Page images
PDF
EPUB

3

bus discedentibus, derelictus. Neque certius quid de Galba: cuncta tamen, utut erant, quæ unquam essent audita, refert.. .« Extremam Galbæ vocem, ut cuique odium aut admiratio fuit, varie prodidere, Alii, suppliciter interrogasse, quid mali meruisset ? paucos dies exsolvendo donativo deprecatum : plures, obtulisse ultro percussoribus jugulum, agerent ac ferirent, si ita e re publica videretur. Non interfuit occidentium, quid diceret. De percussore non satis constat. Quidam Terentium Evocatum, alii Lecanium ; crebrior fama tradidit Lamurium XV legionis militem, impresso gladio, jugulum ejus hausisse.” Non tantum extremæ voces principum excipiebantur, sed quæcunque in re aliqua gravi jactassent, quibusque suos mores prodidissent, ea ex rumore, nullo auctore adhibito, refert Tacitus. Quin et audita est sævissima Vitellii vox, qua se, ipsa enim verba referam, pavisse oculos, spectata inimici morte, jactavit.

In multis quippe rebus, quas æquales vel proximi ætate literis manidare non audebant, quarum igitur auctores,' et testimonia deerant, rumores adeo sequi necessarium erat. Nonnunquam ex rumore accepta distinguit a traditis per certos auctores : “ In tradenda morte Drusi, quæ plurimis maximeque fidis auctoribus memorata sunt, re. tuli : sed non omiserim eorundem temporum rumorem, validum adeo, ut nondum exolescat." ? Illorum omnino rumorum rationem non poterat non habere, qui pervulgati erant, qui diu obtinuerant, quos res notæ et memorandæ fuerant consequutä. “ Nihil tamen Tiberium magis penetravit, quam studia hominum accensa in Agrippinam;

Fuere, qui publici muneris pompam requirerent compararentque, quæ in Drusum

cumulata. Quippe hæc nusquam perscripta fuerant, sed historiæ tamen momentum aliquod efficiebant, uti in rébus agendis vim magnam habuerant. “ Gnarum id Tiberio fuit; utque premeret vulgi sermones, monuit edicto.

Aliud exemplum legimus in extremis Galbæ rebus. 4 - Maturavit ea res (seditio in Belgico erumpens) consilium Galbæ de adoptione secum et cum proximis agitantis. Non sane crebrior tota civitate sermo per illos menses fuerat, primum licentia ac libidine talia loquendi, dein fessa jam ætate Galbæ. Paucis judicium aut reipubl. amor: multi occulta spe, prout quis amicus, vel cliens hunc vel illum ambitiosis rumoribus destinabant."

Per traditionem igitur de rumore, qui olim Romæ fuerat divulgatus, ad Tacitum nonnunquam fuisse relatum putemus. Sæpe vero illum, qui, ex nomine historicis tum indito, rerum auctor. esset, rumoris talis quoque fuisse auctorem putes, ita ut id, quod ipse opinaretur vel judi

pro opinione vel sermone tribueret. Si caussa alicujus rei esset reddenda, ipse quippe animadvertere, mentem intendere, seque in rem ipsam toto animo referre. Hoc se in physicis fecisse, et sic ad magis probabilem rei vel eventus alicujus explicationem pervenisse, ipse fatetur. Quum de exustis igne cælesti regionibus circa mare mortuum variorum relationes vel opiniones commemorasset; addit

caret, aliis

I Hist. I. c. 41. 4 Hist. I. c. 12.

2 Annal. IV, c. 10.

39 Annal. III. c. 4. 5. 6.

tandem :'"ego sicut inclitas quondam urbes igne cælesti flagrasse concesserim, ita halitu lacus infici terram, corrumpi superfusum spiritum, eoque fætus segetum et autumni putrescere reor.

Iterum de Oceano opiniones aliorum referens e suo palam quid addere amat : ? “ Sed mare pigrum et grave (ultra Caledoniam Septentriones versus) remigantibus perhibent: ne ventis quidem perinde attolli: credo, quod rariores terræ montesque, caussa ac materia tempestatum, et profunda moles continui maris tardius impellitur," et postea de longis Borealium regionum diebus : “Quod si nubes non officiant, adspici per noctem solis fulgorem, nec occidere et exsurgere, „sed transire affirmant. Scilicet extrema et plana terrarum, humili umbra, non erigunt tenebras, infraque cælum et sidera nox cadit.”

Mirum videri possit, quod in physicis, quippe in alieno versatus, suam ut judicis quasi ad decidendum ingerat personam, quum in rebus ad hominum mores et naturam pertinentibus ipse apparere nolit, verum quæ ipse cogitarit, judicarit, aliorum quasi ex ore referat. Verum in divinis rebus, quum ipse ex scrutatoris naturæ persona loquebatur, non veritatem et unitatem narrationis turbasse sibi videtur ; in humanis contra rebus non nisi veritatis ipsius testimonium referre, fas esse ducit. Etiamsi igitur quam maxime ingenio indulgeat, tamen ingenium suum, suum judicium interponi non vult. Historicus ipse ut rationes deducens, judicans, decernens nullibi apparere, personæ vero, quas quodque ævum tulerat, solæ loqui, agere, omnia in omnibus esse. Etiamsi conjecturæ tantum adduci possent, has conjecturas tamen æqualibus, non sibi tribuit. 3

“ Prorogatur Poppæo Sabino provincia Masia, additis Achaia et Macedonia. Id quoque morum Tiberii fuit, continuare imperia, ac plerosque ad finem vitæ in iisdem exercitibus, aut jurisdictionibus habere. Caussa variæ traduntur: alii tædio novæ curæ semel placida pro æternis servavisse : quidam invidia, ne plures fruerentur, sunt, qui

existiment, ut callidum eius ingenium, ita anxium judicium, neque enim eminentis virtutes sectabatur, et rursum vitia oderat: ex optimis periculum sibi, a pessimis dedecus publicum metuebat, qua hæsita-tione postremo eo provectus est, ut mandaverit quibusdam provincias, quos egredi urbe non erat passurus,"

Uti quisque, in quacunque conditione, quocunque loco positus, suæ naturæ convenienter se gesserit, id quidem ex hominum natura, ra.busque externis ipse Tacitus conjiciebat, et secum perpendebat ; quum narrationi vero esset includendum, tum, ut historiæ fides servaretur, testibus quibusdam, quippe qui hæc viderint, id tribuit, quod forsan non nisi in Taciti imaginandi vi exstiterat. E. g.

Pisonem (oratione gravi et honorifica a Galba adoptatum) ferunt, statim intuentibus, et mox conjectis in eum omnium oculis, nullum turbati aut exsultantis animi motum prodidisse." 4 Sic scilicet decere ejus personam Tacitus probe viderat.

Quamquam igitur tot monumenta antecedentium temporum, tot

1 Hist. V. c. 7.
4 Hist XI. C. 12. :

? Agric. c. 10. et 12.

3 Annal, I. c. 80.

[ocr errors]

tabulæ publicæ, tot singulorum libelli, epistolæ, commentarii in pri. vatis 'domibus asservati, tam pervulgatus ef' diu sustentatus rumor, argumentum omne historiæ Tacito suggerete potuisse videantur; cre. damus tamen, eum ex ista farragine indicia quidem, et externas sig. nificationes omnes desumsisse, internam vero hominum naturam, tecta animorum, caussas, modum, quo quæque res gesta esset, videri sibi ipsi finxisse.

Otium illi, per imperium Domitiani necessário' impositum, facultatèm dederat cuncta ista tacite colligendi. Nerva, tum et Trajanus illi concesserant, ut procederet, et homines, quales in rebus civilibus in curia, in aula se manifestant, cognosceret ; tum senex se totum in-ani. tiquum ævum, quod sibi describendum sumserat, retulit; tum es vestigiis, quæ collecti a se aliorum libelli indicårant, sibi animos hominum, sibi modum et ductum rei quam maxime nature convenienttes, meditando, colligendo, comparando efformavit: tum denique quemqué agentem, loquentem induxit, vim vitamque narrationi addidit.

Sic ratiocinationes, et judicia enascebantur, quæ vel antiquioris Augustani ævi hominibus tribuenda sustineret;' "Igitur vérso (póst Actiacam pugnam) civitatis statu, nihil usquam prisci et integri moris: omnis, exuta æqualitate, ju'ssa principis aspectáre : fulla in presens formidine, dum Augustus ætate validus, seques et domum, et pacem sustentavit. Postquam provecta jam senectus, ægro et corpore fatigabatur, aderatque finis, et spes novæ : pauci Bona libertatis incassum disserere, plures bellum pavescere: alii cupere : pars multo maxima imminentis dominos variis rumoribus differebant : trtcem Agrippam

Tiberium Neronem maturum annis, spectatum bello, sed vetere atque insita Claudiæ familiæ superbia. Multus hinic ipso de Augusto sermo, plerisque vana mirantibus, quod idem dies äccepti quondam imperii princeps, et vitæ supremus

At apud prudentes vita ejus varie extollebatur; arguebaturve. Hi pietaté erga parentem, et necessitudine Reip. in qua mullus tunc legibus locus, ad arma civilia áctum.

Dicebatur contra, pietatem erga parentem, ét tempora reip. obtentui sumta'; ceterum cupidine dominandi concitos per largitiones veteranos : Sic etiam descriptiones rerum atrocitate sua animos percellentium : ? * Quadraginta armatorum millia irrupere, calonum lixarumque amplior numerus, et in libidinem ac sævitiam corruptior. Non dignitas, non ætas protegebat, quo minus stupra cædibus, cædes stupris miscerentur. Grandævos senes, exacta ætate féminas, viles ad prædam, in ludibrium trahebant. Ubi adulta virgo, aut quis forma conspicuus incidisset, vi manibusque rapientium divulsus, ipsos postremo direptores in mutuam perniciem ngebat. Dum pecuniam, vel gravia auro templorum dona, sibi quisque trahunt, maiore aliorum vi truncabantur. Quidam obvia aspernati, verberibus tormentisque dominorum abdita scrutari, defossa eruere.

Quisque hæc ita accidere potuisse sentit, num vero ex anteceden

1 Annal. I. C. 4.

2 Hist. I. c. 3.

tis alicujus scriptoris narratione, an ex nostri inaginatione fluxerint, Quinctiliani de amplificatione præceptum, quod sane nemo rerum talium narrator tum spernendum sibi duxit, præceptoque additum exemplam, dubium reddere videtur. “ Sic urbium captarum crescit miseratio. Sine dubio enim, qui dicit expugnatam esse civitatem, complectitur omnia, quæcunque talis fortuna recipit: sed in affectus minus penetrat brevis hic velut nuntius. At si aperias hæc, quæ ver. . bo uno inclusa erant, apparebunt et fusæ per domos ac templa flam. mæ, et-ruentium tectorum fragor, et ex diversis clamoribus unus qui: dam sonus, aliorum fuga incerta, alii in extremo complexu suorum cohærentes, et infantium feminarumque ploratus, et male in illum dient servati fato senes: tum illa profanorum sacrorumque direptio, efferentium prædas repetentiumque discursus, et aeti ante suum quisque prædonem catenati, et conatit retinere infantem sunm mater, et sicubi majus lucrum est, pugra inter victores. Licet enim hæc omnia complectatur éversio, rinus est tamen totum dicere quam omnia. Con séquemur autem, ut manifesta sint, si fuerint similia : et licebit etiami falso adfingere, quicquid fieri solet.

Hic scriptores fere æquales eundem campum esse nactos' vides, quorsum acris ingenii et imaginandi vis excurrere posset; castiorem tamen rhetore historicum, et magis leges historiæ retinentem non sine judicï et sensus ejus admiratione videre est.

INQUIRY INTO THE ETYMOLOGY OF PEOR:

TO THE EDITOR OF THE CLASSICAL JOURNAL. Ат p. 293. in

your

No. XIV. Sir W. Drummond has favored your readers with another of those novelties, to which he often arrives by the aid of etymology and ingenious imagination, but which, as I presume, cannot be supported by sufficient evidence or even probability ; this is that the name of the chief God of the Moabites, Baal Peor, together with the worship of that deity, were borrowed by them from the name and respect paid by the Egyptians to their god Horus, whom in their language they would call Pi-or, in which name Pi is only the article the, and even by the Copts at present is often changed into Pe. To this etymologic novelty there seem to be many objections, some of which I will point out.' In the first place, neither Philo Judæus in ancient times, nor any of the modern learned Jews, have ever had any suspicion of such an origin to this deity, or

I Quinct. instit. L. VIII. c. 3.

that the. Moabites had any connexion with the Egyptians. The name also they all derive from the Hebrew language, not the Egyptian, and consider its sense as being in some degree significant of the character of the Deity and the worship paid to him, by denoting something of filthiness or obscenity, although indeed they do not sufficiently explain what the nature of it was. Why then should we be inclined to conjecture, that instead of a native it had a foreign origin, without any other evidence than merely some similitude between the name Pe-or and a supposed Pi-or as being the Egyptian mode of denoting the God Horus? It appears indeed by the inscription on the Rosetta stone, that they did write that name oor (mg) so far as M. Akerblad has been able to decypher the Egyptian letters in it ; but the article Pi is never there prefixed to it, although it occurs often; nor, so far as I can discover by Woidé's Lericon, is an article ever prefixed to the proper name of any person whatever in the modern Coptic language. At p. 74 we read of Pachom, at p. 120 of mena, at p. 126, Shenutius, all without any article prefixed ; if there bę any examples to the contrary in a language of which we know so little, I shall willingly be better instructed.

Thus far, however, there is at most nothing but mere conjecture, from some similitude in the two names, to support the etymology, and this also liable to objection ; but Sir W. Drummond proceeds to add written testimony from Suidas and Jerom in the following sentence : “ Most certainly this Egyptian God Or was the same with Priapus; thus Suidas says το άγαλμα του Πριάπου του Ώρου παρ' Αίγυπτίοις κεκληpoévay &c. ; and Jerom says: Israelitæ educti ex Egypto fornicati sunt cum Madianitis et ingressi sunt ad Baalphegor idolum Moabitarum, quem nos Priapum possumus appellare. This species of idolatry seems to have been borrowed from the Egyptians—it is therefore not improbable, that the name Pe-or was likewise of Egyptian origin.” Hence it appears that, like Jerom, Sir W. Drummond adheres to the opinion of the Jews that there is some obscenity in the worship of Baalpeor, and he rejects the opinion of Selden, who maintained that the fornicatio in question included no other meaning, than merely that of Idolatry, this being the word constantly used in scripture for the worship of Idols in general. But how does this account suit with the cha-" racter of Horus? for he is not described by Plutarch or any others as an obscene Deity, like Priapus or Pan; but quite the contrary, as a noble-spirited, active son of Osiris and Isis, who revenged the death of his father by Typhon, whom Horus afterwards conquered and thus recovered the supreme power in Egypt. “ Prælium cum Ty. phone per plures dies durasse ac victoria Orum potitum.” Why then has Sir William confounded him with Pan and Priapus? If he admits the accounts by Plutarch in other articles, why not in this like: wise? By acting otherwise, he has connected together incoherent ad counts, in order to give plausibility to his own etymology. It may be said, however, that Suidas had set him the example; but if Suidas is contradicted by Plutarch, is the testimony of the former to be preferred, although nothing is to be found in other ancient authors to confirm it? In the Isiac table, Horus is represented more than once as

« PreviousContinue »