was in the early period an essential feature of the satura and was accepted as such by Horace, Juvenal also recognized,' and in this respect he conformed to the practice of his predecessors. In his case, however, the general effect is so modified by the constant presence of the spirit of censure, especially in the earlier books, which alone can be said to contain real satires, that we are not so much impressed by the variety of subject as by the uniformity of treatment. The element of dialogue, also, which was quite regular in the early stages and was largely introduced by Horace, takes a less prominent place in Juvenal. The ninth satire is the only real dialogue, the third is a long monologue with the necessary introduction and conclusion, and fragments of dialogue are found in the first. Thus we see that while dealing independently with the satura and developing it to some extent along lines peculiar to himself, he was yet not entirely unmindful of the example of his predecessors in this field.

2

26. Reminiscences of other poets. Like most other poets of his time, Juvenal was doubtless a diligent student of literature, both Greek and Roman. His use of Homeric names and comparisons and his occasional reminiscences of Lucilius, Ovid, Petronius, Seneca, and other writers, which are pointed out from time to time in the commentary, furnish good ground for this statement. But there are authors whose greater influence on the satirist calls for special remark; namely, Vergil, Horace, and Martial.' When we remember that by the latter part of the first century Vergil and Horace were the text-books of every Roman schoolboy, we are not surprised to find echoes of these poets everywhere in the literature of the period. In the

5

Note on 4, 2; cf. A. Gercke, Seneca-Studien, in Fleckeisen's Jahrb., Suppl. 22, 1896, p. 103. 5 J. Gehlen, De Iuvenale Vergilii imitatore, Gottingae, 1886.

6 P. Schwartz, De Iuvenale Horatii imitatore, Hal. Sax., 1882.

7 H. L. Wilson, The Literary Influence of Martial upon Juvenal, in Am. Jour. Phil., XIX, 1898, pp. 193-209.

8

7, 227.

satires of Juvenal are found reminiscences of word and phrase, often with the thought or point of view quite changed, borrowed comparisons, parodies, metrical and other peculiarities, all of which point to the satirist's thorough familiarity with these writers and sometimes even conscious imitation of them.' But there is none with whom Juvenal seems to have had so close a literary connection as with Martial. When the two authors are read together, as they should be, coincidences of thought and expression crowd upon the attention in such numbers that it is impossible to escape the conclusion that the one was deeply influenced by the other. We have seen that the two poets were on terms of intimate friendship,' so that Juvenal must have been perfectly familiar with the epigrams, the last of which were published in the year 101-102, some time, in all probability, before he had written any of the satires. are not to suppose, then, that the numerous striking parallels are on the whole merely accidental and caused by a common environment, or that the two poets "virtually worked together""; but rather we are led to conclude that Juvenal, sometimes unconsciously, but often intentionally, allowed the familiar thoughts and even the words of his friend to reappear in his own pages. As a rule, however, he seems to have avoided expressing the same thought in the same way as Martial, though now and then he borrows Martial's words, giving them a new meaning or adapting them to a different point of view."

4

1 See, for example, notes on 1, 25, 43, 169; 3, 70; 5, 139, 142; 7, 42, 145; 10, 204 f., 217, 266 f., 268; 12, 9, 32; 13, 222; 14, 62, 230; 15, 100, 127. echoes of Horace, see 1, 51, 165; 3, 143; 5, 88; 7, 53, 62, etc.

2 § 8.

We

235; 8, 120,

For possible

3 Cf. §§ 10 f.

4 This is the view of Friedländer, in Bursian's Jahresb., LXXII, 1892, p. 191, and edition of Juvenal, p. 46.

5 This view of H. Nettleship (Lect. and Essays, Second Series, 1895, p. 131) would involve us in great chronological difficulties.

• A detailed study of this subject is given by H. L. Wilson in the article before mentioned. Many parallels are found also in the commentary.

History of the Text

27. Influence of Juvenal. The first centuries after the death of Juvenal show no sign that his satires were read or known. Not even his name appears in extant literature after the time when Martial ceased to write,' until in the earlier part of the fourth century he is cited by Lactantius. In the course of the next one hundred years the satires seem to have become exceedingly popular not only among scholars and men of letters, such as Servius,' Ausonius, Prudentius,' and Claudian, but also among educated Romans in general." The influence of Juvenal from this time onward and all through the Middle Ages was very great, and many an echo and reminiscence of his poems finds place in the literature not only of Italy, but of France, Germany, and Britain.* Copies were multiplied and scattered throughout Europe; indeed, there was scarcely a monastery that had not one or more, and commentaries and glossaries were very common."

28. Codex Pithoeanus. The best complete 10 Ms. of Juvenal now extant is usually called the codex Pithoeanus (P) after Pierre Pithou, the French lawyer, who edited the satires from it in 1585. It is also frequently referred to as the

1 Cf. § 26.

2 Divin. Institut. III, 29, 17; cf. Iuv. 10, 365 f.

* Note the frequent citation of Juvenal in Servius' commentary on Vergil.

H. de la Ville de Mirmont, De Ausonii Mosella, Paris, 1892, pp. 281 ff.

5 E. B. Lease, A Syntactic, Stylistic, and Metrical Study of Prudentius, Baltimore, 1895, pp. 71 f.

Th. Birt, Zwei politische Satiren des alten Rom, Marburg, 1888, pp. 52–63.

7 Ammian. XXVIII, 4, 14 quidam detestantes ut venena doctrinas Iuvenalem et Marium Maximum curatiore studio legunt, nulla volumina praeter haec in profundo otio contrectantes.

8 For details see M. Manitius, Beiträge zur Gesch. d. röm. Dichter im Mittelalter. 4. Iuvenalis, in Philologus, L, 1891, pp. 354-68, supplemented by M. Maas, ib. LVI, 1897, pp. 525-34, and LVIII, 1899, pp. 157-60.

M. Manitius, Philologisches aus alten Bibliothekskatalogen, in Rhein. Mus., XLVII, 1892, Ergänzungsheft, pp. 66-8. The influence of Juvenal on modern satire was very great; echoes are quoted in the notes.

10 That is, complete to 16, 60; like all other known copies of Juvenal, it breaks off abruptly at that point.

codex Montepessulanus, because it is now in the library of the Medical School at Montpellier (number 125).' This Ms., written in the early part of the ninth century, contains Persius as well as Juvenal, and is furnished with both scholia and glosses. Corrections were made and variant readings added by several different hands from the ninth to the eleventh century; all these are indicated by the letter p. It is probable that P once contained the whole of the last satire; for 16, 60 is the last line of the tenth and what is now the last quire, and, according to F. Buecheler, no one who has handled the Ms. can doubt that it has been mutilated." The surpassing authority of P, which was first shown in Jahn's edition of 1851, rests on the fact that in many passages it alone has preserved the correct reading and that, apart from the changes introduced by p, it is tolerably free from corruptions. It contains, moreover, the best selection from the ancient commentaries.*

29. Aarau fragments. Five leaves of a Ms. which in external appearance closely resembled P were discovered about twenty-five years ago by J. Wirz at Aarau, Switzerland, in the bindings of old books. These fragments not only represent the same recension of the text, but they are like P in containing twenty-nine lines to the page, and even in having the same passages as the corresponding pages of the complete Ms.

30. Bobbio palimpsest. Another fragment which may be mentioned here consists of two leaves of a palimpsest

1 A history of this Ms. from the ninth century is given by Th. Gottlieb, Eranos Vindob., 1893, pp. 145 ff.

These glosses were edited for the first time by E. Lommatzsch, Fleckeisen's Jahrb., Suppl. XXII, 1896, pp. 391-505. For a brief account of the scholia, see § 34.

3 In the edition of Friedl., p. 114.

A detailed account of P with a facsimile of fol. 13 b (= Sat. 1, 1-29) is given by R. Beer, Spicilegium Iuvenalianum, Leipzig, 1885; a facsimile of another page may be seen in the series of Chatelain, pl. cxxvII (= Sat. 6, 603-631). Cf. also F. Buecheler, edition of 1893, pp. xiii ff., and in Friedl., pp. 113 ff.

• Hermes, xv, 1880, pp. 437 ff.; R. Beer, l. 1. pp. 24 ff. These leaves, indicated by the letter A, contain parts of the second, third, sixth, and seventh satires.

from Bobbio, now number 5750 in the Vatican Library.' It is written in capitals and contains one hundred and four verses from Juvenal and Persius. This Ms., in the important passage 15, 27, agrees with P in giving the consul's name as Iunco.

31. A florilegium of St. Gall,' number 870, contains selections from Juvenal to the extent of two hundred and eighty-two verses, and is in general agreement with P. By the aid of this Ms. and of the scholion on 8, 157, Buecheler restored the true reading mulio consul in 8, 148.3

32. Inferior Mss. All other Mss. of Juvenal, too numerous to be mentioned here in detail, form what may be called the inferior or interpolated class (w), of which none is earlier than the ninth century, and almost all are later. These Mss., differing more or less widely one from another, offer a text decidedly inferior to that of P, though in agreement with P sufficiently often to render any clear-cut distinction from the better Ms. impossible. In the codex Laurentianus, XXXIV, 42, of the eleventh century, at the end of the first book, and in the codex Leidensis, 82, of the same century, at the end of the second book, we find the notice Legi ego Nicaeus apud M. Servium Romae et emendavi. If this Servius is the well-known grammarian and author of the commentary on Vergil, the recension of his pupil Nicaeus must be placed about the end of the fourth century.' All the Mss. of the inferior class go back to this Nicaean recension; PA alone,

1 G. Goetz, Iuvenalis et Persii fragmenta Bobiensia, Jena, 1884; a facsimile may be seen in Zangemeister-Wattenbach, Exempla Cod. Lat., tab. v.

2 C. Stephan, Rhein. Mus., XL, 1885, pp. 263-82. The same Ms. contains also scholia on Juvenal; cf. § 34. 3 Cf. his note on the passage.

4 C. Hosius, Apparatus Criticus ad Iuvenalem, Bonn, 1888, gives a collation of seven Mss. of this class and of four florilegia which contain portions of Juvenal.

5 Cf. Buecheler, in Friedl., p. 117.

A facsimile of the pages concerned is given by Chatelain, pl. cxxxiv.

7 See Hosius, l. l. pp. 54 ff.; and Lommatzsch, l. 1. pp. 385 ff. For the recension of Epicarpius see O. Keller, Neue Jahrb., cxxx1, 1885, p. 576, and Chatelain, pl. cxxxv, which presents a page of the codex Parisinus, 9345, of the eleventh century. Here at the end of the second book we read the notice legente aepicarpio scrinbentis (?) exuperantio

servo.