Sempronius Asellio

Received came from the Roman Plebejerfamilie the Sempronier and emerged as the author of a Latin historical work, which dealt primarily with contemporary history, but only in the form of quotations from other authors; Sempronius Asellio († after 91 BC * 158 BC) is.

Life

Sempronius Asellio whose praenomen is unknown, according to the only surviving statement of his life was a military tribune Publius Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus Africanus at the siege of Numancia in Spain ( 134-133 BC). Because of his position, he probably was then about 24 years old, resulting in his date of birth is calculated to approximately 158 BC. As a fragment of his work with great probability to the murder of the tribune Marcus Livius Drusus 91 BC alludes Asellio must have lived at least until this year. According to the testimony of another citation he may have even reported incidents of the years 86 or 83 BC. Otherwise, lie about his biography before any certificates.

Work

Asellio is considered the first Roman historian, who was limited to contemporary history, while his predecessor, their representation usually began with the founding of Rome or written monographs on certain past eras. It was only at a later age and a little later than the historian Lucius Coelius Antipater he wrote his historical work whose exact title has not survived, but fluctuates in between the quotes Res gestae and Historiae. The period treated with sat about 160 BC or when connected directly to his model Polybius 146 BC and lasted until at least 91 BC The exact number of books by Asellios works is not known. It was at least 14, but is expected to be handed down incorrectly specifying that a - usually to an event of the year 86 ( plunder of the port of Piraeus by the commander Sulla ) or 83 BC -related - should come quote from the 40th book. Such a high volume number appears due to the distribution of other citations excluded, because they can be dated as follows: Fragment 4 ( from Book 4) probably 137 BC, the fragments 6 and 7 ( from Book 5) to 133 BC and fragment 11 well described in 91 BC goods ie 46 years ( 137-91 BC), in 11 books ( from book 14), it is unlikely that Asellio another 26 books (namely book 15 to book 40 ) wrote about the years 91-86 and 83 BC. He was also 91 BC already nearly 70 years old and is therefore the 14th book can not have many more to make the page.

Overall, only 15 fragments of Asellios works have survived. Most delivers the Roman Aulus Gellius stained writer. One of these fragments is probably derived from the proem Asellios explanation of the purpose and method of its historical presentation, in which he criticized the " Annals " of his predecessors. This exhausted in the mere enumeration of facts, without giving information about the underlying causes and motivations or internal politics. Also, "real" history should educate moral- patriotic sentiments with the aim to fulfill the readership with more enthusiasm for the execution of government functions such as national defense. Asellio Thus closed well to be the first Roman historian of pragmatic historiography of Polybius. Because of the small number of surviving fragments but can not be assessed the extent to which he placed on the processing of historical facts in his work actually realized his own claim. It is controversial how authors Asellios polemic refers concretely. While part of the researcher believes that it generally means all previous annalists, accept other scholars claim that he criticized only those historians who recorded in their writings especially chronicle material of the priest Annals ( Annales maximi ).

Reception

The Roman orator Marcus Tullius Cicero complained the simple style of Asellio used according to the manner of Polybius. This also explains why the writing was apparently not used by later historians. Anyway, found out Cicero's remark to the 2nd century AD, no mentions of Asellios work which is quoted by grammarians and antiquarians only since the reign of Emperor Hadrian. Aulus Gellius saw Asellio probably directly and partly for reasons of content, which later authors ( Nonius, Charisius, Servius, Priscian ), however, apparently only indirectly through media sources and from a purely linguistic interest.

Output

• H. Peter, Historicorum Romanorum Reliquiae ( HRR ) 1, pp. 179-184.