Yes, that's the case. We have previously unspoken of people introduced without quidam/quondam in a passing comment. In each case there is minimal contextualization. And then of course Aponius Saturninus and Gabinius Secundus without any apparent contextualization.Translation:In Tiberius 2.2 talking about the Claudii, one of the family appointed his messenger Glycias as dictator. This is a parenthesis, not taken anywhere. It is sufficient in the narrative to say he was a messenger, not a certain messenger, just as you know that Chrestus was one of the Jews, no "quondam", no "nomine".He was defeated, and on being bidden by the senate to appoint a dictator, he appointed his messenger Glycias (Glycian uiatorem suum), as if again making a jest of his country's peril..
The phrase his messenger (uiatorem suum) is similar to "an/the instigator" (impulsore) in being a noun phrase identifier.I could mention randomly "the driver Eutychus" in Caligula 55.2, not "a certain driver...", who passingly got rewarded.He was so passionately devoted to the green faction that he constantly dined and spent the night in their stable, and in one of his revels with them he gave the driver Eutychus (agitatori Eutycho) two million sesterces in gifts.
This reference to "a/the driver, Eutychus" (agitatori Eutycho) is a dead ringer. Case closed.
Statistics: Posted by spin — Thu Nov 28, 2024 5:09 am