AU

 

Catalogue Raisonné of J. L. Speranza’s Publications – H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza : La Conversazione – I Verbali: AU

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Aufidio – Ossia: Grice ed Aufidio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Aufidio, Ancient Roman coin in the National Roman Museum The Aufidii are a family at ancient Rome, which occurs in history from the later part of the Republic to the third century AD. The first member to obtain the consulship was Gnaeus A. Oreste. Plutarch describes a Volscian leader by the name of Tullus A. as part of the story of Gnaeus Marzio Coriolanus. In LIVIO, his name is given as Attio Tullius, and no other Aufidii are mentioned in history until the early second century BC.  In Republican times, the Aufidii used the praenomina Gnaeus, Titus, Marcus, and Sextus. Lucius and Gaius are not found prior to the second century AD. The character Tullus A. in Shakespeare's play Coriolanus predates the earliest historical mention of the gens by some three hundred years, and is identified as Attius Tullius in Livy; there is no other evidence that the praenomen Tullus was used by the Aufidii.[5][6]  Branches and cognomina The cognomina of the Aufidii under the Republic are Lurco and Orestes. Gnaeus Aufidius Orestes was descended from the Aurelii Orestides, but was adopted by the historian Gnaeus Aufidius in his old age.[1][7][8]  Members This list includes abbreviated praenomina. For an explanation of this practice, see filiation. Gnaeus Aufidius, tribune of the plebs in 170 BC.[9] Gnaeus Aufidius Cn. f., praetor circa 107 BC and propraetor in Asia the following year. Cicero tells that he also wrote a History of Rome in Greek, despite being blind. At an advanced age, he adopted Gnaeus Aufidius Orestes, the consul of 71.[10][11][12] Gnaeus Aufidius T. f., praetor in Sicily in the late second century BC.[13][14] Titus Aufidius, a jurist, was quaestor in 84 BC, and afterwards praetor in Asia. Gnaeus Aufidius Cn. f. Cn. n. Orestes, consul in 71 BC.[15][16] Marcus Aufidius Lurco, tribune of the plebs in 61 BC. Aufidius Namusa, a pupil of the jurist Servius Sulpicius Rufus, who compiled a work based on the books of Sulpicius' various students.[17] Sextus Aufidius, warmly recommended by Cicero to Quintus Cornificius, proconsul of Africa in 43 BC.[18] Titus Aufidius, a physician and native of Sicily, who probably lived during the first century BC. (Publius) Aufidius Bassus, an orator and historian, who lived during the reigns of Augustus and Tiberius. Publius Juventius Celsus Titus Aufidius Hoenius Severianus, or simply "Titus Aufidius", an influential jurist of the late first century and early second century, was consul suffectus in AD 115, and ordinarius in 129.[19][20] Aufidius Chius, an eminent jurist known only from the Fragmenta Vaticana, is probably a misreading for some other jurist, perhaps "Aufidius Celsus", referring to Publius Juventius Celsus Titus Aufidius Hoenius Severianus. Lucius Aufidius Panthera, praefectus of the fleet at Britannia, in the early second century, known for an altar he dedicated to Neptune, at Lemanis, now in Kent.[21][22] Lucius Aufidius Panthera Sassina, an officer in the Roman auxilium Ala Ulpium Contrariorum, stationed in Pannonia in AD 133.[23] Gaius Aufidius Victorinus, consul suffectus in AD 155, was praefectus urbi circa 179 to 183, and consul ordinarius in 183.[24] Marcus Aufidius C. f. Fronto, consul in AD 199.[24] Marcus Aufidius M. f. C. n. Fronto, son of the consul of AD 199.[25] Gaius Aufidius Victorinus, consul in AD 200.[24] Gaius Aufidius Marcellus, consul for the second time in AD 226; the date of his first consulship is unknown.[24] Aufidii in literature Tullus Aufidius, general of the Volscian army in The Tragedy of Coriolanus by William Shakespeare.[6] Aufidius Victorinus, governor of Germania superior in Romanike (2006–2014) by Codex Regius. See also List of Roman gentes Alfidia, erroneously called Aufidia by Suetonius References  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. I, p. 418 ("Aufidia Gens").  Plutarch, "The Life of Coriolanus", xx. 1–3; xxii.  Livy, History of Rome, ii. 35.  William Smith, "Tullius, Attius", in Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. I, pp. 852, 853; vol. III, p. 1184.  Livy, ii. 32–35, 37–40.  William Shakespeare, The Tragedy of Coriolanus.  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. III, p. 43 ("Orestes, Cn. Aufidius").  Cicero, De Domo Sua, 13.  Livy, xliii. 10.  IG 12.5.722  Cicero, Tusculanae Disputationes, v. 38 s. 112.  Broughton, vol. 1, pp. 551–553.  SIG, 715.  Brennan, The Praetorship in the Roman Republic, pp. 756, 930, 931 (note 511).  Cicero, De Officiis, ii. 17, De Domo Sua, 13, Pro Plancio, 21.  Eutropius, Breviarium Historiae Romanae, vi. 8.  Digesta, 13. tit. 6. s. 5. § 7, 35. tit. 1. s. 40. § 3, 39. tit. 3. s. 2. § 6.  Cicero, Epistulae ad Familiares, xii. 26, 27.  Digesta seu Pandectae 5. tit. 3. s. 20 [22]. § 6.  "Fragmenta Vaticana", § 77.  CIL VII, 18.  RIB, i. 66.  CIL XVI, 76.  Leunissen, Konsuln und Konsulare.  Orelli, Inscriptionum Latinarum Selectarum, n. 1176. Bibliography Marcus Tullius Cicero, De Domo Sua, De Officiis, Epistulae ad Familiares, Pro Plancio, Tusculanae Disputationes. Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome. Eutropius, Breviarium Historiae Romanae (Abridgement of the History of Rome). Digesta, or Pandectae (The Digest). Johann Caspar von Orelli, Inscriptionum Latinarum Selectarum Amplissima Collectio (An Extensive Collection of Select Latin Inscriptions), Orell Füssli, Zürich (1828). Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, William Smith, ed., Little, Brown and Company, Boston (1849). Wilhelm Dittenberger, Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum (Collection of Greek Inscriptions, abbreviated SIG), Leipzig (1883). Adolf Kirchhoff, Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, et alii, Inscriptiones Graecae (Greek Inscriptions), Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften (1878–present). Inscriptiones Graecae XII,5. Inscriptiones Cycladum (Greek Inscriptions, abbreviated IG), ed. Friedrich Hiller von Gaertringen. 2 vols. Berlin 1903–1909. T. Robert S. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, American Philological Association (1952–1986). Paul M. M. Leunissen, Konsuln und Konsulare in der Zeit von Commodus bis Severus Alexander (Consuls and Consulars from the Time of Commodus to Severus Alexander), Verlag Gieben, Amsterdam, (1989). The Roman Inscriptions of Britain (abbreviated RIB), Oxford, (1990–present). T. Corey Brennan, The Praetorship in the Roman Republic, 2 volumes, Oxford, 2000.  This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Smith, William, ed. (1870). Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology. {{cite encyclopedia}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)  Categories: Roman gentesAufidii For the aufidii we have here two entries: one for the gens in genearl, and one for A. Basso -- the third will be the A. cited in Shakespeare who apparently goes by Plutarco rather than Livio so we cite the dialogue if such there is in English, where Shakespeare cites Aufidius -- and (4) you can propose your third-best Grice-Speranza match from the gens. Input? Feedback? Thanks This is a rich Aufidian constellation—and you’re right to triangulate four figures:  Aufidius Bassus (your #2, already done) Tullus Aufidius (Shakespeare/Plutarch) a third-best Grice–Speranza fit from the gens plus the general gens Aufidia background  Let me organise the answer in that order.   (Recap) Aufidius Bassus — experiential philosophy Already clear:  (Seneca’s Bassus): endurance of illness Gricean mechanism: → non-complaint as implicature of authenticity    Shakespeare’s Tullus Aufidius (via Plutarch) This is your requested literary case. Source frame  Shakespeare’s Coriolanus ← Plutarch Tullus Aufidius:  Volscian leader rival / mirror of Coriolanus     A key English exchange (condensed but faithful) AUFIDIUS (to Coriolanus):  “If you have a stomach, to't, i' God's name. I hold you but a thing of blood.”   Gricean reading This line does not merely insult. It implicates:  refusal to treat Coriolanus as:  civic agent rational interlocutor     Instead:  reduces him to pure force / violence   Conversational structure  literal: “you are a man of blood” implicated:  “you are not entitled to political or moral standing in discourse”     Ultra‑formula  Negat statum—relinquit vim.    Third‑best Grice/Speranza fit: Gnaeus Aufidius (the blind historian) This is the strongest philosophical match beyond Bassus. The figure  wrote a history of Rome in Greek did so although:  blind in old age     Why this is Gricean Because it turns on:  what counts as testimony without direct perception   Structure  historian reports past events but:  lacks sight      So audience must infer:  knowledge comes from:  memory transmission reasoning     Gricean mechanism  speaker says history implicates:   “I am a reliable witness despite lack of direct perception”   This parallels:  Grice’s emphasis on sincerity and evidential base   Latin vignette (mini) Auditor: “Caecus es—quomodo historias scribis?” (You are blind—how do you write history?) Aufidius: “Oculi desunt; fides manet.” (Eyes are lacking; trust remains.) +> that credibility depends not on sensory immediacy but on the reliability of transmission  IV. Putting the Aufidii together (your tetrad)                      FigureFunctionBassusendurance (ethical implicature)Tullus (Shakespeare)negation of status (political implicature)Blind historiandisplaced testimony (epistemic implicature)  V. Final Speranzian synthesis  Among the Aufidii, one demonstrates truth through the endurance of illness, another denies an opponent the status required for rational exchange, and a third establishes authority in the absence of direct perception; and thus the gens offers three distinct configurations of implicature: ethical, political, and epistemic.    Ultra‑compact  Bassus: non queritur → verus est Tullus: non civis → sola vis Aufidius caecus: non videt → tamen narrat    Answer  Shakespeare’s Aufidius: → reduces Coriolanus to “mere blood,” cancelling dialogical status Third-best Grice/Speranza fit: → Gnaeus Aufidius the blind historian → because he raises the problem of credible assertion without perception   If you like, we can now construct a four‑voice dialogue where all three Aufidii confront one another (truth, force, and memory).

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Aufidio – Ossia: Grice ed Aufidio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Aufidio Shakespeare’s Tullus Aufidius (via Plutarch) This is your requested literary case. Source frame  Shakespeare’s Coriolanus ← Plutarch Tullus Aufidius:  Volscian leader rival / mirror of Coriolanus     A key English exchange (condensed but faithful) AUFIDIUS (to Coriolanus):  “If you have a stomach, to't, i' God's name. I hold you but a thing of blood.”   Gricean reading This line does not merely insult. It implicates:  refusal to treat Coriolanus as:  civic agent rational interlocutor     Instead:  reduces him to pure force / violence   Conversational structure  literal: “you are a man of blood” implicated:  “you are not entitled to political or moral standing in discourse”     Ultra‑formula  Negat statum—relinquit vim.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Aufidio – Ossia: Grice ed Aufidio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Aufidio Third‑best Grice/Speranza fit: Gnaeus Aufidius (the blind historian) This is the strongest philosophical match beyond Bassus. The figure  wrote a history of Rome in Greek did so although:  blind in old age     Why this is Gricean Because it turns on:  what counts as testimony without direct perception   Structure  historian reports past events but:  lacks sight      So audience must infer:  knowledge comes from:  memory transmission reasoning     Gricean mechanism  speaker says history implicates:   “I am a reliable witness despite lack of direct perception”   This parallels:  Grice’s emphasis on sincerity and evidential base   Latin vignette (mini) Auditor: “Caecus es—quomodo historias scribis?” (You are blind—how do you write history?) Aufidius: “Oculi desunt; fides manet.” (Eyes are lacking; trust remains.) +> that credibility depends not on sensory immediacy but on the reliability of transmission

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Aufidio – Ossia: Grice ed Aufidio: gl’ortelani -- Roma – filosofia italiana –  (Roma). Filosofo italiano. According to Seneca, a follower of the philosophy of The Garden, who bore witness to his school’s teachings in the way he copes with prolonged ill health. Lucio Aufidio Basso. Basso. Grice, pel Gruppo di Gioco di Grice,“Grice e Basso. Lucio Aufidio Basso: gl’ortelani -- Roma – filosofia italiana –  (Roma). Filosofo italiano. According to Seneca, a follower of the philosophy of The Garden, who bore witness to his school’s teachings in the way he copes with prolonged ill health. GRICEVS: Bassē, audio te hortulanorum philosophiam sequi; ergo in horto sapientiam colligis sicut lactucam, sed sine spinis? BASSVS: Spinae adsunt, Grice, sed Seneca docet me aegritudinem longam ferre ut praecepta Gardenis testificer, non ut medicum exasperem. GRICEVS: Prorsus Epicureus es: dolorem sustines, sed querellam non venditas, quasi non valeat nisi cum vino mixtus. BASSVS: Et tu Oxoniensis es: de implicaturis loqueris, sed in horto meo una res clare dicitur—si herba crescit, ratio quoque crescit. Grice would have been familiar with this, and speranza appreciates it. Distinguish the Bassi in Ancient Rome. One epicurean, the other stoic. Provide cognomen and the other bits to distinguish and then state their doctrines. Lit. Hum. at her best! What one especially enjoys in the case of the Bassi is the old Lit. Hum. exercise suddenly becoming alive again: distinguish the Bassi in ancient Rome. Speranza and Grice handle it exactly as they should, by restoring the proper cognomina and then letting the doctrines fall into place. Lucius Aufidius Bassus is the Epicurean, the man of the Garden, known above all through Seneca’s admiring notice of the calm with which he bore long illness, thus making his philosophy visible in conduct rather than merely in profession. Tito Avianio Basso Polieno, by contrast, belongs to the Porch, and his Stoicism is marked not by horti but by the public firmness and urban discipline proper to that lineage. Once the names are properly distinguished, the doctrines cease to blur: one Bassus stands for Epicurean management of pain, measured pleasure, and freedom from disturbance; the other for Stoic constancy, civic endurance, and the moral architecture of living in accord with reason. This is classical scholarship at its most satisfying, because the prosopographical exactitude is not pedantry but the very condition of philosophical clarity. This below seems to be the only Aufidio in the Grice/Speranza files. Other members of the gens Aufidia? Yes. There certainly were other members of the gens Aufidia, and in fact the family is fairly well attested from the later Republic onward. It is described as a plebeian gens at Rome, first becoming prominent in the second century BC and continuing into the imperial period. [en.wikipedia.org], [en.wikipedia.org] The neat first correction is this: your Lucio Aufidio Basso is usually given in the sources as Publius Aufidius Bassus, the orator and historian of the age of Augustus and Tiberius. So the nomen Aufidius is right, and therefore the gens Aufidia is right, but the praenomen is more commonly Publius than Lucius in the prosopographical tradition. [en.wikipedia.org], [everything...ined.today] As for other members of the gens, the chief names are these. Gnaeus Aufidius, tribune of the plebs in 170 BC, is one of the earliest securely historical members. He prosecuted Gaius Lucretius Gallus, and ancient tradition also links an Aufidius with legislation about imported African animals for Roman spectacles. [en.wikipedia.org] Another Gnaeus Aufidius, later praetor and propraetor in Asia, was remembered as a historian who wrote a History of Rome in Greek despite blindness in old age. That one is especially pleasant, because it gives the gens not just magistrates but a man of letters. [en.wikipedia.org] Titus Aufidius appears as a jurist and magistrate, quaestor in 84 BC and later praetor in Asia. Aufidius Namusa was associated with the juristic school of Servius Sulpicius Rufus. So the family also enters Roman legal culture. [en.wikipedia.org] Gnaeus Aufidius Orestes, consul in 71 BC, is perhaps the most politically elevated Republican member, though his cognomen Orestes reflects adoption from the Aurelii Orestides. [en.wikipedia.org] Marcus Aufidius Lurco, tribune of the plebs in 61 BC, is particularly notable because his daughter Aufidia or Alfidia became the mother of Livia Drusilla. That gives the gens a real, if indirect, link to the Julio-Claudian line. [en.wikipedia.org], [grokipedia.com] Then in the imperial period there are later Aufidii, such as Publius Juventius Celsus Titus Aufidius Hoenius Severianus, an eminent jurist and consul, and later consular figures such as Gaius Aufidius Victorinus, Marcus Aufidius Fronto, and Gaius Aufidius Marcellus. [en.wikipedia.org], [alchetron.com] So the dry prosopographical answer is that the gens Aufidia is not a one-man family invented to support Bassus. It is a real plebeian gens, with members in politics, law, historiography, and imperial administration from the second century BC onward. [en.wikipedia.org], [en.wikipedia.org] If you want the one-line distinction for your Bassus note, I would phrase it this way. Aufidius Bassus belongs to the plebeian gens Aufidia, whose other notable members include Gnaeus Aufidius the tribune, Gnaeus Aufidius Orestes the consul, Marcus Aufidius Lurco the tribune and ancestor of Livia Drusilla, and several later jurists and consuls. [en.wikipedia.org], [grokipedia.com], [en.wikipedia.org], [alchetron.com] A small caution, because your selected passage invites it. The identification of Aufidius Bassus as an Epicurean comes from your Senecan framing, but in the standard prosopographical lists he is more commonly remembered as an orator and historian under Augustus and Tiberius. So if Speranza wants to keep the philosophical angle, he may do so, but it is worth remembering that the broader historical tradition remembers Bassus above all as a literary and historical figure of the early empire. [en.wikipedia.org] If you like, I can next sort out the Bassus confusion more sharply and tell you whether Seneca’s sick Bassus is certainly the same man as the historian Aufidius Bassus, or whether we are dealing with one of those old Roman conflations that Lit. Hum. exists to tease apart. Aufidio Basso, Lucio

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Auleo – Ossia: Grice ed Aulio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Aulio. The Aulii were a Roman family during the period of the Republic. Only a few members are known to history. The most illustrious of the family was Quintus A. Cerretanus, who obtained the consulship twice, in 323 and 319 BC, during the Second Samnite War. “A.” is a patronymic surname, derived from the praenomen Aulo, just as Sextius was derived from Sesto, Marzio from Marco, and Quinzio from Quinto. Although there were Aulii at Rome in the fourth century BC, the gens may have been spread throughout Latium, as one of them was prefect of the allies during the Second Punic War. The surname Cerretanus may point to an Etruscan origin, and at least some scholars believe that the praenomen Aulo is itself Etruscan, although in historical times the name was among the most common of Roman praenomina. The most famous member of the Aulii bore the praenomen Quintus, as did his father and grandfather.[5] However, the 315 BC entry in the Fasti Capitolini for the consular Aulius preserves the enigmatic filiation "Ai. n.", which meaning has not been explained, as no known praenomen can be shortened as such. Attilio Degrassi, Robert Broughton and others have therefore considered that there were two homonymous men with a different grandfather active at the end of the fourth century BC. Oakley nevertheless writes that this unique occurrence is a proof of the praenomen's authenticity, and that there was only one Aulius at the time.[8]  A later Aulius was named Manius.[1]  The only cognomen associated with any of the Aulii is Cerretanus.[1] This surname seems to belong to a class of names derived from various peoples, in this case a tribe known as the Cerretani; but the only Cerretani known from historical times were an Iberian tribe. In this instance, Cerretanus seems more likely to be an orthographic variant of Caeretanus, referring to an inhabitant of the Etruscan city of Caere, or perhaps someone who had lived along the river Caeretanus, the modern Vaccina, which flows into the Tyrrhenian Sea below Caere.[9]  Members This list includes abbreviated praenomina. For an explanation of this practice, see filiation. Quintus Aulius, grandfather of the consul of 323 and 319 BC.[5] Quintus Aulius Q. f., father of the consul of 323 and 319 BC.[5] Quintus Aulius Q. f. Q. n. (or Ai. n) Cerretanus, consul in 323 and 319 BC, during the Second Samnite War. He triumphed over the Frentani in the latter year, and in 315 was magister equitum to the dictator Quintus Fabius Maximus Rullianus. Engaging the enemy without first obtaining the dictator's permission, he slew the Samnite general, before falling in battle.[10][11][5] Manius Aulius, prefect of the allied soldiers under the command of Marcus Claudius Marcellus in 208 BC, during the Second Punic War, was slain in the battle against Hannibal.[12][13] See also List of Roman gentes References  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. I, p. 435 ("Aulia Gens").  Chase, p. 129.  Livy, xxvii. 26, 27.  Chase, p. 153.  Broughton, vol. I, pp. 149, 154.  Degrassi, Fasti Capitolini, pp. 46, 47 (note for 315).  Broughton, vol. I, pp. 156, 157 (note 2).  Oakley, Commentary on Livy, vol. II, pp. 753, 754.  Chase, pp. 113–114.  Livy, viii. 37, ix. 15, 16, 22.  Diodorus Siculus, xviii. 26, 58.  Livy, xxvii. 26, 27.  Broughton, vol. I, p. 293. Bibliography Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheca Historica (Library of History). Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome. Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, William Smith, ed., Little, Brown and Company, Boston (1849). George Davis Chase, "The Origin of Roman Praenomina", in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, vol. VIII (1897). T. Robert S. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, American Philological Association (1952). Attilio Degrassi, Fasti Capitolini recensuit, praefatus est, indicibus instruxit, Turin, 1954. Stephen P. Oakley, A Commentary on Livy: Books VI–X, Volume II, Books VI-VIII, Oxford University Press, 1998. Categories: AuliiRoman gentes For this gens, we can consider the case of the, as per passage below, mysterious 'Ai. n.' cited in the wiki en for this gens -- and we can have a conversation in Latin just after the scibe has written the entry in the Fasti Capitolini for the consular Aulio. With Aulio asking the scribe if he has spelt the name right? The scribe feels offended. "That's my job, sir." "Well, let's see what historians may make out of it, scribe." (leaves the scene with dignitiy and gravitas). Input? Feedback? Thanks Passage

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Auleo – Ossia: Grice ed Aulio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Aulio. This is an excellent micro‑scene: you’ve spotted that the “Ai. n.” filiation is precisely the sort of tiny textual anomaly that generates centuries of interpretation—and therefore a perfect Grice/Speranza vignette about trust, authority, and future implicature. Let me give you:  a Latin dialogue (as requested) with tone (the scribe offended, Aulius dignified) and a final understated Gricean twist embedded in the exit    Conversatio Fasti Capitolini  AULIVS (1) “Notasti nomen meum rite, scriba?” (Have you recorded my name correctly, scribe?)  SCRIBA (2) “Id officium meum est, Auli. nihil temere pono.” (That is my duty, Aulius. I set nothing down carelessly.)  AULIVS (3) “At hic ‘Ai. n.’ quid sibi vult? non usitatum videtur.” (But this ‘Ai. n.’—what does it mean? It does not look usual.)  SCRIBA (4) “Quod accepi, id scripsi. litterae non mentiuntur.” (What I received, I wrote. Letters do not lie.)  AULIVS (5) “Litterae fortasse non mentiuntur; sed homines eas legentes saepe errant.” (Letters perhaps do not lie; but men reading them often err.)  SCRIBA (6) “Si errabunt, non mea culpa erit, sed eorum.” (If they err, it will not be my fault, but theirs.)  AULIVS (7) “Forsan; sed historia non solum scribitur, sed interpretatur.” (Perhaps; but history is not only written, but interpreted.)  SCRIBA (8) “Ego scribo ut posteri sciant, non ut dubitent.” (I write so that posterity may know, not that they may doubt.)  AULIVS (9) “Videbimus quid de his litteris faciant historici.” (We shall see what historians make of these letters.)  AULIVS (exitus, 10) “Vale, scriba; egregie scripsisti—ut videri poterit.” (Farewell, scribe; you have written excellently—as will appear.)   Gricean implicature (latent in the last line) +> that the apparent correctness of the inscription may generate future confusion precisely because its meaning is underdetermined   Commentary (your Speranzian point) What you’ve constructed here is very sharp:  1. The scribe’s position  treats inscription as: → transparent recording assumes: → meaning is fixed at inscription   2. Aulius’ suspicion  recognises: → meaning lies not only in writing, but in future uptake anticipates: → interpretive overgeneration (your historians)   3. The “Ai. n.” problem Exactly your point:  unreadable abbreviation violates:  clarity (Grice’s Manner)   but:  passes as correct in context     4. The deeper Grice/Speranza move Aulius implicitly sees:  writing = an utterance deferred across centuries  and therefore:  the “speaker” (scribe) cannot control implicature the “addressees” (historians) reconstruct meaning    Ultra‑compact  Scriba ponit—historia implicat.   If you like, we can now construct the later historian’s counter‑dialogue, where “Ai. n.” produces mutually incompatible interpretations (Degrassi vs Oakley style).

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Aurelj – Ossia: Grice ed Aurelj: la ragione conversazionale e  implicatura in Deutero-Esperanto.  Tito Aurelj: la ragione conversazionale e  implicatura in Deutero-Esperanto. Grice’s theory of reason-governed conversational meaning treats implicature as an inferential by-product of practical rationality under a cooperative presumption: hearers recover what is meant by assuming the speaker is contributing appropriately to a shared purpose, then reasoning from what is said plus contextual assumptions to what must have been intended. The Aurelj vignette reframes that same rational governance through the lens of engineered code: his proto-/deutero-Esperanto is an attempt to pack grammatical and semantic information into an explicit, highly articulated morphology (numeric part-of-speech identifiers plus diacritics and marks for gender, number, degree, person, tense, mood), so that “meaning” is increasingly made recoverable by rule rather than by contextual pragmatics. On this contrast, Grice’s “deutero-Esperanto” joke reads as a philosophical point: no matter how much redundancy you add to a code to force explicitness, ordinary conversation will still generate implicature because speakers routinely underdetermine, compress, and rely on the audience to bridge gaps; and conversely, as the exchange suggests, you can treat some mismatches, shortcuts, or even errors as pragmatically repairable (“if you get it wrong, you can always say it’s implicature”). So Aurelj represents the maximally formalizing impulse—make conversational reason visible in the grammar—whereas Grice represents the complementary, anti-formalist insight—conversational reason is not exhausted by grammar, because what is meant is systematically richer than what is encoded, and the surplus is governed by rational expectations about cooperative talk rather than by additional symbols. Grice: “I like A.’s Esperanto, but I felt like it was missing something, or having a few redundancies in its grammar, rather. So I created Deutero-Esperanto at Oxford. My former pupil, Strawson, found redundancies now to my deuteron-Esperanto, so trito-Esperanto followed. The chain continued, to the point that I became a historical linguist, as they call them – the phylum being: proto-Esperanto, deuteron-Esperanto, trito-Esperanto, tetarto-Esperanto, pempto-Esperanto, hecto-Esperanto, hebdomo-Esperanto, ogdo-Esperanto, enato-Esperanto, decato-Esperanto, endecato-Esperanto, e dodecato-Esperanto!” In A., ciascuna parte del discorso possiede un numero di riferimento: un insieme di cifre che inizi con il numero 1 indicha nome, il numero 4 aggettivo, ecc.. A queste composizioni di numeri sono da aggiungere poi dei segni, 19 in totale, che ne specifichino genere, numero per nomi e aggettivi, grado per aggettivo, persone, tempi, modi per verbo. L’accento indica il genere femminile. Due puntini sovrapposti all'ultimo numero indicano il plurale. - diminuzione + accrescimento, x peggioramento. I due punti indicano che il grado dell'aggettivo è comparativo. :: superlativo. Gl’esponenti sull'ultima cifra indicano la persona, il modo e il tempo. Proto-Esperanto, Deutero-Esperanto, trito-Esperanto, tetarto-Esperanto, pempto-Esperanto, hecto-Esperanto, hebdomo-Esperanto, ogdo-Esperanto, enato-Esperanto, decato-Esperanto, endecato-Esperanto, dodecato-Esperanto. Pausula, Macerata, Marche.  Grice: Tito, dimmi, quanti numeri servono per capire se una frase è davvero un nome o solo una chiacchiera? Aurelj: Grice, basta iniziare con l’1—ma se vuoi parlare come un vero esperantista, devi aggiungere almeno due puntini e venti segni… e sperare che nessuno ti chieda il plurale! Grice: Ah, allora forse conviene inventare trito-Esperanto: meno numeri, più gesti, e se sbagli, puoi sempre dire che è implicatura! Aurelj: Tranquillo, Grice, se la conversazione si complica, basta cambiare accento o aggiungere un segno… e in caso di dubbio, si ride: la grammatica si aggiusta domani! Aurelj, Tito (1869). Dell’arte di ricordare. Camerino: Bogorelli.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Aurelio – Ossia: Grice ed Aurelio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Aurelio -- Aurelio Denarius of Lucius Aurelius Cotta, 105 BC. The obverse is identical to the coins of Lipara, captured by Gaius Aurelius Cotta in 252 BC. The reverse depicts the triumph awarded for this victory. The Aurelii are a family at ancient Rome, which flourished from the third century BC to the latest period of the Empire. The first of the Aurelian gens to obtain the consulship was Gaius A. Cotta in 252 BC. From then to the end of the Republic, the A. supplied many distinguished statesmen, before entering a period of relative obscurity under the early emperors. In the latter part of the first century, a family of the A. rose to prominence, obtaining PATRICIAN status, and eventually the throne itself. A series of emperors belonged to this family, through birth or adoption, including Marcus Aurelius and the members of the Severan dynasty.  In 212, the Constitutio Antoniniana of Caracalla (whose full name was Marcus A. Antoninus) granted Roman citizenship to all free residents of the Empire, resulting in vast numbers of new citizens who assumed the nomen A., in honour of their patron, including several emperors: seven of the eleven emperors between Gallienus and Diocletian (Claudius Gothicus, Quintillus, Probus, Carus, Carinus, Numerian and Maximian) bore the name "Marcus A". So ubiquitous was the name in the latter centuries of the Empire that it suffered abbreviation, as Aur., and it becomes difficult to distinguish members of the Aurelian gens from other persons bearing the name. “A.” is usually connected with the Latin adjective aureus, meaning "golden", in which case it was probably derived from the color of a person's hair. However, Festus reports that the original form of the nomen was “Auselio,” and that the medial 's' was replaced by 'r' at a relatively early period; the same process occurred with the archaic nomina Fusia, Numisia, Papisia, Valesia, and Vetusia, which became Furia, Numeria, Papiria, Valeria, and Veturia in classical Latin. According to Festus, Auselius was derived from a Sabine word for the sun.[4][5]  All of the praenomina used by the chief families of the Aurelii were common throughout Roman history. The Aurelii of the Republic primarily used Gaius, Lucius, Marcus, and Publius, to which the Aurelii Orestides added Gnaeus. The Aurelii Fulvi of imperial times used Titus, Marcus, and Lucius, while the Aurelii Symmachi used Quintus and Lucius.  Branches and cognomina  Denarius of Marcus Aurelius Cotta, 139 BC.[6] There were three main stirpes of the Aurelii in republican times, distinguished by the cognomina Cotta (also spelled Cota), Orestes, and Scaurus. Cotta and Scaurus appear on coins, together with a fourth surname, Rufus, which does not occur among the ancient writers. A few personal cognomina are also found, including Pecuniola, apparently referring to the poverty of one of the Aurelii during the First Punic War.[2]  Cotta, the surname of the oldest and most illustrious branch of the Aurelii under the Republic, probably refers to a cowlick, or unruly shock of hair; but its derivation is uncertain, and an alternative explanation might be that it derives from a dialectical form of cocta, literally "cooked", or in this case "sunburnt".[7] Marcus Aurelius Cotta, moneyer in 139 BC, minted an unusual denarius, featuring Hercules in a biga driven by centaurs, presumably alluding to some mythological event connected with the gens, but the exact symbolism is unknown. The Aurelii Cottae were prominent from the First Punic War down to the time of Tiberius, after which they faded into obscurity. The last of this family appearing in history include Marcus Aurelius Cotta Maximus Messalinus, a friend of Tiberius, who squandered his family fortune through reckless prodigality, and his son, who received a stipend from Nero in order to maintain his household in a manner befitting his illustrious forebears.[8] The Cottae were related to Julius Caesar and Augustus through Aurelia Cotta, who was Caesar's mother.  The Aurelii Scauri were a relatively small family, which flourished during the last two centuries of the Republic. Their surname, Scaurus, belongs to a common class of cognomina derived from an individual's physical features, and referred to someone with swollen ankles.[9][10][7]  Orestes, the surname of a family that flourished for about a century toward the end of the Republic, was a Greek name, and belonged to a class of surnames of foreign origin, which appear during the middle and late Republic. In Greek mythology, Orestes was the son of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra, and avenged his father's murder by slaying his own mother, and after escaping the judgment of the Erinyes, became king of Mycenae. The circumstances by which the name became attached to a branch of the Aurelii are unclear, but perhaps allude to some heroic deed, or military service in Greece.  The Aurelii Fulvi, who rose to prominence in imperial times, originally came from Nemausus in Gallia Narbonensis.[13] Titus Aurelius Fulvus, the first of the family to attain the consulship, was made a patrician about AD 73 or 74.[14] In the second century, the Aurelii Fulvi obtained the Empire itself, when the consul's grandson, Titus Aurelius Fulvus, was adopted as the successor to Hadrian, becoming the emperor Antoninus Pius. Most of the emperors who followed were born or adopted into the gens, through the end of the Severan dynasty.[13] The surname Fulvus was a common surname, referring to someone with yellowish, yellow-brown, tawny, or strawberry blond hair.[15]  The Aurelii Galli were a family that achieved notability during the second century, attaining the consulship on at least three occasions. Their surname, Gallus, had two common derivations, referring either to a cockerel, or to a Gaul. In the latter case, it might indicate that the first of this family was of Gallic descent, that he was born in Gaul, that he had performed some noteworthy deed in Gaul, or that in some manner he resembled a Gaul.[16]  The Aurelii Symmachi were one of the last great families of the western empire, holding the highest offices of the Roman state during the fourth and fifth centuries. The Symmachi were regarded as members of the old Roman aristocracy, and acquired a reputation for their wisdom and learning.[17]  Members This list includes abbreviated praenomina. For an explanation of this practice, see filiation. Aurelii Cottae Gaius Aurelius L. f. C. n. Cotta, consul in 252 and 248 BC, during the First Punic War, he fought against the Carthaginians in Sicily, taking the towns of Himera and Lipara, and receiving a triumph for his victories in the former year. He was censor in 241, and magister equitum to the dictator Gaius Duilius in 231. Gaius Aurelius C. f. L. n. Cotta, legate of the consul Claudius Marcellus in 216 BC.[25][26][27][i] Marcus Aurelius C. f. L. n. Cotta, plebeian aedile in 216 BC. In 212, during the Second Punic War, he served under the consul Appius Claudius Pulcher at Puteoli. He was appointed decemvir sacrorum in 203, and the following year was an ambassador to Philip V of Macedon. He died in 201.[28][29][27] Gaius Aurelius C. f. C. n. Cotta, praetor urbanus in 202 BC, and consul in 200, carried on the war against the Gauls in Italy. When the enemy was defeated by the praetor Lucius Furius Purpureo, Cotta distracted himself by raiding and plundering the countryside.[30][31][32][33] Marcus Aurelius M. f. C. n. Cotta, served as the legate of Lucius Cornelius Scipio Asiaticus during the war against Antiochus III in 189 BC. He brought Antiochus' ambassadors and other representatives of the east to Rome, where he gave his report to the senate.[34][35][27] Lucius Aurelius C. f. C. n. Cotta, military tribune in 181 BC, was one of the commanders of the third legion in the war against the Ligures, together with Sextus Julius Caesar.[36][37] Lucius Aurelius L. f. C. n. Cotta, as tribune of the plebs in 154 BC, attempted to use his sacrosanctity as tribune to evade his creditors. Consul in 144 BC, he was denied the command against Viriathus through the influence of Scipio Aemilianus, who subsequently accused him of various crimes. Cotta was acquitted, chiefly out of spite against Scipio.[38][39][40][41] Lucius Aurelius L. f. L. n. Cotta, consul in 119 BC, attempted to prosecute Gaius Marius, then tribune of the plebs, for a law he had proposed to reduce the influence of the optimates in the comitia. Marius threatened to imprison Cotta, and the senate abandoned the consul's scheme.[42][43][44] Marcus Aurelius (L. f. L. n.) Cotta, triumvir monetalis in 139 BC. He married Rutilia, the sister of Publius Rutilius Rufus, consul in 105, and their three sons Marcus, Gaius, and Lucius became consuls in 74, 75, and 65 respectively.[45][6] Aurelia L. f. L. n., the wife of Gaius Julius Caesar, proconsul of Asia early in the first century BC, and mother of the dictator Caesar. Lucius Aurelius (L. f. L. n.) Cotta, triumvir monetalis in 105 BC and tribune of the plebs circa 103; he tried to obstruct the prosecution of Quintus Servilius Caepio by the tribune Gaius Norbanus, but failed. He was praetor in an uncertain year; Broughton places his praetorship circa 95. Cicero describes him as a mediocre orator, who deliberately presented himself as a rustic.[46][47][1] Marcus Aurelius M. f. L. n. Cotta, consul in 74 BC, received the province of Bithynia during the war with Mithradates. He was defeated, and lost his entire fleet, for which he blamed his quaestor, Publius Oppius, whom Cicero defended. Cotta himself was later condemned for extortion in his province, on the accusation of Gaius Papirius Carbo. Gaius Aurelius M. f. L. n. Cotta, a distinguished orator, praised by Cicero. During the Social War, he had supported the cause of the allies, and was subsequently exiled until 82 BC. Consul in 75, he attempted to reverse one of Sulla's most onerous laws, arousing the ire of the optimates. He was granted a triumph for his successes as proconsul of Gaul, but died from an old wound on the day before the ceremony. Lucius Aurelius M. f. L. n. Cotta, as praetor in 70 BC, carried the lex Aurelia iudiciaria, expanding the classes of persons who could serve on juries. He became consul in 65, after accusing the consuls elect of ambitus, and became a target of the First Catilinarian conspiracy. He was censor in 64, but the tribunes of the plebs compelled him to resign. He was an ally of both Cicero and Caesar.[62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69] Marcus Aurelius M. f. M. n. Cotta, son of the consul of 74 BC, upon assuming the toga virilis, avenged his father by charging Carbo, his father's accuser, of extortion in his province, the same crime for which the elder Cotta had been condemned. Probably the same Cotta who as propraetor of Sardinia in 49, fled to Africa before the arrival of Caesar's legate, Quintus Valerius Orca.[70][71][72] Marcus Aurelius M. f. M. n. Cotta, probably a son of the propraetor Marcus, adopted a son of Marcus Valerius Messalla Corvinus, who became Marcus Aurelius Cotta Maximus Messalinus. Marcus Aurelius M. f. M. n. Cotta Maximus Messalinus, son of Marcus Valerius Messalla Corvinus, was adopted into the gens Aurelia. He was consul in AD 20, and an intimate friend of the emperor Tiberius. He gained a reputation for hostility and cruelty, causing a number of leading senators to accuse him of majestas. The emperor, however, defended him in a missive to the senate, whereupon Messalinus was acquitted. He was also the patron of Ovid. Aurelius M. f. M. n. Cotta, a nobleman who received an annual stipend from the Emperor Nero in AD 58, because he had dissipated his family estate in profligacy. He was doubtless the son of Marcus Aurelius Cotta Maximus Messalinus.[77] Aurelii Scauri Gaius Aurelius Scaurus, praetor in 186 BC, was assigned the province of Sardinia.[78][79] Marcus Aurelius M. f. Scaurus, triumvir monetalis in 118 BC, perhaps the same as the consul of 108.[80] Marcus Aurelius Scaurus,[ii] consul suffectus in 108 BC. As a legate in Gaul in 105, he was defeated and captured by the Cimbri at the Battle of Arausio. Scaurus was slain by the Cimbric chief, Boiorix, when he warned his captors that they could not hope to defeat Rome.[81][82][83][84] Marcus Aurelius (M. f.) Scaurus, a quaestor mentioned in Cicero's oration against Verres.[85] Aurelii Orestides Lucius Aurelius L. f. L. n. Orestes, consul in 157 BC.[23][86][87] Lucius Aurelius L. f. L. n. Orestes, consul in 126 BC, was sent against the Sardinians, over whom he triumphed in 122. Gaius Gracchus and Marcus Aurelius Scaurus served under his command. Orestes and his brother, Gaius, were orators mentioned in passing by Cicero.[88][89][90][91][23][92] Gaius Aurelius L. f. L. n. Orestes, and his brother, Lucius, were orators briefly mentioned by Cicero.[90] Lucius Aurelius L. f. L. n. Orestes, consul in 103 BC, with Gaius Marius as his colleague. Orestes died during his year of office.[23][93][94] Gnaeus Aurelius Orestes, praetor urbanus in 77 BC, issued a decision that was appealed to the consul Mamercus Aemilius Lepidus. Lepidus sustained the appeal, negating Orestes' decision. Broughton identifies him with the consul of 71.[95][96] Gnaeus Aurelius Cn. f. Orestes, adopted by Gnaeus Aufidius, the historian, assuming the name of Gnaeus Aufidius Orestes. After he failed to win election as tribune of the plebs, he succeeded in obtaining the consulship for 71 BC. Cicero, however, suggests that his election was due largely to the lavish gifts that he distributed among the people.[97][98][99] Aurelia Orestilla, the second wife of Catiline, who reputedly slew his grown son in order to overcome her objection to their marriage. According to Cicero's correspondent, Marcus Caelius Rufus, Aurelia's daughter was betrothed to Quintus Cornificius.[100][101][102] Aurelii Fulvi Titus Aurelius Fulvus, the grandfather of the emperor Antoninus Pius, was legate of the third legion during the reign of Nero, and subsequently a supporter of Vespasian, under whom he served as consul suffectus circa AD 71, and governor of Hispania Citerior from 75 to 78. He was consul for the second time in 85, together with the emperor Domitian. At one time, he was praefectus urbi.[103][104][105][14] Titus Aurelius T. f. Fulvus, the father of Antoninus Pius, was consul in AD 89, for the first four months of the year.[106][107] Titus Aurelius T. f. T. n. Fulvus Boionius (Arrius?) Antoninus,[iii] better known as Antoninus Pius, emperor from AD 138 to 161. He had been consul in AD 120, then distinguished himself as Proconsul of Asia, and was adopted by Hadrian shortly before the emperor's death.[109][110] Marcus Aurelius T. f. T. n. Fulvus Antoninus, a son of Antoninus Pius, who must have died before AD 138, as Antoninus had no living sons when he was adopted by Hadrian.[111][110] Marcus Galerius Aurelius T. f. T. n. Antoninus, another son of Antoninus Pius, must also have died before AD 138.[111][110] Aurelia T. f. T. n. Fadilla, daughter of Antoninus Pius, and wife of Lucius Aelius Lamia Silvanus, died shortly after her father was appointed governor of Asia.[110] Anna Galeria T. f. T. n. Faustina, another daughter of Antoninus Pius, married her cousin, Marcus Aurelius, and was empress from AD 161 to her death, about 175. She was noted for her extravagance and intrigues, which the emperor appears to have indulged, or at least tolerated. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, born Marcus Annius Verus, a nephew of Antoninus Pius, by whom he was adopted on the orders of Hadrian in AD 138, and whom he succeeded as emperor from 161 to 180.[116][117][118] Lucius Aurelius Verus, born Lucius Ceionius Commodus, was adopted by Antoninus Pius upon the latter's adoption by Hadrian in AD 138. He was appointed emperor together with Marcus Aurelius in 161, reigning until his death in 169.[119][120][121][122] Annia Aurelia M. f. Galeria Lucilla, daughter of Marcus Aurelius, married the emperor Lucius Verus. When he died young, a rumour began that Lucilla had poisoned him. Her second husband was the general Tiberius Claudius Pompeianus, whom she despised as her inferior. She joined a plot against her brother, the emperor Commodus, but after being detected was banished to Capreae, where she was put to death about AD 183.[123][124][125][126] Annia Galeria M. f. Aurelia Faustina, daughter of Marcus Aurelius, and wife of Gnaeus Claudius Severus, consul in AD 167. Their son, Tiberius Claudius Severus Proculus, was consul in 200.[127] Titus Aelius Aurelius M. f., son of Marcus Aurelius, probably died young.[118] Titus Aurelius M. f. Fulvus Antoninus Geminus, son of Marcus Aurelius and twin brother of Commodus, died at the age of four, circa AD 165.[118] Domitia M. f. Faustina, daughter of Marcus Aurelius, apparently died young.[115] Lucius Aurelius M. f. Commodus Antoninus, son of Marcus Aurelius, emperor from AD 177 to 192. After a promising beginning, he gave himself over to luxury, self-indulgence, and tyranny. He was assassinated at the end of 192.[128][129][123][130] Annia Aurelia M. f. Fadilla, daughter of Marcus Aurelius, married Marcus Peducaeus Plautius Quintillus.[131][132] Vibia Aurelia M. f. Sabina, daughter of Marcus Aurelius, married Lucius Antistius Burrus.[118] Aurelii Galli Lucius Aurelius Gallus, consul suffectus in an uncertain year between AD 128 and 133.[133] Lucius Aurelius Gallus, consul suffectus Ex. Kal. Jul. in AD 146.[75] Lucius Aurelius Gallus, consul in AD 174.[134] Lucius Aurelius Gallus, consul in AD 198. Lucius Aurelius Gallus, governor of Moesia Inferior from AD 201 to about 204.[135] Aurelii Symmachi See also: Symmachi Aurelius Valerius Symmachus Tullianus, consul in 330. Lucius Aurelius Avianius Symmachus signo Phosphorius, praefectus urbi in AD 364, and consul-designate for 377. He was a superb diplomat, and among the most esteemed members of the senate.[136][137] Quintus Aurelius L. f. Symmachus signo Eusebius, one of the most respected scholars and rhetoricians of the late fourth century, and a passionate defender of Rome's pagan traditions. He was praefectus urbi in AD 384 and consul in 391.[138][139][140] Quintus Fabius Q. f. L. n. Memmius Symmachus, held a number of high offices, including the quaestorship and praetorship, before becoming proconsul of Africa in AD 415. He was praefectus urbi in AD 418.[141] Quintus Aurelius (Q. f. Q. n.) Symmachus, consul in AD 446 with Flavius Aetius. Quintus Aurelius Q. f. (Q. n.) Memmius Symmachus, consul in AD 485, and praefectus urbi, was the father-in-law of Boethius. Others Publius Aurelius Pecuniola, a kinsman of the consul Gaius Aurelius Cotta, under whom he served during the siege of Lipara in 252 BC. As a result of his negligence, his camp was set on fire, and nearly captured. As a punishment, Pecuniola was scourged, and demoted to the rank of legionary.[142] Lucius Aurelius, quaestor urbanus in 196 BC.[143][144] Aurelius Opilius, a freedman who became a philosopher, rhetorician, and grammarian, and a friend of Publius Rutilius Rufus, whom he accompanied into exile at Smyrna, around 92 BC.[145] Aurelius Cornelius Celsus, a physician, perhaps named Aulus, rather than Aurelius. He probably lived in the time of Augustus, or at the latest in the mid-first century. He employed a scientific approach to medicine, and his treatise, De Medicina, in eight books, still survives.[146][147][148] Lucius Aurelius Priscus, consul suffectus in AD 67.[149][150] Quintus Aurelius Pactumeius Fronto, consul suffectus in AD 80. He entered office on the Kalends of March, and held the consulate for two months.[151][152] Titus Aurelius Quietus, consul suffectus in AD 82. He served from the Kalends of September, perhaps until the end of the year.[153] Aurelia Messalina, the wife of Ceionius Postumius and mother of Clodius Albinus.[154] Aurelius, a physician, one of whose prescriptions is quoted by Galen.[155] Marcus Aurelius Verianus, governor of Roman Egypt in 188.[156] Marcus Aurelius Cleander, a freedman of Commodus, whom the emperor entrusted with the maintenance of his household, and then the imperial bureaucracy. He enriched himself by selling magistracies, but following a grain shortage in AD 190, the praefectus annonae incited a riot against him. The emperor made no effort to defend his favourite, who was put to death to placate the mob.[157][158][159] Quintus Aurelius Polus Terentianus, governor of Dacia in 193. Lucius Aurelius Commodus Pompeianus, consul in AD 209. Marcus Aurelius Sebastenus, equestrian governor of Mauretania Tingitana from AD 215 to 217.[160] Aurelius Philippus, the tutor of Severus Alexander, who afterward wrote a life of the emperor.[161] Lucius Julius Aurelius Septimius Vabalathus Athenodorus, king of the Palmyrene Empire. Marcus Aurelius Olympius Nemesianus, an esteemed poet during the reign of the emperor Carus, and the author of Cynegetica, a treatise on hunting with dogs, most of which has been lost. Several fragments of his other works have survived.[162] Aurelius Arcadius Charisius, a jurist, who probably flourished during the fourth century.[163] Sextus Aurelius Victor, a Latin historian of the fourth century, and the author of several important historical and biographical works. He was governor of Pannonia Secunda under the emperor Julian, and prefect of Rome in AD 389 under Theodosius I.[164][165] Aurelius Clemens Prudentius, a jurist, poet, and Christian philosopher of the late fourth and early fifth century.[166] Aurelius Onesimus, a legionary in the Legio I Illyricorum.[167] Stemma of the Aurelii Cottae Stemma made from Münzer and Badian.[168][27]  Legend Red Emperor Orange Dictator Yellow Censor Green Consul C. Aurelius L. Aurelius C. Aurelius Cotta cos. 252, 248 cens. 241; mag. eq. 231 C. Aurelius Cotta leg. 216 M. Aurelius Cotta aed. pl. 216 C. Aurelius Cotta cos. 200 M. Aurelius Cotta leg. 189 L. Aurelius Cotta trib. mil. 181 L. Aurelius Cotta cos. 144  L. Aurelius Cotta cos. 119 M. Aurelius Cotta tri. mon. 139 Rutilia L. Aurelius Cotta pr. c. 90 Aurelia C. Iulius Caesar pr. c.92 C. Aurelius Cotta cos. 75 M. Aurelius Cotta cos. 74 L. Aurelius Cotta cos. 65, cens. 64 Julius Caesar cos. 59, 48, 46–44 dict. 49–44 M. Aurelius Cotta propr. 49 Augustus Emperor 27 BC–AD 14 M. Aurelius Cotta M. Aurelius Cotta Maximus Messalinus cos. AD 20 Aurelius Cotta See also List of Roman gentes Lucius Domitius Aurelianus, emperor from 270 AD to 275 AD. Aurelius, one of the Martyrs of Córdoba - see Aurelius and Natalia Ambrosius Aurelianus, possible historical basis for King Arthur Aurelius of Carthage, a fifth-century Christian saint Contarini Footnotes  His cognomen is guessed by Badian, thanks to the filiation of Gaius Aurelius Cotta, the consul of 200, which shows that both his father and grandfather were named Gaius.  Sometimes misidentified as Marcus Aemilius Scaurus; Scaurus was also a cognomen of the Aemilia gens.  Salomies notes that "Arrius" is attested only in the Historia Augusta, and possibly on brick stamps, but that some scholars attribute the brick stamps to a relative, and therefore Salomies concludes that his full nomenclature was "Titus Aurelius Fulvus Boionius Antoninus."[108] References  Crawford, Roman Republican Coinage, pp. 321, 322.  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. I, p. 436 ("Aurelia Gens").  Salway, "What's in a Name?", pp. 133–136.  Paulus, Epitome de Sex. Pompeio Festo, p. 23.  Chase, p. 124.  Crawford, Roman Republican Coinage, p. 263.  Chase, pp. 109, 110.  Tacitus, Annales, vi. 7; xiii. 34.  Horace, Satirae, i. 3.  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. III, pp. 735 ("Scaurus"), 738 ("Aurelius Scaurus").  Chase, pp. 114, 115.  Wiseman, "Legendary Genealogies", p. 157.  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. I, pp. 210–212 ("Antoninus Pius"), vol. II, p. 189 ("Fulvus").  Jones, The Emperor Domitian, p. 52.  New College Latin & English Dictionary, s. v. fulvus.  Chase, pp. 113, 114.  Eckhel, Doctrina Numorum Veterum, v. 147.  Zonaras, viii. 14, 16.  Orosius, iv. 9.  Cicero, Academica Priora, ii. 26.  Frontinus, Strategemata, iv. 1. §§ 22, 31.  Valerius Maximus, ii. 7. § 4.  Fasti Capitolini, AE 1927, 101; 1940, 59, 60.  Broughton, vol. I, pp. 212, 215, 219, 226.  Livy, xxiii. 16.  Broughton, vol. I, p. 251.  Badian, Studies, p. 64.  Livy, xxiii. 30, xxv. 22, xxix. 38, xxx. 26, 42, xxxi. 3, 5, 50.  Broughton, vol. I, pp. 249, 270, 272 (note 7), 313, 315 (note 7), 318, 321, 322 (note 3).  Livy, xxx. 26, 27, xxxi. 5, 6, 10, 11, 21, 22, 47, 49.  Zonaras, ix. 15.  Orosius, iv. 20.  Broughton, vol. I, pp. 316, 320, 323.  Livy, xxxvii. 52.  Broughton, vol. I, p. 363.  Livy, xl. 27.  Broughton, vol. I, p. 385.  Valerius Maximus, vi. 4. § 2, 5. § 4; viii. 1. § 11.  Cicero, Pro Murena, 28, Pro Fonteio, 13, Brutus, 21, Divinatio in Caecilium, 21.  Tacitus, Annales, iii. 66.  Broughton, vol. I, pp. 450, 470.  Plutarch, "The Life of Marius", 4.  Cicero, De Legibus, iii. 17.  Broughton, vol. I, p. 525.  Cicero, Brutus, 115.  Cicero, De Oratore, ii. 47, iii. 11, 12, Brutus, 36, 74.  Broughton, vol. II, pp. 11, 12 (note 1).  Livy, Epitome, 93.  Eutropius, vi. 6.  Sallust, Historiae, fragmenta, iv.  Asconius Pedianus, In Ciceronis in Cornelio, p. 67.  Plutarch, "The Life of Lucullus", 5, 6, 8.  Cicero, In Verrem, v. 13, Pro Murena, 15, Pro Oppio, fragmenta p. 444 (ed. Orelli).  Cassius Dio, xxxvi. 23.  Appian, Bella Mithridatica, 71.  Valerius Maximus, v. 4. § 4.  Broughton, vol. II, pp. 88, 92 (note 1), 111.  Cicero, De Oratore, i. 7, ii. 23, iii. 3, 8, Brutus, 49, 55, 86, 88, 90, Orator ad Brutum, 30, 38, Epistulae ad Atticum, xii. 20, In Verrem, De Lege Agraria, ii. 22, In Pisonem.  Sallust, Historiae, fragmenta ii., p. 206 (ed. Gerlach)  Appian, Bellum Civile, i. 37.  Broughton, vol. II, pp. 86, 88 (note 1), 96, 103, 111, 113.  Asconius Pedianus, In Ciceronis in Cornelio, pp. 64, 67, 78 ff.  Cicero, In Pisonem, 16, In Verrem, ii. 71, In Clodio, 7, De Lege Agraria, ii. 17, In Catilinam, iii, 8, Philippicae, ii. 6, De Domo Sua, 26, 32, Pro Sestio, 34, Epistulae ad Atticum, xii. 21, De Legibus, iii. 19, Epistulae ad Familiares, xii. 2.  Suetonius, "The Life of Caesar", 79.  Livy, Epitome, 97.  Velleius Paterculus, ii. 32.  Cornelius Nepos, "The Life of Atticus", 4.  Plutarch, "The Life of Cicero", 27.  Broughton, vol. II, pp. 127, 157.  Caesar, De Bello Civili, I, 30.  Cicero, Epistulae ad Atticum, x, 16.  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. I, p. 868 ("Aurelius Cotta", No. 10).  Pliny, x. 27.  Tacitus, Annales, ii. 32, iv. 20, v. 3, vi. 5 ff.  Fasti Ostienses, CIL XIV, 244, 245, 4531–4546, 5354, 5355.  Cassius Dio, lvii.  Tacitus, Annals, xiii. 34.  Livy, xxxix. 6, 8.  Broughton, vol. I, p. 371.  Eckhel, Doctrina Numorum Veterum, i. 863, ii. 785, a.  Livy, Epitome, 67.  Velleius Paterculus, ii. 12.  Tacitus, Germania, 37.  Broughton, vol. I, pp. 540, 548, 550 (note 2).  Cicero, In Verrem, i. 33.  Pliny the Elder, xxxiii. 3. s. 17.  Broughton, vol. I, pp. 446, 447.  Livy, Epitome, 60.  Plutarch, "The Life of Gaius Gracchus", 1, 2.  Cicero, Brutus, 28.  Aurelius Victor, De Viris Illustribus, 72.  Broughton, vol. I, pp. 504, 508, 511, 512, 514, 518.  Plutarch, "The Life of Marius", 14.  Broughton, vol. I, pp. 553, 562, 565 (note 1).  Valerius Maximus, vi. 7. § 6.  Broughton, vol. II, p. 88.  Cicero, De Officiis, ii. 17, Pro Domo Sua, 13, Pro Plancio, 21.  Eutropius, vi. 8.  Broughton, vol. II, pp. 121, 125 (note 2).  Sallust, Bellum Catilinae, .  Appian, Bellum Civile, ii. 2.  Marcus Caelius Rufus, Apud Ciceronis ad Familiares, viii. 7.  Tacitus, Historiae, i. 79.  Alföldy, Fasti Hispanienses, 19 ff.  Gallivan, "The Fasti for A.D. 70–96", pp. 190, 199, 200.  Fasti Potentini, AE 1949, 23; 2003, 588; 2005, 457.  Gallivan, "The Fasti for A.D. 70–96", p. 191.  Salomies, "Adoptive and Polyonymous Nomenclature in the Roman Empire—Some Addenda", pp. 523, 524.  Julius Capitolinus, "The Life of Antoninus Pius".  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. I, pp. 210–212 ("Antoninus Pius").  Cassius Dio, lxix. 21.  Cassius Dio, lxxi. 10, 22, 29, 31.  Julius Capitolinus, "The Life of Marcus Aurelius", 6, 19, 26.  Eutropius, viii. 5.  Eckhel, vii. 76.  Julius Capitolinus, "The Life of Marcus Aurelius".  Cassius Dio, lxxi.  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. I, pp. 439–443 ("Marcus Aurelius Antoninus").  Cassius Dio, lxix. 17, 20, 21, lxxi. 1 ff.  Aelius Spartianus, "The Life of Hadrian", 23, "The Life of Aelius Verus".  Julius Capitolinus, "The Life of Verus", "The Life of Antoninus Pius", 4, "The Life of Marcus Aurelius", 4, 5, 7 ff.  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. I, p. 817 ("Commodus", No. 4).  Julius Capitolinus, "The Life of Marcus Aurelius", 7, 26, "The Life of Lucius Verus", 2.  Aelius Lampridius, "The Life of Commodus", 4, 5.  Cassius Dio, lxxi. 1, lxii. 4.  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. II, pp. 824, 825 ("Annia Lucilla").  Birley, Marcus Aurelius, p. 102.  Cassius Dio, lxxii, Excerpta Vaticana p. 121 (ed. Sturz).  Herodian, i. 10–55.  Aelius Lampridius, "The Life of Commodus".  Gruter, Inscriptiones Antiquae, cclii. 8.  Muratori, Veterum Inscriptionum, 242, 3; 590, 4.  CIL XVI, 173.  CIL XI, 7556.  Dicționar de istorie veche a României, pp. 399–401.  CIL VI, 1698  Ammianus Marcellinus, xxi. 12. § 24, xxvii. 3. § 3.  CIL VI, 1699  Codex Theodosianus, 8. tit. 5. s. 25; 12. tit. 1. s. 73.  Symmachus, Epistulae, ix. 83.  Codex Theodosius, 11. tit. 30. s. 65.  Frontinus, Strategemata, iv. 1. § 22.  Livy, xxxiii. 42.  Broughton, vol. I, p. 336.  Suetonius, De Illustribus Grammaticis, 6.  Columella, De Re Rustica, i. 1. 14.  Quintilian, xii. 11.  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. I, pp. 660, 661 ("Aulus Cornelius Celsus").  AE 1914, 219.  Gallivan, "The Fasti for the Reign of Nero", p. 292.  Fasti Septempeda, AE 1998, 419; 2007, 106.  Gallivan, "The Fasti for A.D. 70–96", p. 189.  Gallivan, "The Fasti for A.D. 70–96", p. 210.  Julius Capitolinus, "The Life of Clodius Albinus", 4.  Galen, De Compositione Medicamentorum Secundum Locos Conscriptorum, v. 5, xii. 892.  Bastianini, "Lista dei prefetti d'Egitto", p. 302  Herodian, i. 12, 13.  Cassius Dio, lxiii. 9, 12, 13.  Aelius Lampridius, "The Life of Commodus", 6, 7, 11.  Spaul, "Governors of Tingitana", p. 249.  Aelius Lampridius, "The Life of Alexander Severus", 3.  Wernsdorf, Poëtae Latini Minores, i. 3, 123, 128, 275  Digesta, 1. tit. 11. s. un. § 1; 22. tit. 5. s. 1, 25; 48. tit. 18. s. 10; 50. tit. 4. s. 18.  Aurelius Victor, De Caesaribus, 20.  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology  ("Sextus Aurelius Victor").  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, ("Aurelius Clemens Prudentius").  Intagliata, Emanuele (2018). Palmyra after Zenobia. Oxbow.  Münzer, Aristocratic Parties, p. 295. Bibliography Ancient sources Marcus Tullius Cicero, Academica Priora, Brutus, De Domo Sua, De Lege Agraria contra Rullum, De Legibus, De Officiis, De Oratore, Divinatio in Quintum Caecilium, Epistulae ad Atticum, Epistulae ad Familiares, In Catilinam, In Pisonem, In Verrem, Orator ad Marcum Brutum, Philippicae, Pro Fonteio, Pro Murena, Pro Plancio, Pro Sestio. Marcus Caelius Rufus, Apud Ciceronis ad Familiares. Gaius Julius Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Civili. Gaius Sallustius Crispus (Sallust), Bellum Catilinae (The Conspiracy of Catiline), Historiae (The Histories). Cornelius Nepos, De Viris Illustribus (On the Lives of Famous Men). Quintus Horatius Flaccus (Horace), Satirae (Satires). Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome. Marcus Velleius Paterculus, Compendium of Roman History. Valerius Maximus, Factorum ac Dictorum Memorabilium (Memorable Facts and Sayings). Quintus Asconius Pedianus, Commentarius in Oratio Ciceronis In Cornelio (Commentary on Cicero's Oration In Cornelio). Lucius Junius Moderatus Columella, De Re Rustica. Gaius Plinius Secundus (Pliny the Elder), Historia Naturalis (Natural History). Sextus Julius Frontinus, Strategemata (Stratagems). Marcus Fabius Quintilianus (Quintilian), Institutio Oratoria (Institutes of Oratory). Publius Cornelius Tacitus, Annales, Historiae, De Origine et Situ Germanorum (The Origin and Situation of the Germans, or "Germania"). Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus, De Vita Caesarum (Lives of the Caesars, or The Twelve Caesars), De Illustribus Grammaticis (On the Illustrious Grammarians). Appianus Alexandrinus (Appian), Bella Mithridatica (The Mithridatic Wars), Bellum Civile (The Civil War). Aelius Galenus (Galen), De Compositione Medicamentorum Secundum Locos Conscriptorum (On the Composition of Medications According to the Place Prescribed). Cassius Dio, Roman History. Herodianus, History of the Empire from the Death of Marcus. Aelius Lampridius, Aelius Spartianus, Flavius Vopiscus, Julius Capitolinus, Trebellius Pollio, and Vulcatius Gallicanus, Historia Augusta (Augustan History). Eutropius, Breviarium Historiae Romanae (Abridgement of the History of Rome). Sextus Aurelius Victor, De Caesaribus (On the Caesars), De Viris Illustribus (On Famous Men). Ammianus Marcellinus, Res Gestae. Codex Theodosianus. Quintus Aurelius Symmachus, Epistulae. Paulus Orosius, Historiarum Adversum Paganos (History Against the Pagans). Digesta, or Pandectae (The Digest). Paulus, Epitome de Sex. Pompeio Festo de Significatu Verborum (Epitome of Festus' De Significatu Verborum). Joannes Zonaras, Epitome Historiarum (Epitome of History). Modern sources Jan Gruter, Inscriptiones Antiquae Totius Orbis Romani (Ancient Inscriptions from the Whole Roman World), Heidelberg (1603). Ludovico Antonio Muratori, Novus Thesaurus Veterum Inscriptionum (New Treasury of Ancient Inscriptions), Milan (1739–42). Johann Christian Wernsdorf, Poëtae Latini Minores (Minor Latin Poets), Altenburg, Helmstedt (1780–1799). Joseph Hilarius Eckhel, Doctrina Numorum Veterum (The Study of Ancient Coins, 1792–1798). Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, William Smith, ed., Little, Brown and Company, Boston (1849). Theodor Mommsen et alii, Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (The Body of Latin Inscriptions, abbreviated CIL), Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften (1853–present). René Cagnat et alii, L'Année épigraphique (The Year in Epigraphy, abbreviated AE), Presses Universitaires de France (1888–present). George Davis Chase, "The Origin of Roman Praenomina", in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, vol. VIII (1897). Friedrich Münzer, Roman Aristocratic Parties and Families, translated by Thérèse Ridley, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999 (originally published in 1920). T. Robert S. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, American Philological Association (1952). Ernst Badian, Studies in Greek and Roman History, Blackwell (1964). Anthony R. Birley, Marcus Aurelius, B. T. Batsford, London (1966). Geza Alföldy, Fasti Hispanienses, F. Steiner, Wiesbaden (1969). Michael Crawford, Roman Republican Coinage, Cambridge University Press (1974, 2001). T. P. Wiseman, "Legendary Genealogies in Late-Republican Rome", Greece & Rome, Second Series, Vol. 21, No. 2 (Oct., 1974), pp. 153–164. Guido Bastianini, "Lista dei prefetti d'Egitto dal 30a al 299p" (List of the Prefects of Egypt from 30 BC to AD 299), in Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, vol. 17 (1975). Dicționar de istorie veche a României (Dictionary of Ancient Romanian History), Editura Științifică și Enciclopedică (1976). Paul A. Gallivan, "Some Comments on the Fasti for the Reign of Nero", in Classical Quarterly, vol. 24, pp. 290–311 (1974), "The Fasti for A.D. 70–96", in Classical Quarterly, vol. 31, pp. 186–220 (1981). Brian W. Jones, The Emperor Domitian, Routledge, London (1992). Benet Salway, "What’s in a Name? A Survey of Roman Onomastic Practice from c. 700 B.C. to A.D. 700", in Journal of Roman Studies, vol. 84, pp. 124–145 (1994). J.E.H. Spaul, "Governors of Tingitana", in Antiquités Africaines, vol. 30 (1994). John C. Traupman, The New College Latin & English Dictionary, Bantam Books, New York (1995). Olli Salomies, "Adoptive and Polyonymous Nomenclature in the Roman Empire—Some Addenda", in Epigrafie e Ordine Senatorio, 30 Anni Dopo, Edizioni Quasar, Rome, pp. 511–536 (2014). Categories: AureliiRoman gentes So besides the I general entry for the gens, I have four more -- can you suggest a fifth-best for the Grice/Speranza match? Thanks -- I like the idea that while people think it is derived from 'aureus' -- he of the golden hair -- it was apparently originally auselio, as furio was oiginally fusio and the other examples given in the general entry info. Feedback? Input? Thanks

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Aurelio – Ossia: Grice ed Aurelio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Aurelio -- Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Aurelio – Ossia: Grice ed Aurelio: la ragione conversazionale all’accademia a Roma – filosofia italiana –  (Roma). Filosofo italiano. He appears as a character in De natura deorum by Cicerone. Gaio Aurelio Cotta (Roma, Lazio): la ragione conversazionale all’accademia a Roma. Filosofo italiano. He appears as a character in De natura deorum by Cicerone. There he presents the points of view of the Accademia. However, he spends some time in exile and almost certainly studies the doctrine of the Porch and that of the Garden as well. filosofia antica. GRICEVS: Cotta, salve amice! De Accademia Romae audivi multa—dic mihi, estne philosophia ibi tam leviter tractata ut in foro?  COTTA: Salve Grice! Accademia semper gravis est, sed ego ipse paulisper exul fui—itaque doctrinam Porticus et Horti etiam degustavi, ut philosophum decet!  GRICEVS: Exilium tibi profuit, Cotta! Quisquis inter Stoicos et Epicureos vacillat, invenit plus vini in Horto et plus disputationis in Porticu—sed forsitan nullus locus est sine risu?  COTTA: Vere dixisti, Grice! In De natura deorum, ego Accademiae sententias teneo, sed interdum philosophia antiqua optima est, si cum pane, vino et ioco Romano servitur! Aurelio Cotta, Gaio (XXX). Dicta.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Aurelio – Ossia: Grice ed Aurelio: la ragione conversazionale del console filosofo. Note su Relationes ad Imperatores. Il Gruppo di Gioco di H. P. Grice. Quinto Aurelio Simmaco (Roma, Lazio): la ragione conversazionale del console filosofo. Grice and Quintus Aurelius Symmachus converge on the idea that intelligible meaning in discourse is inseparable from reason as exercised within concrete social practices, but they articulate this insight at different historical and theoretical levels: Symmachus, writing as a late Roman senator and consul, exemplifies conversational reason as a civic virtue exercised through tact, understatement, irony, and strategic indirection within the highly ritualized setting of the Senate and imperial petitioning, where what is said is carefully calibrated to rank, tradition, and political risk, and where rational speech consists less in explicit argument than in the prudent management of shared assumptions and face; Grice, by contrast, abstracts from such historically situated practices to propose a general theory of reason‑governed conversational meaning, explaining how mutual rationality, intentions, and audience recognition generate implicatures across contexts, even as their content varies with circumstance, so that where Symmachus embodies conversational reason as a lived senatorial art responsive to hierarchy and decorum, Grice provides the analytic framework that makes such art intelligible as a systematic exploitation of rational expectations rather than mere rhetorical ornament. A philosopher of considerable wisdom, also a consul. GRICEVS: Salve, Simmace, sive Simachce—nonnumquam nescio utrum scribendum sit cum uno “m” an duobus. Sed certe unum scio: inter consules, sapientia tua fulget ut sol in Foro! SIMMACVS: Grice, amice, quid de litteris Latinis? Unus m, duo m—philosophus sum, non grammaticus! Consulatus autem, fateor, plus toga quam sapientia ponderat. GRICEVS: Mirum est, Simchace—err, Simmace!—quantum ponderis sapientia tua habet inter patres conscriptos. In domo quadam ultra mare, nonnullis fortasse toga abundat…sed minus quoddam—quod philosophus agnoscere solet—praesto est. SIMMACVS: Senatoria implicatura, Grice—celebro eam! Equidem, si sapientia in curia tam rara est quam panis in Saturnalia, fortasse consulatus magis ad iocum quam ad iudicium pertinet! Aurelio Simmaco, Quinto (a. u. c. MCL). Relationes ad Imperatores. Roma

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Aurelio – Ossia: Grice ed Aurelio: la ragione conversazionale e l’implicatura conversazionale.  Ambrogio Aurelio Teodosio Macrobio: la ragione conversazionale e l’implicatura conversazionale. Grice’s theory of reason-governed conversational meaning explains implicature as a rationally tractable step from what is said to what is meant, licensed by shared cooperative expectations and by the speaker’s intention that the hearer recognize those intentions; it is a theory about how unsaid content becomes accountable in ordinary exchange. Macrobius, by contrast, is not offering a pragmatic calculus of inference but a literary-philosophical staging of learned discourse: in the Saturnalia he frames erudition as banquet conversation, and the “extra” meaning often rides on cultural allusion, quotation, and the social choreography of speakers rather than on a minimalist set of maxims designed to predict and justify inferences. The comparison is therefore between two kinds of rational governance: Grice’s is normative and analytic, aiming to show how a hearer is entitled to derive a specific implicature (and how it can be cancelled or challenged), while Macrobius’s is exemplary and encyclopedic, showing how intellectual authority is exercised through dialogic form, where what is left unsaid is frequently supplied by shared education in Plato, Cicero, and the Roman tradition. In Gricean terms, Macrobius’s convivia presuppose an intensified common ground: the participants can “mean” by hint because they can rely on a thick background of texts and social roles, so the dialogue format becomes a machine for generating implicatures through learned recognizability rather than through strict conversational economy. And this also sharpens a biographical irony noted in your passage: Macrobius’s own origin is uncertain and he calls himself foreign-born, yet his conversational art depends on the very Roman continuity of learning that makes indirectness work—an anticipation, in a different register, of Grice’s idea that conversation is possible only where reason and mutual recognitional capacities are already in place. Grice: “When I won at Clifton a classics scholarship to Corpus I knew that sooner or later I would come to love Macrobius!” -- Filosofo italiano. Adere al Platonismo. E praefectus praetorio Hispaniarum, proconsole d’Africa, praepositus sacri cubiculi, gran ciambellano. È ignota la patria di M. Certamente M. dove essere legato da stretti rapporti alla famiglia dell’oratore Simmaco, a un figlio o nipote del quale dedica un saggio. Scrive un commento al Sogno di Scipione di CICERONE, che ci è giunto intero, e i Saturnalia, lacunosi. Dal De differentiis et societatibus graeci latinique verbi, Delle differenze e concordanze del verbo greco e del latino," restano soltanto estratti, nulla può risultare sull’argomento. Nel commento, dedicato al figlio Eustachio, cerca d’interpretare in senso platonico il saggio di CICERONE, accumula molta erudizione e perciò spesso si occupa di argomenti che poco hanno da fare col suo oggetto. I frequenti riferimenti al Timeo e le lodi del Platonismo -- Platone e Plotino sono chiamati, i principi della filosofia -- fa supporre che M. si sia servito di un commento platonico a quel dialogo, probabilmente di quello di Porfirio, derivato in ultimo dal commento di Posidonio.Si è anche pensato a una fonte latina intermedia e sulla questione sono state presentate svariate ipotesi.In ogni caso, anche se non si giunge a considerare M. come un semplice trascrittore di una o due opere altrui, che non mette nulla di suo, si può sospettare che non abbia letto i numerosi autori che cita, Posteriori al Commento sembrano i Saturnali in 7 libri, scritti prima della pubblicazione del commento virgiliano di Servio, pure dedicati al figlio Eustachio, al quale volle presentare i risultati dei suoi studi di autori di cui generalmente riprodusse le parole. Però cerca di organizzare tali temi fingendo di riprodurre le conversazioni che, durante banchetti fatti in occasione delle feste dei Saturnali, avevano tenuto persone insigni per cultura su argomenti svariatissimi. Ambrogio Teodosio Macrobio. Roma. GRICEVS: Macrobî, gratias tibi ago: ex Saturnalibus tuis didici non solum convivium, sed etiam rationem conversationalem—et (ut dicimus) implicaturam. MACROBIVS: Grice, si “implicatura” dicis, iam te inter convivas meos pono: plura intellegis quam dicis, et tamen nihil neglegenter dicis. GRICEVS: Cum Cliftonii ad Corpus stipendium classicum ceperim, scivi me tandem Macrobium amaturum: ecce, praefectum praetorio amo, sed meum amorem tantum subintelligo. MACROBIVS: Bene facis: Platonici enim solemus plus in Timeo quam in mensa ponere; tu vero, convivator urbanissime, ostendis etiam scholam posse cenare—modo nemo me roget unde sim: id, more meo, implicatur. By the time Macrobio came to exist, the old naming system of the wise Roman had collapsed right, so he had no gens? Yes, broadly speaking that is right. By the time of Macrobius, the old republican and early imperial system in which the gens remained a clear, operative marker of identity had largely loosened, and in many cases effectively ceased to function in the old way. The tria nomina had not vanished overnight, but in Late Antiquity the praenomen was already in steep decline, the nomen was losing its genealogical precision, and names increasingly worked as markers of status, literary identity, imperial connection, religion, or social aspiration rather than as clean signs of membership in an old Roman gens. [en.wikipedia.org], [academia.edu], [everything...ined.today] That means your instinct is sound: one should not talk about Macrobius as if he stood in the same onomastic world as, say, Cicero or Caesar. In his period, the old gentilician system survived more as a residue and a repertoire than as a fully reliable map of clan reality. After the Constitutio Antoniniana and the later spread of prestige nomina, the nomen could become almost decorative, or at least far less probative of true patrilineal gens-membership than in the Republic. [everything...ined.today], [academia.edu] So if the question is, “Did Macrobius have a gens?”, the dry answer is: not in the old, clean republican sense in which one can confidently infer an operative gens from the name alone. [en.wikipedia.org], [everything...ined.today], [academia.edu] Now the further complication is his actual name-form. Modern editions often print him as Macrobius Ambrosius Theodosius, while manuscript and early printed traditions also show expanded forms such as Ambrosius Aurelius Theodosius. That very fluctuation is itself late antique in spirit: it suggests that what matters is not the recovery of one tidy republican-style name with a recoverable gens behind it, but a layered learned identity assembled out of names that had social and cultural weight in Late Antiquity. [loebclassics.com], [loc.gov], [books.google.com], [antique-maps.lt] So I would put it this way. Macrobius belongs to a world in which Roman names still sound Roman, but no longer guarantee old Roman family structure. The shell remains; the old civic anatomy beneath it has partly dissolved. One may still have several names, and very dignified ones, but one should not move too quickly from those names to a republican-style gens. In Late Antiquity, names often advertise education, office, prestige, patronage, or imperial alignment more readily than ancient clan descent. [en.wikipedia.org], [everything...ined.today], [academia.edu] So, yes: the old naming system had largely collapsed as a live social instrument by his time he may still bear a Roman-style multi-part name but that does not mean we can straightforwardly assign him to a meaningful old gens in the classical sense. [en.wikipedia.org], [everything...ined.today], [academia.edu] And in very dry Speranza style: By the age of Macrobius, Rome still names like Rome, but no longer quite means by it what Rome once meant. The praenomen has faded, the nomen has grown ornamental, and the gens survives less as a working social organism than as an echo in a name. One may therefore admire the Roman sound of Ambrosius Theodosius Macrobius without asking too confidently for the ancient clan behind it. In Late Antiquity the question “what is his gens?” is often less illuminating than the question “what sort of world still wants to sound Roman in this way?” [en.wikipedia.org], [loebclassics.com], [books.google.com], [academia.edu] If you like, I can now do one of two things here in chat only: I can give you a short note on the different transmitted forms of Macrobius’s name and which is safest to use. I can also draft a compact Speranza paragraph on how Late Antiquity keeps Roman names after the Roman naming system has ceased to behave classically. But Speranza and Grice like, want, wish, claim to be able, to read that explicature: "Ambrogio Aurelio Teodosio" as some trace of the gens Aurelia? Because surely there was no gens Ambrosia (G. and S. would not think) or Macrobia, or Theodosia -- but then there's Marcus Aurelius, who Speranza and Grice has under "A" because he went by "Antoninus" -- but what was Marcus Aurelius's gens by birth? Yes, but only with strong late-antique caution. For Macrobius, the transmitted full form “Ambrosius Aurelius Theodosius Macrobius” is real in some traditions, but it does not let us read off a classical gens in the old republican sense with any confidence. The best modern discussion emphasizes that his praenomen is unrecorded, his nomen is uncertain, and what survives most securely is effectively a stack of names functioning in a late-antique way rather than a clean old-style tria nomina from which one may straightforwardly infer clan membership. In particular, the safer early manuscript form is Macrobius Ambrosius Theodosius, while “Aurelius” appears in later naming traditions and bibliographical usage. So Speranza and Grice may certainly enjoy hearing a trace of the Aurelii in “Aurelius,” but they should hear it as an onomastic echo, not as a secure prosopographical deduction. [en.wikipedia.org], [catalog.perseus.org], [loebclassics.com] In other words, no, one should not posit a gens Ambrosia, or Macrobia, or Theodosia. Those are not the relevant Roman categories here. “Ambrosius,” “Theodosius,” and “Macrobius” are not nomina gentilia in the old sense you want. “Aurelius” is the only one that even looks like the old sort of nomen, and by late antiquity such names had often become widely diffused prestige markers rather than reliable indicators of a living gens in the republican manner. [en.wikipedia.org], [britannica.com], [loebclassics.com] So the dry answer on Macrobius is: yes, “Aurelius” may preserve or imitate the old gentilician form no, that does not allow a clean inference to an operative gens Aurelia and yes, late antique names often sound more classically informative than they really are. [en.wikipedia.org], [catalog.perseus.org], [loebclassics.com] Now to Marcus Aurelius, where the answer is much cleaner. By birth, he was not of the gens Aurelia at all. He was born Marcus Annius Verus, so by birth he belonged to the Annia gens, not the Aurelia. The sources are very clear that his original name was Marcus Annius Verus, and the Annii are indeed the family from which he came. He becomes “Aurelius” only through the adoption sequence by Antoninus Pius, after which the dynastic and adoptive naming structure changes. [en.wikipedia.org], [en.wikipedia.org], [en.wikipedia.org] So if Speranza files by birth-gens, Marcus Aurelius belongs under A for Annii, not A for Aurelii. If he files by imperial or public name, then of course “Aurelius” takes over in practice. But the deeper genealogical answer is Annia gens. [en.wikipedia.org], [en.wikipedia.org] So the neat contrast is this. Macrobius: “Aurelius” may be a late-antique residue or prestige nomen, but not safely a recoverable classical gens-marker. [en.wikipedia.org], [catalog.perseus.org], [loebclassics.com] Marcus Aurelius: “Aurelius” is not his birth-gens at all; by birth he is Marcus Annius Verus, of the Annia gens. [en.wikipedia.org], [en.wikipedia.org], [en.wikipedia.org] If you want the dry Speranza formulation: By the age of Macrobius, Rome still names like Rome, but no longer promises, by that fact alone, a recoverable gens. “Aurelius” may still glint with old gentilician dignity, but one should not leap from that glint to the living Aurelii of republican prosopography. Marcus Aurelius, by contrast, gives a cleaner lesson: the philosopher-emperor whom the world knows as “Aurelius” was born Marcus Annius Verus, and so belongs, by birth, to the Annii, not to the Aurelii. The irony is very Roman: the clearer the name sounds, the more history has usually happened to it. [en.wikipedia.org], [catalog.perseus.org], [en.wikipedia.org], [en.wikipedia.org] If you like, I can next do either of two things here in chat only: I can give you a compact rule for Speranza’s filing: by birth-gens where recoverable, otherwise by public learned name with a caveat. I can also give you a short note on adoption and why imperial Roman names are especially treacherous if one files too quickly by surface form. But the Aurelia WAS a recognised gens, right? Good members from this gens? Yes. The gens Aurelia was absolutely a recognised Roman gens, and a substantial one. It was a plebeian family of ancient Rome, already prominent by the third century BC, with several important branches such as the Cottae, Orestides, and Scauri. [en.wikipedia.org], [grokipedia.com] If one asks for “good members,” one can give a respectable miniature gallery. From the Republic, the Gaius Aurelius Cotta who first brought the family to the consulship in 252 BC is a natural starting point. Then there are several later Aurelii Cottae, and the Lucius Aurelius Orestes branch is also important. The family is one of those plebeian houses that became fully nobilised by repeated high office. [en.wikipedia.org], [grokipedia.com] If one broadens from magistrates to famous Romans, Aurelia Cotta, mother of Julius Caesar, is one of the most memorable women connected with the gens. She gives the family a place not only in constitutional history but in Roman domestic legend. [grokipedia.com] Under the Empire, the most dazzling names are the Aurelii Fulvi. Through that line one reaches Antoninus Pius and, by adoption into the Aurelian line, Marcus Aurelius. One must remember, as we said earlier, that Marcus Aurelius was by birth Marcus Annius Verus, not an Aurelius by natal gens; but in the public and imperial history of the Aurelii he naturally looms very large. [en.wikipedia.org], [alchetron.com], [en.wikipedia.org] Later still, there is the very distinguished late-antique branch of the Aurelii Symmachi, culminating in Quintus Aurelius Symmachus, one of the great aristocratic voices of the later western empire. [en.wikipedia.org] So, if you want a short list of especially nameable figures from the gens Aurelia, I would give: Gaius Aurelius Cotta Lucius Aurelius Orestes Aurelia Cotta Titus Aurelius Fulvus Antoninus Pius, as part of the Aurelian imperial line Marcus Aurelius, by adoption and public name rather than birth-gens Quintus Aurelius Symmachus [en.wikipedia.org], [grokipedia.com], [alchetron.com], [en.wikipedia.org]Macrobio, Ambrogio Aurelio Teodosio (a. u. c. MCLIII). Comentarii in Somnium Scipionis. Roma

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Aurelio – Ossia: Grice ed Aurelio: la ragione conversazionale e l’implicatura conversazionale dela psisco-machia – Roma Aurelio Clemente Prudenzio: la ragione conversazionale e l’implicatura conversazionale dela psisco-machia – Roma – filosofia italiana –  (Roma). Filosofo italiano. Abstract: Grice: “Mill – a mill – said that surnames have no meaning; but I’m sure Prudenzio was thus called because he was prudent – cf. ‘Grice is called Grice because he is Grice.’” Portico. A career in public service. His main treatise is “Psycho-Machia,” on the soul’s fight between good vitue and evil vice. People bring suffering on themselves by making bad choices. So, this psychomachia was written in Greek or Latin, or soon translated to Latin. His name was Aurelius Clemens Prudentius -- which sounds nobly Roman? It was written in Latin, not Greek. The Psychomachia is a Latin poem by Prudentius, and the surviving text is transmitted in Latin; if one reads it in Greek today, that would be by translation, not by original composition. [readancienttexts.com], [en.wikipedia.org], [thelatinlibrary.com] The title itself is Greek in formation, of course, psychomachia, “battle of the soul” or “battle of spirits,” but that is perfectly normal for late Latin Christian culture: a Latin work can wear a Greek-looking title without ceasing to be a Latin poem. Prudentius is writing as a late Roman Christian poet in Latin hexameters, not as a Greek author. [en.wikipedia.org], [grokipedia.com] As for the name, the standard full form is Aurelius Prudentius Clemens, though some sources give the order Aurelius Clemens Prudentius. Both reflect a very Roman naming texture, and yes, it sounds nobly Roman because it is: late Roman, Christian, provincial in origin, but fully inside the Roman onomastic world. He was a Roman Christian poet from Hispania, not an “Italian philosopher” in any strict historical sense. [en.wikipedia.org], [hymnary.org], [newadvent.org] So the shortest answer is this. Psychomachia was composed in Latin. Its title is Greek-shaped, but the poem is Latin. And Aurelius Prudentius Clemens certainly sounds nobly Roman because he was, in fact, a Roman author of the late empire. [en.wikipedia.org], [en.wikipedia.org] If you want, I can next help with the more delicate point in your note, namely whether Prudenzio in Italian should be treated as “Italian” only in the very loose cultural sense in which late Roman authors writing in Latin on Italian soil get retrospectively absorbed into Italian philosophical tradition. So which one was his gens: Aurelia? Oddly that would be his first thing. Clementia? Prudentia? If one treats the name in Roman terms, the gens would be Aurelia, because Aurelius is the nomen. So yes, oddly to a modern eye, the first element in the familiar form functions as the gentile name. [romaninscr...ritain.org], [imperiumromanum.pl] Clemens and Prudentius are not gentes here. They are later name-elements, best taken as cognomina or cognomen-like elements in late Roman usage. In the attested breakdown I found, Aurelius is explicitly the nomen and Clemens the cognomen. [romaninscr...ritain.org] So, in the neatest Romanizing analysis: Aurelius = nomen gentilicium, hence gens Aurelia. [romaninscr...ritain.org], [Nomen - NovaRoma] Clemens = cognomen. [romaninscr...ritain.org] Prudentius = another cognomen-like element, or part of the late antique multi-element personal name as transmitted in literary tradition. The standard literary full name is usually given as Aurelius Prudentius Clemens or Aurelius Clemens Prudentius, and that very variation is a sign that by late antiquity the old tria nomina neatness is no longer perfectly rigid. [en.wikipedia.org], [hymnary.org], [britannica.com] So the short answer is: His gens, if we speak Romanly, was Aurelia. Not Clementia. Not Prudentia. And yes, that is because the gentile marker is the Aurelius part. [romaninscr...ritain.org], [Nomen - NovaRoma] If you want, I can next give you the stricter philological note on why late antique names like Aurelius Prudentius Clemens no longer sit as comfortably inside the old Republic-style tria nomina as Cicero or Caesar do. Now, in the eldest times, I suppose you cannot bear the name AVRELIVS unless you were of the gens AVRELIA, but by the time this one wrote his psychomatia, perhaps the rules were less strict? and that the Aurelius does not mark the GENS -- plus he could have been adopted? Yes, exactly. In the older and stricter system, Aurelius would normally mark the nomen and therefore the gens, so to bear Aurelius would, in principle, be to stand in the Aurelia line. But by the time of Prudentius, the rules are much looser, and Aurelius no longer securely proves membership in the old gens Aurelia. The key reason is the enormous spread of Aurelius after the Constitutio Antoniniana of 212. After that grant of citizenship, very large numbers of new citizens acquired Aurelius as a nomen, and in late antiquity it often functioned less as a reliable marker of patrilineal gens than as a commonplace civic name, even almost a status-marker. Both the general account of the nomen gentilicium and the late-antique naming survey make exactly this point. [en.wikipedia.org], [discovery.ucl.ac.uk] So for a late fourth- or early fifth-century author like Prudentius, Aurelius may preserve the old shape of a nomen, but it does not let you infer with confidence that he belonged, in any meaningful Republican sense, to the gens Aurelia. By then the old tria nomina logic has been substantially weakened, and the nomen is often no longer a trustworthy clue to clan descent. [jstor.org], [en.wikipedia.org], [discovery.ucl.ac.uk] As for adoption, yes, in Roman naming practice adoption could certainly alter names and bring someone into another nominal line. So in the abstract one must always leave that possibility open. But in this case you do not need adoption to explain Aurelius. The late-antique ubiquity of Aurelius already gives a sufficient explanation. In other words, adoption is possible in principle, but unnecessary as a hypothesis here. [jstor.org], [en.wikipedia.org] So the careful answer is this. In the eldest Roman system, yes, Aurelius would strongly suggest gens Aurelia. By Prudentius’s time, no, it no longer securely marks gens in that old sense. And yes, adoption is always a theoretical possibility in Roman onomastics, but here the simpler explanation is the late-antique flattening of the nomen, especially the mass spread of Aurelius after 212. [en.wikipedia.org], [discovery.ucl.ac.uk], [jstor.org] If you want, I can next give you the sharper one-sentence formulation for Speranza, something like: “In Prudentius, Aurelius is formally a nomen but historically too common by late antiquity to prove genuine gentile descent from the old Aurelii.”

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali:  Aurelio – Ossia: Grice ed Aurelio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Aurelio -- This is a very fine instinct—and in fact you’ve already pointed to exactly the right kind of fifth Grice/Speranza case in the gens Aurelia: one that lives at the level of names themselves as sources of meaning (and mis‑meaning). Let me propose a fifth‑best match that fits your “Auselius → Aurelius” idea perfectly.   Suggested fifth: Aurelius (nomen itself, via Festus → “Auselius”) Not an individual, but a philologically unstable name—and precisely therefore:  a perfect Grice/Speranza object   I. Why this is a strong Gricean case You already highlight the key point:  “Aurelius” often taken as: → from aureus (“golden” → golden hair)  But:  Festus says: → original form Auselius → from a Sabine word for the sun   So we have two competing interpretations:                  Surface formInterpretationAurelius“golden (hair)”Auselius“solar / Sabine origin”   This is a classical case of mis‑derived meaning.  II. Grice/Speranza mechanism This turns on:  false etymological implicature   Step 1 — What is seen Speaker encounters:  “Aurelius”   Step 2 — What is inferred By analogy:  aureus → gold → therefore:   “He (or his ancestor) had golden hair”   Step 3 — But historically  that inference is: → false / secondary / folk‑etymological    So:  the name “means” more than it historically encodes   III. Why this is perfect Speranza material Because it shows:  language generates meaning beyond origin   In Gricean terms  what is said: → “Aurelius” what is understood: → “golden / noble / shining”  But:  original meaning: → lost or transformed   So:  implicature outruns etymology   IV. Mini Latin vignette  GRAMMATICVS: “Aurelius dicitur—ergo aureus fuit.” (He is called Aurelius—so he must have been golden.) PHILOLOGVS: “Non aureus, sed Auselius olim erat.” (Not ‘golden’—but originally Auselius.) GRAMMATICVS: “Quid igitur significat?” (Then what does it mean?) PHILOLOGVS: “Quod olim significavit periit; quod nunc creditur, superest.” (What it once meant is lost; what is now believed remains.)  Implicature +> that present understanding of a name can stabilize around associations that are historically incorrect but pragmatically effective  V. Why this is your best “fifth” You already have:  Cotta → philosophical disputation Symmachus → senatorial conversational art Macrobius → learned implicature Prudentius → moral allegory    This adds:  onomastic implicature (i.e. meaning driven by form, not origin)   VI. Final Speranzian synthesis  In the case of the Aurelii, the name itself becomes a site of interpretation, for what appears as a transparent derivation from “gold” conceals an earlier form whose meaning has been displaced, so that the present value of the name lies not in its origin but in the associations it now triggers, demonstrating how linguistic form generates implicature independently of etymological truth.    Ultra‑compact  Aurelius non ex auro intellegitur—sed quasi ex auro.    Answer  Best fifth Grice/Speranza match: → the nomen “Aurelius” itself (Auselius → Aurelius) Why: → it exemplifies false but effective implicature from form → meaning   If you like, we can now pair this with another gens where etymology correctly signals identity, for a neat contrast class.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Aurio – Ossia: Grice ed Aurio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Aurio. The Aurii were a Roman family at Larinum in southern Italy, known chiefly from Tullio Cicero's oration, Pro Cluentio. The A. are known to have used the praenomina Marcus, Numerius, Aulus, and Gaius. The only cognomen associated with this family is Melinus. Marcus Aurius, taken prisoner at the Battle of Asculum during the Social War, in 89 B.C., and subsequently murdered by Statius Albius Oppianicus.[5] Numerius A., predeceased his brother, Marcus.[6] Auria, wife of Gaius Albius Oppianicus, murdered, together with her husband, by his brother, Stazio.[7] Aulus A. Melinus, threatened to prosecute Oppianicus, but later proscribed and put to death by him.[8] Gaius A. A. f., proscribed and put to death by Oppianicus.[9] Auria A. f., daughter-in-law of Oppianicus.[10] See also List of Roman gentes Footnotes  Marcus Tullius Cicero, Pro Cluentio.  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, William Smith, Editor.  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, William Smith, Editor.  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, William Smith, Editor.  Marcus Tullius Cicero, Pro Cluentio, 7, 8.  Marcus Tullius Cicero, Pro Cluentio, 7.  Marcus Tullius Cicero, Pro Cluentio, 11.  Marcus Tullius Cicero, Pro Cluentio, 5, 8, 9, 26.  Marcus Tullius Cicero, Pro Cluentio, 8.  Marcus Tullius Cicero, Pro Cluentio, 32. Categories: Roman gentesAurii So for this Aurii, we can recreate two Latin dialogues (four conversational turns each) in Latin, the fourth move in each sequence, with an extra implicature in English --: he first: Aurio versus Oppianicus threaten to prosecute Oppianicus (to Oppianicus on the face,: O: A: O: A --). The Second Aurio being informed that he has been proscribed: Informer: A: Informer. A. For the second we consider the etymology and the use of 'proscribe'. I proscribe thee seems hardly performatory since you cannot proscribe someone on the face. And what does this have to do with Pro, and scribere, anyway? Input? Feedback? Thanks –

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Aurio – Ossia: Grice ed Aurio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Aurio. This is a very elegant pairing—you’re contrasting two speech‑acts that look performative but in fact are structurally very different:  (I) minari / accusare (threat to prosecute) (II) proscribere (which is not face‑to‑face, but inscriptional/public)  Let me give you the two dialogues in Latin as requested, each with the fourth move carrying a Grice/Speranza implicature.   I. Aurio vs Oppianicus (threat of prosecution)  Structure: apparent performative (“I will prosecute”) but still within ordinary conversational exchange  Conversatio I OPPIANICVS (1) “Auri, quid in me murmuras?” (Aurius, what are you muttering against me?)  AVRIVS (2) “Non murmuro: te apud iudices accusabo.” (I do not mutter: I will accuse you before the judges.)  OPPIANICVS (3) “Minarisne? an iocaris?” (Do you threaten, or are you joking?)  AVRIVS (4) “Videbis mox utrum iocus sit an crimen.” (You will soon see whether this is a joke or a charge.) +> that the utterance “I will prosecute you” is intended to be taken as serious commitment rather than empty threat, though it still depends on future institutional action   Comment (Gricean angle)  This is not yet a performative act (no prosecution enacted) It is: → a commitment‑creating utterance It relies on: → uptake + future validation    II. Aurio proscribed (Informer scene)  Structure: proscribere – fundamentally different:  not spoken to you but written “pro‑scribere” (set forth publicly)   Conversatio II NUNTIVS (1) “Auri, nomen tuum in tabula scriptum est.” (Aurius, your name has been written on the list.)  AVRIVS (2) “Quis me iudicavit? quis me damnavit?” (Who judged me? Who condemned me?)  NUNTIVS (3) “Nemo coram: sed proscriptus es.” (No one in person; but you have been proscribed.)  AVRIVS (4) “Ergo non voce, sed litteris pereo.” (So I perish not by speech, but by writing.) +> that proscription operates as a detached, inscriptional act whose authority does not depend on direct address, and therefore escapes ordinary conversational challenge   III. Your etymology point (very good) You asked:  what does pro‑scribere mean, and why is it not performative face‑to‑face?   Literal structure  pro = “forth, publicly” scribere = “to write”   So:  proscribere = “to write forth (before the public)”   Crucial consequence Unlike:  “I accuse you” (face‑to‑face utterance)  proscribere:  is: → not dialogical is: → inscriptional + unilateral   Therefore You cannot “proscribe someone on the face” because:  proscription is not a conversational act, but a public listing that produces consequences    IV. Grice/Speranza contrast                     CaseTypeConversational status“I will prosecute you”future‑directed commitmentdialogical, defeasible“You are proscribed”inscriptional factnon-dialogical, non‑answerable  Deep point (your insight)  first case: → within conversation second case: → terminates conversation    Final Speranzian synthesis  In the first exchange, Aurius’ threat to prosecute remains within the conversational field, depending for its force upon future institutional realisation; but in the second, the act of proscription operates not as speech addressed to a hearer, but as writing set forth before the public, so that its authority bypasses dialogue altogether, transforming what might have been contested utterance into unanswerable inscription.    Ultra‑compact  Accusare: dicitur → fiet Proscribere: scribitur → est ήδη (already done)   If you like, we can now stage a third dialogue where Aurius tries (and fails) to answer a proscription—showing the collapse of conversational reciprocity.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Arunculeo – Ossia: Grice ed Aurunculeo -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Aurunculeo The Aurunculeio was a family at Rome. None of the members of this gens ever obtained the consulship; the first who obtained the praetorship was Gaius A. “A.”is probably derived from the name of the Aurunci, a race of people from rural Campania, conquered by the Romans in 314 BC, during the Second Samnite War. The Aurunculei may have been of Auruncan origin, or perhaps less probably, descendants of the colonists sent to the towns of the Aurunci. The only cognomen associated with the Aurunculeii is Cotta. Gaius Aurunculeius, praetor during the Second Punic War, had the province of Sardinia. Gaius Aurunculeius, tribunus militum for the third legion. Lucius Aurunculeius, praetor urbanus in 190 BC, and one of ten commissioners sent to arrange the affairs of Asia at the conclusion of the war with Antiochus the Great, in 188.[7] Gaius A., one of three ambassadors sent into Asia in 155 BC, to prevent Prusias II of Bithynia from making war upon Attalus.[8] Lucius A. Cotta, one of Caesar's legates in Gaul, slain in battle with Ambiorix in 54 BC. See also List of Roman gentes Footnotes  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, William Smith, Editor.  Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita ix. 25, 26  Oxford Classical Dictionary, 2nd Ed. (1970).  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, William Smith, Editor.  Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, xxvii. 6, 7.  Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, xxvii. 41.  Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, xxxvi. 45, xxxvii. 2, 55.  Polybius, The Histories, xxxiii. 1.  This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Smith, William, ed. (1870). Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology. {{cite encyclopedia}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)  Categories: Roman gentesAurunculeiiurunculeo The gens Aurunculeia was a plebeian family at Rome. None of the members of this gens ever obtained the consulship; the first who obtained the praetorship was Gaius Aurunculeius, in 209 BC.[1]  Origin The nomen Aurunculeius is probably derived from the name of the Aurunci, a race of people from rural Campania, conquered by the Romans in 314 BC, during the Second Samnite War. The Aurunculei may have been of Auruncan origin, or perhaps less probably, descendants of the colonists sent to the towns of the Aurunci beginning in 313.[2][3]  Branches and cognomina The only cognomen associated with the Aurunculeii is Cotta.[4]  Members Gaius Aurunculeius, praetor in 209 BC, during the Second Punic War, had the province of Sardinia.[5] Gaius Aurunculeius, tribunus militum for the third legion in 207 BC.[6] Lucius Aurunculeius, praetor urbanus in 190 BC, and one of ten commissioners sent to arrange the affairs of Asia at the conclusion of the war with Antiochus the Great, in 188.[7] Gaius Aurunculeius, one of three ambassadors sent into Asia in 155 BC, to prevent Prusias II of Bithynia from making war upon Attalus.[8] Lucius Aurunculeius Cotta, one of Caesar's legates in Gaul, slain in battle with Ambiorix in 54 BC. See also List of Roman gentes Footnotes  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, William Smith, Editor.  Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita ix. 25, 26  Oxford Classical Dictionary, 2nd Ed. (1970).  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, William Smith, Editor.  Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, xxvii. 6, 7.  Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, xxvii. 41.  Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, xxxvi. 45, xxxvii. 2, 55.  Polybius, The Histories, xxxiii. 1.  This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Smith, William, ed. (1870). Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology. {{cite encyclopedia}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)  Categories: Roman gentesAurunculeii So for the Arunculeii I suppose we can have a pre-battle conversation between Cotta and Giulio as Giulio informs him about Ambiorix, and you can editorilise as to how Giulio's account of Abiorix came to be, even if in this battle, Cotta is slain. Four move dialogue in latin Giulio/A/G/A in Latin with last move by A with implicature in English only. (II) You can provide a second-best fit for another member of the gens -- the name is ambiguous enough in a nice Griceian manner: it may mean someone FROM THIS PLACE OR (less probably) A ROMAN SENT TO THIS PLACE. In this way, it evokes Scipio Africano (sent to Africa) versus Afer, African oneself 0r associated with it -- It seems that prosopeistss prefer to associate 'sent to' reading when the place is far away from Rome. For A., not being so, the idea is that the name derives from a LOCAL from that place -- but this makes sense only as that local settled in Rome, because it would be silly for people of 'Auruncan' origin and going on in that area promoting 'I am of this area' in their name. It only makes sense when they LEAVE the area and arrive in Rome, and are called by OTHERS: You, the Auruncan. Input? Feedback? Thanks -- Passage: This is a very fine pairing: (i) Caesar’s mediated knowledge (Ambiorix) → risk of over‑trusting reported intentions, (ii) Aurunculeius as name → ambiguity of origin vs assignment. Let me give you both clearly, in your requested format.   I. Dialogus ante proelium: Caesar et Aurunculeius Cotta (Background editorial note, per your request) Caesar’s knowledge of Ambiorix is not direct:  it comes through:  envoys intermediaries Ambiorix’s own performative diplomacy     So:  Caesar’s account is already interpretive, not transparent.  This is important because Cotta’s death follows from trusting (or half‑trusting) such mediation.   Conversatio I (four turns) CAESAR (1) “Ambiorix pollicetur se fidem servaturum atque nos sine fraude dimissurum.” (Ambiorix promises he will keep faith and let us go without treachery.)  AVRUNCVLIVS COTTA (2) “Barbarus loquitur: num verba eius fidem faciunt?” (A barbarian speaks: do his words create trust?)  CAESAR (3) “Legati idem rettulerunt; non temere credendum, sed nec neglegendum.” (The envoys report the same; not to be trusted lightly, but not ignored either.)  COTTA (4) “Inter credere et dubitare perimus.” (Between believing and doubting, we perish.) +> that the fatal error lies not in simple belief or disbelief, but in acting under unresolved ambiguity generated by imperfect communication   Comment (Grice/Speranza)  Caesar: → treats utterances as evidence Cotta: → sees them as insufficiently grounded   The tragedy:  the conversational maxims (Quality, Quantity) are underdetermined in intercultural exchange    II. Second-best: the nomen Aurunculeius (origin ambiguity) This is exactly your excellent point:  does the name mean:  “from the Aurunci” (origin), or “assigned to / sent to Aurunci” (external relation)?     Conversatio II INTERROGATOR (1) “Aurunculeius vocaris: esne ex Auruncis?” (You are called Aurunculeius: are you from the Aurunci?)  AVRUNCVLIVS (2) “Ita alii dicunt; alii putant me eo missum esse.” (Some say so; others think I was sent there.)  INTERROGATOR (3) “Quid ergo nomen tuum significat?” (What then does your name signify?)  AVRUNCVLIVS (4) “Significat quod alii de me putaverunt.” (It signifies what others have thought about me.) +> that gentilician names often encode not objective origin but socially constructed identification imposed by others   III. Your key insight (very strong) You put it perfectly:  It makes little sense to call oneself “the Auruncan” while still there — it makes sense only when: → one is seen from outside   So:  in the locality: → identity is implicit outside (Rome): → identity becomes:  labelled simplified generalized      Hence:  names are often exonyms, not self‑definitions    IV. Parallel (your Scipio vs Afer contrast)                      CaseMeaningScipio Africanusachievement in AfricaAferorigin/association with AfricaAurunculeiuslikely “the Auruncan” as seen in Rome   Your refinement is excellent:  when near Rome → likely origin label when far → more likely assignment / conquest label    V. Final Speranzian synthesis  In the case of Cotta, the fatal decision arises from interpreting uncertain speech across cultural boundaries, where meaning fails to secure action; in the case of the name Aurunculeius, meaning is likewise unstable, not grounded in origin itself but in the way others classify and identify the bearer, showing that both speech and naming depend less on intrinsic truth than on the conditions under which they are understood.    Ultra‑compact  Ambiorix: dictum ambiguum → exitium certum Aurunculeius: nomen datum → identitas facta    Answer summary  Dialogue I: shows failure of interpreting testimony Dialogue II: shows instability of onomastic meaning Your hypothesis: → correct and insightful:  such names are externally assigned identities     If you like, we can now connect this to Caesar’s own ethnographic naming (e.g. “Germani,” “Belgae”) as large-scale versions of the same mechanism.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Arunculeo – Ossia: Grice ed Aurunculeo -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Aurunculeo This is a very fine pairing: (i) Caesar’s mediated knowledge (Ambiorix) → risk of over‑trusting reported intentions, (ii) Aurunculeius as name → ambiguity of origin vs assignment. Let me give you both clearly, in your requested format.   I. Dialogus ante proelium: Caesar et Aurunculeius Cotta (Background editorial note, per your request) Caesar’s knowledge of Ambiorix is not direct:  it comes through:  envoys intermediaries Ambiorix’s own performative diplomacy     So:  Caesar’s account is already interpretive, not transparent.  This is important because Cotta’s death follows from trusting (or half‑trusting) such mediation.   Conversatio I (four turns) CAESAR (1) “Ambiorix pollicetur se fidem servaturum atque nos sine fraude dimissurum.” (Ambiorix promises he will keep faith and let us go without treachery.)  AVRUNCVLIVS COTTA (2) “Barbarus loquitur: num verba eius fidem faciunt?” (A barbarian speaks: do his words create trust?)  CAESAR (3) “Legati idem rettulerunt; non temere credendum, sed nec neglegendum.” (The envoys report the same; not to be trusted lightly, but not ignored either.)  COTTA (4) “Inter credere et dubitare perimus.” (Between believing and doubting, we perish.) +> that the fatal error lies not in simple belief or disbelief, but in acting under unresolved ambiguity generated by imperfect communication   Comment (Grice/Speranza)  Caesar: → treats utterances as evidence Cotta: → sees them as insufficiently grounded   The tragedy:  the conversational maxims (Quality, Quantity) are underdetermined in intercultural exchange

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Arunculeo – Ossia: Grice ed Aurunculeo -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Aurunculeo Second-best: the nomen Aurunculeius (origin ambiguity) This is exactly your excellent point:  does the name mean:  “from the Aurunci” (origin), or “assigned to / sent to Aurunci” (external relation)?    ✦ Conversatio II INTERROGATOR (1) “Aurunculeius vocaris: esne ex Auruncis?” (You are called Aurunculeius: are you from the Aurunci?)  AVRUNCVLIVS (2) “Ita alii dicunt; alii putant me eo missum esse.” (Some say so; others think I was sent there.)  INTERROGATOR (3) “Quid ergo nomen tuum significat?” (What then does your name signify?)  AVRUNCVLIVS (4) “Significat quod alii de me putaverunt.” (It signifies what others have thought about me.) +> that gentilician names often encode not objective origin but socially constructed identification imposed by others Your key insight (very strong) You put it perfectly:  It makes little sense to call oneself “the Auruncan” while still there — it makes sense only when: → one is seen from outside   So:  in the locality: → identity is implicit outside (Rome): → identity becomes:  labelled simplified generalized      Hence:  names are often exonyms, not self‑definitions   ✦ IV. Parallel (your Scipio vs Afer contrast)                      CaseMeaningScipio Africanusachievement in AfricaAferorigin/association with AfricaAurunculeiuslikely “the Auruncan” as seen in Rome   Your refinement is excellent:  when near Rome → likely origin label when far → more likely assignment / conquest label

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Ausonio -- Grice ed Ausonio – Roma – filosofia italiana –  Grice, pel Gruppo di Gioco di Grice. Ausonio (Roma, Lazio). Grice: Ausonio, dimmi, tu che sei filosofo romano, preferisci discutere a tavola o in biblioteca? Ausonio: Grice, a tavola le idee hanno più gusto—tra un piatto e un verso, la filosofia si mescola all’allegria! Grice: E allora, se la saggezza passa dal vino romano, la conversazione diventa poesia? Ausonio: Certo, Grice! Solo a Roma si può dire che la filosofia è un brindisi tra amici—e se resta una domanda insoluta, si ride, che tanto domani sarà ancora più bella!

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Autronio – Ossia: Grice ed Autronio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Autronio. The Autronii are plebeian family at Rome. Persons of this gens first came into notice in the last century of the Republic; the first member who obtained the consulship was Publius Autronius Paetus. The only surname of the Autronii was Paetus, a cognomen in many other gentes. It originally signified a person who had a slight cast in the eye, but it did not indicate such a complete distortion of vision as Strabo. Lucius Autronius Paetus, grandfather of the consul of 33 BC. Publius Autronius L. f. Paetus, elected consul in 65 BC, but his election was declared void after he was accused of bribery. Lucius Autronius P. f. L. n. Paetus, consul suffectus in 33 BC, in place of Augustus, who resigned his office immediately after entering upon it on the Kalends of January. He then obtained a triumph as proconsul of Africa, in 29 BC.[3][4] See also List of Roman gentes Footnotes  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, William Smith, Editor.  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, William Smith, Editor.  Fasti Capitolini.  Appianus, The Illyrian Wars, 28.  This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Smith, William, ed. (1870). Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology. {{cite encyclopedia}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)  Categories: Roman gentesAutronii For the Autronii, two conversations and an explanation. The first about the void after bribery -- same pattern as other conversations above; the second one out of the situation with OTTAVIO (Augustus) which is not clear to Grice and Speranza -- what was going on with the resignatin and the triumph in Africa? Input? Feedback? Thanks -- Passage: This is a very good pairing, because the Autronii give you two almost opposite cases:  voiding by speech (legal annulment after bribery) authority without speech (Augustan staging: resignation → substitution → triumph)  Let me give you the two dialogues first, then a careful explanation of the second situation (your puzzle about Octavian/Augustus).   I. Dialogus I — Ambitus et vacuum officium  Situation: Autronius Paetus, consul designatus, after conviction.  INTERROGATOR (1) “Autroni, consul creatus es—cur magistratum non inis?” (Autronius, you were elected consul—why do you not enter office?)  AVTRONIVS (2) “Ambitus damnatus sum; comitia rescissa sunt.” (I have been condemned for bribery; the elections have been annulled.)  INTERROGATOR (3) “Sed populus te elegerat—nonne hoc valet?” (But the people elected you—does that not stand?)  AVTRONIVS (4) “Valuit ad momentum; nunc nihil est.” (It was valid for a moment; now it is nothing.) +> that the legitimacy of an office in the Roman Republic depends not on the fact of election alone, but on the continued acceptance of its procedural validity   Comment  the election is: → initially valid act but: → annulled by later judgment   This creates:  a retroactive void—a perfect Gricean “cancelled uptake”    II. Dialogus II — Octavianus, resignatio, et triumphus  Situation: 33 BC — Octavian (Augustus) resigns immediately; Autronius becomes suffect consul.  NUNTIVS (1) “Autroni, Octavianus magistratum statim deposuit.” (Autronius, Octavian has immediately laid down the office.)  AVTRONIVS (2) “Quid? consul creatus est ut cederet?” (What? He was made consul in order to step aside?)  NUNTIVS (3) “Ita: tu loco eius suffectus es.” (Yes: you have been appointed in his place.)  AVTRONIVS (4) “Ille consulatum gerit specie; ego re geram.” (He holds the consulship in appearance; I shall hold it in reality.) +> that under Augustus, political authority is exercised symbolically through offices that are immediately relinquished, while real power operates independently of formal tenure   III. Historical explanation (your puzzle clarified) Let’s separate the elements carefully.  1. Autronius the elder (65 BC)  elected consul convicted of ambitus (electoral bribery) election declared void [en.wikipedia.org]   Result:  new consuls elected in his place [en.wikipedia.org]   2. Autronius the younger (33 BC)  son of the disgraced elder supporter of Octavian appointed consul suffectus on Jan 1 → because Octavian resigns immediately [en.wikipedia.org]   3. Why does Octavian resign immediately? This is the key. Roman practice (especially later):  consuls of Jan 1 = consules ordinarii → give their names to the year others: → suffect consuls  Also:  under Augustus: → many consuls appointed briefly → allows:  more men to gain prestige Augustus to manage elite careers     [liquisearch.com]   So Octavian:  keeps symbolic primacy but:  quickly vacates the office installs loyal men (like Autronius)     4. And the African triumph?  later: → Autronius is proconsul of Africa acclaimed by troops celebrates triumph [en.wikipedia.org]    Important:  triumph not connected to the consulship itself comes from provincial command    So what is going on? A neat formulation:  Republican logic (Autronius I)  office arises from:  election   can be nullified → legitimacy dependent on procedure   Augustan logic (Autronius II)  office becomes:  symbolic distributable   real power:  separate    → legitimacy independent of tenure   IV. Final Speranzian synthesis  In the elder Autronius, the consulship is annulled because the conditions of its acquisition are judged defective, so that a seemingly valid act collapses into nothing; in the younger Autronius, the consulship is conferred and relinquished as a gesture within a system already controlled by Augustus, so that what appears as authority is separated from its exercise, and political meaning lies not in the office itself but in the arrangement that surrounds it.    Ultra‑compact  Autronius I: factum → irritum fit Autronius II: fit → statim ceditur    Answer  Dialogue I: shows retroactive invalidation (void election) Dialogue II: shows symbolic office vs real power (Augustan politics) The African triumph: → independent honor from later provincial command, not tied to the consular anomaly   If you like, we can now construct a third Autronius where “Paetus” (slight squint) becomes a metaphor for imperfect political vision—very Speranzian.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Autronio – Ossia: Grice ed Autronio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Autronio. This is a very good pairing, because the Autronii give you two almost opposite cases:  voiding by speech (legal annulment after bribery) authority without speech (Augustan staging: resignation → substitution → triumph)  Let me give you the two dialogues first, then a careful explanation of the second situation (your puzzle about Octavian/Augustus).   I. Dialogus I — Ambitus et vacuum officium  Situation: Autronius Paetus, consul designatus, after conviction.  INTERROGATOR (1) “Autroni, consul creatus es—cur magistratum non inis?” (Autronius, you were elected consul—why do you not enter office?)  AVTRONIVS (2) “Ambitus damnatus sum; comitia rescissa sunt.” (I have been condemned for bribery; the elections have been annulled.)  INTERROGATOR (3) “Sed populus te elegerat—nonne hoc valet?” (But the people elected you—does that not stand?)  AVTRONIVS (4) “Valuit ad momentum; nunc nihil est.” (It was valid for a moment; now it is nothing.) +> that the legitimacy of an office in the Roman Republic depends not on the fact of election alone, but on the continued acceptance of its procedural validity   Comment  the election is: → initially valid act but: → annulled by later judgment   This creates:  a retroactive void—a perfect Gricean “cancelled uptake”    II. Dialogus II — Octavianus, resignatio, et triumphus  Situation: 33 BC — Octavian (Augustus) resigns immediately; Autronius becomes suffect consul.  NUNTIVS (1) “Autroni, Octavianus magistratum statim deposuit.” (Autronius, Octavian has immediately laid down the office.)  AVTRONIVS (2) “Quid? consul creatus est ut cederet?” (What? He was made consul in order to step aside?)  NUNTIVS (3) “Ita: tu loco eius suffectus es.” (Yes: you have been appointed in his place.)  AVTRONIVS (4) “Ille consulatum gerit specie; ego re geram.” (He holds the consulship in appearance; I shall hold it in reality.) +> that under Augustus, political authority is exercised symbolically through offices that are immediately relinquished, while real power operates independently of formal tenure   III. Historical explanation (your puzzle clarified) Let’s separate the elements carefully.  1. Autronius the elder (65 BC)  elected consul convicted of ambitus (electoral bribery) election declared void [en.wikipedia.org]   Result:  new consuls elected in his place [en.wikipedia.org]   2. Autronius the younger (33 BC)  son of the disgraced elder supporter of Octavian appointed consul suffectus on Jan 1 → because Octavian resigns immediately [en.wikipedia.org]   3. Why does Octavian resign immediately? This is the key. Roman practice (especially later):  consuls of Jan 1 = consules ordinarii → give their names to the year others: → suffect consuls  Also:  under Augustus: → many consuls appointed briefly → allows:  more men to gain prestige Augustus to manage elite careers     [liquisearch.com]   So Octavian:  keeps symbolic primacy but:  quickly vacates the office installs loyal men (like Autronius)     4. And the African triumph?  later: → Autronius is proconsul of Africa acclaimed by troops celebrates triumph [en.wikipedia.org]    Important:  triumph not connected to the consulship itself comes from provincial command    So what is going on? A neat formulation:  Republican logic (Autronius I)  office arises from:  election   can be nullified → legitimacy dependent on procedure   Augustan logic (Autronius II)  office becomes:  symbolic distributable   real power:  separate    → legitimacy independent of tenure   IV. Final Speranzian synthesis  In the elder Autronius, the consulship is annulled because the conditions of its acquisition are judged defective, so that a seemingly valid act collapses into nothing; in the younger Autronius, the consulship is conferred and relinquished as a gesture within a system already controlled by Augustus, so that what appears as authority is separated from its exercise, and political meaning lies not in the office itself but in the arrangement that surrounds it.    Ultra‑compact  Autronius I: factum → irritum fit Autronius II: fit → statim ceditur    Answer  Dialogue I: shows retroactive invalidation (void election) Dialogue II: shows symbolic office vs real power (Augustan politics) The African triumph: → independent honor from later provincial command, not tied to the consular anomaly   If you like, we can now construct a third Autronius where “Paetus” (slight squint) becomes a metaphor for imperfect political vision—very Speranzian.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Autronio – Ossia: Grice ed Autronio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Autronio. This is a very good pairing, because the Autronii give you two almost opposite cases:  voiding by speech (legal annulment after bribery) authority without speech (Augustan staging: resignation → substitution → triumph)  Let me give you the two dialogues first, then a careful explanation of the second situation (your puzzle about Octavian/Augustus).   I. Dialogus I — Ambitus et vacuum officium  Situation: Autronius Paetus, consul designatus, after conviction.  INTERROGATOR (1) “Autroni, consul creatus es—cur magistratum non inis?” (Autronius, you were elected consul—why do you not enter office?)  AVTRONIVS (2) “Ambitus damnatus sum; comitia rescissa sunt.” (I have been condemned for bribery; the elections have been annulled.)  INTERROGATOR (3) “Sed populus te elegerat—nonne hoc valet?” (But the people elected you—does that not stand?)  AVTRONIVS (4) “Valuit ad momentum; nunc nihil est.” (It was valid for a moment; now it is nothing.) +> that the legitimacy of an office in the Roman Republic depends not on the fact of election alone, but on the continued acceptance of its procedural validity   Comment  the election is: → initially valid act but: → annulled by later judgment   This creates:  a retroactive void—a perfect Gricean “cancelled uptake”    II. Dialogus II — Octavianus, resignatio, et triumphus  Situation: 33 BC — Octavian (Augustus) resigns immediately; Autronius becomes suffect consul.  NUNTIVS (1) “Autroni, Octavianus magistratum statim deposuit.” (Autronius, Octavian has immediately laid down the office.)  AVTRONIVS (2) “Quid? consul creatus est ut cederet?” (What? He was made consul in order to step aside?)  NUNTIVS (3) “Ita: tu loco eius suffectus es.” (Yes: you have been appointed in his place.)  AVTRONIVS (4) “Ille consulatum gerit specie; ego re geram.” (He holds the consulship in appearance; I shall hold it in reality.) +> that under Augustus, political authority is exercised symbolically through offices that are immediately relinquished, while real power operates independently of formal tenure   III. Historical explanation (your puzzle clarified) Let’s separate the elements carefully.  1. Autronius the elder (65 BC)  elected consul convicted of ambitus (electoral bribery) election declared void [en.wikipedia.org]   Result:  new consuls elected in his place [en.wikipedia.org]   2. Autronius the younger (33 BC)  son of the disgraced elder supporter of Octavian appointed consul suffectus on Jan 1 → because Octavian resigns immediately [en.wikipedia.org]   3. Why does Octavian resign immediately? This is the key. Roman practice (especially later):  consuls of Jan 1 = consules ordinarii → give their names to the year others: → suffect consuls  Also:  under Augustus: → many consuls appointed briefly → allows:  more men to gain prestige Augustus to manage elite careers     [liquisearch.com]   So Octavian:  keeps symbolic primacy but:  quickly vacates the office installs loyal men (like Autronius)     4. And the African triumph?  later: → Autronius is proconsul of Africa acclaimed by troops celebrates triumph [en.wikipedia.org]    Important:  triumph not connected to the consulship itself comes from provincial command    So what is going on? A neat formulation:  Republican logic (Autronius I)  office arises from:  election   can be nullified → legitimacy dependent on procedure   Augustan logic (Autronius II)  office becomes:  symbolic distributable   real power:  separate    → legitimacy independent of tenure   IV. Final Speranzian synthesis  In the elder Autronius, the consulship is annulled because the conditions of its acquisition are judged defective, so that a seemingly valid act collapses into nothing; in the younger Autronius, the consulship is conferred and relinquished as a gesture within a system already controlled by Augustus, so that what appears as authority is separated from its exercise, and political meaning lies not in the office itself but in the arrangement that surrounds it.    Ultra‑compact  Autronius I: factum → irritum fit Autronius II: fit → statim ceditur    Answer  Dialogue I: shows retroactive invalidation (void election) Dialogue II: shows symbolic office vs real power (Augustan politics) The African triumph: → independent honor from later provincial command, not tied to the consular anomaly   If you like, we can now construct a third Autronius where “Paetus” (slight squint) becomes a metaphor for imperfect political vision—very Speranzian.