Freethought & Rationalism Archive

andrewcriddle · 07-15-2008, 11:12 AM

I've come across an interesting defence of the authenticity of the Annals in Furneaux's edition (1896-1907) online http://www.archive.org/details/annalsoftacitusp00taci

The main section is roughly as follows

Quote:

GENUINENESS OF THE ANNALS.

IT his not hitherto been thought necessary for any editor of this
work to establish its genuineness ; but the recent attempts to prove
it to be a forgery by Poggio Bracciolini in the fifteenth century, while
they cannot be said to have found such acceptance as to necessitate
a full discussion , may make it desirable briefly to subjoin some external
evidence to show that it is at least the work of an ancient
author.

We have no reason to suppose that any scholar of the time of
Bracciolini had access to historians of this period who are lost to us.
Even those whom we have must have been known to him only in
manuscripts. The inventor of a Tacitean history of the principate of
Tiberius or Nero must act as any scholar would now have to act who
desired to compose a Tacitean history of that of Gaius or Domitian. He
must make the best use of Dio Cassius and Suetonius, and of whatever
could be gleaned from other authors, and must invent the rest of the
material, as well as the form and language. Any careful comparison
of the Annals with these sources will show how large a proportion
of the whole narrative as it stands will have to be set down thus to
invention ; and in testing such a theory, the details become important,
almost in proportion to their intrinsic unimportance.

If it can be shown that even a moderate number of facts, such as
would be unlikely to occur to an inventor, stated in the Annals, and in
no other extant author, are confirmed by coins and inscriptions, most
of which were certainly, and all of them probably, unknown in the
fifteenth century ; the supposition of so many felicitous accidents will
be generally conceded to pass the bounds of reasonable probability.

In the Books comprised in the first Medicean MS., the following con-
firmations, most of which are already well known to editors, will be
found :

1. Germanicus is stated to have been augur , flamen , and im-
perator ; and all these tides are confirmed .

2. His eldest son Nero is stated to have been espoused to the
daughter of Creticus Silanus . An inscription gives the name '/#/a
Silani [/., sfion^sa Neronis Caes\aris\ .'

3. The honours decreed to Germanicus at his death are enumerated ,
and in another place it is stated that those decreed to Drusus were in
the main the same . The remains of tablets recording these decrees,
though extremely fragmentary, appear to suggest confirmation of some
of the details, such as the insertion of the name in the Salian hymn,
the exhibition of the effigy at the ' Circenses,' and the erection of arches
(Jani) at three different places .

4. L. Apronius, and P. Cornelius Dolabella, stated to have been at
different times proconsuls of Africa , are shown to have been so by
coins struck there under their permission . The same fact, and the
year of office, are shown respecting L. Asprenas by an inscription .
Another shows M'. Lepidus to have been proconsul of Asia .

5. It is stated that the tribunitian power, though never given to
Germanicus, was afterwards given to Drusus, about a year before his
death . This title, absent on all records of Germanicus, appears on
coins of Drusus, but without record of more than a second year of
office .

6. It is stated, that in the inscription of a statue dedicated by Julia
Augusta to Augustus near the theatre of Marcellus, her name was
placed before that of Tiberius . The Praenestine Calendar gives (with
a date) the fact, and the locality of this dedication, and places the names
in this order, thus apparently following the original inscription .

7. An inscription confirms the statement that Drusus, son of Ger-
manicus, held the honorary office of praefectus urbi .

8. The statement, that Smyrna was chosen as the site of the temple
to be erected by the cities of Asia to Tiberius, his mother, and the
senate , is confirmed by a coin of that city, with a representation of
the temple, and having all three names on the superscription .

9. The title of pontifex, given to L. Piso, better known as praefectus
urbi , is confirmed by the ' Acta Arvalium .'

10. The statement, that Theophanes of Mytilene had received divine
honours from his countrymen , is confirmed by Mytilenaean coins bear-
ing his effigy, with the word ThEOS added to his name .

A few instances of less direct confirmation may here be added :

1. A soldier named Rufus Helvius is mentioned as having received
a civic crown ' . An inscription bears the name of ' M. Helvius Rufus
Civica, prim(us) pil(us),' suggesting the assumption of a cognomen re-
cording the distinction .

2. C. Silanus is stated to have had a sister, Torquata, ' priscae sancti-
moniae virgo .' Inscriptions mention 'lunia, C. Stfant f., Torquata', as
a Vestal virgin, and as chief of that body .

3. Julius Indus, one of the Treveri, is mentioned as in command of
a ' delecta manus V subsequently called an 'ala .' His name appears
to suggest the origin of an ' ala Indiana ' mentioned in several in-
scriptions .

4. Caninius Gallus is mentioned as one of the quindecimviri, and as
' scientiae caerimoniarumque vetus Y a description suitable to a person
who can be shown to have existed at that time, and to have been
magister fratrum Arvalium V

Other instances might, no doubt, be added, but the above will pro-
bably be considered sufficient.

Another curious apparent confirmation will tend, if admitted, to
carry back the date of these Books nearly to that of their reputed
author. In the account of the Frisian rebellion occurs tne sentence
' ad sua tutanda digressis rebellibus V Ptolemy, writing in the gene-
ration next to that of Tacitus, in his list of towns in north Germany
inserts SIATOUTANDA as the name of a place ; which certainly looks
as if he had the passage of the Annals before him, and misunder-
stood it.

In the later Books of the Annals, the principal inscription to be con-
sidered is that containing parts of the speech of Claudius, which indeed
from its dissimilarity in many respects to that given in the Annals has
been cited as evidence on the other side. It must here suffice to refer
to the reasons shown elsewhere for thinking that the composition in
the Annals was based on a knowledge of the original speech, though
much freedom was used in dealing with it.

Whatever may be thought of this, there are other and more indisputable
confirmations of statements found only in these Books, similar to those
above noted in Books I-VI. We may ask from what source Bracciolini
could have ascertained, or by what felicity he could have imagined that
Cadius Rufus was governor of Bithynia , Eprius Matcellus of Lycia ,
Tarquilius Priscus of Bithynia , L. Antistius Vetus of Asia , that Clodius
Quirinalis was ' praefectus classis ",' and Gavius Silvanus tribune of a prae-
torian cohort , that Silanus had a daughter Lepida , that the names of
lulius Aquila , Sextius Africanus , Verulanus Severus , Funisulanus
Vettonianus ' are names of persons employed in public service at a time
agreeing with that of their mention. None of these facts could have been
derived from any other literature known to us ; all are confirmed by coins
or inscriptions of which Bracciolini and his contemporaries must have
been ignorant .

It seems hardly worth while to pursue this subject further. If it is
thus clear that the ' Annals ' must have been written in ancient times,
when sources of information now lost to us were in existence, and are
likely to have been written before the date of Ptolemy, we are entitled to
quote the testimony of Jerome, that Tacitus did write, in thirty Books,
the history of the whole period, or, as he expresses it, ' the lives of the
Caesars,' from the death of Augustus to that of Domitian ; an arrange-
ment of books answering to that of the second Medicean MS., which
contains material purporting to be transcribed from an original of the
date A.D. 395, or contemporary with Jerome . Also on this view the
resemblances in Sulpicius Severus , Ammianus , and other writers will
rank as copies not as originals, and such knowledge of these Books as
is shown in the Middle Ages becomes relevant , especially the grounds for
thinking that a MS. answering generally in contents to the second Medicean
was known to Boccacio, who died before the birth of Bracciolini .

I've proofread a little but for an accurate version and the supporting references please go to the archive site linked above.

Andrew Criddle

andrewcriddle · 07-15-2008, 03:43 PM

There is some material about the use of Tacitus by Paulinus Venetus here
http://www.freidok.uni-freiburg.de/v...r_Germania.pdf
An automatic translation of the German gives this

Quote:

The Mediceus II has, however, in Monte Cassino in the 14th Century in the
Franciscan Paulinus Venetus a topographically interested users
had that one certainly not yet yielded the humanists can count the
significantly different interested. Paulinus Venetus, Paulinus Mino Rita
, was born to 1270/1274, and spent 1324 until his death
1344 Bishop of Pozzuoli. He has the Mediceus II despite the beneventanischen
Written by the humanist Poggio not able to decipher, 42 apparently
can read, he is in this Codex even with marginal notes
immortalized. Even a century before him had a reader at several
The bodies because of poor preparation of Pergaments verblassende
Font of 11 Century nachgezogen.43 The most comprehensive work of
Paulinus Venetus is the Satyrica gestarum rerum, regum atque regnorum et
summorum pontificum historia called world history. It is
a large Opus with various attachments, whose final version likely to
1331 to date and has collected many, as the adjective
satyrica state, and thus any reader something. "The work was
not for everybody's possession. Four copies there, says
in a note today in Bamberg copy is unknown provenance:
"This is a second, the Venice municipality, and a third has
Robert King (the way of Naples, the country's Lord of the Bishop of
Pozzuoli), through which he sent all the situation of their countries and
Regions declared, as if he would have been why it on his
Wisdom views on quite surprised and a fourth book, the Prague church. "45
The annexes include a Mappa mundi, a Erdbeschreibung,
scriptura and pictura, and in the scriptura is the section on Campania
Tacitus quoted two brief passages with names - that's new - and ten
rather long without naming author. Paulinus has Tacitus' 13, 14.und 15th Annals book herausgeschrieben those passages (and gleichzeitigim Mediceus II by Alien margin highlighted), based on Puteoli / Pozzuoli and the locations in the Gulf relating to Misenum, Bauli, Baiae, Cumae, Averner and Lucriner lake and the traces of Nero planned - fossa usque ad ostia Tiberina (Paulinus fossa Monti called Barbari undwohl channel identified with Agrippas, after his time, 1538, eruption durcheine the Monte Nuovo arise had spilled) .46 The use of Tacitus Paulinus is determined -- quite closely and be limited - that on a region-related interest, and there is the inter-eat Rudolph of similar Fulda

42 Poggio Bracciolini, Humanities I: Lettere a Niccolö Niccoli, ed Helene Harth (Florence 1984) No 30 (21.10.1427) 83.
43 Lowe (as in n. 15) with Anna-table 38.
44 Dorothee by the Brinken, Mappa mundi and Cosmographia, in German archive 24 (1968) 118-186, 154-156 here; Isabelle Heullant-Donat , Entrer dans l'histoire. Paolino daVenezia et les prologues de ses chroniques universal, Melanges de l'cole Frafflise deRome. Moyen-äge 105 (1993) 381-442 (called all manuscripts); this., From Origine Mundi.Fra Elemosina e Paolino da Venezia. Italy Franciscains Deux et l'histoire pour le universal auXIVe doctorat s-lettres, 3 Vols. (Paris, 1994) .
45 Konrad Josef Heilig, a contribution to the history of Mediceus II of Tacitus, in Vienna study diene 53 (1935) 95-110, here 104, n. 23
46 Karl Julius Beloch, Campania [1] topography, history and life of the environment in Nea-pels Alterthum (Berlin 1879) 170

Andrew Criddle

mountainman · 07-15-2008, 05:08 PM

This article by Carrier might prove relevant: Argument to Ahistoricity

The way the question is presented "Is the Forgery of Tacitus’ Annals in the Renaissance an Untenable Position?" it is amenable to be seen as the argument to the historicity or ahistoricity (ie: forgery) of Tacitus.

Quote:

There are two ways to "prove" ahistoricity:

(1) If you can demonstrate that there is both (a) insufficient evidence to believe x and (b) sufficient evidence to disbelieve x, then it is reasonable to disbelieve x. This is the "Argument from Silence."

(2) If you can demonstrate that all the evidence can be far better accounted for by a theory (y) other than historicity (theory x), then it is reasonable to believe y and, consequently, to disbelieve x. This is the "Argument to the Best Explanation."

I understand in this instance we seek to prove historicity. The question is does the same framework of logic for ahistoricity (above) work for historicity as well? Or, do the arguments of Ross (for the ahistoricity of Tacitus Analls in this instance) fit this framework? I think they do

Best wishes,

Pete

spamandham · 07-15-2008, 09:37 PM

I am completely ignorant on this subject. If someone who is knowledgeable cares to elucidate....

What is the earliest copy of Annals, or reference to portions of it (not just references to Tacitus, but unequivocal references to Annals), that has been carbon dated?

Without that, it seems it boils down to an argument of how good a Renaissance forger could reasonably be (damn good if the shroud of Turin is used as an example!), and the 'likelihood' of abject forgery vs. traditional historical layering. Once sufficient evidence of forgery has been introduced, only radiometric dating will suffice.

For example, a Renaissance forger could be so familiar with textual style to pass a paloegraphical test, but not familiar enough to pass analysis' of a particular author's style, which requires modern computational tools.

Toto · 07-16-2008, 07:49 PM

The tangent on whether Ross was a good classicist or not has been split off here.

Please stay on topic.

Jeffrey Gibson · 07-17-2008, 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The tangent on whether Ross was a good classicist or not has been split off here.

Please stay on topic.

I hate to disagree with you, but the question of Ross' reputation and whether or not Ross was a good classicist is very much on topic. The claim that Ross' "scholarship" in matters Classical was well regarded is, after all, the basis and buttress of Pete's "argument" that what Ross says vis a vis Tacitus not only should/ought be taken seriously, but is the definitive and final word on the matter.

Jeffrey

gstafleu · 07-17-2008, 07:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

For example, a Renaissance forger could be so familiar with textual style to pass a paloegraphical test, but not familiar enough to pass analysis' of a particular author's style, which requires modern computational tools.

It is not just a matter of style. As has been pointed out above, it seems that the Annals contain items with which a renaissance forger could (reasonably speaking) not have been familiar (only modern research has unearthed them). If I understand correctly that this is indeed the case, then the argument for forgery seems weak.

Gerard Stafleu

Roger Pearse · 07-17-2008, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The tangent on whether Ross was a good classicist or not has been split off here.

Please stay on topic.

I hate to disagree with you, but the question of Ross' reputation and whether or not Ross was a good classicist is very much on topic. The claim that Ross' "scholarship" in matters Classical was well regarded is, after all, the basis and buttress of Pete's "argument" that what Ross says vis a vis Tacitus not only should/ought be taken seriously, but is the definitive and final word on the matter.

It is a separable question, tho, so I think Toto was right to split it. But of course the outcome of that thread does bear on this one.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Toto · 07-17-2008, 08:56 AM

Please focus your comments here on Doherty's OP, not on a side comment about Ross that Pete can't seem to support.

Ross was a 19th century writer; he learned Greek and Latin when those were part of the standard higher education, but clearly he lacks the tools of 20th century scholarship. It is not clear what difference his reputation would make to the argument.

Jeffrey Gibson · 07-17-2008, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Please focus your comments here on Doherty's OP, not on a side comment about Ross that Pete can't seem to support.

Seem???

Quote:

Ross was a 19th century writer; he learned Greek and Latin when those were part of the standard higher education, but clearly he lacks the tools of 20th century scholarship.

According to his reviewers (including, it appears, Hochart), he lacked the tools of 19th century scholarship as well

Quote:

It is not clear what difference his reputation would make to the argument.

Wasn't/weren't Earl's OP and a number of his claims within it ultimately grounded -- through Drews - in J.W. (not W.R. as Earl notes) Ross' "scholarship"?

CF. "The current strength of our ‘urban legend’ proceeds from the end of the 19th century in two books by W. R. Ross and P. Hochart."

And if Ross' "scholarship" was as bad as reviewers of his works have noted, then aren't any claims based upon and/or grounded in that "scholarship" both as credulous as they are worthless?

Jeffrey

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-15-2008, 09:37 PM	#14
spamandham Contributor Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 11,525	I am completely ignorant on this subject. If someone who is knowledgeable cares to elucidate.... What is the earliest copy of Annals, or reference to portions of it (not just references to Tacitus, but unequivocal references to Annals), that has been carbon dated? Without that, it seems it boils down to an argument of how good a Renaissance forger could reasonably be (damn good if the shroud of Turin is used as an example!), and the 'likelihood' of abject forgery vs. traditional historical layering. Once sufficient evidence of forgery has been introduced, only radiometric dating will suffice. For example, a Renaissance forger could be so familiar with textual style to pass a paloegraphical test, but not familiar enough to pass analysis' of a particular author's style, which requires modern computational tools.

07-16-2008, 07:49 PM	#15
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	The tangent on whether Ross was a good classicist or not has been split off here. Please stay on topic.

07-17-2008, 08:56 AM	#19
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Please focus your comments here on Doherty's OP, not on a side comment about Ross that Pete can't seem to support. Ross was a 19th century writer; he learned Greek and Latin when those were part of the standard higher education, but clearly he lacks the tools of 20th century scholarship. It is not clear what difference his reputation would make to the argument.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.