Latin Poetry in the Ancient Greek Novels Daniel

Jolowicz download

https://ebookmass.com/product/latin-poetry-in-the-ancient-greek-novels-
daniel-jolowicz/

Visit ebookmass.com today to download the complete set of

ebooks or textbooks
Here are some recommended products for you. Click the link to
download, or explore more at ebookmass.com

The Ancient Greek Hero in 24 Hours: Sourcebook

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-ancient-greek-hero-in-24-hours-
sourcebook/

Latin Grammarians on the Latin Accent: The Transformation

of Greek Grammatical Thought Philomen Probert

https://ebookmass.com/product/latin-grammarians-on-the-latin-accent-
the-transformation-of-greek-grammatical-thought-philomen-probert/

Staging the Sacred: Performance in Late Ancient Liturgical

Poetry Laura S. Lieber

https://ebookmass.com/product/staging-the-sacred-performance-in-late-
ancient-liturgical-poetry-laura-s-lieber/

Greek Praise Poetry and the Rhetoric of Divinity Felix J.

Meister

https://ebookmass.com/product/greek-praise-poetry-and-the-rhetoric-of-
divinity-felix-j-meister/
Overcoming Uncertainty in Ancient Greek Political
Philosophy J. Noel Hubler

https://ebookmass.com/product/overcoming-uncertainty-in-ancient-greek-
political-philosophy-j-noel-hubler/

Women in Contemporary Latin American Novels:

Psychoanalysis and Gendered Violence 1st Edition Beatriz
L. Botero (Eds.)
https://ebookmass.com/product/women-in-contemporary-latin-american-
novels-psychoanalysis-and-gendered-violence-1st-edition-beatriz-l-
botero-eds/

Ancient and Medieval Thought on Greek Enclitics Stephanie

Roussou

https://ebookmass.com/product/ancient-and-medieval-thought-on-greek-
enclitics-stephanie-roussou/

Ancient and Medieval Thought on Greek Enclitics Stephanie

Roussou

https://ebookmass.com/product/ancient-and-medieval-thought-on-greek-
enclitics-stephanie-roussou-2/

Eliminativism in Ancient Philosophy - Greek and Buddhist

Philosophers on Material Objects Ugo Zilioli

https://ebookmass.com/product/eliminativism-in-ancient-philosophy-
greek-and-buddhist-philosophers-on-material-objects-ugo-zilioli/
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 12/3/2021, SPi

OXFORD CLASSICAL MONOGRAPHS

Published under the supervision of a Committee of the
Faculty of Classics in the University of Oxford
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 12/3/2021, SPi

The aim of the Oxford Classical Monographs series (which replaces the
Oxford Classical and Philosophical Monographs) is to publish books based
on the best theses on Greek and Latin literature, ancient history, and ancient
philosophy examined by the Faculty Board of Classics.
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 12/3/2021, SPi

Latin Poetry in the

Ancient Greek Novels
DANIEL JOLOWICZ

1
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 12/3/2021, SPi

3
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Daniel Jolowicz 2021
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
First Edition published in 2021
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2020949010
ISBN 978–0–19–289482–3
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780192894823.001.0001
Printed and bound by
CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 12/3/2021, SPi

Acknowledgements

In writing this monograph, which is a drastically revised, rethought, and expanded

version of an Oxford DPhil thesis submitted in 2015, I have racked up consider-
able debts of gratitude. I would like to register some of these here. I first addressed
the question of imperial Greek engagement with Latin poetry in an MSt disserta-
tion supervised by Steve Heyworth, which then developed into a doctoral thesis
supervised by Tim Whitmarsh (for the first three years) and Steve again (for the
fourth year). Both intellectually and personally, my debt to Tim and Steve is
profound. In converting thesis to book I have benefited immensely from the
unstinting support of Stephen Harrison, who, as book advisor, read the entire
manuscript multiple times and patiently fielded a bewildering array of queries
generated by my fevered brain. Prodigious thanks are further owed to Ewen Bowie
and (again) Tim Whitmarsh, who likewise read the entire manuscript and made
me think harder about points of detail as well as the bigger picture. My doctoral
examiners, Stephen Harrison and Richard Hunter, as well as the anonymous
reader for the Press, provided stewardship and guidance fundamental to the
transition from the thesis’ bulla to the monograph’s toga uirilis. All of these people
have exhibited a generosity of time and spirit for which I shall be in arrears
indefinitely. Brutally quantitative evidence of their impact on my thinking can be
found in the extent to which they inhabit the pages of the bibliography.
It is also a pleasure to record my sincere gratitude to those whose kindness and
good offices helped shepherd the book to completion, and whose interventions
frequently provided much needed ballast in less predictable waters. The
Introduction has been immeasurably sharpened by the trenchant criticisms of
Owen Hodkinson, Stephen Oakley, Michael Trapp, and Chris Whitton; I owe to
Nick Denyer the term ‘predicative synecdoche’ used in Section 6.5. Individual
queries on a range of matters have been graciously and generously fielded by
Amin Benaissa, Aitor Blanco Pérez, Thomas Coward, Scott DiGiulio, Aneurin
Ellis-Evans, Leofranc Holford-Strevens, Talitha Kearey, Fiachra Mac Góráin,
Hugh Mason, Valeria Pace, Chris Pelling, Susan Stephens, and Nick Zair. I have
profited greatly from those colleagues who, at various times and in various ways,
offered themselves as interlocutors, and without whom the process would have
been far more solitary and far less rewarding: David Butterfield, Gabe Byng,
Nicolò D’Alconzo, Koen De Temmerman, Jaś Elsner, Simon Goldhill, Will
Guast, Larry Kim, Emily Kneebone, Benedek Kruchió, Dawn LaValle Norman,
Anna Lefteratou, Tom Mackenzie, John Morgan, Ben Raynor, Ian Repath, Joyce
Reynolds, Helena Schmedt, Henry Spelman, Estelle Strazdins, Aldo Tagliabue,
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 12/3/2021, SPi

vi 

Brynja Thorgeirsdottir, Stephen Trzaskoma, and Krešimir Vuković. I would also

like to thank Romain Brethes, David Elmer, Richard Hunter, Beatrice Poletti, and
Bruno Rochette for sharing unpublished work with me. It is, finally, a privilege to
acknowledge the teachers that helped get my Greek up and running, Alex Humes
and †Stephen Mann.
I am lucky to have been the recipient of financial and institutional support that
has enabled this project to come to fruition. An AHRC scholarship secured bed
and board at Magdalen College, Oxford, for the first three years of doctoral study,
and Corpus Christi College, Oxford, offered me employment as a stipendiary
lecturer for the fourth. The bulk of the book was written in the environs of Clare
Hall, Cambridge—a genuine locus amoenus—in my capacity as Isaac Newton–
Ann Johnston Research Fellow. I completed the final stages of the book while
employed in teaching capacities by the Faculty of Classics, Cambridge, and by my
current home, King’s College London. I owe a great deal to all of these institutions
(which have kept me in business) and to the vibrant communities of which they
are composed.
My most personal thanks are reserved for those who already know that, without
them, none of this would have happened: for my teammate in life, Elle; for my
mother and father, Corinna and Philip; for my brother, Tommy; and for my
grandparents, †Drosoulla and Tommy, †Grace and †Bobby. It is to this family unit
that I dedicate this book.
D.A.J.
Farnham, July 2020

As this volume was going to press, we celebrated the arrival of Callirhoë. It is

fitting that she crowns the dedication.
D.A.J.
Farnham Common, December 2020
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 12/3/2021, SPi

Contents

Note on Editions and Translations ix

Abbreviations xi

Introduction 1
0.1 Status Quaestionis and Greek Biculturality 1
0.2 Greek–Latin Bilingualism 15
0.3 Latin Literary Papyri in the Context of Education 16
0.4 Further Evidence for Knowledge of Latin Poetry 18
0.5 Festivals and Libraries 21
0.6 Allusion and Intertextuality 28
0.7 Introductory Conclusions 33
1. Chariton and Latin Elegy I: The Language of Love 35
1.1 Introduction 35
1.2 Totalizing Language: ὅλος and μόνος; totus and solus 36
1.3 Death 39
1.4 Jealousy 47
1.5 Conclusion 60
2. Chariton and Latin Elegy II: Ovidian Letters and Exile 62
2.1 Introduction 62
2.2 Ovid’s Epistolary Heroines 63
2.3 Ovidian Exile 80
2.4 Conclusion 89
3. Chariton and Vergil’s Aeneid 91
3.1 Introduction 91
3.2 Dreams 93
3.3 Callirhoe the uniuira 98
3.4 The Role of Children 104
3.5 Funerals and Replicas 107
3.6 Chaereas’ Attempted Suicide 114
3.7 Chariton and Aeneid 4: an Addendum 118
3.8 Conclusion 119
4. Achilles Tatius and Latin Elegy 121
4.1 Introduction 121
4.2 Clitophon, contemptor amoris 128
4.3 Clinias, praeceptor amoris 130
4.4 Clinias’ Erotodidactic Authority 137
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 12/3/2021, SPi

viii 

4.5 The Ethics of Consent 145

4.6 Satyrus, praeceptor amoris 149
4.7 Satyrus and the Metaphor of seruitium amoris 153
4.8 Erotic Symposia 159
4.9 The Eroticization of Female Fears and Tears 163
4.10 Erotic Theft 172
4.11 Clitophon’s Impotence and Ovid, Amores 3.7 180
4.12 Conclusion 187
5. Achilles Tatius and Vergil’s Aeneid 188
5.1 Introduction 188
5.2 Melite and Clitophon as Dido and Aeneas 191
5.3 Leucippe’s Flush and Lavinia’s Blush 202
5.4 Vergilian Phraseology 211
5.5 Conclusion 220
6. Achilles Tatius and the Destruction of Bodies: Ovid, Lucan, Seneca 221
6.1 Introduction 221
6.2 The Death of Charicles: Hippolytus in Euripides, Ovid,
and Seneca 223
6.3 Bodily Reconstitution 235
6.4 The Decapitations of ‘Leucippe’ and Pompey 241
6.5 Ovidian Phraseology 248
6.6 Conclusion 253
7. Longus and Vergil 255
7.1 Introduction 255
7.2 Pastoral Autonomy and Vergil’s Eclogues 262
7.3 Theft and Vandalism and Vergil’s Eclogues 273
7.4 Theft and Vandalism and Ovidian Elegy 278
7.5 Philetas’ Biography and the Vergilian Career 280
7.6 The φηγός and the fagus 291
7.7 Amaryllis, Pastoral Echo, and Longus’ Latin 297
7.8 Tityros and the Succession of the Pipes 305
7.9 The Methymnaean Invasion (2.12–3.2) and Vergil, Aeneid 7 310
7.10 Conclusion 324
Conclusion 326

Works Cited 331

Index Locorum 377
General Index 394
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 12/3/2021, SPi

Note on Editions and Translations

Extended Latin quotations are taken from the Oxford Classical Text where pos-
sible: R. A. B. Mynors 1969 for Vergil; S. J. Heyworth 2007 for Propertius;
J. P. Postgate 1915² for Tibullus; E. J. Kenney 1995 for Ovid’s Amores and Ars;
R. J. Tarrant 2004 for Ovid’s Metamorphoses. For Ovid’s Heroides I use the Loeb
edition of G. Showerman 1914 (revised by G. P. Goold 1977), and for Ovid’s
Tristia and Epistulae ex Ponto I use the Loeb edition of A. L. Wheeler 1924
(revised by G. P. Goold 1996). The editions of the Greek novels are as follows:
B. P. Reardon’s 2004 Teubner for Chariton; J.-P. Garnaud’s 1991 Budé for Achilles
Tatius; M. D. Reeve’s 1982 Teubner for Longus.
Translation of Latin texts frequently takes the Loeb editions as a starting point,
which are subjected to adaptation. Translation of the Greek novels takes the
following as a guide (again, with adaptations): G. P. Goold’s 1995 Loeb for
Chariton; T. Whitmarsh’s 2001 Oxford World Classics translation of Achilles
Tatius; J. R. Morgan’s 2004 Aris & Phillips edition for Longus. All translations,
however, reflect the sense of the Latin and Greek as I see it.
Visit https://ebookmass.com today to explore
a vast collection of ebooks across various
genres, available in popular formats like
PDF, EPUB, and MOBI, fully compatible with
all devices. Enjoy a seamless reading
experience and effortlessly download high-
quality materials in just a few simple steps.
Plus, don’t miss out on exciting offers that
let you access a wealth of knowledge at the
best prices!
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 12/3/2021, SPi
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 12/3/2021, SPi

Abbreviations

Names of ancient authors and titles are abbreviated according to conventions in the Oxford
Classical Dictionary, 4th edn (OCD⁴). Epigraphic corpora are cited according to conven-
tions in OCD⁴, Supplementum epigraphicum Graecum, and L’Année épigraphique.
Papyrological corpora are cited according to the Checklist of Editions of Greek, Latin,
Demotic, and Coptic Papyri, Ostraca, and Tablets (available at http://papyri.info);
I occasionally cite a papyrus by its LDAB number (Leuven Database of Ancient Books;
https://www.trismegistos.org/ldab/) if it occurs as part of a run of consecutive numbers, or
if it does not belong to one of the more familiar corpora. Other abbreviations are as follows:

Bernabé P. Bernabé (ed.) (1987) Poetarum epicorum Graecorum testimonia

et fragmenta (Leipzig).
BNP H. Cancik and H. Schneider (eds) Brill’s New Pauly, English
translation edited by C. F. Salazar and F. G. Gentry (Leiden).
Breccia E. Breccia (ed.) (1911) Iscrizioni greche e latine (Cairo).
CE Carmina Epigraphica, final part of Anthologia Latina (1869–1926),
ed. A. Riese, P. Buecheler, and E. Lommatsch (Leipzig).
Chantraine P. Chantraine (1968) Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue
grecque: histoire des mots (Paris).
Cougny E. Cougny (ed.) (1890) Epigrammatum Anthologia Palatina: cum
Planudeis et Appendica Nova, iii (Paris).
Courtney E. Courtney (ed.) (1993) The Fragmentary Latin Poets (Oxford).
Cunningham J. Rusten and I. C. Cunningham (eds) (2003) Theophrastus:
Characters, Herodas: Mimes, Sophron and Other Mime Fragments
(Cambridge, MA).
Davies-Finglass M. Davies and P. Finglass (eds) (2014) Stesichorus: The Poems.
Edited with Introduction, Translation, and Commentary
(Cambridge).
Denniston J. D. Denniston (1954) The Greek Particles, 2nd edn (Oxford).
Diehl E. Diehl (ed.) (1911) Die Vitae vergilianae und ihre antiken Quellen
(Bonn).
Diggle J. Diggle (ed.) (1970) Euripides: Phaethon. Edited with
Prolegomena and Commentary (Cambridge).
DK H. Diels and W. Kranz (eds) (1952) Fragmente der Vorsokratiker,
6th edn (Berlin).
Ernout Meillet A. Ernout and A. Meillet (eds) (2001) Dictionnaire étymologique de
la langue latine: histoire des mots, 4th edn (Paris).
EV F. Della Corte (ed.) (1984–91) Enciclopedia Virgiliana (Rome).
FGrH F. Jacoby et al. (eds) (1923–) Die Fragmente der griechischen
Historiker (Berlin; Leiden).
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 12/3/2021, SPi

xii 

Foerster R. Foerster (ed.) (1903–27) Libanius: Opera (Leipzig).

FRH T. J. Cornell et al. (eds) (2013) Fragments of the Roman Historians
(Oxford).
Gow A. S. F. Gow (ed.) (1952) Bucolici graeci (Oxford).
GS A. F. Scholfield and A. S. F. Gow (eds) (1953) Nicander: The Poems
and Poetical Fragments (Cambridge).
Helm R. Helm (ed.) (1913) Die Chronik des Hieronymus = Hieronymi
Chronicon/herausgegeben im Auftrage der Kirchenväter (Leipzig).
Hopkinson N. Hopkinson (ed.) (2015) Theocritus. Moschus. Bion. (Cambridge,
MA).
Hordern J. H. Hordern (ed.) (2002) The Fragments of Timotheus of Miletus
(Oxford).
Hosius C. Hosius (ed.) (1913) M. Annaei Lucani Belli civilis libri decem
(Stuttgart).
Hunter R. L. Hunter (ed.) (1983) Eubulus: The Fragments. Edited with a
Commentary (Cambridge).
Jocelyn H. D. Jocelyn (ed.) (1967) The Tragedies of Ennius: The Fragments.
Edited with an Introduction and Commentary (Cambridge).
KA R. Kassel and C. Austin (eds) (1983–) Poetae Comici Graeci
(Berlin; New York).
Keil H. Keil (ed.) (1855–1923; repr. 1961) Grammatici Latini, 8 vols.
Lightfoot J. L. Lightfoot (ed.) (2010) Hellenistic Collection: Philitas.
Alexander of Aetolia. Hermesianax. Euphorion. Parthenius
(Cambridge, MA).
LSJ H. G. Liddell, R. Scott, H. S. Jones, R. McKenzie, P. G. W. Glare,
and A. A. Thompson (eds) (1996) A Greek–English Lexicon, 9th
edn (Oxford).
Maehler H. Maehler (ed.) (2001) Pindarus. Pars II, Fragmenta, indices
(Leipzig).
Merkelbach-Stauber 1 R. Merkelbach and J. Stauber (eds) (1998) Steinepigramme aus dem
griechischen Osten Band 1: die Westküste Kleinasiens von Knidos
bis Ilion (Berlin; New York).
Most G. W. Most (ed.) (2018) Hesiod: Theogony, Works and Days,
Testimonia (Cambridge, MA).
Musa Lapidaria E. Courtney (ed.) (1995) Musa Lapidaria: A Selection of Latin
Verse Inscriptions (Atlanta).
MW R. Merkelbach and M. L. West (eds) (1967) Fragmenta Hesiodea
(Oxford).
NH R. G. M. Nisbet and M. Hubbard (eds) (1970) A Commentary on
Horace Odes Book I (Oxford).
NR R. G. M. Nisbet and N. Rudd (eds) (2004) A Commentary on
Horace Odes Book III (Oxford).
OLD P. G. W. Glare (ed.) (1968–82) Oxford Latin Dictionary (Oxford).
Otto A. Otto (1890) Die Sprichwörter und sprichwörtlichen Redensarten
der Römer (Leipzig).
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 12/3/2021, SPi

 xiii

Pf. R. Pfeiffer (ed.) (1949) Callimachus: The Works. Vol. 1: Fragments

(Oxford).
Pichon R. Pichon (1902) De sermone amatorio apud Latinos elegiarum
scriptores (Paris).
PIR² E. Klebs and H. Dessau (1897–8) 1st edn / E. Groag, A. Stein et al.
(1933–) 2nd edn, Prosopographia Imperii Romani (Berlin).
PMG D. L. Page (ed.) (1962) Poetae Melici Graeci (Oxford).
Powell J. U. Powell (ed.) (1925) Collectanea Alexandrina: reliquiae
minores poetarum Graecorum aetatis Ptolemaicae 324–146 A.C.
(Oxford).
Reed J. D. Reed (ed.) (1997) Bion of Smyrna: The Fragments and the
Adonis (Cambridge).
Ribbeck O. Ribbeck (ed.) (1855) Scenicae romanorum poesis fragmenta
(Leipzig).
Rychlewska L. Rychlewska (ed.) (1971) Turpilii comici fragmenta (Leipzig).
Schierl M. Schierl (ed.) (2006) Die Tragödien des Pacuvius: ein
Kommentar zu den Fragmenten mit Einleitung, Text und
Übersetzung (Berlin).
SH H. Lloyd-Jones and P. Parsons (eds) (1983) Supplementum
Hellenisticum (Berlin; New York).
Sk. O. Skutsch (ed.) (1985) The Annals of Q. Ennius (Oxford).
Smyth H. W. Smyth (1956) Greek Grammar (Boston).
Spanoudakis K. Spanoudakis (ed.) (2002) Philitas of Cos (Leiden).
SSH H. Lloyd-Jones (ed.) (2005) Supplementum Supplementi
Hellenistici (Berlin; New York).
Stronk J. P. Stronk (ed.) (2010) Ctesias’ Persian History (Düsseldorf).
SVF H. von Arnim (ed.) (1905–24) Stoicorum veterum fragmenta
(Leipzig).
SW S. A. Stephens and J. J. Winkler (eds) (1995) Ancient Greek Novels:
The Fragments (Princeton).
TrGF B. Snell, R. Kannicht, and S. Radt (eds) (1971–2004) Tragicorum
Graecorum fragmenta, 6 vols (Göttingen).
V. E.-M. Voigt (ed.) (1971) Sappho et Alcaeus Fragmenta
(Amsterdam).
W. M. L. West (ed.) (1989–92) Iambi et Elegi Graeci ante Alexandrum
cantati, 2nd edn, 2 vols (Oxford).
Warmington E. H. Warmington (ed.) (1935–40) Remains of Old Latin, 4 vols
(Cambridge, MA).
Wendel C. Wendel (ed.) (1914) Scholia in Theocritum vetera (Leipzig).
West M. L. West (ed.) (2003) Greek Epic Fragments: From the Seventh to
the Fifth Centuries BC (Cambridge, MA).
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 12/3/2021, SPi
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 13/3/2021, SPi

Introduction

0.1 Status Quaestionis and Greek Biculturality

One version of the story begins with a bilingual epitaph from Thyatira in Lydia:

Ξένωνι ἐτ(ῶν) [ . . . ] καὶ Πρείμωι ἐτ(ῶν) ε’ τοῖς τέκνοις

και Οὐαλερίῳ Οὐαλερίου γραμματικῷ Ῥωμαικῷ ἐτ(ῶν) κγ’
uota superuacua fletusque et numina diuum
naturae leges fatorumque arguit ordo
spreuisti patrem matremque miserrime nate
Elysios campos habitans et prata ueatum.
For the children Xenon, [ . . . ] years old, and for Primus, five years old,
and for the Latin teacher Valerius, son of Valerius, twenty-three years old.
The laws of nature and the course of fates prove that wishes, lamenta-
tions, and even heavenly powers are superfluous. Most wretched son,
you have scorned your father and mother, since now you dwell in the
Elysian fields and meadows of the blessed.

Kearsley summarizes this early second-century  text as follows: ‘An epitaph for
two sons who die as children. The third person commemorated, Valerius, was not
related and is designated by his profession. He must have earned his place in the
family tomb as tutor to one or more children in the family.’¹ This is one of
hundreds of bilingual (or ‘mixed language’) inscriptions emanating from
imperial-period Asia Minor,² but it is remarkable for three reasons. First is the
inclusion of a Latin teacher (γραμματικῷ Ῥωμαικῷ) in an epitaph from a Greek-
speaking city in the High Empire—this despite the fact that evidence for any
institutionalized Latin-learning in the Greek east during this period is virtually
non-existent.³ Secondly, the accompaniment of the Greek dedication by a Latin

¹ Kearsley (2001) no. 91. The text is Kearsley’s edition of TAM V, 2.1119 = Merkelbach-Stauber 1
04/05/08 (I retain Merkelbach-Stauber’s arguit in verse 3 for the stone’s arcuit; translation mine).
Further bilingual verse epitaphs from Asia Minor: Kearsley (2001) no. 75 (from Ephesus), 85 (from
Teos). Discussion: Uzunoğlu (2013).
² See Levick (1995); Kearsley (2001); Biville et al. (2008).
³ For Kearsley (2001) 150 this epitaph indicates that knowledge of Latin in some wealthy families
‘could have been acquired systematically’. I thank Bruno Rochette for sharing with me an unpublished
paper that addresses this question.

Latin Poetry in the Ancient Greek Novels. Daniel Jolowicz, Oxford University Press (2021). © Daniel Jolowicz.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780192894823.003.0001
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 13/3/2021, SPi

2       

hexameter quatrain speaks to an interest in poetic Latin (perhaps by way of

honouring the deceased grammaticus)—an interest for which, again, evidence
from the High Empire is rare. Thirdly, the description of Elysium in the Latin
quatrain shares an appreciable number of linguistic elements with Vergil’s
account of Aeneas’ arrival at Elysium in the Underworld in the Aeneid
(6.637–41).⁴ Latin education, and Latin poetry in particular, thus emerge as
critical for understanding the content and context of this epitaph for Xenon,
Primus, and Valerius.
This book offers an approach to an overarching issue raised by the inscription,
namely the status and function of Latin poetry in the Greek-speaking world
during the first 200 years of Roman rule. My ultimate aim is to achieve a better
understanding of this phenomenon, as a route to which I shall explore one
particular area of literary activity from the period: the Greek novels. Before
tackling the novels themselves, in the Introduction I shall canvass the evidence
for Greek biculturality through the early- and high-imperial periods (that is, the
first and second centuries); this sketch is designed to weaken the prejudices
surrounding the question of Greek awareness of, and engagement with, Latin
literature (poetry in particular). Having set out in the Introduction a number of
contexts in which practitioners of imperial Greek literature may have encountered
Latin poetry, in Chapters 1–7 I shall offer a series of readings of the Greek novels
that establish Latin poetry, especially that from the Augustan to Neronian periods,
as an essential frame of reference.
The book therefore seeks to offer some approaches to, and case studies of, the
status of Latin poetry from the perspective of imperial Greek literary culture. It is
far from exhaustive, and some of my decisions require explanation. First, the
contents and structure of the book, which is organized by individual novelists and
their Latin poetic interests as follows: Chapters 1 and 2 on Chariton’s Chaereas
and Callirhoe and Latin elegy (treating ‘erotic’ elegy, and epistolary and exilic
themes in Ovid, respectively); Chapter 3 on Chariton’s Chaereas and Callirhoe
and Vergil’s Aeneid; Chapter 4 on Achilles Tatius’ Clitophon and Leucippe and
Latin elegy; Chapter 5 on Achilles Tatius’ Clitophon and Leucippe and Vergil’s
Aeneid; Chapter 6 on Achilles Tatius’ obsession with bodily destruction in con-
nection with Ovid’s Metamorphoses, Lucan’s Bellum Ciuile, and Senecan tragedy
(the Phaedra in particular); and Chapter 7 on Longus’ Daphnis and Chloe and the

⁴ Aeneas fulfils the ‘task of the goddess’ (munere diuae, in the same metrical sedes as the epitaph’s
numina diuum) and arrives at Elysium, which is variously described as locos laetos, amoena uirecta,
sedes beatas, and campos (where the epitaph has Elysios campos and prata ueatum [= beatorum: on the
confusion of B and V in imperial-era inscriptions see Adams (2002) 624–66, for which reference
I thank Nick Zair; the archaic genitive plural in -um follows Vergilian practice, e.g. Aen. 6.92, 6.307,
with Horsfall (2006) ad Aen. 3.704]); if Vergil’s Underworld does serve a functional purpose here, the
poet of the Latin quatrain has transformed Vergil’s happy place into a sad place. A γραμματικός might
himself even compose epic poetry, such as Dioscorides of Tarsus, author of an epic poem about
Knossos (IDelos 1512, for which reference I thank Ewen Bowie).
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 13/3/2021, SPi

 3

Vergilian oeuvre (especially the Eclogues and Aeneid).⁵ Xenophon of Ephesus’

Ephesiaca does not receive a chapter on the basis that it is not possible, on my
reckoning, to offer a systematic account of how the author engages with any given
aspect or genre of Latin poetry;⁶ likewise the fragmentary novels, which receive
glancing notices.⁷ Heliodorus’ Aethiopica lies outside the scope of this study. This
is not because he has sequestered himself from Latin material,⁸ but because my
stated purpose is to support the claim that there is Greek engagement with Latin
poetry during the first two centuries, that is, the period for which the claim is most
controversial. Heliodorus dates to a later period, either the third or fourth
century,⁹ for which, as the evidence gathered in the Introduction will show, the
claim is far less controversial. After all, as a result of the Constitutio Antoniniana
issued by Caracalla in 212 , every free man in the empire became a Roman
citizen.¹⁰
Secondly, why the Greek novels? These texts offer a useful body of material for
such a project, given that those under discussion all belong, with a reasonable
degree of certainty, to the period christened by modern scholarship as the ‘Second
Sophistic’ (roughly periodized as 50–250 ),¹¹ or at least thereabouts: Chariton in
the first century or early second century; Achilles in the second century; and
Longus in the later second or early third century.¹² Their specific dating and
relative chronology are uncertain, but my general argument does not rely on any
security in this regard. The extent to which the novelists conceptualize themselves
as practitioners of a particular genre (‘the novel’) is also unclear,¹³ a situation
compounded by the fact that there is no obvious sign of the novels having

⁵ See Whitmarsh (2005b) on the titles of the novels, noting, at 596, an analogy with Latin love
elegy.
⁶ Although see pp. 155–8, with n. 187, for some possible instances. See Tagliabue (2017) on
Xenophon’s ‘paraliterary’ status.
⁷ E.g. p. 164 n. 221, on Iamblichus’ Babyloniaca and Ovid; p. 209 n. 87, on Ninus and Vergil; p. 218
on the Herpyllis fragment and Vergil.
⁸ See, e.g., Weinreich (1984) 429–31, comparing Hld. 9.21.1 and Verg. Aen. 6.853 on treatment of
enemies. Salgado (2015) makes the unlikely identification of the novelist Heliodorus with the com-
panion of Horace and learned Greek rhetor, also named Heliodorus, at Hor. Serm. 1.5.2–3.
⁹ See Morgan (1996a) 417–21 on the question of Heliodorus’ date.
¹⁰ On this edict see Imrie (2018).
¹¹ This problematic phrase derives from Philostr. VS 481; see Whitmarsh (2001c) 41–5.
Introductions to the literature and culture of the period include Anderson (1993); Swain (1996);
Goldhill (2001); Whitmarsh (2001c), (2005d); König (2009); Richter and Johnson (2017).
¹² Chariton: Ruiz-Montero (1994) 1008–12; Bowie (2002) 54–8; Tilg (2010) 36–78; Jolowicz
(2018a), (2018c) suggests a Flavian date. Achilles: Whitmarsh (2020) 4–5, favouring a date in the
130s; cf. Henrichs (2011) 303–13 on the basis of P.Oxy. 3836; Chew (2014) 63–5. Longus: Morgan
(2004b) 1–2; Pattoni (2005) 122–4; Bowie (2019b) 19–20; see Section 7.1 below.
¹³ Selden (1994) 43 comments: ‘There is no evidence that before the modern era the range of texts
that we have come to call the “ancient novel” were ever thought of together as constituting a coherent
group’; followed by Whitmarsh (2018a) xv, conceiving less of a ‘genre’ than of ‘an imaginative space
that activates multiple interconnections’. See generally Holzberg (1996) and essays in Karla (2009).
Nevertheless, on the possibilities of intrageneric intertextuality see, e.g., Bird (2018); Whitmarsh
(2018b).
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 13/3/2021, SPi

4       

attracted any formalized literary criticism or theory in antiquity;¹⁴ but what is

clear is that the diction, motifs, themes, and plots of each are all homogeneous
enough to allow for them to be approached as a unit, which thus offers the
opportunity for assessing how a given body of Greek prose literature during a
given time period responds to Latin poetry. All this raises the significant question
of whether the novels’ engagement with Latin material makes them a ‘special case’
within the corpus of imperial Greek literature. I defer fuller discussion of this issue
until the Conclusion (at pp. 329–30), but would say here that, if the novels are
indeed ‘different’ in this regard, it is in the scale of their engagement rather than
the fact of their engagement.
Thirdly, why choose to explore prose texts for evidence of engagement with
poetry? And why choose Latin poetry rather than Latin literature at large? Both
questions have to do with sample size and dating. While poetry in Greek was
certainly being composed during the first two centuries (not least in Asia Minor
and Achaia),¹⁵ there is not enough extant material to enable a conclusion one way
or the other. The majority of Greek poetry, especially hexameter—for example
Quintus of Smyrna and Triphiodorus (third century), and Nonnus, Musaeus, and
Colluthus (fifth century)—is from the third century or later, that is, from a period
in which Greek engagement with Latin poetry is a far less controversial propos-
ition than it is for the first two centuries; these authors’ awareness of Latin poetry,
especially Vergil’s Aeneid and Ovid’s Metamorphoses, has been well canvassed.¹⁶
As to why I have chosen to search for evidence of engagement with Latin poetry
(rather than Latin prose as well), this is, again, partially a pragmatic solution to the
need to circumscribe the amount of material under consideration. More signifi-
cantly, a focus on poetry also enables the conclusion that Greek interest in Latin
literature extends beyond the mere need for historical ‘source’ material available in
prose writers such as Cicero or Livy.
Why is such a book necessary? There is a remarkable lack of ancient testimony
illuminating what Roman-period Greek authors actually thought about Latin
literature.¹⁷ A lone voice stands out, although even this relates to prose rather

¹⁴ See Morgan (1993) on this issue, with p. 31 below on the question of ancient readership.
¹⁵ Bowie (1989) gathers epigraphic and literary evidence.
¹⁶ Quintus of Smyrna: Gärtner (2005); A. James (2007); Hadjittofi (2007) 375–80; Scheijnen (2018)
passim. Triphiodorus: D’Ippolito (1976), (1990); Gärtner (2013) 101–4. Nonnus and Vergil: Cataudella
(1932) 333; D’Ippolito (1991) 527–32. Nonnus and Ovid: Braune (1935); D’Ippolito (2007); Diggle
(1970) 180–200; contra Knox (1988), with further (older) bibliography at 536–7; Paschalis (2014).
Colluthus: Cadau (2015) 72–3, 196–7; Morales (2016) 73, with n. 27. Oppian: Rodríguez Pantoja
(2007). Useful summaries include: Torres Guerra (2012); Gärtner (2013); Miguélez-Cavero (2013)
64–71.
¹⁷ A late instance, from the fifth/sixth century , occurs in an epigram by Christodorus of Coptus,
which refers to a cast of characters from the Aeneid (A.P. 2.144–54, 222–7, 246–50), as well as to Vergil
himself (414–16). Critical evaluation of Vergil in this poem is not unambiguously positive—he is a
‘clear-voiced swan’ (λιγύθροος κύκνος) and a ‘second Homer’ (ἄλλον Ὅμηρον), but also nourished by
‘echo’ (ἠχώ): credit for his (derivative) poetic skill is thus placed squarely at the door of the Greek
tradition.
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 13/3/2021, SPi

 5

than to poetry: in the On the Sublime, a text usually attributed to Longinus and
probably composed during the first century ,¹⁸ the author compares the stylistic
virtues of Cicero and Demosthenes—but not before feyly adverting to his self-
consciousness that he, a Greek, should be expressing an opinion on the literary
qualities of a Latin-speaking Roman (12.4–5). Notwithstanding the rhetoric of
cultural differentiation evident in this passage,¹⁹ the impression is nevertheless
one of Greek distance from Roman literature (let alone poetry)—an impression
reinforced, for example, by the second-century orator Aelius Aristides’ complete
silence on the topic of Roman literature in his Roman Oration (Or. 26).²⁰ This
distance is also nominally in line with other arenas of social and cultural life in
which Greeks disavow proximity to the Romans. For example, Plutarch nowhere
alerts us to his Roman citizenship, which we know only by a single inscription
identifying his tria nomina, Lucius Mestrius Plutarchus (SIG 829a);²¹ indeed, the
Vespasianic philosopher Apollonius of Tyana is reported by Philostratus to have
sent a letter to the Ionians rebuking them for their use of Roman names (VA
4.5).²² Apollonius is likewise critical of the presence of Roman baths and the
practice of gladiatorial shows in the Greek east (VA 4.22, 4.27, 4.42).²³ And as is
evident from Dio, excessive familiarity with (or flattery towards) the Romans,
such as shaving off one’s beard in imitation of them, attracts derision from fellow
Greeks (Or. 36.17).²⁴ In the public environment of the Greek elite, apparently
nothing should interfere with the projection of Greekness.
This overly schematic picture of a culturally ghettoized Graeco-Roman world
has prejudiced scholarship to insist that Greeks of the imperial period were not
much interested in Latin literature. Gibbon famously pronounced the orthodox
position, which still holds reasonably firm: ‘There is not, I believe, from Dionysius
to Libanius, a single Greek critic who mentions Vergil or Horace. They seem
ignorant that the Romans had any good writers.’²⁵ Although generally true, this
lacks nuance: Julius Caesar in Appian (B Ciu. 2.146) quotes the Latin dramatist
Pacuvius (a Greek translation of fr. 31 Schierl), for example. Separated from
Gibbon by over two centuries, Woolf maintains that Greeks ‘remained to the
end resistant to Latin literary culture’, and Swain writes that there is ‘[o]ne thing

¹⁸ On attribution and dating see Russell (1981) 64–6; Whitmarsh (2001c) 57 n. 69, with further
bibliography; Heath (2012).
¹⁹ On which see Whitmarsh (2001c) 68–9.
²⁰ This is in pointed contrast to the same author’s Panathenaic Oration, in which Attic literature is
celebrated as part of the Athenian success story (Or. 1.322–30).
²¹ On Plutarch’s views on Rome see Swain (1996) 135–86; Stadter and Van der Stockt (2002).
Plutarch is, however, explicit about his Roman friends and readership: Stadter (2014).
²² Cf. Bowie (1970) 201 on Greek rejection of Roman place-names, measurements, and dating.
²³ See Carter (2009) on Greek spectators’ attitudes to gladiators.
²⁴ On Dio’s position in relation to Rome see Jones (1978) 124–31; Swain (1996) 187–241;
Whitmarsh (2001c) 133–246.
²⁵ Gibbon (1909) 1.38 n. 43 (italics mine).
Visit https://ebookmass.com today to explore
a vast collection of ebooks across various
genres, available in popular formats like
PDF, EPUB, and MOBI, fully compatible with
all devices. Enjoy a seamless reading
experience and effortlessly download high-
quality materials in just a few simple steps.
Plus, don’t miss out on exciting offers that
let you access a wealth of knowledge at the
best prices!
Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
 75 Tytler, vol. i., p. 121. But sir Walter Scott says: “Most of the noble
and ancient families of Scotland are reduced to the necessity of tracing
their ancestors’ names in the fifty‐six sheets of parchment, which
constitute the degrading roll of submission to Edward I.”
76 Mackintosh, Hume, etc.
77 Pearson’s History, vol. ii., p. 310.
78 Among the writs of that time we find many addressed to the
sheriffs of counties, wherein the king “requests you to advise and take
order how you can assist him with one thousand quarters of wheat, for
which he will pay you punctually at Midsummer next.”
79 Hemingford says, “Exiratus Rex prorupit in hæc verba, ut dicitur,
‘Per deum, comes, aut ibis aut pendebis.’ Et ille, ‘Per idem
juramentum, O Rex, nec ibo nec pendebo.’”—See Appendix.
80 Matthew of Westminster.
81 Pearson’s History of England, vol. ii., p. 399.
82 That the name was, in his own day, William Walays, is a fact
concerning which there is no room for doubt. The Scalachronica
(recently printed by the Maitland Club of Glasgow), was written by one
who personally knew the Insurgent leader, and he always writes the
name Walays. Hemingford and Langtoft, two of the best English
historians of that day, always write it Walays. In the “Wallace
Documents,” printed by the Maitland Club, a Charter is given, granted
by the Insurgent leader himself, and there the name stands Walays. A
century later, Andrew Wyntoun, one of the earliest and best of the
Scottish historians, writing about A.D. 1420, always speaks of Walays.
Other writers, following the sound only, write of Walais, or Waleis. But
when many other names suffered change—Botteville into Botfield, and
De Moleyns into Mullins—Walays also was corrupted into “Wallace.” So
entirely has this corruption rooted itself in our English literature, that
we shall feel compelled to yield to it, and shall use, in the following
pages, the customary name of “Wallace.”
83 Lewis on “Roman History,” p. 16.
84 Hemingford, Trivet, Matthew of Westminster, Wykes, Rishanger,
Langtoft, Knighton, the Chronicles of Lanercost, Rochester, St. Alban’s,
Abingdon, etc.
85 Tytler’s History of Scotland, vol. i., p. 134.
86 History of Scotland, vol. i., pp. 126, 127.
87 Tytler’s Scottish Worthies, pp. 172, 184.
88 Tytler’s Scottish Worthies, p. 186.
89 “Wallace Documents,” p. 30.
 90 Chalmers’ Caledonia, vol. i., p. 659.
91 Macfarlane’s History of England, vol. iv., p. 54.
92 History of Scotland, vol. i., p. 72.
93 Hist. of Scotland, vol. i., p. 142.
94 A recent writer, Mr. Pearson, expresses a doubt whether these
acts of unusual cruelty are sufficiently established by evidence. This
incredulity is hardly reasonable. Several English writers who lived at
the time assert the facts; all Scottish historians, Fordun, Wyntoun,
Boece, and Blind Harry, confirm the statement,—some in general,
others in specific terms; and the charges deliberately read to the
prisoner in Westminster Hall, with the sentence passed, surely may be
regarded as leaving no room for doubt.
95 Tytler, Hist. Scotl., vol. i., p. 143.
96 Ibid, p. 146.
97 Selkirkshire, at the present, has about 9,800 people in the whole
county. In 1298 it probably had not 2,000.
98 Cronykyl, viii. 13.
99 Tytler, vol. i., p. 142–147.
100 Tytler, vol. i., p. 163.
101 Hume, chap. xiii.
102 All the claimants at the great arbitration of 1292 derived their
title from David, earl of Huntingdon, the grandson of David I. His
descendants were these—
 David, earl of Huntingdon.
|
+---------------+-------------+
Margaret. Isabel.
| |
Devoirgoil. |
| Robert Bruce.
| |
--------+----------- |
Margaret. John Baliol, |
| king, Robert Bruce,
| 1292 earl of Carrick.
John Comyn. |
Robert Bruce,
afterwards king of Scotland.

103 Professor Stubbs’s Select Charters, p. 35.

104 Hallam, vol. iii., 3.
105 “Malitiam, fraudem, proditionem, et dolum,” Brady, App., N. 37.
106 Tytler’s History of Scotland, vol. i., pp. 121, 122.
107 Samuel Stanham, a merchant and grocer in Lincoln, was one of
the representatives of that city in this parliament of 1301.
108 The city of London, about this time, allowed its four
representatives for their joint expenses, out of the city cash, twenty
shillings per diem; which would be equal to fifteen pounds daily, at the
present time.
109 Rymer’s Fœdera, vol. ii., p. 927.
110 Matthew of Westminster.
111 And not only so; but we find writs of the date of May, 1300,
appointing three justices in Leicestershire, and the like in other
counties, “to hear and determine, in a summary manner, all complaints
of transgressions against the charters.”
112 See Appendix.
113 “History of Lichfield Cathedral,” p. 57.
114 Thus Mr. Tytler tells us of Brace’s conduct in 1297;—that “Bruce
went to Carlisle with a numerous attendance of his friends, and was
compelled to make oath on the consecrated host, that he would
continue faithful to Edward. To give a proof of his fidelity, he ravaged
the estates of Sir W. Douglas, then with Wallace, seized his wife and
children, and carried them to Annandale. Having thus defeated
suspicion, and saved his lands, he privately assembled his father’s
retainers, talked lightly of an extorted oath, from which the pope
would absolve him, and urged them to follow him against the English.”
(Vol. i., p. 129.)
 115 In these remarkable words, occurring in a statute of the realm,
and dictated, we cannot doubt, by Edward’s own lips, we seem to have
a glimpse of his earnest and sincere character. Believing, as all men in
his day believed, that there was a Pontiff at Rome who had full power
“to bind and to loose,” he had applied to that authority, and had been
loosed, so he was assured, from an engagement which was
mischievous in itself, and which had been improperly extorted from
him. Yet, with this dispensation in his possession, what follows? He
himself tells us: “sleepless nights.” What occasioned them? Evidently
that first principle of all his conduct of which Mr. Pearson takes notice:
“He never broke his word.” No papal bull, no external decision of any
kind, could thoroughly reconcile him to an infraction of the Scriptural
rule: “He sweareth to his neighbour, and disappointeth him not,
though it were to his own hurt.”
116 Caxton’s Chronicle, Matthew of Westminster, Fabyan, Holinshed.
117 The Scottish historians, who wrote a century after, claim the
victory in all three engagements; but Hemingford and Trivet, who
wrote at the time, distinctly declare that Neville repulsed the Scotch,
and recovered many of the prisoners. Hume and Tytler, as Scotchmen,
give credit to their own chroniclers; and yet they are uncandid enough
to profess to take their accounts from Hemingford and Trivet. But
these latter writers, who are the only contemporary witnesses, plainly
assert that the advantage, in the third engagement, rested with the
English.
118 Tytler’s History of Scotland, vol. i., p. 186.
119 Hailes’ Annals, vol. i., p. 304.
120 Tytler, vol. i., p. 191.
121 Archæological Journal, No. 27.
122 Tytler’s History of Scotland, vol. i., p. 191.
123 Tytler, vol. i., p. 192.
124 Tytler, vol. i., p. 196.
125 Matthew of Westminster, 1304.
126 Tytler, vol. i., p. 197.
127 Matthew of Westminster, 1304.
128 Langtoft.
129 “Endroit de Will. de Walleys, le Roi entent, qu il soit receu a sa
volute ’t a son ordainement.” (Palgrave.)
130 Rymer’s “Placita,” p. 370.
131 Langtoft says,—
 “Sir John of Menetest followed William so nigh,
He toke him when he feared least, one night his leman by.”
132 History of England, vol. v., p. 97.
133 History of England, vol. ii., p. 428.
134 History of England, vol. ii., p. 424.
135 “They spared none, but slew all down.”—Wyntoun.
136 Blind Harry.
137 Encyclo. Britan.
138 Sir Walter Scott.
139 Many of our popular histories of England, disregarding this
distinction, fall into a variety of errors. Thus Oliver Goldsmith, in his
larger history, says, that in 1306, the competitor, “being old and infirm,
was obliged to give up the ambition of being the deliverer of his
people to his son.” The fact being that the competitor had died eleven
years before, and his son two years before the time of which
Goldsmith was speaking. In his abridged history, which for many years
was the lesson‐book in all our great schools, the statement was thus
altered:—“Bruce, who had been one of the competitors for the crown,
but was long kept a prisoner in London, escaping from his guards,
resolved to strike for his country’s freedom.” The fact being, that
neither of the Bruces had ever been “a prisoner in London,” and that
the competitor, here spoken of, had died in 1295—eleven years before
the period at which we have now arrived. Even Sir Walter Scott falls
into a like inaccuracy, saying, “Bruce, the competitor, after Dunbar,
1296, hinted to Edward his hope of being preferred to the kingdom.”
Whereas, “the competitor” had died a year or two previous.
140 Tytler’s History of Scotland, vol i., p. 204.
141 Fordun, p. 981. He also sat, as an English baron, in the
parliament of Lincoln. (See p. 220.)
142 Fordun, p. 778. Wyntoun, vol. ii., p. 498.
143 “The countess herself, riding up, and with gentle violence taking
hold of his horse’s reins, Bruce suffered himself to be led away in a
kind of triumph to Turnberry.”—Tytler’s Scottish Worthies, p. 292.
144 See p. 124. This sum would be equal to £600 in the present
day.
145 “Scala Chronica,” Leland, vol. i., p. 540.
146 “The vision of a crown could not but haunt him.”—Burton’s
History of Scotland, vol. ii., p. 286.
147 Tytler’s History, vol. i., pp. 129, 206.
 148 Tytler’s History, vol. i., p. 209.
149 Halliwell’s Royal Letters, vol. i., p. 22.
150 Chalmers’ Caledonia, vol. i., p. 671.
151 Chambers, in his “Lives of Eminent Scotsmen,” says: “John
Comyn was the son of Margery, the sister of Baliol, and, setting Baliol
aside, was the heir of the pretensions of their common ancestor.”
152 Tytler, vol. i., p. 213.
153 Macpherson’s Chronykyl of Andrew Wyntoun, vol. ii., p. 501.
154 Barbour, i., 590; Wyntoun, viii., 18.
155 Barbour i., 647.
156 Lingard, vol. ii., p. 615.
157 Sharon Turner says, “On every supposition, it was still the
destruction of a competitor by the person who was to be most
benefited by the crime; and from this suspicious atrocity the memory
of Bruce cannot be vindicated.”
158 Palgrave’s Documents, p. cxxxix.
159 Pearson’s History, vol. i., p. 351.
160 “Bruce was so beaten by ill‐fortune, that he was left alone to
take passage to the Isles with two mariners in a boat, who asked him
‘if he had any tidings of Robert Bruce?’”—Scala Chronica, App. p. 287.
161 Tytler’s Hist., vol. i., p. 222.
162 Matthew of Westminster.
163 Palgrave’s Documents, p. clxxxix.
164 Tytler, vol. i., p. 235.
165 See Appendix.
166 Matthew of Westminster, 1307.
167 This was evidently the date of the erection of the tomb. The
king had died in July, 1307, and had been buried in Westminster in
October. The tomb was naturally completed in the following year.
168 Sir Walter Scott’s History of Scotland, vol. i., p. 87. Sir Walter
forgot here that, before six months had passed, Bruce sent
messengers to the young prince to ask if his submission would be
accepted.
169 Wallace Documents, Maitland Club, Glasgow, 1841, p. 48.
170 History of Scotland, vol. i., p. 68.
 171 Robert III. died of a broken heart; James I. was murdered;
James II. accidentally killed; James III. murdered; James IV. died on
Flodden‐field; James V. of a broken heart. Then followed Mary, who
died on the scaffold, James’s troubled reign, Charles’s bloody death,
and, finally, the expulsion of the family.
172 Rossetti’s translation.
173 Rapin’s History, vol. i., p. 385.
174 Thus, in the most popular of our school histories, Mrs.
Markham’s, the scholar is told of Edward’s “violent acts,” of his fatal
thirst of conquest, of his “mad ferocity,” of his “injustice and violence,”
of the “infinite misery” he inflicted on “many thousands” of people.
175 “The Greatest of the Plantagenets.”
176 The professor had suggested some apology for Wallace’s
violence and cruelty.
177 “Proceedings of Oxford Historical Society, Trinity term, 1864.”
178 Prof. Stubbs’ Select Charters, 1870, p. 35, 51.
179 Yonge’s History of England, p. 113.
180 Creasy’s History of England, p. 485.
181 Historical Essays, by E. A. Freeman, D.C.L., late Fellow of Trinity
College, Oxford, 1871.
182 During the last thirty years a dozen Histories of England have
been published in London, all of which servilely followed Hume,
describing Edward as “unscrupulous,” “perfidious,” and “unprincipled.”
But in the course of the last seven years, all the writers whom we have
just quoted have re‐examined the subject, and they all unite in
declaring the king to have been honest, just, truthful, and
disinterested.
183 All the best biographers of Alfred are obliged to use, at every
turn, the phrases, “It is said,” and “Tradition reports.” Thus, Mr.
Pearson writes: “Probably nothing has been attributed to him without
some real fact underlying the mythical narrative, but it is not always
easy to disentangle the one from the other” (p. 173). Mr. Wright thus
speaks: “It is probable that the king, during the period he remained at
Athelney, was actively engaged in watching the movements of the
Danes. Another legend represents him,” etc. (p. 388). And Mr. Hughes,
the latest biographer of the great king, says of one fact, “This is
related by Asser to have happened,” “which is clearly impossible.” In
another place, “Any attempt to remove the miraculous element would
take all life out of the story.” A third story is described as “a sad tangle,
which no man can unravel.”
 184 Merivale, vol. i., 119, 490.
185 Robertson’s Church History, vol. ii., p. 136.
186 Gleig.
187 Emerson.

Simmons and Botten, Printers, 4A, Shoe Lane, E.C.

Transcriber’s Notes:
The original punctuation, spelling and hyphenation has been retained, except for a small
number of apparent printer’s errors.
The original accentuation has been retained except for:

Crecy changed to Crécy

and
Grosstete changed to Grosstête

for consistency with other occurrences.

There are some instances of Norman French, for example in Footnote 129; these have been
left as printed.
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE LIFE AND
REIGN OF EDWARD I. ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions

will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States
copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy
and distribute it in the United States without permission and
without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the
General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and
distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if
you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the
trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the
Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such
as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and
printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in
the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright
law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially
commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the

free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this
work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase
“Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of
the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or
online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand,
agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual
property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree
to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease
using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for
obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms
of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only

be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by
people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.
There are a few things that you can do with most Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the
full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There
are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™
electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and
help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright
law in the United States and you are located in the United
States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying,
distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project
Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will
support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free
access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for
keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the
work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement
by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full
Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge
with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside
the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to
the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying,
displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works
based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The
Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright
status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project

Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project
Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United

States and most other parts of the world at no cost and
with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it,
give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project
Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United
States, you will have to check the laws of the country
where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of
the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to
anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges.
If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of
paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use
of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth
in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and
distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder.
Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™
License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright
holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files
 containing a part of this work or any other work associated with
Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute

this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the
Project Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if
you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project
Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other format used in the official version posted on the official
Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must,
at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy,
a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy
upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project
Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™
works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or

providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive
from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
 payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt
that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project
Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or
destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project

Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different
terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain
permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™
trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on,
transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright
law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these
efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium
on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as,
but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data,
transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property
infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be
read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except

for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in
paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic
work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for
damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE
THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT
EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE
THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of
receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you
paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you
received the work from. If you received the work on a physical
medium, you must return the medium with your written
explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu
of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.
If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund
in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set

forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’,
WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this
agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this
agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the
maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable
state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of
this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the

Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless
from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you
do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project
Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or
deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect
you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission

of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new
computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of
volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project
Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™
collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In
2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was
created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project
Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your
efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the
Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-
profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the
laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status
by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or
federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions
to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and
your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500

West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact
links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at
www.gutenberg.org/contact
 Section 4. Information about Donations to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission
of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works
that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form
accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated
equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly
important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws

regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of
the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform
and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many
fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not
solicit donations in locations where we have not received written
confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine
the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states

where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know
of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from
donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot

make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations
received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp
our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current

donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a
number of other ways including checks, online payments and
credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About

Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could
be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose
network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several

printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by
copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus,
we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any
particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new
eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear
about new eBooks.
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookmasss.com