In late 310 ce the emperor Constantine was looking to reinforce his imperial legitimacy within an unstable political climate of ‘Tetrarchs’ and ‘usurpers’. His father-in-law Maximian, the very emperor who had made Constantine Augustus, had usurped against him earlier that year. The revolt was soon crushed, and Maximian was made to commit suicide, but the episode had forced Constantine to reconsider the representation of his rule. Perhaps only weeks later, an anonymous orator from Autun delivered a panegyric before the emperor at his court in Trier, Panegyrici Latini VI(7).
This speech provides a window into political and literary culture at a turning point in Constantine's reign. It is thus very welcome that, nearly 30 years after the publication of C.E.V. Nixon's historical commentary on the panegyric (C.E.V. Nixon and B.S. Rodgers, In Praise of Later Roman Emperors: the Panegyrici Latini [1994], pp. 211–53), W. has provided scholars with a literary commentary as part of the collaborative Panegyrici Latini Project. The volume also includes the Latin text of R.A.B. Mynors with a shortened and emended apparatus criticus and a translation by W. on the facing pages. The book is indispensable, not least because it offers a rich framework of analysis. W. examines the speech in the context of its time and place of delivery, but she also investigates its relationship to the other Panegyrici Latini and its role within the Panegirici Diuersorum VII and Panegyrici Latini XII corpora.
The introduction is divided into two parts. Part 1, on the Panegyrici Latini, provides excellent overviews and discussions on the manuscript and commentary traditions, the history and purposes of the corpora, the genre of panegyric, language and style, and intertextuality (pp. 1–35). Throughout, W. repeatedly connects her broader points to passages in VI(7). Part 2 focuses on VI(7) and outlines its historical context, time and place, speaker and audience, and structure (pp. 35–63). Concerning audience, W. notes that, while the primary function of VI(7) was to express loyalty and seek benefits in a ceremonial setting, ‘the orator's secondary audience, those who would later read and study the panegyric at their leisure, was more likely to appreciate its literary qualities’ (p. 59).
Part 2 also includes a series of discussions on the panegyric's representation of key themes: Constantine's relationships with Maximian and Constantius (and how these representations compare with earlier speeches), the emperor as seuerus and mitis, the emperor's association with Augustus and Apollo, and the speech's thematic links with later panegyrics. In this way, W. brings to the reader's attention topics and issues that are revisited in the commentary. W. considers VI(7) to be a ‘people's panegyric’, since ‘the information directed towards the emperor is of greater significance than that which emanates from him’ (p. 26). That said, the orator's announcement that Claudius Gothicus is an ancestor of Constantine, apparently a new claim at the time of delivery (2.1–2) as well as his handling of Maximian's usurpation may suggest imperial briefing (pp. 24–6, 38–9, 234).
The text and translation follow the introduction. W.'s translation is engaging and captures the tone and mood of the rhetoric while not being overly literal. Then comes the brilliantly detailed commentary, which provides analyses of speech structure, chapter and sentence structure, topics of praise, intertextuality, word clusters, the repetition of words and themes, tone, oral delivery, and audience reception. Sections of the commentary are dedicated to words, phrases, clauses, sentences, chapters, and series of sentences and chapters.
The reviewer can only touch on the numerous fascinating discussions. One of the commentary's most notable contributions is the repeated attention that it gives to the ways in which VI(7) uses Julius Caesar to construct its image of Constantine. The speech's intertextual links with Lucan's Pharsalia, Caesar's Bellum Ciuile, the speeches of Cicero and Pan. Lat. VIII(5) establish Constantine as the new Caesar, who has won a civil war against the old and senile Maximian, the new Pompeius (e.g. pp. 46, 145, 206, 215, 254–5, 286, 295–6, 300, 306). W. is also interested in the ways in which the form of the orator's language matches its content. For example, 3.3, the longest sentence in the speech, expresses a metaphor of laboriously climbing to the heights of power (p. 129; cf. e.g. pp. 264, 287).
Other topics include the various meanings of maiestas (pp. 121–2), the contradictory connotations of fortuna (p. 123), the tensions between different modes of imperial succession (pp. 124–6), appearance as an indicator of virtue (pp. 140, 277–8), Constantius’ misericordia and Constantine's iusta seueritas and clementia (pp. 154, 193–5, 198–9, 200, 305–6, 311), golden-age landscapes (pp. 183–5), the personification of rivers (pp. 227–8), approachable and remote emperorship within the panegyrics (pp. 238, 262–3), the transferal of Maximian's virtues to Constantine (pp. 247, 268, 272–3), otium (pp. 249–50), liberalitas (pp. 271–2), imperial divinity across the panegyrics (pp. 314–16) and the orator's use of multiple interlinked Apollos (pp. 316, 324–8).
W. makes a strong case for researching VI(7) in the context of other panegyrics within the VII and XII corpora. The editors of the corpora influence the reader with their inclusion and arrangement of different panegyrics, and the orator in 310 ce often uses intertextual allusions to earlier panegyrics in the corpora, those that were delivered to Maximian, Constantius and Constantine, to construct his own images of these emperors. Indeed, W.'s commentary is partly interested in how Constantine's image in VI(7) represents a progression from that found in Pan. Lat. VII(6), from 307 ce, the earliest of the speeches in the corpora to have Constantine as its subject (e.g. pp. 3–4, 40–1). The panegyric's intertextual allusions to earlier speeches, and the imperial ‘coming of age’ (p. 13) that this produces, both in the context of 310 ce and within the corpora that were subsequently produced, are explored throughout the book.
The book is not without errors and omissions (e.g. Pan. Lat. VII(6)8 where VIII(5)8 is intended [p. 153]; ‘Batavian campaign’ where Constantius’ campaign against intimae Franciae nationes is intended [p. 158]; Agamemnon where Alexander is intended [p. 281]; Pan. Lat. X(2)17.3 where 10.3 is intended [p. 282]; Galerius where Maximian is intended [p. 322]; Pan. Lat. V(8)24.4 where 14.4 is intended [p. 326]). W.'s translation of 15.4 does not take account of consilii (p. 85). W. appears to reject the idea that the Tetrarchic Augusti had legally adopted the Caesars as their sons, but she does not refer to the debate that attends this topic (p. 125). In discussing Eutropius’ inclusion of Fausta in his account of Maximian's usurpation (10.3), W. omits any reference to Lactantius, De Mortibus Persecutorum 30, and Zosimus 2.11, both relevant passages (pp. 234, 236). In considering the status of retired Tetrarchs, W. does not mention the honours that they were accorded, such as the title Pater Augustorum (pp. 238–9). W. states that when Victorinus besieged Autun, the city's appeal to Claudius Gothicus was unsuccessful because this emperor had died (p. 336). Rather, this was the final nail in the coffin. Claudius had several months to act, but he had other priorities (J.F. Drinkwater, The Gallic Empire [1987], pp. 37–8). Naturally, this made the episode a delicate issue for the Constantinian orators of Gaul.
Regardless, W.'s commentary is replete with detailed research and intriguing discussions. It is a necessary companion for any scholar researching VI(7). Moreover, it should be consulted in the study of other panegyrics, especially the other speeches of the Panegyrici Latini. Undoubtedly, it will remain the standard literary commentary on VI(7) for a long time to come.
