Skip to main content

Full text of "[untitled] The American Journal of Philology, (1922-01-01), pages 181-184"

See other formats


STOP 



Early Journal Content on JSTOR, Free to Anyone in the World 

This article is one of nearly 500,000 scholarly works digitized and made freely available to everyone in 
the world by JSTOR. 

Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other 
writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the 
mid-seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries. 

We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this 
resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non-commercial 
purposes. 

Read more about Early Journal Content at http://about.jstor.org/participate-jstor/individuals/early- 
journal-content . 



JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people 
discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching 
platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit 
organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please 
contact support@jstor.org. 



REVIEWS. 181 

of the two poems, cannot be composite. The author might have 
quoted Hennequin : L'ame d'un grand artiste est celle qui peut 
fremir en un million de sensibilizes individuelles et fait la joie 
et la douleur d'un peuple. 

This Brief for Homer is the manifesto of a new movement 
in the study of the poet. It says to the lover of great poetry: 
' Your feeling that only one great poet could have composed 
Iliad and Odyssey has the support of sound philological re- 
search,' and to the philologist : — ' I challenge you to make Homer, 
rather than the latest — or any— book on Homer, the base of 
your research ; to study why Homer introduces certain features 
and motifs, and how he uses them, rather than to conjecture 
what may have been his sources — which must remain unknow- 
able ; to submit your minds to the spirit of his poetry, for this 
is the final test of any work of art; in other words, to unite 
philologistic — as Croce calls modern philology — with the true 
philology or love of letters.' 

Such a manifesto and challenge, based as it is on the profound 
and scholarly knowledge of Homer, need have no fear of essential 
ultimate success. But it implies an acceptance of the responsi- 
bilities of leadership. The battle for the rehabilitation of Homer 
has only just begun. While Professor Scott's previous work 
and the reasonableness of his position as summed up in these 
lectures give the rapidly increasing Unitarian party confidence in 
his resources and his resourcefulness, the world will look for a 
greater and more comprehensive work, when time shall have 
given ripeness and perspective to the views of the author's first 
period of scholarly productivity, the close of which these lectures 
mark. The book in its external form, which unites simplicity 
and neatness with ease of legibility, fittingly inaugurates the pub- 
lication of the Sather Classical Lectures. 

Samuel E. Bassett. 

University Op Vermont 



La Loi de Hieron et les Romains. Par Jerome Carcopino. 
Paris, B. de Boccard, 1919. 22 + 308 pp. 8°. 

French erudition has made an important contribution to the 
history of Boman Law in M. Jerome Carcopino's book on the 
lex Hieronica. Three studies of this law are, it is true, already 
in existence. But that of Degenkolb, written too early to utilize 
papyrological discoveries, saw in the lex Hieronica a purely 
Boman piece of legislation. Those of Eostowzew 1 and of 

1 Eostowzew, Studien zur Geschichte des rom. Kolonates, 1910, p. 233. 



182 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 

Wilcken 2 grafted it upon the revenue laws of Ptolemy Phila- 
delphus. 

The fundamental contribution of M. Carcopino's work con- 
sists in the proof that the lex Hieronica is purely Sicilian in its 
nature and was utilized by the Romans after their occupation. 
Altho this thesis appears to have been cursorily noticed by 
Wilcken (1901) and Rostowzew (1903), it is first established 
here. The law, according to Carcopino, dates from Hiero II, 
who, it appears, did not himself create the tithe, but simply 
settled the form of a preexisting tax that had been simultane- 
ously established in Greek Sicily and Carthage in Gelon's time 
to meet similar financial needs. 

The argument is essentially based on the De Frumento — the 
third book of the Actio Secunda in Verrem. It is precisely this 
oration of Cicero that has been most neglected, and it is no 
small merit to have discovered what can be drawn from these 
pleadings, and to have actually analyzed them so profoundly 
that all future explanations of the De Frumento will have to 
be based on that of M. Carcopino. 

With remarkable critical power the author, in a work of 300 
pages, traces the origin and practice of the law, its deformation 
under Roman rule, its utilization by Verres, and the conse- 
quences which such an application actually had in Sicily. 

Three new theories appear to deserve especial mention. The 
first asserts that Sicily, instead of being, as previously believed, 
the promised land of the Roman tithe-farmers' societies was, 
on the contrary, a country where their activities were prohibited. 
The adjudicatio at Syracuse excluded by law the tithe-farming 
companies formed at Rome. A remarkable point in the course 
of this argument is the demonstration by the author that the 
classical opinion on the subject — formulated principally by M. 
Delorme and by M. Belot 3 — is based on an erroneous confusion 
of the publicans of small means who requisitioned wheat in 
person (referred to as decumani by Cicero in Book III) with 
the powerful publicans of the equestrian order (also referred 
to as decumani in Book II). 4 

Carcopino's second novel theory penetrates even more deeply 
into the heart of the law and reaches a subject which has occu- 
pied many jurists. 5 He proves in regard to the legal procedure 
in taxation that the legis actio per pignoris capionem, instead 
of being in common use in 73 B. C, as was usually thought, 
was established in Sicily on the isolated initiative of Verres at 

2 Wilcken, Deutsche Literaturzeitung, 1897, col. 1015. 
3, Histoire des Chevaliers Romains, II, 177. 
* See J. Carcopino, Decumani, pp. 401-442. 

6 Collinet, Saisie privge; Trapenard, Ager scripturarius ; Degenkolb, 
Die Lex Hieronica und das Pfandungsrecht der Pachter. 



REVIEWS. 183 

a time when it was falling into desuetude at Kome. Taking as 
a basis the test of Gaius (IV 30), the author shows that the 
lex Aebutia abolished the manus injectio. In this connection, 
he exposes the weakness of the contrary argument, founded on 
the senatusconsultum de pago Montano, the date of which is 
uncertain, and which appears to be merely a corollary of the 
power of coercion of the magistrate. On the one hand, we do 
not find any authentic examples of the manus injectio after 
126 B.C.; on the other hand, eighteen years after the lex 
Aebutia, the publicans had already given up the pignoris capio 
and had recourse to the formulary procedure, as is shown by 
the fact that the agrarian law of 111 B. C. ordered the magis- 
trates to designate the recuperatores to examine into the claims 
formulated by the publicans. 6 And as the formulary procedure 
had come from the province to Rome at the time when the 
charter of Sicily was accorded, it is hardly probable that the 
pignoris capio was transplanted to Sicily where it had no root 
and where it was repugnant to the spirit of the lex Hieronica 
which recognized the right of both cultivators and tithe-farmers 
to appear as plaintiffs. M. Carcopino sees a definite confirmation 
of this theory in the text of Cicero's Actio Secunda in Verrem, 
III 11, 27, of which he gives a very accurate interpretation. 

Thirdly, the book renders a great service in sweeping aside a 
firmly established error. All the commentators of the Actiones 
in Verrem from Zumpt 7 and all historians since Marquardt, 8 
Dareste 9 and P. P. Girard, 10 divided the Sicilian civitates into 
two classes — the decumanae civitates (34 or 35 in number), 
subject to the lex Hieronica, and the civitates of the ager pub- 
licus, subject to the tithe. M. Carcopino demonstrates that the 
fact that a city belongs to the ager publicus does not in the 
least exempt it from submission to the collection of tithes. (He 
gives a specific proof of it for the city of Leontini.) The ager 
publicus is scattered through all the civitates, but no city 
(except Leontini) is totally incorporated in the Eoman ager 
publicus. 

In addition to propounding and establishing the new views 
described in the three preceding paragraphs, M. Carcopino clears 
up many doubtful points and corrects many current minor 
errors. He also presents a complete study of the frumentum 
emptum, on which only vague and brief statements were here- 
tofore to be found. 

• P. F. Girard, Textes, 4 pp. 46 sqq. 
' Edition of In "Verrem, p. 437. 

* Organisation de l'Empire, II, p. 53. 

" De conditione et forma Siciliae, pp. 32-34. 
"Organisation judiciaire des Eomains, p. 330, n. 1. 



184 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSILOLOGY. 

There is perhaps one criticism that one might make of the 
work. It does not delve sufficiently into the sources of the lex 
Hieronica. After having shown the numerous analogies between 
the lex Hieronica and the financial laws of Ptolemy Philadelphus 
enacted six years after the death of Arsinoe, — that is to say in 
265/264 B. C. — the author concludes somewhat prematurely (p. 
64) : " Le nombre et la fidelite des ressemblances que nous 
venons de constater excluent l'hypothese d'une source commune, 
d'un vofioi TeXwviKoi de la Grece propre, dont les Grecs installes 
en Egypte depuis cinquante ans auraient pu, soudain et a la 
meme date, s'inspirer independamment les uns des autres. Au 
contraire, l'idee d'une imitation directe est confirmee par 
Phistoire." M. Carcopino then recounts the numerous relations 
existing at this time between the Sicilians and the Egyptians; 
and, after proving that the law of Ptolemy was anterior to the 
lex Hieronica, he concludes that the second is an imitation of 
the first. But from the similarity of the two laws, it is just as 
possible to induce a common origin for the two as a direct imi- 
tation of the one by the other, and the historical argument is 
not conclusive in favor of either hypothesis since the Sicilians 
were in as close relations with the Greeks as with the Egyptians, 
and certainly the Greek influence in Sicily was stronger than 
the Egyptian. Even supposing that there was a direct influence 
of the law of Ptolemy on that of Hiero, this does not at all 
exclude the other hypothesis. While making use of the original 
model was it not possible to adopt certain happy and recent 
modifications? M. Carcopino leaves this question unanswered. 

PlEERE LEPAULLE. 
Harvard Law School. 



La Table Hypothecate de Veleia: fitude sur la Propriete Fon- 
ciere dans TApennin de Plaisance. Par F. G. De Paohteke. 
Paris: Librairie Ancienne Honore Champion, 1920. (Bib- 
liotheqtie de l'ficole des Hautes Etudes, 228) . xx -+- 120 pp. 

De Pachtere has succeeded in extracting a remarkable 
amount of valuable information from the famous Veleian in- 
scription. In the first two chapters he shows that Mommsen's 
conclusions (Hermes, xix, 363 ff.) were partly incorrect, partly 
inadequate. By tracing with unusual acumen the limits of 
many of the pagi mentioned in the inscription he demonstrates 
that the districts named are largely mountainous and that it is 
chiefly in the infertile and rocky regions, not in the lowlands, 
that small holdings gave way to latifundia. In the fertile 
regions, the small plots survived more successfully than Momm- 
sen supposed.