In addition to the testimony of Jerome, Suetonius also wrote the following on Livius Andronicus:
The beginnings of the subject [grammar], too, were humble, for the earliest teachers, who were also both poets and Italian Greeks (I refer to Livius and Ennius, who gave instruction in both tongues at home and abroad, as is well known), did no more than interpret the Greeks or give readings from whatever they themselves had composed in the Latin language. For while some tell us that this same Ennius published a book “On Letters and Syllables” and another “On Metres,” Lucius Cotta is right in maintaining that these were not the work of the poet, but of a later Ennius, who is also the author of the volumes “On the Science of Augury.”
(De Grammaticis 1, trans. J.C. Rolfe).
This information is quite interesting, for the following reasons:
1) Suetonius makes no mention of Spurius Carvilius, the freedman who I mentioned in the previous posts. This absence likely means either that Suetonius did not know about Spurius Carvilius (possible, but I am doubtful) or that Suetonius’ research suggested that he lived during a different time (possible, but would would get complicated for Suetonius if he also believed that Carvilius was the man who invented the letter g).
2) While the testimony of Jerome suggests that Andronicus worked as a teacher prior to his manumission and then became a professional poet, this description suggests that Andronicus continued to teach after he was freed. As Beare notes in his 1940 article, this testimony makes sense if we assume that in the third century that there was a very small reading public at Rome. Such a small reading public would mean that the status of a poet would have little value and therefore Andronicus would not be able to leverage that status into some sort of income.
The beginnings of the subject [grammar], too, were humble, for the earliest teachers, who were also both poets and Italian Greeks (I refer to Livius and Ennius, who gave instruction in both tongues at home and abroad, as is well known), did no more than interpret the Greeks or give readings from whatever they themselves had composed in the Latin language. For while some tell us that this same Ennius published a book “On Letters and Syllables” and another “On Metres,” Lucius Cotta is right in maintaining that these were not the work of the poet, but of a later Ennius, who is also the author of the volumes “On the Science of Augury.”
(De Grammaticis 1, trans. J.C. Rolfe).
This information is quite interesting, for the following reasons:
1) Suetonius makes no mention of Spurius Carvilius, the freedman who I mentioned in the previous posts. This absence likely means either that Suetonius did not know about Spurius Carvilius (possible, but I am doubtful) or that Suetonius’ research suggested that he lived during a different time (possible, but would would get complicated for Suetonius if he also believed that Carvilius was the man who invented the letter g).
2) While the testimony of Jerome suggests that Andronicus worked as a teacher prior to his manumission and then became a professional poet, this description suggests that Andronicus continued to teach after he was freed. As Beare notes in his 1940 article, this testimony makes sense if we assume that in the third century that there was a very small reading public at Rome. Such a small reading public would mean that the status of a poet would have little value and therefore Andronicus would not be able to leverage that status into some sort of income.