Aspicimus populos quorum non sufficit irae
Occidisse aliquem, sed pectora, brachia, vultum
Crediderint genus esse cibi. Quid diceret ergo,
Vel quo non fugeret, si nunc haec monstra videret
Pythagoras, cunctis animalibus abstinuit qui

170

THIS satire is said by Heinrich not to be found in two MSS. of Copenhagen. Lubinus (1603) says of it, "Nec desunt qui hanc Satyram Juvenalis esse negent cum in antiquissimis codicibus non inveniatur. Aliter sentit magnus ille Scaliger filius (Joseph) ut praesenti mihi quondam ipse indicavit." He does not say by whom its absence from ancient MSS. is affirmed, and he had just before said that in very old MSS. it came. before the fifteenth satire. Calderini (about 1450) a contemporary of Valla says, "Penultimo loco haec Satira edita est a Juvenali, sed librariorum culpa in finem translata; quem errorem ex codicibus antiquis facile dignoscas." Ruperti tells us Valla says it is wanting in the oldest MSS., but does not refer us to the place where he says so. Caspar Barthius (1624) quotes from a MS. of his: "Satira haec non postremo edita est a Juvenale sed ordo debet esse ut istam sequatur praecedens. Juvenalis enim a Paride in exilium extrusus non videtur sibi male esse. Ergo laudat militiam. Quidam dicunt non esse Juvenalis sed ab ejus amico appositam." Barthius adds, "Nos si quis sententiam rogarit dicemus Juvenalis plane non esse. In eadem autem opinione fuit olim Ang. Decembrius estque hodie J. Rutgersius" (Barth. Adv. xiv. 16). The Scholiast of Pithoeus says, "Ista a plerisque exploditur et dicitur non esse Juvenalis." S. xvi. v. 2 is quoted by Priscian, and v. 6 and 42 by Servius. The former lived about the middle of the fifth century, and the latter rather earlier: the commentary (on Virgil) attributed to Servius has been interpolated in many places and cannot be relied on. But the satire must have been extant in Priscian's time and supposed by him to be Juvenal's. Some parts of the Scholia of Pithoeus were written by one who was not a Christian (see note on xiv. 103), and for this reason are supposed to be earlier than Constantine (A.D, 306). But other parts are by later hands, and the Scholium above mentioned is not to be implicitly relied upon as of great antiquity. Jahn quotes a Scholium on a Paris MS. which he assigns to the twelfth century, in which it is said that the satire is by some not supposed to be genuine, but that this opinion is refuted by the quotation of v. 42 by Servius.

I think the above is all the authority from old sources that can be adduced, and it

does not amount in my opinion to sufficient evidence against the authenticity of the satire. The only MSS. from which it is distinctly said to be absent are the two Copenhagen noticed by Heinrich, who does not mention their ages.

What Lubinus says is only repeated from others, whom he does not name, while if Scaliger really said to Lubinus what he attributes to him, his opinion must be allowed great weight. If he did not, then Lubinus' word is worth nothing. The date of the principal Scholium is uncertain, and the observation it contains makes no reference to MSS.; and though the Scholium shows that the satire was by many not thought to be Juvenal's, it does not say on what grounds they "exploded" it. An opinion founded only on the merits of a work like this would not be worth more in the third century than now.

That the poem is complete no one can say, whether it be Juvenal's or another's, and one who had set himself to imitate Juvenal, and had the ability to do it as well as this writer, is not likely to have published a fragment or a composition so defective in order and integrity as this. I do not think with Heinrich that it is begging the question to say it is only a fragment. It seems to me impossible to view it in any other light than that of an unfinished poem, and I think it may very well have been a posthumous publication of Juvenal's. I cannot otherwise account for its publication at all, for as a whole it is without point; while nevertheless it contains some good writing worthy of Juvenal, and might have been expanded, if the author had finished it according to his design, into a very amusing satire. Whoever the writer was, it is to be regretted for historical purposes he did not finish his work, for it relates to a subject, Roman military life, which is full of interest.

Heinrich is right in saying that to judge of the authenticity of a work by the style and manner and language is unsafe, that the value of such judgment depends on the capacity of the critic, and that it requires peculiar skill and natural instincts, which are not common. But in this instance, where it is not denied by those who think Juvenal may be the author that the work is not in the state in which if he had finished it we should now have had it, this sort of sagacity is not wanted. The satire is in a condition in which no author of so much capacity would have given it to the world who wished to gain reputation by it, and no author of reputation would have published it in his lifetime, though he might have made it known to his friends. The person who wrote v. 7 (which Heinrich rejects without good reason) must have intended to write more on the subject that verse introduces; and he who should bring in a single example by an exordium plainly intended for several and not see that he was bungling, could never have written the verses in which that example is set forth.

I do not think then there is sufficient reason for supposing the fragment spurious, or the partial rejection of it in early times to have proceeded from any other cause than its imperfect character.

The satire is in the form of an epistle like the last, and it professes to set forth the advantages of a military life, looking at it as a young man might when tired of a civilian's restraints. Of these advantages the writer instances the liberty of the soldier to assault a civilian without any fear of an action for damages, for the soldier can only be tried in camp, and if a townsman comes there for redress he may get a rude sort of justice from a court-martial, but the whole camp will make him rue his revenge. Then justice in civil courts is attended with many delays, while in the camp it is prompt and decisive. Besides which a father has no power over his son's military earnings, and the soldier can make a will of his own.

This is literally the whole of the satire. It is as much a satire upon the camp as the town, and so probably it would have been carried out in a variety of comparisons between the soldier and civilian. Assuming Juvenal to be the author of the satire we need not imagine (as the old commentators did) any particular circumstances having given rise to it. The subject is one that might have suggested itself to any one, and

no doubt it was capable of illustration in many ways. There is among ourselves sufficient distinction between the habits of the army or navy and those of civilians to suggest plenty of material for good-humoured raillery on either side; and military justice especially has always been a subject of wonder or amusement to non-military persons, while some soldiers on their part are seriously of opinion that courts of law are only made to obstruct justice, and to prevent honest men or dishonest from getting their due. It is to be observed that the author of this piece writes as a civilian, and the force of the satire turns partly on this.

ARGUMENT.

O Gallus, who can tell the advantages of lucky service? Give me a successful legion and I'll enlist and think my stars have favoured me. Of course a fortunate hour avails one more than if his wife or mother wrote commending one to Mars. V. 7. First the advantages that all enjoy. The greatest is that no civilian dares to strike you, nay more, if you strike him he holds his tongue and dares not show his grievance to the praetor. If he would have revenge he has his judge, a stout centurion in the camp, for soldiers may not go beyond for trial. Most just no doubt is the centurion's judgment, and if I've right upon my side he'll give me satisfaction. But all the camp will see that my revenge shall prove a greater trouble than the wrong. And he's a bold man who would dare offend so many boots and hobnails. And who would come so far to give his evidence ? Let's dry our tears, nor trouble friends who will not fail to excuse themselves. The man who dares to witness to the assault is worthy of the olden times: a lying witness may be easier got against a townsman than a true against a soldier's fortunes and his honour.

V. 35. And if a scoundrel neighbour moves my landmark, or debtor will not give me back my own, then I must wait and go through all the law's delays, but soldiers are allowed the time that suits themselves and no drag stops their suit.

V. 51. The soldier too may make a will while yet his father lives, for all he gets in service is his own. The old man therefore courts his lucky soldier who by fair favour is rewarded as his gallant deeds deserve. For 'tis the general's interest that the brave should also be the lucky and pride themselves upon their chains and collars

QUIS numerare queat felicis praemia, Galle,
Militiae? Quod si subeuntur prospera castra,
Me pavidum excipiat tironem porta secundo

1. Quis numerare queat] According to Heinrich this is an imitation of the opening of the last satire. The writer asks "who can number the advantages of military service if it be successful? As for that, if I join a fortunate legion, let me enlist and I shall count myself lucky." He speaks as a young man might speak of joining what is called by our soldiers a crack regiment, and like some of our own tiros he can think of nothing more delightful. He is speaking sarcastically. In place of 'quod,' the MSS. have 'nam,' and 'quod' which I prefer, with Heinrich, is only found in a quotation of this verse by Priscian (viii. 6. 31; 15. 82). [Ribbeck has

quot, si... castra!'] Some of the more distinguished legions bore names of honour, such as Victrix, Felix, Adjutrix, and so forth. This is what he means by 'prospera castra.' A Roman camp, which was nearly square, had four principal gates, the Porta Praetoria before the commander's tent and facing the enemy, Decumana in the rear, and Principales, dextra and sinistra, at the sides. A soldier was a 'tiro' till he had seen service and was acquainted with his duties. Pavidum' is here only a redundant epithet. Most tirones' might be supposed to feel a little uneasy at first. I see no reason therefore to adopt Hein. rich's alteration of 'me' into 'nec.'

Sidere. Plus etenim fati valet hora benigni,
Quam si nos Veneris commendet epistola Marti
Et Samia genitrix quae delectatur arena.

Commoda tractemus primum communia, quorum
Haud minimum illud erit, ne te pulsare togatus
Audeat; immo etsi pulsetur, dissimulet nec
Audeat excussos Praetori ostendere dentes,
Et nigram in facie tumidis livoribus offam,
Atque oculum medico nil promittente relictum.
Bardaicus judex datur haec punire volenti

4. fati valet hora benigni,] This is Juvenal's ironical style: having mentioned a lucky star he adds, "for of course the moment of a smiling fate is of more avail than a letter of recommendation to Mars from Venus or his mother Juno." Juno's worship at Samos is well known from other writers and from Virgil in particular (Aen. i. 15: " Quam Juno fertur terris magis omnibus unam Posthabita coluisse Samo"). Her temple, the Heraeum, was on the coast, and it is to the Samian shore that 'arena' refers, not to the sandy character of the island, as Ruperti says, for it is generally very fertile.

5

10

n.) The meaning may be the same there as here, but still there may be doubt about the thing. It is not certain that 'bardaicus' agrees, as many take it, with 'calceus' in this place. I think it may be taken independently as in Martial. Calceus' will in that case be qualified like 'surae' by 'grandes.' 'Calceus' was the general name for a walking shoe or boot as opposed to others worn in the house, or sandals which only covered the sole or were strapped on to the upper part of the foot. Of the latter sort were caligae' (24) which were heavy sandals with nails worn by the common soldiers as the 'calceus was worn by the officers, though sometimes the officers wore 'caligae' (Lips. on Tac. Ann. i. 41). See iii. 247, n.

,

ret."

66

7. communia,] That which all soldiers held in common. Togatus' is the common word for a civilian. Immo' here is affirmative of what precedes, and introduces something more. planta mox undique magna It is sometimes used negatively according to the nature of Calcor et in digito clavus mihi militis haethe sentence: but its common use is to add some statement, reason, &c., in continuation and support of what goes before. Professor Key (L. G. 1429) thinks the negative use arises from carelessness of speech. Mr. Long considers the word a contraction of in modo' (Cic. in Verr. ii. 1. 1, n., "Immo vero adsit").

11. tumidis livoribus offam,] Offa,' which is used for a chop or other piece of meat, Juvenal uses twice, each time in a sense of his own. In S. ii. 33 it signifies an abortive birth; here it means a swelling from a blow. 'Livoribus' are black contusions. Medico nil promittente' means that the doctor cannot warrant that the man will not lose his eye.

13. Bardaicus judex datur] Among other things that stink Martial (iv. 4) mentions "Lassi bardaicus evocati," "the bardaicus of the weary veteran.’ Some interpreters say it means a cucullus,' a cloak with a covering for the head, otherwise called bardocucullus.' (S. viii. 145,

The form bardaicus' is not certain. Some MSS. have 'bardiacus' which seems more suited to the metre. I doubt whether the second syllable of 'bardaicus' according to its received etymology can be shortened. For this reason the reading 'Archaicis' has been properly rejected in Horace, Epp. i. 5. 1, "Si potes Archiacis conviva recumbere lectis." The name is said to be derived from the Bardaei, an Illyrian people from whom this sort of military shoe was taken, as it is said.

Juvenal says (according to the above) if a man wishes to punish the soldier who has maltreated him, the judex assigned to him is a 'bardaicus,' a great boot, and a pair of thick calves under a big bench: that is, he must carry his case into the camp, and if he is allowed a trial it will be a court-martial with a centurion for judex. Judicem dare' was properly said of the praetor who could appoint if he pleased a judex privatus to hear a private case at the instance of the

Calceus et grandes magna ad subsellia surae,
Legibus antiquis castrorum et more Camilli
Servato, miles ne vallum litiget extra
Et procul a signis. Justissima Centurionum
Cognitio est igitur de milite; nec mihi deerit
Ultio si justae defertur causa querelae.
Tota cohors tamen est inimica, omnesque manipli
Consensu magno efficiunt curabilis ut sit
Vindicta gravior quam injuria. Dignum erit ergo