Front Page Titles (by Subject) Appendix A: Juvenilia - The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume I - Autobiography and Literary Essays
Return to Title Page for The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume I - Autobiography and Literary Essays
The Online Library of Liberty
A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.
Search this Title:
Appendix A: Juvenilia - John Stuart Mill, The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume I - Autobiography and Literary Essays 
The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume I - Autobiography and Literary Essays, ed. John M. Robson and Jack Stillinger, introduction by Lord Robbins (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1981).
About Liberty Fund:
The online edition of the Collected Works is published under licence from the copyright holder, The University of Toronto Press. ©2006 The University of Toronto Press. All rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form or medium without the permission of The University of Toronto Press.
Fair use statement:
of mill’s childhood compositions (see App. C below) only the opening pages of his first “History of Rome” and his “Ode to Diana” have survived. Both are in BL Add. MS 33230, c.1 and c.2, presented by Mill’s sister Harriet on 29 April, 1887.
The “History” is written on sheets cut, folded, and sewn to make a little booklet of ten leaves: the title and name (with the information that the author was 6½ years old when he wrote—or began?—it) are on 1r; the text is recto, with the facing versos used for notes and the lists of consuls in office during the events described in the latter part of the text (a common device in Roman histories of the period). In the text below, the notes are given as footnotes and the lists as marginal notes. As the text breaks off in mid-sentence, and the list of consuls on 10v implies a facing text, it may be inferred that the “History” continued into another booklet, and probably into more than one. The paper is watermarked “G Pike” but there is no date on any of these sheets. The hand is not that of the young Mill, Alexander Bain, who saw this version of the “History” before it was given to the British Museum, says “a lady friend of the family copied and preserved it” (John Stuart Mill [London: Longmans, Green, 1882], p. 3).
In editing this fragment, the great temptation (one that some will think we should have succumbed to) was to print a diplomatic text, preserving all the idiosyncrasies of the original. But several problems militate against this single happy solution: first, since the manuscript is not in Mill’s hand, we would be preserving someone else’s version, as we are not able to determine which of the many errors of various kinds are Mill’s responsibility; second, we do not know exactly on which source he was drawing for particular bits of information, so we cannot tell when an “error” is in his source or is the result of carelessness or failure of comprehension on his part; third, there are different renderings (both Greek and Latin) of various proper names, so there is no one contemporary correct form; fourth, while with juvenilia of this kind it is important to preserve the flavour of the original, one should not leave the reader puzzled and unable to solve small mysteries.
Our attempt to balance these considerations has resulted in the following decisions.
1. The text follows the manuscript in substantives and accidentals except (a) when the reading of a proper name is uncertain, in which case an accepted version is used, (b) when different erroneous versions of a proper name occur, in which case the version that dominates in the “History” is used, even though it is mistaken, (c) in the few places where aberrant accidentals might impede the reader’s understanding, in which case normal forms are used, and (d) where there is a manifest though minor error in syntax, likely to be the copyist’s responsibility, in which case a correction is made. A list of these corrections is given at the end. Also listed are places where, though no correction has been made, the reader may be given pause (for example, “Aborian” [542.3 (of the text)], which must be wrong, is not altered, but in this list “Aborigian [Aboriginal]” is suggested as the intended word).
2. The marginal list of Consuls, like the text relating specifically to the Consuls and their succession, is left unamended, except that—as in (a) and (b) above—names are adjusted to the dominant (even if erroneous) form. There are misidentifications, misorderings, and gaps, but to have altered and corrected these would have involved a major distortion of the manuscript’s text; the reader interested in comparing this version with the modern one should consult T. Robert S. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, Vol. I (New York: American Philological Association, 1951).
3. The references in the manuscript’s notes are rudimentary, and so have been expanded and the accidentals altered to make comprehension easier. The individual changes are not listed, but are summarized. Some notes have been expanded and some added by the editors; square brackets signal these changes.
4. As elsewhere in this volume, we have changed “&” to “and” and have lowered superscripts to the line. In the manuscript there are inked lines drawn across the page to separate the “chapters”; these have been omitted here. Normal footnote indicators, in sequence, have replaced the superscript “(a)” that appears in each case in the manuscript.
The History of Rome by John Stuart Mill aged 6½ yrs
First Alban Government Roman Conquest in Italy
We know not well any part, says Dionysius of Halicarnassus, of the History of Rome till the Sicilian invasion.[*] Before that time, the country had not been visited by any foreign invader. After the expulsion of the Sicilians, Aborian Kings reigned for several years: but in the time of Latinus, Aneas, son of Venus and Anchises came to Italy, and established a kingdom there called Albania. He then succeeded Latinus in the government, and engaged in the wars of Italy. The Rutuli, a people living near the sea, and extending along the Numicus up to Lavinium opposed him. However Turnus their King was defeated and killed by Aneas. Aneas was killed soon after this. The war continued to be carried on chiefly against the Rutuli, to the time of Romulus, the first king of Rome. By him it was, that Rome was built.
Latin Government Regal State
Romulus, then conquered the Lavinienses, and defeated the Veians. He established a Senate. The Romans seized the Sabine women and on account of this the Sabines made war with them. * Romulus took Canina, Crustiminium, and Antemna.
He also took Cures and died.
Numa Pompilius chosen King
Numa Pompilius a Sabine was chosen king in the room of Romulus. He thoroughly restored his People to the exercise of peace. He died however soon.
Taking of Alba, Death of Hostilius
Tullus Hostilius, a very warlike prince, succeeded him. He took the cities of Alba, Fidæna and died. Ancus Marcius succeeded him. He took Politorium. Tellena and Ficcana, Latin cities† and also Fidæna and Velitræ and died.
Tarquinius Evergetes chosen King
Tarquinius Priscus, his successor, took Apiolæ, Crustiminium and Collatia. He gave to his brother Arynx the government of Collatia, with the name of Collatinus. Collatinus defeated the Tuscans at Veii and Cera. Tarquin himself defeated them near Eratum, a city of Sabinia. He died and was succeeded by Servius Tullius.
This Prince defeated the Sabines and Tuscans and died.
Tarquinius Superbus, his Successor took Suessa, a city of the Volsci. He finally reduced the Sabines.
Government of Rome after the deposition of Kings
Behaviour of Collatinus and Poplicola
A conspiracy, formed in favor of Tarquin, was quelled. It had been carried on by near relations of the Consuls. Collatinus retired from Rome to Lavinium, where he lived and died in peace. * Poplicola was appointed Consul in his stead. Brutus (though the Romans gained the victory) was slain in a battle against Tarquin. Sp. Lucretius was appointed Colleague of Poplicola.
Sabine war. Disorder of the government
Aquian and Volscian wars
Alterations in the text (the original version is given first, with the altered one in square brackets)
542.1 (of text) or Rome [of Rome]
542.9 cheifly [chiefly]
542.13 Lavneian [Lavinienses] [the reading is quite uncertain, but certainly wrong—cf. Lavinium correctly given above]
543.3 died, [died.]
543.9 Fidæne [Fidæna] [as in following line, and 545.7, 545.17 may read Fidænæ, but should be Fidenæ]
543.9 Politorium [Politorium,]
543.10 Ficcana [Ficcana,]
543.13 Apiolæ [Apiolæ,]
543.13 Crastiminium [Crustiminium] [to correspond to 543.1, should read Crustumerium (or Crustumium or Crustumesia)—but certainly does not anywhere]
543.18, 546.19 Volci [Volsci] [as elsewhere and correct]
545.3 war disorder [war. Disorder]
545.7 Tubertus [Tubertas] [see 545.5, list.3-6, n.3 in “Not altered” list]
545 list.5-8 [moved slightly up page to proper place]
545.13 to Camerium [took Camerium] [he did]
545.21, and list.22 Clodius [Clœlius] [copyist’s error?]
546 list 9 Minucias [Minucius]
546 list 18 Junius [Julius] [as in text and 546 list 33, but see “Not altered” list for ibid.]
Alterations in the footnotes (the notes being hurried and rudimentary, the punctuation has been silently altered, also italics have been added to titles and foreign words, and some short forms have been expanded [“Hist” becomes “History”, “vid” and “vi” become “vide”, “Atrat” becomes “Atratinus”, and “Dionys Halic” becomes “Dionysius of Halicarnassus”])
543n.1 on the [in the] [for sense]
543n.8, 544n.19 at [ut]
544n.2 chronology [Chronology]
544n.2 (pp [pp] [i.e., there was an extra parenthesis]
544n.2 calls [call]
545n.1 Cordun [Cordus]
545n.4 Sempronii of [Sempronii Of]
Not altered (possible corrections and explanations are given in square brackets after the reading in the text)
542.2,3 (of text) Sicilians [the invasion was by the Siculi. Σικελοι, or Sicels]
542.3 Aborian [intended Aborigian? / Aboriginal?, the word is underlined in pencil in the MS, but no correction is offered]
542.4, 8, 9 Aneas [Aeneas]
542.5 kingdom . . . Albania [city . . . Alba]
542.7 Numicus [in MS the word is underlined in pencil and “i” interlined, Livy gives Numicus. Dionysius, Numicius]
543.1 Crustiminium [Crustumerium? (see “Altered” list. 543.13)]
543.10 Ficcana [Ficana; the “i” could also be an “e”]
543.15 Cera [Caere]
543.16, 545.10 Eratum [Eretum]
545.5, list.3-6, n.3 Posthumias Tubertas [Posthum(i)us Tubertus]
545.11, list.10 Vicelinus [Viscellinus, Vecellinus in Dionysius]
545 list.13 Posthumius [Posthumus in text, but a variant]
545 list.20 Elva [Helva]
545.14 Flaccus [Flavus, there is what may be an intended correction here, in ink, elsewhere the reading is unmistakably Flaccus]
545.29 Aquian [Aequian]
546.3, list.3 Vetasius [Vetusius in Livy, Veturius in Hooke and Dionysius]
546.5 Posthumias Cominius [Posthumius Cominius]
546.8-9 P. Sicinnius [L. Sicinnius]
546 list.18, 33 Tullus [Iulus; but see “Altered” list. ibid.]
546.21, list.23 Sicinnius [Sicinius in Hooke and Livy, Siccius in Dionysius]
546 list.35 Med [should be Fusus There was a Sp. Furius Medullinus Fusus as Quaestor in the 34th Consulship, probably Mill made a slip.]
The “Ode to Diana,” written recto and verso on a single sheet (watermarked “R Lomas” but lacking a date), is probably in Mill’s hand, and likely was written slightly later than the “History” (see App. C, nos. 2 and 6). The manuscript, a fair copy, presents no textual problems, except that wear and folding make the reading of stanza 5, line 1 (“Th’unhappy”) and line 4 (“sweet”) just less than certain.
[[*] ]The reference would appear to be to Διονυσίου Ἁλικαρνασέως τὰ εὑρισκόμενα, ἱστορικά τε καὶ ῥητορικά, συγγράμματα (Greek and Latin), 2 vols. (Frankfurt: Weschel Heirs, 1586), which (as Mill says at p. 544n below) is in folio. In this edition (as in others of similar format) The Roman Antiquities occupies Vol. I. Specifically indicated is Vol. I, p. 7 (I, 9, 1-2), where, however, the “Sicels” are identified as a native race.
[* ]Hooke’s History of Rome, vide remarks in the History of the Seven Roman Kings on the reign of Romulus, p. xxxi. That same Author also says that it was he who called the rich, Patricians, the poor, Plebeians. Ibid., Regal state of Rome in full account of the reign of Romulus. [Presumably the first reference is to the “Preface,” which appeared in the 2nd and subsequent editions of Hooke; however the information and the page reference do not match any edition examined. Bk. I, entitled “The Regal State of Rome,” covers the reigns of the seven Kings of Rome. The second reference is to Chap. ii (“Romulus”), §4.]
[† ]Hooke, ut supra, Ancus Marcius, p. 187, in regal state of Rome. [The reference is to Bk. I, Chap. v (“Ancus Marcius”), §1.]
[* ]Plutarch (vide p. 273, 301) calls this man Publicola. But Hooke (vide p. 255) and Dionysius Halicarnassus (Chronology of the Consuls, pp. 766-7) call him Poplicola. It is always spelt Ποπλικολας (Poplicola) in Greek not Πυβλικολας (Publicola). Therefore that is the reason of its being Poplicola in Dionysius not Publicola, as in Plutarch. Livy also calls him Poplicola. I know not the reason of its being Poplicola in Hooke and Livy. It is also spelt Ποπλιος (Poplius) in Greek, not Πυβλιος (Publius). It must doubtless be a mistake in Langhorne’s Plutarch. [This learned footnote is not without its difficulties. In Plutarch’s Lives, trans. John and William Langhorne, 6 vols. (London: Dilly, 1770). “Publicola” is indeed used, but the references do not match this or any other edition examined (in this, the 1st edition, the relevant passages are Vol. I, pp. 243-73, and 274-9). Once again the Hooke reference does not correspond to any edition examined, but is presumably to Bk. II, Chap. i, §6, where the conferring of the name is explained; in §5 of that chapter, he is referred to as “Publius.” The reference to the “Chronology of the Consuls” in the edition of Dionysius cited above is correct. The Livy reference is probably to Bk. II, Chap. viii, §2, however (and we do not know what edition is in the mind of the young Mill, who is not thought to have yet begun to learn Latin), various versions of the name appear in different editions, including “Publicola” and “Poblicola.” Of course no “mistake” is involved, but merely different versions of the actual and honorific names.]