18 The Imperial Government
mustdry.’’Suetonius,however,saysthatPolybiuswasa studiis,^102 andnone
oftheotherreferencestohimmentionshispost.ElsewhereintheConsola-
tioSenecamentionsPolybius’literarydistinction(8,2–3;11,5)andsaysthat
thishelpedhisrisetoprominence—‘‘longagotheloveofCaesarliftedyou
toahigherrank,andyourliterarypursuitshaveelevatedyou’’(6,2);healso
mentions Polybius’ occupations, ‘‘that is,studiumet Caesar’’ (5, 2). Can we
takeit,asisnormallyassumed,^103 thatPolybiuswasbothalibellisanda studiis,
beingsucceededintheformerpostbyCallistus,whomZonaras(beforemen-
tioningthedeathof Polybius)calls‘‘inchargeofthelibelliofpetitions’’?^104
IftheexternalevidencegivesnoindicationthatPolybiuswasa libellis,what
ofthepassageofSeneca?Themerementionoflibelliisnotdecisive,forall
officials(nottospeakoflandownerslikePliny,fromtheircoloni)^105 werepre-
sentedwiththese,thoughtheonlyunambiguousfirst-centuryevidenceof
animperialattendantreadinglibellirelatestoParthenius,thecubiculariusof
Domitian—‘‘hedoesnotreadbooks[libri]butpetitions[libelli].’’^106 Thepas-
sage shows clearlyat least, both from its first phrase and the last sentence,
thatPolybiushadactuallytolistentotheentreatiesofindividuals.Werethe
libelliwhich he was to ‘‘disponere’’ (deal with) intended for the Emperor?
Iftheconclusionisprobable,itismadesobythefollowingclause,making
clearthathearrangedmattersfortheEmperor’sattention.Ifso,werethese
thelibellihanded direct to the Emperor, like those mentioned above, and
thenlaidasidetobedealtwithlater?OrdidtheyreachtheEmperoronly
viaanofficial?Thelatterinterpretationconflictswiththeotherknownevi-
dence,thoughisnotforthatreasonnecessarilywrong.Butatanyrateitis
certainthateventhispassage,intendedtoflatteritsaddressee,doesnotgive
theslightesthintthatanofficialdealtwiththelibelliinthefirstinstance,in
thesenseofproducinga‘‘draftreply,’’orsomethinglikeit,fortheemperor
toapprove.
Ifthispassageisevidenceforthefunctionsofthea libellis(ratherthanthe
a studiis,aboutwhosefunctionswehavenootherevidence),^107 thenitisthe
- Suet.,Div. Claud.28.
- P-W,s.v.‘‘Polybius’’(5).
- Zonaras11,9–10Dio(Boiss.)60,30,6b.
- Pliny,Ep.9,15,1.
- Martial11,1,5.
- Thenormalsupposition(e.g.,O.Hirschfeld,Die kaiserlichen Verwaltungsbeamten bis
auf Diocletian^2 [1905],332–33;L.Friedländer,SittengeschichteRoms^9 [1919–21],55;A.M.Duff,
Freedmen in the Early Roman Empire^2 [1958],157)isthatthea studiiswassomekindof‘‘direc-
torofresearch’’fortheemperor.Thisisnomorethanadeductionfromthecommonsense
ofstudia.Onemightwonderwhetherthemeaningisnotbetterunderstoodbytakingitas
asimplepluralofstudiuminthesenseof ‘‘favour’’or‘‘support.’’