The name is absent

of details. Pauvinius' Fasti are a splendid work, and his sup-
plements to them deserve admiration, considering his resources.
It was a piece of good fortune for him that fragments of the
Capitoline Fasti, which yielded many results, were found during
the building of a church. Several pieces also have been disco-
vered in my own presence, from which useful hints may be
derived in relation to times for which Livy is lost.

The Fasti have come down to us in several separate col-
lections, and even for periods in which we arc without Livy’s
guidance.

About the close of the sixteenth century Stephanus Pighius,
of Campen in Overysscl⁵, a man of great learning, first con-
ceived the idea of restoring the history of Home in the form
of annals; his object being not merely to produce a supplement
for the lost portion of Livy, but to subject the history of Livy
himself to a critical examination. But the idea of his annals
is a mistake. He dwells upon things of secondary importance.
If the Fasti were preserved complete, they would be important
only in so far as we might see, for instance, when the distinction
between the patrician and plebeian aediles ceased to be observed,
and in so far as we might form conclusions as to the age and
life of certain persons from the time of their consulship or
praetorship. When a young man, I endeavoured to Icarn the
consular Fasti by heart, and I believe that Roman youths did
frequently so learn them. Many Romans of good, memory
were able, for example, to state the year of the consulship of
Scaevola and Crassus, or of other men, at any time. This
would have been a useful exercise for a memory like that of a
Scaligcr or a Murctus. Pighius, of course, wished to restore the
Fasti for the times for which they were lost; this he did as far
as possible by collecting the scattered statements of the ancient
writers; but where he had no authorities, he made up the
Fasti of what seemed possible or probable to him, according
to the leges annales. For example, when he wants a tribune
of the people, he puts in the name of some plebeian quite at
random and without any reason whatever; when he wants the

⁵ lie was secretary to Cardinal Granvella, and afterwards lived as a priest at
Xanten on the Rhine, but he had spent many years in Italy. His Commentaiy
on Valerius Maximns, and his Hercules Prodicius, are highly respectable
performances. The country of the lower Rhinchad at that time seteral excellent
scholars, such as Fr. Fabricius.—N.

name of an aedile, lie takes the name of one whom he knows
to have been consul afterwards; and in this manner he makes
out whole lists of tribunes, aediles, etc.⁶ It was not however,
his intention to deceive, for he marked his supplements as such.
This has been so little heeded that, until recently, there have
been scholars who took the Fasti of Pighius for authentic
records. G. J. Vossius transcribed many things on no autho-
rity except that of Pighius; and Professor Schubert of Kbnigs-
berg, in his work on the Iioman aediles, has introduced names
of aediles which are simply copied from Pighius: but not-
withstanding all this, he who writes on Iioman history cannot
dispense with the work of Pighius. IIe used inscriptions, and
also made many ingenious combinations; it has often led me
to the discovery, that combinations which I myself had made
were wrong. Pighius died before he had completed his task,
and the learned Jesuit, Andreas Schottus, of Antwerp, pub-
lished the work with a continuation by himself, which is
. far inferior to what Pighius had written.

An account of the treatment of Koman history gives us a
picture of the course of philology in general: in the fifteenth
century it was scarcely awakened and uncritical; in the six-
teenth, people penetrated rapidly and deeply into the spirit of
antiquity, but without entirely securing the results. The fair
period of philology however disappears about the beginning
of the seventeenth century; and in Germany, where it had
sprung up rather late, it was crushed by the Thirty years’ war.
It was combined with other studies: diligent and laborious
works were produced, but they were without genius, and their
philological substance was small. The school of Strasburg,
however, still maintained its reputation. Towards the end
of the Thirty years’ war, John Freinsheim of Strasburg wrote
his Supplements to the work of Livyd This bold under-
taking is executed very unequally.⁸ As far as single facts are
concerned, he left little unnoticed; but in a thorough compre-
hension of these ages; and in the arrangement of the materials
relating to them he is deficient. He had no idea of the Roman
state in either its military or its civil affairs, though he was

⁶ Compare vol.ii. p. 559, and notes 1238 and 1297.

⁷ Thercierencesintlieoriginalcdition are printed ∖ cry incoιrcetly, and tl^,∣e
reprint in Drakcnboiclds edition of Livy is still worse, or at least just a∙' had a^ς>
the original edition.—N.              ⁸ Compare vol. Hi. note 847.

<<   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   >>

More intriguing information