relation to Latin. He has much to say about translation from Greek into Latin, and the limits to its possibility; he also sometimes employs unacknowledged calques of Greek words. A survey of his reading demonstrates the expected knowledge of Homer, and direct acquaintance with Aristophanes' Frogs, Menander's Plocion, Aeschines' In Timarchum, and Demosthenes' De corona; he is also the first author to quote any of the Anacreontea. Knowledge of other poems and speeches may be second-hand. The chapter compares Gellius's Greek reading and interests with those of Fronto, Marcus Aurelius, and Apuleius.
Leofranc Holford-Strevens
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- February 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199263196
- eISBN:
- 9780191718878
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199263196.003.0004
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Prose and Writers: Classical, Early, and Medieval
When a word or construction used by Gellius attracts our notice, it may be either pre- or post-classical, the latter including false archaisms; although in certain matters he returns to pre-Augustan ...
More
When a word or construction used by Gellius attracts our notice, it may be either pre- or post-classical, the latter including false archaisms; although in certain matters he returns to pre-Augustan usage, he is not consistent in refusing recent developments, although his colloquialisms come from Plautus rather than the street. He likes joining synonyms, and is fond of variation; for these purposes he sometimes combines archaic, classical, and new expressions. Although a conscious artist who when translating or adapting Greek takes pains to match his style to his source, he rarely writes for declamatory delivery as Fronto and Apuleius do, but shows that he can do so when contrasting Cicero with Gaius Gracchus.Less
When a word or construction used by Gellius attracts our notice, it may be either pre- or post-classical, the latter including false archaisms; although in certain matters he returns to pre-Augustan usage, he is not consistent in refusing recent developments, although his colloquialisms come from Plautus rather than the street. He likes joining synonyms, and is fond of variation; for these purposes he sometimes combines archaic, classical, and new expressions. Although a conscious artist who when translating or adapting Greek takes pains to match his style to his source, he rarely writes for declamatory delivery as Fronto and Apuleius do, but shows that he can do so when contrasting Cicero with Gaius Gracchus.
Leofranc Holford-Strevens
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- February 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199263196
- eISBN:
- 9780191718878
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199263196.003.0008
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Prose and Writers: Classical, Early, and Medieval
This chapter considers Gellius's relations with the leading Roman orator of his age, Marcus Cornelius Fronto, and his Greek counterpart Herodes Atticus. Fronto, who appears in five chapters, is ...
More
This chapter considers Gellius's relations with the leading Roman orator of his age, Marcus Cornelius Fronto, and his Greek counterpart Herodes Atticus. Fronto, who appears in five chapters, is represented as rather closer to Gellius in his literary concerns than his preserved writings suggest, in particular more interested in linguistic purism; he is also made to cite Vergil, which the real Fronto never does, and to admire Claudius Quadrigarius, enthusiasm for whom was in fact Gellius's own. Although Herodes' pre-eminence in Greek oratory is acknowledged, Gellius concentrates on matter rather than matter, recording his defence of grief that a Stoic (not alone) had called immoderate and his contemptuous dismissal of sham philosophers; overall he represents him more favourably than other writers do.Less
This chapter considers Gellius's relations with the leading Roman orator of his age, Marcus Cornelius Fronto, and his Greek counterpart Herodes Atticus. Fronto, who appears in five chapters, is represented as rather closer to Gellius in his literary concerns than his preserved writings suggest, in particular more interested in linguistic purism; he is also made to cite Vergil, which the real Fronto never does, and to admire Claudius Quadrigarius, enthusiasm for whom was in fact Gellius's own. Although Herodes' pre-eminence in Greek oratory is acknowledged, Gellius concentrates on matter rather than matter, recording his defence of grief that a Stoic (not alone) had called immoderate and his contemptuous dismissal of sham philosophers; overall he represents him more favourably than other writers do.
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- March 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780226713007
- eISBN:
- 9780226713021
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226713021.003.0001
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Ancient Greek, Roman, and Early Christian Philosophy
In 1815 Angelo Mai found a long-lost treasure of the classical world in the Ambrosian Library in Milan: a palimpsest codex containing, among other works, many of the letters of Marcus Cornelius ...
More
In 1815 Angelo Mai found a long-lost treasure of the classical world in the Ambrosian Library in Milan: a palimpsest codex containing, among other works, many of the letters of Marcus Cornelius Fronto and his correspondents, who included the emperor Marcus Aurelius. The events of Marcus's life are known mostly through much later sources, of which the best are the Historia Augusta biographies of Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, and Marcus and a very late condensed version of book 70 of Cassius Dio's history. The letters between Marcus and Fronto from 139 to 145 provide what appears to be direct evidence of a living relationship of some kind. The future emperor, revered as a sort of saint from antiquity onward, is exuberant, slangy, sometimes impudent, and (as he says himself in letter 37) bubbling over with love for Fronto. Were Marcus and Fronto in love? Were they lovers? This book presents only a selection of letters: all the letters from the years 139–48 that testify to the feelings of the correspondents.Less
In 1815 Angelo Mai found a long-lost treasure of the classical world in the Ambrosian Library in Milan: a palimpsest codex containing, among other works, many of the letters of Marcus Cornelius Fronto and his correspondents, who included the emperor Marcus Aurelius. The events of Marcus's life are known mostly through much later sources, of which the best are the Historia Augusta biographies of Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, and Marcus and a very late condensed version of book 70 of Cassius Dio's history. The letters between Marcus and Fronto from 139 to 145 provide what appears to be direct evidence of a living relationship of some kind. The future emperor, revered as a sort of saint from antiquity onward, is exuberant, slangy, sometimes impudent, and (as he says himself in letter 37) bubbling over with love for Fronto. Were Marcus and Fronto in love? Were they lovers? This book presents only a selection of letters: all the letters from the years 139–48 that testify to the feelings of the correspondents.
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- March 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780226713007
- eISBN:
- 9780226713021
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226713021.003.0002
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Ancient Greek, Roman, and Early Christian Philosophy
This chapter presents an exchange of letters between Marcus Aurelius and Marcus Cornelius Fronto. The first letter, written by Marcus to Fronto, indicates that Marcus is longing for Fronto. Marcus ...
More
This chapter presents an exchange of letters between Marcus Aurelius and Marcus Cornelius Fronto. The first letter, written by Marcus to Fronto, indicates that Marcus is longing for Fronto. Marcus also says: “Should I not burn with love of you when you've written this to me?” In his reply, Fronto makes a proposal to go for a walk down by the river Illyssus. Both letters are dated December 139 CE.Less
This chapter presents an exchange of letters between Marcus Aurelius and Marcus Cornelius Fronto. The first letter, written by Marcus to Fronto, indicates that Marcus is longing for Fronto. Marcus also says: “Should I not burn with love of you when you've written this to me?” In his reply, Fronto makes a proposal to go for a walk down by the river Illyssus. Both letters are dated December 139 CE.
André Tchernia
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- November 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780198723714
- eISBN:
- 9780191829376
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198723714.003.0018
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE
Three case studies that shed light on the conditions in which trade was conducted on the Alexandria grain run form the subject of this chapter. Two are based on the Murecine tablets and the other on ...
More
Three case studies that shed light on the conditions in which trade was conducted on the Alexandria grain run form the subject of this chapter. Two are based on the Murecine tablets and the other on a passage from a text by Fronto. If we bear in mind the conditions for transporting goods, market laws do not of themselves explain the sale of Egyptian chickpeas in Pozzuoli and of Baetican oil in Athens and Alexandria, or the fact that Cretan wines were among those most commonly consumed in Rome. The circulation of these goods was a side effect of the huge trade in grain from Alexandria and the shipping it generated between Italy and the eastern Mediterranean. It can be classified as a marginal but far from negligible economic activity, brought into being by the need to organize the supply of the vast and anomalous mega-city that was Rome.Less
Three case studies that shed light on the conditions in which trade was conducted on the Alexandria grain run form the subject of this chapter. Two are based on the Murecine tablets and the other on a passage from a text by Fronto. If we bear in mind the conditions for transporting goods, market laws do not of themselves explain the sale of Egyptian chickpeas in Pozzuoli and of Baetican oil in Athens and Alexandria, or the fact that Cretan wines were among those most commonly consumed in Rome. The circulation of these goods was a side effect of the huge trade in grain from Alexandria and the shipping it generated between Italy and the eastern Mediterranean. It can be classified as a marginal but far from negligible economic activity, brought into being by the need to organize the supply of the vast and anomalous mega-city that was Rome.
