MARCELLUS. tinted himself with the elder Vespasian also, and was nearly as powerful for a while under the Fla- vian house as under Claudius and Nero. But towards the close of Vespasian's reign, A. D. 79, Marcellus, from yvaat motives is uuknown, en- gaged in Alienus Caecina's conspiracy against the emperor [Caecina Alienus]. Caecina was as- sassinated, Marcellus was tried, convicted, and, unable to withstand the long-stored hatred of the senators, destroyed himself. (Dion Cass. Ixvi. 16.) The character of Marcellus is drawn by the author of the Dialogue de Oratorihus (5, 8, 13); his elo- quence was his only merit, and he abused it to the worst purposes. A coin of the town of Cyme in Aeolia bears on its obverse, AN0T. EnPIfl. MAPKEAAH. F. KT., and refers, probably, to the period of his procon- sulate of Pamphylia. (Eckhel, Doct. Num. Vet. vol. ii. p. 493.) [W. B. D.] MARCELLUS, GRA'NIUS, praetor of Bithy- nia, in the reigu of Tiberius, was accused, in A. d. 15, by his own quaestor, Caepio Crispinus, and by the notorious delator, Hispo Romanus, of treason and extortion in his provincial government. Mar- cellus was acquitted of treason, but convicted and fined for extortion. Tacitus marks this trial as one of the earliest of those frivolous yet fatal accu- sations which multiplied with the years and vices of Tiberius. (Tac. Ann. i. 74.) [W. B. D.] MARCELLUS, MA'RCIUS, a rhetorician mentioned by Seneca. (CWr. 28, 29.) [W.B.D.] MARCELLUS, MI'NDIUS, was an adherent of Augustus in the last war with Sext. Pompey, B. c. 36. Through Marcellus Menodorus nego- tiated his second desertion from Pompey to Augus- tus. (Appian, B. C v. 102.) [W. B. D.] V MARCELLUS, P. NERA'TIUS, is mentioned by the younger Pliny {Ep. iii. 8) as a person of rank and interest at Trajan's court. He was consul in A. D. 1 04. (Fasti.) [ W. B. D.J MARCELLUS, NO'NIUS, a Latin gram- marian, the author of an important treatise, which in MSS. is designated as Nonii Marcelli Peripa- tetici Tulmrticensis de Compendiosa Doctrina per Litteras ad Filium, for the latter portion of which title many printed copies substitute erroneously De Proprieiaie Sennonis. The most recent editor is obliged to confess, after a full investigation of every source from which information could be de- rived, that we are totally unacquainted with the personal history of this writer, that we cannot fix with certainty either the place or the time of his birth, that it is difficult to detect the plan pursued in the compilation of the work, that no satisfactory classification of the numerous codices has yet been accomplished, and that no sure estimate has been formed of their relative value. The epithet Tubur- iicensis., which appears also under the varying shapes, Tubwcicensis, Tuhurgicemds^ Tiburtieensis^ Thiburlicmsis^ Tiburiensis, does not lead readily to any conclusion. We can scarcely agree with Wass in considering it equivalent to Tiburtinus., a word which occurs so frequently elsewhere, that even the most ignorant transcribers would not have transformed it so rudely ; nor can we persuade ourselves that Gerlach has succeeded in proving that it must be derived from Tubursicum or Tubtir- sicca., in Numidia, near the river Ampsaga, a town which became at an early period the seat of a Christian bishopric, and is to be distinguished from Tubursicum, in the proconsular province of Africa, MARCELLUS. 937 also a bishop's see, the inhabitants of which un- questionably termed themselves T/nbursicenses (see Orelli, Corp. Inscrip. No. 3691), from the Colonia Tvburnica^ the 0}>pidum Tubwnicense of Pliny {H. N. vii. 4), and from the Oppidum Tuburbitanum Majus and Minus of the ecclesiastical writers. It is equally difficult to determine within narrow limits the epoch when Nonius flourished : he must be later than the middle of the second century, since once at least (p. 49, ed. Gerl.) he refers to Appuleius, and frequently copies A. Gellius, al- though he nowhere refers to him by name. He must be earlier than the sixth century, since he is himself quoted repeatedly by Priscian (pp.43, 278, 477, ed. Krehl.). Two points are thus fixed, but they are unfortunately far asunder, and we are left to wander over a space of three centuries, Avhile the very nature of the piece almost entirely ex- cludes the possibility of drawing any inference from style ; all that can be said upon this head is, that the various words and expressions which have been adduced for the purpose of proving that he must belong to the fifth century, will, without exception, be found, upon examination, to fail in establishing this proposition ; and on the other hand, the argu- ments employed to demonstrate that he ought to be placed at the commencement of the third are equally powerless. He may be the same person with the grammarian Marcellus addressed by Au- sonius {Carm. xix.), but there is no evidence what- ever in favour of the supposition except the identity of a very common name. The work is divided into eighteen chapters, but of these the first twelve ought in reality to be viewed as separate treatises, composed at different periods, with different objects, and not linked together by any connecting bond. At the same time each chapter is far from presenting a compact, well-ordered, consistent whole, but generally ex- hibits a confused farrago, as if a compartment of an ill -kept commonplace book had been transcribed without adequate pains having been bestowed on the classification and distribution of the materials collected. Some idea of the contents may be ob- tained from the following outline : — Cap. I. De Proprietate Sermonum., may be re- garded as a glossary of obsolete words, which are thrown together without any arrangement. Many are, however, inserted which do not belong to this class, and which might, with perfect propriety, be transferred to c. iv. Cap. II. De Honestis et Nove Veterum Dictis. A collection of words placed in alphabetical order, which were employed by the early Latin writers in a sense different from that which they bore in the age of Nonius. Many of these ought to have found a place in c. i. ; and from the statements with regard to others, we might draw some curious inferences regarding the state of the language when this tract was drawn up. Cap. III. De Indiscretis Generibus, a collection of words in alphabetical order, of which the gender is found to vary in the best authorities, such as Jinis, calx, papaver, and the like. Cap. IV. De vera Significatione Verborum, a collection of words in alphabetical order, which occur in the same or in different writers with marked variations of meaning, such as aequor, con- ducere, lustrare. This is by far the longest section in the book. Cap. V. De Dijffcrentiis Verboram^ what we
