Any late writer who quotes from an alleged Jokebook of Cornelius Tacitus is doomed to incur suspicion, and the culprit Fulgentius has duly met his fate. In the words of one distinguished scholar he was ‘something of a fraud; many of the learned titles he quotes he had certainly never read, many never even existed,’ whilst another characterises his work as ‘a curious mixture of genuine citation and cool forgery, none of it trustworthy without external confirmation.’ Both were writing on other matters, which enhances the need for a full consideration of Fulgentius‘ methods. The problem has been looked into before, but not in the wider context required. Thus, for easy instance, editors of Petronius still print the fragments of their author cited by Fulgentius without reflecting upon their authenticity. And devotees of that more famous fraud, the Historia Augusta, could profit more than they have done from a closer look at our man.
Mountain and molehill? Cornelius Tacitus and Quintus Curtius