PROLEGOMENA

It is established from certain passages in Cicero (Letters to Atticus XIII.12, 3; 16, 1; 18; Letters IX.8; and Academic Posteriors I.1, 2ff.), first correctly applied by Mueller, that M. Terentius Varro did not leave his twenty-five books On the Latin Language—which he was occupied with composing between 47 and 45 B.C.—for others to publish, as was Mueller’s opinion (Varro, Preface, pp. VI—XI; Festus, Preface, p. XXIX ff.), a view approved by Lachmann (Minor Works II, p. 164) and Ritschel (Opuscula III, p. 465 ff.). We believe there is no reason to deny that he published them himself, following Leonard Spengel (Abhandlungen der bayerischen Akademie VII 2, 1854, p. 443 ff. and Preface 2, p. XXXVII) and August Wilmanns (On the Grammatical Books of Varro, p. 37 ff.). They also correctly concluded this from the fact that Jerome's index openly testifies that Varro compiled an epitome of these books (cf. Ritschel's Opuscula III, p. 526): it is by no means probable that he would have intended to adapt this while the books were not yet brought to completion. Regarding the claim that there were twelve books on syntax, which some affirmed to be a wonder because Chrysippus had left many more on the same subject, Wilmanns (p. 15) provided an excellent counter-argument. Furthermore, Spengel (as cited) reasonably conjectured that the author published the triad dedicated to Septumius (Books II—IV) earlier, "for if he had not done so, he would not have dedicated the entire work of twenty-five books to Cicero, but twenty-two." Scholars have rightly surmised that the first book was appended only upon the completion of the work, and not to that triad; this is also supported by the very beginning of the fifth book. Regarding the manner in which Varro addresses Cicero—even though he only mentioned him in the inscriptions of the individual books—Vahlen spoke of this in Opuscula academica I, p. 392. Moreover, in his honor, he created an example: "Tullius and Antonius were consuls" (p. 128, 8); just as he sometimes sets "Marcus" and more often "Terentius" as an example for his own name, and likewise uses "Reatinus" of Reate, and not infrequently considers the Sabines (see the Index under the respective terms).

We know little or nothing of the fate these books had in the times immediately following their publication. What seems to point back to Varro in Livy, Virgil, Propertius, and Ovid relates more to his Antiquities than to his grammatical books. Vitruvius 1 (before 27 B.C.) knew the books; we have prefixed his words to the first page. Mueller has already explained 2 that Verrius Flaccus, who agrees with Varro in many things, seems to have drawn his knowledge from elsewhere: namely, from the same books, primarily...

1) Cf. Lachmann, loc. cit.; Sontheimer, "Vitruvius and his Time," pp. 70; 71.
2) Festus, Preface, p. XXIX: "A diligent cultivator of Varro... he never mentions the books On the Latin Language of that most learned man and extracted nothing from them." Add what Goetz (Questiones Varronianae, p. V) argued regarding this matter.