﻿THE AGE OF PETRONIUS ARBITER. 33 



Kome. It is certainly inconsistent with the statement of Statilius himself (page 380) : 

 " Sed maculam tarn clefonnem satis superque opinor a vita et factis meis detergunt, 

 quae a me, ut dixi, privatim ad optimum Mocaenicum hac de re scripta sunt ; multo 

 vero prolixius hoc ipsum praestitit, et omnem peuitus adversariorum calumniam nuda- 

 vit et refutavit res ipsa post codicem hunc Romam transmissum et doctorum hominum 

 oculis subjectum." He was prevailed upon to send the codex to Rome, not so much 

 by the importunity of Antonius Priulus, the governor of Dalmatia, as by the insin- 

 uations and charges of his adversaries, calling m question the genuineness of the frag- 

 ment. 



Statilius evidently possessed a better knowledge of the Latin language in general, 

 and of that of Petronius in particular, than either of his assailants, and meets mth 

 marked success most of their objections and charges ; and I am inclined to think that 

 the ability of his defence did much to induce the learned to recognize the intrinsic 

 claims of the fragment to be considered genume, and produce eventually a verdict in 

 favor of its genuineness. Many of his remarks show that he was not only well acquainted 

 with the Latin language, but also with the philosophy and history of language. An 

 evidence of this may be found in what he says of the gradual changes of language, and 

 their different effect upon different classes of the people, the less educated retaining 

 longer the earlier forms and expressions. In his sensible defence of Petronius for 

 making his vulgar characters use the language of the vulgar, he adverts to and ex- 

 plains the fact, that this \-ulgar language exhibits a greater resemblance to the Italian, 

 French, and Spanish languages, than the pure Latin, because it was chiefly this vulgar 

 language, the "lingua rustica" of Latium, which was by Roman armies transplanted 

 into other parts of Italy, into Gaul, and Spain. Adverting to the notion taken up by 

 Wagenseil, that Trunalchio is a satire upon Nero, he points out the absurdity of ascrib- 

 ing to Xero what Avas common to many or all : " Quae ergo socordia est, quod multorum, 

 immo omnium fuit commune, uni Neroni tamquam proprium assignare"; and then 

 he adds, with great good sense : " Quid enim necesse est Trimalchionem esse Nero- 

 nem 1 Mihi Petronium nihil aliud voluisse quam sub persona Trimalchionis stultorum 

 divitum, quorum magna tunc Romae manus, ineptam eruditionis ostentationem urba- 

 nius traducere propemodum constat." While cruelty was one of the most striking 

 characteristics of Nero, not the least trace of it appears in the character of Trimalchio, 

 and Statilius justly observes : " Certe sine his notis et quasi proprio, ut ita dicam, cha- 

 ractere non magis ad verum pingi potuit Nero quam sine barba Jupiter, sine crinibus 

 Apollo, sine hasta Pallas, sine tridente Neptunus." In another place he says : " Alia 

 omnia in animo habuit Petronius noster, cum Trimalchionem in scenam uiduxit, quam 



