Obrazy na stronie

that fills the Persian chronicles with their most horrid stories: and we learn from the same sources the dreadful depravity of their characters and the vast extent of their influence. Cramped by the rigid forms of a pompous and wearisome ceremonial, surrounded by the ministers of their artificial wants, and guarded from every breath of truth and freedom, the successors of Cyrus must have been more than men if they had not become the slaves of their priests, their eunuchs, and their wives. The contagion of these vices undoubtedly spread through the nation: the Persians were most exposed to it, as they were in the immediate neighbourhood of the court. Yet there is no difficulty in conceiving that, long after the people had lost the original purity and simplicity of their manners, the noble youth of Persia may have been still educated in the severe discipline of their ancestors, which is represented as nearly resembling the Spartan. They may have been accustomed to spare diet and hard toil, and trained to the use of horses and arms. These exercises do not create and are not sufficient to keep alive the warlike spirit of a nation, any more than rulers and precepts to form its moral character. The Persian youth may still have been used to repeat the praises of truth and justice from their childhood, in the later period of their history, as they had when Cyrus upbraided the Greeks with their artifices and lies: and yet in their riper years they might surpass them, as at Cunaxa, in falsehood and cunning, as much as they were below them in skill and courage. Gradually, however, the ancient discipline either became wholly obsolete or degenerated into empy forms; and the nation sank into that state of utter corruption and imbecility which Xenophon, or, rather, the author of the chapter that concludes his historical romance, has painted, not from imagination, but from the very life. —(Thirlwall's Greece, vol. 2, p. 185, seqq.) Persicus Sinus, a part of the Indian Ocean, on the coast of Persia and Arabia, now called the Persian Gulf. PERsis, or Persia Proper, the original province of the Persians. (Vid. Persia.) PERsius, or Aulus Persuus FLAccus, a Roman satIrist, was born at Volaterrae, a town of Etruria, about the 20th year of the reign of Tiberius, A.D. 34. He was of equestrian rank. He lost his father at the age of six years, and his mother, Fulvia Sisenna, married a second time, but the stepsather whom she gave her son lived only a short period. Persius appears to have shown towards his mother the strongest filial affection. He was trained at Volaterræ till his twelfth year, and he then proceeded to Rome, where he studied grammar under Rhemnius Palaemon, and rhetoric under Virginius Flaccus. At the age of sixteen he became a | " of Annæus Cornutus, a Stoic philosopher, who ad come from Leptis in Africa to settle at Rome. Lucan, the poet, was his fellow-disciple in the school of Cornutus. Persius and Cornutus were bound to each other by feelings more like those of father and son, than such as usually subsist between preceptor and scholar. This friendship continued without interruption till the death of Persius, which took place in his 28th or 30th year. The poet bequeathed his books and a large sum of money to Cornutus, who, however, declined to receive the latter, and gave it up to the sisters of Persius. The materials for a life of Persius are scanty, but they are sufficient to show him in a very favourable light. Amid prevailing corruption, he maintained a high moral character. He consistently applied his principles as a Stoic to the purses of self-discipline. His acquaintance with men and things was the result of private study more than of actual converse with the world, so that, as his writings testify, he viewed human life as he thought it should be, rather than as it really was. Different opinions are formed of Persius as a satirical poet. Quin

tilian and Martial, with some of the early Christian writers, bear a high testimony to his merits, as do likewise several modern critics. Others consider him not worth reading. Gifford, who studied him thoroughly, says, among many eulogies of him, “His life may be contemplated with unabated pleasure; the virtue he recommends he practised in the fullest extent; and, at an age when few have acquired a determinate character, he left behind him an established reputation for genius, learning, and worth.”—The works of Persius consist of six satires, with a prologue. The metre of the latter is of the kind called Choliambic (lame Iambic), being an Iambic trimeter, with a spondee in the sixth place instead of an iambus. The Satires contain altogether only 650 hexameters; and in some manuscripts they are given as one continuous work. Whether Persius wrote more than we now possess, as the author of his life attributed to Suetonius affirms, we know not ; but since Quintilian and Martial speak of his claims to distinction, though he left “only one book,” we should conclude that no other production of his was known in their time. The chief defect of Persius is an affected obscurity of style, which is so great and so general that there are few scholars who read these performances for the first time, whose progress is not arrested at almost every line by some difficulty that presents itself. It has been conjectured, and not without some show of reason, that one of the causes of the great obscurity of Persius is the caution

with which he constantly conceals his attacks upon

Nero. The scholiast, moreover, expressly states, with regard to several verses of the poet, that they were intended for the emperor. This may be a sufficient apology for Persius as far as Nero is concerned; but why allow the same obscurity to pervade the rest of his poem " The Satires of Persius would, in fact, be absolutely unintelligible for us, if we had not the labours of an ancient scholiast, or, rather, a collection of extracts from several scholiasts, to guide us; and even with this aid we are frequently unable to comprehend the meaning of the satirist. The conclusion seems irresistible, that much of this obscurity is owin to the peculiar character of the poet's mind, to his affected conciseness, and to the show of erudition which he is so fond of exhibiting. Some critics, who condemn the negligent style of Horace, give the preference to Persius as a satirist on account of the greater harmony of his hexameters. Melody of diction, however, cannot compensate for the want of perspicuity; besides, the style of Horace, in his satires, is purposely made to approximate to that of familiar life. It must appear surprising that Persius is so reserved re specting the gross vices and immorality of the age in which he lived. The best way of accounting for this is to ascribe it to the retired life led by the youthful poet in the bosom of a virtuous family, and his consequent want of experience in the excesses of the day. The best editions of Persius are, that of Isaac Casaubon, revised by his son Meric, Lond, 1647, 4to ; Bond, Norih., 1631, 8vo; Koenig, Gött., 1803, 8vo, and also with Rupert's edition of Juvenal, Glasg., 1825. PERTINAx, Publius Helvius, a Roman emperor after the death of Commodus, was born about A.D. 126, at Villa Martis, near Alba Pompeia, on the banks of the Tanarus, in the modern Piedmont. His father was a freedman, who dealt in charcoal, an important article of fuel in Italy even at the present day. He received from his parent a good education, and was placed by him under the tuition of Sulpicius Apollinaris, a celebrated grammarian, who is repeatedly mentioned by Aulus Gellius. Pertinax became a proficient in the Greek and Roman languages; and, after the death of his master, he taught grammar himself. But, being dissatisfied with the small profits of his profession, he entered the army; and, being assisted by the interest of Lollianus Avitus, a man of consular family, and his father's patronus, he was promoted to a command. He was sent to Syria at the head of a cohort, and served with distinction against the Parthians, under L. Verus, the colleague of Marcus Aurelius. He was afterward sent to Britain, where he remained for some time. He subsequently served in Moesia, Germany, and Dacia, but, upon some suspicion of his fidelity, he was recalled by Marcus Aurelius. Having cleared himself, he was made praetor, and commander of the first legion, and obtained the rank of senator. Being sent to Rhaetia and Noricum, he drove away the hostile German tribes. His next promotion was to the consulate, and he publicly received the praise of Marcus Aurelius, in the senate and in the camp, for his distinguished services. In Syria he assisted in repressing the revolt of Avitus Cassius. He was next removed to the command of the legions on the Danube, and was made governor of Maesia and Dacia, and afterward returned to Syria as governor, where he remained until the death of Marcus. Capitolinus says, that his conduct was irreprehensible till the time of his Syrian government, when he enriched himself, and his conduct became the subject of popular censure. On his return to Rome, he was banished by Perennis, the favourite of Commodus, to his native country, Liguria. Here he adorned Villa Martis with sumptuous buildings, in the midst of which, however, he left his humble, paternal cottage untouched. He remained three years in Liguria. After the death of Perennis, Commodus commissioned him to proceed to Britain, where the licentiousness of the troops had degenerated into mutiny. On his arrival, the soldiers wished to salute him as emperor, and were with difficulty prevented by Pertinax, who seems to have found the discipline of the legions in a most deplorable state. One of the legions revolted against him ; and, in trying to repress the revolt, he was wounded and left among the dead. On his recovery he punished the mutineers, and solicited the emperor for his recall, as his attempts at restoring discipline had rendered him obnoxious to the army. He was then sent as proconsul to Africa, and was afterward made prefect of Rome, in which of. fice he showed much moderation and humanity. Af. ter the murder of Commodus, two of the conspirators, I,astus and Electus, went to Pertinax and offered him the empire, which the latter at first refused, but afterward accepted, and was proclaimed emperor by the senate on the night previous to the first of January, A.D. 193. In the speech which Pertinax delivered on the occasion, he said something complimentary to Lietus, to whom he owed the empire, on which Q. Sosius Falco, one of the consuls, observed, that it was easy to foresee what kind of an emperor he would make, if he allowed the ministers of the atrocities of Commodus to retain their places. Pertinax mildly replied, “You are but a young consul, and do not yet know the necessity of forgiving. These men have obeyed the orders of their master Commodus, but they did it reluctantly, as they have shown whenever they had an opportunity.” He then repaired to the imperial palace, where he gave a banquet to the magisthates and principal senators, according to ancient custom. The historian Dio Cassius was one of the guests. Pertinax recalled those who had been exiled for treason under Commodus, and cleared from obloquy the memory of those who had been unjustly put to death. But his attempts to restore discipline in the army alienated the affections of the soldiers, who had been accustomed to license during the reign of Commodus. As he found the treasury empty, he sold the statues, the plate, and all the valuable objects amassed by his predecessor. By this means he collected money to pay the praetorians, and to make the usual gifts to the people of Rome. He publicly declared that he would receive no legacies or inheritance from any one, and he abolished several taxes and tolls which had been 6 N

imposed by Commodus. Pertinax was cherished by the senate and people; but the turbulent praetorians, secretly encouraged by the traitor Lotus, conspired against the new emperor. After offering the empire to several persons, they went to the palace three hundred in number. The friends of Pertinax urged him to conceal himself until the storm had passed; but the emperor said that such conduct would be unworthy of his rank ; and he appeared before the mutineers, and calmly remonstrated with them upon the guilt of their attempt. His words were making an impression upon them, when one of the soldiers, a German by birth, threw his spear at him, and wounded him in the breast. Pertinax then covered his face, and, praying the gods to avenge his murder, was slain by the other soldiers. Electus alone defended him as long as he could, and was killed with him. The soldiers cut off the head of Pertinax and carried it into their camp, and then put up the empire at auction, offering it to the highest bidder. It was purchased by Didius Julianus. Pertinax was 67 years of age, and had reigned 87 days. (Ca itol., Vit. Pert—Dio Cass., 73, 1–Encycl. Useful Knowl., vol. 17, p. 509.) PERUsia, now Perugia, one of the most ancient and distinguished cities of Etruria, situate at the southeastern extremity of Lacus Trasymenus, or Lago di Perugia. The era of its foundation long preceded that of Rome, though the precise period cannot be ascertained with certainty. In conjunction with the other Etrurian states, it long resisted the Roman arms, but, when reduced, it became a powerful and wealthy ally. It was a Roman colony about 709 A.U.C. under the consulship of C. Vibius Pansa; and, some years after, sustained a memorable siege, in which Antony held out against Octavius Caesar, but was at last forced by famine to surrender. On this occasion, many of the Perusians were put to death, and the city was accidentally burned; a madman having set fire to his own house, a general conflagration ensued. (Appian, Bell. Cir., 5, 49. —Compare Well. Paterc., 2, 74—Florus, 4, 5–Suet., Wit. Aug., 96.) Perusia appears, however, to have risen again from its ruins, according to Appian and Dio Cassius (48, 15); and under the Emperor Justinian we find it maintaining a successful siege against the Goths. (Cramer's Ancient Italy, vol. 1, p. 219.) PescenNics. Vid. Niger. Pessists (gen, -untis; in Greek IIecavoic, gen. -ošvtoc), a city of Galatia, on the river Sangarius, and near the western confines, according to D'Anville's map. It was of very early origin, but chiefly famous on account of the worship of Cybele. Straho says, that Mount Dindymus (whence she was named Dindymene) rose above the town. So great was the same of the shrine and statue of the goddess, that the Romans, enjoined, as it is said, by the Sibylline books, caused the latter to be conveyed to Rome, since the safety of the state was declared to depend on its removal to Italy. A special embassy was sent to King Attalus, to request his assistance on this occasion: this sovereign received the Roman deputies with great kindness and hospitality, and, having conveyed them to Pessinus, obtained for them permission to remove the statue of the mother of the gods, which was no thing else but a great stone. On its arrival at Rome, it was received with great pomp and ceremony by the Roman senate and people, headed by Scipio Nasica, who had been selected for this office by the national voice as the best citizen, according to the injunction of the Pythian oracle. This took place in the year 547 U.C., near the close of the second Punic war. (Liv., 29, 10, seqq.—Strab., 567.) Stephanus of Byzantium affirms, that Pessinus originally bore the name of Arabyza, when the district in which it stood be. longed to the Caucones; but he does not mention from what author he derives this * (Steph. Byz., s. v. 'Apátiva). Herodian and Ammianus give various derivations of the name of Pessinus, which are not worth repeating. (Herod., 1, 11.—Ammian. Marcell., 22, 22.-Compare Steph. Byz., s. v. IIcaruvoto.) It would seem that the inhabitants of Pessinus, after parting with the image of their goddess to the Romans, had still another one in store, for we learn from Livy, that the worship of Cybele was still observed in this city after its occupation by the Gauls, since the priests of the goddess are said to have sent a deputation to the army of Manlius, when on the banks of the Sangarius. (Livy, 38, 18.) Polybius mentions the names of the individuals who then presided over the worship and temple of Cybele. (Polyb., fragm., 20, 4.) In the fourth century, also, the Emperor Julian turned away from his line of march against the Persians, for the purpose of visiting the shrine. (Amm. Marcell., 22, 9.)—Pessinus was the chief city of the Tolistoboii, who settled in this part of the country, and, according to Strabo's account, was a place of considerable trade. It sank in importance under the Romans; and although Constantine the Great, in his new arrangement of the provinces, made Pessinus the capital of Western Galatia (Galatia Salutaris.—Hierocles, p. 697), yet the city gradually disappeared from notice after the commencement of the sixth century.— Great uncertainty exists with regard to the site of this place, since its ruins have not been explored by any modern traveller. From the Antonine Itinerary we know that it was ninety-three miles from Ancyra, with which it communicated through Germa, Windia, and Papiria. Germa, the first of these stations, is known to answer to Yerma, on the modern road leading from Eski-cher to Ancyra : the Itinerary would lead us to place it sixteen miles from that site, towards the Sangarius. The Table Itinerary, on the other hand, gives a route from Dorylaeum to Pessinus, by Midaeum and Tricomia, and allows seventy-seven miles for the whole distance. But the road from Dorylaeum to Ancyra did not pass by Pessinus, but by Archelaium and Germa, as appears from another route in the Antonine Itinerary (p. 202), so that it is evident that Pessinus could not have been situated where Colonel Leake would place it, beyond Juliopolis, or Gordium, on the right bank of the Sangarius, and near its junction with the Hierus, as it would then have been exactly on the

road to Ancyra, and such a route as that by Germa

would never have been given in the Antonine Itinerary. We ought therefore, perhaps, to look for the ruins of Pessinus not far from the left bank of the Sangarius, somewhere in the great angle it makes between its junction with the Yerma and the Pursek. In Lapie's map, the ruins of Pessinus are laid down in the direction which we have just mentioned, on a site called Kahé, but the authority for this is not given. (Cramer's Asia Minor, vol. 2, p. 86, seqq.—Leake's Tour, p. 88, seqq.)—The temple of Cybele at Pessinus, as also its porticoes, were of white marble, and surrounded by a beautiful grove. The city was indebted for these decorations to the kings of Pergamus. The priests of the goddess were at one time high in rank and dignity, and possessed of great privileges and emoluments. (Strab., 567.) Petilia, I. a town of Italy, in the territory of the Bruttii, on the coast of the Tarentine Gulf, and to the north of Crotona. It was fabled to have been settled by Philoctetes, after the Trojan war. (Virg., AEn., 3, 401.) In the opinion of the most judicious and best informed topographers, it occupied the situation of the modern Strongoli. (Holsten, ad Steph. Byz, p. 307.-Romanelli, vol. 1, p. 206.) This small town, of whose earlier history we have no particulars, gave a striking proof of its fidelity to the Romans in the second Punic war, when it refused to follow the example of the other Bruttian cities in joining the Carthaginians. In consequence of this resolution, it was

besieged by Hannibal, and, though unassisted by the Romans, it held out until reduced to the last extremity of famine; nor was it till all the leather in the town, as well as the bark and young shoots of trees, and the grass in the streets, had been consumed for subsistence, that they at length surrendered. (Wel. Paterc., 6, 6–Liv., 23, 30.) Ptolemy incorrectly classes Petilia with the inland towns of Magna Graecia (p. 67), and Strabo confounds it with the Lucanian Petilia. (Cramer's Anc. Italy, vol. 2, p. 389.)—II. A town of Lucania, confounded by Strabo with the Bruttian Petilia. It is supposed to have been situated on what is now the Monte della Stella, not far from Paestum. (Cramer's Anc. Italy, vol. 2, p. 368.) Petilius, an individual at Rome, surnamed Capitolinus. According to the scholiasts on Horace (Sat, 1, 4, 94), he had been governor of the Capitol. They add, that he was accused of having stolen, during his office, a gold crown consecrated to Jupiter, and that, having plead his cause in person, he was acquitted by the judges in order to gratify Augustus, with whom he was on friendly terms. Hence, they say, arose his surname of Capitolinus. One part, at least, of the story is incorrect, since the Capitolini were a branch of the Petilian family long before this. (Compare Vaillant, Num. Fam. Rom, vol. 2, p. 222.) What degree of credit is due to the rest of the narrative it is hard to say. A full examination of the whole point is made by Wieland (ad Horat., l.c.). Petosiris, a celebrated astrologer and philosopher of Egypt. He wrote, according to Suidas, an astrological work, compiled from the sacred books; a treatise concerning the mysteries of the Egyptians, &c. (Suidas, s. v.–Pliny, 2, 23.−Jun., 6, 581—Athenatus, 3, p. 114–Jacobs, ad Anthol. Gr., vol. 2, pt. 2, p. 470.-Salmas., de Ann. Clim, p. 66, 353.) Ptolemy everywhere calls him 'Apraioc, and says that he and Necepsus were the authors Tig k2Haktipukåc &yoyoc, that is, of the art of computing a person's nativity from an enumeration of “climacteric years,” reference being also had at the same time to the position of the stars. (Salmas., l.c.) PETRA, I. a city of Arabia, the capital of the Nabathai, and giving name to the division of the country called Arabia Petraea. It was situate a short distance below the southern boundary of Palestine. The ordinary form of the name is Petra (# II&Tpa); Josephus, however, in some places gives the neuter plural (rù IIerpá), and many of the Church-fathers the feminine plural Petra (al IIárpal). The appellation given to the city originated in the peculiar nature of its situation. It stood on an elevated plain, and was well supplied with sountains and trees; but all around were rocks, which only allowed an access to the place on one side, and that a difficult one. Hence the name of the place, from Tërpa, “a rock.” The country beyond this, especially towards the borders of Palestine, was a continued sandy waste. According to Diodorus Siculus (19, 55), there was no city in this quarter in the time of Antigonus, but only a place strongly fortified by nature, and supplied with numerous caves that were used as dwellings. Here, upon a rock (Širi Twoc Trétpac), the Nabathai were accustomed to leave their families and plunder whenever they went on distant expeditions, and this served them as a stronghold. The troops of Antigonus, on their sudden inroad into the country, found in this spot a large quantity of frankincense and myrrh, and also five hundred talents in silver. (Diod, l.c.) The incense and myrrh show that they carried on an overland traffic with the neighbouring communities, and it is to this same traffic that the city of Petra owed its origin. , All subsequent writers speak of Petra as a city, and an important place of trade. Eckhel gives a coin, on which we find the inscription 'Aéptávn IIÉrpa MurpóTooto. If the coin be genuine, it shows that in the time of the Emperor Hadrian, Petra not only belonged to the Roman sway, but had also adopted the name of its conqueror. (Dio Cass., 68, 14.) The Syrians (and the Church fathers) call this place Rhekem ("Pektu) which also denotes “a rock;” and Arhekeme ('Apekéum.—Josephus, Ant. Jud., 4, 7). Josephus states that Aaron died in its neighbourhood; he calls it in this passage Arke ("Apkm) by contraction. (Ant. Jud., 4, 4.) St. Jerome makes it the same with the Sela of Scripture (2 Kings, 14, 7). Traces of the Syrian name remained at a late period, and we find the place mentioned by Abulseda under the appellation of Ar Rakim, with the remark that there were dwellings here cut out of the rock. D'Anville names it incorrectly Karak. Petra seems not to have continued a place of trade for any very long time ; at least Ammianus Marcellinus is silent respecting it, though he enumerates very carefully the important places in this region. Petra lay, according to Diodorus (19, 108), at the distance of 300 stadia from the Dead Sea; and, according to Strabo (779), three or four days’ journey, or from twelve to sixteen geographical miles in a southern direction from Jericho.—The remains of the ancient city were for a long time undiscovered by modern travellers. Burckhardt and Bane, at last, discovered them at Wady Moussa, in 1812, but could not give them a close examination through fear of the Arabs. In 1828, two French travellers, De la Borde and Linant, visited the spot, and gave a description of the ruins; but the best and fullest account is that afforded by the pages of Mr. Stephens, who was at Petra in 1836. (Incidents of Travel, vol. 2, p. 50, seqq.—Mannert, Geogr., vol. 6, pt. 1, p. 137, 2d ed.)—II. A fortress of Macedonia, among the mountains beyond Libethra, the possession of which was disputed by the Perrhaebi of Thessaly and the kings of Macedonia. (Lit., 39, 26. —Id., 44, 32.) It commanded a pass which led to Pythium in Thessaly by the back of Olympus.-III. A fortress on Mount Haemus. (Liv., 40, 22.)—IV. A Corinthian borough or village, of which Eetion, the father of Cypselus, was a native. (Herod., 5, 91.)— V. A rock-sortress in Sogdiana, taken by Alexander. (Quint. Curt., 7, 11.) It was also called Ozi Petra, probably from its being near the river Oxus. PETRAEA, one of the 'divisions of Arabia, so called, not, as is commonly supposed, from its stony or rocky character (Térpa, “a rock,” “a stone"), but from its celebrated emporium Petra. (Wid. Petra, I.) It was bounded on the east by Arabia Deserta, on the west by Egypt and the Mediterranean, on the south by the Red Sea, which here divides and runs north in two branches, and on the north by Palestine. This country contained the southern Edomites, the Amalekites, the Cushites, who are improperly called the Ethiopians, the Hivites, &c. Their descendants are at present known by the general name of Arabians; but it is of consequence to notice the ancient inhabitants as they are mentioned in the text of Scripture. (Wid. Arabia.) Petr Eius, Marcus, a Roman commander. He was lieutenant to the consul C. Antonius, and was intrusted by the latter, who feigned indisposition, with the command of the Roman forces against the army of Catiline, whom he totally defeated. (Sall., Bell. Cat., c. 59, seq.) Faithful to the cause of the republic, he became one of Pompey's lieutenants in Spain during the civil contest, and endeavoured, in conjunction with Afranius, to oppose the progress of Caesar in that country. They were both, however, compelled to surrender (Caes., Bell. Civ., 1, 38, seqq.), and retired after this to Greece, where they joined the army of Pompey. After the battle of Pharsalia, Petreius fled to Patrae, where Cato afforded him an asylum ; and he subsequently accompanied Scipio into Africa. Here again, however, the defeat at Thapsus disappointed his hopes, and he sell, according to Livy, by his own hand, after having performed the same sad office for Juba,

the partner of his flight. (Liv., Epit., 114.) According to Hirtius, however, Juba and Petreius having agreed to die by each others' hands, the African prince easily killed his Roman friend, who was already advanced in years; but having attempted, without effect, to slay himself, persuaded one of his own slaves to become his executioner. (Hirtius, Bell. Afric., c. 94. —Compare Florus, 4, 2, 69.-Appian, Bell. Civ , 2, 100.-Senec., Suas., 7.--1d., de Provid., 2.) PetriNUM, a village in the district of Sinuessa, in Italy. (Hor., Epist., 1, 5, 5.) Petrocoril, a Gallic tribe, belonging originally to Celtic Gaul, but subsequently forming part of Gallia Aquitanica, when this last was detached from Celtica. Their territory corresponded to the modern Perigord, and their capital Petrocorii answers to the present Perigneur. Both these modern names retain manifest traces of the ancient appellation. (Caes., B. G., 7, 75–Lemaire, Ind. Geogr. ad Caos., s. v.) Petro Nius, Titus, surnamed Arbiter, because Nero had named him Arbiter elegantiac. He was born, according to some modern scholars, at Massilia (Marseille) or somewhere in its vicinity, of a good family, but received his education at Rome. No one knew better how to unite the love of letters with the most unrestrained desire for pleasure. His portrait has been drawn by Tacitus with the hand of a master. It must be confessed, however, that the Petronius of Tacitus has the praenomen of Caius, and the Petronius of whom we are now treating that of Titus. There prevails, indeed, much uncertainty respecting the praenomen of Petronius; Pliny (37, 7) calls the Petronius of Tacitus, Titus; while the scholiast on Juvenal gives him the name of Publius.-We will here insert the passage of the historian above mentioned, which gives so graphic a description of the character of the man: “He passed his days in sleep, and his nights in business or pleasure. Indolence was at once his passion and his road to same. What others did by vigour and industry, he accomplished by his love of pleasure and luxurious ease. Unlike the men who profess to understand social enjoyment, and ruin their fortunes, he led a life of expense without profusion; an epicure, yet not a prodigal; addicted to his appetites, but with taste and judgment; a refined and elegant voluptuary. Gay and airy in his conversation, he charmed by a certain graceful negligence, the more engaging as it flowed from the natural frankness of his disposition. With all his delicacy and careless ease, he showed when he was governor of Bithynia, and afterward in the year of his consulship, that vigour of mind and softness of manners may well unite in the same person. From his public station he returned to his usual gratifications, fond of vice, or of pleasures that bordered upon it. His gayety recommended him to the notice of the prince. Being in favour at court, and cherished as the companion of Nero in all his select parties, he was allowed to be the arbiter of taste and elegance. Without the sanction of Petronius nothing was exquisite, nothing rare or delicious. Hence the jealousy of Tigellinus, who dreaded a rival, in the good graces of the emperor almost his equal, in the science of luxury his superior. Tigellinus determined to work his downfall, and accordingly addressed himself to the cruelty of the prince; that master passion to which all other affections and every motive were sure to give way. He charged Petronius with having lived in close intimacy with Savinus the conspirator; and, to give colour to that assertion, he bribed a slave to turn informer against his master. The rest of the domestics were loaded with irons. Nor was Petronius suffered to make his defence. Nero at that time happened to be on one of his excursions into Campania. Petronius had followed him as far as Cumae, but was not allowed to proceed farther than that place. He seened to linger in doubt and fear, and yet he was not in a hurry to leave a world which he loved. He opened his veins and closed them again, at intervals losing a small quantity of blood, then binding up the orifice, as his own inclinations prompted. He conversed during the whole time with his usual gayety, never changing his habitual manner, nor talking sentences to show his contempt of death. He listened to his friends, who endeavoured to entertain him, not with grave discourses on the immortality of the soul or the moral wisdom of philosophers, but with strains of poetry, and verses of a gay and natural turn. He distributed presents to some of his servants, and ordered others to be chastised. He walked out for his amusement, and even lay down to sleep. In his last scene of life he acted with such calm tranquillity, that his death, though an act of necessity, seemed no more than the decline of nature. In his will, he scorned to follow the example of others, who, like himself, died under the tyrant's stroke : he neither flattered the emperor, nor Tigellinus, nor any of the creatures of the court; but having written, under the fictitious names of profligate men and women, a narrative of Nero's debauchery, and his new modes of vice, he had the spirit to send to the emperor the tablets, sealed with his own seal, which he took care to break, that, after his death, it might not be used for the destruction of any person whatever.” (Tacitus, Ann., 16, 18, seqq.)—Some critics have thought that the Petronius to whom this passage refers is not the same with the author of the work that has come down to us, entitled Satyricon. Their chief argument is, that the work which, according to Tacitus, Petronius, when dying, caused to be sent to Nero, was written on portable tablets (codicilli), a circumstance that militates against the idea of its being a production of any length. It is urged, moreover, that the accomplices in the tyrant's debaucheries and crimes were named in the work, whereas the actors in the Satyricon bear fictitious names. It is evident, indeed, that the Satyricon is not the piece of which Tacitus makes mention, and that Nero caused the latter to be destroyed; but it would seem that the critics who advocate this opinion go too far when they deny also the identity of the writers. What is there to prevent our supposing that Petronius, having now no measure to keep with the world, amused himself with tracing on his testamentary tablets the scandalous lives of the individuals, whose general manners he was content with depicting in his larger work? Those critics, on the other hand, who do not see in the author of the Satyricon the friend and intimate companion of Nero, are divided in opinion as to the period when he lived. Some carry him up as high as the era of Augustus, while others place him under the Antonines, or even in the fourth century. Both parties ground their respective arguments on his style. The former discover in it the purity of the golden age, while the latter find it markcd with many low and trivial expressions, and with many solecisms that indicate the decline of the language. Without wishing to throw the blame of some of these saults on the manuscript itself, which is in so deplora. ble a state that many passages remain incapable of being deciphered, notwithstanding all the efforts of the commentators, may we not suppose that these pretended solecisms have been purposely put by the author in the mouths of individuals of the lower class, and that the unusual words employed by him only appear such to us, because we are unacquainted with the language of debauchery and intoxication among the Romans 1– Some critics, surprised that Seneca makes no mention of Petronius, think that this silence is owing to the circumstance of that philosopher's believing himself to be alluded to in the following lines aimed by Petronius against the Stoics:

“Ipsi qui cynica traducunt tempora scena, Nonnunquam nummis vendere verba solent.”

If it were certain, as some suppose, that Terentianus Maurus was the contemporary of Martial, there would remain but little doubt respecting the epoch when Petronius lived, since Terentianus cites him once under the name of Arbiter, and another time under that of Petronius. In 1770, a learned Neapolitan, Ignarra, supported, with some new reasons, the opinion that Petronius lived towards the end of the era of the Antonines. It appears more than probable, he maintains, that the Satyricon was written in the same city in which the scene of the banquet of...Trimalcion is laid, and that its object is to depict the manners of the Neapolitans. Many hellenisms and solecisms, some of which still remain among the lower orders at Naples, prove, he thinks, that Petronius was either born in that city, or received his education there. As to the period in which he lived, he indicates it himself, accordin

to Ignarra, in the 44th, 57th, and 76th chapters, an

elsewhere, by giving to the city of Naples the title of colony, or in speaking of the colonial magistrates. Ignarra then proceeds to show that Naples only became a Roman colony towards the close of the reign of Commodus. Finally, he remarks that Petronius, in the 76th chapter, makes mention of the mathematician Serapion, who lived under Caracalla, as appears from a passage in Dio Cassius (78, 4). Ignarra thinks that Petronius, born under the Antonines, had, by a caresul study of good models, appropriated to himself much of the elegance of the golden age, without getting entirely rid of the corruption of that in which he happened to live. (De Palaestra Neapolitana, &c., p. 182, seqq.) Wyttenbach appears to favour the opinion of Ignarra, in some of its features (Bibl. Crit., pt. 5, p. 84, seqq.); but many arguments might be cited against it.—Some critics, again, have thought that the author of the Satyricon was not called Petronius, but that, as the treatise on the art of cookery was entitled Apicius, and the Distichs Cato, so this Menippean Satire has been styled Petronius by the author: this opinion, however, is altogether untenable.—The Satyricon of Petronius is written in the Varronian or Menippean style of satire. We have merely a fragment of it, or, to speak more correctly, a succession of fragments, which some lover of loose and indecent reading would seem to have selected from the work in the middle ages, for it is said that the Satyricon existed entire in the twelfth century. The fragments that remain form so many episodes: the most witty of these is the well

known history of the Ephesian Matron; but the long

est, and the one most descriptive of the manners of the day, is the Banquet of Trimalcion, a ridiculous per

sonage, intended, as some think, to represent the Em

peror Claudius. This fragment was found in the 17th century at Trau in Dalmatia, in the library of a certain Nicolaus Cippius, and was published for the first time at Padua, in 1662. It gave rise to a very warm contest among the scholars of the day. Adrien de Valois and Wagenseil attacked its authenticity, which was defended in its turn by Petit, the celebrated physician, in a treatise in which he assumed the name of Marinus Statileius. The manuscript was sent to Rome and examined by some of the first critics of the day. It passed after this into the library of the King of France. At present there is no doubt as to its authenticity.—The noise which this discovery made in the literary world induced a French officer named Nodot to attempt an imposture, which did not, however, answer his hopes. He published, in 1693, at Rotterdam, a pretended Petronius, complete in all its parts, which he said had been found at Belgrade, in 1688, by a certain Dupin. At first, some members of the academies of Nimes and Arles suffered themselves to be imposed upon ; the fraud, however, was soon discovered. We must not confound with this last-mentioned individual a Spaniard named Marchena, who, in 1800, amused himself with publishing a new fragment

« PoprzedniaDalej »