Page:English Historical Review Volume 35.djvu/475

1920 SHORT NOTICES 467 broken after his second triumph, when his head appeared on the coinage for the first time : for although it is true that the titles ' Dictator perpetuo ' and 'parens patriae ' do not occur in conjunction with that of ' Imperator ', they characterize parallel and doubtless contemporary issues, such as those of L, Aemilius Buca and P. Sepullius Macer ; and the natural interpreta- tion of Dio Cass. xliv. 4 confirms the date. From Caesar's death onwards the republican rules were constantly violated in both respects, and it is hard to think that this was not due to the example set by the dictator. With this deduction^ however, Mr. McFadyen has still accomplished a useful piece of criticism ; and many interesting questions are raised and elucidated in the course of his dissertation : for instance, Mommsen's conjecture that Augustus's assumption of the praenomen Imperatoris may have been due to the suggestion of Agrippa is fortified, and the meticulous formalism of Tiberius is well brought out and accounted for. Mr. McFadyen should not have passed his proofs without correcting ' M. TuUius Cicero ' to ' C. Cilnius Maecenas ' on p. 32 or ' Trebonius PoUio ' to ' Trebellius PoUio ' on p. 67. The reference to ' Kornemann, Historische Vierteljahrschrift (1914), pp. 440 ff.' (i.e. to a one-page review of Kornemann's PriesterJcodex in der Regia) can hardly be called either accurate or relevant ; if it must be given, it should be supplemented by a reference to Soltau's article in the same volume, pp. 321 ff. H. S. J. Mr. Francis Holland's readable and attractive Seneca (London : Longmans, 1920) was originally intended to serve as an introduction to a translation of the letters, and is admirably designed for such a purpose. It cannot be said, however, that it throws any fresh light on Seneca or his times, nor indeed does the subject lend itself to any great originality or novelty of view. The historical narrative is well written, consisting to no small extent of brief and judicious paraphrases of Tacitus, while the ground is fully covered and the available evidence carefully considered. With regard to the estimate given of Seneca's character and the view taken of the literary and philosophic value of his works, Mr. Holland presents what will seem to many too favourable a picture. There is no evidence that Seneca was the first, as Mr. Holland suggests (p. 176), to make Stoicism a practical force at Rome. No writer shows up better in anthologies than Seneca, while few distinguished authors are more disappointing when read in bulk. The lack of solid argument and consecutive order produces a feeling of restlessness and dissatisfaction. There is endless repetition, while the shallow brilliance of the epigrams scattered broadcast on every page for many becomes an utter weariness. Seneca is a society preacher of considerable merit, but his style is tjrpical of the flashy rhetoric of the schools of oratory and soon produces a feeling of strain and unreality. This does not neces- sarily imply that Seneca was himself insincere. But both his writings and much that we are told of his life are consistent with a very considerable degree of insincerity. His character is admittedly difficult to analyse. But Mr. Holland goes too far in his apologia : neither in character, moral influence, nor literary skill does Seneca, on the evidence available, deserve to be rated quite so high. As to the plays that have come down under the Hh2