Wundervölker, Monstrosität und Hässlichkeit im Mittelalter (German Edition)

Sue Bohlin offers a quiz covering Bible basics rather than trivia. That's because we're not reading and studying the Bible. Who wrote the first five books of the Old Testament? .. Probe fulfills this mission through our Mind Games conferences for youth and adults, our 3-minute daily radio program, and.

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online The Rex Guide to Roman Emperors (The Rex Guides Book 2) file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with The Rex Guide to Roman Emperors (The Rex Guides Book 2) book. Happy reading The Rex Guide to Roman Emperors (The Rex Guides Book 2) Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF The Rex Guide to Roman Emperors (The Rex Guides Book 2) at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF The Rex Guide to Roman Emperors (The Rex Guides Book 2) Pocket Guide.

It had seemed possible that this coinage might even have been some sort of limited edition; a rarity for the Anglo-Saxons.

  • Ancient Roman Monarchy.
  • Fighting Out of Mobberley, England;
  • that we should think as well as read, not only do we once more.
  • Edward Gibbon-The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire 1!
  • A Walk In The Darkness (Ben and Danielle).
  • Smashwords – The Rex Guide to Roman Emperors – a book by E Warr.

But Watlington has added over a dozen more specimens, by a number of new moneyers and diverse in style; an indication that, although this may have been a short-lived coinage, it was produced on a significant scale. The coinage with the two emperors stands out as a substantive as well as symbolic segment of the coinage of the s. One central question historians and numismatists will consider is what kind of infrastructure lies behind the coinage. Most pennies from the ninth century carry the name of the man who made the coin, the moneyer, as well as that of the king under whom he worked.

It is rare for coins of this period, however, to carry an explicit reference to where they were made. Canterbury and London were both mint-towns, but which coins belong to each and which might be the work of moneyers based elsewhere? Did moneyers move between different places, or did kings share the services of moneyers in major centres such as London? The coins in the Watlington hoard may give fresh answers to these questions and the nuts and bolts of the monetary system which emerge could speak volumes about the organisation and economic geography of ninth-century England.

A larger issue which will have to be revisited is the relationship between money and politics. Who chose to use images such as the two emperors: one or both kings, or local authorities such as the moneyers? Who chose how to title the kings on their coins? The Watlington hoard offers an increasingly clear window onto the interaction of Mercia, Wessex and the Vikings, as well as the local articulation of political and economic power. One can only look forward to what else will be seen by gazing through it.

As means of public competition were removed from the nobility, manners and conduct became increasingly important. These exercises were for dedicated Stoics like Seneca and of course Marcus Aurelius. I have argued elsewhere that the Veyne—Foucault model does not work without modiWcation for the eastern, Greek- speaking nobilities. For them we can certainly point to a clear concern with internal and external evaluation of appearance, of sexuality and marriage, of language; but the context of all this is the still considerable local political power of their class in the great 79 Cf.

Mougeon and E. Beniak, Linguistic Consequences. Elias, Court Society and Civilizing Process. Foucault, Care of the Self; P. Hadot, Inner Citadel.

Cleopatra | Winx Club Wiki | FANDOM powered by Wikia

But the model is attractive for Fronto and Gellius and anyone else who belonged to the court or its periphery and we need to take the idea of a periphery Xexibly, remembering that we often know very little of individual aspirations and oppor- tunities or institutional spurs. Thus the intensity of the discourse of love and aVection between Fronto and Marcus marks it out as a mannered response to the pressure of an unequal relationship. It was properly the sphere of the language professional, the grammarian; but the basis of his inXuence lay in the wide acceptance of his premisses and their usefulness in determining social status and social integration.

The Nights are here located in a bicultural environment, for of the thirty titles Gellius now mentions nineteen are Greek. He con- demns these predecessors and rivals for their studied prettiness.

  1. Starting Out: The Réti.
  2. The Cavalier (Bodices and Boudoirs).
  3. Johann Wolfgang von Goethes Hymne Prometheus im Kontext des 18. Jahrhunderts (German Edition).
  4. Join Kobo & start eReading today.
  5. Wicca 1A: Annies Book of Magic and Women!
  6. Gellius was an admirer of the great cultural Wgures of his day. Some of these have professional expertise in grammar Sulpicius Apollinaris or rhetoric Antonius Julianus or philosophy Calve- nus Taurus, Favorinus , others are over-educated amateurs who combine high education and occasional teaching with politics Fronto, Herodes Atticus.

    The most appealing chapters of the Attic Nights are dialogues or staged scenes presenting these char- acters in discussion of Roman or Greek high culture. This is part of the artistry of the work. But it is also a genuine reXection of a culture where continuous evaluation by male peers was the name of the game. What emerges very strongly from Gellius is a sense of the past as a repository of correct social behaviour. This is hardly surprising given the traditions of Roman historiography and the value accorded to exempla in literature and art. I begin with an example from the end of the Attic Nights which places discussion of these matters in a familiar courtly and mannered context.

    The scene is a debate between Favorinus and the jurist Sextus Caecilius Africanus , pupil and follower of the great jurist-politician Salvius Julianus Aemilianus. For anyone investi- gating Antonine culture, Favorinus has to be a focus. As we shall see, Favorinus appears in Gellius as an expert on Greek and Roman culture. He is biculturalism incarnate. Yet as Gellius was quite aware, Favorinus presented himself Wrst and foremost as a Hellenist. Barigazzi, Favorino, 98— includes the Gellian testimonia and fragments for Favorinus with useful comments. Gleason, Making Men, 3—20, — Greek Corinth was destroyed by the Romans in bc and was then founded as a Roman colony in 44 by Julius Caesar.

    In the Hadrianic period its public epigraphy suddenly turns Greek. At Attic Nights To Favorinus they appeared to be riddled with confusion and laid down punishments that were either too harsh or too lenient. Kent, Corinth, 18— Roman culture is taken as dominant in Ps. Philo, Leg.

    VS —92 is neutral. See too Beall, below, Ch. For example, at 2. Later in the same book 2. Favorinus is made to say that Latin suVers form a greater inopia than Greek in names for colours. It is important for Gellius to present Favorinus talking with authority on Latin.

    Holford-Strevens, Aulus Gellius, [90]. Note 6. Holford-Strevens, op. At For Gellius detailed linguistic knowledge was the indispensable basis of culture. Favorinus as an expert on Latin is the theme of He then proceeds to reveal his deep familiarity with Cicero and Cato, backed up by quotations from Homer and Aristophanes to make general points. For lack of courtesy in this regard cf.

    This emerges explicitly in Gellius does not allow continuous Greek into his Nights with the exception of quoted passages, only one of which is long. There is virtually no Greek. The interweaving of Favorinus and Gellius is manifest and the quotation of similar thoughts in the old Roman poets successfully Romanizes a Greek topic. A like apology for a transla- tion comes at the end of As editors have noted, the Latin translation is improved by echoes of Ovid. Here again advice which is suited to Greek—a medical subject—is purveyed in Latin, though his audience would have been perfectly capable of reading it in Greek.

    Related titles

    Gellius several times quotes snippets of Favorinus in Greek. For the importance of medical knowledge to humanitas see The function of the particular point as a spur to general know- ledge has been alluded to already regarding the testimonies of Favorinus and Fronto. Gellius was quite aware that some of his recollections were boring and pedantic. He countered this by placing dull information in an arresting or entertaining context— the routing of an obstreperous grammarian, a boat trip on the star- studded Saronic gulf, wandering home from the Vatican plain as the sun set, and so on.

    Although the discussion is exclusively Roman, the results tell us much about Antonine biculturalism. First, intellectuals in the ancient world tended to be restricted to the wealthy. Second, grading citizens by class and making clear their duties and obliga- tions to each other is something dear to Gellius.

    Bilingualism is explicit in the last appearance of Fronto in the Nights, The man is a Greek who has come to Rome to learn Latin. Whether Gellius here records quotations actually delivered or foisted on his speaker is irrelevant it was he who chose to publish them in his work. Garcea and V. Lomanto, below, Ch. On citizenship and Latin cf. On the attitudes here cf. But at This attitude is relevant to his control of Greek material and his comments on it. The Nights contain a fair amount of Greek the overall quantity is of course very small , but most of it is technical terminology or free-standing quotation.

    There is virtually no code-switching which is not clearly connected with grammatical, rhetorical, or philosophical subjects the most common type of code-switching in Latin literature. The Nights are not private letters: the private scenes Gellius gives us, however Wctional, are presented to a male public audience.

    The sketch of Julianus certainly shows how relaxed Gellius can be with regard to contem- porary Greeks; Fronto could never have laughed like this. The comparability of Roman and Greek culture is clear from the same note 1. Herodes is always introduced in the Nights as a consular or senator, i. The abuse accords both cultures equal status. Contrast For technical switching cf. Gamberale, La traduzione, chs. For the wider context of Latin translation from Greek consult A. Bartelink, Hieronymus. On the other hand Epictetus is translated without apology at Unfortunately the note on his experiences of translating Plato in book 8 is lost 8.

    But the various comments on the problems of and opportunities presented by translating longer passages or individual words give suYcient indication that Gellius thought some things were best left in Greek and at the same time believed that Roman authors like Vergil could translate with real Xair or could fall Xat. Symptomatic of this is the development of the word opicus. In origin this was an ethnic, an early form of Oscus. But a fragment of Cato the Elder makes it clear that it was used by Greeks to disparage Romans. The story of Arion at Anderson, below, Skutsch on Ennius, Ann. Fronto, Ep.

    At Juvenal, Sat. The same usage occurs three centuries later in Sidonius Apollinaris, Ep. This humour is not without sign- iWcance. In the grammarian Scaurus there is contempt for someone who cannot follow his explanation of aspirated words in Greek. In Fronto there is tension, in Marcus self-irony. Not to under- stand Greek was not to belong. The picture which emerges from Gellius is that of a man who believed fervently in the association of culture and morality. Knowledge of language and literature was the key expression of this.

    When Melissus had made a mistake as he had , who could fail to be disappointed? But what role? As has been remarked, Fronto, Gellius, and Apuleius oVer insuYcient evi- dence of a widespread linguistic movement. In any case, trying to look at things in terms of Greek purism is the wrong way to go about it. Rather, Gellius and the others are concerned to demon- state their command of all Roman culture and its transmission through literature. This includes early Latin the ueteres ; but it certainly does not stop with these authors.

    Their understanding of the Latin language in its full development gave them the right in their own eyes to innovate extensively. We should assume that they would have been happy for those as cultured and as literary as themselves to do the same. Tertullian has been seen as one of their natural heirs in this regard.

    This lexicon had perforce to contain and naturalize Greek terminology. All these men needed Greek to show they possessed culture. They needed it to enrich Latin as necessary. They needed it as an alternative register for technical subjects, the aVections, awkward or problematical rela- tions. They needed to be in control of it in an era when the Greek language was again at the height of its powers.

    Favorinus and Marcus Aurelius Meditations are the most striking surviving examples of Latin speakers making extensive use of Greek at this time. But we should not forget Claudius Aelian in the early decades of the next century. His two surviving miscel- lanies, the Varia historia and De natura animalium, not to mention his Letters of Farmers, would have excited the scorn of Gellius. In them he makes bold claims for his choice of language Atticizing Greek and his ability to sustain it Nat. Yet Aelian was exceptional. More interest- ing is evidence for the continuing acceptability of Greek code- switching in Latin in the same generation from the great jurist Ulpian.

    Whatever the case, he clearly expects his Latin readers to know suYcient Greek to understand his switches and, more importantly, to accept them as normal. There are in fact a very few examples of code-switches in earlier jurists and a couple immediately after Ulpian. This should perhaps be connected with his conscious attempt to promote Roman law in the new environment of the Constitutio Antoniniana. It may well show that he was in fact a Greek speaker who failed to appreciate the constraints on Greek in Latin public discourse law.

    It also shows an appreciation that Greek was a natural part of Latin speech and that display of a Greek identity, far from being intru- sive, was a sine qua non of the highest Roman culture. Praxean 3. Fredouille, edn. In this chapter we shall focus on ch. To nanus Fronto prefers the native term pumilio, which is attested in the works of early writers.

    As Fronto is not sure of his choice, he asks his friends, who are waiting with him to pay the emperor their respects in the salutatio Caesaris: C. Sulpicius Apollinaris, regarded by Gellius as an outstanding grammarian, teacher of the future emperor Pertinax in the early s HA Pert.

    CIL vi. We wish to thank Leofranc Holford-Strevens for discussing a previous version of this paper. Stabant forte una in uestibulo Palatii fabulantes Fronto Cornelius et Festus Postumius et Apollinaris Sulpicius, atque ego ibi adsistens cum quibusdam aliis sermones eorum, quos de litterarum disciplinis habebant, curiosius captabam. In his Natural History, Pliny, who had described Conopas as a minimus man and implicitly Andromeda as a minima woman during the reign of Augustus 7.

    Later on, he speaks of the pollard plane called chamae- platanus, lit. While showing that love makes people blind to the faults of the beloved, the poet quotes some examples of the ancient topos of euphemistic terms of endearment and, more generally, of the psychological mechanism of changing the objective reality in bonam partem 4. Using metaphorical expressions, Fronto conceives his literary theory in three stages: the genus humile of mutterers murmurantes , and two levels of genus sublime, i. See R. Loanwords and Literary Models They should be imitated, because their long-neglected language may suggest insperata atque inopinata uerba, i.

    Porcius alone of the orators of all time, and his constant imitator C. Sallustius, are among these; of poets Plautus especially, and most espe- cially Q. Ennius and his zealous rival L. Haines, i. The imitation of ancient authors, pursued by Fronto and Gellius3 in order to give new vitality and meaningfulness to the literary language, must not hinder the perspicuity of communication.

    Both the former ibid. Such inadequate messages should be replaced by common, even trite, expressions. Gellius agrees with his master Fronto on the theoretical aspects of his literary doctrine, but, as we shall see, he makes his own independ- ent assessment of the authors to be imitated.

    The case of Laberius, the Wrst to use the word nanus, is exemplary of this attitude. Yet he speciWes that it is not a. Fronto also proposes a quadripartite division of the genera dicendi gracilis, aridus, sublimis, mediocris , where Lucretius is deWned as sublimis De eloq. On the evaluation of Lucretius by Fronto, see R. The Greeks considered anyone who was not a Greek as a barbarian, including the Romans cf.

    Here the author criticizes the reproduction of Greek phonemes in Latin nominal inXection in barbaris casibus Graecam litteram adhibere. See B. Aristotle, in ch. Dupont-Roc and J. Lallot, edn. Whereas J. Ateius Praetextatus Philologus and native Latin grammarians Santra, Clodius Tuscus, Cloatius Verus wrote on this subject between the beginning of the Wrst century bc and the middle of the Wrst century ad. In Theod. Cupaiuolo, La teoria della derivazione, and R. Cavazza, Studio su Varrone, 88—97; D.

    This hypothesis is parallel to, and probably convergent with, the annalistic tradition of the Arcadian origin of Rome, as found in the fragments of Fabius Pictor 1, p. Gellius 2, p. Even when Greek is incorporated in the domain of peregrinitas, as is the case with the taxonomy of Quintilian, Inst. Greek loanwords are so many—Quintil- ian claims—because Latin is derived from Greek and it also borrows Greek terms when it lacks its own.

    On this passage, see B. On the phonographematic level, for example, Diomedes GL i.

    1. Romulus and Remus;
    3. Blue Guide Museums and Galleries of London!
    4. Indische Fragmente. Das Tagebuch einer Reise. (German Edition).
    5. MATT R. ROCKS: A Story That Matters;
    6. Evidence of an Anglo-Saxon Alliance.
    7. Mezen- tius, gaza. Moreover, according to Cassiodorus in Eutych. GL vii. Rhenus, Hannibal forms preserve the original aspiration in Latin. On the morphophonemic level, Varro fr. But, while a barbarum nomen uel uerbum aliquod peregrinum takes an arbitrary accent, non-integrated Graeca uerba save their original accent cf. GL iv. He not only lists diVerent typologies e. GL ii. For example, commenting on the toponyms Suthul and Muthul, Priscian prefers to consider them as communia, rather than neuter, because Punic, like Chaldaean, Hebrew, and Syriac, lacks this gender GL ii.

      He adds that barbarian words end frequently in phonological clusters which. Baratin, La Naissance de la syntaxe, —8. Epicuro] non solum Graecia et Italia, sed etiam omnis barbaria commota est; Diu. Collart, Varron grammairien, 73—5. This kind of problem was already discussed by Varro, who attests to a polemic between Crates and Aristarchus LL 8. Varro agrees with this opinion in a fragment of his De antiquitate litterarum fr.

      The taxonomy of linguistic units in three species hides their diVerent contribution to the overall system of the Latin language. In the vast corpus of the grammatici Latini, only barbarian proper nouns18 are taken into account and admitted. On the other hand, barbarian common nouns are generally proscribed as errors in speech in chapters de uitiis et uirtutibus orationis, where the external. This last term also occurs among the examples that Latin grammarians, following Donatus, derive from classical authors in order to illustrate the phenomenon of barbarolexis.

      Roman Latin. Vainio, Latinitas and Barbarisms, 25—6, 87—8, Holtz, edn. Ces exemples sont classiques depuis longtemps. See also the deWni- tions of barbarolexis in Cominianus quoted by Charis. The Wrst occurrence of the term barbarolexis cf. TLL ii. From Charisius on the term barbarolexis no longer refers to Greek words. Adams, Bilingualism, In his answer, Apollinaris not only quotes a reference showing the Greek origin of nanus, but also acknowledges in his friend the right that Pom- ponius Porcellus had denied to the emperor Tiberius, i.

      Anyway, nanus is considered a much less vulgar word than those introduced into the Latin language by Laberius. Fuisset autem uerbum hoc a te ciuitate donatum aut in Latinam coloniam deductum, si tu eo uti dignatus fores, essetque id inpendio probabilius, quam quae a Laberio ignobilia nimis et sordentia in usum linguae Latinae intromissa sunt. The theoretical assumption underlying the praise of Fronto by Apollinaris is that correct linguistic usage must be evaluated through the criterion of auctoritas, i.

      In comparison with the deWnition of Latinitas given by Varro fr. In his reply, the anonymous grammarian recalls some lines of Helvius Cinna fr. Fronto, however, had doubted the propriety of using nanus not so much for animals as for people. Gellius seems intentionally to forget some occurrences of this term: 1 Propertius 4. Courtney, The Fragmentary Latin Poets, The syntagm Genumana per salicta, which has been interpreted by some scholars as an allusion to the Cisalpine origin of Cinna see A. Traglia, Poetae noui, ; T. Wiseman, Cinna the Poet, 46—7; L. Sumner, review of Wiseman, op.

      This strange forgetfulness is consistent with other pieces of evi- dence spread in ch. The argumentative structure of Noctes In Democriti] modumque ipsum, quo caecitatem facile sollertia subtilissima consciuit, Laberius poeta in mimo, quem scripsit Restionem, uersibus quidem satis munde atque graphice factis descripsit.

      Even in this latter type, however, the correct- ness of non-assimilated forms is vouched for by both archaic and late Republican authors. On the reduplicative perfect, see LHSz i. For a more detailed discussion, see V. The nexus susque deque also occurs in Plautus, Amph. Nam et curulibus magistratibus functi, si nondum a censoribus in senatum lecti erant, senatores non erant et, quia in postremis scripti erant, non rogabantur sententias, sed, quas principes dixerant, in eas discedebant.

      The adjective bibosus is attested only in Salinator, from which Gellius quotes the line 80 R. In his gloss on pedarius Festus Pedaneus also occurs in Cic. On the technical meaning of pedaneus, see A. Varro, LL 7. Ernout and A. Meillet Dictionnaire, s. On the two forms, see LHSz i. In addition to the two lines by Laberius and Cinna, somniculosus also occurs in Fronto, Ep. In his opinion, the interpretation of amorabunda is doubt- ful, because according to Caesellius Vindex pp.

      Here he reproaches Laberius for his excessive boldness in coining neologisms and questions the correctness of many of his word-choices; as the capitulum has it Quod Laberius uerba pleraque licentius petulantiusque Wnxit; et quod multis item uerbis utitur, de quibus, an sint Latina, quaeri solet. On the basis of purist criteria and apart from any aesthetic evalu- ations, Gellius identiWes two categories of words which he Wnds equally blameworthy, namely neologisms and vulgarisms, i.

      On this point, see LHSz i. Ernout, Les Adjectifs; also F. Cavazza, below, Ch. On this formation, see LHSz i. Pianezzola, Gli aggettivi verbali in -bundus. Sed molestius equidem culpa- tiusque esse arbitror uerba noua, incognita, inaudita dicere quam inuolgata et sordentia. Laberius in mimis, quos scriptitauit, oppido quam uerba Wnxit praeli- center.

      In the hapax legomena mendicimonium R. Fronto had warned against the selection of inappropriate preWxes, especially as far as the compounds of luere and verbs derived from the same root are concerned Ad M. On the two suYxes, see LHSz i. In this chapter Gellius tells that he has celebrated Saturnalia in Athens with some friends and that they whiled away the time telling each other riddles.

      The right solution to each riddle earned the prize of a sesterce; other- wise, the penalty of a sesterce had to be paid: hoc aere conlecto quasi manuario cenula curabatur omnibus, qui eum lusum luseramus. Undoubtedly the syntagm in catomum had a certain vulgar Xavour. On this passage, see van den Hout, Commentary, —8. But quasi suggests that by means of this com- parison Gellius intends to associate the money collected through an erudite pastime with that won by lucky gamesters. It can be pointed out that many of the words he lists are either hapax legomena or terms attested, in the age before Marcus Aurelius, only in texts with technical content.

      Elutriare, which in Laberius occurs with lintea as its object R. In NH Lauandaria R. The other occurrences of. Tyrrell and L. Purser, v. It may be that Laberius alludes to the mythical Atalanta, excellent huntress and unequalled runner, who took part in the hunting of the Calydonian boar. The verb malaxare, whose origin is explained in Varro, LL 6. The vulgar character and foreign origin of gurdus 13 R. It occurs in Varro, LL 5. From the latter meaning, according to Caesar, BG 7. Our ignorance of the plot prevents our understanding the word.

      Obba 60 R. It is glossed poculi genus by Nonius , L. While obba designates a vessel of above-average quality,58camella 60 R. It is attested in the literary language both in Ovid, Fast. In Varro, LL 5. The lexicographers, however, assign capitium a diVerent meaning. Festus Nonius, 56 Truncis arborum aut admodum Wrmis ramis abscisis atque horum delibratis ac praeacutis cacuminibus perpetuae fossae quinos pedes altae ducebantur.

      Huc illi stipites demissi et ab inWmo reuincti, ne reuelli possent, ab ramis eminebant. Quini erant ordines coniuncti inter se atque implicati: quo qui intrauerant se ipsi acutissimis uallis induebant. Hos cippos appellabant. Petronius, According to Ernout—Meillet, Dictionnaire, s.

      In Petronius The Graecism gubernius 3 R. Gellius himself mentions Cicero, who, in Cluent. The word occurs in Hor. In Plin. NH Botulus R. In PF Since the cook pretends that he has forgotten to disembowel the pig, Trimalchio orders him to do so in front of the guests, and suddenly Leuenna R. Gellius approves not so much of its use as of the adherence to the original neuter gender The use of emplastrum 1 R.

      Nor can the nouicii semidocti be identiWed who are held responsible for the mistake. Perhaps they are the grammarians of average education with whom Gellius often conducts a polemic. However, in actual fact many Greek loanwords that came into Latin through contacts among uneducated speakers show 63 See W. These remarks, however, do not prevent Gellius from nega- tively assessing the extension of the use of nanus from small animals to people of short stature.

      Most of all, such a discrepancy shows that within a literary movement which is generally considered to be homogeneous, one can record a variety of positions and that the love for the ueteres does not necessarily imply an unconditional approval. For a recent evaluation of the archaist movement, see U.

      Students of grammar and etymology have always known that in antiquity these two disciplines fared unequally. Grammar, which lent itself more both to theorizing and to direct analysis, became so systematic that its study depends even now in part on the ancients; etymology, not an independent science till the nine- teenth century, was by its nature too technical, too dependent on a scientiWc rigour unattainable in antiquity, to achieve successes and stable results and to leave an inheritance for posterity.

      In conse- quence, although the Stoics, unjustiWably conWdent in their methods, proclaimed that there was no word whose etymology could not be stated Varro fr. Clear and well known too is the connection of etymology with philosophy, not only in the systematic structure of the etymological. Author and translator wish jointly to acknowledge fruitful discussions of this chapter. Gellius, heir to a similar intellectual tradition, could not stand outside it; neither the knowledge nor the premisses for such an advance were available, even had he been a titan of erudition.

      As an etymologist we cannot expect him to do more than continue on established lines with the methods, procedure, and to a lesser extent ends already stated. Being the student and devotee of gram- mar that he was, he is interested in etymology mainly as a means towards correctness in the use of language. He had already seen that it provided a key for the interpretation of linguistic facts: correct spelling, correct expression, correct meaning all came from the etymology of words.

      He not only quotes his sources but corrects them, as he not infrequently does in matters of philology and literature. Sometimes he names them; at other times we can identify them with a high degree of probability from his mode of composition since consecutive chapters may derive from.

      Amongst the chief exponents cited by Hosius in his edn. Kretzschmer, De Gellii fontibus, and L. Ruske, De A. Gellius the Etymologist However, it is those etymologies that cannot be assigned to his sources, and therefore may be considered his own, with which I shall be concerned below. Gellius has privileged and preferred sources for etymology;4 the most important are Favorinus K. Nigidius Figulus K. Verrius Flaccus K. Terentius Varro K. They plainly suYce, with their doctrina, to cover the whole range of his interests, except perhaps for legal terms, and are the main sources both of the etymologies and of the Noctes Atticae as a whole.

      Cornelius Fronto K. Beck, Sulpicius Apollinaris, 18— Aistermann, De M. Antistius Labeo K. Aistermann , Q. Asconius Pedianus cf. Ateius Capito K. Cae- cilius, Caesellius Vindex K. Claudius K. Claudius Quadrigarius R. Cornelius Scipio minor R. Aelius Gallus K.

      The Thrifty Guide to Ancient Rome: A Handbook for Time Travelers

      Sulpicius Rufus K. Julius Hyginus K. Laberius, Laelius Felix R. Lavinius K. The origins of the Burgundian kingdom within the Roman Empire are always although perhaps rather too simply traced to the transfer of the remnant of the people to Sapaudia in c. What is equally unclear is the scale of the settlement. It is mentioned in only one Chronicle that known as the Chronicle of , and the archaeology does not suggest that large numbers of identifiable Burgundians were transferred to Sapaudia.

      Even so, in the current state of our knowledge, it is unlikely that the Burgundian settlement in Sapaudia was extensive. In any case, there may not have been a large pool of Burgundians after the Hunnic onslaught. This party was led by Gundioc. Certainly they were first and foremost an army. Soon after , however, they returned. Thus far, we can talk of a relatively small body of Burgundians, under the leadership of kings who had also come to hold the office of magister militum.

      We have no legislation that we can identify as being issued by either Gundioc or Chilperic, but we can be certain that these two leaders had a say in the settlement arrangements which can be traced in later laws. We know remarkably little about events in the zone controlled by Chilperic, despite a few comments in the letters of Sidonius Apollinaris and in the Vita Patrum Iurensium. Perhaps more important was the career of Gundobad, who left Burgundy for Italy, where he served under his uncle Ricimer. Two years later, however, he abandoned Italy, apparently after the elevation of Julius Nepos.

      As we learn from letters of Avitus of Vienne, however, he did not see himself as giving up his title. All we can say is that he was well established by , when he received an embassy from the Ostrogothic ruler of Italy, Theodoric, led by Epiphanius of Pavia. Ennodius in the Vita Epiphanii described Gundobad as rex and as princeps Burgundionum. The Gallo-Romans, of course, would have constituted the majority of the population. This, however, was not the end of immigration into the Gibichung kingdom.

      There are also adveni and homines extraneae nationis , who appear in the Liber Constitutionum. More important, in Constitutio Extravagans 21, which is unfortunately dateless, but is unlikely to be earlier than , we hear of Goths who have escaped from the Franks, and who are being given permission to settle in regione nostra.

      All barbarian peoples were mongrel, but the ethnic mix among the followers of Gundobad and Sigismund seems to have been extreme. Against this background, the tendency to substitute barbarus for Burgundio surely makes a good deal of sense. So too, the use of the phrase populus noster was a convenient way of talking about all the subjects of the ruler, but especially the barbarians among them. The people of the Burgundian kingdom were indeed the people of the Gibichung ruler.

      These terms represent a simple reality, and would no doubt have been more acceptable to a non-Burgundian barbarian living within the kingdom than would the word Burgundiones , especially in those laws dealing with matters other than the settlement of Burgundians. Given the mongrel nature of the Gibichung subjects, one might also consider the value of the term rex. That Gundioc, Gundobad, Sigismund and Godomar were all called rex at some point in clear enough. We are not dealing with ethnic kingship.

      This was an authority that all, including the Romans, could recognise. It was, however, an authority which was first and foremost military. It is perhaps not surprising that the signatories of the Prima Constitutio were Burgundian comites , who may well have been primarily military men rather than urban administrators. Of course, the Gibichungs legislated on issues that went far beyond the military, and their power was over the whole population. Ethnic terminology has bedevilled interpretations of the post-Roman period.

      To speak of the Burgundian kingdom is a convenient shorthand, but the area ruled by the descendents of Gundioc was not Burgundian in an meaningful sense. The Burgundians were not numerically dominant, nor were they the only barbarian group within the Gibichung realm. As for the rulers themselves, they were reges , but preferred not to see themselves as reges Burgundionum , arguably because the descriptor might seem to be limiting.

      They were principes and domni , and above all they were officers of the empire, legislating within an imperial tradition, with Roman laws in front of them, which they used and modified as they thought fit. He stated this, angling for the office of magister militum , which had been held by his father, grandfather and great-uncle. He may not have received the title before he issued the Liber Constitutionum , but the origins of the Code surely lie in the Roman authority of the Gibichungs.

      Ian Wood University of Leeds. Harries and I. Wood eds. Among more recent discussions of the Burgundian laws see H. Davies and P. Fouracre eds. Aux origines du Code civil , M. Rouche and B. Rio ed. The opening phrase of the law, which announces that it is the titulum centesimum quintum , is unique, and deserves consideration.

      Goffart, Barbarians and Romans A. The Techniques of Accommodation , Princeton, , p. For a more recent assessment, I. Porena and Y. Goetz, J. Jarnut and W. Pohl eds. Most of the documentation for the Burgundian kingdom is now conveniently gathered together in K. Martindale, Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire , vol. See Avitus, epp. See also the translations and commentary in D.