04-19-2009, 02:20 PM
An interesting conundrum, indeed, Jona. Thankyou for challenging our assumptions and making us think.
It seems that an agnomen in -anus is certainly not the usual way of advertising an adoption. But, as with many other assumptions on your list, this has simply been accepted without proof.
I suspect that Scipio Aemilianus took the agnomen (or had it foisted upon him by the historian?) to differentiate between the myriad other Publii Cornelii Scipiones. Because the whole reasoning behind adoption was, by and large, to shore up a failing gens, the "usual" method was for the adoptee to take his new father's praenomen and gentilicium. Thus, the sons of L. Aemilius Paullus became Q. Fabius Maximus (thus joining the Fabian gens) and P. Cornelius Scipio (thus joining the Cornelian gens). Fabius Maximus is never (to my knowledge) known as Fabius Maximus Aemilianus, but there were no other Fabii Maximi to confuse the issue. Not so with the Cornelii Scipiones, who were legion! (I'm really just thinking aloud here.
)
When we come to Caius Octavius and his adoption into the Julian gens, maybe there are other factors at work. If Cicero is the only one to call him Octavian in his lifetime, it is surely an insult.
For example, we know that Titus Pomponius Atticus was adopted by Q. Caecilius, so his new adoptive name (reflecting membership of the Caecilian gens) ought to have been Q. Caecilius Atticus (or maybe Q. Caecilius Pomponius Atticus). But Cicero pokes fun at him by calling him Q. Caecilius Pomponianus (Cic., Ad Att. 3.20). Just a thought ...
It seems that an agnomen in -anus is certainly not the usual way of advertising an adoption. But, as with many other assumptions on your list, this has simply been accepted without proof.
I suspect that Scipio Aemilianus took the agnomen (or had it foisted upon him by the historian?) to differentiate between the myriad other Publii Cornelii Scipiones. Because the whole reasoning behind adoption was, by and large, to shore up a failing gens, the "usual" method was for the adoptee to take his new father's praenomen and gentilicium. Thus, the sons of L. Aemilius Paullus became Q. Fabius Maximus (thus joining the Fabian gens) and P. Cornelius Scipio (thus joining the Cornelian gens). Fabius Maximus is never (to my knowledge) known as Fabius Maximus Aemilianus, but there were no other Fabii Maximi to confuse the issue. Not so with the Cornelii Scipiones, who were legion! (I'm really just thinking aloud here.
)When we come to Caius Octavius and his adoption into the Julian gens, maybe there are other factors at work. If Cicero is the only one to call him Octavian in his lifetime, it is surely an insult.
For example, we know that Titus Pomponius Atticus was adopted by Q. Caecilius, so his new adoptive name (reflecting membership of the Caecilian gens) ought to have been Q. Caecilius Atticus (or maybe Q. Caecilius Pomponius Atticus). But Cicero pokes fun at him by calling him Q. Caecilius Pomponianus (Cic., Ad Att. 3.20). Just a thought ...
