Roger Rees, one of the most authoritative scholars of the XII Panegyrici Latini, enriches his already extensive production with this critical edition, translation (the second in English after that of C. E. V. Nixon) and commentary of the panegyric by Pacatus Drepanius, delivered in Rome in 389 in the presence of the emperor Theodosius. The extensive Introduction (1–110), in addition to offering an updated overview of the entire collection of the XII Panegyrici Latini, contextualises Pacatus’ discourse in every respect. The structural, linguistic, rhetorical and stylistic analysis of the panegyric, which summarises the detail of the commentary, also takes into account the rhythmic clauses (79–81). The section on intertextuality (88–102) exemplifies not only the allusiveness of this speech compared to other panegyrics (significant because it is the last text in the collection, of which Pacatus is the probable editor) but also in relation to numerous texts belonging to different genres of Latin and Greek literature (recorded in an Index locorum at 461–517). The sections on the history of the text, printed editions and translations are dense and rigorous. At 107, before the Sigla, R. proposes a Stemma that takes into account the reconstruction by Mynors of the two families of manuscripts called X1 and X2.
The critical text presents some innovations compared to the most recent editions of Pacatus’ panegyric. Some examples: R. inserts into the text at 35.3 his own conjecture quadrata (with agmina), against quadratae (legiones) of M (the lost Moguntinus probably at the origin of almost all extant manuscripts), a phrase not otherwise attested; at 11.6 retains M's moenibus, to which other recent critical editions preferred moribus of Balduinus, and at 34.1 testis est in place of Scheffer's correction testis es, adopted by the other editors but not necessary (R.'s reference to the formula testis est as typical of the genre is persuasive). It is also appropriate to read at 9.6 Puteanus’ sellis (already accepted by D. Lassandro) in the place of suis of the manuscripts. The usus scribendi of Pacatus suggests to R. the reception at 16.5 of Livineius’ praestitisti in place of praebuisti of w (corrector of Vaticanus lat. 1775), that is read in other editions (prefuisti M).
The commentary, which is marked by erudition and completeness, guarantees a comprehensive reading of the panegyric. It can be said that every word, taken in itself and in the phrasal context, receives the right attention from a morphological, lexical, syntactic and stylistic point of view. By way of example, many terms and locutions attested only in this oration in the Panegyrici (some of which constitute an unicum in Latin), and the way in which Pacatus reinterprets imperial virtues, such as amicitia (279–82) and memoria (288–91), are highlighted.
The literary aspect is the subject of great attention both in the Introduction and in the Commentary. R. shows that Pacatus, a versatile author known and appreciated by his contemporaries also as a poet (Introduction, 5–6), adopts a personal and recognisable stylistic code, particularly evident at the end of the chapters (Commentary, 202–3) and emphasises the clarity of the discourse (see e.g. 217) and the particular literary quality of some passages, such as the one dedicated to the description of Spain, homeland of Theodosius, at 4.1–4. R. also observes that the orator, drawing on the other panegyrists, knows how to be ‘elusive and allusive’ (Commentary, 211). The analysis of rhetorical resources shows that Pacatus knew well the precepts of Menander Rhetor's Basilikos Logos, which he follows in trying to achieve different effects.
The commentary highlights the carefully calibrated self-portrait that the speaker allows to shine through (Introduction, 73–5; Commentary, 196 and 434): Pacatus, who at the beginning presents himself as an outsider, gradually turns into a fully romanised Gallus (this also applies to his homeland; see 438). With the peroratio, R. emphasises the close link between the endless power of Theodosius and the influence that the author believes he will have on future writers (101–2; 433–4), in connection with the textual signals alluding to the edition of the collection of the XII Panegyrici.
Regarding the historical dimension, R.'s work takes up and updates several contributions (such as the dissertation of F. Grinda and the fundamental commentary of C. E. V. Nixon and B. Saylor Rodgers), through a careful review of historical and literary sources. Among the main themes considered are the probable Christian faith of Pacatus (for which the poem De cereo Paschali, attributed to the panegyrist by A. Turcan-Verkerk, is an important clue; see Introduction, 7–9), the circumstances of Theodosius’ accession to the principate and his relations with Magnus Maximus. Much space is reserved for the role of Gaul in the years following the battle of Adrianople (378) until the visit of Theodosius to Rome in 389. The commentary also underlines the passages of the speech where Pacatus is among the few sources, if not the only one, for historical circumstances still little known, such as the conduct of Magnus Maximus in Gaul (see e.g. the Commentary, 309).
In conclusion, through its scientific approach and authority this edition is essential for studies of the panegyric of Pacatus Drepanius and the entire collection of the XII Panegyrici Latini.
