This dissertation presents the first examination and analysis of Cornelius Nepos' Eumenes on its own terms and in its own right. Although Nepotian studies have experienced a revival, for example, in the form of the two recent monographs by Rex Stem (2012) and John Lobur (2021), as well as Francesco Ginelli's (2022) commentary, Nepos' Eumenes has received comparatively little individual attention, besides Stem (2018) and James Bradley (1991), despite being the equally longest biography in Nepos' Liber De Excellentibus Ducibus Exterarum Gentium and the author's only biography of a subject from the Argead Macedonian world. Chapter 1 discusses Nepos' conception of biography, his methods, and his use of source(s) as they concern the Eumenes. Nepos is consciously writing vitae and not historia and prioritises the virtutes of his subjects in his construction of biography at the expense of res gestae. His aims are explicitly stated (Epam. 4.6; Pelop. 1.1) and continually inform his writing. Nepos utilised Hieronymus of Cardia as his principal, and probably only source, as Bradley (1991) argues. By comparing Nepos' Eumenes with other sources derived principally from Hieronymus (i.e. Diodorus Siculus, Arrian Successors, Plutarch's Eumenes, Justin' Epitome of Pompeius Trogus, and the Heidelberg Epitome), I reconstruct a hypothetical schema of information contained in Hieronymus' original work, and thus what was available to Nepos, to show that Nepos selects only such information that illuminates the exemplary virtutes of Eumenes. Chapter 2 begins by showing how Nepos' presentation of Eumenes aligns broadly with the other accounts derived from Hieronymus. Then I argue that Nepos foregrounds the idea of Eumenes as a homo novus (a‘new man') to better explain his career for his Roman audience. Nepos' ascription to Eumenes of virtus, industria, and ingenium is unambiguously reminiscent of the language with which prominent homines novi (especially Cato Maior, C. Marius, and Cicero) spoke about themselves and are spoken about, and the ideology of novitas generally. The discrimination experienced by Eumenes is contrasted with that experienced by homines novi in Rome. Whereas Chapters 1 and 2 deal focus on Eumenes as a biography, Chapter 3 takes a more historical and historiographical approach: I focus on Nepos' highly abbreviated account of the Babylonian Settlement (June to July 323 BC) which is markedly different from our other extant sources. With close reading and commentary-style discussion, I show how and why Nepos constructed his account as he does and propose possible solutions to the so called ‘errors' attributed to Nepos.
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations