Editing Marcus Cornelius Fronto (section)

==Surviving works==
Until 1815, the only extant works ascribed (erroneously) to Fronto were two grammatical treatises, ''De nominum verborumque differentiis'' and ''Exempla elocutionum'' (the latter being really by [[Arusianus Messius]]). In that year, [[Angelo Mai]] discovered in the [[Biblioteca Ambrosiana|Ambrosian]] library at [[Milan]] a [[palimpsest]] manuscript, on which had been originally written some of Fronto's letters to his imperial pupils and their replies; four years later Mai found several more sheets from this manuscript in the Vatican. These palimpsests had originally belonged to the famous [[Bobbio Abbey|convent of St Columbanus]] at [[Bobbio]] and had been written over by the monks with the acts of the First [[Council of Chalcedon]].

The letters from the Ambrosian palimpsest, along with the other fragments, were published at Rome in 1815. The Vatican texts were added in 1823, as was the end of his ''Gratiarum actio pro Carthaginiensibus'' from another Vatican manuscript. It was not until 1956 that [[Bernhard Bischoff]] identified a third manuscript (consisting of a single leaf) that contained fragments of Fronto's correspondence with Verus which overlapped the Milan palimpsest; however, the actual manuscript had been first published in 1750 by [[Dom Tassin]], who conjectured that it might have been the work of Fronto.<ref>This account of Fronto's rediscovery is based on L.D. Reynolds (editor), ''Texts and Transmission: A Survey of the Latin Classics'' (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983), pp. 173f.</ref>

These fragments disappointed Romantic scholars as not matching the writer's great reputation, partly because Fronto's teachings, with their emphasis on studying ancient writers in search of striking words, were not in accordance with current fashion (Italy, where not only Mai but [[Leopardi]] enthused over them, was an exception), partly because they gave no support to the assumption that Fronto had been a wise counsellor to Marcus Aurelius (indeed, they contain no trace of political advice), and partly because his frequent complaints about ill health, especially those collected in book 5 of ''Ad M. Caesarem'', aroused more annoyance than compassion. These adverse judgements were reversed once Fronto was read for what he was rather than what he was not, as already in the sympathetic treatment by Dorothy Brock, ''Studies in Fronto and his Age'' (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1911).

The bulk of the letters consist of correspondence with Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, in which the character of Fronto's pupils appears in a very favourable light, especially in the affection they both seem to have retained for their old master.<ref>[[Amy Richlin]], ''Marcus Aurelius in Love'' (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006).</ref> There are also letters to friends, chiefly letters of recommendation, but including one (''Ad amicos'' 1. 19) in which an out-of-sorts Fronto (''ego epistulas invitissime scribo'', "I hate writing letters") complains of [[Aulus Gellius]]' attempts to procure copies of his writings for publication. (Fronto appears in five chapters of the ''Noctes Atticae'', though expressing tastes that sometime seem closer to Gellius' own than to those evinced in the letters.) The collection also contains treatises on eloquence, some historical fragments, and literary trifles on such subjects as the praise of smoke and dust, of negligence, and a dissertation on [[Arion]]. In addition, a fragment of a speech is preserved by [[Minucius Felix]] (''Octavius'' 9. 6–7) in which Fronto accuses the Christians of incestuous orgies.

Marcus Aurelius, in his ''[[Meditations]]'', says nothing of Fronto's rhetorical teaching; nor, although writing in Greek, does he so much as mention his teacher of Greek rhetoric and longtime friend [[Herodes Atticus]]. He does, however, credit Fronto with teaching him about the vices of tyranny and the lack of affection in the Roman upper class (1.11); since the former were commonplaces, there may be a concealed reference to life under Hadrian, whom Fronto retrospectively claims to have feared rather than loved,<ref>''Ad M. Caesarem'' 2.4.1; a certain distancing from Hadrian may be observed in the actions of Antoninus Pius and the words of Marcus Aurelius.</ref> but the latter is borne out by the master's remark that there is no Latin equivalent for the Greek ''philóstorgos'', meaning "affectionate".<ref>''Ad Verum'' 1.6.7, ''Ad amicos'' 1.3.3 (margin).</ref> The letters between Aurelius and Fronto, which reveal the intimate nature of their relationship, are the only [[Love letter|love letters]] to survive from antiquity.<ref>Amy Richlin (trans.), ''Marcus Aurelius in Love'', University of Chicago Press, 2007</ref>

The ''[[editio princeps]]'' was by Mai, as described above; the standard edition is the Teubner text by M. van den Hout (Leipzig, 1988). The [[Loeb Classical Library]] printed an edition of Fronto's correspondence with a facing English translation by C. R. Haines in two volumes (1919–1920); its text, though dated, is still of interest.{{To whom?|date=December 2023}} Van den Hout also published a full-scale commentary in English (Leiden, 1999).