GRICE E PROBO

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘Grice e Probo: la ragione conversazionale dell’implicatura dell’in-plicatura conversazionale -- Roma Probo (Roma, Lazio): la ragione conversazionale dell’implicatura dell’in-plicatura conversazionale. He studies under Eusebio at the same time as Sidonio, and may have assisted Eusebio in his teaching. He married the cousin of Sidonio, the daughter of Simplicio. “All very confusing, and possibly unimportant, historically speaking from the standpoint of philosophy if it were not for the fact that Sidonio coined the term ‘inplicatura’ [sic].” – Grice.  GRICEVS: PROBE, heri modo cum collega philosopho Spe sermocinabar; ille, more suo, dixit “Roma ipsa est schola in qua verba implicantur priusquam explicantur”—et mox nominavit Sidonium, quasi is solus sciret quomodo res in plicis laterent. PROBVS: Non longe abest a vero. Ego Eusebio una cum Sidonio interfui, atque (ut fama est) interdum adiuvi in docendo; postea etiam in familiam intravi, cum Simplicii filiam—Sidonii consobrinam—duxi. Ita factum est ut domi quoque “explicare” difficile esset: omnia erant vel affinitate vel doctrina involuta. GRICEVS: Spes et ego mirabamur quomodo Sidonius, uno tantum verbo, rem totam quasi complicaret: utrum res sit inplicatura, an vero ipsa res semper in plicis sit, et nos tantum nodos tangamus. Nam inter “in” et “plicare” est quidam modus: non est addere, sed implicare, involvere, quasi chartam iterum iterumque flectere, donec ipsa forma dicat plus quam litterae. PROBVS: Audeo dicere inplicaturam vestram—Spei et tuam—ipsam IN-PLICARE: nos implicat, involvit, et (ut ita dicam) in nodum adducit; quod certe Spe voluit, cum hoc consilium “inplicandi” pararet. Sed iucundum est: quia haec confusio domestica (Eusebius, Sidonius, Simplicius, consobrina, ego) ostendit idem prorsus in sermone: non semper opus est “dedicare” aut “declarare”; interdum satis est bene plicare, ut qui audit, ipse se explicet. Yes, Sidonius Apollinaris was Gallo-Roman. He was born at Lugdunum in Gaul and belongs squarely to the late Roman aristocracy of Gaul. [en.wikipedia.org], [tertullian.org] As for Probus, the evidence points the same way: he is not best treated as Italo-Roman, but as a Gallic Roman, effectively Gallo-Roman in the same broad world as Sidonius Apollinaris. In Sidonius Apollinaris’s letter to Probus, Probus is presented as a school companion under Eusebius, as someone intellectually intimate with Sidonius Apollinaris, and as the husband of Sidonius Apollinaris’s cousin. Another notice places Probus at Narbo, as the son of Magnus, a Roman senator of Narbonne. That strongly supports a Gallic, not Italian, setting. [tertullian.org], [en.wikipedia.org] So the cautious conclusion is: Sidonius Apollinaris: definitely Gallo-Roman. [en.wikipedia.org], [tertullian.org] Probus: probably also best treated as Gallo-Roman, or at least as a Roman aristocrat of Gaul, not as Italo-Roman. [tertullian.org], [en.wikipedia.org] One caution, though. Your passage’s details about Probus marrying “the daughter of Simplicius” do not match the evidence I found. The relevant letter says that Probus married Sidonius Apollinaris’s cousin, but the prosopographical identification of Simplicius is itself disputed in modern scholarship, so I would be wary of building too much on that family detail. [tertullian.org], [cambridge.org] And on the “coined inplicatura” point: I would be very cautious there too. I found nothing reliable suggesting that Sidonius Apollinaris coined any such term. [en.wikipedia.org], [sidonapol.org] So, short answer: yes for Sidonius Apollinaris, and probably yes for Probus too, in the sense that both belong to the Gallo-Roman aristocratic world. [en.wikipedia.org], [tertullian.org], [en.wikipedia.org]