Roman naming conventions in late Republican and early Imperial prose

Abstract

This dissertation examines how various naming conventions were used in literary texts during the two phases of onomastic changes in Roman nomenclature, the first phase taking place in the second century BC when tria nomina and the double-name form “praenomen + cognomen” gradually replaced the archaic “praenomen + nomen gentilicium” in common and official use, and the second phase featuring the emergence of the“nomen gentilicium + cognomen” in the late Republic and its subsequent dominance in the early Empire.

Chapter 1 examines the numismatic evidence and the senatus consulta from inscriptions to trace the emergence of the tria nomina and the ennobling “praenomen + cognomen” form in the second century BC. On that basis, and drawing on the works of the late Republican writers Cicero and Caesar, the nature of the emergent form “nomen gentilicium + cognomen” and its reversal in the late Republic is also explored.

Chapter 2 uses statistics to present some general onomastic patterns across Livy’s 35 remaining books. The analysis reveals two distinctive onomastic traditions that influenced Livy, the tria nomina and the “praenomen + nomen gentilicium”, derived from the pontifical records and the senatorial records respectively. Mixed usages in expressions of a consular year and provincial distributions are also closely examined.

Chapter 3 observes on Valerius Maximus’ naming conventions in different contexts. Special attention is given to different names of an individual, especially Pompey, as well as the same name of different individuals of some prominent families, including the Scipiones, the Fabii Maximi, the Aemilii Pauli, Lepidi and Scauri and the Fulvii and Valerii Flacii.

This study not only supplements the existing scholarship on Roman nomenclature, but also addresses important questions such as how writers adapted to changing conventions, how names could convey different implications in a literary text, and how collective memory was formed about historical figures. As a whole, the dissertation aims to make a case for the significance of Latin authors’ use of names for our understanding of literary texts.