sion of Decebalus. The time of this fact was U. C. 855 or 856. The proximity of the two epistles in question is presumptively an argument that the death of Frontinus, which made a vacancy in the Auguratus, and Pliny's application to be appointed in his stead, were nearly synchronous with the close of the first Dacian war, U. C. 855 or 856*.

It is a remarkable circumstance that, though this war began in U. C. 854, and was not over for the first time until U. C. 856†, when Trajan celebrated his first triumphus Dacicus; there is no allusion to it in the first nine books of the letters. The first extant allusion to the wars in Dacia occurs vi. 27. sect. 5. under the general name of Trajan's Recentia opera; in answer to an inquiry from Severus, a friend of Pliny's, Quid designatus consul in honorem principis censeret. These recentia opera imply no less than the exploits of both the Dacian wars and especially the celebrated bridge over the Danube, a work of the second war, as Dio shews, lxviii. 13, most probably in U. C. 858. This epistle, then, was later than the close of the second war. There is also, at vi. 31. sect. 8, an allusion to something which happened when the emperor was in Dacia; though that epistle too, as I apprehend, was written after the conclusion of both wars. Lib. viii. 4. in a letter written to one Caninius, Pliny congratulates him on having selected the Bellum Dacicum, as the subject of an epic poem, which he was projecting; enumerating among its other topics of an extraordinary

* Julius Frontinus, who thus appears to have died U. C. 855 or 856, was commanding in Britain, a little before Agricola was appointed to that province, U. C. 831. See Tacitus, Vita Agricolæ, 17. His death is alluded to, ix. 19. §. 1. 6.

VOL. IV.

It is clearly to be collected from Spartian, Hadrianus,3, that the first war began, Trajano iv. and Articuleio Coss. U. C. 854; and the second, about Candido ii. et Quadrato ii. Coss. U. C. 858.

Ff

character, Novos pontes fluminibus injectos... pulsum regia, pulsum etiam vita, regem nihil desperantem . . . actos bis triumphos, quorum alter ex invicta gente primus, alter novissimus fuit. This epistle then is later than U. C. 859, the close of the second Dacian contest.

If the fact of this fresh hiatus in the chronological series of the epistles, be thus presumptively made out ; the reason of it may be ascribed partly to Pliny's marriage, an event of that period, and partly and chiefly to the intervention of the first Dacian war, which just fills up the chasm in question, beginning U. C. 854, and ending U. C. 856. This was a war of great difficulty and danger, as may be collected even from the imperfect account of it, which Xiphilinus has preserved from Dio. Whether Pliny was personally engaged in it along with Trajan, I cannot undertake to say. There is a letter of his, at x. 11, written to Trajan in behalf of Rosianus Geminus, who had been his quæstor during his consulship; in which he expresses an hope that he had recommended himself to the emperor's notice, not only Ex honoribus quos in urbe sub oculis ejus gesserat, verum etiam ex commilitio. The war here alluded to is most probably the first Dacian war. But this letter implies that Pliny did not personally attend upon the emperor during it. Still the public mind in Rome must have continued in great suspense until it was over; and the absence of Trajan from Italy might impose so much the more of the cares and responsibility of office upon those whom he left with the charge of affairs behind him; of whom Pliny would very probably be one. The letters then which he might write during this period would probably be few; and not considerable enough to be preserved or published.

The general regularity of the letters, however, from iv. 1. to the end of the ninth book, is easily to be made out; beginning U. C. 856, and proceeding uninterruptedly to U. C. 862, where I think they expire.

The accusation of Bassus, which is related iv. 9, and is generally referred to at vi. 29, if we may argue from the analogy of the cases of Priscus and Cæcilius, would be instituted at the time of his return from his province, in the latter half of the year; which might be the latter half of U. C. 856 itself. It is true, that a Bæbius Macer is called consul designatus at the time, iv. 9. sect. 16, who yet appears in the Fasti Almeloveeniani, ex Kal. Maiis, U. C. 854. But the authenticity of the Fasti in these subdivisions of the consular year, is not always to be depended on: nor, besides, is it impossible that Macer might be consul once in U. C. 854, and again in U. C. 857*.

The case of Marcellinus, related in iv. 12, furnishes internal evidence that Cæsar, or Trajan, was in Rome at the time. But this case was brought before him and the senate, on the return of Marcellinus from his province; and therefore it might come on, U. C. 856, exeunte, when Trajan was certainly returned for the first time from Dacia, and yet not gone thither again, for the second.

Lib. iv. 17. sect. 1. a Caius Cæcilius is mentioned as consul elect when Pliny undertook the cause of Corellia the daughter of his friend Corellius, to whom i. 12, and other epistles, relate. No Caius Cæcilius appears

*The colleague of this Macer, ex Kal. Maiis U. C. 854, is represented as Valerius Paullinus. A Valerius Paullinus is mentioned in this same account, iv. 9. sect. 20: but not as consul designatus. Moreover, Cæpio Hispo is often mentioned in the

same account, but not as consul designatus: who yet is probably the same person who appears consul, ex Kal. Jul. U. Č. 854 also; under the name of Cælius Hispo. No Cælius Hispo is mentioned in the Epistles of Pliny.

in the Fasti, except C. Cæcilius Classicus*, ex Kal. Jul. U. C. 855. But the Cæcilius here alluded to may be Cæcilius Strabo, mentioned iv. 12. sect. 4, when the affair of Marcellinus was pending; and so mentioned as to imply that both he and Bæbius Macer, also mentioned, were consules designati at the time. This epistle then may bear date either U. C. 856 exeunte, or before Cæcilius' turn of office, U. C. 857.

Lib. iv. 22. sect. 1. Pliny says he had just been present as one of the emperor's privy council, when the cause relating to the suppression of the Gymnicus agon apud Viennenses, by one of their duumviri or municipal consuls, was tried before him. As this cause was brought on by that magistrate's going out of office, it might be tried U. C. 857, before Trajan again took the field on his second Dacian expedition. And it is a singular coincidence that though the emperor was in Italy at the time of this discussion, in the beginning of the year, he does not appear to have been so, at the time of the Comitia, much later in the year. See iv. 25. sect. 2. †

Lib. v. 4 and 14, both relate to the case of Nominatus: which was tried before the senate, as 14. sect. 7, 8. proves, in the absence of Trajan. The time of them,

* Cæcilius Classicus, accused by the Afri, U. C. 852, died before the cause was tried, U. C. 853 see iii. 4. §. 7: 9. §. 5. 13.

+ The internal evidence of iv. 23, proves that Pliny, when he wrote it, was considerably less than 60 (see sect. 3, 4.), yet, compared with iv. 24. 1-5,that he was much above the age of juvenis. The time of these Epistles was probably U. C. 857, when Pliny was 42 or 43. He refers to that action, before the centumviri, mentioned at the

outset of iv. 24, also i. 18. sect.3: whence it appears it took place in the time of Domitian, and when Pliny was adolescentulus. Lib. v. 8. sect. 8, he began to plead at 19, U. C. 833 (see vi. 20. §. 5,) and he was 30, the age when men began to be considered juvenes, U. C. 844 or 845, four or five years before the death of Domitian. Between that time and U. C. 857, many such changes might take place, as he comments upon in iv. 24.

on the supposition of their regularity, cannot be earlier than U. C. 858, medio, when the Dacian war was not quite over, or Trajan not yet returned from it. Yet Afranius Dexter is mentioned, 14. sect. 4, as consul elect; who appears in the Fasti, as consul suff. ex Kal. Oct. U. C. 851. jan would have been on the spot, or Nerva have been emperor and present. Besides which, an Afranius Dexter, who is styled consul, was either killed by his servants, or committed suicide, apparently in his year of office, as related viii. 14. sect. 12-yet the inquiry into his death was going on, viii. 14, at a period later than viii. 4; which last is after the conclusion of the second Dacian war. I cannot believe these letters are so much out of place; and will rather suppose that the Fasti are in error, or that Afranius was consul more than once, or that a different Afranius Dexter is meant in each of these instances.

But in U. C. 850 or 851, Tra

Lib. v. 15: when this Epistle was written, Pliny was enjoying the retirement of the country, as he commonly did towards the end of the summer quarter * ; and he had just heard that his friend Cornutus Tertullus had been appointed to the care of the Via Emilia. It appears too from sect. 2, that some similar office had lately been conferred on Pliny: which naturally brings to his recollection that they had been colleagues In

* From sect. 1-8, it seems this retirement was at Pliny's municipium; whether Comum or Tifernum is doubtful. From v. 6. sect. 1. 45, 46. I should apprehend that it was the latter, near to his Villa apud Tuscos. v. 15. sect. 9, he had but a stated time of absence allowed him; which implies that he was in an office of some kind or other, at the time-the nature of which will be explained by and by.

Lib. v. 14, containing the conclusion of the affair of Nominatus, was written from the country as I should suppose; sometime after it was over.

Pliny's prosocer was with him at the time of v. 15: and it appears from viii. 20. sect. 3, that this prosocer had estates at Ameria, in Umbria, on the way to Pliny's Tusci. Cf. however, iv. I. §. 3, 4. and vii. 16. §. 3: 23:

32.