Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T02:47:54.837Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Fall of the Capitol Again: Tacitus, Ann. II. 23

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2012

Otto Skutsch
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In JRS 43 (1953), 77 f. I stated that in a number of passages Silius Italicus (1. 625 f.; 4. 150 f.; 6. 555 f.) seems to attest a version of history according to which not only the city but the Capitol also was taken by the Gauls. I therefore suggested that the same version I should be recognized in Ennius, Ann. 164 f.:

qua Galli furtim noctu summa arcis adorti

moenia concubia uigilesque repente cruentant.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 68 , November 1978 , pp. 93 - 94
Copyright
Copyright ©Otto Skutsch 1978. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 J. Wolski, Hist, 5 (1956), 44 f., denies the existence of such a version, but he regrettably misinterprets the evidence which he adduces: Pliny, NH 3. 9. 57 does not report Theopompus (FGH 115. 317) as saying that the town only was taken; he reports him as saying nothing about Rome other than that she was taken.

2 On Tertullian as an antiquarian see Barnes, T. D. in Studia Patristica xiv (1976), 3Google Scholar ff., and on this passage in particular 12 f.; also his Tertullian (1971), 204 f. Barnes thinks Tertullian may have known Ennius; compare Vahlen's edition of Ennius, p. lxxxvi.

3 I am grateful to E. Wistrand for directing my attention to this passage. He must not, however, be held responsible for the use I am making of it here.

4 The virgula above se is probably that which in the Mediceus is often put above an e, especially in monosyllables; but it might derive from the majuscle abbreviation of final nt. Whichever it is, se(nt) and sat look like two different shots, wrongly inserted between per and is, at an original sent which had become difficult to read. Some modern editors, adopting perissent, retain satis, which makes no sense, or, following Renaissance suggestions, turn it into prostrati, an addition wholly superfluous and therefore un-Tacitean. It could hardly be tolerated before perissent, let alone at the end of the sentence.

5 The assonance capto Capitolio may be no more than accidental; but cf. Livy 3. 22. 1 and 23. 2: Capitolium captum: 34. 5. 8: Capitolio … capto; Silius 4. 151: Capitolia capta (ThLL Onom. II 162. 12 ff.).