Dubii, Falsi, Varii
179. AEGIALEUS. Man of liberal education; physician? Carchar (Mesopotamia). 276/82.
PLRE I s.v. Aegialaus, p. 16.
One of four judges in the debate between Mani and the bishop Archelaus (claruit sub imperatore Probo , Jer. De vir. ill . 72) composed by Hegemonius, which survives in a defective Latin trans., Acta Archelai (s.IV 2/2?), and which Epiphan. Panar. haeres . 66.10ff. draws upon.
A pagan and vir primarius (Acta Arch . 12) of Carchar (
, Epiphan. Panar. haeres . 66.10.2), A. is described as archiater nobilissimus et litteris apprime eruditus in Acta Arch . and as 
in Epiphan. The medical expertise attributed to A. in Acta Arch . is associated in Epiphan. with a Claudius 
, who in turn appears as a simple rhetor in Acta Arch. ; for the correspondences between the two works, see s.v. Manippus, no. 236. The phrase 
in Epiphan.—"a man of letters by his very nature" or "to the depths of his being," i.e., litteris apprime eruditus —probably finds 
used as a simple epithet, in a nontechnical, nontitular sense; cf. Appendix 3.
The debate is of very doubtful historicity.
+ 180. AETHERIUS. Gramm. (and poet?). Apamea. Aet. incert. ; probably not before s.V ex. / s. VI init.
RE Suppl. 1.41 (Crusius); Chr.-Sch.-St. 2:2.107-9; Hunger 2.13; Koster, "De accentibus" 133f.
Listed in the catalogue of gramm. in Kröhnert, Canones 7, as 
, under the heading 
; cf. ibid. 50ff. Fragments of his work are included in the compilation 
published from codd. Urbin. 151
and Laurent. LVII.34 by Koster, "De accentibus." Other fragments are found in a similar compilation inscribed 
vel sim . in codd. Paris. suppl. gr. 202 and Laurent. LV.7. The compilation remains unpublished; cf. Cramer, Anecd. Paris . 1.397, with Hilgard, GG 4:2, xc; Egenolff, Orthoepischen Stücke 32; Kröhnert, Canones 50.
Evidence for A.'s date is lacking. His presence in the company of Orus, Georgius Choeroboscus, and Ioannes Philoponus (qq.v., nos. 111, 201, 118) may suggest that he should not be set earlier than s.V 2/2 or s.VI init., although like Choeroboscus he could have lived much later. Pace Kröhnert, Canones 51, no reliable conclusions concerning A.'s date can be drawn from the order of his appearance in the catalogue noted above, esp. since there seems to be a serious corruption in the catalogue's text immediately after A.'s name; see s.v. Orus ad fin .
A. is possibly the poet Aetherius mentioned in the Suda Ai .116, 
(Cf. SudaP .204 for an Aetherius as dedicatee of a poem by Panolbius [= PLRE II s.v., p. 829]; for a discussion placing the poet Aetherius in the context of s.V ex., see Alan Cameron, "Wandering Poets" 505f.). There is no evidence that would allow a certain conclusion. The identification was denied by Kröhnert, Canones 52; it was affirmed more or less tentatively by Crusius, RE Suppl. 1.41; by Koster, "De accentibus" 133 n. 1; and by Chr.-Sch.-St. 2:2.1079. Note that Crusius and Koster miscontrued the argument of Kröhnert, who proposed that A. was designated 
in the mss noted above in order to distinguish him from another Aetherius, viz., the poet; Kröhnert did not claim that A. must be distinguished from the poet because he is designated 
, which would, of course, be absurd. But Kröhnert's argument still falls short of compulsion.
If Simplicius the brother of Aetherius the poet is Simplicius the philosopher, as is often assumed or suggested, the identification of A. with the poet is probably ruled out: A. was an Apamean, whereas Simplicius's brother presumably had the same origin as Simplicius, in Cilicia; cf. Agath. Hist . 2.30 Keydell.
181. AGROECIUS. Rhetorician? Bishop of Sens? Gaul. s.V 2/4(-3/4?).
RE 1.902 (Goetz); Sch.-Hos. 4:2.206-7; PLRE II s.v. 3, p. 39.
Agroecius: cf. GL 7.114.7f., "Agroecius" cum Latine scribis, per diphthongon scribendum, non, ut quidam putant, per "i," "Agricius, " perhaps correcting Auson. Prof . 15, on Censorius Atticus Agricius; cf. Green, "Prosopographical Notes" 23.
Styled rhetor in codd. Bern. 338 and 432. A.'s Ars gives no sign of his profession or status beyond the fact that he writes to his dedicatee, the bishop Eucherius of Lyons, as an inferior to a superior; cf. the salutation, Domino Eucherio episcopo Agroecius ; and cf. esp. GL 7.113.1-3, libellum Capri de orthographia misisti mihi. haec quoque res proposito tuo et moribus tuis congrua est, ut, qui nos in huius vitae actibus corrigere vis, etiam in scribendi studiis emendares ; cf. also the Horatian tag, decus et praesidium meum , that closes the prefatory epistle. A. is often identified with Agroecius the bishop of Sens, who received Sidonius Apollinaris Ep . 7.5; that Agroecius is probably the learned metropolitanus referred to at Ep . 7.9.6.
The dedication to Eucherius as bishop dates A.'s Ars sometime between 434 and 450; cf. Stroheker, Senatorische Adel 168 no. 120. If A. is the recipient of Sidon. Apoll. Ep . 7.5, he was still alive ca. 470/71. If the identification of A. with the bishop of Sens is correct, then the early date of the Ars relative to Sidonius's letter and the tone of the dedication to Eucherius (see above) suggest that A. composed his work before his elevation to the episcopacy.
Author of an Ars de orthographia , or Orthographia (the mss have both), presented as a supplement to the work of Flavius Caper, De orthographia et de proprietate ac differentia sermonum ; cf. GL 7.113.8ff. A.'s Ars was transmitted with Caper in the mss and is listed with Caper—and with Isidore of Seville, who drew on A.—in the catalogue of gramm. in cod. Bern. 243, Anecd. Helv . = GL 8, cxlix; the Ars is published in GL 7.113-25 and was edited most recently by M. Pugliarello (Milan, 1978).
A. was possibly related to other known Gallic Agroecii: the rhetorician of Bordeaux commemorated by Ausonius (see above) and referred to by Sidonius in Ep . 5.10.3; or the primicerius notariorum of Jovinus noted in Stroheker, Senatorische Adel 144 no. 12, and in PLRE II s.v. 1, pp. 38f. Cf. also Agroecius the "?wealthy layman" who contributed to the construction of a church at Narbo, noted in PLRE II s.v. 2, p. 39.
182. ALBINUS. Dign., loc. incert . s.IV 1/2 or before?
RE 1.1315.24ff. (Graf); Sch.-Hos. 4:1.142; PLRE I s.v. 4, p. 33.
Albinus: Victorinus De metris et de hexam., GL 6.211.23f. = Audax GL 7.339.1f., Albinus in libro quem de metris scripsit . Mentioned in the list of those who mensuram esse in fabulis . . . Terentii et Plauti et ceterorum comicorum et tragicorum dicunt , Rufinus GL 6.565.4.
The identification of A. with Ceionius Rufius Albinus (= Albinus 15 PLRE I, pp. 37f.) has been suggested on the strength of the metrical interests attributed to the latter at Macrob. Sat . 1.24.19; cf. PLRE I s.v. Albinus 4. Alternatively, identification has been sought with Ceionius
Rufius Albinus, the grandfather(?) of the latter; cf. Graf, RE 1.1315; PLRE I s.v. Albinus 14 ad fin ., p. 37. Evaluation of the probabilities turns on the dating of Victorinus De metris , which was almost certainly composed in the first half or not far into the second half of s.IV; see s.v. Victorinus, no. 273. (The identity of the author of the De metris —certainly not Marius Victorinus—is irrelevant here.) Further, the fact that a reference to A. is found in the Excerpta of Audax (q.v., no. 190), who was not, ut vid ., drawing on Victorinus (nor vice versa), suggests that A. was already mentioned in the common source of Victorinus and Audax; and this in turn almost certainly rules out the younger Ceionius Rufius Albinus (= Albinus 15 PLRE I).
Identification of A. with Albinus the author of a work on music (= Albinus 5 PLRE I, p. 34) has also been suggested in PLRE I s.vv. Identification of these two with the elder Ceionius Rufius Albinus (= Albinus 14 PLRE I) was proposed by Graf, RE 1.1315; Minio-Paluello, "Text" 67 (and others before; cf. Sch-Hos. 4:1.142); differently Pfligersdorffer, "Zur Frage." All these identifications are obviously uncertain.
183. ALETHIUS. Poet and quaestor sacri palatii (ut vid .). s.IV ex. / s.V init.
The subject of Claudian Carm. min . 24 = Alethius 1 PLRE I, p. 39. A mistaken interpretation of Carm. min . 24.6, irati relegam carmina grammatici , would make him a gramm.: so most recently Gnilka, "Beobachtungen" 70ff.
184. ANTIOCHUS. Teacher. Antioch. s.IV ex.
Wolf, Schulwesen 40; PLRE I s.v. 9, p. 72.
The recipient of Libanius's consolation and advice in Or . 39. It can be said with certainty only that A. was a teacher (
), one of whose rivals had been favored with the patronage of the man Libanius calls "Mixidemus": Or . 39.2, 
; cf. 39.16, 
. There is no decisive evidence A. was a rhetorician, though that is assumed by Foerster, ed., vol. 3 p. 264 (likewise in PLRE I s.v.); he may have been a grammarian. Mixidemus's influence in the courts (Or . 39.12ff.) might suggest that A. and his rival were concerned with rhetoric; note, however, that in conclusion Libanius advises A. to console himself by writing invective poetry against Mixidemus, 
(Or . 39.24). Wolf, Schulwesen 40, correctly says that the matter is an open question; Chr.-Sch.-St. 2:2.1075 n. 3 assume that A. was a grammarian.
A. also appears to have been a poet: cf. Lib. Or . 39.24, 
. But the remark may only be a reference to A.'s general literary attainments, a conceit preparing the way for the specific advice noted above.
A. is probably not to be identified with Antiochus the 
(advocate) of Or . 27.10ff., as he is by Foerster and PLRE I. The Antiochus of Or . 27 was not a teacher; cf. Wolf, Schulwesen 40 n. 85.
185. ELIUS APRILICUS. Scribe. Rome. s.III.
PLRE I s.v., p. 86.
Incorrectly identified as a "Jewish grammaticus " in PLRE I on the basis of CIL 6.39085. He was a Jewish scribe, sc. of a synagogue: the inscr. reads 
, not 
; cf. N. Müller, Jüdische Katakombe 115f., with Müller and Bees, Inschriften 6f.
186. AQUILA. Gramm.? Born 335/40? Still alive in 392.
Seeck, Briefe 80; PLRE I s.v. 2, p. 90.
Mentioned by Libanius in 355/56; see Ep . 469.4, to A.'s father, Gorgonius, assessor to the governor of Armenia, urging him to show favor to the sophist Himerius and thus 
. This has been interpreted to mean that A. was a student of Libanius at the time; cf. Petit, Étudiants 26, 49. If so, he is likely to have been born 335/40.
He reappears some thirty-six years after Ep . 469 as the recipient of Ep . 1030 (an. 392), in which Libanius praises the long 
—presumably literary labors, the usual sense in Libanius—that A. had conducted as a favor (
) for Libanius's friend Olympius (= PLRE I s.v. 3, pp. 643f.; d. 388/89). The allusive phrasing of the letter suggests that A. was now performing this favor for Libanius—
—and that the end of the project, whatever it was, was in sight: 
. Perhaps with 
this is a way of saying delicately that Libanius will continue to provide whatever encouragement, material as well as emotional Olympius provided in the past.
A.'s metier is very uncertain. Seeck, Briefe 80, tentatively identified A. with the homonymous 
of Suda A.1041 or with the 
of Suda A.1042. The former sounds more like the earlier(?) rhetorician and philosopher repeatedly praised and cited by Syrianus (= PLRE I s.v. Aquila 1, p. 90). If the Aquila 
of Suda A.1042 is to be identified with a known Aquila, and if in fact A.1042 refers to an Aquila different from A.1041, then A. is a candidate, nothing more. Even then, there is no
guarantee that 
is being used in a technical or professional sense in the Suda ; cf. Appendix 3.
* 187. ARETHUSIUS. Teacher. Antinoopolis. s.IV.
A 
mentioned in the letter of a bridegroom named Papais to his future mother-in-law, Nonna, concerning preparations for the wedding: PAnt . 2.93 = Naldini, Cristianesimo no. 80. A. had apparently given the gift of a pearl: lines 33ff., 
."Arethusius" is not a common name, and, as the editor of PAnt . 2.93 (Zilliacus) remarks, it is "an appropriately poetic name for a teacher." Perhaps it is a surnom de métier ; cf. s.v. Clamosus, no. 29. For other evidence of teachers at Antinoopolis in s.IV, cf. esp. PAnt . 3.156: fragments of Il . 2, with [---]
on the verso.
* 188. ARISTODEMUS. Gramm.? s.IV 2/2? (probably not before s.IV).
Author of an epitome of the 
of Herodian, dedicated to a certain Danaus: Suda A.3915, 
. It has been conjectured that this epitome is the work surviving in some mss of s.XV / s.XVI under the names of Theodosius and Arcadius; cf. Galland, De Arcadii qui fertur libro 12ff.; cf. also s.vv. Arcadius, Theodosius, nos. 16, 152. If that Danaus is the gramm. Danaus (q.v., no. 43) known from the correspondence of Libanius—the profession is appropriate, and the name is very rare—then A. could be dated to the second half of s.IV. No epitome of Herodian is known to have been made before s.IV. See further Kaster, "'Wandering Poet'" 157f.
189. ASTYAGIUS. Gramm.? s.V?
RE 2.1865 (Goetz); Sch.-Hos. 4:2.210; PLRE II s.v., p. 174.
Cited by Pompeius (q.v., no. 125) as an authority on the pronoun; see GL 5.209.1-5, 211.8-10. He was therefore possibly a grammarian. The suggestion in Sch.-Hos. 4:2.210 that Pompeius's first citation, docente Astyagio istam rationem mirifice , betrays "Gleichzeitigkeit und persönliche Beeinflussung" is conceivably correct in substance; cf. below. But since docere or 
in such contexts can equally refer to the written works of predecessors with whom one has no personal connection, the phrasing offers no safe grounds for the inference; see esp. s.v. Romanus, no. 129.
A. is probably to be dated in s.V, before Pompeius, who cites him, and after Servius, whose commentary on Donatus he seems to have known.
It is further possible that the interpolated version of Servius's commentary known to Pompeius was A.'s work: see GL 5.211.5ff., with Chap. 4 n. 36; cf. Chap. 4 n. 8.
The reference to A. in Mai, Classicorum auctorum . . . tomus 5.152 (cod. Neap. Bibl. Reg. IV A 34), is not independent testimony but is derived, like all the other excerpts there, from Pompeius.
190. AUDAX. Dign., loc., aet. incert .: before s. VII; after s.IV 1/2?
RE 2.2278 (Goetz), 14.1845.36ff. (Wessner); Sch.-Hos. 4:2.214-15; PLRE II s.v. 2, p. 184.
Author of a work inscribed De Scauri et Palladii libris excerpta per interrogationem et responsionem in the mss, published in GL 7.320-62. The first sections of the work, GL 7.320-48, correspond to the Ars of Victorinus; see s.v. Victorinus, no. 273. The nature of the resemblances between the two works, however, rules out the direct dependence of one upon the other, and points to a common source. Later portions of the work, GL 7.349-57, show the influence of Probus Inst. art., GL 4.143ff. On the sources of the Excerpta , see Sch.-Hos. 4:2.214-15; Barwick Remmius 77ff. The work is written in question-and-answer form with varying constancy.
A. is to be dated before Julian of Toledo (bp. 680-90), who quotes him in his Ars (1.1.8, p. 11.48ff. Maestre-Yenes) and calls him a grammaticus (1.1.38, p. 17.193ff.). A term. p. q . of s.II would be established if the Scaurus of the title is Terentius Scaurus; Palladius cannot be identified, but cf. s.v., no. 242. If the resemblances of A. and Victorinus are attributable to a common source, it must have existed by the first half or the early second half of s.IV; cf. s.v. Victorinus. If A. relied on Probus's Inst. art ., then a term. p. q . of s.IV 1/2(?) would be established. If the influence of Diomedes that Keil detected is real (GL 7.318f.; cf. Barwick, Remmius 77ff.), a still later term. p. q . (s. IV 2/2 or s.V) would be provided. And if Hubert, "Isidore" 297ff., is correct, at least a part of the excerpts, the "Recapitulatio de accentibus" (GL 7.357.13ff.), depends on Isidore of Seville.
191. AUXILIUS. Gramm.
PLRE I s.v., p. 142.
Auxilius (Scaliger: Ausilius codd.); butt of Auson. Epigr . 6. Called grammaticus (tit.) and magister (vv. 1, 3).
The poem plays on the name "Auxilius" and the noun auxilium , branding the gramm. a walking solecism: vv. 3-4, Auxilium te nempe vocas, inscite magister. / da rectum casum: iam solecismus eris ; in fact, the flaw would strictly be classified as a barbarism, not a solecism—but barbarismus is not suited
to the meter (solecismus , for soloecismus , is itself a metaplasm used metri causa ; cf. Chap. 4 p. 151, Chap. 5, p. 173). As with the other creatures of the epigrams, there is a good chance that Auxilius is a fiction produced for the sake of the conceit; cf. Booth, "Notes" 242 n. 23; cf. also s.v. Philomusus, no. 246.
* 192. BABYLAS. Teacher and martyr. Nicomedia. 304?
A teacher allegedly martyred with eighty-four of his ninety-two pupils at Nicomedia in the Great Persecution: Inédits byzantins , ed. Halkin, 330ff., 
An old man at the time of his denunciation (§1.19 and passim ), he is evidently presented as a teacher of letters for very young students; cf. §1.21f., 
[cf. §2.7] 
. Note that out of his class of ninety-two pupils (§4.31ff.) of various ages (§4.9f.) only the ten oldest children are presented before the tribunal "to give answers that seemed to be beyond the reach of the age of the rest" (§5.1ff.), i.e., the others were not yet capable of reasoning; cf. §5.8ff. B. is otherwise called simply 
: §§1.37; 4.20, 29; 5.40, 46, 48; 7.1f. He was denounced for abusing his profession by teaching the children Christian hymns and the Psalms instead of 
: §1.25ff.; cf. §3.23, B.'s crime referred to as 
; and cf. §2.4ff. Eighty-four of his ninety-two pupils confessed their Christianity (§4.31ff.) and were executed with him (§6.28ff.).
The story in its present form is legendary, and B. himself is probably a doublet of St. Babylas of Antioch; cf. Halkin, ed., Inédits byzantins 329f. On the number pd ' and its connections with the story of St. Babylas, see Delehaye, "Deux Saints." Note, however, that the narrative is not without historical elements, since Priscillianus, the 
(i.e., praeses Bithyniae ) who oversees the executions (§3.38ff., §6), was in fact a persecutor of Christians at Nicomedia in this period: Lact. De mort. pers . 16.4; PLRE I s.v. Priscillianus, p. 729.
* 193. CABRIAS. Teacher. Panopolis. Dead by s.IV init.
"The wife of Cabrias the teacher" is registered as the owner of a parcel of land in a list from Panopolis Of s.IV init.: PPanop . 14.25, 
. For the date and for the reading of C.'s name, see Kaster, "P. Panop." C. is almost certainly the 
Chabrias known from another, contemporary listing of properties in Panopolis, PBerlBork . col. 1.18; see Kaster, "P. Panop."; cf. also s.v. Chabrias, no. 198.
The form of the listing suggests that C. was dead at the time of the survey; cf. s.v. Chabrias and s.v. Eutyches, no. 214; cf. also Kaster, "P. Panop." 133 n. 7.
194. CALLIOPIUS. Scholasticus . s.V?
RE 3.1361-62 (Wissowa); PLRE I s.v. 5, p. 175.
A man of learning (scholasticus ; see below) attested in the subscriptions in some minuscule mss of Terence that descend from the hyparchetype S : Calliopius recensui (or recensuit ) and feliciter Calliopio bono scholastico ; see Jahn, "Subscriptionen" 362ff.; on the transmission of Terence, see the survey of Reeve, "Terence." The subscriptions and hence their relations to the ms families have never accurately been catalogued; cf. Zetzel, Latin Textual Criticism 224. C.'s name has been given to the "Calliopian recension" of the text of Terence.
C.'s responsibility for the text of this so-called recension is controversial. Substantial credit is given to C. by those who believe that the recension was achieved at a single stroke; cf. Wissowa, RE 3.1361, following Leo, "Überlieferungsgeschichte"; Wessner's review of Jachmann, Gnomon 3 (1927), 343ff.; Lindsay, "Notes" 33ff., with Craig, Jovialis 5ff. According to a different, more likely, theory, the recension would be the result of gradual change and accretion, and C.'s importance would be diminished; cf. Pasquali, Storia2 361ff. Jachmann, Geschichte 120ff., esp. 124ff., also denies C. any substantial role, though he retains the idea of a one-stage recension.
C. is usually dated to the fifth century; attempts at dating again involve assumptions concerning his responsibility for the recension; see esp. Wessner's review of Jachmann, p. 344; Craig, Jovialis p. v.
On the strength of the epithet scholasticus he has been regarded as a gramm. (so, e.g., Jachmann, Lindsay, Craig, Wessner, Wissowa, above), a "? lawyer or grammaticus" (PLRE I s.v.), or a lawyer and gramm. (Seeck, Briefe 103). Three points should be noted.
First, scholasticus seems to occur here in a scribal subscr., i.e., the epithet is not necessarily C.'s description of himself. The relationship between the two forms of the subscr. is not clear; see Jahn, "Subscriptionen" 362ff.; and cf. above.
Second, although in the East 
came to serve predominantly as a professional title equivalent to "advocate" or "lawyer," in the West—where C. is presumably to be located, although not even that is clear—scholasticus appears to have stayed in use somewhat longer as a simple epithet, comparable to doctus or litteratus , with no necessary connotation of a specific profession. So much seems to emerge from the evidence collected by Claus, "S XOL AS TIKOS " 43ff.; scholasticus is, of course, also used as a lawyer's title in the West, esp. in the law codes.
Third, I know of no instance where scholasticus by itself clearly serves as a professional title equivalent to grammaticus ; cf. Lehnert, "Griechischrömische Rhetorik" 45; Claus, "S XOL AS TIKOS " 43ff.; cf. also s.vv.
Bonifatius, Coronatus, Lollianus, Philagrius, Aur. Theodorus, nos. 22, 204, 90, 117, 150. It is likely, therefore, that the person who described C. as bonus scholasticus meant nothing more specific than "the good man of learning," "good scholar," "good student." For scholasticus in subscriptions, of. esp. the rhetorician Felix's student Deuterius, termed scholasticus and discipulus in the subscr. to Martianus Capella; see Jahn, "Subscriptionen" 351. For the type of scribal subscr. represented by feliciter Calliopio bono scholastico , see s.v. Servius, no. 136, ad fin .
+ 195. CARMINIUS. Dign., loc., aet. incert. ; before s.IV ex. / s.V init.
RE Suppl. 3.235 (Kroll); Sch.-Hos. 4:1.180.
Author of a work De elocutionibus cited by Servius at Aen . 5.233; also cited by Servius at Aen . 6.638, 861; 8.406. The two citations in Aen . 6 give no useful indication of their origin; the citation in Aen . 8 may come from a commentary: Probus vero et Carminius propter sensum cacenphaton "infusum" legunt . All three could, however, be derived from a work De elocutionibus .
The mss of Macrob. Sat . 5.19.13 present the Carminii curiosissimi et docti verba from a work De Italia (the phrase Carminii verba recurs at the beginning of 5.19.14). Meursius emended Carminii at 5.19.13 to Granii ; Willis emended to Granii, viri —probably correctly. That would be the Granius Licinianus or Granius Flaccus cited elsewhere in the Sat . (1.16.30, 18.4) on antiquarian matters; cf. RE 7.1819ff. nos. 12, 13.
C. must be placed before Servius and probably after Valerius Probus, with whom he is cited by Servius at Aen . 8.406. Datable instances of the name "Carminius" cluster in the early empire, and C. is likely to be closer to s.II (so Kroll, RE Suppl. 3.235) than to s. IV (as in Sch.-Hos. 4:1.180). His omission from PLRE I was probably correct.
196. CATO. Poet. Africa. s.V 4/4.
Sch.-Hos. 4:2.74; Szövérffy, Weltliche Dichtungen 1.183; PLRE II s.v. 1, p. 272.
Author of a poem on a land-reclamation project of the Vandal king Huneric (477-84), preserved in the codex Salmasianus, Anth. Lat . 1:1.387. The allusion to Genesis 1.6 in the poem suggests that he was Christian: vv. 3f., of Huneric, verbo divisit aquas molemque profundi / discidit iussis .
C. has been called a gramm. (e.g., Sch.-Hos. 4:2.74; Szövérffy, Weltliche Dichtungen 1.183; Riché, Education 38) on the basis of an assumed identity with the author of a grammatical Liber Catonis from which extracts on adverbs and on differentiae—ad and at, -ve and vae , etc.—are transmitted in cod. Montepessulan. 306 (s.IX) following extracts from the Epitomae of the gramm. Virgilius Maro (s.VII). For the text of the extracts ex libro Catonis , see Huemer, "Epitomae " 519 n. 1. Nothing further is known of
this work. The title Liber Catonis might suggest some connection or confusion with the Dicta Catonis , which was used as a schoolbook and is often found in the company of grammatical texts; see, e.g., such entries as Catonis libellus et in eodem ars Phocae or Donatus minor et Cato simul or primus liber est Donati, in quo continetur liber Catonis, Aviani, atque Prisciani liber minor in medieval catalogues noted by Quicherat, "Fragments" 125 n. 1, and by Manitius, Handschriften 167ff. The Dicta Catonis is itself preserved in an earlier portion of cod. Montepessulan. 306, fol. 11r -13v . Nothing but the name "Cato" favors the identification with C.
197. ARRUNTIUS CELSUS. Before s.III med.
RE 2.1265 (Goetz); Sch.-Hos. 3.174; PLRE I s.v. 6, p. 194.
Arruntius Celsus: Charis. GL 1.213.18f. = 276.9-10 Barwick, 222.6f. = 286.13-14B., 222.30 = 287.12B. Celsus: Chaffs. GL 1.200.27f. = 261.1-2B., 207.13f. = 268.19-20B., 212.3f. = 274.18-19B., 214.4f. = 276.24-25B., 214.18 = 277.13B., 223.11f. = 288.1-2B.; Consentius GL 5.375.1, 390.6ff.; Priscian GL 2.148.16ff. = 215.13 (and four other times). Cited also as Arruntius: Priscian GL 2.98.7f., 251.13f.; 3.408.2ff. Cited as Arruntius Claudius (q.v., no. 202) by Diomedes, GL 1.321.11f.
A grammatical authority of uncertain date. The citations in Charisius appear only in a section excerpted from Iulius Romanus (q.v., no. 249) on adverbs, GL 1.190.8-224.22 = 246.18-289.17B.; they must therefore be assumed to have been present in the work of the latter. Hence C. is probably to be placed in s.III (before s.III med.), or even earlier; see s.v. C. Iulius Romanus; cf. also Sch.-Hos. 3.174, "vor Romanus und wahrscheinlich auch Caper (s.II)"; and cf. Goetz, RE 2.1265. C. is dated "? III / IV" in PLRE I, although there is virtually no chance of his being as late as s.IV. See also s.v. Arruntius Claudius.
Perhaps to be identified with the Celsus cited in the Scholia Vaticana and the scholia of Servius Danielis to Georg . 1.277; 2.333, 479; 3.188, 296, 313. In at least some of these citations, however, the person meant may more probably be (A.) Cornelius Celsus, the encyclopedist of early s.I who is cited in Schol. Vat . at Georg . 4.1; cf. esp. Ribbeck, Prolegomena 25f.
* 198. CHABRIAS. Teacher. Panopolis. Dead by s.IV init.
"Another house, belonging to the sons of Chabrias the teacher [
] and [his] brothers," registered in a topographical listing of properties in Panopolis executed early in s.IV, PBerlBork . col. 1.18. For the date, see Youtie, "P. Gen."; Borkowski, PBerlBork . p. 13. The listing of the property as the joint possession of C.'s sons and brothers, i.e., of his heirs, shows that C. was dead at the time of the survey; cf. Youtie, "P. Gen." 170; Borkowski, PBerlBork . 26ff. For other 
in this same register, see s.vv. Eutyches, Theon, nos. 214, 267.
C. is almost certainly the 
Cabrias whose wife (i.e., widow) is recorded as the owner of a parcel of land in another, contemporary list from Panopolis, PPanop . 14.25; see s.v. Cabrias, no. 193; cf. Kaster, "P. Panop."
+ 199. IOANNES CHARAX. Gramm. s.VI 1/2 / s.IX 1/2.
RE 3.2123-24 (Cohn); Chr.-Sch.-St. 2:2.1077, 1078; Hunger 2.13f., 19.
Styled 
: Choerobosc. Schol. in Theodos., GG 4:2.243.8, 245.15, 297.22; ms of the 
(Bekker, Anecd . 3.1149) and mss of the 
(cf. Egenolff, Orthographischen Stücke 4f.).
The subject, form, and content of C.'s Schol. in Theodos ., excerpted by the patriarch of Alexandria Sophronius (841-60) and dedicated to Ioannes, bishop of Tamiathis, all show that C. was a teacher. The work originated as a series of lectures—not a written treatise—on the basic textbook of Theodosius (q.v., no. 152), and it refers to lectures anticipated or already delivered on other texts or topics in the syllabus: e.g., GG 4:2.399.35f., 
, [viz., of Herodian] 
; 430.6f., 
[sc. 
] 
; cf. 375.23f., 
[sc. 
] 
; 426.15f., 
; for lectures already delivered, cf. 430.1, 
, on 
, of which C. also promises a more detailed presentation (cf. 430.6f., quoted above). C.'s Schol. in Theodos . thus belongs to the category of 
commentaries; the phrasing of 426.15f. shows that the passages cited above refer primarily not to C.'s writings but to the course of his lectures: 
, "when we come to the other technical treatises." For other cross-references of this type, and on 
commentaries, cf. s.v. Georgius Choeroboscus, no. 201.
In addition to the excerpts from C.'s Schol. in Theodos ., Sophronius also preserves a fragment of C.'s 
(sc. 
), GG 4:2.397.1-398.27, inscribed 
[viz., 
] 
and inserted after the scholia on 
25 of
Theodosius, on the same subject. Two other works are preserved under his name, 
(in Bekker, Anecd . 3.1149-55) and 
, both dependent on Herodian; cf. Egenolff, Orthoepischen Stücke 36f., Orthographischen Stücke 4f., respectively. The 
is accessible only in the brief excerpt found in Cramer, Anecd. Oxon . 4.331f. C. is listed under the heading 
in the catalogue of gramm. in Kröhnert, Canones 7.
C. cannot be dated earlier than s. VI 1/2, since he cites Ioannes Philoponus (q.v., no. 118)—twice, as 
: Bekker, Anecd . 3.1150; GG 4:2.432.5. He was active before Sophronius (see above) and before Georgius Choeroboscus, who cites C. four times in his own Schol. in Theodos . (see above), each time as an approved authority. Choeroboscus must now be dated to s.IX 1/2 (see s.v.). I strongly suspect but cannot prove that C. lived closer to the end than to the beginning of the period defined by those termini ; note esp. his concern qua gramm. with usage in Scripture.
He was a Christian; cf. his opinion on the use of the imperative 
in Scripture, cited by Choerobosc. GG 4:2.245.15f., and his use of the formula 
. vel sim . in the passages cited above.
200. FL. SOSIPATER CHARISIUS. v.p., magister . s.IV 2/4-2/3?
RE 3.2147-49 (Goetz); Sch.-Hos. 4:1.165-69; PLRE I s.v. 3, p. 201.
Fl. Sosipater Charisius: Ars tit., GL 1.1.1 = 1.1 Barwick; Rufinus GL 6.572.18. Also Sosipater Charisius: Rufinus GL 6.565.4. Charisius elsewhere in Rufinus and gramm. For citation of C. as "Flavianus," see s.v., no. 219.
Author of an Ars grammatica in five books; C. states in the dedication that his labor was largely devoted to compilation and arrangement: cf. GL 1.1.4f. = 1.5-6B., artem grammaticam sollertia doctissimorum virorum politam et a me digestam in quinque libris ; cf. also the phrasing of Diomedes at GL 1.299.2-7. That statement is borne out by the contents; see Sch.-Hos. 4:1.168 and esp. Barwick, Remmius . On the history of the text, see now briefly Rouse, "Charisius."
C. is styled v.p., magister in the tit. of the Ars . It is not certain whether magister denotes his profession or a palatine office. If the former, perhaps the designation in full would be magister urbis Romae , as Keil conjectured: cf. app. crit . ed. Keil ad loc . (Nellen, Viri 99, mistook Keil's conjecture for the transmitted reading). Or the style might denote C.'s profession otherwise, perhaps with the full designation magister studiorum : cf. s.vv. L. Terentius Iulianus, Annius Namptoius, nos. 87, 103; cf. also s.vv. Dositheus, Servius, nos. 53, 136. If the style denotes an office, perhaps the office was magister scrinii , as suggested in PLRE I. The composition of an
ars might at first sight suggest that C. was a professional gramm.; but cf. s.v. Consentius, no. 203, and note that C. says he compiled his ars out of fatherly concern for his son: GL 1.1.4-6 = 1.4-7B., amore Latini sermonis obligare te cupiens, fili karissime, artem grammaticam . . . dono tibi misi . The dedication of the work to his son appears to place C. in the category of learned amateurs such as, e.g., Aulus Gellius, Ti. Claudius Donatus, and Macrobius; see s.v. Nonius Marcellus, no. 237; cf. Chap. 2 at nn. 142, 152, 153. The use of the name "Flavius" is consistent with tenure of an imperial dignitas ; cf. Keenan, "Names" (1973) 33ff. The name would place him no earlier than s.IV 2/4, a date likely on other grounds (see below).
C. cites Cominianus (q.v., no. 34) and so is probably later than s.III ex. / s.IV init. His use of magnus . . . Iulianus . . . Augustus in a paradigm (GL 1.44.28f. = 54.5-6B.) might indicate that he wrote during or not long after the reign of Julian; cf. Tolkiehn, "Lebenszeit" 1055. On the possible significance of the name "Flavius" for dating, see above. His work was perhaps known to Diomedes (q.v., no. 47).
C. may be cited in the scholium of Servius Danielis (not Servius) to Aen . 9.329, "temere" significat et "facile": Plautus (quoting Bacch . 83) = Charis. GL 1.221.11ff. = 285.27-29B., "temere" pro "facile" Plautus in Bacchidibus (quoting the same verse), in a section from Iulius Romanus. If this were a genuine citation, and if Servius Danielis here represented the commentary of Aelius Donatus, we would be able to locate C. all the more firmly in the middle of s.IV. But the second condition is by no means certainly satisfied; and as for the first, the full forms of the quotations in the two places—Charisius = Plautus + Cato; Servius Danielis = Plautus + Ennius + possibly Cato (see the app. crit . in Servii . . . commentarii ed. Thilo, ad loc .) + Ennius again—make it less probable that Servius Danielis is citing C. If there is any connection at all, the material in the two places probably derives ultimately from a common source that has been more faithfully reproduced in Servius Danielis.
The dedication of the Ars shows that C. was not a "Roman of Rome": GL 1.1.9ff. = 1.12-15B., erit iam tuae diligentiae . . . studia mea . . . memoriae tuisque sensibus mandare, ut quod originalis patriae natura denegavit, virtute animi adfectasse videaris ; cf. esp. Macrob. Sat . 1 praef. 11. On the conjecture of African origin, see below. The statement hodieque nostri per Campaniam sic locuntur (GL 1.215.22f. = 279.1-2B.) is not evidence for C.'s origo . It may suggest that C. lived in Italy, but it is more likely to have been taken over from his source at this point, Iulius Romanus (q.v., no. 249).
Usener, "Vier lateinische Grammatiker" 492, conjectured that C. is lurking behind the Charistus who appears in one ms of Jer. Chron . s.a. 358 as the gramm. who went from Africa to Constantinople to succeed Evanthius (q.v., no. 54). That conjecture is probably correct in the sense
that "Charistus" is no doubt a corruption involving C.'s name; but it is also probably wrong, in the sense that the passage in Jerome should not be emended to read "Charisius"; see s.v. Chrestus, no. 27.
+ 201. GEORGIUS CHOEROBOSCUS. Gramm.; "ecumenical teacher"; deacon and ecclesiastical archivist. Constantinople. s.IX 1/2.
RE 3.2363-67 (Cohn); Chr.-Sch.-St. 2:2.1079f.; Hunger 2.11, 13f., 19, 23, 50.
Styled 
cod. Marc. 491; 
in four other mss (cf. Hilgard, GG 4:2, lxi; the title 
is regarded skeptically by Darrouzès, Recherches 22f.); 
, codd. Marc. 491, Taurin. 261; 
, codd. Barocc. 50, Paris. gr. 2554; 
, cod. Paris. suppl. gr. 1198; 
, codd. Barocc. 116, Paris. gr. 2758, Vat. gr. 1751, Hamburg. 369; 
, cod. Paris. gr. 2008.
From his lectures there survive, in the form of an 
commentary, the scholia on the 
of Theodosius (q.v., no. 152), GG 4:1-2, ed. Hilgard; cf. also the excerpts 
, which derive from the scholia, ed. Koster, "De accentibus" 151ff., with 140ff. Similarly preserved are the scholia on the 
of Hephaestion (ed. Cons-bruch, Hephaestionis Enchiridion 177ff.), a 
(an epitome, in Cramer, Anecd. Oxon . 2.167ff.; cf. Egenolff, Orthographischen Stücke 17ff.; Hilgard, GG 4:2, lxxviii-lxxxii), and 
of the Psalms (Gaisford, Georgii Choerobosci Dictata 3.1ff.; for mss of the work found since Gaisford, see Bühler and Theodoridis, "Johannes von Damaskos" 398 n. 7). On 
commentaries, see Richard, "
"; cf. s.v. Ioannes Charax, no. 199. For C.'s in particular, cf. the inscr. 
vel sim . in codd. Neap. Borb. II D.3, Coislin. 176, and Paris. gr. 2831 of the Schol. in Theodos. ; cod. Paris. suppl. gr. 1198 of the scholia to Hephaestion; cod. Barocc. 50 of the 
; cod. Pads. gr. 2756 of the 
.
Also attributed or attributable to C. and transmitted in various states of preservation are scholia to Dionysius Thrax and a commentary, 
, on the 
appended to the 
of Dionysius.
The scholia to Dionysius survive only in extracts; see Hilgard, GG 1:3, xv-xviii; with Uhlig, GG 1:1, xxxiv. For the versions of the 
see GG 1:3.124-28, 128-150; with Uhlig, GG 1:1, l-li; Hilgard, GG 4:2, lxx-lxxii. A treatise 
also attributed to C. is accessible as part of a collection of excerpts in Valckenaer, Ammonius 188ff.; cf. Egenolff, Orthoepischen Stücke 17ff. On the doubtful or pseudepigraphic works 
(Walz, Rhet. Gr . 8.802-20; Spengel, Rhet. Gr . 3.244-56), 
(cod. Brit. Mus. Addit. 5118), and 
(cod. Paris. gr. 2090), see Cohn, RE 3.2366.67ff.; Hilgard, GG 4:2, lxxxviii-lxxxix.
The scholia to Theodosius—and, less frequently, the scholia to Hephaestion and the commentary on the 
—refer to topics or texts either already covered in the syllabus, e.g., GG 4:2.192.25, or to be presented in the future, e.g., 4:1.135.5, 200.25ff., 211.37, 286.37f.; 4:2.52.31f., 79.11f., 299.9ff. The references allow us to draw a fairly precise picture of the curriculum C. and his pupils followed; cf. esp. Hilgard, GG 4:2, lxviii-lxxxvii.
A term. p. q . of s. VI init.- 1/2 was long recognized in C.'s citations of Ioannes Philoponus (q.v., no. 118; cf. also s.v. Ioannes Charax, no. 199). C. was dated to s.VI by Cohn, RE 3.2363.51f.; the same date was assumed by, e.g., Glück, Priscians Partitiones 44ff.; Lemerle, Premier humanisme 79. For other estimates of C.'s date, see Wouters, "P.Ant. " 603 n. 17; Bühler and Theodoridis, "Johannes von Damaskos" 399 n. 14. B. A. Müller, "Zu Stephanos" 345ff. (accepted by Chr.-Sch.-St. 2:2.1079 n. 4), sought to find a term a. q . in the reference to C. in the 
of Stephanus (q.v., no. 144) of Byzantium s.v. 
, arguing against Meineke's seclusion of that reference as an interpolation in his edition of Stephanus (Berlin, 1849). But Müller: failed to acknowledge C.'s own citation of Stephanus, GG 4:1.305.1ff., a passage that cannot be an interpolation, as Hilgard pointed out; cf. GG 4:2, liv. A date for C. in s.IX 1/2 has now been established by Theodoridis, "Hymnograph," who notes C.'s citations of the hymnograph Clemens and of Andreas Peros. Bühler and Theodoridis, "Johannes von Damaskos," already inferred a term. p. q . of s.VIII 1/2 from C.'s knowledge of the 
of John the Damascene; likewise earlier Papadopulos-Kerameus, "Zur Geschichte," noted by Alpers, Attizistische Lexikon 91 n. 25. A term. a. q . is implied by the citations of the 
and 
in Etym. Gen . and by the excerpts of the scholia to Theodosius in the 
published by Koster, "De accentibus," both compiled sometime in s.IX med.- 2/2. This date in turn is consistent with the style 
; cf. Speck, Kaiserliche Universität 74ff. (although Speck places C. in s.VI); Theodoridis, "Hymnograph" 344. A date in s.IX is also consistent with C.'s use of the Psalter
as a grammatical text, which we should hardly expect in the Constantinople of s.VI, and with the form of C.'s name: "Ein Familienname Choiroist in den Jahrhunderten 6 und 7 schwer glaublich" (P. Maas, private communication, quoted by Di Benedetto, "Techne" 797 n. 2).
202. ARRUNTIUS CLAUDIUS.
PLRE I s.v. Claudius 8, p. 208.
Cited by Diomedes, GL 1.321.11f., sicut Arruntius Claudius asserit , in all likelihood a mistaken reference to Arruntius Celsus (q.v., no. 197; cf. Sch.-Hos. 4:1.180). C. was omitted from RE , presumably because it was taken for granted that Diomedes is in error; cf. RE 12.1265 (Goetz), where Diomedes is simply listed among those who cite Celsus. Jeep, "Priscianus" 7f., suggested that Diomedes misread a reference in his source in the form Arruntius teste Claudio [sc. Didymo ]; for citation of the man as Arruntius, see s.v. Arruntius Celsus. If Jeep was correct, then Celsus could not be dated later than s.I.
203. CONSENTIUS. v.c . Narbo? s.V 1/2?
RE 4.911-12 (Goetz); Sch.-Hos. 4:2.210-13; PLRE II s.v. 3, p. 310; cf. Stroheker, Senatorische Adel 161f. nos. 95, 96.
Author of a grammatical work parts of which are now preserved as the De duabus partibus orationis nomine et verbo (GL 5.338ff.) and as the De barbarismis et metaplasmis (GL 5.386ff.; also edited by M. Niedermann [Neuchâtel, 1937]). References to preceding and subsequent parts of the larger work occur in the sections that survive; cf. Keil, GL 5.332; Sch.-Hos. 4:2.211.
Termed Consentius, v.c . in codd. Monac. 14666 and Leid. Voss. 37. 8. The titulatur in cod. Bern. 432, INCIPIT ARS CONSENTII VIRI CLARI / 
QUINTI CONSULIS [QUINQ CIVITATU ], is gibberish; on its origin as a scribal ludus , cf. Keil, GL 5.334. None of the mss calls him grammaticus , and there is nothing in the extant work to suggest that he was a gramm. by profession; rather, his style (cf. Keil, GL 5.333), his readiness to quote from the spoken Latin of his day (e.g., GL 5.391.31ff.), and his independence in organization and judgment (cf. Sch.-Hos. 4:2.211) all combine to distinguish his work from that of the professional grammatici ; cf. also Loyen, Sidoine 80; Holtz, Donat 83f., 86. On the evidence available, he should be placed in the class of learned amateurs.
Unequivocal evidence for date and location is lacking; on his possible sources, see Barwick, Remmius 4ff.; Holtz, Donat 87ff., the latter esp. on C.'s use of the main source of Donatus. A term. p. q . of s.IV med. is consistent with his use of Lucan, whom he quotes at least twice: GL 5.345.22, 355.17; for use of Lucan as a criterion for dating, cf. s.v.
Phocas, no. 121. An origin in Gaul has been detected in C.'s frequent use of Gallic place names in examples; cf. GL 5.346.3ff., 348.35. It has been customary since Lachmann (ed., Terent. Maur. [Berlin, 1836] xiii) to associate C. with the Consentii of Narbo known to Sidonius Apollinaris; cf. Carm . 23; Ep . 8.4, 9.15.1 v. 22. Attempts at a more precise identification have been made, either with the younger Consentius (= Stroheker, Senatorische Adel no. 96 = PLRE II s.v. 2, pp. 308f.), poet and influential palatine minister under Valentinian III and Avitus (so Osann, Beiträge 2.345ff.); or with the elder Consentius, described as poet, stylist, and polymath by Sidonius Apollinaris, Carm . 23.97ff. (= Stroheker, Senatorische Adel no. 95 = PLRE II s.v. 1, p. 308), father of the younger Consentius and son-in-law of the usurper Iovinus (so Loyen, Sidoine 80f.). If either identification is correct, it is probably the latter: C. would then have been dead by 462, the term. p. q . of Sidon. Carm . 23, and probably would have been born sometime in the last two decades of s.IV—ca. 380, according to Loyen, Sidoine 80 n. 144.
204. CORONATUS. Scholasticus and poet; v.c . Africa. s.VI init.
RE 4.1644 (Skutsch); Sch.-Hos. 4:2.74; Szövérffy, Weltliche Dichtungen 1.187; PLRE I s.v., p. 229, superseded by PLRE II s.v., p. 326.
Epigrammatic poet three of whose poems are included in the codex Salmasianus: Anth. Lat . 1:1.223 (cf. Cupaiuolo, "Locus "), 226, 228. Probably to be identified with Coronatus scholasticus the author of a grammatical work on final syllables, dedicated to Luxurius (q.v., no. 235); cf. the dedicatory epistle, with the salutation Domino eruditissimorum [cod. Monac. 14252: domino viro eruditissimo peritissimorum cod. S. Paul. in vall. Lavant. 24] atque inlustri fratri Luxorio Coronatus , published by Keri, De grammaticis 4 n. (cf. GL 4, 1) = Rosenblum, Luxorius 259. His place and date are suggested by his inclusion in the cod. Salinas. and esp. by his probable connection with Luxurius. He is styled vir clarissimus in the inscr. of the poems in Anth. Lat .
On the strength of the grammatical treatise and the epithet scholasticus C. is commonly said to have been a gramm.; cf., e.g., Levy, RE 13.2103.23ff., 2104.29ff.; Rosenblum, Luxorius 36; Riché, Education 38. Skutsch, RE 4.1644.15ff., is correctly silent. The designation is far from certain: mere authorship of a grammatical work does not guarantee that the author was a gramm.; nor does C. give any indication in the dedicatory epistle that the work grew out of or was intended for use in the schools. Scholasticus is not certainly C.'s self-description but simply occurs in the incipit of cod. S. Paul. in vall. Lavant. 24, fol. 75, expliciunt finales Sergii, incipiunt Coronati scholastici. Scholasticus here probably means merely "learned man" or "scholar" and is distinct from the professional title
grammaticus ; cf. s.v. Calliopius scholasticus , no. 194, ad fin . There is no reason to think that C. was anything but a learned amateur, as his friend Luxurius appears to have been (see s.v.).
+ 205. FABIUS(?) DEMETRIUS. Gramm. Tarraco. s.III.
A magister grammaticus , on an epitaph found at a level of secondary usage in an early Christian necropolis at Tarraco: AE 1928, 200 = AE 1938, 17 = ILER 5716 = RIT 443, D (is ) M (anibus ) [Fabio? De ]metrio [ma ]gistro [gramma ]tico Q (uintus ?) [F ]abius [---fra ]t (ri ?) piiss [imo b ]eneme [renti ---]. For the style magister grammaticus , see Appendix 1.1a. The name "[F]abius" seems uncertain; there is no trace of the -a - in the photograph in RIT . Alföldy, RIT p. 481, dated the inscription to s.III, with a range of s.II ex. / s.IV 1/2.
* 206. DIOCLES.
. Arsinoe. Born 347/ 51; dead not before 408/12.
Monk at Arsinoe, formerly a gramm.(?) and philosopher(?): Pallad. Hist. Laus . 58, p. 152.5ff. Butler,
He was chosen by Dorotheus to administer the bulk of a gift of 500 solidi sent to Arsinoe by the younger Melania (p. 151.20ff.).
207. DIOGENES. Gramm.? Cyzicus. s.IV / s.VI init.? (before Stephanus of Byzantium).
RE 5.737-38 (Schwartz); Chr.-Sch.-St. 2:2.1077; PLRE II s.v. 4, p. 360.
Diogenes: 
, Steph. Byzant. s.vv. 
= FGrH IIIb, 474F1-3; 
, SudaD .1146, the latter name the result of an evident confusion or partial fusion with Diogenianus, gramm. of the reign of Hadrian (cf. SudaD .1139-40, and below). A 
, SudaD .1146. Native of Cyzicus: 
, Suda ibid.; Steph. Byzant. s.v. 
= FGrH 474F2.
The citations in the 
of Stephanus (q.v., no. 144) of Byzantium provide a term. a. q . of s.VI 1/2 at the latest. If the title 
given in the Suda (ibid.) is authentic, D. is not likely to have been active
before s.IV; cf. Chr.-Sch.-St. 2:2.803 n. 2, 1077 n. 2; Schwartz, RE 5.737.63ff. But the authenticity of that title, with 
, is not certain. Note that Stephanus cites the work as 
s.v. 
(= FGrH 474F1) and as 
s.v. 
(= FGrH 474F3); the text of Stephanus s.v. 
(= FGrH 474F2) seems to be corrupt, 
. Compare the case of Theagenes, whose local history of Macedon is cited as 
by Photius, Bibl . cod. 161 (2.127 Henry), but simply as 
by Stephanus (FGrH IIIc, 774F2-12, 14, 15). For similar, earlier efforts by a gramm., cf. esp. the case of Ti. Claudius Anteros, gramm. of Mylasa(?), honored 
, Labraunda 3:2.66.20ff. (s.II; not before 127).
In addition to the work on Cyzicus (in at least three books, in prose, as the citations in Stephanus show), there are three treatises on grammatical subjects attributed to D. in the Suda (ibid.): a 
, a 
, and a 
. Because the Suda appears to confuse D. with the Hadrianic gramm. Diogenianus (see above), Bernhardy conjectured that those works should be attributed to the latter; this was accepted by, e.g., Jacoby, FGrH IIIb, 474T1 and commentary. It remains to be pointed out that if in fact the confusion is so severe, there is a very good chance that D. was not a 
at all.
208. TI. CLAUDIUS MAXIMUS DONATIANUS. Gramm.? Aet. incert. ; perhaps not before s.IV 2/2.
RE 5.1532 (Goetz); Sch.-Hos. 4:1.169; PLRE I s.v. Donatianus 6, p. 268; cf. ibid. s.v. Donatianus 1, p. 267.
Son of Ti. Claudius Donatus (q.v., no. 209), to whom the latter dedicated his Interpretationes Vergilianae . Name and filiation: Interp . tit., ed. Georgii, 1.1.2f.; cf. postscr. 2.642.5f., Tiberio Claudio Donatiano filio suo .
Perhaps D. is the gramm. Donatianus (q.v., no. 51) of the Donatiani fragmentum, GL 6.275.10ff. On the profession and date of the latter, perhaps not before s.IV 2/2, see s.v. The identification is, however, extremely uncertain: note esp. that if D. was the gramm., he was presumably already active when his father wrote the Interp . as a senex —in which case his father's very unflattering comments on the grammatici and their teaching (see s.v. Ti. Claudius Donatus) would be surprisingly if not impossibly tactless.
Further, if D. is to be dated as late as s.IV 2/2, he is probably not Donatianus the senator cited by Priscian, GL 2.225.10, Donatianus in senatu pro se . For with the exception of Vegetius, whose work is known
to have enjoyed some currency in Constantinople (cf. Jahn, "Subscriptionen" 344f.), Priscian quotes no Latin auctor —i.e., no authoritative model other than a technical writer—later than Ulpian.
209. TI. CLAUDIUS DONATUS. Aet. incert. ; perhaps s.IV med.-2/2.
RE 5.1547 (Wessner); Sch.-Hos. 2.105-7; PLRE I s.v. Donatus 4, pp. 268f.
Ti. Claudius Donatus, author of the Interpretationes Vergilianae: Interp . tit., ed. Georgii, 1.1.1; postscr., 2.642.5. The work provides no positive indication of D.'s status; he was almost certainly not a professional gramm., since he explicitly rejects the practices of the schools (proem., 1.1.5ff.) and would even remove Vergil from the sphere of the grammatici : 1.4.27f., intelleges Vergilium non grammaticos sed oratores praecipuos tradere debuisse . His motives for composing the Interp . for his son may be compared in general with those of Macrobius in the Saturnalia ; cf. Kaster, "Macrobius" 258ff. He was probably, like Macrobius, a learned amateur.
His stated interest in the text is rhetorical; his comment, largely paraphrase. For the suggestion that he had been an advocate, see Georgii, ed., 1, viii-ix.
His promise (2.642.12ff.) to compose a work on the characters and historical details in the Aeneid was not to our knowledge fulfilled.
D. composed the Interp . as a senex (2.642.7f.). He is sometimes dated after Servius (q.v., no. 136) because the Interp . allegedly depends on the commentaries of Aelius Donatus and of Servius, and because Servius appears to be ignorant of D. But the dependence is extremely doubtful a use of common sources at most; see Burckas, "De Tib. Claudii Donati in Aeneida commentario" 10ff.; Hoppe, "De Tib. Claudio Donato" 18ff. Further, since D. self-consciously separated himself from the scholastic tradition (see above), it is not surprising that Servius, writing within that tradition, should not know him. If his son and dedicatee, Ti. Claudius Maximus Donatianus, is the man from whose schoolroom the Donatiani fragmentum derives, then D. could possibly be dated to s.IV med.-2/2. But this too is very uncertain; see s.vv. Donatianus and Ti. Claudius Maximus Donatianus, nos. 51, 208.
210. EUDAEMON. Gramm. or, more probably, teacher of rhetoric. 
Born not after ca. 335, and probably not before ca. 324; dead not before 364.
Seeck, Briefe 131f.; Petit, Étudiants 86; PLRE I s.v. 2, p. 289.
Recipient or subject of Lib. Ep . 454 (an. 355/56), 364 (an. 358), 66 (an. 359), 1428 (an. 363), 1286, 1300, 1303 (all an. 364); cf. also Ep . 368 (an. 358).
E. is firmly identified as a "rhetor" in PLRE I, p. 289; cf. Schemmel, "Sophist" 58 (somewhat confused). Petit, Étudiants 86, treats him as a gramm. (similarly Norman, Autobiography 156); Seeck, Briefe 131f., more vaguely speaks of him as a "Lehrer." In fact, explicit and unequivocal indication of E.'s profession is lacking; conclusions must be drawn from the following three passages, which require full presentation.
Ep . 454.4 (an. 355/56), to Phasganius:
Ep . 364.5-6 (an. 358), introducing the poet and teacher Harpocration to Aristaenetus:
school together; i.e., in their schooldays Harpocration had had his upbringing (
) in common with E., as now, in their teaching days, he had a common livelihood (
); cf. 
, a phrase that more suitably describes the relations between friends and contemporaries than those between brothers or between pupil and teacher.
Ep . 368.1, 3, to Themistius: 
[sc. 
] 
If we take as our premise that 
is used here figuratively, this should mean that Harpocration went to Constantinople in the person of a sophist. The phrasing of the first clause, esp. 
, might also suggest that Harpocration was teaching in Libanius's school. Since he was teaching with E., then E. would also be a teacher in Libanius's school; cf. Ep . 364.7, where Libanius says that he personally will console E. for the loss of his friend Harpocration. In Ep . 368.1, however, 
may simply refer to Antioch in general, as opposed to Constantinople.
Clearly, the interpretation of Ep . 364.5 is critical. If the inference drawn above is correct, then Harpocration was a gramm. at Antioch but went to Constantinople as a sophist; in that case, E. was a gramm. at Antioch also. If, however, the inference is not correct—if Libanius's words at Ep . 364.5 should not be pressed to make 
mean "the ancient poets" exclusively—then there is no evidence that Harpocration was a gramm., and he was probably already a teacher of rhetoric at Antioch; in that case, E. probably taught rhetoric also. Given the risk involved in imposing the required precision on Libanius's words at Ep . 364.5—and so the uncertainty of the inference—and given, too, the language of Ep . 368, esp. 368.3, 
, I think that the second alternative is on balance marginally more likely to be correct. But I have no great confidence in this conclusion, and I am aware that other alternatives could be squeezed from the data. If, however, it is correct to conclude that Harpocration and E. were teachers of rhetoric, then a further inference follows with regard to the interpretation of Ep . 454.4 above: as a teacher of rhetoric, E. would not have been interested in Oiling the gap left by the gramm. Iulius. In that case, his machinations alluded to in Ep . 454 concerned some matter unrelated to Iulius's death, and he might already have been a member of Libanius's school by 355/56, as he perhaps was in 358 (see the discussion of Ep . 368.1 and 3 above). This, too, is obviously uncertain. But one further, more firm conclusion can be added: since E. and Harpocration are said to have grown up together (see Ep . 364.5-6 above) and since Harpocration was an Egyptian (see s.v., no. 226), E. must also have been an Egyptian. The patronage of Sebastianus, Ep . 454.4, might point in the same direction.
Briefly, then, the following seems to have been the course of E.'s career through 358: a teacher of rhetoric and native of Egypt, E. was
perhaps in a position by 355/56 to seek or hold a teaching post in Libanius's school at Antioch. He cannot therefore have been born much later than ca. 335; he was not yet married in 355/56 (see below). He remained in Antioch when his long-time friend and fellow teacher Harpocration left for Constantinople in 358.
E. was still in Antioch in 359, enjoying a correspondence with Themistius at Constantinople (Ep . 66.5), possibly as a result of the latter's connection with Harpocration; cf. Ep . 368 and s.v. Harpocration. Autumn 363 found him away from Antioch but still presumably having that city as his base; in Ep . 1428.2 he brings a letter from Libanius to the PPO Or . Saturninius Secundus signo Salutius, who was making his way with the retinue of Jovian to Antioch. Jovian was somewhere between Edessa and Antioch at the time; cf. Seeck, Briefe 412f.
A year later, however, E. was in Cilicia, where he was acting as Libanius's "ambassador" to the god Asclepius at Tarsus—Libanius was suffering from the gout—and looking forward to his own marriage. For Libanius's gout, see Ep . 1286.3, 1300, 1303.1; for E. as Libanius's 
, Ep . 1300.1; for E.'s marriage, Ep . 1300.4, 
[viz., the cure for the gout] 
. Libanius evidently expected the marriage to take place in Cilicia. This may mean that E. had left Antioch and had taken up residence in Tarsus. Although that is not a necessary conclusion—
in Ep . 1300.1 might suggest that his return to Antioch was anticipated—it is clear that his stay in Cilicia was long enough for Libanius to correspond with him. (Ep . 1300 and 1303 are the only letters addressed to E. in the extant corpus.) E. was closely attached (Ep . 1303.2) to Quirinus, a sophist, several times a provincial governor, and a landowner in Cilicia, who evidently died not long before the autumn of 364 (= PLRE I s.v., pp. 760f.).
E. was a pagan and dabbled in the interpretation of dreams (Ep . 1300.1).
Since he was of an age to teach in 355/56, he is not likely to have been born much later than ca. 335. If Ep . 1428.2 can be pressed (Libanius, sending E. to Salutius, uses the simile of fathers who gain vicarious enjoyment by sending their sons to banquets they cannot themselves attend) he is not likely to have been close to Libanius's age, i.e., not likely to have been born before ca. 324.
E. is not to be confused with Eudaemon of Pelusium, who, int. al ., was probably older; see s.v., no. 55.
211. FL. EUGENIUS. 
(392-94).
PLRE I s.v. 6, p. 293.
Fl. Eugenius only in two inscr. dated by the consulship (West) of Theodosius and Fl. Eugenius, ICVR , n.s., 3.8159, 8430; Eugenius elsewhere.
His chronology is uncertain for the period before his elevation, but he was connected with Ricomer by 385 (see below). His place of teaching is unknown; it was presumably in the West.
Described by Socrates as 
, HE 5.25.1; cf. Theoph. Chron . p. 71.2f. de Boor, 
. According to Zosimus 4.54, 
, he was a teacher of rhetoric; cf. Ioan. Ant. frg. 187, FHG 4.609, 
. Given the latter evidence, and given the fact that Socrates' expression 
could refer as well to rhetoric as to grammar (cf. HE 5.14.5; for the expression in Socrates, see s.v. Paulus, no. 116, and Appendix 1.2a), one might think that 
is used by Socrates here in the nontechnical sense, "man of letters," vir litteratus ; cf. Appendix 3. But in fact Socrates otherwise uses the word only in its narrower, titular sense; cf. HE 2.46.3; 3.1.10, 7.18, 16.2-3; 4.9.4, 25.5; 5.16.10, 15. His exact profession therefore seems to be an open question.
Probably before 385 (see below) E. abandoned teaching for the palatine service (Soc. HE 5.25.1), wherein he was respected because of his eloquence and literary attainments: Soc. ibid., 
; Zos. ibid., 
; Ioan. Ant. ibid., 
. He became an 
(Soc. ibid.; cf. Theoph. ibid.), i.e., a magister scrinii (
, Philostorg. HE 11.2) overseeing the drafting of 
, imperial rescripts. This was probably after 385; in 385 he is referred to as v.c . (Symm. Ep . 3.61), although by that date he would probably have been entitled, if he was a magister scrinii , to the rank of spectabilis ; cf. Ensslin, RE , 2. Reihe, 3.156.59ff.
While in the palatine service he became the protégé of Ricomer; cf. Zos. ibid., Ioan. Ant. ibid. This will have been sometime before 385; cf. Symm. Ep . 3.60 (undated) and 61 (an. 385). Both these letters were brought to Ricomer by E., who is referred to in them as dominus et frater meus and v.c., frater meus , respectively. Ricomer introduced him to Arbogast, who intended to use him as a cat's-paw, since he himself could not aspire to the throne because of his barbarian origins (Philostorg. ibid.).
E. was alleged to have been a pagan (Philostorg. ibid.; cf. Soz. HE 7.22.4) or to have served by his usurpation as the rallying point of pagan resistance; see Rufinus HE 2.33; Aug. CD 5.26; Oros. 7.35; cf. also Ambros. Ep . 57.2ff. But the sources may exaggerate the religious motives for the usurpation; cf. Ziegler, Zur religiösen Haltung 85ff.; O'Donnell, "Career" 136ff.; Szidat, "Usurpation."
On E.'s elevation and events through the battle of the Frigidus (5 Sept. 394), see RLAC 6.860-77 (Straub); Matthews, Western Aristocracies 238ff.; RE Suppl. 13.896.64ff. (Lippold); and Ziegler, O'Donnell, and Szidat as cited above.
212. EUSEBIUS. Rhetorician (probably). Aet. incert. ; not later than s.IV / s.V.
RE 6.1445 (Brzoska); Sch.-Hos. 4:1.149; PLRE I s.v. 34, p. 307.
A writer on prose rhythm, according to Rufinus, GL 6.573.25 = Rhet. Lat. min . 581.18; not a "metrical writer," pace Sch.-Hos. and PLRE I. He appears also to have commented on Cic. De inv. ; cf. Grillius Rhet. Lat. min . 598.20. Both data, esp. the latter, suggest that he was a rhetorician rather than a gramm. Evidence for precise dating is lacking; since he is cited by Rufinus and Grillius (qq.v., nos. 130, 225), he cannot be later than s.IV / s.V.
* 213. EUTROPIUS. Gramm.? Aet. incert. ; before s.VI init.
Cited by Priscian, GL 2.8.19f., on the letter x ; quoted immediately after Servius.
The name suggests a late-antique date; identification with any other known literary Eutropii—e.g., the historian, or Fl. Eutropius the subscriber of Vegetius at Constantinople in 450 (cf. Jahn, "Subscriptionen" 344f.)—is not evident.
* 214. EUTYCHES. Teacher. Panopolis. Dead by s.IV init.
"A house belonging to Casiana, daughter-in-law of Eutyches the teacher [
]," and "another house belonging to the sons of Eutyches the teacher," registered in a topographical listing of properties in Panopolis executed early in s.IV: PGen . inv. 108 = SB 8.9902 = V. Martin, "Relevié" 39ff. = PBerlBork . A.II.2 and 14. For the date, see references s.v. Chabrias, no. 198. The two houses were evidently located in the same quarter of the town. The manner of the registration shows that E. was no longer alive at the time of the survey; cf. s.v. Chabrias. For other 
in the same register, see s.v. Chabrias and s.v. Theon, no. 267.
215. EUTYCHIANUS. Gramm.? s.IV 1/2-2/3?
PLRE I s.v. 2, p. 319; cf. ibid. s.v. 3.
Called 
, Script. orig. Constantinop . 2.144.3 Preger; included in a group of authors of autopsy accounts of the dedication of Constantinople and said to have been with Julian in Persia.
The source is very untrustworthy; note esp. that others included among the supposed eyewitnesses—e.g., Eutropius, Troilus—could not possibly have been present. Its terminology is not likely to be precise; 
, "first secretary of the sacred consistory," is certainly anachronistic; 
is perhaps used in a nontechnical sense, "man of letters," as it sometimes is in the Suda (cf. Appendix 3). The notice of
E. should therefore be regarded as of very doubtful historicity; there may be a complete or partial confusion with Eutychianus the soldier and historian, who is also said to have accompanied Julian on his Persian campaign; cf. PLRE I s.v. 3.
+ 216. FELIX. Schoolmaster and martyr.
Magister puerorum and martyr; the story of his passion is legendary and a doublet of that of Cassianus (q.v., no. 26) of Imola, possibly borrowed to explain the origin of F.'s name, "St. Felix in pincis. " See Iacobus de Voragine, Historia Lombardica seu legenda aurea (Nuremberg, 1482) fol. 20v : Felix pronomine "in pincis" dicitur, vel a loco in quo requiescit, vel a subulis cum quibus passus perhibetur. nam pinca subula dicuntur. aiunt enim quod cum magister puerorum extiterit et eis nimium rigidus fuerit, tentus a paganis, cum Christum libere confiteretur, traditus fuit in manibus puerorum quos ipse docuerat, qui eum cum stilis d subulis occiderunt .
+ 217. FILOCALUS.
RE 19.2432-33 (Kroll); cf. Barnes, "More Missing Names" 148.
A Filocalus appears three or four times in "Sergius" Explan. in Don . in exchanges that take the form interrogavit Filocalus. . . . respondit (sc. Servius ?: see below): GL 4.498.23, 501.31, 503.11, 515.30. In the first of these places Keil's text reads interrogatus Filocalus . . . respondit ; there interrogatus should be corrected to interrogavit if the name Filocalus is to remain. But note that the majority of mss reported by Keil have simply interrogatus . . . respondit , perhaps correctly.
Kroll, RE 19.2432-33, followed by Barnes, "More Missing Names" 148 (on F.'s omission from PLRE I, but the omission is probably correct; see below), assumed that F. was a gramm. and identified him with Furius Dionysius Philocalus, the calligrapher associated with the epigrams of Damasus (cf. Ferrua, Epigrammata 21ff.) and with the Chron. A.D . 354. This is almost certainly incorrect. It is chronologically difficult to associate a figure active near the middle of s.IV with Servius (on whose involvement here, see following), whose teaching did not begin until the end of the century (see s.v., no. 136). Moreover, Kroll was too hasty in assuming F. was a gramm.; for it seems probable that the subject of respondit is supposed to be Servius magister ; cf. GL 4.496.26f., where magister Servius dictavit begins the section in which the exchanges appear. It is more likely that F. is here supposed to be a pupil of Servius—in which case the chronological problems would be insurmountable. Finally, we must note that F. is not the only character to appear in these exchanges: one also finds interrogavit Rusticus at GL 4.499.24. The names "Filocalus" and "Rusticus" thus paired—"Mr. Refined" and "Mr. Uncouth"—should
arouse suspicion, and that suspicion should be heightened by the fact that the questions asked by the two correspond to their names. F.'s are fairly involved and show a good grasp of the ars and auctores ; Rusticus's is treated as a bit stupid. It would seem that we are dealing with imagined circumstances here; cf., e.g., Pomp. GL 5.142.35ff., with Chap. 4 p. 160; cf. also s.v. Ter(r)entius, no. 262. Both F. and Rusticus should be regarded as fictions, types invented for the sake of the exchanges, which are themselves devised for the sake of illustration. The entire passage, which finds the teacher responding to questions, is comparable to the model exchanges devised exempli gratia by Pompeius, cited above. PLRE I was correct in omitting F.
218. FIRMIANUS. Gramm.? Vergilian commentator? Before s.IV med.? Cf. PLRE I s.v. 1, p. 338.
Author of a commentary(?) on Vergil, responsible for the correct reading of Aen . 7.543. The name is preserved ad loc . in Servius Danielis (= DServ.): dicit etiam quidam commentarius—Firmiani [DServ.]—"convecta" legendum . If the name in DServ. is derived from the variorum commentary of Donatus, to which the compiler of DServ. had access, then F. could be placed before s.IV med. On the commentarius , see below.
The relation of F. to Firmianus the metrical writer and to the rhetorician and Christian apologist L. Caecilius Firmianus qui et Lactantius is uncertain. The former should perhaps be dated before s.IV med., since his remarks to a certain Probus on comic meter not only were excerpted by Rufinus (q.v., no. 130) but also seem to have been drawn on by [Marius Victorinus] = Aelius Festus Aphthonius: Firmianus ad Probum de metris comoediarum sic dicit . . . . Rufinus GL 6.564.7-20 = [Marius Victorinus] Ars gramm., GL 6.78.19-79.1. The excerpts in Rufinus and the text of Aphthonius = [Victorinus] appear to be derived independently from the same source, although this is uncertain, as is the date of Aphthonius.
Firmianus the metrical writer is usually assumed to be identical with Lactantius; cf. s.v. Victorinus, no. 273, for Lactantius quoted on a metrical point. If the two were the same man, then the date of the metrical writer would of course be established independently of the considerations noted above; and the remarks to Probus would probably have been part of Lactantius's correspondence, not a separate metrical treatise; cf. Jer. De vir. ill . 80, ad Probum epistularum libros quattuor , with Comm. Galat. 2 prol., Lactantii nostri quae in tertio ad Probum volumine de hac gente (sc. Gallorum opinatus sit verba ).
If the commentarius Servius mentions was in fact a full-scale commentary, its author is likely to have been a Firmianus other than Lactantius. The term commentarius may, however, represent nothing more than
Servius's inference; i.e., the reading attributed to F. may have originally stood in a passing observation or quotation—made, say, in a miscellaneous work such as the correspondence noted above—that Servius found in his source (e.g., in the form Firmianus ait ) and simply assumed was derived from a commentary. (Servius is not completely trustworthy in such matters; cf. Chap. 5 pp. 190ff.) In that case all three Firmiani could be Lactantius.
Other combinations are conceivable: e.g., for the Firmianus on meter identical with the Firmianus on Vergil but not with Lactantius, cf. Ogilvie, Library 12f.
219. FLAVIANUS.
Sch.-Hos. 4:1.167; cf. PLRE I s.v., p. 349.
Flavianus, listed in the catalogues of gramm. in codd. Bonon. 797 (Negri, "De codice" 266) and Bern. 243 (Anecd. Helv = GL 8, cxlix, de Italia . . . Flaviani IIII [sc. libri ]). Cited by later gramm.; cf. esp. Hagen, Anecd. Helv . = GL 8, clxiv-clxvii. The citations appear to be derived from Charisius (q.v., no. 200), and the name "Flavianus" is probably a mistaken interpretation of his nomenclature, "Fl(avius) Sosipater Charisius." Cf. s.v Priscianus, no. 126, for similarly mistaken expansions of "Fl." in the name "Fl. Theodorus."
* 220. FLAVIUS. Gramm.
A 
, addressee of a letter on a wooden tablet, SB 1.5941 = Maspéro, "Études" 150ff. The letter offers some circumstantial touches: a precise date, 21 September 510 (cf. Sijpesteijn and Worp, "Chronological Notes" 273 n. 21); appropriate honorific titles for the gramm. in lines 1-2 recto, 
[cf. PMonac . 14.29f., an. 594] 
a specific occupation for the writer in line 3 recto, 
Nonetheless, the document is revealed to be a practice exercise or formulary by its use of generalized names (
, 
), by such expressions as 
(lines 2f. verso), and by the verso's disjointed contents. For this kind of practice draft, see SB 1.6000 (s.VI), APF 1902-3, 183 no. 1 (s. VII); cf. SB 4.7433 (s.V med.), 7434 (s.II), 7435 (s.VI). We are therefore not dealing with a real gramm. here. It is worth remarking, however, that this notional gramm. is given the name "Flavius"—and thus a status higher than that of the 
, an Aurelius; cf. Chap. 3 pp. 109f.—and that he is presumed to be married and to have some purchasing power; cf. lines 3f. verso, 
.
221. ATILIUS FORTUNATIANUS. Gramm. Aet. incert. ; before s.IV?
RE 2.2082-83 (Consbruch); Sch.-Hos. 4:1.148-49; PLRE I s.v. 2, p. 369.
Author of an Ars on meter, GL . 6.278-304, dedicated to a member of a senatorial family (6.278.3-5); the exposition emphasizes the Horatiana metra . F. was a gramm., the former teacher of the dedicatee; cf. 6.279.3-4, cum artem grammaticam et intellexeris apud me et memoriae mandaveris diligenter .
There is no indication of F.'s precise date; Consbruch, RE 2.2083, conjectured s.III ex. or s.IV init. But note that F. mentions the praetorship evidently as an important office calling for eloquence and standing high in the traditional senatorial cursus: 6.278.4-6, ut eloquentia senatoriam cumules dignitatem (quid enim pulchrius disertissimo praetore? aut quid sublimius eloquentissimo consule ?). Such a conception of the praetorship should indicate a date before s.IV, unless the passage is intentionally archaizing. Note also that the only source F. cites by name, Philoxenus (6.302.20), belongs to s.I B.C .; cf. Theodoridis, Fragmente 3ff. If these hints suffice to date F. before s.IV, he cannot be the dedicatee of Servius's De metris Horatii , named at GL 4.468.3, Servius Fortunatiano DN . For a more likely candidate, see PLRE I s.v. Fortunatianus 3, p. 369.
222. T. GALLUS. Gramm.? Vergilian commentator. s.V / s.VI?
Sch.-Hos. 2.108f.; PLRE II s.v. 2, p. 492.
Titus Gallus: subscr. to the Buc . in the Scholia Bernensia, haec omnia de commentariis Romanorum congregavi, id est Titi Galli et Gaudentii et maxime Iunilii Flagrii Mediolanensis (-ses codd. Bern. BC: -tium cod. Voss.); subscr. to Georg . 1, †Titus Gallus de tribus commentariis Gaudentius [codd. Bern. BC: -tii cod. Voss.] haec fecit . Elsewhere Gallus.
Commentator on the Bucolica (?) and Georgica , known only from the Scholia Bernensia ; cited by name only in the scholia to Georg . 1. His contribution to the scholia on the Buc . will be established only if the subscr. noted above is in fact that, and not an inscr. to Georg . 1; on the problem, cf. Wessner, "Bericht" 208f.
His date can be established only conjecturally and with no great precision—s.V/s.VI? Cf. Funaioli, Esegesi . 398; cf. also s.vv. Iunius Filargirius, Gaudentius, nos. 60, 223.
223. GAUDENTIUS. Gramre.? Vergilian commentator. s.V / s. VI?
RE 7.857-58 (Funaioli); Sch.-Hos. 2.108f.; PLRE II s.v. 10, p. 495.
Commentator on the Bucolica and Georgica , known by name from the Scholia Bernensia : see the subscr. to the Buc . and to Georg . 1, quoted s.v.
T. Gallus, no. 222; cf. passim in the scholia. Also cited by name in a commentary on Orosius, in a note that corresponds to Schol. Bern . on Georg . 4.387; cf. Lehmann, "Reste" 199.
He can be dated only very tentatively (s.V / s.VI?), on the grounds of his seeming dependence on Servius. Cf. also s.v. Iunius Filargirius, no. 60, and s.v. T. Gallus.
* 224. GORGON(I)US. Teacher? Rome. s.IV / s.VI.
Gorgon(i)us magister , a Christian, on an epitaph set up by his wife Ianuar(i)a, ILCV 720 (Rome): Ianuar (i )a co (n )iugi benemerenti Gorgon (i )o magistro primo . The last word was added by a later hand; between magistro and primo (i.e., at the end of the original inscr.) and running vertically there is a drawing of what might be a volumen or a capsa ; cf. De Rossi, Roma 2, pls. 45-46 no. 43.
225. GRILLIUS. Rhetorician. Before Priscian; s.IV / s.V?
RE 7.1876-79 (Münscher); Sch.-Hos. 4:2.263-64; PLRE I s.v., p. 404.
Cited by Priscian as ad Vergilium de accentibus scribens, GL 2.35.24ff. The citation concerns marks of aspiration. Author also of a commentary on Cic. De inv ., partially preserved: Rhet. Lat. min . 596ff., Excerpta ex Grilli commento in primum Ciceronis librum de inventione . The latter evidence esp. suggests that he was a rhetorician rather than a grammarian.
His date is uncertain: before Priscian (q.v., no. 126), who cites him; later than Eusebius (q.v., no. 212), whom he cites. According to the catalogue of Amplonius Ratinck (an. 1412), G. also composed commentaries super Topicam Marci Tullii Cyceronis and super libris 5 Boecii de consolatu philosophico ; cf. Manitius, Handschriften 233. (I am indebted to C. E. Murgia and D. R. Shanzer for alerting me to this notice.) The latter, if authentic, could not have been written before s. VI 2/4—a fact difficult to reconcile with Priscian's citation of G., though conceivably consistent with it if G. was Priscian's younger contemporary. The notice, however, is probably worthless. Note that the same source provides other, certainly spurious attributions: a commentary by Fulgentius on the De nupt. Merc. et Philol . of "Martialis" and a commentary by Cassiodorus on Boeth. De consol. phil. ; cf. Manitius, Handschriften 302, 320.
226. HARPOCRATION. Gramm. or, more probably, sophist. 
Born not after ca. 335, and not before ca. 324; dead not before 363.
RE 7.2410 (Seeck; cf. id., Briefe 131, 298); Schemmel, "Sophist" 58; Bouchery, Themistius 107ff.; Petit, Étudiants 86; PLRE I s.v., p. 408.
The subject of Lib. Ep . 364, 368 (both an. 358), 818 (an. 363). An Egyptian (Ep . 368.2) and a poet (Ep . 364.5), H. was an instructor of rhetoric (less likely a gramm.) with his long-time friend and fellow student Eudaemon (q.v., no. 210), at Antioch in 358, perhaps in Libanius's school. In that year Themistius invited him (Libanius says 
, with evident hyperbole) to come to Constantinople as a sophist (Ep . 368).
His position at Antioch and his relation to Eudaemon are controversial; for relevant texts and detailed discussion, see s.v. Eudaemon. The reason for Themistius's summons is also a matter of discussion. For the view that H. went to Constantinople to teach, see Seeck, Briefe 298; for the view that his summons was part of Themistius's attempt to expand the senate of the new capital, see Bouchery, Themistius 107ff.
H. was a friend of both Themistius and Libanius in 363 (Ep . 818). Since H. seems to have been a close contemporary of Eudaemon, any conclusions regarding the latter's chronology (see s.v.)should also apply to H.
H. cannot be Aur. Harpocration the panegyrist from Panopolis (s.IV 2/4) mentioned in PKöln inv. 4533v (see Browne, "Panegyrist" and "Harpocration"); the latter was dead before 358. Identification with other literary Harpocrationes is uncertain; cf. RE 7.2416f., s.v. nos. 6, 7, 10.
227. HELLADIUS. Gramm.? Antinoopolis. s.IV init.
RE 8.98-102 no. 2 (Gudeman), 8.103 no. 4 (Seeck); Chr.-Sch.-St. 2:2.974; PLRE I s.v. 1, p. 412.
Helladius son of Besantinous: Phot. Bibl . cod. 279 (8.170 Henry), 
; Photius mistook 
for a toponym (8.187 Henry), although according to Gudeman, RE 8.98.44ff., the error was not new with him.
Author of a 
excerpted by Photius (Bibl . cod. 279) and originally written in iambics (8.187 Henry). Photius does not style him 
, though the excerpts reveal a man with pronounced grammatical interests; this caused Gudeman to imagine that the work was composed for school use (RE 8.100.33ff.). Gudeman's comparison with Aulus Gellius (ibid. 28f.) is, however, more apt, and points away from the schoolroom. Note esp. that, like Gellius, H. prefers the usage of the ancients to the rules of the grammatici ; cf. esp. 8.180 Henry, 
vs. 
8.181 Henry, 
vs. 
H.'s views and his manner of expression suggest a distance from the professionals.
A native of Antinoopolis (8.187 Henry; cf. below) "in the time of Licinius and Maximianus": 8.187 Henry, 
In addition to the 
in at least four books (8.170 Henry), H. is credited with eight other poems, also in iambics: 8.187 Henry, 
, 
.
Photius inferred that he was a pagan (8.187 Henry). Though Photius's conclusions are not always reliable (cf. s.v. Ioannes Lydus, no. 92), note the passage on the supposed leprosy of Moses (8.170 Henry), which appears to place H. in a long and largely Alexandrian tradition of anti-Jewish exodus stories; cf. Gager, "Moses." The passage in H., with its reference to a Philo, is printed as a fragment of the 
of Philo of Byblos, FGrH IIIc, 790F11; but Gager, "Moses" 248, connected it with Philo Alexand. Mos . 1.79 (4.138.7ff. Cohn), on Exodus 4.6.
* 228. AUR. HERODES. Teacher. Karanis. 299.
Signatory of two declarations of land lying in different districts of Karanis, owned by Aur. Isidorus and by Herois, his mother: PCairIsid . 3.41, 
; 4.21 (the same). The declarations were made for the census of 297 and were executed in September 299 for the censitor Iulius Septimius Sabinus (= Sabinus 17 PLRE I, p. 794).
On the 
acting as secretary of the district, cf. PCairIsid . pp. 42f. at line 41; Lallemand, Administration 176; and s.vv. Aur. Plution, Anonymus 14, nos. 248, 278. The 
in these documents were evidently acting in an unofficial capacity: such declarations are equally valid with or without the signature of the 
; cf. PCairIsid . pp. 42f. Cf. also s.vv. Sosistratus (SB 6.9270), no. 260 = Anonymus 15 (SB 6.9191), no. 279.
229. HESPERIUS. Gramm.(?) or, more probably, rhetorician. Clermont-Ferrand. s.V 2/2.
Sch.-Hos. 4:2.269; PLRE II s.v. 2, p. 552.
Teacher to whom Ruricius of Limoges commended his son: Ep . 1.3, CSEL 21.356.16ff., ita et tenerorum adhuc acies sensuum ignorantiae nubilo quasi crassitate scabrosae rubiginis obsessa, nisi adsidua doctoris lima purgetur, nequit sponte clarescere . It is not clear from the context whether he taught grammar or rhetoric; but since Ruricius's phrasing does not suggest that his son was only beginning his education, and since much is made of H.'s eloquentia in the other two letters he receives from Ruricius (1.4, p. 356.24ff., and 1.5, p. 357.23ff.), he probably taught the latter. H. is styled devinctissimus filius semperque magnificus Hesperius in the salutations.
H. is probably the Hesperius who received Sidon. Apoll. Ep . 2.10 (469 or early 470: Loyen, ed., 2.247) and who is mentioned in Sidon. Apoll. Ep . 4.22.1 (late 476 or 477: Loyen, ed., 2.254). At the time of Ep . 2.10 he was a iuvenis (2.10.1) interested in poetry and oratory, apparently still as a student; cf. 2.10.1, cum videmus in huiusmodi disciplinam iuniorum ingenia succrescere, propter quam nos quoque subduximus ferulae manum . He was, however, already anticipating marriage: Ep . 2.10.5, propdiem coniunx domum feliciter ducenda . At the time of Ep . 4.22 he was evidently settled at Clermont-Ferrand. The letter calls him vir magnificus (cf. above) and gemma amicorum litterarumque .
* 230. HIEROCLES. Gramm.? s.III 2/2 / s.IV?
RE Suppl. 11.687 (Thierfelder), cf. ibid. 1062-68 (id.); Chr.-Sch.-St. 2:2.1049f.
Compiler of jokes; gramm., according to(?) the inscr. of the longer version of the 
: cod. Paris. suppl. gr. 690, 
. But 
is reported for this inscr. in the most recent edition, by A. Thierfelder (1968); cf. cod. Monac. gr. 551, 
. The briefer version of the compilation (= recension b ) is simply inscribed 
. On the date of the collection, see s.v. Philagrius, no. 117.
231. HIERONYMUS. Gramm.(?) or, more probably, rhetorician. 
s.V 414 / s.VI 1/4.
RE 8.1565 (Müinscher); Chr.-Sch.-St. 2:2.1028; Garzya and Loenertz, eds., Procopii . . . epistolae pp. xxxi-xxxii s.v. Jérôme A (cf. also p. xxix); PLRE II s.v. 2, pp. 560f.
Recipient of Procop. Gaz. Ep . 2, 9, 81, 86, 91, 124. On Ep . 57, see below ad fin .
From his 
(Ep . 2.13f.), Elusa (Ep . 9.7, 81.4, 91.21, 124.2), H. went to Egypt, where he taught (Ep . 2.2ff.). Procopius suggests that he made the change to improve his prospects (Ep . 2.24ff.). He soon returned (Ep . 2.1ff., 9.1ff.) and married (Ep . 2.28ff., Procopius's congratulations; Ep . 9.11f., the anticipation of a child). He returned to Egypt (Ep . 81.1ff.; cf. 86.1f.) and taught at a city upriver from Alexandria (Ep . 86.3f.), viz., Hermopolis (Ep . 124.5). Procopius says that H. had abandoned his wife and child (Ep . 91.38f.), although they are with him by the time of Ep . 124 (§16).
It is not simply stated whether he taught as a gramm. or as a rhetorician: e.g., he is variously said to be teaching 
(Ep . 2.2ff., 91.34ff.), 
(Ep . 2.6), and 
(Ep . 91.14), with no evident distinction. But
he was concerned or had occasion in his teaching to use language reminiscent of the sophist Aelius Aristides; cf. Ep . 91.14f., 
. Further, he could claim a training in rhetoric (Ep . 91.27, 
, and he apparently took offense that Procopius addressed him as an inferior (Ep . 91.5ff., 24ff.). He is therefore more likely to have been a rhetorician.
H. is not to be identified with Stephanus the recipient of Ep . 57, pace Garzya and Loenertz, eds., Procopii . . . epistolae pp. xxix, xxxi-xxxii; see s.v. Stephanus, no. 142.
+ 232. HIERONYMUS. Gramm.? s.IV 212 / s.VII 2/2.
Sch.-Hos. 4:1.163.
A grammatical writer, ut vid. ; cited three times—twice as Hieronimus, once as Hieronymus—in the Ars Ambrosiana , an anonymous commentary on Book 2 of the Ars maior of Donatus: pp. 22.386, 24.454f., 132.140 ed. B. Löfstedt; cf. Sabbadini, "Spogli" 170; Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur 1.520f.; Law, Insular Latin Grammarians 93-97.
Of uncertain date, probably after Donatus and before the latter part of s.VII, when the commentary seems to have been composed (B. Löfstedt, ed., p. vii). The term. a. q . depends on one Old Irish gloss that occurs in the text and is datable to ca. 700. Law, Insular Latin Grammarians 94 n. 73, remarks the possibility that the gloss "was present in a source-text and was copied by the author of the Ars Ambrosiana . If this is so, the terminus ante quem would be set by the date of the manuscript alone" (s.IX / s.X init.).
Cf. s.v. Nepos, no. 240. For suggested identification of H. with St. Jerome, cf. Tolkiehn, "Kirchenvater," with Lammert, "Grammatiker," and Tolkiehn, "Noch einmal."
233. HOËN(I)US. Gramm.? Poet. Gaul. s. V med.
Sch.-Hos. 4:2.269; PLRE II s.v., p. 566.
Gallic poet and apparently a teacher of Sidonius Apollinaris: Carm . 9.311ff., nostrum aut quos retinet solum disertos, / dulcem Anthedion et mihi magistri / Musas sat venerabiles Hoëni . As teacher of Sidonius he would have been active in the 440s; the connection with poetry might suggest that he was a gramm., but that is not certain. For the suggestion that he taught grammar at Aries, cf. Stevens, Sidonius 11.
* 234. LEONTIUS. Gramm. Nicomedia. s.III ex.
Teacher of the saint Eustathius who was martyred with his brothers, Thespesius and Anatolius, in the Great Persecution under Maximian:
Halkin, ed., "Passion" 292 °2, 
[sc. 
] 
.
The passio belongs to the genre of passions épiques ; cf. Halkin, ed., "Passion" 288. Its information is not to be taken at face value; L. may be a fiction (cf. s.v. Babylas, no. 192). Note, however, that the author probably strives for a degree of verisimilitude in describing the circumstances of Eustathius's education: the father, a 
selling his wares in Nicaea and Nicomedia, gave only Eustathius, his eldest son, a formal literary education, and that only in grammar; thereafter Eustathius joined his father and brothers at their trade; cf. the sentence quoted above with the sentences that follow it, 
[A: 
. P] 
235. LUXURIUS. Gramm.(?: unlikely) and poet; vir clarissimus et spectabilis . Africa, probably Carthage. s.V ex. / s.VI 1/3.
RE 4.2102-9 (Levy); Sch.-Hos. 4:2.73f.; Szövérffy, Weltliche Dichtungen 1.178f., 186f.; PLRE II s.v. Luxorius, p. 695; Prosop. chrét . I s.v. Luxorius, p. 655.
Luxurius: on the form of the name, against "Luxorius," see Happ, "Luxurius." Epigrammatic poet (Anth. Lat . 1:1.18, 203, 287-375 = 91, 90, 1-89 Rosenblum) and apparently dedicatee of the Liber de finalibus of Coronatus (q.v., no. 204) scholasticus .
L. lived in Africa, probably in Carthage; see Anth. Lat . 1:1.330.1 = 44.1 R., Tyriis ; cf. Rosenblum, Luxorius 44, who is perhaps too skeptical. He can be dated to the end of the fifth century and the first third of the sixth; cf. Anth. Lat . 1:1.203 = 90R., written under Hilderic (523-30); cf. also Rosenblum, Luxorius 43.
L. is commonly said to have been a gramm. (see below), but direct evidence is lacking. He is styled vir clarissimus et spectabilis in the inscr. of Anth. Lat . 1:1.18 = 91R. and of the liber epigrammaton = 287-375 = 1-89R.; contrast the case of Calbulus (q.v., no. 23). The arguments in favor of the claim that L. was a gramm. fall well short of probability; and the substance of Anth. Lat . 1:1.287 = 1R. shows fairly dearly that L. was not a gramm.
There are two arguments adduced in favor of L.'s having been a gramm., for which cf. esp. Schubert, Quaestionum . . . pars I 24f., with Levy, RE 13.2104.29ff., and Rosenblum, Luxorius 38. The arguments are as follows.
First, L. is the dedicatee of the grammatical work, Liber de finalibus , by Coronatus scholasticus ; cf. the dedicatory epistle, with the salutation
Domino eruditissimorum [cod. Monac. 14252: domino viro eruditissimo peritissimorum cod. S. Paul. in vall. Lavant. 24] atque inlustri fratri Luxorio Coronatus , published by Keil, De grammaticis 4 n. (cf. GL 4, 1) = Rosenblum, Luxorius 259. But it is not likely that Coronatus himself was a gramm. (see s.v.), and the references to L.'s learning that occur in the epistle are commonplaces, too vague to have any specific probative value; cf., e.g., peritiam tuam et ardorem tui excellentiorem ingenii or in tuo gremio sofistarum [N.B.] novi cuncta versari or fallere nequivisset, quod tu proba diligas ac defendas, et quae <<in>utilia et inepta cognoscas te saepius damnare cognovi . Rosenblum's translation of the salutation, Luxorius 259, "To Luxorius, most learned teacher," etc., is incorrect.
Second, L.'s status as a gramm. has been inferred from Anth. Lat . 1:1.287 = 1R., with L.'s address to the gramm. Faustus (q.v., no. 58) as nostro . . . animo probate conpar (v. 3) and his request that Faustus circulate the poems per nostri similes . . . sodales (v. 14). But the expressions simply mean that the two were friends, not coprofessionals. Note that the conventional argument, if valid, would necessarily imply that L. had requested his poems be circulated only among his fellow gramm. Note too that on the same argument Sidon. Apoll. Carm . 24, with the gramm. Domitius included among the poet's sodales , would prove that Sidonius was a gramm. also.
Against these arguments, it is important to notice that L. asks Faustus not simply to circulate the poems but to review and approve them first:
[versus] transmisi memori tuo probandos
primum pectore; deinde, si libebit,
discretos titulis, quibus tenentur,
per nostri similes dato sodales
nam si doctiloquis nimisque magnis
haec tu credideris viris legenda,
culpae nos socios notabit index—
tam te, talia qui bonis recenses,
quam me, qui tua duriora iussa
fed nescius, immemor futuri.
(Anth. Lat . 1:1.287.11-20)
In other words, L. is emphasizing and relying upon the special competence of Faustus qua gramm.—cf. v. 4, tantus grammaticae magister artis —to judge the quality of his poetry. The motif is found elsewhere in late-antique Latin poetry; cf. Sidon. Apoll. Carm . 24.10ff., where the libellus of Sidonius is told to go first to the gramm. Domitius, a stern critic: vv. 14-15, sed gaudere pores rigore docto: / hic si te probat, omnibus placebis . The implications are similar: the man who sends the poems (L. or Sidonius)
affects to recognize in the gramm. an expertise he himself either does not possess, or possesses in smaller measure. There is a distance established between the sender and the recipient; the poem's implied protocol shows that L. like Sidonius was not a gramm. by profession.
It remains to be pointed out that if L. was not a gramm., one of the main supports vanishes for identifying L. with Lisorius, a poet and writer on orthography of unknown date before s.XI; cf. Happ, "Zur Lisorius-Frage." That identification is unlikely on other grounds; cf. S. Mariotti, "Luxorius."
236. MANIPPUS or MARSIPUS. Gramm., or rhetorician, or both? Carchar (Mesopotamia). 276/82.
RE 14.1146 (Dörries); PLRE I s.v. Manippus, p. 541.
One of four judges in the debate between Mani and the bishop Archelaus (claruit sub imperatore Probo , Jer. De vir. ill . 72) composed by Hegemonius, which survives in a defective Latin trans., Acta Archelai (s. IV 2127), and which Epiphan. Panar. haeres . 66.10ff. draws upon.
Manippus: Acta Arch . 12. Or Marsipus: Epiphan. Panar. haeres . 66.10.2. A pagan and vir primarius (Acta Arch .) of Carchar (
, Epiphan.). M. is described in the Acta Arch . as grammaticae artis [grammaticus cod. Ambros. O. Sup. 210] et disciplinae rhetoricae peritissimus , the phrase corresponding to 
in Epiphan.; peritissimus corresponds to 
exactly as grammatica ars et disciplina rhetorica does to 
(i.e., 
). M. was therefore either the local teacher of liberal letters or simply a cultured man. The point matters little, however, since the historicity of the debate is very doubtful.
The other judges appear as follows in the two versions: Claudius and Cleobulus, duo fratres egregii rhetores vs. 
; Aegialeus, archiater nobilissimus et litteris apprime eruditus vs. 
.
Cf. s.v. Aegialeus, no. 179.
237. NONIUS MARCELLUS. Gramm.? (unlikely.) Tubursicum Numidarum. s.III init. / s.VI init. (s.IV init.?).
RE 17.882-97 (Strzelecki); Sch.-Hos. 4:1.142; Lindsay, ed., Nonii . . . libri pp. xiii-xiv; PLRE I s.v. 11, p. 552.
Nonius Marcellus: De compendiosa doctrine tit.; Priscian GL 2.35.20, 269.20f., 499.20f. Though often assumed to have been a grammaticus because of the character of his extant work (see below), he is not likely to have been a professional gramm.; the style Peripateticus in De comp. doctr . tit., whatever it may have meant to M., suggests that his cultural ambitions lay elsewhere. He is to be associated with the learned amateurs—e.g.,
Aulus Gellius, Ti. Claudius Donatus, Macrobius—who dedicate their works to their sons; cf. De comp. doctr . tit., ad filium . A professional gramm. dedicates his work to friends, patrons, or pupils; no man known to be a professional gramm. in late antiquity dedicates a work to a son or other family member. Cf. s.v. Fl. Sosipater Charisius, no. 200; Chap. 2 at nn. 142, 152, 153.
Called Tubursicensis in De comp. doctr . tit., M. is probably identical with or a relative of Nonius Marcellus Herculius of Tubursicum Numidarum, who is honored in CIL 8.4878 = ILS 2943 = Inscr.
Later than Gellius, whom he does not name but clearly used; likewise later than Septimius Serenus (e.g., 61.26M. = 86L.) and Apuleius (68.21M. = 96L.), whom he cites. Earlier than Priscian, who cites him (see above). Inscr. is probably to be dated to 326/33. Constantine is the sole Augustus ; Constantine and one of his brothers are Caesares : if the brother is Crispus, the date will be between late September and early November 324; or, more likely, if the brother is Constantius, the date will be between 326 and 333. But since M.'s relation to the dedicator is unknown, it is difficult to use Inscr. for dating. On the subscription to Persius, dated to 402 and attached to an abridgment of De comp. doctr ., see Clausen, "Sabinus' MS."
Author of the De compendiosa doctrina (cited as de doctorum indagine by Priscian at GL 2.35.20 and 269.20f.), a collection of lexicographical, morphological and antiquarian lore in twenty books. Also author of Epistolae a doctrinis de peregrinando , a lost work of unknown content referred to at De comp. doctr . 451.11M. = 723 L.
His family was evidently of some local importance in the early fourth century; Inscr. mentions restorations of a public street and of baths and other buildings by Nonius Marcellus Herculius.
238. MARCIANUS. Imperial tutor of grammar (ca. 366) and Novatian 
. Constantinople. Died 395.
PLRE I s.v. 8, p. 554.
M.'s career is sketched by Socrates HE 4.9.4 (-Soz. HE 6.9.3; Suda M.207), 5.21.1-4 (= Soz. 7.14.2-3), 6.1.9 (= Soz. 8.1.9).
A virtuous and eloquent man: Soc. 4.9.4, 
(in Socrates' usage 
regularly means "eloquent" vel. sim . rather than "reputable," "well regarded"); cf. the version of Soz. 6.9.3, drawing on Soc., 
. M. had been in the palatine service for some time before being chosen to teach 
to Anastasia and Carosa, the daughters of Valens (Soc. ibid.). He was a Novatian presbyter at the time; out of regard for him Valens relaxed his persecutions of the Novatians: Soc. ibid.; cf. 5.21.3. The date will have been ca. 366; cf. Soc. 4.9.7-8.
M. became Novatian bishop of Constantinople in 384 or 385 (Soc. 5.21.1-4); he was succeeded by Sisinnius in November 395 (Soc. 6.1.9), who was in turn succeeded by M.'s son, Chrysanthus, in 407 (Soc. 7.6.10) or 412 (cf. Soc. 7.17.1); the later date is probably correct. For the career of Chrysanthus, cf. Soc. 7.12.1ff., with PLRE I s.v., p. 203. In 419 Chrysanthus was succeeded by Paulus (q.v., no. 116; Soc. 7.17.1); Paulus in turn was succeeded in 438 by Marcianus (Soc. 7.46.1), who was perhaps M.'s grandson.
M. is to be treated not as a gramm. but as one of a select group of teachers in the fourth and early fifth centuries, the tutors at the imperial court; none of them came to his position as a gramm. For survey and comment, see Chap. 3 at n. 167; note M.'s prior service as a palatinus .
+ 239. "METRORIUS."
A name incorrectly derived from the title of a treatise De finalibus metrorum, GL 6.229ff., METRORU giving rise to METRORII; cf. Wessner, RE 14.1847.43ff.; cf. also s.v. "Sergius," no. 255. Apart from the mss that carry the work, the name is also found in the catalogues of gramm. in codd. Bonon. 797 (cf. Negri, "De codice" 266) and Bern. 243 (cf. Hagen, Anecd. Helv. = GL 8, cxlix-cl) and in a library catalogue of s. IX from Lorsch (Manitius, Handschriften 178).
240. NEPOS. Gramm.? s.IV 2/2 / s.VII 2/2.
RE 16.2511 (Ensslin); Sch.-Hos. 4:1.163; PLRE I s.v., p. 623.
A grammatical writer, ut vid ., whose clarifications of Aelius Donatus are twice cited in the Ars Ambrosiana , an anonymous commentary on Book 2 of Donatus's Ars Maior ; cf. pp. 150.226f., 152.266ff. ed. B. Löfstedt. For the date of the commentary, see s.v. Hieronymus, no. 232.
N. is perhaps the Nepos to whom the otherwise unattested neuter form culmum is attributed in the De dub. nom.: GL 5.576.12, culmum generis neutri, ut Nepos vult . The work is a compilation concerning nouns of dubious gender, with examples drawn from auetores sacred and profane ranging from the Psalms to Isidore of Seville; its date is therefore later than s.VII 1/3. The passage on culmus , however, is rather confused—a use of culmus in the feminine is mistakenly attributed to Vergil—and the republican author Cornelius Nepos might be meant, since the Nepos who is cited appears in the company of Cicero, Varro, and Vergil; attribution to Cornelius Nepos is assumed by OLD s.v. culmus .
241. FL. OPTATUS. Teacher of letters? Patricius and consul . Born s.III 3/3; died 337.
RE 18.760-61 (Ensslin); PLRE I s.v. 3, p. 650; Booth, "Some Suspect Schoolmasters" 5f.
Uncle of the Optatus who was the target of Lib. Or . 42 Pro Thalassio ; for the relationship, see Or . 42.26-27. Patricius and consul prior of 334; for this part of his career, see Ensslin, RE 18.760-61; and PLRE I s.v. 3, p. 650.
Libanius says O. began as a 
, a "teacher of letters, who taught Licinius's son in return for a couple of wheaten loaves and the other nourishment that goes with them" (Or . 42.26). After Licinius fell in 324, O. allegedly came into prominence thanks to his wife, the daughter of a Paphlagonian innkeeper; she was, Libanius implies, liberal with her favors (Or . 42.26).
Since Valerius Licinianus Licinius was born in mid-315, O. would not have had him as a pupil before 321 or 322; he could therefore have been imperial tutor for two or three years before the end of Licinius's reign. Probably born sometime in s.III 3/3, he was executed in 337 (Zos. 2.40.2). But it is difficult to derive other firm conclusions from Or . 42.26, for three reasons.
First, some account must be taken of Libanius's exuberant invective, which runs through the speech as a whole; cf. esp. the notorious rogues' gallery of parvenus assembled at Or . 42.23-24. The author's animus is manifest in Or . 42.26, both in the insultingly low, if not actually servile, wage that Libanius specifies and in his sneers at the origins and behavior of O.'s wife.
Second, the phrase 
is evidently intended per se as a sneer at O.'s origins. The phrase is the peg on which Libanius hangs his elaborate sarcasm at the beginning of Or . 42.26, sharply distinguishing his opponent's antecedents from the empire's ruling elite: 
. For the assumption that the offspring of a man who earned his living 
would normally be subject to contempt, see Dip Chrys. Or . 7.114; cf. esp. Demosth. De cor . 258, Demosthenes' attack on the background of Aeschines, which might have inspired Libanius here. For other evidence of the same social bias, cf. Booth, "Some Suspect Schoolmasters" and "Image" 2. Further, though 
(= 
) is denotatively equivalent to 
, Libanius here notably avoids the latter term, which he regularly uses as an honorable title for teachers of liberal letters, i.e., grammarians; on this see Appendix 2. His use of 
is probably intended to suggest that O. was nothing more than a lowly teacher of nonliberal letters; see Kaster, "Notes" 340.
But, third, that O.'s estate was so low is difficult to believe. Eunuchs aside, of the seven persons known to have taught the children of reigning emperors throughout the fourth century, not one came to his position as a grammaticus, much less as a still humbler "teacher of letters." (For a list, see Chap. 3 n. 167; cf. s.v. Marcianus, no. 238.) Most often, the tutor was a professional rhetorician; in the two decades immediately before and after O.'s tenure, one finds Lactantius, Exsuperius, and Ausonius's uncle Arborius. In view of all the above, then, we should conclude that Libanius is bending the truth: either the claims in the passage are mere fabrications intended to smear Libanius's opponent (so Booth, "Some Suspect Schoolmasters"), or, as seems more likely to me, O. was in fact an imperial tutor and, as such, probably a more prestigious man of letters than Libanius found it useful to admit.
+ 242. PALLADIUS. Dign., loc., aet. incert. ; after s.IV 1/2(?); before s. VII ex.
RE 18:2(2).203 (Aly).
Name found in the title of the work of Audax (q.v., no. 190), De Scauri et Palladii libris excerpta per interrogationem et responsionem, GL 7.320ff. If P. is to be associated with the latter portion of the work (GL 7.349-57; cf. Keil, GL 7.318), which resembles sections of Probus Inst. art. (cf. GL 4.143ff.), then he may be the intermediary through whom the doctrine of the Inst. art. was transmitted to Audax. in that case, he could be dated sometime after s.IV 1/2 (?: see s.v. Probus, no. 127) and before s.VII ex., Audax's term. a. q. (see s.v.). The name suggests a late-antique date. He is not mentioned elsewhere.
+ 243. PANISCUS. Teacher. Egypt(Panopolis?). s.III med.
Paniscus 
, father of Tamuthes, on a mummy label dated 19 April 256: Corp. ét. no. 900, p. 76 = CRIPEL 1976-77, no. 563. The theophoric name "Paniscus" is closely associated with Panopolis; cf. V. Martin, "Relevé" 60.
244. PAPIRIANUS. Dign., loc., aet. incert. : before s.VI init.; after s.IV med.?
RE 18:2(2).1001f. (Helm); Sch.-Hos. 4:2.218-19; PLRE I s.v. 2, pp. 666f.
Papirianus: Priscian GL 2.27.11, 31.2, 503.16, 593.14; Cassiod. De orth., GL 7.158.9, Inst. 1.30.2. Also Paperianus: some codd. of Priscian and Cassiod. (see Keil's app. crit. at the passages cited just above); on this form of the name, cf. below.
Author. of a treatise De orthographia, cited by Priscian—therefore before s.VI init.—and excerpted by Cassiodorus, GL 7.158.9-165.6. (For the title, see Prisc. GL 2.27.12, 593.15.) An opinion attributed to P.
by Priscian, GL 2.503.16f., contradicts the corresponding passage in Cassiodorus's excerpt, GL 7.165.6. In the excerpt of Cassiodorus, at GL 7.161.14-16, a passage from Book 1 of Donatus's Ars maior is paraphrased: GL 4.367.12-14 = 604.1-2 Holtz. If the paraphrase stood in P.'s treatise, then he can be dated after s.IV med.; but since the paraphrase is placed at the end of a section to confirm what precedes—sic et Donatus dicit —it is equally likely to be Cassiodorus's addition. Cassiodorus felt free to make minor additions to the texts he was excerpting, as, e.g., comparison of the text of Martyrius (q.v., no. 95) with Cassiodorus's excerpts shows.
The other technical writers cited in the excerpt from P. are Velius Longus and Caesellius Vindex—both early s.II—and an unknown Gratus artigraphus. In Priscian, P. is cited in the company of Pliny and Probus (GL 2.31.2) and of Nisus and Probus (GL 2.503.16), all of s.I (if Probus is Valerius Probus). He is listed fourth at Cassiod. De orth. praef. (GL 7.147.7), after Curtius Valerianus (q.v., no. 271) and before Martyrius. Along with the other men listed there, P. is implicitly distinguished from Priscian, the modernus auctor ; see also Cassiod. Inst 1.30.2, where again P. stands between Curtius Valerianus and Martyrius and is classed among the orthographi antiqui ; cf. also s.v. Curtius Valerianus.
P. is probably the Q. Papirius a fragment of whose work De orthographia is printed at GL 7.216.8-14; cf. Quinti Papirii orthographia listed with works of Caesellius Vindex and of Caper in a catalogue from Murbach (Manitius, Handschriften 267). The latter Papirius's work De analogia is mentioned in a library catalogue of Bobbio (Manitius, ibid.). P. is probably also the Pap(p)erinus—with the form of the name, cf. also "Paperianus" above—to whom an Analogia is attributed in the catalogue of gramm. in cod. Bern. 243 (Anecd. Helv. = GL 8, cxlix) and whose Artificialia Paperini de analogia was excerpted by Politian (ed. Pesenti, "Anecdota " 72-85); cf. Tolkiehn, "Grammatiker." Pap(p)erinus is cited in several medieval handbooks in various mss; see Hagen, Anecd. Helv. = GL 8, cclii-ccliii; Bischoff, "Ergänzungen."
245. PHALERIUS. Gramm.(?) or, perhaps more likely, rhetorician. Tavium (Galatia). 393.
RE 6.1971 s.v. Falerius no. 2 (Seeck); ibid. 19.1663 s.v. Phalerios no. 1 (id.); PLRE I s.v., p. 692.
Commended by Libanius to the rhetorician Paeonius at Tavium, where P. was intending to teach (Ep. 1080). It has been suggested that P. was a gramm.; so Jones, LRE 999, presumably in the belief—reasonable enough in itself—that a town the size of Tavium would not have two rhetoricians. But Libanius's words rather suggest that P. was a rhetorician;
note esp. Ep. 1080.2, 
. Possibly P. was intending to assist rather than to rival Paeonius; Libanius stresses that P. will be the 
of Paeonius (Ep. 1080.5-6).
246. PHILOMUSUS.
PLRE I s.v., p. 698.
Auson. Epigr. 7:
DE PHILOMVSO GRAMMATICO
Emptis quod libris tibi bibliotheca referta est,
doctum et grammaticum te, Philomuse, putas?
hoc genere et chordas et plectra et barbita condes:
omnia mercatus cras citharoedus eris.
Philomusus may be a literary creation, the name invented to suit the conceit; see testimonia in Schenkl, ed., MGH AA 5:2.207; cf. Booth, "Notes" 242 n. 22; cf. also s.vv. Auxilius, Filocalus, nos. 191, 217.
Further, despite the lemma de Philomuso grammatico (so cod. Voss. 111), P. is presented not as a grammaticus but as a man who merely possesses the trappings: thus the lemma in some mss (see app. crit. in Schenkl, ed., ibid.), ad Philomusum qui arbitratur se doctum cum nihil sciret The entry in PLRE I would more accurately read, "would-be grammaticus lampooned by Ausonius."
Finally, grammaticus here seems to be used like doctus (v. 2), not as a technical term or professional title but as an epithet, "man of letters"—a sense that Greek 
continued to possess long after the Latin borrowing was largely confined to its technical application. For lateantique examples in Latin and Greek, see Appendix 3. We should probably regard grammaticus as a predicate adjective, meant to suggest the Greek equivalent of doctus ; cf. the Greek terms in the second couplet. The point is that P. fancies himself "learned and lettré, " in both languages; the books with which he stuffs his library are presumably in Latin and in Greek.
247. PLUTARCHUS. Gramm.? Athens. Before late 472 / May 476.
PLRE II s.v. 4, p. 894.
Plutarchus the son of Hierius: Damasc. V. Isid. frg. 289 Zintzen. One of the educated men of Athens, 
, among whom Pamprepius strove to show himself 
while a gramm. there. For the date, see s.v. Pamprepius, no. 114.
PLRE is probably right to reject on chronological grounds the emendation of Asmus, according to whom the passage should read "Hierius the
son of Plutarchus," so that P. would be identified with the homonymous scholarch. Less likely, however, is PLRE 's identification of P. as a gramm. The text of Damasc. V. Isid. frg. 289 assigns no specific profession to P.; contrast the case of the other man mentioned there, Hermias (= Hermeias 4 PLRE II, p. 548), who is identified as a 
. Moreover, the point of the passage is precisely that Pamprepius, though teaching grammar at the time, was striving to gain a reputation for excellence beyond grammar, in 
, the other branches of liberal learning short of philosophy. The men against whom he is measured here, then, should be men known for the excellence of their general culture—cf. 
—not for their skill specifically in grammar.
* 248. AUR. PLUTION. Teacher. Philoteris (Arsinoite nome). 300.
Signatory of a declaration of land made by Aur. Kamoutis of Arsinoe for the census of 297, executed sometime between January and August 300 for the censitor Iulius Septimius Sabinus (= Sabinus 17 PLRE I, p. 794): PRyl. 4.656.23 Arsinoite nome, 
. The declaration appears to have been made at Philoteris, west of Theadelphia (cf. line 5, 
).
For the secretarial function of the 
in this type of document, see esp. s.v. Aur. Herodes, no. 228; cf. s.v. Anonymus 14, no. 278. Cf. also s.vv. Sosistratus (SB 6.9270), no. 260 = Anonymus 15 (SB 6.9191), no. 279.
249. C. IULIUS ROMANUS. Gramm.? Italy? s.III init. / s.IV med. (s. III 2/3?).
RE 10.788-89 (Tolkiehn); Sch.-Hos. 3.168-69; A. Stein, "Zur Abfassungszeit"; PIR2 I.520; PLRE I s.v. 9, p. 769; della Casa, "Giulio Romano."
C. Iulius Romanus: Charis. GL 1.177.6 = 150.3-4 Barwick, 190.8 = 246.18B., 229.3 = 296.14B., 230.1 = 297.26-27B., 236.16 = 307.17B., 239.1 = 311.14B., 254.8 = 332.21B. Iulius Romanus or Romanus elsewhere in Charisius.
Author of a book of '
, "basics" or "resources," arranged according to topics: cf. GL 1.230.1 = 297.26-27B., libro
sub titulo de coniunctione ; 1.238.16 = 311.lB., libro
sub titulo de praepositione. The words treated under each topic were arranged alphabetically. The work is known only from the extensive excepts made by Charisius: on the principle of analogy, GL 1.116.29ff. = 149.21-187.6B.; on adverbs, 190.8ff. = 246.18-289.17B.; on conjunctions, 229.3ff. = 296.14-297.28B.;
on prepositions, 236.16ff. = 307.17-311.2B.; and on interjections, 239.1ff. = 311.14-315.27B.
His profession and status are not precisely known. Charisius calls him disertissimus artis scriptor, GL 1.232.7 = 301.17B.; this probably means that Charisius did not know either. But note that if such expressions as licet grammatici velint stood in R.'s work (cf. GL 1.129.25-30 = 164.30-165.7B., rejecting the grammatici in favor of the elder Pliny), the distance they imply should suggest that he was not a gramm. by profession; cf. s.v. Helladius, no. 227. The statement in Charis. GL 1.215.22f. = 279.1-2B., hodieque nostri per Campaniam sic locuntur, is probably taken over from R. and may imply that he lived in Italy.
Charisius provides a term. a. q. of s.IV med. (see s.v., no. 200). The citations of auctores and technical writers of s.II med.-ex. that occur in the excerpts—Fronto (e.g., GL 1.197.3f. = 256.8B.), Apuleius (GL 1.240.28f. = 314.4-5B.), Fl. Caper (e.g., GL 1.145.23 = 184.19B.), Statilius Maximus (e.g., GL 1.209.4 = 270.29B.), Helenius Acro (e.g., GL 1.210.11 = 272.14B.)—are no doubt attributable to R., and so provide a term. p. q. R.'s concern with the forms of the Old Testament names "Adam" and "Abraham" (GL 1.118.13f. = 151.15-17B.) would not likely consist with a date earlier than s.III.
Possible grounds for more precise dating are found in two of Charisius's excerpts, where R. cites the opinions of a Marcius Salutaris, v.p.: GL 1.202.2 = 262.10-11B., 229.19 = 297.8-9B. (where the rank is given). Salutaris is perhaps to be identified with a man of the same name known to have been alive 244/48; see A. Stein, "Zur Abfassungszeit"; cf. s.v. Marcius Salutaris, no. 252. R. may have been a friend and contemporary of Salutaris, who is otherwise unknown to literary history: both the opinions cited concern Vergil and need not reflect anything more than the judgment of a man with the standard literary education. Further, personal connection would account for R.'s accurate knowledge of Salutaris's titulatur: so Stein, "Zur Abfassungszeit"; see s.v. If so, R. could be dated to s.III 2/3. But this is uncertain, and R.'s Marcius Salutaris may have been a descendant or an ancestor Of the Salutaris of 244/48.
Further evidence for more precise dating is lacking. The places alleged by Stein, "Zur Abfassungszeit," to show Salutaris's name being used in grammatical examples do not stand up under examination, with the barely possible. exception of Charis. GL 1.47.9 = 57.28B. = Diom. GL 1.307.2 = Exc. Bob., GL 1.545.18. Under the name of Cominianus the Schol. Bern. to Ecl. 3.21 cites the second of the opinions of R.'s Salutaris: though this might seem to provide a term. a. q. of s.III ex. / s.IV init. (cf. s.v. Cominianus, no. 34), it is doubtless an instance of Charisius's being
cited as Cominianus, a frequent error in medieval sources; cf., e.g., the Schol. Bern. at Georg. 1.215, 2.84, 3.311.
250. ROMULUS.
PLRE I s.v. 1, p. 771.
Auson. Prof. 8, Grammaticis Graecis Burdigalensibus, vv. 1-4:
Romulum post hos prius an [= Hor. Carm. 1.12.33] Corinthi anne Sperchei pariterque nati
Atticas Musas memorem Menesthei
grammaticorum?
Should I call to mind "first after these Romulus, or" the Attic Muses of Corinthus, or of Spercheus and likewise his son Menestheus, the grammatici ?
Booth, "Notes" 242f. (following Corpet), and, less decisively, Green, "Prosopographical Notes" 23, are certainly correct in banishing Romulus from the rolls of the Greek gramm. of Bordeaux. The structure and sense of the stanza depend upon the antithesis between the two direct objects, Romulum and Atticas Musas : as Booth says, Ausonius is "pretending to debate whether to place Prof. 10 [on the Latin grammatici of Bordeaux] before Prof. 8." Accordingly, the only gramm. here are Corinthi . . . Sperchei . . . Menesthei grammaticorum. Not incidentally, this relieves Ausonius of an embarrassment of riches, three teachers of Greek primis . . . in annis (the necessary count if Romulus were included); vv. 9-10, tertius horum mihi non magister, / ceteri . . . docuere, will then mean that Corinthus and Spercheus taught Ausonius, but Spercheus's son, Menestheus, did not, presumably because he was too young. Menestheus will therefore represent the next generation of teachers, after Ausonius's school-days and before, or partially overlapping with, his own time as teacher. Menestheus will still have been active nostro . . . in aevo (v. 7).
Prof. 8 provoked something of a muddle in PLRE I. Although Romulus is treated (s.v., p. 771) as real and so, in line with vv. 9-10, as one of Ausonius's teachers, Spercheus "with Corinthus" is also said (s.v., p. 851) to have been one of Ausonius's teachers, which he could not then have been: if Romulus were real, Spercheus would be tertius. But PLRE I says nothing s.v. Corinthus (p. 229) about his relation to Ausonius; and Menestheus, at first omitted from PLRE I, is said in the addenda of Martindale, "Prosopography" 249, to have been one of Ausonius's teachers.
251. SABINUS. Gramm.? Before s.V?
RE, 2. Reihe, 1.1599 (Funaioli); PLRE I s.v. 2, p. 791.
Known only from a citation in Cledonius (q.v., no. 31; s.V?), GL 5.20.19, on the temporal nuance of the Latin optative. Since he is cited with Probus—evidently with a view to Probus Inst. art., GL 4.160.28-161.4—and against Donatus, he may belong to early s.IV; cf. s.v. Probus, no. 127. But this is very uncertain.
252. MARCIUS SALUTARIS. v.e., procurator = (?) v.p., gramm.? s.III med.
RE 14.1590-91 (Stein and Wessner); Sch.-Hos. 3.175, 4:1.167, without the papyri; A. Stein, "Zur Abfassungszeit"; PLRE I s.v., p. 800 (cf. Martindale, "Prosopography" 250f.).
Pap.: 1 = PLond. 3.1157v = Wilck. Chrest. 375 Hermopolis (an. 246); 2 = SB 3.7035 (partial) = PLeit. 16 = PWisc. 2.86 (an. 244146); 3 = POxy. 17.2123 (an. 247/48); 4 = POxy. 33.2664 (ca. an. 247/45); 5 = POxy. 1.78 (undated). Inscr. = Bodl. Gr. Inscr. 3018, cited at POxy. 33 p. 87 nn.1, 2.
S. appears in Pap. 1-4 and Inscr. as an 
with the rank of 
, i.e., egregius (Pap. 1-5), together with the rationalis Claudius Marcellus (Pap. 1-5, Inscr.; cf. PIR2 C.923) in the years ca. 244-48.
Identified by A. Stein, "Zur Abfassungszeit" (cf. RE 14.1590f.), with Marcius Salutaris the v.p. whose opinions on Vergil are twice cited by C. lulius Romanus (q.v., no. 249) in excerpts in Charisius: GL 1.202.2 = 262.10-11 Barwick, 229.19 = 297.8-9B. The rank vir perfectissimus appears in the latter place. It has been thought that another source of Charisius alludes to Marcius Salutaris the v.p. by using the name "Salutaris" in a grammatical example, Chaffs. GL 1.47.9 = 57.28B. = Diom. GL 1.307.2 = Exc. Bob., GL 1.545.18. But this conclusion becomes unlikely if the use of the name is viewed in the context of the passage as a whole; cf. GL 1.47.3-9 = 57.20-28B., with, e.g., 1.143.5f. = 151.5-6B. If the identification of S. with the Marcius Salutaris known to Romanus is correct, S. must have enjoyed a promotion in rank, from v.e. to v.p., after the period documented in Pap. 1-5, and Romanus's references to him will be later than ca. 248; see also s.v. C. Iulius Romanus.
Romanus's references are thought to derive from an ars or commentary by S., but this inference is not necessary. Nor is it necessary to think that S. was a professional gramm. (the profession or status of Romanus is similarly uncertain). The two opinions of S. that Romanus cites—on the nuance of ilicet at Aen. 2.424 and of an at Ecl. 3.21—concern Vergil, who made up the common ground of all men liberally educated
in Latin. They are simply opinions, showing no great learning and, in the second, little sense—although this failure was not peculiar to amateurs. Accordingly, S. may be thought to have written a work after ca. 248, of uncertain description and otherwise unknown, on which his later rank was inscribed; or else he may be thought to have been a contemporary of Romanus, who knew his rank and his opinions through personal connection.
Finally, the identification may be incorrect. In that case the Marcius Salutaris of Romanus could be a son of the procurator; it is less likely that he was S.'s grandson, in view of the constraints imposed by the chronology of Romanus and Charisius. Or he may have been S.'s ancestor, since the rank of vir perfectissimus occurs from s.II med. onward.
253. SELEUCUS. Gramm. Emesa. Aet. incert.
Seeck, Briefe 272f.; RE, 2. Reihe, 2.1248f. (id.); PLRE I s.v. 3, p. 819.
The Suda,S .201, gives notice of a Seleucus 
of Emesa, author of an hexameter (i.e., didactic) poem on fishing, in four books, 
; also of a commentary on the lyric poets, and of a 
in two books.
He has been identified firmly by Seeck (Briefe 272f.; RE, 2. Reihe, 2.1248f.) and tentatively in PLRE I (s.v. 3) with Seleucus (= PLRE I s.v. 1) the brother-in-law of the gramm. Calliopius (q.v., no. 25) of Antioch and correspondent of Libanius, whom Libanius urged in 365 to write a history of Julian's Persian campaign (Ep. 1508.6-7). Since Libanius says nothing to suggest that his correspondent was a gramm., there is prima [facie little reason to identify him with the S. who is styled 
in the Suda. Moreover, even if we ignore the style in the Suda, where 
is sometimes used imprecisely (see Appendix 3), the identification remains unlikely for three reasons.
First, the correspondent of Libanius has no known ties to Emesa, but appears to be most at home in Cilicia; cf. Ep. 770, which seems to show Seleucus a provincial high priest, with Ep. 771, which mentions his connection with Celsus, governor of Cilicia. At Briefe 272f., Seeck dismissed the evidence of the Suda and called Seleucus a Cilician, though at RE, 2. Reihe, 2.1248 he called Seleucus an Emesene with holdings in Cilicia.
Second, in Ep. 1508.6-7, Libanius suggests that Seleucus console himself for his misfortunes in the manner of Thucydides, by writing a history of Julian's Persian campaign—the only possible link with. the S. of the Suda, author of a 
. But there is no hint that the suggestion was followed. PLRE I twice misstates the contents of Ep. 1508: s.v. Seleucus 1, "He undertook the composition of a history of Julian's Persian
campaign . . . (nothing more is known of this work)"; and s.v. Seleucus 3, "Possibly to be identified with Seleucus 1, whose history of Julian's Persian campaign is mentioned Lib. Ep. 1508."
Third, the S. of the Suda was clearly involved with poetry, as author and commentator, and in fact his 
could well have been a poem. But when Libanius suggests that his friend write a history, he clearly has in mind a work of prose, as the analogy of Thucydides shows; and although Libanius has more than one occasion to refer to Seleucus's literary attainments (Ep. 1508.5ff.; cf. Ep. 499.3ff.), he mentions no interest in poetry.
254. VIBIUS SEQUESTER. Not before s.IV ex. / s.V.
RE, 2. Reihe, 8.2457-62 (Strzelecki); Sch.-Hos. 4:2.120-22; PLRE I s.v., p. 823.
Author of a glossary of place names found in poetry. Although S. refers to plerosque poetas in his preface (p. 1.6f. Gelsomino), he in fact limits himself to Vergil, Lucan, Silius Italicus, and some Ovid (Met. 15). He used Lucan extensively, nearly as much as he did Vergil; cf. Pueschel, De Vibii . . . fontibus 9ff., 33; Gelsomino, "Studi" (1961, 1962). This use of Lucan suggests that he did not write before interest in that poet revived in the course of s.IV; cf. Wessner, "Lucan"; with Kaster, "Servius."
He is incorrectly presented as "?grammaticus" by PLRE I s.v. That title rather belongs to his son and dedicatee, Virgilianus; see s.v., no. 163. The latter is included in PLRE I s.v., p. 969, but his profession is not mentioned.
+ 255. "SERGIUS."
Name under which Servius is sometimes cited (see s.v., no. 136) and under which circulate at least four grammatical works not by Servius:
1) De littera, de syllaba, de pedibus, de accentibus, de distinctione, GL 4.475-85.
2) Explanationes in Donatum, GL 4.486-565, with Anecd. Helv. = GL 8.143-58; an edition of the final part of the Explan. entitled "De vitiis et virtutibus orationis," published in part by Keil, GL 4.563-64 "De solecismo," is now in Schindel, Figurenlehren 258-79. On the compilation and attribution of the Explan., see Schindel, Figurenlehren 34ff. To his discussion of the Entstehungszeit of the Explan. add that a possible term. a. q. of s.VI init. is provided by the reference of Coronatus (see below).
3) A work De grammatica, GL 7.537.1-539.15; see Finch, "Text."
4) In cod. Vat. Pal. lat. 1753 a version of the De finalibus metrorum of "Metrorius" (q.v., no. 239), GL 6.240-42, onto which the first two paragraphs of Servius's De finalibus have been grafted and the heading ad Basilium amicum Sergii has been attached.
The two references to Sergius in cod. Bern. 243, de Sicilia [sc. venerunt ad nos libri ] IIII discipulorum eius [viz., Donati ] id est Honorati et Sergii et Maximi et Metrorii and de Italia . . . Sergii novem de littera et de barbarismo, cannot be placed with certainty. The former may refer to the version of the De finalibus just noted, which is attributed to "Metrorius" in two codd., Neap. lat. 2 (= Vindob. 16) and Monac. 6281 (= Frising. 81), that also transmit the metrical treatise of Maximus Victorinus (q.v., no. 274); the latter may refer to the De litt, de syll., etc., or to the Explan. (differently Hagen, Anecd. Helv. = GL 8, ci). For the catalogue of gramm. in cod. Bonon. 797, see Negri, "De codice" 266. See also the reference to peritissimus Sergius by Coronatus (q.v., no. 204) scholasticus in the prefatory epistle to his De finalibus (Keil, De grammaticis 4 n. = Rosenblum, Luxorius 259), which is transmitted after the Explan. in cod. S. Paul. in vall. Lavant. 24. Cf. also Wessner, RE, 2. Reihe, 2.1845.21ff.; Hagen, Anecd. Helv. = GL 8, lxxxix-xcvi, cxcii-cciii; Holtz, Donat 234, 429.
Which (or whether any) of the works noted above was written by a man named Sergius cannot be determined.
+ 256. SERGIUS. Gramm. Loc., aet. incert. ; before s.IX 1/2.
Cited by Georgius Choeroboscus as 
, Schol. in Theodos., GG 4:2.73.14ff., against Ioannes Philoponus and Orus (qq.v., nos. 118, 111). A term. a. q. of s.IX 1/2 is provided by Choeroboscus; cf. s.v., no. 201. He is perhaps to be identified with Sergius (q.v., no. 257) the lector of Emesa and epitomator of Herodian, or with the 
mentioned in the catalogues of gramm. in Kröhnert, Canones 7, and Rabe, "Listen" 340, or with both.
+ 257. SERGIUS. Lector. Emesa. Aet. incert. ; perhaps before s.IX 1/2.
Chr.-Sch.-St. 2:2.1078.
Lector of Emesa, author of an epitome of Herodian: cod. Vindob. gr. 294, 
; a version of the epitome without inscr. is found in cod. Harl. 5656. Cited as 
by Pachomius Rhusanus (s.XV-s.XVI); cf. Hilgard, Excerpta 3ff. (the text appears ibid. 6-16).
Perhaps to be identified with 
(q.v., no. 256) cited by Georgius Choeroboscus (q.v., no. 201), Schol. in Theodos., GG
4:2.73.14ff., in which case S. would have been active before s.IX 1/2; see s.v. Georgius Choeroboscus. Perhaps also or alternatively identifiable with the 
in the catalogues of gramm. in Kröhnert, Canones 7, and Rabe, "Listen" 340. He is probably not to be identified with Sergius the Eutychianist, gramm. and correspondent of Severus of Antioch (see s.v. Sergius, no. 135), pace Hilgard, Excerpta 5; Ludwich, De Ioanne Philopono 9f.
258. SERVILIO. Ecclesiastical teacher. s.V ex. / s.VI init.
PLRE II s.v., p. 997.
At one time a teacher of Ennodius; cf. Epist. 5.14, MGH AA 7.183f. (506; Sundwall, Abhandlungen 77). It has been suggested that S. was Ennodius's master in liberal studies; cf. Riché, Education 24 n. 44. The text, however, indicates that S. was Ennodius's spiritual or ecclesiastical mentor: Epist. 5.14.2, sic ego sanctitatis tuae adfectione possessus, quamquam me de peritia iactare non audeam, vultum tamen praeceptoris expecto, ne degeneri te credas ecclesiasticum germen filio commisisse, quia quamvis memoria mea ad centenos se non valeat fructus extollere, scit tamen semina multiplicata redhibere cultori.
259. SOLYMIUS(?). Teacher or student? Seleucia (Isauria). s.V med.
PLRE II s.v., p. 1020.
The son of one gramm., Alypius, and the brother of another, Olympius (qq.v., nos. 6, 108), at Isaurian Seleucia, according to the received text of [Basil. Sel.] Vie et miracles de Sainte Thècle 2.38 Dagron. His father fell ill and was cured by Saint Thecla; at the time S. was either a teacher or a student, and devoted half the day to 
, half to tending his father.
Anomalies in the text, however, combine to suggest that some corruption has occurred and that 
is a garbling of 
: see Kaster, "Vie. " "Solymius" probably should be regarded as an error for "Olympius."
* 260. SOSISTRATUS. Teacher. Egypt (Arsinoite nome?). 337.
Teacher who wrote out a loan agreement in 337, probably somewhere in the Arsinoite nome (see Wegener, "Some Oxford Papyri" 209): PBodl. inv. e.129 = SB 6.9270 = Zilliacus, "Anecdota" 132, lines 22ff., 
. On the role of S., Zilliacus remarks, "As for the meaning of the note 
I Suppose it is equivalent to the usual 
. . . . Sosistratus presumably works as a private symbolaiographus " ("Anecdota" 133 n. 24); cf. CIL 10.3969 = ILS 7763, with Kinsey, "Poor Schoolmaster?" Cf. also
still earlier PCairZen. vol. 3 p. 290 (addendum to PCairZen. 2.59257) = PapLugdBat. 20A.20.9f. (252 B.C. ), 
.
For a different reconstruction of the same passage in PBodl. inv. e.129, see SB 6.9191 = Wegener, "Some Oxford Papyri" 209, and s.v. Anonymus 15, no. 279. Though this earlier version was apparently unknown to Zilliacus, his interpretation of the role of the 
is nonetheless probably preferable; see s.v. Anonymus 15.
261. STEGUS.
Cf. Chr.-Sch.-St. 2:2.1075 n. 5.
The name appears in one family of mss as a corruption in the tit. of Procop. Gaz. Ep. 13, 
; see the app. crit. in the ed. of Garzya and Loenertz ad loc. The gramm. in question was Stephanus (q.v., no. 141), who received Ep. 71, 89, and 105 in addition to Ep. 13. Cf. also s.vv. Alypius, Hierius, nos. 7, 71.
+ 262. TER(R)ENTIUS.
Ter(r)entius grammaticus, a pupil of Priscian according to the Commentum Sedulii on Eutyches (q.v., no. 57): Anecd. Helv. = GL 8.1.11f. = p. 87.15f. Löfstedt, Ter (r )entius [Terrentius cod. T: Terentius cod. B] grammaticus "cum autem" inquit "fuissemus ego et Eutex in schola Prisciani, sic ait nobis. . . . "
But T. is introduced in the Commentum Sedulii only to provide a fanciful etymology for the equally fanciful name Eutex ; cf. s.v. Eutyches. For the etymology, see Keil, GL 5.445; Löfstedt, ed., testimonia ad loc. T. is in all likelihood a fiction, to be identified with the gramm. "Terrentius" invented by the gramm. Virgilius Maro (s.VII) along with the fictional grammarians "Don," brother of Donatus, "Galbungus," et al.; the etymology offered in the Commentum may well derive from the same source, though it is not in the surviving Epitomae of Virgilius Maro; cf. Wessner, RE, 2. Reihe, 5.595; B. Löfstedt, "Miscellanea" 161f. (for other references to T.), 163.
263. TETRADIUS. Teacher; perhaps gramm. 
? s.IV 2/2.
RE, 2. Reihe, 5.1071f. (Ensslin); PLRE I s.v., p. 885.
Tetradius: Auson. Epist. 11 tit., v. 2. Whether he taught at Iculisma (Angoulême; vv. 21ff.) as a gramm. or as a rhetorician is not dear; the fact that T. was a poet (see below) is not much help on the question. Ausonius's emphasis on Iculisma's obscurity might suggest that it was not large enough to support a rhetorical school. T. could then have been
a gramm. or a general teacher of liberal letters; cf. s.v. Domitius Rufinus, no. 131; see also Kaster, "Notes" 342ff.
It is also unclear whether T. was still teaching at the time of Epist. 11. The sharp antithesis Ausonius draws between his condition at Iculisma and his current state—docendi munere adstrctum gravi (v. 21) vs. floreas (v. 26)—seems to suggest that he had broken the bonds of the munus grave altogether and had gone on to a different, better, fortune rather than that he had simply moved to a more favorable position.
T.'s origins are unknown. He had been a pupil of Ausonius, presumably at Bordeaux (vv. 17-18; the relationship is reversed at RE, 2. Reihe, 5.1072.1f.), and had subsequently taught at Iculisma (above). By the time of Epist. 11, he had left Iculisma (vv. 19-28). T.'s location is not stated, but Ausonius was writing near Saintes: vv. 11f., cur me propinquum Santonorum moenibus / declinas . . .? Since T. is near Ausonius—vv. 25-26, nunc frequentes atque claros nec procul / cum floreas inter viros —it is a reasonable inference that T. was at Saintes; cf. Matthews' review of PLRE I, CR 24 (1974), 101.
The letter was written in the year of Ausonius's consulship, i.e., 379, or else sometime after: v. 30, spernis poetam consulem. If T. was of an age to have been a pupil of Ausonius at Bordeaux sometime in the period 336-67, he cannot have been born before the early 320s or much later than the early 350s—presumably he was born closer to the former terminus, since the conceit of the letter, his alleged disdain for Ausonius, would seem more decorously used of someone more nearly Ausonius's contemporary than of someone less than half his age.
T. was a poet (vv. 23-24, 31-32, 37-38); Ausonius specially mentions his skills as a satirist, comparing him to Lucilius (vv. 1-10).
T. is possibly to be identified with Taetradius the proconsularis vir who converted to Christianity under the influence of St. Martin at Trier: Sulp. Sev. V. Martin. 17; cf. PLRE I s.v., p. 873; Green, "Prosopographical Notes" 23.
+ 264. THEODORETUS. Gramm. Asiana? Aet. incert. ; perhaps before ca. 568.
The epigram may once have been collected in the Cycle of Agathias, which would provide a term. a. q. of ca. 568; for the date, cf. Cameron and Cameron, "Cycle "; differently Baldwin, "Four Problems" 298ff. and "Date." But the attribution to the Cycle is uncertain; cf. Cameron and
Cameron, "Cycle " 20. T. was dated to s.IV / s.V by Beckby, ed., Anth. Gr. 4.745; on what grounds is not clear.
Perhaps to be identified with Theodoretus the author of a treatise 
; cf. s.v., no. 265.
+ 265. THEODORETUS. Gramm. and poet? Aet. incert. ; perhaps before ca. 568.
RE, 2. Reihe, 5.1801-2 (Wendel); Chr.-Sch.-St. 2:2.1080; Hunger 2.:12f.
: inscr. cod. Vindob. gr. 240 fol. 47. 
: most codd. and v. I of the dedicatory epigram; cf. Uhlig, "Noch einmal" 791; Egenolff, Orthoepischen Stücke 11ff.
Author of a treatise 
drawn from the twentieth book of the 
of Herodian; cf. Egenolff, Orthoepischen Stücke 10ff., Orthographischen Stücke 32. As yet unedited, T.'s treatise was used in compiling the Mischlexicon
, 
in Valckenaer, Ammonius2 188ff. It was introduced by a twelve-line epigram dedicating the work to a certain Patricius; for the text of the poem, see Uhlig, "Noch einmal" 791f.; cf. Pachomius Rhusanus (s.XV - s.XVI), in Hilgard, Excerpta 5, 
.
Because he produced an epitome of Herodian, T. probably cannot be dated before s.IV; cf. s.v. Aristodemus, no. 188. T. may well belong to s.V / s.VI, as the names "Theodoretus" and especially "Patricius" suggest.
Perhaps to be identified with Theodoretus (q.v., no. 264) the gramm. whose epigram on the governor Philippus is preserved as Anth. Gr. 16.34. It is probably a coincidence that the Suda,F .352, records a 
.
+ 266. THEODORUS. Gramm. or poet, or both. s.VI 1/2.
Subject of two funerary epigrams by Julian the Egyptian (Anth. Gr. 7.594, 595) and possibly of one by Paul the Silentiary (7.606), all from the Cycle of Agathias. His term. a. q. is therefore ca. 568; cf. Cameron and Cameron, "Cycle "; differently Baldwin, "Four Problems" 298ff. and "Date."
Julian claims that T. "revived" or "rescued from oblivion" the labors of the ancient poets (7.594.3f.) and that the latter are now buried with him (7.595.4.). He was presumably a gramm. or a poet, or both; cf. 7.594.1-4:
The lines could bear either interpretation. For the phrasing of vv. 1-2, cf. GVI 1182 = IKyzik. 515.2 (s.II); SEG 6.829 = GVI 1305.3-4 (s.II 2/2).
Paul's epigram mentions no literary attainments, in notable contrast to the poems of Judah. If T. was nonetheless its subject, he was survived by a son.
* 267. THEON. Teacher. Panopolis. s.IV init.
Theon 
, registered as the owner of a new house, 
(sc. 
), in Panopolis in a topographical listing of properties executed early in s.IV, PBerlBork. col. 12.34. For the date, see references s.v. Chabrias. Note that unlike the other two 
mentioned in the same register, Chabrias and Eutyches (qq.v., nos. 198, 214), T. appears to have been alive at the time of the survey; cf. Kaster, "P. Panop." 133f.
268. THESPESIUS. Gramm.(?) or, more probably, rhetorician. Caesarea (Palaestina). s.IV 2/3.
RE, 2. Reihe, 6.60 (Stegemann); Hauser-Meury, Prosopographie s.v., p. 174; PLRE I s.v. 2, p. 910.
Thespesius: Jer. De vir. ill. 13; Greg. Naz. Epitaph. 4 (PG 38.12f.). Called rhetor by Jerome; 
in the lemma of Greg. Naz. Epitaph. 4. Gregory's poem praises T. as a glorious example of the 
that was the special pride of Athens: vv. 3-4, 
. Since this must mean oratory—it can hardly mean grammar—the lemma is probably mistaken. The error was perhaps due to 
in v. 3, where T.'s skit in improvisation(?) is mentioned: 
. Cf. Hauser-Meury, Prosopographie 174.
Active at Caesarea in Palestine: according to Jerome, De vir. ill. 13, T. taught Gregory and Euzoius in the city that housed the library of Origen and Pamphilus and that later had Euzoius as its bishop. As teacher of Gregory Nazianzen (born 329) at Caesarea, T. must have been active at least by the mid- or late 340s. The date of his death cannot be fixed; but since the 
seem to be arranged chronologically, it can be placed between ca. 357 (Epitaph. 1-3) and ca. 367 (Epitaph. 5).
269. TROILUS. Gramm. Loc., aet. incert.
PLRE II s.v. 2, p. 1128.
According to the tit. of Anth. Gr. 16.55, a gramm., author of an epigram on the base of a statue raised by a city to the wrestler Lyron. T. is dated
by Beckby, ed., to ca. 375; for what reason is not clear. It is possible, however, that he lived in late antiquity.
270. STATIUS TULLIANUS. Dign., loc., aet. incert. ; before s.IV med.
RE, 2. Reihe, 3.2223-24 (Funaioli); Sch.-Hos. 4:1.180; PLRE I s.v., p. 924.
Glossographer or antiquarian; author of a work De vocabulis rerum (codd. Macrob.: deorum Eyssenhardt). A citation from the first book is found at Macrob. Sat. 3.8.6-7 = Servius Danielis ad Aen. 11.542. The common source of Macrobius and Servius Danielis here is almost certainly the variorum commentary of Aelius Donatus; cf. Funaioli, RE, 2. Reihe, 3.2223-24; Marinone, Elio Donato 71, 77; Santoro, Esegeti 36ff. T. should therefore be dated before s.IV med. Nothing more is known about him.
271. CURTIUS VALERIANUS. Dign., loc., aet. incert ; before ca. 580, and perhaps before s.VI init.
RE 4.1891f. (Wessner); Sch.-Hos. 4:2.218; PLRE II s.v. 7, p. 1142.
Writer on orthography excerpted by Cassiodorus, De orth., GL 7.155.22ff. Listed third at De orth. praef. (GL 7.147.6), after Velius Longus and before Papirianus (q.v., no. 244). Along with the other men listed there, V. is implicitly distinguished from Priscian, the modernus auctor (cf. GL 7.207.3, nostro tempore ); cf. also Inst. 1.30.2, where again V. stands between Velius Longus and Papirianus, and is classed among the orthographi antiqui. He may therefore be dated before Priscian; but on Cassiodorus's shortcomings in chronology, see s.vv. Eutyches, Phocas, nos. 57, 121. Though V.'s relation to Papirianus is uncertain, the dependence Keil suggested, GL 7.134, seems very doubtful; likewise the date of Papirianus—certainly before Priscian, perhaps after Aelius Donatus; but cf. s.v. Papirianus. V. can at least be dated before ca. 580, the date of Cassiod. De orth. and of the revision of Cassiod. Inst.
272. VICTOR. Gramm.? Before s.V med. / s.VI init.
PLRE I s.v. 7, p. 959.
The opinion of a Victor in an Ars grammatica is cited by Priscian, GL 2.14.13f., under the heading "De syllabis." Rufinus GL 6.573.26 lists a Victor as an authority who had written on rhythm, de numeris (sc. oratoriis ), in Latin.
It is not certain that the two are the same man. The second is usually identified with the author of a rhetorical handbook, C. Iulius Victor; cf. Cybulla, De Rufini . . . commentariis 39f. The first remains a mystery. If Priscian cites him correctly as the author of an Ars grammatica, he probably should not be identified with C. Iulius Victor, Sulpicius Victor, or Claudius Marius Victor. "Victorinus" has been suggested in place of
"Victor"; cf. GL 2.14.13f., app. crit. But nothing comparable to the opinion Priscian cites can be found either in the extant Ars of Marius Victorinus or in the work of Aphthonius that was circulating under Victorinus's name by the middle of s.V.
* 273. VICTORINUS. Gramm. s.IV 1/2?
Victorinus grammaticus, cod. Sangall. 877; Victorinus or Victurinus, codd. Vat. Regin. 1587, Neap. Borbon. IV A 34. Presented as the author of a grammatical Ars with metrical appendix, GL 6.:185-215. The Ars is also transmitted without the appendix, and the appendix in turn is found independently; but the common format of the two sections and other features of the paradosis make it certain that the two parts belong to a single whole; for details, see Wessner at RE 14.1845.36ff. and in Teuffel 3 §408.4.
Since the work also appears without attribution in cod. Vat. Regin. 251, and since the metrical appendix in cod. Paris. lat. 7559 and the part of the Ars preserved in cod. Neap. lat. 2 (= Vindob. 16) are attributed to Palaemon, the whole is possibly an acephalous work ascribed to various well-known authors in the course of transmission. H. van Putschen attached the name "Maximus Victorinus" (q.v., no. 274) to the work in his ed. (Hanoviae, 1605).
The work is written throughout in the question-and-answer format that belongs to the schools; for analysis, see Barwick, Remmnius 77ff. A reference to Lactantius occurs at GL 6.209.11ff.: nostra quoque memoria Lactantius de metris "pentameter" inquit et "tetrameter. " If the wording, with the phrase nostra memoria, indicates that the writer was a contemporary of Lactantius, then the reference should place the genesis of the work in S.IV 1/2. But note also that an allusion to the Ars of Aelius Donatus suggests a date after s.IV med.: GL 6.200.24f., de pronomine similiter quoniam Donatus exposuit, ideo praetermisimus. The latter may, however, be due to revision in the course of transmission; cf. Barwick, Remmius 82 n. 1.
Though the Ars bears a marked resemblance to the Excerpta of Audax (q.v., no. 190), differences between the two suggest reliance on a common source rather than dependence of one on the other.
+ 274. MAXIMUS (?) VICTORINUS. Gramm. or rhetorician? Loc., aet. incert ; before Bede.
Cf. RE 14.1847.27ff. (Wessner); Sch.-Hos. 4:1.154.
Called Maximus or Maximinus or Maximianus Victorinus in the mss (Maximinus Victorinus in the oldest, cod. Neap. lat. 2 [= Vindob. 16, s.VII / s.VIII]): see Keil, GL 6, xx-xxi. He is probably the Maximus mentioned in the company of "Honoratus" (= Servius), "Sergius," and
"Metrorius" in the catalogues of gramm. in codd. Bonon. 797 (Negri, "De codice" 266) and Bern. 243 (Anecd. Helv. = GL 8, cxlix); cf. further s.v. "Sergius," no. 255.
Author of a Commentum or Commentarius de ratione metrorum (so the mss), GL 6.215-28. Of uncertain profession or status, he is styled Maximianus grammaticus in the subscr. of cod. Monac. 6281, but he appears to be especially concerned with rhetoric; cf. GL 6.227.25-27, haec prudenti satis sunt, hisque exemplis omnia in promptu habebit. rhetoricam autem eloquentiam, id est veram, nosse non poterit, nisi qui ad eam hoc vestigio venerit.
His date is likewise beyond determination, save that Bede refers to him (as "Victorinus"), De orth., GL 7.248.17ff. = 6.215.16ff.
+ 275. URBANUS. Gramm.? Vergilian commentator. Loc., aet. incert. ; s.II med. / s.V init.
RE, 2. Reihe, 9.982-86 (Strzelecki); Sch.-Hos. 3.173.
Commentator on Vergil, cited eleven times by Servius. The nature of the citations makes it reasonably dear that U.'s work was a commentary, not some other type of grammatical work. Servius's citations provide a term. a. q. of s.IV ex. / s.V init.; though firm evidence for a term. p. q. is lacking, there is some reason to suppose U. was later than Velius Longus; cf. Serv. ad Aen. 5.517, with Schol. Veron. to Aen. 5.488; Strzelecki, RE, 2. Reihe, 9.983.31ff.
Very little recommends the common suggestion that U. is the M. Damatius Urbanus whose literary attainments are recorded on CIL 8.8500 = ILS 7761 Sitifis (an. 229): summarum artium liberalium, litterarum studiis utriusque linguae perfecte eruditus, optima facundia praeditus. Praise of this type is very common in inscr., and implies no specific accomplishment beyond a liberal education: e.g., for utraque lingua eruditi (vel sim. ) in or from Africa, see the inscr. collected at Champlin, Fronto 17 n. 84. Further, the Urbanus of CIL 8.8500 died in his twenty-third year.
276. ZOSIMUS. Sophist. Ascalon. s.V ex. / s. VI init.
RE, 2. Reihe, 10.790ff. (Gärtner); PLRE II s.v. 4, p. 1206.
A sophist of Ascalon active under Anastasius, according to the Suda, Z.169, where he is partially confused, ut vid., with the homonymous and nearly contemporary sophist of Gaza (= Zosimus 2 PLRE II, p. 1205). The confusion is inconsequential for our purposes, however; for although Z. is called a gramm. by PLRE II—perhaps a slip, after Gärtner, RE, 2. Reihe, 10.790ff., where the term seems to be used loosely—no ancient source identifies him as a gramm., and nothing that we know about him or about his homonym suggests that he was one. The work associated
with him is wholly concerned with prose, esp. the Attic orators; see Gärtner, RE, 2. Reihe, 10.791ff. That by itself indicates he was a sophist.
* 277. ANONYMUS 13. Teacher. Oxyrhynchus. s.III / s.IV.
In a private account dated by the editor (J. Barns) to s.III / s.IV: POxy. 24.2425 col. ii.16, 
. The units involved are not specified, but the amounts recorded in the part of the account published are fairly uniform, ranging from 17 to 22.
* 278. ANONYMUS ("the Elder") 14. Teacher. Karanis. 299.
Signatory of a declaration of land owned by Aur. Isidorus, lying in two districts of Karanis: PCairIsid. 5.45, [
± 10] 
. The declaration was made for the census of 297 and was executed 11 September 299 for the censitor Iulius Septimius Sabinus (= Sabinus 17 PLRE I, p. 794). Probably the same man appears as a signatory in a copy of another document of the same type apparently executed at the same time and concerning parcels of land located in the same districts: PNYU 1.1.15, 
.
Evidently distinct from the 
Aur. Herodes who appears in a similar capacity on two similar documents prepared at the same time in Karanis; see s.v. Aur. Herodes, no. 228. The two men were performing the same job at the same time probably because the parcels of land lay in different parts of Karanis; see PCairIsid. p. 48.
On 
as secretaries, see references s.v. Aur. Herodes, no. 228. Cf. also s.vv. Aur. Plution, no. 248; Sosistratus (SB 6.9270), no. 260 = Anonymus 15 (SB 6.9191), no. 279.
* 279. ANONYMUS 15. Teacher. Arsinoite nome. 337.
Teacher found performing a notarial function in a loan agreement drafted probably somewhere in the Arsinoite nome in 337: PBodl. inv. e.129 = SB 6.9191 = Wegener, "Some Oxford Papyri" 209, lines 22ff., 
. With the role of the 
here, Wegener compared that of Aur. Herodes (q.v., no. 228) at SB 5.7669.41 = PCairIsid. 3.41; cf. also PCairIsid. 4.21 (s.v. Aur. Herodes); PRyl. 4.656 (s.v. Aur. Plution, no. 248); PCairIsid. 5.45, PNYU 1.1.15 (s.v. Anonymus 14, no. 278). Note, however, that the latter documents belong to a homogeneous set, viz., declarations of land before the censitor, distinct from the private agreement found here.
A perhaps preferable reconstruction of this passage would read 
for 
; see s.v. Sosistratus, no. 260.
* 280. ANONYMUS 16. Teacher. Egypt. s.IV?
In an account dated to the "fourth (?) century": OPetr. 450, 
b . The units of payment are not specified, but the same figure is given in the five other entries that are legible.
* 281. ANONYMUS 17. Magister (sc. alicuius artis liberalis ). Rome? s.V ex. / s.VI init.
Subject of Ennod. Carm. 2.96 (MGH AA 7.172), with the lemma de quodam Romano qui magister voluit esse. The poem's theme is conventional, the ignorant would-be teacher: vv. 2-3, littera nulla colit brutae commercia linguae. / numquam discipulus, valeas dic unde magister. Perhaps a literary invention; cf. s.vv. Auxilius, Philomusus, nos. 191, 246.