j.linderski, the menander inscription from pompei zpe 159, 2007

The Menander Inscription from Pompei and the Expression Primus ScripsitAuthor(s): J. LinderskiSource: Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, Bd. 159 (2007), pp. 45-55Published by: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn (Germany)Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20191193 .

Accessed: 29/06/2013 22:23

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 ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn (Germany) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend accessto Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 152.2.176.242 on Sat, 29 Jun 2013 22:23:39 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=habelt

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20191193?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


45

The Menander Inscription from Pompei

and the Expression primus scripsit*

In 1931 Amadeo Maiuri published the soon famous "ritratto di Menandro" found in a Pompeian house

henceforth to be known as Casa del Menandro. The painting is located on the right wall in an exedra in

the peristyle.1 The poet is sitting in a chair, an ivy wreath adorns his head; at his feet in bright yellow

paint there is the label: Menander. In his left hand he holds a volumen, in which seven lines, in small

cursive black letters, were discernible (the titulus has since almost entirely evanesced). Maiuri (1.112)

presented the following text:

Menander

Hie primus

(novam?) com

(o)ediam scripsit.

Lib(ri) quattuor

He was not able to decipher lines 5 and 6, but on p. 115, in a drawing of the volumen, he indicated in

line 6 the numeral XII, and in line 7 he read lib. IIII.2

In his edition of 1952 (CIL IV, Suppl. Ill 1, 7350b) Matteo Della Corte gave a very different text.

He printed it in facsimile and in a linear transcription which we can arrange (for better visualization) in

the following way:

Menander

hie primus

om[niu]m como

This investigation forms a sequel to the piece The Paintress Calypso and Other Painters in Pliny, ZPE 145 (2003) 83 96 (and 148 [2004] 126), and develops brief remarks on p. 93.

Abbreviations: GL = Grammatici Latini I-VIII (Lipsiae 1857-1870); PCG = R. Kassel and C. Austin, Poetae Comici Graeci I (2001), II (1991), III 2 (1984), IV (1983), V (1986), VI 2 (1998), VII (1989), VIII (1995) (Berlin). The Vergilian scholiasts are (primarily) cited in the editions of G. Thilo, Servil grammatici qui feruntur in Wergilii Aeneidos libros

commentarii, 1-2 (Lipsiae 1878-1883); In Wergilii Buc?lica et Ge?rgica commentarii (Lipsiae 1887); H. Hagen, Appendix Serviana (Lipsiae 1902). Other editions are indicated suo loco.

1 A. Maiuri, II ritratto di Menandro nella Casa delle Argenterie a Pompei, Bolletino dArte 25 (1931) 241-51 (non vidi), soon followed by a detailed account in his magnificent monograph, La casa del Menandro e il suo tesoro di argenter?a 1-2

(Roma 1933), esp 1.106-21; R. Ling, Roman Painting (Cambridge 1991) 159, correctly informs that the painting is on "the

right side of an exedra", but cf. pi. XIVB where the location is rather confusingly indicated as "Exedra 23, left wall" (i.e. of

the peristyle). The best photograph still in Maiuri, La Casa, Tav. XII.

2 Maiuri's reading was reproduced by M. Bieber, The History of the Greek and Roman Theater1 (Princeton 1961) 91,

with a strange translation: "Menander was the first to write New Comedy in four books" (completely disregarding the two

lines left blank by Maiuri), and by G. M. A. Richter, The Portraits of the Greeks 2 (London 1965) 228. So also A. Koerte -

A. Thierfelder, Menandri quae super sunt. Pars altera (Lipsiae 1959), p. 5, test. 22. As M. Gigante, Civilt? delle forme letterarie nelTantica Pompei (Napoli 1979) 132-37 at 133, pertinently observes, none of these scholars was aware of Della

Corte's reading and interpretation of 1933 (these pages were first published by Gigante in his script Note epigrafiche e

fil?lo giche [Napoli 1969] 3-8, and republished again in I. Gallo [ed.], Studi Salernitani in memoria di Rajfaele Cantar ella

[Salerno 1981] 30-35, in the article "La vita teatrale nell'antica Pompei", 9-51). And even more recently Ling [n. 1] 159,

translates "he was the first to write New Comedy". This translation presumes the paradosis novam comoediam, and thus

Maiuri's original text, which, however (as Gigante 133 points out), Maiuri himself has later modified, admitting (at least in

partial deference to Della Corte) that the title of a comedy was inscribed on the volumen; see A. Maiuri, Pompei12 (Roma

1976) 74.



46 J. Linderski

ediam scripsit

[Trig?]emino rum (vacat) xii

(vacat) lib(er?) iiii (vacat).

Della Corte was a towering figure in Pompeian epigraphy, but his decipherment of this difficult cursive

hand is only partially successful. The text of the first four lines is sane (or almost sane); the rest is

inspired guesswork. His reconstruction of lines 5-7 Delia Corte explains as follows: "comparatur hie

poeta cum comicis reliquis, qui postea fabulam consimilem prodiderunt". The same text, and the same

explanation, already in his edition in Not. Sc. 1933, 289-90 (although he appears with time to have

grown less certain: there are no question marks in the text as reconstructed in Not. Sc). The number XII

he inclined to interpret as an ordinal, hence duodecimam, and the number IV as a cardinal, hence lib(er)

quartus. There is one major difference between the two editions of Della Corte: in Not. Sc. between

lines 6 and 7 he indicates (as also does Maiuri in his drawing at 1.115) a blank space of at least two

lines; this indication is missing in CIL. But, interestingly, this empty space may be just a figment: the

apographs reproduced by A. Varone (see below, n. 58), including the original apograph of Della Corte,

indicate at best a space of one line, which apparently was left uninscribed.

In line 5 Della Corte's [Trig]eminorum is inspired and uncertain. A play entitled Trigemini and

ascribed to Plautus is indeed on record (Gell. 6.9.7), and it is possible that also other dramatists, Greek

and Roman, produced pieces on the subject of triplets.3 That no such play is attested for Menander is

per se of little weight; this weight, however, becomes substantial when we realize that out of 105 plays

(or 108 or 109)4 credited to Menander the titles of almost 100 are known.5 On the other hand among the

comedies of Menander we find a play entitled Aioujioci.6 It is enticing to conjecture that this is the title

appearing in Latin on the scroll the Pompeian Menander holds in his hand.7 But we should not overlook

another possibility. Many plays of Menander bear a double title: Trigemini may be such a doublet. On

the surface of things we should thus wholeheartedly embrace either the reconstruction of Della Corte or

the proposal of M. Gigante: comolediam scripsit I... G]eminarum?

Disquiet persists. To be proclaimed the first and the best of just those authors who selected triplets or (female) twins as the subject for a play is a feeble compliment,9 and with respect to Menander it is

3 We certainly can well imagine a praetexta about the Horatii and Curiatii, but triplets was also an excellent subject for

a comedy, potentially rich in astrology; cf. (though it is a late text) Manetho, Apotelesmatica, ed. A. Koechly, in: Poetae

bucolici et didactici (Paris 1862) 4.456, who speaks of xpiOujicov rcai?cov ?ocujllocgto: yeveOtax. 4 Gell. 17.4.4, and PCG VI 2, pp. 1,18, test. 1,46.

5 See the convenient list in F. H. Sandbach (ed.), Menandri reliquiae selectae (Oxonii 1972) 339-40. (The sec. ed. of

1990 is in fact only a corrected reprint with addenda.) 6 For testimonies and fragments, see PCG VI 2, pp. 100-101, test, i-ii, frg. 114-118 (cf. p. 14, test. 35b; p. 17, test.

42.16). 7 If we accept Della Corte's reading ]eminorum, the only available Latin words (as the electronic searches show) are

geminorum, trigeminorum and the tribal name Meminorum. Should we read \eminarum we have at our disposal, in addition

to the ubiquitous feminarum, only heminarum and geminorum. 8

Gigante [n. 2] 134, 136; duly adduced by Kassel-Austin, PCG VI 2, pp. 14 (test. 35b), 100 (test. *ii). They soberly

regard the letters in which the title of the play may be hiding as uncertain and print them with subscript dots, and in the shape

eminorum. Indeed in the apograph of the inscription which Della Corte appended to his article of 1933 [n. 1] in this

word no a is easily discernible (though perhaps cannot be excluded). If Geminae is indeed the play referred to, and the

reading is G]eminorum, we would here have the same mistake as in the Catalogus tackygraphicus fabularum (PCG VI 2,

test. 42.16). In front of ]eminorum there appear to have been the traces of four letters. Gigante's interpretation has now

become a new orthodoxy. See for instance the widely used guidebook by A. and M. De Vos, Pompei, Ercolano, Stabia

(Guide archeologiche Laterza [Roma-Bari 1982]) 94. They casually inform that on the scroll Menander is characterized as

"il primo autore della commedia Le gemelle (Didumai)".

9 And a compliment factually inaccurate: as Gigante [n. 2] 135 adverts, Antiphanes composed somewhat earlier a play

entitled A-??rripi? r\ Ai?vum. See PCG II, pp. 336-37 (he also composed a piece entitled A??duoi, PCG II, pp. 353-56. A



The Menander Inscription from Pompei 47

feebler still. For Menander, although in his own lifetime not overly successful, soon after his demise

came to be regarded as the inventor1? of nova comoedia, and the towering representative of the genre.

This sentiment is well recorded by Velleius Paterculus 1.16.3: "una (aetas illustravit) priscam illam et

veterem sub Cratino Aristophaneque et Eupolide comoediam; ac novam [comicam] Menander aequales

que eius artis magis quam operis Philemon ac Diphilus et invenere intra paucissimos annos neque

imitandam11 reliquere".12

Gigante (134, n. 142), quoting Cicero, pro Flacco 65: "Quis umquam Graecus comoediam scripsit in qua servus primarum partium non Lydus esset", assures himself that the juncture comoediam scribere

is good Latin. It is13 - but this is not the point. Our question is a different one, namely: is the phrase

primus (omnium) comoediam (tragoediam etc.) scripsit followed by the title of a play (or other piece) in

the genitive a normal, well attested Latin locution? Dispassionate electronic searches in the Bibliotheca

Teubneriana Latina 3 and in the Packard Humanities Institute's Latin Data Bank offer the answer. They

produced only one example of the locution hie primus scripsit [see no. (11) and n. 26], two examples of

the phrase primus omnium scripsit [see nos. (1) and (2)], and several examples of primus scripsit. It is

an instructive dossier, historically and linguistically (here arranged partially ad sensum, and partially, the dates often being uncertain, in an approximate chronological order):

(1) Quint. Inst. 3.1.11: "Antiphon (ca 480-^11) ... <qui> orationem primus omnium scripsif. At

first glance this is obscure, but other sources offer elucidation: Antiphon was the first to write speeches for afee.14

(2) Porphyrio15 ad Hor. Epist. 2.1.62 (ed. A. Holder, Innsbruck 1894): "Livium autem dicit

Andronicum, qui primus omnium Latinas fabulas scripsif.16 Cf. below, (3).

thought occurs that this may be true also of Menander). Also Aristophon may have composed a play about female twins,

PCG IV, pp. 1-2. Ancient philologians were of course interested in establishing which author was the first to treat of a

dramatic theme. Sch. in Aristoph. Aves 281-82 (ed. D. Holwerda [Groningen 1991]), pp. 50-51, provides a good example. Several anonymous commentators are adduced. One of them observes (281b): <S>ikoKkei ?oxi ?p?uxx Tripeucf] "Ercovj/, and the

other elaborates further (282c): ? locpOK?fj? Tipcorov xov Trip?a ?7toir|0?v, erca Oi^iOK?fj?. Cf. Tragicorum Graecorum

Fragmenta I (?d. B. Snell [G?ttingen 1985]), p. 140, test. 6c; IV (?d. S. Radt [1977]), pp. 436-37 (the corrected editions with addenda by R. Kannicht [1986,1999] do not add anything to these passages).

10 On the topos of the first discoverer, see A. Kleing?nther, IIPOTOS EYPETHI (Philologus Suppl, 26.1 [Leipzig 1933]); K. Thraede, "Erfinder II, geistesgeschichtlich", Reallex. f. Ant. u. Chr. 5 (1962) 1191-1278. These works are

invaluable for cultural history, but they are not very helpful as to the phraseology, which is here our prime concern. There

exist numerous instances of the phrase npmoq eypa\\fe, and of other similar expressions; they ought to be collected in a

corpus. 11 So Watt, but as he notes in his apparatus the paradosis is imitanda corrected by Acidalius. Cf. PCG VI 2, p. 27, test.

93.

12 This text was adduced in support of the reading (novam) already by Maiuri. I follow the Teubner edition of W. S.

Watt (1988). With Acidalius (1567-1595) he deletes after novam the reading comicam; comoediam is to be supplied from

the preceding sentence. M. Elefante in her edition and commentary (Welleius Paterculus. Ad. M. Winicium consulem libri duo

[Hildesheim 1997]) 196, defends comicam: "Si tratta di un neologismo, il cui valore sem?ntico si chiarisce in rapporto a

m?sica (cf. Cic. De or. 3,132); come m?sica ? 'Tarte della m?sica", cosi c?mica non indica tanto il genere della commedia,

quanto l'arte dei commediografi". Not persuasive; and methodologically to introduce a supposed neologism is but a

conjurer's trick. For the appreciation of Menander, cf. also Quint. Inst. 10.1.72, and see a full collection of testimonia in the

monumental opus of Kassel-Austin VI2, pp. 1-A5.

13 Electronic searches reveal numerous examples of the juncture scribere comoediam, tragoediam, fabulam (also

poema, saturam, mimos, orationem, historiam, etc.). It would be tedious (and unnecessary) to list them all here.

14 See the edition and commentary by J. Adamietz, M. F. Quintiliani Institutionis oratoriae liber III (M?nchen 1966) 71 (cf. 190-91). The wording of Amm. Marc. 30.4.5 is of interest: "Antiphon

... quern ob defensum negotium omnium

primum antiquitas prodidit accepisse mercedem". Ps.-Plut. Witae X orat. 832C has o-uveypOKpev... rcpakoc corrected from the

paradosis rcpcoTOv); and Clem. Alex. Strom. 1.79.3 (quoting Diodoros) uic6o{)... rcpokov ..Aoyov... ypa\|/au?vov. 15 On Porphyrio, his commentary, and his method of work, see the erudite study by S. Diederich, Der Horazkommentar

des Porphyrio im Rahmen der kaiser zeitlichen Schul- und Bildungstradition (Berlin 1999), esp. 1-14.



48 J. Linderski

(3) Ps.-Acro17 ad H?r. Epist. 2.1.62 (ed. O. Keller, vol. 2, Lipsiae 1904): "Livius antiquissimus

poeta fuit Andronicus, qui primus comoedias scripsif\ Observe that the qualification Latinas is sloppily

omitted; but that Livius wrote in Latin should have in any case been obvious to the pupils from the very text of Horace.

(4) Plin. NH3.51 (ed. C. Mayhoff, Lipsiae 1906): "Theophrastus, qui primus externorum aliqua de

Romanis diligentior scripsif.

(5) Plin. NH 34.76 (ed. Mayhoff, 1897): "Demetrius (sc. fecit) ... S<i>monem,18 qui primus de

equitatu scripsif.19

(6) Porphyrio ad Hor. Serm. 1.10.46: "Quern [sc. Lucilium] inventorem huius operis m?rito dixit,

quia primus Lucilius huius modi carmina scripsif.20

(J) Porphyrio ad Hor. Ars 79: "Primus Archilochus iambo<s> scripsit in Lycambam <sooerum

suum". Brief and inelegant; a smoother and ampler explication in Ps.-Acro: "Iambicum metrum primus Archilocus invenit, quo usus est in Lycamben, quern persecutus est, quod ei Neobulen, desponsatam iam filiam denegavit". This latter text depends ultimately (including the phrase usus est) on a Greek

predecessor, cf. Sch. in Lucianum 29.33 (ed. H. Rabe, Lipsiae 1906, pp. 146-47): tc? xe y?p iaji?co

'Ap%i?,o%o?, ov Kai rcpcoT?v cpaoi tco pixpco %pr|cjaG0ai,21 jcpo? ??piv tcov A\)Koc|i?iocDV 8iey%eip? OOCTO.

(8) Serv. auct. ad Georg. 1.176 (ed. G. Thilo, Lipsiae 1887): "aut Hesiodi, qui primus de agricultura

scripsif.22

(9) Diomedes,23 Ars grammatica, GLI, p. 484, lines ?>-4 (ed. H. Keil, Lipsiae 1857): "epos Latinum

primus digne scripsit is qui res Romanorum decem et octo complexus est libris, qui et annales <in>scri

buntur".24

(10) Ps.-Acro ad Hor. Ars 220: "nam primus Thespis tragoediam scripsif.25 Cf. below (11).

16 Cf. Cic. Brut. 72: "Atqui hic Livius qui [secl. Sch?tz] primus fabulam ... docuit"; 73: "Livius, ... qui primus fabulam

d?dit"; Gell. 17.21.42: "primus omnium L. Livius poeta fabulas docere Romae coepit"; Serv. ad Aen. 10.636: "Livius

Andronicus, qui primus edidit fabulam [Latinam] apud nos"; Diom. GL I [see below, (9)], p. 489, lines 7-8: "constat apud

illos (sc. Romanos) primum Latino sermone comoediam Livium Andronicum scripsisse". 17 Cf. Diederich [n. 15] 8-11. 18 A fifth century author; see [L.] Wickert, RE 3A (1927) 173-75, s.v. no. 7; K. Widdra, Xenophon, Reitkunst (Berlin

1965) 9-15, 72. 19

Xenophon, de re equ. 1.1, employs a similar phrase (but without primus): G-uveypaxye u?v o?v Kai Siu?ov ?iepi

?7C7tiKf?c. Clemens Alex. Strom. 7.16.101.4, adduces him in a list of major representatives of various genres of achievement.

20 Cf. Plin. NHpraef. 1: "Lucilius, qui primus condidit stili nasum"; Quint. 10.1.93: "Satura ... in qua primus insignem

laudem adeptus Lucilius".

21 Cf. Hephaestion, Enchiridion de metris 19, 21, 27, 47 (ed. M. Consbruch, Lipsiae 1906), where Archilochos is

described as the first to employ several other meters (rcpciyco? Kexpnrai or expriaaxo). Cf. also Porphyrio ad Hor. Ep. 1.19.23:

"Ideo Parios, quia Archilochus Parius <primus> est iambici carminis scriptor". 22 Cf. Plin. NH 18.201: "Hesiodus, qui princeps hominum de agricultura praecepit". Greek texts credit Hesiod with

various first achievements, but I was not able to find a phrase stylistically akin to the enunciations of Servius and Pliny.

23 On his date (perhaps IVth c; certainly before the middle of the Vth), and the sources, see R. A. Kaster, Guardians of

Language: the Grammarian and Society in Late Antiquity (Berkeley 1988) 270-72. Recently a comprehensive study of this

grammarian has been presented by R. Dammer, Diomedes Grammaticus (Trier 2001). Dammer is primarily interested in

Diomedes' grammatical theory, and does not offer a systematic review of quotations adduced by Diomedes. But it is evident

that Diomedes was keenly interested in Ennius' diction. He quotes a number of passages from the Annals and plays, many of

them not mentioned by any other grammarian. See O. Skutsch, The Annals of Ennius (Oxford 1985) 42.

24 Cf. Porphyr, ad Hor. Epist. 1.19.7, commenting on Ennius ipse pater. "Pater autem Ennius ideo, quod ipse primus

Latinorum ad heroici versus imitationem adspiraverit"; Lucr. 1.116-18 "Ennius ut noster cecinit, qui primus amoeno I detulit

ex Helicone perenni fronde coronam, I per gentis Italas hominum quae clara clueret". Cf. C. Bailey, Titi Lucreti Cari De

rerum natura libri sex (Oxford 1947) 2.619 ad loc. (he missed Diomedes and Porphyrio).




(11) Iunius Philargyrius, Expl. in Verg. Buc 8.10 (ed. H. Hagen, Lipsiae 1902, p. 145, containing recensio a), explanatio I (commenting on Vergil's "Sola Sophocleo tua carmina digna coturno"): "idest

ideo eum Sophocli conparabat, quia hie primus [expl. II: quod primus hic26] tragoediam scripsit, et

Asinium Pollionem significat, qui tragoediam scripsit illo tempore".27 As Hagen annotates, the same

explication also in Scholia Bernensia (ed. H. Hagen, Leipzig 1867, repr. Hildesheim 1967 [containing recensio b]), p. 816, cf. esp. "Sophocles, poeta tragicus, qui primus tragoediam scripsif (and also "is

enim [Sophocles] primus tragoediam conposuif). Asinius Pollio, consul and triumphator,28 was

Vergil's early supporter and social superior; this explains Vergil's extravagant praise and the elevation

of Pollio to the rank of a Roman Sophocles. The scholiasts, however, adduce a formal reason for the

comparison. Vergil compares Pollio and Sophocles because (quia; quod; is enim) the Greek poet was

the first to write tragedy. Literally taken this is wildly inaccurate: how could the scholiasts forget to

remember Aeschylus not to speak of Thespis!29, and this nonsense reaches its nadir in the comment to

line 11 (expl. I): "quia nemo ante te scripsit tragoediam nee post te scripturus est". But these are

wretched texts wretchedly abridged.30 We should presume that in the ultimate source (probably the

variorum edition of Donatus) mention must have been made of innovations wrought by Sophocles in the

art of tragedy and of his first rank among the tragedians.31 Be that as it may - but for the comparison

with Pollio to have any validity the Roman poet must have also been perceived as an innovator in the art

of Latin tragedy. Here a verse of Vergil himself immediately comes to mind, Buc. 3.86: "Pollio et ipse

2^ Cf. Porphyrio, ad Hor. Ars 275: "Thespis primum tragoedias scripsif; Donatus, Excerpta de comoedia (ed. P.

Wessner, Donatus, Commentum Terenti 1 [Lipsiae 1902] 5.9 = p. 24.19-20): "Thespis autemprimus haec scripta in omnium

notitiam protulit". 26 The order hie primus is much more frequent than primus hie. Combined with scribere this locution is attested only in

Philargyrius and in our inscription, but connected with other verbs it is several times on record, especially in Pliny, with

respect to literary, artistic, and scientific inventors: Cic. Brut. 38 (of Demetrius Phalereus): "hie primus inflexit orationem";

72: "atqui hie Livius [qui] primus fabulam C. Claudio Caeci filio et M. Tuditano consulibus docuit"; Plin. NH 36.83: "hie idem architectus (Sostratus Cnidius) primus omnium pensilem ambulationem Cnidi fecisse traditur"; 34.58: "primus hie

(Myro) multiplicasse veritatem videtur"; 34.59: "hie (Pythagoras Reginus) primus nerv?s et venas expressit"; 35.60:

"Apollodorus Atheniensis ... hie primus species exprimere instituir"; 35.128: "Euphranor Isthmius ... hie primus videtur

expressisse dignitates heroum et usurpasse symmetrian"; Quint. 3.6.60: "Translationem hie (Hermagoras) primus omnium

tradidit"; Porph. ad Hor. Ars 402: (Tyrtaeus) "Primus hie tubae mod<ul>ationes dedit; Serv. ad Verg. Buc. 6.42: "hieprimus

(Prometheus) astrologiam Assyriis indicavit".

27 I am well aware of the can of philological worms opened by G. W. Bowersock when he argued for Octavian (and

against Pollio) as the addressee of the Eighth Eclogue (HSCP 75, 1971, 73-80). He thus revived the idea of earlier erudites, and of Servius (on Buc. 8.6). Fierce debate ensued, voluminous and repetitious. For Bowersock and Augustus, see esp. W.

Clausen, A Commentary on Wirgil, Eclogues (Oxford 1994) 233-37; A. Luther, Historische Studien zu den Buc?lica Wergils (Sb. Wien 698 [2002]) 7-9, 46-47; against Bowersock and for Pollio, see esp. E. Coleiro, An Introduction to WergiVs

Bucolics (Amsterdam 1979) 259-61; J. Farrell, CP 86 (1991) 204-11, esp. 206-8; V. Tandoi, in M. Gigante (ed.), Lecturae

Wergiliane. Le Bucoliche2 (Napoli 1988) 268-73; R. P. H. Green, Euphrosyne 24 (1996) 225-36; H. Seng, Wergils Eklogenbuch (Hildesheim 1999) 64-75. To a detached observer it would certainly appear that an acrobatic argument is

needed to take Sophocleo ... coturno as addressed to Octavian. For the present purpose this is a side issue; for us of

importance is the mind and method of those scholiasts who argued that this line pertained to Pollio.

28 See J. Andr?, La vie et Voeuvre d'Asinius Pollion (Paris 1949) 9-26; and more recently the thoughtful essay by L.

Morgan, The Autopsy of C. Asinius Pollio, JRS 90 (2000) 51-69. 29 Better commentators did remember: for Thespis, see above in the text (10), and n. 25; and for Aischylos, see

Porphyrio, ad Hor. Ars 278: "Aeschylus primus tragoedi[i]s coturnos et syrma et personam dedit". Cf. C. O. Brink, Horace

on Poetry. II: The Ars Po?tica' (Cambridge 1971) 310-14.

30 On Iunius Philargyrius or perhaps rather Filagrius (5th c.)? and the vicissitudes of his Vergilian commentaries, see the

convenient summaries by Kaster [n. 23] 284-85; P. L. Schmidt, NP 6 (1999) 70-71 (s.v. Iunius II 2). The debate on the connections between various Vergilian commentaries has been recently aptly summarized by C. Baschera, Ipotesi di una

relazione tra il Servio Danielino e gli Scolii Weronesi a Wirgilio (Verona 2000) 9-36.

31 For both approaches, see Wita Sophoclis, inter alia quoting the epigram ascribed to the Hellenistic poet Lobo, where

Sophocles is eulogized as Tcpcoxe?a Aa?ovxa xrj Tpayuc?j t?%vrj. See H. Lloyd-Jones and F. Parsons, Supplementum Hellenisticum (Berlin 1983), p. 255, frg. 519.



50 /. Linderski

facit nova carmina". What Vergil wished to convey through these words has been avidly and

inconclusively debated,32 but the scholiasts' understanding is not in doubt. Servius and Servius auctus

address the phrase nova carmina no less than six times,33 and always give the same exegesis: nova is

glossed as magna and miranda. Nova as intimating magna is startling, but in the idiom of scholia these

terms had a well defined sense, neglected by modern students of Vergil. Mire (which has been

excellently treated in two recent studies on the language of grammarians34) is mostly connected with

passages in genus grande, with bold rhetorical figures, metaphors and personifications, but also with

invective and polemic, and (not surprisingly) with all kinds of extraordinary things and circumstances.

The carmina of Pollio were thus in some respect extraordinary, and hence novel, nova?5 They were

also magna, and this is an epithet that suits very well the heroic verses of a tragedian.36

(12) Fragm. Bobiensia ad grammaticam pertinentia, GL VII, p. 543, line 8 (ed. H. Keil, Lipsiae

1880): "Cea ?nsula est patria Simonidis, qui neniarum metrumprimus scripsif.31 To these examples we may add several passages in which primus and scribere are conjoined

syntactically in a different manner:38

(13) Seneca, Ep. 88.39, in a contemptuous question: "annales evolvam omnium gentium et quis

primus carmina scripserit quaeram?"

(14) Iunius Philargyrius, Expl. in Verg. Buc. 6.1 (expl. I): "PRIMA idest non quod primus Buc?lica

Latina hic scripserit, sed hoc ait: prima haec me voluit idest Thalia conscribere, mox et alia factu

rum".39

(15) Sch. Veron. in Verg. Buc 6.1 (ed. C. Baschera, Gli Scolii Veronesi a Wirgilio [Verona 1999], p 79 [replacing the edition by H. Hagen, Lipsiae 1902]): "Aut nostra ex omnibus prima, quasi primus Latine Bucolicon Vergilius sc[ribserit versu usus] Siciliensi, idest Theocriti".40

32 Cf. Andr? [n. 28] 30-39, esp. 31; Clausen [n. 27] 111-12. 33 Buc. 3.86: magna, miranda (cf. Ovid. Met. 7.758, mirandum and novitas); 5.71: compared to novum vinum\ Aen.

3.240: quoted to illustrate Vergil's nova proelia for "novum bellum non est cuius extat exemplum"; 4.10, an interesting

lemma: to illustrate "quis no vus ... hospes", referring to Dido's future husband, Servius adduces the line concerning Pollio to

give novus the sense of magnus, whereas Serv. auctus prefers to quote a phrase from Terentius, Eun. 317, nova figura sc.

oris (well paraphrased by J. Barnsby, Terence, Eunuchus [Cambridge 1999] 145, as "unusual looks", literally "a new type of

face), to convey the sense of "qualis antea numquam"; Georg. 1.43 (Serv. auct.): magnum, 4.356: magna. To these instances

we have to add Philarg. Buc. 3.86: "mirabilia carmina".

34 See esp. Diederich [n. 15] 302-5; and also R. Jakobi, Die Kunst der Exegese im Terenzkommentar des Donat (Berlin

1996) 5-6, 76, 107. In the text of Servius (and Serv. auctus) mire and similar expressions occur almost three hundred times;

a detailed investigation is a desideratum. Interestingly in only two passages is there an association with carmen (Buc. 3.86,

pertaining to Pollio [see n. 33]; Georg. 3.498).

3^ This opinion of scholiasts memorably clashes with the Tacitean stricture (Dial. 21.6): archaic, harsh and dry

("videtur mini inter Appios et Menenios studuisse"; "durus et siccus"). Cf. Seneca in Gell. 12.2.10 (about Vergil). 36 Cf. Porphyr, ad Hor. Carm. 4.15.3-4; ad Hor. Ars 360.

37 Cf. Ps.-Acro ad Hor. Carm. 2.1.38 (vol. 1, Lipsiae 1902): "Nenia carmen lugubre ...

quod Simonides ... primus

instituir"; and Porphyrio ad loc: "Simonides ... Bprivotx;... optime scripsif.

38 I also note two examples of primus connected with a form of conscribere: 1) Apul. Flor. 15 (p. 22, lines 8-10, ed. R.

Helm): "Pherecydes ...

qui primus versuum nexu repudiate conscribere ausus est passis verbis, soluto locutu, libera oratione

(cf. V. Hunink, Apuleius ofMadauros. Florida [Amsterdam 2001] 148-49; an informative commentary, but Hunink missed

the closest stylistic parallel, Porphyrio ad Hor. Carm. 4.9.3: "Gloriatur se primum lyrica carmina Latina lingua ausum

scribere"); 2) Dig. 1.2.2.44: (Pomponius libro singulari enchiridii) "Aulus Ofilius ... de legibus vicensimae primus

conscribit [Mommsen notes the reading conscripsit in the edition of G. Haloander of 1529]; de iurisdictione idem edictum

praetoris primus diligenter composuit" (on Ofilius, see W. Kunkel, Herkunft und soziale Stellung der r?mischen Juristen

[Weimar 1952, reprinted with addenda Graz-Wien-K?ln 1967]). For the expressions ausus est and componere in conjunc

tion with primus, cf. Hor. Serm. 2.1.62-63: "Cum est Lucilius ausus /primus in hunc operis componere carmina morem" (cf.

above, n. 20).

3^ But see Serv. auct. ad loc. "ostendit ergo se primum post Theocritum buc?lica scripsisse", rightly followed by

modern commentators; cf. Clausen [n. 27] 178-79.




(16) (Ps.)-Probus41 ad Georg. 3.10 (ed. H. Hagen, Lipsiae 1902): "Inde ergo se deducturum Musas

dicit, quia primus Mantuanorum carmina scripserif.

(17) Suet. Gramm. 27.1-2 (ed. Kaster [n. 41]): "M.' Otacilius Pitholaus ... primus omnium

libertinorum, ut Cornelius Nepos opinatur, scribere historiam orsus". Cf. Raster's comment, 300-1.

(18) Ps. Aero ad Hor. Carm. 1.26.9: "Hoc ... aut quia primus Horatius Latine lyricum carmen

scripsisse dicitur".42

A mixed and haphazard lot, but two themes, one cultural, and one linguistic, emerge with clarity. The

preoccupation with the originator, condemned by Seneca so eloquently [above (13)], is the hallmark of

the grammarian and the collector of curiosa; in our list (not counting Seneca) no author of fine literature

figures. The Pompeian inscription descends from that antiquarian tradition.

Linguistically primus (omnium) scripsit reveals itself as a sound and appropriate phrase, but it is

also evident that the reconstruction of the whole text of the inscription, from Delia Corte to Gigante and

beyond, runs counter to the idiom. To the question posed at the beginning of this investigation the texts

deliver a resounding rejection: there does not seem to exist even a single instance of scribere plus the

name of a play (or any other title) in the genitive.43 The name of a piece may appear in the accusative,44

but commonly titles were introduced by set phrases, such as (comoedia etc.) quam inscripsit, quae

inscribitur or inscripta est, cui nomen est, titulus est.45

Rebus sic stantibus, there is not even the slightest justification for the aberrant construct primus ...

scripsit comoediam Geminarum (vel sim.). In emendations and supplements we have no right to

postulate unattested words and unattested locutions.46 In our inscription the initial sentence thus ends

emphatically with scripsit. Yet we hardly can attribute to the composer of these lines the idea that

Menander was the first to write comedy as such. Maiuri's original instinct, as so often, was right: we

need the epithet novam. Two options offer. Primus omnium scripsit is a relatively rare locution. Hence

perhaps hie primus I [novam] como/'ediam scripsit. Still all apographs appear to show at the beginning of the line an o and an m. We might thus combine Maiuri and Della Corte, and squeeze novam into the

lacuna in line 3. The sentence assumes the following shape: hie primus (possibly primu[s\; see below) /

om[nium nova]m comolediam scripsit. This is fully idiomatic, and factually correct.

If there is no space for novam, we still get an enunciation linguistically correct but factually

misleading: hie primu[s] I om[niu]m comolediam scripsit. This is very akin to careless statements

proferred by some scholiasts, and even by Quintilian: see above (1), (3), (11). Now Roman playwrights

4^ As Baschera indicates, several letters read by earlier editors are now illegible (aut nostra ex om and quasi). See also

his comments (46-58) on the "ambiente cult?rale" and the sources of the Scholia. On our passage, cf. Idem, Ipotesi [n. 30]

37-38. On Vergil's primus ego, see the commentary by R. A. B. Mynors, Wirgil, Georgics (Oxford 1969) 180.

41 See on him P. L. Schmidt, NP 10 (2001) 361-63 (s.v. Probus 4); R. A. Kaster, Suetonius, De grammaticis et

rhetoribus (Oxford 1995) 242-69, esp. 248; M. Giosefi, Studi sul commento a Wirgilio dello Pseudo-Probo (Firenze 1991) is a massive investigation of codices, earlier editions, and the humanists, but it does not deal directly with the commentator or

the commentary itself.

42 Cf. Ps.-Acro's insipid comment on 1.1.34: "aut ab eo Lesbio, qui primus fuit lyricus scriptor". 43 It is important to stress that this finding holds not only for the phrase primus scripsit but also for all the electronically

ascertained instances of seribere comoediam (etc.). Cf. n. 13.

44 I was able to find only one instance: Macr. Saturn. 2.4.2 (of Octavian): "Aiacem tragoediam scripserat eandemque

quod sibi displicuisset deleverat".

45 See esp. the preface of Gellius (4-10), where he - as a preamble to introducing his own title of Noctes Atticae - lists

a variety of inscriptiones affected by various authors. Of modern studies I would recommend particularly the exhaustive

study by B.-J. Schr?der, Titel und Text, well explained by subtitles: Zur Entwicklung lateinischer Gedicht?berschriften. Mit

Untersuchungen zu lateinischen Buchtiteln, Inhaltsverzeichnissen und anderen Gliederungsmitteln (Berlin 1999), passim,

esp. 8-60, 319-28 (with ample further literature). Cf. also C. Moussy, Les appellations latines des titres de livres, in J.-C.

Fredouille and others (eds.), Titres et articulations du texte dans les oeuvres antiques (Paris 1997) 1-7.

46 A sin of pride which even the most accurate and erudite philologists would gladly commit, cf. Mnemosyne 52 (1999) 265.



52 /. Linderski

imitated (almost exclusively) the new comedy, not the old (cf. PCG VI 2, pp. 21-23, test. 62-69). Thus

for the composer of our inscription this would be the comedy, and Menander its creator.47 As the

inscription vanished, no certain solution is in sight. In the next two lines according to Delia Corte and Gigante there appears to have stood the title of a

play in the genitive. How to account for the case? Famous mosaics from Mytilene with representations of scenes from the comedies of Menander come to mind. The individual tableaus are identified by the

name of the piece in the genitive, and the number of the act, for instance KYBEPNHT?2N / ME (with E

placed above M) T, rvu?epvTyccov ji?(po?) y', the third act of Kybernetai.4* The Mytilene mosaics are

dated to the third century CE., but they go back to Hellenistic originals, and the division into acts is

attested for Menander already in a Hellenistic papyrus containing fragments of Sikyonios (or perhaps

Sikyonioi)49; furthermore we occasionally encounter indications of ji?po? in the scholia.50 It has been

argued that the portrait in Pompei derives ultimately, no doubt through the intermediary of copy books

(or rolls) of famous works of art, from the painting by Kratinos in the Athenian pompeion.51 The

original will have naturally displayed a Greek text on the papyrus roll; the Latin version is the

contribution of a local painter in Pompei. The title of the play as we have it was probably also selected

to suit the tastes or demands of the owner of the house, perhaps with some topical reference. After the

genitive form of the title we might thus reasonably expect the indication of ju?po? or in Latin actus.52

This word may have stood in what was at the time of Maiuri a lacuna in line 6. Unfortunately this line

of argument is inadmissible if the numeral at the end of line 6 was deciphered correctly. A twelfth act is

impossible.

47 K.-W. Weeber, Decius war hier ... Das beste aus der r?mischen Graffiti-Szene (Z?rich-D?sseldorf 1996) 93, no.

302, reproduced the first four lines of Della Corte's text, and translates: "Menander. Dieser hat als erster von allen eine

Kom?die geschrieben". 48 S. Charitonidis, L. Kahil, R. Ginouv?s, Les mosa?ques de la maison du M?nandre ? Mytil?ne (Bern 1970) 54 [= PCG

VI 2, p. 152, test, i]; for other titles, see 31 [= PCG VI 2, p.191, test, ii]; 39, 41 [= p. 214, test, ii], 44, 46, 49, 51 [= p. 159,

test, i], 55, 57, 60, and 15, 97-105 for a general discussion concerning the titles, the division into acts, and the illustrations of

Menander's comedies. See also L. Kahil, Remarques sur l'iconographie des pi?ces de M?nandre, in M?nandre (Entretiens

sur l'Antiquit? Classique 16 [Vandoeuvres-Gen?ve 1970]) 231-51, with helpful comments by E. W. Handley (pp. 253-54).

M?po? to denote "act of a play" is incredibly missing in Liddell-Scott (although this meaning of the word was recognized in

TLL s.v. "actus" [col. 450, line 78] already in 1900); this omission was only partially repaired in the Supplement of 1968,

and no new material (despite the striking finds in Mytilene) was added in the Supplement of 1996. 49 See Les mosa?ques [n. 48] 97, n. 2; A. W. Gomme and F. H. Sandbach, Menander. A Commentary (Oxford 1973)

646; A. M. Belardinelli, Menandro, Sicioni (Bari 1994) 143-45, with further ample literature. The term employed is,

however, not u?po?, but the indication XOPOY. Cf. also PCG VI 1, p. 134, frg. 184 for Thrasyleon.

50 But apparently not with the name of the play in the genitive. See Les mosa?ques [n. 48] 97, n. 2; Handley [n. 48]

253-54. From his examples we have, however, to remove the reference to Pap. Ox. 2741, a commentary on Eupolis'

Marikas, where (frg. 1 B, col. ii,17) the expression em tcoi tceutitcoi u?pei was convincingly interpreted by F. D. Harvey, ZPE

23 (1976) 231-33, as referring to the maritime loan (at the customary rate of twenty percent) and not to the fifth act. Cf. PCG

V, p. 405, fr. 192, line 97, with the reference to Harvey's article in app.

51 The Paintress Calypso [above, n. *] 92-94.

52 See TLL s.v. "actus", coll. 450-51. For Latin plays, a formal division into acts, and the indication of persons and

scenes, came rather late, see J. Andrieu, Etude critique sur les sigles de personnages et les rubriques de sc?ne dans les

anciennes ?ditions de T?rence (Paris 1940), esp. 85-98; Idem, Le dialogue antique (Paris 1954), esp. 35-65: "La division en

actes" (sceptical as to the existence of a formal division into acts, but this scepticism has now been undermined, in any case

with respect to Menander, by the mosaics from Mytilene). J. Marouzeau, in his lucid introduction to Terence, vol. I (Coll.

Bud? [Paris 1947]) 30-35; Brink [n. 29] 248-51. Latin grammarians quote numerous passages from comedies and tragedies,

but they never identify the actus. In only one manuscript of Terence (E; cf. Marouzeau, p. 76) we find, and only once, an

indication of actus: Andr. 458: fijnis) II a(ctus). The only specific references are to prologues, and the mention of a prologue

is occasionally combined with the title of the play in the genitive; see e.g. Quint. 11.3.91 (ut in Hydriae prologo [PGC VI 1,

p. 224, fr. 355]); Suet. De poet. 11.44 (ut in prologo Adelphorum); Prise. GL III, p. 186, lines 1-2 (Terentius in prologo

Eunuchi)', p. 421, line 13 (Plautus in Truculenti prologo); Diomed. GL I, p. 350, lines 11-12 (ut apud Terentium quoque

legitur in prologo Eunuchi).




A perceptive scholar has observed that in the papyrus roll Menander is holding only the last page

(the 8g%octok?aAiov) is visible, and that the text itself constitutes an imitation of the inscriptio of a

literary volumen.53 There is also a suggestion offered by Gigante that we have in the inscription a

mention of an anthology of Menander's comedies in four books: "Interpretando xii come duodecimam e

lib. iiii come liber quartus, avremmo indicata la commedia delle Gemelle come dodicesima di

un'edizione menandrea, di cui verebbe citato il quarto libro. Leggendo libri quattuor, si potrebbe

pensare ad un'edizione di commedie scelte in quattro libri: tre per ogni libro. Le Gemelle sarebbero

l'ultima del quarto libro". The intervening lines between these numerals may have contained

stichometric information.54 Not impossible but far-fetched and desperate. In the two (or three lines) which were already blank when Maiuri and Della Corte inspected the inscription one would rather

expect a quotation from the comedy named in the preceding line(s), perhaps with some topical

appropriateness for the owner of the house or with some gnomic maxim. Lib. TV may indeed well

denote lib(er) or lib(ri); and in this context the paradosis of a memorable Propertian verse would

demonstrate that plays of Menander could indeed be conceived of and read as libri (3.21.27-28):

"persequar aut Studium linguae, Demosthenis arma / librorumqm tuos, docte M?nandre, sales".

Unfortunately librorumque hangs strangely undefined, produces an inelegant line, and has rightly been

disputed.55 Two unsure texts are not good candidates for strengthening each other. But above all there is

the obstacle of the (supposed) genitive. As demonstrated ad oculos, the proposed string comoediam

scripsit Geminorum is unparalleled; but unparalleled is also a locution that would try to combine

Geminorum (or any other title in the genitive) and duodecimam.

Gigante himself was not completely satisfied with his ideas concerning the numerals, and in a

footnote (p. 136, n. 153) proposed an entirely different solution. They might refer to the sums of money. He called attention to the report of Harpokration: M?vocv?po? ?' ?v 'AvaxiGeixevrj Kai ?v Ai8\)|Liai? npoq

xa?? i?' ?pa%|Lia?? Kai Tpico?oAxSv (priai towod? (i.e. the freed slaves) xe?e?v.56 The two numerals

could denote duodecim denarii (or drachumae as in Plautus or drachmae as in Terence) and libellae

quattuor (though Plautus, Most. 357, translates triobolon as tres nummi), and thus stand at the beginning and the end of a translation of a passage from the Didymae. This passage may have been selected by Q.

Poppaeus Eros, probably a procurator of the owner of the house, who thus "ricordava e nobilitava la sua

emancipazione".57 That a passage from a comedy of Menander was quoted is a pleasing suggestion (cf.

above), but the ingeniously conceived libellae quattuor hardly qualify as a rendering of triobolos

(libella was denarii decuma, Varro, LL 5.174), and the term libella does not seem to be recorded in the

context of Roman manumissions. We have to abandon the enticing conceit of a cultured version of the

53 G. Pugliese Carratelli, L'instrumentum scriptorium nei monumenti Pompeiani ed Ercolanesi, in Pompeiana. Raccolta di studi per il secondo centenario degli scavi di Pompei (Napoli 1950) 266-78 at 266-67. On papyrus rolls, their

winding and unwinding, and their attachment to wooden rods, the umbilici, see M. Capasso, Wolumen. Aspetti della tipolog?a del rot?lo librario antico (Napoli 1995), esp. 73-98. For a very differently constructed instrument from Pompei, excavated

in 1873, but only recently identified as a roll winder, see S. Wood, Literacy and Luxury in the Early Empire: A Papyrus-Roll Winder from Pompei, MAAR 46 (2001) 24-40, esp. 26-32.

54 Gigante [n. 2] 135-36, following a remark by D. Del Corno, Selezioni menandree, Dioniso 38 (1964) 130-81 at 148,

n. 48. Commenting on lib. /Vhe observes: "dunque un'antologia". 55 Various conjectures have been proposed; see the list in G. R. Smyth, Thesaurus criticus ad Sexti Propertii textum

(Leiden 1970) 119; also docte has been impugned (cf. loc. cit.). PCG VI 2, p. 26, test. 89, keeps the paradosis, adduces in

apparatu selected conjectures, and refers to a recent discussion by J. P. Gould; in his subsequent edition of Propertius in

Loeb Class. Libr. (1990) this scholar accepted two emendations, libaboque and culte, and produced a pleasing translation.

5^ Harp. p. 204,5 Dind., reproduced (with further sources concerning the manumission payment in Athens) in PCG VI

2, p. 61, frg. 33; p. 101, frg. 116.

57 His name stands on a bronze signaculum (Not. Sc. 1933, 295) found in the house. But it is a quaint idea to suppose that a freedman would sponsor a painting in the house of his former master and current employer to celebrate his own

manumission. On the Poppaei in Pompei, see P. Castren, Ordo Populusque Pompeianus. Polity and Society in Roman

Pompeii (Acta Instituti Romani Finlandiae [Roma 1975]) 209.



54 /. Linderski

Petronian Trimalchio who famously celebrated his manumission in a gaudy mural (Sat. 29). But to

confess ignorance is a difficult thing to do. The newest entrant into the numeral fray bears witness to

that frailty. Antonio Varone ventured the following reconstruction: Menander. I Hie primu[m] om[niu]m

como/ediam scripsit I qu[i] e(rat) annolru[m\ = XIV = / Lib(ri) = IIII (after primu[m] by a lapsus calami

there is omitted the indication of the end of the line). He translates: "Menandro. Costui prima di ogni altra cosa scrisse una commedia all et? di 14 anni. 4 libri".58

Varone based his reconstruction on three old photographs, the original apograph of Delia Corte, the

apograph "leggermente diverso" published in CIL, the apograph of Maiuri, and also on the autopsy of a

few traces of letters still visible. He reproduces (p. 50, nos. F and E) the original apograph of Della

Corte and also the apograph made by the "disegnatore" R. Miele. It is not clear what in his text the

equation symbol (=) should denote (empty spaces? - but this does not obtain for Lib. IIII, where no

apograph indicates a lacuna).

We begin with the translation. It does not make much sense. Odd things occur in life, and odd

phrases in literature and inscriptions, but what message should it be that Menander wrote a comedy still

as a teenager before he wrote other things. He did not write any "altra cosa" but the comedies.59

Varone's earlier rendering (see n. 58), according to which Menander wrote a comedy for the first time at

the age of twelve (sic!), produces at least a sensible utterance. But hardly acceptable. Anonymus De

comoedia, our only testimony in this matter, states that Menander wrote his first comedy still as an

ephebus, i.e. not yet twenty years old, but certainly not as young as twelve or fourteen.60 Varone is well

aware of that situation: "la tradizione attribuisce a Menandro la presentazione al concorso della sua

prima commedia a diciannove anni: con essa concorderebbe in pieno anche la nostra iscrizione, ove si

leggesse al sesto rigo XIX, lettura non del tutto impossibile, anche se a me ? sembrato pi? punt?ale

leggere XIV" (p. 47). A spectacular example of special pleading. First of all Varone is uncertain as to

the numeral: it may be XIV; XIX is not entirely impossible, and his earlier inclination (and of all earlier

editors) was XII (the unanimous reading of all early copies). It is a preconceived theory in search of a

suitable numeral. Antiquarians and scholiasts were interested in all kinds of mirabilia, among them

precocious young writers. A Greek poet in Rome, eleven years old, is enshrined in stone.61 To import such an image into our inscription, on the flimsiest of epigraphical grounds, is not a sensible procedure.

But above all the Latin text thus produced is a mirabile onto itself.

It was the inspection of a photograph, Varone writes (p. 54. n. 8), that made possible the

"integrazione" primu[m] in place of primus read by Maiuri and Della Corte. This is inaccurate: Delia

Corte did indeed read primus, but Maiuri printed primu(s). At the end of the line all apographs report a

trace of a letter, perhaps the lower part of an s. But even if we agree that no trace of an s was ever

visible, this does not mean that we should rush to embrace Varone's primu[m]. Primus (omnium) ...

scripsit, as amply demonstrated in this paper, was a standard Latin locution; primum scripsit, while not

58 A. Varone, Gli abitanti della casa, in G. Stefani (ed.), Menander. La Casa del Menandro di Pompei (Milano 2003)

46-55 at 47. In his earlier attempt at a reconstruction and translation Varone gave a slightly different version: Menander. I

Hie primu[m] o[-] comolediam scripsit I qui e(rat) anno/ru[m] XII. I Libri IIII ("Menandro. Questi scrisse per la prima

volta una commedia all'et? di dodici anni. Quattro libri"). See his piece Le iscrizioni, in M. Borriello and others (eds.),

Pompei. Abitare sotto Wesuvio (Ferrara 1996) 200.

59 For a similar conceit of a scholiast, cf. above in the text, example (14), and n. 39.

60 PCG VI 2, p. 1, test. 3. And see the excellent study by St. Schr?der, Die Lebensdaten Menanders, ZPE 113 (1996)

35-48, esp. 36-38.

61 For a commentary, see J. A. Fern?ndez Delgado, J. Ure?a Bracero, Un testimonio de la educaci?n literaria griega en

?poca romana: IG XIW 2012 = Kaibel, EG 618 (Badajoz 1991); S. D?pp, Das Stegreif gedieht des Q. Sulpicius Maximus, ZPE 114 (1996) 99-114; H. Bernsdorff, Q. Sulpicius Maximus, Apollonios von Rhodos und Ovid, ZPE 118 (1997) 105-112.




impossible, has but a few attestations,62 and in the whole electronically searchable corpus of Latin

literature there is no example of the phrase primum omnium ... scripsit (or scripsisse). The phrase qui erat annorum is rare but well attested.63 But the abbreviation e(rat) is unprece

dented. Varone is again well aware of that fact (p. 54, n. 7): it is "l'insolita abbreviazione", but it can be

"utilmente confrontata" with s(unt) of CIL IV 1900 and fruit) of CIL IV 2450. Much more useful and

telling is the confrontation with the statistical data gleaned from the Epigraphische Datenbank Heidel

berg: 162 examples of s(unt), 4 of fruit), 2790 of e(st), and none of e(rat). But unattested is not only the

abbreviation e(rat); the whole sequence hie ... qui erat is well-nigh solitary.64 To conclude: the first four lines are safe enough and banal enough. They receive illumination from

the idiom and preoccupations of scholiasts and antiquarians. The remainder of the vanished text, much

more intriguing, has served only as a proving ground for philological ingenuity or its reverse.

Chapel Hill, N.C. J. Linderski

62 In the material collected in this paper there is in fact only one secure attestation: see above, n. 25 (Porphyrio, ad Hor.

Ars 275). See also Serv. ad Aen. 6.667: "nam ad ipsum (sc. Orpheum) primum carmen scripsit (sc. Musaeus), quod

appellate crater". In all other instances primum occurs in the construction of ace. cum inf. {primum scripsisse), and thus in

the nominative we may well postulate primus; see above, nn. 16 (Diom. GL I, p. 489, lines 7-8); 38 (Porphyrio ad Hor.

Carm. 4.9.3); 39 (Serv. auct. ad Verg. Buc. 6.1); cf. 14 (Amm. Marc. 30.4.5). The TLL article prior (primus), erudite in all

matters grammatical, is disappointing with respect to phraseology: only a meagre selection of passages referring to primi inventores (of the type primus, primum fecit I factum etc.), coll. 1345,68

- 1346,25; 1364,39-59; and no treatment in one

place of various kinds of junctures with omnium. Of the instances of primus (primum) scripsit asssembled in this paper none

appears to be listed.

63 Liv. 33.33.3: "sed erat trium ferme et triginta annorum"; Dig. 10.2.39.2: "Seruo libertatem dedit qui erat annorum

quindecim"; 48.10.5.pr.3: "qui... et annorum uiginti quinqu? eraf. But observe that Servius does not employ erat when he

provides this information (ad Verg. Buc. 1.28): "ut diximus XXVIII. annorum scripsit buc?lica"; cf. Buc. pr. p. 3, line 26

(ed. Thilo): "sane sciendum Vergillium XXVIII. annorum scripsisse buc?lica".

64 For the construction hie ... qui Varone adduces (p. 54, n. 8) V. V??n?nen, Le latin vulgaire des inscriptions

pomp?iennes (Berlin 19663) 122 (he quotes the edition Helsinki 1937, 206), but none of the examples listed by V??n?nen even approximately matches the sentence conjured up by Varone. Hie ...

qui is in fact not infrequent, especially in informal

Latin of the comedians, but for the phrase hie ... qui erat there does not appear to exist any parallel. In Cicero's sentence

(Werr. 2.1.67) "Hie lictor istius Cornelius, qui cum eius servis eraf, hie does not refer to Cornelius but (as Professor Kassel

observes) simply means "here", pointing to the place where Cornelius was killed.



j.linderski, the menander inscription from pompei zpe 159, 2007

Documents

menander inscription

jstor terms

jstor archive

menander hie primus

terms conditions of

rgica commentarii lipsiae

pmall use subject

following text