Maurus (or Marius) Servius Honoratius, Roman grammarian and commentator on Virgil, flourished at the end of the 4th century AD.
He is one of the interlocutors in the Saturnalia of Ambrosius Theodosius Macrobius, and allusions in that work and a letter from Symmachus to Servius show that he was a pagan. He was one of the most favourable examples of the Roman "grammatici" and the most learned man of his time.
He is chiefly known for his commentary on Virgil, which has come down to us in two distinct forms. The first is a comparatively short commentary, definitely attributed to Servius in the superscription in the manuscripts and by other evidence. A second class of manuscripts (all going back to the 9th and 10th centuries) presents a much expanded commentary, in which the first is embedded; but these manuscripts differ very much in the amount and character of the additions they make to the original.
The added matter is undoubtedly ancient, dating from a time but little removed from that of Servius, and is founded to a large extent on historical and antiquarian literature which is now lost. The writer has been identified as Aelius Donatus since E. K. Rand's essay in 1916. A third class of manuscripts, written for the most part in Italy and of late date, repeats the text of the first class, with numerous interpolated scholia of quite recent origin and little or no value.
It is constructed very much on the principle of a modern edition, and is partly founded on the extensive Virgilian literature of preceding times, much of which is known only from the fragments and facts preserved in the commentary. The notices of Virgil's text, though seldom or never authoritative in face of the existing manuscripts, which go back to, or even beyond, the times of Servius, yet supply valuable information concerning the ancient recensions and textual criticism of Virgil. In the grammatical interpretation of his author's language, Servius does not rise above the stiff and overwrought subtleties of his time; while his etymologies, as is natural, violate every law of sound and sense. As a literary critic the shortcomings of Servius, judged by a modern standard, are, great, but he shines in comparison with his contemporaries.
In particular, he deserves credit for setting his face against the prevalent allegorical methods of exposition. But the abiding value of his work lies in his preservation of facts in Roman history, religion, antiquities and language, which but for him might have perished. Not a little of the laborious erudition of Varro and other ancient scholars has survived in his pages. Besides the Virgilian commentary, other works of Servius are extant: a collection of notes on the grammar (Ars) of Aelius Donatus; a treatise on metrical endings (De finalibus); and a tract on the different metres (De centum metris).
Editions of the Virgilian commentary by Georg Fabricius (1551); Pierre Daniel, who first published the enlarged commentary (1600); and G Thilo and H Hagen (1878 - 1902) which is the only editon of the whole of Servius' work. Currently in development is the Harvard Servius (Servianorum in Vergili Carmina Commentariorum Editio Harvardiana).
The Essai sur Servius by E Thomas (1880) remains an elaborate and valuable examination of all matters connected with Servius; many points are treated also by O Ribbeck in his Prolegomena to Virgil; see also a review of Thilo's edition by H Nettleship in Journal of Philology, 10 (1882). For Donatus' authorship of the supplimentary material see E. K. Rand, "Is Donatus's Commentary on Virgil Lost?" Classical Quarterly 10 (1916), 158-164. J. J. Savage provides a complete listing of the manuscripts of the Virgilian commentary in two separate articles: "The Manuscripts of the Commentary of Servius Danielis on Virgil", Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 43 (1932), 77-121; "The Manuscripts of Servius's Commentary on Virgil", Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 45 (1934), 157-204.
This entry is based on text from the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica.Bibliography:
