Aggenus Urbicus
Agennius Urbicus was a Latin specialist writer of the 5th (?) Century AD
Name, source location
Under the name of Agennius Urbicus agrimensorum Romanorum have received two incomplete traditional treatises in the so-called Corpus: De controversiis agrorum and a Frontin commentary, called Commentum de agrorum qualitate. Both tracts are already in the oldest manuscript, the Arcerianus B connected in the Inscriptionen and Subscriptionen with the name of a AGGENVS or AGENVS VRBICVS, which is why, in addition to the authorship of the Commentum, the names form Agennius must remain debatable. The selected research author name goes back on a Bamberg codex (9th - 10th century) The two of them independent epigraphic evidence can not necessarily identify with Agennius Urbicus. The CIL XIII in 1674-75 mentioned M. Adginnius Urbicus ( dated to the 1st century AD) can not connect from philological considerations with the author of gromatischen tracts; Word choice and syntax of the tracts indicate the 5th century AD ( or even later ).
Work
The Agennius Urbicus attributed treatise De controversiis agrorum in the version available to us based on the edition Carl Olof Thulins, which in its turn is based on the text layout on the Lachmann edition of 1848-53. Both editions use for the following manuscripts: Arcerianus B ( first class, 7th century) and the manuscripts P and G of the second class. Lachmann adopted by the bulk of this text, to be able to split a second book Frontinus. Also Thulin is him, albeit without specifying Frontin followed in what was typographically marked in the editions by italic (or smaller ) and Latin (and larger ) printing type. In addition, the texts have been constituted by large sheet of changes in the manuscripts probably partially disturbed order in both editions.
In contrast Agennius is probably not the author of the Commentum de agrorum qualitate. The treatise is understood (as the name shows ) as a comment of Frontinus 's De agrorum qualitate explains continuously passages from Frontin (some with roll-call citation ) and draws the font de limitibus a Hyginus zoom. Choice of words and grammar can also be the Commentum to the conclusion that it is a late antique work, probably dating from the 5th century AD, is. Thus, the first compilation or processing stage and the beginning of reception of Agrimensorentexte is also highlighted. The aim of the commentator is to explain the areas categorized as in need of explanation writings ( Thulin Ed 51, 8-10. ): Suscepimus qualitates agrorum tractandas atque plano sermone et lucido exponendas, et ea quae ut volumus a veteribus obscuro sermone conscripta sunt et apertius intellegibilius Exponere ad erudiendam posteritatis infantiam ... ( = We have undertaken to treat the properties of fields and present it in a clear and lucid language, and we want that which has been written by the ancients in dark language represent a clear and explicit to educate the child's ignorance of posterity ... ) Whether it is meant that the unknown author, commented on them as masters or books for school use, can not be answered conclusively. The Commentum added was a booklet with the text illustrative geometric drawings, the so-called Liber diazographus.
Lachmann has evaluated the performance of the Agennius in two tracts decidedly negative. Especially for Commentum the pseudo - Agennius there are statements that it was " the pathetic work of a Christian schoolmaster " or the claim that " his unfortunate name ... created confusion " have. Indeed, it must be checked to what extent the manuscripts are interpolated with the work of the Agennius; just the aufscheinenden in Commentum text layers are not yet sufficiently investigated. If it is really no handwriting " free from the interpolations of Agenius (sic) Urbicus " is, may be doubted.