ESTAR EN EL SUELO

The methodology of the author in the construction of the Historiae both conforms to and deviates from the stylistic example of breviaria. The Historiae is a blend of descriptive passages impassively conveying the material of history, interspersed with highly rhetorical comments and lengthier sections that continually return the reader to Orosius‘s apologetic agenda.160 Each book opens with a preface written in the first person, often with a concentration of theological and polemical statements, that

elucidates what will come in the forthcoming chapter. At the end of the chapter comes a further rhetorical statement which makes the argument of the section explicit. For instance, Book Two opens with the sentence, ‗I think that...‘ (arbitror) in a discussion of the religious truth of the Christian God as the creator of mankind and the judicial divine punishment of man for sin in the world.161 At the end of Book Two the argument recently made is summarised with clear evidence to demonstrate the sack of Rome in AD 410 was much less serious than the Gallic sack of the city in the fourth century BC (2.19.12-16). The factual material which narrates events according to an organised chronology most corresponds to the style of breviaria. This style of historical prose is spread throughout with statements or comments which reveal the partiality of the author, as well as longer passages which allow the contemplation of events that have been described. Robert Browning understands that Orosius‘s apologetic ‗leaves no room for the detached objectivity – real or feigned – of the classical historian.‘162 The

juxtaposition between the formal, unadorned narrative and the emotive reaction it generates is demonstrated in Book Three with the focus on Alexander the Great. The section opens with a firm chronology: ‗So Alexander, in the four hundred and twenty- sixth year after the founding of the City, succeeded Philip on the throne.‘163 (3.16.1, p. 100) Orosius relies upon Justin‘s Epitome of Trogus for this material which he

160

For a discussion of the style, brevity, rhetoric and truthfulness of the Historiae, see Van Nuffelen, (2012), pp. 115-145.

161 _{2.1.1, p. 44: ‗I think that...‘; 2.1.1, vol. 1, p. 84: arbitror.} 162

Browning, (1982), p. 72.

163 _{3.16.1, vol. 1, p. 163: Igitur Alexander anno ab Vrbe condita CCCCXXVI patri Philippo successit in}

condenses and manipulates.164 The statistic of the size of Alexander‘s army is reproduced almost exactly by Orosius from Justin, as well as the accompanying comment:

In his army, there were thirty-two thousand infantry, four thousand five hundred cavalry, and one hundred and eighty ships. With so small a force it is uncertain whether Alexander is more to be admired for having conquered the whole world or for having dared to undertake it.165(3.16.3, p. 100)

The text relates the Persian wars against Darius with statistics of the size of armies and the numbers killed, the martial expansion of his empire, and his death. Although the passage cannot be described as impartial, initially the style is dry and factual, focusing mainly on the wars of Alexander through events and statistics. Like Justin‘s Epitome and Eutropius‘s Breviarium, this is the story of history, a narrative relating to important events and celebrated persons in the past, in the main uncomplicated by personal interjection and insight.166

The turn comes following the conclusion of this narrative in the demise of Alexander, when the first-person narrative voice intervenes:

O wicked soul of man and heart always inhuman. Did I not fill my eyes with tears as I reviewed these events to prove the recurring cycles of the misfortunes of all ages, in the relating of so much evil, because of which the whole world on learning of death itself or because of the fear of death trembled? Did I not grieve in my own heart? As I turned these things over in my mind, did I not make the miseries of my ancestors my own, viewing them as the common lot of man?167 (3.20.5, p. 107)

This archetypal construction where an exposition of a period of history is followed by a highly emotional and introspective response occurs throughout the Historiae, for instance: following the narration of Athenian history in Book Two which ends with the death of Darius (2.14.1-2.18.3), the composition changes to an expressive reflection of the ‗masses of misfortunes‘ and the ‗slaughter of that time‘.168

(2.18.4, p. 74) Again in

164 _{See Justin, Epitoma, 11.2-13.1.}

165 _{3.16.3, vol.1, p. 164: In exercitu eius fuere peditum XXXII milia, equitum IIII milia quingenti, naues}

CLXXX. Hac tam parua manu uniuersum terrarum orbem utrum admirabilius sit quia uicerit an quia adgredi ausus fuerit incertum est. Justin records 182 ships.

166 _{Den Boer identifies only one place (1.12.2) where Eutropius interrupts his own narrative. Den Boer,}

(1972), p. 138.

167

3.20.5, vol. 1, p. 173: O dura mens hominum et cor semper inhumanum! ego ipse, qui haec pro adserenda omnium temporum alternanti calamitate percenseo, in relatu tanti mali quo uel morte ipsa uel formidine mortis accepta totus mundus intremuit, numquid inlacrimaui oculis? numquid corde condolui? numquid reuoluens haec propter communem uiuendi statum maiorum miserias meas feci?

168 _{2.18.4, vol. 1, p. 124: Ecce paruissima pagina uerbisque paucissimis quantos de tot prouinciis populis}

Book Four, after the relation of the first Punic war (4.7.1-12.9) comes a lengthy commentary which bemoans the lack of Roman peace:

...in only one year did the Roman viscera not sweat blood, and in the midst of the many periods of long centuries the wretched City, truly a wretched mother, has enjoyed rest scarcely at any time from the fear of sorrows, not to say sorrows themselves.169 (4.12.9, p. 146)

These emotional and rhetorical passages are the opposite of the style of authorship found in Eutropius‘s Breviarium. The purpose of the Breviarium, to provide ‗a simple, succinct and readable account of Roman history‘, is distinguished from the purpose of the Historiae, to persuade its reader using all of history.170 The frequent referencing of the self by the narrator is a deliberate strategy to control the sense of the past the reader develops; in using his own emotional reaction as an example, Orosius not only

determines the narrative of the past but also how the reader should respond to it. This is recognised by Browning: ‗Orosius continually interrupts his narrative to make personal comments, moral or ironical, on the matter which he narrates, and to suggest to his reader the appropriate reaction.‘171 Van Nuffelen understands that the Historiae is ‗at once a narrative of the past and an argument on how to interpret that past.‘172 This is history but with a purpose, writing about the material of history utilised as evidence in order to fulfil an apologetic agenda.173