XXX
L. cinciüs alimentus.
Iiis more advanced years — which bore the title Q. Fabii
Annales, and when he found a Fabius who lived between Cato
and Piso, he added Pictor, a name with which he was familiar,
where he ought to have added Maximus. Such a mistake
most easily occurs when a person dictates.33 We must also
remember that Cicero did not possess a very extensive know-
ledge of the history of his country, in evidence of which I
need only mention what everybody knows, that his repeated
statement about the self-sacrifice of Decius, the grandson, is a
mere fancy of his own.39 Cicero not seldom blunders in the
praenomen of a person; thus, contrary to all other authorities,
he calls Virginia’s father Decimus Virginius. The praenomen
Numerius was moreover very common in the family of the
Fabii, so that it may have been rather familiar to Cicero.
Lastly Diodorus mentions the same dream of Aeneas, which is
referred to by Cicero, and Statesthatitistaken from Fabius.40
LECTURE V.
L. Cincius Alimentus1, who, as we learn from Dionysius of
Halicarnassus2, wrote the history of Rome in Greek, was a
contemporary of Q. Fabius Pictor. It is very instructive to
examine such isolated statements, in order to form a correct
estimate of their value ; for without Dionysius we should not
know that Cincius wrote in Greek. From two passages of
Livy3 we know only that Cincius wrote on the second Punic
38 When a man speaks under great mental excitement, he may easily make a
blunder ; hut when he dictates, it may happen still more easily. It has often
happened to me, that in rcferrin g to a man I pronounced a wrong name, and
did so repeatedly, until some one called my attention to it. Another instance
of such a blunder occurs in a letter of Cicero to Atticus (vi. 2). He had called
the citizens of Phlius Phliuntii, and Atticus reminded him that they were called
Phliasii. Cicero replies, that the mistake had escaped him, and that he knew
very well what he ought to have said. The principle of comparing the relations
of ancient history with those of our own time, in order to form a more distinct
notion of them, should also be followed in the explanation of ancient authors.—N.
39 See vol. iii. p. 505. Cicero, De Finib. ii. 19, Tnscul. Quaest. i. 37.
40 Diodor. Fragm. ap. Syncell. p. 366, cd. Dindorf. In Corte’s edition of
SallustjthefragmentsofPabiusPictor are printed along with those of Iabius
ServiIianus.—N.
* Compare vol. i., p. 272, foil. 2 i. 6. 3 xxi. 38, vii. 3.
C. ACILXUS.
XXXl
war but from Dionysius4 we learn that he wrote a complete
history of his country from the earliest down to his own time.
He was a senator and praetor in the second Punic war, and
was taken prisoner by the Carthaginians at the beginning of
the war.3 From these facts we see that he must have been a
man of great personal merit; for although the Koman laws
were at that time very severe towards prisoners of war, yet
he rose to high offices. He tells us that he conversed with
Hannibal, who gave him an account of his passage over the
Alps : another proof of his personal importance and of his
ability to speak Greek. Livy calls him maximus auctor, and
considers his authority as decisive. Besides his history of
Kome, he is said to have written in Latin, on chronology, on
the consular power, and on the Roman calendar. There can
be no doubt that the Greek and Latin works are the produc-
tions of the same author. Dionysius informs us that differing
in this respect from the majority of his countrymen, he treated
of the Roman antiquities as an independent and critical inves-
tigator.6 How much Dionysius may have borrowed from him,
cannot be ascertained. A fragment of his in Festus throws
much light on the relation subsisting between the Romans and
the Latins.
Not long after him (subsequent to the year 570), C. Acilius
wrote Roman annals from the earliest times, down to the war
with Antiochus. In one passage quoted from his work he
speaks of Romulus, and Dionysius refers to him in regard to
the restoration of the sewers. His work likewise was in Greek,
and was afterwards translated into Latin by one Claudius who
is otherwise unknown to us.τ Acilius too seems to have been
an important and respectable writer. Thus the literature of
Rome was at that time essentially a Greek one.
There are some other Romans who, at a later time, wrote in
Greek ; but it is uncertain whether they wrote the entire history
of their country, or only memoirs of their own time. We
have mention of A. Postumius Albinus, a Contemporaryofthe
elder Cato (about 600), and Cn. Aufidius, a contemporary of
Cicero’s youth. It was probably about the beginning of the
4 i. 6. 5 Livy, xxi. 38, xxvi. 23, 28, xxvii. 7, etc.
β A-Krause, Vitae et Fragmenta veterum Historicorum Romanorum p. 68, foil.
7 Livy. xxv. 39, xxxv. 14; Cicero, De Off. iiɪ. 32; Dionys. iii. 77; Plutarch,
Romul. 21.