﻿THE AGE OF PETROMUS ARBITER. Ill 



althougli he agrees with Dousa, that Petronius is the Petronius of Tacitus, does not 

 in this passage find an attack on Liican. He says, in his In T. Petronii Arhitri Sati/ri- 

 con Commcnta* in language more distinguished for good sense than good Latinity: 

 " Meram igitur historiam canere eoque ordine res, quo gestae sunt, describere, a poetae 

 omnino esse munere alienum, edocet in praesentia Petronius et latius in I Iliad. Eusta- 

 thius, quem vide. Minime vero innuit Arbiter, quod poema ex historia non sit con- 

 ficiendum ; tale namque delirium in mentem hominis eruditissimi cadere non potuit, 

 cum nemo nesciat omnibus epicis poetis res gestas sive historiam esse pro argumento. 

 Quod et tragicis commune quoque est. Unde poeta ab Scaligero patrc adsertus Luca- 

 nus yindicatusque ab nugatorum calumniis, grammaticorum objicientium Aidelicet, 

 ilium historiam conscripsisse non poema. Ipsummet itidem volunt hie Arbitrum sugil- 

 lare, conarique ideo de sacris Musarum adscensuque difficilibus sedibus ilium, iu'sito 

 tamen Apolline, deturbare. Equidem autem prorsus ignoro, uti Pharsaliae sci-iptori 

 convenire potessit rigida sane aliasque erudita isthaec Petronii declamatio. Scriptori, 

 inquam, qui eximia cum esset eruditione insigniter instructus, spiritu insupcr termaxi- 

 mo, sive, ut ille alitor, plusquam poetico, bcllum illud funestissimum scriberc adgressus 

 est. Itaque ego potius existimo, magno ipsum in pretio fuisse nostro Petronio, prae- 

 sertim cum neque antiquius habuerit quidquam, quam eum scilicet, turn rebus tum 

 verbis, penitus toto in proximo poematio imitari, uti ex sequent! hand nimis adcurata 

 conlatione liquido patefiet." 



Studer neither adopts nor rejects the view of Dousa, but expresses himself doubt- 

 ingly. Adverting to the epic poems, the " Trojae Halosis" and the "Bellum Civile," 

 he says (p. 85): "It is not quite clear whether the satirist, by putting them in the 

 mouth of an old, half-insane poet, Eumolpus, intended to parody the faults and foibles 

 of his poetic contemporaries, or seriously believed that he was furnishing something 

 better than they whose defects he, theoretically indeed, pointed out with clearness, but 

 did not escape in his own attempts." 



I have above conceded that it is quite natural for the reader of the passage under 

 consideration to think at once of Lucan as the object of Eumolpus's criticism, and 

 spoken of those who, carried away by this first impression, have endeavored to main- 

 tain their opinion of this relation of the Pharsalia of Lucan and the "Carmen Civile" 

 of Petronius. But if we enter upon a closer examination and comparison of the two 

 productions which, according to Dousa and his followers' theory, must be compared, 

 the result at which we shall arrive will be a very difierent one. One difiereucc, impor- 

 tant although merely external, at once presents itself; it is the extent of the two works. 



* Burmann's edit., Vol. II. p. 231. 



