Interpreting Valerius Maximus’ Facta et dicta memorabilia as ‘a piece of literature in its own right’ (p. 1) was one of the aims of the 2017 conference in Cape Town, from which many papers in this volume emerged. Most of this thematically arranged volume goes beyond that and proves that there are well thought-out reasons for everything Valerius writes, for how he arranges his material as well as for every detail he avoids recording. Almost 30 years after M. Bloomer's influential monograph Valerius Maximus and the Rhetoric of the New Nobility (1992), Reading by Example stands as a clear milestone in the scholarship, definitely demonstrating that Valerius has a project (or projects) and deserves to be investigated for his system of thought and defined authorial choices – and not primarily as ancillary to other authors.
Wardle's analysis moves between structure and ideology, exploring the consequences of rearranging Valerius’ thematically organised anecdotes into chronological order, as if it were a continuous history like that of his contemporary Velleius Paterculus. There follows an analysis of exempla about the kings of Rome. This reveals that Valerius marks a clear division between monarchy and Republic and describes the former in surprisingly positive terms. Turning to the transition from Republic to Principate, Wardle focuses on key terms pertaining to state and (more briefly) time and finds no noticeable break in the description of the two systems. Wardle concludes that Valerius is not interested in drawing a division between his own time and the Republic, arguing, in line with most scholars (W.M. Bloomer, A.M. Gowing, M. Roller), for his alignment with Augustan ideology of continuity. Seeing what would emerge if Valerius had written a ‘proper’ continuous history is a compelling intuition: although Valerius certainly had a reason to arrange his material as he did, unravelling it reveals new and exciting reading possibilities.
The Facta et dicta presents clear textual boundaries between internal and external material; given the prominence of the former, the latter is still partially overlooked. In her contribution S. Lawrence argues that the division between exempla domestica and externa is not intended to reinforce the difference between the two worlds, but rather to emphasise their unity (as investigated in her 2006 Ph.D. thesis and contra other approaches that view Valerius’ handling of externality as focused on separation – p. 47). To sustain her argument, Lawrence focuses on chapter 2.6, the only entirely external section in a book mostly about Rome. As Lawrence rightly points out, Valerius’ drastic shift in approach in an otherwise cohesive book suggests a well thought-out authorial intention. Throughout the chapter the focus remains on the universality of human virtues that bridge the gap between geographical and textual boundaries: Romans and foreigners stand on equal ground when it comes to exemplary behaviour, and indeed the latter can surpass the former in showcasing virtue, as the episode of the woman of Cea (2.6.8) testifies. The detailed analysis of this under-investigated biographical episode, undoubtedly the core of chapter 2.6, stands out as the most fascinating part of Lawrence's contribution, since it shows clearly how layered and refined Valerius’ management of the dialogue between external and internal material really is.
Following his recent article on the same theme (AClass 60 [2017]), J. Atkinson focuses on Coriolanus, providing a character-based investigation of the type inaugurated by T.F. Carney on Marius (RhM 105 [1962]) and carried out also recently by other scholars (e.g. D. Wardle, CP 92 [1997] and AClass 48 [2005]; J. Murray, Mnemosyne [forthcoming 2022]). Valerius presents an essentially positive view of a character categorised in other sources as a villain. Atkinson makes an interesting case for reading Valerius’ management of Coriolanus’ story as hinting at Tiberius, but also at Livia (in relation to Coriolanus’ mother Veturia).
The central idea of R. Roth's chapter is that Valerius’ arrangement of his material about Italians is skilfully manipulated to provide lessons for his contemporary audience. Particularly compelling is the idea that the Italians’ peripheral status allows Valerius to explore the ‘categorial ambiguity’ (p. 96) of moral evaluation. Among the Italians, the depiction of the Campanians as collective embodiment of vices stands out. Roth convincingly suggests that their negative representation is strategic and might aim at interrogating important contemporary issues such as societal reconciliation after civil war; this is particularly interesting in view of Valerius’ apparent reluctance to touch upon these problematic themes (A. Gowing, Empire and Memory [2005]).
S. Lentzsch analyses how the act of looting is portrayed in the Facta et dicta. The attitude of Greek and Roman authors (Polybius, Cato, Sallust, Livy) towards the phenomenon and its implications for public mores is investigated in the opening survey; then, differences and similarities between their approach and Valerius’ are analysed. Lentzsch argues that Valerius is aware of this literary and historical background, but, it emerges, carefully manipulates his material according to the exemplary genre with the aim of advertising the continuity between Republic and Empire.
As readers of Valerius know, Germanicus is never mentioned in the collection; he is, on the other hand, a prominent character in Tacitus’ Annals. A. Gowing tries to identify points of contact between Valerius and Tacitus precisely through the figure of Germanicus. By analysing several themes found in Valerius that are applied by Tacitus to Germanicus (military discipline, triumphs, piety, amicitia, Alexander the Great), Gowing points out that the ethical systems of these two apparently incompatible authors align and that connections are revealed. Gowing's contribution stands out for two reasons: first, suggesting the possibility of a ‘dialogue’ between Valerius and Tacitus without underestimating the former in comparison to the latter opens the possibility of further fruitful parallel readings. Furthermore, Gowing emphasises that Valerius’ silences are often as important as his words; while reading too much into an author's silence is arguably not always a good idea, Gowing's article proves that this exercise is often helpful and indeed advisable in appreciating the Facta et dicta memorabilia.
The interrelation between ethics and exemplarity is recognised by R. Langlands as one of the main features of the Facta et dicta; she has analysed it in depth through comparison with philosophical works, especially Cicero's De officiis, applying the concept of ‘situational variability’ (JRS 101 [2011]). Valerius’ engagement with Cicero is the core of Langlands’s contribution: Langlands carries out a detailed comparative reading of chapter 3.3 de patientia and the second book of the Tusculanae disputationes to see how the authors handle themes such as the endurance of pain and the utility of philosophy. Particularly noteworthy are Valerius’ departures from Cicero's philosophical treatise, which Langlands interprets as direct responses to Cicero's arguments. As she convincingly puts it (p. 185), ‘Valerius’ language and imagery echo that work, drawing attention to the discrepancy. This provocative lack of fit is typical of Valerius’ method’ – which is shown not to be that of a shallow excerptor, but something more. Valerius’ engagement with philosophy has been debated: for instance, F. Römer's reading of his work according to Stoic precepts (WS 103 [1990]) has been rejected by Wardle in his commentary on Book 1 (1998), but also recently reconsidered by Lawrence (Antichthon 49 [2015]) and Wardle himself (RhM 161 [2018]). With this chapter Langlands gives another crucial contribution to our understanding of Valerius as a refined thinker, deeply involved in critical and provocative conversation with his source material and current philosophical debates.
According to G. Baroud, a tension (akin to Langlands’s ‘lack of fit’) emerges from Valerius’ handling of amicitia in chapter 4.7. It is perhaps surprising, for instance, that the Roman exempla of the chapter are all set in moments of civic disorder and their stories characterised by horrific details, while their Greek counterparts showcase ‘the humane values of affection, equality, reciprocity, and tranquillity’ (p. 198). Through the detailed analysis of 4.7 Baroud suggests that Valerius is aware of contemporary reflections on amicitia, but that he reworks them to offer his audience the chance to engage critically with the material: issues such as how amicitia evolved in view of early imperial social mobility and the consequent potential danger for stability were pressing in Valerius’ time, as the case of Sejanus testifies. Taking an approach reminiscent of a recent contribution by Lawrence on Valerius’ ambiguous handling of Republican eloquentia (‘Vis and Servitus’, in: C. Gray et al. [edd.], Reading Republican Oratory [2018]), Baroud's chapter is innovative because it reads and interprets the Facta et dicta not just within the usual boundaries of rhetoric and ethics framed by Bloomer (1992) and C. Skidmore (Practical Ethics for Roman Gentlemen [1996]), but also as a ‘document that takes on the appearance of a rhetorical and ethical handbook to encode and communicate serious social and political insights’ (p. 229).
Valerius confines the majority of vices to Book 9. Murray, who dealt extensively with this book in his 2016 dissertation, analyses Valerius’ handling of this theme paying attention to his sources, narrative strategies, the Tiberian context and contemporary works. Murray's detailed insights from two case studies on avarice (9.4) and revenge (9.10) give us a foretaste of what will emerge from his commentary of Book 9 currently in preparation and makes a strong case for his argument that Valerius’ role in ‘discussion of immorality and vice’ (p. 9) needs to be properly assessed.
As E. Brobeck states, Valerius ‘presents a highly visual moral history of Rome’ (p. 261). Valerius’ employment of the rhetorical stratagem of enargeia is the focus of the first part of Brobeck's chapter. She then turns to Valerius’ depiction of art objects: the core of the analysis are exempla in 5.4.7 and 5.4.ext.1 about two women (an anonymous Roman and Pero, subsequently the embodiment of Caritas Romana) who showcase their pietas by breastfeeding their parents. Brobeck convincingly argues in favour of the importance of this diptych in the context of Valerius’ overall project, suggesting that his aim is ultimately that of advertising the didactic superiority of writing over painting.
The generic boundaries of the Facta et dicta are extremely nuanced. By analysing some of Valerius’ narrative tools (especially his programmatic statements) D. Burgersdijk sets the work within the biographical tradition, identifying in Cornelius Nepos a noteworthy predecessor. Burgersdijk's analysis is enhanced by a concise but convincing investigation of Valerius’ influence and use in late antique works, with a specific focus on the biographies of the Historia Augusta.
Following in the steps of D. Schullian's work on the Facta et dicta's manuscript transmission (e.g. Medioevo e Umanesimo [1981]), K. Conrau-Lewis focuses on how the work was received and repurposed by medieval readers, especially Christian preachers. Through the presentation of two case studies, the fourteenth-century index made by Giunta de Sancto Geminiano and the c. 1360 commentary by Conrad von Waldhausen, Conrau-Lewis illustrates the richness of Valerius’ reception, opening, like the rest of this excellent volume, new paths for further research.
