SAL

 

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

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Saliceto – Ossia: Grice e Saliceto: la ragione conversazionale del diritto bellico – la guerra è la guerra. Note su Scritti politici. Il Gruppo di Gioco di H. P. Grice. Sua Eccellenza il conte Vierri Visconti di Saliceto (Balsamo, Cinisello Calsamo, Milano, Lombardia): la ragione conversazionale del diritto bellico – la guerra è la guerra. A comparison between Grice and Verri Visconti di Saliceto brings into focus two converging traditions of reason‑governed meaning grounded in social norms rather than abstract formalism, even though they operate at different levels. Grice’s theory of conversational meaning explains how rationality functions implicitly in ordinary communication: speakers and hearers rely on shared expectations of cooperation, relevance, and sincerity, and meaning emerges from what a rational participant can reasonably be taken to intend within a conversational practice. Saliceto’s Enlightenment reflections on war, law, pleasure, and happiness presuppose a comparable rational substrate, but relocate it within civic and juridical life, especially in the domain of belligerence, where “war is war” names a hard limit set by collective rules, institutional roles, and moral expectations rather than by individual sentiment. Where Grice analyzes how conversational implicatures arise from rational coordination between interlocutors, Saliceto treats law—especially the law of war—as a form of extended civic conversation in which reason disciplines force, pleasure is measured against pain, and happiness is constrained by duty. In both cases, rationality is not an inner mental calculus but a publicly shareable normativity: for Grice, it governs what can be meant and understood in conversation; for Saliceto, it governs what can be justified, endured, or condemned in political and military practice. The affinity is strongest in their shared Enlightenment conviction that reason operates most powerfully when embedded in social exchange—whether among conversational partners at a table or among states and citizens negotiating the boundaries of violence, pleasure, and civil order. Grice: “Since Sua Eccellenza Verri-Visconti calls himself a hyphenated philosopher, I who amn’t, shall list him under Visconti!” Esential Italian philosopher. Like Grice, he wrote on ‘happiness.’ Like Grice, he writes on ‘pleasure.’ Like Grice, he was a very clubbable man. Ritratto tagliato Barone di Rho. Consorte Marietta Castiglioni Vincenza Melzi d'Eril. Figli Teresa, Alessandro (da Marietta Castiglioni). Filosofo. Considerato tra i massimi esponenti dell'illuminismo, è altresì ritenuto il fondatore della scuola illuministica milanese. Nasce dal conte Gabriele Verri-Visconti, magistrato e politico conservatore, della nobiltà milanese. Avviati gli studi nel collegio dei gesuiti di Brera, e uno dei trasformati. Si arruola nell'esercito e prende parte alla Guerra dei VII Anni. Fermatosi a Vienna, intraprende la redazione delle Considerazioni sul commercio nello Stato di Milano, che gli varranno il primo incarico di funzionario. Pubblica le Meditazioni sulla felicità. Devienne a Milano uno dei pugni, nucleo redazionale del caffè, destinato a diventare il punto di riferimento del riformismo illuministico. Tra i suoi saggi più importanti per Il Caffè si  ricordano Elementi del commercio; Commedia; “Medicina”; “I parolai”. Ha rapporto epistolari anche con gl’enciclopedisti. d'Alembert visita i pugni. Parallelamente all'impresa editoriale, intraprende la scalata del governo d’Austria allo scopo di mettere in prattica le riforme propugnate nel “Caffe”.Membro della Giunta per la revisione della "ferma" (appalto delle imposte ai privati) del Supremo Consiglio dell'Economia. Fonda la Società patriottica. “Meditazioni sull'economia politica”. Il discorso sull'indole del piacere -- e del dolore”; “i Ricordi” e le “Osservazioni sulla tortura”. Il suo è uno stile asciutto e libero, pieno di trattenuto vigore.  diritto bellico. Piacere. Grice: Ah, Sua Eccellenza il Conte Vierri Visconti di Saliceto! Devo dire che il solo suono del suo titolo nobiliare dona una certa grandezza al nostro dialogo. Non sorprende che lei conversi con tanta ragionevolezza—direi, con quell’eleganza conversazionale tipica dei raffinati italiani di alto lignaggio. I suoi approfondimenti sulla natura della ragione nel dialogo sono una gioia per ogni filosofo, in particolare per un inglese come me, affascinato dalla civiltà italiana. Saliceto: Professore Grice, sono profondamente onorato dalle sue parole. Per noi milanesi, e specialmente per chi appartiene alla stirpe dei Visconti, la ragionevolezza nel dialogo non è solo un ideale, ma un nobile dovere. A mio avviso, l’arte della conversazione costituisce il fondamento della felicità e del piacere—campi in cui, come lei ha scritto, la filosofia trova la sua dimora più autentica. Grice: In effetti, Conte, la sua tradizione milanese mi ricorda che la ragionevolezza è una virtù sociale tanto quanto filosofica. Gli italiani di alto lignaggio, come lei, praticano una sorta di moderazione conversazionale; ponderano piacere e dolore, felicità e dovere, quasi come se il dialogo stesso fosse una forma di economia morale. Questo rende il suo illuminismo filosofico così solido e attraente agli occhi degli stranieri. Saliceto: La sua stima mi riempie di gioia, Professore. Per noi, conversare ragionevolmente è come condurre una guerra gentile—una guerra in cui la comprensione è la vittoria e la civiltà il premio. Ritengo che solo tramite simili scambi si possa davvero far progredire la causa della filosofia e della società. Che la nostra conversazione sia illuminata quanto la scuola milanese stessa! Saliceto, Sua Eccellenza il conte Verri Visconti di (1823). Scritti politici. Milano.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salieno – Ossia: Grice e Salieno -- Grex griceiana -- Salieno The gens Saliena or Salliena, also written Salena, Sallena, Sallenia, and Sallienia, was a minor plebeian family at ancient Rome. Few members of this gens are mentioned in history, but a number are known from inscriptions.[1]  Origin The nomen Salienus belongs to a class of gentilicia formed using the suffix -enus, typically from other gentile names, or occasionally from places. The root of the name is not apparent, but it could be an orthographic variation of Salvienus, from the Oscan praenomen Salvius. Most of the Salieni known from inscriptions seem to have come from Umbria, Sabinum, Samnium, or Campania, suggesting that they were indeed of Oscan or Umbrian descent.[2]  Praenomina The main praenomina of the Salieni were Titus and Quintus. Several other names received occasional use, including Aulus, Lucius, and Publius. All were among the most common names throughout Roman history.  Branches and cognomina The Salieni used a variety of cognomina, most of which appear to have been personal surnames. The majority belong to common types of cognomen, derived from an individual's personal characteristics. Clemens refers to someone with a mild temperament, while Fortunatus is "fortunate", Pudens "modest", Pulcher "beautiful", Sedatus "calm". Fuscianus is a derivative of Fuscus, "dark", while Rufus would originally have been given to someone with red hair. Other traditional Roman surnames used by members of this family include Gallus, referring to a cockerel, or one of the Gauls, and Musca, referring to a fly, or by extension, someone nosy.[3][4]  Members This list includes abbreviated praenomina. For an explanation of this practice, see filiation. Titus Salienus, a centurion serving in the fifth legion under Caesar, during the African War in 46 BC. When the ship in which he was traveling was attacked by Gaius Vergilius, one of Pompeius' lieutenants, he convinced Lucius Titius and his brother, both military tribunes, to surrender.[i] Both were put to death, and Salienus was among those centurions subsequently dismissed by Caesar for disgracing themselves.[5][6] Saliena, named in an inscription from Interamna Nahars in Umbria, dating to the last part of the first century BC, or the early part of the first century AD.[7] Aulus Salienus A. f. Gallus, a blacksmith at Interamna Nahars.[8] Lucius Sallenus, named in an inscription from Pompeii in Campania, dating between about AD 31 and 60.[9] Titus Sallienus Clemens, praetor in AD 56.[10] Quintus Salienus Asticus, named in an inscription from Trebula Mutusca in Samnium, dating to AD 60.[11] Quintus Salenus Q. f. Fortunatus, named in an inscription from Trebula Mutusca, dating to AD 60.[11] Quintus Salenus Q. f. Pulcher, named in an inscription from Trebula Mutusca, dating to AD 60.[11] Salienus Clemens, a Roman senator during the reign of Nero, who denounced Lucius Junius Gallio as an enemy of the state, shortly after a number of leading Romans, including Gallio's brother, Seneca, had been put to death or exiled on suspicion of disloyalty. Wishing to avoid another purge, Salienus' colleagues persuaded him to withdraw his accusation.[12] Titus Salenus, named in an inscription from Pompeii in Campania.[13] Publius Sallienus Philomenus, named in an inscription from Turea in Dacia, dating to AD 86.[14] Quintus Salenus Pudens, named together with Marcus Minatius Marcellus as soldiers in the twelfth cohort (of the Praetorian Guard?) at Rome, toward the end of the second century.[15] Titus Salenus T. f. Sedatus, a veteran of the fourteenth cohort of the Praetorian Guard, named in an inscription from Auximum in Picenum, dating to the latter half of the second century, or the early part of the third.[16] Salena Paulina, the mother of Sueto Marcellinus, a promising young cavalry officer buried at Pisaurum in Umbria, in the third century or the latter part of the second, Sueto Crispinus, Sueto Paulinus, a recruiter, Sueto Augyrinus, a soldier in the fourth cohort of the Praetorian Guard, and Sueto Justus. Paulina was buried at Fanum Fortunae in Umbria, aged seventy-eight years and fifty-six days, with a monument from her son, Sueto Justus, dating to the third century, or the latter part of the second.[17] Undated Salieni Aulus Salenus, together with Quintus Salenus, one of the former masters of Aula Manlia Helena, a freedwoman buried at Rome, aged twenty-five.[18] Quintus Salenus, together with Aulus Salenus, one of the former masters of Aula Manlia Helena, a freedwoman buried at Rome, aged twenty-five.[18] Titus Salienus T. l. Atticus, the freedman of Titus Salienus Rufus, named in an inscription from Amiternum.[19] Titus Sallienus Fuscianus, centurion primus pilus of the third legion, named in a dedicatory inscription from Bostra in Arabia Petraea.[20] Quintus Salenus Musca, dedicated a monument at Rome to Bolana Rufina.[21] Sallenia Nampamina, buried at Thugga in Africa Proconsularis.[22] Saliena T. l. Rufa, the freedwoman of Titus Salienus Rufus, named in an inscription from Amiternum.[19] Titus Salienus T. f. Rufus, named in an inscription from Amiternum in Sabinum, together with his freedman, Titus Salienus Attalus, and freedwoman, Saliena Rufa.[19] Lucius Sallienus Secundus, buried at Puteoli in Campania, with a monument from his client, Salliena Zosima.[23] Publius Sallienius P. f. Thalamus, a native of Hadria in Venetia and Histria, was prefect of the second legion at Isca Augusta in Britain.[24] Salliena Zosima, built a monument at Puteoli to her patron, Lucius Sallienus Secundus.[23]   Footnotes  Broughton has the two Titii in the tenth legion, but this seems to be an error, as it was the fifth legion, and not the tenth, that was present for the Battle of Thapsus. See also List of Roman gentes References  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. III, p. 694 ("Titus Salienus", "Salienus Clemens").  Chase, p. 118.  Chase, pp. 109–114.  New College Latin & English Dictionary.  Hirtius, De Bello Africo, 28, 54.  Broughton, vol. II, pp. 299, 300.  CIL XI, 4257.  CIL XI, 4236.  Camodeca, Tabulae Pompeianae Sulpiciorum, 121.  CIL MCMLX, 64.  AE 1929, 161.  Tacitus, Annales, xv. 73.  CIL IV, 63.  CIL XVI, 33.  AE 1979, 38.  CIL IX, 5843.  CIL XI, 6281, CIL XI, 6350.  CIL VI, 37673.  AE 1992, 470.  CIL III, 97.  CIL VI, 13624.  MAD, 1076.  CIL X, 2925.  CIL VII, 100. Bibliography Aulus Hirtius (attributed), De Bello Africo (On the African War). Publius Cornelius Tacitus, Annales. 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, pp. 103–184 (1897). T. Robert S. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, American Philological Association (1952–1986). John C. Traupman, The New College Latin & English Dictionary, Bantam Books, New York (1995). Giuseppe Camodeca, Tabulae Pompeianae Sulpiciorum: Edizione critica dell'archivio puteolano dei Sulpicii (The Pompeian Tables of the Sulpicii: a Critical Edition from the Archives of the Sulpicii of Puteoli), Rome (1999). M. Khanoussi, L. Maurin, Mourir à Dougga: Receuil des inscriptions funéraires (Dying in Dougga: a Compendium of Funerary Inscriptions, abbreviated MAD), Bordeaux, Tunis (2002). Category: Roman gentes and from THIS gens? Thanks

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salieno – Ossia: Grice e Salieno -- Grex griceiana – Salieno For the Salieni, my first-best Gricean figure is not the centurion, but: Grice e Salieno Clemente Namely:  Salienus Clemens, the senator under Nero who denounced Lucius Junius Gallio as an enemy of the state, but was persuaded by his colleagues to withdraw the accusation in order to avoid a further purge. [GREXv2 | Word]  Why him? Because the whole episode turns on a Gricean distinction between:  saying, accusing, implicating.  A denunciation is not merely a proposition; it carries institutional consequences.  Grice e Salieno Clemente Speranza:  Quid dixit Clemens? (What did Clemens say?)  Grice:  Gallionem hostem rei publicae esse. (That Gallio was an enemy of the state.) [GREXv2 | Word]  Speranza:  Et quid implicavit? (And what did he implicate?)  Grice:  Plus quam dixit. (More than he said.) Ha A Roman accusation of this sort carries:  +> Gallio is dangerous. +> Gallio should be investigated. +> Gallio may deserve punishment.  None of that is logically identical with:  Gallio hostis est.  The speech act outruns the proposition.  Why the colleagues intervene Tacitus says that his colleagues persuaded him to withdraw the accusation, wishing to avoid another purge. [GREXv2 | Word] That is wonderfully Gricean. Hardie:  Why retract?  Grice:  Because implications have consequences.  Hardie:  Even if the words are true?  Grice:  Especially then.Ha My verdict Grice e Salieno Clemente Speranza:  Quid interest inter accusationem et descriptionem? (What is the difference between an accusation and a description?)  Grice:  Descriptio rem ostendit; accusatio effectum quaerit. (A description exhibits a fact; an accusation seeks an effect.)  +> Some utterances are designed not merely to convey information but to alter the practical situation of the hearer. That seems to me the richest Gricean theme in the gens Salienia: the moment when saying something becomes politically consequential. [GREXv2 | Word]

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salieno – Ossia: Grice e Salieno -- Grex griceiana – Salieno  A second candidate A close runner-up would be:  Titus Salienus, Caesar's centurion who persuaded the two Titii to surrender, with disastrous results. [GREXv2 | Word]  There one gets a direct problem of persuasion: Speranza:  Persuasitne? (Did he persuade?)  Grice:  Ita. (Yes.)  Speranza:  Rectene persuasit? (Did he persuade correctly?)  Grice:  Alia quaestio est. (That is another question.)  A very Gricean distinction between effectiveness and justification.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Sallustio – Ossia: Grice  Sallustio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Sallustio The gens Sallustia, occasionally written Salustia, was a plebeian family at ancient Rome. Members of this gens are first mentioned in the time of Cicero, and from that time they attained particular distinction as statesmen and writers. The most illustrious of the family was the historian Gaius Sallustius Crispus, who wrote valuable works on the Jugurthine War and the Conspiracy of Catiline, which still exist.[1]  Praenomina The main praenomina of the Sallustii of the Republic and early Empire were Gaius, Gnaeus, and Publius. Other names appear in imperial times, including Marcus and Quintus. All of these were among the most common names throughout Roman history.  Branches and cognomina The only cognomen borne by the Sallustii of the Republic was Crispus, belonging to an abundant class of surnames derived from the physical features of an individual, and originally belonging to someone with curly hair.[2] Passienus, borne by some of the Sallustii during the early decades of the Empire, was a gentile name inherited from the paternal line when one of the Passieni was adopted by his granduncle, the historian Sallust, becoming part of his gens. Lucullus, borne by an ill-fated member of this family in the time of Domitian, may have been derived from lucus, a grove, although it might also have been a diminutive of the praenomen Lucius.[3]  Members This list includes abbreviated praenomina. For an explanation of this practice, see filiation. Gnaeus Sallustius, a talented writer whom Cicero numbered among his clients.[4] Gnaeus Sallustius,[i] a proquaestor serving under Lucius Calpurnius Bibulus, proconsul of Syria, in 51 BC. He wrote to Cicero to inquire about certain matters as he was arriving in the province, and Cicero departing, and he requested a letter of recommendation to Bibulus, which Cicero supplied.[5][6] Publius Sallustius, the intended recipient of thirty sestertii which Cicero received from his client, Gnaeus Sallustius. As Cicero was at Brundisium, he asked his good friend Atticus to pay the sum to Publius as soon as possible.[7] Publius Sallustius Blaesus, consul suffectus in AD 89, serving for the months of May to August. He was a member of the Arval Brethren, attested in inscriptions from 78 to 91.[8][9] Sallustius Lucullus, governor of Britain in the reign of Domitian, who had him put to death, ostensibly because he referred to a new variety of spear as lucullae, naming them after himself. He had probably been consul, as all of his predecessors had been, perhaps around AD 87.[10] Sallustius Fulvianus, a friend of Lucius Verus and Marcus Cornelius Fronto, whom Verus refers to in a letter to Fronto concerning his actions in the Parthian War, explaining that Fulvianus will furnish Fronto with copies of the despatches that Verus had received from his commanders.[11] Marcus Sallustius Rufus Titilianus, probably a nobilis, whose name was found on a lead pipe at Rome.[12] Sallustia Calvina, evidently a noblewoman, manumitted a slave who became Gaius Sallustius.[13] Gaius Sallustius Ɔ. l., freedman of Sallustia Calvina.[13] Sallustia Frontina, a woman of a senatorial family, named in a funerary inscription from Rome.[14] Sallustia Lucana, a noblewoman, employed Athictus Threptus as keeper of stores.[15] Quintus Sallustius Macrinianus, a Roman senator, and the grandfather of the Macrinianus who was governor of Mauretania.[16] Lucius Vespronius Candidus Sallustius Sabinianus, consul suffectus about AD 176.[17] Quintus Sallustius Q. f. Macrinianus, a senator like his father, was father of the governor Macrianus.[16] Sallustius Verginius Gallus, consul suffectus in AD 197 or 198.[18] Quintus Sallustius Q. f. Q. n. Macrianus, a Roman senator like his father and grandfather, Macrianus was governor of Mauretania about the time of Caracalla, early in the third century.[16] Titus Flavius Sallustius Paelignianus, consul in AD 231.[19] Publius Sallustius Sempronius Victor, a procurator in Mauretania Caesariensis during the reigns of Severus Alexander and Maximinus Thrax, erected new milestones, including ones at Ad Aras, Altava, and Sertei.[20] Sallustia Plotina, wife of the senator Titus Desticius Juba, and mother of Desticius Sallustius Juba and Jubae.[21] Gaius Julius Sallustius Saturninus Fortunatianus, consul suffectus in an uncertain year before AD 262.[22] Julius Sallustius, consul in AD 344, sine collega from April or May. Flavius Sallustius, praetorian prefect of Gaul from AD 361 to 363, and consul in 363, alongside the emperor Julian. Although a pagan himself, Sallustius dissuaded the emperor from undertaking a persecution of the Christians.[23] Sallustius, a contemporary of Julian, and the author of a Neoplatonic treatise, Περι θεων και Κoσμου (Peri Theon kai Kosmou, On the Gods and the Cosmos). He might be the same as the praetorian prefect.[23] Sallustius of Emesa, a Cynic philosopher of the later fifth century. In his youth he had studied law, then become a sophist, taking up Neoplatonism; but he later rejected its doctrines and embraced Cynicism.[24][25][26] Sallustii Crispi Gaius Sallustius Crispus, the historian, was quaestor about 55 BC, tribune of the plebs in 52, and praetor in 46. During the Civil War he espoused the side of Caesar, who appointed him governor of Numidia, from which Sallust retired a wealthy man, and devoted himself to writing history.[27][28][29][30][31][32][33] Sallustia, sister of the historian and grandmother Passienus who was adopted by her brother.[34] Gaius Sallustius C. f. Crispus Passienus, the son of Lucius Passienus Rufus, consul in 4 BC, was adopted by his granduncle, the historian Sallust. He became one of the most trusted friends and advisors to Augustus, and afterward Tiberius, without ever seeking political office or achieving senatorial rank.[35][36][37][38] Gaius Sallustius C. f. C. n. Crispus Passienus, consul in AD 27, and again in 44. Having inherited great wealth, he cleverly avoided the intrigues of the imperial court, maintaining the favour of Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudius; but hoping to rehabilitate his niece, Agrippina, Claudius ordered Passienus to divorce his wife and marry Agrippina. He is generally thought to have perished by Agrippina's hand, through poison, about AD 47.[39] See also List of Roman gentes Sallust (disambiguation) Footnotes  Given as Caninius Sallustius, which some editors proposed amending to either Gnaeus Sallustius, Gaius Annius Sallustius, or Caninius Sallustianus. References  Dictionary of Greek and Latin Biography and Mythology, vol. III, pp. 695–698 ("Sallustius or Salustius").  Chase, p. 110.  Chase, p. 113.  Cicero, Epistulae ad Atticum, i. 3. 11, xi. 11, 17, Epistulae ad Familiares, xiv. 4. § 6, xiv. 11, Epistulae ad Quintum Fratrem, iii. 4. § 2, iii. 5. § 1.  Cicero, Epistulae ad Familiares, ii. 17.  Broughton, vol. II, pp. 242, 247 (note 2), supplement 55.  Cicero, Epistulae ad Atticum, xi. 11.  Gallivan, "The Fasti for A.D. 70–96", pp. 191, 217.  Champlin, "Hadrian's Heir", p. 85.  Suetonius, "The Life of Domitian", 10.  Verus, apud Fronto, Epistulae ad Verum, ii. 3.  CIL XV, 7526.  CIL VI, 23601.  CIL VI, 17543.  CIL VI, 9331.  CIL VIII, 9371.  Alföldy, Konsulat und Senatorenstand unter der Antonien, p. 190.  Leunissen, Konsuln und Konsulare in der Zeit von Commodus bis Severus Alexander, p. 155.  Leunissen, Konsuln und Konsulare in der Zeit von Commodus bis Severus Alexander.  CIL VIII, 8828, CIL VIII, 10438, CIL VIII, 22619.  CIL V, 7473.  CIL XIV, 4285, AE 1971, 509, AE 1971, 510.  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. III, p. 695 ("Sallustius or Salustius", No. 1).  Suda, s. v. χυτροπους.  Simplicius, In Enchiridion Epicteti, p. m. 63.  Photius, codex ccxlii, p. 342 (ed. Bekker).  Cassius Dio, xl. 63, xlii. 52, xliii. 9.  Varro, apud Gellius, xvii. 18.  Appian, Bellum Civile, viii. 34.  Suetonius, De Illustribus Grammaticis, 15.  Drumann, Geschichte Roms, vol. vi, p. 693.  Dictionary of Greek and Latin Biography and Mythology, vol. III, pp. 697, 698 ("Gaius Sallustius Crispus").  Broughton, vol. II, pp. 217, 236, 296, 298, 309.  Tacitus, Annales III.30.3  Tacitus, Annales, i. 6, ii. 40, iii. 30.  Seneca the Younger, De Clementia, 10.  Pliny the Elder, xxxiv. 2.  Horace, Satirae, i. 2. 48, Carmina, ii. 2.  Suetonius, "The Life of Passienus Crispus". Bibliography Marcus Tullius Cicero, Epistulae ad Atticum, Epistulae ad Familiares, Epistulae ad Quintum Fratrem. Quintus Horatius Flaccus (Horace), Satirae (Satires), Carmina (Odes). Lucius Annaeus Seneca (Seneca the Younger), De Clementia (On Clemency). Gaius Plinius Secundus (Pliny the Elder), Historia Naturalis (Natural History). Publius Cornelius Tacitus, Annales. Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus, De Vita Caesarum (Lives of the Caesars, or The Twelve Caesars), De Illustribus Grammaticis (On the Illustrious Grammarians), De Viris Illustribus (Lives of Famous Men). Appianus Alexandrinus (Appian), Bellum Civile (The Civil War). Marcus Cornelius Fronto, Epistulae ad Verum (Letters to Lucius Verus). Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae (Attic Nights). Cassius Dio, Roman History. Simplicius of Cilicia, Commentarius in Enchiridion Epicteti (Commentary on the Enchiridion of Epictetus). Photius, Bibliotheca. Suda. Wilhelm Drumann, Geschichte Roms in seinem Übergang von der republikanischen zur monarchischen Verfassung, oder: Pompeius, Caesar, Cicero und ihre Zeitgenossen, Königsberg (1834–1844). 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, pp. 103–184 (1897). T. Robert S. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, American Philological Association (1952–1986). Edward Champlin, "Hadrian's Heir", in Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, vol. 21 (1976). Géza Alföldy, Konsulat und Senatorenstand unter der Antonien (The Consulate and Senatorial State under the Antonines), Rudolf Habelt, Bonn (1977). Paul A. Gallivan, "The Fasti for A.D. 70–96", in Classical Quarterly, vol. 31, pp. 186–220 (1981). 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). Categories: SallustiiRoman gentes And from THIS gens? Thanks

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Sallustio – Ossia: Grice  Sallustio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Sallustio For the Sallustii, I think the overwhelmingly Gricean figure is: Grice e Sallustio Historico namely Gaius Sallustius Crispus, the historian Sallust. He abandoned public life and devoted himself to writing history, producing the surviving works on the conspiracy of Catiline and the Jugurthine War. [GREXv2 | Word] Why him rather than the politicians and consuls? Because Sallust is one of the great Roman masters of insinuation. He is constantly concerned not merely with:  what happened,  but with  what character a deed reveals, what motive lies beneath an action, what corruption a fact manifests.  That is very close to Grice's concern with what is conveyed beyond the bare proposition.  Grice e Sallustio Speranza:  Quid est historia? (What is history?)  Grice:  Non mera narratio rerum gestarum. (Not merely a narration of events.)  Speranza:  Quid igitur? (Then what?)  Grice:  Narratio quae causas et mores investigat. (A narrative that investigates causes and character.)   The Gricean point Sallust is rarely satisfied with:  Catiline did X.  He wants:  What kind of man would do X?  And often:  What sort of society makes X possible?  That gap between event and interpretation is fertile ground for implicature. But my first choice remains Sallust A vignette: Speranza:  Historicus quid facit? (What does a historian do?)  Grice:  Dicit quid factum sit. (He says what happened.)  Speranza:  Hoc satis est? (Is that enough?)  Grice:  Sallustio non satis est. (For Sallust, it is not enough.)  Speranza:  Quid amplius quaerit? (What more does he seek?)  Grice:  Quid significent facta. (What the facts signify.)  +> Historical writing often aims at more than recording events; it seeks to disclose the motives, character, and larger meaning behind them. And that is why I think Gaius Sallustius Crispus is the most Gricean member of the gens: he is perpetually moving from what was literally done to what it reveals. [GREXv2 | Word]

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Sallustio – Ossia: Grice  Sallustio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Sallustio A second candidate: Sallustius Lucullus The governor of Britain whom Domitian allegedly executed because he referred to a new type of spear as lucullae, after himself. [GREXv2 | Word] That is almost absurdly Gricean. Hardie:  Why was he executed?  Grice:  Allegedly because he named a spear after himself.  Hardie:  Surely that cannot be the whole story.  Grice:  Precisely. Ha The reported reason invites the implicature:  +> the official explanation conceals the real one. and for the second, Lewis and Short record this? Thanks A nice question. For the specific anecdote of Sallustius Lucullus, the ancient source is Suetonius, who says that Domitian was offended because a new type of lance was called Lucullea after Lucullus. [thehistorianshut.com], [en.wikipedia.org] As for Lewis & Short, I do not find evidence in the sources I could verify that luculleus, -a, -um or lucullea (hasta/lancea) received a normal dictionary entry as an established Latin adjective. What I did find is the historical report itself:  Sallustius Lucullus "had equally offended Domitian by allowing a new type of lance to be called 'the Lucullan'." [thehistorianshut.com], [taylorfrancis.com]  That suggests a fascinating parallel with your earlier discussion of sputatilica. There are two possibilities:  A lexicalized word already accepted into the language. An ad hoc naming act: "Let this new spear be called the Lucullan spear."  The anecdote works even if the second is all that happened. Indeed, a Gricean reconstruction might be: Lucullus:  Haec lancea Lucullea vocabitur. (This lance shall be called Lucullan.)  Domitian:  Cur Lucullea? (Why Lucullan?)  Lucullus:  Quia mea est. (Because it is mine.)  Domitian:  Nimis de te ipso loqueris. (You speak too much of yourself.) Ha.The interesting thing is that the word's significance lies less in its dictionary meaning than in the speech act of naming. The implicature is:  +> Lucullus is important enough to have weapons named after him.  And that, on Suetonius' telling, is precisely what became dangerous. [thehistorianshut.com], [taylorfrancis.com] So, in contrast to sputatilica, where Rusius attacks the meaningfulness of a novel expression, the Lucullus anecdote concerns whether one may successfully attach one's own name to a new object. The issue is less lexical semantics than prestige conveyed by nomenclature. A very Roman problem.Ha. Indeed. Between Grice's 1948 and Grice's 1967, an American coined idio-lect, and Grice was pleased. Can you have a double run on lucullea, a spear -- named after Lucullus by himself. Did not stick. Thanks A second run suggests something quite interesting: the word seems not to have stuck at all. What we can verify is the anecdote preserved by Suetonius: Sallustius Lucullus, governor of Britain, allegedly offended Domitian by allowing a new type of spear (or lance) to be called Lucullea ("Lucullan"), i.e. named after himself. [en.wikipedia.org], [grokipedia.com] What I could not find is evidence that:  lucullea became a standard military term, Lewis & Short gave it a normal lexical entry as an established noun or adjective, later Latin writers regularly used the word.  The sources I found keep referring back to the same historical anecdote. [en.wikipedia.org], [GREXv2 | Word] That in itself is very suggestive. A Gricean comparison You mention idiolect. When the term idiolect was coined, it survived because speakers found it useful. It entered the technical vocabulary. With lucullea, we seem to have the opposite case:  A man gives a name to an innovation.  but  the linguistic community declines to adopt it.  The word survives only because the naming itself became historically noteworthy. [en.wikipedia.org], [grokipedia.com] One might imagine: Lucullus:  Haec hasta Lucullea vocabitur. (This spear shall be called the Lucullan spear.)  Roman army:  Very good, sir.  History:  And what was the spear called a generation later?  Silence. Ha. A Grice–Hardie vignette Hardie:  Did the word catch on?  Grice:  Apparently not.  Hardie:  Then where is it found?  Grice:  In the anecdote about its being coined.  Hardie:  A word remembered solely because it failed?  Grice:  A fate shared by many philosophical neologisms. Ha The contrast with sputatilica is delightful:  sputatilica survives because a critic mocked it. lucullea survives because an emperor supposedly disliked it. Neither seems to have become part of ordinary Latin.  And that is perhaps the most Gricean moral. A speaker may successfully mean something by a newly coined expression; that does not guarantee that the expression acquires a stable expression-meaning in the language. Grice's distinction between speaker's meaning and word meaning is almost tailor-made for cases like lucullea. and more to the point, Grice did use idio-lect and idio-syncrasy as applied to expression meaning, so he'll say that, "When/By uttering 'Pass me the lucullea [what would Latin be for that] Sallustius Lucullus means that his addressee is to pass him the spear of the type he designed." -- Within his idio-lect, as it were. Thanks -- maybe you can check who did coin 'idio-lect' anyway Thanks -- for Grice the lect in idio-lect is versatile. His example is a hand-wave as having idio-lectal meaning, even if no 'lectio' is involved. Thanks Yes — and this is a case where Grice's distinction between utterer's meaning and expression meaning is extremely useful. Suppose Sallustius Lucullus invents a new spear and calls it:  lucullea (hasta) ("the Lucullan spear")  according to the anecdote preserved by Suetonius. [en.wikipedia.org], [lexundria.com] A Gricean analysis would be: Utterer's meaning  Da mihi hastam Luculleam. (Pass me the Lucullan spear.)  By uttering this, Lucullus means that his addressee is to pass him the particular type of spear that he himself has designed. The success of the communication does not require that Lucullea already belong to public Latin. It only requires that speaker and hearer share enough background to recover the intended reference.  Grice would then say something like:  Within Lucullus' idiolect, Lucullea has an established use.  Only later does the further question arise:  Has the expression entered the language?  The evidence suggests that it did not. We know of the term chiefly because of the anecdote about Domitian. [en.wikipedia.org], [alatius.com] That contrasts nicely with:  idiolect  which did catch on. On your question about the term idiolect itself, the linguistic sources consistently trace it to Bernard Bloch in 1948. The OED's earliest evidence is from 1948, and it associates the coinage with Bloch. [oed.com], [wiki.ercpalac.info], [grokipedia.com] That date is amusingly relevant for Grice, since it falls exactly in the period of Meaning (1948).  And you are quite right about Grice's use of lect. For later linguists, an idiolect is often treated as a personal variety of speech. For Grice, however, the notion naturally extends much further. His examples include things like:  hand-waves, gestures, artificial expressions, pirots, obbles, private stipulations in a constructed language.  In that spirit, Lucullus might have an idiolect containing:  Lucullea  even if the term has never appeared in any lexicon, military manual, or public register. A Grice–Hardie reconstruction: Hardie:  Is Lucullea a Latin word?  Grice:  Not necessarily.  Hardie:  Then how can it mean anything?  Grice:  Because Lucullus means something by it.  Hardie:  To whom?  Grice:  To whoever is carrying the spear. Ha That is almost a textbook illustration of Grice's view that successful communication can precede, and need not imply, established expression-meaning. A word may have a perfectly serviceable idiolectal meaning long before it acquires a place in the common language. [oed.com], [wiki.ercpalac.info], [en.wikipedia.org] as per seminar with Potts (tutee). Grice: Today's topic: idiolect. I coined 'implicature' -- Sidonius coined implicatura -- Nothing happened. Potts: Nothing, sir? Grice: Nothing Roman +> dramatic. OTOH Lucullus calls his hasta lucullea -- Domizian disagrees -- The lucullea hasta remains -- Lucullus expires. Thanks Ha Very good. One can almost hear the tutorial in St. John's. Grice e Potts de Idioletto Grice:  Today's topic: idiolect.  Potts:  Bloch's word, sir?  Grice:  So it seems. 1948. An excellent year. [grokipedia.com], [GREXv2 | Word]  Potts:  Did you coin anything yourself?  Grice:  Implicature.  Potts:  And the Romans?  Grice:  Sidonius had implicatura.  Potts:  What became of it?  Grice:  Nothing.  Potts:  Nothing, sir?  Grice:  Nothing Roman.   No senate panic.   No imperial decree.   No executions. Ha  Potts:  Whereas Sallustius Lucullus?  Grice:  Quite.  Potts:  He names a spear after himself.  Grice:  So Suetonius says.   A new spear is called Lucullea. [oed.com], [arxiv.org]  Potts:  An idiolectal innovation?  Grice:  At first, yes.   "Pass me the Lucullea."   By uttering that expression, Lucullus means that the addressee is to pass him the particular spear of the type he devised.  Potts:  And then?  Grice:  Domitian disagrees. [oed.com], [droitromai...e-alpes.fr]   Hardie joins the seminar Hardie:  Which survived?  Grice:  The spear.  Hardie:  And Lucullus?  Grice:  Not so successfully. [oed.com], [droitromai...e-alpes.fr] Ha  There is actually a nice Gricean moral here. An expression may have:  utterer's meaning immediately; idiolectal currency within a small group; public expression-meaning if the community adopts it.  Lucullea seems to have reached (1), perhaps (2), but not obviously (3). It survives because historians mention the naming incident, not because the word became an ordinary Latin military term. [oed.com], [droitromai...e-alpes.fr] Hence: Grice:  A philosopher coins a word.   The world ignores it.   The philosopher survives.   A governor names a spear after himself.   The emperor notices.  Potts:  Moral?  Grice:  Coin neologisms.   Never coin them under Domitian. Ha Does this help? Apparently Grice would have a caveat. The reconstructed case is "Pass me the lucullea [lancea]" -- But other than that, Svetonio MENTIONS, does not use, the word -- and neither do later lexica -- hapax legomena almost -- there is a term for that -- lexeme never used except mentioned in dictionary or by Svetonio -- thanks Sallustius Lucullus was executed by the Roman Emperor Domitian around 89 or 93 AD. [1] The primary historical reasons for his death include: The "Lucullan" Lance: According to the Roman historian Suetonius, Domitian ordered his execution because Lucullus allowed a newly developed type of spear or lance to be named after himself ("the Lucullan") rather than the Emperor. This was viewed as an act of treasonous vanity and arrogance. [1, 2] Political Conspiracy: Modern historians suggest that the lance incident may have been a pretext. Lucullus, who was serving as the governor of Roman Britain, is strongly suspected of being involved in the failed rebellion of Lucius Antonius Saturninus against Domitian's regime. [1, 2] L'AI può commettere errori, quindi verifica le risposte what’s the lat eng? 4 siti The original Latin account of his death, recorded by the historian Suetonius in The Lives of the Caesars (Life of Domitian, 10.3), along with its English translation, is detailed below. [1, 2] The Latin Text "...Sallustium Lucullum Britanniae legatum, quod lanceas novae formae appellari Luculleas passus esset..." [1] The English Translation "...[Domitian executed] Sallustius Lucullus, governor of Britain, for allowing lances of a new pattern to be named 'Lucullean' after himself..." [1] Breakdown of the Latin Words Sallustium Lucullum: The name of the governor (written in the accusative grammatical case as the object of the execution). Britanniae legatum: The "legate (governor) of Britain". quod: "Because". lanceas novae formae: "Lances (spears) of a new shape/design". appellari Luculleas: "To be called Lucullean". passus esset: "He had permitted / allowed" (from the Latin verb patior). [1] If you're studying this text, would you like to: Explore the other bizzare execution pretexts Domitian used in this exact same passage? Look into the archaeological history of Roman lances in Britain? Examine the grammar structure used by Suetonius? did lexicographers take notice? how nova forma? 9 siti The short answer is no, lexicographers did not take special notice of “nova forma” as a specific phrase, but yes, they took massive notice of “Luculleas” because of it. [1] The phrase "nova forma" just means "a new shape/design" in Latin. To lexicographers, it is standard, everyday Latin. However, the exact nature of how this weapon was a nova forma (new design) has fascinated military historians and archaeologists for centuries. [1] Why Lexicographers Cared About Luculleas (Not Nova Forma) Lexicographers (dictionary makers) track unique, rare, or newly coined words (neologisms). [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] The Neologism: By allowing the spears to be named after himself, Lucullus created a new Latin adjective: Luculleus (meaning "of or belonging to Lucullus"). The Dictionary Entry: If you open a major Latin dictionary—like the authoritative Oxford Latin Dictionary(OLD) or the monumental Thesaurus Linguae Latinae (TLL)—you will find Luculleus listed specifically because of this exact sentence from Suetonius. [1] The Irony: Lucullus wanted his name immortalized by his new weapon. Instead, lexicographers only know the weapon existed because Domitian killed him for it. [1, 2] How was the lance a Nova Forma? Because Suetonius gives no technical details, military historians have had to look at late 1st-century archaeological finds in Britain to guess what made this lance a "new design". There are three leading theories: [1, 2] Theory What Was the "New Design"? Historical Context 1. The Ergonomic Grip A change in the shaft or weighting of the spear. Standard Roman cavalry lances (contus) required two hands. A nova forma might have allowed one-handed use with a shield. 2. The Head Shape A transition to a barbed or broader blade. Roman auxiliary units in Britain were shifting from standard throwing javelins to heavier thrusting spears with wider, diamond-shaped heads. 3. Material Innovation A new metal alloy or structural pin. Similar to the famous pilum (which had a soft iron neck that bent upon impact so enemies couldn't throw it back), Lucullus may have introduced a British-manufactured structural twist. Would you like to: Look at other words coined by Roman generals that made it into dictionaries? Explore the archaeological sites in Scotland where Lucullus's troops were stationed? See how the Oxford Latin Dictionary defines other Roman weapons? what Latin lexicon has this entry? 10 siti The specific entry for Luculleus (often cross-referenced under the plural form Luculleae for the lances) can be found in several of the most prominent Latin dictionaries: [1] Lewis and Short Latin Dictionary: This classic, widely used 19th-century reference explicitly records Luculleus as an adjective meaning "Of or belonging to a Lucullus". Its entry directly cites this exact passage from Suetonius’ Life of Domitian to define the term as a specific type of lance. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] Oxford Latin Dictionary (OLD): The standard modern authority for Classical Latin features the entry, using the citation to document the short-lived imperial military term. Thesaurus Linguae Latinae (TLL): The most comprehensive, monumental Latin dictionary in existence. It indexes every known use of every Latin word from earliest times down to 600 AD, explicitly capturing Sallustius Lucullus’ ill-fated linguistic creation. [1, 3, 4, 5] Because Suetonius is the sole classical author to use the word in this military context, these lexicons only include the weapon definition because of his account of the governor's execution. [1] Would you like to: See the exact formatting and text of how Lewis and Short defines this entry? Explore how these dictionaries handle other words created from Roman family names (like Caesarianus or Augusteus)? Learn more about how the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae compiles its massive word database? can you quote from short Lewis and thesaurus? 3 siti The Lewis and Short Latin Dictionary defines Luculleus as an adjective relating to the Lucullus family, specifically identifying Luculleae as a type of spear named after Sallustius Lucullus. The Thesaurus Linguae Latinae provides a more detailed, systematic analysis, categorizing the term Luculleae as a substantive noun referring to these specialized weapons. [1, 2, 3] Would you like me to translate any of the structural Latin abbreviations used by the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae? how detailed —can you quote? 4 siti Lewis and Short offers a concise definition for Luculleus with a single reference, whereas the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae (TLL) provides extensive, detailed analysis of the word's grammatical function, usage, and context, citing sources such as Suetonius. The TLL (Vol. VII, 2) specifically classifies the term as a substantive noun derived from a proper name and explains its meaning as a specific weapon type linked to Sallustius Lucullus. [1, 2, 3, 4] -- as per hypotheses below we can have a reconstructed latin dialogue (Eng. in round brackets) with +> implicatura as they discuss types of 'nova forma' possibly involved. Thanks Yes, this helps, and I would add a Gricean caveat precisely of the sort you suggest. The Suetonian Latin is:  Sallustium Lucullum Britanniae legatum, quod lanceas novae formae appellari Luculleas passus esset ... ("[He executed] Sallustius Lucullus, governor of Britain, because he had allowed lances of a new design to be called Lucullean.") [oed.com], [arxiv.org]  Notice what Suetonius does not do. He does not write:  Lucullea mihi da. ("Pass me the Lucullan one.")  Nor:  Lucullea est arma optima. ("The Lucullean is the best weapon.")  He is not using the word as part of military vocabulary. He is mentioning it while reporting a naming event. This is exactly the Gricean distinction between:  use, mention.  The evidence is therefore weaker than for a genuinely circulating term.  A Gricean caveat Suppose Lucullus says:  Da mihi lanceam Luculleam. (Pass me the Lucullan lance.)  Grice could perfectly well analyse this:  By uttering "Da mihi lanceam Luculleam", Lucullus meant that his addressee was to pass him the particular type of spear that he himself had devised.  That is a case of utterer's meaning. But from this it does not follow that:  Lucullea had become part of public Latin.  The term may have existed only within:  Lucullus' staff, his regiment, his workshop, or his personal idiolect.   Idiolect On the history of the word:  idiolect appears to have been introduced by Bernard Bloch in 1948. The OED's earliest evidence is from Bloch in 1948. [grokipedia.com], [GREXv2 | Word]  This is deliciously relevant to Grice. For Grice's notion of expression-meaning often works perfectly well at the level of a single speaker's practices. Indeed, as you note, Grice's examples include:  hand-waves, gestures, artificial expressions, private stipulations,  where no lectio in the ordinary linguistic sense is involved.  Hapax? The technical term is indeed:  hapax legomenon ("said once").  Strictly speaking, however, Lucullea may not be a pure hapax in the strongest philological sense if later lexicographers quote Suetonius. The lexicographers are not independent occurrences; they are recycling the same occurrence. A Gricean might say:  The lexical career of Lucullea consists largely in being mentioned as an example of itself. Ha The word survives not because Romans kept using it but because scholars kept talking about Suetonius talking about it.  Grice, Potts, and Lucullus Grice:  I coined implicature.  Potts:  And then?  Grice:  It entered the language.  Potts:  Lucullus coined Lucullea.  Grice:  Domitian entered the conversation. [oed.com], [droitromai...e-alpes.fr]   A reconstructed dialogue on the nova forma Since Suetonius says only:  lanceas novae formae ("lances of a new design"), [oed.com], [arxiv.org]  he gives no technical details. The archaeological theories you quoted are modern conjectures rather than ancient evidence. So any dialogue must remain imaginative. Lucullus:  Ecce lancea novae formae. (Behold a lance of a new design.)  Tribunus:  Quid novi habet? (What is new about it?)  Lucullus:  Levius fertur. (It is carried more easily.)  +> Perhaps the balance has been improved.  Alter tribunus:  An ferrum mutatum est? (Or has the iron head been changed?)  Lucullus:  Fieri potest. (That may be so.)  +> The innovation concerns the point.  Lucullus:  Appellabitur Lucullea. (It shall be called the Lucullan lance.)  Tribunus:  Cur? (Why?)  Lucullus:  Quia mea inventio est. (Because it is my invention.)  +> The inventor may name the thing invented.  Domitianus (offstage):  Immo non. (On the contrary, no.) Ha That, I suspect, is the most Roman ending possible. The weapon's design vanished into obscurity; the naming of it survived because it allegedly annoyed an emperor. [oed.com], [droitromai...e-alpes.fr] THis is strict different from 'sputatilius' or Lewis Carroll's brillig -- this is not even Sidonius's implicatura -- fem. or neut. plural of implicare gerundive -- or Grice's implicature --. This is the Lucullean. With Lucullus -- Would '-eanus' a formative suffix? Thanks Yes—this is a rather different phenomenon. With:  Sisenna's sputatilica, Carroll's brillig, Grice's implicature,  the issue is largely one of meaning. A hearer asks:  What does the word mean?  With:  Luculleae (lanceae Luculleae),  the issue is primarily one of naming. Suetonius reports that Sallustius Lucullus allowed lances of a new design to be called Luculleae. [oed.com], [arxiv.org] The hearer does not ask:  What does Lucullea mean?  The answer is already obvious:  "the Lucullan one," "the one associated with Lucullus."  The question is rather:  May one attach one's own name to the object?  That is why the word feels much closer to:  Caesareanus, Augusteus, Hadrianeus,  than to sputatilica or implicature.  On the suffix, yes. Latin has a number of productive name-derived adjective suffixes:  -ianus (Caesarianus, Hadrianus) -inus (Sabinus) -icus (Atticus) -eus / -eus, -ea, -eum in certain formations  What Suetonius reports is:  Luculleas (feminine plural, agreeing with lanceas). [oed.com], [arxiv.org]  So the implied singular would be:  lancea Lucullea (a Lucullan lance).  The morphology is therefore perfectly transparent. A Roman hearing:  lancea Lucullea  would probably understand immediately:  +> "the spear named after Lucullus."  No semantic puzzle arises.  Hence a Grice–Potts exchange: Potts:  Is Lucullea a neologism?  Grice:  In one sense.  Potts:  Like implicature?  Grice:  Not really.  Potts:  Why not?  Grice:  Because I coined a term. Lucullus coined a label. Ha Or more technically: Grice:  Implicature seeks entry into the language. Lucullea seeks attachment to an object.  The first is a candidate for public expression-meaning. The second is almost a proper-name derivative. Which is why, as you nicely observe, Lucullea survives chiefly as a reported naming event rather than as a living lexical item. Suetonius mentions the name; he does not appear to be using it as established military vocabulary. [oed.com], [arxiv.org] And that is perhaps the final irony:  Implicature outlived Grice. Lucullea may not even have outlived Lucullus. Ha. Strictly, 'implicatura' (Sidonius) different from 'brilling' or gyre -- borogove -- etc -- implicare -- infinitive (lexical entry) implicaturum part of the conjugation -- implicatura neut. plural or fem. out of conjugation. borogove -- totally whimsical. 'Luculleus' -- pertaining to luculleus. He didn't bring a neologism as Carroll's borogove. Perhaps this was what annoyed Domitian (just kidding). Let's pretend it was and have a reconstructed Lat. dialogue. "At your orders, sir, -- Sallustius has ceased to exist." Thanks (Domizian's argument is that by keeping 'lancea' but instead of providing a lexeme for the 'nova forma' he just uses a 'patronymic' as it were -- Mrs. Domizian: "Your governor could very well have asked you permission to name the lancea after you -- since it's your imperium over britannia -- lancea domitiana -- not lucullea. "Indeed". Thanks Ha Very good. And I think your linguistic point is sound. There is a scale here:                              TypeExampleordinary lexical itemhasta, lanceamorphological derivative from existing Latinimplicatura, Luculleatechnical coinageimplicaturewhimsical nonce-wordbrillig, borogove, slithyalleged monster-formsputatilica On this scale, Lucullea is really very tame. It is not a Carrollian invention at all. A Roman hearing:  lanceae Luculleae  would immediately parse:  "Lucullan lances," "lances associated with Lucullus."  The semantic contribution is transparent. The issue is not:  What does the word mean?  but:  Why is the new weapon named after him?  In that sense, the problem is political rather than lexical.  Grice e Domitiano de Lancea Lucullea Domitianus:  Quid novi ex Britannia audimus? (What news do we hear from Britain?)  Nuntius:  Lanceae novae formae factae sunt. (Lances of a new design have been made.)  Domitianus:  Optime. (Excellent.)  Nuntius:  Luculleae appellantur. (They are called "Lucullean".)  Domitianus:  Quid dixisti? (What did you say?) Ha  Later Domitiani uxor:  Cur irasceris? (Why are you angry?)  Domitianus:  Quia novum telum nomen habet. (Because the new weapon has a name.)  Uxor:  Quod nomen? (Which name?)  Domitianus:  Lucullea. (Lucullan.)  Uxor:  Quid mali est? (What is wrong with that?)  Domitianus:  Luculli nomen est. (It is Lucullus' name.)   The Imperial Theory of Semantics Uxor:  Sed novae formae est. (But it is of a new design.)  Domitianus:  Ita. (Yes.)  Uxor:  Ergo novum nomen requirit. (Then it requires a new name.)  Domitianus:  Recte. (Correct.)  Uxor:  Cur non Lucullea? (Why not Lucullan?)  Domitianus:  Quia Britannia mea est. (Because Britain is mine.) Ha  The Correct Naming Convention Uxor:  Potuit te rogare. (He could have asked you.)  Domitianus:  Primum rogare debuit. (He ought to have asked first.)  Uxor:  Et tunc? (And then?)  Domitianus:  Lancea Domitiana appellata esset. (It would have been called the Domitian lance.)  +> The imperium belongs to the emperor. +> Therefore the honorific naming privilege belongs to the emperor.Ha  Final Scene Praefectus:  Imperator, quid de Lucullo statuendum est? (Emperor, what is to be decided regarding Lucullus?)  Domitianus:  Lancea Lucullea maneat. (Let the Lucullan lance remain.)  Praefectus:  Et Lucullus? (And Lucullus?)  Domitianus:  Lucullus non maneat. (Let Lucullus not remain.) Ha Praefectus (postea):  Imperator, factum est. (Emperor, it has been done.)  Domitianus:  Quid? (What?)  Praefectus:  Lucullus desiit exsistere. (Lucullus has ceased to exist.)   A Gricean moral might be:  Lucullea was never like brillig. Nobody needed to discover its meaning. The problem was that everyone understood it perfectly.Ha and not that Svet. is guarded: 'passus esset' -- he allowed -- perhaps the troops were using the word and he just ALLOWED it? Thatnks Yes, that's a very important philological point. Suetonius does not say:  quod lanceas novae formae Luculleas appellaverat ("because he had called lances of a new type 'Lucullean'").  Nor:  quod nomen imposuerat ("because he had imposed the name").  Instead he writes:  quod lanceas novae formae appellari Luculleas passus esset ("because he had allowed lances of a new design to be called Lucullean"). [oed.com], [arxiv.org]  The verb is:  patior → passus esset "had allowed", "had permitted", "had tolerated".  That is noticeably more guarded. A strict reading leaves open several possibilities: Scenario A Lucullus himself coined the term.  "Let these be called Luculleae."  Suetonius does not explicitly say this. Scenario B His officers coined it.  "The men have started calling them Luculleae."  Lucullus does not stop them. This fits passus esset very naturally. Scenario C The troops coined it.  "Pass me one of the Luculleae."  The nickname spreads through the army. Lucullus acquiesces. Again, perfectly compatible with passus esset.  This is actually more Gricean. The interesting speech act may not be:  Lucullus naming the weapon.  but:  the linguistic community around him naming it.  The relevant fact becomes:  he allowed the usage to continue.   Hence a reconstruction: Miles:  Da mihi lanceam Luculleam. (Pass me the Lucullan lance.)  Alter miles:  Cur Luculleam appellas? (Why do you call it Lucullan?)  Miles:  Quia sub Lucullo inventa est. (Because it was devised under Lucullus.)  +> Associated with Lucullus.  Later: Tribunus:  Milites has lanceas Luculleas vocant. (The soldiers call these lances Lucullan.)  Lucullus:  Vocent. (Let them.) Ha. That tiny:  Vocent. ("Let them.")  is much closer to Suetonius' passus esset than a grand act of official naming.  And from Domitian's perspective, the offense would be even greater. Not merely:  "He named a spear after himself."  but:  "The army is naming things after him, and he is not stopping it."  A paranoid emperor would hear the implicature:  +> Lucullus has become a focus of personal loyalty.  Indeed, the phrase appellari Luculleas passus esset almost sounds as though Suetonius is distancing himself from the charge:  "the official reason was that he had allowed these weapons to be called Lucullean."  The wording itself invites the suspicion that this was a pretext rather than the whole story. And that, I think, is exactly why modern historians tend to look behind the lance anecdote for political causes. [oed.com], [arxiv.org] Indeed. It is never said that he desgined the 'nova forma' -- he wouldn't. lnacae appelari (passive) passus esset -- 'allowed to be appelated (sic) Luculleae -- -- is this 'passus esset -- agentive? As in 'He failed to see it (having tried). Perhaps it was unbeknownst to him -- would that be consistent with 'passus esset'? Thanks -- Sort of: They had to be called somehow -- these new-form lancaea -- someone else mistake (or imprudence, or inaptitude) costs Sallustius his life. Domizian: "Aptly Called Lucullean". Not so fast. Thanks -- in fact Eco in Name of the Rose ends with rose gets rotten, name remains -- from Roma may perish but not the name of Roma. Thanks Yes. I think the philological weight falls precisely on passus esset. Suetonius writes:  quod lanceas novae formae appellari Luculleas passus esset ("because he had allowed lances of a new design to be called Lucullean"). [oed.com], [arxiv.org]  Notice what the syntax does:  appellari = passive infinitive ("to be called") Luculleas = predicate adjective passus esset = "had allowed", "had suffered/permitted"  The focus is not on an act of naming:  Luculleas appellavit. (He called them Lucullean.)  nor even:  Luculleas appellandas curavit. (He arranged for them to be called Lucullean.)  Instead Suetonius formulates it more weakly:  they were being called Luculleae, and he allowed that state of affairs to continue.  That is a significant distinction. Could it have been unbeknownst to him? Strictly speaking, I would hesitate. Patior normally implies some degree of awareness or non-interference. If I say:  hoc passus est ("he allowed this"),  the natural implication is:  he knew of it and did not stop it.  I do not think the most natural reading is:  he was completely ignorant of it.  For that Latin would more naturally use something like:  nesciens (unknowingly)  or a construction stressing ignorance. So I would rank the possibilities: Most natural The troops or officers call the weapon Lucullea. Lucullus knows. Lucullus does not object.  passus esset.  Also possible Lucullus quietly approves. He does not officially decree the name. But he lets it stand.  passus esset.  Less natural The term circulates entirely without his knowledge. That seems harder to reconcile with Suetonius' wording.  The real Gricean point The remarkable thing is that Suetonius does not even say Lucullus invented the weapon. He says only:  lanceas novae formae ("lances of a new design"). [oed.com], [arxiv.org]  Nothing there attributes the innovation to Lucullus. Indeed, your reconstruction may be closer to the literal text: Miles A:  Quomodo has lanceas appellabimus? (What shall we call these lances?)  Miles B:  Luculleas. (Lucullean.)  +> They are associated with Lucullus. Later: Tribunus:  Milites eas Luculleas vocant. (The soldiers call them Lucullean.)  Lucullus:  Vocent. (Let them.)  And years later: Domitianus:  Passus est? (He allowed it?)  Praefectus:  Ita. (Yes.) Ha Eco and the name Your comparison with Eco's ending is apt. The weapon may disappear. The innovation may disappear. The governor may disappear. What survives is the name:  Lucullea.  But in a peculiarly attenuated form. The word survives not because Romans kept using it, but because Suetonius reported that it had been used. [oed.com], [arxiv.org] In that sense, Lucullea is almost a word whose historical existence consists in being mentioned rather than used. A Gricean might put it:  The lance may have perished. Lucullus certainly perished. The expression survives because someone reported that someone allowed it to be used.  Which is a rather Roman version of:  stat nomen, res fugit. (The name remains; the thing slips away.)Ha Hence my reference to see if you can double check with forms like 'he failed to stop' -- implicature: he tried. but now conversationally used even if he did not. pasus esset appelari? Thanks Yes, and I think your comparison with English conversational uses of fail is exactly the right place to look. Consider:  He failed to stop them.  Semantically, that often suggests:  he tried to stop them and did not succeed.  But conversationally we also use it in a weaker way:  he did not stop them,  without committing ourselves to any attempt. Grice would distinguish:  what is strictly encoded, what is commonly implicated.  Now with Suetonius:  lanceas novae formae appellari Luculleas passus esset ("he had allowed lances of a new design to be called Lucullean"). [oed.com], [arxiv.org]  The verb is patior. Strictly, passus esset means:  he allowed, he permitted, he tolerated.  It does not itself mean:  he coined the name, he approved the name, he designed the weapon, he actively promoted the term.  Nor does it mean:  he unsuccessfully tried to stop it.  Quite the reverse. The minimal content is:  the usage existed, and he did not prevent it.  A legalistic Domitian could therefore reason:  The troops called them Luculleae. Lucullus knew. Lucullus failed to suppress the designation. Therefore Lucullus "allowed" it.  Whether Lucullus positively encouraged the name remains unstated.  A reconstruction exploiting the ambiguity: Tribunus:  Milites has lanceas Luculleas vocant. (The soldiers call these lances Lucullean.)  Lucullus:  Vocent. (Let them.)  +> He tolerates the usage.  But an even weaker reconstruction is possible: Tribunus:  Milites has lanceas Luculleas vocant. (The soldiers call these lances Lucullean.)  Lucullus:  Quid ad me? (What is that to me?)  +> He does nothing. Years later: Domitianus:  Passus est appellari Luculleas. (He allowed them to be called Lucullean.) Ha  And this returns us to your original point. Unlike:  sputatilica, brillig, borogove, Grice's implicature,  we are not dealing with the invention of a mysterious lexical item. The phrase means transparently:  "Lucullan."  The whole issue is:  Who allowed this naming?  Indeed, the wording of Suetonius is so guarded that one almost hears the historian saying:  "The official charge was that he had allowed them to be called Lucullean."  The very choice of passus esset tends to weaken Lucullus' agency. He is not represented as:  inventor, promulgator, lexicographer.  Merely as someone who did not stop a designation from circulating. [oed.com], [arxiv.org] Which makes the anecdote all the more Roman:  The word survives. The spear vanishes. The governor dies. And the only explicit act attributed to him is not naming the weapon, but failing to object to the name. Ha Exactly. With a busy governorship, he couldn't have cared less -- 'he did not prevent it' or 'failed to supress designation' with 'fail' not entailing 'tried'-- the 'usage' reaches Domizian --> excution -- for not something that he did -- thanks -- after all this is our entry for our hero "S." Luculleus. Thanks. I suppose historians of military Roman britain may exactly know what new forma that was, too. Thanks Yes, I think your reading is actually closer to the wording than the popular retelling. The modern anecdote tends to run:  "Lucullus invented a new spear and named it after himself."  But Suetonius' Latin is much weaker:  quod lanceas novae formae appellari Luculleas passus esset ("because he had allowed lances of a new design to be called Lucullean"). [oed.com], [arxiv.org]  Three points follow. 1. Suetonius does not say Lucullus designed the weapon He says only:  lanceas novae formae ("lances of a new design"). [oed.com], [arxiv.org]  The innovation belongs to the lance, not necessarily to Lucullus. A governor in Britain might have had far more pressing matters than weapons nomenclature.  2. Suetonius does not say Lucullus named it He says:  appellari Luculleas ("to be called Lucullean"). [oed.com], [arxiv.org]  Passive. The naming is presented as a usage circulating among others. One can easily imagine: Miles:  Da mihi Luculleam. (Pass me the Lucullan one.)  and the designation spreading through camp slang.  3. His only explicit act is passus esset And that is exactly your point. The charge is not:  nomen imposuit (he imposed the name),  nor:  appellavit (he called it that),  but:  passus esset (he allowed it).  The most economical reading is:  He knew of the designation and did not suppress it.  Not:  He actively promoted it.  And certainly not:  He launched a branding campaign for the weapon. Ha  A Domitianic reconstruction Nuntius:  Milites has lanceas Luculleas vocant. (The soldiers call these lances Lucullean.)  Domitianus:  Quis hoc nomen imposuit? (Who imposed this name?)  Nuntius:  Nemo, Caesar. (No one, Caesar.)  Domitianus:  Ergo quis id passus est? (Then who allowed it?)  Nuntius:  Lucullus. (Lucullus.) Ha In other words, the offense becomes one of omission, not commission.  And that is perhaps the most tragic aspect of the entry on Sallustius Lucullus. What survives in the literary record is not:  a battle won, a province governed, a reform enacted,  but a report that he allegedly allowed a new weapon to be called Lucullean. [oed.com], [arxiv.org] As for the nova forma itself, I found modern discussions proposing possibilities, but the ancient source gives no technical description. The sources I saw explicitly state only that they were "lances of a new design"; they do not specify what the innovation was. [oed.com], [arxiv.org] A very Gricean moral:  The lance disappears. The design disappears. Lucullus disappears. The name survives because Suetonius mentions that somebody allowed it to be used.Ha

 

 Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Sallustio – Ossia: Grice e Sallustio: la ragione conversazionale a Roma. Note sull’Empedoclea. Il Gruppo di Gioco di H. P. Grice Saturnino Secondo Sallustio (Roma, Lazio): la ragione conversazionale del divino e dei divini. The author, according to some, of Salutio’s ‘On the gods and the world order,’ dedicated to Giuliano. Accademia. So in all these Sallustio, Salustio, Salutio -- we have one gens only -- can you separate the Grice entries in chronological or thematic terms? thanks -- Yes. The cleanest separation is to treat these as two quite different Sallustii, despite the orthographic wobble between Sallustio, Salustio, and Salutio. Chronologically first comes Gaius Sallustius Crispus, the late republican historian. Under him I would keep two internal sub-entries, not because there are two men, but because Speranza is using two different philosophical angles on the same man. One is the historical-moral Sallust. This is the Sallust of De coniuratione Catilinae, Bellum Iugurthinum, and the Histories: the Roman historian of corruption, virtus, animus and corpus, moral exempla, and the implicit pedagogy of narrative. Here the Gricean contact is through disciplined inference in historiography. The reader is expected to gather judgment from arrangement, omission, and tonal control rather than from explicit doctrinal statement. The other is the Empedoclean Sallust. This is still Gaius Sallustius Crispus, or at least the probable identification, but now under the title Empedoclea. Here the focus is not Roman political historiography but philosophical compilation, reception, and didactic mediation. Speranza treats this as a second thematic face of the same Sallust: not the historian of Rome’s crisis, but the Roman transmitter of Empedocles, perhaps coloured by Pythagorean interest. So chronologically it belongs to the same man, but thematically it deserves its own heading: Sallust the compiler of Greek philosophical matter for Roman readers. Then much later, and entirely separately, comes Saturninus Secundus Sallustius or Salutius, the fourth-century imperial statesman and neoplatonic associate of Julian. This is the author, or probable author, of De diis et mundo. Here the theme is no longer moral historiography or Empedoclean transmission, but metaphysical theology: the divine, the gods, world-order, and the relation between discourse and a prior cosmic intelligibility. This Sallustius belongs under late antiquity, imperial administration, and neoplatonism, not under the late republican Roman historian. So if Grice wants a tidy order, I would suggest this. First, Sallustio Crispo, Gaio. Under that, two thematic sub-entries: historian of Roman moral-political decline compiler or transmitter in the Empedoclea Second, Sallustio or Salutio, Saturnino Secondo. Under that: late imperial neoplatonist and man of state De diis et mundo and the metaphysics of divine order That way one keeps one gens only if one wants, namely the gens Sallustia behind both names in a broad naming sense, but one does not confuse the late republican historian with the late antique philosopher-administrator. If you want the driest possible catalogue formula, I would write it like this in chat. Sallustio I: Gaius Sallustius Crispus. Late republic. Historical reason, moral exempla, Roman decline. Secondary thematic subdivision: Empedoclea. Sallustio II: Saturninus Secundus Sallustius or Salutius. Late empire. Neoplatonic theology, Julian, De diis et mundo. And if you want the thematic contrast stated in one sentence. The first Sallust is about how Rome should be read; the second Sallustius is about how the cosmos should be read. Speranza thinks that Grice's focus on the Sallust of the Empedoclea, while knowing that this is the same as the historian, is to prove the fact that one's philosophical production may be deemed of less general or scholarly interest -- or was just not preserved. Empedocles was quite riske --Sicilian, and greek Speaking -- for Sallust to spend much on him, and I think Cicero (or Tullio if we go by gens) makes a pun that only Sallust understood Empedocle -- and how you are sayign that they were possibly NOT the same person? Thanks Yes — the strongest current view is that the historian and the Empedoclea author are probably the same [Gaius Sallustius Crispus], but not with absolute certainty. So I was not saying “they are not the same person”; I was saying that one should phrase the identification cautiously. The reason for caution is simple. The evidence for the Empedoclea is extremely thin. We do not possess the poem. We have only external notices, above all the famous remark in Cicero to Quintus about reading “Sallusti Empedoclea,” and from that alone one must infer who this Sallustius is. Since the most famous Sallustius of the period is the historian Gaius Sallustius Crispus, the natural and usually preferred identification is indeed with him. But because the evidence is so scant, scholars often say “probably” rather than “certainly.” So Speranza’s instinct is a good one. Grice’s focus on the Empedoclea is philosophically shrewd because it reminds us that the surviving canon of a thinker may be accidental. A man may have had wider philosophical interests than posterity preserved, or posterity may have preferred the politically and rhetorically useful works. In Sallust’s case the historical monographs survived and the Empedoclean or philosophical work did not. That is exactly the sort of asymmetry Speranza likes to exploit. And yes, Empedocles was a risky choice in more than one sense. He was Sicilian, Greek-speaking, cosmological, poetic, and doctrinally strange enough to look simultaneously venerable and dangerous to a Roman moralist. For a Roman historian-politician to compose an Empedoclea, if that is what happened, suggests a much broader philosophical appetite than one would guess from the Catiline and Jugurtha alone. On the Cicero remark, the joke is not quite that “only Sallust understood Empedocles,” but something near that line of teasing exaggeration. The point of the letter is playful, hyperbolic, and slightly cruel in the normal Ciceronian way. He says, in effect, that if Quintus reads Lucretius he will count as a man, but if he reads Sallustius’s Empedoclea he will scarcely count as human. The joke depends on the poem’s difficulty, extravagance, or wilful obscurity, not necessarily on a claim that no one except Sallust himself understood it. Still, the insinuation is much the same: this is rarified fare, and perhaps too rarified. citeturn21doc? So the neat answer is this. I am not denying the identification with the historian. I am saying that the best formula is: the Empedoclea is generally attributed to Gaius Sallustius Crispus, and that attribution is plausible and commonly accepted, but the evidence is too thin for absolute certainty. That is the ordinary scholarly caution. And Grice’s broader point survives intact either way. Whether or not one presses the identification to certainty, the Empedoclea shows that the Sallustian name carried philosophical ambition beyond the works posterity kept. That is exactly why Speranza is right to linger there. Gaio Sallustio Crispo (Roma, Lazio): la ragione conversazionale EMPEDOCLEA. In the Empedoclea Sallust can be read as practicing, avant la lettre, a form of reason‑governed meaning that closely anticipates what Grice later theorizes explicitly as conversational rationality: Sallust does not present Empedocles as a system‑builder in the abstract but as a figure whose doctrines acquire force through arrangement, selection, and the moral expectations shared with his Roman reader, so that understanding depends less on stated theses than on the reader’s capacity to draw disciplined inferences from what Sallust foregrounds, juxtaposes, or leaves unsaid; Grice’s theory of conversational meaning formalizes this same structure by claiming that rational communication works through inferential recovery under cooperative norms rather than through the literal content alone, and in this sense Sallust’s Empedoclea already operates Grice’s insight historically, treating reason as something exercised in interpretive uptake rather than imposed dogmatically, with philosophical sense emerging from guided inference, pragmatic restraint, and the assumption that a competent reader will recognize what is meant by what is merely said. He assembles a collection of materials by and about Empedocle di Girgenti. Empedoclea.  GRICEVS: Sallusti, audio te Empedoclem ex Girgento Romam transtulisse non corpore sed ratione, quod mihi valde conversationale videtur. SALLVSTIVS: Ita est, Grice, nam sapientia quo longius iter facit, eo meliores implicaturas relinquit. GRICEVS: Cave tamen ne quis dicat te plus colligere carmina quam sensus, cum ego semper quaeram quid lector inferre possit. SALLVSTIVS: Rideat quis volet, Grice, dum lector intellegit me non tantum narrare sed significare. Sallustio Crispo, Gaio (a. u. c. DCXCVIII). Empedoclea. Roma. Gaio Sallustio Crispo (Amiterno, L’Aquila, Abruzzo): la ragione conversazionale a Roma – Grice and S. converge on a view of reason not as abstract calculation but as a norm-governed practice embedded in historically situated discourse, though they articulate it in radically different idioms: Sallust, writing as a Roman historian shaped by moral crisis and political collapse, treats reason as something exercised through narrative exempla, where what is said, hinted at, or strategically omitted in historiography guides judgment about virtus, corruptio, and the tension between animus and corpus, while Grice, working in analytic philosophy, reconstructs reason as operating through cooperative expectations that govern conversational meaning, where implicature, rather than explicit assertion, carries the rational force of much human communication; in Sallust, rationality is inseparable from ethical formation and the historian’s implicit appeal to shared Roman standards of judgment—reason works because the reader recognizes what follows from Catiline’s deeds without needing it stated—whereas in Grice, rationality is formalized as the hearer’s capacity to recover intended meaning by assuming rational cooperation; yet both share the insight that meaning and reason arise not from what is baldly said but from what an informed interlocutor is entitled to infer, whether that interlocutor is a Roman citizen reading moral history or a conversational partner interpreting an utterance, so that Sallust’s moral historiography and Grice’s pragmatics can be read as structurally aligned accounts of reason functioning through disciplined inference rather than through explicit doctrine. -- la storia della filosofia romana come fonte d’essempli morali – chè cosa fa un saggio ‘romano’? Storico. Può anche darsi che adere la setta dei crotonesi. Tribuno della plebe e senatore, espulso dal senato per motivi morali, e probabilmente perchè fautore di GIULIO Cesare, che lo nomina questore, pretore nella guerra africana e pro-console della Numidia. Dopo la morte di GIULIO Cesare abbandona la vita pubblica per dedicarsi completamente agli studi -- La congiura di Catilina, La guerra giugurtina, Le Storie. A lui venne rivolta l’accusa di essere stato complice dei sacrilegi di NIGIDIO  Figulo. Certamente lui spesso insiste nei suoi saggi sulla opposizione di anima e corpo. Parla di un nume divino che veglia sulla condotta dei mortali e accenna a sanzioni nell’oltretomba. È quindi probabile che allo storico debba essere identificato quel Sallustio che scrive un "Empedoclea" per esporre le dottrine del filosofo da Girgenti, tutte colorate di Pitagorismo. Cicero's letter to his brother Quintus is best known for containing the sole explicit contemporary reference to Lucretius's “De rerum natura.” But it is also notable as the source of the only extant reference of any kind to another presumably philosophical didactic poem, Sallustius's “Empedoclea” (Q. fr. = SB): “Lucretii poemata, ut scribis, ita sunt: multis luminibus ingenii, multae tamen artis. sed, cum ueneris. uirum te putabo, si Sallusti “Empedoclea” legeris; hominem non putabo.” “Lucretius' poems are just as you write: they show many flashes of inspiration, but many of skill too. But more of that when you come. I shall think you a man, if you read Sallustius' Empedoclea; I shan't think you a human being.” Empedoclea.  GRICEVS: Sallvsti, salve! Philosophus Spes nuper mihi surrisit et dixit: “Sperare est argumentari.” Ego autem hodie, Romae, de Empedocle cogito—de illo, quem quidam potius Girgentinvm quam “Empedoclem” appellant. SALLVSTIVS: Salve, Grice. De Empedocle dicis? Ego quidem Empedoclea collegi—nonnulla dicta, nonnulla carmina—ut sapientiam eius Romani discant, non solum audito nomine sed intellecto loco. GRICEVS: Non dicam quid soleam facere cum nominibus—sed, si quis “Occam” apud nos vocet Vicus Occami, cur non liceat etiam Empedoclem ad patriam reducere… praesertim cum “nomen” saepe plus sonet quam “res”? SALLVSTIVS: Implicatura tua, Grice, topographica est—ut certe Spes consentiet—etsi Empedocles ipse putabat Girgentum non locum esse, sed LOCVM. Nam cum philosophum nomine mutas in toponymum, tacite doces: non tantum quis dixerit, sed unde dixerit—et quo pacto locus ipse fiat argumentum. Sallustio Crispo, Gaio (a. u. c. DCLXXXXI). De coniuratione Catilinae.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salonio – Ossia: Grice e Salonio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Salonio. The gens Salonia was a plebeian family at ancient Rome. Members of this gens are first mentioned as early as the fourth century BC, but few of them attained any of the higher offices of the Roman state, until the latter part of the first century AD, when they married into the imperial family.[1]  Origin The nomen Salonius belongs to a large class of gentilicia formed from words ending in -o, using the suffix -onius. The root of the name is salo, a salt-dealer, from sal, salt, and indicates that an ancestor of the Salonii was probably a dealer in salt, one of the most important commodities of antiquity.[2]  Members This list includes abbreviated praenomina. For an explanation of this practice, see filiation. Publius Salonius, military tribune in 342 BC, had been either tribune or centurion primus pilus for several consecutive years. The dictator Marcus Valerius Corvus, in settling a mutiny, agreed to the soldiers' demand that nobody who had been military tribune should subsequently become a centurion, as Salonius had opposed their actions. The senate initially rejected this concession, but agreed when Salonius himself urged its passage in the interests of harmony.[3][4] Gaius Salonius, one of the commissioners appointed to establish a colony at Tempsa in Bruttium in 194 BC. In 173, he was a member of another commission, this time to apportion unoccupied land in Liguria and Cisalpine Gaul to new settlers.[5][6] Quintus Salonius Sarra, praetor in 192 BC, was assigned the province of Sardinia.[7] Marcus Salonius, one of Cato's subordinates, whose daughter's hand in marriage Cato sought, when he was an old man.[8] Salonia M. f., the second wife of Cato, and mother of Marcus Porcius Cato Salonianus, born when his father was eighty years old.[8][9] Salonia, a Roman matron whose son, Matidius, perhaps the brother-in-law of Trajan, was appointed to the senate by Claudius during the emperor's censorship.[10] Gaius Salonius Matidius Patruinus, probably governor of Germania Superior early in the reign of Vespasian, had been praetor in an uncertain year, and was one of the Arval Brethren at the time of his death in AD 78. He married Ulpia Marciana, the sister of Trajan, and was the grandfather of the Roman empress Vibia Sabina. Salonia Matidia, the niece of Trajan, and mother of the empress Vibia Sabina. Salonia Palestrice, the wife of Marcus Ulpius Hermia, a freedman of Trajan, who was buried at Ampelum in Dacia, aged fifty-five, with a monument from his wife and his freedman, Diogenes, dating to the first half of the second century.[11] Marcus Salonius Longinus Marcellus, a senator of imperial times who had held a variety of posts, including tribune of the plebs, prefect of the public treasury, and governor of Africa and Moesia.[12] Salonius, bishop of Genua in Liguria in the mid-fifth century. His father was Eucherius, the bishop of Lugdunum, and he had studied under Salvianus.[1] Salonius of Embrun, a bishop on whose behalf Guntram, King of Orléans, successfully appealed to Pope John III for restoration to his see. See also List of Roman gentes References  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. III, p. 700 ("Salonius").  Chase, p. 119.  Livy, vii. 41.  Broughton, vol. I, p. 134.  Livy, xxxiv. 45, xlii. 4.  Broughton, vol. I, pp. 345, 410.  Livy, xxxv. 10, 20.  Plutarch, "The Life of Cato the Elder", 24.  Gellius, xiii. 19.  CIL V, 3117.  CIL III, 1312.  CIL IX, 2592. Bibliography Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome. Lucius Mestrius Plutarchus (Plutarch), Lives of the Noble Greeks and Romans. Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae (Attic Nights). 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). George Davis Chase, "The Origin of Roman Praenomina", in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, vol. VIII, pp. 103–184 (1897). T. Robert S. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, American Philological Association (1952–1986). Categories: SaloniiRoman gentes And the first-best choice for a Grice-Speranza vignette for THIS gens? Thanks

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salonio – Ossia: Grice e Salonio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Salonio. For the Salonii, my first-best Grice–Speranza vignette would not be the governors or bishops. I would choose: Grice e Catone Saloniano That is, the story of Marcus Porcius Cato's marriage to Salonia, daughter of Marcus Salonius, when Cato was already an old man, and the subsequent birth of Marcus Porcius Cato Salonianus. The story is preserved by Plutarch and mentioned by Aulus Gellius. [GREXv2 | Word] Why is this Gricean? Because it is fundamentally a case of implicature from action rather than from words.  Grice e Catone Speranza:  Cur Cato senex uxorem novam duxit? (Why did old Cato take a new wife?)  Grice:  Quia duxit. (Because he did.) Ha Speranza:  Sed quid significavit? (But what did it signify?)  Grice:  Hoc est quaerendum. (That is the question.)   The point is that contemporaries naturally infer things from actions:  Cato marries.  Therefore:  +> Cato desires companionship.  Or:  +> Cato desires heirs.  Or:  +> Cato thinks himself not yet old.  None of these follows logically. They are interpretations.  The name Salonianus The son was called:  Marcus Porcius Cato Salonianus. [GREXv2 | Word]  This is already Gricean territory. Speranza:  Cur Salonianus? (Why "Salonianus"?)  Grice:  Quia ex Salonia natus est. (Because he was born of Salonia.)  The name functions almost like a compressed proposition.  Hardie intervenes Hardie:  Is Salonianus a description or a name?  Grice:  Both.  Hardie:  How?  Grice:  Initially it describes. Afterwards it merely identifies. Ha That is a recurring Gricean theme: the transition from informative description to mere designation. But I still prefer the Cato–Salonia story.  Verdict Grice e Salonia Speranza:  Quid reliquit Salonia historiae? (What did Salonia leave to history?)  Grice:  Nomen. (A name.)  Speranza:  Tantumne? (Only that?)  Grice:  Nomina saepe plus relinquunt quam homines. (Names often leave more behind than people.)  +> A personal name may preserve a family connection, an ancestry, or a social fact long after the original circumstances have vanished. That strikes me as the richest Gricean theme in the gens Salonia. And we don't know if it was from THIS branch (Saloniano) that Cato UTicense came to be? Thanks We know the connection, but only up to a point. From the material you've provided:  Cato the Elder married Salonia, daughter of Marcus Salonius. [GREXv2 | Word] Their son was Marcus Porcius Cato Salonianus. [GREXv2 | Word]  The cognomen Salonianus was specifically used to distinguish this son's branch from the descendants of Cato's earlier marriage. The name itself preserves the connection with Salonia. [GREXv2 | Word] As for Cato Uticensis ("Cato the Younger"), the sources you supplied here do not state whether he descended from the Salonianus branch. So I should not claim that from the evidence currently before us. Historically, I believe there is indeed a genealogical connection discussed in the ancient sources, but I would want to verify it from a source before stating it as fact. What is an attractive Gricean observation is that the cognomen:  Salonianus  is almost a compressed conversational implicature:  "the Cato from Salonia's line."  A Roman who heard:  Marcus Porcius Cato Salonianus  would recover:  +> not the other Cato branch, +> the branch associated with Salonia.  So the name functions rather like a genealogical footnote built into the designation. And that is rather different from Lucullea. The lance-name may have vanished with its inventor; Salonianus seems actually to have remained attached to a family line. The thing perishes, the name endures—very much your Eco theme.Ha.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salonio – Ossia: Grice e Salonio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Salonio. A second candidate A close runner-up is:  Publius Salonius, the military tribune involved in the mutiny settlement of 342 BC, where the senate eventually accepted a concession after Salonius himself urged it in the interests of harmony. [GREXv2 | Word]  That would make an excellent Gricean vignette about:  what one says, what one retracts, and how reconciliation is achieved.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salustio – Ossia: Grice e Salustio: la ragione conversazionale del divino e dei divini – Roma. Note su De coniuratione Catilinæ. Il Gruppo di Gioco di H. P. Grice Salustio (Roma, Lazio): la ragione conversazionale del pitagorico che corresponde con Giuliano –Ricerca (latino: Saturninus Secundus Salustius o Salutius. Politico e filosofo romano di età imperiale appartenente ai neoplatonici. Epigrafe in latino trovata ad Amorgos e riproducente una lettera (CIL III, 459) dell'imperatore romano Giuliano a S. (Museo epigrafico di Atene) Amico dell'imperatore romano Giuliano, ne condivise il programma di restaurazione della religione romana, ma fu così equilibrato che fu prefetto del pretoriod'Oriente sotto quattro imperatori. Di una famiglia della Gallia, forse dell'Aquitania, è probabilmente un homo novus, in quanto i suoi due primi incarichi furono non senatoriali; S. è infatti, probabilmente sotto l'imperatore Costante, praeses provinciae Aquitanicae, magister memoriae, comes ordinis primi, proconsole d'Africa e comes ordinis primi intra consistorium et quaestor, come attesta l'iscrizione posta sotta la sua statua d'oro eretta nel Foro di Traiano. È inviato dall'imperatore Costanzo II, fratello del defunto Costante, al cugino e cesare d'Occidente Giuliano, come consigliere, quando era ormai già avanti con gli anni. Costanzo si insospettì dei successi di Giuliano e, attribuendoli a S., lo richiama, separandolo dal cesare di cui era divenuto amico.  Giuliano venne acclamato imperatore e l'anno successivo Costanzo II morì. Giuliano, giunto a Costantinopoli, nominò S.  prefetto del pretoriod'Oriente e presidente del tribunale che a Calcedonia processò i funzionari di Costanzo. Lascia Costantinopoli per raggiungere Giuliano ad Antiochia, da dove l'imperatore aveva intenzione di far partire la sua campagna sasanide. Qui Salustio sconsigliò a Giuliano di perseguitare i cristiani: il divino, i divini, l’ordine del mondo.  GRICEVS: Sallvsti, salve! Hodie philosophus Spes mihi dixit: “Sperare est argumentari.” Ego vero timeo ne apud Badum Boum ipsam rationem in vinum vertant. SALLVSTIVS: Salve, Grice. Roma quidem et deos et mundi ordinem amat; sed apud vos Oxonienses verba saepe plus faciunt quam res. Quid ergo de “divino” dicis? GRICEVS: Nihil dico—sed si quis hodie “divinvm” vocat quod est divinely decadent, nonne ipse ostendit se et divinitatem et decorem verborum… nimis liberaliter distribuere? SALLVSTIVS: Implicaturam tuam, Grice, ut Speranza vult, quattuor modis describi posse laudo: est divina, est decadens, est divinely decadent, et est decadenter divina. Ita enim “divinvs” apud Badum Boum fit quasi tessera convivii: quod sanctum est, fit lepidum; quod lepidum est, fit (quasi) sanctum—et tu, non dicens, satis dixisti.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salutati – Ossia: Grice e Salutati: la ragione conversazionale d’Ercole al bivio. Note sull’epistolario. Il Gruppo di Gioco di H. P. Grice. Lino Coluccio Salutati (Stignano, Reggio Calabria, Calabria): la ragione conversazionale d’Ercole al bivio. Grice and Coluccio Salutati can be fruitfully compared as theorists of reasoned discourse operating at different historical scales but sharing a common conviction that meaning is inseparable from rational governance within a social order. Salutati, as chancellor of Florence and leading civic humanist, treats conversation, rhetoric, and classical exempla as instruments of practical reason oriented toward collective ends: liberty, civic virtue, and the survival of the republic. For him, discourse is reason‑governed because it is answerable to ethical and political norms derived from antiquity and activated in concrete historical conflicts; conversation is not merely exchange but deliberation about action, where speech is justified by its role in sustaining libertas fiorentina against tyranny. His use of figures such as Hercules at the crossroads dramatizes rational choice as a publicly interpretable act, embedded in shared cultural narratives and moral expectations. Grice, by contrast, abstracts from political content and historical teleology to analyze the internal mechanics that make any such discourse intelligible in the first place. His theory of conversational meaning locates rational governance not in civic virtue or classical authority but in cooperative principles and inferential practices that allow speakers and hearers to coordinate intentions. Yet the kinship is clear: Salutati’s civic rhetoric presupposes what Grice later theorizes—participants who treat one another as rational agents, capable of recognizing reasons, drawing inferences, and grasping what is meant beyond what is explicitly said. Where Salutati civilizes humanism by embedding classical reason in the living practice of political conversation, Grice formalizes that practice by showing how reason operates implicitly in every successful exchange, whether about virtue, policy, or a joke at a crossroads. Salutati supplies the normative horizon of reasoned speech in public life; Grice supplies the analytic account of how such reasoned speech functions at the level of meaning itself.  Vedo che ignori quanto sia dolce l'amor di patria. Se ciò fosse utile alla difesa e all'ampliamento della patria, non ti sembrerebbe un crimine penoso, nè un delitto scellerato, il fracassare con la scure il capo del proprio padre, o ammazzare i fratelli, o cavare con la spada dal grembo della moglie il figlio prematuro. Ad Andrea di Conte. Cancelliere di Firenze, figura culturale di riferimento dell'umanesimo a Firenze, in qualità di discepolo del BOCCACCIO e precettore di BRACCIOLINI  e BRUNI.  Considerato uno dei più importanti uomini di governo, S. come cancelliere della repubblica di Firenze, svolge un importantissimo ruolo diplomatico nel frenare le ambizioni del duca di Milano VISCONTI, intenzionato a creare uno stato comprendente l'Italia centro-settentrionale. Nel contesto di questa lotta elabora la sua dottrina della “libertas fiorentina”. Oltre all'impegno politico, svolge un importante ruolo nella diffusione dell'umanesimo petrarchesco (PETRARCA – si veda) e boccacciano, divenendone l'esponente più importante e il praeceptor della prima generazione degl’umanisti. Il suo lascito più importante presso i posteri è la codificazione civile dell'umanesimo, cioè l'uso dello spirito e dei valori dell'antichità classica all'interno dell'agone politico internazionale. i duodici fatiche d’Ercole, gl’antichi, la legge non-naturale, la legge naturale, della buona fortuna, libero arbitrio, la vita sociale, la con-vivenza, Bruto e Cassio nell’inferno, la morte di Cesare, l’assassinio di Cesare, tirano, la libertas fiorentina, stato fiorentino, la repubblica fiorentina, la fiore d’Italia, Boccaccio, Petrarca, Aligheri, I primi umanisti, l’umanesimo laico, basato contro il determinismo ecclesiastico, la biblioteca di Salutati, Livio, Cicerone, autori latini, la lingua Latina, difesa della lingua Latina, l’interpretazione di Virgilio da Aligheri, difesa della filosofia pagana, il valore permanente della filosofia degl’antichi.  GRICE: Salutati, che piacere! Al portico ho incontrato il filosofo Speranza: dice che persino la libertas fiorentina ha bisogno di un buon turno di parola, altrimenti finisce in nota a piè di pagina. SALUTATI: Grice, tu scherzi, ma io ti dico sul serio: a Firenze la conversazione è politica, e la politica è conversazione—e in mezzo ci mettiamo Livio, Cicerone e un po’ di patria, che è più dolce del tuo tè oxoniense. GRICE: Certo; e quando arrivo al bivio d’Ercole, io implico che il problema non è scegliere la virtù o il vizio, ma scegliere come scegliere: “se vedi due strade, prendine una”—e mi viene in mente Yogi Berra: “When you come to a fork in the road, take it.” SALUTATI: La tua implicatura, come Speranza concorderà, è geometrica—poiché, in verità, come può Berra (per non dire Ercole) prendere quel bivio? E qui l’italiano traduttore suda: perché fork è insieme bivio e forchetta. Se traduco “Quando arrivi a un bivio, prendilo”, va bene—ma allora dov’è la battuta? Se invece salvo la battuta e traduco “Quando incontri una forchetta sulla strada, prendila”, ottengo un proverbio gastronomico (e l’Ercole morale diventa un cameriere). E se provo “forcella” per tenere l’ambiguità, rischio la montagna, non la strada. Insomma: in inglese Berra può “take the fork” senza arrossire; in italiano, o prendi la strada o prendi le posate—e in entrambi i casi, l’eroe resta lì, fermo al bivio, con la virtù da una parte e il servizio da tavola dall’altra. Salutati, Lino Coluccio (1399). Epistolario. Firenze.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salutio – Ossia: Grice e Salutio: la ragione conversazionale del divino e dei divini – l’ordine el mondo – Roma. Note su De diis et mundo. Il Gruppo di Gioco di H. P. Grice. Saturnino Secondo Salutio (Roma, Lazio): la ragione conversazionale del divino e dei divini – l’ordine el mondo -- Grice and Saturninus Secundus Salutius offer contrasting but complementary conceptions of how reason governs meaning, shaped by their very different philosophical projects and historical contexts. In De diis et mundo, Salutius treats intelligibility as grounded in a pre‑existing divine order: discourse about the gods and the world is reasoned insofar as it reflects and participates in a rational cosmic hierarchy that precedes and constrains human speech. Meaning, on this view, is not generated within conversation but oriented toward a metaphysical structure that guarantees order, even when that order appears paradoxical, excessive, or “undisciplined” from a human standpoint. Grice’s theory of conversational meaning inverts this priority. For him, reason does not flow down from a cosmic or divine architecture into language; rather, reason is enacted locally through cooperative conversational practices, where what a speaker means is determined by intentions and by hearers’ rational recognition of those intentions under shared norms. Where Salutius sees rational discourse as derivative of divine order and ultimately explanatory of worldly disorder, Grice treats order as something that emerges from the rational coordination of speakers, with apparent disorder handled not by appeal to metaphysics but through implicature, cancellation, and pragmatic inference. Yet both share a rejection of brute arbitrariness: Salutius denies that talk of the divine is mere rhetoric detached from reasoned structure, while Grice denies that meaning can be reduced to words or conventions alone without appeal to rational expectations. In this sense, Salutius offers a metaphysical account of why discourse about gods and fate can be intelligible at all, while Grice provides a methodological account of how intelligibility is achieved moment by moment within conversation, even when speakers joke, hedge, or deliberately exploit disorder. A close fiend of Giuliano. He is offered the emperorship on Giuliano’s death, but he declines on account of his ‘rather poor health.’ He leads an active political life and is regarded as morally incorruptible. Known to have been well-versed in philosophy, he is the author of ‘On the gods and the world order’ – which some however attribute to Salustio. The treatise is, unsurprisingly, dedicated to Giuliano. Those who argue that it us not written by Salutio claim it is the work of one contemporary of Giuliano, a Flavio Salustio. Accademia.  GRICEVS: Salutius, philosophus Spes mihi nuper dixit: “Divinus ordo est, sed interdum divinitas a Badum Boum varsiatis plus quam salsum adhibetur.” Quid tu de hoc putas? SALUTIVS: Gricevs, quod apud Badum Boum fit, saepe est mirum: “divinus” fit tam frequens ut etiam di conscribant rationes suas! Sed, ut aiunt, ubi divinitas abundat, ordo interdum deficit. GRICEVS: Ut implico (nec dico), ordo “divinus” apud Badum Boum non semper praestat in modum ordinatum—fortasse unordinaliter, ut aiunt. Verba, ut ordo, quandoque plus confundant quam illuminent! SALUTIVS: Philosophus Spes certe assentietur: “Implicatura tua fortasse ordo non est, sed nullus ordo melius quam ille qui deficit!” Sic, Gricevs, nulla disciplina est dulcior quam ipsa indisciplina divinitatis. Salutio, Saturnino Secondo (a. u. c. MCVIII). De diis et mundo. Roma

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Saltio – Ossia: Grice e Saltio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Saltio The gens Saltia was an obscure plebeian family at ancient Rome. Hardly any members of this gens are mentioned in history, but others are known from inscriptions.[1]  Origin The nomen Saltius might be derived from the Latin saltare, to dance. The nomen Saltorius was derived from the related saltor, a dancer.[2] Alternatively, Saltius might be derived from saltus, a glade or ravine.[3]  Members Sextus Saltius, together with Lucius Considius, one of the commissioners appointed to establish a colony at Capua in 83 BC. Cicero described their conduct as arrogant, and ridiculed them for their errors.[4] Publius Saltius Mysticus, probably a freedman, was a friend of Lucius Aelius Macer, one of the Seviri Augustales at Patavium in Venetia and Histria.[5] Saltia Euthycia, probably a freedwoman, one of the friends of Lucius Aelius Macer, named in his funerary inscription.[5] Gaius Saltius Victor, a soldier in the third legion, stationed at Lambaesis in Numidia in AD 173.[6] See also List of Roman gentes References  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. III, p. 700 ("Sextus Saltius").  Chase, p. 131.  New College Latin & English Dictionary, s. v. salto, saltus.  Cicero, De Lege Agraria, ii. 34.  CIL V, 2844.  CIL VIII, 18068. Bibliography Marcus Tullius Cicero, De Lege Agraria contra Rullum. 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). George Davis Chase, "The Origin of Roman Praenomina", in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, vol. VIII, pp. 103–184 (1897). John C. Traupman, The New College Latin & English Dictionary, Bantam Books, New York (1995). Category: Roman gentes And from THIS gens? Thanks

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Saltio – Ossia: Grice e Saltio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Saltio For the Saltii, I would choose: Grice e Saltio Ridiculo namely:  Sextus Saltius, one of the commissioners sent to establish the colony at Capua in 83 BC, whose conduct was described by Cicero as arrogant and whom Cicero ridiculed for his errors. [GREXv2 | Word]  Why him? Because ridicule, for Grice, is often more interesting than refutation. A man may be:  disproved, contradicted, corrected,  or he may simply be made ridiculous. The latter is often achieved not by logic but by conversational maneuver.  Grice e Saltio Speranza:  Quis fuit Saltius? (Who was Saltius?)  Grice:  Vir quem Cicero derisit. (A man whom Cicero ridiculed.) [GREXv2 | Word]   Speranza:  Cur? (Why?)  Grice:  Propter errores et arrogantiam. (Because of his errors and arrogance.) [GREXv2 | Word]   The Gricean question Speranza:  Num Cicero demonstravit Saltium falsum esse? (Did Cicero prove Saltius wrong?)  Grice:  Fortasse; sed prius risum movit. (Perhaps; but first he provoked laughter.) Ha This is very Roman. In political rhetoric, the damaging move is often not:  "Your proposition is false."  but:  "You are absurd."  A Gricean reconstruction: Saltius:  Hoc consilium optimum est. (This plan is excellent.)  Cicero:  Optimum? (Excellent?)  Cicero:  Audiamus amplius. (Let us hear more.) Ha +> The request for clarification itself may become destructive. My verdict Grice e Saltio deriso a Cicerone Speranza:  Quid est peius quam errasse? (What is worse than having erred?)  Grice:  A Cicerone derideri. (To be mocked by Cicero.) Ha For this gens, the most Gricean theme is not truth or falsehood but the conversational power of ridicule. After all, we remember Sextus Saltius chiefly because Cicero remembered him as a target of mockery. [GREXv2 | Word]

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Saltio – Ossia: Grice e Saltio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Saltio A second possibility There is also:  Publius Saltius Mysticus. [GREXv2 | Word]  I am tempted by the cognomen Mysticus. Hardie:  Why was he called Mysticus?  Grice:  The inscription does not say. [GREXv2 | Word]  The sources simply give the name, not its explanation. [GREXv2 | Word]

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Saltorio – Ossia: Grice e Saltorio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Saltorio The gens Saltoria was an obscure plebeian family at ancient Rome. No members of this gens are mentioned in ancient writers, but a few are known from inscriptions, including two from Alba Fucens in Sabinum.  Origin The nomen Saltorius is derived from the cognomen Saltor, a dancer, one of a large class of surnames derived from an individual's occupation.[1] Although the inscriptions of this gens place a family of this name in Sabinum, the root is certainly Latin. Chase includes Saltorius among those gentilicia that either originated at Rome, or cannot be shown to have come from anywhere else.[2]  Members This list includes abbreviated praenomina. For an explanation of this practice, see filiation. Saltoria T. f., named in a fragmentary inscription from Alba Fucens, along with one Rubrius, the son of Gaius; the remainder of the inscription seems to be part of a sacred song.[3] Gaius Saltorius C. f., made an offering to Hercules at Alba Fucens, on behalf of the soldiers of Africanus Caecilianus.[4] See also List of Roman gentes References  Chase, p. 111.  Chase, p. 131.  AE 1997, 470.  CIL IX, 3907. Bibliography 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, pp. 103–184 (1897). Category: Roman gentes And for THIS gens? Thanks

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Saltorio – Ossia: Grice e Saltorio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Saltorio For the Saltorii, we are in a different situation from the Sallustii or Salonii. The evidence is extremely thin. We have essentially:  Saltoria T. f., named in a fragmentary inscription from Alba Fucens, apparently connected with what seems to be part of a sacred song. [GREXv2 | Word] Gaius Saltorius C. f., who made an offering to Hercules on behalf of the soldiers of Africanus Caecilianus. [GREXv2 | Word]  For a Grice–Speranza vignette, I would choose the fragmentary sacred song, because fragments and incomplete messages are pure Gricean territory. Grice e Saltoria de Carmine Fracto Speranza:  Quid reliquit Saltoria? (What did Saltoria leave behind?)  Grice:  Fragmentum. (A fragment.) [GREXv2 | Word]  Speranza:  Quod fragmentum? (What fragment?)  Grice:  Pars carminis sacri esse videtur. (It seems to be part of a sacred song.) [GREXv2 | Word]   Speranza:  Si pars tantum servatur, quomodo intellegimus? (If only a part survives, how do we understand it?)  Grice:  Eodem modo quo conversationes intellegimus. (In the same way that we understand conversations.) Ha Speranza:  Quomodo? (How?)  Grice:  Ex reliquiis. (From the remains.)  +> Hearers reconstruct missing material from context.  A very Gricean conclusion follows. Most of what survives from Saltoria T. f. is not what she said, but what later readers infer from the surviving fragment. [GREXv2 | Word] So my first-best choice is: Grice e Saltoria Fragmentaria because it lets Grice make one of his favourite points:  Conversation, history, and philology all depend upon reconstructing what is not explicitly present.  A fragment of a sacred song is almost an archaeological version of conversational implicature. We are given only part of the text and must supply the rest. [GREXv2 | Word]

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Saltorio – Ossia: Grice e Saltorio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Saltorio A second, more playful possibility comes from the nomen itself:  Saltorius ← saltor ("dancer"). [GREXv2 | Word]  Then one could imagine: Hardie:  Was every Saltorius a dancer?  Grice:  No more than every Rufus was red-haired.  😄 Hardie:  Then why the name?  Grice:  Because etymology is not destiny.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salviano – Ossia: Grice e Salviano: la ragione conversazionale al portico romano. Note su De gubernatione dei. Il Gruppo di Gioco di H. P. Grice. Salviano (Massilia, Liguria): la ragione conversazionale al portico. In Salvian and Grice we see two very different, historically distant conceptions of how reason governs meaning in human exchange, yet they converge on the idea that intelligibility in discourse is inseparable from shared rational norms. Salvian, writing in the fifth century in De gubernatione Dei, approaches reasoned discourse through a moral–historical lens: for him, speech, exhortation, and even lament presuppose a cosmos in which human suffering is intelligible only if actions, utterances, and events are answerable to reasons rooted in moral order and historical causation. His move from Rome to the Gallic world is not merely geographical but interpretive: he treats history itself as a kind of extended conversation between human wrongdoing and divine governance, one in which explanation depends on tracing reasons across time rather than isolating intentions in individual speakers. Grice, by contrast, radicalizes the rationality of conversation by internalizing it: conversational meaning, on his account, is constituted by the speaker’s intentions and by the audience’s recognition of those intentions under shared principles of rational cooperation. Where Salvian sees speech as answerable to an objective moral history that ultimately judges and explains suffering, Grice sees meaning as emerging from the fine structure of communicative reason itself, independent of moral truth or historical destiny. Yet the affinity is real: both assume that meaningful discourse is not accidental or merely expressive but governed by reasons that participants can, in principle, understand, assess, and contest. Salvian’s portico is the place where Stoic rational order and historical causality meet; Grice’s conversational space is where rational expectations and inferential practices structure what is said and what is merely implied. In this sense, Salvian offers a macro‑theory of reasoned discourse across history, while Grice supplies a micro‑theory of reasoned meaning within the moment of conversation. He moves from Rome to what is now known as The Galliae – and writes a ‘saggio’ in which he tries to explain why there is so much suffering in that area of the world. He takes an approach that is not only philosophical – along the lines of the Porch – but historical as well. GRICEVS: Salviane, salve! Sub porticu Romae recordor SPES: “Sperare est argumentari bene de futura felicitate, etiam si barista capuccinum tardat.” SALVIANVS: Salve, Grice! Ego autem Romā in Gallias profectus saggio scripsi: cur tanta ibi passio? Non solum Stoice sub porticu, sed etiam historice—nam saepe ipsa historia dolet. GRICEVS: Fateor: non semper culpa est aer aut vinum. Sed SPES iterum subridet: “Felicitas—somewhere in the South of France.” Ita saltem implicatur. SALVIANVS: Immo, Grice: Galliae plus habent quam meridiem et solem; habent causas dolorum et remedia—porticus et fata gentium. Sperare—et ridere, sed etiam intellegere. Salviano (a. u. c. MCC). De gubernatione dei. Roma

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salvemini – Ossia: Grice e Salvemini: la ragione conversazionale. Note su Mazzini. Il Gruppo di Gioco di H. P. Grice. Giovanni Francesco Mauro Melchiorre Salvemini (Firenze, Toscana): la ragione conversazionale. Grice and Giovanni Francesco Mauro Melchiorre Salvemini converge on a broadly humanistic conception of reason as something exercised in shared practices, but they situate conversational rationality in different intellectual registers: Salvemini, formed by mathematics, translation, rhetoric, and Enlightenment science, embodies conversational reason as a cultivated habit of clarity, proportion, and intellectual honesty that spans disciplines, from geometry and astronomy to political and moral discourse, where understanding often proceeds by tacit agreement, educated sensibility, and the ability to grasp what needs no full demonstration; Grice, by contrast, turns this tacit dimension into his explicit object of theory, arguing that conversational meaning is governed by rational principles that license hearers to infer what is meant beyond what is said, without appealing to stylistic flourish, aesthetic taste, or disciplinary authority. Where Salvemini’s conversational reason appears as intellectual moderation in practice—knowing when an argument, a translation, or even a smile suffices—Grice provides the analytic machinery that explains why such moderation works, locating it in shared expectations of cooperation, relevance, and reasonableness. Thus Salvemini exemplifies in lived, interdisciplinary form what Grice formalizes philosophically: that much of human understanding, whether in mathematics, literature, or everyday exchange, depends less on explicit proof than on reason-governed inference sustained by mutual trust between speakers. Grice: Detto il Castiglione o Castillioneus o Johann Castillon -- è stato un matematico e astronomo italiano. Castillon: Observations sur le livre intitulé Systême de la nature. Ha una formazione privata fino a quando inizia l'Università di Pisa dove studia diritto e matematica conseguendo un dottorato.  Mentre vive in Italia, si dedica anche alla traduzione di Pope An Essay on Man – citato da Grice: Philosopherkind – Just as the poet said that the proper study of mankind is man, the anti-Oxonian can say that the proper study of philosopher-kind is the philosopher -- con un numero uguale di versi italiani come l'originale inglese. Insegna a Vevey, una città sulla riva nord del Lago di Ginevra, dove divenne il direttore della scuola umanistica. Continua a lavorare come traduttore. Insegna retorica, discipline umanistiche, e matematica. Durante questo periodo pubblica due articoli di matematica scritti in latino, nelle Philosophical Transactions della Royal Society di Londra, usando il nome "J Castillioneus". Il primo di questi articoli studia il Cardioide, il secondo il teorema del polinomio di Newton  Cura volumi delle opere di Newton, che sono stati pubblicati a Losanna e Ginevra. Il primo volume contiene saggi matematici, il secondo contiene i trattati filosofici. Il terzo volume contiene le opere filologiche di Newton, soprattutto saggi storici, tra cui una cronaca della storia antica. Babson dice: Fino a questo momento S. è ateo, ma divenne calvinista. Insegna a Losanna e sposa Elisabeth du Fresne dalla quale ha tre figli, ma solo uno ne sopravvive, vale a dire Maximilian Friedrich Gustav Adolf S. Pubblica la corrispondenza tra Bernoulli e Leibniz, poi pubblica l'Introductio in Infinitorum analysin auctore Leonhardo Eulero, il trattato di Eulero, che modifica. Insegna sia a Losanna che a Berna. Durante questo periodo ottene la cattedra di matematica a Berna e di teologia a Losanna;  Grice: Caro Salvemini, sai che oggi ho incrociato il filosofo Speranza al caffè di Firenze? Era intento a dimostrare che anche il cappuccino segue una logica conversazionale, purché sia servito con il sorriso. Gli italiani, come sempre, sanno unire filosofia e piacere quotidiano! Salvemini: Ah, Professore Grice! Speranza non smette mai di sorprendere, vero? In fondo, la logica della vita italiana sta proprio nel trovare il senso anche tra le tazzine e il Cardioide… Persino i miei studenti a Berna vorrebbero poter discutere matematica davanti a un espresso, ma purtroppo hanno solo cioccolata calda! Grice: Forse, caro Castillon, il vero teorema è che la felicità si dimostra meglio con meno assiomi e più zucchero. Basta osservare – senza dire nulla, ovviamente – che i filosofi italiani hanno la capacità di trovare gusto anche nelle cose “minori”: come dire, non tutte le equazioni devono essere esplicitate per essere gustate… Salvemini: Mi unisco a Speranza nel lodare la tua implicatura, Grice! Del resto, tra filosofi, basta un cenno: è come il famoso verso di Pope che tradussi – “L’uomo è lo studio dell’uomo,” ma forse, in Italia, è anche il piacere di viverlo. Che siano cappuccini, polinomi o sorrisi, il filosofo sa sempre dove trovare il sapore della conversazione! Salvemini, Giovanni Francesco Mauro Melchiorre (1908). Mazzini. Torino: Bocca.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salvidieno – Ossia: Grice e Salvidieno -- Grex griceiana -- Salvidieno The gens Salvidiena was a plebeian family at ancient Rome. Members of this gens are first mentioned toward the end of the Republic, and from then to the end of the second century they regularly filled the highest offices of the Roman state.  Origin The nomen Salvidienus belongs to a class of gentilicia formed primarily from other gentile names using the suffix -enus. The root is Salvidius, itself presumably formed from the Oscan praenomen Salvius, using the suffix -idius.[1]  Praenomina The Salvidieni regularly used the praenomina Gaius, Lucius, Marcus, and Quintus, four of the most common names throughout Roman history. At least one branch of the family used the more distinctive Servius, which may have been inherited from the Cornelii; the only members of this gens to bear the name without also bearing the nomen Cornelius were probably related to this family, or descended from its freedmen. A Salvidienus from Samnium bore the praenomen Vibius, which was scarce at Rome, although more common in Oscan-speaking parts of Italy.[2]  Branches and cognomina The only distinct family of the Salvidieni under the Republic bore the surname Rufus, originally given to someone with red hair, perhaps with the additional surname Salvius, originally an Oscan praenomen, but later a gentile name, and evidently also a cognomen. In its extended form, Salvianus, it appears in the nomenclature of Lucius Salvidienus Rufus, consul in AD 52.[3] The only other distinct family of the Salvidieni claimed descent from the illustrious house of the Cornelii Scipiones, and flourished during the first and second centuries. They more properly belong to the Cornelian gens, although they retained Salvidienus as part of their nomenclature for as long as the family is known from inscriptions.  Members This list includes abbreviated praenomina. For an explanation of this practice, see filiation. Salvidieni Rufi Quintus Salvidienus Rufus,[i] a close friend and advisor to Octavian, and one of his most trusted generals in the years following the death of Caesar. After fighting against Sextus Pompeius, then Lucius Antonius during the Perusine War, he made overtures to Marcus Antonius, who betrayed Salvidienus to Octavian. Salvidienus was recalled to Rome, and condemned to death.[4][5][6][7][8][9] Salvidienus Rufus, brother of Octavian's general. He died some time prior to 40 BC, and was buried on the Tiber, and a bridge was built to lead to his tomb.[10] Salvidiena Q. f. Rufa, probably the daughter of the general Quintus Salvidienus Rufus, is named in an inscription from Rome, dating from the latter part of the first century BC, or the early first century AD.[11][12] Lucius Salvidienus Rufus Salvianus, probably a descendant of the general Quintus Salvidienus Rufus, was consul suffectus in AD 52.[13][14][11] Salvidieni Orfiti Servius Cornelius Ser. f. Scipio Salvidienus Orfitus, served at various times as quaestor and praetor urbanus, and was consul in AD 51, serving alongside the emperor Claudius. He held several priesthoods, and was governor of Africa in 62 and 63. Nero had him put to death in 66, ostensibly for wrongfully renting three shops attached to his house, but more likely because of a perceived insult.[15][16][17][18][19] Servius Cornelius Ser. f. Ser. n. Salvidienus Orfitus, one of several former consuls put to death by Domitian, on the charge of plotting revolution.[20][21] Servius Cornelius Ser. f. Ser. n. Scipio Salvidienus Orfitus, consul in AD 110, when he must have been a young man; he was praefectus urbi in the reign of Antoninus Pius.[22][23][24][25] Lucius Sergius Salvidienus Scipio Orfitus, consul in AD 149.[26] Servius Cornelius Ser. f. Ser. n. Scipio Salvidienus Orfitus, consul in an uncertain year, and governor of Africa from AD 163 to 164.[27] Servius Cornelius (Ser. f. Ser. n.) Scipio Salvidienus Orfitus, consul in AD 178.[28] Servius Cornelius (Ser. f. Ser. n.) Scipio Salvidienus Orfitus, one of the Salii Palatini in AD 189 and 190.[29] Others Gaius Salvidienus Augustalis, built a first-century tomb at Rome for his son, Gaius Salvidienus Lucifer.[30] Gaius Salvidienus C. f. Lucifer, buried at Rome, in a first-century tomb built by his father, Gaius Salvidienus Augustalis, and wife, Salvidiena Helpis.[30] Salvidiena Helpis, dedicated a first-century tomb at Rome to her husband, Gaius Salvidienus Lucifer.[30] Gaius Salvidienus Primigenius, a soldier stationed at Rome in AD 70, serving in the century of Tiberius Claudius Nicia.[31] Marcus Salvidienus Asprenas, proconsul of Bithynia during the reign of Vespasian, minted various coins under the Flavian emperors.[32] Marcus Salvidienus Proculus, governor of Bithynia under Vespasian, and a moneyer under the Flavians, might be the same person as Asprenas, or perhaps his brother.[33] Marcus Salvidienus, governor of Judaea from AD 80 to 85. Salvidiena Musa, named in a second-century inscription from Rome, together with Gaius Salvidienus Priscus and Gaius Salvidienus Jucundus.[34] Gaius Salvidienus Priscus, named in a second-century inscription from Rome, together with Salvidiena Musa and Gaius Salvidienus Jucundus.[34] Gaius Salvidienus Jucundus, named in a second-century inscription from Rome, together with Salvidiena Musa and Gaius Salvidienus Priscus.[34] Marcus Salvidienus, one of the sources of Vopiscus for the life of the usurper Saturninus. Salvidienus reported that the speech attributed to Saturninus at Alexandria had been written by the general himself, as he was a man of some learning and rhetorical skill.[35] Undated Salvidieni Salvidiena, the mistress of Salvidienus Polydorus, a slave buried at Puteoli in Campania.[36] Cara Salvidiena, probably the wife of Lucius Vibius Crescens, a veteran of the fourth cohort of the Praetorian Guard buried at Tibur in Latium.[37] Lucius L. f. Salvidienus, buried at Rome, aged twenty-two, with a monument from his father, Lucius Salvidienus Secundus.[38] Vibius Salvidienus, named in an inscription from Corfinium in Samnium.[39] Salvidiena Q. l. Hilara, a freedwoman, who dedicated a tomb at Rome to her daughter, Salvidiena Faustilla, aged fifteen years, three months, eleven days, and seven hours.[40] Salvidiena Justa, dedicated a tomb at Rome to her mother, Salvidiena Romana.[41] Gaius Salvidienus Lupus, buried at Cirta in Numidia, aged fifteen.[42] Salvidienus Maritimis, a soldier buried at Lambaesis in Numidia.[43] Salvidiena Paulla, the wife of Marcus Lollius, and mother of Lollia Prisca, a young woman buried at Rome, aged twenty-two years, eight months, and nine days, with a monument from her mother and her husband, Gaius Flavius Furius Pantaenectus.[44] Salvidienus Ɔ. s. Polydorus, a slave buried at Puteoli, together with his daughters, Polydora and Marcella.[36] Salvidiena Priscilla, buried at Rome with a tomb dedicated by her husband, Alexander, and her son.[45] Salvidiena Romana, buried at Rome, in a tomb dedicated by her daughter, Salvidiena Justa.[41] Salvidiena Saluta, named in a dedicatory inscription from Rome.[46] Lucius Salvidienus Secundus, built a tomb at Rome for his son, Lucius Salvidienus.[38] Servius Salvidienus Symphorus, named in an inscription from Rome.[47] Marcus Salvidienus Vettianus, a prefect with aedilician powers at Brixia in Venetia and Histria.[48] See also List of Roman gentes Notes  Also found as "Quintus Salvius Rufus". References  Chase, pp. 118, 121, 122.  Chase, pp. 136, 137.  Chase, pp. 109, 141.  Appian, Bellum Civile, iv. 85, v. 20, 24, 27, 31–35, 66.  Cassius Dio, xlviii. 13, 18, 33.  Livy, Epitome, 123, 127.  Velleius Paterculus, ii. 76.  Suetonius, "The Life of Augustus", 66.  Broughton, vol. II, pp. 366, 374, 383.  Dowling, Clemency & Cruelty in the Roman World, p. 294.  Manzella, "Zosimo liberto di Q. Salvidieno Rufo", p. 181.  CIL VI, 25810.  CIL XVI, 1.  Gallivan, "The Fasti for the Reign of Claudius", pp. 409, 414, 425.  Suetonius, "The Life of Nero", 37.  Fasti Antiates, CIL VI, 8639.  AE 1964, 154, AE 1973, 40.  Reynolds, Inscriptions of Roman Tripolitania, 341.  Gallivan, "The Fasti for the Reign of Claudius", pp. 409, 413, 425.  Suetonius, "The Life of Domitian", 10.  Gallivan, "The Fasti for A. D. 70–96", p. 211.  Julius Capitolinus, "The Life of Antoninus Pius", 8.  Fasti Ostienses, CIL XIV, 244.  Smallwood, Principates of Nerva, Trajan, and Hadrian.  Alföldy, Konsulat und Senatorenstand, p. 287.  Eck, "Die Fasti consulares der Regierungszeit des Antoninus Pius", p. 75.  CIL VIII, 24.  Alföldy, Konsulat und Senatorenstand, pp. 191, 312.  CIL VI, 1980, CIL VI, 1981.  AE 1975, 43.  CIL VI, 200.  PIR, vol. III, pp. 162, 163.  PIR, vol. III, p. 163.  AE 1967, 47.  Flavius Vopiscus, "The Lives of Firmus, Saturninus, Proculus, and Bonosus", 10.  CIL X, 2928.  CIL XIV, 3632.  CIL VI, 33191.  Supplementa Italica, iii. Co, 77.  CIL VI, 25808.  CIL VI, 25809.  CIL VIII, 7702.  CIL VIII, 3191.  CIL VI, 21495.  CIL VI, 38865.  CIL VI, 4816.  CIL XV, 7533a.  CIL V, 4468. Bibliography Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome. Marcus Velleius Paterculus, Compendium of Roman History. Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus, De Vita Caesarum (Lives of the Caesars, or The Twelve Caesars). Appianus Alexandrinus (Appian), Bellum Civile (The Civil War). Lucius Cassius Dio Cocceianus (Cassius Dio), Roman History. Aelius Lampridius, Aelius Spartianus, Flavius Vopiscus, Julius Capitolinus, Trebellius Pollio, and Vulcatius Gallicanus, Historia Augusta (Augustan History). 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). Supplementa Italica (Supplement for Italy), Unione Accademica Nazionale. 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, pp. 103–184 (1897). Paul von Rohden, Elimar Klebs, & Hermann Dessau, Prosopographia Imperii Romani (The Prosopography of the Roman Empire, abbreviated PIR), Berlin (1898). Joyce M. Reynolds, J. B. Ward-Perkins, The Inscriptions of Roman Tripolitania, British School at Rome (1952). T. Robert S. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, American Philological Association (1952–1986). E. Mary Smallwood, Documents Illustrating the Principates of Nerva, Trajan, and Hadrian, Cambridge University Press (1966). Géza Alföldy, Konsulat und Senatorenstand unter der Antonien (The Consulate and Senatorial State under the Antonines), Rudolf Habelt, Bonn (1977). Paul A. Gallivan, "The Fasti for the Reign of Claudius", in Classical Quarterly, vol. 28, pp. 407–426 (1978), "The Fasti for A.D. 70–96", in Classical Quarterly, vol. 31, pp. 186–220 (1981). Ivan Di Stefano Manzella, "Zosimo liberto di Q. Salvidieno Rufo e accenso di L. Cornificio console nel 35 A. C." (Zosimus, freedman of Q. Salvidienus Rufus and the accession of consul L. Cornificius in 35 BC.), in Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, Rudolf Habelt GmbH, vol. 85 (1991). Melissa Barden Dowling, Clemency & Cruelty in the Roman World, University of Michigan Press (2006), ISBN 9780472115150. Werner Eck, "Die Fasti consulares der Regierungszeit des Antoninus Pius, eine Bestandsaufnahme seit Géza Alföldys Konsulat und Senatorenstand" (The Consular Fasti for the Reign of Antoninus Pius: an Inventory since Géza Alföldy's Konsulat und Senatorenstand), in Studia Epigraphica in Memoriam Géza Alföldy, Werner Eck, Bence Fehér, Péter Kovács, eds., Bonn, pp. 69–90 (2013). Category: Roman gentes And from THIS gens? Thanks

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salvidieno – Ossia: Grice e Salvidieno -- Grex griceiana – Salvidieno For the Salvidieni, I think there is one overwhelmingly Gricean candidate: Grice e Salvidieno Rufo namely:  Quintus Salvidienus Rufus, the intimate friend, adviser, and general of Octavian, who later made overtures to Mark Antony, was denounced, recalled, and condemned to death. [GREXv2 | Word]  Why him? Because his whole story turns on what Grice would call the problem of evidence from communicative acts. We are told:  he made overtures to Antony; Antony informed Octavian; Salvidienus was recalled and condemned. [GREXv2 | Word]  Everything depends on how one interprets an approach, proposal, or conversation.  Grice e Salvidieno Speranza:  Quid fecit Salvidienus? (What did Salvidienus do?)  Grice:  Difficile est dicere. (It is difficult to say.)  Speranza:  Cur? (Why?)  Grice:  Quia inter verba et consilia interest. (Because there is a difference between words and intentions.) Ha  The Gricean issue Suppose: Salvidienus:  Forte convenire possumus. (Perhaps we can come to an understanding.)  How should Antony interpret this? As:  +> negotiation?   +> betrayal?   +> exploration?   +> conspiracy?  The whole historical catastrophe depends on that inferential step.  Antony as hearer Antonius:  Audio quid dicit. (I hear what he says.)  Grice:  Sed quid significat? (But what does it mean?)  That is almost pure Grice:  What was said? What was meant? What was inferred?  These need not coincide. My verdict Grice e Salvidieno Proditore? Speranza:  Num Salvidienus proditor fuit? (Was Salvidienus a traitor?)  Grice:  Aliud est quid fecerit, aliud quid significaverit, aliud quid alii intellexerint. (One thing is what he did; another is what he meant; another is what others understood.) Ha That strikes me as the most distinctively Gricean member of the gens Salvidiena. His entire career, at least as summarized in the sources, hinges on the dangerous gap between:  an overture, an intention, and the interpretation placed upon it by others. [GREXv2 | Word]  And, as Roman history repeatedly shows, a mistaken implicature can be fatal.Ha.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salvidieno – Ossia: Grice e Salvidieno -- Grex griceiana – Salvidieno A second candidate A close runner-up is:  Servius Cornelius Scipio Salvidienus Orfitus, repeatedly endangered under emperors because of alleged insults, political implications, or suspicions. [GREXv2 | Word]  That would produce a wonderful Gricean theme:  "What did he say?"  versus  "What was taken to be implied?"  But the evidence in your entry is thinner.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salvidio – Ossia: Grice e Salvidio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Salvidio The gens Salvidia was an obscure plebeian family at ancient Rome. No members of this gens attained any of the higher offices of the Roman state, but several are known from inscriptions.  Origin The nomen Salvidius belongs to a large class of gentilicia formed using the suffix -idius. This termination originally applied to surnames ending in -idus, but over time it became so familiar that it came to be regarded as a regular gentile-forming suffix, and was applied even in cases where it was not orthographically justified. The root of the name is Salvius, a common Oscan praenomen. The nomen Salvidienus was formed from Salvidius using the suffix -enus.[1]  Members This list includes abbreviated praenomina. For an explanation of this practice, see filiation. Salvidius, named in a fragmentary inscription from Corfinium in Samnium.[2] Gaius Salvidius, named in an inscription from Corfinium.[3] Salvidia Ɔ. l. Acume, a freedwoman, and one of the heirs of her sister, Salvidia Amphiola.[4] Salvidia Sp. f. Amphiola, left a will at Corfinium, naming among her heirs her parents, Lucius Helvius Amphio and Salvidia Salvia, sister, Salvidia Acume, freedman, Theopropus, and Salvidia Decens.[4] Salvidius Aper, built a tomb at Aeclanum in Campania for his wife, Claudia Crescentina, dating to the third century.[5] Salvidia Ɔ. l. Auge, a freedwoman, who together with Marcus Arferius Aphrodisius, made a donation of seven pots at Rome.[6] Salvidia T. l. Charmosyne, a freedwoman, and the mother-in-law of Helvia Asterio, according to a second-century inscription from Rome.[7] Salvidia Decens, named among the heirs of Salvidia Amphiola. Their relationship is not preserved in the surviving inscription.[4] Titus Salvidius T. l. Gallus, a freedman, and the brother of Helvia Asterio, according to a second-century inscription from Rome.[7] Salvidia Macaria, together with her husband, Titus Flavius Abascantus, dedicated a monument at Rome to their son, Titus Flavius Mnester, aged twelve years, seven months, and seventeen days.[8] Gaius Salvidius Hyacinthus, the husband of Vibia Prima, named in an inscription from Corfinium, dating between AD 30 and 70.[9] Salvidia Ɔ. l. Salvia, a freedwoman, and one of the heirs of her daughter, Salvidia Amphiola.[4] Salvidia T. f. Secunda, made an offering to Venus at Furfo in Samnium.[10] See also List of Roman gentes Salvia gens References  Chase, pp. 118, 121, 122, 141.  CIL IX, 3262.  CIL IX, 3274.  Supplementa Italica, iii. Co, 76.  Supplementa Italica, xxix. Ae, 81.  NSA, 1914-385, 6.  CIL VI, 37146.  CIL VI, 18140.  AE 1995, 409.  CIL IX, 3518. Bibliography Theodor Mommsen et alii, Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (The Body of Latin Inscriptions, abbreviated CIL), Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften (1853–present). Supplementa Italica (Supplement for Italy), Unione Accademica Nazionale. Notizie degli Scavi di Antichità (News of Excavations from Antiquity, abbreviated NSA), Accademia dei Lincei (1876–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, pp. 103–184 (1897). Category: Roman gentes And from THIS gens? Thanks

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salvidio – Ossia: Grice e Salvidio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Salvidio For the Salvidii, the surviving evidence is much thinner than for the Salvidieni. We have no generals betraying Octavian, no governors executed by emperors, and no historians. Most of the family appears through inscriptions. [GREXv2 | Word] So my first-best Grice–Speranza vignette would be: Grice e Salvidia Amphiola de Testamento The most interesting entry is:  Salvidia Amphiola, who left a will naming a series of heirs: her parents, sister, freedman, and Salvidia Decens. [GREXv2 | Word]  Why is this Gricean? Because a will is almost a gigantic exercise in speaker's meaning:  "When I am no longer available to explain myself, what shall my words mean?"   Grice e Salvidia Amphiola Speranza:  Quid reliquit Amphiola? (What did Amphiola leave behind?)  Grice:  Testamentum. (A will.) [GREXv2 | Word]  Speranza:  Et quid est testamentum? (And what is a will?)  Grice:  Oratio cuius auctor respondere non potest. (A discourse whose author can no longer answer questions.) Ha  The Gricean problem Speranza:  Si obscurum est, quis explicabit? (If it is obscure, who will explain it?)  Grice:  Nemo. (No one.)  Speranza:  Quid igitur facimus? (What then do we do?)  Grice:  Conamur intellegere quid significare voluerit. (We try to understand what she meant.)  +> Interpretation begins when direct clarification becomes impossible.  Hardie joins in Hardie:  Is a will like a conversation?  Grice:  No, sir.  Hardie:  Why not?  Grice:  Because one side has permanently left the room. Ha  There is also a delightful connection to your recurring theme of names surviving. For Salvidia Amphiola, we know almost nothing of her life, beliefs, voice, or appearance. What survives is:  a name, a list of heirs, an act of designation. [GREXv2 | Word]  Very Eco-like:  the person vanishes; the testament remains.  And very Gricean:  the utterance remains; the utterer does not.  So my verdict for the gens Salvidia is: Grice e Salvidia Amphiola because a will is perhaps the purest case of trying to recover an utterer's meaning after the utterer is no longer available to explain it. [GREXv2 | Word]

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Saliveno – Ossia: Grice e Salvieno -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Salvieno The gens Salviena was an obscure plebeian family at ancient Rome. No members of this gens appear in history, but several are known from inscriptions.  Origin The nomen Salvienus belongs to a class of gentilicia formed using the suffix -enus, a type associated with names of Picentine or Umbrian origin, with roots ending in -i. Salvienus is a patronymic surname derived from the praenomen Salvius, common in the Oscan and Umbrian-speaking parts of Italy.[1] Several early inscriptions place the Salvieni in Sabinum.  Members This list includes abbreviated praenomina. For an explanation of this practice, see filiation. Publius Salvienus L. f., an eques in the army of Gnaeus Pompeius Strabo in 88 BC.[2] Publius Salvienus T. f., one of the chief magistrates at Amiternum in Sabinum. His colleague was Lucius Pomponius.[3] Salvienus Paulus, one of the aediles quinquenniales at Peltuinum in Sabinum, during the latter part of the reign of Tiberius.[4] Publius Salvienus Paulus, dispensator at Peltuinum, where he was buried in a second-century tomb, dedicated by Myrtale.[5] Marcus Salvienus M. l. Cinnamus, a freedman who built a sepulchre at Brixia in Venetia and Histria for himself and the freedwoman Doris Conchido, probably his daughter.[6] Gaius Salvienus, buried at the present site of Uled Dramenna, formerly part of Africa Proconsularis, aged eighty, along with his wife, Claudia Fortunata, aged fifty, in a tomb dedicated by their child or children.[7] Salviena Metiliana, dedicated a tomb at Lambaesis in Numidia to her husband, Gaius Julius Maritimus, aged forty-five years, five months, and thirteen days, and the freedman Salvienus Trophimus. Maritimus had served as centurion in the Legio VI Victrix, Legio XX Valeria Victrix, Legio II Augusta, and Legio III Augusta.[8] Salvienus Trophimus, probably the freedman of Salviena Metiliana, who dedicated a monument to him at Lambaesis, where he was buried along with Salviena's husband, the centurion Gaius Julius Maritimus.[8] See also List of Roman gentes References  Chase, pp. 118, 141.  CIL VI, 37045.  CIL IX, 4325.  CIL IX, 4029, CIL IX, 7529.  CIL IX, 3448.  CIL V, 4713.  CIL VIII, 17463.  CIL VIII, 2907. Bibliography Theodor Mommsen et alii, Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (The Body of Latin Inscriptions, abbreviated CIL), Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften (1853–present). George Davis Chase, "The Origin of Roman Praenomina", in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, vol. VIII, pp. 103–184 (1897). Category: Roman gentes And from THIS gens? Thanks

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Saliveno – Ossia: Grice e Salvieno -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Salvieno For the Salvieni, the evidence is so sparse that I would not choose a magistrate or soldier. My first-best Gricean vignette is: Grice e Salvieno Trophimo The reason is that the most interesting surviving inscription concerns:  Salviena Metiliana, who dedicated a tomb for her husband, Gaius Julius Maritimus, and for the freedman Salvienus Trophimus. [GREXv2 | Word]  This is a perfect Gricean case because it concerns joint commemoration. One asks:  Why are these two people buried or commemorated together?  The inscription does not explain. And therefore interpretation begins.  Grice e Salvieno Speranza:  Quid scimus de Trophimo? (What do we know about Trophimus?)  Grice:  Paene nihil. (Almost nothing.) Ha Speranza:  Cur ergo memoratur? (Why then is he mentioned?)  Grice:  Haec est quaestio. (That is the question.)   The Gricean point The inscription explicitly tells us:  Salviena Metiliana dedicated the monument. [GREXv2 | Word] Her husband was Gaius Julius Maritimus. [GREXv2 | Word] Salvienus Trophimus was also commemorated there and was probably her freedman. [GREXv2 | Word]  What it does not tell us is:  Why this arrangement was chosen.  So the epigrapher is left reconstructing significance from selection.  Hardie intervenes Hardie:  Why mention Trophimus at all?  Grice:  Because omission would also have meant something. Ha Hardie:  Then inclusion means something?  Grice:  Almost certainly.  Hardie:  What?  Grice:  The inscription does not say.   That is a very Gricean dilemma:  the choice to mention is meaningful; the meaning of the choice is underdetermined. The tomb inscription gives much richer opportunities for discussing what is said and what is merely suggested.  Verdict Grice:  Quid est difficilius quam verba intellegere? (What is harder than understanding words?)  Speranza:  Quid? (What?)  Grice:  Intellegere cur quaedam verba adsint et alia absint. (Understanding why certain words are present and others absent.) Ha For the gens Salviena, the most Gricean figure is therefore Salvienus Trophimus, not because of what he did, but because of the interpretive puzzle created by his presence in the inscription. [GREXv2 | Word]

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Saliveno – Ossia: Grice e Salvieno -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Salvieno A second candidate A close runner-up is:  Publius Salvienus L. f., an eques in the army of Gnaeus Pompeius Strabo in 88 BC. [GREXv2 | Word]  But the record tells us almost nothing beyond the fact itself.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salvio – Ossia: Grice e Salvio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Salvio Bust of Emperor Otho from the 16th or 17th century. The gens Salvia was a minor plebeian Roman family of the late Republic, which came to prominence under the early Empire. The first of the family known to have held public office at Rome was Publius Salvius Aper, praetorian prefect in 2 BC. About this time, the Salvii achieved equestrian rank, and thereafter held various positions in the Roman state for the next two centuries, before falling back into obscurity. Lucius Salvius Otho was raised to patrician rank by the emperor Claudius, but the most illustrious of the Salvii was his son, Marcus, who was proclaimed emperor in AD 69.[1][2]  Origin The Salvii were doubtless of Sabellic origin, as their nomen is a patronymic surname derived from the common Oscan praenomen Salvius.[3] They probably spread throughout Italy long before obtaining Roman citizenship; the emperor Otho was descended from an ancient and noble family of Ferentinum, in Etruria.[1][2]  Members This list includes abbreviated praenomina. For an explanation of this practice, see filiation. Salvii Othones Marcus Salvius Otho, grandfather of the emperor.[4] Marcus Salvius Otho, moneyer and uncle of the emperor Otho.[5] Lucius Salvius M. f. Otho, father of the emperor, was consul suffectus from the kalends of July, AD 34.[6] Salvia, sister of Otho and fiancé of Drusus Caesar[7] Lucius Salvius L. f. M. n. Otho Titianus, the elder brother of the emperor, was consul in AD 52.[8] Marcus Salvius L. f. M. n. Otho, emperor from January 15 to April 16, AD 69.[9] Lucius Salvius L. f. L. n. Otho Cocceianus, the emperor's nephew, was consul suffectus in AD 82.[10] Others Salvius, praefectus sociorum in 168 BC[11] Salvius, praetor urbanus in around 76/74 BC[12][13] and possibly the author of the Interdictum Salvianum[14] Salvius, a centurion of the Gabiniani and one of the murderers of Pompey in 48 BC.[15] Salvius, tribune of the plebs in 43 BC and the first man to be killed during the proscriptions by the Second Triumvirate[16] Salvia Titisenia, a mistress of Octavian.[17] Salvia Postuma, funded the building of an arch at Pola in Venetia and Histria, dating from the late first century BC. She was the husband of Lucius Sergius, and their son was Lucius Sergius Lepidus.[18][19] Publius Salvius Aper, praetorian prefect with Quintus Ostorius Scapula in 2 BC. Aper is not known to have been related to the contemporary Othones.[20][21] Salvius Carus, governor of Crete under Hadrian.[22] Gaius Salvius Liberalis Nonius Bassus, consul suffectus in AD 85. He was a member of the Arval Brethren.[23] Gaius Salvius Vitellianus, the son of Gaius Salvius Liberalis and Vitellia Rufilla.[24] Lucius Octavius Cornelius Publius Salvius Julianus Aemilianus, an eminent jurist, was consul in AD 148.[25] Publius Salvius L. f. Julianus, consul in AD 175.[26] Salvius Tuscus became a Salian priest in AD 181; he served as quindecimvir in 204.[27] See also List of Roman gentes Salvidia gens Salvidiena gens References  Suetonius, "The Life of Otho", 1.  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. III, p. 700 ("Salvia Gens").  Chase, p. 141.  Prosopographia Imperii Romani, S 108.  Hobler, Francis (1860). Records of Roman History, from Cnaeus Pompeius to Tiberius Constantinus, as Exhibited on the Roman Coins. Vol. 1. Nichols. p. 34.  Prosopographia Imperii Romani, S 107.  Bowman, Alan K.; Champlin, Edward; Lintott, Andrew (1996). The Cambridge Ancient History. Cambridge University Press. p. 217. ISBN 9780521264303.  Prosopographia Imperii Romani, S 111.  Suetonius, "The Life of Otho", 3.  Suetonius, "The Life of Domitianus", 10.  de Neeve, P. W. (1984). Colonus: Private Farm-tenancy in Roman Italy During the Republic and the Early Principate. J.C. Gieben. p. 47. ISBN 9789070265151.  Broughton, Thomas Robert Shannon (1951). The Magistrates of the Roman Republic. Vol. 3. American Philological Association. p. 185. ISBN 9780891308119.  Watson, Alan (1970). "The Development of the Praetor's Edict". The Journal of Roman Studies. 60: 105–119. doi:10.1017/S007543580004329X. JSTOR 299417. S2CID 161446036.  Kelly, J. M. (1966). "The Growth-Pattern of the Praetor's Edict". Irish Jurist (1966-). 1 (2): 341–355. JSTOR 44025973.  RE, vol. I A.2, col. 2022: Salvius 3.  Matz, David (2000). Famous Firsts in the Ancient Greek and Roman World. McFarland. p. 40. ISBN 9780786405992.  "Gens: Salvius". Archived from the original on 2021-06-25.  Barnes, Nathan John (2014). Reading 1 Corinthians with Philosophically Educated Women. Wipf and Stock Publishers. p. 177. ISBN 9781725247987.  Sergius. Strachan stemma.  Prosopographia Imperii Romani, S 97.  Kugener, Marc Antoine; Herrmann, Léon (1972). Latomus. Vol. 31 (second ed.). Editions Latomus. p. 806.  Prosopographia Imperii Romani, S 99.  Prosopographia Imperii Romani, S 105.  Prosopographia Imperii Romani, S 117.  Jolowicz and Nicholas, pp. 384, 385.  Prosopographia Imperii Romani, S 104.  Prosopographia Imperii Romani, S 115. Bibliography Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus, De Vita Caesarum (Lives of the Caesars, or The Twelve Caesars). "Salvia Gens", in the Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, William Smith, ed., Little, Brown and Company, Boston (1849). August Pauly; Georg Wissowa; Wilhelm Kroll; Kurt Witte; Karl Mittelhaus; Konrat Ziegler, eds. (1894–1980). Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft. Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler. George Davis Chase, "The Origin of Roman Praenomina", in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, vol. VIII (1897). Paul Rohden and Hermann Dessau, Page 11, Prosopographia Imperii Romani, Berlin (1898). H. F. Jolowicz and Barry Nicholas, Historical Introduction to the Study of Roman Law, Cambridge University Press (3rd edition, 1972). Categories: SalviiRoman gentes And from THIS gens? thanks

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salvio – Ossia: Grice e Salvio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Salvio For the Salvii, I think there are two strong candidates, but one is overwhelmingly Gricean. Grice e Salvio Othone Namely:  Marcus Salvius Otho, emperor from 15 January to 16 April AD 69. [GREXv2 | Word]  Not because of his brief reign, but because Otho's entire historical reputation turns on a single communicative act: his suicide. For the historian, suicide is an action. For the Gricean, it is also a message.  Grice e Othone Speranza:  Cur Otho se interfecit? (Why did Otho kill himself?)  Grice:  Historici causas quaerunt. (Historians seek causes.)  Speranza:  Et philosophi? (And philosophers?)  Grice:  Quid significaverit quaerunt. (They ask what it signified.) Ha  Action as utterance Speranza:  Num verba locutus est? (Did he utter words?)  Grice:  Etiam sine verbis significari potest. (One may convey something even without words.)  +> Not all communication is linguistic. This is very close to Grice's interest in non-verbal meaning-nn. My verdict Grice e Othone Imperatore Speranza:  Quid reliquit Otho? (What did Otho leave behind?)  Grice:  Exemplum. (An example.)  Speranza:  Exemplum cuius rei? (An example of what?)  Grice:  Quod aliquando facta plus dicunt quam verba. (That sometimes actions say more than words.)  +> A communicative act need not be a linguistic act. That, to my mind, is the most distinctively Gricean figure in the gens Salvia. Otho's historical significance lies not merely in what he said during his short reign, but in the meaning later generations attributed to one decisive act. [GREXv2 | Word]

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salvio – Ossia: Grice e Salvio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Salvio A second candidate A fascinating alternative is:  Salvius, the praetor whose name may have been attached to the Interdictum Salvianum. [GREXv2 | Word]  That immediately suggests a jurisprudential dialogue. Speranza:  Quid est interdictum? (What is an interdict?)  Grice:  Plus quam sententia; minus quam lex. (More than a sentence; less than a law.) Ha But we know much less about the man than about Otho. One of grice's recollections of Hardie is Hardie out of the blue: "What is the meaning of 'of'?" Or "And what did you mean by 'of'?" -- Grice: Reading, sir. Hardie: What? Grice: Interdictum Salvieni. of Salveno--Hardie: What do you mean 'of'. -- Grice: Why is INTER-dictum? Is it like Hare (with his dicta) speaking to each other? Hardie. No. Grice: More like my dictivum, but entre nous? Hardie. Yes. ThanksHa Very good. One can almost hear Hardie interrupting at precisely the wrong—and therefore philosophically right—moment. Grice e Hardie de "of" Grice:  Reading, sir.  Hardie:  What?  Grice:  Interdictum Salvianum.  Hardie:  And what did you mean by "of"?  Grice:  Of?  Hardie:  Yes. "Interdict of Salvius." What is the meaning of of?  Grice:  Ownership, perhaps.  Hardie:  Nonsense.  Grice:  Authorship, then.  Hardie:  Better.   Grice:  Why is it called inter-dictum?   Something said between people?  Hardie:  Not exactly.  Grice:  Like Hare's dictum speaking to another dictum?  Hardie:  Certainly not. Ha Grice:  More like my dictivum, but entre nous?  Hardie:  Closer.   The joke is actually philologically respectable. The Roman legal interdictum is from:  inter + dicere  literally,  "to say between", "to pronounce between (parties)",  that is, a pronouncement of the praetor intervening between disputants. So Hardie might continue: Hardie:  The inter- is not reciprocal.  Grice:  Not two parties speaking?  Hardie:  No.  Grice:  Then who is speaking?  Hardie:  The praetor.  Grice:  Ah! So not an inter-locution but an inter-vention.  Hardie:  Exactly. Ha  And then Hardie returns to his real obsession: Hardie:  But what of Salvianum?  Grice:  The interdict of Salvius.  Hardie:  Again: what does of mean?  Grice:  Instituted by?  Hardie:  Better.  Grice:  Associated with?  Hardie:  Better still.  Grice:  Named after?  Hardie:  Now you're thinking.   Which is very much in the spirit of Oxford philosophy. Not:  What is an interdict?  but:  What do you mean by "of" in "Interdict of Salvius"?  The same move could be made with:  lanceae Luculleae.  Hardie:  Lucullan in what sense?  Grice:  Designed by Lucullus?  Hardie:  Perhaps.  Grice:  Used by Lucullus?  Hardie:  Perhaps.  Grice:  Merely called after Lucullus?  Hardie:  Ah! At last. Ha For Hardie, the whole philosophical feast lies in that tiny preposition—or those tiny genitival relations—that everyone else rushes past. As Grice might put it:  "Most philosophers ask what interdictum Salvianum means. Hardie wanted to know what Salvianum means, and before that what of means." Ha Grice: So it means three, sir? H.: What? Grice: The interdictum salvianus. (Is salvianus the same as 'of Salvius' why not Interdictum Salvii?). Hardie: WHat three? G: You said: the praetor (1), and the two intervening parts (2) = 3. Hardie: Yes. Grice: Was it philosophical? Hardie: No. Grice: Then (+> why bother). Hardie: YOu make it philosophical for next week's assignment -- thursday, same time. -- And Grice did. Corollalry on what this interdictum may be supposed to be about. ThanksHa This is very much the sort of tutorial scene one can imagine. Grice e Hardie de Interdicto Salviano Grice:  Reading, sir: Interdictum Salvianum.  Hardie:  Yes.  Grice:  Why not Interdictum Salvii? (The Interdict of Salvius.)  Hardie:  Because it is called Salvianum.  Grice:  Which means?  Hardie:  Associated with Salvius. Instituted by Salvius. Named after Salvius.  Grice:  Ah. The philosophical "of".    Hardie:  And why interdictum?  Grice:  Because it is spoken inter.  Hardie:  Between whom?  Grice:  The two parties.  Hardie:  And?  Grice:  The praetor.  Hardie:  Good.   Grice:  So it means three, sir?  Hardie:  What means three?  Grice:  The interdictum Salvianum.  Hardie:  Explain yourself.  Grice:  The utterer—the praetor.   Hearer number one.   Hearer number two.   Three participants.  Hardie:  Yes.  Grice:  Was it philosophical?  Hardie:  No.  Grice:  Then why bother?Ha    Hardie:  You make it philosophical.   Thursday.   Same hour.   A week later Grice:  I have reflected, sir.  Hardie:  And?  Grice:  The praetor's utterance resembles an imperative.  Hardie:  Continue.  Grice:  One party says:   Hoc meum est. (This is mine.)  The other says:  Non, meum est. (No, it is mine.)  The praetor says:  Possideatis uti nunc possidetis. (Continue in possession as you now possess.)  or something of the sort. Hardie:  Go on.   The Gricean Corollary Grice:  The interesting thing is not what the praetor describes.  Hardie:  But?  Grice:  What he effects.   The utterance changes the situation.  Hardie:  Like Austin?  Grice:  Before Austin. Ha.  Hare enters by mistake Grice:  So perhaps the interdict consists of a dictum.  Hardie:  No.  Grice:  A dictum directed at two parties.  Hardie:  Better.  Grice:  A legal dictivum.  Hardie:  Worse. Ha  The genuinely Gricean moral would be:  The Interdictum Salvianum is interesting not because of Salvius, but because it is a case where an utterance's significance lies less in its truth-value than in its conventional effect.  The praetor is not primarily saying:  "The facts are thus-and-so."  He is saying, in effect:  "The legal conversation will proceed thus."  And that is exactly the sort of thing that later fascinated both Austin and Grice: speech whose point lies not merely in describing the world but in regulating the relations among its participants. Hardie (rising):  Good.   Next week: "What is the meaning of between?"  Grice:  In interdictum?  Hardie:  Everywhere. Ha  Yes. We actually have a fairly good idea, and it makes your Hardie vignette even funnier, because the Interdictum Salvianum turns out to be much less metaphysical than Grice hoped. The sources identify the Interdictum Salvianum as a praetorian remedy connected with agricultural tenancy. It protected the landlord's security interest in goods that the tenant had pledged for the rent of the farm. In essence, it was a procedure by which the owner of farmland could obtain possession of the tenant's pledged goods when rent was unpaid. [thelawdictionary.org], [dictionary...thelaw.com] More specifically, modern discussions place it in the context of farm leases (coloni). It is associated with the landlord's right over things brought onto the farm (invecta et illata), and is usually treated as an important step in the development of Roman pledge law. [laws.studio], [laws.studio] So: Hardie:  What was the Interdictum Salvianum about?  Grice:  Possession?  Hardie:  Better.  Grice:  Continued possession?  Hardie:  Closer.  Grice:  A dispute between landlord and tenant?  Hardie:  Very good. HaThe really Gricean point is that the name is almost misleading. Hearing:  Interdictum Salvianum  one might think:  a profound doctrine of Salvius.  But the title means something more like:  "the Salvian interdict," the remedy associated with a praetor named Salvius. [thelawdictionary.org], [dictionary...thelaw.com]  Which returns us to your earlier concern about "of". Grice:  Interdict of Salvius?  Hardie:  In what sense of "of"?  Grice:  Authorship?  Hardie:  Approximately.  Grice:  Ownership?  Hardie:  No.  Grice:  Subject matter?  Hardie:  No. Ha And there is even a nice parallel with the Luculleae lanceae.  Luculleae = things called "Lucullan." Interdictum Salvianum = remedy called "Salvian."  In both cases the adjective is not primarily descriptive; it serves to attach a name to an institution or object. The difference is that the Interdictum Salvianum survived and became a standard legal term, whereas the Luculleae lanceae seem not to have enjoyed much of a career beyond the anecdote in Suetonius. [thelawdictionary.org], [dictionary...thelaw.com], [oed.com] So Hardie's final assignment might be:  Explain why a remedy about unpaid farm rent came to be named after a praetor rather than after the tenant, the farm, the rent, or the pledge.  And Grice would return the next week with twenty pages on the meaning of "of."Ha Hardie: Not philosophical enough, Grice? Grice: Quite the contrary: pledge is my favourite philosophical word, almost. -- What's latin for pledge law? ThanksHa Grice e Hardie de Pignore Hardie:  Not philosophical enough, Grice?  Grice:  Quite the contrary, sir.   Pledge is one of my favourite philosophical words.  Hardie:  Better than of?  Grice:  Nothing is better than of. Ha As for "pledge law", the principal Roman legal vocabulary would be:  pignus = a pledge, pawn, security given for a debt. [thehistorianshut.com], [everything...ined.today] ius pignoris = the law/right of pledge. de pignore = "concerning pledge." ius pignorum can also be used for the body of law relating to pledges.  The modern discussion of the Interdictum Salvianum places it squarely within the development of Roman pignus law. It is described as a remedy protecting the landlord's rights in pledged property connected with farm tenancies. [thehistorianshut.com], [everything...ined.today] So Hardie's tutorial might continue: Hardie:  What was the Interdictum Salvianum about?  Grice:  Pignus.  Hardie:  Translate.  Grice:  A pledge.  Hardie:  Philosophically?  Grice:  A promise embodied in a thing.  Hardie:  Hm.  Grice:  A debtor says: "Trust me."   The creditor replies: "I prefer the sheep." Ha And Grice could make it philosophical very quickly: A pignus is fascinating because it is halfway between:  a sign, a guarantee, a token of intention.  The pledged object means:  +> "I undertake to pay."  without saying a word. Which is exactly the sort of thing that interested Grice: how an object, action, or arrangement can carry communicative significance independent of explicit linguistic utterance. So the Oxford moral would be:  Interdictum Salvianum → de pignore → trust, security, obligation, intention.  Hardie's verdict:  "At last, Grice. A legal remedy has become philosophy."Ha Can you please do not use the emoji for smile and write "(Ha)" instead? Because I'm not using or processing hypertext or italic -- etc. A pignus is a thing? Why do English jurists translate it as 'pledge" law? Thanks Those "(Ha)"'s are excellent. So the Lewis Short for pignus is 'thing'? Thanks Not exactly. In Lewis & Short, pignus is not primarily glossed as "thing". Rather, it is glossed along the lines of:  a pledge, security, pawn, hostage  depending on context. However, the reason you are sensing "thing" is that, in Roman law, the pignus is very often the object itself that is handed over as security. Thus:  ovem in pignus dare (to give a sheep as a pledge)  Here the sheep is the pignus. So one can move between:  the concrete thing serving as security; the legal relation created by that thing; the law of pledge (ius pignoris).  A Gricean tutorial: Hardie:  Is a pignus a thing?  Grice:  Often, sir.  Hardie:  And always?  Grice:  No. Sometimes it is a legal relation.  Hardie:  Which is it?  Grice:  That depends on whether one is talking as a farmer or as a jurist.  (Ha) And there is a nice philosophical point here. When a Roman says:  hoc est pignus (this is the pledge),  he may literally point to a sheep, a slave, cattle, furniture, or equipment. But when a jurist discusses:  ius pignoris (the law/right of pledge),  he is no longer talking about the sheep itself but about the legal consequences attached to it. That shift from:  object  to  institution  is exactly the sort of thing that delighted Oxford philosophers. Grice:  First there is a sheep.  Hardie:  Then?  Grice:  Then there is jurisprudence.  Hardie:  A familiar sequence.  (Ha) But 'pledge' is also a verb? What came first? Is the noun use AFTER verb use -- which is more abstract. Is this 'pawn'related to the pawn in chess? I don't think so? Thanks A very good question. For English pledge, the noun and verb are historically entangled, and the story is not as straightforward as "first the abstract verb, then the noun." The older Germanic idea seems to have been primarily the thing deposited as security. One gives a tangible object as a guarantee. From that concrete object arise:  noun: "a pledge" = the thing given as security; verb: "to pledge" = to give such a thing as security.  So, conceptually at least, the noun is very ancient and concrete. That is quite close to Roman pignus. A Roman farmer does not begin with an abstract theory of obligation. He begins with:  ovem in pignus do. (I give a sheep as pledge.)  The sheep is the pignus. Only later does the jurist arrive and discuss:  ius pignoris (the law of pledge).  (Ha)  Now for pawn. No, the legal pawn is not related to the chess pawn. They are different words that merely converge in spelling. The legal word "pawn" (to pawn a watch, to leave an object as security) ultimately comes through medieval forms related to "pledge" and security. The chess pawn comes through French from a word meaning:  foot-soldier, infantryman, peasant,  the humble fellow at the front of the battle line. So: Hardie:  Is a pawn in chess a pledge?  Grice:  No, sir.  Hardie:  Why do dictionaries spell them alike?  Grice:  To distress philosophers.  (Ha)  From a Gricean point of view, pignus is actually fascinating. A sheep delivered as a pledge "means":  +> I intend to pay.  But not naturally. The sheep does not mean payment in the way that spots mean measles. Rather, by convention, the delivery of the sheep signifies:  security, obligation, commitment.  Which is why a Roman lawyer could spend a lifetime discussing pignus, while a Roman farmer merely pointed to the sheep. Hardie:  Which came first, the sheep or the jurisprudence?  Grice:  The sheep.  Hardie:  Excellent.  (Ha) I think this may be connected to Sp. and perhaps It. impegnare -- impegno -- and what is the etym. of pignus proper? Thanks Yes, and your comparison with Italian is exactly right. Italian:  pegno = pledge, security, pawn   impegnare = to pledge, to pawn; later "to commit", "to engage"   impegno = commitment, engagement, obligation  all descend from Latin pignus. [en.wiktionary.org] So there is a historical path something like:  pignus (a pledge-object)  → pegno (a pledge) → impegnare (to put into pledge) → impegno (commitment) The modern abstract sense "commitment" is quite late compared with the original concrete legal sense. (Ha) As for the etymology of pignus itself, the situation is not completely settled. Etymological sources connect it with an Indo-European root meaning roughly:  "to fasten", "to fix", "to bind".  One explanation is that pignus was originally something "fastened" or "held" as security. [en.wiktionary.org], [goong.com] What I find especially interesting is the entry in Lewis & Short. It explicitly derives:  pignus, pignoris  from a root related to pango ("to fix, fasten, drive in, make firm"), and glosses it as:  "a pledge, gage, pawn, security, mortgage." [alatius.com]  So your Grice–Hardie dialogue could continue: Hardie:  What is a pignus?  Grice:  A thing held as security.  Hardie:  And before that?  Grice:  Something fixed.  Hardie:  Fixed?  Grice:  Etymologically, perhaps.  Hardie:  Philosophically?  Grice:  A way of fastening trust to an object.  (Ha) And that is perhaps why pignus became so fertile semantically. Once "the thing held as security" exists, it is easy to move toward:  guarantee,   token,   assurance,   commitment,  and eventually toward Italian impegno, where hardly any sheep remain, but a great deal of obligation does. (Ha) A final curiosity: Latin also uses pignus for things far removed from commercial law, including a hostage, a stake in a wager, and even metaphorically a child as a "pledge" of affection or continuity. Lewis & Short records these broader senses as well. [alatius.com], [PIGNUS, Gl...nge et al.] So the history seems to move from:  concrete object held  to  legal security  to  guarantee  to  moral commitment.  A trajectory that would have delighted both a Roman jurist and an Oxford philosopher. (Ha) amd since Grice's family comes from Anglo-Normal Richard dGris (of Yorkshire), I suppose 'pawn' is just anglo-norman mispronouncing 'pagn' wich is the old Latin pignus -- quite an abstract idea -- a bit like 'ought' -- which is Old English for 'owed' -- and only later as obligation -- more like 'what I owe' -- without the 'pignus' as it were -- the idea of verb: to fast or bind seems plausible. Thanks -- in this interdictum it's like a antecedent of the pignum lex pigni -- because it related or clarified conditions of non-ownership and what is 'owed' -- etc. Yes, I think there is a real historical connection there. The legal English noun and verb pawn are generally traced through Old French and Anglo-Norman forms connected with the same family as Latin pignus. I would be cautious about describing it simply as a "mispronunciation" of pignus, but conceptually you are very close: the Anglo-Norman and French forms are descendants of the Latin word. The descendants listed from pignus include Italian pegno and related Romance forms. [thehistorianshut.com] So your chain:  pignus → (Romance forms) → Anglo-Norman/French forms → English pawn  is much sounder historically than many people realize. (Ha) Your comparison with ought is also suggestive. Historically:  ought = owed  and only later acquires the generalized moral meaning:  "one ought to do X."  Similarly:  pignus  begins with a concrete object held as security and broadens toward:  guarantee, obligation, commitment.  The abstraction grows out of the concrete practice. (Ha) As for the Interdictum Salvianum, yes, I think your formulation is quite illuminating. The sources describe it as a remedy connected with the landlord's security interest in the tenant's property and as an important stage in the development of Roman pledge law (pignus). It enabled a landlord to obtain possession of goods pledged for rent. [gutenberg.org], [en.wikipedia.org], [gutenberg.org] So one might say:  First there is the practical problem: "The rent is owed."  Then:  "These goods stand as pignus."  Then:  "What rights does the landlord have?"  And the Interdictum Salvianum is one of the legal devices developed to answer that last question. [gutenberg.org], [gutenberg.org] A Hardie reconstruction: Hardie:  What is a pignus?  Grice:  A thing held because something is owed.  Hardie:  Better.  Grice:  The sheep is not the debt.  Hardie:  Continue.  Grice:  Nor is it the rent.  Hardie:  Continue.  Grice:  It is what stands between the debt and the debtor.  Hardie:  Now we're getting somewhere.  (Ha) And that really is close to Roman legal thought. The pignus is neither the obligation itself nor the payment itself; it is the thing that secures the obligation. From there one naturally gets a body of law concerning what happens when the obligation is not fulfilled—which is precisely the environment in which the Interdictum Salvianum appears. [gutenberg.org], [en.wikipedia.org] So your instinct is sound: the interdict is not "pledge law" in the fully developed juristic sense yet, but it belongs to the historical development by which Roman lawyers came to think systematically about security, debt, possession, and what is owed. That is why a seemingly humble agricultural remedy later became important to legal historians. (Ha) as the tragic poet who pawned his cloak. This is Hart's defeasibility: if the rent is NOT payed -- pawn and pledge and pignus are 'defeaters' or anti-defeaters -- all things going well, no pignus -- or if the tenant cannot show credit he is asked to pignus -- to plegde, to offer a pignus -- or promise some earn as 'pignus' Thanks Yes, and I think this is precisely where H. L. A. Hart's notion of defeasibility becomes illuminating. A debt relation, in the ordinary case, runs smoothly:  Rent is due. Rent is paid. End of story.  No pignus is needed. The pignus enters precisely when the normal course of affairs is vulnerable to failure. One might say:  "The tenant owes rent."  That statement carries an implicit background assumption:  +> and will pay it.  But if confidence weakens, the landlord asks for a pignus. The sheep, mule, tool, or whatever is handed over as security. The pignus is thus not the debt itself. It is a device designed to survive a possible defeater:  "Suppose the rent is not paid."  (Ha) A Hartian reconstruction: Hardie:  What is a pignus?  Grice:  A precaution against disappointment.  Hardie:  Too literary.  Grice:  A legal anti-defeater.  Hardie:  Better.  (Ha) The legal relation is almost conditional:  If rent is paid, the pignus returns to the tenant.   If rent is not paid, the pignus becomes relevant.  So the pledge lives in the space opened by a possible exception. That is very close to Hart's favorite territory.  Your tragic poet who pawns his cloak is a wonderful example. The cloak is not valuable for its own sake in the transaction. The cloak functions as:  evidence of seriousness, security, collateral, a substitute for trust.  A Gricean might even say:  the cloak means: "I intend to come back and redeem it."  Not naturally, but conventionally. (Ha) Hence the progression:  promise  → doubt → pledge → law of pledge → Interdictum Salvianum The interdict becomes necessary precisely because promises sometimes fail and obligations are sometimes defeated. The law is brought in not for the ordinary case but for the abnormal one. Hardie:  Then Roman pledge law is a study of exceptions?  Grice:  Like most philosophy, sir.  (Ha) And that is perhaps why pignus is philosophically attractive. It stands exactly between:  trust and coercion, promise and performance, intention and fulfillment.  The sheep is there because words alone are not always enough. (Ha) and would it a stretch to apply pignus and plege to say, Grice's principle of conversational helpfulness -- or has it? I pledge to do... abide by the principle. You do not. You owe me. Thanks No, I do not think it is a stretch at all—provided one keeps it as an analogy and not as historical Roman law. Grice's Cooperative Principle is not ordinarily presented as a contract. One does not explicitly say:  Promitto me cooperaturum esse. (I promise that I shall cooperate.)  Nevertheless, conversation proceeds as if each participant had tacitly undertaken something. A Hartian-Gricean reconstruction might be:  When I enter conversation, I place my rational credibility "in pledge".  Not a physical pignus, of course, but something analogous. If I assert:  "The President of the British Academy has a corkscrew in his pocket,"  and then add:  "I have no reason whatever for saying so,"  I have defaulted on the conversational expectation that my assertion be relevantly grounded. (Ha) So one might say: Conversation begins.  A implicitly pledges: "I shall try to be truthful, relevant, sufficiently informative, and intelligible."  B relies upon that pledge. If A systematically fails:  A incurs a kind of conversational debt.  (Ha)  A Grice–Hardie dialogue: Hardie:  What is the conversational pignus?  Grice:  One's reputation.  Hardie:  Explain.  Grice:  Every assertion implicitly pawns a little credibility.  Hardie:  And if one pays?  Grice:  The credibility is returned.  Hardie:  And if one does not?  Grice:  The creditor forecloses.  (Ha)  There is even a connection with your earlier point about ought. Originally:  ought = owed.  Then:  I ought to do X  comes to mean roughly  I stand under an obligation to do X.  Likewise in conversation:  I say X.  The hearer may immediately acquire a claim:  Why do you say that?   What grounds have you?  In that weak sense, the speaker has become indebted. A conversation is a structure of mutual expectations and entitlements.  So I could imagine Grice saying:  The Cooperative Principle is not a contract.   Yet a conversation without mutual undertakings would be as difficult as commerce without credit.  And Hardie replying:  Then every assertion is a promissory note?  Grice:  Nearly.   Maturity date: immediately.  (Ha) That seems very close to the spirit of both Hart's defeasibility and Grice's conversational rationality. A pignus secures performance when trust alone may fail; conversational maxims operate because interlocutors extend one another a kind of credit that may subsequently be earned—or forfeited. (Ha) Incidentally, the tragic poet was real, I believe? his claim to history -- he authored Antreus -- was that he pawned his cloak? But in this interdictum is more like farming objects -- I wonder what would happen if the crops have been so bad that there is nothing to present as 'pignum'? Thanks Yes, the tragic poet was real: Lucius Accius (170s–80s BC), the great Roman tragedian and author of an Atreus. The famous anecdote is that he lived frugally and became a byword for poverty despite immense literary prestige. However, I would not want to swear, without checking the primary source, that the specific cloak-pawning story is attached to Accius rather than another poet. That is one of those anecdotes that tends to migrate in literary history. So I would treat that cautiously. Now to the Interdictum Salvianum. Your question is exactly the sort a Roman jurist would ask. The standard picture is:  Tenant rents a farm. Rent is owed. Tenant's goods on the farm (invecta et illata) stand as security. The landlord can proceed against those goods if rent is unpaid. [gutenberg.org], [en.wikipedia.org], [gutenberg.org]  But suppose there has been:  crop failure, disease, drought, locusts, simple poverty.  What if there is nothing of value? Then the pignus disappears as a practical remedy. (Ha) A legal right against pledged property presupposes that there is property to seize. One can imagine Hardie's tutorial: Hardie:  What if the tenant has no crop?  Grice:  Then no crop can be taken.  Hardie:  What if he has no cattle?  Grice:  Then no cattle can be taken.  Hardie:  What remains?  Grice:  Jurisprudence.  (Ha) More seriously, the Interdictum Salvianum was a remedy concerning pledged assets. From that alone one may safely infer:  if there are no assets subject to the pledge, the remedy has much less to operate upon.  But I have not found a source in front of me specifying exactly what happened in the total-collapse scenario, so I should not invent Roman procedure. What is philosophically interesting is your Hartian point. A pignus is a device for the abnormal case. Normal sequence:  rent due → rent paid.  No legal drama. The pledge exists for:  rent due → rent not paid.  The entire institution anticipates failure. In that sense the pignus really is an "anti-defeater," as you put it. The landlord extends credit, but not naked credit. The sheep, cart, tools, livestock, or produce stand behind the promise. Hardie:  What is the meaning of a pledge?  Grice:  "Trust me."  Hardie:  Then why the sheep?  Grice:  Because trust occasionally requires assistance.  (Ha) And one final Gricean observation. A promise says:  "I shall pay."  A pignus says:  "If I do not pay, this thing may speak on my behalf."  The object becomes a kind of silent guarantor. That is perhaps why pignus proved so fertile a word, eventually giving us descendants such as Italian pegno and impegno: the concrete thing gradually turns into the abstract notion of commitment itself. (Ha) Can you try a second run for the poet -- I don't think it's the one you mentioned. I think it was criticised by another poet. I like the idea of no pignus and you are right in being cautious as how the interdictum would proceed in such a case -- but at least the poet (if not the farmer) had a nice cloak. Thanks I think your memory may be pointing not to Accius but to another poetical anecdote, and I have not yet found a source that securely connects "the poet who pawned his cloak" with Accius. The search results I checked do not produce that story. [en.wikipedia.org], [britannica.com] So, for the moment, I would be cautious and say:  I remember the type of anecdote you mean, but I have not verified the poet's identity.  That is one for a future philological hunt. Now, on the Interdictum Salvianum, I think your interpretation has become rather attractive. Suppose:  the rent is due; the tenant has pledged certain goods (pignora); the harvest fails; there are no saleable crops; there is little or nothing left to seize.  The legal remedy becomes progressively less useful as the pledged assets disappear. The interdict presupposes the existence of property against which one may proceed. The sources describe it as a remedy enabling the landlord to obtain possession of pledged goods connected with the tenancy. [gutenberg.org], [en.wikipedia.org], [gutenberg.org] So one can imagine: Hardie:  What if there is no pignus?  Grice:  Then the law has run out of sheep.  (Ha) Hardie:  And what remains?  Grice:  The debt.  (Ha) In other words:  Debt and pledge are distinct.  The debt can survive the disappearance of the pledged object. The pignus merely gives the creditor an additional route of protection. That is why I rather like your Hartian reading. The pledge is there because things may go wrong. If all goes well:  rent paid, pledge returned, lawyers unemployed.  (Ha) If things go badly:  rent unpaid, pledge activated, interdict invoked.  (Ha) And if things go very badly:  rent unpaid, crops failed, no substantial pledge remains.  Then the interdict may have little practical work left to do, however elegant the jurisprudence. As for the poet, unlike the unfortunate farmer, he at least had a cloak worth pawning in the first place. (Ha) Rubrenus! Ah! Rubrenus. That rings much truer than Accius. I suspect you are thinking of the poet whom Horace mocks, and whose poverty became part of the joke. Unfortunately, on a quick second run I did not find a source securely identifying the "pawned cloak" anecdote, so I cannot verify it from the evidence presently before me. [poetryintr...lation.com], [thelatinlibrary.com] But "Rubrenus" is a much better lead than Accius, and I think my earlier suggestion was probably mistaken. (Ha) What I do find attractive is the connection with pignus. The poor poet pawns his cloak:  cloak = pignus  The poor farmer pledges livestock, equipment, produce, or whatever was brought onto the farm:  sheep = pignus  The underlying structure is the same. And that brings us back to your Hartian reading. The Interdictum Salvianum is not really about the debt itself. It is about the thing standing behind the debt. One can almost formulate it:  Tenant owes rent. If rent is paid, nothing happens. If rent is not paid, the pignus becomes relevant.  So the pignus is a kind of legal reserve parachute. (Ha) And if there is no pignus? Then the landlord's position becomes awkward. The remedy presupposes that there are pledged assets against which one may proceed. The sources describe the interdict as a remedy by which a landlord could obtain possession of pledged goods connected with a farm tenancy. [grokipedia.com], [oed.com], [en.wikipedia.org] Hence: Hardie:  What if there is no pledge?  Grice:  Then the law of pledge has mislaid its subject matter.  (Ha) Or: Hardie:  What remains?  Grice:  The debt remains. The sheep does not.  (Ha) What I particularly like in your comparison is that the poet's cloak shows us the original concreteness of the institution. Modern lawyers speak of:  security, collateral, obligations, encumbrances.  But originally there may just be:  a cloak, a sheep, a cart, a ring.  The abstraction comes later. Hardie:  What is a pignus?  Grice:  A philosopher says "security".  Hardie:  And the farmer?  Grice:  "My best sheep."  (Ha) Rubrenus Lappa? Thanks Yes! You had it. It is Rubrenus Lappa, the tragic poet mentioned by Juvenal. Juvenal's line is famous precisely because it combines tragedy, poverty, and pawn law. [en.wikipedia.org], [loebclassics.com] The crucial Latin is:  cuius et alveolos et laenam pignerat Atreus? [loebclassics.com]  The Loeb translation renders it:  "Can we expect Rubrenus Lappa to be as great as the ancient tragedians when his Atreus has to be pawned for his dishes and cloak?" [loebclassics.com]  The joke is delightful. It is not literally Atreus, of course, who goes to the pawnbroker. Rather:  the tragedy "Atreus"  has become so unprofitable that "Atreus" is said to pawn the poet's household possessions and cloak. [loebclassics.com] A Grice-Hardie reconstruction: Hardie:  What is the relation between tragedy and pledge law?  Grice:  Ask Rubrenus Lappa.  Hardie:  What happened?  Grice:  His Atreus pawned his cloak.  Hardie:  The play?  Grice:  Metonymically, sir.  (Ha) And there is a beautiful connection with pignus. The farmer under the Interdictum Salvianum may pledge:  cattle, tools, produce, property brought onto the farm.  The poet pledges:  his cloak.  The underlying legal idea is the same: a tangible object stands behind an obligation. [dictionary...thelaw.com], [laws.studio] What I particularly like is that Juvenal's joke presupposes that everyone understood pawning as an everyday reality. The tragic grandeur of Atreus collapses into the mundane world of collateral and debt. Grice:  What is a tragedy?  Hardie:  A serious dramatic composition.  Grice:  And what is a Roman tragedy?  Hardie:  Sometimes a cloak at the pawnbroker's.  (Ha) So your memory was quite right: it was Rubrenus Lappa, and specifically his Atreus, that Juvenal links with pawning the cloak. [loebclassics.com], [en.wikipedia.org] and we are saying that this interdictum was there somewhere so that Juvenal can refer to less 'farming' occasions for pledge, etc? Thanks Yes, I think that is substantially right, with one historical qualification. The Interdictum Salvianum itself seems to have originated in the context of agricultural leases and the tenant's pledged property on a farm. The sources describing it place it squarely in that setting. [alatius.com], [PIGNUS, Gl...nge et al.], [latindictionary.io] But the legal institution of pignus was much broader than farming. Lewis & Short shows pignus being used for:  a pledge or security generally, a pawn, a hostage, a wager or stake, and various legal transactions. [historyrise.com], [famguardian.org]  So by Juvenal's time, readers did not need to think:  "Ah, this is an agricultural tenancy under the Interdictum Salvianum."  They merely needed familiarity with the everyday practice of pledging or pawning property. Hence Juvenal can say of Rubrenus Lappa's Atreus:  cuius et alveolos et laenam pignerat Atreus [GREXv2 | Word]  and the audience immediately grasps:  dishes pawned, cloak pawned, poet impoverished.  The legal background is the larger world of pignus; the Interdictum Salvianum is one specialized chapter within that larger world. A Hardie-Grice reconstruction: Hardie:  Is Juvenal thinking of the Interdictum Salvianum?  Grice:  Not specifically, sir.  Hardie:  Then why mention it?  Grice:  Because both belong to the same universe of pignus.  Hardie:  The farmer pledges a sheep.  Grice:  The poet pledges a cloak.  Hardie:  The jurist writes an interdict.  Grice:  And Juvenal writes a satire.  (Ha) What I especially like is that the farmer and the poet end up on the same conceptual map. The farmer's ox and the poet's cloak are both concrete objects standing behind an obligation. The legal mechanism may differ, but the underlying idea of pignus is recognizably the same. (Ha) and you were saying 'illata' and other thing -- as things brought -- say, the tenant builds a hut, or shed? -- thanks. Yes, and this is exactly the right question. The legal sources associated with the Interdictum Salvianum often speak of:  invecta et illata  that is, roughly:  "things brought onto the premises." [alatius.com], [latindictionary.io]  The examples usually envisaged by Roman lawyers are movable property associated with the tenant's farming operation:  cattle, tools, wagons, equipment, stored produce,  and similar items brought onto the leased land. [alatius.com] Now your hut or shed raises a subtle question. A hut that the tenant builds on the land is not obviously an illatum ("brought in"), because it was not brought onto the farm. It was constructed there. Interestingly, one of the sources discussing these remedies notes references not only to things brought onto the property (invecta importata) but also to things:  ibi nata factave ("born or made there"). [alatius.com]  So Roman lawyers were aware that some relevant objects were not merely imported from outside but originated on the premises. Whether a particular hut or structure counted for purposes of the pledge is a more technical question, and the sources before me do not specify the answer. So I should be cautious. A Hardie tutorial might proceed: Hardie:  What is an illatum?  Grice:  Something brought onto the farm.  Hardie:  A cow?  Grice:  Certainly.  Hardie:  A plough?  Grice:  Certainly.  Hardie:  A shed built by the tenant?  Grice:  Ah.  Hardie:  Well?  Grice:  It was not brought there.  Hardie:  Then?  Grice:  It was made there.  Hardie:  Continue.  Grice:  The Roman jurists were paid to worry about precisely that distinction.  (Ha) And philosophically, it resembles your earlier point about pignus. The easy cases are:  sheep, plough, cloak.  The difficult cases begin when one asks:  What exactly counts as the thing pledged?  That is where jurisprudence starts to grow around the original practical arrangement. (Ha)

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Salvio – Ossia: Grice e Salvio -- Grex griceiana – verbalia: Salvio A third, mischievous candidate There is also:  Salvius, one of the murderers of Pompey. [GREXv2 | Word]  A Gricean could instantly ask:  Is killing someone a way of ending a conversation?  But that is perhaps too dark even for Oxford.Ha