Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T20:05:17.945Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Fall of the Capitol

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2012

O. Skutsch
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Three times Silius Italicus refers to the Gallic catastrophe in a somewhat startling manner : Pun. I, 525 f. ‘Gallisque ex arce fugatis Arma revertentis pompa gestata Camilli’; 4, 150 f. ‘ipse tumens atavis Brenni se stirpe ferebat Crixus et in titulos Capitolia capta trahebat’; 6, 555 f. ‘Allia et infandi Senones captaeque recursat Attonitis arcis facies.’ Taken individually each passage can be explained away: ‘ex arce fugatis’ may be a metrical substitute for ‘de arce depulsis’ Crixus may boast and exaggerate; and in their terror at the news of Lake Trasimene the Romans may see more than actually happened. Taken together, however, the three statements very strongly suggest that Silius had in mind a story according to which not only the city but the Capitol itself was captured. Or did Vergil's ‘Galli per dumos aderant arcemque tenebant’ (see below), though not actually misinterpreted by him, create a formal pattern in his mind, which he applied without considering its content ? Silius apart, tradition is unanimous in making the geese and the prompt action of Manlius save the Capitol; in fact the defenders do not even suffer any casualties.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 43 , Issue 1-2 , November 1953 , pp. 77 - 78
Copyright
Copyright ©O. Skutsch 1953. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 ‘repulsed from the citadel.’ J. D. Duff (Loeb, ed. 1949).

2 Thus Ruperti-Lemaire, and, e.g., Norden, Ennius u. Vergilius, 107; cf. Silius 8, 17 ‘vaniloquum Celtae genus’.

3 This is what I imagine the commentaries might have said had they not chosen to preserve a discreet silence.

4 The evidence is collected by Schwegler, , Röm. Gesch. III, 256 ffGoogle Scholar.

5 Ribbeck, , Rh.M. 10 (1856), 276 Google Scholar; Norden, l.c., 105 f.; Pasquali, Gött. Gel. Anz., 1915, 605 f.; Timpanaro, , Stud. Ital. 23 (1948), 25 fGoogle Scholar.

6 Norden compared Plutarch, Cam. 27: ὥστε τοὺς πρώτους ἁΨαμἑνους τῶν ἄκρων ὅσον ἤδη τοἴς φύλαξιν ἐπιΧειρεἵν κοιμωμένοις.

7 There is perhaps a slight suspicion that Vergil may have combined two contradictory versions, as he does, for instance, in 6, 764 f. (Silvius). They would not be too well integrated : 653 ‘Capitolia celsa tenebat (Manlius)’, jars with 657 arcemque tenebant (Galli), and 656 ‘Gallos in limine adesse with 657 'Galli per dumos aderant’. Possibly 652–656 were meant to replace 657–662.

8 Cf. Vahlen, Ennius 2, p. LIX f., who compares Livy XLV, 35, 3.

9 A full discussion of the old problem need not be attempted here since the mention of Aemilius Paullus is sufficient to invalidate Müller's argument. But I may perhaps use this opportunity to state that ‘I laid my lips to the great springs from which Father Ennius drank; and he sang … (catalogue) …; when Apollo addressed me’ seems to me unworthy of Propertius. Cecinit is apparently due to the preceding bibit.

10 Norden is probably correct in making cruentant the equivalent of trucidant (‘hinmetzeln’). The verb is used so rarely in the sense of ‘to stain somebody with his own blood’ (Cic. poet. 7, 5 M. = de div. 1, 106; Phil. 2, 86; Propert. 4, 8, 65) that the absence of a parallel for ‘to kill’ rather than ‘to wound’ can hardly cause surprise.

11 Cf. Niebuhr, , Röm. Gesch. I, 575, 4Google Scholar (= Hist, of Rome, I, 546, 1213). I am indebted to my friend Professor Momigliano for reminding me of this passage.

12 Ennius, An. 129 ‘hic occasus datust: at Horatius inclutus saltu’ was, on account of saltu, referred by Vahlen to Horatius Cocles and attributed to Bk. IV although Festus quotes it as from Bk. II. In the second edition Vahlen was content to leave the line in Bk. II and accordingly to see in Horatius one of the triplets. This is now universally accepted. But even if Ennius did tell the story of Codes it would not follow that the city was successfully defended to the end.