Enmannsche Kaisergeschichte

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Enmannsche Kaisergeschichte (in English often called Enmann's Kaisergeschichte) is a modern term for a hypothesized Latin historical work, written in the 4th century but now lost.

The German scholar Alexander Enmann made in 1884 a comparison of several late Roman historical works and found many similarities, which could not be explained by a direct literary relationship between the extant works (Eine verlorene Geschichte der roemischen Kaiser und das Buch De viris illustribus urbis Romae). Enmann postulated a theory of a lost historical work, which was the common source for authors including Aurelius Victor, Eutropius, and the author of the Historia Augusta.[1] The work is not mentioned by any late Roman historian, but Enmann's analysis is today largely accepted and modified.[2] However, there are some scholars, especially den Boer, who would question its existence, but the majority accept it.[3]

The Kaisergeschichte (History of the Emperors) was a brief historical work. It had covered the time from emperor Augustus to 337 or 357.[3] It was used by Aurelius Victor, Eutropius, Festus, the Historia Augusta, Jerome, the anonymous Epitome de Caesaribus, and other late Roman histories.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  • Alexander Enmann, Eine verlorene geschichte der römischen Kaiser und das buch de viris illustribus urbis romae. Philologus, no. Supplement-Band 4, Heft 3. (1884). p. 337-501.
  • Willem den Boer, Some Minor Roman Historians. Leiden, 1972.
  • Timothy David Barnes, The Sources of the Historia Augusta. Collection Latomus v. 155. Bruxelles: Latomus, 1978.
  • Burgess, R. W. (1995). "On the Date of the Kaisergeschichte". Classical Philology. 90 (2): 111–128. JSTOR 270485.  (with bibliography).

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Burgess (1995), pp. 111-114.
  2. ^ Cf. Richard W. Burgess (2005). "A Common Source for Jerome, Eutropius, Festus, Ammianus, and the Epitome de Caesaribus between 358 and 378, along with Further Thoughts on the Date and Nature of the Kaisergeschichte". Classical Philology. 100 (2): 166–192. JSTOR 10.1086/432844. 
  3. ^ a b Burgess (1995), pp. 113-114.