Marcus Tullius Cicero: Brutus [PDF]

Zitiervorschau

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS B R V TV S

Μ. T V L L I CICERONIS

BRVTVS E D IT E D BY

A. E. D O U G L A S U N IV E R SIT Y OF SOUTHAM PTON

OXFORD AT T H E C L A R E N D O N P R E S S

1966

Oxford University Press, Ely House, London W. i GLASGOW N E W Y O R K TORONTO M ELB O U R N E W E L LIN G TO N CA PE TO W N SA LIS B U R Y IBA D A N N A IR O B I LU SA K A A D D IS ABABA BOM BAY CALCUTTA M ADRAS K A RA CHI LA H O R E DACCA KUALA LU M PU R H O N G KO NG

© Oxford University Press iq 66

PRINTED

IN

GREAT

BRITAIN

P RE F A CE Brutus is in many ways the most approachable of his three major rhetorical writings. It is remarkable that, despite the appearance towards the end of the nineteenth century of Sandys’s edition of Orator and Wilkins’s of De Oratore, no one has hitherto essayed to fill the gap with any considerable English commentary on Brutus. In the interval, the editor’s tasks and resources have changed so much that I can acknowledge my debt to those notable works without having to appear to invite comparison with them. The editor of Brutus now has available four major sources of enlightenment without which his task would be both harder and less stimulating. My debt to the prosopographical articles by Münzer and his school in R.-E. and to Malcovati’s Oratorum Romanorum Fragmenta I have made explicit on many pages. Not less real are my debts to Broughton’s Magistrates of the Roman Republic and to the vivacious writings of Professor E. Badian. I also owe much to many friends. I am especially indebted to Professor R. G. Austin for encouragement and helpful advice in the earlier stages of my work, to Messrs. R. G. M. Nisbet and J. Briscoe who devoted time and learning to a detailed criticism of a draft of my commentary with a generosity beyond anything I had any right to hope or expect, and to Mr. D. A. Russell for his painstaking reading of the proofs and perceptive comments thereon. I must also express my thanks to the University of Southampton for assistance with travelling expenses, and to the staff of the Clarendon Press for much courtesy and helpfulness. For the faults that remain in a work to which so many C i c e r o ’s

VI

PREFACE

have thus contributed—and in particular for any uneven­ ness that has resulted from the length of time that I have been engaged on my task—I accept the responsibility. A. E. D. Southampton December 1965

CONTENTS INTRO DU CTIO N I. The date of Brutus II.

Cicero’s reasons for writing Brutus

h i. The dialogue form in Brutus IV . V. V i.

ix x

xvii

Rhetorical theory and its place in Brutus

xxv

H istorical sources of Brutus

xliv

The te x t of Brutus

ABBR EVIA TIO NS

liv lix

TEXT COMMENTARY

i

A PPEN DIXES A.

A selection of fragments

235

B. A conspectus of textual points >

245

c.

247

The Lex Thoria

INDEXES

251

INTRODUCTION I. T H E D A T E O F B R U T U S

i. Brutus, a history of Roman oratory presented in dialogue form, was Cicero’s first published work after De Re Publica (54-51 B.c.) (cf. § 19). The date of its composition and publication falls in the early months of 46 b .c. For it men­ tions events of the autumn of 47, e.g. Brutus’ defence of Deiotarus before Caesar (§ 21), and his appointment as governor of Cisalpine Gaul (§171, Plut. Brut. 6), as well as implying, in the word domi (§ 10), Cicero’s return to Rome which took place at about this time (fam. xiv. 20)—a hint which, though part of the setting of the dialogue, is probably not pure fiction. The reference to expected bad news (ibid.) suggests that Cicero was at work on the dialogue during Caesar’s African campaign, i.e. after December 47. It has usually been held that it was completed before the news of Cato’s death at Utica reached Rome, about the end of April 46. This view rests chiefly on the fact that Cicero explicitly avoids dealing with living orators in his own per­ son in the dialogue, preferring to describe some of them, e.g. Caesar, M. Marcellus, Metellus Scipio, through the mouths of the other characters. Cato seems to belong in this cate­ gory. He is mentioned only in passing, out of chronological position, and is described mainly by Brutus (§ 118). There­ fore he was still alive, or not known to be dead, when Cicero composed the dialogue. Further P. Groebe1has argued that Brutus is referred to in the proem to Paradoxa Stoicorum, a work addressed to M. Brutus, in the words (pr. 5) ‘illud maiorum vigiliarum munus in tuo nomine (i.e. in Brutus) 1 ‘Die Abfassungszeit des Brutus und der Paradoxa Ciceros’ {Hermes lv (1920) 105-7).

INTRO DUCTIO N

apparuit’, Paradoxa itself being 'parvum opusculum lucu­ bratum his iam contractioribus noctibus’. As Paradoxa was written before the news of Cato’s death reached Rome (cf. par ad. 2), this seems to imply the period end of February—intercalary month—March 46 for the composi­ tion of Brutus. But there are difficulties. Barwick has pointed out (Barw. Intr. 6) that L. Manlius Torquatus, who was killed at Thapsus, is referred to as dead in § 265, and the fact that Lentulus Spinther, who was probably put to death after the battle, is described (§ 268) implies that he was dead at the time when this part of Brutus was composed. Barwick sug­ gests that the work was first privately circulated and then revised for more general publication, when the above pas­ sages were added and other alterations made. The double account relating to Molon (§§ 307 and 312, cf. nn.) might be due to this revision. It seems to me also possible that the news of Thapsus and its sequels reached Rome after Cicero had written much, but not all, of his dialogue. He then added the allusions to certain orators whom he now knew to be dead, but saw no need to alter or transfer the account of Cato which he had already written. Perhaps he was already planning the separate eulogy of Cato which he produced shortly afterwards.1 II. C I C E R O ’S R E A S O N S F O R W R I T I N G

BRUTUS

(i) The letters from Brutus and Atticus 2. Cicero explains at the outset of the dialogue the occasion of its composition. After a prologue concerning the death 1 E. A. Robinson (TAPA lxxx (1949) 368-74) would set the renewal of Cicero’s literary activities, and therewith the composition of Brutus, in October 47 b . c . and the months immediately following. In fact we have no idea how long the composition of Brutus occupied Cicero so that no arguments can show conclusively when he began the work, or studies in preparation for it.

REASONS FOR W RITIN G B R U T U S

XI

of Hortensius (50 b .c .) (§§1-9), he introduces the inter­ locutors of the dialogue, Atticus and Brutus, visiting him at his house in Rome. He thanks them for certain writings of theirs, described as ‘letters’, which had revived his interest in intellectual pursuits after the despondency and inactivity of the preceding period, following his return to Italy after Pharsalus. Brutus is the outcome of this revival. 3. Brutus’ ‘letter’, as Hendrickson1has convincingly argued, was the treatise De Virtute, known from passing references elsewhere, of which the theme was that virtue alone is sufficient for the happy life—the familiar Stoic doctrine (cf. Tuse. V . i, Seneca ad Helv. 8. 1, 9. 4). The identification has interesting consequences. While many2have suggested that Brutus’ letter was some otherwise unknown political mani­ festo, which gave Cicero an exaggerated idea of Brutus’ hostility to Caesar, Hendrickson concludes that it advocated political quietism and non-resistance to Caesar’s régime. ‘Virtue’ in this context is private and personal virtue : in the political field Cicero must be content with his past achieve­ ments (cf. §330). It further follows that, though Brutus helped to stimulate the production of the work named after him, the numerous political allusions which it contains are not a reflection of Brutus’ own views but a deliberate re­ joinder to them. Cicero, whether Brutus agreed or not, could not acquiesce in a situation which meant the effective end of Roman oratory, and he points this argument by appeals ad hominem. It is Brutus whose career will suffer (§§22, 330 ff.). Alternatively, Cicero seems to argue, if Brutus is right, the time has come to write the obituary notice of Roman oratory (Haenni3 describes Brutus as a Grabrede), with an account of its infancy and growth to its glorious m aturity in Hortensius and Cicero himself. 1 AJPh lx (1939) 4 OI_I3 · 2 e.g. Ciaceri Cicerone e i suoi tempi (Milan 1930) ii. 264, Gelzer RE X. i. 982. 3 Die literarische Kritik in Ciceros Brutus (Freiburg 1905) p. 52.

xii

INTRO DU CTIO N

(This theme of development was important in another con­ nexion, cf. Intr. 6.) 4. From Atticus came a handbook of chronology, the Liber Annalis (see further Intr. 39). Some modern writers, in trying to assess the various strands of motive that are more or less obviously interwoven in Brutus, have unduly neg­ lected Cicero’s genuine interest in the historical aspect of his subject. Chronological studies were evidently much in vogue in Rome at this time, and Cicero’s own interest in history is easily demonstrated,1 quite apart from his own claims in the matter (e.g. §322). Martha (Intr. xi; cf. Barw. Intr. 19), opposing the tendency to see in Brutus primarily a polemical work, maintained that it is ‘avant tout une histoire’. (ii) The ‘Atticist’ controversy (a) The history and nature of Roman Atticism 5. Yet Cicero drops a significant hint when he says (§ 15) that he was already looking for just such a work as the Liber Annalis—in other words his subject was already taking shape in his mind. That this was so was due to current literary controversies, in particular the controversy which had arisen between Cicero and a group of his younger con­ temporaries with regard to oratorical style. The elaborate and ornate style perfected by Cicero had grown wearisome to a new generation, and there emerged a coterie, centring on C. Licinius Calvus, which proclaimed adherence to the spare ‘Attic’ style of Lysias. Those whose theory or practice disagreed with this ideal were dubbed ‘Asianists’, because the oratorical style fashionable in the Hellenistic East was, by comparison with the old Attic tradition, high-flown to the point of turgidity. It is evident that Cicero was one of the main objects of the attack on ‘Asianism’ (cf. Quintii. 1 Cf. R. Schütz Ciceros historische Kenntnisse (Berlin 1913) for a detailed survey; M. Rambaud Cicéron et l'histoire romaine (Paris 1953) ch. ii.

REASO NS FOR W RITIN G B R U T U S

xm

xii. io. 10-15). There are traces of a private correspondence on literary matters between Cicero on the one hand and Brutus and Calvus on the other.1 There is much more sub­ stantial evidence in the works, including Brutus, published by Cicero in defence of his own position during 46 B.c. (On the critical vocabulary of the controversy, see Intr. 35.) No reader of Brutus and Orator can mistake the temporary importance of the controversy, but its wider significance has been greatly exaggerated by modem scholars,2 who have treated ‘Atticism’ and ‘Asianism’ as technical terms of criticism referring to movements with long histories and many identifiable adherents. A sober study of the evidence suggests that these terms are mere polemical slogans ; so far as their implied appeals to history or geography have any substance, Cicero meets them convincingly (cf. Intr. 6). It suggests also that Atticism developed after 54, when De Oratore was published, since that work contains no indis­ putable allusion to the controversy, and perhaps mainly during Cicero’s absences from Rome from 51 onwards, and that it disappeared as an active movement as suddenly as it had emerged. Calvus died in 47, and his adherents were negligible. For there is no ground for assigning a single known orator other than Calvus to the Atticist movement. The best case for such assignation is Brutus ; we know that he shared Calvus’ dislike of Cicero’s ‘effeminate’ rhythms (Tac. dial. 18. 5). But the belief that he was an Atticist involves the assumption that Cicero crowned extreme dis­ ingenuousness in Brutus and Orator with actual insult in Tusc. ii. 3, where, as Barwick points out (Barw. Intr. 15), Cicero says of the Attici in a work dedicated to Brutus that 1 Cf. Hendrickson ‘Cicero’s Correspondence with Brutus and Calvus on oratorical style' (A JPh xlvii (1926) 234-58). 2 Those of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and un­ critical followers of theirs. Of recent years more cautious views have been expressed in this as in so many other fields. For a fuller state­ ment and defence of my views, see my art. in CQ n . s . v (1955) 241-7.

XIV

INTRODUCTION

they are ‘paene ab ipso foro irrisi’. Brutus was tempera­ mentally incapable of Ciceronian effusiveness, but that is another m atter.1 (b) Cicero’s attitude to the Atticists 6. Cicero’s retort to the Atticists is carefully argued, and, in a purely literary context, convincing. He acknowledges the weaknesses of ‘Asianic’ oratory, though maintaining that some is good of its kind (§§ 51, 325). He points out that to confine the term ‘Attic’ to imitation of Lysias is absurd. To reject the Grand Style is, in his view, to throw away the gains made during the development of Roman oratory from its vigorous and unpolished beginnings in the time of Cato to his own day. Hence his half-ironical appeal to the imitators of Lysias and Hyperides to take Cato seriously (§§ 67-68) has to be balanced by his allowing Atticus, later in the dialogue (§§ 292-9), to demonstrate that the best models were the most developed, i.e. Hortensius and Cicero. Here we have a return to the opening theme of the dialogue, where the description of Greek oratory is made to illustrate the idea of development—a theme which intrudes some­ what illogically even in the very passage where Cicero extols Cato’s merits—and we can hardly miss the implied claim th at Cicero was the nearest thing to a Roman Demosthenes. 7. But the choice of Lysias as a model was perhaps not solely determined by stylistic considerations. If we see the zenith of the Roman Atticist movement in the period of the Civil War and Caesar’s dictatorship when political oratory was in abeyance, we need not be surprised at the instinct to follow Lysias, whose forte was in the lawsuit. Cicero himself recognizes the suitability of the genus tenue, or Plain Style, for such matters {or. 30, opt. gen. 10, 11). The fiery political 1 F. Portalupi in Bruto e i neoatticisti (Turin 1955) argues that Brutus was no Atticist, but had been affected in his attitude to oratory by his adherence to the Stoically-inclined ‘ Old ’ Academy of Antiochus. On the Stoic ideas about oratory cf. Intr. 27.

REASONS FOR W RITIN G B R U T U S

XV

oratory of a Demosthenes had no place in Caesar’s Rome. Not till after the Ides of March could a Roman orator deliver ‘Philippics’. Thus while Atticism doubtless re­ presented a genuine reaction against the long-dominant ideals of Hortensius and Cicero, the stylistic question is bound up with the political situation. Cicero’s rejection of the Caesarian régime is of a piece with his conviction that there is still a place for the Grand Style of oratory.1 (c) The effect of the controversy on Cicero’s account of orators 8. There is, then, evidence from a number of passages of a polemical intention in Brutus. But we must guard against the suggestion expressed or implied by some modern writers that, because of the presence of polemic, the dialogue is tendentious to the point of dishonesty and distortion. To understand Brutus, we have of course to be aware that Cicero had a strong, positive viewpoint. It is hard for us to realize how recently the fashion of accepting almost any statement by almost any ancient writer at its face-value gave place to a critical approach to ancient history and literature, so th at it was a genuine discovery that a work like Brutus was the product of an individual viewpoint which was not necessarily fair or sound. But this led too readily to an assumption that such a viewpoint was prob­ ably unfair and unsound. Although the fallacy in such an assumption can now be recognized without difficulty, views like this, not without assistance from an anti-Ciceronian bias among many of the would-be scientific critics, re­ mained influential well into the present century. The fact is that Cicero’s critical preferences are not concealed, nor are 1 Cf. Meerwaldt de Dionysiana virtutum et generum dicendi doctrina (Amsterdam 1920) on the connexions between the Grand, Middle, and Plain Styles and deliberative, epideictic, and judicial oratory (cf. Intr. 24 (a)), although he perhaps exaggerates the extent to which those connexions were theoretically worked out in ancient rhetoric. 814437

b

XVI

INTRODUCTION

they applied unfairly. They are fully expounded in De Oratore (cf. Martha Intr. pp. vi ff.). To put them with the utmost brevity, Cicero held that the marks of a great orator are copia and ornatus, a polished, rhythmical, and emotional style, backed by a wide range of intellectual interests (cf. further, Intr. 31). In applying these standards, Cicero is remarkably free of partisanship, as a careful reading of his remarks on Calvus himself will make clear, and there are many other examples. For instance, Ser. Galba (cos. 144 B.c.) was in his own day acknowledged as the supreme orator of his time. Cicero and others found this fact puzzling in the light of Galba’s sur­ viving written works, but Cicero explained it as due to his vigour and emotional fervour (§§91-94), which, according to Cicero, makes for better and more successful oratory than the analytic and didactic manner preferred by the Atticists. But this is no mere debating point at the expense of the unimpassioned Attic style, and indeed Calvus himself did not lack passion in his manner of delivery. Cicero may be credited with having found the solution of a problem arising from admitted facts : he seems inclined to reverse the tradi­ tional order of merit (1) Galba, (2) Laelius, (3) Scipio, when considering these orators in terms of their appeal in his own day, i.e. in terms of their value as permanent literature, while accepting it with regard to their immediate effective­ ness.1 There are other instances. The discussion of Antonius and 1 The argument of §§ 183-200 is inconsistent with this approach; Cicero there maintains that popular and informed judgements of orators must essentially coincide. The inconsistency, which Cicero acknowledges in respect of his judgement of Visellius Varro (§ 264), is due not only to his desire to approve on occasion, from the literary point of view, a less popular orator, while using arguments elsewhere which enabled him to reproach the Atticists with their unpopularity. It is also to some extent a reflection of the dilemma implicit in all criticism of oratory, the dilemma presented by oratory's dual role as ‘artificer of persuasion’ and a form of literature.

T H E D IA L O G U E FORM IN B R U T U S

xvii

Crassus leaves us in no doubt that Cicero preferred Crassus, the more polished and restrained of the two, whom indeed he describes as elegantium parcissimus, because he was a more complete orator in the Ciceronian sense, combining solemnity with wit, pure diction and logical exposition with fullness of style. The passages on Scaurus and Ruti­ lius (§§ no-16, especially 116) and on Cotta and Sulpicius (§§ 201-4) also serve to show Cicero’s sympathy with diverse types of oratory. Lack of sympathy he shows only for the totally incompetent or politically irresponsible. His judge­ ments are not to be dismissed as the special pleadings of a controversialist. To reject them is to reject the noble ideals of De Oratore. It is of hardly more than incidental significance that it was the activities of a narrow-minded literary clique which prompted Cicero to complement and justify the account of those ideals there offered by the appeal to history which he makes in Brutus—an appeal whose outcome he had no occasion to fear. These activities did no more than provide one of the stimuli that led to the production of Brutus, and in their pettiness and super­ ficiality contrast strikingly with the sanity and breadth of Ciceronian criticism (cf. Intr. 31 ff.). III. T H E D IA L O G U E FORM IN B R U T U S

(i) The characters in the dialogue 9. There are only two characters apart from Cicero him­ self, namely his lifelong friend T. Pomponius Atticus, and M. Iunius Brutus. They play a minor part, since Cicero favoured the expository form of dialogue, in which long speeches predominate, and on this occasion it is appropriate for one central character (here Cicero himself) to take the largest part in the conversation.1 The minor characters, 1 As in leg., amic., sen., parts of Tusc.—but it is quite wrong to suggest (as, e.g., OCD art. Dialogue, Latin) that all Cicero’s dialogues

xviii

INTRO DUCTIO N

after a preliminary interchange of pleasantries, are em­ ployed to feed the chief speaker with suitable questions, or to introduce digressions by interventions. In Brutus they are also entrusted with the description of still living orators, and made to pay such compliments to Cicero himself as he considers appropriate (cf. on this Quintii, xi. i. 21)—two naïve devices for avoiding invidia which perhaps owe to their very naïveté their effect of verisimilitude. (ii) Brutus in the dialogue and in real life 10. How far does Cicero give an accurate representation of the real character and opinions of his friends ? While there is no reason to believe that Atticus’ behaviour and sentiments in the dialogue are in any important point inconsistent with his real character and opinions, the question of Brutus is more complex. In the dialogue he figures as Cicero’s modest and admiring pupil, and is made to share Cicero’s political discontents as well as his oratorical ideals. It is arguable that in all these respects Cicero has distorted the truth. (a) Cicero’s relations with Brutus 11. Brutus’ personal relations with Cicero seem never to have been marked by the degree of cordiality that Cicero would have liked. They had some contact as pleaders in the year 52 (§ 324), and Cicero was encouraged by Atticus to are dominated by a single character. Further, although it is now the fashion to label all expository, as opposed to dramatic, dialogue as ‘Aristotelian’, it is to be noted that for Cicero himself the charac­ teristic feature of Aristotelian dialogue is precisely the appearance in a leading role of the author himself (Q.f. iii. 5. 1). It is true that Cicero describes the De Oratore, in which he does not himself appear, as written Aristotelio more {Jam. i. 9. 23), but the interpretation of this phrase has long been controversial (cf. Wilkins Intr. p. 4 ; Hirzel Der Dialog i. 276 if.) ; it probably refers to the handling of the subjectmatter in a broader, less pedantic, and (as Cicero claimed) more ‘philosophical ’ manner than was usual in rhetorical handbooks, and not, as Hirzel himself concluded, simply to the use of long speeches.

THE

DIALO GUE

FORM IN B R U T U S

xix

make Brutus’ closer acquaintance (Att. vi. i, 3) ; but from the first Brutus’ dislike of anything but the most direct plain speaking gave an appearance of arrogance and aloof­ ness (Att. vi. i. 7, 3. 7), and Cicero is hard put to it to make a compliment out of these characteristics in or. 34. That very outspokenness which made Brutus attractive to Cicero prevented the development of friendship for which the emotional Cicero hoped.1 He was never accepted by Brutus in the role of political and intellectual mentor which he had assigned to himself. (b) Cicero, Brutus, and the political situation 12. For, although Brutus may not have been a whole­ hearted Caesarian in 46,2 he was probably far from abandon­ ing hope of a Republic restored by Caesar. The abandonment of hope, as is generally held on the strength of Att. xiii. 40. i, did not come till after Munda (March 45 B.c.). Un­ like Cato, Brutus had come to terms with his conscience and his conqueror. So far from joining the stalwarts of Republican resistance in Africa, he had accepted a governor­ ship from Caesar, and had probably written to Cicero, as we have seen (Intr. 2, 3), to recommend acquiescence in the situation. We should with Shakespeare recognize in Brutus a man 'with himself at war’.3 This was inevitable if his philosophy, as expressed in De Virtute, was a doctrine of personal self-sufficiency not intimately bound up with the preservation of the existing order, as was Cato’s, for whom there was no alternative but to continue the fight. Cicero, too, was divided in mind. But while Gelzer has detected even in Brutus an appeal to Caesar rather than the intransigent hostility of an old-fashioned Republican (cf. 1 Cf. E. Meyer Casars Monarchie (Stuttgart, Berlin 1918) p. 452. 2 Cf. Purser in Hermathena ix (1894) 369-84, followed by R. E. Jones in AJPh lx (1939) 307 if., both reacting against the extreme views of O. Schmidt; and see above, Intr. 3. 3 Cf. M. Radin Marcus Brutus (Oxford 1939) PP· 231 ff.

INTRO DUCTIO N

Barw. Intr., 19), it can hardly be doubted that Cicero was less content with the situation than Brutus (Intr. 3). Even so, it is more on the assumption of Brutus’ acquiescence in the general tone of the dialogue than on the remarks put into his mouth that the case for actual distortion must rest. Jones (art. cit.) sees a tendency to distortion in the way that ‘Brutus complains of the silence of eloquence, of the lack of Sulpicius’ counsel and Cicero’s voice, and of the death of many excellent men slain in the Civil Wars (Brutus 23, 157, 266)’. But Brutus is made to state, in conformity with what we may suspect to have been his real view, that eloquence does not appeal to him primarily on account of its political rewards (§ 23). Regrets at the death of his friends, even at the enforced silence of Cicero and Sulpicius, the real Brutus may well have felt. (c) Cicero on Brutus’ oratory 13. It is in regard to oratory that Cicero is most clearly guilty of distortion. Although Brutus did not call himself an Atticist (Intr. 5), he shared Calvus’ views on some aspects of Cicero’s oratory, and later (44 b . c .) expressed his disagreement with Cicero’s idëas de optimo genere oratorum (Att. xiv. 20. 3). His oratorical practice harmonized with what we can detect of his theory. It was a serious, astringent oratory (Tac. dial. 25, Quintii, xii. 10. n ), pure in diction, not avoid­ ing monotony (or. no), a style which had little appeal to later generations (Tac. dial. 21) except on the ground of its evident sincerity (Quintii, x. 1. 123). Tacitus and Quintilian alike see in him a philosopher rather than an orator. Morawski’s argument1 that Brutus could on occasion pro­ duce a vigorous or colourful phrase does not substantially affect this picture. When Cicero was asked by Brutus to revise a speech for him, he could do nothing with it—it was 1 ‘De M. Iunii Bruti genere dicendi’ (Eos xvii (1911) 1-6).

TH E DIALOGUE FORM IN B R U T U S

xxi

unimpeachable in expression, but Cicero would have done the whole thing in a different, more impassioned manner (Att. X V . i a, 2).1 Cicero’s tribute to Brutus’ defence of Deiotarus was mere compliment (§ 21 n.). 14. Thus we can agree with E. J. Filbey2 that many expres­ sions of opinion and assent put into Brutus’ mouth by Cicero are false to fact : e.g. Sulpicius’ lack of lepos (§ 204) would not have worried Brutus ; at § 249 Brutus’ approval of Cicero and any orator who resembled him is assumed ; at § 254 Brutus amplifies Caesar’s praise of Cicero as copiae inventor ; at § 279 Brutus declares that the most important function of an orator is to arouse the passions of an audience. But perhaps Filbey slightly exaggerates the distortion : e.g. at § 125, it is probable that C. Gracchus was in fact the only orator of his period read by Brutus and his contemporaries, and that too, as Cicero says, because of his relatively full style ; the description of Marcellus (§ 249), though it includes the word splendor, perhaps inappropriate in Brutus’ mouth, is largely conventional, and the least important part of what is said about him. Lastly, the phrase ornatum uberri­ mis artibus applied by Cicero to Brutus (§ 332) is hardly more than Cicero’s way of saying ‘well-educated’, and the exaggeration, if any, is formal, not material. On certain points Cicero and Brutus would have agreed, e.g. the importance of training in philosophy and logic (§309, cf. or. 12-16, 116-18) and of the careful choice of words and dignified delivery (§§249-50). 15. How did Brutus react to the misrepresentation? This use of dialogue form must have been too well understood for him to take personal offence; he may even have felt flat­ tered. None the less he and Cicero had to agree to differ on matters of oratorical principle {or. ad fin.). It is commonly 1 But the fact that Brutus asked for Cicero's help is significant for the relations between the two men (Portalupi op. cit. p. 33). 2 ‘Concerning the oratory of Brutus’ (CPh vi (1911) 325~ 33 )·

xxii

INTRODUCTION

held that Brutus protested to Cicero against his transferring the political atmosphere of Brutus to his pamphlet on Cato which he wrote immediately afterwards, but this rests on an entirely conjectural, though ingenious, interpretation of a fragment of correspondence preserved by Quintilian (v. io . 9) : ‘ipse Cicero ad Brutum ita scribit : “veritus fortasse ne nos in Catonem nostrum transferremus illim mali quid, etsi argumentum simile non erat” .' This particular inter­ pretation of these words is due to Schmidt (op. cit. p. 174 n. 4, cf. Tyrrell and Purser vi. cii. ff.), but we do not know that Brutus is the subject of veritus nor, though this is more plausible, that illim refers to Brutus : it would be idle to enumerate possible alternatives. Surely any eulogy of Cato must have been 'political dynamite' (cf. Att. xii. 4. 2) beside which the political asides in Brutus would have seemed innocuous. (iii) Literary merits of the dialogue 16. We come now to consider Brutus from the literary rather than historical angle. Cicero’s attem pt to construct a dia­ logue with an historical survey as its subject is, despite the conjectures of various scholars, without any certainly known precedent.1 It is true that the dialogue form was used for a wide range of expository purposes in the Hellenistic Age, 1 St. Jerome in the prologue to his De Viris Illustribus (Migne P.L. xxiii. 631-4) names a number of Greek (mostly Peripatetic) and Latin writers whom he regards as his predecessors, but most of them appear to have written collections of separate short lives, of the kind repre­ sented for us by, for example, Nepos, Suetonius, and Diogenes Laertius, and there is no suggestion, nor other evidence, that they used dialogue. They are thus to be distinguished from Cicero in Brutus, to which Jerome also refers: ‘Dominum Jesum Christum precor ut quod Cicero tuus qui in arce Romanae eloquentiae stetit non est facere dedignatus in Bruto, oratorum Latinae linguae texens catalogum, id ego in eius Ecclesiae scriptoribus enumerandis digne cohortatione tua impleam.’

THE

DIALO GUE

FORM IN B R U T U S

xxiii

especially by Peripatetic writers (Christ-Schmid n. i. 52), and there is reference to Aristotle’s Περί Πολτών as being in dialogue form. There also survive papyrus-fragments of Satyrus’ life of Euripides, written as a dialogue (Pap. Oxy. ix. 1176, Christ-Schmid 11. i. 83), but in spirit and manner it is totally different from Brutus (Gudeman RE s.v. Satyrus 230-1). Cicero’s undertaking was, then, unusual, perhaps completely novel, a fact which adds much to the interest of attempting to assess the formal merits of his work. 17. In this regard Brutus is a remarkable tour de force. For reasons already given (Intr. 9), we shall not look for the lively interplay of sharply etched characters engaged in dialectical discussion that we find in the earlier works of Plato. In his use of the expository dialogue Cicero shows his skill rather in the depiction of 'atmosphere’, that is in his picture of intellectual activity among Romans against their particular political backgrounds, and we find that in pre­ senting his material, Cicero, as befits a successful orator, is by no means lacking in the arts of effective exposition. So in Brutus the atmosphere of regret and foreboding is bril­ liantly depicted and sustained. Against this background Cicero, marshalling and deploying an immense amount of chronological and literary information, makes skilful use of digression and anecdote to avoid monotony and lend life to the narrative (cf. Hendr. Intr. p. 10), particularly where there is danger of the reader being ‘repelled by a close con­ catenation of proper names’, e.g. at §§ 182 ff. It has been felt1 that these digressions are ill knit into the narrative, that the constant recurrence of such phrases as ad instituta redeamus is an artistic blemish due to hasty composition, or, as some nineteenth-century critics were too willing to think, to interpolation. Rather they illustrate the instinc­ tive skill which a practised writer can bring to bear even in 1 e.g. by Sabbadini ‘Dubbi sui Bruto di Cicerone’ (Riv. Fit. xxix (1901) 259).

INTRODUCTION

rapid writing.1 There are, too, despite the austerity of the subject-matter and the lugubrious setting, not a few touches of humour, notably the digression on rhetorical history (§§42- 43)· To those who doubt the vivacity of Cicero’s manner, it would be easy to retort by referring to the passages both in Brutus and in other dialogues which scholars have mis­ understood simply through losing sight of the fictitious character of the dialogue. It is not uncommon to meet citation of ‘Atticus’ opinions’ for which the sole evidence is some remark attributed to him in a dialogue of Cicero’s. So D ’Alton2 writes: ‘In this work [Brutus] he treats of many insignificant orators. . . . He carried this practice so far that Atticus protests against his draining out the dregs.’ The opinions cited in this and similar comments may have been authentically held by Atticus, but what is relevant here is that Cicero cannot be accused of failing to achieve veri­ similitude. 18. In a pleasantly written and unpretentious monograph, E. Becker has contributed to the understanding and ap­ preciation of Cicero’s dialogues some points of importance, of which the following are especially relevant to Brutus.3 (i) In addition to the use of digression, Cicero avails himself of the dialogue form to limit the scope of discussion by ruling out subjects he does not wish to discuss (cf. § 297, where the promise to return to the subject is a fiction of the dialogue), (ii) More important is Becker’s stress on the Roman character of the dialogues, illustrated among other things by the frequent setting of the dialogues in periods of leisure and relaxation from the serious business of life, especially public affairs (cf. otiosus § 10, cum sciremus te esse 1 There are of course a number of perfunctory and loosely written passages, to which I sometimes draw attention in the Commentary. 2 Roman Literary Theory and Criticism (London (1931) p. 167). 3 Technik und Szenerie des ciceronischen Dialogs (Osnabrück 1938) especially pp. 12, 14-16, 20, 34, 37, 39.

RH ETORICAL TH EO RY

IN B R U T U S

xxv

vacuum § 20), the characters almost all being figures of im­ portance in Roman public life. Furthermore, they are generally relatives or close friends meeting at each other’s homes, often with the set purpose of entertaining themselves with discussion, sometimes even with the subject for con­ sideration determined in advance. All this contrasts with the numerous Platonic dialogues where a chance meeting or gathering in the ordinary course of daily life is the occasion of the conversation. The invariable courtesy of the Ciceronian disputants towards each other, and especially towards their elders, is again in contrast with the occasional asperities of Platonic discussion. If from Becker’s observations we are led to the unsur­ prising conclusion that Roman intellectual life was much less lively and spontaneous than the Greek, and much more strongly influenced by practical considerations, we can at the same time assert that Cicero has not failed in the attem pt to portray that life as it was. IV. R H E T O R I C A L T H E O R Y A N D I T S P L A C E IN B R U T U S

(i) Cicero’s attitude to rhetoric 19. Long before Cicero’s time. Rhetoric, i.e. the theoretical study of oratory, had become a highly technical subject. For its technicalities he had no great love. He disliked their false appearance of scientific exactness and their inartistic effect, and the pedantries they encouraged in those who were attracted by them for their own sake. Rhetoric was for him a humane study, an art rather than a science. None the less, the judgements and discussions in Brutus, even though it is the least technical of Cicero’s rhetorical treatises, are built on a framework of traditional rhetorical ter­ minology, which is only partially concealed by the variety of formulation which Cicero employs. In what follows an

XXVI

INTRODUCTION

attempt will be made to indicate the most important parts of the framework, placing them in relation to their appearance in Brutus and to their historical development.1 (ii) Rhetoric in the fifth century B.C. 20. Ancient tradition agreed, with no significant variation, that the beginnings of formal rhetorical teaching fell in the early fifth century, that the place of origin was Sicily, and that the first practitioners were Corax and Tisias (§46). Their contribution was to provide a system of general arguments which could be memorized, thus enabling a speaker to present an orderly case based on general prin­ ciples, mainly those of gIkos, probability, and without re­ liance on a script. For the Greeks, like audiences since their time, liked to maintain the pretence that they were listening to extempore oratory, even when everyone knew that the speech was not even the speaker's own composition. The concern of these earliest rhetoricians was almost exclusively with forensic cases,2 and this emphasis thus early laid 1 Until expected new volumes of Müller-Otto’s Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft appear, the standard work on the subject is likely to remain W. Kroll’s art. Rhetorik in RE Supplbd. vii, to which reference is made in this part of my Intr. as Kr. M. L. Clarke Rhetoric at Rome (London 1953), G. A. Kennedy The Art of Persuasion in Greece (Princeton and London 1963) are valuable works in English. For pre-Aristotelian Rhetoric L. Radermacher’s Artium Scriptores (Vienna 1951) is an invaluable source-book. F. Solmsen’s ‘The Aristo­ telian tradition in ancient Rhetoric ’ (A JPh lxii (1941) 35 ff., 1670.) is important for Hellenistic developments, while L. Laurand De Μ. Tulli Ciceronis studiis rhetoricis (Paris 1907) gives a characteristically balanced and elegant survey of Cicero’s own debt to earlier theorists. 2 So almost all later tradition implies. That they also gave training in political oratory is strongly urged by S. Wilcox ‘The Scope of Early Rhetorical Instruction’ (Harvard Studies, liii (1942) 137 ff.). But it seems clear that legal oratory from the first lent itself most readily to technical study and formal instruction (cf. G. A. Kennedy ' The Earliest Rhetorical Handbooks ’ in A JPh lxxx (1959) iöpff.esp. 1 7 3 )·

RH ETORICAL TH EO RY

IN B R U T U S

xxvii

thereon persisted throughout the history of Rhetoric (Kr. 1041 ; cf. Hinks in CQ xxxiv (1940) 61-69). 21. Next came the group of sophists who flourished in the latter half of the fifth century B.c. (§§ 30, 46). Developments of sophistic Rhetoric which appear in Brutus are : the oratorical genre of 'praise and blame’ (έπαινο? καί ψόγος, laudatio et vituperatio)1 (§§47, 65), and the development of ‘commonplaces’ (κοινοί τόποι, loci communes or simply loci), set discourses on topics likely to be relevant to many speeches (§§ 46, 82, 124).2 Some study of means of appealing to the emotions, especially pity (e'Aeo?, miseratio) (§§ 82, 142) is attributed to Thrasymachus. With all these develop­ ments was associated the art of ‘heightening’ or ‘exaggera­ tion’ (αϋξ-ησίζ, augere, amplificatio) (§§ 47, 82, 146). (On the Figures see Intr. 26.) The theory of the sophists was im­ parted more by example and demonstration than by formal theoretical instruction or the writing of handbooks (τόχναι, artes) (§§ 46, 48), and their interests extended far beyond the field of judicial oratory (Kr. 1043-8). 22. About the same time Theodorus of Byzantium (§48) initiated or developed the division of speeches into parts (cf. Solmsen in RE zweite R. v. 1844-5). This process lent itself from the 'first to futile and pedantic elaboration, and was attacked by Plato and Aristotle. But it left its mark on all subsequent theory. The basic parts were the proem (προοίμιον, exordium, principium), narration (διήγησή, narratio), proof (ττίστίς, confirmatio), and epilogue (επίλογος, peroratio). This system is criticized but employed by Aristotle (Rhet. 1 There are many Greek and Latin variants of most rhetorical terms. I have attempted to give the commonest forms and to include all those that appear in Brutus. 2 ‘As regards . . . commonplaces there were considered to be two types, disquisitions on the heinousness of certain notorious sins and sinners, and certain general questions which can be argued either way, such as the credibility of witnesses and the desirability of believing rumours’ (Clarke op. cit. p. 28).

xxviii

INTRODUCTION

iii. 13). The first and last items appear in Brutus (§§ 127, 158, 190, 209). More important for our purpose is the triad of natural ability (φύσις, ingenium, natura), technical knowledge or training (επιστήμη, ars, doctrina), and practice (μελέτη, τριβή, industria, exercitatio), which is at least as old as the fifth century, and recurs constantly in Cicero’s Rhetorica (cf. 22 n., 25, 98, no, i n , 125, 233, 236-7, 240, 243, 245, 247, 249, 267-8, 272, 276, 280, 282, 302-3, 327, 331). It cannot be proved that Cicero never referred to, for example, ingenium without con­ sciously alluding to the triad, but it was certainly never far from his thoughts. From the purely logical point of view the classification is more satisfactory than many in Rhetoric, and its insistence that there was more to oratory than could be learned from handbooks and teachers attracted Cicero. (iii) Rhetoric in the fourth century B.C. 23. In the fourth century, rhetorical theorizing was actively pursued. For us, the most substantial names are those of Isocrates and Aristotle. Isocrates’ teaching, although in­ fluential, is not easily disentangled from the other traditions. It seems to have had more in common with the 'philosophi­ cal’ tradition of Aristotle and the Peripatetics than the rivalry of Isocrates and Aristotle and the stock antithesis of philosophy and rhetoric might lead us to suppose. Isocrates stressed the importance of wide general culture, and of the conception of fitness to occasion in oratory. Technically, he developed periodic structure, and seems to have clung to the organization of Rhetoric on the basis of the parts of the speech. But his importance lies not in the detail of his teaching, but above all in the fact that, whereas for the earlier sophists Rhetoric had been only one, even if some­ times the most important, of the ‘subjects’ they taught, Isocrates made it the basis of his complete educational system, so inaugurating a tradition in education which lasted throughout antiquity and beyond it (Kr. 1049-52).

RHETO RICA L TH EO RY IN B R U T U S

xxix

24. Aristotle, following out hints of Plato in Phaedrus, started or systematized a number of important lines of theory, (a) He was the first, according to Quintii, iii. 4. 1, to formulate the threefold division of speeches (tria genera causarum) into forensic (8πανικόν, forense, iudiciale), de­ liberative {συμβουλευτικόν, deliberativum), and epideictic (emSei/o-i/cov, demonstrativum) cf. rhet. 1. 3. 3. This last in­ cluded all oratory which did not aim at a practical result, i.e. a verdict in the courts or a decision in the assembly. It came to be associated with both speeches of ‘praise and blame’ and speeches made for display—categories which might coincide, but were under no necessity to do so. Much confusion in ancient and modern thought has arisen from this vague and unsatisfactory term.1 In later theory Rhetoric was true to its origins in laying disproportionate emphasis on the forensic genre. This tendency, as Hinks observes, 'was stoutly contested by Cicero in his later years’. Yet, for all his stress on the orator as statesman and as rising above the pedantries of the rhetoricians’ precepts for legal cases, there remains in the background the feeling that forensic oratory—which was constantly of course as ‘political’ as anything that fell under the heading of ‘deliberative’ ora­ tory—is the true test of the orator and the field of his greatest achievements (cf. 333. 29 η.). On the other hand, epideictic oratory, apart from the laudatio funebris (§§61-62), had virtually no place in Roman life, cf. its treatment in de or. ii. 43 ff. and or. 37-42. The classification is alluded to in Brutus perhaps at §287, but there only. Elsewhere Cicero keeps closely to the facts of Roman public life.2 (b) In Aristotle we have the beginnings of a fivefold 1 Cf. D. G. Hinks in CQ xxx (1936) 170-6; V. Buchheit Unter­ suchungen zur Theorie des Genos Epideiktikon (Munich 1963). 2 Quintii, iii. 7. 1-2 sensibly distinguishes laudation from epideictic or non-practical oratory on the ground that in Roman life laudation only occurred in political or legal contexts, even the laudatio funebris being related to public life.

INTRO DU CTIO N

division of oratory which became standard in later theory : Invention, i.e. the discovery of material (ευρεσις, inventio). Arrangement (διάθεσις, dispositio), Style (λεξις, elocutio), Memory (μνήμη, memoria), and Delivery {υπόκρισή, actio). The first two are already to be found in Plato Phaedr. 236A. Aristotle deals with Proofs (i.e. inventio, very broadly interpreted). Style, and Arrangement, and briefly with Delivery. Proofs he divides into arguments (εν αυτω τω λόγω), appeals to emotion (πάθη), and appeals based on character (ηθη). The parts of a speech come under the heading of Arrangement. The third Book of the Rhetoric is devoted mainly to Style. It contains noteworthy discus­ sions of periodic structure and prose-rhythm. Cicero at­ tached high importance to these as a mark of developed oratory (allusions in Brutus §§ 32-34, 68, 96,140,162, 272, 274) (Kr. 1057-65). (c) Aristotle does not mention κοινοί τόποι (cf. Intr. 21) but refers to κοινά by which he means types of argument common to all kinds of speech.1 Cicero follows this doc­ trine with modifications in de or. ii. 163-73 (Solmsen op. cit. p. 172), but in Brutus only the older term and doctrine appear. Both doctrines appear in Orator (cf. 44, 46, with 126). (iv) Theophrastus 25. Aristotle’s successor Theophrastus undertook a more elaborate investigation of Style in his Περί λεξεως (not now extant), and followed up Aristotle’s brief hint on ύπόκρισις (rhet. iii. 1. 2-3) (Kr. 1071, 1075). At what date Memory

was added to complete the fivefold scheme is quite uncertain. Stoic theory down to the early second century seems to have lacked it (Diog. Laert. vii. 1. 43) (Kr. 1097). 1 e.g. the argument from the possibility of one thing to the possi­ bility of something similar, or from the existence of a consequent to the existence of its usual antecedent (rhet. ii. 18 ff.). The κοινοί ■πίστας of rhet. ii. 20 are more general still, the types of logical argument, i.e. παράδειγμα and ενθύμημα.

R H ETO R IC A L TH EO RY IN B R U T U S

xxxi

The fivefold scheme is dominant in later theory, although division by the parts of the speech is still found in the latest ancient rhetoricians, e.g. in Apsines (third century a .d .). Much ingenuity was expended on integrating the two schemes and the various subordinate elements of Rhetoric already mentioned or to be mentioned hereafter, but we cannot here pursue the innumerable variations of detail which resulted.1 Either in full or in part the fivefold division appears in Brutus §§25, no, 139, 158, 176, 202, 203, 214, 215, 221, 225, 227, 233-5, 238>24°. 250, 265, 272, 274-6, 301-3. Most often omitted are the two least important heads, memoria and dispositio. The textbook treatment of dispositio tended to be very brief, or to be padded out with material already covered by inventio, especially if the parts of the speech were dealt with under inventio, as in Rhetorica ad Herennium. 26. To Theophrastus is traceable with varying degrees of certainty much of what later writers say on the subject of Style (Kr. 1109).2 He appears to have offered a more formal treatment, with some changes of emphasis, of the material presented in Arist. rhet. iii. Theophrastus’ four ‘virtues’ of style {άρετα'ι λεξεως) {or. 79, 65. 19 n.) were {or. 79) 'Ελληνι­ σμός, σαφήνεια, πρεπον, κατασκευή, rendered in Latin by, for example, the' adverbs Latine, plane, apte,3*ornate {de or. iii. 37, or. l.c.). Of these the last, and that not in Cicero’s view alone, became much the most important, ultimately being identified by some writers with the whole of elocutio (cf. Solmsen, op. cit. 183). Clarity, which was for Aristotle the one virtue of style, and suitability were obvious general 1 See K. Barwick ‘Die Gliederung der rhetorischen τέχνη . . .’ in Hermes lvii (1922) 1 ff. 2 Earlier scholars often exaggerated what could be known, but G. M. A. Grube The Greek and Roman Literary Critics (London 1965) ch. vi, goes too far in rejecting the Theophrastean origin of the four ‘virtues’ and some form of the doctrine of three styles (see below). 3 Cicero often uses this term also of ‘well-fitted’, i.e. rhythmical, prose (34. 21, etc.) which is technically a subdivision of ornatus. C 814437

INTRODUCTION

recommendations and offered little scope for the detailed precepts which rhetoricians delighted to invent or teach— though the famous doctrine of the Three Styles (cf. Intr. 27) may have originated in an attem pt to reduce the idea of irpéirov to rules (cf. de or. iii. 212). Correctness of language was an equally obvious desideratum, but the detailed treat­ ment of it came to be regarded as the grammarian’s province (rhet. Her. iv. 17, Quintii, viii. 1. 2). For Cicero it was some­ thing to be taken for granted. It is true that Latinitas, Latinus sermo play a more important part in Brutus (§§ 108, 109, 128, 132, 135, 140, 143, 166, 210, 252 ff., 267) than in De Oratore. This change may show the influence of Caesar’s De Analogia (§§252 ff.) which, according to Hendrickson,1 was conceived as a rejoinder to Cicero’s slighting allusions in the earlier work to the scientific pursuit of Latinitas. But Cicero does not shift his ground (cf. § 140). Pronunciation was included under this heading (cle or. iii. 40-47, Brut. 133). The treatment of ornatus rests on a basic division into εκλογή and σύνθεσις, that is, words considered individually and in combination. The former group was subdivided into propria (κυρία) and translata (μεταφοραί, in a wider sense than English ‘metaphor’), and the use of words classed as unusual and archaic (·γλώσσαι, inusitata, prised), or invented (τταττοιημένα, facta), was considered. Under ‘combinations of words’ were considered euphony and smoothness (e.g. avoidance of hiatus), periodic structure and rhythm, and perhaps the Figures (σχήματα , lumina, the Greek word in §§69, 141, 275; on the Latin renderings cf. 275. 25 η.), though there is evidence that we have here a separate category (κόσμος or κατασκευή) parallel to εκλογή and συνθεσις. The Figures provided ample scope for theorists (Kr. 1108). The sophists, especially Gorgias, had first elaborated their conscious use, and Polus concerned himself with their nomenclature (Plato Phaedr. 267c; cf. Isocr. Panath. 2, Arist. rhet. iii. 9. 9). They came to be divided into Figures 1 CPh i (1906) 97-120.

R H E T O R IC A L T H E O R Y IN B R U T U S

xxxiii

of Speech (dependent on a particular wording, e.g. metaphor, paronomasia) and Figures of Thought (those not so depen­ dent, e.g. rhetorical question) (cf. §§69, 140). A further confused and confusing distinction marked off as τρόποι (§ 6g) certain verbal devices. Quintilian in Books viii and ix follows this arrangement, but his discussion shows that it was controversial, and the distinction between τρόποι and σχήματα was never very firm (Kr. m o , cf. Schräder in Hermes xxxix (1904) 563 ff., esp. on Cicero's usage, pp. 593 ff.). This system underlies the discussions of orators in §§ 140, 272, 274-6, 303. But Cicero does not overestimate its value.1 In De Oratore he treats the first three Virtues very sketchily, and in dealing with ornatus introduces a wide range of topics not normally covered under this head before summarizing the conventional doctrine, his object being to stress that ornatus springs from a wide education, not the precepts of rhetoricians. He has his own idea of the Virtues; ornatus, as he interprets it, gravitas, and copia are prominent in Brutus (cf. refs, in Intr. 35). The stress he lays on the ‘over­ all’ stylistic impression2 produced by an orator as something not fully analysable into component elements does not ap­ pear to be traceable beyond him to any other source. At the same time, the traditional doctrines contained points in which he was especially interested, notably vocabulary,3and also prose-rhythm (Intr. 24). 1 Even if we ignore broader questions of the value of the system as an instrument of criticism, we find internal flaws in the system itself. Thus archaisms could be classed as propria or translata. Metaphor (in the modern sense) fitted less naturally under simplicia, where tradition placed it, than under coniuncta. In fact the tropes seem to have been invented in answer to a felt need for a category of Figures confined within a single word. Many linguistic points discussed under ornatus would be as much at home under Latinitas, though Cicero distinguishes two kinds of dilectus verborum in § 140. 2 Cf. totum genus in §§ 64, 126, 129, 239, 306, and habitus (ovationis) in § 2 2 7 , de or. iii. 199. 3 Cf. esp. references to verba in §§216, 246, 250, 26T, 265, 272, 274, 303

.317·

INTRODUCTION

27. To Theophrastus has also been commonly attributed the invention of Three Characters of Style (χαρακτήρες λόγον, genera dicendi).1 These were the Grand (μεγαλοπρεπής , grave, sublime), the Middle (μέσος, μικτός, mediocre), and the Plain (Ισχνός, subtile, tenue). This doctrine is briefly alluded to in De Oratore (see below) and is most fully treated in Orator. But in Brutus itself it is a system of two styles, the Grand and the Plain, that we meet (§§35, 201). This, a purely literary contrast, should be distinguished from two other contrasts which have philosophical implications : (a) Ora­ tory in general )( Stoic dialectic (§ 118). This is not in itself a contrast of Styles at all, but leads to (b) the emotive ) ( the expository-argumentative Style (§§89, 144-6, cf. 65). The Stoics accepted only the latter, believing that Rhetoric should teach simply the unadorned setting forth of logical arguments and conclusions. So that Cicero held that Stoic theory hardly offered a training in public speaking at all (fin. iv. 7), but only useful instruction in logical method (or. 113-1:5). Even Cato had a conventional rhetorical training (§ 119). I believe that Hendrickson2 erred in trying to establish closer connexions between the philosophical op­ positions of Style and the rhetorical contrast of Grand and Plain than is warranted by the evidence, and in particular in tracing by these means Stoic origins for the Atticist advocacy of the Plain Style. The omission of the Three Styles in Brutus is probably best explained by supposing that, despite the study of Theophrastus which led to the somewhat cursory mention of the threefold division in De Oratore (iii. 177, 199, 210-12), Cicero remained true to the twofold classification which is 1 The attribution has been questioned by Hendrickson A JPh xxvi (1905) 249-90, J. Stroux De Theophrasti virtutibus dicendi (Leipzig 1912), and others: for a history of the controversy, cf. A. Körte in Hermes lxiv (1929) 69-86. I accept the attribution, though agreeing with Hendrickson that for Theophrastus the Middle, i.e. Mean, Style was the best; cf. my article in Eranos lv (1957) 18-26. 2 In A JPh l.c.

R H E T O R IC A L T H E O R Y IN B R U T U S

xxxv

hinted at in inv. ii. 51 and part. or. 4, just as he retained the conventional non-Aristotelian interpretation of the loci communes (Intr. 21, 24). He had not yet realized how the doctrine of Three Styles could be combined with a doctrine of Three Functions to provide an impressive answer to his Atticist opponents. This was a development first introduced in Orator.1 28. To the Three Functions we now turn. The three are movere (inflammare, concitare), conciliare (delectare), docere {probare). They first appear in De Oratore (ii. 115, 121, 128, 310), and are frequently referred to in Brutus (§§ 185, 187-8, 198, 276, 279, 322). In this connexion, too, we can trace a doctrine of Two Functions (cf. § 89, part. or. 4) which tend to be associated with particular parts of the speech. In de or. ii. 310, Cicero rejects this doctrine. It is usually and, I think, rightly maintained that the doctrine of Three Functions is a specifically Ciceronian revival of the three­ fold means of appeal expounded by Aristotle (Intr. 24), although there are some slight adjustments which led Sandys (on or. 69) to deny the connexion. The chief dif­ ference is that the appeal to ηθη, which in Aristotle is in­ herent in the speech itself, includes for the Roman the speaker’s auctoritas with all that meant as a means of in­ fluencing an audience (§§109, h i , 221, 222, 238, 327).2 (v) Hellenistic rhetoric 29. Two further developments of the Hellenistic Age call for mention. {a) With the Peripatetics is especially associated the study of to yeXoîov, wit and humour in oratory : allusions to it in Brutus are at §§ 105, 128, 143, 158, 164, 173, 177, 322. Even if conscious theoretical reference is not always to be assumed, Cicero’s interest in the theory of this branch of 1 Cf. my article cited above. 2 Cf. H. K. Schulte Orator (Frankfurt 1935) PP· 37~ 3 8·

INTRO DU CTIO N

Rhetoric, of whicli he himself was a considerable practi­ tioner, is shown by the long discussion in de or. ii. 217-90 (Kr. 1076-7). (δ) At §§ 263, 271 Cicero mentions Hermagoras (middle of second century), one of the few Hellenistic rhetoricians who is more than a name to us.1 He is thought to have been under Stoic influence, and seems to have stressed the impor­ tance of close argument and clear expression. (To Theo­ phrastus’ Virtues the Stoics added brevity (συντομία , brevitas) (Diog. Laert. vii. 1. 59): for Cicero’s view of this cf. §50.) But Hermagoras was a rhetorician, not a philosopher: he emphasized in the context of the Hellenistic rivalry between Rhetoric and Philosophy the claim made by Aristotle (cf. or. 46), before the division became rigid, that Rhetoric should consider general questions (tfeoeis·) as well as particular ones (ύττodeaeis). He also laid the foundations of the doctrine of στάσις (status, constitutio) in the form which later theorists elaborated with an arid pedantry remarkable even in rhetori­ cians. It concerns, roughly speaking, the nature of the question at issue in a case. The Auctor ad Herennium and Cicero in his eariy De Inventione say a good deal about it, but it is scantily treated in Cicero’s mature works (de or. ii. 104-12, 132, or. 45). It appears in part. or. (33, 101 ff.), which is of course a textbook, and Quintilian devotes to it a lengthy and complicated chapter (iii. 6) ; skill in this field plays little part in Cicero’s assessments of orators in Brutus —there is a bare hint in some accounts of certain orators’ inventio (e.g. at §§ 227, 239, 275) (Kr. 1090-4 (Hermagoras and sta^s-doctrine), 1081-3 (Stoics)). (vi) Rhetoric and literary criticism 30. These then are some of the materials which provide the framework for rhetorical handbooks like the Rhetorica ad Herennium and De Inventione, and are visible at many 1 See Schmid-Stählin vii. 2. 1. 305 ff. ; D. Matthes in Lustrum iii (1958) 58 ff·, 262 ff., and his edition of the fragments (Leipzig 1962).

RH ETORICAL

THEORY

IN

BRUTUS

xxxvii

points in De Oratore and Orator. In Brutus, too, they are ever present. How far do they provide a satisfactory basis for literary criticism? Most modem writers, unsympathetic to Rhetoric in all its manifestations, tend to belittle them as mechanical, stereotyped formulae. Faults and anomalies are indeed abundant and evident, yet there is something to be said for a system which, whatever its shortcomings, provides a firm and generally understood basis for judge­ ment. If both as a system of education and as a basis for criticism, Rhetoric concentrates overmuch on form and technique, and too readily slides into pedantry and aridity, it at least provides, when properly applied, a safeguard against eccentricity and subjectivity. Hence 'they [the Romans] exhibit little in the way of impressionist criticism. Most of their criticism might be styled practical or dog­ matic' (D’Alton op. cit. p. vii). The ancient critics con­ centrated on the formal aspects of creative writing because they saw these to be susceptible of analysis and generaliza­ tion. They knew well that ingenium was vital to the orator —it was one of the earliest elements in the rhetorical tradi­ tion (Intr. 22)—but, because it was individual, it could not be included within the limits of a τέχνη. Haenni (op. cit. pp. 42 ff.) is right to point out that Cicero’s treatment of individuality in the orators he deals with is quite inadequate from the modem point of view, and that such treatment as he has in mind was not to be found before the nineteenth century. But one reason why Cicero thus failed to antici­ pate the developments of two millennia has now been indicated. We must also remember that his mode of criti­ cism, with its stress on training, theory, and form, reflects not merely a critical fashion but also something real in ancient literary practice, which again largely persisted until the eighteenth century, namely a much greater regard for traditional 'rules’ and conventions as to form and manner than has more recently been acceptable. We are not here concerned with the growing realization that this regard was

xxxviii

INTRODUCTION

not necessarily damaging to the creative impulse, but only with the fact that formal criteria are clearly not inap­ propriate for a literature in which formal elements play so large a part. Perhaps too the compass of the Latin language as a literary medium before Cicero's time was not so wide that much individual variation in its use was to be looked for. Nor, though limited by this system, is Cicero its slave. He selects from it, adapts it, adds to it. In particular, he returns consciously to the humaner tradition of Aristotle and Theophrastus, of the days before philosophy and rhe­ toric finally quarrelled and the latter settled into rigid and pedantic systems. When speakers in De Oratore comment on ‘Crassus' ' originality in these respects, it is Cicero to whom the tribute is due. It is indeed in De Oratore that Cicero’s mastery and individuality are most fully shown. Brutus is not an achievement of the same order: it is not so highly polished, and contains more that is perfunctory. But the question to be asked is uot whether Cicero has suc­ ceeded in bringing alive all the minor figures in the long procession of Roman orators, but whether another type of critical vocabulary and approach, had it existed, would have served his purpose better. In any case part of his purpose was, by a deliberate perfunctoriness, to indicate how few attained real stature as orators (cf. § 137 n.). Further, no Roman orator save Cicero has left more than the most meagre fragments: criticism of writers who are lost to us inevitably has an air of remoteness. Unfortunately for us it follows from the nature of rhetori­ cal criticism that direct quotation is often reserved, in a fashion which might be paralleled from modern musical or art criticism, for the illustration of points of technical detail.1 In Brutus, Cicero never ceases to refer his con­ temporaries to orations accessible in his day so that they 1 Dionysius of Halicarnassus is exceptional in his use of very long quotations. But Greek critics generally were freer than Roman in this respect.

RH ETORICAL TH EO RY

IN B R U T U S

x x x ix

may test his judgements and form their own. Yet, since he is not concerned with technical detail nor, like Quintilian, writing a handbook of instruction, there is not a single direct quotation from any Roman orator, except an argu­ ment drawn from Cicero’s own pro Gallio (now lost) (§ 278). (vii) Other aspects of Cicero’s criticism 31. Cicero’s criticism is not exclusively rhetorical. It has at least four distinguishable aspects. First, indeed, there is judgement in terms of technical rhetoric, apparently pre­ dominant because it was the easiest to make explicit. But secondly, as we have seen, there is the implicit recognition that rhetorical categories do not account exhaustively for the total impact of an orator; for the contribution of ingenium the Roman reader was very properly referred to extant speeches (e.g. §§82, 122). Two further aspects were largely Cicero’s own contribution : first, the attem pt to see the orator in his historical setting; second, consideration of the orator as exponent of the supreme human activity of statesmanship, with all the implications for his back­ ground, education, and character which Cicero had ex­ pounded in De Oratore (cf. Intr. 8). (a) The historical aspect 32. It appears that the visual arts were the first subjects of a genuinely historical criticism, that is, of a criticism which treated their history as more than a mere chronological framework (cf. on § 70) : in de or. ii. 92 ff. where Greek ora­ tory is divided into aetates, the language at one point sug­ gests derivation from visual-art criticism. There is no certainty as to when and where the transference to litera­ ture was first made. But to Cicero belongs the credit of making the first extensive survey of the Roman contribu­ tion to a literary genre, in which he pursues the theme that artistic and literary genres rise from primitive simplicity

xl

INTRO DU CTIO N

and roughness to a degree of elaboration and polish which marks their high point, and considers orators in relation to the measure of cultural development attained in their day (§§ 27, 102, 107, 173), and occasionally remarks on individual innovations (§§ 82, 95). Again Cicero has been charged with a lack of particularity and detailed illustration (D’Alton op. cit. pp. 194-203) : we have already glanced at the reasons for this (Intr. 30). Nor does Cicero fail to make it clear that he read and heard all the speeches he could. Haenni (op. cit. pp. 27, 34) noted that Cicero seems to attach more importance to the influence of teachers, most of whom were not practising orators, than to the influence of orators themselves upon their successors. But here again we must concede that Cicero was well placed to know the facts, and that this is only further evidence of the impor­ tance of training and theory in ancient literary practice (cf. too de or. ii. 88 ff.). J. W. H. Atkins1 has given a sympathetic account of Cicero’s experiments in historical criticism. But interesting though Cicero’s historical method is, it should not be mis­ interpreted. He nowhere abandons his absolute standards. He is not asking his readers to ‘make an effort of historical imagination’ in order to understand and assess earlier writers adequately. He was not sufficiently remote from any extant orator for such a process to be necessary. His statements that relate orators to the times when they lived are intended to support the theme of development, not to conflict with it by a suggestion that merit is relative. There is an apparent exception to this in the Elder Cato, of whom it is suggested that he is an orator of great genuine merit if we make allowance for the date at which he lived (§§ 66 ff.). But this is in fact little more than a half-ironical argumentum ad hominem, and not the landmark in the his­ tory of criticism which, taken in isolation, it might appear to be. Cicero is simply saying to his opponents: ‘You 1 Literary Criticism in Antiquity (London 1934) ii. 40-41.

RH ETORICAL

THEORY

IN

BRUTUS

xli

oppose my elaborate and polished style as Asianic—but you do not recognize plain Attic merit when confronted with it.'1 Even at §69 hesitations immediately appear: we are told that Cato must be rewritten in Ciceronian style to merit the praise bestowed on him (§ 68), and later on we get a revaluation of him in terms of ‘absolute’ standards, that is, of Cicero’s own achievement (§§292-8). (ib) Cicero’s ideal orator 33. If the historical method is probably Cicero’s own innova­ tion, the use of criteria derived from the conception of the complete orator as set out in De Oratore is certainly his. The orator is a statesman, not merely a forensic advocate ; for this high role he needs a wide and deep culture and a sense of political responsibility. To the former, home influences, as well as formal education, contribute (cf. §§ 98, 104, 127, 169-72, 210-13, 24 2< 25 2)· Formal education must involve philosophy, jurisprudence, and history (§§ 161, 322), as well as rhetoric. Apart from allusions to education in general (§§95, 132, 173, 228, 236, 282, 332), Cicero frequently mentions the attainments of orators in these individual requirements.2 Laurand (op. cit., pp. 87-88) attributes to Cicero the inclusion in the rhetorical education of all these except philosophy. As for political responsibility, while we sympathize at once with Cicero’s hostility to the habitual accusator (§§ 12931, 136, 164, 168, 221), his allusions to the political views of orators (e.g. §§ 95, 221 ff., 268) may seem irrelevant and objectionable. But (i) Cicero is fully aware that literary value and political orthodoxy are two distinct criteria (cf., 1 Cf. C. Knapp, ‘A Phase of the Development of Prose-writing Among the Romans’ (CPh xiii (1918) 138-54, esp. 147). 2 Philosophy : §§94, 114, 116, 117-21, 175, 306, 315; jurispru­ dence: §§ 81, 98, 102, 145, 150, 175, 178, 179, 214, 267, 306; history: §§ 81, 205, 214, 237, 267; literature: §§ 104, 107, 108, 114, 131, 167, 168, 175, 205, 214, 237, 247, 265, 283.

xlii

INTRODUCTION

e.g., §§ 103-4) ; lie does not make the one depend on the other;1 (ii) the orator wielded great power for good and evil: the moral criterion cannot be excluded. We may assume that Cicero, like Quintilian, accepted Cato’s defini­ tion of the orator as vir bonus dicendi peritus. That only a ‘good man’ could be a ‘good orator’ was the reply to the charge that rhetoric was immoral. This attitude is irre­ proachable, but perhaps Cicero was too willing to accept a party-political definition of vir bonus. 34. We have now considered some of the ways in which Cicero, while allowing technical rhetoric to play the proper part which it cannot be denied to have in the criticism of oratory, subordinates it to wider ideals. Brutus itself can be judged by the standards which Cicero applies to others : we see in it how literary skill and sound judgement can transform and give some lasting value to what might have been a bare historical narrative or a piece of ephemeral polemic. (c) Critical terminology 35. In the controversy with the Atticists, use was made of a number of terms which are not technical terms of rhetoric but slogans or catchwords. Cicero set his face against the threatened debasement of the critical language. He refuses to identify sanitas with Atticism, or even with Calidius’ re­ strained but polished style—such sanitas is a vitium. To describe L. Crassus, whom he so greatly admired, he uses elegans and parcus, terms which the Atticists might have 1 Or only within certain limits. The descriptions of, for example, Saturninus and Glaucia (§ 224) suggest that beyond a certain point Cicero could not but be influenced by his identification of ‘ good oratory’ with what he regarded as ‘statesmanlike utterance’. But he is not uniformly hostile to those whose political views he disliked. Such passages as § 224 do not seem nearly such good evidence of prejudice when read in the context of the whole work. C. is much more at fault in dragging in viri boni who had no real place in the history of Roman oratory (e.g. §§ 222, 267-8).

R H E T O R IC A L T H E O R Y IN B R U T U S

xliii

wished to appropriate. It is, therefore, always necessary to have regard to context, but, with this reservation, the following may be regarded as usually applicable to the Plain or Attic Style : acutus,1 63, 291. anguste,1 289. argutus 65, 167. astrictus 94, 120, 309. attenuate, 201, 283. brevis, 63, 145, 197. elegans, 35, 63, 86, 89, 9 5 ,130, 133, 140, 143, 148, 153, 163, 194, 211, 239, 252, 261, 263, 272, 283, 285, 303 (refer­ ences in italics are to elegan­ tia in respect of vocabulary, cf. § 130 η.), enucleate, 35, 115. exilis, 114, 284, 289.

exsiccatus, 291. gracilitas, 64. ieiunitas, 202, 285. inopia, 118, 221, 238, 246, 282, 285. limatus, 35, 93. minutus, 291. pereleganter, 197. pressus, 35, 51, 197, 201, sanus 51, 52, 202, 276, 279, 284. siccus, 202, 285. sincerus, 202, 287, 291. solidus, 291. subtilis, 35, 64, 65, 67, 89,

247,

202. 278,

291.

The following terms relate similarly to the Grand Style : abundans, 234, 238, 320. altus, 66, 276. amplus, 201, 202, 239. aptus (rhythmical), 34, 68 , 264, 273, 303. ardens, 276. argutus, 325. comm otus, 129, 317. concinnitas, 287, 325, 327. contentio, 202, 276, 304. copia, 21, 26, 36, 44, 51, 108, 1x5, 120, 138, 144, 179, 198, 216, 224, 234, 240, 242, 250, 253. 254. 255, 271, 282, 294, 303, 304·

elatus, 35. exornatus, 325. grandis, 35, 126, 203, 273, 289. gravis, 35, 38, 86, 88, 89, 93, 126, 143, 221, 265, 291. illustris, 65. incitatus, 35, 93, 203, 325,326. inflatus, 202. magnificus, 123, 201, 261. ornatus, 21, 27, 35, 40, 52, 94, 123, 146, 147, 198, 227, 246, 261, 262, 263, 280, 291, 317, 325, 327

·

perornatus, 158. plenus, 125.

1 The references are to all relevant occurrences of the stems without distinction between adjectives, adverbs, abstract nouns, etc.

xliv

INTRO DU CTIO N

redundans, 51, 203, 316. splendidus, 78, 104, 201, 216, 261, 273, 303. sublate, 201.

uber, 125, 198. vehemens, 86, 93, 105, 158, 177. volubilis, 105,203.

V. H I S T O R I C A L S O U R C E S

OF B R U T U S

(i) Cicero’s knowledge of Greek Oratory and Rhetoric (a) Analysis of Brutus §§ 26-51 36. The most important passage is the brief outline in §§ 2651, which must be analysed before Cicero's sources for it can be discussed. From this it will emerge that the conventional view, that §§ 26-35 (or 45) deal with practical oratory and §§36 (or 46) to 51 with rhetorical theory, is too simple. (1) We have first an account of Athenian oratory basically the same as that in de or. ii. 93-95, with the addition of early statesmen, the sophists, and Socrates, and a digression on Isocrates’ use of prose-rhythm. The sophists, of whom the same five are mentioned as in de or. iii. 127-9, appear as rhetoricians, magistri dicendi. Since the theme is the late development of oratory compared with other arts, the early statesmen receive only brief mention (§§ 26-38). (2) But in a recapitulation intended to point the chronological moral, the moral is in fact blurred by allusions to oratory in Homer and his characters. Cicero returns to the point by asserting that Pericles was the first who adhibuit doctrinam, the first prope perfectus orator (§§ 39-45). (3) This suggests a new thought : a love of oratory is not the product of undeveloped or warlike societies, as is proved by Aristotle’s account of the growth of rhetorical theory (§§ 46-48). The introduction of this material leads to a new account of certain sophists and to three inconsistencies : (i) in ignoring Homer and the Homeric heroes just mentioned, (ii) in an account of early fifth-century origins incompatible with §§ 30 and 44, (iii) in a change of attitude to Isocrates. (4) In §§49-50 Cicero

H IS T O R I C A L S O U R C E S OF B R U T U S

xlv

attem pts to reassert Athens’s monopoly and its late date, but in a much more qualified form than at § 26, and then outlines Hellenistic developments, with for obvious reasons a sharper distinction than in De Oratore between Attic and Asianic oratory (§51). It is clear that, starting from some basis like the straight­ forward account in De Oratore, Cicero has in Brutus amended, elaborated, and in places, perhaps through failure to inte­ grate material new to him, confused it. (b) The sources for Greek Oratory and Rhetoric 37. I. Homeric oratory. Brutus 40 seems to be almost the first extant allusion to Homer’s attribution of oratorical skill to his characters (cf. Radermacher, op. cit. pp. 6-9), although there are vague allusions to oratorical powers in the heroic period in Plato (Phaedr. 261B— jokingly), Philo­ demus (rhet. i i . 71 Sudh.), de or. iii. 57. Later writers worked out the rhetorical elements in Homer in laborious detail (cf. Quintii, ii. 17, 8, x. i. 46-47 (Peterson ad loc.), xii. 10, 64; Gell. vii. 14).1 II. For the early Athenian statesmen Cicero is dependent on general assumptions, with the addition of Thuc. i. 138 on Themistocles, and probably, as Alfonsi2 has argued, Nepos. III. Orators of the later fifth century. The general histori­ cal outline was traditional, but there is some increase in chronological exactness in Brutus compared with De Oratore, presumably due to the researches of Atticus.3 Cicero’s stylistic judgements are admittedly based on Thucydides (§ 29). Comparison of his descriptions in Brutus 1 Cf. Radermacher in Rh. Mus. Iii (1897) 417 and on the impor­ tance of the controversy on the place of rhetoric in Homer cf. G. A. Kennedy in A JPh lxxviii (1957) 23-34. 2 ‘Nepote fonte di Cicerone?’ (Rh. Mus. xciii (1950) 59-65). 3 Cf. Münzer ‘Atticus als Geschichtsschreiber’ (Hermes xl (1905) 50-100, esp. 78 ff.).

xlvi

INTRO DU CTIO N

with de or. ii. 56 and 93 suggests that, although he adopts there a slightly different grouping so that Lysias too comes into the reckoning, he made similar deductions in the earlier work. But it is clear that at one time Cicero thought there was evidence for the orators of the period other than that provided by their ‘speeches’ in Thucydides and Xenophon. In De Oratore he alleges that there were admitted writings of Pericles, Critias, and Alcibiades (but not of Theramenes). But he does not claim to have read them, and in Brutus drops the claim for Alcibiades, and modifies it for Pericles (cuius quaedam . . .feruntur). On Pericles’ alleged remains Quintilian’s scepticism was greater (iii. 1. 12, xii. 2. 22), Plutarch’s complete {Per. 8). Along with the doubts as to the genuineness of the speeches attributed to these orators we trace an increasing conviction that Thucydides offered no model for oratory (§287, cf. or. 30-32) and that the speeches in his work are evidence for nothing but the style of Thucydides himself. Negatively, Cicero nowhere mentions Andocides, and Antiphon appears only in the second-hand account at §§46- 47· IV. Fourth-century oratory. The predominance of five orators (Demosthenes, Hyperides, Aeschines, Lysias, Iso­ crates) is noteworthy (cf. de or. iii. 28; Quintii, x. 1. 76 ff. ; the same five only in ps.-Longinus). Cicero quotes the first four as models of Attic oratory (§ 285), adding Demetrius of Phalerum, Demochares, Charisius, and Hegesias (§§ 285-6) from those later orators whose works he claims to know. He had heard of Dinarchus and Lycurgus, although he knew little about them (on Lycurgus cf. § 130 n.). The reputation of Demades as orator and wit had survived, his speeches had not.1 Cicero never mentions Isaeus. V. Rhetoric to Aristotle. Cicero stresses the indebtedness 1 The ‘fragments’ (cf. De Falco Demade (Pavia 1932)) are aphor­ isms which were preserved in memory, cf. n. on § 36.

H IS T O R IC A L SOURCES OF B R U T U S

x lv ii

of his generation to Aristotle’s Συναγω γή Τβχνών in inv. ii. 6 (cf. de or. ii. 160), and purports to reproduce its judgements in Brutus 46-48. We have already seen how ill these accord with the traditions represented by the preceding account, and that they are not necessarily reliable I have argued elsewhere.1 His acquaintance with works of the Isocratic school is vouched for by de or. iii. 173, or. 172-6, 191-2, 194, apart from numerous allusions to Isocrates himself. No other single source is traceable for those other traditions (nor would one expect there to be), though Cicero’s direct acquaintance naturally included the major historians and orators and many of the dialogues of Plato. VI. Hellenistic oratory and rhetoric. Cicero does not provide a continuous history of this period. In Brutus, if we exclude Cicero’s contemporaries, we find only allusions to the orators Charisius and Hegesias, and to Theophrastus and Hermagoras as theorists, whom he clearly knew well. Elsewhere he refers to the Peripatetics Hieronymus [or. 190) and Theodectes (or. 172, 194, 218) and the Academic Charmadas (de or. i. 84 ff.). The Stoics, apart from Mnesar­ chus (de or. i. 83), Chrysippus, and Cleanthes (fin. iv. 7), and a well-known story about Zeno (or. 113), are generally re­ ferred to as a school, as frequently are the Peripatetics and Academics. All these with the sole exception of Hermagoras were philosophers, not professional rhetoricians; and it is perhaps to the philosophic schools rather than the con­ temporary Hellenistic rhetoricians with whom he studied that Cicero’s knowledge of the Hellenistic background is to be traced. (ii) Roman oratory 38. A long list of sources can be drawn from explicit allusions in Brutus itself. (a) The earliest period. Here, as with early Athenian orators, the account is based on deductions of oratorical 1 Latomus xiv (1955) 536-9. 814437

d

xlviii

INTRODUCTION

capacity from political importance as witnessed by general historical tradition, while Cicero is even more careful in the Roman context to emphasize that there was no evidence for oratory in the true sense, only for certain powers of per­ suasion (§56). But the basis of Cicero’s actual selection is not easy to detect. Martha1 rightly rejects the theory ad­ vanced by Jordan2 that the selection of orators in §§52-57 is due to a single identifiable source, the historian Valerius Antias (fl. 80 B.c.), even though the traditional part played by Menenius Agrippa in the First Secession of the Plebs (494 B.c.) (Livy ii. 32 and most later authorities) is ignored in favour of M. (or M’.) Valerius the Dictator. Martha’s own conjectures on the sources of §§ 55-56 have found little acceptance. He argues that Cicero’s choice was largely dictated by the order of names in Atticus’ work, but his arguments are over-subtle. Probably little here is owed to Atticus, unless Cicero was in doubt as to the very broad chronology required to place these figures, which is un­ likely. There is also little plausibility in Kroll’s stress on Cicero’s acquaintance or political association with contem­ porary bearers of the names Valerius, Fabricius, Curius, and Flaminius. Tentatively I suggest the following : § 54. 510-449 b .c . : three figures of major importance in the history of Roman freedom, one of whom expelled a tyrant, two of whom achieved their objects by pacific and legal means. The political point is obvious, and the mention of L. Brutus is directed explicitly at M. Brutus (see further nn. ad loc.). That of M. Valerius is probably a variant tradition, doubtless encouraged but not necessarily invented by mem­ bers of the gens Valeria. The sources of this period are too confused and contain too much that is legendary for a search for special explanations to be rewarding. L. Valerius was 1 ‘Note sur la composition du ch. XIV de Brutus’ (Rev. Philol. xiv (1891) 46-50). 2 Hermes vi (1871) 196-213.

H IS T O R IC A L SO UR CES OF B R U T U S

xlix

important in the tradition and has already appeared in rep. ii. 54. 449-c. 300 b , c . Presumably the political developments (e.g. the Licinian-Sextian Laws) seemed to Cicero less im­ portant than the preceding establishment of fundamental rights (cf. the account in rep. l.c.), and some antedating is inherent in the tradition, hence the often mystifying repeti­ tions of identical items of legislation (cf. Treves OCD s.v. Valerius Potitus: 'the annalists liked to connect the basic elements of the Roman constitution with either the begin­ nings of the Republic . . . or the restoration of the consul­ ship’). At all events, Cicero ignores this period. § 55. App. Claudius : the transition was perhaps suggested, as Martha thought, by the mention of the decemviri led by an earlier App. Claudius ; he was also the author of the first extant speech (cf. n. ad loc.). Fabricius, Coruncanius, and Curius: three worthies con­ temporary with App. Claudius and often mentioned together by Cicero (e.g. Suit. 23, Plane. 61, de or. iii. 56, nat. d. ii. 165, sen. 43, amie. 18, 28, 39, parad. 12), and here introduced with barely sufficient justification. Curius interested Cicero as a novus homo like Cicero himself {Mur. 17, Sull. 23) and, again like Cicero, Coruncanius had come from outside Rome itself {Sull. 23, Plane. 20 ; Tac. ann. xi. 24) : his eminence was vouched for by the pontificum commentarii, from which source also probably comes the story of M. Popillius. § 56. Popillius’ prominence is hard to explain ; he is nowhere else mentioned by Cicero, nor is the story of the origin of the cognomen Laenas found elsewhere. Even his identity is uncertain. He is normally identified with the Popillius who was consul four or five times between 359 and 348 B.c. {RE Popillius no. 20, M RR i. 121-9), a distinguished but not unique record. But he would be out of chrono­ logical position, and Martha has argued for a later Popillius (cos. 316) {RE Popillius no. 21), assuming, quite plausibly, that later records antedated the use of the cognomen in

1

INTRO DUCTIO N

attributing it to the earlier consul. Although the chrono­ logical argument must be allowed much weight, I think the earlier Popilhus the more likely and regard § 56 as an ap­ pendix or afterthought based on some special information which Cicero used at this point. (b) The Second Punic War to the death of Cato (149 B.C.). Here were available the poems of Ennius, Cato’s Origines, and various annalists mentioned by Cicero, A. Postumius Albinus, Fabius Pictor, C. Fannius (§81), P. Cornelius Scipio, son of the elder Africanus (§77), and Coelius Anti­ pater (§ 132). Many of these dealt with the earlier period also, but their use is not directly traceable in Brutus. Apart from the Scipio mentioned, Ti. Gracchus the elder whose Greek speech at Rhodes survived (§79), and Cato, who included many of his own speeches in his Origines (§§ 80, 89), there was little direct evidence for oratory: hence the frequent use of such phrases as accepimus, habitus est. (c) 149-90 B . c . Three types of source were here available : (1) extant orations, now becoming much more plentiful; (2) other writings: (a) Annalists such as Fannius and Calpurnius Piso (§ 106), whose Annals extended at least as far as 146 b . c . (b) Political memoirs, a form which apparently became fashionable at the end of the second century. Cicero mentions those of M. Scaurus (§ 112) and Q. Catulus (§ 132). Those of Rutilius Rufus are known from other sources.1 (c) The poems of Lucilius (§§99, 160, 172, 274). (3) Oral tradition (e.g. §§ 105, 107). Hendrickson2 has argued that the apparent citation of oral information often conceals the use of written sources, it being a convention of dialogue to stress the spoken word in all contexts. The theory is at­ tractive, but each case must be considered on its own. We need not doubt that Cicero’s recollection of his friend L. 1 Cf. Hendrickson ' The Memoirs of Rutilius Rufus ’ in CPh xxviii (1933) 153 ff· 2 'Literary Sources in Cicero’s Brutus and the Technique of Cita­ tion in Dialogue’ (AJPh xlvii (1926) 234-58).

H IS T O R IC A L SO URCES OF B R U T U S

li

Gellius' remark about C. Carbo (§ 105) is authentic, nor that he heard the aged poet Accius discussing one Brutus (§ 105) and other orators. But even if we can be sure that Cicero and his brother on their visit to the exiled Rutilius Rufus in Asia (§85, rep. i. 13) listened to many reminiscences of the great men of Rutilius' own youth, the details in §§ 85-88 may still owe much to Rutilius’ written memoirs.1 For the later period, scepticism would clearly be out of place. Cicero must have learned from his older contem­ poraries (§§ 100, 127). He had relatives who knew L. Crassus intimately (de or. i. 191) ; he himself was attached as a pupil to the Scaevolae and to Aelius Stilo. (d) From 90 b .c . We are here within the period of Cicero’s own recollections. He paints a vivid picture of his early devotion to the forum and its orators (§§ 304-5). That this fascination never left him calls for no demonstration. The changes in source-material are paralleled by changes in critical approach : first, the simple deductions from politi­ cal importance; then figures of primarily political impor­ tance of whose oratorical prowess some specific evidence had survived ; then the age from which more numerous orations were preserved. At this point Cicero’s criticism begins to be detailed, but only in respect of inventio, dispositio, and elocutio, qualities that survive in the written word. (Martha has observed th at of ninety orators cited up to this point, i.e. the time of Antonius and Crassus, only about a third are the subjects of any substantial comment, but of that third almost all had left written speeches.) This last period merges 1 It is of course impossible to prove or disprove such suggestions as that of Fraccaro, Studi sull’età dei Gracchi (Pisa 1912-14) i. 317 ff., that the arrangement of orators in §§ 81 ff., where it is independent of Atticus’ chronological arrangement of magistracies, depended on a single annalistic source such as Fannius. The concentration on events of 141-138 and the Gracchan period is self-explanatory and Cicero may have made his own patterns (cf. 108. 22 n.). He does after all acknowledge a debt for the elaborate account of the silva Sila affair.

lii

INTRO DU CTIO N

into the beginnings of live oral tradition. Finally, for Cicero’s own times we have an altogether fuller treatment which includes descriptions of orators’ delivery and powers of memory as well. (iii) Chronology 39. For his interest in, and knowledge of, chronology, Cicero, as he makes clear, was above all indebted to Atticus’ Liber Annalis, in which Atticus, according to Nepos {Alt. xviii. 2), ‘magistratus ordinavit, nulla enim lex neque pax neque bellum neque res illustris est populi Romani quae non in eo suo tempore sit notata, et . . . familiarum originem sub­ texuit’. Whatever the precise content of Atticus’ book,1much can be learned of Cicero’s methods by examination of the text. Careful attention to chronology begins with M. Cethegus and Cato the Elder (§§57 ff.). Cato serves as a focus for four groups (older, close, younger, and much younger con­ temporaries) (78. 26 η., 8o. 16 n.), each internally arranged loosely and by association. The two Gracchi similarly serve as focuses, or rather climaxes, of two groups of orators (cf. the summary of the argument at 94. 28 n.). From this point, however, a new and very precise method comes into use, which was long unrecognized because of the concentra­ tion of commentators on the dates of magistracies where known. Cicero used not magistracies but dates of birth as his chronological foundation, certainly from Antonius and Crassus (§§ 137 ff.) and probably from the group including 1 It seems that the Liber Annalis included neither plebeian magis­ trates, as Münzer saw, nor in fact praetors (cf. my remarks in A JPh lxxvii (1956) 380-1), except as these were responsible for legislation or other specific achievements, so that the scope of magistratus ordinavit is, as enim implies, indicated in the following words. Cf. further A. Byrne Titus Pomponius Atticus (Bryn Mawr 1920) pp. 4051, and Münzer’s article already cited, where the improvement in Cicero’s chronological knowledge after this date is discussed.

H ISTO RICA L

SO UR CES OF B R U T U S

liii

C. Gracchus, M. Scaurus, and P. Rutilius (§§ n o f.). I have discussed this in detail in a forthcoming article.1 Naturally Cicero felt free to make various adjustments of strict chronological order, and dislocations are often men­ tioned explicitly (cf., e.g., §§223, 225, 229). On vexed questions of literary history, Cicero used other sources—Accius, Varro, and the veteres (antiqui) commentarii (§§ 60, 72), whatever these were : they are not to be identified with official documents such as the pontificum commentarii, or the annales maximi,2 nor, as has often been suggested, with official records of dramatic productions, which would not be called commentarii and would probably not have been so obscure as to need rediscovery in Cicero’s time. 40. Not the least remarkable feature of Brutus is its freedom from discernible historical error. Suspicion, it is true, at­ taches to the account of the relationship of L. Afranius and C. Titius (§ 167), but even here it is far from certain that Cicero was wrong (cf. n. ad loc.). The survey is also remarkable for its completeness. Cicero’s claims to omit nobody (§§ 251, 269-70) are made in a light tone, yet so far as our knowledge goes, they are little more than the truth. Many of the orators in Brutus are known to us as such from no other source—many of these are merely viri boni whose claims to eloquence Cicero hardly pretends to advance seriously—some are not known at all. On the other hand, of those known to us from other sources as orators, and known to have died before the early months of 46 (cf. Intr. 1), Malcovati’s Oratorum Romanorum frag­ menta provides only a handful who do not appear in Brutus.3 1 In A JPh for 1966. See in particular the notes on 94. 28, 127 (summary of argument), 129. 26 (C. Fimbria), 165. 6, 182. 6, 236. 7, 237. 26, 239. 17, 242. 14, 265. 13, 269. 21, 273. 28, 274. 9, and Appendix C. 2 Cf. Naumann De fontibus et fide Bruti Ciceronis (Halle 1882) pp. 34 ff. 3 E. Badian, reviewing that work in JR S xlvi (1956) 218 ff. calls

liv

INTRO DU CTIO N

Excluding one or two where the evidence is very vague or doubtful, we have M. Claudius Marcellus, the conqueror of Syracuse (cf. Livy xxvii. 27. 13 on his funeral oration over his father), M. Sergius Silus, praetor 197 (Plin. n.h. vii. 104) —it may be relevant that the Liber Annalis did not include praetors (p. lii, n. 1, above), the first non-consular in Brutus apparently belonging to the second half of the second century B.c. (§83)—and M. Cato (cos. 118) who 'multas orationes . . . scriptas reliquit’ (Gell. xiii. 19. 9) and has a fragment in Priscian (cf. ORF pp. 160-1). On M. Duronius and Helvius Mancia, active by c. 97 [de or. ii. 274), cf. Appendix A 28, 29 n. On M. Aemilius Lepidus (cos. 78) see 175. 2 n. Finally, Catiline and Clodius are ignored. VI. T H E T E X T O F B R U T U S

41. In 1422 Gherardo Landriani, Bishop of Lodi, which lies north-west of Milan, discovered in his cathedral a manu­ script containing Cicero’s De Inventione, De Oratore, Orator, Brutus, and also the Rhetorica ad Herennium, which was regarded from late antiquity to the Renaissance as the work of Cicero. This discovery not only enabled the often defec­ tive traditions of the works other than Brutus to be cor­ rected or completed:1 Brutus itself, apart from a handful of quotations, had been unknown for centuries. The manuscript from Lodi (Laudensis) was itself soon lost, but copies of all or part of it were already in circula­ tion, and from these further copies continued to be made attention to the omission of a number of orators, especially populares. Those he names are in Brutus. Cicero and Malcovati of course have in common the omission of a great number whose public careers must have involved some speech-making: for instance, neither mentions Marius or Sulla. It is also important to remember that though there are some exceptions, especially among viri boni, Cicero is not primarily interested in those who made their mark in fields of oratory other than the forensic (Intr. 24). 1 Cf. J. Stroux Handschriftliche Studien zu Cicero De Oratore: die Rekonstruktion der Handschrift von Lodi (Basle 1921).

T H E T E X T OF B R U T U S

lv

throughout the fifteenth century. The most important of these Renaissance manuscripts are indicated in the list of sigla. Their interrelations are extremely complex,1and there is little sure ground, except that H and M are direct de­ scendants of B and of little independent value, and that O, though not a direct copy of the Laudensis, was corrected by comparison with it. But the consensus of all or most of the earlier manuscripts (L) certainly represents the reading of the Laudensis ; readings found in a minority of the manu­ scripts will normally be errors or corrections by the Renais­ sance copyists. That the Laudensis was far from faultless a glance at the apparatus criticus will show. 42. The most recent developments in the study of the text have not yielded any important innovations. (i) The Cornell manuscript (B2), to which the siglum U has been assigned, is an early descendant of the Laudensis. Its readings, which are fully recorded by Kytzler and Malcovati in their recent editions, must now be put in the balance in the process of recovering the archetype, but at no point do they help to resolve significant cruces. (ii) The same is unfortunately true of the fragment dis­ covered at Cremona and published by I. Pettenazzi in the Bollettino storico Cremonese xx (1957). It contains §218 signa . . . § 227 sine ulla and § 265 quanta . . . § 274 Lucilius. The neatness and legibility of its Carolingian minuscule suffice to show that it cannot be a fragment of the Laudensis itself, on the obscurity and illegibility of which the fifteenthcentury testimony agrees.2 But it belongs to the same tradition, reading, e.g. at 223. 24 cognitionibus, at 271. 5 sunt P. Cominium, and at 273. 32, i quam. eius. Its chief importance, apart from its great 1 Cf. H. Malcovati in Athenaeum xxxvii (1959) 174 ff. who ques­ tions the accuracy of the stemma proposed by P. Reis in his Teubner edition (Leipzig 1934) and is sceptical about the possibility of con­ structing a better one. 2 Cf. Malcovati’s discussion in Athenaeum xxxvi (1958) 30 fb

Ivi

INTRODUCTION

historical interest as much the oldest surviving manuscript of any part of Brutus, lies in the confirmation it provides of the general accuracy of the fifteenth-century copyists. 43. The text of the present edition is that of Wilkins's Oxford Classical Text of 1903, with some minor corrections. My own opinions as to the correct readings, where I differ from Wilkins, affect the printed text only in the removal of squared brackets at a number of places1 where all or most modern editors agree that the reading of the manuscripts is inoffensive, or even if in some way offensive, not necessarily to be treated as something that Cicero could not have writ­ ten. For a conspectus of all other passages where I dissent from Wilkins, see Appendix B. (See also p. 246 note.) 44. ‘Clausulae’ and Textual criticism. When Wilkins did his work, little was understood about Ciceronian prose-rhythm, in particular the so-called ‘clausulae’ and their relevance to textual problems.2 To put the m atter at its simplest, we are now aware that in all his writings except his most in­ formal letters Cicero shows a preference for ending major ‘units’, i.e. periods and their larger subdivisions, with the rhythms - - sa,3 - ^ ^ and — ^ and certain 1 26. 25, 47. 9, 59. 23, 130. 8, 141. 22, 142. 25, 181. i, 218. 28, 307. 15. 326. 7, 327. 13. The apparatus reveals in each case what words are affected. 2 In antiquity the word clausula meant merely the ‘end of a sentence ’. The modern use of the word to mean a particular rhythmi­ cal form of ending, though strictly incorrect, is too well established and convenient to be abandoned. 3 —w —w is often preceded by —o —, ------ , or less commonly —w w, and such rhythms are sometimes treated, notably by Zielmski, as having a special place in Cicero’s system of preferences. But com­ parison with Latin prose in which no attempt was made to secure any special rhythms (i.e. prose of the nineteenth century) yields no evidence that Cicero gave them any such special place. For in­ stance, in both ‘non-rhythmical ’prose as defined above and in Cicero, —w — w —w represents about one-fifth of all occurrences of —w —w, though all forms of —w —w are of course much commoner in Cicero (about 25 per cent, against 16 per cent.).

T H E T E X T OF B R U T U S

lvii

resolutions of them, e.g. — and a dislike o f------ ^ and — — Since prose-rhythm is not a m atter of abso­ lute rules, dislike does not amount to anything like an absolute ban, and both 'disliked’ and ‘neutral’ rhythms may occur. The application of our knowledge of these tendencies in the field of textual criticism has been concisely summarized as follows d ‘The rhythm of the clausula often helps one to decide between variant readings. . . . Where an emendation gives a good clausula its attractiveness is increased ; where it destroys a good clausula it must be regarded with great suspicion . . . where a rare clausula is given by the manu­ scripts one must be on the look-out for corruption ; but a rare clausula by itself will not normally be a sufficient ground for rejecting the tradition.’ So at 31. 26 the mere omission of verbis, leaving a clausula heroica, is unsatis­ factory, and at 323. 28 esse viderer as an emendation of -es videremur is intolerable (cf. also 57. 6 with app. erit., 181. 29, 327. 17). Rhythmical considerations also affect the choice of reading at, for example, no. 17, 172. 7, 256. 17, 276. 10. 1 R. G. M. Nisbet in his edition of in Pisonem pp. xix-xx.

ABBREVIATIONS T h e following is a list of books cited more than once in the commentary. They are referred to by the abbreviations given below in brackets or by the author’s name alone. I. EDITIONS OF BRUTUS

Piderit, K. W., and Friedrich, W. Leipzig 1889 [P.-F.] Kellogg, M. Boston 1889 [Kell.]. Martha, J. Paris 1892 [Martha]. ------Paris 1932 (Budé series) [Martha (Budé)]. Reis, P. Leipzig 1934 (Teubner series) [Rs.]. Hendrickson, G. L. London 1939 (Loeb series) [Hendr.]. Barwick, K. Heidelberg 1949 [Barw.]. Jahn, O.-Kroll, W.-Kytzler, B. Berlin 1963 [Kr.].1 Malcovati, H. Leipzig 1965 (Teubner series). II. OTHER WORKS

Austin, R. G. Quintiliani Institutionis Oratoriae liber xii. 2nd edition. Oxford 1954. ------M. Tulli Ciceronis pro M. Caelio oratio. 3rd edition. Oxford i960. Badian, E. Foreign Clientelae. Oxford 1958 [Badian, FC]. ------‘From the Gracchi to Sulla’. Historia xi (1962) 197-245 [Badian GS].2 1 Kytzler’s revision of Kroll’s edition (Berlin 1908) makes few changes in the introduction and commentary, but provides a fuller apparatus criticus which reports the readings of the Cremonafragment and U (cf. Intr. 42), and many modern emendations, especially those suggested since 1908. It contains a full bibliography of recent work relating to Brutus and may also be consulted for a fuller list of editions. 2 With this exception I give on each occasion the complete reference or the appropriate cross-reference to articles in periodicals.

A B BR EVIA TIO NS

lx

Badian, E. Studies in Greek and Roman History. Oxford 1964 [Badian Studies]. Bardon, H. La Littérature latine inconnue. Paris 1952. Broughton, T. R. S. The Magistrates of the Roman Republic. New York 1952 (Supplement i960) [MRR]. The Cambridge Ancient History. Cambridge 1923-39 [CAH]. Fordyce, C. J. Catullus. Oxford 1961. Greenidge, A. H. J. The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time. Oxford 1901 [Greenidge]. Greenidge, A. H. J., and Clay, A. M. Sources for Roman His­ tory 133-70 B.c. 2nd edition revised by E. W. Gray. Oxford i960 [Greenidge and Clay]. Halm, C. Rhetores latini minores. Leipzig 1873 [RLM ]. Handford, S. A. The Latin Subjunctive. London 1947. Hofmann, J. B. Lateinische Umgangssprache. 3rd edition. Heidelberg 1951. Jacoby, F. Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker. Berlin and Leiden 1923-58 [FgrH.]. Jolowicz, H. F. A n Historical Lntroduction to the Study of Roman Law. Cambridge 1952. Keil, H. Grammatici Latini. Leipzig 1857 [GL]. Klotz, A. Scaenicorum Romanorum fragmenta. Munich 1953.

Kühner, R., and Stegmann, C. Ausführliche Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache. References are to the third edition (Satzlehre only), Leverkusen 1955 [K.-S.]. Laughton, E. The Participle in Cicero. Oxford 1964. Lebreton, J. Etudes sur la langue et la grammaire de Cicéron. Paris 1901. Leo, F. Geschichte der römischen Literatur. Berlin 1958 (reprint) [Leo Röm. Lit.]. Maleo vati, H. Oratorum Romanommfragmenta. 2nd edition. Turin 1955 [ORF]. Mommsen, Th. Römisches Staatsrecht. 3rd edition. Leipzig 1887 [Staatsr.]. ----- Römisches Strafrecht. Leipzig 1899 [Strafr.].

ABBREVIATIO NS

lxi

Morel, W. Fragmenta poetarum Latinorum epicorum et lyricorum. Leipzig 1927. Münzer, F. Römische Adelsparteien und Adelsfamilien. Stuttgart 1920 [Münzer RA]. Nägelsbach, K. F. Lateinische Stilistik. 9th edition. Nurem­ berg 1905. Neue, F., and Wagener, C. Die Formenlehre der lateinischen Sprache. 3rd edition. Leipzig 1902. Neuhauser, W. Patronus und Orator. Innsbruck 1958. Nisbet, R. G. M. Tulli Ciceronis de domo sua ad pontifices oratio. Oxford 1939. Nisbet, R. G. M. M . Tulli Ciceronis in L. Calpurnium Pisonem oratio. Oxford 1961. The Oxford Classical Dictionary. Oxford 1949 [OCD]. Pauly, A.-Wissowa, G.-Kroll, W. Realenzyklopädie der Altertumswissenschaft [RE]. Peter, H. Historicorum Romanorum reliquiae. Leipzig 1914 [Peter HRR]. Radermacher, L. Artium scriptores (Reste der voraristote­ lischen Rhetorik). Vienna 1951 [Radermacher AS]. Reid, J. S. Marci Tulli Ciceronis Academica. London 1885. ------M. Tulli Ciceronis de finibus bonorum et malorum libri I, I I . Cambridge 1925. Roscher, W. H. Lexikon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie. Leipzig 1844-. Sandys, J. E. M. Tulli Ciceronis Orator. Cambridge 1885. Schanz, M., and Hosius, C. Geschichte der römischen Litera­ tur. I. Teil. 4th edition. Munich 1927 [Schanz], Schulz, F. History of Roman Legal Science. Oxford 1946. Schulze, W. Zur Geschichte der lateinischen Eigennamen. Berlin 1904 [Schulze Eigenn.]. Scullard, Η. H. Roman Politics 220-150 B.c. Oxford 1951. Summers, W. C. Select Letters of Seneca. London 1912. Syme, R. The Roman Revolution. Oxford 1939 [Syme RR], Taylor, Lily R. Party Politics in the Age of Caesar. Berkeley 1949 [Taylor PP].

lxii

ABBREVIATIO NS

Taylor, Lily R. Voting Districts of the Roman Republic. Rome i960. [Taylor VDRR]. Thesaurus Latinae Linguae. Leipzig 1900- [TLL]. Wilkins, A. S. M. Tulli Ciceronis de oratore libri tres. Oxford 1892. Wirszubski, C. Libertas as a Political Idea at Rome. Cam­ bridge 1950. Woodcock, E. C. A New Latin Syntax. London 1959.

BRVTVS

S I GLA F= B= O= G= H= M = L= N = D = . dett. = vulg. =

codex Florentinus Magliabecchianus cod. Ottobonianus 1592 cod. Ottobonianus 2057 O2 — vetus corrector cod. Neapolitanus iv B 43 cod. Neapolitanus iv B 36 cod. Mutinensis vi D 6 consensus codicum FBOGHM Venetus prior (Ellendt) Nannianus Parisinus 7704 codices inferioris notae, sive omnes sive plures vulgata lectio

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS BR V TVS e Cilicia decedens Rhodum venissem et eo mihi de Q. Hortensi morte esset adlatum, opinione omnium maiorem animo cepi dolorem. Nam et amico amisso cum consuetudine iucunda tum multorum officiorum coniun5 ctione me privatum videbam et interitu talis auguris digni­ tatem nostri conlegi deminutam dolebam ; qua in cogita­ tione et cooptatum me ab eo in conlegium recordabar, in quo iuratus iudicium dignitatis meae fecerat, et inauguratum ab eodem, ex quo augurum institutis in parentis eum loco io colere debebam. Augebat etiam molestiam quod magna sapientium civium bonorumque penuria vir egregius coniunctissimusque mecum consiliorum omnium societate alienissimo rei publicae tempore exstinctus et auctoritatis et prudentiae suae triste nobis desiderium reliquerat, dole15 bamque quod non, ut plerique putabant, adversarium aut obtrectatorem laudum mearum sed socium potius et con­ sortem gloriosi laboris amiseram. Etenim si in leviorum artium studio memoriae proditum est poetas nobilis poeta­ rum aequalium morte doluisse, quo tandem animo eius 20 interitum ferre debui, cum quo certare erat gloriosius quam omnino adversarium non habere ? cum praesertim non • modo numquam sit aut illius a me cursus impeditus aut C

vm

10 a u g e b a t vulg. : a u g e b a m q u o L : q u o e g o Stangl

L

19 m o r t e

L

: m o rtem

Lambinus

i

3

Μ. TV LLI C ICERO N IS

ab illo meus, sed contra semper alter ab altero adiutus et 4 communicando et monendo et favendo. Sed quoniam per­ petua quadam felicitate usus ille excessit e vita suo magis quam suorum civium tempore et tum occidit cum lugere facilius rem publicam posset, si viveret, quam iuvare, vixit- 5 que tam diu quam licuit in civitate bene beateque vivere : nostro incommodo detrimentoque, si est ita necesse, doleamus, illius vero mortis opportunitatem benevolentia potius quam misericordia prosequamur, ut, quotienscumque de clarissimo et beatissimo viro cogitemus, illum potius quam io 5 nosmet ipsos diligere videamur. Nam si id dolemus, quod eo iam frui nobis non licet, nostrum est id malum quod modice feramus, ne id non ad amicitiam sed ad domesti­ cam utilitatem referre videamur ; sin tamquam illi ipsi acer­ bitatis aliquid acciderit angimur, summam eius felicitatem >5 non satis grato animo interpretamur. Q Etenim si viveret Q. Hortensius, cetera fortasse desi­ deraret una cum reliquis bonis et fortibus civibus, hunc autem aut praeter ceteros aut cum paucis sustineret dolo­ rem, cum forum populi Romani, quod fuisset quasi theatrum 20 illius ingeni, voce erudita et Romanis Graecisque auribus 7 digna spoliatum atque orbatum videret. Equidem angor animo non consili, non ingeni, non auctoritatis armis egere rem publicam, quae didiceram tractare quibusque me assue­ feceram quaeque erant propria eum praestantis in re publica 25 viri tum bene moratae et bene constitutae civitatis. Quod si fuit in re publica tempus ullum, cum extorquere arma posset e manibus iratorum civium boni civis auctoritas et oratio, tum profecto fuit cum patrocinium pacis exclusum 8 est aut errore hominum aut timore. Ita nobismet ipsis 30 3 e x c e s s i t Bake : c e s s i t L 13 a n g i m u r vulg. : a n g i t u r 0 "BxH l 18, 1 9 h u n c a u t e m a u t Piderit : h u n c a u t e m e t L : h u n c a u t Lanibiuus : h u n c a u t e m Ellendt 2 4 d i d i c e r a t i l l e t r . maluit Friedrich 30 aut e r r o r e vulg. : a u t t e r r o r e L i p s i s o»i. BHM

BRVTVS

28

accidit ut, quamquam essent multo magis alia lugenda, tamen hoc doleremus quod, quo tempore aetas nostra per­ functa rebus amplissimis tamquam in portum confugere deberet non inertiae neque desidiae, sed oti moderati 5 atque honesti, cumque ipsa oratio iam nostra canesceret haberetque suam quandam maturitatem et quasi senectu­ tem, tum arma sunt ea sumpta, quibus illi ipsi, qui didi­ cerant eis uti gloriose, quem ad modum salutariter uterentur, non reperiebant. Itaque ei mihi videntur fortunate beate- 9 10 que vixisse cum in ceteris civitatibus tum maxime in nostra, quibus cum auctoritate rerumque gestarum gloria tum etiam sapientiae laude perfrui licuit. Quorum memoria et recor­ datio in .maximis nostris gravissimisque curis iucunda sane fuit, cum in eam nuper ex sermone quodam incidissemus. | 15 Nam cum inambularem in xysto et essem otiosus domi, ^ 10 M. ad me Brutus, ut consueverat, cum T. Pomponio venit, homines cum inter se coniuncti tum mihi ita cari itaque iucundi, ut eorum aspectu omnis quae me angebat de re publica cura consederit. Quos postquam salutavi : Quid 20 vos, inquam, Brute et Attice ? numquid tandem novi ? Nihil sane, inquit Brutus, quod quidem aut tu audire velis aut ego pro certo dicere audeam. Tum Atticus : Eo, inquit, n ad te animo venimus, ut de re publica esset silentium et aliquid audiremus potius ex te quam te adficeremus ulla 25 molestia. \ ros vero, inquam, Attice, et praesentem me cura levatis et absenti magna solacia dedistis. Nam vestris primum litteris recreatus me ad pristina studia revocavi. Tum ille : Legi, inquit, perlibenter epistulam quam ad te Brutus misit ex Asia, qua mihi visus est et monere te pru30 denter et consolari amicissime. Recte, inquam, est visus ; 12 nam me istis scito litteris ex diuturna perturbatione totius valetudinis tamquam ad aspiciendam lucem esse revocatum. 1 6 v e n i t Fleckeiscn : v e n e r a t q u i d Nipperdey : n u n c q u i d L

L

17 i t a q u e codd. : a t q u e O 2 0 n u m ­ 2 5 p r a e s e n t e m F : p r a e s e n t e codd.

3 ia

Μ. TV LLI C IC ER O N IS

Atque ut post Cannensem illam calamitatem primum Mar­ celli ad Nolam proelio populus se Romanus erexit posteaque prosperae res deinceps multae consecutae sunt, sic post rerum nostrarum et communium gravissimos casus nihil ante epistulam Bruti mihi accidit quod vellem aut quod 5 13 aliqua ex parte sollicitudines adlevaret meas. Tum Brutus : Volui id quidem efficere certe et capio magnum fructum, si quidem quod volui tanta in re consecutus sum. Sed scire cupio, quae te Attici litterae delectaverint. Istae vero, in­ quam, Brute, non modo delectationem mihi sed etiam, ut 10 spero, salutem attulerunt. Salutem ? inquit ille. Quodnam tandem genus istuc tam praeclarum litterarum fuit ? An mihi potuit, inquam, esse aut gratior ulla salutatio aut ad hoc tempus aptior quam illius libri quo me hic adfatus quasi 14 iacentem excitavit? Tum ille: Nempe eum dicis, inquit, 15 quo iste omnem rerum memoriam breviter et, ut mihi quidem visum est, perdiligenter complexus est ? Istum 4 ipsum, inquam, Brute, dico librum mihi saluti fuisse. Tum Atticus : Optatissimum mihi quidem est quod dicis ; sed quid tandem habuit liber iste quod tibi aut novum aut 20 15 tanto usui posset esse? Ille vero et nova, inquam, mihi quidem multa et eam utilitatem quam requirebam, ut ex­ plicatis ordinibus temporum uno in conspectu omnia vide­ rem. Quae cum studiose tractare coepissem, ipsa mihi tractatio litterarum salutaris fuit admonuitque, Pomponi, ut 25 a te ipso sumerem aliquid ad me reficiendum teque remune­ randum si non pari, at grato tamen munere : quamquam illud Hesiodium laudatur a doctis, quod eadem mensura reddere iubet quae acceperis aut etiam cumulatiore, si possis. 15 d i c i s vulg. : d i c e s codd. 16 r e r u m L : r . R o m a n a r u m Bake : r . n o s t r a r u m Jahn 1 9 m i h i q u i d e m e s t F: m i h i ç s t q u i d e m e s t G : q u i d e m m i h i e s t ΟΒλΜ : q u i d e m m i h i H : m i h i q u i d e m o p t . e s t B : m i h i , i n q u i t , e s t Slangl 21 e s s e p o s s e t O 22 et e am a ttu lit Mahly : a t t u l i t e t e a m Gud. 38 2 4 q u a e Eberhard : q u a L : q u o B1II1 veins

BRVTVS Ego autem voluntatem tibi profecto emetiar, sed rem ipsam 16 nondum posse videor; idque ut ignoscas, a te peto. Nec enim ex novis, ut agricolae solent, fructibus est, unde tibi reddam quod accepi —sic omnis fetus repressus est exustus5 que siti flos veteris ubertatis exaruit—nec ex conditis, qui iacent in tenebris et .ad quos omnis nobis aditus, qui paene solis patuit, obstructus est. Seremus igitur aliquid tamquam in inculto et derelicto solo ; quod ita diligenter colemus, ut impendiis etiam augere possimus largitatem tui muneris : io modo idem noster animus efficere possit quod ager, qui cum multos annos quievit, uberiores efferre fruges solet. Tum ille: Ego vero et exspectabo ea quae polliceris, nec 17 exigam nisi tuo commodo et erunt mihi pergrata, si solveris. Mihi quoque, inquit Brutus, [et] exspectanda sunt ea quae 15 Attico polliceris, etsi fortasse ego a te huius voluntarius procurator petam, quod ipse, cui debes, incommodo se tuo exacturum negat. At vero, inquam, tibi ego, Brute, non 5 solvam, nisi prius a te cavero amplius eo nomine neminem, cuius petitio sit, petiturum. Non me hercule, inquit, tibi re20 promittere istuc quidem ausim. Nam hunc, qui negat, video flagitatorem non illum quidem tibi molestum, sed adsiduum tamen et acrem fore. Tum Pomponius : Ego vero, inquit, Brutum nihil mentiri puto. Videor enim iam te ausurus esse appellare, quoniam longo intervallo modo primum 25 animadverti paulo te hilariorem. Itaque quoniam hic quod 19 mihi deberetur se exacturum professus est, quod huic debes ego a te peto. Quidnam id ? inquam. Vt scribas, inquit, aliquid ; iam pridem enim conticuerunt tuae litterae. Nam ut illos de re publica libros edidisti, nihil a te sane postea i e m e t i a r L : r e m e t i a r vulg. 4 e s t addidit Bake 5 s i t i f l o s Lambinus : fl o s s i t i L i x c u m vulg. : q u a m FOMB'H1vetus : s e p e BHG 14 e t sccl. vulg.·. tuentur Ftcckcisen et Friedrich 16 i n c o m m o d o s e t u o Eberhard·, i n c o m m o d o L : s e i n c o m m o d o t u o Latnbinus 20 a u s i m G2: a u s u s s i m codd.

5 >9

Μ. TV LLI C IC ER O N IS

accepimus : eisque nosmet ipsi ad rerum nostrarum memo­ riam comprehendendam impulsi atque incensi sumus. Sed 20 illa, cum poteris ; atque ut possis, rogo ; nunc vero, inquit, si es animo vacuo, expone nobis quod quaerimus. Quid­ nam est id? inquam. Quod mihi nuper in Tusculano in- 5 cohavisti de oratoribus, quando esse coepissent, qui etiam et quales fuissent. Quem ego sermonem cum ad Brutum tuum vel nostrum potius detulissem, magno opere hic audire se velle dixit. Itaque hunc elegimus diem, cum te sciremus esse vacuum. Qua re, si tibi est commodum, ede illa quae 10 21 coeperas et Bruto et mihi. Ego vero, inquam, si potuero, faciam vobis satis. Roteris, inquit : relaxa modo paulum animum aut sane, si potes, libera. Nempe igitur hinc tum, Pomponi, ductus est sermo, quod erat a me mentio facta causam Deiotari fidelissimi 15 atque optimi regis ornatissime et copiosissime a Bruto me 6 audisse defensam. Scio, inquit, ab isto initio tractum esse sermonem teque Bruti dolentem vicem quasi deflevisse iudiciorum vastitatem et fori. Feci, inquam, istuc quidem et 22 saepe facio. Nam mihi, Brute, in te intuenti crebro in 20 mentem venit vereri, ecquodnam curriculum aliquando sit habitura tua et natura admirabilis et exquisita doctrina et singularis industria. Cum enim in maximis causis versatus esses et cum tibi aetas nostra iam cederet fascisque summitteret, subito in civitate cum alia ceciderunt tum etiam ea 25 23 ipsa, de qua disputare ordimur, eloquentia obmutuit. Tum ille : Ceterarum rerum causa, inquit, istuc et doleo et dolendum puto ; dicendi autem me non tam fructus et gloria quam studium ipsum exercitatioque delectat : quod mihi nulla res eripiet te praesertim tam studioso mei. 30 r e r u m n o s t r a r u m Lambinus : a d v e t e r u m a n n a l i u m Victor a d r e r u m n a t u r a l i u m L : a d v e t e r u m r e r u m n o s t r a r u m vulg. : a d V. r. n o s t r a t i u m Baehrens 13 s a n e codd. : p l a n e Wetzel 18 q u a s i sccl. Stangl : g r a v i t e r maluit Eberhard 21 e c q u o d n a m O : e t q u o d n a m F : q u o d n a m vulg. 3 0 r e s codd. : v i s C.F. W. Müller s t u d i o s o m e i Margraff: s t u d i o s u m e t L : s t u d i o s o codd. : s t u d i o s o e t i ad

Pisanus :

BRVTVS Dicere enim bene nemo potest nisi qui prudenter intellegit ; qua re qui eloquentiae verae dat operam, dat prudentiae, qua ne maximis quidem in bellis aequo animo carere quis­ quam potest. Praeclare, inquam, Brute, dicis eoque magis 24 5 ista dicendi laude delector quod cetera, quae sunt quon­ dam habita in civitate pulcherrima, nemo est tam humilis qui se non aut posse adipisci aut adeptum putet ; eloquen­ tem neminem video factum esse victoria. Sed quo facilius sermo explicetur, sedentes, si videtur, agamus. Cum idem 10 placuisset illis, tum in pratulo propter Platonis statuam con­ sedimus. Hic ego : Laudare igitur eloquentiam et quanta vis sit 25 eius expromere quantamque eis qui sint eam consecuti dignitatem adferat, neque propositum nobis est hoc loco 15 neque necessarium. Hoc vero sine ulla dubitatione con­ firmaverim, sive illa arte pariatur aliqua sive exercitatione quadam sive natura, rem unam esse omnium difficillimam. Quibus enim ex quinque rebus constare dicitur, earum una quaeque est ars ipsa magna per sese. Qua re quinque artium 20 concursus maximarum quantam vim quantamque difficultatem habeat existimari potest. Testis est Graecia, quae 2g cum eloquentiae studio sit incensa iamdiuque excellat in ea praestetque ceteris, tamen omnis artis vetustiores habet et multo ante non inventas solum sed etiam perfectas, 25 quam haec est a Graecis elaborata dicendi vis atque copia. In quam cum intueor, maxime mihi occurrunt, Attice, et quasi lucent Athenae tuae, qua in urbe primum se orator extulit primumque etiam monumentis et litteris oratio est coepta mandari. Tamen ante Periclem, cuius scripta quae- 27 d i s e r t o Prohasel : t a m s t u d i o s u m e t e x e r c i t a t u m a u d i e n t i Friedrich 2 v e r a e vulg. : v e r e L 6 p u l c h e r r i m e FOG 1 2 l a u d a r e H 1: lau d ari L 1 3 e x p r i m e r e vel e x p o n e r e codd. deil. h is L sunt BHM 1 5 , 1 6 c o n f e r a m v e r i FO'1 vetus i 6 i l l a O ' G 2 : u l l a codd. 1 9 q u a r e L : q u a r u m Kayser 21 h a b e a t : h a b e a n t L· 25 a G r a e c i s sed. H. Meyer·, a b e i s corr. Fiderit

7 27

Μ. TV LLI CIC ER O N IS

dam feruntur, et Thucydidem, qui non nascentibus Athenis sed iam adultis fuerunt, littera nulla est quae quidem orna­ tum aliquem habeat et oratoris esse videatur. Quamquam opinio est et eum, qui multis annis ante hos fuerit, Pisistra­ tum et paulo seniorem etiam Solonem posteaque Clisthenem 5 28 multum ut temporibus illis valuisse dicendo. Post hanc aetatem aliquot annis, ut ex Atticis monumentis potest per­ spici, Themistocles fuit, quem constat cum prudentia tum etiam eloquentia praestitisse ; post Pericles, qui cum floreret omni genere virtutis, hac tamen fuit laude clarissimus. 10 Cleonem etiam temporibus illis turbulentum illum quidem 29 civem, sed tamen eloquentem constat fuisse. Huic aetati suppares Alcibiades Critias Theramenes ; quibus tempori­ bus quod dicendi genus viguerit ex Thucydidi scriptis, qui ipse tum fuit, intellegi maxime potest. Grandes erant 15 g verbis, crebri sententiis, compressione rerum breves et ob 30 eam ipsam causam interdum subobscuri. Sed ut intelle­ ctum est quantam vim haberet accurata et facta quodam modo oratio, tum etiam magistri dicendi multi subito exsti­ terunt. Tum Leontinus Gorgias, Thrasymachus Calche- 20 donius, Protagoras Abderites, Prodicus Cius, Hippias Elius in honore magno fuit ; aliique multi temporibus eisdem docere se profitebantur; arrogantibus sane verbis, quem ad modum causa inferior—ita enim loquebantur—dicendo fleri 31 superior posset. His opposuit sese Socrates, qui subtilitate 25 quadam disputandi refellere eorum instituta solebat [verbis]. Huius ex uberrimis sermonibus exstiterunt doctissimi viri ; primumque tum philosophia non illa de natura, quae fuerat 2 f u e r i t X : f u i t maluit Eberhard 7 u t . . . p e r s p i c i secl. A t t i c i s Lambinus : A t t i c i X 13 C r i t i a s vulg. : C r i t a s X 1 6 c r e b r i E 2: c r e b r i s X c o m p re ssio n e X : c o m p re h e n s io n e S/angl iQ t u m sed Jahn 2 1 A b d e r i t e s F2 Quintii, iii. 1. 1 0 : A b d e r i t a s BMG : A b d e r i t a HO P r o d i c u s F : P r o d i g u s codd. C ius . . . E l i u s Flcckeisen : C e i u s . . . E l e i u s codd. 22 in h o n o r e m a g n o f u i t sed. Jahn fuere B 1 : fuerit H 2 6 v e r b i s codd. secl, Haupt : a c e r b i u s Feldhuegd : u r b a n i u s Vitelli : u r b a n i s s u m e Orelli

Eberhard

BRVTVS antiquior, sed haec, in qua de bonis rebus et malis deque hominum vita et moribus disputatur, inventa dicitur. Quod quoniam genus ab hoc quod proposuimus abhorret, philo­ sophos aliud in tempus reiciamus ; ad oratores, a quibus 5 digressi sumus, revertamur. Exstitit igitur iam senibus illis 32 quos paulo ante diximus Isocrates, cuius domus cunctae Graeciae quasi ludus quidam patuit atque officina dicendi ; magnus orator et perfectus magister, quamquam forensi luce caruit intraque parietes aluit eam gloriam quam nemo io meo quidem iudicio est postea consecutus. Is et ipse scri­ psit multa praeclare et docuit alios ; et cum cetera melius quam superiores tum primus intellexit etiam in soluta ora­ tione, dum versum effugeres, modum tamen et numerum quendam oportere servari. Ante hunc enim verborum 33 15 quasi structura et quaedam ad numerum conclusio nulla erat aut, si quando erat, non apparebat eam dedita opera esse quaesitam—quae forsitan laus sit, verum tamen natura magis tum casuque, non umquam aut ratione aliqua aut ulla observatione fiebat. Ipsa enim natura circumscriptione 34 20 quadam verborum comprehendit concluditque sententiam, quae cum aptis constricta verbis est, cadit etiam plerumque numerose. Nam et aures ipsae quid plenum, quid inane sit iudicant et spiritu quasi necessitate aliqua verborum com­ prehensio term inatur; in quo non modo defici sed etiam 25 laborare turpe est. Tum fuit Lysias ipse .quidem in causis 3g forensibus non versatus, sed egregie subtilis scriptor atque elegans, quem iam prope audeas oratorem perfectum dicere. Nam plane quidem perfectum et quoi nihil admodum desit 8 e t p e r f e c t u s m a g i s t e r sect. Bake (cf. Rufin, p. 1 8 9 Or.) 10 q u i d e m m e o BHM : q u i d e m ont. Rufin. 1 8 n o n u n q u a m Peter : n o n · n u n q u a m a u t Z . : n o n n u m q u a m h a u d Rufin.·, n a t u r a m a g i s t r a c a s u q u e , n o n u n q u a m Baehrens q u a m add. vulg. : om. L et Rufin. u lla addidit Fleckeisen ex Rufino 20 v e r b o r u m secl. Schütz 21 c o n ­ s t r i c t a FO : c i r c u m s c r i p t a codd. : s t r u c t a Bake 2 6 v e r s a t u s O* vetus 2 8 c u i vulg. : q u o FO : c u i q u o G1 : i n q u o codd.

9

35

Μ. T V L LI CICERO N IS

Demosthenem facile dixeris. Nihil acute inveniri potuit in eis causis quas scripsit, nihil, ut ita dicam, subdole, nihil versute, quod ille non viderit ; nihil subtiliter dici, nihil presse, nihil enucleate, quo fieri possit aliquid limatius ; nihil contra grande, nihil incitatum, nihil ornatum vel ver- 5 borum gravitate vel sententiarum, quo quicquam esset 36 elatius. Huic Hyperides proximus et Aeschines fuit et Lycurgus et Dinarchus et is, cuius nulla exstant scripta, Demades aliique plures. Haec enim aetas effudit hanc copiam ; et, ut opinio mea fert, sucus ille et sanguis incor- 10 ruptus usque ad hanc aetatem oratorum fuit, in qua naturalis 37 inesset, non fucatus nitor. Phalereus enim suceessit eis seni­ bus adulescens eruditissimus ille quidem horum omnium, sed non tam armis institutus quam palaestra. Itaque de­ lectabat magis Atheniensis quam inflammabat. Proces- 15 serat enim in solem et pulverem, non ut e militari tabernaeulo, sed ut e Theophrasti doctissimi hominis umbraculis. 3$ Hic primus inflexit orationem et eam mollem teneramque reddidit et suavis, sicut fuit, videri maluit quam gravis ; sed suavitate ea, qua perfunderet animos, non qua perfri 20 ngeret, [et] tantum ut memoriam concinnitatis suae, non, quem ad modum de Periele scripsit Eupolis, cum delecta­ tione aculeos etiam relinqueret in animis eorum a quibus esset auditus. 10 Videsne igitur vel in ea ipsa urbe, in qua et nata et alta 25 3 9 sit eloquentia, quam ea sero prodierit in lucem ? Si quidem ante Solonis aetatem et Pisistrati de nullo ut diserto memo­ riae proditum est. At hi quidem, ut populi Romani aetas est, senes, ut Atheniensium saecula numerantur, adulescentes debent videri. Nam etsi Servio Tullio regnante viguerunt, 30 tamen multo diutius Athenae iam erant quam est Roma 2 h is Β Ή 3 d i c i t maluit Eberhard 6 e s s e t L et Charisius : e x s t e t Stangl 11 i n q u o maluit Reiz 14 p a l a e s t r a e Lambinus 21 e t secl. Manutius 25 v e l Heusinger : u t L : B r u t e Martha

BRVTVS

IO 39

ad hodiernum diem. Nec tamen dubito quin habuerit vim magnam semper oratio. Neque enim iam Troicis tempori-40 bus tantum laudis in dicendo Vlixi tribuisset Homerus et Nestori, quorum alterum vim habere voluit, alterum suavi 5 tatem, nisi iam tum esset honos eloquentiae ; neque ipse poeta hic tam [idem] ornatus in dicendo ac plane orator fuisset. Cuius etsi incerta sunt tempora, tamen annis multis fuit ante Romulum ; si quidem non infra superiorem Lycurgum fuit, a quo est disciplina Lacedaemoniorum 10 astricta legibus. Sed studium eius generis maiorque vis 41 agnoscitur in Pisistrato. Denique hunc proximo saeculo Themistocles insecutus est, ut apud nos, perantiquus, ut apud Atheniensis, non ita sane vetus. Fuit enim regnante iam Graecia, nostra autem civitate non ita pridem dominatu 15 regio liberata. Nam bellum Volscorum illud gravissimum, cui Coriolanus exsul interfuit, eodem fere tempore quo Per­ sarum bellum fuit, similisque fortuna clarorum virorum; si 4 2 quidem uterque cum civis egregius fuisset, populi ingrati pulsus iniuria se ad hostis contulit conatumque iracundiae 20 suae morte sedavit. Nam etsi aliter apud te est, Attice, de Coriolano, concede tamen ut huic generi mortis potius adsentiar. At ille ridens : Tuo vero, inquit, arbitratu ; quoniam n quidem concessum est rhetoribus ementiri in historiis, ut aliquid dicere possint argutius. Vt enim tu nunc de Corio25 lano, sic Clitarchus, sic Stratocles de Themistocle finxit. Nam quem Thucydides, qui et Atheniensis erat et summo 4 3 loco natus summusque vir et paulo aetate posterior, tantum morbo mortuum scripsit et in Attica clam humatum, addidit5 5 e l o q u e n t i a e G~ : e l o q u e n t i a L 5, 6 ip s e p o e ta h ic t a m id e m . . . o r a t o r L : i p s i p o e t a e h i c i a m i d e m . . . o r a t o r i Martha : i d e m secl. Eberhard·, i n t e r d u m maluit Stangl : i d e n t i d e m Baehrens n d en i­ q u e h u n c L : d e m u m . H u n c Bake : d e m u m , q u e m Simon 14 G r a e c a maluit Jahn 20 e s t a p u d t e BGHM 28 m orbo addidit Teufel ducente Thucydide i. 1 3 8 a d d i d i t FOG : a d d i d i t q u e

Kayser

II 4 3

Μ. TV LLI C IC ER O N IS

fuisse suspicionem veneno sibi conscivisse mortem : hunc isti aiunt, cum taurum immolavisset, excepisse sanguinem patera et eo poto mortuum concidisse. Hanc enim mortem rhetorice et tragice ornare potuerunt, illa mors vulgaris nullam praebebat materiem ad ornatum. Qua re quoniam 5 tibi ita quadrat, omnia fuisse i?i Themistocle paria et Corio­ lano, pateram quoque a me sumas licet, praebeho etiam 4 4 hostiam, ut Coriolanus sit plane alter Themistocles. Sit sane, inquam, ut libet, de isto ; et ego cautius posthac historiam attingam te audiente, quem rerum Romanarum 10 auctorem laudare possum religiosissimum. Sed tum fere Pericles Xanthippi filius, de quo ante dixi, primus adhibuit doctrinam ; quae quamquam tum nulla erat dicendi, tamen ab Anaxagora physico eruditus exercitationem mentis a re­ conditis abstrusisque rebus ad causas forensis popularis- 15 que facile traduxerat. Huius suavitate maxime hilaratae Athenae sunt, huius ubertatem et copiam admiratae eius12 dem vim dicendi terroremque timuerunt. Haec igitur aetas 45 prima Athenis oratorem prope perfectum tulit. Nec enim in constituentibus rem publicam nec in bella gerentibus 20 nec in impeditis ac regum dominatione devinctis nasci cupiditas dicendi solet. Pacis est comes otique socia et iam bene constitutae civitatis quasi alumna quaedam elo46 quentia. Itaque ait Aristoteles, cum sublatis in Sicilia tyrannis res privatae longo intervallo iudiciis repeterentur, 25 tum primum, quod esset acuta illa gens et controversia tnatura, artem et praecepta Siculos Coracem et Tisiam conscripsisse—nam antea neminem solitum via nec arte, sed accurate tamen et descripte plerosque dicere — ; scriptas5 o r n a n d u m maluit Lambinus 6 i n add. cd. Rom. T h em isto cli 1 6 p e r d u x e r a t BHM 2 0 . 2 1 n e c i n FO‘l : n e c codd. (bis) 2 2 , 2 3 e t i a m F '2 : e t i a m L 24 S ic ilia G : S ic ilia m L 26,27 e t c o n t r o v e r s i a n a t u r a L : e t c o n t r o v e r s a i n e a i u r a Madvig : e t c o n ­ t r o v e r s i a n a t a Peter : e t c o n t r o v e r s i i s n a t a Jacobs : e t c. m a t u r a Martha 2 9 d e s c r i p t e Schmitz : d e s c r i p t o L

codd. dctt.

BRVTVS

12 4 6

que fuisse et paratas a Protagora rerum inlustrium disputa­ tiones, qui nunc communes appellantur loci; quod idem 47 fecisse Gorgiam, quem singularum rerum laudes vitupera­ tionesque conscripsisse, quod iudicaret hoc oratoris esse 5 maxime proprium, rem augere posse laudando vituperandoque rursus affligere ; huic Antiphontem Rhamnusium similia quaedam habuisse conscripta ; quo neminem umquam melius ullam oravisse capitis causam, cum se ipse defenderet, se audiente locuples auctor scripsit Thucy10 dides ; nam Lysiam primo profiteri solitum artem esse 48 dicendi ; deinde, quod Theodorus esset in arte subtilior, in orationibus autem ieiunior, orationes eum scribere aliis coepisse, artem removisse ; similiter Isocratem primo artem dicendi esse negavisse, scribere autem aliis solitum orationes, 15 quibus in iudiciis uterentur; sed cum ex eo, quia quasi committeret contra legem ‘ quo quis iudicio circumvenire­ tur,’ saepe ipse in iudicium vocaretur, orationes aliis desti­ tisse scribere totumque se ad artes componendas transtulisse, jg Et Graeciae quidem oratorum partus atque fontis vides, ad 49 20 nostrorum annalium rationem veteres, ad ipsorum sane re­ centes. Nam ante quam delectata est Atheniensium civitas hac laude dicendi, multa iam memorabilia et in domesticis et in bellicis rebus effecerat. Hoc autem studium non erat commune Graeciae, sed proprium Athenarum. Quis enim 50 25 aut Argivum oratorem aut Corinthium aut Thebanum scit fuisse temporibus illis ? nisi quid de Epaminonda docto homine suspicari libet. Lacedaemonium vero usque ad hoc tempus audivi fuisse neminem. Menelaum ipsum 2 q u i Eberhard : q u a e L 3 , 4 q u e m . . . c o n s c r i p s i s s e Bake : c u m . . . c o n sc rip sisse t L 9 s e a u d i e n t e damnavit Campe 10 n a m L· : t u m Eberhard : i a m Stangl e s s e seel. Bake 13 p r i m o sed. Eberhard a r t e m - . . . n e g a v i s s e et a u t e m sed. Kayser 15 q u a s i q u i Jahn 1 6 a q u o q u i s Jahn c i r c u m v e n i e t u r maluit Martha 1 9 p a r t u s a t q u e f o n t e s L : p a r t u s a t q u e f e t u s Ernesti : c rtu s a tq u e fo n tes

Jahn

27

lib e t

O:

b

lic e t

F:

lu b et

codd.

13 5°

Μ. TV LLI C IC ER O N IS

dulcem illum quidem tradit Homerus, sed pauca dicentem. Brevitas autem laus est interdum in aliqua parte dicendi, 51 in universa eloquentia laudem non habet. At vero extra Graeciam magna dicendi studia fuerunt maximique huic laudi habiti honores inlustre oratorum nomen reddiderunt. 5 Nam ut semel e Piraeo eloquentia evecta est, omnis per­ agravit insulas atque ita peregrinata tota Asia est, ut se 1 externis oblineret moribus omnemque illam salubritatem Atticae dictionis et quasi sanitatem perderet ac loqui paene dedisceret. Hinc Asiatici oratores non contemnendi qui- 10 dem nec celeritate nec copia, sed parum pressi et nimis 52 redundantes ; Rhodii saniores et Atticorum similiores. Sed de Graecis hactenus ; etenim haec ipsa forsitan fuerint non necessaria. Tum Brutus: Ista vero, inquit, quam necessaria fuerint 15 non facile dixerim ; iucunda certe mihi fuerunt neque solum non longa, sed etiam breviora quam vellem. Optime, in­ quam, sed veniamus ad nostros, de quibus difficile est plus intellegere quam quantum ex monumentis suspicari licet. Quis enim putetj aut celeritatem ingeni L. Bruto illi nobili- 20 οο φ tatis vestrae principi defuisse? qui de matre savianda ex oraculo Apollinis tam acute arguteque coniecerit ; qui summam prudentiam simulatione stultitiae texerit ; qui potentissimum regem clarissimi regis filium expulerit civi­ tatemque perpetuo dominatu liberatam magistratibus annuis 25 legibus iudiciisque devinxerit ; qui conlegae suo imperium abrogaverit, ut e civitate regalis nominis memoriam tolleret : quod certe effici non potuisset, nisi esset oratione persuasum. 54 Videmus item paucis annis post reges exactos, cum plebes prope ripam Anionis ad tertium miliarium consedisset 3 0 8 o b l i n e r e t vnlg. : o b t i n e r e t O : o p t i n e r e t codd. 13 f u e r u n t GBUM 2 0 a u t sed. Piderit i n g e n i i a u t e l o q u e n t i a m Lambinus 23 t e x e r i t a u t e l o q u e n t i a m Schütz q u i G1 : q u a e P : q u e O2 vetus : q u e m codd. 3 0 A n i o n i s G'2: A n i e n i s 0 ’ G 1 : A n e o n i s codd.

BRVTVS

H 54

eumque montem, qui Sacer appellatus est, occupavisset, M. Valerium dictatorem dicendo sedavisse discordias eique ob eam rem honores amplissimos habitos et eum primum ob eam ipsam causam Maximum esse appellatum. Ne 5 L. Valerium quidem Potitum arbitror non aliquid potuisse dicendo, qui post decemviralem invidiam plebem in patres incitatam legibus et contionibus suis mitigaverit. ‘Possumus 55 Appium Claudium suspicari disertum, quia senatum iamiam inclinatum a Pyrrhi pace revocaverit ; possumus C. Fabri1 0 cium, quia sit ad Pyrrhum de captivis recuperandis missus orator ; Ti. Coruncanium, quod ex pontificum commentariis longe plurimum ingenio valuisse videatur ; M.\ Curium, quod is tribunus plebis interrege Appio Caeco diserto homine comitia contra leges habente, cum de plebe con15 sulem non accipiebat, patres ante auctores fieri coegerit : quod fuit permagnum nondum lege Maenia lata. Licet 56 aliquid etiam de M. Popili ingenio suspicari, qui cum consul esset eodemque tempore sacrificium publicum cum laena faceret, quod erat flamen Carmentalis, plebei contra 20 patres concitatione et seditione nuntiata, ut erat laena amictus ita venit in contionem seditionemque cum auctori­ tate tum oratione sedavit. Sed eos oratores habitos esse aut omnino tum ullum eloquentiae praemium fuisse nihil sane mihi legisse videor : tantum modo coniectura ducor ad 25 suspicandum. Dicitur etiam C. Flaminius, is qui tribunus 57 plebis legem de agro Gallico et Piceno viritim dividundo tulerit, qui consul apud Trasumennum sit interfectus, ad populum valuisse dicendo. Q. etiam Maximus Verrucosus orator habitus est temporibus illis et Q. Metellus, is qui 3 0 bello Punico secundo cum L. Veturio Philone consul fuit. 9 i n c l i n a n t e m maluit Bake 1 2 M ’. Lambinus : M . Let sic ubique f u i t vulg. : f u e r i t L 1 9 l a e n a BH superscripta v e s t e 20 et s e d i t i o n e secl. Ellendt 23, 24 m ih i s a n e n ih il Β Ή Μ 27 tu le rit . . . s i t L : t u l i t . . . e s t Schütz T a r s u m e n n u m L ; cf. Quini, i.

16

5. CIC. B R V T .

2

15 57

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS

15 Quem vero exstet et de quo sit memoriae proditum eloquem tem fuisse et ita esse habitum, primus est M. Cornelius Cethegus, cuius eloquentiae est auctor et idoneus quidem mea sententia Q. Ennius, praesertim cum et ipse eum audi­ verit et scribat de mortuo : ex quo nulla suspicio est amici- 5 58 tiae causa esse mentitum. Est igitur sic apud illum in nono ut opinor annali : additur orator Cornelius suaviloquenti ore Cethegus Marcus Tuditano conlega 10 Marci filius— et oratorem appellat et suaviloquentiam tribuit, quae nunc quidem non tam est in plerisque (latrant enim iam quidam oratores, non loquuntur), sed est ea laus eloquentiae certe maxima— is dictust ollis popularibus olim, 15 qui tum vivebant homines atque aevum agitabant, flos delibatus populi— 59 probe vero ; ut enim hominis decus ingenium, sic ingeni ipsius lumen est eloquentia, qua virum excellentem prae­ clare tum illi homines florem populi esse dixerunt— 20

Suadaeque medulla. Π « 0 ώ quam vocant Graeci, cuius effector est orator, hanc Suadam appellavit Ennius eius autem Cethegum medullam fuisse vult, ut, quam deam in Pericli labris scripsit Eupolis sessitavisse, huius hic medullam nostrum oratorem fuisse 2 5 60 dixerit. At hic Cethegus consul cum P. Tuditano fuit bello Punico secundo quaestorque his consulibus M. Cato modo plane annis c x l ante me consulem ; et id ipsum nisi unius esset Enni testimonio cognitum, hunc vetustas, ut alios i d e q u o . . . p r o d i t u m incl. Jahn 6 m e n t i t u m L : e m e n t i t u m Bake 9 M a r c u ’ T u d i t a n o c o l l e g a Schutz : M a r c u s s t u d i o c o l l e g a m L 15 d i c t u s t o l l i s Gronovius : d i c t u s L 1 6 a g i t a b a n t Gronovtus : a g e b a n t L 21 s u a d a e q u e vulg.·. s u a d a t vel s u a d a t F'OGB. s u a d a i F*, suadae F 3 2 3 , 2 4 e i u s . . . v u l t secl. Schütz 24 la b ris F 2 : lib ris F 1 codd. 2 7 h i s vulg. : is codd.

BRVTYS fo rta sse m u lto s, o b liv io n e o b ru isset.

15 60 I lliu s a u tem a eta tis

q u i serm o fu erit ex N a e v ia n is scrip tis in te lle g i p o test.

H is

e n im co n su lib u s, u t in v e terib u s co m m en ta riis scrip tu m est, N a e v iu s e st m o rtu u s ; q u am q u am V arro n o ster d ilig en tissi5 m u s in v e stig a to r a n tiq u ita tis p u ta t in h o c erratum v ita m q u e N a e v i p ro d u c it lo n g iu s.

N a m P la u tu s P . C la u d io L. P o rc io

v ig in ti a n n is p o st illo s q u o s a n te d ix i co n su lib u s m ortu us e st, C a to n e c e n so r e.

H unc igitur Cethegum consecutus est aetate Cato, qui 61 10 annis ix post eum fuit consul. Eum nos ut perveterem habemus, qui L. Marcio M’. Manilio consulibus mortuus est, annis lx x x v i ipsis ante me consulem. Nec vero 16 habeo quemquam antiquiorem, cuius quidem scripta pro­ ferenda putem, nisi quem Appi Caeci oratio haec ipsa de 15 Pyrrho et non nullae mortuorum laudationes forte delectant. E t hercules eae quidem exstant : ipsae enim familiae sua 62 quasi ornamenta ac monumenta servabant et ad usum, si quis eiusdem generis occidisset, et ad memoriam laudum domesticarum et ad inlustrandam nobilitatem suam. Quam20 quam his laudationibus historia rerum nostrarum est facta mendosior. Multa enim scripta sunt in eis quae facta non sunt : falsi triumphi, plures consulatus, genera etiam falsa et ad plebem transitiones, cum homines humiliores in alienum eiusdem nominis infunderentur genus ; ut si ego 25 me a M’. Tullio esse dicerem, qui patricius cum Servio Sulpicio consul anno x post exactos reges fuit. Catonis 63 autem orationes non minus multae fere sunt quam Attici Lysiae, cuius arbitror plurimas esse—est enim Atticus, quoniam certe Athenis est et natus et mortuus et functus 30 omni civium munere, quamquam Timaeus eum quasi Licinia 10 vim FG2: nu H : m in codd. 14 nisi codd. : nisi si Manutius 15 delectent maluit Ernesii 16 eae quidem Fq : hae quidem M : equidem F XG 21 eis vulg. : his L 23 a plebe maluit Lambinus

ι 6 63

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS

et M u cia le g e rep etit S yracu sas— et q u od am n o n n u lla in eis etia m in ter ip so s sim ilitu d o .

m odo

est

A c u ti su n t,

eleg a n te s faceti b reves ; sed ille G raecu s ab o m n i la u d e 6+ felicior.

H a b e t en im certos su i stu d io so s, q u i n o n tam

h a b itu s corporis o p im o s q uam q u o s, v a letu d o

m odo

g ra cilitates

b o n a sit, ten u ita s

co n sec ten tu r,

ip sa

5

d e le c ta t—

q u am q u am in L y sia su n t sa ep e etia m lacerti, sic u ti fieri n ih il p o ssit v a len tiu s ; verum est certe g en er e to to strigo­ sior — , sed h a b e t ta m en su o s lau d atores, q u i h a c ip sa eiu s ^ su b tilita te a d m o d u m gau d ean t.

C a to n em vero q u is n o stro -

jo

s rum oratorum , qui q u id e m n u n c su n t, le g it ? au t q uis n o v it o m n in o ?

A t q u em virum , d i b o n i ! m itto c iv e m au t se n a ­

torem au t im p eratorem ; oratorem e n im h o c lo c o q u aerim u s : q u is illo gravior in la u d a n d o ? a cerb io r in vitu p era n d o ? in s e n te n tiis .a r g u tio r ? in d o c e n d o e d isse r e n d o q u e su b tilio r?

15

R eferta e su n t ora tio n es a m p liu s c e n tu m q u in q u a g in ta , q uas q u id em a d h u c in v e n e rim et leg er im , e t verbis e t rebus inlu strib u s.

L ic e t ex h is elig a n t ea q u a e n o ta tio n e et la u d e

d ig n a sin t : o m n es oratoriae virtu tes in eis

reperientur.

66 Iam vero Origines eius quem florem aut quod lumen elo- 20 quentiae non habent ? Amatores huic desunt, sicuti multis iam ante saeculis et Philisto Syracusio et ipsi Thucydidi. Nam ut horum concisis sententiis, interdum etiam non satis [autem] apertis cum brevitate tum nimio acumine, officit Theopompus elatione atque altitudine orationis suae (quod 25 idem Lysiae Demosthenes) sic Catonis luminibus obstruxit 67 haec posteriorum quasi exaggerata altius oratio. Sed ea in nostris inscitia ' est, quod hi ipsi, qui in Graecis antiquitate delectantur eaque subtilitate, quam Atticam appellant, hanc in Catone ne noverunt quidem. Hyperidae volunt esse et 30 68 L y sia e.

L audo.

S e d cur n o lu n t C a to n es ?

A ttic o g en er e

7 uti Stangl : ut et codd. : et secl edd. 2 4 autem sed. vulg. : interdum autem non satis Mariha offecit maluit Schütz 25 quod . . . Demosthenes secl. Schutz 27 ea Bake : et L 30 ne vulg. : non L 31 Catones vulg. : Catonis L

BRVTVS

17 68

dicendi se gaudere dicunt. Sapienter id quidem ; atque utinam imitarentur, nec ossa solum sed etiam sanguinem ! Gratum est tamen quod volunt.—Cur igitur Lysias et Hy­ perides amatur, cum penitus ignoretur Cato ? Antiquior 5 est huius sermo et quaedam horridiora verba. Ita enim tum loquebantur. Id muta, quod tum ille non potuit, et adde numeros et u t aptior sit oratio, ipsa verba compone et quasi coagmenta, quod ne Graeci quidem veteres factitave­ runt : iam neminem antepones Catoni. Ornari orationem 69 10 Graeci putant, si verborum immutationibus utantur, quos appellant τρόπους, et sententiarum orationisque formis, quae vocant σχήματα : non veri simile est quam sit in utroque genere et creber et distinctus Cato. Nec vero ignoro n o n -18 dum esse satis politum hunc oratorem et quaerendum esse 15 aliquid perfectius ; quippe cum ita sit ad nostrorum tempo­ rum rationem vetus, ut nullius scriptum exstet dignum quidem lectione quod sit antiquius. Sed maiore honore in omni­ bus artibus quam in hac una arte dicendi versatur antiquitas. Quis enim eorum qui haec minora animadvertunt non in- 70 20 tellegit Canachi signa rigidiora esse quam ut imitentur veri­ tatem ; Calamidis dura illa quidem, sed tamen molliora quam Canachi ; nondum Myronis satis ad veritatem adducta, iam tamen quae non dubites pulchra dicere ; pulchriora etiam Polycliti et iam plane perfecta, ut mihi quidem videri 25 solent ? Similis in pictura ratio est ; in qua Zeuxim et Poly­ gnotum et Timanthem et eorum, qui non sunt usi plus quam quattuor coloribus, formas et liniamenta laudamus ; at in Aetione Nicomacho Protogene Apelle iam perfecta sunt omnia. Et nescio an reliquis in rebus omnibus idem 71 30 eveniat : nihil est enim simul et inventum et perfectum ; 3 gratum . . . volunt secl. Eberhard 7 ut add. vulg, 10 utamur maluit Stangl 13 creber et F ‘M‘ : creberet Ml : crebere F lG\ crebre codd. 15 quippe . . . antiquius sed. Eberhard 17 maiore in honore Sauppe 18 arte secl. vulg. observatur Bährtns 3 4 etiam FO om. vulg. et iam FO2 al. etiam O' vulg.

ι8 71

Μ. T V L L I C IC E R O N IS

nec dubitari debet quin fuerint ante Homerum poetae, quod ex eis carminibus intellegi potest, quae apud illum et in Phaeacum et in procorum epulis canuntur. Quid, nostri veteres versus ubi sunt ? quos olim Fauni vatesque canebant, cum neque Musarum scopulos . . . . nec doctis dictis studiosus quisquam erat ante hunc ait ipse de se nec mentitur in gloriando : sic enim sese res habet. Nam et Odyssia Latina est sic tamquam opus aliquod Daedali et Livianae fabulae non satis dignae quae iterum 73 legantur. Atqui hic Livius [qui] primus fabulam C. Claudio Caeci filio et M. Tuditano consulibus docuit anno ipso ante quam natus est Ennius, post Romam conditam autem quartodecimo et quingentensimo, ut hic ait, quem nos sequimur. Est enim inter scriptores de numero annorum controversia. Accius autem a Q. Maximo quintum con­ sule captum Tarento scripsit Livium annis xxx post quam eum fabulam docuisse et Atticus scribit et nos in antiquis 73 commentariis invenimus, docuisse autem fabulam annis post xi C. Cornelio Q. Minucio consulibus ludis Iuventatis, quos Salinator Senensi proelio voverat. In quo tantus error Acci fuit, ut his consulibus xl annos natus Ennius fuerit : quoi si aequalis fuerit Livius, minor fuit aliquanto is, qui primus fabulam dedit, quam ei, qui multas docuerant ante hos consules, et Plautus et Naevius. Haec si minus 74 . . . . apta videntur huic sermoni, Brute, Attico adsigna, qui me inflammavit studio inlustrium hominum aetates et tempora persequendi. Ego vero, inquit Brutus, et delector ista 6 quisquam superarat add Victorius 7 doctis dictis Bergk : dicti L 8 de se Ennius, Bake codices deteriores secutus 9 sic in L : sic [ut] vulg. ii qui sed. Schütz 13 conditam autem FO : autem conditam codd. 16 consule M 2G2 : cos. F : consulem codd. 17 captum O vulg. -.capto L 20 Iuventatis corr. Victorius : luentatis FOG : luctantis codd. 22 x x x BHMG 23 cui vulg. : quod L fuerit Madvig : fuit L

5

10

15

20

25

B R V T VS

19

74

quasi notatione temporum et ad id quod instituisti, orato­ rum genera distinguere aetatibus, istam diligentiam esse accommodatam puto. Recte, inquam, Brute, intellegis. 75 Atque utinam exstarent illa carmina, quae multis saeculis 5 ante suam aetatem in epulis esse cantitata a singulis con­ vivis de clarorum virorum laudibus in Originibus scriptum reliquit Cato ! Tamen illius, quem in vatibus et Faunis adnumerat Ennius, bellum Punicum quasi Myronis opus delectat. Sit Ennius sane, ut est certe, perfectior ; qui si 76 10 illum, ut simulat, contemneret, non omnia bella persequens primum illud Punicum acerrimum bellum reliquisset. Sed ipse dicit cur id faciat. ‘Scripsere,’ inquit, ‘alii rem vorsibus ’— et luculente quidem scripserunt, etiam si minus quam tu polite. Nec vero tibi aliter videri debet, qui 15 a Naevio vel sumpsisti multa, si fateris, vel, si negas, surripuisti. Cum hoc Catone grandiores natu fuerunt C. Flaminius 77 C. Varro Q. Maximus Q. Metellus P. Lentulus P. Crassus, qui cum superiore Africano consul fuit. Ipsum Scipionem 20 accepimus non infantem fuisse. Filius quidem eius, is qui hunc minorem Scipionem a Paullo adoptavit, si corpore valuisset, in primis habitus esset disertus ; indicant cum oratiunculae tum historia quaedam Graeca scripta dulcis­ sime. Numeroque eodem fuit Sex. Aelius, iuris quidem 25 civilis omnium peritissumus, sed etiam ad dicendum paratus. De

m in o rib u s

au tem

C. S u lp iciu s

G allus,

qui

m axim e

o m n iu m n o b iliu m G raecis litteris stu d u it ; isq u e et orato­ rum in n u m ero est h a b itu s et fu it reliq u is rebus ornatus a tq u e e le g a n s.

Ia m e n im erat u n ctior q u a ed a m sp len d id ior-

30 q u e c o n su e tu d o lo q u e n d i. N a m h o c p raetore lu d o s A p o llin i i, 2 oratorum . . . aetatibus sed. Stangl 7 tamen L : ita me Weidner: nam Naevi Eberhard 8 enumerat BHM bel­ lum codd. det. : bello L 19 is qui maluit Stangl 29 vinctior Peter

M. TVLLI CICERONIS

20 ;8

fa c ie n te cu m T h y e s te n fab u lam d o c u isse t, Q . M arcio C n.

79 S erv ilio co n su lib u s m ortem o b iit E n n iu s. tem p o rib u s T i. G racch u s

P.

E rat isd e m

F ., q u i b is co n su l et ce n so r

fuit, cu iu s e st oratio G raeca a p u d R h o d io s ; q u em civ em cu m

g ravem

tu m

etiam S c ip io n e m

etiam

e lo q u e n te m

co n sta t fu isse.

N a sica m , qui est C o rcu lu m

q u i item b is co n su l e t ce n so r fuit, h a b itu m

P.

5

ap p ellatu s, e lo q u e n tem

aiun t, illiu s q u i sacra a cc ep erit filium ; d ic u n t etia m L . L e n ­ tu lu m , qui cu m C. F ig u lo c o n su l fuit. Q . N o b ilio r e m M . F. iam p atrio in stitu to d ed itu m stu d io litteraru m — q u i 10 etia m Q . E n n iu m , q u i cu m p atre e iu s in A e to lia m ilita ­ verat, civ ita te d o n a v it, cu m trium vir c o lo n ia m d e d u x isse t— et T . A n n iu m L u sc u m h u iu s Q . F u lv i c o n leg a m n o n ind i80 sertu m d ic u n t fu isse ; a tq u e etiam L . P a u llu s A frican i pater p erso n a m p rin cip is civ is fa cile d ic e n d o tu ebatur.

E t vero 15

etiam tu m C a to n e viv o , qui a n n o s q u in q u e e t o c to g in ta n atu s e x c e ssit e vita, cu m q u id em eo ip so a n n o con tra Ser. G albam ad p o p u lu m su m m a c o n te n tio n e d ix isset, q uam etiam Gratta­ ge n em scrip tam reliq u it— se d v iv o C a to n e m in o res n atu m u lti u n o tem p o re oratores floruerunt.

N a m e t A . A lb in u s, is q u i 20

G ra ece scrip sit h istoriam , q u i c ö n su l c u m L. L u c u llo fuit, e t litteratu s e t d isertu s fuit ; et ten u it cu m h o c lo cu m q u en d a m etiam

Ser. F u lv iu s et u n a Ser. F a b iu s P icto r et iuris et

litterarum et an tiq u ita tis b e n e p eritu s ; Q u in tu sq u e F a b iu s L a b e o fuit orn atu s isd e m fere la u d ib u s.

N a m Q . M e tellu s, is 25

cu iu s q u attu or filii co n su la res fu erun t, in p rim is est h a b itu s elo q u e n s, qui p ro L . C o tta d ix it a c c u sa n te A frica n o ; cu iu s et a lia e su n t o ra tio n es et co n tra T i. G ra cch u m ex p o sita est 82 in C . F a n n i a n n a lib u s.

T u m ip se L . C o tta est veterator

h ab itu s ;— se d C. L a e liu s et P . A frican u s in

prim is e lo - 30

8 accepit maluit Schütz, qui et Idaeae matris sacra habet 10 patrio vulg. : patre L 12 triumvir vulg : iiivir Eberhard : iiivirum L 15 Et vero Lambinas : at vero L 23 una Ser. BHM ·. una Serius A: Numerius Mattha 29 Cotta est Stangl : Cotta vulg.'. Cottae L

BRVTVS

ai 82

quentes, quorum exstant orationes, ex quibus existimari de ingeniis oratorum potest. Sed inter hos aetate paulum his antecedens sine controversia Ser. Galba eloquentia prae­ stitit ; et nimirum is princeps ex Latinis illa oratorum 5 propria et quasi legitima opera tractavit, ut egrederetur a proposito ornandi causa, ut delectaret animos, ut permo­ veret, ut augeret rem, ut miserationibus, ut communibus locis uteretur. Sed nescio quo modo huius, quem constat eloquentia praestitisse, exiliores orationes sunt et redolentes 10 magis antiquitatem quam aut Laeli aut Scipionis aut etiam ipsius Catonis, itaque exaruerunt, vix iam ut appareant. De ipsius Laeli et Scipionis ingenio quamquam ea est 83 fama, ut plurimum tribuatur ambobus, dicendi tamen laus est in Laelio inlustrior. At oratio Laeli de collegiis non 15 melior quam de multis quam voles Scipionis; non quo illa Laeli quicquam sit dulcius aut quo de religione dici possit augustius, sed multo tamen vetustior et horridior ille quam Scipio ; et, cum sint in dicendo variae voluntates, delectari mihi magis antiquitate videtur et libenter verbis etiam uti 20 paulo magis priscis Laelius. Sed est mos hominum, ut 84 nolint eundem pluribus rebus excellere. Nam ut ex bellica laude aspirare ad Africanum nemo potest, in qua ipsa egregium Viriathi bello reperimus fuisse Laelium : sic ingeni litterarum eloquentiae sapientiae denique etsi utrique primas, 25 priores tamen libenter deferunt Laelio. Nec mihi cetero­ rum iudicio solum videtur, sed etiam ipsorum inter ipsos concessu ita tributum fuisse. Erat omnino tum mos, ut in 85 reliquis rebus melior, sic in höc ipso humanior, ut faciles essent in suum cuique tribuendo. Memoria teneo Smyrnae 22 30 me ex P. Rutilio Rufo audivisse, cum diceret adulescentulo i, 2 quorum . . . potest sed. Jahn 5 degrederetur Latnbinus 6 ut permoveret vulg.: aut p. L 7 commiserationibus Lambinus 8, 9 quem . . . praestitisse sed. Eberhard roaut Scipionis vulg. : aut ont. L 13 fama Baiter·, iam L 14col­ legiis vulg. : collegis L 17 venustior L : corr. CPM*

22 8j

M. TVLLI CICERONIS

se accidisse, ut ex senatus consulto P. Scipio et D. Brutus, ut opinor, consules de re atroci magnaque quaererent. Nam cum in silva Sila facta caedes esset notique homines inter­ fecti insimulareturque familia, partim etiam liberi societatis eius, quae picarias de P. Cornelio L. Mummio censoribus 5 redemisset, decrevisse senatum, ut de ea re cognoscerent et 86 statuerent consules. Causam pro publicanis accurate, ut semper solitus esset, eleganterque dixisse Laelium. Cum consules re audita A mplivs de consili sententia pronuntia­ vissent, paucis interpositis diebus iterum Laelium multo 10 diligentius meliusque dixisse iterumque eodem modo a con­ sulibus rem esse prolatam. Tum Laelium, cum eum socii domum reduxissent egissentque gratias et ne defatigaretur oravissent, locutum esse ita : se quae fecisset honoris eorum causa studiose accurateque fecisse, sed se arbitrari causam 15 illam a Ser. Galba, quod is in dicendo atrocior acriorque esset, gravius et vehementius posse defendi. Itaque auctori87 täte C. Laeli publicanos causam detulisse ad Galbam ; illum autem, quod ei viro succedendum esset, verecunde et dubi­ tanter recepisse. Vnum quasi comperendinatus medium 20 diem fuisse, quem totum Galbam in consideranda causa componendaque posuisse; et cum cognitionis dies esset et ip se R u tiliu s rogatu so cio ru m d o m u m ad G alb am m a n e v e n is s e t, u t eu m a d m o n ere t et ad d ic e n d i te m p u s a d d u ceret, u sq u e illu m , q u o a d ei n u n tia tu m e s s e t c o n su le s d e sc e n d isse , 25 o m n ib u s e x c lu sis c o m m e n ta tu m in q u a d a m te stu d in e cu m servis litteratis fu isse, tem p o re so litu s esset.

q u oru m In terim

alii a liu d d icta re e o d e m cum

e sse t ei n u n tia tu m

te m p u s esse , e x isse in a e d is e o co lo r e e t e is o cu lis, u t e g isse

88 causam, non commentatum putares.

Addebat etiam idque 3°

3 in silva Sila Turnebus·, in siuas ita F: istiuas ita BHMG: Stiuas ita O 4 liberti Corradus 16 atrocior Friller : ad­ hortor L : asperior Martha : ardentior Corradus, alii alia temptaverunt 27 alii add. Manutius 28 a tempore L : a dei. vulg. 30 id quod maluit Lambinus

BRVTVS

22 88

ad rem pertinere putabat, scriptores illos male mulcatos exisse cum Galba ; ex quo significabat illum non in agendo solum, sed etiam in meditando vehementem atque incen­ sum fuisse. Quid multa ? magna exspectatione, plurimis 5 audientibus, coram ipso Laelio sic illam causam tanta vi tantaque gravitate dixisse Galbam ut nulla fere pars orationis silentio praeteriretur. Itaque multis querelis multaque miseratione adhibita socios omnibus approbantibus illa die quaestione liberatos esse. Ex hac Rutili narratione suspi- ^ io cari licet, cum duae summae sint in oratore laudes, una subtiliter disputandi ad docendum, altera graviter agendi ad animos audientium permovendos, multoque plus pro­ ficiat is qui inflammet iudicem quam ille qui doceat, ele­ gantiam in Laelio, vim in Galba fuisse. Quae quidem vis 15 tum maxime cognita est, cum Lusitanis a Ser. Galba prae­ tore contra interpositam, ut existimabatur, fidem interfectis L. Libone tribuno plebis populum incitante et rogationem in Galbam privilegi similem ferente, summa senectute, ut ante dixi, M. Cato legem suadens in Galbam multa dixit ; 20 quam orationem in Origines suas rettulit, paucis ante quam mortuus est [an] diebus an mensibus. Tum igitur nihil 90 recusans Galba pro sese et populi Romani fidem implorans cum suos pueros tum C. Galli etiam filium flens commenda­ bat, cuius orbitas et fletus mire miserabilis fuit propter 25 recentem memoriam clarissimi patris; isque se tum eripuit flamma, propter pueros misericordia populi commota, sicut idem scriptum reliquit Cato. Atque etiam ipsum Libonem non infantem video fuisse, ut ex orationibus eius intellegi potest. Cum haec dixissem et paulum interquievissem : 91 30 Quid igitur, inquit, est causae, Brutus, si tanta virtus in 9 Rutili Friedrich·. Rutilii Orelli : Rutilia L·. Rutiliana vulg. 14 vis tum vulg. : is est istum L 15 cognita est F : cognita sit C 17 L. Libone Corradus : T. Libone L 21 an sed. Parcus nihil add. Corradus, collaio'Val. Max. viii. 1, 2 22 et secl. Campe

23 91

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS

oratore Galba fuit, cur ea nulla in orationibus eius appareat ? quod mirari non possum in eis qui nihil omnino scripti 24 reliquerunt. Nec enim est eadem, inquam, Brute, causa non scribendi et non tam bene scribendi quam dixerint. Nam videmus alios oratores inertia nihil scripsisse, ne 5 domesticus etiam labor accederet ad forensem—pleraeque enim scribuntur orationes habitae iam, non ut habeantur— ; 93 alios non laborare, ut meliores fiant—nulla enim res tantum ad dicendum proficit quantum scriptio— : memoriam autem in posterum ingeni sui non desiderant, cum se putant satis 10 magnam adeptos esse dicendi gloriam eamque etiam ma­ iorem visum iri, si in existimantium arbitrium sua scripta non venerint; alios, quod melius putent dicere se posse quam scribere, quod peringeniosis hominibus neque satis 93 doctis plerumque contingit, ut ipsi Galbae. Quem fortasse 15 vis non ingeni solum sed etiam animi et naturalis quidam dolor dicentem incendebat efficiebatque ut et incitata et gravis et vehemens esset oratio ; dein cum otiosus stilum prenderat motusque omnis animi tamquam ventus hominem defecerat, flaccescebat oratio. Quod eis qui limatius dicendi 20 consectantur genus accidere non solet, propterea quod prudentia numquam deficit oratorem, qua ille utens eodem modo possit et dicere et scribere ; ardor animi non semper adest, isque cum consedit, omnis illa vis et quasi 94 flamma oratoris exstinguitur. Hanc igitur ob causam vide- 25 tur Laeli mens spirare etiam in scriptis, Galbae autem vis occidisse. 25 Fuerunt etiam in oratorum numero mediocrium L. et Sp. Mummii fratres, quorum exstant amborum orationes ; simplex quidem Lucius et antiquus, Spurius autem nihilo 30 ille quidem ornatior, sed tamen astrictior ; fuit enim doctus ex disciplina Stoicorum. Multae sunt Sp. Albini orationes. i appareat Latnbinus : apparet L 6, 7 pleraeque . . . habeantur sed. S/angl 20 eis L : is G : his F 32 ex d. vtdg. : et d. L

BRVT VS

25

94

Sunt etiam L. et C. Aureliorum Orestarum, quos aliquo video in numero oratorum fuisse. P. etiam Popilius cum 9? civis egregius tum non indisertus fuit ; Gaius vero filius eius disertus, Gaiusque Tuditanus cum omni vita atque 5 victu excultus atque expolitus, tum eius elegans est habitum etiam orationis genus. Eodemque in genere est habitus is qui iniuria accepta fregit Ti. Gracchum patientia, civis in rebus optimis constantissimus M. Octavius. At vero M. Aemilius Lepidus, qui est Porcina dictqs, isdem tempo10 ribus fere quibus Galba, sed paulo minor natu et summus orator est habitus et fuit, ut apparet ex orationibus, scriptor sane bonus. Hoc in oratore Latino primum mihi videtur 96 et levitas apparuisse illa Graecorum et verborum comprensio et iam artifex, ut ita dicam, stilus. Hunc studiose duo 15 adulescentes ingeniosissimi et prope aequales C. Carbo et Ti. Gracchus audire soliti sunt ; de quibus iam dicendi locus erit cum de senioribus pauca dixero. Q. enim Pompeius non contemptus orator temporibus iliis fuit, qui summos honores homo per se cognitus sine ulla commenda20 done maiorum est adeptus. Tum L. Cassius multum potuit 97 non eloquentia, sed dicendo tamen ; homo non liberalitate, ut alii, sed ipsa tristitia et severitate popularis, cuius quidem legi tabellariae M. Antius Briso tribunus plebis diu restitit, M. Lepido consule adiuvante ; eaque res P. Africano vitupe25 rationi fuit, quod eius auctoritate de sententia deductus Briso putabatur. Tum duo Caepiones multum clientes consilio et lingua, plus auctoritate tamen et gratia subleva­ bant. Sex. Pompei sunt scripta nec nimis extenuata, quam- 2g quam veterum est similis, et plena prudentiae. P. Crassum ^ 30 valde probatum oratorem isdem fere temporibus accepimus, qui et ingenio valuit et studio et habuit quasdam etiam 3 ciuis FG2 : cuius C 10 minor vulg. : minus L 14 et iam Faber : etiam L 26 Briso L : Restio Martha clientes FOM* : dicentes C 28 Sex. Macivig: sed L

2 6 98

Μ. TV L LI C ICERO N IS

domesticas disciplinas. Nam et cum summo illo oratore, •Ser. Galba, cuius Gaio filio filiam suam conlocaverat, adfinitate sese devinxerat et cum esset P. Muci filius fratremque haberet P. Scaevolam, domi ius civile cognoverat. In eo industriam constat summam fuisse maximamque gratiam, 5 99 cum et consuleretur plurimum et diceret. Horum aetatibus adiuncti duo C. Fannii C. et M. filii fuerunt ; quorum Gai filius, qui consul cum Domitio fuit, unam orationem de sociis et nomine Latino contra C. Gracchum reliquit sane et bonam et nobilem. Tum Atticus: Quid ergo? estne ista 10 Fanni ? nam varia opinio pueris nobis erat. Alii a C. Persio litterato homine scriptam esse aiebant, illo quem significat valde doctum esse Lucilius ; alii multos nobilis, quod quis100 que potuisset, in illam orationem contulisse. Tum ego : Audivi equidem ista, inquam, de maioribus natu, sed num- 15 quam sum adductus ut crederem ; eamque suspicionem propter hanc causam credo fuisse, quod Fannius in mediocribus oratoribus habitus esset, oratio autem vel optima esset illo quidem tempore orationum omnium. Sed nec eiusmodi est ut a pluribus confusa videatur—unus 20 enim sonus est totius orationis- et idem stilus—, nec de Persio reticuisset Gracchus, cum ei Fannius de Menelao Maratheno et de ceteris obiecisset ; praesertim cum Fannius numquam sit habitus elinguis. Nam et causas defensitavit et tribunatus eius arbitrio et auctoritate P. Africani gestus 25 non obscurus fuit. Alter autem C. Fannius M. filius, C. Laeli gener, et moribus et ipso genere dicendi durior. 101 Is soceri instituto, quem, quia cooptatus in augurum conlegium non erat, non admodum diligebat, praesertim cum ille Q. Scaevolam sibi minorem natu generum praetulisset— 30 cui tamen Laelius se excusans non genero minori dixit se 7 C. et M. H'1: C. M. L 8 filius FGO : Fannius C 9 C. add. Jahn 18, 19 est . . . est maluit Bake 22 ei Gniter: et L· 27, 28 durior. Is vulg. : durioris L

BR VT VS

26 ιοί

illud, sed maiori filiae detulisse—, is tamen instituto Laeli Panaetium audiverat. Eius omnis in dicendo facultas historia ipsius non ineleganter scripta perspici potest, quae neque nimis est infans neque perfecte diserta. Mucius 102 5 autem augur, quod pro se opus erat, ipse dicebat, ut de pecuniis repetundis contra T. Albucium. Is oratorum in numero non fuit, iuris civilis intellegentia atque omni pru­ dentiae genere praestitit. L. Caelius Antipater scriptor, quem ad modum videtis, fuit ut temporibus illis luculentus, 10 iuris valde peritus, multorum etiam ut L. Crassi magister. 27 Vtinam in Ti. Graccho Gaioque Carbone talis mens ad Ι0^ rem publicam bene gerendam fuisset, quale ingenium ad bene dicendum fuit : profecto nemo his viris gloria prae­ stitisset. Sed eorum alter propter turbulentissimum tribuna15 tum, ad quem ex invidia foederis Numantini bonis iratus accesserat, ab ipsa re publica est interfectus ; alter propter perpetuam in populari ratione levitatem morte voluntaria se a severitate iudicum vindicavit. Sed fuit uterque summus orator. Atque hoc memoria patrum teste dicimus ; nam 104 20 et Carbonis et Gracchi habemus orationes nondum satis splendidas verbis, sed acutas prudentiaeque plenissimas. Fuit Gracchus diligentia Corneliae matris a puero doctus et Graecis litteris eruditus. Nam semper habuit exquisitos e Graecia magistros, in eis iam adulescens Diophanem Myti25 lenaeum Graeciae temporibus illis disertissimum. Sed ei breve tempus ingeni augendi et declarandi fuit; Carbo, 105 quoi vita suppeditavit, est in multis iudiciis causisque cognitus. H unc qui audierant prudentes homines, in qui­ bus familiaris noster L. Gellius, qui se illi contubernalem 30 in consulatu fuisse narrabat, canorum oratorem et volubilem et satis acrem atque eundem et vehementem et valde 3 historia L : ex historia vulg. 19 dicimus FO'GxB' : didici­ mus B2UM0 2G'2 22 Gracchus L : Ti. Gracchus Stangl 25 ei Lambinus : et L 27 quoi Friedrich : cui Aldus : quo L : quod vulg. : quoad Lambinus

27 I05

Μ. TV LLI C ICERO N IS

dulcem et perfacetum fuisse dicebat ; addebat industrium etiam et diligentem et in exercitationibus commentationibusi0^ que multum operae solitum esse ponere. Hic optimus illis temporibus est patronus habitus eoque forum tenente plura fieri iudicia coeperunt. Nam et quaestiones perpetuae hoc adulescente constitutae sunt quae antea nullae fuerunt ; L. enim Piso tribunus plebis legem primus de pecuniis repetundis Censorino et Manilio consulibus tulit—ipse etiam Piso et causas egit et multarum legum aut auctor aut dissuasor fuit, isque et orationes reliquit, quae iam evanuerunt, et annalis sane exiliter scriptos— ; et iudicia populi, quibus aderat Carbo, iam magis patronum desiderabant, tabella data ; quam legem L. Cassius Lepido et Mancino consulibus tulit. 2$ Vester etiam D. Brutus M. filius, ut ex familiari eius l0' L. Accio poeta sum audire solitus, et dicere non inculte solebat et erat cum litteris Latinis tum etiam Graecis ut temporibus illis eruditus. Quae tribuebat idem Accius etiam Q. Maximo L. Paulli nepoti ; et vero ante Maximum illum Scipionem, quo duce privato Ti. Gracchus occisus esset, cum omnibus in rebus vehementem tum acrem aiebat J0g in dicendo fuisse. Tum etiam P. Lentulus ille princeps ad rem publicam dumtaxat quod opus esset satis habuisse eloquentiae dicitur ; isdemque temporibus L. P'urius Philus perbene Latine loqui putabatur litteratiusque quam ceteri; P. Scaevola valde.prudenter et acute; paulo etiam copiosius nec multo minus prudenter M’. Manilius. Appi Claudi volubilis, sed paulo fervidior oratio. Erat in aliquo numero etiam M. Fulvius Flaccus et C. Cato, Africani sororis filius, i dicebant, addebant Lambinas 2 commentationibus vnlg. : commendationibus L 12 quibus aderat Carbo sect. Eberhard 13. 14 quam . . . tulit seel. Bake 18 tribuebat TaUcmand codicem inferioris notae secutus : tribuerat L 25 pei belle BHM1 literatusque BHMG 28 oratio. Erat Friedrich : oratio erat L : oiatio. Erant IVeidner : erat oratio vnlg.

5

10

15

20

25

BRVTVS

28 108

m e d io c r e s oratores ; etsi F la c c i scrip ta su n t, sed u t stu d io si litterarum .

F la c c i a u tem a em u lu s P . D e c iu s fuit, n o n infans

ille q u id em ,

se d

u t v ita sic ora tio n e etia m tu rb u lentus.

M . D ru su s C. F ., q u i in trib u natu C . G racch u m co n leg a m 109

5 iteru m trib u n u m fregit, vir et ora tio n e gravis e t au ctoritate, eiq u e p ro x im e a d iu n ctu s C. D ru su s frater fuit. g en tilis,

B ru te,

M.

P en n us

fa cete

T u u s etiam

a gitavit in

C. G ra cch u m , p a u lu m aeta te a n tec ed en s.

tribunatu

F u it en im M . L e ­

p id o e t L. O reste c o n su lib u s q u aestor G racchu s, tribunus 10 P e n n u s, illiu s M a rci filius, q u i cu m Q. A e lio co n su l fuit ; se d is o m n ia su m m a sp eran s a e d ilic iu s est m ortuus.

N am

d e T . F la m in in o , q u e m ip se vid i, n ih il a c c e p i n isi L a tin e d ilig en te r lo cu tu m . H is

a d iu n c ti su n t

15 C. G racch u s.

De

C.

C urio

M.

S cau ru s

P.

R u tiliu s

no

S cau ro et R u tilio b reviter lic e t d icere,

quorum n eu ter su m m i oratoris h a b u it la u d em , et esi uter­ q u e in m u ltis cau sis versatu s.

E rat in q u ib u sd am lau d an d is

viris, etia m si m a x im i in g e n i n o n e sse n t, p rob abilis tam en in d u str ia ; q u a m q u a m h is q u id em n o n o m n in o in gen iu m , 20 se d oratorium in g e n iu m d efu it.

N e q u e en im refert vid ere

q u id d ic e n d u m sit, n isi id q ueas so lu te et su aviter d icere ; n e id q u id em satis est, n isi id q u o d d icitu r fit v o c e voltu m o tu q u e co n d itiu s.

Q u id d icam o p u s e s s e d o ctr in a ? sin e m

q u a etia m si q u id b e n e d icitu r a d iu v a n te natura, ta m en id, 25 q u ia fortu ito

fit, sem p e r paratum

e sse

n o n p o test.

In

S cauri o ra tio n e, sa p ie n tis h o m in is et recti, gravitas su m m a et naturalis q u a ed a m in erat au ctoritas, n o n ut cau sam , sed

5 fregit Victor Pisanus : fecit L

7 facete Lambinus : facile L 8 M. FO : L C 9 et sect. vulg. 12 Flaminino OGB1 : Flaminio B2 16 et est uterque Slangl : et uterque L : at uterque ver­ satus est Martha 17, 18 Erat in quibusdam laudandis viris . . . probabilis tamen industria Peter·, erant . . . laudandi viri et, vel si . . . probabiles Slangl: erat. In quibusdam laudandis viris etiamsi. . . pro­ babiles L : erat: in quibusdam laudandi viri.. . probabiles Orel/i 2 0 oratorium FH : oratorum C

8 C. Gracchum paulum vulg, : paulum C. Gracchum L

cic.

BRVT,

3

M . T V L L I C IC E R O N IS

II2 ut testimonium dicere putares, cum pro reo diceret. HoC dicendi genus ad patrocinia mediocriter aptum videbatur, ad senatoriam vero sententiam, cuius erat ille princeps, vel maxime ; significabat enim non prudentiam solum, sed quod maxime rem continebat, fidem. Habebat hoc a 5 natura ipsa, quod a doctrina non facile posset ; quamquam huius quoque ipsius rei, quem ad modum scis, praecepta sunt. Huius et orationes sunt et tres ad L. Fufidium libri scripti de vita ipsius acta sane utiles, quos nemo legit ; at Cyri vitam et disciplinam legunt, praeclaram illam quidem, 10 sed neque tam nostris rebus aptam nec tamen Scauri laudi­ bus anteponendam. 3° I p s e etia m F u fid iu s in a liq u o p atron oru m n u m ero fuit. 4

I J 2

t

R u tiliu s au tem m q u o d a m tristi et sev ero g en er e d ic e n d i versatu s est. cu m

p u lsam rem ,

E rat u terq u e natura v e h e m e n s et acer ; ita q u e 15

u na co n su la tu m p etiv issen t, n o n ille solu m , qui re­ tulerat, a ccu sa v it am b itu s

se d

voca v it.

d esig n a tu m

S caurus etiam a b so lu tu s R u tiliu m

c o m p e tito ­ in

iu d iciu m

M u lta q u e op era m u lta q u e in d u stria R u tiliu s fuit,

q u a e erat p rop terea gratior, q u o d id e m m a gn u m m u n u s d e

n 4 iure r e sp o n d en d i su stin eb a t.

20

S u n t eiu s o ration es ieiu n a e ;

m u lta praeclara d e iure ; d o ctu s vir et G raecis litteris eru d i­ tus, P a n a eti au ditor, p ro p e p erfectu s in S to icis ; q uorum p eracu tu m et artis p le n u m oration is g en u s scis ta m en e sse ex ile n ec satis p opulari a d se n sio n i a c c o m m o d a tu m .

Ita q u e

25

illa, q u a e propria est h u iu s d isc ip lin a e , p h ilo so p h o ru m d e s e ipsorum o p in io firm a in h o c viro et sta b ilis in v e n ta est. 115 Q u i cu m

in n o c e n tissim u s in iu d iciu m v o ca tu s e sse t, q uo

iu d ic io c o n v u lsa m p en itu s scim u s e s s e rem p u b lica m , cu m esse n t e o tem p o re e lo q u e n tissim i viri L. C rassus et M . A n- 30

i cum pro reo diceret om. BHM ·. sed. Schütz 5 continet maluit Campe g acta L : lectu Geel 15 erat uterque Jahn : et uterque L 22 eruditus vulg. : eruditi L 28 cum inn. vulg. : quam inn. L : quamquam inn. Lambinus

BRVTVS

30 ” 5

to n iu s co n su la res, eoru m a d h ib ere · n eu tru m volu it.

D ix it

ip se pro se s e et p a u ca C. C otta, q u o d sororis erat filiu s— et is

q u id e m

ta m en

u t orator, q u a m q u a m

erat

adm odum

a d u le s c e n s — , et Q. M u c iu s e n u c le a te ille q u id em et p o lite, 5 ut

so leb a t, n eq u a q u a m

au tem

ea v i a tq u e co p ia quam

g en u s illu d iu d ic i et m a g n itu d o ca u sa e p o stu lab at.

H a b e - 116

m u s igitu r in S to ic is oratoribu s R u tiliu m , S caurum in a n ti­ q u is ; u tru m q u e ta m en

la u d em u s,

q u o n ia m

per illo s n e

h a e c q u id e m in c iv ita te g en era h a c oratoria la u d e caruerunt. 10 V o lo en im u t in sc a e n a sic etiam in foro n on eo s m o d o laudari, q u i c e le ri m o tu e t d ifficili utantur, sed e o s etiam q u o s statarios a p p e lla n t, q u oru m sit illa sim p le x in a g en d o veritas, n o n m o lesta .

.

.

31

E t q u o n ia m S to ico ru m e st facta m e n tio , Q . A e liu s T u b er o „ 15 fuit illo tem p ore, L . P a u lli n ep o s ; n u llo in oratorum n um ero, sed vita sev e ru s et co n g ru en s cu m ea d isc ip lin a q uam c o le ­ bat, p a u lo etia m durior ; q u i q u id em in trib u natu iu d icaverit co n tra

P . A frica n i a v u n c u li sui testim o n iu m

v a ca tio n em

au gu res q u o m in u s iu d ic iis op eram d aren t n o n h ab ere ; sed 20 u t vita sic o ra tio n e d u ru s in c u ltu s h orrid u s ; ita q u e h o n o ri­ b u s m aioru m r e sp o n d e r e n o n p otu it.

F u it au tem co n sta n s

civ is et fortis e t in p rim is G racch o m o lestu s, q u o d in d ica t G ra cch i in eu m oratio.

S u n t etia m in G ra cch u m T u b er o n is ;

is fu it m e d io c r is in d ic e n d o , d o c tissim u s in d isp u ta n d o . 25 T u m B ru tu s : Q u a m h o c id e m in n o stris co n tin g ere in tel- 118 le g o q u o d in G raecis, ut o m n es fere S to ic i p ru d en tissim i in d isse r e n d o sin t et id arte fa cia n t sin tq u e a rch itecti p a en e verboru m , id e m trad u cti a d isp u ta n d o ad d ic en d u m in o p es reperiantur.

V n u m e x c ip io C a to n em , in q u o p erfectissim o

30 S to ic o su m m a m elo q u e n tia m n o n d esid erem , q uam exigu am 4 e t Q.Bake: s e d Q . L 6 H a b e m u s L·. h a b e a m u s Madvig 1 0 e t i a m ont. BHM, secl. Omnibonus 17 q u i d e m ont. BHM t r i b u n a t u Schütz : t r i u m v i r a t u L i u d i c a v e r a t BHMG 19s e d u t L : e t u t Bake 2 2 C. G r a c c h o maluit Stangl 23, 24 S u n t . . . d i s p u t a n d o sed. Simon 2 4 is l u i t . . . d i s p u t a n d o sed. Kayser

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS in Fannio, ne in Rutilio quidem magnam, in Tuberone 119 nullam video fuisse. Et ego: Non, inquam, Brute, sine causa, propterea quod istorum in dialecticis omnis cura consumitur, vagum illud orationis et fusum et multiplex non adhibetur genus. Tuus autem avunculus, quem ad 3 modum scis, habet a Stoicis id quod ab illis petendum fuit ; sed dicere didicit a dicendi magistris eorumque more se exercuit. Quod si omnia a philosophis essent petenda, 120 Peripateticorum institutis commodius fingeretur oratio. Quo magis tuum, Brute, iudicium probo, qui eorum [id est ex 10 vetere Academia] philosophorum sectam secutus es, quorum in doctrina atque praeceptis disserendi ratio coniungitur cum suavitate dicendi et copia ; quamquam ea ipsa Peripa­ teticorum Academicorumque consuetudo in ratione dicendi talis est ut nec'perficere oratorem possit ipsa per sese nec 15 sine ea orator esse perfectus. Nam ut Stoicorum astrictior est oratio aliquantoque contractior quam aures populi re­ quirunt, sic illorum liberior et latior quam patitur con­ suetudo iudiciorum et fori. Quis enim uberior in dicendo 121 Platone? Iovem sic aiunt philosophi, si Graece loquatur, 20 loqui. Quis Aristotele nervosior, Theophrasto dulcior ? Lectitavisse Platonem studiose, audivisse etiam Demo­ sthenes dicitur—idque apparet ex genere et granditate ver­ borum ; dicit etiam in quadam epistula hoc ipse de sese—, sed et huius oratio in philosophiam tralata pugnacior, ut ita 25 dicam, videatur et illorum in iudicia pacatior. ^ Nunc reliquorum oratorum aetates, si placet, et gradus persequamur. Nobis vero, inquit Atticus, et vehementer quidem, ut pro Bruto etiam respondeam. Curio fuit igitur eiusdem aetatis fere sane inlustris orator, cuius de ingenio 30 ex orationibus eius existimari potest : sunt enim et aliae et 9 a t q u e A c a d e m i c o r u m i n s t . Martha 10, 11 id e s t . . . A c a ­ d e m i a sect. Lambinas 14 c o n s , r a t i o n e Kayser d o c e n d i Martha 2 0 s i c a i u n t Schütz : s i c u t a i u n t L 2 6 v i d e a t u r Ernesli: v i d e t u r L 2 8 i n q u i t aciei. vulg.\ oui. L

BRA'TVS

32 122

pro Ser. Fulvio de incestu nobilis oratio. Nobis quidem pueris haec omnium optima putabatur, quae vix iam comparet in hac turba novorum voluminum. Praeclare, inquit Brutus, teneo qui istam turbam voluminum effecerit. 5 Et ego [inquam] : Intellego, Brute, quem dicas ; certe enim et boni aliquid adtulimus iuventuti, magnificentius quam fuerat genus dicendi et ornatius ; et nocuimus fortasse, quod veteres orationes post nostras, non a me quidem— meis enim illas antepono—, sed a plerisque legi sunt 10 desitae. Me numera, inquit, in plerisque ; quamquam video mihi multa legenda iam te auctore, quae antea contemnebam. Atqui haec, inquam, de incestu laudata oratio puerilis est locis multis : de amore, de tormentis, de rumore loci sane inanes, verum tamen nondum tritis 15 nostrorum hominum auribus nec erudita civitate tolerabiles. Scripsit etiam alia non nulla et multa dixit et illustria et in numero patronorum fuit, ut eum mirer, cum et vita suppeditavisset et splendor ei non defuisset, consulem non fuisse. Sed ecce in manibus vir et praestantissimo ingenio 20 et flagranti studio et doctus a puero C. Gracchus. Noli enim putare quemquam, Brute, pleniorem aut uberiorem ad dicendum fuisse. Et ille : Sic prorsus, inquit, existimo atque istum de superioribus paene solum lego. Immo plane, inquam, Brute, legas censeo. Damnum enim illius 25 immaturo interitu res Romanae Latinaeque litterae fecerunt. Vtinam non tam fratri pietatem quam patriae praestare voluisset ! Quam ille facile tali ingenio, diutius si vixisset, vel paternam esset vel avitam gloriam consecutus ! Eloquentia quidem nescio an habuisset parem neminem. Grandis est 30 verbis, sapiens sententiis, genere toto gravis. Manus extrema 2 p u t a b a t u r FO' : p u t a b a n t u r C 5 in q u a m in te lle g o L : in te lle g o , i n q u a m Schütz·, i n q u a m seil. Fdedrich 1 0 m e n u m e r a Weidner:. e n u m e r a L : n u m e r a . . . m e Ernesti 1 6 e t i l l u s t r i a e t vutg. : i l l u s t r i e t i n Z . : e t i l l u s t r i i n n u m e r o ^ p a t r o n o r u m ] Martha 17 e i v i t a John

123

124

^

126

M. TVLLI CICERONIS non accessit operibus eius; praeclare incohata multa, perfecta non plane. Legendus, inquam, est hic orator, Brute, si quisquam alius, iuventuti ; non enim solum acuere sed etiam alere ingenium potest. 127

H u ic su c c e s sit aetati C. G alba, S ervi illiu s e lo q u e n tissim i 5 viri

filius,

P.

C rassi

e lo q u e n tis

et

iuris

p eriti

gener.

L au d a b a n t h u n c patres nostri, fa v eb a n t etia m p rop ter patris m em oriam , sed c e c id it in cursu.

N a m ro g a tio n e M am ilia,

Iu gu rth in a e co n iu ra tio n is in v id ia , cu m p ro sese ip se d ix isset, op p ressu s est. qui

ta n to

in

ed iscer em u s.

E x sta t eiu s peroratio, q u i ep ilo g u s d icitu r honore

p ueris

n o b is

erat

ut

eu m

; 10

etiam

H ic , q u i in c o n le g io sa cerd o tu m e sse t, prim us

p o st R o m a m c o n d ita m iu d ic io p u b lic o e st c o n d em n a tu s.

128 P* S cip io , qui est in co n su la tu m ortu us, n o n m u ltu m ille q u id em n e c sa ep e d ic eb a t, se d et L a tin e lo q u e n d o cu iv is 15 erat par et o m n is sa le fa c etiisq u e su perab at.

E iu s co n le g a

L . B e stia a b o n is in itiis orsus tr ib u n a tu s— n am P . P o p iliu m

vi C. Gracchi expulsum sua rogatione restituit—», vir et acer et non indisertus, tristis exitus habuit consulatus. Nam invidiosa lege [Mamilia quaestio] C. Galbam sacerdotem et 20 quattuor consularis L. Bestiam C. Catonem Sp. Albinum civemque praestantissimum L. Opimium, Gracchi inter­ fectorem, a populo absolutum, cum is contra populi studium 129 stetisset, Gracchani iudices sustulerunt. Huius dissimilis in tribunatu reliquaque omni vita civis improbus C; Licinius 25 Nerva non indisertus fuit. C. Fimbria temporibus isdem fere, sed longius aetate provectus, habitus est sane, ut ita di­ cam, lutulentus [patronus] asper maledicus; genere toto paulo fervidior atque commotior, diligentia tamen et virtute animi atque vita bonus auctor in senatu ; idem tolerabilis patronus 30 5 C . G a l b a vulg. : p . G a l b a L S e r u i l i u s OBHM: S e r u l i u s C 8 M a m ilia / Y M a n i l i a C 17 a add. Müller 20 M a m i l i a q u a e s t i o secl. Peter 22 C . G r a c c h i Stangl 24 G r a c c h u m i u d i c e s BHM 2 5 P . L i c i n i u s Martha 2 8 l u t u l e n t u s Jahn : l u c u l e n t u s L : t r u c u l e n t u s Emesti p a t r o n u s sicl. Jahn

BRVTVS

34

I29

nec rudis in iure civili et cum virtute tum etiam ipso orationis genere liber; cuius orationes pueri legebamus, quas iam reperire vix possumus. Atque et acri ingenio et 130 sermone eleganti, valetudine incommoda C. Sextius Calvinus 5 fuit ; qui etsi, cum remiserant dolores pedum, non deerat in causis, tamen id non saepe faciebat. Itaque consilio eius, cum volebant, homines utebantur, patrocinio, cum licebat. Isdem temporibus M. Brutus, in quo magnum fuit, Brute, dedecus generi vestro, qui, cum tanto nomine esset 10 patremque optimum virum habuisset et iuris peritissimum, accusationem factitaverit, ut Athenis Lycurgus. Is magi­ stratus non petivit, sed fuit accusator vehemens et molestus, ut facile cerneres naturale quoddam stirpis bonum de­ generavisse vitio depravatae voluntatis. Atque eodem Γ3r 15 tempore accusator de plebe L. Caesulenus fuit, quem ego audivi iam senem, cum ab L. Sabellio multam lege Aquilia [de iustitia] petivisset. Non fecissem hominis paene infimi mentionem, nisi iudicarem qui suspiciosius aut criminosius diceret audivisse me neminem. Doctus etiam Graecis 35 20 T. Albucius vel potius plane Graecus. Loquor ut opinor ; sed licet ex orationibus iudicare. Fuit autem Athenis adulescens, perfectus Epicurius evaserat, minime aptum ad dicendum genus. Iam Q. Catulus non antiquo illo more, sed hoc nostro, 132 25 nisi quid fieri potest perfectius, eruditus. Multae litterae, i v i r t u t e L : v e r i t a t e Martha 3 a t q u e e t a c r i Friedrich : a t q u e e t i a m L : a c u t o e t i a m Kayser : a t q u e i a m Fiderit 8 i n q u o secl. Jahn 9 d e d e c u s codd. det. : g e n u s L : v u l n u s ed. Rom. : d e ­ d e c u s i n u s t u m Lambinus 11, 12 m a g i s t r a t u s n o n p e t i v e r i t s e d a c c u s a t i o n e m f a c t i t a v e r i t [ u t A t h e n i s L y c u r g u s ] Martha : a c c u s a ­ t i o n e m . . . i s secl. Kayser·. u t . . . m o l e s t u s secl. Eberhard 16 S a b e l ­ l i o vulg. : S a v e l i o L : S a u f e i o Martha 17 d a m n i i n i u r i a Hotomann·. d e i u s t i t i a L (secl. Friedrich) : . . . s e s t e r t i a Martha 19 i n G r a e c i s maluit Madvig 2 0 A l b u c i u s vulg. : A l b i t i u s L p l a n e Vogel : paene L L o q u o r vulg, : l o q u a r L 2 5 n isi q u id fieri L : nisi q u o d a l i q u i d f i e r i Martha : v e l si q u i d f i e r i Eberhard p e rfe c te e ru ­ d i t u s I. Mueller·, e r u d i t u s vulg.·. e r u d i t i u s L

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS

35 132

summa non vitae solum atque naturae sed orationis etiam comitas, incorrupta quaedam Latini sermonis integritas ; quae perspici cum ex orationibus eius potest tum facillime ex eo libro quem de consulatu et de rebus gestis suis conscriptum molli et Xenophontio genere sermonis misit ad 5 A. Furium poetam, familiarem suum ; qui liber nihilo notior 133 est quam illi tres, de quibus ante dixi, Scauri libri. Tum Brutus : Mihi quidem, inquit, nec iste notus est nec illi ;— sed haec mea culpa est, numquam enim in manus inciderunt ■—nunc autem et a te sumam et conquiram ista posthac 10 curiosius. Fuit igitur in Catulo sermo Latinus ; quae laus dicendi non mediocris ab oratoribus plerisque neglecta est. Nam de sono vocis et suavitate appellandarum litterarum, quoniam filium cognovisti, noli exspectare quid dicam. Quamquam filius quidem non fuit in oratorum numero, sed 15 non deerat ei tamen in sententia dicenda cum prudentia tum 13.4 elegans quoddam et eruditum orationis genus. Nec habitus est tamen pater ipse Catulus princeps in numero patro­ norum, sed erat talis ut, cum quosdam audires qui tum erant praestantes, videretur esse inferior, cum autem ipsum 20 audires sine comparatione, non, modo contentus esses, sed 135 melius non quaereres. Q. Metellus Numidicus et eius conlega M. Silanus dicebant de re publica quod esset illis viris et consulari dignitati satis. M. Aurelius Scaurus non saepe dicebat sed polite; Latine vero in primis est 25 eleganter locutus. Quae laus eadem in A. Albino bene loquendi fuit ; nam flamen Albinus etiam in numero est habitus disertorum. Q. etiam Caepio, vir acer et fortis, cui ^ g fortuna belli crimini, invidia populi calamitati fuit. Tum etiam C. L. Memmii fuerunt oratores mediocres, accusa- 30 tores acres atque acerbi ; itaque in iudicium capitis multos 9 sed L : nec m e d i o c r i t e r OG

Lambinus 0% B : qui

fo rtu n a

11 i g i t u r , i n q u a m 19 u n a a u d i r e s Kayser 2 6 b e n e l o q u e n d i sed. Kayser

Rtvius L

Eberhard

21 e o

12

c o n te n tu s 28 cui fo rtu n a

BRVTVS

36

136

vocaverunt, pro reis non saepe dixerunt/ Sp. Thorius satis valuit in populari genere dicendi, is qui agrum publicum vitiosa et inutili lege vectigali levavit. M. Marcellus Aesernini pater non ille quidem in patronis, sed et in 5 promptis tamen et non inexercitatis ad dicendum fuit, ut filius eius P. Lentulus. L. etiam Cotta praetorius in medio- 137 crium oratorum numero, dicendi non ita multum laude processerat, sed de industria cum verbis tum etiam ipso sono quasi subrustico persequebatur atque imitabatur anti10 quitatem. Atque ego et in hoc ipso Cotta et in aliis pluribus in­ tellego me non ita disertos homines et rettulisse in oratorum numerum et relaturum. Est enim propositum conligere eos qui hoc munere in civitate functi sint, ut tenerent 15 oratorum locum; quorum quidem quae fuerit ascensio et quam in omnibus rebus difficilis optimi perfectio atque absolutio ex eo quod dicam existimari potest. Quam multi 138 enim iam oratores commemorati sunt et quam diu in eorum enumeratione versamur, cum tamen spisse atque 20 vix, ut dudum ad Demosthenem et Hyperidem, sic nunc ad Antonium Crassumque pervenimus ! Nam ego sic existimo, hos oratores fuisse maximos et in his pri­ mum cum Graecorum gloria Latine dicendi copiam aequatam. 25

O m n ia v e n ie b a n t A n to n io in m e n tem ; ea q u e su o quae- ^ q u e lo c o , u b i p lu rim u m proficere et valere p o ssen t, ut ab im p eratore

e q u ite s

p e d ite s

levis arm atura, sic ab illo in

m a x im e o p p o rtu n is o ra tio n is partibus co n lo ca b an tu r. m em oria su m m a, n u lla m e d ita tio n is

Erat

su sp ic io ; im paratus

30 sem p er aggred i ad d ic e n d u m vid eb atu r, se d ita erat paratus u t iu d ic e s illo d ic e n te n o n n u m q u a m v id eren tu r n on satis 3 vectigali c i t a t i s BHM

Campe

coci. dei. :

vectig ale 19 c u m t a m e n

L L

4 sed [e t] : quam tam en

Siangl Bake : c u m

5 ex er­ tan d e m

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS 140 parati ad cavendum fuisse. Verba ipsa non illa quidem elegantissimo sermone—itaque diligenter loquendi laude caruit neque tamen est admodum inquinate locutus—, sed illa, quae propria laus oratoris est in verbis,—nam ipsum Latine loqui est illud quidem, ut paulo ante dixi, in magna 5 laude ponendum, sed non tam sua sponte quam quod est a plerisque neglectum : non enim tam praeclarum est scire Latine quam turpe nescire, neque tam id mihi oratoris boni quam civis Romani proprium videtur ;—sed tamen Antonius in verbis et eligendis, neque id ipsum tam leporis causa 10 quam ponderis, et conlocandis et comprehensione devincien­ dis nihil non ad rationem et tamquam ad artem dirigebat ; verum multo magis hoc idem in sententiarum ornamentis 141 et co n fo rm a tio n ib u s. Q u o g en er e q uia p raestat o m n ib u s D e m o s th e n e s , id c irco a d o c tis oratoru m est p rin cep s iu d i- 15 catus. Οχήματα en im q u ae v o c a n t G raeci, ea m axim e orn an t oratorem ea q u e n o n tam in v erb is p in g en d is h a b e n t 38 pondus quam in inluminandis sententiis. Sed cum haec magna in Antonio tum actio singularis ; quae si partienda est in gestum atque vocem, gestus erat non verba expri- 20 mens, sed cum sententiis congruens : manus umeri latera supplosio pedis status incessus omnisque motus cum verbis sententiisque consentiens; vox permanens, verum sub­ rauca natura. Sed hoc vitium huic uni in bonum converte142 bat. Habebat enim flebile quiddam in questionibus 25 aptumque cum ad fidem faciendam tum ad misericordiam commovendam : ut verum videretur in hoc illud, quod Demosthenem ferunt ei, qui quaesivisset quid primum esset in dicendo, actionem ; quid secundum, idem et idem tertium respondisse. Nulla res magis penetrat in animos 30 3 s e d . . . v e r b i s sed. Eberhard 4 p r o p r i a Lambinus : p r o ­ p rie L i i c o m p r e h e n s i o n e cod. det.·, c o m p r e s s i o n e L 17 o r a t o r e m L : o r a t i onem Lambinus e a q u e L : q u a e Jahn : a t q u e Stangl 2 2 , 2 3 c u m . . . c o n s e n t i e n s sed. Schütz 2 5 in q u e s t i o n i b u s sed. Weidner·, c o n q u e s t i o n i b u s maluit Lambinus 30 n u l l a L : n e c u l l a Schenkt

BRV TVS

38 142

e o sq u e fin git form at flec tit ta lisq u e oratores videri facit, q ualis ip si se videri volu n t. H u ic

alii

p arem

L. C rassu m . 5 n e m in e m in g e n iu m

Illu d

esse

d iceb a n t,

q u id em

certe

alii

a n tep o n eb a n t 143

o m n e s ita iu d icab an t,

e sse qui h oru m altero utro p a tro n o cu iu sq u am requireret.

E q u id e m

q u am q u am A n to n io tan ­

tu m trib u o q u a n tu m supra dixi, ta m en C rasso n ih il statu o fieri p o tu isse p erfectiu s. gravitate 10

E rat su m m a gravitas, erat cum

iu n ctu s facetiaru m et u rb anitatis oratorius, n on

scu rrilis lep o s, L a tin e lo q u e n d i accurata et sin e m o lestia d ilig en s eleg a n tia , in d isse r e n d o m ira ex p lica tio ; cu m d e iure civ ili, cu m d e a e q u o et b o n o d isp u taretur, argu m en ­ N a m ut A n to n iu s co n iectu ra 39

toru m et sim ilitu d in u m cop ia.

m o v e n d a au t se d a n d a su sp ic io n e aut ex c ita n d a in c red ib ilem ^ 15 v im h a b e b a t : sic in in terp reta n d o , in d efin ien d o , in ex p li­ ca n d a a eq u ita te

n ih il erat

C rasso co p io siu s ; id q u e cum

sa ep e alias tu m ap u d cen tu m v ir o s in M ’. Curi cau sa c o g n i­ tu m est.

I ta e n im m u lta tu m con tra scrip tu m pro a eq u o 145

et b o n o d ixit, ut h o m in e m a cu tissim u m Q . S ca ev o la m et in 20 iure, in q u o illa ca u sa vertebatur, p aratissim u m obrueret argu m en to ru m e x e m p lo r u m q u e co p ia ; a tq u e ita tum ab h is p a tro n is a eq u a lib u s et iam co n su la rib u s ca u sa illa d ic ta est, cu m u terq u e ex con traria parte ius e lo q u e n tiu m

iuris

25 e lo q u e n tissim u s

p eritissim u s

S c a e v o la

c iv ile

C rassus,

putaretur.

d efen d eret, ut iuris

peritorum

Q u i q u id em

cu m

p era cu tu s e sse t ad ex c o g ita n d u m q uid in iure aut in a eq u o veru m a u t e sse t

au t n o n

esset, tum verb is erat ad rem

c u m su m m a b revitate m irab iliter ap tu s.

Q u a re sit n o b is 146

orator in h o c in terp reta n d i ex p la n a n d i ed issere n d i g en ere 30

m irab ilis,

sic

ut

sim ile

n ih il v id erim ;

in

a u g en d o ,

in

o rn a n d o , in re fe lle n d o m agis ex istim a to r m e tu en d u s quam : d i s p u t a b a t u r Eberhard 22 e t iam M : e tia m C sicu t C

12 d i s p u t a r e t u r

secl. Kayser 3 0 s i c u t GM ;

L

14 a u t e x c i t a n d a 2 8 c u m ont. BHM

M. TVLLI CICERONIS 4 ° ad m iran d u s orator.

V eru m ad C rassum revertam ur.

Tum

147 B ru tu s: E tsi satis, in q u it, m ih i vid eb ar habere co g n itu m S ca ev o la m ex eis rebus quas a u d ieb a m sa ep e ex C. R u tilio , q u o u tebar p rop ter fam iliaritatem

S c a ev o la e nostri, tam en

ista m ih i eiu s d ic e n d i tan ta laus n o ta n o n erat ; ita q u e ce p i 5 v olu p ta tem tam ornatum virum ta m q u e e x c ellen s in g en iu m

148 fuisse in nostra re publica. Hic ego : Noli, inquam, Brute, existimare his duobus quicquam fuisse in nostra civitate praestantius. Nam ut paulo ante dixi consultorum alterum disertissimum, disertorum alterum consultissimum fuisse, 10 sic in reliquis rebus ita dissimiles erant inter sese, statuere ut tamen non posses, utrius te malles similiorem. Crassus erat elegantium parcissimus, Scaevola parcorum elegantissimus ; Crassus in summa comitate habebat etiam severitatis satis, Scaevolae multa in severitate non deerat tamen 15 149 comitas. Licet orqnia hoc modo; sed vereor ne fingi videantur haec, ut dicantur a me quodam modo ; res se tamen sic habet. Cum omnis virtus sit, ut vestra, Brute, vetus Academia dixit, mediocritas, uterque horum medium quiddam volebat sequi ; sed ita cadebat ut alter ex alterius 20 150 laude partem, uterque autem, suam totam haberet. Tum Brutus : Cum ex tua oratione mihi videor, inquit, bene Crassum et Scaevolam cognovisse, tum de te et de Ser. Sulpicio cogitans esse quandam vobis cum illis similitudi­ nem iudico. Quonam, inquam, istuc modo? Quia mihi 25 et tu videris, inquit, tantum iuris civilis scire voluisse quan­ tum satis esset oratori, et Servius eloquentiae tantum assumpsisse ut ius civile facile posset tueri ; aetatesque vestrae, ut illorum, nihil aut non fere multum differunt. 151 Et ego : De me, inquam, dicere nihil est necesse ; de Servio 30 2 i n q u i t om. BHM haberi L 3 his L 4 u t e b a r vulg. : u t e b a t u r L : u t e b a m u r Gebhart : q u o u t e b a t u r p e r f a m i l i a r i t e r ( p e r ­ q u a m f a m i l i a r i t e r Eberhard) S c a e v o l a , u t n o s t i Kayser 28 p o s s e t cod. det,·, p o s s i t L 29 n i h i l f e r e a u t n o n m u l t u m Madvig

BRVTVS

41

151

autem et tu probe dicis et ego dicam quod sentio. Non enim facile quem dixerim plus studi quam illum et ad dicendum et ad omnis bonarum rerum disciplinas adhi­ buisse. Nam et in isdem exercitationibus ineunte aetate 5 fuimus et postea una Rhodum ille etiam profectus est, quo melior esset et doctior ; et inde ut rediit, videtur mihi in secunda arte primus esse maluisse quam in prima secundus. Atque haud scio an par principibus esse potuisset; sed fortasse maluit, id quod est adeptus, longe omnium non 10 eiusdem modo aetatis sed eorum etiam qui fuissent in iure civili esse princeps. Hic Brutus: Ain tu? inquit. 152 Etiamne Q. Scaevolae Servium nostrum anteponis ? Sic enim, inquam, Brute, existimo, iuris civilis magnum usum et apud Scaevolam et apud multos fuisse, artem in hoc 15 uno; quod numquam effecisset ipsius iuris scientia, nisi eam praeterea didicisset artem quae doceret rem universam tribuere in partis, latentem explicare definiendo, obscuram explanare interpretando, ambigua primum videre, deinde distinguere, postremo habere regulam qua vera et falsa 20 iudicarentur et quae quibus propositis essent quaeque non essent consequentia. Hic enim adtulit hanc artem omnium 133 artium maximam quasi lucem ad ea quae confuse ab aliis aut respondebantur aut agebantur. Dialecticam mihi 42 videris dicere, inquit. Recte, inquam, intellegis ; sed 23 adiunxit etiam et litterarum scientiam et loquendi elegan­ tiam, quae ex scriptis eius, quorum similia nulla sunt, facillime perspici potest. Cumque 'discendi causa duo- 154 bus peritissimis operam dedisset, L. Lucilio Balbo C. Aquilio Gallo, Galli hominis acuti et exercitati promptam 30 et paratam in agendo et in respondendo celeritatem subtili­ tate diligentiaque superavit ; Balbi docti et eruditi hominis 2 q u e m q u a m Lambinus 5 u n a sed. Jah ή 6 d o c tio r o ra to r a t i n d e Martha : e t sed. Campe 1 8 a m b i g u a Lambinus : am b ig u a m L 2 4 d i c e r e i n q u i t L : i n q u i t d i c e r e cod. det. 26 q u o r u m v o l u m i n a m u l t a Koch 2 7 d i c e n d i FO2

Campe

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS in utraque re consideratam tarditatem vicit expediendis conficiendisque rebus. Sic et habet quod uterque eorum 155 habuit, et explevit quod utrique defuit. Itaque ut Crassus mihi videtur sapientius fecisse quam Scaevola—hic enim causas studiose recipiebat, in quibus a Crasso superabatur ; 5 ille se consuli nolebat, ne qua in re inferior esset quam Scaevola—, sic Servius sapientissime, cum duae civiles artes ac forenses plurimum et laudis haberent et gratiae, perfecit ut altera praestaret omnibus, ex altera tantum assumeret quantum esset et ad tuendum ius civile et ad 10 156 obtinendam consularem dignitatem satis. Tum Brutus : Ita prorsus, inquit, et antea putabam—audivi enim nuper eum studiose et frequenter Sami, cum ex eo ius nostrum pontificium, qua ex parte cum iure civili coniunctum esset, vellem cognoscere—et nunc meum iudicium multo magis 15 confirmo testimonio et iudicio tuo ; simul illud gaudeo, quod et aequalitas vestra et pares honorum gradus et artium studiorumque quasi finitima vicinitas tantum abest ab obtrectatione et invidia, quae solet lacerare plerosque, uti ea non modo non exulcerare vestram gratiam sed etiam 20 conciliare videatur. Quali enim te erga illum perspicio, 157 tali illum in te voluntate iudicioque cognovi. Itaque doleo et illius consilio et tua voce populum Romanum carere tam diu ; quod cum per se dolendum est tum multo magis consideranti ad quos ista non tralata sint, sed nescio quo 25 pacto devenerint. Hic Atticus : Dixeram, inquit, a prin­ cipio, de re publica ut sileremus ; itaque faciamus. Nam si isto modo volumus singulas res desiderare, non modo querendi sed ne lugendi quidem finem reperiemus. Per­ gamus ergo, inquam, ad reliqua et institutum ordinem 50 6 n o l e b a t vulg. : s o l e b a t L 7 s a p i e n t i s s i m e vulg. : a p s e n t i s sum e L q u i c u m Eberhard d u a e H 2 : d u o L {et sic saepe) 1 9 e t add. vulg. ( i n v i d i a q u e cod. det.) m a c e r a r e maluit Madvig u t i e a vulg.·. u t i n [L) e a . . . e x u l c e r a r i . . . c o n c i l i a r i Martha

BR VT VS

43 158

persequamur. Paratus igitur veniebat Crassus, exspecta­ batur, audiebatur; a principio statim, quod erat apud eum semper accuratum, exspectatione dignus videbatur. Non multa iactatio corporis, non inclinatio vocis, nulla inambu5 latio, non crebra supplosio‘pedis ; vehemens et interdum irata et plena iusti doloris oratio, multae et cum gravitate facetiae ; quodque difficile est, idem et perornatus et perbrevis ; iam in altercando invenit parem neminem. 159 Versatus est in omni fere genere causarum; mature in 10 locum principum oratorum venit. Accusavit C. Carbonem eloquentissimum hominem admodum adulescens ; summam ingeni non laudem modo sed etiam admirationem est con­ secutus. Defendit postea Liciniam virginem, cum annos 160 X X V I I natus esset. In ea ipsa causa fuit eloquentissimus 15 orationisque eius scriptas quasdam partis reliquit. Voluit adulescens in colonia Narbonensi causae popularis aliquid adtingere eamque coloniam, ut fecit, ipse deducere; exstat in eam legem senior, ut ita dicam, quam aetas illa ferebat oratio. Multae deinde causae ; sed ita tacitus tribunatus 20 ut, nisi in eo magistratu cenavisset apud praeconem Cranium idque nobis bis narravisset Lucilius, tribunum plebis nesciremus fuisse. Ita prorsus, inquit Brutus ; sed 161 ne de Scaevolae quidem tribunatu quicquam audivisse videor et eum conlegam Crassi credo fuisse. Omnibus 25 quidem aliis, inquam, in magistratibus, sed tribunus anno post fuit eoque in Rostris sedente suasit Serviliam legem Crassus ; nam censuram sine Scaevola gessit : eum enim magistratum nemo umquam Scaevolarum petivit. Sed haec Crassi cum edita oratio est, quam te saepe legisse certo 30 scio, quattuor et triginta tum habebat annos totidemque annis mihi aetate praestabat. His enim consulibus eam legem suasit quibus nati sumus, cum ipse esset Q. Caepione 5 v e h e m e n s i n t e r d u m e t i r a t a Campe 30 t u m L : d u m F, secl. Kayser

binus

21 b i s

om. O, secl. Lam-

M. TVLLI CICERONIS c o n su le

n atu s et

A n to n iu s.

Q uod

C.

L a elio ,

id c irco

trien n io

ip so

m in or

quam

p o su i ut d ic e n d i L a tin e prim a

m aturitas in qua aeta te e x stitisse t p o s s e t notari et in te lle ­ geretu r iam ad

su m m u m

paene

esse

p erd u ctam ,

u t eo

nihil ferme quisquam addere posset, nisi qui a philosophia, 5 ... . . . .. , r ιύ2 a iure civili, ab historia fuisset instructior. Erit, inquit [M.J Brutus, aut iam est iste quem exspectas ? Nescio, inquam. Sed est etiam L. Crassi in consulatu pro Q. Caepione t defensione iunctat non brevis ut laudatio, ut oratio autem brevis ; postrema censoris oratio, qua anno duodequinquagesimo usus est. In his omnibus inest quidam sine ullo fuco veritatis color ; quin etiam comprehensio et ambitus ille verborum, si sic τρίοδον appellari placet, erat apud illum contractus et brevis, et in membra quaedam, quae κωλα 163 Graeci vocant, dispertiebat orationem libentius. Hoc loco 15 Brutus : Quando quidem tu istos oratores, inquit, tanto opere laudas, vellem aliquid Antonio praeter illum de ratione dicendi sane exilem libellum, plura Crasso libuisset scribere : cum enim omnibus memoriam sui tum etiam disciplinam dicendi nobis reliquissent. Nam Scaevolae 20 dicendi elegantiam satis ex eis orationibus, quas reliquit, 164 habemus cognitam. Et ego : Mihi quidem a pueritia quasi magistra fuit, inquam, illa in legem Caepionis oratio ; in qua et auctoritas ornatur senatus, quo pro ordine illa dicuntur, et invidia concitatur in iudicum et in accusatorum 25 factionem, contra quorum potentiam populariter tum dicen­ dum fuit. Multa in illa oratione graviter, multa leniter, multa aspere, multa facete dicta sunt ; plura etiam dicta quam scripta, quod ex quibusdam capitibus expositis nec explicatis intellegi potest. Ipsa illa censoria contra Cn. 30 44

6 M . secl. Heusinger 8 in c o n s u l a t u p r o Q . C a e p i o n e d e f e n ­ s i o n e ilin c ta L : e x c o n s u l a t u ( p e c u la tu s ) r ei) Q . C a e p i o n i s d e f e n s i o m i n u t a Stangl, qui et conicit i n c. p r o Q C. ( t e s t i m o n i i l o c o o r a t i o ) d e fe n sio n e tin cta 13 p e r h i o d o r u m Z., corr. vulg. 15 d i s p e r t i b a t o r a t i o n e L, corr. vulg. 2 1 e i s vulg. : h i s L

BRV TVS

44 164

Domitium conlegam non est oratio, sed quasi capita rerum et orationis commentarium paulo plenius. Nulla est enim altercatio clamoribus umquam habita maioribus. Et vero 1 6 5 fuit in hoc etiam popularis dictio excellens ; Antoni genus 5 dicendi multo aptius iudiciis quam contionibus. H oc loco ipsum Domitium non relinquo. Nam etsi non 45 fuit in oratorum numero, tamen pono satis in eo fuisse orationis atque ingeni, quo et magistratus personam et con­ sularem dignitatem tueretur ; quod idem de C. Caelio 10 dixerim, industriam in eo summam fuisse summasque virtutes, eloquentiae tantum, quod esset in rebus privatis amicis eius, in re publica ipsius dignitati satis. Eodem 166 tempore M. Herennius in mediocribus oratoribus Latine et diligenter loquentibus numeratus est ; qui tamen summa 15 nobilitate hominem, cognatione sodalitate conlegio, summa etiam eloquentia, L. Philippum in consulatus petitione superavit. Eodem tempore C. Claudius, etsi propter sum­ mam nobilitatem et singularem potentiam magnus erat, tamen etiam eloquentiae quandam mediocritatem adferebat. 20 Eiusdem fere temporis fuit eques Romanus C. Titius, qui 167 meo iudicio eo pervenisse videtur quo potuit fere Latinus orator sine Graecis litteris et sine multo usu pervenire. Huius orationes tantum argutiarum, tantum exemplorum, tantum urbanitatis habent, ut paene Attico stilo scriptae 25 esse videantur. Easdem argutias in tragoedias satis ille quidem acute, sed parum tragice transtulit. Quem stude­ bat imitari L. Afranius poeta, homo perargutus, in fabulis quidem etiam, ut scitis, disertus. Fuit etiam Q. Rubrius 168 Varro, qui a senatu hostis cum C. Mario iudicatus est, acer 30 et vehemens accusator, in eo genere sane probabilis. Doctus autem Graecis litteris propinquus noster, factus ad dicendum, 7 p o n o GB : p o n e FO 12 d i g n it a ti s L l o q u e n t i b u s secl. Kraffert 17 C l o d i u s L p r u d e n t i a m Campe 23 ta n tu m e x em p lo ru m f a c t u s L : n a t u s maluit Eberhard

cic. brvt.

13, 14 L a t i n e . . . 1 8 p o t e n t i a m L· : sed. Kayser 31 4

45 168

M. TVLLI CICERONIS

M. Gratidiqs Μ. Antoni perfamiliaris, cuius praefectus cum esset in Cilicia est interfectus ; is qui accusavit C. Fimbriam, M. Mari Gratidiani pater. Atque etiam apud socios et Latinos oratores habiti sunt Q. Vettius Vettianus e Marsis, quem ipse cognovi, prudens 5 vir et in dicendo brevis; Q. D. Valerii Sorani, vicini et familiares mei, non tam in dicendo admirabiles quam docti et Graecis litteris et Latinis ; C. Rusticelius Bononiensis, is quidem et exercitatus et natura volubilis ; omnium autem eloquentissimus extra hanc urbem T. Betucius Barrus A- io sculanus, cuius sunt aliquot orationes Asculi habitae ; una Romae contra Caepionem nobilis sane, quoi orationi Caepi­ onis ore respondit Aelius, qui scriptitavit orationes multis, 170 orator ipse numquam fuit. Apud maiores autem nostros video disertissimum habitum ex Latio L. Papirium Fregel- 15 lanum Ti. Gracchi P. F. fere aetate ; eius etiam oratio est pro Fregellanis colonisque Latinis habita in senatu. Tum Brutus : Quid tu igitur, inquit, tribuis istis externis quasi oratoribus ? Quid censes, inquam, nisi idem quod urbanis ? praeter unum, quod non est eorum urbanitate quadam quasi 20 171 colorata oratio. Et Brutus :· Qui est, inquit, iste tandem urbanitatis color? Nescio, inquam ; tantum esse quendam scio. Id tu, Brute, iam intelleges, cum in Galliam veneris ; audies tum quidem etiam verba quaedam non trita Romae, sed haec mutari dediscique possunt; illud est maius, quod 25 in vocibus nostrorum oratorum retinnit quiddam et resonat urbanius. Nec hoc in oratoribus modo apparet sed etiam 172 in ceteris. Ego memini T. Tincam Placentinum hominem facetissimum cum familiari nostro Q. Granio praecone dica­ citate certare. Eon’, inquit Brutus, de quo multa Lucilius ? 30 2 i s q u i Jahn 3 p a t e r vtdg. : p a t r e m L 11 u n a e t i l l a Bake 12 c u i vulg. : q u o L 13 L. A e l i u s e t i a m FOG : a u t e m C 2 4 t u m Weidner·, t u L codd. det. : r e t i n u i t FOG·, r e c i n u i t BHM

Madvfg : Stangl

illa

L

: 16 26 re tin n it

BRVTVS

46

Isto ipso ; sed Tincam non minus multa ridicule dicentem Granius obruebat nescio quo sapore vernaculo ; ut ego iam non mirer illud Theophrasto accidisse, quod dicitur, cum percontaretur ex anicula quadam quanti aliquid venderet 5 et respondisset illa atque addidisset ‘ hospes, non pote mi­ noris/ tulisse eum moleste se non effugere hospitis speciem, cum aetatem ageret Athenis optimeque loqueretur omnium. Sic. ut opinor, in nostris est quidam urbanorum, sicut illic Aiticorum sonus. Sed domum redeamus, id est ad nostros 10 revertamur. Duobus igitur summis, Crasso et Antonio, L. Philippus proximus accedebat, sed longo intervallo tamen proximus. Itaque eum, etsi nemo intercedebat qui se illi anteferret, neque secundum tamen neque tertium dixerim. Nec enim 15 in quadrigis eum secundum numeraverim aut tertium, qui vix e carceribus exierit, cum palmam iam primus acceperit, nec in oratoribus, qui tantum absit a primp, vix ut in eodem curriculo esse videatur. Sed tamen erant ea in Philippo, quae qui sine comparatione illorum spectaret, satis magna 20 diceret : summa libertas in oratione, multae facetiae ; satis creber in reperiendis, solutus in explicandis sententiis ; erat etiam in primis, ut temporibus illis, Graecis doctrinis insti­ tutus, in altercando cum aliquo aculeo et maledicto facetus. Horum aetati prope coniunctus L. Gellius non tam vendi- 1 25 bilis orator, quamvis nescires quid ei deesset ; nec enim erat indoctus nec tardus ad excogitandum nec Romanarum rerum immemor et verbis solutus satis ; sed in magnos oratores inciderat eius aetas ; multam tamen operam amicis et utilem praebuit, atque ita diu vixit ut multarum aetatum eum 7 quom o p i n o r ed.

BxHxMl : q u o m F : q u o m o d o OG o m n iu m . Sic,u t Rom. : O m n i n o s i c [ u t ] , o p i n o r Stangl : O m n i u m h i c [ u t o p i n o r i n n o s t r i s ] Martha : o m n i u m L : o m n i n o codd. det. 8 illic OM‘ : i l l i s GM' : i l l e C 9 i d e s t . . . r e v e r t a m u r secl. Lambinus 2 3 e t m a l e d i c t o secl. Kayser 2 4 G e l l i u s e s t Stangl 25 q u a m ­ v i s Jeep : q u a m u t L

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS 175 oratoribus implicaretur. Multum etiam in causis versabatur isdem fere temporibus D. Brutus, is qui consul cum Mamerco fuit, homo et Graecis doctus litteris et Latinis. Dicebat etiam L. Scipio non imperite Gnaeusque Pompeius Sex. F. aliquem numerum obtinebat. Nam Sex. frater eius prae- 5 stantissimum ingenium contulerat ad summam iuris civilis et ad perfectam geometriae et rerum Stoicarum scientiam, fitem in iure et ante hos M. Brutus et paulo post eum C. Billienus homo per se magnus prope simili ratione sum­ mus evaserat ; qui consul factus esset, nisi in Marianos con- 10 176 sulatus et in eas petitionis angustias incidisset. Cn. autem Octavi eloquentia, quae fuerat ante consulatum ignorata, in consulatu multis contionibus est vehementer probata. Sed ab eis, qui tantum in dicentium numero, non in oratorum fuerunt, iam ad oratores revertamur. Censeo, inquit Atticus ; 1 5 eloquentis enim videbare, non sedulos velle conquirere. 48 Festivitate igitur et facetiis, inquam, C. Iulius L. F. et 177 superioribus et aequalibus suis omnibus praestitit oratorque fuit minime ille quidem vehemens, sed nemo umquam ur­ banitate, nemo lepore, nemo suavitate conditior. Sunt eius 20 aliquot orationes, ex quibus ■sicut ex eiusdem tragoediis 178 lenitas eius non sine nervis perspici potest. Eius aequalis P. Cethegus, cui de re publica satis suppeditabat oratio— totam enim tenebat eam penitusque cognoverat ; itaque in senatu consularium auctoritatem adsequebatur— ; sed in 25 causis publicis nihil, in privatis satis veterator videbatur. Erat in privatis causis Q. Lucretius Vispillo et acutus et iuris peritus ; nam Ofella contionibus aptior quam iudiciis. i v ersab atu r

Kayser -.

v ersaretu r

L

:

v ersatu s est

Stangl

5

a l i q u e m vulg. : a u t q u e m H l : a t q u e m C 7 p e r f e c t a m vulg. : p e rfe c tu m L e t acid. vulg. s c ie n tia m if a m in iu re e t L : item i n i u r e e m i n u e r a t a n t e Prohastl. Glossema in verbis s i m i l i r a t i o n e inesse putat Martha : m a g n u s L : c o g n i t u s Rau : s i m i l i r a t i o n e p r o p e maluit Schütz a o n o n add. Friedrich 2 6 i n p r i v a t i s vulg. : p riv atis L 2 7 e r a t vulg. : e r a n t L 2 8 O f e l l a Victor Pisanus : a f i li a L

BRVTVS

48 I 78

Prudens etiam T. Annius Velina et in eius generis causis orator sane tolerabilis. In eodem genere causarum multum erat T. Iuventius nimis ille quidem lentus in dicendo et paene frigidus, sed et callidus et in capiendo adversario 5 versutus et praeterea nec indoctus et magna cum iuris civilis intellegentia. Cuius auditor P. Orbius meus fere aequalis 179 in dicendo non nimis exercitatus, in iure autem civili non inferior quam magister fuit. Nam T. Aufidius, qui vixit ad summam senectutem, volebat esse similis horum eratque et 10 bonus vir et innocens, sed dicebat parum ; nec sane plus frater eius M. Vergilius, qui tribunus plebis L. Sullae im­ peratori diem dixit. Eius conlega P. Magius in dicendo paulo tamen copiosior. Sed omnium oratorum sive rabu- 180 larum, qui et plane indocti et inurbani aut rustici etiam 15 fuerunt, quos quidem ego cognoverim, solutissimum in dicendo et acutissimum iudico nostri ordinis Q. Sertorium, equestris C. Gargonium. Fuit etiam facilis et expeditus ad dicendum et vitae splendore multo et ingenio sane proba­ bili T. Iunius L. F. tribunicius, quo accusante P. Sextius 20 praetor designatus damnatus est ambitus ; is processisset honoribus longius, nisi semper infirma atque etiam aegra valetudine fuisset. Atque ego praeclare intellego me in eorum commemora- 49 jg tione versari qui nec habiti sint oratores neque fuerint, prae25 teririque a me aliquot ex veteribus commemoratione aut laude dignos. Sed hoc quidem ignoratione ; quid enim est superioris aetatis quod scribi possit de eis, de quibus nulla monumenta loquuntur nec aliorum nec ipsorum ? de his autem, quos ipsi vidimus, neminem fere praetermittemus 2 m u ltu m L : L : m agna cum F 2: S y l l a e L

m u l t u s vulg. : m u l t a r u m Jahn 5 m agna cum . . . t u m Eberhard 11 V i r g i l i u s F S u llae 1 4 e t i n u r b a n i codd. det. : a u t i n u r b a n i L 24 sin t . . . fu e rin t C : su n t . . . fuerunt H 2 7 s c i r i p o s s i t maluit Eberhard 2 9 p r a e t e r m i t t e m u s Bake : p r a e t e r m i t t i m u s / .

49 ι 8 ι

M. TVLLI CICERONIS

182 eorum quos aliquando dicentis vidimus. Volo enim sciri in tanta et tam vetere re publica maximis praemiis eloquen­ tiae propositis omnis cupisse dicere, non plurimos ausos esse, potuisse paucos. Ego tamen ita de uno quoque dicam ut intellegi possit quem existimem clamatorem, 5 quem oratorem ffiisse. Isdem fere temporibus aetate in­ feriores paulo quam Iulius, sed aequales propemodum fuerunt C. Cotta P. Sulpicius Q. Varius Cn. Pomponius C. Curio L. Fufius M. Drusus P . Antistius ; nec ulla aetate 183 uberior oratorum fetus fuit. ^ Ex his Cotta et Sulpicius cum 10 meo iudicio tum omnium facile primas tulerunt. Hic At­ ticus : Quo modo istuc dicis, inquit, cum tuo iudicio tum omnium ? Semperne in oratore probando aut improbando vulgi iudicium cum intellegentium iudicio congruit? An alii probantur a multitudine, alii autem ab eis qui intelle- *5 gunt ? Recte requiris, inquam, Attice ; sed audies ex me 184 fortasse quod non omnes probent. An tu, inquit, id laboras, si huic modo Bruto probaturus es ? Plane, inquam, Attice, disputationem hanc de oratore probando aut improbando multo malim tibi et Bruto placere, eloquentiam autem 20 meam populo probari velim. Etenim necesse est, qui ita dicat, ut a multitudine probetur, eundem doctis probari. Nam quid in dicendo rectum sit aut pravum ego iudicabo, . si modo is sum qui id possim aut sciam iudicare; qualis vero sit orator ex eo quod is dicendo efficiet poterit intel- 25 185 legi. Tria sunt enim, ut quidem ego sentio, quae sint efficienda dicendo : ut doceatur is apud quem dicetur, ut delectetur, ut moveatur vehementius. Quibus virtutibus oratoris horum quidque efficiatur aut quibus vitiis orator aut non adsequatur haec aut etiam in his labatur et cadat, 30 L : a u d i v i m u s Ruhnken e o r u m . . . v i d i m u s secl. s c i r i codd. det. : s c i r e L 1 5 a m u l t . vulg. a b eis : ab h is L 17 l a b o r a s , s i h u i c Manutius : l a b o r a s s e h u i c L 1 9 d e . . . i m p r o b a n d o secl. Schütz 2 5 q u o d q u i s maluit Jahn : q u o d i p s e Weidner 2 7 d i c e t u r L : d i c a t u r codd. det. i v id im u s

Kayser codd. det.

BRVTVS

49 185

artifex aliquis iudicabit. Efficiatur autem ab oratore necne, ut ei qui audiunt ita afficiantur ut orator velit, vulgi adsensu et populari adprobatione iudicari solet. Itaque numquam de bono oratore aut non bono doctis hominibus cum populo tj0 5 dissensio fuit.l An censes, dum illi viguerunt quos ante 186 dixi, non eosdem gradus oratorum vulgi iudicio et doctorum fuisse ? De populo si quem ita rogavisses : Quis est in hac civitate eloquentissimus ? in Antonio et Crasso aut dubitaret aut hunc alius, illum alius diceret. Nemone Philippum tam 10 suavem oratorem, tam gravem, tam facetum his anteferret, quem nosmet ipsi, qui haec arte aliqua volumus expendere, proximum illis fuisse diximus? Nemo profecto; id enim ipsum est summi oratoris summum oratorem populo videri. Qua re tibicen Antigenidas dixerit discipulo sane frigenti ad 187 15 populum : Mihi cane et Musis; ego huic Bruto dicenti, ut solet, apud multitudinem, Mihi cane et populo, mi Brute, dixerim, ut qui audient quid efficiatur, ego etiam cur id efficiatur intellegam. Credit eis quae dicuntur qui audit oratorem, vera putat, adsentitur probat, fidem facit oratio : 20 tu artifex quid quaeris amplius ? Delectatur audiens multi- 188 tudo et ducitur oratione et quasi voluptate quadam perfun­ ditur : quid habc.^ nuod disputes ? Gaudet dolet, ridet plorat, favet odit, contemnit invidet, ad misericordiam in­ ducitur, ad pudendum, ad pigendum ; irascitur mitigatur, 2- sperat tim et; haec perinde accidunt, ut eorum qui adsunt mentes verbis et sententiis et actione tractantur; quid est quod exspectetur docti alicuius sententia ? Quod enim pro­ bat multitudo, hoc idem doctis probandum est. Denique hoc specimen est popularis iudici, in quo numquam fuit 30 populo cum doctis intellegentibusque dissensio. Cum multi 189 essent oratores in vario genere dicendi, quis umquam ex his 2 a u d i u n t L : a u d i a n t Emesti : a u d i e n t codd. det. 14 d i x e r i t s a n e d i s c i p u l o Madvig 18 h i s L, corr. vulg. 24 m i t i g a t u r Schütz : m i r a t u r L 27, 28 q u o d . . . p r o b a n d u m e s t sect. Campe 29, 30 i n q u o . . . d i s s e n s i o sect. Eberhard

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS excellere iudicatus est vulgi iudicio qui non idem a doctis probaretur ? Quando autem dubium fuisset apud patres nostros eligendi cui patroni daretur optio quin aut Antonium optaret aut Crassum ? Aderant multi alii ; tamen utrum de his potius dubitasset aliquis, quin alterum nemo. Quid, £ adulescentibus nobis cum esset Cotta et Hortensius, num quis, cui quidem eligendi potestas esset, quemquam his anteponebat ? Tum Brutus : Quid tu, inquit, quaeris alios ? de te ipso nonne quid optarent rei, quid ipse Hortensius iudicaret videbamus ? qui cum partiretur tecum causas,— 10 saepe enim interfui—perorandi locum, ubi plurimum pollet oratio, semper tibi relinquebat. Faciebat ille quidem, in­ quam, et mihi benevolentia, credo, ductus tribuebat omnia. Sed ego quae de me populi sit opinio nescio ; de reliquis hoc adfirmo, qui vulgi opinione disertissimi habiti sint, 15 eosdem intellegentium quoque iudicio fuisse probatissimos. 191 Nec enim posset idem Demosthenes dicere quod dixisse Antimachum clarum poetam ferunt : qui cum convocatis auditoribus legeret eis magnum illud quod novistis volumen suum et eum legentem omnes praeter Platonem reliquis- 20 sent, Legam, inquit, nihilo minus : Plato enim mihi unus instar est centum milium. Et recte ; poema enim recon­ ditum paucorum adprobationem, oratio popularis adsensum vulgi debet movere. At si eundem hunc Platonem unum auditorem haberet Demosthenes, cum esset relictus a ceteris, 25 192 verbum facere non posset. Quid tu, Brute, posses, si te ut Curionem quondam contio reliquisset? Ego vero, inquit ille, ut me tibi indicem, in eis etiam causis, in quibus omnis res nobis cum iudicibus est, non cum populo, tamen si a corona relictus sim, non queam dicere. Ita se, inquam, res 30 habet. Vt, si tibiae inflatae non referant sonum, abiciendas 2 f u i s s e t L : f u i t Eberhard 4 A t e r a n t maluit Ernesti 7 c u ' vulg. : q u o L 2 2 c e n t u m m i l i u m Camerarius : o m n i u m m . illu m L 2 4 m o v e r e B M'2: m o v e r i L 2 6 p o s s e s n e , s i t u vttlg. : p o s s e s nisi tu L

BRVTVS

51 192

eas sibi tibicen putet, sic oratori populi aures tamquam tibiae sunt ; eae si inflatum non recipiunt—aut si auditor omnino tamquam equus non facit, agitandi finis faciendus est. Hoc • IQ} tamen interest, quod vulgus interdum non probandum ora- ' ' 5 torem probat, sed probat sine comparatione ; cum a medio­ cri aut etiam a malo delectatur, eo est contentus ; esse melius non sentit, illud quod est, qualecumque est, probat. Tenet enim auris vel mediocris orator, sit modo aliquid in eo ; nec res ulla plus apud animos hominum quam ordo et ornatus 10 orationis valet. Qua re quis ex populo, cum Q. Scaevolam Ιξ)4. pro M. Coponio dicentem audiret in ea causa, de qua ante dixi, quicquam politius aut elegantius aut omnino melius aut exspectaret aut posse fieri putaret ? Cum is hoc probare 105 vellet, M’. Curium, cum ita heres institutus esset, ‘ si pupillus 15 ante mortuus esset quam in suam tutelam venisset,’ pupillo non nato heredem esse non posse : quid ille non dixit de testamentorum iure ? de antiquis formulis ? quem ad modum scribi oportuisset, si etiam filio non nato heres institueretur? quam captiosum esse populo, quod scriptum esset neglegi 196 20 et opinione quaeri voluntates et interpretatione disertorum scripta simplicium hominum pervertere? Quam ille multa 197 de auctoritate patris sui, qui semper ius illud esse defenderat ? quam omnino multa de conservando iure civili ? Quae quidem omnia cum perite et scienter item breviter et 25 presse et satis ornate et pereleganter diceret, quis esset in populo qui aut exspectaret aut fieri posse quicquam melius putaret ? At vero, ut contra Crassus ab adulescente deli- 53 cato, qui in litore ambulans scalmum repperisset ob eamque rem aedificare navem concupivisset, exorsus est, similiter 30 Scaevolam ex uno scalmo captionis centumvirale iudicium 6 a m a l o vulg. : m a l o L d e l e c t e t u r OG 13 p o s s e f i e r i C : f i e r i p o s s e OG 1 9 e s s e t Ernesii : e s s e L 22 qui . . . d e ­ f e n d e r a t secl. Eberhard 2 4 i t e m M. Haupt : t u m i t a L : t u m [ i t a ] Friedrich : s u m p t a Martha 2 6 a u t e x s p e c t a r e t a u t secl. Jahn

53 Γ97

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS

hereditatis effecisse : hoc ille initio, consecutis multis eius­ dem generis sententiis, delectavit animosque omnium qui aderant in hilaritatem a severitate traduxit ; quod est unum ex tribus quae dixi ab oratore effici debere. Deinde hoc voluisse eum, qui testamentum fecisset, hoc sensisse, quoquo 5 modo filius non esset, qui in suam tutelam veniret, sive non natus sive ante mortuus, Curius heres ut esset ; ita scribere plerosque et id valere et valuisse semper. Haec et multa eius modi dicens fidem faciebat ; quod est ex tribus oratoris 198 officiis alterum. Deinde aequum bonum testamentorum 10 sententias voluntatesque tutatus est : quanta esset in verbis captio cum in ceteris rebus tum in testamentis, si neglege­ rentur voluntates ; quantam sibi potentiam Scaevola adsumeret, si nemo auderet testamentum facere postea nisi de illius sententia. Haec cum graviter tum ab exemplis copiose, 15 tum varie, tum etiam ridicule et facete explicans eam admi­ rationem adsensionemque commovit, dixisse ut contra nemo videretur ; —hoc erat oratoris officium partitione tertium, genere maximum. Hic ille de populo iudex, qui separatim alterum admiratus esset, idem audito altero iudicium suum 20 contemneret ; at vero intellegens et doctus audiens Scaevo­ lam sentiret esse quoddam uberius dicendi genus et ornatius. Ab utroque autem causa perorata si quaereretur, uter prae­ staret orator, numquam profecto sapientis iudicium a iudicio vulgi discreparet. Qui praestat igitur intellegens imperito? 25 Magna re et difficili; si quidem magnum est scire, quibus rebus efficiatur amittaturve dicendo illud quidquid est quod aut effici dicendo oportet aut amitti non oportet. Praestat etiam illo doctus auditor indocto, quod saepe, cum oratores duo aut plures populi iudicio probantur, quod dicendi genus 30 i h o c i n i ll o i n i t i o c o n s e c u t u s L ( c o n s e c u t i s codd. det.) : h o c c e i l l e i n i t i o , c o n s e c u t i s Stangl : h o c i l l e i n i t i o . . . a n i m o s f q u e ] . . . a d e r a n t e t Madvig 6 v e n i r e t C : v e n i s s e t BHM 15 t u m a b vidg. : cum ab L 1 6 f a c e t e vulg. : f a c i l e L 2 7 d i c e n d o sccl. Kraf-

fert

BRVTVS

54 199

optimum sit intellegit. Nam illud quod populo non pro­ batur ne intellegenti quidem auditori probari potest. Vt enim ex nervorum sono in fidibus quam scienter ei pulsi sint intellegi solet : sic ex animorum motu cernitur quid 5 tractandis his perficiat orator. Itaque intellegens dicendi 200 existimator, non adsidens et adtente audiens, sed uno aspectu et praeteriens de oratore saepe iudicat. Videt oscitantem iudicem, loquentem cum altero, non numquam etiam circulantem, mittentem ad horas, quaesitorem ut di10 mittat rogantem : intellegit oratorem in ea causa non adesse, qui possit animis iudicum admovere orationem tamquam fidibus manum. Idem si praeteriens aspexerit erectos intuentis iudices, ut aut doceri de re idque etiam vultu probare videantur, aut ut avem cantu aliquo sic illos viderit oratione 15 quasi suspensos teneri aut, id quod maxime opus est, miseri­ cordia odio motu animi aliquo perturbatos esse vehementius : ea si praeteriens, ut dixi, aspexerit, si nihil audiverit, tamen oratorem versari in illo iudicio et opus oratorium fieri aut perfectum iam esse profecto intelleget. 20 Cum haec disseruissem, uterque adsensus est ; et ego 55 201 tamquam de integro ordiens : Q uando1igitur, inquam, a Cotta et Sulpicio haec omnis fluxit oratio, cum hos maxime iudicio illorum hominum et illius aetatis dixissem probatos, revertar ad eos ipsos ; tum reliquos, ut institui, deinceps 25 persequar. Quoniam ergo oratorum bonorum—hos enim quaerimus—duo genera sunt, unum attenuate presseque, alterum sublate ampleque dicentium ; etsi id melius est quod splendidius et magnificentius, tamen in bonis omnia quae summa sunt iure laudantur. Sed cavenda est presso 2C 2 30 illi oratori inopia et ieiunitas, amplo autem inflatum et cor2 a u d i t o r i sed. Kayser 1 0 o r a t o r e m sed. Weidnet 13 u t a u t a u t sed. Martha 2 2 , 2 3 m a x i m e cum meo i u d i c i o t u m o m n i u m i l l i u s a e t a t i s Eberhard : m a x i m e i u d i c i o i l l o r u m o m n i u m [ e t i l l i u s a e t a t i s ] Martha : m a x i m e et meo e t o m n i u m e t i l l i u s a e t a t i s o r a t o r i b u s

L:

Jahn

M. TVLLI CICERONIS ruptum orationis genus. Inveniebat igitur acute. Cotta, dicebat pure ac solute ; et ut ad infirmitatem laterum per­ scienter contentionem omnem remiserat, sic ad virium im­ becillitatem dicendi accommodabat genus. Nihil erat in eius oratione nisi sincerum, nihil nisi siccum atque sanum ; 5 illudque maximum, quod cum contentione orationis flectere animos iudicum vix posset nec Omnino eo genere diceret, tractando tamen impellebat ut idem facerent a se commoti 203 quod a Sulpicio concitati. Fuit enim Sulpicius vel maxime omnium, quos quidem ego audiverim, grandis et, ut ita 10 dicam, tragicus orator. Vox cum magna tum suavis et splendida ; gestus et motus corporis ita venustus ut tamen ad forum, non ad scaenam institutus videretur ; incitata et volubilis nec ea redundans tamen nec circumfluens oratio. Crassum hic volebat imitari; Cotta malebat Antonium ; sed 15 204 ab hoc vis aberat Antoni, Crassi ab illo lepos. O magnam, inquit, artem ! Brutus : si quidem istis, cum summi essent 56 oratores, duae res maximae altera alteri defuit. Atque in his oratoribus illud animadvertendum est, posse esse sum­ mos, qui inter se sint dissimiles." Nihil enim tam dissimile 20 quam Cotta Sulpicio, et uterque aequalibus suis plurimum praestitit. Qua re hoc doctoris intellegentis est videre, quo ferat natura sua quemque, et ea duce utentem sic instituere, ut Isocratem in acerrimo ingenio Theopompi et lenissimo Ephori dixisse traditum est, alteri se calcaria adhibere alteri 25 205 frenos. Sulpici orationes quae feruntur, eas post mortem eius scripsisse P. Cannutius putatur aequalis meus, homo extra nostrum ordinem meo iudicio disertissimus. Ipsius Sulpici nulla oratio est, saepeque ex eo audivi, cum se scribere neque consuesse neque posse diceret. Cottae pro 30 7 n e c . . . d i c e r e t srch Weidner 1 0 o m n i u m add.codd. det. 18 m a x i m a e codd. det. : m a x i m e L 1 9 post i l l u d add. i n q u a m Weidner 2 i S u l p i c i o L : S u l p i c i i Madvig 24 e t le n is s im o C : e d e n is s i m o O' : e t l e n i s s i m u m GM1 : e t l e n t i s s i m o Vogel ex Quintii, ii. 8 , 11 2 7 C a n u t i u s vulg.

BRVTVS

56 205

se lege Varia quae inscribitur, eam L. Aelius scripsit Cottae rogatu. Fuit is omnino vir egregius et eques Romanus cum primis honestus idemque eruditissimus et Graecis litteris et Latinis, antiquitatisque nostrae et in inventis rebus et 5 in actis scriptorumque veterum litterate peritus. Quam scientiam Varro noster acceptam ab illo auctamque per sese, vir ingenio praestans omnique doctrina, pluribus et inlustrioribus litteris explicavit. Sed idem Aelius Stoicus esse voluit, orator autem nec studuit umquam nec fuit. 10 Scribebat tamen orationes, quas alii dicerent; ut Q. Metello +F., ut Q. Caepioni, ut Q. Pompeio Rufo, quamquam is etiam ipse scripsit eas, quibus pro se est usus, sed non sine Aelio. His enim scriptis etiam ipse interfui, cum essem apud Aelium adulescens eumque audire perstudiose solerem. 15 Cottam autem miror summum ipsum 'oratorem minimeque ineptum Aelianas levis oratiunculas voluisse existimari suas. His duobus eiusdem aetatis adnumerabatur nemo tertius, sed mihi placebat Pomponius maxime, vel dicam, minime displicebat. Locus erat omnino in maximis causis praeter 20 eos de quibus supra dixi nemini, propterea quod Antonius, qui maxime expetebatur, facilis in causis recipiendis erat ; fastidiosior Crassus, sed tamen recipiebat, Horum qui neutrum habebat, confugiebat ad Philippum fere aut ad Caesarem ; +Cottat Sulpicius expetebantur. Ita ab his sex 25 patronis causae inlustres agebantur; neque tam multa quam nostra aetate iudicia fiebant, neque hoc quod nunc fit, ut causae singulae defenderentur a pluribus, quo nihil est vitio­ sius. Respondemus eis quos non audivimus : in quo primum saepe aliter est dictum aliter ad nos relatum ; deinde magni

206

207

57

20S

8 S t o i c u s e s s e v o l u i t vulg. : S t o i c u s v o l u i t L : S t o i c u s s t u d u i t Martha : S t o i c u m s e v o l u i t Stangl 11 L, F . Martha : B a l e a r i c i f i li o Lamhinus C a e p i o n i vulg. : C a e p i o n e L 13 s c r i p t i s om. Ol : s c r i b e n d i s Lambinus : s c r i b e n t i b u s Kraffert 2 4 post C o t t a S u l p i c i u s ^ i i i ’ e x p e t e b a n t u r Martha : rarius C o t t a et S u l p i c i u s e x ­ p e t e b a n t u r Eberhard : tum C . et S . e x p e t e b a n t u r Piderit : C o t t a raro, rarius S . e x p e t e b a t u r Stangl : alii alia

57 2°8

M. TVLLI CICERONIS

interest coram videre me, quem ad modum adversarius de quaque re adseveret, maxime autem, quem ad modum quae­ que res audiatur. Sed nil vitiosius quam, cum unum corpus debeat esse defensionis, nasci de integro causam, cum sit ab 2cg altero perorata. Omnium enim causarum unum est naturale 5 principium, una peroratio ; reliquae partes quasi membra suo quaeque loco locata suam et vim et dignitatem tenent. Cum autem difficile sit in longa oratione non aliquando aliquid ita dicere ut sibi ipse non conveniat, quanto diffici­ lius cavere, ne quid dicas quod non conveniat eius orationi 10 qui ante te dixerit ? Sed quia et labor multo maior est totam causam quam partem dicere et quia plures ineuntur gratiae si uno tempore dicas pro pluribus, idcirco hanc R consuetudinem libenter adscivimus. Erant tamen quibus videretur illius aetatis tertius Curio, 15 quia splendidioribus fortasse verbis utebatur et quia Latine non pessime loquebatur, usu, credo, aliquo domestico. Nam litterarum admodum nihil sciebat ; sed magni interest quos quisque audiat cotidie domi, quibuscum loquatur a puero, quem ad modum patres, paedagogi, matres etiam loquantur. 20 211 Legimus epistulas Corneliae matris Gracchorum : apparet filios non tam in gremio educatos quam in sermone matris. Auditus est nobis Laeliae C. F. saepe sermo : ergo illam patris elegantia tinctam vidimus et filias eius Mucias ambas, quarum sermo mihi fuit notus, et neptes Licinias, quas nos 25 quidem ambas, hanc vero Scipionis etiam tu, Brute, credo, aliquando audisti loquentem. Ego vero ac libenter quidem, inquit Brutus; et eo libentius, quod L. Crassi erat filia. 212 Quid Crassum, inquam, illum censes, istius Liciniae filiunl, Crassi testamento qui fuit adoptatus ? Summo iste quidem 30 dicitur ingenio fuisse, inquit ; et vero hic Scipio, conlega meus, mihi sane bene et loqui videtur et dicere. Recte, inquam, 2 m a x i m i BuUmann 9 sibi i p s e n o n c o n v e n i a t L : s ib i i p s u m n o n c o n v e n i a t Lambinus : t i b i i p s e n o n c o n v e n i a s Emesti 11 t e om. HG 22 tam g re m io F

BRVTVS

58

212

iudicas, Brute. Etenim istius genus est ex ipsius sapientiae stirpe generatum. Nam et de duobus avis iam diximus, Scipione et Crasso, et de tribus proavis, Q. Metello, cuius quattuor illi filii, P. Scipione, qui ex dominatu Ti. Gracchi 5 privatus in libertatem rem publicam vindicavit, Q. Scaevola augure, qui peritissimus iuris idemque percomis est habitus. Iam duorum abavorum quam est inlustre nomen, P. Scipio- 213 nis, qui bis consul fuit, qui est Corculum dictus, alterius omnium sapientissimi, C. Laeli.— O generosam, inquit, 10 stirpem et tamquam in unam arborem plura genera, sic in istam domum multorum insitam [atque inluminatam] sapien­ tiam !—Similiter igitur suspicor, ut conferamus parva magnis, 59 Curionis, etsi pupillus relictus est, patrio fuisse instituto puro sermone adsuefactam domum ; et eo magis hoc iudico quod 15 neminem ex his quidem, qui aliquo in numero fuerunt, co­ gnovi in omni genere honestarum artium tam indoctum, tam rudem. Nullum ille poetam noverat, nullum legerat orato- 214 rem, nullam memoriam antiquitatis conlegerat ; non publi­ cum ius, non privatum et civile cognoverat. Quamquam hoc 20 quidem fuit etiam in aliis et magnis quidem oratoribus, quos parum his instructos artibus vidimus, ut Sulpicium, ut An­ tonium. Sed ei tamen unum illud habebant dicendi opus elaboratum ; idque cum constaret ex quinque notissimis partibus, nemo in aliqua parte earum omnino nihil poterat : 25 in quacumque enim una plane clauderet, orator- esse non posset; sed tamen alius in alia excellebat magis. Reperie- 215 bat quid dici opus esset et quo modo praeparari et quo loco locari, memoriaque ea comprendebat Antonius, excellebat autem actione ; erant[que] ei quaedam ex his paria cum 4 q u a t t u o r i l l i filii Jcthn·. q u a t t u o r filii L : q u a t t u o r filii consulares 11 a t q u e i n l u m i n a t a m L (secl. Kayser) : a t q u e i n n a t a m a t q u e i n s e m i n a t a m Slangl: alii alia 19 h o c vulg. : h i c F: id C 2 4 [ p a r t e ] e a r u m Vassis: p a r t i u m e a r u m Slangl 27 p r a e p a r a r i vulg. : p r a e p a r a r e L : a p p a r a r i Campe 29 e ra n tq u e

Campe Schütz·, F dett

: erant

C

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS Crasso, quaedam etiam superiora ; at Crassi magis nitebat oratio. Nec vero Sulpicio neque Cottae dicere possumus neque cuiquam bono oratori rem ullam ex illis quinque 216 partibus plane atque omnino defuisse. Itaque in Curione hoc verissime iudicari potest, nulla re una magis oratorem commendari quam verborum splendore et copia. Nam cum 6 0 tardus in cogitando tum in struendo dissipatus fuit. Reliqua duo sunt, agere et meminisse : in utroque cachinnos inridentium commovebat. Motus erat is, quem et C. Iulius in perpetuum notavit, cum ex eo in utramque partem toto corpore vacillante quaesivit quis loqueretur e luntre, et Cn. Sicinius homo impurus, sed admodum ridiculus,—neque 217 aliud in eo oratoris simile quicquam, Is cum tribunus plebis Curionem et Octavium consules produxisset Curioque multa dixisset sedente Cn. Octavio conlega, qui devinctus erat fasciis et multis medicamentis propter dolorem artuum delibutus, ‘.numquam,’ inquit, ‘ Octavi, conlegae tuo gratiam referes : qui nisi se suo more iactavisset, hodie te istic muscae comedissent.’ Memoria autem ita fuit nulla, ut aliquotiens, tria cum proposuisset, aut quartum adderet aut tertium quaereret ; qui in iudicio privato vel maximo, cum ego pro Titinia Cottae peroravissem, ille contra me pro Ser. Naevio diceret, subito totam causam oblitus est idque veneai8iiciis et cantionibus Titiniae factum esse dicebat. Magna haec immemoris ingeni signa ; sed nihil turpius quam quod etiam in scriptis obliviscebatur quid paulo ante posuisset, ut in eo libro, ubi se exeuntem e senatu et cum Pansa no­ stro et cum Curione filio conloquentem facit cum senatum Caesar consul habuisset omnisque ille sermo ductus esi e 2 - 4 n e c v e r o . . . d e f u i s s e sed. Eberhard 7 in s t r u e n d o F : in in stru en d o C 11 q u i s L et Quintii. : q u i d Campe lo q u e re tu r vulg. : l o q u e t u r L e i u n t r e FMG : e l i n t r e O a : c l u n t r e O 1 : e l i i n t r e BH : i n l u n t r e Quintii. 1 2 , 1 3 n e q u e . . . q u i c q u a m sed. Kayser 2 6 o b l i v i s c e r e t u r Manutius 28, 29 cum . . . h a b u isse t secl. Ernesti 2 9 d u c t u s e s t Orelli : d u c t u s e s s e t Lambinus : d u c t u s L : d u c i t u r vulg.

5

10

15

20

25

6o 218

BRVTVS

percontatione fili quid in senatu esset actum. In quo multis verbis cum inveheretur in Caesarem Curio disputatioque esset inter eos, ut est consuetudo dialogorum, cum sermo esset institutus senatu misso, quem senatum Caesar consul 5 habuisset, reprendit eas res quas idem Caesar anno post et deinceps reliquis annis administravisset in Gallia. Tum 219 Brutus admirans : Tantamne fuisse oblivionem, inquit, in scripto praesertim, ut ne legens quidem umquam senserit quantum flagiti commisisset ? Quid autem, inquam, Brute, 10 stultius quam, si ea vituperare volebat quae vituperavit, non eo tempore instituere sermonem, cum illarum rerum iam tempora praeterissent ? Sed ita totus errat ut in çodem sermone dicat in senatum se Caesare consule non accedere et id dicat ipso consule exiens e senatu. Iam, qui hac parte 15 animi, quae custos 6st ceterarum ingeni partium, tam debilis esset ut ne in scripto quidem meminisset quid paulo ante posuisset, huic minime mirum est ex tempore dicenti solitam effluere mentem. Itaque cum ei nec officium deesset et 2 2 0 flagraret studio dicendi, perpaucae ad eum causae defere2 0 bantur. Orator autem vivis eius aetatis aequalibus proxi­ mus optimis numerabatur propter verborum bonitatem, ut ante dixi, et expeditam ac profluentem quodam modo cele­ ritatem. Itaque eius orationes aspiciendas tamen censeo. Sunt illae quidem languidiores, verum tamen possunt augere 2 5 et quasi alere id bonum quod in illo mediocriter fuisse concedimus : quod habet tantam vim ut solum sine aliis in Curione speciem oratoris alicuius effecerit. Sed ad instituta redeamus. 1 - 4 i n q u o . . . m i s s o sect. Eberhard 2, 3 d i s p u t a t i o q u e . . . d ia lo ­ g o r u m sed. Kayser 6 ad m in istrav it M : a d m in istrav isset C 1 3 i n s e n a t u m codd. det. : i n s e n a t u L 1 4 e t i d Latubtnns : s e d id L 1 6 u t n e , . . p o s u i s s e t sed. Eberhard 2 0 v iv is e iu s a e ta tis a eq . Friedrich : v i v i s e i u s a e q u a l i b u s L {sect. Kayser) : a t e m p o r i s e i u s a e q . Madvig : a s u i s a e q . Piderit : v i v i s e t i a m a e q . Stangl 25 m ed io ­ c r i t e r L : n o n m e d i o c r i t e r Stangl C IC . B R V T ,

5

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS In eodem ieritur numero eiusdem aetatis C. Carbo fuit 221. . . . . . . . illius eloquentissimi viri filius. Non satis acutus orator, sed tamen orator numeratus est. Erat in verbis gravitas et facile dicebat et auctoritatem naturalem quandam habe­ bat oratio. Acutior Q. Varius rebus inveniendis nec minus ? verbis expeditus ; fortis vero actor et vehemens et verbis nec inops nec abiectus et quem plane oratorem dicere auderes, Cn. Pomponius lateribus pugnans, incitans animos, acer 222 acerbus criminosus. Multum ab his aberat L. Fufius, tamen ex accusatione M’. Aquili diligentiae fructum ceperat, io . Nam M. Drusum tuum magnum avunculum, gravem ora­ torem ita dumtaxat cum de re publica diceret, L. autem Lucullum etiam acutum, patremque tuum, Brute, iuris quoque et publici et privati sane peritum, M. Lucullum, M. Octavium Cn. F., qui tantum auctoritate dicendoque 15 valuit ut legem Semproniam frumentariam populi frequentis suffragiis abrogaverit, Cn. Octavium M. F., M. Catonem patrem, Q. etiam Catulum filium abducamus ex acie, id est a iudiciis, et in praesidiis rei publicae, cui facile satis facere 223 possint; collocemus. Eodem Q. Caepionem referrem, nisi 20 nimis equestri ordini deditus a senatu dissedisset. Cn. Car­ bonem M. Alarium et ex eodem genere compluris minime dignos elegantis conventus auribus aptissimos cognovi tur­ bulentis contionibus. Quo in genere, ut in his perturbem aetatum ordinem, nuper L. Quinctius fuit ; aptior etiam 23 324 Palicanus auribus imperitorum. Et quoniam huius generis facta mentio est, seditiosorum omnium post Gracchos L. Appuleius Saturninus eloquentissimus visus est ; magis specie tamen et motu atque ipso amictu capiebat homines quam aut dicendi copia aut mediocritate prudentiae. Longe 30 i f u i t sccl. Vassis 2 f i li u s . I s Jahn 10 ta m e n L : ta m e ts i Eberhard c e p i t maluit Stangl 1 8 i d e s t a i u d i c i i s sect. Manutius 2 4 c o n t i o n i b u s vulg. : c o g n i t i o n i b u s L 25 e tia m M . Statigl

BRVTVS

62 224

autem post natos homines improbissimus C. Servilius Glau­ cia, sed peracutus et callidus cum primisque ridiculus. Is ex summis et fortunae et vitae sordibus in praetura consul factus esset, si rationem eius haberi licere iudicatum esset. 5 Nam et plebem tenebat et equestrem ordinem beneficio legis ' devinxerat. Is praetor eodem die quo Saturninus tribunus plebis Mario et Flacco consulibus publice est interfectus ; homo simillimus Atheniensis Hyperboli, cuius improbitatem veteres Atticorum comoediae notaverunt. 10 Quos Sex. Titius consecutus homo loquax sane et satis 225 acutus, sed tam solutus et mollis in gestu ut saltatio quaedam nasceretur cui saltationi Titius nomen esset. Ita cavendum est ne quid in agendo dicendove facias, cuius imitatio rideatur. Sed ad paulo superiorem aetatem 63 15 revecti sumus ; nunc ad eam de qua aliquantum sumus locuti revertamur. Coniunctus igitur Sulpici aetati P. Antistius fuit, rabula 226 sane probabilis, qui multos cum tacuisset annos neque contemni solum sed inrideri etiam solitus esset, in tribu20 natu primum contra C. Iuli illam consulatus petitionem extraordinariam veram causam agens est probatus ; et eo magis quod eandem causam cum ageret eius conlega ille ipse Sulpicius, hic plura et acutiora dicebat. Itaque post tribunatum primo multae ad eum causae, deinde omnes 2v maximae quaecumque erant deferebantur. Rem videbat 227 acute, componebat diligenter, memoria valebat ; verbis non ille quidem ornatis utebatur sed tamen non abiectis ; expedita autem erat et perfacile currens oratio ; et erat eius quidam tamquam habitus non inurbanus ; actio paulum 3 i n s u m m i s . . . e x p r a e t u r a maluit Campe i n p r a e t u r a secl. Schenkl : paene c o n s . f. e s t [ s i . . . e s s e t ] n a m . . . d e v i n x e r a t [ i s . . . i n t e r ­ f e c t u s ] Eberhard 6 i s p r a e t o r L : i g i t u r p r . Stangl i o est add. Jahn i i d i s s o l u t u s B lH 13 i ta c a v e n d u m . . . r i d e a t u r sed. Stangl : i r r i d e a t u r Friedrich 1 5 r e i e c t i OlG 18 ia c u is s e t Baehrens 2 9 q u i d a m Manutius'. q u i d e m L

63

227

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS

cum vitio vocis tum etiam ineptiis claudicabat. Hic tem­ poribus floruit eis quibus ■inter profectionem reditumque L. Sullae sine iure fuit et sine ulla dignitate res publica ; hoc etiam magis probabatur, quod erat ab oratoribus quae­ dam in foro solitudo. Sulpicius occiderat, Cotta aberat et 5 Curio, vivebat e reliquis patronis eius aetatis nemo praeter Carbonem et Pomponium, quorum utrumque facile superabat. Inferioris autem aetatis erat proximus L. Sisenna, 228 doctus vir et studiis optimis deditus, bene Latine loquens, gnarus rei publicae, non sine facetiis sed neque laboris io multi nec satis versatus in causis ; interiectusque inter duas aetates Hortensi et Sulpici nec maiorem consequi poterat et minori necesse erat cedere. Huius omnis facultas ex historia ipsius perspici potest, quae cum facile omnis vincat superiores, tum indicat tamen quantum absit a summo 15 quamque genus boc scriptionis nondum sit satis Latinis litteris inlustratum. Nam Q. Hortensi admodum» adule­ scentis ingenium ut Phidiae signum simul aspectum et pro229 batum est. Is L. Crasso Q. Scaevola consulibus primum in foro dixit et apud hos ipsos quidem consules, et cum 20 eorum qui adfuerunt, tum ipsorum consulum qui omnis intellegentia anteibant, iudicio discessit probatus. Vndeviginti annos natus erat eo tempore, est autem L. Paullo C. Marcello consulibus mortuus : ex quo videmus eum in patronorum numero annos quattuor et quadraginta fuisse. 25 Hoc de oratore paulo post plura dicemus ; hoc autem loco voluimus aetatem eius in disparem oratorum aetatem in­ cludere. Quamquam id quidem omnibus usu venire necesse fuit, quibus paulo longior vita contigit, ut et cum multo maioribus natu quam essent ipsi et cum 30 aliquanto minoribus compararentur. Vt Accius - isdem vulg. L sect. Schütz

2 eis m aioris

: his L 3 u l l a sed. Jahn 12 m a i o r e m vulg. : 2 6 h o c . . . i n c l u d e r e seJ. Eberhard 27 a e ta te m e i u s add. Stephanus a e t a t e m oui. Ο

BRVTVS aedilibus ait se et Pacuvium docuisse fabulam, cum ille octoginta, ipse triginta annos natus esset : sic Hortensius non 230 cum suis aequalibus solum sed et mea cum aetate et cum tua, Brute, et cum aliquanto superiore coniungitur, si 5 quidem et Crasso vivo dicere solebat et magis iam etiam vigebat cum Antonio et Philippo iam sene pro Cn. Pompei bonis dicente in illa causa, adulescens cum esset, princeps fuit et in eorum, quos in Sulpici aetate posui, numerum facile pervenerat et suos inter aequalis M. Pisonem M. 10 Crassum Cn. Lentulum P. Lentulum Suram longe prae­ stitit et me adulescentem nactus octo annis minorem quam erat ipse multos annos in studio eiusdem laudis exercuit et tecum simul, sicut ego pro multis, sic ille pro Appio Claudio dixit paulo ante mortem. Vides igitur ut ad te 2^ 15 oratorem, Brute, pervenerimus tam multis inter nostrum tuumque initium dicendi interpositis oratoribus ; ex quibus, quoniam in hoc sermone nostro statui neminem eorum qui viverent nominare, ne vos curiosius eliceretis ex me quid de quoque iudicarem, eos qui iam sunt mortui nominabo. 2 3 Tum Brutus : Non est, inquit, ista causa quam dicis, quam ob rem de eis qui vivunt nihil velis dicere. Quaenam igitur, inquam, est ? Vereri te, inquit, arbitror ne per nos hic sermo tuus emanet et ei tibi suscenseant quos prae­ terieris. Q uid? vos, inquam, tacere non poteritis? Nos 25 quidem, inquit, facillime ; sed tamen te arbitror malle ipsum tacere quam taciturnitatem nostram experiri. Tum 232 ego : Vere tibi, inquam, Brute, dicam. Non me existimavi in hoc sermone usque ad hanc aetatem esse venturum ; sed ita traxit ordo aetatum orationem ut iam ad minores etiam 30 pervenerim. Interpone igitur, inquit, si quos videtur; i e d i l i b u s OG : e t e d i b u s F: e d i b u s C c u m vulg. : q u o L v i g e b a t L : v i g e n t e f l o r e b a t Kayser c u m A n t o n i o e t Madvg : A n t o n i o e t c u m L : A n t o n i o e t [ c u m ] Martha 7 d icen te L : d i c e n s Schütz 11 n a c t u s a e m u l u m Kayser 1 2 s t a d i o Rivtus 1 8 e l i c e r e t i s vulg. : e l i g e r e t i s L

6

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS deinde redeamus ad te et ad Hortensium. Immo vero, inquam, ad H ortensium; de me alii dicent, si qui volent. Minime vero, inquit. Nam etsi me facile omni tuo ser­ mone tenuisti, tamen is mihi longior videtur, quod propero audire de te ; nec vero tam de virtutibus'dicendi tuis, quae 5 cum omnibus tum certe mihi notissimae sunt, quam quod gradus tuos et quasi processus dicendi studeo cognoscere. 233 Geretur, inquam, tibi mos, quoniam me non ingeni praedicatorem esse vis sed laboris mei. Verum inter­ ponam, ut placet, alios et a M. Crasso, qui fuit aequalis 10 Hortensi, exordiar. 66 Is igitur mediocriter a doctrina instructus, angustius etiam a natura, labore et industria et quod adhibebat ad obtinendas causas curam etiam et gratiam, in principibus patronis aliquot annos fuit. In huius oratione sermo 15 Latinus erat, verba non abiecta, res compositaq diligenter, nullus flos tamen neque lumen ullum, animi magna, vocis parva contentio, omnia fere ut similiter atque uno modo dicerentur. Nam huius aequalis et inimicus C. Fimbria non ita diu iactare se potuit ; qui omnia magna voce dicens 20 verborum sane bonorum cursu quodam incitato ita furebat tamen, ut mirarere tam alias res agere populum, ut esset 234 insano inter disertos locus. Cn. autem Lentulus multo maiorem opinionem dicendi actione faciebat quam quanta in eo facultas erat ; qui cum esset nec peracutus, quamquam 25 et ex facie et ex vultu videbatur, nec abundans verbis, etsi fallebat in eo ipso : sic intervallis, exclamationibus, voce suavi et canora, t admirando t inridebat, calebat in agendo, ut ea quae deerant non desiderarentur. Ita, tamquam Curio copia non nulla verborum, nullo alio bono, tenuit oratorum 3028 2 8 a d m i r a n d o i n r i d e b a t c a l e b a t L: a d m i r a n d o o r e d i c e b a t Friedrich : a d m i r a n t e s i n r e t i e b a t Schütz : a d m i r a n d a s i n c e d e b a t [ c a l e b a t ] Martha·. a d m i r a n d o i r r i d e n d o l a t e b a t Lambiuus : a d m i r a n d u m i l l i c i e b a t ita c a l e b a t Madvig, alii aha

BRV TVS

66 235

locum : sic Lentulus ceterarum virtutum dicendi medio- 235 critatem actione occultavit, in qua excellens fuit. Nec multo secus P. Lentulus, cuius et excogitandi et loquendi tarditatem tegebat formae dignitas, corporis motus plenus 5 et artis et venustatis, vocis et suavitas et magnitudo. Sic in hoc nihil praeter actionem fuit, cetera etiam minora quam in superiore. M. Piso quidquid habuit, habuit ex disciplina maximeque ex omnibus, qui ante fuerunt, Graecis 236 doctrinis eruditus fuit. Habuit a natura genus quoddam 10 acuminis, quod etiam arte limaverat, quod erat in repre­ hendendis verbis versutum et sollers, sed saepe stoma­ chosum, non numquam frigidum, interdum etiam facetum. Is laborem [quasi cursum] forensem diutius non tulit, quod et corpore erat infirmo et hominum ineptias ac stultitias, 15 quae devorandae nobis sunt, non ferebat iracundiusque respuebat sive morose, ut putabatur, sive ingenuo liberoque fastidio. Is cum satis floruisset adulescens, minor haberi est coeptus postea. Deinde ex virginum iudicio magnam laudem est adeptus et ex eo tempore quasi revocatus in 20 cursum tenuit locum tam diu quam ferre potuit laborem ; postea quantum detraxit ex studio tantum amisit ex gloria. P. Murena mediocri ingenio, sed magno studio rerum 237 veterum, litterarum et studiosus et non imperitus, multae industriae et magni laboris fuit. C. Censorinus Graecis 23 litteris satis doctus, quod proposuerat explicans expedite, non invenustus actor, sed iners et inimicus fori. L. Turius parvo ingenio sed multo labore, quoquo modo poterat, saepe dicebat ; itaque ei paucae centuriae ad consulatum defuerunt. C. Macer auctoritate semper eguit, sed fuit 23S 30 patronus propemodum diligentissimus. Huius si vita, si 2 i n q u a e x c e l l e n s f u i t sed. Weidner 5 s i c L : s e d Orellt : s c i l i c e t Siangl qui ei sed. s c i l i c e t . . . s u p e r i o r e 13 q u a s i c u r s u m sed. Jahn 1 7 i s L : i t a q u e Kayser: i g i t u r Siangl 28 sa e p e L : e t s a e p e Bake : s a e p e q u e Siangl

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS mores, si vultus denique non omnem commendationem ingeni everteret, maius nomen in patronis fuisset. Non erat abundans, non inops tamen ; non valde nitens, non plane horrida oratio ; vox gestus et omnis actio sine lepore ; at in inveniendis componendisque rebus mira accuratio, ut 5 non facile in ullo diligentiorem maioremque cognoverim, sed eam ut citius veteratoriam quam oratoriam diceres. Hic etsi etiam in publicis causis probabatur, tamen in ^ privatis inlustriorem obtinebat locum. C. deinde Piso 1,9 statarius et sermonis plenus orator, minime ille quidem 10 tardus in excogitando, verum tamen vultu et simulatione multo etiam acutior quam erat videbatur. Nam eius aequa­ lem M \ Glabrionem bene institutum avi Scaevolae dili­ gentia socors ipsius natura neglegensque tardaverat. Etiam L. Torquatus elegans in dicendo, in existimando admodum 15 prudens, toto genere perurbanus. Meus autem aequalis Cn. Pompeius vir ad omnia summa natus maiorem dicendi gloriam habuisset, nisi eum maioris gloriae cupiditas ad bellicas laudes abstraxisset. Erat oratione satis amplus, rem prudenter videbat ; actio vero eius habebat et in voce 20 magnum splendorem et i n . motu summam dignitatem. 240 Noster item aequalis D. Silanus vitricus tuus studi ille quidem habuit non multum sed acuminis et orationis satis. Q. Pompeius A. F., qui Bithynicus dictus est, biennio quam nos fortasse maior, summo studio discendi multaque do- 25 ctrina, incredibili labore atque industria; quod scire possum : fuit enim mecum et cum M. Pisone cum amicitia tum studiis exercitationibusque coniunctus. Huius actio non satis commendabat orationem ; in hac enim satis erat 241 copiae, in illa autem leporis parum. Erat eius aequalis 30 P. Autronius voce peracuta atque magna nec alia re ulla probabilis, et L. Octavius Reatinus, qui cum multas iam 5 a c c u ra tio L : c u ra ac ra tio d i s c e n d i Lambintis : d i c e n d i

25

Macivig L

13 a u i

vulg.

: aut

L

BRVTVS

6 8

241

causas diceret, adulescens est mortuus—is tamen ad dicen­ dum veniebat magis audacter quam parate— ; et C. Staienus, qui se ipse adoptaverat et de Staieno Aelium fecerat, fervido quodam et petulanti et furioso genere dicendi ; quod quia 5 multis gratum erat et probabatur, ascendisset ad honores, nisi in facinore manifesto deprehensus poenas legibus et iudicio dedisset. Eodem tempore C. L. Caepasii fratres ^ 242 fuerunt, qui multa opera, ignoti homines et repentini, quae­ stores celeriter facti sunt, oppidano quodam et incondito 10 genere dicendi. Addamus huc etiam, ne quem vocalem praeterisse videamur, C. Cosconium Calidianum, qui nullo acumine eam tamen verborum copiam, si quam habebat, praebebat populo cum multa concursatione magnoque clamore. Quod idem faciebat Q. Arrius, qui fuit M. Crassi 15 quasi secundarum. Is omnibus exemplo debet esse quan­ tum in hac urbe polleat multorum oboedire tempori mul­ torumque vel honori vel periculo servire. His enim rebus 243 infimo loco natus et honores et pecuniam et gratiam con­ secutus etiam in patronorum—sine doctrina, sine ingenio— 20 aliquem numerum pervenerat. Sed ut pugiles inexercitati, etiam si pugnos et plagas Olympiorum cupidi ferre possunt, solem tamen saepe ferre non possunt, sic ille cum omni iam fortuna prospere functus labores etiam magnos excepisset, illius iudicialis anni severitatem quasi solem non tulit. 25 Tum Atticus : Tu quidem de faece, inquit, hauris idque 244 iam dudum, sed tacebam ; hoc vero non putabam, te usque ad Staienos et Autronios esse venturum. Non puto, in­ quam, existimare te ambitione me labi, quippe de mortuis ; sed ordinem sequens in memoriam notam et aequalem 30 necessario incurro. Volo autem hoc perspici, omnibus conquisitis, qui in multitudine dicere ausi sint, memoria quidem dignos perpaucos, verum qui omnino nomen 1 6 m u l t o r u m sed. Gruter v i d e r i maluit Stangl

Madvig

32 in d ig n o s

BHM

verum

sed.

6g 244

M. TVLLI CICERONIS

habuerint, non ita multos fuisse. Sed ad sermonem insti° tutum revertamur. T. Torquatus T. F. et doctus vir ex Rhodia disciplina Molonis et a natura ad dicendum satis solutus atque expeditus, cui si vita suppeditavisset, sublato ambitu consul factus esset, plus facultatis habuit ad dicen- 5 dum quam voluntatis. Itaque studio huic non satis fecit, officio vero nec in suorum necessariorum causis nec in 246 sententia senatoria defuit. Etiam M. Pontidius municeps noster multas privatas causas actitavit, celeriter sane verba volvens nec hebes in causis vel dicam plus etiam quam 10 non hebes, sed effervescens in dicendo stomacho saepe iracundiaque vehementius ; ut non cum adversario solum sed etiam, quod mirabile esset, cum iudice ipso, cuius delenitor esse debet orator, iurgio saepe contenderet. M. Messalla minor natu quam nos, nullo modo inops, sed 15 non nimis ornatus genere verborum; prudens, acutus, minime incautus patronus, in causis cognoscendis componendisque diligens, magni laboris, multae operae multarumque causa247 rum. Duo etiam Metelli, Celer et Nepos, non nihil in causis versati nec sine ingenio nec indocti, hoc erant populare 20 dicendi genus adsecuti. Cn.· autem Lentulus Marcellinus nec umquam indisertus et in consulatu pereloquens visus est, non tardus sententiis, non inops verbis, voce canora, facetus satis. C. Memmius L. F. perfectus litteris, sed Graecis, fastidiosus sane Latinarum, argutus orator verbis- 25 que dulcis sed fugiens non modo dicendi verum etiam cogitandi laborem, tantum sibi de facultate detraxit quan­ tum imminuit industriae. 7 * Hoc loco Brutus : Quam vellem, inquit, de his etiam 248 oratoribus qui hodie sunt tibi dicere liberet ; et; si de 30 aliis minus, de duobus tamen quos a te scio laudari solere, 7

i i t a C : t a m OG 4 c u i L : q u i Kn\ser maluit Meyer 1 6 n i m i s C : m i n u s OG n ih il L 21 C n . Manutius : C . L

13 m i r a b i l i u s e s t 1 9 n o n n i h i l vulg. :

BRVTYS

71 248

Caesare et Marcello, audirem non minus libenter quam audivi de eis qui fuerunt. Cur tandem ? inquam ; an. exspectas quid ego iudicem de istis, qui tibi sunt aeque noti ac mihi ? Mihi me hercule, inquit, Marcellus satis est notus, 5 Caesar autem parum ; illum enim saepe audivi, hic, cum ego iudicare iam aliquid possem, afuit. Quid igitur de illo 249 iudicas, inquam, quem saepe audivisti ? Quid censes, inquit, nisi id, quod habiturus es similem tui ? Ne ego, inquam, si ita est, velim tibi eum placere quam maxime. Atqui et ita est, 10 inquit, et vehementer placet ; nec vero sine causa. Nam et didicit et omissis ceteris studiis unum id egit seseque cotidianis commentationibus acerrime exercuit. Itaque et 250 lectis utitur verbis et frequentibus senientiis et splendore vocis et dignitate motus fit speciosum et inlustre quod 15 dicit, omniaque sic suppetunt, ut ei nullam deesse virtutem oratoris putem ; maximeque laudandus est, qui hoc tempore ipso, quod liceat in hoc communi nostro et quasi fatali malo, consoletur se cum conscientia optimae mentis tum etiam usurpatione et renovatione doctrinae. Vidi enim 20 Mytilenis nuper virum atque, ut dixi, vidi plane virum. Itaque cum eum antea tui similem in dicendo viderim, tum vero nunc a doctissimo viro tibique, ut intellexi, ami­ cissimo Cratippo instructum omni copia multo videbam similiorem. Hic ego: Etsi, inquam, de optimi viri no b is-251 25 que amicissimi laudibus libenter audio, tamen incurro in memoriam communium miseriarum, quarum oblivionem quaerens hunc ipsum sermonem produxi longius. Sed de Caesare cupio audire quid tandem Atticus iudicet. Et ille : 72 Praeclare, inquit, tibi constas, ut de eis qui nunc sint nihil 30 velis ipse dicere ; et hercule si sic ageres, ut de eis egisti 6 i a m otn. BHM e s ) Madvig 9 a tq u i 1 4 e t add. vulg. Peter·, c u m L

7

i n q u a m add. Jahn 8 (id q u o d a g n i t u r u s : a t q u e L· 1 3 s e n t e n t i i s add. Jahn 1 5 d i c i t Orelli'. d i c i t u r L 17 q u o d

vulg.

M. TVLLI CICERONIS

7 2 35 I

qui iam mortui sunt, neminem ut praetermitteres : ne tu in multos Autronios et Staienos incurreres. Qua re sive hanc turbam effugere voluisti sive veritus es ne quis se aut praeteritum aut non satis laudatum queri posset, de Caesare tamen potuisti dicere, praesertim cum et tuum de illius in- 5 genio notissimum iudicium esset nec illius de tuo obscurum. 3 5 2 Sed tamen, Brute, inquit Atticus, de Caesare et ipse ita iudico et de hoc huius generis acerrimo existimatore sae­ pissime audio, illum omnium fere oratorum Latine loqui elegantissime ; nec id solum domestica consuetudine, ut 10 dudum de Laeliorum et Muciorum familiis audiebamus, sed quamquam id quoque credo fuisse, tamen, ut esset perfecta illa bene loquendi laus, multis litteris et eis qui­ dem reconditis et exquisitis summoque studio et diligentia 253 est consecutus : qui etiam in maximis occupationibus ad te 15 ipsum, inquit in me intuens, de ratione Latine loquendi accuratissime scripserit primoque in libro dixerit verborum dilectum originem esse eloquentiae tribueritque, mi Brute, huic nostro, qui me de illo maluit quam se dicere, laudem singularem ; nam scripsit his verbis, cum hunc nomine 20 esset adfatus : ac si, ut cogitata praeclare eloqui possent, non nulli studio et usu elaboraverunt, cuius te paene prin­ cipem copiae atque inventorem bene de nomine ac digni­ tate populi Romani meritum esse existimare debemus; ^ hunc facilem et cotidianum novisse sermonem num pro 25 254 relicto est habendum? Tum Brutus: Amice hercule, in­ quit, et magnifice te laudatum puto, quem non solum prin­ cipem atque inventorem copiae dixerit, quae erat magna 3 e s add. q u in L

vulg.

6 n e c i l l i u s F: n e i l l i u s C 1 5 q u i Schneider·. s c r i p s i t (sic F) . . . d i x i t . . . t r i b u i t q u e maluit Eberhard 2 1 u t c o g i t a t a vulg. : c o g i t a t a u t Stangi: s i c. p . e l o q u i u t p . Ernesii 2 2 c u i u s L : i n q u o i l l i u s Martha : h u i u s Piderit 2 5 h u n c f a c i l e m e t vulg. : h u n c f a c i l e e t L : h u n c c e f a c i l e Stangl n u i n Lallemand : n u n c L 2 6 r e l i c t o L : d e r e l i c t o Lambinus : r e i c u l o Madvig : d e l i c t o Schütz

τη

BRVTVS

73 25t

laus, sed etiam bene meritum de populi Romani nomine et dignitate. Quo enim uno vincebamur a victa Graecia, id aut ereptum illis est aut certe nobis cum illis communica­ tum. H anc autem, inquit, gloriam testimoniumque Cae- 2 5 5 5 saris tuae quidem supplicationi non, sed triumphis mul­ torum antepono. J~Et recte quidem, inquam, Brute ; modo sit hoc Caesaris iudici, non benevolentiae testimonium. Plus enim certe adtulit huic populo dignitatis, quisquis est ille, si modo est aliquis, qui non inlustravit modo sed etiam 10 genuit in hac urbe dicendi copiam, quam 'illi, qui Ligurum castella expugnaverunt : ex quibus multi sunt, ut scitis, triumphi. Verum quidem si audire volumus, omissis illis 256 divinis consiliis, quibus saepe constituta est imperatorum sapientia salus civitatis aut belli aut domi, multo magnus 15 orator praestat minutis imperatoribus. ‘ At prodest plus imperator.’ Quis negat ? Sed tamen—non metuo ne mihi acclametis ; est autem quod sentias dicendi libere locus— malim mihi L. Crassi unam pro M’. Curio dictionem quam castellanos triumphos duo. ‘ At plus interfuit rei publicae 20 castellum capi Ligurum quam bene defendi causam M’. Curi.’ Credo; sed Atheniensium quoque plus interfuit 257 firma tecta in domiciliis habere quam Minervae signum ex ebore pulcherrimum ; tamen ego me Phidiam esse mallem quam vel optimum fabrum tignarium. Qua re non quan25 tum quisque prosit, sed quanti quisque sit ponderandum est ; praesertim cum pauci pingere egregie possint aut fin­ gere, operarii autem aut baiuli deesse non possint. Sed perge, Pomponi, de Caesare et redde quae restant^] Solum quidem, inquit ille, et quasi fundamentum oratoris 30 vides, locutionem emendatam et Latinam, cuius penes quos 3 n o b i s c u m i l l i s BHM : n o b i s c u m G r e c i s FOG : n o b i s c u m Simon 5 n o n t u a e q u i d e m s u p p l i c a t i o n i maluit Staiigl 17 l i b e r e Jahn : lib e r L 1 8 L . om. F, damnat Martha 24 t i g n a r i u m G2 : tig n u a riu m L

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS laus adhuc fuit, non fuit rationis aut scientiae, sed quasi bonae consuetudinis. Mitto C. Laelium P. Scipionem : aetatis illius ista fuit laus tamquam innocentiae sic Latine loquendi—nec omnium tamen, nam illorum aequalis Caeci­ lium et Pacuvium male locutos videmus—sed omnes tum 5 fere, qui nec extra urbem hanc vixerant neque.eos aliqua barbaries domestica infuscaverat, recte loquebantur. Sed hanc certe rem deteriorem vetustas fecit et Romae et in Graecia. Confluxerunt enim et Athenas et in hanc urbem multi inquinate loquentes ex diversis locis. Quo magis 10 expurgandus est sermo et adhibenda tamquam obrussa ratio, quae mutari non potest, nec utendum pravissima 259 consuetudinis regula. T. Flamininum, qui cum Q. Metello consul fuit, pueri vidimus : existimabatur bene Latine, sed litteras nesciebat. Catulus erat ille quidem minime in- 15 doctus, ut a te paulo est ante dictum, sed tamen suavitas vocis et lenis appellatio litterarum bene loquendi famam confecerat. Cotta, qui se valde dilatandis litteris a simili­ tudine Graecae locutionis abstraxerat sonabatque contra­ rium Catulo, subagreste quiddam planeque subrusticum, 20 alia quidem quasi inculta et silvestri via ad eandem laudem pervenerat. Sisenna autem quasi emendator sermonis usitati cum esse vellet, ne a C. Rusio quidem accusatore deterreri potuit quo minus inusitatis verbis uteretur. Quid260 nam istuc est ? inquit Brutus ; aut quis est iste C. Rusius ? 25 Et ille : Fuit accusator, inquit, vetus, quo accusante C. Hirtilium Sisenna defendens dixit quaedam eius sputatilica 75 esse crimina. Tum C. Rusius : Circumvenior, inquit, iudices, nisi subvenitis. Sisenna quid dicat nescio ; metuo 2 P . F-G2M : P i l u m F'OBH : P . i l l u m Staugl 6 a liq u a b a r b a r i e s 0 ‘ G1 at.: a l i q u a b a r b a r i i n L : a l i q u a b a r b a r i a Martha ir t a n q u a m Manutias: q u a m t u m F: q u a n t u m OG : q u a m C 14 L a t i n e l o q u i maluit Kayser 18 q u i Erncsti : q u i a L 23 q u id em L : q u a d a m Manutius 2 6 C h i r t i l i u m L : C . H e r e n n i u m Martha 29 d i c a t vulg. : d i c a s L

BRVTVS

75 260

insidias. Sputatilica, quid est hoc? sputa quid sit scio, tilica nescio. Maximi risus ; sed ille tamen familiaris meus recte loqui putabat esse inusitate loqui. Caesar autem 261 rationem adhibens consuetudinem vitiosam et corruptam 5 pura et incorrupta consuetudine emendat. Itaque cum ad hanc elegantiam verborum Latinorum—quae, etiam si orator non sis et sis ingenuus civis Romanus, tamen neces­ saria est—adiungit illa oratoria ornamenta dicendi, tum videtur tamquam tabulas bene pictas conlocare in bono το lumine. H anc cum habeat praecipuam laudem, in com­ munibus non video cui debeat cedere. Splendidam quandam minimeque veteratoriam rationem dicendi tenet, voce motu forma etiam magnificam et generosam quodam modo. Tum Brutus : Orationes quidem eius mihi vehementer pro- 2(>2 15 bantur. Compluris autem legi atque etiam commentarios, quos idem scripsit rerum suarum. Valde quidem, inquam, probandos ; nudi enim sunt, recti et venusti, omni ornatu orationis tamquam veste detracta. Sed dum voluit alios habere parata, unde sumerent qui vellent scribere historiam, 20 ineptis gratum fortasse fecit, qui illa volent calamistris inurere : sanos quidem homines a scribendo deterruit ; nihil est enim in historia pura et inlustri brevitate dulcius. Sed ad eos, si placet, qui vita excesserunt, revertamur. C. Sicinius igitur Q. Pompei illius, qui censor fuit, ex 25 filia nepos, quaestorius mortuus est; probabilis orator, iam vero etiam probatus, ex hac inopi ad ornandum, sed ad inveniendum expedita Hermagorae disciplina. Ea dat rationes certas et- praecepta dicendi, quae si minorem habent apparatum—sunt enim exilia—, tamen habent 30 ordinem et quasdam errare in dicendo non patientis vias. 5 e m e n d a b a t OG 1 3 m a g n i f i c a m e t g e n e r o s a m (Lambinus (coli. 5 5 5 : m ag n ifica e t g e n e ro s a L 15 ( c o m p l u r i s a u t e m l e g i ) ... c o m m e n ta rii^ /« « ^ ·/ 1 6 q u o s i d e m Stangl : q u o s Bake : q u o s d a m L 1 8 d e t r a c t o Lambinus 2 0 i l l a v o l e n t Sueton. : v o l u n t i l l a L 2 2 e n i m e s t BHM 2 4 S i c i n i u s vulg. {coli. § 2 6 4 ) : S i n i c i u s FOG : s i n u c i u s C

Suet. Iui.

M. TVLLI CICERONIS Has ille tenens et paratus ad causas veniens, verborum non egens, ipsa illa comparatione disciplinaque dicendi iam in 264 patronorum numerum pervenerat. Erat etiam vir doctus in primis C. Visellius Varro, consobrinus meus, qui fuit cum Sicinio aetate coniunctus. Is, cum post curulem aedilitatem 5 iudex quaestionis esset, est mortuus ; in quo fateor vulgi iudicium a iudicio meo dissensisse. Nam populo non erat satis vendibilis : praeceps quaedam et cum idcirco obscura quia peracuta, tum rapida et celeritate caecata oratio ; sed neque verbis aptiorem cito alium dixerim neque sententiis 10 crebriorem. Praeterea perfectus in litteris iurisque civilis 265 iam a patre Aculeone traditam tenuit disciplinam. Reliqui sunt, qui mortui sint, L. Torquatus, quem tu non tam cito rhetorem dixisses, etsi non deerat oratio, quam, ut Graeci dicunt, πολιτικόν. Erant in eo plurimae litterae nec eae 15 vulgares, sed interiores quaedam et reconditae, divina me­ moria, summa verborum et gravitas et elegantia ; atque haec omnia vitae decorabat gravitas et integritas. Me qui­ dem admodum delectabat etiam Triari in illa aetate plena litteratae senectutis oratio. Quanta severitas in vultu ! 20 quantum pondus in verbis ! quam nihil non consideratum 266 exibat ex ore ! Tum Brutus Torquati et Triari mentione commotus—utrumque enim eorum admodum dilexerat— : Ne ego, inquit, ut omittam cetera quae sunt innumerabilia, de istis duobus cum cogito, doleo nihil tuam perpetuam 25 auctoritatem de pace valuisse ! Nam nec istos excellentis viros nec multos alios praestantis civis res publica perdi­ disset. Sileamus, inquam, Brute, de istis, ne augeamus dolorem. Nam et praeteritorum recordatio est acerba et acerbior exspectatio reliquorum. Itaque omittamus lugere 30 5 a e d i l i t a t e m FOG : d i g n i t a t e m C 9 r a p i d a [ e t ] Schütz : r a p i d i ­ t a t e e t Dederich : r a p i d i t a t e [ e t c e l e r i t a t e ] Eberhard : r . l i n g u a e c. Weidner : e a i p s a c . Martha 18 g r a v i t a s C : d i g n i t a s O 1 : g r a n d i t a s ( 1. 1 7 ) . . . g r a v i t a s Orelli : g r a v i t a s . . . c a s t i t a s coni Stangl a 8 n e c a u g e a m u s OG

BRVTVS

76

266

et tantum quid quisque dicendo potuerit, quoniam id quae­ rimus, praedicemus. Sunt etiam ex eis, qui eodem bello occiderunt, M. Bibulus, ^ qui et scriptitavit accurate, cum ptaesertim non esset orator, 5 et egit multa constanter; Appius Claudius socer tuus, conlega et familiaris meus : hic iam et satis studiosus et valde cum doctus tum etiam exercitatus orator et cum auguralis tum omnis publici iuris antiquitatisque nostrae bene peritus fuit. L. Domitius nulla ille quidem arte, sed Latine tamen 10 et multa cum libertate dicebat. Duo praeterea Lentuli 268 consulares, quorum Publius ille nostrarum iniuriarum ultor, auctor salutis, quicquid habuit, quantumcumque fuit, illud totum habuit e disciplina ; instrumenta naturae deerant ; sed tantus animi splendor et tanta magnitudo ut sibi 15 omnia, quae clarorum virorum essent, non dubitaret asci­ scere eaque omni dignitate obtineret. L. autem Lentulus satis erat fortis orator, si modo orator, sed cogitandi non ferebat laborem ; vox canora, verba non horrida sane, ut plena esset animi et terroris oratio ; quaereres in iudiciis 20 fortasse melius, in re publica quod erat esse iudicares satis. Ne T. quidem Postumius contemnendus in dicendo ; de re 269 publica vero non minus vehemens orator quam bellator fuit, effrenatus et acer nimis, sed bene iuris publici leges atque instituta cognoverat. 25 H oc loco Atticus : Putarem te, inquit, ambitiosum esse, si, ut dixisti, ei quos iam diu conligis viverent. Omnis enim commemoras, qui ausi aliquando sunt stantes loqui, ut mihi imprudens M. Servilium praeterisse videare. Non, inquam, 78 ego istuc ignoro, Pomponi, multos fuisse qui verbum num- 270 30 quam in publico fecissent, cum melius aliquanto possent quam isti oratores quos conligo dicere ; sed his comme3 s u n t e n im p lan e

FOG:

O':

Kayser

18 u t

plen e G e s s e t secl. h o r r o r i s C : f e r v o r i s Purgold

C IC . B R V T .

L : a t Weidner 19 Schütz·, e t Weidner 23 a c e rrim u s F

p len a

L

:

terro ris

6

Μ. T \rLLI CICERONIS morandis etiam illud adsequor, ut intellegatis primum ex omni numero quam non multi ausi sint dicere, deinde ex 271 eis ipsis quam pauci fuerint laude digni. Itaque ne hos quidem equites Romanos, amicos nostros, qui nuper mortui sunt, omittam P. Cominium Spoletinum, quo accusante de- 5 fendi C. Cornelium, in quo et compositum dicendi genus et acre et expeditum fuit ; T. Accium Pisaurensem, cuius accu­ sationi respondi pro A. Cluentio, qui et accurate dicebat et satis copiose, eratque praeterea doctus Hermagorae prae­ ceptis, quibus etsi ornamenta non satis opima dicendi, 10 tamen, ut hastae velitibus amentatae, sic apta quaedam et parata singulis causarum generibus argumenta traduntur. 2 7 2 Studio autem neminem nec industria maiore cognovi, quam­ quam ne ingenio quidem qui praestiterit facile dixerim C. Pisoni genero meo. Nullum tempus illi umquam vaca- 15 bat aut a forensi dictione aut a commentatione domestica aut a scribendo aut a cogitando. Itaque tantos processus efficiebat ut evolare, jion excurrere videretur ; eratque ver­ borum et dilectus elegans et apta et quasi rotunda con­ structio ; cumque argumenta excogitabantur ab eo multa et 2 0 firma ad probandum tum concinnae acutaeque sententiae ; gestusque natura ita venustus ut ars etiam, quae non erat, et e disciplina motus quidam videretur accedere. Vereor ne amore videar plura quam fuerint in illo dicere ; quod non ita est; alia enim de illo maiora dici possunt. Nam 2 5 nec continentia nec pietate nec ullo genere virtutis quem7 Q quam eiusdem aetatis cum illo conferendum puto. Nec vero M. Caelium praetereundum arbitror, quaecumque eius in exitu vel fortuna vel mens fuit; qui quamdiu auctoritati meae paruit, talis tribunus plebis fuit ut nemo contra 30 civium perditorum popularem turbulentamque dementiam a senatu et a bonorum causa steterit constantius. Anii5 o m i t t a m add. n i m i a m Eberhard

Kayser

32 an tiq u a m

Slaugl

:

quam

L

:

BRVTVS

79 273

quam eius actionem multum tamen et splendida et grandis et eadem in primis faceta et perurbana commendabat oratio. Graves eius contiones aliquot fuerunt, acres accusationes tres eaeque omnes ex rei publicae contentione susceptae ; 5 defensiones, etsi illa erant in eo meliora quae dixi, non contemnendae tamen saneque tolerabiles. Hic cum summa voluntate bonorum aedilis curulis factus esset, nescio quo modo discessu meo discessit a sese ceciditque, postea quam eos imitari coepit quos ipse perverterat. Sed de M. Calidio 274 10 dicamus aliquid, qui non fuit orator unus e multis, potius inter multos prope singularis fuit : ita reconditas exquisitasque sententias mollis et perlucens vestiebat oratio. Nihil tam tenerum quam illius comprensio verborum, nihil tam flexibile, nihil quod magis ipsius arbitrio fingeretur, ut 1 5 nullius oratoris aeque in potestate fuerit : quae primum ita pura erat ut nihil liquidius, ita libere fluebat ut nusquam adhaeresceret ; nullum nisi loco positum et tamquam in ver­ miculato emblemate, ut ait Lucilius, structum verbum videres ; nec vero ullum aut durum aut insolens aut humile 20 aut [in] longius ductum ; ac non propria verba rerum sed pleraque translata, sic tamen ut ea non inruisse in alienum locum sed immigrasse in suum diceres ; nec vero haec soluta nec diffluentia sed astricta numeris, non aperte nec eodem modo semper sed varie dissimulanterque conclusis. 25 Erant autem et verborum et sententiarum ‘illa lumina quae 275 vocant Graeci σχήματα, quibus tamquam insignibus in ornatu distinguebatiir omnis oratio. Q va de re agitvr autem illud quod multis locis in iuris consultorum inclu­ ditur formulis, id ubi esset videbat. Accedebat ordo rerum 276 30 plenus artis, actio liberalis totumque dicendi placidum et sanum genus. Quod si est optimum suaviter dicere, nihil est quod melius hoc quaerendum putes. Sed cum a nob's i dictionem m aluit M artha 20 in ante longius secl. vulg.

39

19 ullum vulg. : nullum L id Corradus : et L

M. TVLLI CICERONIS paulo ante dictum sit tria videri esse quae orator efficere deberet, ut doceret, ut delectaret, ut moveret : duo summe tenuit, ut et rem illustraret disserendo et animos eorum qui audirent devinciret voluptate ; aberat tertia illa laus, qua permoveret atque incitaret animos, quam plurimum 5 pollere diximus ; nec erat ulla vis atque contentio : sive consilio, quod eos, quorum altior oratio actioque esset ardentior, furere atque bacchari arbitraretur, sive quod natura non esset ita factus sive quod non consuesset sive quod non nosset. Hoc unum illi, si nihil utilitatis habebat, 10 277 afuit; si opus erat, defuit. Quin etiam memini, cum in accusatione sua Q. Gallio crimini dedisset sibi eum vene­ num paravisse idque a se esse deprensum seseque chiro­ grapha testificationes indicia quaestiones manifestam rem deferre diceret deque eo crimine accurate et exquisite dis- *5 putavisset, me in respondendo, cum essem argumentatus, quantum res ferebat, hoc ipsum etiam posuisse pro argu­ mento, quod ille, cum pestem capitis sui, cum indicia mortis se comperisse manifesto et manu tenere diceret, tam solute 278 egisset, tam leniter, tam oscitanter. f Tu istuc, M. Calidi, 20 nisi fingeres, sic ageres ? praesertim cum ista eloquentia alienorum hominum pericula defendere acerrime soleas, tuum neglegeres ? Vbi dolor ? ubi ardor animi, qui etiam ex infantium ingeniis elicere voces et querelas solet? Nulla perturbatio animi, nulla corporis, non frons percussa, non 2 5 femur ; pedis, quod minimum est, nulla supplosio. Itaque tantum afuit ut inflammares nostros animos, somnum isto . loco vix tenebamus.’ Sic nos summi oratoris vel sanitate vel vitio pro argumento ad diluendum crimen usi sumus. 4 d e v i n c e r e t L : corr. M2G‘ 5 a t q u e FOG : e t C 10 n o s s e t Friedrich : p o s s e t L 1 2 c r i m i n i vidg. : c r i m i n e L 15 d i f f é r é L : corr. M'i 18 i n s i d i a s m o r t i s maluit Kayscr 19 c o m p e r i s s e m . e t sed. Eberhard 21 c u m L s u m m a Martha p r a e s e r t i m i s t a e l o q u e n t i a : c u m Eambinus 2 2 s o l e a s vulg. : so les L 2 5 n o n f r o n s Quintii, x i . 3 . 1 2 3 : f r o n s n o n L 27 a b e s t Quintii.

BRVTVS

8o 279

Tum Brutus: Atque dubitamus,, inquit, utrum ista sanitas 279 fuerit an vitium ? Quis enim non fateatur, cum ex omnibus oratoris laudibus longe ista sit maxima, inflammare animos audientium et quocumque res postulet modo flectere, qui 5 hac virtute caruerit, id ei quod maximum fuerit defuisse ? Sit sane ita, inquam ; sed redeamus ad eum qui iam unus 81 restat, Hortensium, tum de nobismet ipsis, quoniam id etiam, Brute, postulas, pauca dicemus. Quamquam facienda mentio est, ut quidem mihi videtur, duorum adulescentium, 10 qui si diutius vixissent magnam essent eloquentiae laudem consecuti. C. Curionem te, inquit Brutus, et C. Licinium Calvum 280 arbitror dicere. Recte, inquam, arbitraris 3 quorum quidem alter [quod verisimile dixisset] ita facile soluteque verbis J 5 volvebat satis interdum actitas, crebras quidem certe sen­ tentias, ut nihil posset ornatius esse, nihil expeditius. Atque hic parum a magistris institutus naturam habuit admirabilem ad dicendum 3 industriam non sum expertus, studium certe fuit. Qui si me audire voluisset, ut coeperat, 20 honores quam opes consequi maluisset. Quidnam est, inquit, istuc ? et quem ad modum distinguis ? Hoc modo, inquam. Cum honos sit praemium virtutis iudicio studio- 281 que civium delatum ad aliquem, qui eum sententiis, qui suffragiis adeptus est, is mihi et honestus et honoratus 25 videtur. Qui autem occasione aliqua etiam invitis suis civibus nactus est imperium, ut ille cupiebat, hunc nomen honoris adeptum, non honorem puto. Quae si ille audire voluisset, maxima cum gratia et gloria ad summam amplitu­ dinem pervenisset, ascendens gradibus magistratuum, ut 30 pater eius fecerat, ut reliqui clariores viri. Quae quidem etiam cum P. Crasso M. F., cum initio aetatis ad amicitiam 14 [ q u o d v e r . d i x i s s e t ] sccl. Lambtmis 3 0 u t re liq u i c la rio re s v i r i L : sed. Weidner·, u t r e l i q u i m a i o r e s , c l a r i v i r i Jahn 31 c u m

add. vtilg.

M. TVLLI CICERONIS se meam contulisset, saepe egisse me arbitror, cum eum vehementer hortarer ut eam laudis viam rectissimam esse 282 duceret quam maiores eius ei tritam reliquissent. Erat enim cum institutus optime tum etiam perfecte planeque eruditus, ineratque et ingenium satis acre et orationis non 5 inelegans copia ; praetereaque sine adrogantia gravis esse videbatur et sine segnitia verecundus. Sed hunc quoque absorbuit aestus quidam insolitae adulescentibus gloriae ; qui quia navarat miles operam imperatori, imperatorem se statim esse cupiebat, cui muneri mos maiorum aetatem 10 certam, sortem incertam reliquit. Ita gravissumo suo casu, dum Cyri et Alexandri similis esse voluit, qui suum cursum transcurrerant, et L. Crassi et multorum Crassorum in 82 . . . . . . . „ ventus est dissimillimus. Sed.ad Calvum—is enim nobis 283 . . . . . erat propositus—revertamur; qui orator fuit cum litteris i 5 eruditior quam Curio tum etiam accuratius quoddam di­ cendi et exquisitius adferebat genus ; quod quamquam scienter eleganterque tractabat, nimium tamen inquirens in se atque ipse sese observans metuensque ne vitiosum colligeret, etiam verum sanguinem deperdebat. Itaque eius 20 oratio nimia religione attenuata doctis et attente audienti­ bus erat inlustris, a multitudine autem et a foro, cui nata eloquentia est, devorabatur. 2S4 Tum Brutus : Atticum se, inquit, Calvus noster dici oratorem volebat : inde erat ista exilitas quam ille de 25 industria consequebatur. Dicebat, inquam, ita ; sed et ipse errabat et alios etiam errare cogebat. Nam si quis eos qui nec inepte dicunt nec odiose nec putide Attice putat dicere, is recte nisi Atticum probat neminem. I114 p e r f e c t e l i t t e r a t u s Stangl : notavit lamnam Jahn s o l i t a e L : n o n i n s o l i t a e cdd. vett. : i n s i t a e Campe vulg. : m u n e r e L m a i o r u m vulg. : m a l o r u m L Corradus : f u i s s e t L : f u i s s e t + Friedrich : c u m f u i s s e t e s s e t Fiderit 2 0 d e p e n d e b a t L : corn F2O2 al.

vulg.

8 in ­ 10 m u n e r i 15 f u i t Schütz : c u m 2 2 a add.

BRVTVS

82 284

sulsitatem enim et insolentiam tamquam insaniam quandam orationis odit, sanitatem autem et integritatem quasi reli­ gionem et verecundiam oratoris probat. Haec omnium debet oratorum eadem esse sententia. Sin autem ieiunita- 285 5 tem et siccitatem et inopiam, dum modo sit polita, dum urbana, dum elegans, in Attico genere ponit, hoc recte dumtaxat ; sed quia sunt in Atticis alia aliis meliora, videat ne ignoret et gradus et dissimilitudines et vim et varietatem Atticorum. ‘ Atticos,’ inquit, ‘ volo imitari.’ Quos? nec 10 enim est unum genus. Nam quid est tam dissimile quam Demosthenes et Lysias ? quam idem et Hyperides ? quam horum omnium Aeschines ? Quem igitur imitaris ? Si aliquem : ceteri ergo Attice non dicebant ? si omnis : qui potes, cum sint ipsi dissimillimi inter se ? In quo illud 15 etiam quaero, Phalereus ille Demetrius Atticene dixerit. Mihi quidem ex illius orationibus redolere ipsae Athenae videntur. At est floridior, ut ita dicam, quam Hyperides, quam Lysias : natura quaedam aut voluntas ita dicendi fuit. E t quidem duo fuerunt per idem tempus dissimiles inter 20 se, sed Attici tamen ; quorum Charisius multarum oratio­ num, quas scribebat aliis, cum cupere videretur imitari Lysiam ; Demochares autem, qui fuit Demostheni sororis filius, et orationes scripsit aliquot et earum rerum historiam quae erant Athenis ipsius aetate gestae non tam historico 25 quam oratorio genere perscripsit. Atque Charisi vult Hegesias esse similis, isque se ita putat Atticum, ut veros illos prae se paene agrestis putet. At quid est tam fra- 287 ctum, tam minutum, tam in ipsa, quam tamen consequitur, concinnitate puerile? ‘Atticorum similes esse volumus.’ 3 0 Optime ; suntne igitur hi Attici oratores ? ‘ Quis negare potest ? Hos imitamur.’ Quo modo, qui sunt et inter se 7 a l i i s add. Bake 8 e t v i m e t v a r i e t a t e m seel. E. V. Eberhard 12 si a l i q u e m , vtdg: s e d a l i q u e m L 2 5 a t q u e Stangl : a t L : a c Jahn 3 1 i m i t a m u r G: i m i t a t u r H : i m i t a n t u r FOBM1 quo q u o m o d o BHM

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS dissimiles et aliorum ? ‘ Thucydidem,’ inquit, ‘ imitamur.’ Optime, si historiam scribere, non si causas dicere cogi­ tatis. Thucydides enim rerum gestarum pronuntiator sin­ cerus et grandis etiam fuit ; hoc forense concertatorium iudiciale non tractavit genus. Orationes autem quas inter- 5 posuit—multae enim sunt—eas ego laudare soleo; imitari neque possim si velim, nec velim fortasse si possim. Vt si quis Falerno vino delectetur, sed eo nec ita novo ut proximis consulibus natum velit, nec rursus ita vetere ut Opimium aut Anicium consulem quaerat— ‘atqui hae notae 10 sunt optimae,’ credo ; sed nimia vetustas nec habet eam quam quaerimus suavitatem nec est iam sane tolerabilis— 28S num igitur qui hoc sentiat, si is potare velit, de dolio sibi hauriendum putet? Minime ; .sed quandam sequatur aeta­ tem. Sic ego istis censuerim et novam istam quasi de 15 musto ac lacu fervidam orationem fugiendam nec illam praeclaram Thucydidi nimis veterem tamquam Anicianam notam persequendam. Ipse enim Thucydides si posterius S4 fuisset, multo maturior fuisset et mitior. ‘ Demosthenem igitur imitemur.’ O di boni ; quid, quaeso, nos aliud agi- 20 ruus aut quid aliud optamus ?. At rion adsequimur. Isti 289 enim videlicet Attici nostri quod volunt adsequuntur. Ne illud quidem intellegunt, non modo ita memoriae proditum esse sed ita necesse fuisse, cum Demosthenes dicturus esset, ut concursus audiendi causa ex tota Graecia fierent. 25 At cum isti Attici dicunt, non modo a corona, quod est ipsum miserabile, sed etiam ab advocatis relinquuntur. Qua re si anguste et exiliter dicere est Atticorum, sint sane Attici ; sed in comitium veniant, ad stantem iudicem dicant : subsellia grandiorem et pleniorem vocem desiderant. 30 290 Volo hoc oratori contingat, ut cum auditum sit eum esse π optimae vulg. : optime L 16 musto ac secl. EllencH: de lacu ac musto Martha : de musti lacu Baehrens 20 quaeso vulg.·. quasi L 23 ita om. BHM

BRV T VS

84 290

dicturum, locus in subselliis occupetur, compleatur tribunal, gratiosi scribae sint in dando et cedendo loco, corona multiplex, iudex erectus ; cum surgat is qui dicturus sit, significetur a corona silentium, deinde crebrae assensiones, 5 multae admirationes ; risus cum velit, cum velit fletus : ut qui haec procul videat, etiam si quid agatur nesciat, at placere tamen et in scaena esse Roscium intellegat. Haec cui contingant, eum scito Attice dicere, ut de Pericle audimus, ut de Hyperide, ut de Aeschine, de ipso quidem 10 Demosthene maxime. Sin autem acutum prudens et idem 291 sincerum et solidum et exsiccatum genus orationis probant nec illo graviore ornatu oratorio utuntur et hoc proprium esse Atticorum volunt, recte'laudant. Est enim in arte tanta tamque varia etiam huic minutae subtilitati locus. 15 Ita fiet ut non omnes, qui Attice, idem bene, sed ut omnes, qui bene, idem etiam Attice dicant. Sed redeamus rursus ad Hortensium. 85 Sane quidem, inquit Brutus ; quamquam ista mihi tua fuit 292 periucunda a proposita oratione digressio. Tum Atticus: 20 Aliquotiens sum, inquit, conatus, sed interpellare nolui. Nunc quoniam iam ad perorandum spectare videtur sermo tuus, dicam, opinor, quod sentio. Tu vero, inquam, Tite. Tum ille : Ego, inquit, ironiam illam quam in Socrate dicunt fuisse, qua ille in Platonis et Xenophontis et Aeschini 25 libris utitur, facetam et elegantem puto. Est enim et minime inepti hominis et eiusdem etiam faceti, cum de sapientia disceptetur, hanc sibi ipsum detrahere, eis tribuere inludentem, qui eam sibi adrogant, ut apud Platonem Socrates in caelum effert laudibus Protagoram Hippiam 30 Prodicum Gorgiam ceteros, se autem omnium rerum inscium fingit et rudem. Decet hoc nescio quo modo illum, nec 20 conatus L : concitatus vel commotus Eberhard 21 iam secl. non nulli 22 Tite FOG\ Attice C 27 disceptetur L : disce­ ptatur codd. det. 28 adrogant FOG\ adigant C : adrogent Ernesti

Μ. TV LLI C IC ER O N IS Epicuro, qui id reprehendit, assentior. Sed in historia, qua tu es usus in omni sermone, cum qualis quisque orator fuisset exponeres, vide quaeso, inquit, ne tam reprehendenda sit ironia quam in testimonio. Quorsus, inquam, istuc? 293 non enim intellego. Quia primum, inquit, ita laudavisti 5 quosdam oratores ut imperitos posses in errorem inducere. Equidem in quibusdam risum vix tenebam, cum Attico Lysiae Catonem nostrum comparabas, magnum me hercule hominem vel potius summum et singularem virum— nemo dicet secus— ; sed oratorem? sed etiam Lysiae similem? 10 quo nihil potest esse pictius. Bella ironia, si iocaremur ; sin adseveramus, vide ne religio nobis tam adhibenda sit 294 quam si testimonium diceremus. Ego enim Catonem tuum ut civem, ut senatorem, ut imperatorem, ut virum denique cum prudentia et diligentia tum omni virtute excellentem 15 probo ; orationes autem eius ut illis temporibus valde laudo—significant enim formam quandam ingeni, sed ad­ modum impolitam et plane rudem—, Origines vero cum omnibus oratoris laudibus refertas diceres et Catonem cum Philisto et Thucydide comparares, Brutone te id censebas 20 an mihi probaturum? Quos enim ne e Graecis quidem quisquam imitari potest, his tu comparas hominem Tuscugg lanum nondum suspicantem quale esset copiose et ornate 2q. dicere. Galbam laudas. Si ut illius aetatis principem, adsentior—sic enim accepimus— ; sin ut oratorem, cedo 25 quaeso orationes—sunt enim—et dic hunc, quem tu plus quam te amas, Brutum velle te illo modo dicere. Probas Lepidi orationes. Paulum hic tibi adsentior, modo ita laudes ut antiquas ; quod item de Africano, de Laelio, cuius tu oratione negas fieri quicquam posse dulcius, addis 30 etiam nescio quid augustius. Nomine nos capis summi 7 c u m L : sed Stangi : n a m 1 2 t a m et q u a m . . . d i c e r e m u s secl. o r a t o r i i s Lambinus

Eberhard, qui et conicdt u t c u m Eberhard 19 o r a t o r i s L :

BRVTVS

86 295

viri vitaeque elegantissimae verissimis laudibus. Remove haec : ne ista dulcis oratio ita sit abiecta ut eam aspicere nemo velit. Carbonem in summis oratoribus habitum 296 scio ; sed cum in ceteris rebus tum in dicendo semper, quo 5 iam nihil est melius, id laudari, qualecumque est, solet. Dico idem de Gracchis, etsi de eis ea sunt a te dicta, qui­ bus ego adsentior. Omitto ceteros ; venio ad eos in quibus iam perfectam putas esse eloquentiam, quos ego audivi sine controversia magnos oratores, Crassum et Antonium. De 10 horum laudibus tibi prorsus adsentior, sed tamen non isto modo : ut Polycliti Doryphorum sibi Lysippus aiebat, sic tu suasionem legis Serviliae tibi magistram fuisse ; haec ger­ mana ironia est. Cur ita sentiam non dicam, ne me tibi adsentari putes. Omitto igitur quae de his ipsis, quae de 297 15 Cotta, quae de Sulpicio, quae modo de Caelio dixeris. Hi enim fuerunt certe oratores ; quanti autem et quales tu videris. Nam illud minus curo quod congessisti operarios omnis ; ut mihi videantur mori voluisse non nulli, ut a te in oratorum numerum referrentur. Haec cum ille dixisset : 87 20 Longi sermonis initium pepulisti, inquam, Attice, remque commovisti nova disputatione dignam, quam in aliud tempus differamus. Volvendi enim sunt libri cum aliorum tum 298 in primis Catonis. Intelleges nihil illius liniamentis nisi eorum pigmentorum, quae inventa nondum erant, florem et 25 colorem defuisse. Nam de Crassi oratione sic existimo, ipsum fortasse melius potuisse scribere, alium, ut arbitror, neminem. Nec in hoc Λρων» me duxeris esse, quod eam orationem mihi magistram fuisse dixerim. Nam etsi tute melius existimare videris de ea, si quam nunc habe30 mus, facultate, tamen adulescentes quid in Latinis potius 2 sit L : erit Weidner ut eam vulg. : autem L 4 quo iam Jahn : quoniam L : quo vulg. 5 laudari vulg. : laudare L 2 0 pepulisti vulg. : depulisti L : detulisti Manutius 2 6 [ut] ar­ bitror Schütz 27 (ϊρωνα me duxeris Baehrens : yroniam eduxeris L : ironiam duxeris codd. det. . 2 8 tute Stangl : ut H : ut tu C

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS 299 imitaremur non habebamus. Quod autem plures a nobis nominati sunt, eo pertinuit, ut paulo ante dixi, quod in­ tellegi volui, in eo, cuius omnes cupidissimi' essent, quam pauci digni nomine evaderent. Quare dpmva me, ne si Africanus quidem fuit, ut ait in historia sua C. Fannius, 5 existimari velim. Vt voles, inquit Atticus. Ego enim non alienum a te putabam, quod et in Africano fuisset et in 300 Socrate. Tum Brutus: De isto postea; sed tu, inquit me intuens, orationes nobis veteres explicabis ? Vero, inquam, Brute; sed in Cumano aut in Tusculano aliquando, si modo i° licebit, quoniam utroque in loco vicini sumus. Sed iam ad id unde digressi sumus revertamur. Hortensius igitur cum admodum adulescens orsus esset 301 . ° . . m foro dicere, celeriter ad maiores causas adhiberi coeptus est : et quamquam inciderat in Cottae et Sulpici aetatem, 15 qui annis decem maiores erant, excellente tum Crasso et Antonio, dein Philippo, post Iulio, cum his ipsis dicendi gloria comparabatur. Primum memoria tanta quantam in nullo cognovisse me arbitror, ut quae secum commentatus esset, ea sine scripto verbis eisdem redderet quibus cogita- 20 visset. Hoc adiumento ille tanto sic utebatur ut sua et commentata et scripta et nullo referente omnia omnium 302 adversariorum dicta meminisset. Ardebat autem cupidi­ tate sic ut in nullo umquam flagrantius studium viderim. Nullum enim patiebatur esse diem quin aut in foro diceret 25 aut meditaretur extra forum. Saepissime autem eodem die utrumque faciebat. Attuleratque minime vulgare genus dicendi ; duas quidem res quas nemo alius : partitiones quibus de rebus dicturus esset et conlectiones, memor et 303 quae essent dicta contra quaeque ipse dixisset. Erat in 30 4 iifxuva vulg. : ironia L 15 et add. Ellendt 16 erant add. Rau 18 in nullo vulg. : in nullo viro 0 1 al : in viro GXM 3 : in­ vito C 22 omnia omnium Stangl : omnia omnia FBHM·. omnia C 23 cupiditate dicendi maluit Kaystr 29 collectiones vulg. ·. coniectiones L memor ef OGB : memor F i memor eorum Orelli : [memor] eorum Jahn

BRV TVS

88 303

verborum splendore elegans, compositione aptus, facultate copiosus ; eaque erat cum summo ingenio tum exercitationi­ bus maximis consecutus. Rem complectebatur memoriter, dividebat acute, nec praetermittebat fere quicquam quod 5 esset in causa aut ad confirmandum aut ad refellendum. Vox canora et suavis, motus et gestus etiam plus artis habebat quam erat oratori satis. Hoc igitur florescente Crassus est mortuus, Cotta pulsus, iudicia intermissa bello, nos in forum venimus. Erat Hortensius in bello primo 8 9 304 10 anno miles, altero tribunus militum, Sulpicius legatus ; aberat etiam M. Antonius ; exercebatur una lege iudicium Varia, ceteris propter. bellum intermissis ; cui frequens aderam, quamquam pro se ipsi dicebant oratores non illi quidem principes, L. Memmius et Q. Pompeius, sed ora15 tores tamen teste diserto utique Philippo, cuius in testimonio contentio et vim accusatoris habebat et copiam. Reliqui qui tum principes numerabantur in magistratibus 3 ° 5 erant cottidieque fere a nobis in contionibus audiebantur. Erat enim tribunus plebis tum C. Curio, quamquam is 20 quidem silebat, ut erat semel a contione universa relictus ; Q. Metellus Celer non ille quidem orator, sed tamen non infans ; diserti autem Q. Varius C. Carbo Cn. Pomponius, et hi quidem habitabant in rostris ; C. etiam Iulius aedilis curulis cottidie fere accuratas contiones habebat. Sed me 25 cupidissimum audiendi primus dolor percussit, Cotta cum est expulsus. Reliquos frequenter audiens acerrimo studio tenebar cottidieque et scribens et legens et commentans oratoriis tantum exercitationibus contentus non eram. Iam consequente anno Q. Varius sua lege damnatus excesserat; 30 ego autem in iuris civilis studio multum operae dabam 306 i i a b e r a t , a b e r a t maluit Wex. M. sect. Kllendt 12 c u i vulg.·. qui L 13 q u a m q u a m L : c u m vulg. : q u o q u e Madvig 15 u t i q u e Jahn : u t e r q u e L : u t e n t e s u t e r q u e Buttmann in te s ti ­ m o n i o sect. Weidner 24 a c c u r a t a s om. BHM 28 o r a t o r i i s Corradits : o r a t o r i s L t a n t u m L : t a m e n Corradus 30 i n

add. Müller

M. TVLLI CICERONIS Q. Scaevolae Q. F., qui quamquam nemini se ad docendum dabat, tamen consulentibus respondendo studiosos audiendi docebat. Atque huic anno proximus Sulla consule et Pompeio fuit. Tum P. Sulpici in tribunatu cottidie con­ donantis totum genus dicendi penitus cognovimus ; eo- 5 demque tempore, cum princeps Academiae Philo cum Atheniensium optimatibus Mithridatico bello domo pro­ fugisset Romamque venisset, totum ei me tradidi admirabili quodam ad philosophiam studio concitatus, in quo hoc etiam commorabar attentius—etsi rerum ipsarum varietas 10 et magnitudo summa me delectatione retinebat—quod tamen sublata iam esse in perpetuum ratio iudiciorum vide307 batur. Occiderat Sulpicius illo anno tresque proximo trium aetatum oratores erant crudelissime interfecti, Q. Catulus M. Antonius C. Iulius. Eodem anno etiam Moloni Rhodio 15 Romae dedimus operam et actori summo causarum et g o magistro. Haec etsi videntur esse a proposita oratione diversa, tamen idcirco a me proferuntur ut nostrum cursum perspicere, quoniam voluisti, Brute, possis—nam Attico haec nota sunt—et videre quem ad modum simus in spatio 10 308 Q. Hortensium ipsius vestigiis persecuti. Triennium fere fuit urbs sine armis, sed oratorum aut interitu aut discessu aut fuga—mam aberant etiam adulescentes M. Crassus et Lentuli duo—primas in causis agebat Hortensius, magis magisque cottidie probabatur Antistius, Piso saepe dicebat, 25 minus saepe Pomponius, raro Carbo, semel aut iterum Philippus. At vero ego hoc tempore omni noctes et dies in 309 omnium doctrinarum meditatione versabar. Eram cum Stoico Diodoto, qui cum habitavisset apud me wi?cumque vixisset, nuper est domi meae mortuus. À quo cum in 30 i Q. F . Fabricius : p. f. L se add. vulg. 3 docebat se G1 11 quod tamen Madvig·. sed tamen L 15 eodem . . . magistro seel. Bake·, in § 312 audacius transtulit Martha 17 proposita oratione Lambinus : proposita ratione O : proposito ratione C 29 diodoto F: diodoro B2M : dioto C me alterum add. vulg.

BRVTVS

9 0

309

aliis rebus tum studiosissime in dialectica exercebar, quae quasi contracta et astricta eloquentia putanda est ; sine qua etiam tu, Brute, iudicavisti te illam iustam eloquentiam, quam dialecticam esse dilatatam putant, consequi non 5 posse. Huic ego doctori et eius artibus variis atque multis ita eram tamen deditus ut ab exercitationibus oratoriis nullus dies vacuus esset. Commentabar declamitans—sic 310 enim nunc loquuntur — saepe cum M. Pisone et cum Q. Pompeio aut cum aliquo cottidie, idque faciebam mul­ io tum etiam Latine, sed Graece saepius, vel quod Graeca oratio plura ornamenta suppeditans consuetudinem similiter Latine dicendi adferebat, vel quod a Graecis summis doctoribus, nisi Graece dicerem, neque corrigi possem neque doceri. Tumultus interim in recuperanda re publica 311 15 et crudelis interitus oratorum trium Scaevolae Carbonis Antisti, reditus Cottae Curionis Crassi Lentulorum Pompei, leges et iudicia constituta, recuperata res publica ; ex nu­ mero autem oratorum Pomponius Censorinus Murena sub­ lati. Tum primum nos ad causas et privatas et publicas 20 adire coepimus, non ut in foro disceremus, quod plerique fecerunt, sed ut, quantum nos efficere potuissemus, docti in forum veniremus. Eodem tempore Moloni dedimus operam; 312 dictatore enim Sulla legatus ad senatum de Rhodiorum praemiis venerat. Itaque prima causa publica pro Sex. 25 Roscio dicta tantum commendationis habuit ut non ulla esset quae non digna nostro patrocinio videretur. Deinceps inde multae, quas nos diligenter elaboratas et tamquam elucubratas adferebamus. Nunc quoniam totum me non naevo aliquo aut cre- 313 30 pundiis, sed corpore omni videris velle cognoscere, comI quae quasi MG‘B 2: qua quasi C 4 quam . . . putant secl. Eberhard 13 possem vulg. : possim L 14 in add. Orelli re p. G Eberhard : res p. L 25 habuit vulg. : habui L non nulla Madvig cum codd. det. 27 et tanquam Rivius codd. det. : etiam quam E

M. TVLLI CICERONIS

91 3’3 p lectar n o n

n u lla

n ecessaria.

etiam

q u a e fo rta sse v id ea n tu r m in u s

E rat e o tem p o re in n o b is su m m a gracilitas et

infirm itas corporis, p roceru m e t te n u e c o llu m : q u i h a b itu s e t q u a e figura n o n p rocu l a b e sse p u tatu r a v ita e p ericu lo, si E o q u e m a gis 5

a cc e d it la b o r et lateru m m agn a c o n te n tio .

h o c e o s q u ib u s eram carus, c o m m o v e b a t, q u o d o m n ia sin e rem issio n e, sin e varietate, vi su m m a v o c is e t to tiu s corporis 314 c o n te n tio n e d iceb a m .

Ita q u e cu m m e e t a m ici e t m e d ici

hortarentur u t ca u sa s agere d esisterem , q u o d v is p o tiu s p eri­ cu lu m

m ih i

a d eu n d u m

d isc e d e n d u m

p u tavi.

quam S e d cu m

a sp erata

d ic e n d i gloria 10

c e n se r em re m issio n e et

m o d er a tio n e v o c is et co m m u ta to g en er e d ic e n d i

me

et

p ericu lu m vitare p o sse e t tem p era tiu s d icere, u t c o n s u e tu ­ d in em d ic e n d i m u tarem , ea c a u sa m ih i in A sia m p rofici­ sc e n d i fuit. e t iam

in

Ita q u e cu m esse m b ie n n iu m versatu s in ca u sis 15 foro celeb ra tu m

315 su m p ro fectu s.

m eum

nom en

esset,

R om a

C u m v e n isse m A th e n a s, se x m e n sis cu m

A n tio c h o v eteris A c a d e m ia e n o b ilissim o e t p ru d en tissim o p h ilo so p h o fui stu d iu m q u e p h ilo so p h ia e n u m q u am

in ter­

m issu m a p rim aq u e a d u le sc e n tia c u ltu m e t sem p er a u ctu m 20 h o c rursus su m m o au cto re e t d o c to r e ren ovavi.

E odem

tam en tem p o re A th e n is ap ud D e m e tr iu m Syrum v etere m et n o n ig n o b ile m d ic e n d i m agistru m s tu d io se exerceri so leb a m . P o s t a m e A s ia to ta peragrata e s t t c u m

su m m is q u id em

oratoribu s, q u ib u sc u m ex erceb a r ip sis lib e n tib u s ; q u oru m 25 erat p rin cep s

M e n ip p u s S tra to n ice n sis m e o

A sia illis te m p o rib u s d ise rtissim u s ;

et,

m o lestia ru m n e c in ep tiaru m A ttico ru m 316 illis n um erari re cte p o test.

si

iu d ic io n ih il

to ta

h ab ere

est, h ic orator in

A d sid u issim e a u tem m ecu m

5 accedit/’2: accidit/. 11 desciscendum maluit Emesti 12 et . . . dicendi sed. Weidner 14 mutarim FBHM : ut . . mutarem sed. Eberhard 16 et iam F: etiam C 24 cum L : et cum vidg. : dum s. studeo Eberhard : fuique cum Kayser : et summis quidem or. usus sum Piderit : referta tum Friedrich 28 nec FOG : et C

BRVTVS fu it D io n y s iu s

M agnes ;

A d ra m y tten u s X e n o c le s .

9 1 316

erat etia m

A e sc h y lu s

C n id iu s,

H i tu m in A sia rh etorum prin­

c ip e s n u m erab an tu r.

Q u ib u s n o n co n te n tu s R h o d u m v en i

m eque

q u em

ad

eu n dem ,

R o m a e au d iveram

M o lo n em

5 a p p lica v i cu m a cto rem in veris ca u sis scrip to rem q u e prae­ sta n tem tu m in n o ta n d is a n im a d v e rte n d isq u e v itiis et in in stitu e n d o d o c e n d o q u e p ru d en tissim u m .

I s d ed it operam ,

si m o d o id c o n se q u i p o tu it, u t n im is re d u n d a n tis n o s et supra flu en tis iu v e n ili q u a d a m d ic e n d i im p u n ita te et licen tia 10 reprim eret e t q u a si extra ripas d ifflu en tis co erceret. recep i m e b ie n n io p o st n o n m o d o m u tatu s.

Ita

ex ercitatior sed prope

N a m e t c o n te n tio n im ia v o c is resed erat et quasi

d eferverat oratio

la ter ib u sq u e vires et corpori m ed io cris

h a b itu s accesserat.

. .

. .

92

D u o tu m e x c e lle b a n t oratores qui m e im ita n d i cu p id ita te ^

15

in cita ren t, C o tta e t H o r te n s iu s ; q uorum alter rem issu s et le n is et propriis verb is co m p r e n d e n s so lu te e t fa cile se n te n ­ tiam , alter o rn atu s, a cer et n o n talis q u a lem tu eu m , B rute, iam d eflo r e sc e n te m

20 g en er e

co g n o v isti, se d verborum

co m m o tio r.

Ita q u e

cu m

H o r te n s io

e t a ctio n is m ih i m agis

arbitrabar rem esse , q u o d e t d ic e n d i ardore eram propior et

a eta te

c o n iu n ctio r.

E te n im vid eram in isd em cau sis,

u t pro M . C a n u le io , p ro C n . D o la b e lla co n su la ri, cum C otta p rin cep s a d h ib itu s e sse t, p riores ta m en agere partis H or25 te n siu m . can oru m V num - n o b ilis

A c rem en im oratorem , et in c e n su m et a g en tem et c o n c u r su s h o m in u m

igitu r

annum ,

eg im u s, cu m

cu m

foriq u e strep itus desiderat. red issem u s

q uaestu ram

ex

A sia , cau sas 318

n o s, co n su la tu m

C otta,

i Aeschilus .F: esculus G cnidius O1 vetus : gnidius F: enidius C 6 in add. Eberhard g supra fluentes FG : suprafluentes C et s. secl. Schütz 10 diffluentes vulg. : diffluenti F : diffluentem C 12 resederat. . . deferverat vulg. : reciderat . . . referv^rat L 13 corpori codd. det. : corporis L 18 et non L·. certe non Weidner·, id est non Slang! : et sect. Bake 21 quod L : cui Jahn 24 esset L : erat maluit Stangl 25 et add. Bake c i c . BRVT. 7

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS

9 2 318

aedilitatem peteret Hortensius. Interim me quaestorem Siciliensis excepit annus, Cotta ex consulatu est profectus in Galliam, princeps et erat et habebatur Hortensius. Cum autem anno post ex Sicilia me recepissem, iam videbatur illud in me, quicquid esset, esse perfectüm et habere maturi- 5 tatem quandam suam. Nimis multa videor de me, ipse praesertim ; sed omni huic sermoni propositum est non ut ingenium et eloquentiam meam perspicias, unde longe 319 absum, sed ut laborem et industriam. Cum igitur essem in plurimis causis et in principibus patronis quinquennium 10 fere versatus, tum in patrocinio Siciliensi maximum in certamen veni designatus aedilis cum designato consule 93 H o r te n sio . so lu m

S ed

q u o n ia m

e n u m er a tio n e m

o m n is h ic

oratorum

veru m

serm o etiam

n o ster n o n p raecep ta

q u a ed a m d esid era t, q u id tam q u am n o ta n d u m et an im ad - 13

320 vertendum sit in Hortensio breviter licet dicere. Nam is post consulatum—credo quod videret ex consularibus nemi­ nem esse secum comparandum, neglegeret autem eos qui consules non fuissent—summum illud suum studium re­ misit quo a puero fuerat incensus, atque in omnium rerum 20 abundantia voluit beatius, ut ipse putabat, remissius certe vivere. Primus et secundus annus et tertius tantum quasi de picturae veteris colore detraxerat, quantum non quivis unus ex populo, sed existimator doctus et intellegens posset cognoscere. Longius autem procedens ut in ceteris e lo -25 quentiae partibus, tum maxime in celeritate et continua­ tione verborum adhaerescens, sui dissimilior videbatur fieri 321 cottidie. Nos autem non desistebamus cum omni genere exercitationis tum maxime stilo nostrum illud quod erat i i maximum Rau : maxime L 14 oratorum Lambinus : orato­ riam L 17 videret G2 : viderit L 2 4 existimator codd. det. : aestumator F 2B 2M2G : exstumator C 2 5 cognoscere Fz : agnoscere Orelli : vix agnoscere Martha : magnum scelus L : ut M : cum Lambinus

BRV TVS

9 3

321

augere, quantumcunque erat. Atque ut multa omittam in hoc spatio et in his post aedilitatem annis, et praetor primus et incredibili populari voluntate consul sum factus. Nam cum propter adsiduitatem in causis 5 et industriam tum propter exquisitius et minime vulgare orationis genus animos hominum ad me dicendi novi­ tate converteram. Nihil de me dicam: dicam de ceteris, 322 quorum nemo erat qui videretur exquisitius quam vulgus hominum studuisse litteris, quibus fons perfectae elo10 quentiae continetur, nemo qui philosophiam complexus esset matrem omnium bene factorum beneque dicto­ rum, nemo qui ius civile didicisset rem ad privatas causas et ad oratoris prudentiam maxime necessariam, nemo qui memoriam rerum Romanarum teneret, ex qua, 15 si quando opus esset, ab inferis locupletissimos testis excitaret, nemo qui breviter arguteque inluso adversario laxaret iudicum animos atque a severitate paulisper ad hilaritatem risumque traduceret, nemo qui dilatare posset atque a propria ac definita disputatione hominis ac tem20 poris ad communem quaestionem universi generis orationem traducere, nemo qui delectandi gratia digredi parumper a causa, nemo qui ad iracundiam magno opere iudicem, nemo qui ad fletum posset adducere, nemo qui animum eius, quod unum est oratoris maxime proprium, quocumque res postu- ^ 25 laret, impellere. Itaque cum iam paene evanuisset Hor- 323 tensius et ego anno meo, sexto autem post illum consulem consul factus essem, revocare se ad industriam coepit, ne cum pares honore essemus, aliqua re superior esse viderer. Sic duodecim post meum consulatum annos in maximis 30 causis, cum ego mihi illum, sibi me ille anteferret, coniun2 e t . . . a n n i s secl. Eilendi h i s codd. dett. : i i s L 3 popu­ l a r i L : p o p u l i Lambinus : p o p u l i R . Orelli c o n s u l add. Friedrich 1 6 i l l u s o Schütz : i n c l u s o L : e l u s o Baéhrens 2 0 a d c o m . G2 : a d om. L a r - 2 5 t r a d u c e r e . . . i m p e l l e r e vulg. : t r a d u c e r e t . . . i m p e l ­ le re t L 2 8 s u p e r i o r e s s e v i d e r e r Jahtt : s u p e r i o r e s v i d e r e m u r L

Μ. TVLLI CICERONIS

9 4 323

ctissime versati sumus, consulatusque meus, qui illum primo leviter perstrinxerat, idem nos rerum mearum gestarum, 324 quas ille adm irabatur, la u d e co n iu n x era t. p ersp ecta

est

u triu sq u e

n ostru m

M a x im e

ex ercita tio

p a u lo

vero a n te

quam perterritum arm is h o c stu d iu m , B ru te, n ostru m co n - 5 ticu it su b ito et o b m u tu it : cu m le g e P o m p e ia tern is h oris ad d ic e n d u m d atis ad cau sas sim illim a s in ter se v e l p o tiu s ea sd em n o v i v en ieb a m u s co tid ie.

Q u ib u s q u id em

ca u sis

tu etia m , B ru te, p raesto fu isti co m p lu risq u e et n o b iscu m et so lu s eg isti, u t qui n o n satis d iu vixerit H o r te n siu s ta m en 10 h u n c cursum c o n fe cer it : an n is a n te se d e c im ca u sa s agere co e p it q uam

tu e s n atu s ;

id e m

quarto et sex a g e n sim o

a n n o , p erp au cis an te m ortem d ie b u s, u n a tecu m soceru m tu u m d e fe n d it A p p iu m .

D ic e n d i au tem g en u s q u o d fuerit

in u troq u e, o ra tio n es u triu sq u e etiam p o steris n o stris in d i- '5 _ cabunt. 95 ?2. Sed si quaerimus cur adulescens magis floruerit dicendo quam senior Hortensius, causas reperiemus verissimas duas. Primam, quod genus erat orationis Asiaticum adule­ scentiae magis concessum quam senectuti. Genera autem 20 Asiaticae dictionis duo sunt : unum sententiosum et argu­ tum, sententiis non tam gravibus et severis quam concinnis et venustis, qualis in historia Timaeus, in dicendo autem pueris nobis Hierocles Alabandeus, magis etiam Menecles frater eius fuit, quorum utriusque orationes sunt in primis 25 ut Asiatico in genere laudabiles. Aliud autem genus est non tam sententiis frequentatum quam verbis volucre atque incitatum, quale est nunc Asia tota, nec flumine solum orationis, sed etiam exornato et faceto genere verborum, in quo fuit Aeschylus Cnidius et meus aequalis Milesius 30 3 c o n i u n x e r a t L : c o n i u n x i t Stangl 11 s e d e c i m Nipperdey. decem L 1 2 e t add. vulg. 1 9 p r i m a m Ernesti: p r i m u m L 2 2 e t s e v e r i s q u a m vulg. : e t s i v e r i s n u n q u a m L 2 6 a liu d L : a l t e r u m E. F. Eberhard 2 8 q u a l e BHM : q u a l i C : q u a l i s codd. dett, 2 9 f a c e t o L : f a c t o Ruhnken 3 0 f u i t L : f l o r u i t Eberhard

BRV TVS

95 325

Aeschines. In his erat admirabilis orationis cursus, ornata sententiarum concinnitas non erat. Haec autem, ut dixi, 326 genera dicendi aptiora sunt adulescentibus, in senibus gravi­ tatem non habent. Itaque Hortensius utroque genere 5 florens clamores faciebat adulescens. H abebat enim et Meneclium illud studium crebrarum venustarumque sen­ tentiarum, in quibus, ut in illo Graeco, sic in hoc erant quaedam magis venustae dulcesque sententiae quam aut necessariae aut interdum utiles; et erat oratio cum incitata 10 et vibrans tum etiam accurata et polita. Non probabantur haec senibus—saepe videbam cum inridentem tum etiam irascentem et stomachantem Philippum—, sed mirabantur adulescentes, multitudo movebatur. Erat excellens iudicio 327 vulgi et facile primas tenebat adulescens. Etsi enim genus 15 illud dicendi auctoritatis habebat parum, tamen aptum esse aetati videbatur. Et certe, quod et ingeni quaedam forma elucebat et exercitatio perfecta verborum astricta com­ prehensione, summam hominum admirationem excitabat. Sed cum iam honores et illa senior auctoritas gravius quid20 dam requireret, remanebat idem nec decebat idem ; quod­ que exercitationem studiumque dimiserat, quod in eo fuerat acerrimum, concinnitas illa crebritasque sententiarum pri­ stina manebat, sed ea vestitu illo orationis quo consuerat ornata non erat. H oc tibi ille, Brute, minus fortasse placuit 25 quam placuisset, si illum flagrantem studio et florentem facultate audire potuisses. Tum Brutus : Ego vero, inquit, et ista quae dicis video ® 0 320

7 i n q u i b u s L : i n q u o Stangl i n q u i b u s . . . u t i l e s secl. Friedrich : u t i n i l l o . . . h o c secl. Eberhard 1 0 p r o b a b a n t u r Ernesti·. p r o ­ b a n tu r L i i t u m . . . t u m maluit Bake 1 3 , 14 E r a t e x c e l l e n s . . . a d u l e s c e n s secl. Schütz : e r a t . . . v i d e b a t u r secl. Friedrich : e r a t . . . e x c i t a b a t secl. Eberhard 17 e l u c e b a t Lambinus·. l u c e b a t L e t om. G e t . . . e t secl. Schütz e x e r c i t a t i o Martha : e x e r c i t a ­ tio n e L v e rb o ru m , e r a t q u e L : e r a t q u e v e r b o r u m vulg. : e r a t v e r ­ b o r u m e r a t q u e Friedrich : e r a t s e n t e n t i a r u m c o n c i n n i t a s v e r b o r u m ­ q u e Bake c o m p r e h e n s i o n e Martha : c o m p r e h e n s i o L

96 328

Μ . T V L L I C IC E R O N IS

qualia sin t et H o r te n siu m m agn u m oratorem sem p er putavi m a x im e q u e p rob avi p ro M essa lla d ic e n te m , cu m tu afuisti.

Sic ferunt, inquam, idque declarat totidem quot dixit, ut aiunt, scripta verbis oratio. Ergo ille a Crasso consule et Scaevola usque ad Paullum et Marcellum consules floruit, 5 nos in eodem cursu fuimus a Sulla dictatore ad eosdem fere consules. Sic Q. Hortensi vox exstincta fato suo est, nostra 329 p u b lico .

M eliu s, q u a eso , om in are, in q u it B rutus.

S it sa n e

u t vis, in q u am , et id n o n tam m e a cau sa q uam tu a ;

sed

fortu natu s illiu s ex itu s, qui ea n o n v id it cu m fieren t q u a e 10 p rov id it futura.

S a ep e en im inter n o s im p e n d e n tis casu s

d eflev im u s, cu m b e lli c iv ilis ca u sa s in p rivatorum c u p id ita ­ tib u s in clu sa s, p acis sp em a p u b lic o c o n s ilio e s s e ex clu sa m vid erem u s.

S ed illu m vid etu r fe lic ita s ip siu s qua sem p er

est u su s ab eis m iseriis q u ae c o n se c u ta e su n t m orte v in d i- 15 cavisse.

33°

Nos autem, Brute, quoniam post Hortensi clarissimi oratoris mortem orbae eloquentiae quasi tutores relicti sumus, domi teneamus eam saeptam liberali custodia et hos ignotos atque impudentis procos repudiemus tueamur- 20 que ut adultam virginem caste et ab amatorum impetu quantum possumus prohibeamus. Equidem etsi doleo me in vitam paulo serius tamquam in viam ingressum, prius quam confectum iter sit, in hanc rei publicae noctem inci­ disse, tamen ea consolatione sustentor quam tu mihi, Brute, 25 adhibuisti tuis suavissimis litteris, quibus me forti animo esse oportere censebas, quod ea gessissem quae de me etiam me tacente ipsa loquerentur viverentque m ortuo; quae, si recte esset, salute rei publicae, sin secus, interitu ipso testimonium meorum de re publica consiliorum darent. 30 ont. BHM 3 i d e m q n e BHM 8 o m i n a r e Gs : o m i r e : o m itte C i t p r o v i d i t L : p r a e v i d i t Lambinus 21 a m a t o r u m vulg. : a r m a t o r u m L 2 8 [ m e ] t a c e n t e Stangl v i v e r e n t ­ q u e m o r t u o Stangi: m o r t u o q u e ( m e add. Einesti) v i v e r e n t vulg.: m o rtu o v iv e r e n tq u e L 2 9 s a l u t e vulg. ; s a l u t i L t et

O'1/· G '

BRVTVS

97 33 >

Sed in te intuens, Brute, doleo, cuius in adulescentiam per 9 7 medias laudes quasi quadrigis vehentem transversa incurrit ^ misera fortuna rei publicae. Hic me dolor tangit, haec cura sollicitat et hunc mecum socium eiusdem et amoris et 5 iudici. Tibi favemus, te tua frui virtute cupimus, tibi optamus eam rem publicam in qua duorum generum am­ plissimorum renovare memoriam atque augere possis. Tuum enim forum, tuum erat illud curriculum, tu illuc veneras unus, qui non linguam modo acuisses exercitatione io dicendi sed et ipsam eloquentiam locupletavisses graviorum artium instrumento et isdem artibus decus omne virtutis cum summa eloquentiae laude iunxisses. Ex te duplex nos 332 afficit sollicitudo, quod et ipse re publica careas et illa te. Tu tamen, etsi cursum ingeni tui, Brute, premit haec impor15 tuna clades civitatis, contine te in tuis perennibus studiis et effice id quod iam prope modum vel plane potius effeceras, ut te eripias ex ea quam ego congessi in hunc sermonem turba patronorum. Nec enim decet te ornatum uberrimis artibus, quas cum domo haurire non posses arcessivisti ex 20 urbe ea quae domus est semper habita doctrinae, numerari in vulgo patronorum. Nam quid te exercuit Pammenes vir longe eloquentissimus Graeciae ? quid illa vetus Academia atque eius heres Aristus hospes et familiaris meus, si qui­ dem similes maioris partis oratorum futuri sumus ? Nonne 333 25 cernimus vix singulis aetatibus binos oratores laudabilis constitisse ? Galba fuit inter tot aequalis unus excellens, cui, quem ad modum accepimus, et Cato cedebat senior et qui temporibus illis aetate inferiores fuerunt, Lepidus postea, deinde Carbo ; nam Gracchi in contionibus multo faciliore 30 et liberiore genere dicendi, quorum tamen ipsorum ad aetatem laus eloquentiae perfecta nondum fuit ; Antonius 3 a n g i t Cormdus 3 , 4 h a e c c u r a FOG: h a e c m e c u r a 1 8 p a t r o n o r u m sed. Kayser 2 1 q u i d t e G1 : q u i t e L e x s t i t i s s e maluit Rivius 2 9 c o n t i o n i b u s u s i s u n t Piderit

BHM 26

97 333

Μ. TV LLI C IC ER O N IS BRVTVS

Crassus, post Cotta Sulpicius Hortensius. Nihil dico amplius, tantum dico : si mihi accidisset ut numerarer in multis . . . si operosa est concursatio magis opportuno­ rum . . . 3 Post o p p o r t u n o r u m in subscriptione libri B addidit Flavius Blondus : non erat amplius in exemplari, a quo abscisse sunt charte due : quam­ quam ut mihi videtur nedum charte, sed pauca admodum deficiunt. In O addidit Ardizzi: nem inveniplura in perveteri codice ; fortunae qui­ dem iniquitas id totum si tamen quiddam erat recidit

COMMENTARY § § 1 —9 . Prologue. A s I returned from my province, I heard of the death of Hortensius. Contrary to general expectation, I was deeply distressed by this event. Yet Hortensius was fortunate in that he did not live to see the suppression of eloquence at Rome. Brutus resembles the Academica and De Legibus among C.’s major treatises in lacking a formal dedication. W ith the second version of the Academica, C. sent a separate dedica­ tory letter to Varro {fam. ix. 8). In De Legibus, as in Brutus, the dedication is indicated by passages in the dialogue itself (16. i n.). Y et the noble and moving passage with which Brutus opens is a dedication of a kind, to the memory of Hortensius not only as a man b u t as a symbol of the old Republican order and oratory, which C. half recognized to be a t an end, while compelling himself to hope th a t Brutus would have the ability and opportunity to carry on the old traditions. The whole work is unified by a return a t the end to these opening themes. § 1. I. Cilicia: C. governed this province 51-50 b.c. He returned to Italy by way of Side, Ephesus, Rhodes, and Athens (A tt. vi. 7. 2, fam . ii. 17. 1). decedens : this technical term for 'leaving one’s province’ often as here refers to the whole journey (‘while on my way hom e’), cf. Tusc. ii. 61 ‘solebat narrare Pompeius se cum Rhodum venisset decedens ex Syria audire voluisse Posido­ n iu m ’. Rhodum : a natural stopping-place, also attractive as a centre of learning from a t least the second century b .c. Cf. Tusc. ii. 61 (last n.) and on 51. 12.

2. Q. Hortensi : Q. Hortensius (114-50), R E no. 13, cos. 69, a leading optimate, and until C.’s rise, the greatest orator of the period. On his political career and his oratory cf. §§ 228 ff., 301 ff., 317 ff. He was ill in 51 b .c. {Att. v. 2. 2), in the early summer of 50 Caelius told C. th a t Hortensius was dying [fam. viii. 13. 2), and in June 50 C. learned of his death {Att. vi. 6. 2). opinione . . . : ‘I was more distressed than anybody expected’. On the compressed abl. of comparison with spe, 814437

B

COM M ENTARY exspectatione, etc. see K.-S. ii. 469-70. For opinio of ' expecta­ tio n ’, Very. ii. 2. 182 ‘homini praeter opinionem improviso incidi’, fam. iii. 2. 1, xiv. 23, dom. 32. On C.’s relationships with Hortensius cf. § 2 nn. 3. et amico amisso : balances interitu . . . auguris; privatum with its abis, balances dignitatem . . . deminutam, et . . . videbam refers to C.’s personal loss, et . . . dolebam to the public loss. This careful attention to balance, rhythm , and assonance is a good example of rhetorical artifice used not to conceal insincerity or emptiness of thought bu t to give con­ trolled expression to deep feeling. 5. dignitatem: ‘sta tu s’, ‘prestige’. For an analysis of its meaning in Roman political life cf. J. P. V. D. Balsdon CQ N . s . X (i960) 45. 6. nostri conlegi : C. became augur in 53 b .c., replacing P. Crassus, who was killed in his father’s campaign against the Parthians (§§ 281 f.). 7. cooptatum : originally a candidate for augurship was nomi­ nated by a single augur, and co-opted by the whole college. At this date two augurs nominated {Phil. ii. 4), and all candi­ dates, probably three in number, were submitted to popular vote (cf. 83. 14 n.). cooptatum here is thus loosely used, cf. Phil. xiii. 12 ‘auguratus locum in quern ego . . . eum mea nominatione cooptabo’. 8. iudicium . . . fecerat : most intelligent Romans were sceptical about the science of augury, though it was in fact consistent with Stoic views of divine providence. B ut as in other ages, open flouting of traditional religious usages still shocked even the sceptical. Election to the augural college remained a coveted reward for distinguished public service, cf. Taylor P P ch. iv. inauguratum : ‘formally adm itted to the augural college’. 9. in parentis . . . loco : more than mere words to the Romans with their tradition of the immense authority of the pater­ familias. Superior magistrates stood in this relationship to their quaestors (Verr. ii. 1. 40, fam. xiii. 10. 1, de or. ii. 198 ff.). For the respect in which senior augurs generally were held cf. sen. 64. §

. 10. A ugebat. . . reliquerat : ‘my distress was increased by the fact th a t in a period when wise and loyal citizens were few, a remarkable man closely associated with me in all 2

§ 1. 2-§ 3. 2

3

m atters of policy had died a t a time most inopportune from the political point of view, and had left us sadly regretful at the loss of his authority and good sense’. i i . sapientium . . . penuria: cf. fam. iii. i i . 3 ‘in summa bonorum et fortium civium copia’ contrasted with ‘tan ta penuria in omni vel honoris vel aetatis gradu’. 13. alienissimo : i.e. during the crisis leading to the Civil War, cf. 4. 3 ‘suo magis quam suorum civium tem pore’. auctoritatis : on the fundamental role of auctoritas in Roman political life cf. R. Heinze Hermes lx (1925) 348 ff. 15. non . . . : non goes closely with adversarium etc.: ‘because I had lost not, as most people thought, an opponent, . . . but an ally . . .’. C. now elaborates the thought of opinione omnium . . . (§1). Reasons for the prevalent assumption of hostility between C. and Hortensius were their political dis­ agreements and oratorical rivalry. The former, acute at the start of C.’s career, as in the trial of Verres and the debates on the Manilian law, diminished as C.’s views became, after his consulship, nearer to those of the optimates. Hortensius and C. were on the same side in the political trials from 63 onwards, e.g. those of Murena, Flaccus, P. Sulla, Sestius, Scaurus, and Milo (cf. too AU. ii. 25. i). This entente was interrupted only when C. suspected Hortensius—with many others—of treachery a t the time of his exile. The forensic rivalry C. here makes out to have been friendly competition. 17. gloriosi laboris : oratory. § 3 . 17. leviorum artium : even cultured Romans often affected contem pt for poetry and the fine arts, though C.’s pretended ignorance of Greek a rt in the Verrines represents the natural attitude of a public speaker a t any time and place. B ut C. genuinely felt th a t these things were inferior in status to oratory, cf. 70. 19, fin. v. 7, sen. 50, de or. i. 212, and Tac. dial. 10. 5. 18. p o eta s n o b ilis : as Sophocles at the death of Euripides (vit. Eur. 10). 19. m orte: doleo with abl. is frequent, and Lambinus' emenda­ tion mortem spoils the rhythm. 2. communicando . . . favendo : ‘ by taking common counsel, by advice and support’. For communicare absol. of sharing ideas between friends, cf. Att. xii. 36. 1 'non habeo . . . quicum tam audacter communicem quam t e ’, fam. iv. 1. 1,

COM M ENTARY

4

off. i. 50, de or. i. 250, or. 144. favendo : as in the m atter of the augurate, and in 58 b . c . ‘vidi hunc ipsum Q. Hortensium . . . paene interfici servorum manu cum mihi adesset’ (Mil. 37). § 4 . 3.

quadam : perhaps apologetic, because of the paradox of regarding Hortensius’ death as p art of his good fortune, but more probably intensifying, cf. 306. 8 ‘ admirabili quodam . .. studio’, K.-S. i. 643. felicitate : for the sentiment cf. fam. ii. 16. 3, also § 329. excessit e vita : in this expression excedere is used with or without the preposition (cf. 80. 17, 262. 23), cedere nor­ mally without. B ut it is unwise to make a hard and fast rule out of an evident preference, and L ’s cessit should be kept. 4. turn , . . viveret : ‘when he would have been able, if he had continued to live’, or, as we say, ‘if he had lived’. This forward-looking sense is implicit in the imperfect subjunctive. I t both explains the regular use with present reference in conditional sentences and is often traceable when classical authors use the imperfect in conditionals referring to the past (Woodcock, p. 155). 6. in civitate . . . : civitate, like rem publicam above, means the free state, cf. fam. v. 21. 3 (written in April 46, the date of Brutus) *qui vitam ingenuam in beata civitate et in libera re publica viximus’. 8. benevolentia : the satisfaction felt a t a friend’s good fortune. I have found no exact parallel to this sense. 10. cogitemus : sub-oblique subjunctive within a purpose clause. The frequentative subjunctive with quotienscumque is first found in Livy v. 54. 3. At all periods the frequentative subjunctive is rare in primary tenses, cf. K.-S. ii. 206 f. §

. The thought is a commonplace, cf. amic. 10, Tusc. i. i n ; and for contexts where the death was held to be timely, cf. Att. ii. 24. 4, de or. iii. 8, Tac. Agr. 44-45, Jerome epp. 60. 15. 12. quod : could well be preceded by a mark of punctuation, as it is the connecting relative: ‘th a t is our misfortune; let us endure it with restraint’. 5

§ 6. 19. aut praeter . . . paucis : ‘more than anyone else or a t any rate with few to equal h im ’, cf. de or. i. 31 : ‘vel solus vel cum perpaucis ’.

§ 3 . 2 -§ 7 . 30

5

21. voce erudita : i.e. of any such learned utterance. C. has himself in mind, and is preparing for the otherwise abrupt mention of himself in § 7. Graecisque : C. claims th a t Roman oratory is worthy of the attention of the Greeks with their own great tradition of oratory and continuing pre-eminence in rhetorical theory and training. §

. 22. angor: with acc. inf. as in awric. 90 ‘peccasse enim se non anguntur fam . vii. 15. 1.

7

egere : 'feel the need o f’, cf. parad. epp. i. 10. i i , a.p. 154.

23.

52,

Hor. serm.

i. 1. 5 9 ,

didiceram : Friedrich, feeling this allusion to C.’s own posi­ tion in a eulogy of Hortensius inconsistent with C.’s ' urbanity ’, suggested didicerat ille . . . me assuefecerat. But the transition is prepared in 6. 21, and at 8. 30, nobismet ipsis, C. becomes explicit, returning to Hortensius only in § 9.

24.

bene moratae et bene constitutae : ‘ possessing both sound morality and a sound constitution’. Quintii, viii. 6. 24 com­ ments on the metonymy implicit in the use of bene moratus of whole communities. Quod si f u it. . . : 'b u t if ever there was a time in our politi­ cal history when the authority and eloquence of a patriotic citizen could have wrested the weapons from the hands of his impassioned fellow citizens, it was a t the precise moment when the advocacy of peaceful measures was ruled out by the wrongheadedness of some and the tim idity of others’.

26.

posset : consecutive (generic) cf. M il. 28 ‘profectus id tem ­ poris cum iam Clodius . . . redire potuisset’, K.-S. ii. 332, Woodcock, p. 191.

28.

profecto : emphasizes th a t a statem ent is a personal view of the writer, sometimes asseverative (FI. 53 ‘non est ita, iudices, non est profecto’), sometimes hesitant (cf. Eng. ‘surely’) (A tt. vi. 5. 1 'nunc quidem profecto Romae es: quo si ita est te salvum venisse gaudeo’).30

29.

30. errore . . . timore : cf. Lig. 17 ‘scelus tu illud vocas, Tubero ? . . . alii errorem appellant, alii timorem ’. The thought recurs constantly in C.'s writings from 49 onwards, el. fam. ii. 16. 3, iv. i . i , V. 21. 2, xvi. i i . 2, 12. 2, Att. vii. 14. 3, Marc. 14, Lig. 28, Deiot. 29, Phil. ii. 24.

6

COM M ENTARY

Ita nobismet . . . reperiebant : ‘My own experience was this. Granted th a t there were other much weightier causes for grief, I was none the less saddened by one thing in particular. After a successful career, a man of my age was justified in seeking refuge in a haven not of sloth and idleness but of temperate and honourable retirement. Even my style of oratory was showing signs of age and had an air of m aturity and elderliness about it. Yet a t th a t very time recourse was had to arms—arms for which those very men who had learned to win glory with them were now at a loss to find a beneficial use’. 1. essent: subjunctive by attraction, cf. Phil. vi. 3 ‘haec sententia . . . sic . . . valuit ut quamquam discessio non facta esset de or. ii. 1. 2. aetas nostra : ‘ a man of my age ’, cf. Att. xv. 4. 3 ‘ u t nostrae aetati, quoniam interfecto domino [sc. Caesare] liberi non sumus, non fuerit dominus ille [sc. Antonius] fugiendus’, Sest. 109, Vat. 24, TLL i. 1134. 24. 3. tamquam in portum : using this phrase of Scipio Aemilianus (off. iii. 2), C. stresses th a t the enforced retirem ent of his own later years was by no means the distinguished otium th a t was his due, cf. or. 148, ac. post. 11. 4. deberet: ‘had the rig h t’, cf. Arch. 1 ‘earum rerum . . . A. Licinius fructum repetere prope suo iure d eb et’. 5. oratio: ‘oratory’, almost ‘style’, a sense as frequent in Brutus as ‘an oration’. canesceret : the word is rare except literally. Quintii, xi. X. 31 cites this word and passage in arguing th a t a less flam­ boyant style befits older men; cf. 325. 19. 7 . illi ipsi : Caesar and Pompey, whose fame in foreign con­ quest is contrasted with the catastrophe of the Civil War. § 8 . 30.

§ 9 . 13. iucunda sane . . . : 'actually agreeable, even in the midst of great and grievous anxieties’, sane stresses the paradox of C. ’s finding anything pleasant a t such a time. 14. ex sermone quodam : ‘as the result of a conversation’, the conversation of §§ 10—24, ™ which the history of Roman oratory is first mentioned at § 20. § § 1 0 - 1 9 . Brutus and Atticus visited me recently, and the con­ versation turned to the letters which they had lately sent me, and to which I owed a revival of my spirits and intellectual interests. I promised to repay the debt I owed them both.

§ 8 . 30 -§ 11. 23

7

§ 10. 15. inambularem : walking under cover [de or. ii. 12) or in a garden (Livy i. 54. 6). Romans naturally preferred walks under cover or a t least in shade, cf. de or. i. 28 (Wilkins Intr. 6-7), leg. i. 15. On C.’s habits cf. Plut. Cic. 8. 5 fjv 8 è καί τψ άλλην πepi τό σώμα θΐραπ€ΐαν ακριβή; καί π€ριττος ώστ€ και τρίφΐσι και περίπατοις αριθμώ τεταγμενοις χρησθαι, lb. 36. 3 εωθεν έστώς ή περιπατών προ τοϋ δωματίου τούς άσπαζομένους εδεξιοΰτο. x y s to : (ξυστός or ξυστόν) cf. (ic. pr. 9; originally a covered training-ground in a gymnasium, then, in Roman usage, a covered walk attached to a private house (Gk. παραδρομίς), cf. Vitr. vi. 7. 5, Plin. epp. ii. 17. 17. o tio su s : i.e. at his home in Rome: contrast §§ 20, 300; cf. Intr. 18. 16. M. ad m e : praenomen and nomen are separated, bu t by conjunctions, many times in C. (cf. 57. 28, 96. 17, etc.); for the much rarer insertion of a pronoun cf. de or. i. 40 ‘ C. ipsum Carbonem’, Phil. xiii. 20 'Decimus se Brutus obiecit’. v e n it : venerat (L). Fleckeisen maintained th a t such a plu­ perfect is unique at the beginning of a dialogue, and proposed venit. B ut no other dialogue has a precisely parallel opening. venerat means ‘had arrived’ before the 'recollections’ and ‘ conversation ’ of § 9, and should be kept. 17. in ter se c o n iu n c ti : cf. Nep. Att. 8, 9, 16 for their friendship in the period after the deaths of Caesar and Cicero. 19. Q uid v o s : cf. de or. ii. 13 ‘Quid vos tandem? Crassus, num quidnam, inquit, novi ? ' The missing verb will be, for example, vultis, quaeritis, adfertis, b u t C.’s colloquial vague­ ness may be similarly rendered: ‘“ W ell?” I said’ ('How now ’, Hendr.). 2 0 . n o v i : news was awaited about Caesar’s African campaign against the supporters of Pompey (cf. fam. v. 21. 3). 2 2 . pro certo : there were of course rumours, but dependable news was hard to come by, and C.'s letters of 49 show th a t in turbulent times even news received pro certo often proved false. § 11· 23. esse t : Latin often uses historic tenses after a perfect main verb, even where English usage requires the ‘perfect with “ h av e” ’, cf. Woodcock p. 102. sile n tiu m : cf. 157. 26. In real life Atticus avoided political controversy, even to the extent of associating with the trium ­ virs who proscribed Cicero. B ut the calculating non-partisan Atticus was an admirable foil for the emotional Cicero.

COM M ENTARY

8

Vos .. . Attice : Atticus is addressed because he spoke last, while the sentence refers to both Atticus and Brutus, cf. Virg. A en. ix. 525 ‘vos, o Calliope, precor, adspirate canenti’ (a prayer addressed to all the Muses but naming only one) ; for an example of a different type cf. 149. 18 ‘vestra, Brute, vetus Academia ’, and see Fordyce on Catull. 39. 20. 2 6 . absenti: ‘when I was far away from y o u ’, absens implies only the separation of the persons concerned, not ‘ absence ’ from where one normally is or is expected to be; cf. Sest. 130, Att. vii. 15. I, and Virgil’s famous ‘illum absens absentem auditque videtque’ (Aen. iv. 83, copied by Ovid Trist, v. 2. 45) on which Servius notes ‘unum suffecerat'. vestris primum litteris : for the emphasis thrown on vestris, ‘ it was your letters by which . . .’ cf. 12. 31 ‘istis scito litteris’. 27. pristina studia : rhetoric, philosophy, literature, cf. §315. 28. perlibenter : there are 22 adjectives and adverbs com­ pounded with per- in Brutus, many of them extremely rare. J. André, R É L xxix (1951) 121—54, questions the usual view th a t this form of intensification was in origin colloquial. epistulam : Intr. 2, 3. 29. Asia : where Brutus met Caesar in 47 and defended Deiotarus before him a t Nicaea, cf. § 21. 25.

§

. 3 0 . Recte . . . est visus : ‘you were right in thinking so ’. mi hi visus est is ‘ I thought th a t he ’. 3 2 . valetudinis : ‘general well-being’. For C.’s state of mind in the period before he wrote Brutus, see the letters, esp. Att. xi. 5—25 (November 48—July 47, after which C. in Rome had direct contact with Atticus, and the letters cease until November 46). tamquam . . . lucem : the picture as at 13. 14 ‘me . . . excitavit’ is of C. lying prostrate with grief, cf. dom. 96 'speravi . . . me iacentem . . . posse excitari’, har. resp. 50. 1. Cannensem : Jerome epp. vii. 1 borrows this allusion. Marcelli : later the conqueror of Syracuse. On the enthu­ siasm aroused by this success cf. Livy xxiii. 30. 19. 2. ad Nolam : there were two Roman victories near this Campanian town, the first in 216 (Livy xxiii. 16), the second and greater in 215 (ib. 44-46). Livy suggests th a t some authorities exaggerated the scale of the earlier victory, but admits its importance for Roman morale. 1 2

§ 11. 25- § 15. 22

3.

9 sic : this parallel may have been inspired by B rutus’ visit to M. Claudius Marcellus (cos. 51, cf. 248. 1 n.) referred to in his De Virtute, the ‘le tte r’ discussed in the present passage (Intr. 2, 3 cf. §§ 249 ff.), or by A tticus’ study of the history of the Claudii Marcelli (Nep. Ait. 18. 4).

4. nostrarum : C.’s personal affairs, which he found in disorder on his return to Italy in October 48. § 1 3 . i i . Quodnam tandem : a startled question: 'a remark­ able kind of letter by your account ! W hatever can it have been ? ’ 13. salutatio : ‘dedication’, playing upon salus above. 14. adfatus : adfari is, like fari, a mainly poetical word, used by C. chiefly of dedicating books, cf. 253. 21, sen. 1. § 14. 15. Nempe : ‘you must mean the one in which . . . ’ nempe is here used ‘in summing up or explaining another’s m eaning’ (L & S s.v. I. 2). 16. omnem rerum memoriam : ‘the whole of history’. Even though this phrase seems not to be precisely paralleled, it is a natural combination accepted by all recent edd., and the evidence is strongly against the nineteenth-century additions which would confine Atticus’ work to Roman history, cf. or. 120 ‘etiam rerum gestarum et memoriae veteris ordinem maxime scilicet nostrae civitatis sed etiam imperiosorum populorum et regum illustrium, quem laborem nobis Attici nostri levavit labor’; see also Münzer Hermes xl (1905) 78 ff. (though Alfonsi Rh. Mus. xciii (1949) 59-65 sees Nepos’ Chronica as C.’s source for some information on Greek his­ tory). If the lack of the usual adjective with rerum were a serious difficulty, it would be better to introduce gestarum or veterum cf. or. l.c. § 15. 22. u t . . . viderem : ‘th a t the chronology was set out so th a t I could see it all at a glance’. This type of appositional noun-clause deserves sharper differentiation from the ordi­ nary consecutive or generic clause than it normally receives ; see Woodcock p. 126, L & S pp. 1942 col. 3 and 1943 col. 1. explicatis : set out clearly, or fully, cf. 24. 9, and de or. i. 163 ‘sed tu . . . perfice u t Crassus haec quae coartavit et peranguste refersit in oratione sua, dilatet nobis atque explicet’, ib. i. 57.

IO

COM M ENTARY

24. ipsa mihi . . . : i. e. the mere revival of interest in literature benefited C. ; the Liber A nnalis indicated the particular form which C.’s acknowledgement might take. 28. illud Hesiodium : Cf. W .D . 349 f. ev μ€ν μ€τρεΐσθαί n a p i yetrovos eü S’ άηοδοΰνα ι / αύτω τ ω μέτρω καί λοηον a t Ke δΰνηαί. Cf. Att. X l l l . 1 2 . 3, where some of the Greek is quoted, and off. i. 48. For this type of expression cf. Tusc. iii. 56 ‘Caecilianum illud’, div. ii. 31, M il. 32, K.-S. i. 211 ; cf. for a different formula sen. 50‘illud Solonis’, Tusc. iii. 62, iv. 78, div. ii. 51. 29. quae : off. l.c. has ea quae utenda acceperis, but L ’s qua in the present passage is nearer the Greek. cumulatiore : often used of a debt repaid, cf. fam . xiii. 4. 1 'magno enim meo beneficio affecti cumulatissime mihi gratiam rettu leru n t’, Phil. xiv. 35, Pease on A en. iv. 436. cumulus, connected with κΰω, κΰμα, is a swollen or rounded heap, and so implies an excess over the ‘flat ’ measure which would represent an exact repayment. §

1 6 . i. Ego autem . . . : ‘I shall certainly make you a repay­ ment of good intentions ; but I find myself unable yet to repay the debt itself : I ask your indulgence for this. For repayment of what I have received can be made neither from fresh crops, as is the way of farmers—every shoot is so severely checked, and its blossom so scorched and dried up with thirst for its former lushness—nor from crops stored up, for they lie hidden in darkness, and I who almost alone had access to them now find the entrance blocked. I shall sow something in an un­ cultivated and neglected soil, and tend it with such care th a t I shall be able even to add interest to your generous gift, if only my mind is capable of doing the same as a field which, after lying fallow for many years, usually produces even more abundant crops.’ In this difficult passage, in which it is hard to determine how far the metaphors should be pressed for precise references, C. promises to repay his debt to Atticus, and in § 19 his debt to Brutus, by some published works. A. W hat future works are to be dedicated to (1) Brutus, (2) Atticus? B. W hat are the conditi fructus, and why are they not available ? A. I. Hendrickson, A JP h lx (1939) 405 n. 4, rightly argues th a t the offering to Brutus is Brutus itself; this passage replaces the usual dedicatory preface. In leg. i. 15, C. similarly distinguishes the imaginary dialogue from the

§ 15. 24—§ 17.14

II

written work in which it is reported, to the confusion of some critics (e.g. Hirzel Dev Dialog i. 478). 2. Possibly the offering to Atticus is also Brutus, which, while named after Brutus, is not specifically dedicated to him, and is largely based on Atticus’ researches. The elabo­ rate fencing of Brutus and Atticus, each undertaking to dun C. on behalf of the other, is a hint th a t the work is a gift to both, and aliquid in seremus aliquid (16. 7) is the same as in scribas aliquid (19. 27). Most comm, take inculto . . . solo of a type of writing, and it would then refer to the ‘field’ covered by Brutus, a novel undertaking (Intr. 16). B ut surely C. is referring to his own mind and creative faculties, noster animus (16. 10) cf. or. 48. Most scholars find a reference to some other project, e.g. philosophy, history, or the De Legibus on which C. was at work 46—44 B.c. B. Cicero apparently means th a t he has begun certain work which he cannot now complete, though the metaphor of aditus may merely relate to the inadvisability of publica­ tion. Harnecker saw reference to the ανέκδοτα, begun in 5 9 (Att. ii. 6. 2, 7. I , 8. 1) and perhaps alluded to again in 44 (A tt. xiv. 17. 6). I t may again be the De Legibus, if th a t was not intended (when C. wrote the present passage) as the present for Atticus. Certainty is unattainable. emetiar : ‘measure out ’ (muchmore commonly ' traverse ’), cf. Hor. serm. ii. 2. 105, resgest. div. Aug. 15. B ut the vulgate reading remetiar is nearer to Hesiod’s ev άποδοΰναι, and tempting. 3. est, unde : cf. Ter. ad. 122 ‘ est unde haec fian t’, har. resp. 29 ‘si habuerit unde tibi solvat’. 5. siti flos : L ’s flos siti should be retained. For siti exarescere with object, gen. cf. rep. i. 66 ‘cum enim inquit (Plato) inexplebiles populi fauces exaruerunt libertatis s iti’ (Plato Rep. 5 6 2 C όταν οΐμαι δημοκρατονμένη πόλις iXevOeplas διφησασα . . .). None the less C. seems to confuse ‘The flower is dried up with thirst i.e. need of ra in ’ and the ‘thirst i.e. sense of loss, for its former healthy condition’. 9. impendiis : ‘with interest’, cf. Varro l.l. v. 183, and the colloquial use, Att. x. 4. 9 ‘ille impendio nunc magis odit senatum ’. §

1 7 . 14. Mihi quoque . . . : ‘I to o ’, said Brutus, 'm ust await the fulfilment of your promise to Atticus, though possibly as

COM M ENTARY his self-appointed agent, I shall demand the paym ent which the actual creditor refuses to exact except at your conve­ nience’. ‘B ut I shan’t pay you, B rutus’, I replied, ‘unless I first secure your guarantee th a t the original creditor shall make no further claim for the said debt.’ [et] : (pergrata) et Rs. Friedrich and Fleckeisen would retain the first et, and read et si in the next line, completing the construction by supplying an apodosis after negat, e.g. (ne tu mihi suscenseasy (Fleck.), or interpolating a protasis et si (forte tu non solverisy (Friedr.). 16. procurator : an agent for any purpose, here the collection of debts. Naturally such agencies frequently led to litigation cf. the imaginary cases in Quintii, iv. 4. 6, vii. 1. 19, and see Gaius inst. iv. 84. se tuo : there is no need to add se ; the accusative subject of the acc. inf. is often omitted when it is obvious or unemphatic, even in dignified Latin, cf. K.—S. i. 701, Lebreton pp. 376 ff. I t is not so easy to do without tuo. Ammon sug­ gested negat tuo ‘on rhythmical grounds’, b u t this change merely replaces a perfectly good rhythm by another good but less common one. Corradus’ incommodo tuo (without se) is attractive, cf. Att. xii. 47. 1 (46. 2). §

. 18. cavero : cavere ah, receive security from, cavere with dative, offer security to, cf. TLL iii. 637. 16, 49. For cavere with acc. inf. cf. Verr. ii. 4. 92 ‘si . . . cautum esset eos testi­ monium non esse dicturos’. neminem, cuius petitio sit : lit. ‘ no one to whom the claim belongs', i.e. the original creditor, a legal formula, cf. Gaius inst. iv. 98, Att. i. 8. 1, fam. xiii. 28. 2, Rose. com. 35 ff., Greenidge p. 241. 1 8

19. repromittere : ‘ guarantee ’, again a common financial term, cf. Plaut, asin. 453-4 ‘verum istuc argentum tamen mihi si vis denumerare / repromittam istoc nomine solutam rem futuram ’, Rose. com. 12, etc. 20. ausim : most MSS. have ausus sim, but a deponent perfect potential subjunctive would be unique in C. (K.—S. i. 176). Y et C. also avoids these archaic optatives, except in di faxint (Kroll, Glotta xxii (1934) 5). ausim always has the weakened force of audere ‘venture’ ‘be disposed t o ’ (Nisbet on dom. 112), see also 25. 15 n.

§ 17. 14-§ 21.11

13

21. flagitatorem: ‘a d u n ’. Brutus cannot give the promise asked for, since Atticus will pursue his claim, ‘if not to the point of causing distress, at any rate with persistence and vigour’. Cf. top. 5 for the metaphor: ‘admonitus huius aeris alieni nolui deesse ne tacitae quidem flagitationi tuae ’. non illum quidem : quidem is often thus used concessively in the first p art of an antithesis, preceded by a personal pronoun or ille (‘not, it is true . . . but all the same . . .’), cf. 140. I, 239. 10, K.-S. i. 623. 24. appellare: ‘call on y o u ’ for payment, TLL ii. 274. 21, L & S s.v. IIb . § 19. 29. de re publica : begun in 54, published by 51. i. rerum nostrarum : the MSS. reading rerum naturalium is impossible. B ut it is hard to see why the easy nostrarum (Lambinus) should have been corrupted. Victor Pisanus ’s veterum annalium is attractive. Although, as P.—F. point out, stress on ancient history is not strictly appropriate to the Liber Annalis, no doubt the early sections involved the most research and were those primarily stimulated by De Re Publica with its survey of early Roman history (ii. 1-63). § § 2 0 - 2 4 . Atticus said that Brutus and he wished me to resume an earlier discourse on the history of oratory. §

2 0

. 5. Tusculano : the earlier conversation, like the one reported in Brutus, was probably a fiction, though it is likely th a t C. discussed the composition of Brutus with Atticus while they were both in Rome after July 47 (cf. 12. 32 n.). 6. de oratoribus : the first explicit mention of the subject of the dialogue. 8. tuum vel nostrum : cf. Att. vi. 2. 7 'venio ad Brutum tuum, immo nostrum, sic enim m avis’. Here, of course, Atticus is represented as speaking. §

2 1

. i i . potuero : either ‘ if I find I can ’, a sense often found with the fut. perf. in main sentences, cf. dom. 37 ‘iam omnium sacra interierint’ (Nisbet ad loc., Austin on Cael. 35), or simply ‘if I c an ’, for Lattm ann, Philologus Suppl, vi. 171, has argued th a t since potero is as common as potuero in this formula, no distinction of time can be intended (contrast Wilkins on de or. ii. 85), i.e. it is simply a survival of the old

COM M ENTARY

14

colloquial use, common in Comedy, of the fut. perf. as equiva­ lent to the fut. simple. 12. faciam . . . satis : ‘ I shall give you satisfaction ’, again frequent in financial connexions, L & S s.v. satis D. 2. 14. Nempe igitur : ‘well th e n ’, introductory or resumptive, cf. part. or. 42 ‘ sunt exposita iam fere ea quae de facto quaerun­ tur. nempe igitur ea restant quae . . .’. 15. Deiotari : tetrarch of Galatia, who helped Pompey in the Civil War. Later he was provisionally pardoned by Caesar, but in the settlement after the battle of Zela, he lost much territory to neighbouring potentates. His case was unsuc­ cessfully presented by Brutus at Nicaea (A tt. xiv. 1. 2). He was defended before Caesar, on other charges, b y C. in 45, in the extant speech pro rege Deiotaro. fidelissimi : from the Republican point of view (Phil. xi. 34). Caesar was sceptical (last n.). 16. ornatissime et copiosissime : two qualities always com­ mended by C. (cf., e.g., de or. i. 21, 48, Intr. 35), bu t attributed to Brutus only in compliment (Intr. 13-14). Caesar spoke of this speech as delivered ‘valde vehementer et libere ’ (A tt. xiv. i. 2), the ‘m odernist’ Aper in Tac. dial. 21. 6 speaks of its lentitudo ac tepor. Caesar of course refers to B rutus’ energetic delivery and free-spokenness, Aper to stylistic qualities as revealed in the published oration. A similar distinction ex­ plains the conflicting judgements on Calvus (§ 283 nn.). 17. Scio . . . : ‘I am aware, hé said, th a t the conversation had the origin you mention, and that, in your distress on B rutus’ account, you mourned over the desolation of the law-courts and forum ’. 18. vicem : this adverbial accusative is esp. frequent with dolere. quasi deflevisse : deflere means basically to ‘weep for th a t which is ended ’, ‘ to mourn the dead ’, cf. de or. iii. 9 ‘ (mors Crassi) est a multis saepe defleta’. C. here apologizes with quasi for what he feels to be a metaphorical use. 19. Feci : used like Eng. ‘to d o ’ Gk. noielv to avoid repetition of an earlier verb, i.e. deflevi, cf. 118. 27, 130. 6, 190. 12, also 160. 17, L & S s.v. facio E, TLL vi. 107-8. §

. 20. Nam mihi . . . : 'as I think about you, Brutus, I often find myself anxiously wondering whether your unusual

2 2

§ 21. ll- § 23.1

ι5

natural gifts, choice erudition, and remarkable industry will ever find any scope for action at all in te : intueri has in only when used metaphorically (and not always then), otherwise the direct object. 21. vereri : indirect questions with verbs of fearing, surprise, etc., are common, but only when introduced by an interroga­ tive word; K.—S. ii. 487 cite an isolated example of vereor num from Gaius {dig. 20. 11. 4. 2). aliquando : ‘ a t last ', a sense rarely absent when C. uses the word, sometimes emphatic, cf. Verr. ii. 1. 72 ‘aliquando miseremini sociorum’. 22. natura . . . doctrina . . . industria : Intr. 22, Wilkins Intr. 57, Colson on Quintii, i. pr. 27, Austin on Quintii, xii. 1. 9, Caplan on rhet. Her. i. 3. On B rutus’ rhetorical education see on §§ 3 3 1 - 2 . 23. maximis causis : we know only of his defence of his fatherin-law App. Claudius on charges of peculatus and maiestas in 50 (230. 13, 324. 12,/am . ni. 11, O RF p. 465). 24. cum tibi . . . : ‘when I had reached an appropriate age to give way to you and yield you precedence'. fascisque summitteret : a technical phrase, not elsewhere found metaphorically. The common metaphorical use of fasces almost always refers to political power. 26. ordimur : examples in prose of ordiri with infinitives (cf. 301. 13, leg. i. 14) are not numerous, since its literal meaning, ‘to lay the warp for weaving’, does not lend itself to th at construction and C. was still conscious of it, cf. de or. ii. 145 'pertexe modo quod exorsus es’. §

. 27. Ceterarum rerum : the loss of life, failure of the Republican cause, etc. B rutus’ view here th a t the practice and study of oratory, without political rewards, is satisfying in itself shows C. making a curious unconscious forecast of the growth of declamation under the Principate, not th a t he would have approved the sensational form th a t it often took. 30. tam studioso mei : this reading is neat and well suited to C.’s characterization of Brutus (Intr. 10). Some editors prefer to keep the reading of L and variously supplement a presumed lacuna after et: exercitatum audienti P .-F ., exer­ citatum intuenti Rs., optimarum artium cupidum intuenti Kr. i. Dicere . . . : ‘for effective eloquence is possible only for the man of intellectual interests ; therefore the man who devotes 2 3

ι6

COM M ENTARY himself to true eloquence devotes himself to intellectual pur­ suits, with which nobody can comfortably dispense even in the greatest of wars.’ prudenter . . . prudentiae : a difficult passage. The range of reference of the twenty-five occurrences of prudens, pru­ dentia, etc., in Brutus covers good judgement in politics (e.g. 2. 14, 28. 8), in criticism (105. 28, 239. 16), in the use of oratorical skill (e.g. 93. 22, 104. 21, 239. 20), and specifically of jurisprudence (97. 28 n.). Here we need yet another inter­ pretation, but ne . . . bellis, with the stress falling on maximis, rules out such favoured candidates as ‘common sense’ and, still more, 'm ilitary skill’ (Martha, Kr.). The correct sense ‘philosophy’, ‘intellectual interests’, is rare, b u t cf. Tusc. i. 7 ‘Aristoteles . . . coepit . . . prudentiam cum eloquentia iungere’, 102. 7. C. held some knowledge of philosophy to be an essential part of the orator’s equipment, cf. in general de or. i. 54—73, iii. 54—89, or. 14—17, and with reference to himself 161. 5, 322. 10, or. 12. The choice of word may be dictated by C.’s desire to make this idiosyncratic doctrine more acceptable, by using a word which could mean ‘common sense’ and only in the rel. clause indicating his real view. The commentator’s dilemma is well shown in Hendr. who translates prudentia ‘sound thinking ’, which is what C. says, and notes ‘philosophy’, which is w hat C. means (though Hendr. also accepts the strange and un­ necessary view th a t C. is discussing the intellectual equip­ ment of a military commander).

3. aequo animo carere : a stock phrase, cf. Rose. Am . 144, dom. 97, Vat. 38, Tusc. iii. 26,/am. vii. 1. 2. §

2 4 . 5. cetera : the status and prestige associated with the offices of state and honours which Caesar bestowed on his supporters, many of them socially humiles.

9. si videtur : ‘if you like’, cf. ac. post. 35, Tusc. i. 23, nat. d. i. 17, iii. 19. 10. pratulo : ‘a lawn ’, cf. Att. xii. 6. 2, rep. i. 18. C. hardly had ‘ a small meadow ’ (L & S) attached to his Roman house. Platonis statuam : perhaps from the famous original by Silanion (OCD s.v. Silanion, W inter Kunstgeschichte in Bildern 317. 2). On the bronze statue of Demosthenes at C.'s Tusculanum cf. or. n o , on Atticus’ statue of Aristotle, Att. iv. 10. i. The choice of this spot symbolizes C.'s view th a t Plato

§ 2 3 . l-§ 2

5 .19

17

seemed to C. the fountain-head both of philosophy and of eloquence. consedimus : the customary indication in a Ciceronian dialogue th a t the main discussion is about to begin, so de or. i. 29, leg. ii. 7, ac. post. 14, ac. pr. 9, fin. iii. 9,fat. 4 (cf. M. Ruch Le Préambule dans les œuvres philosophiques de Cicéron (Paris 1958) pp. 3 7 7 - 8 )· § § 2 5 - 3 8 . I began by saying that I did not intend to sing the praises of eloquence, but must stress its difficulty, for which the late development of oratory in Greece is evidence. § 2 5 . 12. Laudare igitur . . . : ‘to sing the praises of eloquence and to expatiate on its power and the distinction it confers on those who possess it is not my purpose on this occasion, nor do I need to do so ’—dramatically, because the agreement of Atticus and Brutus could be assumed, and in fact because C. had written De Oratore. Two rhetorical devices are combined here, praise of one’s subject, -with which de or. (i. 30) and inv. (i. 5) begin, and occultatio (παρασιώπησή, reticentia), intro­ ducing or mentioning a topic by stating th a t one need not or will not discuss it. 15. confirmaverim : potential, cf. K.-S. i. 176-7, Handford § 119. Perhaps a conscious imitation of the Gk. ΐΐποιμ άν, etc., this usage is comparatively rare in Republican Latin apart from C.’s later treatises and letters. 16. arte . . . exercitatione . . . natura : an allusion to the triad (22. 22), but as Kr. points out, natura is not here strictly logical : a natural gift cannot properly be ‘ difficult ’. Further, the members of the triad are here alternatives. There is thus a reference to the controversy about the nature of oratory in which each of the three had its advocates, cf. de or. i. 5 (doctrinajars, ingenium, exercitatio), ib. 96 (artificium, facultas, studium), ii. 29 (artificium, studium), ib. 70 (ratio, exercitatio). In de or. ii the least plausible claimant (natura, facultas, in­ genium) disappears, and it is absent from Quintii.’s discussion of the nature of oratory in ii. 15. 2. On the history of the dis­ pute, cf. Norden Die antike Kunstprosa (Leipzig 1898) p. 8 n. 2. 18. quinque rebus : inventio, dispositio, elocutio, memoria, actio, cf. Intr. 24 (iii), rhet. Her. i. 3, inv. i. 9, part. or. 3, or. 43-60, Quintii, iii. 3, cf. v. 10. 54. 19. ars : τέχνη, any theoretical or systematic knowledge capable of a practical application. 814437

C

ι8

COM M ENTARY

§

2 6 . 24. multo ante . . . : ‘long before effective and copious eloquence was developed’. True eloquence, in C.’s view, in­ volves vis and copia; elaborata stresses th a t oratory is not an easy, natural growth, but can be brought to m aturity only with time and effort. The Atticists had questioned these cherished beliefs of his. inventas . . . perfectas : a common antithesis in ancient histories of arts and techniques, cf. 71. 30, de or. i. 13. Dion. Hal. classifies A ttic orators as eiperai or τ ε λ α ω τα ί of genres (Din. 1). In such contexts, perfectus implies not ‘perfection’, i.e. faultlessness, but full m aturity, cf. 44. 18, 70. 24. 27. lucent : quasi is added because lucent here stands alone, whereas usually some other word reinforces and eases the metaphorical use, cf. imp. Pomp. 41 ‘imperi nostri splendor . . . lucet’, Sest. 60 ‘virtus . . . lucet in tenebris’. tuae : because of Atticus’ long association with Athens, to which he owed his cognomen (Nep. Att. 2-4).

§ 2 7 . 29. Periclem . . . feruntur : cf. Intr. 37 and on § 44. 1. feruntur : ‘are in circulation under his nam e’, the earliest certain instance of this usage, cf. Quintii, i. pr. 7 ‘sub nomine meo libri ferebantur artis rhetoricae’, iii. 1. 12 (paraphrasing the present passage), Suet, gramm. 1. 3. The Gk. φίρασθαι (LSJ s.v. φέρω A. viii. 1) may have been in C.’s mind. nascentibus : cf. or. 39 'modo primumque nascentia’, ac. pr. 15 ‘quod si illi (i.e. early philosophers) tum in novis rebus quasi nascentes haesitaverunt’. Reid ad loc. gives parallels, not all of which need bear his interpretation of ' youthful ', ' immature ', as opposed to ‘newly bom ’. 2. littera nulla : ‘not a w ord’ cf. fam. ii. 17. 6 ‘ad me litteram numquam m isit’, har. resp. 11, de or. iii. 60. 3. oratoris . . . : ‘seems like the work of a real o rato r’. 4. opinio est : balances littera nulla : ‘ no written record exists, b u t it is thought . . .’. Pisistratum . . . Solonem . . . Clisthenem : the three most notable statesmen of sixth-century Athens ; on Pisistratus cf. on § 41. Their reputation as ‘orators’ is of course based purely on general considerations of their political eminence, and the fact th a t they were able to attain power or carry reforms. The chronological indications, and the appearance of Cleisthenes (not in de or.) show A tticus’ influence.

§ 26 . 24 - § 29.13

19

6. u t . . . : ‘for those d ay s’, 'considering the date at which they lived’. §

2 8

. 7. Atticis : most recent edd. keep Attici (L), rightly, since Atticus dealt with Greek history (cf. 14. 16 n.), and the point here is chronological. 8. Themistocles : cf. Thuc. i. 138. 3 KaL μεν μ ετά χειρας εχοι και εξηγησασθαι οιός τε , ών δ’ άπειροί είη κρΐναι ίκανώς ούκ άπη λλακτο . C. may have taken ίξηγη σασθαι as ‘expound’. 9. Pericles : cf. on § 44. qui cum . . . : ‘who, while remarkable for every kind of distinction, showed his highest excellence in this realm of achievem ent’. i i . Cleonem . . . eloquentem : Aristophanes and Thucydides, though hostile to Cleon’s personality and policies, admit his sway over the people, cf. Thuc. iii. 36. 6 βιαιότατος τω ν πολιτώ ν τω τ ε δήμω παρά πολύ εν τω τό τε πιθανώ τατος (cf. iv. 21. 3)> Aristophanes Knights, passim. §

2 9

. 13. suppares: 'nearly contem porary’, a rare word, here only in C. cf. Yell. i. 17 ‘dulcesque Latini leporis facetiae per Caecilium Terentiumque et Afranium suppari aetate nitue­ r u n t’. On compounds with sub-, cf. on subobscuri, below. Alcibiades : Plut. Alcib. 10. 3 (quoting Theophrastus) εύρειν μεν ην τα ζέοντα και νοησαι πάντω ν ίκανώτατος, ζητώ ν δε μη μόνον â δει λεγειν άλλα και ώς δεΐ το ΐς όνόμασι κα'ι τοΐς ρημασι , ούκ εύπορων δε πολλάκις εσφάλλετο κα'ι μ ετα ξύ λ ίγω ν άπεσιώ πα και διελειπεν.

Aristophanes alludes to Alcibiades’ lisp or impediment, e.g. Wasps 44-46. In de or. ii. 93 (' antiquissimi fere sunt quorum quidem scripta constent Pericles et Alcibiades et eadem aetate Thucydides’) C. implies th a t speeches of Alcibiades were or had been available in writing, but there is no hint of this elsewhere, and the present passage implies the contrary (cf. Intr. 37). Critias : a relation of Plato, and leader of the Thirty Tyrants of Athens (404-403 b.c.). Herodes Atticus (second cent. A . D . ) initiated a revival of interest in Critias’ oratory after long neglect (Philostr. vit. soph. 564). He is mentioned in addition to the Ten Orators of the ‘ canon ’ in Hermogenes de ideis ii. i i . 388, 390. Some of his speeches were thus long extant. Both Hermogenes (l.c.) and Philostratus {vit. soph. 501-3) describe Critias’ oratory as elevated in tone (σεμνόν), but pure in diction, clear, and avoiding evident artifice.

COM M ENTARY

20

T h e ra m e n e s : Thuc. viii. 68. 4 Θηραμενης . . . άνηρ οΰτε ε'ιπεΐν ούτε γνωναι αδύνατο?. Nothing survived (de or. ii. 9 3 )· Xenophon Hell. ii. 3. 35 ff. puts a speech in his mouth on the occasion of his trial by his fellow members of the Thirty (403 B.c.). 14. T h u cyd id i : a common form of genitive of Greek proper names in -es, cf. Wilkins on de or. i. 88, Neue i. 509 ff. 15. G randes : often of ‘elevated’ diction or delivery, Intr. 35. The subject of the sentence has to be supplied from the sense of what precedes, e.g. ‘the orators of those tim es’. 16. verbis . . . se n te n tiis : a stock rhetorical antithesis, cf. 35. 5, 126. 30, etc., ‘words’ and ‘thoughts’; res and verba are similarly opposed cf. 65. 17, part. or. 3. But the collocation of all three as here (cf. de or. ii. 34) is unusual, the distinction being complicated by the addition of sententiae in its technical sense, thoughts pithily expressed (γνώμαι) ; cf. de or. ii. 56 ‘ (Thucydides) ita creber est rerum frequentia u t verborum prope numerum sententiarum numero consequatur, ita porro verbis est aptus et pressus, e tc.’, Quintii, x. x. 73 ‘densus et brevis et semper instans sibi Thucydides'. crebri : creber, originally used of things ‘ close-packed ’ in space or time, developed a use with abl. like Eng. ‘packed w ith ’, but apart from a few passages in poets, e.g. Virg. Aen. i. 85, Ov. met. xi. 190, it is almost confined to rhetorical con­ texts, cf. 69. 13, 173. 21, or. 81, C. ap. Suet. Jul. 55. 2 ,0 ./. ii. i i (12). 4, and (less technically) Plane. 83, Att. i. 19. 1. compressione : a rare word, but cf. pressus (35. 3 n.), de or. ii. 56, compressius loqui (fin. ii. 17). 17. su b ob scu ri : or. 30 ‘ipsae illae contiones (the speeches in Thuc.) ita multas habent obscuras abditasque sententias vix u t intellegantur’. Dion. Hal. Thuc. 51, 55 complains th a t Thuc. is unintelligible without a commentary (γραμματικών εξηγήσεις). Use of the prefix sub- ‘slightly’ is a m ark of informal style. Like compounds in per- ( ii . 28 n.), such words were often ad hoc coinages, rarely or never used again. Brutus has suppar (above), subobscurus, subagrestis (259. 20), subrusticus (137. 9, 259. 20), subraucus (141. 23), all rare.

18. a c c u r a ta : ‘careful’. The limited sense ‘accurate’ as to facts and figures is never demanded by the Latin con­ text. fa c ta : ‘w rought’, ‘artificial’, cf. de or. iii. 184 ‘orationem quae quidem sit polita atque facta quodam m odo’, ib. i. 63,

§ 30.

§ 29. 13-§ 31. 26

21

Hor. serm. i. io. 58, Sandys on or. 172. Gk. πεποίημένος, cf. ps.-Longin. Sublim. 3. 4. 20. Gorgias . . . : on the sophists cf. Intr. 21, Wilkins Intr. 28-31, Sandys Intr. vii-xi. Here grouped together without distinction as making the worse argument appear the better and being opposed by Socrates (the same names appear in de or. iii. 126-30, Quintii, iii. 1. 8 ff.), they made technical con­ tributions to Rhetoric which were by no means indistinguish­ able, cf. §§ 46-47. Thrasymachus : one of the first to handle systematically appeals to the emotions, and a pioneer of rhythmical prose, as C. later discovered (cf. on 32. 12), and of figures of the Gorgianic type (or. 38-39) (Radermacher A S pp. 70-76). 21. Protagoras : 46. 1 n. Prodicus : was mainly concerned with the study of words, cf. his subtle differentiation of near-synonyms in Plato Protag. 337A-C, but also according to Quintii, iii. 1. 12 with loci communes (Radermacher A S pp. 66—69). Hippias : an epideictic orator, who claimed competence in many subjects, and a student of rhythms and the functions and usages of words (Radermacher A S pp. 102-6). 23. arrogantibus : usually of persons, but cf. div. ii. 1 ‘quod genus philosophandi minime arrogans . . . arbitrarem ur ’, har. resp. 16, TLL ii. 654. 21. quem ad modum causa inferior : the charge appears first in Aristophanes’ Clouds 112 if., where Socrates is included among the sophists, and was brought again by Socrates’ accusers (Plato Apol. 19B). In Gell. v. 3. 7, Protagoras is said to have introduced the practice. Aristotle rhet. ii. I402a24 equates it with the sophistic τόπος of probability (ΐΐκός). I t is also re­ lated to the sophistic, and later Academic, practice of argu­ ing both sides of a single question, cf. Tusc. ii. 9, de or. iii. 80, or. 46 (further refs, in Sandys). §

. 25. subtilitate . . . disputandi : close-knit argument (on subtilis cf. 35. 26 n.) as opposed to oratorical display. On the difference between philosophical and oratorical discourse cf. §§ 118 if., or. 62-64; even at its most ornate the former 'sermo potius quam oratio dicitur’ (64).26

3 1

26. instituta: ‘doctrines’. [verbis] : the MSS. reading is clearly unsatisfactory, bu t to

22

COM M ENTARY

bracket leaves a clausula heroica; it is better to obelize, as Barw. 27. doctissimi viri : all the great philosophical schools claimed descent from Socrates {de or. iii. 61-62). 28. illa de natura : φυσική, naturalis is used in this sense by Seneca epp. 89. 9 and later writers. C. refers to the specula­ tions of the pre-Socratics on the nature of the universe. On the change introduced by Socrates cf. Arist. met. A 987b, Tusc. iii. 8, V . 10, ac. post. 15, Sen. epp. 71. 7; rep. i. 16 deals with an objection to this view of Socrates. I. de bonis rebus : moralis is introduced as a novelty in 44 B.c. in fat. i ‘ quia pertinet ad mores quod ήθος illi vocant nos eam partem philosophiae de moribus appellare solemus: sed decet augentem linguam Latinam nominare moralem’. B ut C. did not use the word again, even in De Officiis. I t reappears in Seneca. 4. aliud in tempus : a fiction of dialogue, Intr. 18. §

. 6. cuius domus . . . : ‘whose house was open to all Greece like a kind of school and factory of oratory’. 7. ludus : de or. ii. 94 ' cuius (sc. Isocratis) e ludo tam quam ex equo Troiano meri principes exierunt’, cf. ib. ii. 57, or. 12, 40, fin. V . 7. In fin. l.c., or. 12, and here, officina has a distinctly unfavourable suggestion of mass-production. On Isocrates’ pupils cf. Miinscher RE ix. 2212. They included the orators Isaeus and Hyperides, and the historians Androtion, Cephisodotus, Dioscurides, Philiscus, Ephorus, Theopompus. 8. magnus . . . perfectus : not a perfect orator, nor is Lysias quite perfect (35. 27); only Demosthenes earns th a t title. For disparagement of Isocrates’ claims as an orator because he did not appear in public cf. opt. gen. 17. 9. caruit : of voluntary abstention, cf. Tusc. i. 88, TLL iii. 452. 30. For Isocrates’ explanation (weak voice and lack of effrontery) cf. panath. 10-11. 11. praeclare : with docuit as well as scripsit. cetera .. . intellexit : but the authenticity of the theoretical writings th a t went under his name was a vexed question even in antiquity, cf. inv. ii. 7, Quintii, ii. 15. 4, [Plut.] vitt. at oratt. 838E, Radermacher A S pp. 153-63. 12. primus . . . : ‘he was the first to recognize th a t even in prose, provided th a t you avoid verse-metre, a kind of measure and rhythm should be observed'. 3 2

§ 3 1 . 2 6 -§

3 4 .1 9

23

Isocrates’ pupil Naucrates claimed for his master the in­ vention of prose-rhythm {de or. iii. 173). C. later discovered the prior claims of Thrasymachus {or. 38 ff., 175). so lu ta o ra tio n e : ‘prose’ cf. de or. iii. 173, 184, or. 174, 183, 192, but in or. 42, 64 of loosely constructed prose, and in 274. 23, or. 77 specifically of non-rhythmical prose. 13. dum versum effugeres : a t all times a precept for rhythmical prose, cf. Arist. rhet. iii. 8, de or. iii. 184, or. 172, 187, H. W. and F. G. Fowler The King’s English (Oxford 1931) p. 304. § 3 3 . 14. a n te h u n c . . . : ‘ before

him there was no building-up of words and ■rhythmical rounding-off, or, whenever it oc­ curred, it was not clear th a t it had been achieved of set pur­ pose. T hat is perhaps a merit, but at all events it was at th a t time more the occasional result of instinct or chance [reading nonnumquam quam aut, see below] than of any conscious policy or intention’. 15. stru ctu ra : the ‘ building-up ’ of words into a larger unit, the period (cf. structum, 274. 18), so in or. 149, opt. gen. 5. co n c lu sio : cf. de or. ii. 34 'artificiosa verborum conclu­ sione’, or. 20 where ‘ (oratione) neque perfecta atque con­ clusa’ is contrasted with ‘et structa et term inata’. 16. n o n ap p areb at : cf. or. 219, where C. maintains th a t occa­ sional rhythmical effects in Thucydides and Herodotus were accidental, a view which Quintii, with a characteristic apology for such tem erity rejects (ix. 4. 16). 17. q u ae . . . s it : an aside, acknowledging the hostility of the Atticists to over-artificial prose-rhythm (Intr. 4, 5). n a tu ra . . . ca su q u e : or. 170 'plerumque casu, saepe n a tu ra ’ (on the same topic). L ’s nonnunquam aut contradicts the tenor of C.’s argu­ ment, and cannot stand. The vulgate addition of quam after nonnumquam neatly restores both sense and rhythm ; for the displacement of nonnumquam on grounds of emphasis or rhythm cf .fin. ii. 5, Tusc. ii. 36, div. i. 25, Plane. 9. Rufinus’ version nonnumquam haud also restores sense and rhythm, b u t conflicts with C.’s normal restrictions on the use of baud. Fleckeisen’s addition of Rufinus’ ulla before observatione is harmless; it would naturally have dropped out of the MSS., as w ithout the quam it is meaningless. enim . . . : ‘for nature itself enfolds and rounds off thought within a kind of boundary of words. When the

§ 3 4 . 19. Ip sa

24

COM M ENTARY words within which the thought is confined are well arranged, a rhythmical cadence as well usually results. The ears them ­ selves are judges of what is satisfyingly full or inadequate, and the range of the words is limited by the breath as a natural necessity. I t is discreditable not merely to run out of breath but even for it to become laboured.’ The argument of this passage, in which C. struggles to explain the instinctive use of periods and rhythms by old writers, is: every idea naturally demands only a limited number of words for its expression; when these words are well chosen and arranged, the result is normally rhythmical, circumscriptione : for this sense cf. or. 38, 221, part. or. 72.

21. aptis: emphatic, as its position shows; it is not merely ‘suitable’, but almost a t.t. of prose-rhythm from its original sense ‘well fitted together’ cf. de or. ii. 34, or. 149, 168, 233, part. or. 72. constricta : cf. similar uses of colligere {or. 168), vincire {de or. iii. 176), astringere {or. 187). cadit : also t.t. of rhythmical ‘cadence’ cf. de or. iii. 182, or. 149, etc. etiam : the presence of this word is important. In ancient eyes, prose-rhythm was not identical with the rhythm s of the ends of sentences, the so-called clausulae, to which modern researches have largely been confined (cf. OCD art. ProseRhythm). C.’s lengthy contributions to the subject {de or. iii. 171-98, or. 149-236) show much interest in the structure of the period as a whole. B ut even with him, and more markedly in Quintilian’s im portant discussion (ix. 4), it was clearly sentence-endings which lent themselves best to analy­ sis and precept; cf. W. Schmid Über die klassische Theorie und Praxis des antiken Prosarhythmus (Wiesbaden 1959) and my review CR N.s. x (i960) 131-2. 23. spiritu : the argument from the natural limits of breath is inconsistent with the argument above from the natural limits of a thought expressed in words. In de or. C. argues th a t the pauses furnish an opportunity for taking breath (iii. 173) but are not determined by it ; the clausulae are pleasant for their own sake (iii. 181, cf. or. 228). Polemical considerations made him seek a ' natural ’ explanation and origin of prose-rhythm (Intr. 5). comprehensio : one of several equivalents for Gk. meplohos in or. 204. C. never settled on a single rendering, cf. Bornecque RPh lx (1934) 141, Stegemann Bph W (1932) 1083-90.

§ 3 4 . 1 9 - § 3 5 .1

25

non versatus : not habitually engaged. Lysias made one appearance, in the prosecution of Eratosthenes, one of the Thirty Tyrants, who had brought about the death of his brother. subtilis : ‘finely w rought' cf. de or. i. 17, with Wilkins’s n. tracing the meanings ‘fine-woven ’ ‘ refined ’ ‘precise ’ ‘plain ’ (seldom, except of close argument, ‘subtle’), or. n o . Quintii. X . i. 78 echoes the whole sentence. scriptor : i.e. λογογράφος. 2 7 . elegans : elegans, elegantia are frequent in C.’s rhetorical writings (cf. Intr. 35). I t may refer to a restrained style, as here; more often it indicates a ‘fastidious’ choice of words (89. 13 n., 140. 2), and purity of diction, though it should accompany, is not the same thing as a simple style. Gell. xi. 2 points out th a t to the time of the elder Cato elegans was uncomplimentary, = ‘qui nimis lecto amoenoque cultu victu­ que esset’, but later was used cum laude, cf. 148. 13 η. iam prope : contrasted with the following plane quidem, cf. 332. 16, or. 226 ‘Lysiam . . . alterum paene Demosthenem’. 2 8 . quoi : this form long survived, cf. Quintii, i. 7. 27, Neue ii. 452, Fordyce on Catull. 1. 1, and may account for the MSS. confusion, but Kr., Rs. are content with cut. desit : in a rel. clause parallel to a preceding adjectival expression, a generic subjunctive is naturally normal, cf. Nisbet on dom. 23, K.-S. ii. 296 ff. I. Nihil acute ... : ‘in the speeches which he published there was no subtlety of argument, no scope one might almost say for craft or cunning, which he overlooked; when concise, straight-forward, and unadorned expression was possible, his style was unequalled in smoothness of finish, while there was nothing adm itting of elevated or impassioned utterance, or the adornment of weighty thought or expression, in which he could be surpassed for sublim ity’. C. deals only with Demosthenes’ inventio (which tended to absorb dispositio, cf. Intr. 25) and elocutio, ignoring memoria and actio as he is dealing with published writings. E berhard’s dicit for dici is intended to save C. from the illogicality of saying ‘there was nothing capable of refined . . . expression than which anything more polished could be found’, the real contrast being with Demosthenes’ actual use of refined expression. B ut C. sacrifices logic to rhetoric. The passage claims in effect th a t Demosthenes’ perfection consisted in mastery of both Plain and Grand Styles, cf. or. § 3 5 . 26.

26

COM M ENTARY

104, 110, opt. gen. 10, Dion. Hal. Dem. 8,33, and so is directed against those who admired the Plain Style alone. In de or. ii. 10 C. pays a similar tribute to his brother Quintus: ‘quid enim tua potest esse oratione aut subtilius aut ornatius ? ’ 2. subdole . . . versute : ut ita dicam is added because both words were normally disparaging and probably somewhat colloquial. 3. viderit : so, of recognizing points th a t can be made, in 227. 25. After negative and virtually negative main clauses a negative consecutive clause normally has perfect subjunctive, cf. dom. 27 ‘qui tantus fuit labor, quae simultas, quae con­ tentio quam ego . . . non susceperim?’ (Nisbet ad loc., Lebreton p. 227). 4. presse : Intr. 35, cf. or. 20 (Sandys's references show th a t it was often a t.t. of the Atticist controversy, cf. 51. 11). enucleate: cf. 115. 4, de or. iii. 32, or. 28. Stegemann in Glotta xx (1931-2) 183-6 argues th a t in addition to meaning 'removing the nut from the shell’, ‘giving the kernel of the m atter ’, enucleare has an idea of ‘ straining away the pips of a pomegranate’, and he distinguishes other shades of mean­ ing. His arguments are entertaining rather than convincing; no passage resists the conventional interpretation. limatius : 'm ore polished’, lit. filed, cf. de or. i. 180, or. 20, Quintii, ii. 8. 4 ‘presso limatoque genere dicendi’. 6. esset : the change of tense after possit is unexpected bu t not unparalleled, e.g. rep. i. 51 ‘praesertim cum hoc natura tulerit non solum u t summi virtute et animo praeessent imbecillioribus, sed u t hi etiam parere summis v elin t’. §

3 6 . 7 . proximus : in rank. Some ranked Hyperides higher than Demosthenes, cf. [Plut.] vitt. x oratt. 849D, ps.-Longin. Sublim. 34. i : he and Demosthenes are named as two typically great orators at 138. 20, ac. post. 10, de or. i. 58. Hyperides supported Demosthenes’ anti-Macedonian policy, and was like him a victim of Antipater in 322. He was little more than a name until the discovery in the nineteenth century of con­ siderable papyrus fragments. Aeschines : Demosthenes’ chief opponent; several speeches survive. 8. Lycurgus : a supporter of Demosthenes. Only the speech against Leocrates survives. Cf. 130. 11 n. Dinarchus : a younger contemporary of Demosthenes, who lived into the third century B.c.; three speeches survive.

§3 5 . l-§ 3 7 .1 4 9.

27

Demades : cf. Quintii, ii. 17. 12, xii. 10. 49. A spurious frag­ m ent survives, and an index of fourteen spurious speeches ‘quae nobis omnes hac una excepta . . . temporis beneficio ablatae s u n t’ (Blass’s edn. praef. x). aetas : the age of Demosthenes, cf. Quintii, x. i. 76 ‘sequitur oratorum ingens manus u t cum decem simul Athenis aetas una tu le rit’. In Mnemosyne (ser. iv) ix (1956) 30-40, I argued th a t Quintii, is referring to the Demosthenic Age, and not to the ‘ canon ’ of ten Attic orators beginning with Antiphon. W hether or not I am right in this, it is clear th a t the present passage in Brutus should not be cited, though it often has been, to support the belief th a t Quintii, refers to the ‘canon’. See further on 286. 20.

10. fert : cf. Nisbet on dom. 32: ‘ferre with such abstract sub­ jects as opinio, voluntas, means “ to te n d ’’, ‘‘to incline” ; with other abstract subjects it can range among such ideas as “ allow”, “ require”, “ suggest ”, “ m ak en atu ral” cf. 160.18. sucus . . . et sanguis : ‘sap and blood’, an alliterative double metaphor from the ‘vital fluids’, cf. or. 76, Att. iv. 16. 10 (18. 2), Quintii, xii. 10. 14 ‘exsuci et exsangues’, sucus in de or. ii. 88, 93, sanguis in 68. 2, 283. 20. 12. non fucatus nitor : ‘a brilliance owing nothing to artifice’. nitor, as its literal use shows, is a ‘ smooth sheen ’, also applied to the bloom of beauty in human beings; fucus was a reddish seaweed from which a red dye or rouge was derived. Thus the bloom here is natural, not owed to cosmetics. For fucus, fucatus used metaphorically, cf. 162. 12, de or. ii. 188 ‘tarn sine pigmentis fucoque puerili’, iii. 100, or. 79, Quintii, viii. 3. 6, Tac. dial. 26. i ; for a close parallel to the present passage, de or. iii. 199 ‘his tribus figuris (styles) insidere quidam venustatis non fuco inlitus sed sanguine diffusus debet color’. §

. 12. Phalereus: on the oratory and rhetoric of Demetrius of Phalerum (c. 350-283), cf. 285. 15 n., R E Demetrius no. 85, 2829-30.

3 7

14. non tam armis . . . : 'practised not so much in military weapons as on the athletic training-ground’; cf. Quintii, x. I . 33 ‘non athletarum toris sed militum lacertis opus esse: nec versicolorem illam, qua Demetrius Phalereus dicebatur uti, vestem bene ad forensem pulverem facere’, ib. 79 ‘ Isocra­ tes . . . palaestrae quam pugnae magis accommodatus’. For palaestra of the style of philosophers and other non-political

COM M ENTARY

28

writers cf. de or. i. 81 ; of epideictic oratory, as that which aims only at giving pleasure, or. 42. delectabat. . . inflammabat : two of the three ‘ Functions ’, Intr. 28. C. regarded the power to stir the emotions as the most im portant (198. 18, 276. 5, cf. opt. gen. 3). 16. in solem . . . : ‘ the heat and dust ’ not of the stadium bu t of battle (cf. de or. i. 157). C. has sometimes been taken to mean th a t all Demetrius’ oratorical activities were ‘unreal’, mere exercises (cf. Quintii, ii. 4. 41 for the tradition th a t he in­ vented the school-declamation on fictitious themes). B ut C. is here saying th a t Demetrius’ training (as an ' athlete ’ rather than a ‘warrior ’) was unsuitable for the real contests in which he engaged. As if aware th at he could be misunderstood, C. uses the same metaphors but clarifies his meaning at leg. iii. 14 ‘Phalereus ille Demetrius . . . mirabiliter doctrinam ex umbraculis eruditorum otioque non modo in solem atque in pulverem sed in ipsum discrimen aciemque produxit’. 17. Theophrasti : Intr. 25-26, for his place in the history of Rhetoric, but C. here is of course thinking of Peripatetic teaching in general. On the connexion with Demetrius, cf. fin. V . 54, off. i. 3. R E l.c. [line 12] 2818-19. umbraculis : ‘shady retreats’, so also umbratilis, umbrati­ cus. Consider the Stoic ‘porch’, the Peripatetic περίπατος in the Lyceum, the Academic ‘grove’, the Epicurean ‘garden’; the palaestra too had its covered ξυστός. §

. i8. inflexit: (i) perhaps simply ‘gave oratory a new tw ist’ (Kell.), explained by et . . . reddidit, ‘by making it soft and delicate’, or (ii) ‘gave it m odulation’ ‘a new to n e’ (Hendr., P.-F.), a musical metaphor, cf. or. 56 ‘v o le t.. . voce . . . inclinata videri gravis et inflexa miserabilis’, de or. ii. 193, possibly also Quintii, x. 1. 80 ‘quamquam is (Demetrius) primus inclinasse eloquentiam dicitur, multum ingeni habuisse et facundiae fateor’, but Quintii, may mean only ‘set oratory on the road downhill’, or (iii) ‘made oratory supple and flexible’, a metaphor taken from statuary like many others in Brutus (cf. 262. 17 n.) ; for mollis in this sense cf. 70. 21. 19. suavis : Demetrius’ suavitas is stressed in or. 91, cf. off. i. 3. For the play on suavis, gravis, cf. 186. 10, de or. iii. 96, or. 168. 20. perfringeret: ‘broke through in to ’, cf. or. 97 ‘haec (elo­ quentia) modo perfringit, modo inrepit in sensus’, Tac. hist. 3 8

§ 37 . 14—§ 39 . 27

29

iv. i ‘initium id perfringendarum dom uum ’. Such a function would naturally be associated with the Grand Style, as in or. l.c. rather than with suavitas, but C.’s point emerges in what follows : Pericles’ oratory too was noted for charm, but it left its sting behind. 2 1. [et] ta n tu m : either ‘ to such an extent th a t ’ or ‘ so th a t he left only a memory . . .’. Manutius’ deletion of et is generally accepted, but the word seems harmless. Editors cite Place. 66 ‘summissa voce agam tantum u t iudices audiant’, but the interpretation which makes tantum ut there equivalent to dum modo is doubtful, and not relevant here. c o n c in n ita tis : neat and tasteful artistry, esp. in rhythmical structure of sentences and the use of figures, cf. de or. ii. 8i, or. 20, rhet. Her. Hi. ig, 22, and often in passages cited above on § 34. 22. Eupolis : writer of Attic Old Comedy (ob. 411 b.c.) in his Δ ήμοι (fr. 94, Kock i. 281) (cf. de or. iii. 138) : Π ειθώ τις επεκάθεζεν i -πι το ΐς χείλεσι, j ούτως εκήλει και μόνος τω ν ρητόρων / τό κέντρον εγκ α τελειπ ε το ΐς άκροωμενοις.

§ § 3 9 - 4 4 . Thus you see how late in terms of Greek history oratory developed. The argument is hesitant and digressive, cf. Intr. 36. §

. 25. vel : all editors emend L ’s ut. Yet ut . . . quam is well attested in colloquial usage, cf. Plaut. Stich. 570 ‘ut apologum fecit quam fab re!’, asin. 581, mil. 400. All these examples are in oratio recta, but an extended use with the stock colloquialism videsne ut, viden ut seems quite possible. a lta : cf. de or A. 13 'A thenas in quibus summa dicendi vis et inventa est et perfecta ’. From Livy’s time alitus was used to avoid confusion with the adjectival use of altus, wellnourished, so tall, high, deep. C. uses altus as a true par­ ticiple only four times (here, fam. vi. 1. 6, Plane. 81, nat. d. ii. 118), always with the surrounding context removing the ambiguity. 26. q u a m e a sero : for the word-order, cf. 126. 27, 137. 16, 197. 21, and see on 40. 6. 27. n u llo : the scruple which forbade nemine hardly outlived the first century a . d . Tac. has it occasionally, Suetonius and later writers frequently. diserto : disertus was an older word than eloquens (first attested in C. Gracchus ap. Gell. xi. 10. 6, next in Antonius’ 3 9

C O M M E N T A R Y

30

libellus (cf. § 163) ap. de or. i. 94 ' disertos ait se vidisse multos, eloquentem omnino neminem’, cf. or. 18). It often means ‘glib’ (cf. 196. 20), reflecting the suspicion with which a ‘ clever ’ speaker was regarded in early Rome, or in other contexts reflects the condition of Roman oratory before (a) the impact of Greek rhetoric (b) the emergence of orators capable of a genuinely elevated style (cf. C.’s discussion de or. l.c.). Hence C. uses it (i) of undeveloped and unpolished oratory (here, 55. 8, 77. 22, 81. 22, 95. 3), (ii) of mediocrities generally (135. 28, 137. 12, 205. 28), (iii) since true eloquence is the perquisite of the statesman, of those outside the Roman governing class (170. 15, 205. 28), (iv) of Hellenistic speakers, like class (iii) precluded by political circumstances from being true eloquentes (104. 25, 315. 27), and (v) of practitioners of literary forms other than oratory (101. 4, 167. 28). Perhaps not even at 148. 10 and 190. 15 (cf. n.) is some similar nuance absent. 30. debent : debere, despite L & S, frequently expresses intel­ lectual or logical necessity, cf. Att. xi. 15. 2 ‘quo minus debes mirari non posse me tanto dolori resistere’, de or. i. 12, Antibarbarus s.v. Servio Tullio : sixth king of Rome, traditionally reigned 5 7 8 - 5 3 5 B-C., cf. Tusc. i. 38. §

. 2. Troicis temporibus : cf. Intr. 37, Radermacher A S pp. 6-8. 3. Vlixi ; Iliad iii. 221—3 άλλ’ ore 8η δπα re μζγάλην €κ στήθεος lei / καί ënea νιφά8οσσίν ioiKora χ€ΐ.μ€ρίησιν, j ουκ αν Ιπειτ’ Ό8υσ·ήΐ γ* èplaaeie βροτος άλλος. 4· Nestori : Iliad i. 247—9 τοΐσ ι 8è Ν ίσ τω ρ / ή8υεπης àvôpovae, λιγνς Π υλίω ν αγορητής / τοΰ καί από γλω σση ς μ ίλ ιτο ς γλνκίω ν péev αν8η. 5· neque ipse . . . : nor would this same poet speaking in his own person have been so elaborate in style—in a word, an orator’. ipse : in his narrative as opposed to the speeches of his characters. 6. [idem] : idem can be retained : for the separation of tam from the word it modifies, cf. Reid on ac. pr. 83. The inserted word is often colourless, e.g. a preposition, part of esse, hie, is, but cf. Cael. 16 ‘numquam enim tam Caelius amens fuisset’, Tusc. v. 43. plane : so with a noun at 43. 8, 250. 20, Sest. 129 ‘eum plane eversorem rei publicae fore ’, and in the second part of 4 0

§3 9 . 2 7 -§ 4 2 .1 9

31

a phrase for contrast or, as here, emphasis, div. Caec. 12 ‘de quo non praeiudicium sed plane iudicium factum p u ta tu r’, nat. d. ii. 58. 7. incerta : for ancient views on the date of Homer cf., e.g., C. M. Bowra Tradition and Design in the Iliad (Oxfotd 1930) p. 251. 8. in fra : very rare in this sense of ‘later than ’, perhaps only in Livy xxviii. 43. 5, Quintii, i. 7. 20. Its use here is presumably due to superiorem. su p erio rem : Timaeus (Plut. Lyc. 1) suspected th at the chronological difficulties over Lycurgus were due to the existence of two men of the same name (cf. rep. ii. 18). Modem scholars suspect th a t they were due to his never having existed at all. 9. d iscip lin a : the whole way of life viewed as something taught (cf. rep. i. 70, de or. i. 196, ii. 67 (of the Roman way of life) and frequently of the Spartan αγωγή (TLL v. i. 1326. 51)) was confined (astricta) within a legal framework. § 41. 10. Sed : resumptive, cf. 44. 11, 64. 9, 81. 19, 140. 9. i i . Pisistrato : cf. Solon (ap. Diog. Laert. i. 52, fr. 8 Diehl) on Pisistratus: els γάρ γλώσσαν opâre και els Ιποs αΐόλον avSpos/ els ϋργον S’ ουδέν γιγνόμενον ßhenere, Val. Max. V Ü i . ç. ext. I. D e n iq u e : last of the orators before Pericles, who primus adhibuit doctrinam (§ 44). 13. regnante ia m Graecia : a curious expression in view of the internal divisions of classical Greece and limited control of the non-Greek world : rep. i. 58 ‘senescente iam Graecia’ and nat. d. iii. 82 ‘in ipso Graeciae flore' are much easier. Presumably C. is seeking an antithesis with dominatu regio liberata, but regnante can hardly mean ‘maîtresse d ’elle-même' (Martha). Trsl. ‘at the height of her power’. 16. C oriolan u s : associated with Themistocles in Att. ix. 10. 3 and, again chronologically, amic. 42, where his exile is dated tw enty years before th a t of Themistocles. Livy dates Corio­ lanus’ exile to 491 b . c . For doubts on the Coriolanus story cf. Mommsen Röm. Forsch, ii. 113 ff. OCD art. Coriolanus, and refs, there, C AH vii. 497-500 (Last). § 4 2 . 19. c o n a tu m . . . su a e : ‘the impulses of their passionate resentment ’. This use of conatus is rare, and with a dependent abstract genitive of this kind, unparalleled, but is related to

32

COM M ENTARY

its use as equivalent to impetus, studium, cf. nat. d. ii. 122 ‘dedit . . . natura beluis et sensum et appetitum u t altero conatum haberent ad naturales pastus capessendos, etc. ’ For this ‘psychological’ sense cf., e.g., Phil. x. 11, Cael. 60, probably Cat. i. 15, Livy vii. 6. 9. 20. aliter : for the uncertainty as to Coriolanus’ death, cf. Livy ii. 40. io- π ; on Themistocles, Thuc. i. 138. 4, Plut. Them. 31, Hill Sources for Greek History from 478-431 B.c. (2nd edn. Oxford 1951) p. 349. 21. huic . . . mortis : suicide. 23. concessum est . . . : this humorous and lively digression proves (i) th a t C. knew very well the difference between his­ tory and rhetorical history, just as the notorious letter to Lucceius (fam. v. 12), requesting a favourable account of C.’s consulship in Lucceius’ history, proves th a t C. knew the difference between history and political propaganda, (ii) th a t C. could write lively and convincing dialogue, to judge from the number of those who have treated this passage as the report of an actual conversation in which C.’s ‘ rhetorical view of history’ was shown up. On all this, cf. A. Gwynn Roman Education (Oxford 1926) p. 106, Paladini Latomus vi (1947) 329—44, B. Walker Annals o f Tacitus (Manchester 1952) pp. 144-6. 24. argutius: ‘sm arter’, ‘more pointed’. The ‘ point ’ is in the parallelism between the two distinguished exiles. Timaeus, the rhetorical historian (cf. on 63. 30, 325. 23), was one of the first exponents of the ‘pointed style’ (cf. Summers Select Letters of Seneca (London 1910) pp. xviii if.). arguere means basically ‘to make clear’. From its basic sense ‘clear’, ‘sharply defined’, argutus derives a wide range of meanings, both of physical objects (a slipper, Catull. 68. 72, a horse’s head, Virg. georg. iii. 80, and often of shrill sounds) and as a term of criticism (Pis. 70, of Philodemus’ poetry). The word is rare before C.’s time. 25. Clitarchus : a romancer rather than historian of the third century b.c., cf. Quintii, x. 1. 74 ‘Clitarchi probatur ingenium, infam atur fides’, FGrH. no. 137 (IIb 741 ff., IId 484 ff.), OCD art. Cleitarchus. Stratocles : usually identified with the orator and politician who prosecuted Demosthenes in the Harpalus affair (324 b .c .) and later supported Demetrius of Phalerum. Nothing, how­ ever, is known of his activities as a rhetorical historian.

§ 4 2 . 19- § 4 4 .1 3

33

§ 43. 26. summo loco: cf. or. 32 ‘cum praesertim fuisset (Thucydides) honoratus et nobilis’. He was connected with the family of Miltiades and Cimon (Marcell. vit. Thuc. 2). His high connexions are assumed to enable him to discover the facts. 27. paulo : ‘only a little ’, the true meaning of paulo (aspauci = ‘only a few’), cf. Quinct. 40 ‘si non statim paulo quidem post, si non paulo a t aliquanto'. tantum morbo mortuum : Teuffel’s addition of morbo from Thuc. i. 138. 4 νοσήσαί èè τελευτά τον βίον is reasonable and generally accepted; Simon suggested aegrotantem. 28. in Attica : cf. Plut. Them. 32 for other views. addidit : co-ordinate with scripsit, with asyndeton for con­ trast (‘ but added ’) ; both verbs govern quern, which is picked up by hunc. 2. isti : ‘ your friends ’, the rhetorical historians. cum taurum . . . : the story of the bull’s blood is first found in Aristophanes Knights 83-84, so th a t it is older than rhetorical history, a fourth-century development. On the alleged lethal effects of bull’s blood, see the commentators on Aristophanes. 4. rhetorice et tragice : two Greek words, conveying disparage­ m ent of Greek ways. 7 . pateram . . . : ‘you can have the bowl too from me, and I'll provide a sacrificial victim as well, so th a t Coriolanus can be nothing more nor less than a second Themistocles’, i.e. I ’ll make their deaths completely identical, though the bull’s blood is not in the legend of Coriolanus. § 4 4 . 10. quem . . . religiosissimum: ‘the most scrupulous authority on Roman history whom I can cite’, auctor, '‘ au th ority’, never merely ‘author’ ‘w riter’ in C. (Nettleship Contrib. Lat. Lex. s.v.) cf. 57. 3. For laudare, ‘to cite’, cf. L & S s.v. II. 12. Xanthippi filius : an uncommon assimilation of the Gk. formula ό Ξανθίππου to the Latin usage with filius, but cf. Verr. ii. 5. 16 ‘Apollonio Diocli filio’ and examples from Plautus in TLL vi. i. 754. 47. Simon ejects the words, but C., as elsewhere in this passage (cf. 27. 1 n.), probably has Greek phraseology in mind. 13. doctrinam : emphatic; formal instruction implies con­ scious technique. D 814437

COM M ENTARY

34

q u am q u am . . . dicendi : ‘ although there was no instruction in oratory as such a t th a t time . . 14. A n a x a g o ra : for Anaxagoras’ connexion with Pericles there are many ancient authorities, e.g. Plato Phaedr. 269E, Isocr. Antid. 235, Plut. Per. 4—5, Cic. rep. i. 25, de or. iii. 138, or. 15, Quintii, xii. 2. 22. Pericles was said to have owed to Anaxagoras a lofty and full style and a knowledge of human psychology. O n the chronology of Anaxagoras’ career and visits to Athens cf. J. A. Davison CQ n . s . iii (1953) 39-45. p h y sico : φ υσικφ , a ‘natural philosopher’, the term espe­ cially associated with the pre-Socratic philosophers. Socrates pursued φΰσεως Ιστορία in youth, but abandoned it (Plato Phaedo 96A). 16. H u iu s su a v ita te . . . : ‘Athens was delighted by his charm, marvelled at his fullness and fluency, and was awestruck by the dreadful vigour of his eloquence’. Anaphora, assonance, increasingly weighty rhythms give force to this striking elaboration of the traditional idea th a t Pericles combined charm and vigour (§ 38, de or. iii. 138). 17. Athenae : the personification of place-names in C. is neither rare nor confined to passages in a lofty style, cf. or. 212, Verr. ii. 2. 103, 5. 154, Lebreton pp. 75 if. 18. terrorem : a rare word in rhetorical contexts (but cf. 268. 19, Font. 33 ‘barbaro atque immani terrore verborum ’), for it refers to something beyond the range of system and theory, even though pseudo-Longinus tried to bring the ‘sublime’ and Demetrius (de eloc. 240 ff.) what he calls δeivorqs within the framework of rhetoric. B ut for fear as an emotion to be aroused by the orator cf. 188. 25, de or. iii. 32, ps.-Long. 34. 4.

§ § 4 5 - 4 8 . For eloquence develops only in peaceful, free, and settled communities, as Aristotle shows in his account of the history of Rhetoric. §

. 18. Haec igitur : C. returns to the theme of §§ 26-27. The first more or less ‘ complete ' orator emerged late in his­ tory. 19. prope p erfectu m : a verbal inconsistency with 35. 27, where Lysias is so described. B ut there perfectus is near to Eng. ‘perfect’ (cf. on 26. 24); here C. means th a t Pericles by ap­ plying doctrina and being able both to charm and to overawe 4 5

§4 4 .

13

-§ 4 6 . 2 4

35

his audience, was the first to dispose of the complete equip­ m ent of the truly eloquens. Nec enim . . . : ‘neither among peoples still achieving a settled constitution, nor among those constantly engaged in warfare, nor among those bound and shackled by the tyranny of despots can a love of oratory be born. Eloquence attends on peace, she associates with civic calm, and she is nurtured by a society already well ordered.’ On this theme cf. de or. i. 14, 30, or. 141. In inv. i. 2 C. maintained the commonplace (cf. Solmsen Hermes lxvii (1932) 151-4) th a t eloquence preceded and facilitated the establish­ m ent of an ordered society. Tacitus {dial. 40), recalling the turbulent last years of the Roman Republic, parodies the passage thus 'non de otiosa et quieta re (sc. eloquentia) loquimur, . . . sed est magna illa et notabilis eloquentia alumna licentiae quam stulti libertatem vocitant, comes seditionum . . . quae in bene constitutis civitatibus non o ritu r’. B ut C.’s pax and otium do not refer to complete political calm, b u t to freedom from great external and civil wars, during which, as C. well knew, oratory was silenced. The passage is, however, awkward for other reasons. C. now introduces an explanation for the late rise of oratory barely consistent with th a t advanced in §§ 24—25, the diffi­ culty of the art. The Aristotelian summary, to which this passage is a prologue, is also an awkward addition, necessi­ tating a further summing-up of the chronological argument in § 49 (cf. Intr. 36). B ut C. was obsessed a t the time with the idea of the abolition of tyranny, for which the Sicilian rhetori­ cians provided as convenient a tex t as the fifth-century Athenian democracy. 20. constituentibus : C. uses participles as class-substantives (the Greek participle with the article) most frequently in the philosophical works, where Greek originals may have in­ fluenced him, cf. nat. d. ii. 154 ‘soli enim ratione utentes iure ac lege v iv u n t’, K.-S. i. 223, Laughton pp. 79 ff. 23. alumna : the met. use is very rare, hence C.’s twofold apology quasi . . . quaedam; he uses the phrase again in Phil. vii. 7 ‘ego itaque pacis u t ita dicam alum nus’. §

. 24. Itaque ait Aristoteles : cf. Intr. 37. v. itaque often introduces not a direct consequence but some looser con­ nexion, ‘and th a t is why . . .’, cf. 114. 25, Gael. 23.

4 6

36

COM M ENTARY

25. tyrannis : e.g. Thrasydaeus of Acragas, overthrown in 472, Thrasybulus of Syracuse, overthrown in 466. res . . . repeterentur : ‘restitution was being sought’. The phrase was used in international relations, before declarations of war, and in the criminal courts of extortion (de rebus repetundis) but also in civil processes, cf. M ur. 3. 26. acuta : on the sharpness of the Sicilians cf. div. Caec. 28,

Verr. ii. 3. 20, Tusc. i. 15, de or. ii. 217. controversia fnatura : of many suggestions the most recent is the best, Malcovati’s controversiae nata. 27. artem et praecepta : i.e. textbooks, Gk. τέχνη (LSJ s.v. iii),

cf. Quintii, i. pr. 24, xii. pr. 2 (Austin ad loc.). Coracem et Tisiam : Intr. 20, cf. Plato Phaedr. 273A, Arist. rhet. ii. 24. 11, OCD s.w . G. A. Kennedy A JP h. lxxx (1959) 175 ff. 28. via : ‘methodically’, Gk. όδω, cf. Arist. rhet. i. 1. 2 (Cope ad

loc. for Greek and Latin refs.), or. 10, 116 (Sandys ad loc.). 29. descripte : better discripte. Earlier speakers arranged their

topics, arguments, with care and logic, but without conscious adherence to rule : cf. W. Rhys Roberts CR xviii (1904) 18 for an attem pt to relate a fr. of a τέχνη in Doric dialect (Oxy. pap. iii. 27-30) to the work of Tisias and Corax and this passage in particular. scriptasque . . . : ‘and th a t Protagoras had produced in writing prepared discourses on im portant topics, which are now termed “ commonplaces” . Gorgias, he says, did the same, writing out passages in praise and disparagement of individual things, because he thought th a t to enhance a sub­ ject by praise or to belittle it by disparagement was the especial function of the orator.’ scriptas fuisse : a ‘pluperfect’ infinitive, used occasionally by C., and more frequently by later writers, to indicate th a t something had happened, was in existence, before the point of time indicated in fuisse, cf. imp. Pomp. 20 ‘dico eius adventu maximas Mithridatis copias ornatas atque instructas fuisse ’, Balb. 53 ‘quod (sc. the foedus Latinum of 493 B.c.) nuper in columna meminimus . . . incisum et perscriptum fuisse ’ (K.-S. i. 164-5, Lebreton pp. 203 ff.). Yet the point of the usage in the present passage is not clear : does it imply, as in Balb. l.c., th a t the writings were no longer extant in Aristotle’s time ?

§ 4 6 . 2 5 -§ 4 7 . 7

37

1. Protagora: Radermacher A S pp. 35-41. Protagoras is asso­ ciated w ith communes loci only here and in Quintii, iii. 1. 12, his best attested contribution to Rhetoric being in grammar. 2. communes . . . loci : Intr. 21, cf. inv. ii. 48, de or. iii. 106, or. 47 ; rhet. Her. ii. 9 eccentrically interprets communes as ‘ com­ mon to defence and prosecution’. §

4 7 . 3. Gorgiam : (Radermacher A S pp. 42-66) the most im portant and influential of the sophists in relation to Rhetoric. As with the others, our evidence th a t he produced a formal written τέχνη is late and doubtful; he probably taught by example and oral instruction. He was chiefly remembered for his extravagant use of various figures of speech (cf. frr. in Radermacher A S pp. 52-60). quern . . . conscripsisse : Bake’s change for L ’s cum . . . conscripsisset is unnecessary. laudes vituperationesque : cf. Plato Phaedr. 267A (Tisias and Gorgias) τά τ ' αν σμικρά μεγα λα και τα μ εγά λα αμικρά φαίνεσθαι ποιοΰσιν. Isocr. paneg. 8 makes this claim for oratory in general, b u t singularum rerum implies th a t Gorgias attacked and defended the selfsame subject, a practice commonly thought unethical (cf. Arist. rhet. i. 1. 12), and his extant Helena shows him defending what was commonly held to be reprehensible, in order to demonstrate the power of oratory (cf. V. Buchheit Untersuchungen zur Theorie des Genos Epideiktikon (Munich i960) pp. 31 ff.). Isocr. antid. 255, Cic. de or. ii. 35 (echoed by Quintii, ii. 4. 20) carefully reserve praise for the good, dispraise for the bad. On praise and dispraise in Rhetoric, cf. Intr. 24, rhet. Her. iii. 10, and Quintilian’s critical remarks (iii. 4. 3-5). Buchheit op. cit. has many valuable observations. 5. augere . . . affligere : chiasmus, assonance, and παρίσω σις make this passage typically Gorgianic. Hence perhaps the use of affligere which is unusual in this rhetorical context (elsewhere abicere, minuere (or. 127), extenuare (de or. iii. 104), deprimere (Quintii, viii. 3. 89)). 6 . Rhamnusium : of the Attic deme 'Pαμνούς. η, similia quaedam : Radermacher A S pp. 76—102. Common­ places appear in his extant speeches (Radermacher pp. 76-78) ; the extant Tetralogies argue the opposite sides of cases— their genuineness is generally accepted, though the question is no t settled, cf. K- I. Dover CQ xliv (1950) 44-60. There is

COM M ENTARY

38

fairly good evidence th a t Antiphon produced formal τεχναι or a t least collections of προοίμια and επίλογοι, from which the commonplaces in the speeches might have been drawn. habuisse conscripta : here the process, never quite complete in classical Latin, by which habere became a mere auxiliary, is well under way, cf. 147. 2, K.—S. i. 763, Woodcock p. 80; Thielmann Archiv ii. 372 if., 509 ff. suggests a juristic origin for (con)scriptum habere, etc., ‘to have in w riting’. quo . . . Thucydides : on trial after the fall of the Four Hundred (411 B.c.), cf. Thuc. viii. 68. 1-2 καί αυτός re . . . άριστα φαίνεται των μέχρι εμοΰ ΰπερ αυτών τούτων αιτιαθεis . . . θανατου όίκην άπολογησάμενος. Fragments of this defence survive. Neither C. nor Quintilian appears to have read it, nor anything else by Antiphon. 8. oravisse : causam orare, = to plead a cause, is a legal archaism, found elsewhere in C. only at Quinct. 43 (for litem orare cf. de or. ii. 43, off. iii. 43). perorare, oratio, orator pre­ served this meaning after the simple verb orare had become a synonym of rogare except in some Augustan revivals of the older meaning (Virg. Aen. vi. 847 'alii . . . orabunt causas , melius’, Livy iii. 71. 3, xxx. 1. 5, xxxix. 40. 6, xlv. 36. 2), cf. Neuhauser, p. 121. 9. se audiente : Thucydides was in exile from Athens a t the time, nor do his words give grounds for supposing th a t he was present, unless C. thought th a t μ εχρϊ εμοΰ implied it. The words, formerly deleted as an ignorant gloss, are now usually retained as a mistake by C. §

. 10. nam Lysiam . . . : 'Lysias indeed was a t first in the habit of maintaining th a t there was such a thing as the theory of oratory; afterwards, because Theodorus was a more subtle theorist, but a less forceful orator, Lysias began to write speeches for others to deliver, and abandoned the theoretical role. In the same way, Isocrates at first denied th a t there was a theory of oratory, and used to write speeches for others to deliver in the courts. But after being repeatedly brought to trial for what would be with us contravention of the Lex Sempronia against judicial malpractice, he gave up writing speeches for others, and devoted himself entirely to com­ posing theoretical treatises.’ Unless with ninteenth-century scholars we delete much of this passage (cf. app. crit.), we m ust recognize much bias in Aristotle, or the member of his school who compiled the

4 8

§ 47 . 7 -§ 48 . 17

39

(cf. my comments referred to in Intr. 37. v n.). While the contrast of Lysias and Theodorus does not directly conflict with our evidence, the remarks on Isocrates will not bear examination. After an early career as λογογράφος Isocra­ tes abandoned all activities directly connected with forensic oratory, including theoretical instruction in it (his attacks on the writing of speeches were only a minor p art of his polemic against forensic activity in general), not because he was brought to trial (see in line 17 below), nor in order to com­ pose textbooks, bu t so as to devote himself to a wider educa­ tional programme. Only in this connexion, in the middle, not a t the start, of his career, have we any evidence for hostility to ars dicendi [in soph. 19—20). nam : here a particle of transition, to be distinguished from uses where an ellipse can be postulated, cf. G. H. Poyser CR n . s . ii (1952) 8-10, Austin on Gael. 4. 12. ieiunior : 202. 30 n. 13. primo . . . negavisse : m ust balance primo .. . dicendi above, which m ust therefore mean ‘was accustomed to declare that the a rt of rhetoric existed’, not ‘was accustomed to profess the art of rhetoric ’ (taking solitum with esse, or, with Bake, spoiling the rhythm by deleting esse). The passage contains blurred echoes of the fourth-century controversy as to the exact status of rhetoric (25. 16 n.). Unless there was a τέχνη of rhetoric, it could not be taught ‘scientifically’. 15. ex eo, quia : cf. leg. i. 43 ‘haec nascuntur ex eo quia natura propensi sumus ad diligendos homines’. 16. ‘quo . . . circumveniretur’ : the MSS. reading may well be sound as a quotation of some formula like (si quis quid fecerit) quo, etc. thrown into past sequence, cf. Clu. 144 ‘ qui coisset quo quis condemnaretur ’. Specific references to the law occur only here and Clu. 151, where the context indicates th a t it dealt with the bringing about of judicial murder, e.g. by organizing bribery (see N. J. Miners CQ n . s . viii (1958) 241, U. Ewins J R S 1 (i960) 94 if.). 17. saepe ipse . . . : but the practice of λογογραφία was not illegal, and Isocrates’ Antidosis case can hardly be relevant; it came a t the end of his career, and was unique (contrast saepe). Possibly C. misunderstood some reference to a non-judicial Kplats or έλεγχος', possibly indicium itself is general, with a mere play on the judicial sense in quasi committeret. . . . But the historical credit of the passage as a whole is still past saving. Σ υναγω γή Τεχνών

40

COM M ENTARY

§ § 4 9 - 5 2 . These then are the origins of Greek oratory, a purely Athenian achievement. Later, oratory spread over Asia, and the Asianic style emerged, and also a Rhodian style. But let us turn to Roman oratory. §

4 9

. 19. partus atque fontis : ‘birth and origins’, partus is not elsewhere used metaphorically in this sense, and is rare in the sense of ‘offspring’, but parere is common metaphori­ cally. Nineteenth-century edd. (cf. app. crit.) also objected to the mixture of metaphors, but the very common metaphor fontis in fact makes partus easier, and for some much more striking mixed metaphors, cf. Pis. 69, prov. cons. 31, de or. ii. 162. ad . . . rationem : ' in terms of Roman chronology ’, cf. 69. 15. 22. laude dicendi : ‘ the a rt of speaking and the glory of its exercise’ (Hendr.), cf. 28. 10. 23. non . . . commune : not all the ‘A ttic ’ orators were Athe­ nian. On Lysias cf. on § 63, Dinarchus was Corinthian, Isaeus perhaps Chalcidian. B ut all wrote in Attic for the Athenian courts. §

5 0

. 2 6. Epaminonda docto : on Epaminondas’ wide culture cf. Plut. Ages. 27, Pelop. 4; on his eloquence, Nep. Epam. 5 ‘ fuit etiam disertus, u t nemo ei Thebanus par esset eloquentia, neque minus concinnus in brevitate respondendi quam in perpetua oratione ornatus’; ibid, on his opponent Meneclides ‘satis exercitatum u t Thebanum scilicet; namque illi genti plus inest virium quam ingeni’. 2 7 . Lacedaemonium : cf. Tac. dial. 40 (arguing th a t oratory is not found in well-organized societies, cf. on § 45) ‘ quern enim oratorem Lacedaemonium, quem Cretensem accepi­ mus ? ’ ‘ C. is tacitly and rightly ignoring Brasidas, who is described by Thucydides with an im portant reservation, as one who “ for a Lacedaemonian’’ was not w ithout ability as a speaker’ (Sandys p. ii). Veil. i. 18 denies th a t Argos, Sparta, and Thebes produced any able writers except Pindar. 28. Menelaum : Ilia d in. 213—14 rot μεν MevéXaos άπιτροχάδην άγόρΐυΐ / 7ταΰρα μεν άλλα μαλά λιγάωζ, cf. Quintii. ΧΗ. IO. 64. 2. interdum .. . parte : i.e. sometimes in narratio (Intr. 22, rhet. Her. i. 14), but not always even there (de or. ii. 326), and certainly not, in C.’s view, in oratory as a whole. The Stoics

§ 4 9 . 1 9 -§

5 1 .1 2

41

recommended brevity in universa eloquentia (Intr. 29 (b)) ; its association with narratio, Isocratic in origin, was criticized by Arist. rhet. iii. 16. 4, cf. inv. i. 28, Quintii, xii. 2. 31-32. C. recommends brevity in senatorial debate, cf. leg. iii. 40 ‘brevitas non modo senatoris sed etiam oratoris magna laus est in sententia’. §

. 6. Nam ut semel . . . : ‘as soon as eloquence had set sail from the Piraeus, it travelled through all the islands of the Aegean, and made its home in the whole of Asia so com­ pletely th a t it tainted itself with foreign ways and lost the sound and healthy Attic style and well-nigh forgot the art of correct speech’. e Piraeo : cf. AU. vii. 3. 10 on the correctness of the pre­ position with Piraeus. 8. oblineret : lit. ‘sm ear’, of extravagant adornment, cf. Hor. epp. ii. i. 204, rhet. Her. iv. 16 ‘si crebrae collocabuntur (ex­ ornationes), oblitam (obliquam MSS.) reddent orationem’, cf. inlitus {de or. iii. 199, cited0036. 12). The vulgate oblineret (for L ’s obtineret) is a neat Renaissance emendation, found in N. salubritatem : cf. salubre (or. 90), Gk. vyn??. 9. dictionis : here ‘style’ (Ae£t?) cf. 325. 21. sanitatem : Intr. 35. C. resisted the Atticists’ attem pt to appropriate this term (Quintii, x. 1. 44, Tac. dial. 23. 3), while recognizing its appropriateness to the orators of Athens. quasi is to be taken with the whole phrase. loqui : of style (elocutio) rather than oratory as a whole (dicere) : 'to speak good Greek’. 10. Asiatici: on the Atticist-Asianist controversy cf. Intr. 5-8. Here the term is strictly geographical, although this passage shows a more explicit understanding than de or. ii. 93-95 of the stylistic effects of the spread of Greek oratory in the Hellenistic period, cf. Jebb Attic Orators ii. 440, CAH vii. 255-6 . non contemnendi . . . : ‘far from contemptible m respect of fluency and fullness of style, but lacking in conciseness and inclined to verbosity’, cf. or. 231. 12. Rhodii : on the associations of Aeschines and Hyperides with Rhodes, cf. [Plut.] vitt. x. oratt. 840D, Dion. Hal. Din. 8. Later, as slight but sufficient evidence suggests, Rhodes developed a distinctive method in oratory and rhetoric (cf. F. Portalupi Sulla corrente Rodiese (Turin 1957), who 5 1

COM M ENTARY

42

also demolishes the once common assertion th a t C. was a ‘ Rhodian ’ orator), and these remarks are not a mere compli­ ment to C.’s Rhodian teacher Molon (307. 15), as used to be suggested (Wilkins Intr. 48, Sandys on or. 25, Intr. xliii). I t is the Attic and Asianist ‘schools’ which on inspection dis­ solve into the slogans of controversialists (Intr. 5, cf. my review of Portalupi, CR n . s . viii (1958) 286). On Rhodes as an intellectual centre cf. 1. 1 n., Marx’s edn. of rhet. Her. proleg. pp. 157-9, Wilkins l.c. §

. 13. hactenus : little was to be said of Hellenistic oratory. The gap was not, however, as Wilamowitz suggested (Hermes XXXV (1900) 42), due to the establishment of the canon of Attic orators. The superiority of the orators of the fifthfourth centuries did not receive this particular recognition till later, cf. my art. cited on 36. 9.

5 2

§ § 5 3 - 6 0 . Presumably the distinguished figures of our early history were capable speakers, but the first orator known as such was M. Cornelius Cethegus, at the time of the second Punic War. The style of that age is known to us from the works o f Naevius. §

. On the choice of personalities mentioned in §§ 53-56 cf. Intr. 38 {a).

5 3

20. aut : the single aut is paralleled in or. 229, fin. iv. 77, off. i. 9, cf. TLL ii. 1572. 56, K.-S. ii. 107. In such passages the writer changes his mind and either omits the second alterna­ tive entirely, or expresses it in some other way, as here the expected aut eloquentiam is replaced by quod . . . persuasum. ingeni : the ingenium of early orators is stressed, since ars and exercitatio (Intr. 22) were not yet developed. L. Bruto : cf. Plut. Brut. 1, Livy i. 56. The connexion of the later Iunii Bruti with the Liberator is also alleged in de or. ii. 225, Tusc. iv. 2, Phil. i. 13, and implied on well-known coins of the Brutus of this dialogue (Vessberg Studien zur Kunstge­ schichte der römischen Republik (Leipzig 1941) pp. 122-4, pl. ii. 1—4). The connexion of a plebeian house with a patrician ancestor seemed dubious even in antiquity (Plut. Brut. 1.4); modern scholars doubt the whole tradition concerning L. Brutus (Syme, R R p. 85, R E supp. v. 356-69). nobilitatis : ‘ nobility ’ in the later Republic m eant descent from holders of high office, and was often limited to those of consular ancestry (H. Strasburger R E art. nobilitas, A. Afzelius in Class, et Med. vii (1945) 150 ffi).

§ 5 1 . 1 2 -§

5 4 .2

43

21. principi: 'originator', ‘au th o r’. m a tre : cf. Livy i. 56 ‘ex infimo specu vocem redditam ferunt: "Im perium summum Romae habebit qui vestrum primus o iuvenes osculum m atri tulerit. . . . ” Brutus .. . velut si prolapsus cecidisset, terram osculo contigit: scilicet quod ea communis m ater omnium mortalium esset’. 24. p o ten tissim u m r e g em : Tarquinius Superbus, expelled 509 B . c . potens here implies ‘despotic’, as potentia regularly implies ‘despotism’. C. often attaches it to rex. cla rissim i reg is : Tarquinius Priscus, traditionally reigned 616-578 B.C . filium : Livy i. 46. 4 mentions but rejects a tradition th a t Superbus was Priscus’ grandson. 25. p erp etu o . . . a n n u is : cf. Livy ii. i. 7 ‘libertatis autem originem inde magis quia annuum imperium consulare factum est quam quod deminutum quicquam sit ex regia potestate numeres’, perpetuo m ust have seemed a t this date a more effective by-blow a t Caesar than the usual regio {de or. ii. 225, Plane. 60). 26. d ev in x e rit : society was henceforth ‘bound ’ by law and con­ stitution, an im portant commentary on the idea of libertas cf. Wirszubski pp. 6 if. co n le g a e : L. Tarquinius Collatinus, R E Tarquinius no. 8, cf. rep. ii. 53, off. iii. 40, Livy ii. 2 and refs, in M R R i. 1—2. The dative is used after abrogare as with other verbs of depriving, etc., cf. TLL i. 138. 35. 28. o ra tio n e p ersu a su m : not everybody believed this, cf. de or. i. 37 and 57. 22. §

. 29. p a u c is a n n is : the first secession of the plebs (494 b . c . ) : Livy ii. 33, Ascon. in Cornel. 76 (Clark). I t led to the institu­ tion of the tribunate of the plebs. 1. appellatus est : ‘was then given the name Sacred’, cf. pro Cornelio fr. 49 (Schoell) ‘montem illum trans Anienem qui hodie Mons Sacer nominatur, in quo arm ati consederant, aeternae memoriae causa consecrarent’. 2. M. V a ler iu m : on the part played by Menenius Agrippa {RE Menenius no. 12) in Livy ii. 33 and most later authorities, bu t not Valerius Maximus (viii. 9. 1), cf. Intr. 38 {a). Most sources give the dictator’s praenomen as M’. d icta to r em d icen d o : for the word-play, cf. inf. ‘ Potitum . . . potuisse’. Perhaps C. does not take these early orators 5 4

COM M ENTARY very seriously. In any case, ‘ it required more than eloquence. Tribunes were conceded’ (Kell.). 5. L. V a leriu m . . . P o titu m : R E Valerius no. 304, part-author of the Valerio-Horatian Laws (449 b . c .), cf. Livy iii. 55, and for discussions of th a t account and others, C AH vii. 480, OCD art. Valerius Potitus. 6. post . . . in v id ia m : ‘ after the unpopular rule of the decem­ v iri’, the second body of ten, appointed 451 B.c., whose tyrannical behaviour and refusal to lay down office led to the second secession of the plebs and the Valerio-Horatian Laws (last n.), cf. Livy iii. 33-59, for the phrase ibid. 42. 6, 43. 2. For invidia with an adj. replacing the genitive cf. Sail. Jug. 39. 5 ‘invidia fraterna’, Clu. 77 ‘invidia senatoria’, K.-S. i. 212— but this replaced genitive is not strictly objective, as K.-S. make it, for invidia (often, as here, political ‘unpopularity’, ‘odium ’) is the unpopularity a person experiences, not the dislike one person feels for another, for which C. felt com­ pelled to coin the word invidentia (Tusc. iii. 20). : Schanz pp. 40-41, O R F p. 1, R E Claudius no. 91; cos. 307, 296, cf. Plut. Pyrrh. 18. 2-19, Appian Samn. 10, and on 61. 14. disertum : 39. 27 n. Livy believed in Appius’ eloquence (x. 15. 12, 19. 6, 22. 7). 9 . Pyrrhi p ace : in 280 b . c .— the only known occasion of a speech by Appius. Cf. Cael. 34 (among the reproaches which C. makes Appius address to the degenerate Clodia) ‘ideone ego pacem Pyrrhi diremi ut tu amorum turpissimorum cotidie foedera ferires ? ’ possumus C. F ab riciu m : sc. suspicari disertum, so below with Ti. Coruncanium, M ’. Curium. C. Fabricius Luscinus (RE Fabricius no. 9) was cos. 282 and 276 b . c . 10. quia s i t . . . : Plut. Pyrrh. 20. Fabricius’ display of imper­ turbability and incorruptibility on this occasion became legendary. 11. orator : placed at the end for rhythm and also emphasis, for orator here has the old sense ‘spokesman’, ‘envoy’, favoured by Livy and the poets, who rarely use it of the political or forensic ‘orator’ (cf. 47. 8 n. and Neuhauser’s work cited there). Seneca epp. 114.13 ironically names Appius and Corun­ canius as favourite authors of contemporary archaizers. e x . . . co m m en ta riis : cf. C AH vii. 328. Peter H R R i. v § 5 5 . 8. A p p iu m C laudium

§ 5 4 . 2 -§

5 6 .1 7

45

maintains th a t the commentarii contained pontifical decisions given on particular occasions and are distinct from the libri pontificum which described traditional rituals, but cf. Schanz pp. 26 ff. for the view th a t in early times a t least no such distinction existed. They were certainly distinct from the annales maximi, an historical record maintained by the pontifical college {de or. ii. 52). It is not clear whether C.'s judgement rests on statements about Coruncanius or actual decisions attributed to him. 12. M’. Curium . . . : ‘We can claim some oratorical gifts forM ’. Curius, for when Appius Claudius Caecus, himself a capable speaker, in his capacity as interrex was conducting the elec­ tions in an illegal fashion and refused to accept a consul of plebeian origin, Curius as tribune compelled the patres to signify their assent in advance—a considerable achievement before the passing of the Lex Maenia.’ During an interregnum in 298 (Livy x. 11), when Curius (cos. 290, 275, and 274) was tribune, App. Claudius, holding the elections as interrex, refused to declare a plebeian elected as consul, in defiance of the Lex Genucia of 342, by which one consul must, and both could, be plebeian. He claimed th at the patrum auctoritas was not a formality but could be with­ held. Curius insisted th a t it be given ante, i.e. before the result of the election was known. The Lex Maenia evidently made the patrum auctoritas a formality for elections in the comitia centuriata, but it is not mentioned elsewhere. For doubts about the story cf. R E Curius no. 9, Staatsr. iii. 1042 nn. I, 3. On the right of the presiding magistrate to refuse candidatures or even the declaration of elected candidates cf. F. Cassola I gruppi politici romani nel iii secolo a. C. (Trieste 1962) pp. 14-16. 13. interrege : an office dating, as the name implies, to the regal period (Livy i. 17), at all times confined to patricians (1dom. 38). P. Sulpicius succeeded Appius and held the elec­ tions duly. 14. de plebe : a regular formula used adjectivally with nouns, for ‘plebeian’, cf. 131. 15, TLL v. i. 55. 34, 58. 28. 15. patres . . . auctores : cf. Livy i. 17. 9. In historic times patres seem to have been the patrician senators (CAH vii. 413-14)· §

5 6

. 17. M. Popili : on the identification cf. Intr. 38 (a).

46

COM M ENTARY

19. laena : a lined cloak, ‘toga duplex in qua flamines sacri­ ficabant infibulati’ (Servius on Aen. iv. 262). Schulze Eigenn. p. 530 n. 3 prefers to see in Laenas an Etrusco-Latin genti­ licium (cf. Maecenas, Asprenas) used as a cognomen. flamen Carmentalis : the flamines (RE s.v. flamen) were priests in charge of special cults, the flamines maiores being responsible for those of Jupiter, Mars, and Quirinus. Much less is known of the flamines minores, the present passage supplying the only known name of one of these priests for Republican times. Carmenta or Carmentis was in m yth a goddess of prophecy and mother of Evander (Virg. Aen. viii. 333 ff., Ovid Fasti i. 461 ff.), but originally associated with childbirth (Roscher s.v.). 22. oratores : ‘ orators worthy of the name 23. aut . . . : ‘or th at any value at all was then placed on elo­ quence I cannot recollect ever having read ’. The roughness of early oratory was a commonplace, cf., e.g. Livy ii. 32. 8; de or. i. i 4 dates Roman interest in oratory ‘postea quam imperio omnium gentium constituto diuturnitas pacis otium confirmavit’, i.e. presumably in the second century B.c. §

. 25. Dicitur etiam : C. passes from those whose claims as persuasive speakers are deduced from their achievements to those for whose performance as orators there was direct evidence. 26. de agro . . . : inv. ii. 52, ac. pr. 13, sen. 11. Polyb. ii. 21. 8 dates the affair to 232, but sen. l.c. to 228. Münzer sees here Atticus’ chronology, plausibly, for C. combines mention of a consulship with a tribunician law, and Atticus gave consul­ ships and while not recording all tribunates, listed im portant leges (Intr. 39), but Polybius’ date is preferred by most scholars (Walbank Commentary on Polybius (Oxford, 1957) ad loc.). Flaminius’ proposal was carried in the assembly against the wishes of the senate, and the method employed rather than the scope of the proposal gave offence (C AH vii. 806 ff.). This ager Gallicus was on the borders of Picenum, and other evidence suggests th a t no territory in Picenum itself was involved (Walbank l.c.). dividundo : the old form which survived in legal and official phraseology. On its occurrences in MSS. of C. and others cf. Neue iii. 331 ff. 27. Trasumennum : 217 b . c . 5 7

§ 5 6 . 1 9 -§ 5 7 . 5

47

ad p o p u lu m : ‘before the people’, not the senate. For ad, cf. 8o. i8, 289. 29, TLL i. 520. 20. 2 8 . V erru co su s : O R F p. 4. For ‘W arty ’ as an agnomen of Fabius Maximus Cunctator cf. Plut. Fab. 1. 3, Sen. ben. ii. 7. i, iv. 30. 2, incert. de vir. ill. 43, poet. lat. min. (Baehrens) iii. 158. 2 9 . orator : Plut. Fab. I ρ α κ ε ι... τον ... λόγον οργανον πειθονς προς τον όρμον ευ μά λα πρεπόντω ς τω βUp κατακεκοσ μρ μόνον. ον γαρ επρν ώ ραϊσμος ουδέ κενρ καί αγοραίος χάρις, άλλα νους ίδιον κα'ι περιττόν èv γνιομολογιαις σ χρμ α και βάθος εχων, ας μά λισ τα τα ΐς Θονκνδίδου προσεοικεναι λόγουσι· διασώ ζεται γα ρ αυτόν λ ό γ ο ς ον είπεν εν τ φ δρμω, τοΰ παιδος αντοΰ μ εθ ’ νπατείαν άποθανάντος εγκω μιον. On the laudatio

funebris of his son cf. 62. 16 n., sen. 12. For us, Fabius is represented by three words in Priscian (GL ii. 380. 10). Q. Metellus : O R F p . 9, R E Caecilius no. 81, cos. 206 b . c . Plin. n.h. vii. 139-41 gives a fr. of his funeral oration over his father, Val. Max. vii. 2. 3 another fr. He was the father of Metellus Macedonicus (81. 25). 1. Q uem v ero . . . : 'b u t the first man for whom recorded evidence survives th a t he was genuinely eloquent and acknow­ ledged as such is M. Cornelius Cethegus. Our authority for his eloquence is Ennius, and a reliable one, too, I think, inasmuch as he both heard Cethegus speak and recorded his opinion of him after his death.’ e x ste t : Latin prefers the type primus hoc fecit to an ordi­ nary generic subjunctive with superlatives and virtual superlatives (prim us, solus, unus, etc.) ; the relative and subjunctive with such words is normally restrictive, cf. 65. 16, 265. 13, de or. ii. 8, 93, Fuse. i. 38, v. 55, Tim. 1, and both constructions together in 127. 12. Usually the restric­ tive clause is grammatically separable from the rest of the sentence ; here it cannot be removed without destroying the sense. elo q u e n te m fu isse : exstat with acc. inf. has no parallel in C. (but cf. Plin. n.h. vii. 48) ; it is found—in a different sense— with a dependent question in de or. i. 72 ‘apparet atque exstat utrum simus earum rudes an didicerimus', Phil. ix . 7.

: O R F p. 11, R E Cornelius no. 92, cos. 204 b . c . No frr. nor titles or occasions of speeches are pre­ served. 5 . a m ic itia e : not personal friendship (which might well lead to 2 . M . C orneliu s C eth egu s

48

COM M ENTARY

flattery after a m an’s death.), but political partisanship, cf. Syme R R p. 12. §

. 7. ut opinor : qualifies nono. I t is often used to diminish the suggestion of pedantry or affectation in displays of exact or recondite knowledge, cf. 85. 2, Sest. 48 ‘virgines Athenis regis, opinor, Erechthei filiae’, Verr. ii. 4. 5. annali : most citations of Ennius which mention books use the formula in nono annalium {libro) ; the present use is found in grammarians, and esp. Gellius (ii. 26. 21, xiii. 22. 18, but contrast i. 22. 16, xviii. 2. 16). 8. additur . . . filius : ‘ there was appointed also, as colleague to Tuditanus, Marcus Cornelius Cethegus, son of Marcus, the orator of the winning utterance'. orator : it is usually thought th a t Ennius intended the sense ‘envoy’, ‘spokesman’ (cf. 55. 11 n.), and th a t C. ignored this fact, though by implication distinguishing the two mean­ ings in 55. i i , for Fabricius was certainly an ‘envoy’, but as regards eloquence, only conjecturally disertus. B ut we lack proof th a t Cethegus and Tuditanus went on an embassy together, while they were certainly consular colleagues in 204. If Ennius is referring to the consular elections, orator may be some sort of agnomen (cf. Neuhauser p. 127). suaviloquenti : apart from Quintii.’s citation of this pas­ sage (xi. 3. 31), the word occurs only in Lucr. i. 945 and rep. V . i i (of Menelaus), a fr. known from Gellius’ discussion (xii. 2. 7) of a passage in which Seneca criticized C.'s use of such words and admiration for Ennius. Seneca rightly supposed th a t C. was influenced more by Ennius’ praise of oratory than by the aesthetic quality of the lines, but C. himself does not suggest otherwise. 9. Tuditano conlega : L ’s studio conlegam is nonsensical, bu t editors do not precisely agree how best to restore to Tuditanus the place which is evidently his. P .—F., M artha read conlegae Tuditano, Kr., Hendr. Tuditano conlegae, Rs., Malcovati and editions of Ennius agree with Wilkins in following Schütz. 11. suaviloquentiam : found only here. C.’s use of brevilo­ quentia in some lost work was also censured by Seneca ap. Gell. l.c. (above). 12. non tam . . . : for non tarn followed not by quam bu t by a fresh clause introduced by sed cf. fin. i. 1. latrant : ‘b a rk ’ or even ‘howl’, emphatically placed, cf. de 5 8

§ 5 7 . 5 -§

59

.21

49

or. ii. 220, iii. 138. This natural colloquial metaphor is also in Hor. serm. i. 3. 136, ii. 1. 85, Quintii, xii. 9. 12. 15· is d ictu st. . . : ‘he was called by his fellow countrymen of those days, who lived and passed their lives then, the choice flower of the people’. agitabant for L ’s agebant and ollis (om. L) are from Gell. l.c. Merula proposed dictust popularibus ollis, assuming th a t olim was an alteration by some reader who did not know ollis, and so made this quotation metrically continuous with the one preceding. The emendation is defended by O. Skutsch CQ N.s. xiii (1963) 97 ff. B ut the coincidence of a similar corrup­ tion in the text of Gell, and so presumably in the text of C. used by Seneca is difficult, as is the assumption of a reader who knew olim in the sense of turn, but not ollis. ollis : cf. Quintii, viii. 3. 25 on the archaic effect of this word when used by later writers, e.g. Virg. A en. i. 254, iv. 105, V . 10. olim, the adverb from olle, originally meant ‘at th a t time ’, cf. Plaut, trin. 523 ‘ olim terra quom proscinditur / in quinto quoque sulco m oriuntur boves’, ollis . . . olim has the kind of naïve assonance typical of Ennius (cf. fit via vi, etc.) and early Latin generally. 16. aevum agitabant : aevum ‘ age ’, ‘life ’, is poetical, agitare as synonym for agere is also mainly poetical—and Sallustian, cf. Cat. 2, Jug. 94. The phrase aevum agitare was copied by Virgil georg. iv. 154 (a mock-epic description of bees), Aen. X· 235· 17. delibatus : delibare is ht. to taste a little of, or take a little away from, something; hence (i) as here, to cull, pluck, enjoy, cf. Sest. 119 ‘u t . . . omnis undique flosculos (sc. orationis) carpam atque delibem’, (ii) to take away, detract from. §

. 18. u t e n i m . . . : ‘for just as intellect is the glory of man, the light of the intellect is eloquence, and men of th a t time did well to call the man who excelled in eloquence the flower of the people and ‘‘the very heart of Persuasion” ’. 19. qua : ablative of respect with excellentem', praeclare goes w ith dixerunt. 21. S u a d a eq u e : Suadaique Martha (Budé), Suadai Rs. who wishes to read this form also in Quintii, ii. 15. 4 ‘dicens (sc. Isocrates) esse rhetoricen persuadendi opificem, id est netßovs δημιουργόν, neque enim mihi permiserim eadem uti declina­ tione qua Ennius M. Cethegum Suadai (Suadae, MSS., vulg., 5 9

814437

E

COM M ENTARY Radermacher) medullam vocat’. But there declinatione may mean not ‘declension’, but ‘form ation’, ‘derivation’ (from suadere) (cf. Quintii, viii. 3. 32), for the word Suada itself is found only in citations of this passage and was doubtless unparalleled. Further -ai as the archaic genitive ending has two long syllables. Ennius recognized the etymological con­ nexion of suavis, suadere. m e d u lla : nominative, picking up from flos . . . populi. 2 2 . Πειθώ : ‘what the Greeks call πειθώ, of which the orator is the creator, Ennius called Suada, and claimed th a t Cethegus was its very marrow, so that he alleged th a t of th a t goddess whom Eupolis described as sitting on the lips of Pericles, the Roman orator was the very m arrow ’. The contrast in the idea th a t Cethegus was the ‘m arrow ’ of a goddess which merely sat on Pericles’ lips is very far­ fetched, and its expression cumbrous (the addition of cuius . . . orator adds to the confusion), though the system of ‘gram­ matical gender ’ makes the personification of ‘Persuasion ’ less awkward than it is in English. q u am v o c a n t : C. uses Greek words w ithout some explana­ tory phrase only in the letters, cf. 69. 11, 292. 23, Kr. on or. 36. effector : an echo of πειθοΰς δημιουργός, cf. Quintii, l.c. above, Plato Gorg. 453A, and the stress on persuasion in Arist. rhet. i. I. 14, and de or. i. 138. effectoris found only in C. before the Christian writers, who use it, like C. (Tusc. i. 70, Tim. 17), of the creator of the Universe, Plato’s δημιουργός. For less specialized uses, cf. div. ii. 55, 147. 2 4 . E u p o lis : cf. 38. 22 n.

: a very rare frequentative, by which C. repre­ sents in or. obi. the imperfect όπεκάθεζεν of the Greek. Such frequentative formations tend to be colloquial.

25. se ssita v isse

§

. 2 7. M. Cato : Cato the censor (234-149 b.c.), so domi­ nant a figure th a t his career provides chronological pointers, below (Catone censore) and §§ 70 ff. m o d o p la n e . . . : ‘only 140 years precisely’. C. emphasizes the recent and rapid growth of Roman oratory, plane should mean ‘exactly’. The interpretation ‘in round num bers’ (P.-F., Kell.) lacks support. M artha suggests th a t this may be ‘ exclusive ’ reckoning, from the end of 204 to the beginning of 63, cf. on 72. 16 (p. 64). 28. id ip su m : Cethegus’ skill as an orator. 6 0

§5 9 . 2 1 -§ 6 1 .1 2

5i

29. vetustas : usually, as here, ‘ age ’ considered as the passing of time (cf. div. i. 109), so even of the future, Mil. 98 ‘de me . . . nulla . . . obmutescet vetustas ’, but occasionally of anti­ quity, cf. dom. 86 ‘monumenta vetustatis’. ut alios : sc. obruit, ‘as perhaps it has in fa c t’. 2. sermo : ‘style’, cf. 68. 5, 130. 4, etc. Naevianis : cf. the argument from Thucydides’ style (§ 29). Naevius (c. 270-c. 200) is referred to rather than Plautus perhaps because some of his plays had Roman themes, and his epic was in the native Saturnian metre. 3. commentariis : Intr. 39. 4. Varro : his output included de scaenicis originibus and de comoediis Plautinis. noster : C. admired and indeed stood in awe of Varro’s learning, cf. 205. 6, ac. post. 8, 9. The first of his extant letters to Varro (/am. ix. 1—8), referring to C.’s return to his studies (late 47 or early 46 b .c.), shows th a t C. was in touch with Varro when he began work on Brutus. 6. producit : possibly the commentarii had the date of Naevius’ last play, and took this also to be the date of his death, while Varro had grounds for doubting th a t assumption (cf. F. Leo Plautinische Forschungen (Berlin 1912) i. 66). Jerome puts Naevius’ death in 201 b .c. For a suggestion th a t the date was considerably later cf. H. B. Mattingly Historia ix (i960) 414 ff. Nam . . . : ‘ for Plautus died in the consulship of P. Claudius and L. Porcius tw enty years later than the date I just men­ tioned, during Cato’s censorship’ (i.e. 184 b .c.). Theunstated assumption is th a t Plautus was Naevius’ contemporary. Yet why should Plautus not have outlived a contemporary? Naevius was in any case old enough to have fought in the first Punic War, and so was bom probably c. 270. How much of this argument is due to Varro and how much to C. we cannot tell. On the Varronian chronology of Roman literature and its rivals cf. on §§ 72 ff. § § 6 1 - 6 2 . Cato was the first orator who left writings worthy of attention, unless you count App. Claudius’ speech about Pyrrhus and the surviving funeral orations. 10. annis ix : 195 b .c. 12. ipsis: ‘exactly’, cf. 161. 1, Att. iii. 21,

COM M ENTARY

52

14. A p p i Caeci : cf. 55. 8, 13. oratio : evidently extant,

but C. quotes Ennius’ version for preference (sen. 16), cf. E. D uckett Studies in Ennius (Bryn Mawr 1915) p. 37. Isid. etym. i. 38. 2, probably following Varro, describes Appius as the man who ‘apud Romanos adversus Pyrrhum solutam orationem primus exercuit’. 15. m o rtu o ru m la u d a tio n es : the laudatio funebris over a dis­ tinguished man (or, later, woman, de or. ii. 44) was a striking Roman custom, cf. Polyb. vi. 53-34, Vollmer Jahrb.für Phil. supp, xviii. 450 ff., C. Martha Etudes morales (Paris 1900) pp. i ff. The achievements not only of the deceased but of the whole family were surveyed. Tradition assigned its origins to the earliest days of the Republic, cf. Dion. Hal. ant. Rom. v. 17 (Publicola on the young Brutus), Livy ii. 47 (478 B.c.), ib. 61 (468 b . c . ). The only form of epideictic oratory (Intr. 24 (a)) which played an im portant part in Roman life, it had little relation to the oratory taught by rhetoricians (de or. ii. 341, cf. M. Durry R P h sér. 3. xvi (1942) 105 ff.). Quintii, xi. 3. 153 has a brief and obvious hint on the manner appropriate to such occasions.

§

6 2

. 16. E t h erc u les . . . : ‘and they are extant, all rig h t’, e x sta n t : examples extant in C.’s day include (i) Fabius

Maximus on his son, (ii) Marcellus of Syracuse by his son, (iii) L. Metellus (ob. 221) by his son, (iv) Scipio Aemilianus by Q. Fabius Allobrogicus, (v) Q. Catulus on his mother, (vi) 6 κράτιστος ΐΐπ ίΐν τω ν τότε on Sulla, (vii) Julius Caesar on his aunt and on his mother (cf. O RF pp. 5, 9, 10, 199, 220, 389— 90, and for (vi) Appian b.c. i. 106. 5). B ut C. was clearly here thinking rather of early mediocre performances, oratorically and historically unsatisfactory, handed on (with necessary additions) from one generation to the next. su a q u a s i . . . : ‘kept them as a sort of m ark of honour and a record’, ornamenta suggests th a t the laudationes were an equivalent of the insignia of the magistracies whose tenure they recorded. 17· et ad usum . . . : ‘ for use when any of the family should die, as a record of the family’s distinctions, and as a proof of their high b irth ’. 18. o c c id isse t : pluperfect subjunctive, because of the or. obi. concealed in ad usum (‘utemur si quis occiderit’). For pas­ sages where the or. obi. is even more completely concealed and the pluperfect subjunctive simply indicates a future

§ 6 1 . 1 4 —§ 6 3 . 2 7

53

condition seen from a point of view in the past cf. x6i. 6, W. S. W att CQ xliii (1949) 11. 19. nobilitatem : cf. 53. 20 n. 21. mendosior: ‘rather i n a c c u r a t e mendosus is used esp. of errors in writing. Livy viii. 40 repeats this complaint about the laudationes. 22. plures : ‘an exaggerated number o f’, genera . . . : ‘false genealogies to o ’. 23. ad plebem . . . genus : ‘transfers to the plebs fabricated so as to blend men of humbler birth into other families of the same nam e’. Transitions to the plebs were made by patricians who wanted to stand for plebeian magistracies, esp. the tribunate, as in the well-known case of P. Clodius in 58 b . c . Lambinus’ proposal a plebe missed the point, which is th a t plebeians might claim falsely th a t their family had once been patrician b u t became plebeian by transitio. 24. eiusdem nominis : several gentes, e.g. the Claudii and the Servilii, had both patrician and plebeian branches (cf. Münzer RA pp. 133 ff.) so th a t such claims were not prima facie fraudulent; nor can C. be questioning the claims of noble bu t plebeian families like the Marcii and (despite Münzer l.c.) the Iunii B ruti themselves (cf. 53. 20 n.) to descent from early patrician families. B ut there were of course many less dis­ tinguished bearers of old Roman names. On the sort of problem th a t arose cf. fam. ix. 21. 2-3 where C. is indignant with Papirius Paetus for denying th a t there had been patri­ cian Papirii. 25. a M ’. Tullio esse : a M’. Tullius Longus was consul in 500 b . c . All consuls were patricians until long after th a t date. esse ab = oriri ab is rare, b u t cf. Phil. xiii. 27 ' Decius, ab illis . . . Muribus Deeds', nat. d. ii. 129, K.-S. i. 494. § § 6 3 - 6 9 . Cato was an excellent orator. Our modern Atticists might be expected to take more notice of him. His style is oldfashioned, but could easily be brought up to date. Of course, oratory had not reached its peak in him. 6 3 . 27. orationes : C. claims to have read more than 150 (§ 65). Titles or occasions of nearly 80 are known today (ORF pp. 18-97, Scullard Appendix II pp. 256 ff.). There are many fragments, some fairly long. He is for us, as for C., the first

COM M ENTARY

54

Roman orator of whose style and methods we can form some idea (cf. Appendix A, 2-7). No other source is so compli­ m entary as C. in the present passage (cf. O RF pp. 12-18 for the testimonia) ; Livy xxxix. 40. 4 comes nearest. That C. was aware th at he was exaggerating is shown by the qualifica­ tions in §§ 292 if. Most other sources stress Cato’s love of controversy and frequent appearances in the courts. Nepos Cat. 3. i merely calls him probabilis orator, Plut. Cat. ma. 1. 5 ρητωρ ίκανος.

28. plurimas : 425 speeches were attributed to Lysias ([Plut.] V itt. X o ra tt. 836 a ) Of which ol περί Διονύσιον κα'ι Καικίλιον ac­ cepted 233 as genuine. In his extant work (L ys. xvii. 491 R) Dion. Hal. claims for him not less than 200 forensic speeches. Atticus : ‘ an Attic orator’, without polemical force, though C. may be hinting at the fact th a t the Atticists made their hero an orator whose strict claim to the name ‘A ttic’ could be questioned. 29. natus : Lysias’ father, Cephalus of Syracuse, was invited by Pericles to settle in Athens before Lysias’ birth. mortuus : cf. [Plut.] l.c. functus .. . munere : presumably a reference to the Ισοτέλεια conferred on Lysias, rather than to the brief period when he enjoyed full citizenship and made his only personal appear­ ance in the courts (35. 26 n.); the grant of citizenship was revoked on technical grounds.30 30. Timaeus : c. 356—260 b .C; of Tauromenium in Sicily. His history dealt mainly with Sicilian affairs. On his style cf. on §325; frr. in FGrH no. 566 (IIIb 581 ff.). Licinia et Mucia lege : the law of Licinius Crassus and Mucius Scaevola (coss. 95 b .c.) (Ascon. p. 67 Clark, Greenidge and Clay pp. 119-20) did not, as is usually stated, compel the repatriation of the Italian allies: it was a law 'u t in suae quisque civitatis ius redigeretur’, i.e. Roman citizen rights were withdrawn from non-Romans (cf. Badian FC p. 297). On this view this passage, though humorously intended, is much more pointed. i. Syracusas : for repetere with this accusative cf. Plaut. Bacch. 775-6 ‘ quam mox navigo / in Ephesum u t aurum repetam a Theotimo domum’. quodam modo . . . non nulla : the phrasing is carefully qualified, but Plut. Cat. ma. 7 still finds the comparison absurd.

§ 6 3 . 2 7 -§

64

.6

55

: ‘pointed’, ‘subtle’, a term often applied to orators of the Plain Style (Intr. 35) because of their appeal to the intellect (or. 20, 84, 98, Quintii, xii. 10. 59 ‘quorum (sc. dicendi generum) ea fere ratio est ut primum (sc. subtile) docendi . . . praestare videatur officium; in docendo autem acumen exigi vid eatu r’). Cf. too de or. ii. 93: ‘subtiles acuti breves sententiisque magis quam verbis abundantes’. 3. f a c e t i: ‘neat', ‘sm art’, 'light of touch’, contrasted with ineptus (292. 26), rudis (de or. i. 32, or. 20), cf. Quintii, vi. 3. 19 f. on Horace’s ascription (serm. i. 10. 44) to Virgil of molle atque facetum. ab : ‘in respect o f’, cf. 161. 5, 198. 15, 233. 12, de or. iii. 229 ‘nihil enim isti adulescenti neque a natura neque a doctrina deesse sentio’, K.-S. i. 496, Lebreton p. 412.

2. A c u ti

§ 6 4 . 4. H a b e t . . . : ‘he enjoys the support of a definite group of partisans, who look less for fullness of bodily figure than slenderness of form, people who like actual thinness, so long as the general health is sound—not but what even Lysias often displays some muscle, of the toughest possible kind, but he is certainly in general rather slight—but still he has his admirers who are quite thrilled by this spareness of h is’. 5. o p im o s : ‘f a t’ esp. of cattle, here beginning its career as a critical term, cf. or. 25 ‘opimum quoddam et tamquam adipatae dictionis genus’ (further refs, in Sandys). g ra c ilita te s : i.e. instances of gracilitas', cf. Quintii, xii. 10. 24 'Lysiacae gracilitati’. 6. v a letu d o : cf. or. 76 ‘etsi enim non plurimi sanguinis est (sc. the Plain Style orator), habeat tamen sucum aliquem oportet u t etiam si illis maximis viribus careat, sit u t ita dicam integra valetudine’. te n u ita s : cf. opt. gen. 9 ' Lysiam et eius quidem tenuita­ tem ’. d electa t : it is always possible to maintain th a t in such changes of mood (consedentur . . . delectat) there is an inten­ tional change from the idea of a class to particular individuals (cf. Hor. epp. ii. 2. 182 ‘sunt qui non habeant, est qui non curat habere’), b u t sometimes the point is microscopic, e.g. Tusc. i. 18 ‘sunt qui . . . putant . . . sunt qui . . . censeant’, and here, despite M artha and Lebreton p. 310. Perhaps there should be a semicolon after consedentur (so M artha (Budé)), making quos a connecting relative, so th a t delectat states a fact about the class defined by consedentur.

56

COM M ENTARY

7. la certi : cf. opt. gen. 8 ‘non sunt contenti quasi bona vale­ tudine sed vires sanguinem lacertos quaerunt 8. g en ere to to : ‘in his whole character ’, ‘g e n e r a lly cf. 126. 30, 129. 28, cf. Intr. 26 (p. xxxiii). str ig o s io r : ‘rather lean’, strigosus is rare, and chiefly ap­ plied to animals, metaphorically only here, cf. Nonius 168 M ‘ strigosus apud veteres morbus dicitur iumentorum qui cor­ pora stringat aut fame aut alia viti causa, quasi stringosus’. 9. su o s : like certos above, emphasizes the existence of a dedi­ cated group of enthusiasts for Lysias. §

. 12. a u t . . . a u t : follows naturally the implied negative in mitto, K.—S. ii. 105. 15. d ocen d o ed isseren d oq u e : in the exposition and proof of a case: for docere as t.t., cf. 89. 11, 185. 27, 200. 13, for edis­ serere, 146. 29; disserere is similarly used a t 118. 27, 120. 12, 143. XI. 18. n o ta tio n e : perhaps literally, of actual marking in a text, cf. Sen. epp. 6. 5 (‘imponam no tas’), Gell. xvii. 2. i, 2 (notare, adnotamentum), xix. 7. 12 {adnotatiunculd), Fronto Ant. lm p. ii. 5, p. 107 N (notabilis). 19. virtutes: ‘ oratorical excellences ’ in general, not the Theophrastean àperal AéÇews (Intr. 26), which C. renders ornamenta {de or. i. 144), laudes {or. 79) ; in or. 139, ‘ quasi virtutes ’ refers to certain figures, cf. on 235. 1. 6 5

§ 66. 2 0 . O rigines : a work in seven books tracing the history of Rome from the time of Aeneas (hence its title) to 149 B.c. Frr. in Peter H R R i. 54-97. florem : any brilliant feature or rhetorical adornment, κόσμος λίξΐως (cf. 233. 17, 298. 24, or. 65), with especial refer­ ence to the figures, cf. de or. iii. 96 ' conspersa sit (oratio) quasi verborum sententiarumque floribus’. On lumen v. inf. (on line 23), and cf. 275. 25 n. The following remarks about historians suggest th a t C. is not here thinking only of Cato’s speeches, which he included in his history (cf. 89. 20), but elsewhere {de or. ii. 51, leg. i. 6) he treats Cato merely as one of several early writers of dry and meagre annals. B ut all this passage is a controversialist’s exaggeration qualified in §§292 ff. Nep. Cat. 3. 3-4 credits Cato with ' multa industria et diligentia ’ bu t ‘nulla doctrina’.

§ 6 4 . 7 -§ 68. 2

57

: cf. 294. 20. Philistus, who as a boy witnessed the Athenian siege of Syracuse, died in 356. He wrote a history of Sicily in a t least twelve books. Frr. in FGrH. no. 556, M b 551 ff· 2 3 . N a m u t . . . : ‘just as Theopompus with his lofty and elevated style prevented a proper view of their abrupt apoph­ thegms, which are sometimes even rendered obscure by their brevity and exaggerated subtlety (Demosthenes did the same to Lysias), so the towering style of later writers has cut off Cato’s light’. There is an elaborate play on lumina, rhetorical figures, and the light which reaches a building. On ‘ ancient lights ’ in Roman law cf. Gaius inst. ii. 31, and de or. i. 179, off. iii. 6 5 ^ , and dom. 115 ‘ (Clodius) primo se luminibus eius esse obstructurum m inatur’ (see Nisbet’s helpful note). On Thucydides cf. § 29, on Philistus cf. Q.f. ii. 12. 4 ‘ Siculus ille capitalis, creber, acutus, brevis, paene pusillus Thucydi­ des’, de or. ii. 57, and Quintii, x. 1. 74 ‘Philistus . . . imitator Thucydidis et ut multo infirmior, ita aliquatenus lucidior’, Dion. Hal. vett. cens. p. 426 R, ad Pomp, v, p. 779 R. co n c isis : ‘broken ’, ‘ chopped up ’, less complimentary than ‘concise’, cf. de or. ii. 159 (of the Stoics) ‘genus sermonis . . . exile aridum concisum ac minutum ', ib. 61, or. 40, 230, 231. 2 4 . a c u m in e : cf. 236. 10, 240. 23, 242. 12, and on acuti, 63. 2. 2 5 . T h eo p o m p u s : the fourth-century historian, pupil of Isocra­ tes, and author of the Hellenica, covering the period 411-394, and Philippica, a discursive work in fifty-eight books, based on the career of Philip of Macedon. Frr. in FGrH. no. 115, II. 526.

2 2 . P h ilisto

usually, as here, of culpable ignorance. For the explanatory quod-clause cf. nat. d. ii. 131 ‘ilia quanta benignitas naturae quod tam multa ad vescendum tam varia tam que iucunda gignit’, K.-S. ii. 270-1. 3 0 . n e n o v e r u n t q u id em : 'have not even recognized’. H yp erid a e : ‘ orators like Hyperides ’, the common use of plural proper names, cf. 244. 27, K.—S. i. 72. § 6 7 . 2 8 . in s c it ia :

§ 68. 2. o ssa . . . s a n g u in e m : cf. 36. 10, Tac. dial. 21. 8 ‘oratio autem sicut corpus hominis ea demum pulchra est in qua non eminent venae nec ossa numerantur, sed temperatus ac bonus sanguis implet membra ’, etc.

58

COM M ENTARY

5, horridiora: for horridus, ‘rough ’, ‘ uncouth ’ of language or style, cf. 83. 17, 238. 4, 268. 18, or. 20, ib. 152 ‘orationes . . . horridulae Catonis’, Quintii, xii. 10. 10 ‘fuere quaedam genera dicendi condicione temporum horridiora’. 6. Id muta . . . : ‘change th a t (i.e. the antiquior sermo), which Cato in his day could not do, add rhythms, and to make the style neater, fit the words together and as it were mortise them, a thing which not even the Greeks of early times practised, and then you will place no one above C ato’. muta . . . antepones : for the imperative as protasis with the apodosis (often introduced by iam or turn) in the future or future perfect, cf. 295. 1, dom. 37, K.-S. ii. 165. 8. coagmenta : a favourite metaphor of C.’s, from carpentry, masonry, etc., cf. Sandys on or. 77, Quintii, viii. 6. 63, xii. 10. 77. ne . . . veteres : i.e., according to C.’s view a t the time of writing (cf. on 32. 12), before Isocrates. §

. 9. Ornari : emphatic and technical; cf. Intr. 26 on the Greek doctrine of τρόποι and σχήμα τα , and C.’s own divergence from the belief in figures as the chief source of ornatus. 10. immutationibus: literally, ‘interchanges ’ rendering τρόποι?, as formis — σχημασι (275. 26). As t.t. it was confined to metonymy (de or. iii. 207, or. 94). 6 9

11. orationisque . . . : for formae orationis — ‘verbal figures’ as opposed to ‘figures of thought’ cf. or. 181, 220. 12. non veri simile : ‘incredible’. 13. creber : 29. 16 n. distinctus: ‘marked o u t’, ‘adorned’ (Sandys on or. 21), more often of the writings than the writer, b u t cf. Tac. dial. 18 ‘ utroque distinctior . . . Cicero ’. Cato’s use of figures, even if in fact as striking as C. here alleges, need not indicate conscious application of Greek theory (T. Frank Life and Literature in the Roman Republic (Cambridge 1930) p. 142). 15. quippe cum . . . : ‘for he is archaic in relation to our times, in the sense th a t there survives no earlier w ritten work by anyone, at least none worth reading’. § § 7 0 - 7 6 . The visual arts and our own poetry show a process of development from the rough and primitive to the more polished.

§ 68. 5 -§

70

.20

59

19. Q uis e n im . . . : one expects C. to say th a t even antique sculptors have recognition not accorded to early Roman orators but he slips into illustrations of development in the arts with the stress on the ultimate attainm ent of per­ fection. Alternatively, sed . . . antiquitas m ust be entirely parenthetical, and §§ 70 ff. illustrate nec . . . perfectius of § 69. h a e c m in o ra : the visual arts, cf. 3. 17 n., Quintii, ii. 21. 8. Comparisons of artists and orators were commonplace (Sandys Intr. lxxi ff.), b u t detailed chronological schemes like the present are extremely rare (apart from this passage and Quintii, xii. 10. 1-9, where the basic idea is borrowed from C., perhaps only Demetr. de eloc. 14). Chronological histories of art and literature, and such comparisons in particular, prob­ ably reflect Peripatetic influence, for the school from the time of Aristotle showed unique interest in process and develop­ ment. Quintii, l.c. borrows C.’s argument, giving his own fuller illustrations and a more elaborate critical account (cf. Austin ad loc.). B ut C.’s account should not be regarded, as is usual, as a mere fragment, with puzzling omissions, notably Pheidias, of a single tradition more fully recorded by Quintilian. Q uintilian’s elaboration in fact involves him in some diffi­ culties, since, while painting reached its agreed culmination in Apelles, there were at least three claimants for the first place in sculpture, (i) Polyclitus, (ii) Pheidias and the fifthcentury A ttic school, and (iii) the fourth-century sculptors Praxiteles and Lysippus. Thus the chronological argument was difficult to sustain. Quintilian also employs a variety of aesthetic criteria (cf. Austin, though the detailed attribu­ tions of types of criticism in his notes should be regarded cau­ tiously). C., by contrast, employs a single criterion which exactly fits his purpose. He omits Pheidias (cf. de or. iii. 26) because in connexion with increased flexibility of modelling, he is less relevant than the bronze-casters to whom C, confines himself. Besides, Pheidias was not the sculptor par excellence in ancient times; a t most he ranked first in statues of gods or as a worker in ivory (cf. 257. 22, Quintii, xii. 10. 9).

§ 70.

ancient writers confuse two sculptors of this name; the earlier, referred to here, from Sicyon, fl. c. 490, was best known for a bronze statue of Apollo a t Didyma (near Miletus) (cf. Overbeck Die antiken Schriftquellen zur Geschichte der bildenden Künste bei den Griechen (Leipzig 1868) pp. 76-77). im ite n tu r v e r ita te m : ancient art-theory was not scornful

2 0 . C a n a c h i:

6o

COM M ENTARY

of ' representationalism ’, except for such special reasons as Plato’s. B ut imitari = μιμεΐσθαι, and can mean more than ‘im itate’, and veritas was not mere photographic likeness. Since the true nature of anything was thought to be revealed in its perfected form, pulchritudo was essential for veritas and idealization of the subject was encouraged (Arist .poet. I454b: (painters) όμοιους ποιοΰντες καλλίους γράφουσιν) ; excessive realism resulting in ugliness was criticized, cf, Quintii, xii. i o. 9 ‘ De­ metrius tamquam nimius in ea (sc. veritate) reprenditur et fuit similitudinis quam pulchritudinis am antior’, Plin. n.h. xxxv. 153. For the view th a t these ideas as well as the interest in chronological development were Peripatetic, and revived in Rome in C.’s time, cf. A. Oltramare R É L xix (1941) 94. Fur­ ther, a rt criticism from the fourth century was much concerned with the expression of ηθη and πάθη , not mere physical likeness, with ideal proportions (συμμετρία ), and with the implications of the familiar artistic genre of the representation of gods. 21. Calamidis: fl. c. 460 (Overbeck pp. 95—98), later best known for his sculptures of horses (Plin. n.h. xxxiv. 71, Prop. iii. 9. 10) and his ‘Sosandra’ (Lucian im. 6). dura: cf. Hor. serm. ii. 3. 20-22 ‘olim nam quaerere amabam / . . . quid scalptum infabre, quid fusum durius esset ’. molliora : cf. Virg. Aen. vi. 847: ‘excudent alii spirantia mollius aera’. 22. Myronis: of Eleutherae (NW. Attica), another sculptor of the mid-fifth century. Copies of his Discobolus survive. Pliny n.h. xxxiv. 58 seems to conceal beneath some puzzling renderings of Greek terminology a tribute to Myron’s intro­ duction of variety of posture, etc. : ‘primus hic multiplicasse veritatem videtur, numerosior in arte quam Polyclitus et in symmetria diligentior’. 24. Polycliti : of Argos or Sicyon. Best known for his Diadumenos and Doryphorus (296.11), he, like Myron, was a bronzecaster whose work survives in marble copies. perfecta : cf. 26. 24 n. 25. Zeuxim : fl. towards the end of the fifth century. He was chiefly remarkable for technical advances towards greater verisimilitude. Famous works were the Helen and the Family of Centaurs. Polygnotum : fl. earlier than Zeuxis, perhaps 470—440. Theophrastus (ap. Plin. n.h. vii. 205) regarded him as the ‘inventor’ of painting, i.e, the first great painter. B ut K r.’s strictures on C. for not naming all the im portant painters, in

§ 7 0 . 2 0 -§ 7 1 . 5

6ι

the precise chronological order which modern scholars (not w ithout difficulty) have determined, are uncalled-for. 26. Timanthem : late fifth century, especially famous in popu­ lar tradition for his representation of Agamemnon at the sacrifice of Iphigenia with his head concealed in his cloak, ‘ quoniam summum illum luctum penicillo non posset imitari ’ {or. 74, cf. Quintii, ii. 13. 13, Plin. n.h. xxxv. 73). eorum : C. does not necessarily mean th a t this group in­ cludes the painters just named, though he is often assumed to do so. 27. quattuor coloribus : white, black, red, yellow (Plin. n.h. xxxv. 50, cf. or. 169), see Austin on Quintii, xii. 10. 3. As in Quintii, l.c. the criticism of painting is more technical than th a t of sculpture, probably because of the interest taken in the problems of achieving the illusion of solidity in a twodimensional medium. formas et liniamenta : ‘contours and outlines’, since shad­ ing and perspective were lacking in these artists. 28. Aetione . . . : a group of late-fourth-century painters. Aetion (Overbeck pp. 363-4) was best known for his ‘Mar­ riage of Alexander and Roxane', Nicomachus (Overbeck pp. 334-5) for his technical skill as a ‘lightning artist ’. Proto­ genes and Apelles were traditionally great rivals for primacy in their profession. On Protogenes’ ‘Ialysus’ cf. or. 5. Per­ haps the most famous of Apelles’ many recorded paintings was his ‘Venus Anadyomene’. §

7 1

. 30. inventum . . . perfectum : 26. 24 η.

3· Phaeacum : Od. viii. 43 ff. (the minstrel Demodocus). procorum : Od. i. 154, xvii. 263, xxii. 330 (Phemius). 5. quos olim . . . : this quotation from Ennius’ A nnales (Vahlen 214) was preceded by the words ‘scripsere alii rem / vorsibus ’ quoted at 76. 12 (cf. or. 171, div. i. 114) and refers to Naevius’ handling of the First Punic W ar in his Bellum Punicum. Fauni vatesque is disparaging. Fauni were old Italian divini­ ties associated with prophesyings in the native Saturnian metre (Varro l.l. vii. 36, cf. Geil. v. 21. 7 for the use to describe the primitive and old-fashioned); vates, the native word for ‘p o et’ (contrasted with the Gk. Musarum), was later revived with an honourable connotation by the Augus­ tan poets.

COM M ENTARY 6. scopulos : Parnassus or Helicon. The rest of the line, omitted by C. as often in citations of well-known tags, is not otherwise preserved. 7. doctis dictis : all recent editors keep L ’s dicti. O. Skutsch CQ xlii (1948) 94-96 on grounds of sense and scansion a ttri­ butes quisquam erat and some other words to C., punctuating as follows: “ ‘quos ohm F au n i” vatesque canebant, cum "nequeM usarum scopulos . . . nec dicti studiosus” quisquam erat “ ante hunc” ait ipse de se.’ ante hunc : 'before m e’. On this use of Mc (Gk. 58 e) cf. Nisbet on dom. 5. 9. Odyssia : Livius Andronicus’ translation into Latin Saturnians (frr. in Morel pp. 7 ff.). sic tamquam : an unusual collocation, especially where tamquam has no verb, but cf. de or. ii. 180. 10. Daedali : the mythical figure credited with numerous in­ ventions in the working of wood and metal, and especially in architecture and sculpture, and regarded as the actual creator of many archaic works of art which survived in classical times (OCD art. Daedalus) : here the type of the primitive artist. § 7 2 . i i . C. Claudio . . . : 240 b . c . 12. docuit : cf. Gk. δώάσκειν. Att. vi. i. 18 is the earliest occur­ rence of the expression, which was never much used. 13. post Romam conditam : cf. Solinus i. 22 ‘Romam placuit conditam Pomponio et M. Tullio Olympiadis sextae anno te rtio ’ i.e. 754-3. Münzer, Hermes xl (1905) 60, suggests th a t Atticus invented this system of reckoning from the founda­ tion of the city, but the accepted calculation was Varro’s. In rep. ii. 18 C. follows Polybius’ date of 751/50, a fact which may reflect only C.’s careful avoidance of anachronism: Varro’s work was not known to members of the Scipionic circle. 14. hic : Atticus, probably depending on Varro, who had already written on such topics (60. 4) and whose de poetis Gell. xvii. 21, 42 ff. cites for this ‘early’ chronology. 16. Accius : tragic poet and author of Didascalica, a work in verse on the history of the Roman stage (Schanz pp. 131 ff.). Born 170, he lived long enough to discuss oratory with C. (107. 16), hence the modem conjecture th a t he lived till c. 85 B .C .

§ 7 1 . 6-§

72

.

16

63

The passage is usually interpreted thus: C. crushingly refutes Accius, who made two blunders about Livius Androni­ cus by stating (i) th a t he was captured at Tarentum in 209 B.c. (Q. Fabio quintum consule) a generation after he had in fact produced a play at Rome, according to superior evidence (antiqui commentarii), (ii) th a t he produced his first play in 197, a date which makes him contemporary with Ennius, and so junior to Naevius and Plautus, who had already produced plays before th a t date. Certain difficulties, however, need further discussion. (i) W hy does C. introduce the roundabout and inconclusive argument about the age of individual writers? He has al­ ready refuted Accius from the commentarii. The appearance of Ennius in fact suggests th a t there was little safe ground except Ennius’ own statem ent th a t he came after Naevius (cf. §§ 71, 76). The assumed contemporaneity of Naevius and Plautus has already been used to support a dubious argument (§61). (On the limitations of the evidence available to C. and his contemporaries cf. H. Drexler Plautinische Akzentstudien (Breslau 1933) ii. 366.) Further, why does C. ignore the apparent further blunders in Accius' account of the produc­ tion of 197 (v. inf.) ? (ii) We do not know how much ground C. shared with Accius (cf. Drexler l.c.), th a t is, how far Accius is being refuted from premisses th a t he would have accepted, e.g. on the date of Naevius and Plautus, the date of Ennius’ birth, even the priority of Andronicus over all others. Modern scholars have observed traces, slight but persistent through antiquity, of a self-consistent ‘Accian’ chronology differing from Y arro’s in giving later dates for the birth of Roman literature and many early writers (Hendrickson A J P h xix (1898) 285 ff., Leo Hermes xxxix (1904) 63 ff., Weinreich Hermes li (1916) 306 ff.). Accius thus may have been wrong about Livius in terms of Varro’s chronology bu t not neces­ sarily of his own, and it remains an unsolved puzzle th a t he blundered, as presumably he did, about events th a t on his own view almost overlapped with his own lifetime (cf. H. B. M attingly CQ N.s. vii (1957) 159 #·)· (iii) C.’s first objection looks clear and well documented, though, as the doubts of Drexler and Mattingly reveal, of the date and character of the commentarii we know nothing (cf. 60. 3, Intr. 39). B ut modem assumptions th a t Accius’ cir­ cumstantial error arose from a confusion of the events of 209 with the capture of Tarentum in 272 and a supposed transfer

64

COM M ENTARY

of Andronicus to Rome at th a t time should be viewed scepti­ cally (W. Beare CQ xxxiv (1940) 12 ff., who follows Niese, Hermes xxxi (1896) 504-5, in scepticism about the capture of Tarentum in 272 also). Further, even if captum Tarento (OU vulg.) seems an improvement on capto T. of other MSS., one should not build elaborate structures on a doubtful text. Possibly capto is right and a further acc. inf. clause has been lost, which described Livius’ activities in 209, presumably as some sort of pioneer. Nor is th a t all: annis post xi (below) needs consideration. Apart from Martha, who sees here the same, exclusive reckoning as he postulates a t 60. 28, com­ mentators ignore the fact th a t this figure cannot refer to the interval 209-197, nor, without unforgivable ambiguity in C.’s Latin, to the period from the proelium Senense (Metaurus) (207) to 197. Therefore, either (i) xi should be emended, or (ii) Accius has blundered, or C. has incorrectly reproduced him, or (iii) the lacuna which I have suggested before these words also included a reference to one of Livius’ best-known works, the hymn to Juno sung in 207 (Livy xxvii. 37. 7). All these uncertainties are not diminished by Livy’s a ttri­ bution of the games in fulfilment of Salinator’s vow to 191 (xxxvi. 36. 5), together with the statement, on which he makes no comment, th a t Valerius Antias placed the first ludi scaenici in th a t year—at the festival of the Magna Mater—he himself having already dated the first performance to 194 (xxxiv. 54-3)· §

7 3

. 20. Iuventatis : an old Roman cult, increasingly assimi­ lated from c. 220 B.c. to the Greek cult of Hebe (Roscher s.v. Iuventas). 21. Salinator : M. Livius Salinator defeated Hasdrubal on the river Metaurus, near the town of Sena in Umbria (207 b . c . ) . 24. dedit : a commoner and earlier expression than docuit (72. 12 n.), cf. Ter. hec. 1, haut. 33, eun. 23. 25. Plautus et Naevius : the date of Plautus’ first play is un­ known. In Gell. xvii. 21. 47 he appears as a contemporary of Cato, while Naevius’ first production (ibid. 45) is explicitly dated to 235 b . c . §

7 4

. 26. adsigna : always of imputing blame, not credit, until the Augustan period. i. notatione: lit. ‘putting a distinguishing m ark o n ’, cf. 65. 18 n., Nep. Att. 18. 2 (of the liber annalis) ‘nulla . . . res

§ 7 2 . 1 6 -§

77

.

17

65

inlustris est populi Romani quae non in eo suo tempore sit n o ta ta ’. Commentators, as often, make heavy weather of quasi ; the expression, as indeed the whole topic of chronology (Intr. 4), was novel. 2. genera . . . aetatibus : repeats the idea of § 20 {de oratoribus . . . fuissent). §

. 4. carmina : Tuse. i. 3, iv. 4, Varro ap. Non. s.v. assa voce ‘in conviviis pueri modesti ut cantarent carmina antiqua, in quibus laudes erant maiorum et assa voce (‘unaccom­ panied’) et cum tibicine’. On Niebuhr’s theory th a t these songs were the source of the familiar legends of early Rome cf. Momigliano J R S xlvii (1957) i o 4 S· 7. Tamen illius : nam illius. Kr. but most editors keep tamen. C. leaves out one-half of the contrast: ‘ (those old songs must have been very crude), but Naevius’ poem, like Myron’s sculpture, marks a half-way stage to perfection and so affords some pleasure ’, or perhaps ‘ (well, the old songs aren’t extant) but a t all events Naevius’ poem . . .’. 7 5

§ 7 6 . i i . reliquisset : ‘left (virtually) untouched’. 15. sumpsisti . . . surripuisti : an im portant distinction in ancient views of literary borrowing, cf. Sen. suas. iii. 7 ‘fecisse illum (sc. Ovidium) quod in multis aliis versibus Vergili fecerat, non surripiendi causa sed palam mutuandi, hoc animo u t vellet agnosci’. On rhythmical grounds, C. must have pronounced the last word sürpüîstï, not sürripüisti (cf. agr. ii. 46). For the shortened form metri gratia in poets, cf. Lucr. ii. 314, Hor. carm. iv. 13. 20. § § 7 7 - 9 4 . 27. We come now to older and younger contemporaries of Cato, notably Scipio Aemilianus, Laelius, and Galba.

§ § 7 7 -8 1 , with their references to literature, law, history, and education, and to Greek studies and works in Greek by Roman writers, implicitly reveal the scale and suddenness of the intellectual awakening of the Roman governing classes in the early second century b . c . under the impact of Greece. § 77. 17. C. Flaminius . . . : on Flaminius, Fabius Maximus, and Q. Metellus cf. on §57. C. Varro (cos. 216) was held F 814437

COM M ENTARY responsible for the disaster of Cannae: on this hostile tradi­ tion cf. Scullard pp. 51-52. 18. P. Lentulus : the cos. 236 hardly belongs here, so this must be the praetor of 203 (RE Cornelius no. 214), one of the ten legati sent to Macedon in 196 (Livy xxxiii. 35. 2, 39. 2). He was possibly the object of Cato’s attack in the speech apud censores in Lentulum (Gell. v. 13. 4, O RF pp. 80—81). P. Crassus : pont. max. 212, cens. 210, pr. 208, cos. 205 ; R E Licinius no. 69. Cf. Livy xxx. 1. 5 'congestis omnibus humanis ab natura fortunaque bonis nobilis idem ac dives erat, forma viribusque corporis excellebat, facundissimus habebatur seu causa oranda seu in senatu et ad populum suadendi ac dissuadendi locus esset, iuris pontificii peritissimus; super haec bellicae quoque laudis consulatus com­ potem fecerat’, cf. de or. iii. 134. 19. superiore Africano : O RF pp. 6 ff. Africanus when used by C. without qualification almost always means Aemilianus, bu t cf. Pis. 14, de or. i. 210. 20. accepimus : C. expressly states th a t Scipio left no written works (off. iii. 4). Gell. iv. 18. 2 quotes as genuine a few words said to have been uttered by Scipio when accused of various misdemeanours at the end of his life (cf. Appendix A, 1). Livy xxxviii. 51 gives his own elaboration of these remarks. Both he and Gell, speak of a full extant oratio but doubt its genuineness (cf. Schanz p. 212, Scullard pp. 290 ff.). infantem : in the literal sense ‘incapable of utterance ’, cf. 90. 28, 101. 4, 108. 2, or. 56, Reid on fin. i. 52. Filius : O RF p. ιο ί, R E Cornelius no. 331. On this sickly son of the elder Africanus cf. sen. 35, off. i. 121, Veil. i. 10. 3 ‘nihil ex paterna maiestate praeter speciem nominis vigo­ remque eloquentiae retinenti’. 21. hunc : ‘nearer in tim e’, cf. off. i. 121 ‘hunc Paullo n a tu m ’. Scipio Aemilianus was the son of Aemilius Paulus (80. 14). 23. oratiunculae : no trace has survived of them nor of his history, cf. Peter H R R i. cxviii. Graeca : in Greek. Gelzer, Hermes lxviii (1933) 129, argues th a t Greek was used because the works were propaganda for Rome directed at a Greek-speaking public (cf. Leo Röm. Lit. i. 39/ 85)/ but this view is less acceptable than the conven­ tional one, th a t at this date Greek provided a more flexible and developed medium than Latin, particularly for histoiy, which was one of the last forms to be naturalized at Rome (so Peter H R R i. lxxv, Bardon i. 31).

§7 7 . §

17

-§

7 9

.

3

67

. 24. Sex. Aelius : Paetus, nicknamed Catus, ‘subtle’, cos. 198, cens. 184, R E Aelius no. 105. On his distinction as a jurist, de or. i. 198, 212, Tusc. i. 18, rep. i. 30, dig. i. 2. 2. 38 (Pomponius) ‘ exstat illius liber qui inscribitur tripertita, qui liber velut incunabula iuris continet’. Ius civile was strictly, as used by Republican lawyers, a term equivalent to ius inter cives, ius privatum as distinct from ius publicum, cf. 214. 18 n., Schulz p. 72. Under the influence of Greek philosophical ideas and as a natural conse­ quence of the expansion of Roman power, it came to mean the law of Rome as contrasted with ius commune, ius gentium (Jolowicz p. 93). T hat is, it could be regarded as th a t sub­ division of ius privatum (relations between individuals) which dealt with Roman citizens only, cf. dig. i. 1. 1. 2 ‘privatum ius tripertitum est: collectum etenim est ex naturalibus prae­ ceptis aut gentium aut civilibus’. 26. De minoribus : on de cf. 55. 14 n. minoribus is contrasted with grandiores natu above. C. Sulpicius Gallus : or Galus, cf. R E Sulpicius 65 ff. and 66, O R F p. 102, cos. 166. 27. oratorum : emphatic; contrast the preceding non infantem, disertus, ad dicendum paratus, iam enim . . . below explains the development. 28. reliquis rebus . . . : ‘a man of distinction and taste in other fields’, esp. astronomy. Galus’ scientific explanation of a lunar eclipse for the benefit of a panic-stricken Roman army in Macedon (168 b . c . ) is described in rep. i. 23, cf. Plin. n.h. ii. 53 who states th a t Galus wrote on the subject. No other speech is known. 29. unctior : smoother and richer. The word is not elsewhere found in literary contexts, hence apologetic quaedam. 3 0 . Nam . . . : i.e. for Ennius (who did so much to develop the resources of Latin) died in Galus’ praetorship, 169 b . c . On Ennius in this regard, cf. Hor. a.p. 55 ff. 1. Thyesten: a play often quoted esp. by C., cf. Klotz pp. 90-94, 2. obiit : the date of death may simply have been deduced from the date of the last play, as Münzer suggested, but there may have been other evidence. For Varro’s presumed refutation of a similar argument about Naevius, cf. 60. 6 n. 7 8

§ 7 9 .3 . Ti. Gracchus : O RF p. 98, R E Sempronius no. 53, cos.

68

COM M ENTARY

177 and 163, cens. 169, father of the tribunes Tiberius and Gaius. 4. est : ‘is e x ta n t’. There is no evidence to confirm or refute Miinzer’s conjecture th a t C. found the speech preserved in some Greek writer like Posidonius. apud Rhodios : probably during a visit to Asia Minor in 165 (Polyb. X X X . 27, 31. 19, M R R i. 438). 5. eloquentem : like oratorum above, emphatic. B ut in de or. i. 38 Scaevola, rebutting Crassus’ claims for eloquence as the prerequisite of civilized life (cf. on § 45) and also as pervading private as well as public life, describes this Ti. Gracchus as ‘homo prudens et gravis haudquaquam eloquens’, who yet saved the State ‘non accurata quadam orationis copia sed nutu et verbo ’, while his sons used their great eloquence to wreck the constitution. Livy knew of a speech said to have been delivered by Gracchus during the controversies affecting Scipio (77. 20 n.) but doubted its genuineness (Schanz p. 212). P . . . Scipionem : cos. 162, 155, cens. 159, cf. §213. 6. Corculum: ‘brainy’, cf. Tusc. i. 18 ‘Nasica ille prudens bis consul Corculum et “ egregie cordatus homo catus Aeliu’ Sextus’” , Phil. iii. 16 ‘nihil illo contemptius, qui propter haesitantiam linguae stuporemque cordis cognomen ex contu­ melia tra x it’, TLL iv. 935. 79. 8. illius qui sacra . . . : the rites of the Magna Mater were intro­ duced into Rome in 204 b . c . , and the delicate task of receiv­ ing the goddess was entrusted to the ‘best man ’ in Rome, the young P. Scipio Nasica (Livy xxix. 14). L. Lentulum : O RF p. 103, R E Cornelius no. 224, cos. 156. Nothing is known of speeches. 9. Q. (Fulvium) Nobiliorem : cos. 153, defended Galba on the Lusitanian issue (§89) (Livy per. 49). 10. iam . . . : the hellenized literary education was now becom­ ing fashionable. 11. patre : M. Fulvius Nobilior, cos. 189, was one of the dis­ tinguished patrons of Ennius, who dealt with the Aetolian W ar in Book xv of the Annales, and also perhaps in the play Ambracia. He dedicated a temple to the Muses a t Rome [Arch. 27), set up the Fasti therein, and wrote a commentary on them (Macrob. sat. i. 12. 16). Cato criticized Nobilior because is in provinciam poetas duxisset (Tusc. i. 3), and for other things (Gell. v. 6. 24).

§7 9 . 3 -§ 8 1 .2 3

69

militaverat : not necessarily in actual fighting (Vahlen p. xiv). 12. civitate: Ennius came from Rudiae in Calabria. For such individual conferments cf. Daremberg-Saglio civitas II, and on the type of enfranchisement here in question, i.e. enrol­ m ent of a peregrinus as a citizen in a Roman colony, Taylor V D R R p . 19. coloniam : in 184, Q. Nobilior was one of a commission of three which established colonies at Potentia in Picenum and Pisaurum in Cisalpine Gaul (Livy xxxix. 44. 10). The long gap between this assignment and the consulship in 153 has led some to assume th a t two different men are involved. But as his father had just triumphed over the Aetolians, and another Fulvius (Flaccus) was one of the triumvirs, Q. Nobi­ lior may have been selected as quite a young man thanks to the prestige of his family a t the time. 13. T. Annium Luscum : O RF p. 106, R E Annius no. 64, cos. 153. C. does not appear to know his speech against Gracchus, of which Festus p. 411 L preserves a few words, cf. Livy per. 58, Plut. Ti. Gr. 14. 5 εν λόγοις προς τά ς ερω τήσεις και αποκρίσεις άμαχος είναι δοκών, i.e. he was effective in altercationes (cf. 158. 8 n.). On his probable identification with the envoy sent to Perseus in 173 (Livy xlii. 25, R E no. 63) cf. Badian J R S xlvi (1956) 220. §

. 14. L. Paullus : O RF pp. 100 ff., R E Aemilius no. 114, Schanz p. 212, cos. 182 and 168, conqueror of Perseus of Macedon. For a fragment of a speech cf. Appendix A, 8. 15. personam . . . tuebatur : ‘easily sustained the role of a lead­ ing citizen with his oratory’, personam tueri, cf. 165. 8. 16. etiam tum : Cato’s longevity compels C. to divide his younger contemporaries into two groups. 17. excessit : 149 B.c. Livy xxxix. 40. 12 and Plut. Cat. ma. 15.5 make Cato 90 when he died, but th a t is merely an exaggerated round figure. Plut. ib. 1. 6, Cic. sen. 50 agree with C.’s reckoning here, making Cato’s date of birth 234. Galbam : cf. § 89. §

8 0

8 1 . 20. A. Albinus : P F Postumius no. 31, cos. 151. On his history cf. Peter H R R i. cxxiv ff., 53-54, Bardon i. 72. 23. Ser. Fulvius : usually identified with the cos. of 135 (RE Fulvius no. 64), who seems premature at this point of Brutus,

7°

C O M M EN TA R Y

and since C. identifies by their consulships the lesser figures in these sections, it is possible th a t we are dealing with another man. Or the cos. 135 may have made slow progress: he is conjecturally identified with one of Q. Fulvius’ two sons who were fighting in Illyricum in 171 (RE l.c., Livy xlii. 28. 10). una Ser. : Numerius Martha, Rs. cf. div. i. 43 where, how­ ever, Peter H R R i. lxxvii follows Hertz in reading nostri for Numeri and thus abolishing the annalist Num. Fabius Pictor. The praenomen Ser. would be unique in our records of the Fabii, but Münzer, R E Fabius no. 128, does not regard this objection as insuperable. Several passages from C. onwards attest the existence of a history in Latin by a Fabius Pictor. B ut scholars greatly disagree as to whether this was (i) a Latin work by Q. Fabius Pictor, who certainly wrote a history in Greek and lived at the time of the second Punic War, (ii) a translation of his work by another hand, possibly the writer referred to here, (iii) an independent work by a later Fabius Pictor, possibly the writer referred to here, cf. Schanz pp. 171 if. Peter H R R i. lxxvii, clxxiv, 112-13; A. Momigliano R A L xv (i960) 310, F. Branchini Athenaeum xxxix (1961) 358. iuris : a Fabius Pictor (praenomen not stated) who wrote on ius pontificium is mentioned in Geli. i. 12. 14, and identified with an historian of th a t name by Nonius p. 518. 25. Labeo : the cos. 183, friend of Terence (Suet. Ter. 4), is too early, esp. as C. is taking particular pains over chronology. M artha suggests a son or grandson otherwise unknown. We should thus have two non-consulars following a consular group, a procedure which becomes very common from this point on. Yet another Fabius (by adoption), Q. Fabius Maximus Servilianus (cos. 142), is mentioned in late antiquity (Macrob. sat. i. 16. 25, Schol. Veron. Virg. georg. 3. 7) as writing on history and law (cf. Dion. Hal. ant. Rom. i. 7). Q. Metellus : Macedonicus, Schanz p. 216, O RF pp. 106-7, R E Caecilius no. 94, cos. 143. 26. quattuor filii : Q. Metellus Baliaricus (cos. 123), L. Metellus Diadematicus (117), M. Metellus (115), C. Metellus Caprarius (113), cf. Val. Max. vii. 1. 1 (fortuna) fecit ut eodem tempore tres filios consulares, unum etiam censorium et triumphalem, quartum praetorium viderit’. 27. pro L. Cotta : cos. 144, accused, presumably on a charge of extortion (div. Caec. 69), by Scipio when he ‘bis consul

§ 8 1 . 2 3 -§

8 2

.

1

71

fuerat et . . . Carthaginem Numantiamque deleverat’ (Mur. 58), so between 132 and Scipio’s death in 129. Cotta was acquitted, according to C., because the jury refused to be overawed by Scipio’s overwhelming prestige, b u t according to Appian b.c. i. 23. 2, through bribing the jury. On the repeated adjournments of the case cf. Val. Max. viii. 1. 11. 28. aliae : apart from the speeches for Cotta and against Gracchus, we know only of the de prole augenda, which Augustus caused to be read to the senate in connexion with his legislation to encourage marriage (Livy per. 59, Geli. i. 6, Appendix A, 9, 10). Gellius’ attribution to Numidicus is an error (A. Berger, A JP h lxvii (1946) 323 ff.). contra Ti. Gracchum : on Gracchus ’ proposal to distribute to the recipients of his land-allotments the money bequeathed to Rome by Attalus of Pergamum (Plut. Ti. Gr. 14, Greenidge and Clay pp. 7, 11). exposita : ‘ r e p r o d u c e d ’, cf. or. 23, rep. i . 13, p e r h a p s w i t h a S u g g e s t i o n of a b r i d g e m e n t cf. 164. 29, de or. i . 227. 29. C. Fanni : cf. on §§ 99, ιο ί. §

. 29. veterator: ‘ an old hand ’, usually with the implica­ tion ‘an old rogue’, cf. 178. 26, 238. 7, 261. 12, off. iii. 57, 113. 30. C. Laelius : cos. 140, close friend of Aemilianus, and the chief speaker in De Amicitia, hence its alternative title Laelius. Allusions to his oratory often include comparisons with Scipio or Galba (de or. i. 58, 255, iii. 28). P . Africanus : Scipio Aemilianus, cos. 147 and 134. Various members of the ' Scipionic Circle ’ are mentioned in the follow­ ing sections. eloquentes : in emphatic contrast to veterator. i. exstant: Schanz p. 214, O RF pp. 115-234. We have frr. of 3, and allusions to another 3 speeches of Laelius; of Scipio, 9 speeches are known, there are frr. of 7 of these, and a few unassignable frr. as well as some dicta, on which cf. A. E. Astin CQ n . s . x (i960) 135 ff. Those th a t do more than illustrate detailed peculiarities of diction reveal a direct vivid style, and show th a t the Roman gift for vituperation was early developed (see Appendix A, 11-14). de ingeniis : throughout the assessments th a t follow, the qualifications in § 295 m ust be remembered. In Tac. dial. 25. 7 Messalla, defending the ‘ ancients’, concedes his opponent’s point as regards this period: ‘quod ad Ser. Galbam et C. 8 2

72

COM M ENTARY

Laelium attinet, et si quos alios antiquiorum agitare non destitit (Aper), non exigit defensorem, cum fatear quaedam eloquentiae eorum u t nascenti adhuc nec satis adultae defuisse’. Aper had called them (i8. i) ‘horridi et impoliti et rudes et informes’. Quintii, xii. io. 39 echoes C.’s praise of some of these orators as ‘genuinely A ttic’, bu t ib. 10 speaks of ‘Laelii Africani Catones etiam Gracchique quos tu licet Polygnotos vel Callonas appelles ' (cf. on § 70). He begins his survey of Roman oratory in x. 1. 105, where he is concerned with useful models for oratory, with C. and his contempora­ ries. The archaizers of the second century a . d . showed renewed interest in these early orators, bu t mainly as sources of linguistic oddities, as they were for subsequent generations of grammarians and commentators. 3. Ser. Galba : Schanz pp. 215 ff., O RF pp. 109 ff., R E Sulpi­ cius no. 58, cos. 144. Five speeches are referred to, four relating to cases mentioned in Brutus, but there are no frr. For praise of his oratory cf. de or. i. 40, 58, bu t there C.’s imaginative regard for the dramatic date of the dialogue (91 B.c.) m ust be remembered. 4. nimirum . . . uteretur : ' in fact, he was the first Roman who discharged the peculiar and proper duties of the orator, in the use of digression from his subject as an embellishment, in charming his hearers or arousing their emotions, in magnify­ ing his theme, and in making use of pathetic appeals and commonplaces ’. princeps : cf. Fuse. i. 5 : ‘ a t contra oratorem celeriter com­ plexi sumus; nec eum primo eruditum aptum tam en ad dicendum; post autem eruditum, nam Galbam, Africanum, Laelium doctos fuisse traditum est; studiosum autem eum qui iis aetate anteibat Catonem: post vero Lepidum Carbo­ nem Gracchos ’. 5. quasi legitima: ‘required by law ’, not ‘legitim ate’, i.e. permitted by law. All these opera (Intr. 21, 28) relate to the emotional side of oratory, even digressio, cf. de or. ii. 312 ‘saepe datur ad commovendos animos digrediendi locus’. egrederetur : Quintii, iv. 3. 12 ‘hanc partem -παρέκβασήν vocant Graeci, Latini egressum vel egressionem’. B ut in C. digredi, digressio are commoner, cf. 292. 19. 9. exiliores : ‘ thinner and more archaic in flavour ’. i i . exaruerunt: 'have so withered away ’ (compared with their freshness when delivered) ‘ th a t they are scarcely visible any

§ 82. l-§ 84. 23

73

longer’ (i.e. not as most comm, say, ‘they are neglected’, but rather ‘ (even to the reader) they seem like withered flowers ’). vix iam u t . . . : this word-order is idiomatic, cf. 173. 17, K.-S. ii. 614 ff. §

8 3

. 14. de collegiis : Laelius’ masterpiece, cf. nat. d. iii. 5 ‘oratio nobilis’, ib. 43 ‘aureola oratiuncula’, in which he resisted a proposal to make appointment to the priestly colleges subject to popular vote (145 b .c.) (amic. 96). A pro­ posal to this effect was carried in 104 by Cn. Domitius (165. 6 n.), repealed by Sulla, and re-enacted by Labienus in 63. 15. de multis . . . : ‘any one you like from a large number of Scipio’s ’. quam voles : = quaevis. Inflexion of the verbal part of adverbial quamvis is common (cf. Verr. ii. 2. 102, Cael. 63, har. resp. 19, Woodcock p. 202, K.—S. i. 649), and in certain passages inflexion of pronominal quivis may be suspected, e.g. Verr. ii. 4. 28 ‘ cui velles tuam causam probare’. B ut here alone is the relative (quam) governed not by the infinitive of the main verb understood with velle (‘cui probare velles ’) but by p a rt of velle itself, so th a t the whole phrase acts as a pro­ noun of a different case, the nominative. ilia : Lebreton p. 93 claims many examples in C. of the weakening of ille, etc., to mere equivalents of celui, to avoid repetition of a noun. Yet read in their contexts, nearly all his examples, like the present one, have some more or less clear demonstrative reference. 17. augustius : cf. 295. 31 n. 18. voluntates: ‘preferences’ in style, cf. or. 52, de or. ii. 92, 94. delectari.. . libenter : Laelius was archaic by the standards of his own day, and from conscious preference. Archaism in moderation was a recognized source of ornatus (de or. iii. 152 ff., cf. or. 80). §

8 4

. 2 1. nolint . . . : quoted by Politian (epp. ix. 2) in refer­ ence to the detractors of Pico della Mirandola. ex : 'in respect o f’, cf. ab, 63. 3. 2 2 . aspirare : ‘hope to rival’, lit. ‘breathe upon’, so ‘come n e a r’ in various senses, cf. Nisbet on Pis. 11. 2 3 . Viriathi : the rebel leader of the Lusitani, who greatly troubled the Romans until his treacherous murder in 140 (OCD art. Viriathus). Laelius fought against him as praetor

74

C O M M E N T A R Y

(145) but here as elsewhere, e.g. off. ii. 40, C. exaggerates his prowess. 24. primas : sometimes the first prize (πρωτεία) cf. 183. 11, or. 18, 29, sometimes the leading role (cf. πρωταγωνιστής) as a t 327. 14, probably de or. ii. 147, iii. 213, cf. secundarum 242. 15 n. 27. tributum fuisse : cf. 46. 29 n. : this m utual arrangement precedes the iudicium ceterorum, who include even C.'s con­ temporaries. So, below, commentatum fuisse (87. 26) ‘had gone on practising u n til’. §

. 29. suum . . . tribuendo : hardly more than a pretext for the following anecdote, for C. has just implied th a t Scipio was as good an orator as Laelius, and th a t only the mos hominum aided ipsorum concessu led to the judgement th a t Laelius was the better, and in the following sections he com­ pletely abandons this topic in favour of a comparison of Laelius and Galba. Smyrnae . . . P. Rutilio Rufo : Rutilius (cf. on §§ n o , 113 ff.), condemned in the extortion court (92 b .c.), spent his exile among his alleged victims in the province of Asia. 3 0 . audivisse cum diceret : the subjunctive is not uncommon in such phrases even in oratio recta and present time (Nisbet on dom. 93). Hendrickson sees here an example of a convention whereby dialogue reports as conversation information derived from written sources, cf. Intr. 38 (c), and on 107. 16. 1. P. Scipio : 138 b .c. 2. ut opinor : 58. 7 n. Nam . . . : ‘ Some well-known men had been done to death in the forest of Sila. The slaves, and some of the free men, associated with the company which had hired the contract for the pitch-workings from the censors P. Cornelius Scipio and L. Mummius, were alleged to be responsible. The senate resolved th a t the consuls should investigate and determine the m atter.’ 3. silva Sila : this forest in Bruttium, restored by Turnebus from the chaos of the MSS., is known from Dion. Hal. fr. Ambr. 20. 1 as a source of timber and from Strabo vi. 1. 9 as supplying pitch. 4. fam ilia: as a legal term, used esp. of 'corpus quoddam servorum . . . paratum . . . vectigalis causa’ (dig. xvi. 195. 3). 8 5

§ 8 4 . 2 3 -§

87

. 20

75

societatis : the company of publicani, so socii 88. 8. 5. P. Cornelio : Aemilianus, censor with Mummius 142 b . c . 6. redemisset : on the contracts covered by the censoria locatio, which are mostly known, apart from the notorious taxcontracts, from casual allusions such as the present, cf. Staatsr. ii. 1. 443. 7. consules : on the consular jurisdiction, cf. ib. 101-4. It was a rarely used survival of the judicial powers originally taken over by the consuls from the king, but long since exercised in the ordinary way by the praetors. § 8 6 . 9. AMPLIVS . . . : ‘had ordered a fresh hearing’. This procedure followed the verdict of non liquet, cf. on comperen­ dinatus, 87. 20, Greenidge p. 498. consili : the consuls sat with a consilium of assessors, R E iv. 919, J. A. Crook Consilium Principis (Cambridge 1955) p . 6.

16. atrocior : cf. de or. ii. 200 ; for asperior cf. de or. iii. 28, for ardentior cf. ib. ii. 190, or. 99, for incitatior (Busche, Rs.) cf. 93. 17. 17. gravius et vehementius : true, no doubt, but 'Laelius' abandonment of the brief with the advice th a t Galba, a less scrupulous advocate, be employed, indicates something rather unsavoury’ (H. Hill The Roman Middle Class (Oxford I 9 5 2) P- 91)· §

. 20. recepisse : normally more specific than accepisse, implying acceptance at the request of another, or with acknowledgement of responsibility, cf. de or. ii. 101, fin. i. 68. quasi comperendinatus : comperendinatus (4th decl.), later comperendinatio, involved a gap nominally of a day (perendie, the day after tomorrow) in the hearing of a case, after which the main arguments were repeated. This procedure, intro­ duced in the extortion courts by a law of Glaucia, led, whether by express legal provision or not, to the disuse of the verdict n o n l i q v e t and the formula a m p l i v s , at least in th a t court. (Our evidence for procedure in the other quaestiones, even in C.’s own day, is meagre.) quasi indicates the anachronism, and also perhaps the use of a legal term appropriate only to the extortion court. See Greenidge pp. 498 ff., J. P. V. D. Balsdon P B S R xiv (1938) 98 ff., esp. 108-13. 8 7

76

COM M ENTARY

23. rogatu : like concessu (84. 27) is found only in d o m u m ad G albam : a commoner formula

the abl. sing, than Galbae

domum, TLL v. i. 1959. 37. 25. d escen d isse : to the forum from the higher residential dis­ tricts, cf. Cael. 2. 2 6 . te stu d in e : ‘a stu d y ’, cf. Varro l.l. v. 161 ‘in hoc (sc. cavo aedium) locus, si nullus relictus erat sub divo qui erat, testudo ab testudinis similitudine' (sc. dictus est), cf. Virg. Aen. i. 505 ‘media testudine tem pli’. 27. servis litter a tis : ‘educated slaves’, who would take down salient ideas of substance, arrangement, etc. There is no question of the whole speech being written in advance, cf. on 91. 7. 2 9 . aed is : the main part of the house, where Rutilius was waiting. i . m a le m u lc a to s : ‘badly knocked a b o u t’, a common colloquial phrase (Hofmann p. 74). Many comm, refuse to take it literally here, but idque . . . putabat suggests an apology by Rutilius for mentioning something discreditable.

§88.

3.

m ed ita n d o : influenced by its resemblance to, though not etymologically connected with, Gk. μελετάν, meditari often means ‘practise’ ‘rehearse’, cf. 139. 29 n., 302. 26, 308. 28. 7. silen tio praeteriretu r : ‘failed to draw applause’.

§

8 9

. 10. d u ae . . . la u d es : Intr. 28.

: b u t Rutilius cannot have approved of the implication th a t this ‘more effective ’ oratory was also ‘b e tte r’. On his disapproval of Galba’s methods described in § 90, cf. de or. i. 227-8.

12. m u lto q u e p lu s

13. e le g a n tia m : cf. 35. 27 n. Here the sense demanded is clearly ‘fastidious restraint’ (cf. de or. iii. 28, contrasting Laelius’ lenitas with Galba’s asperitas), cf. subtiliter disputandi above, almost a t.t. for ‘dialectic’ (31. 25). At 211. 24 Laelius’ elegantia is his pure latinity, cf. Att. vii. 3. 10 ‘Terentium cuius fabellae propter elegantiam sermonis p u ta­ bantur a C. Laelio scribi’. p raetore : 151 b . c . Viriathus’ rebellion.

15.

Galba’s action helped to provoke

§ 8 7 . 2 3 —§ 9 0 . 2 5

77

16. interpositam . . . fidem : the word-order shows th a t the issue was the breach of faith, not the massacre. On this episode cf. Suet. Galba 3, Livy per. 49, Val. Max. viii. 1. 2. 17. L. Libone . . . ferente : de or. i. 227 ‘quaestionem ferente' suggests th a t Libo proposed an ad hoc quaestio, similem suggests th a t the bill, while clearly directed against Galba, did not mention him by name, or it would have without qualification been a privilegium (a bill naming an individual; such bills had been illegal since the Twelve Tables, leg. iii. 44, Gell. X . 20. 1). Hence we may rule out the interpretation of rogationem here as the last stage (the ‘ proposal ’ of a penalty for the named defendant) in a trial before the people (Nisbet on dom. 45). 19. M. Cato : § 80, Mur. 59. 20. Origines : cf. Gell. xiii. 24. 15 ‘itidem Cato ex Originum vii in oratione quam contra Ser. Galbam dixit . . . “multa me dehortata sunt huc prodire: anni, aetas, vox, vires, senectus; verum enimvero cum tantam rem peragier arbitrarer . . 21. diebus an mensibus : C. later asked Atticus whether Libo was tribune in 150 or 149 (Att. xii. 5. 3). an without any verb of doubt or question is uncommon in C., but cf. Madvig on fin. ii. 104, K.-S. ii. 527. §

. 2 1 . nihil recusans: ‘asking no mercy for himself’ as contrasted with the children.

9 0

C. Galli : cf. 78. 26, de or. i. 228 ‘propinqui sui Quintum pupillum filium ’, Val. Max. l.c. The relationship is uncertain. The Galbae and Galli are traceable as separate branches of the Sulpicii from the mid-third century. Fronto gets it wrong (ad M . Caes. iii. 20, p. 56 N). commendabat: i.e. ‘se . . . populum Romanum tutorem instituere dixisset illorum orbitati’ (de or. l.c.). Quintii, vi. i. 30 ff. discusses the use of these dramatic gestures (‘tragoe­ diae’, ib. 36, de or. l.c.) to arouse pity, stressing the disastrous consequences when they go wrong. 2 4 . mire miserabilis : possibly, as Kr. suggests, an echo of Cato, in view of the alliteration and mire, a word otherwise found in C. only in a few passages from the letters, and Verr. ii. 2. 98. 2 5 . memoriam : the date and circumstances of Gallus’ death are unknown. 23.

78

COM M ENTARY

scriptum : Quintii, ii. 15. 8 writes as though Cato’s com­ m ent ‘nisi pueris et lacrimis usus esset, poenas daturum fuisse’ (de or. i. 228) came in his speech, an evident slip. ipsum Libonem : O RF p. 138, R E Scribonius no. 18. Nothing is known of his career or speeches apart from the case against Galba.

27.

§

. 30. inquit . . . Brutus : cf. 204. 17, de or. i. 113. On the complex conventions of word-order with inquit, cf. K.—S. ii. 5 3 4 -5 · 1. ea nulla : cf. Hofmann p. 80 for the colloquial use of nullus for non, Landgraf on Rose. Am . 128. C. rarely uses it outside the letters. 2. quod mirari . . . : the apparent obscurity of the thought, of which comm, offer various elaborate explanations, is due simply to C.’s wish to lead into a little sermon on the value of writing (cf. 92. 9 n.) which has no connexion with the problem about Galba. The remark he assigns to Brutus is the merest truism: the contrast between Galba’s speeches as delivered and as written does not apply to those who never wrote out their speeches for circulation. (For a similar glimpse of the obvious cf. leg. i. 7.) C. then discusses why some orators did not write at all. The obscurity is thus created by C.’s allowing Brutus to know w hat the Cicero of the dialogue intends to say next, a momentary lapse of his dramatic sense. The explanations favoured by other comm, usually involve translating nec enim as if it were neo tamen. 6. domesticus . . . forensem : this contrast is common in con­ texts which show th a t forensis was felt to be connected with the unrelated foris, rather than forum : here it is literally correct. 7. habitae iam . . . : speaking from a prepared full script wTas exceptional (Plane. 74; Att. iv. 3. 3 ,/am . x. 13. 1 refer only to prepared drafts of motions put in the senate, and Plane. l.c. also refers to a speech in the senate (red. sen.)). Quintii, x. 7. 30-32, after referring to writing as a useful preparation for extempore speaking, mentions the use by busy advocates such as C. of written notes of exordia and salient points (cf. 164. 2 n.), and concedes th a t such notes may be held in the hand and referred to, but speeches th a t had been w ritten in full should be memorized. Ancient rhetorical training laid great stress on memoria (Intr. 24, 25). 9 1

§ 9 0 .2 7 - § 9 3 . 15

79

The relation of the written speech after delivery to the speech as delivered is a much more complex problem. Even in ancient times there were disputes as to the proper proce­ dure and as to the actual procedure of earlier orators, cf. Quintii, xii. 10. 49 ff., Pliny epp. i. 20. In modern times, while Laurand Etudes sur le style des discours de Cicéron (Paris 1931) vol. i, ch. i has argued th a t the published versions were not, as has sometimes been urged, almost irrelevant as indications of what was actually said, J. Humbert Les Plaidoyers écrits et les plaidoiries réelles de Cicéron (Paris 1925) showed th a t under the legal procedure of the time, C.’s forensic speeches could not have been delivered in their pub­ lished form, which represents a conflation of arguments used a t different stages of the case. Here, too, it is noteworthy th a t C. says not th a t Galba’s speeches as delivered were more impressive than those same speeches when read, but th at at the time of writing he could not recapture the emotions (and presumably therefore the form of expression of those emo­ tions), which he felt when speaking. B ut he implies th a t the more polished orator would not have the same difficulty. §

9 2 . 9. scriptio : on this doctrine, ancient authority, includ­ ing critics of the written speech (Alcidamas soph. 2), agreed, cf. 321. 29, de or. i. 150 ff. ‘stilus optimus et praestantissimus dicendi effector ac magister, etc.’, fam. vii. 25. 2, Quintii, x. 3 ff. The hard work involved is stressed in de or. l.c., i. 257 ‘nec tamen hoc tan ti laboris est quanti videtur' ib. iii. 190. 10. p u tan t: cum in its explicatory sense, ‘inasmuch a s ’, is distinguished from its use for the precedent cause by having an indicative verb, K.—S. ii. 331. 12. existimantium : good judges, critics, cf. existimari, 82. 1, existimator, 146. 31. 14. quod . . . : i.e. speaking better than one writes, peringeniosis : full of natural ability [ingenium), but lack­ ing technical knowledge [doctrina). 15. contingit : the rhythm demands the strong stop after contingit, not Galbae.

§

. 15. Quem . . . oratio : ‘perhaps the fire he showed when actually speaking was due not so much to native talent as to his emotional make-up, and a naturally passionate disposi­ tion, which made his style of oratory swift, powerful, and

9 3

COM M ENTARY

8o

vigorous. B ut when he took up his pen a t leisure, all emotion failed him like the wind dropping, and his style fell fla t’. 16. ingeni . . . animi : C. distinguishes a natural gift for emotional oratory from a naturally emotional disposition in the orator himself. 17. dolor : indignation, or passion (πάθοή generally, cf. 158. 6, 278. 23, D. R. Shackleton Bailey Propertiana (Cambridge 1956) p. 21. incitata : 326. 9, or. 67, and of the effects of certain rhythms, ib. 187, 201, 212. 19. motusque . . . animi : cf. Tusc. iv. 55 (a defence of emotional oratory) ‘oratorem vero irasci minime decet, simulare non dedecet. An tibi irasci tum videmur cum quid in causis acrius et vehementius dicimus ? Quid ? cum iam rebus transactis et praeteritis orationes scribimus, num irati scribimus ? ’ hominem : = eum, a colloquial and sometimes, esp. in comedy, contemptuous use, cf. Rose. com. 25, TLL vi. 2882.13. 22. prudentia : technical skill. Those who depend on such skill, not their own emotionalism, to arouse the audience, do not have Galba’s difficulty. §

. 26. mens : contrasted with vis, as above prudentia with ardor. spirare : cf. or. 130 ‘carent libri spiritu illo propter quem maiora eadem illa cum aguntur quam cum leguntur videri solent’, Hor. carm. iv. 9. 97-12, Dion. Hal. Dem. 54.

9 4

§ § 9 4 . 2 8 - 1 2 6 . We now discuss the Gracchi and their con­ temporaries. The orators of the Gracchan period are arranged in small connected groups without precise regard for consulship-dates or other chronological considerations, though with attention to seniority of status within the groups, and in such a way th a t C. can vary lists of minor figures with longer considera­ tion of im portant ones, or with digressions (§§ 99-101, 11821). We have (1) §§ 94—102 (a) three orators whose speeches were extant, (6) a group of consulars and relatives, with a tribune a t the close, (c) the im portant M. Aemilius Lepidus, (d) other consulars, and the non-consular Sex. Pompeius at the close, (e) P. Crassus and other connexions of Scaevola and Laelius, with Caelius Antipater at the close. (2) §§ 103-6. Ti. Gracchus and C. Carbo. (3) §§ 107-10. More senior contem­ poraries of the Gracchi (overlapping in date with 1), broadly

8ι

§ 9 3 . 1 5 -§ 9 5 . 4

consuls followed by tribunes, though the tribune Drusus was later consul. (4) §§110—17. Outstanding contemporaries of C. Gracchus, i.e. Scaurus and Rutilius (consuls) and Tubero (not mentioned in the ‘programme’, n o . 14, but introduced to perm it a digression on the Stoics and Cato Uticensis). (5) §§ 122—6. Curio (praetorian), and C. Gracchus—oratorically the climax, b u t it is also no accident th a t he comes after the curule magistrates, who are interrupted only by the one line of parenthesis about Fufidius (113. 13) and the designed digression on Tubero. Note too the first clear indication with Scaurus and Rutilius th a t Cicero is using dates of birth rather than magistracies for placing orators in order (cf. Intr. 39). Rutilius was not consul till 105, but was a contemporary of Scaurus and both were about the same age as C. Gracchus. Cf. Schanz pp. 215—22 on the more im portant orators dis­ cussed in these sections. § 9 4 . 28. L. et Sp. Mummii : R E Mummius nos. 7a, 13. Lucius, cos. 146, conqueror of Corinth; Spurius, friend of Scipio Aemilianus (rep. i. 18, amic. 69) who while at Corinth with his brother sent home letters in light verse (A tt. xiii. 6. 4). As with the others named in this section, nothing is known of their speeches (O RF pp. 134—5). 31. astrictior : ‘ta u te r’, 120. 16, 309. 2, Tusc. iii. 13 ‘Stoicorum more agamus qui breviter astringere solent argum enta’; rep. V . 16 describes Mummius as ‘nimis odio quodam rhetorum imbutus ’. 32. Sp. Albini : prob, the cos. 148, one of the ten commissioners sent to arrange the affairs of Greece in 146 b . c . xiii. 30. 3) ; R E Postumius no. 47, O RF p. 135. i. L. . . . Orestarum : Lucius was cos. 126 (RE Aurelius no. 180), nothing is known of Gaius. ( A t t .

§ 9 5 . 2. P. . . . Popilius : R E Popillius no. 28, cos. 132. 3. civis egregius : i.e. he strongly opposed Ti. Gracchus and his followers (cf. 128. 17, Greenidge and Clay pp. 13, 51). Nothing is known of speeches. His son Gaius is otherwise unknown. 4. Gaiusque Tuditanus : R E Sempronius no. 92, cos. 129, author of historical commentarii (Gell. vi. 4. i, 4, xiii. 15. 4, Dion. Hal. ant. Rom. i. 11). Appointed to deal with the law­ suits arising from the Gracchan land law τψ Βυσχέρααν ΪΒών έπ' Ίλλυριούς iarpareve (App. b.c. i. 19. 4). 814437

G

COM M ENTARY iniuria : when Octavius (tribune 133) persisted in his opposi­ tion to Ti. Gracchus’ agrarian bill, Gracchus had him deposed from office. ■fregit . . . patientia : ‘brought about the downfall of Ti. Gracchus by his persistent opposition’. Octavius disappears from history after his deposition, but the unconstitutional action to which he had compelled Gracchus marked the turning-point in Gracchus’ career. 9. M. Aemilius Lepidus : R E Aemilius no. 83, O R F pp. 135 ff. cos. 137, named among im portant orators of his time, de or. i. 40, rhet. Her. iv. 7. 10. summus orator : cf. 295. 27. On the implied contrast orator) (scriptor see on §91. 11. orationibus : we have two frr. amounting to nine words in all.

7.

§

. 12. Hoc . . . stilus : ‘I regard him as the first Roman orator to show the smoothness achieved by the Greeks, a periodic style, and a technically accomplished p en ’. 13. levitas : ‘ smoothness ’, λειότης, cf. or. 20 ‘ oratione levi et structa et term inata’, de or. iii. 171. comprensio : cf. 34. 23. 14. artifex . . . stilus : a pen (the emphasis is on the written word) showing ars, conscious technique. This is the first extant example of artifex as an adjective, later a common use, artificiosus being almost confined to C., artificialis to Quintilian. 17. locus : in §§ 103 ff. Q. . . . Pompeius : R E Pompeius no. 12, O RF pp. 139 ff., cos. 141, cens. 131. He twice defended himself successfully, once on a charge of extortion (Val. Max. viii. 5), and on a famous occasion, when, after extricating his army from a difficult situation by making terms with Num antia w ithout the senate’s approval (140 b.c.), he denied his evident guilt, and became a type of the improbe callidus (fin. ii. 54) by contrast with Hostilius Mancinus, who, in an identical situa­ tion three years later, acknowledged his responsibility (rep. iii. 28, off. iii. 109). Later, Pompeius was an active opponent of Ti. Gracchus. 19. homo per se cognitus : cf. 175. 9, Cal. i. 28. On Pompeius as novus homo, Verr. ii. 5. 181, Font. 23, Mur. 16. 9 6

§ 9 5 . 7 -§ §

9 7

§

9 8

98

. 29

83

. 20. L. C assiu s : R E C a ssiu s no. 72, tr. 137, cos. 127. 21. n o n . . . d icen d o : for the variation of construction, cf. 222. 15, Flacc. 92 'to tam Asiam magnitudine poculorum bibendoque superavit’, Lebreton p. 388, Austin on Cael. 42. 22. severitate : on this tra it (and his addiction to the phrase cvi b o n o ) cf. Ascon. in M il. 45 Cl. 23. le g i ta b ella ria e : 106. 13. The law required juries to vote by ballot. C. always speaks of it as disastrous (amic. 41, leg. iii. 34-37, Sest. 103), and certainly its main practical effect was only to replace whatever moral or other intimidation accompanied the system of open voting by ram pant corrup­ tion. B riso : an unknown cognomen, which M artha replaced by Restio, the only cognomen known for the Antii, but he has not been generally followed. One should expect unique cognomina (often mere nicknames, and by no means always inherited), above all in those gentes which normally had no cognomina, cf. my art. Greece &· Rome 2nd ser. v (1958) 62 ff. 24. v itu p e ra tio n i : this predicative dative only here and fam. xiii. 73 (Roby i:. iva). 26. duo C aepion es : Cn. and Q., R E Servilius nos. 46, 48, coss. 141, 140. They testified against Q. Pompeius. The cos. 140 was responsible for the murder of Viriathus. Otherwise little is known of them, and C. makes no serious claim for their oratory. Their clientes may have been Spaniards, who would be the victims of Pompeius’ alleged extortions. 28. Sex. P o m p ei . . . : 'there are extant writings of Sex. Pompeius which are not too meagre, although he is oldfashioned, and they show much wisdom ’ or ‘knowledge of the law ’, prudentia, prudens, etc. (cf. 23. 1 n.) refer, certainly or possibly, to jurisprudence at 108. 26, 169. 5, 178. 1, 246. 16. I t may be significant th a t one of Pompeius’ sons was a jurist, cf. 175. 5-6, which shows th a t this Pompeius was the father of Cn. Pompeius Strabo (cos. 89) also : cf. R E Pompeius no. 17, which does not mention this passage, presumably because the praenomen is due to emendation. . 29. P . C rassu m : R E Licinius no. 72. By birth a Scaevola, hence known as Mucianus, he was cos. 131, and killed in Asia in 130 in the war against Aristonicus (Greenidge and Clay pp. 18 ff.), cf. de or. i. 240 ‘fuit Crassus in numero disertorum sed par Galbae nullo modo’.

84

COM M ENTARY

: training ' actually provided by members of his own fam ily’, so below domi: he need look no further. 3. P . M uci : cos. 175. 4. P . S ca ev o la m : cf. 108. 26. As cos. 133 he refused to resort to violence against Ti. Gracchus (Val. Max. iii. 2. 17). He succeeded his brother Q. Scaevola, later P. Crassus Mucianus (above, line 29), as pontifex maximus. The Mucii Scaevolae had a unique reputation as experts in pontifical and civil law, cf. 102. 7, 145. 19, off. i. 116. 6. e t co n su leretu r . . . : he both g a v e responsa on points of law, (cf. 113. 21 n.) and also spoke in the courts. Few made their mark in both fields (cf. §§ 150 if.). 3 1 . etia m d o m estica s

: these Fannii presented a problem to C., which is still not finally resolved. After writing this passage, in which C.f. was cos. (122) and M.f. an historian and Laelius’ son-in-law, C. looked at the question again. In Att. xii. 5. 3, though faced by powerful objections by Atticus, he still attaches weight to the evidence of Hortensius and an epitome of Fannius’ history by Brutus, th a t the son-in-law of Laelius was also the historian. The evidence of CIL i. 650 th a t the cos. was M.f. persuaded nineteenth-century scholars th a t the two had simply been interchanged; they made M.f. cos. 122, and C.f. the historian and son-in-law of Laelius. B ut Laelius’ son-in-law appears as M.f. both here, and, after C.’s further investigation, in amic. 3. Münzer, Hermes lv (1920) 427 if., maintained th a t M.f. was the cos. and also Laelius’ son-in-law and the historian, partly on the ground th a t Ait. xvi. 13c. 2 shows a connexion of M.f. as tribune with Scipio Aemilianus, and the son-in-law of Laelius was a mem­ ber of the Scipionic circle (rep. i. 18), but Att. l.c. does not prove so much. Fraccaro, Athenaeum iv (1926) 153 if., agreed with Münzer in making the son-in-law of Laelius M.f., but held with Atticus th a t the historian was not Laelius’ son-inlaw, and must be C.f. D. R. Shackleton Bailey Towards a Text of Cicero ad Atticum (Cambridge i960) p. 55, justifiably doubts whether our information is sufficient to yield any convincing solution. 8. co n su l cu m D o m itio : 122 b .c. de so c iis . . . : O RF pp. 143-5, Greenidge and Clay p. 41. Gracchus proposed to extend the franchise to the totally unenfranchized Italians (socii) and those enjoying the inter§ 9 9 . 7. duo C. F a n n ii

§ 9 8 . 3 1 -§

101

.4

85

mediate status, the nomen Latinum. C. comments {de or. iii. 183) on the cretic rhythm of the opening of the speech ‘Si Quirites minas illius ’ : for a more extended fragment cf. Appendix A, 15. i i . C. Persio : a man of learning (litterato) known only from this passage and the quotation from Lucilius alluded to here ‘Persium non curo legere, Laelium Decimum volo’, i.e. I do not w ant to be read by the very learned {de or. ii. 25, fin. i. 7). § 100. 22. Menelao Maratheno : of Marathos in Phoenicia. The Greek influence in the education of the Gracchi (cf. § 104) was clearly much used in propaganda against them. Two short frr. of Fannius (O RF nos. 6, 7, cf. Appendix A, 16) show him quoting parallels from Greek history as evidence th a t C. Gracchus aimed at a tyranny of the Greek type. The names Phalaris, Pisistratus, and Dionysius are there used not in a mere parade of learning, but in a calculated appeal to the narrow nationalism of the audience . 23. de ceteris : unknown to us, and perhaps the figments of propagandist exaggeration. 24. causas : nothing is known. 25. tribunatus : in Att. xvi. 13c. 2 C. asks Atticus for the date of the tribunate of C. Fannius M.f., tentatively suggesting 142 B . c . Münzer in the article cited above [99. 7 n.] surmises th a t by the date of the letter (44 b . c . ) C. knew th a t the cos. 122 described as C.f. in the present passage was in fact M.f. 27. ipso genere : as indicated by the history, 101. 3. § 1 0 1 . 28. soceri instituto : cf. 79. 10 ‘patrio in stitu to ’. cooptatus : cf. i. 7 n. At this date Laelius would have a right of nomination. 30. sibi : Quintii, vii. 9. 12 notes the ambiguity of sibi ‘nam id sibi et ad socerum referri et ad Fannium po test’. 2. Panaetium : moderate Stoic philosopher, an associate of Scipio Aemilianus from c. 144. After Scipio’s death in 129 he became head of the Stoic school. The first two books of C.’s De officiis are based on a work of his. 3. historia : cf. 81. 29, Peter H R R i. cxciii. 139-41. 4. nimis : cf. on 179. 7. neque . . . diserta : in leg. i. 6 Fannius is included among the early dry annalists, ‘ quid tarn exile quam isti omnes ? ’

COM M ENTARY

86

§

. 4 . Mucius : Q. Scaevola cos. 117 (RE Mucius no. 21) called ‘the augur' to distinguish him from his namesake the pontifex maximus (§ 148). On his quarrel with Albucius cf. on 131. 20. See also 306. 1 n. 7. omni prudentiae genere: ‘intellectual interests generally’ (23. i n.). 8. Caelius Antipater : wrote, about the end of the first century B . c., seven books on the Second Punic War, a work both historically and stylistically im portant (OCD art. Coelius Antipater, Peter i. ccxi. 158 ff.). Brutus epitomized his work (Att. xiii. 8) as well as th at of Fannius (99. 7 n.). 9. ut . . . luculentus : similarly qualified judgements in leg. i. 6, de or. ii. 54. 10. Crassi : L. Licinius Crassus, the great orator discussed in §§ 143 ff. On his connexion with Caelius, cf. de or. l.c. 1 0 2

§ 1 0 3 . i i . Vtinam . . . : C. is entirely unsympathetic to the politics of the Gracchi, though slightly less hostile to Gaius (cf. har. resp. 43). He shows no understanding of the motives th a t inspired the Gracchan reforms, preferring in the dreariest tradition of reactionary thought to treat their motives as purely personal—spite in Tiberius (see next n.), revenge in Gaius (cf. 126. 26). Nor does he criticize their opponents’ obstructiveness, resort to violence—though again he is slightly cooler about the death of Gaius—and bloodthirsty repression of Gracchan supporters after the murders of the tribunes themselves. The repeated ‘ If only . . . ’ (utinam here and in 126. 26) evades all the im portant questions. 15. foederis Numantini : Ti. Gracchus was quaestor to Man­ cinus (96. 17 n., Plut. Ti. Gr. 5- 7) · (Though Gracchus had arranged the truce, it was his senior officer who paid the penalty.) The episode became a stock theme in the rhetorical schools (top. 37, Val. Max. i. 6, 7, Quintii, iii. 8.3, vii. 4. 12, 13). 16. ipsa re publica : in fact, as C. asserts elsewhere (212. 5, Cat. i. 3, Tusc. iv. 51), by a private individual (P. Scipio Nasica, 107. 20), without even the constitutionally dubious support of the s.c. ultimum which was to be invoked against C. Gracchus. For a thin justification cf. rep. ii. 47. 17. perpetuam : Carbo (RE Papirius no. 33, tr. pi. 131 or 130, cos. 120) became in 130 a member of the commission of three appointed (under Gracchus’ law) to redistribute lots of ager

§ 1 0 2 . 4 -§

104

.20

87

publicus. In 121 he defended Opimius, who killed C. Grac­ chus, but the next year was accused by Crassus of maiestas (159. 10) and committed suicide by taking a decoction of cantharides (fa m . ix. 21. 3). In his speech Crassus questioned the genuineness of Carbo’s ‘ conversion ’ to the optimate cause {de or. ii. 170). Hence C. refers pointedly to Carbo’s persistent ‘ irresponsibility ’ in adhering to the popular cause {in populari ratione, cf. S est. ιο ί, 114, Phil. v. 49, and for the opposite in optima ratione, dom. 87). levis, levitas as terms of abuse refer simply to lack of gravitas, and are freely used bv C. of (i) Greeks, etc., (ii) radical politicians. Particularly in the latter connexion, there need be no connotation of ‘fickleness’, cf. J. Collins Historia iv (1955) 451. §

. 19. Atque h o c ... : ‘in saying this we rely on the recollec­ tions of the last generation, for the extant orations of Carbo and Gracchus are lacking in brilliance of diction, though in­ telligent and skilful’. The distinction made in § 91 between the written and spoken speech is not relevant here. C. is thinking only of the different effects of the spoken speech on its audience and the same oration when read in the light of later development of Roman oratory {nondum satis). 20. orationes : nothing remains of Ti. Gracchus’ speeches in their original form, and sundry references to both the Gracchi (often in contexts where they simply stand for great anti­ quity) are not convincing evidence th a t his speeches survived as well as those of Gaius (cf. on 125. 20). B ut passages in Plutarch and Appian which claim to represent what he said perhaps recall the original (esp. Plut. Ti. Gr. 9. 5, 15. 2 ff., O R F pp. 145 if.). See also de or. i. 38, har. resp. 41, where, as here, his elo­ quence is contrasted with his political attitude, and Plut. Ti. Gr. 2 . 2 : πρώτον μεν οΰν ιδέα προσώπου και β λέμ μ α τι και κινηματι 1 0 4

πράος και κ α τα σ τημα τικος ην ό Τιβέριος, έντονος δέ και σφόδρος ό Γάϊος, ώ σ τΐ και δημηγορεΐν τον μεν év μια χώρα βεβιηκότα κοσμίω ς, τον δέ 'Ρω μαίω ν πρώ τον επί τοΰ βήμα τος περιπατώ τ ε χρησασθαι καί περισπάσαι την τήβεννον εξ ώμου λέγοντα . . . έπειτα ό λόγος τοΰ μεν Ρ α ίο υ φοβερός και περιπαθής εις δείνωσιν, ήδίων δέ ο' τοΰ Τιβερίου και μάλλον επ α γω γό ς οίκτου· τη δέ λέξει καθαρός και διαπεπονημένος ακριβώς έκεΐνος, ό δέ Ρ α ίο υ πιθανός και γεγανω μένος.

Of Carbo we have a few words from his defence of Opimius {de or. ii. 165, 169, O RF pp. 153 ff.).

COM M ENTARY

88

21. p ru d en tiaequ e : cf. 93. 22 η. 22. C orneliae : daughter of the elder Africanus, cf. 211. 21 n. 24. D io p h a n em : alleged to have joined with Blossius, a philo­ sopher from Cumae, in encouraging Gracchus in his agrarian reform, and put to death in 132 by the consular commission which suppressed Gracchus’ supporters (Plut. Ti. Gr. 8, 20, Strabo xiii. 617). §

. 27. m u ltis . . . ca u sisq u e : we know only of h is unsuc­ cessful proposal (131 n.c.) to legalize the re-election of tribunes (amic. 96, Livy per. lix) and the plea for Opimius. 29. L. G elliu s : cf. 174. 24. co n tu b ern a lem : metaphorical, cf. Sull. 34 ‘L. ille Tor­ quatus, cum esset meus contubernalis in consulatu’. 30. ca n o ru m . . . : apart from the hints about Galba’s vehe­ mence, derived from Rutilius (§§ 85 ff.), this is the first description of an orator’s delivery, canorum = ‘melodious’ (cf. de or. iii. 28 ‘profluens quiddam habebat Carbo et canorum ’), sometimes in a bad sense ‘sing-song’ (off. i. 133). Despite the ancient insistence on preserving the distinction between the orator and the stage-singer (e.g. Quintii, xi. 3. 57), a differ­ ence of degree rather than kind is indicated by such passages as or. 57 ‘ e s t . . . in dicendo quidam cantus obscurior, non hic e Phrygia et Caria rhetorum epilogus paene canticum sed ille quem significat Demosthenes et Aeschines, cum alter alteri obicit vocis flexiones’; cf.'too the story of the slave who helped C. Gracchus to control his intonation by playing on a pipe (de or. iii. 225). The delivery of an ancient orator might well astonish a modern audience. 31. eu n d em . . . : the first group of adjectives refers to delivery, the second to style. i . d iceb at, ad debat : anacoluthon, prudentes homines having no verb. Emendation is easy, but unnecessary. 3. m u ltu m op erae : cf. Quintii, x. 7. 27 ‘siquidem C. Carbo etiam in tabernaculo solebat hac uti exercitatione dicendi’. (But is this a false deduction from contubernalem above?) §

1 0 5

1 0 6 . 4. p a tro n u s : on the development of this sense, ‘advo­ c ate ’, ‘defending counsel’ (freq. in Brutus henceforward, for reasons which emerge in the next sentence) from the strict legal usage cf. Neuhauser pp. 12 ff., 187 ff.

§ 1 0 4 . 2 1 -§

108

. 22

89

5. q u a e stio n e s p erp etuae : permanent jury-courts, contrasted with ad hoc trials before assemblies (indicia populi, below). 7. L. . . . P iso : cos. 133, R E Calpurnius no, 96. As tribune (149) he instituted the first permanent quaestio, to try cases of extortion (Verr. ii. 3. 195, 4. 56; he may have been sympa­ thetic to Ti. Gracchus (D. C. Earl Athenaeum xxxviii (i960) 283 ff.) but was later an opponent of C. Gracchus. He seems to have attracted anecdotes (Font. 39, Tusc. iii. 48) as well as the nickname Frugi, which, so far as is known, he was the first of the Pisones to bear. 9. multarum legum : we know only of his opposition to C. Gracchus’ lex frumentaria (ORF pp. 156-7). 11. a n n a lis : on this ‘sketchily w ritten’ history cf. de or. ii. 53, Peter H R R i. clxxxi. 120 ff. Gell, admired his simplicissima suavitas (xi. 14. i, cf. vi. 9. i), but K. Latte, S.-b. deutsch. Akad. IViss. i960, no. 7, accuses him of carrying a moralizing tendency to the point of distorting the truth. iu d icia p op u li : the traditional form of trial before the comitia. On the procedure cf. Nisbet on dom. 45. 12. ia m m a g is . . . : it was now more necessary to convince the jury by argument or eloquence. 13. tabella data : 97. 23 n. §

. 15. D . B ru tu s : cos. 138, R E Iunius no. 57. : according to Hendrickson (85. 29 n., Intr. 38 (c)), an artistic fiction based on C.’s knowledge of D. B rutus’ friendship with Accius (cf. Arch. 27, Val. Max. viii. 14. 2, leg. ii. 54, Plut. rom. quaesi. 34). 19. Q. M ax im o : Allobrogicus, cos. 121, O RF p. 199, R E Fabius no. 110. His father was a son of Aemilius Paullus adopted by a Fabius Maximus. He delivered the funeral oration on Scipio Aemilianus (62. 16 n,). On the interpretation of Schol. Bob. M il. p. 118, i i ‘oratio C. Laeli Sapientis qua usus videtur Q. Fabius Maximus in laudatione mortui Scipionis’ see Bardon i. 65. 20. Scipionem : P. Scipio Nasica cos. 138, O RF pp. 157-9, RE Cornelius no. 354, cf. on 103. 16. 1 0 7

16. au d ire so litu s

§

. 22. P . L en tu lu s : there seems no alternative to identifi­ cation of this princeps (cf. next n.) with the cos. suff. 162 (RE Cornelius no. 202), who (i) must then have continued his

1 0 8

go

COMMENTARY

political activities to a ripe old age—he was wounded in the riots of 122, (ii) is far the most striking example in Brutus of a consular orator appearing without comment in a context unrelated to the date of his consulship. B ut his appearance here in connexion with events of 122 does not prove, as Fraccaro supposed, th a t C. was simply reproducing names from some Gracchan annalist (Intr. 38 (c)). His p art in these affairs was notorious (Phil. viii. 14, Val. Max. v, 3. 2 f.), p rincep s : so C. always describes this Lentulus, cf. de or. i. 211. On the term princeps senatus and its meaning cf. Staatsr. iii. 969, R E Supp. vi. 699. A t Lentulus’ date it was still an official title conferred, often self-conferred, on a senior patrician, usually a vir censorius. Valerius Flaccus in 84 B . c . was the last holder of the title in this sense. There­ after the phrase was merely honorific. A. Gwosdz Der Begriff des römischen Princeps (Breslau 1933) fails to make his case th a t the word princeps alone never means p. senatus, bu t always p. civitatis, though it can of course mean a member of the group of leading consulars known as principes civitatis. ad rem . . . e sse t : ‘ adequate for the demands of politics, at least', but not in the courts, cf. on Scaurus in § 112. 24. F u riu s P h ilu s : RE Furius no. 78, cos. 136, a member of the Scipionic circle (de or. ii. 154, rep. iii. 5, amic. 25, Mur. 66). He took p art in the Numantine War. 2 5 . perbene L atin e : ' in excellent Latin ’ : the first of some dozen allusions to Latinus sermo, Latinitas (cf. Intr. 26), apart from the detailed consideration in §§ 261 ff. On the development of canons of pure and accurate latinity as an innovation of the Scipionic circle cf. A. Dihle Hermes lxxxv (1957) 179 fL 26. P . S ca ev o la : R E M u ciu s n o. 17, cos. 133, cf. 98. 4 n. 2 7 . M \ M an iliu s : R E Manilius no. 12, cos. 149, a jurist (de or. i. 212, rep. i. 20, iii. 17, fin. i. 12). Appi Claudi : cos. 143, sympathetic to his son-in-law Ti. Gracchus in 133, and a member of the land-commission (103. 17 n.) (Plut. Ti. Gr. 9, 13). 29. M. F u lv iu s F la cc u s : R E Fulvius no. 58, another Gracchan commissioner, cos. 125; an energetic reformer and supporter of C. Gracchus, he became tribune in the Gracchan interest in 122, and was killed with him in 121; on his policies cf. Badian FC pp. 176 ff. C. Cato : R E Porcius no. 5, cos. 114. A disreputable character condemned for extortion (Greenidge and Clay p. 61)

§ 1 0 8 . 2 2 -§

.

i and later a victim of the quaestio Mamilia (§ 128). Nothing is known of speeches. 1. sed u t studiosi : Malcovati (O RF p. 159) suspects th a t as only meritorious speeches would survive at all, C. under­ estimates Flaccus out of political bias. B ut th a t argument should apply a fortiori to C. Gracchus, of whom as an orator C. speaks with enthusiasm (§§ 125-6). The reference is prob­ ably not to speeches a t all, but other works showing an interest in literature (so Bardon i. 92). 2. P . Decius : O R F pp. 155-6, R E Decius no. 9, tr. 120, pr. 115. He unsuccessfully prosecuted Opimius for his part in the death of C. Gracchus (de or. ii. 132, Livy per. lxi). For a fascinating reconstruction of Decius’ career cf. E. Badian J R S xlvi (1956) 91 ff. §

109

12

9

. 4. M. Drusus : O RF pp. 161—2, R E Livius no. 17, tr. 122, cos. 112, cens. 109 in which year he died. He was father of M. Livius Drusus, tr. 91. He 'b ro k e’ Gracchus by out­ bidding him in proposing measures designed to win popular support (Plut. C. Gr. 9, Greenidge and Clay pp. 42-43). 6. C. Drusus : R E Livius no. 15, a jurisconsult and blind (Tusc. V . 112, Val. Max. viii. 7. 4). 7. M. Pennus : R E Junius no. 123, tr. 126. facete . . . C. Gracchum, paulum : L ’s paulum C. Gracchum is irreproachable in itself, but facile agitavit ( ? = ‘performed with fluency ’) is hardly possible : in C. agitare needs an object. The vulgate inversion provides the object, but again C., like most other writers, rarely uses agitare = ‘ harass ’ except with non-personal subjects or (passively) agents. I take facile agitavit to be corrupt, and not so easily emended as is usually supposed. (The confusion facilejfacete has almost certainly occurred at 198. 16, but there is no evidence to support Lambinus’s proposal of the same change here.) The conflict between Pennus and C. Gracchus concerned Pennus’ law of 126 expelling aliens from Rome (off. iii. 47, O R F pp. 179-80). 9. tribunus . . . : these details, unparalleled for a tribune in Brutus, may depend on Atticus’ research into the history of the gens Iunia (Nep. Alt. 18. 3), possibly incorporated in the Liber Annalis. 1 0 . c u m Q. Aelio : 1 6 7 b . c . 12. T. Flaminino : cos. 123, cf. 259. 13. 1 0 9

92

COM M ENTARY

§ 1 1 0 . 14. C. Curio : pr. 121, M. Scaurus cos. 115, cens. 109, P. Rutilius cos. 105, C. Gracchus tr. 123-2. The first three were born c. 160, C. Gracchus in 154. 15. Scau ro e t R u tilio : O RF pp. 162-71, R E Aemilius no. 140, Rutilius no. 34. 16. e t e s t . . . : versatus gives a preferable rhythm ; other­ wise Wilkins’s text, following L except for punctuation and P eter’s probabilis (L probabiles), is acceptable, et here = ‘and yet’, cf. TLL v. ii. 893—4. 20. N eq u e en im . . . : C. here treats specifically oratorical talent as being shown in style (nisi . . . dicere) and delivery (voce . . . conditius), cf. de or. ii. 120. 21. so lu te : ‘fluently’, cf. 173. 21 : on more technical senses cf. 32. 12 n. 23. co n d itiu s : cf. 177. 20, so of w it {de or. ii. 227) and of rhythm {or. 185) as adding ‘spice’ to oratory. : essentially the same argument as in § 9 3 - Scaurus’ naturalis auctoritas (below) corresponding to Galba's naturalis dolor, and semper paratum, ‘always avail­ able ’, to prudentia numquam deficit oratorem. 2 6 . sa p ie n tis . . . : C. always speaks highly of Scaurus, cf. esp. Font. 24 ‘ecquem hominem vidimus . . . parem consilio gravitate constantia ceteris virtutibus, honoris ingeni rerum gestarum ornamentis M. Aemilio Scauro fuisse?’, Mur. 36. For a different view, Sali. Jug. 15 ‘impiger factiosus avidus potentiae honoris divitiarum ceterum vitia sua callide occul­ ta n s ’, ib. 29. The key is Sest. 101 ‘pater tuus, M. Scaure, . . . a Graccho usque ad Q. Varium seditiosis omnibus re stitit’. See further on Sallust’s view, A. R. Hands, J R S xlix (1959) 56 ff. 2 7 . n a tu ra lis : cf. de or. i. 214 ‘M. vero Scaurus . . . si audierit hanc auctoritatem gravitatis et consili sui vindicari a te, Crasse, quod eam oratoris propriam esse dicas, iam, credo, huc veniat et hanc loquacitatem nostram vultu ipso aspectu­ que conterreat; qui quamquam est in dicendo minime con­ temnendus, prudentia tamen rerum magnarum magis quam dicendi arte n ititu r’. § 1 1 1 . 2 3 . Q uid d ica m . . .

§ 1 1 2 . 3 . ad sen a to r ia m . . . s e n te n tia m : cf. the advice in part. or. 83, 97, leg. iii. 40.

§ 1 1 0 . 1 4 —§ 1 1 3 . 2 1

93

cuius : i.e. senatus·, for the ad sensum construction, cf. Fordyce on Catuli. 64. 368-9, 66. 83. 5 . quod . . . continebat: ‘what was most to the p o in t’, an unusual use of continere in the active, though the correspond­ ing passive use (quo res continetur) is common in C.’s rhetorical and philosophical works. fidem : ‘reliability ’. 7. scis : singular, because the rhetorical instruction is addressed to Brutus as C.’s junior and an active politician. praecepta : i.e. on how to create an impression of sincerity, cf. Arist. rhet. i. 2. 3 f., rhet. Alex. 38. 2. 8. orationes : little remains, but two frr. (9, 10) anticipate C. in the language of vituperation (‘nefarius vulturius, patriae parricida’, ‘vulturius rei publicae’, cf. Sest. 71, Pis. 38). L. Fufidium : known only from these sections, and for his austerity of life, Plin. n.h. xxxiii. 21. 9. de vita : probably a political apologia, the work is mentioned in Tac. Agr. i. 3 ' ac plerique suam ipsi vitam narrare fiduciam potius morum quam adrogantiam arbitrati sunt, nec id Rutilio et Scauro citra fidem aut obtrectationi fu it’, Val. Max. iv. 4. i i . acta : Geel’s lectu is adopted by many editors, but the con­ tra st legit. . . legunt is more effective without the intrusion of this rare supine. 10. Cyri vitam . . . : Xenophon’s Cyropaedia which was in fact a favourite of C.’s (fa m . ix. 25. 1 'Παιδείαν Κόρου quam con­ triveram legendo totam in hoc imperio (i.e. in Cilicia) expli­ cavi’) and of Aemilianus (Q.f. i. 1. 23). . 15. uterque : Rutilius and Scaurus. Fufidius is men­ tioned only in parenthesis. 16. consulatum : f o r 115 b . c . 18. Scaurus etiam : cf. de or. ii. 280 for an anecdote of the trial. 20. idem : cf. 98. 6 n. 21. respondendi: 'giving responsa on points of law ’. Rutilius was a pupil of the Scaevolae (off. ii. 47). Ti. Coruncanius (55. 11) was said to have started the tradition of settling points of law, and at the same time instructing pupils, by giving answers in public. In republican times the authority of the responsa was simply the auctoritas of the individual jurist who gave them, but under the Principate, the ius §

1 1 3

94

COM M ENTARY respondendi was a privilege officially conferred, and from H adrian’s time the responsa were legally as well as in practice binding.

§ 114. 21. orationes : apart from the speeches mentioned in Brutus, there was a speech de modo aedificiorum known in Augustus’ time (Suet. Aug. 89. 2). 22. Graecis litteris : he wrote an historical work in Greek (Peter H R R i. cclxviii. 187 ff.) which Hendrickson, CP xxviii (1933) 153 ff., regarded as the same in substance as the Latin memoirs de vita sua occasionally cited by grammarians. Most scholars reject this view (Schanz p. 209, Bardon i. 112). C. makes no explicit allusion to either work, b u t he could hardly have omitted reference in the present context to the Latin version if he knew it. Any indebtedness to Rutilius’ work, e.g. in §§ 85 ff. (cf. 85. 29 n. Intr. 38 (c)), m ust be to the Greek work. 2 3 . Panaeti auditor : cf. off. iii. 10 ‘Posidonius . . . scrib it. . . P. Rutilium Rufum dicere solere qui Panaetium a u d iv erat. . .’. Stoicis : neuter, but quorum is masculine. 2 4 . peracutum . . . : ‘very subtle and technically accomplished ’, cf. de or. iii. 66 ‘orationis etiam genus habent (sc. Stoici) fortasse subtile et certe acutum, sed u t in oratore, exile, inusitatum, abhorrens ab auribus vulgi, obscurum, inane, ieiunum, ac tam en eius modi quo uti ad vulgus nullo modo possit', ib. ii. 159. Stoic argumentation was so ‘sh arp ’ and a t the same time involved th a t C. often describes it as ' thorny ’ (ac. pr. 112, fin. iii. 3, iv. 6, 79, or. 114). 26. ilia .. . opinio : 'th e well-known view of themselves taken by philosophers of th a t school ’, i.e. the Stoic view th a t the Stoic philosopher embodied all virtue, including all th a t was necessary of the arts of rhetoric. § 115. 2 8. innocentissimus in iudicium . . . : as legate to Q. Scaevola, governor of Asia ( ? 94 B.c. : on the date and political background see E. Badian Athenaeum xxxiv (1956) 104 ff.), Rutilius checked many abuses by the publicani ; on his return to Rome he was tried before a jury of equites on charges of extortion, and condemned (Greenidge and Clay pp. 125 ff.). No doubt rhetoricians, anxious to find a Roman equivalent of Socrates, and partisan propagandists, combined to exag­ gerate Rutilius’ virtue (cf. Veil. ii. 13. 2 ‘virum non saeculi

§1 1 3 . 2 1 -§ 1 1 7 .1 6

95

sui sed omnis aevi optim um ’), yet after all it was Rutilius’ trial, and not th a t of some other senatorial governor, which became the type of a miscarriage of justice, and no one has shown it to have been anything else. 2 9 . convulsam : again an exaggeration, but the trial was at least an im portant episode in the history of ill feeling between senate and equester ordo in this period. 3 0 . L. C rassus et M. A n to n iu s : cf. §§ 138 ff. 1. D ix it ip se . . . : cf .de or. i. 229 ‘non modo supplex iudicibus esse noluit, sed ne ornatius quidem aut liberius causam dici suam, quam simplex ratio veritatis ferebat, paulum huic Cottae tribuit partium, disertissimo adulescenti, sororis suae filio; dixit item causam illam quadam ex parte Q. Mucius more suo, nullo apparatu, pure et dilucide ’, and the ironical climax (ib. 230) ‘nemo ingemuit, nemo inclamavit patrono­ rum, nihil cuiquam doluit, nemo est questus, nemo rem publicam imploravit, nemo supplicavit: quid multa? pedem nemo in illo iudicio supplosit, credo, ne Stoicis renuntiaretur’. (On pedis supplosio cf. 141. 22.) 2. C. C otta : cf. on §§ 201 ff. 4 . Q. Mucius : the pontifex, cf. §§ 145 ff. § 1 1 6 . 12. s ta ta r io s : cf. Donatus on Ter. ad. prol. 24 ‘duo agendi sunt principales modi, motorius et statarius’, Ter. haut. 35 f. ‘ date potestatem m ihi/ statariam agere u t liceat per silentium ’. quorum s i t . . . : ‘who display a simple, not fussy, natural­ ism in their acting ’. veritas: cf. 162. u n . ; molesta: cf. 143. 10 ‘sine molestia diligens’. § 1 1 7 . 14. T ubero : O R F p. 171, R E Aelius no. 155, another member of the Scipionic Circle {rep. i. 14). Panaetius (ac. pr. 135, fin. iv. 23, Tusc. iv. 4), Panaetius’ pupil Hecaton (off. iii. 63), and Posidonius (Plut, denobil. 18. 3) all dedicated books to him. He is presumably the Stoic philosopher and jurist mentioned in C.’s lost de iure civili in artem redigendo (Gell. i. 22. 7). 15. n ep o s : he was the son of Aemilius Paullus’ daughter, and nephew of Aemilianus. 16. c o n g r u e n s : as when he conducted the funeral of Aemilianus with such marked austerity as to lose favour in his candida­ ture for the praetorship (Mur. 75). The statem ent (de or. ii.

96

COM M ENTARY

341) th a t he delivered the laudatio funebris on th a t occasion appears to be an error (cf. O R F ρ. 121, 107. 19 n.). colebat : de or. iii. 87 ‘dies et noctes virum summa virtute et prudentia videbamus philosopho cum operam daret, Q. Tuberonem’. 17. tribunatu : most editors keep L ’s triumviratu as a reference to the tresviri capitales, though there is no other evidence for these officials performing this function (Staatsr. ii. 561). The date of Tubero’s tribunate is uncertain. 19. augures . . . : ‘th a t augurs enjoyed no exemption from serving on juries ’. Augurs traditionally enjoyed certain vaca­ tiones (RE s.v. augures, col. 2321); the institution of quae­ stiones presumably made it necessary to decide the issue here referred to. 20. itaque . . . : Pompon, dig. i. 2. 2. 40 states th a t he was cos. suff. but can safely be ignored (he makes other mistakes). 21. respondere: ‘equal’, cl. fin. iii. 8 ‘u t ita erudiatur u t et patri et Caepioni nostro et tibi tam propinquo respondeat’. 22. Graccho : cf. Priscian (GL ii. 88. 4) 'C. Gracchus contra Q. Aelium Tuberonem . . .’. Rs. prints Stangl’s . 24. doctissimus in : not parallel to the poetic and late usage, ‘trained in ’, first attested in prose in Quintii, xii. 3. 3 ‘satis in ea re doctus ’. The balance with mediocris in dicendo shows th a t the sense is ‘ (when engaged) in close argument most learned’ rather than ‘well trained in close argum ent’. §

. 27. disserendo : in logical argument (cf. 120. 12, 143. 11) here synonymous with disputando (31. 25 n.), though in or. 113 it is a general term (‘discourse’) covering both dia­ lectic and oratory. architecti : they built up arguments by series of syllogisms. architectus used metaphorically usually has stress on the idea of ‘initiator’ (Rose. Am. 132, Clu. 60, fin. i. 32).28

1 1 8

28. inopes : cf. fin. iv. 7 ‘scripsit artem rhetoricam Cleanthes, Chrysippus etiam, sed sic u t si quis obmutescere concupierit nihil aliud legere debeat’; for a more charitable view, Quintii. X . i . 84 'm inus indulsere eloquentiae Stoici veteres, sed cum honesta suaserunt tum in colligendo probandoque quae insti­ tuerant plurimum valuerunt, rebus tamen acuti magis quam (id quod sane non adfectaverunt) oratione magnifici’.

§1 1 7 . 1 6 -§ 1 1 9 . 8

97

Catonem : on the placing of this digression on the younger Cato (e. 95-46) cf. Intr. 1. 30. eloquentiam : much is known from C. and Plut. (cf. ORF pp. 406—15) of occasions when Cato spoke. B ut Plut. Cat. mi. 23.1 notes th a t no speech was preserved except th a t advocat­ ing the death penalty for the Catilinarians, which was taken down by the stenographers whom C. introduced into the senate for the occasion. (Sallust’s version [Cat. 52) may thus owe something to the original.) There is, however, one letter (fam . X V . 5). Cato was notoriously given to filibustering (leg. iii. 40, Schol. Bob. Plane, p. 157, 24, Gell. iv. 10. 8, Plut. Cat. mi. 43. 1—2, Caes. b.c. i. 32. 3). 29.

§ I I 9 .4 . vagum . . . : ‘ they do not employ the free, spreading, and varied style appropriate to oratory'. 5. avunculus : B rutus’ mother Servilia was Cato’s half-sister, her mother Livia (daughter of Livius Drusus, cos. 112) being married first to Q. Servilius Caepio, secondly to M. Porcius Cato, grandson of the censor (cf. Table, p. 162). 6. petendum fuit : so in or. 115, C. acknowledges th a t Stoic logic, described in much the same terms as in § 152, has value for the orator as a training in thought. 7 . dicendi magistris : cf. the words addressed to Cato in fin. iv. 7 ‘ ista ipsa, quae tu breviter—regem, dictatorem, divitem solum esse sapientem—a te quidem apte ac rotunde : quippe, habes enim a rhetoribus ’. Nothing is known of Cato’s rhetori­ cal teachers. Later tradition stressed the austere blunt Cato’s lack of rhetorical artifices (e.g. Plut. Cat. mi. 5. 2). At the same time C. has given no names and may be adjusting the facts so as to allow the Republican hero the rhetorical training which he recognized as essential to the statesman. 8. Quod si omnia . . . : the argument is: If the whole of an orator’s equipment had to be drawn from philosophy, style would be better shaped by the practices (or doctrines, insti­ tutis) of the Peripatetics. That, Brutus, is why I am glad that you adhere to a philosophic school, the Academy, which, like the Peripatetic, expresses its teaching in a fluent style, though th a t style is itself too loose and free for forensic use. M artha’s addition of atque Academicorum (119. 9) is mis­ conceived, and raises deeper issues than its author realized. For many of the passages which he cites to show the virtual identity of the Peripatetic and Academic schools (and other 814437

H

COM M ENTARY

98

similar passages), e.g. ac. post. 17, 33, fin. iv. 5, v. 8, leg. i. 38, off. i. 2, iii. 20, merely echo the propaganda of Antiochus of Ascalon (cf. § 315) for his claim to revive the original ‘ old ' Academy from which the sceptical ‘new ' Academy of Arcesilas, Carneades, and Philo had ‘deviated’. His doctrines were in fact a mixture of Stoic theory of knowledge and Peripatetic ethics (cf. 149. 19), and the identity of Academics and Peripatetics is usually asserted explicitly for propagandist reasons (not casually assumed) in connexion with ethics. In rhetorical theory, the Academy, though supplying material for part, or., was unim portant compared with the Peripatetics (cf. de or. i. 43). (The Peripatetics greatly in­ fluenced De Oratore, while modern attem pts to trace specific Academic influences have inevitably failed, being prompted by a misunderstanding of or. 12 ‘fateor me oratorem . . . ex Academiae spatiis exstitisse’, which refers to philosophy in general, not Academic rhetoric.) Again, the Peripatetic practice of arguing both sides of a question (or. 46) and the more sceptical New Academy’s demolition of any thesis (de or. i. 43, not. d. i. 11), though sometimes confused (ac. pv. 7, Quintii, xii. 1. 35, 2. 25), are properly distinct (de or. ii. 80, fin. v. 10), while Antiochus’ stoicizing dogmatism was remote from both. W hat then of Peripateticorum Academicorumque (120. 13), which inspired M artha’s emendation ? T hat is another cal­ culated blurring of the distinction, though done from per­ sonal, not philosophical, motives. Discussing the expository methods of the philosophers (cf. on line 14 below), C. begins with the stylish Peripatetics alone. B ut in order to compli­ ment the Academic Brutus, he slides into an apparently casual linkage of the schools. B ut he found orationis siccitas in contemporary Academics (cf. on line 15, and on Antiochus’ stylistic inadequacy cf. Att. xiii. 19. 5), and has to draw his evidence from the early masters of the schools. Aristotle and Theophrastus were perhaps still living influences (cf. or. 127), but Plato cannot have played any such role in Antiochus’ ‘Academy’ (C. simply ignores the vicissitudes of the school) in which Brutus was trained. §

. n . sectam : the ‘O ld’ Academy, cf. 149. 18, 332. 22. quorum . . . : ‘whose mode of discussion in expounding their teaching is combined with charm and fullness of style ’ (cf.fin . iv. 5-6). 1 2 0

§ 1 1 9 . 8-§ 1 2 1 . 2 1

99

14. ratione dicendi : a common meaning ‘the art of rhetoric’ (cf. 163. 18 n.) is customarily accepted here, but it is ruled out by consuetudo and the whole context, ratione, like ratio above, is simply ‘m ethod’. C. is not talking about the rhetorical doctrines of the different philosophical schools, but about the methods and style employed in their philosophical discourses. M artha’s docendi gives this meaning and may be right. 15. nec perficere . . . : cf. nat. d. ii. 1 ‘ne ego, inquit, incautus qui cum Academico et eodem rhetore congredi conatus sim ! nam neque indisertum Academicum pertimuissem, nec sine ista philosophia rhetorem quamvis eloquentem: neque enim flumine conturbor inanium verborum nec subtilitate senten­ tiarum si orationis est siccitas’. The reference is again not to rhetorical training but the methods of philosophical argument, cf. or. 16, 113, de or. iii. 80—81. See above all the discussion of the place of philosophy in the orator’s equipment at de or. iii. 54—147, and esp. on the value of the various philosophies, ib. 54-81. 16. ut . . . sic : the same contrast at Tusc. iii. 22. astrictior : cf. 94. 31 n., or. 67. 18. consuetudo iudiciorum : cf. or. 62, leg. i. 11. 19. uberior : cf. or. 5 ‘amplitudo Platonis'. §

1 2 1 .20. Iovem : cf. Plut. Cic. 24, Dion. Hal. Dem. 23, and for other tributes to Plato’s style, e.g. de or. i. 47, or. 62. 21. nervosior: ‘more sinewy’, cf. nervi, 177. 22. C.’s judge­ ments on Aristotle’s style {de or. i. 49, or. 5, 62 with Sandys’ n., ac. pr. 119, top. 3,fin. i. 14, Plut. Cic. 24) are often thought so enthusiastic th a t they cannot refer to his extant works but relate to the exoteric writings now almost entirely lost. Yet C.'s eulogies often merely include Aristotle with other philo­ sophers in w hat may be ex parte pleadings on behalf of philosophy in general, and the famous flumen orationis aureum {ac. pr. l.c., Plut, l.c.) may refer only to the particular passage in question. Here nervosior is particularly interesting. I t is at first sight surprising in a context where the stress is on fluency and charm, and nervi are elsewhere said to be lacking in philo­ sophical writing {or. 62), and in the Peripatetics above all {or. 127, cf. off. iii. 106). Yet so unusual a word can hardly be due to corruption, and is it not precisely how the modern reader would describe Aristotle's extant writings ?

ΙΟΟ

COM M ENTARY

Theophrasto : cf. or. 62 ‘Theophrastus divinitate loquendi nomen invenit’, Diog. Laert. v. 38; see also off. i. 3, Seneca nat. quaest. vi. 13. 1, Quintii, x. 1. 83. 22. audivisse . . . : as consistently denied by modern scholars as it is asserted by ancient sources (de or. i. 89, or. 15, off. i. 4, Tac. dial. 32, Quintii, xii. 2. 22, [Plut.] vitt. x oratt. 844B, and Plut. Dem 5, which names as the source Hermippos (third cent. B .C .) who had drawn On some αδέσποτα υπομνήματα). 23. genere et granditate : ‘a style marked by grandeur of lan­ guage’. granditas is a very rare word. 24. in . . . epistula : the fifth of the extant collection of letters attributed to Demosthenes mentions Plato (1490), but only in connexion with the moral excellence inculcated by him. 26. videatur: 'would seem if transferred’; tralata represents the protasis. Kr., Rs. return to videtur of L. § 1 2 2 .3 1 . orationibus: O RF pp. 173-4. The only known speech (pro Fulvio) supplies the only fr. ‘nemo potest uno aspectu neque praeteriens in amorem incidere ’ (inv. i. 80, cf. rhet. Her. ii. 33) which became a stock illustration of the fallacy whereby ‘id quod raro fit fieri omnino negatur’. I. pro Ser. Fulvio : possibly the case in which L. Crassus appeared in 113 (160. 13, Greenidge and Clay p. 60). 3. turba : for C.’s pride in his output cf. or. 108 'nemo enim orator tam m ulta ne in Graeco quidem otio scripsit quam multa sunt nostra’, leg. i. 9. §

1 2 3

. 4. qui : not uncommon as interrogative pronoun, K.-S. i. 655-6, Neue ii. 432. 5. Et ego . . . : the reading of L, correctly punctuated, presents no difficulty: ‘E t ego’ inquam ‘intellego . . .’, i.e. “ 'Yes, and I know who you mean, B rutus,” I answered.’ §

. 13. de amore . . . : 'passages about love, torture, and rumour which are really pointless, but passed muster when Roman ears were still unpractised and our community un­ tutored ’. On amore, cf. 122. 31 n. The arguments for and against the value of evidence extracted by torture or based on rumour had long been standardized loci (inv. ii. 46, 50, rhet. Her. ii. 10, 12, Quintii, v. 1. 3, 4; Arist. rhet. i. 15. 26, part. or. 50). 1 2 4

§ 121 . 21 - § § 126 . 30

ΙΟΙ

ΐ8. splendor : distinction of family, though, as C. implies, not of the highest degree. Curio’s father (RE Scribonius no. 8) had been praetor, splendor, splendidus are much used of Roman knights (TLL v. ii. 716. 17). §

. 19. ecce in manibus : ‘ there now confronts u s ’, cf. Verr. i. 16, TLL viii. 363. 28, 55. 20. C. Gracchus : O R F pp. 174—98, N. Haepke C. Gracchi oratoris Romani fragmenta (Munich 1915). Thanks in par­ ticular to Gellius we have a few substantial frr. of Gracchus (nos. 26—28, 44, 48, 49 total about 60 lines in Malcovati’s text and cf. Appendix A, 17—22) while Festus noted grammatical peculiarities such as poteratur, malo cruce. Thus his works long survived. B ut for us he illustrates almost as much as his contemporaries, the remarks above about the neglect of C.’s predecessors. From w hat remains we infer th a t Gracchus’ strength was in a forceful simplicity, both in narration and in emotional appeals. B ut the developed mastery of complex and rhythmical periods was still to come. Gellius (xi. 13) in a fascinating discussion of fr. 32 reveals Gracchus’ deficiencies in th a t respect. 21. pleniorem . . . : echoed and modified by Tac. dial. 18. 2 ‘sic Catoni seni comparatus C. Gracchus plenior et uberior’. 23. Immo plane : some comm, understand solum, but even as an excited exaggeration (Kr.) it seems an unlikely thing for C. to say. The sense is ‘Yes, certainly I recommend you to read him ’. For immo not as usual correcting, but strengthen­ ing, particularly in pressing for the fulfilment of some inten­ tion expressed or promise made by the other speaker, cf. Plaut. Bacch. 909, 1177, aul. 307, 781, Ter. Andr. 550, eun. 877. 25. fecerunt : Rs. postulates a lacuna after fecerunt on the basis of Quintii.’s allusion in a section on actio (xi. 3. 8) other parts of which derive from Brutus : ‘C. Gracchum in deflenda fratris nece totius populi Romani lacrimas concitasse’. But Quintii, seems in this instance to be referring to de or. iii. 214. 1 2 5

. 27. tali ingenio : for the sentiment cf. har. resp. 43, de or. i. 38, off. ii. 43. 30. genere toto : cf. 64. 8 n. Manus extrema : ‘the finishing to u ch ’, 'th e final polish’. A part from Virg. A en. vii. 572, classical Latin prefers summa manus (TLL viii. 355, Summers on Sen. epp. 12. 4). §

1 2 6

COM M ENTARY

102

§§

- 3 7 . Minor orators of the period after the Gracchi. The structure is: C. Galba, victim of the quaestio Mamilia (§ 127), P. Scipio, cos. n i , and his colleague, a victim of the quaestio (born c. 155 ?), and four other victims (not mentioned for their oratory and so irrelevant to the chronological sequence) (§ 128), a tribune; C. Fimbria, cos. 104, but bom c. I 55 (§ 129) ; a group of non-consulars all probably born c. 150 (§§130-1); consuls of 109-99 born c. 150 (§§132-5); non-consulars, mostly known as tribunes c. 111-103 and prob­ ably born c. 145-140 (§§ 136-7). On these orators cf. Schanz pp. 222-4. 1 2 7

. 5. C. Galba : O RF ρ. 205, R E Sulpicius no. 51, son of the Galba of §§ 82 ff. The quaestorship of c. 120 attributed to him in nineteenth-century editions lacks supporting evidence. 6. gener : cf. 98. 2. 8. rogatione Mamilia : 109 b.c. (Greenidge and Clay pp. 68-69). Sallust Jug. 40 tells the story from the opposite political viewpoint, though not without criticizing the vindictiveness of the anti-senatorial factions: ‘interim Romae C. Mamilius Limetanus tribunus plebis rogationem ad populum promulgat uti quaereretur in eos quorum consilio Iugurtha senati decreta neglexisset, quique ab eo in legationibus aut imperiis pecunias accepissent, qui elephantos quique perfugas tradidissent . . . sed plebes incredibile memoratu est quam intenta fuerit quantaque vi rogationem iusserit, magis odio nobilitatis . . . quam cura rei publicae’. 9. Iugurthinae . . . invidia : ' because of the hostility aroused by the allegations of conspiracy with Ju g u rth a ’. 12. edisceremus : ‘learned by heart'. qui . . . esset : esset is restrictive, cf. on exstet, 57. 1: ‘the first member of a priestly college to be condemned'. §

§

1 2 7

1 2 8 . 14. P . Scipio : R E Cornelius no. 355, cos. i n (cf. 212. 3, off. i. 109) son of Scipio Nasica (107. 20). 16. sale facetiisque : the first orator thus distinguished by C., yet no record of his wit survives even in the long discussions of oratorical wit and humour in de or. ii. 217-89, Quintii, vi. 3, nor is anything else known of his oratory. 17. Bestia: R E Calpurnius no. 23, tr. 121, cos. h i . On his taking bribes to give up the campaign against Jugurtha, cf.

§ 1 2 7 . 5 -§ 129. 26

103

Sail. Jug. 28—29. He was attacked on his return by C. Mem­ mius (136. 30). As with Albinus and Opimius below, nothing whatever is known of his oratory; eius . . . sustulerunt is a digression prompted by the fate of Galba. 18. expulsum : during C. Gracchus’ tribunates (Plut. C. Gr. 4), c f. § 9 5 ·

20. [Mamilia quaestio] : the deletion of these words as a margi­ nal note is plausible; so too is K r.’s invidiosa lege Mamilia quaestorium (quaestorium balancing consularis). 21. C. Catonem : cf. 108. 29. No details are known of his part in the Jugurthine affair. On his condemnation and exile cf. Verr. ii. 4. 22, Balb. 28. Sp. Albinum : R E Postumius no. 45, cos. n o . Sallust’s not entirely one-sided account makes Bestia and also Opimius (Jug. 16) clearly guilty of taking bribes, b u t Albinus guilty only of dilatoriness and incompetence (ib. 36, 38—39). 22. Gracchi interfectorem : there are full accounts of Opimius’ p art in the death of C. Gracchus—with the support of the s.c. ultimum, hence at least in p art C.’s approval of him—in Plut. C. Gr. i i ff., Appian b.c. i. 25—26. 23. absolutum : when accused in 120 by Decius and defended by Carbo for his p a rtin Gracchus’ death (103. 17, 108. 2 nn.). 24. Gracchani : jurors appointed under C. Gracchus’ lex iudiciaria (Greenidge and Clay pp. 34-35). The weight of evi­ dence and probability is th at these jurors were exclusively drawn from the equites. C. also is clearly thinking of them as partisan adherents of the Gracchan faction taking vengeance on Opimius as the slayer of Gracchus, despite the anti-popular politician’s acquittal by a indicium populi (cf. 106. 5 and see on 161. 26). Note the chiastic arrangement Gracchi . .. populo . . . popxdi . . . Gracchani. §

. 25. C. Licinius Nerva : otherwise unknown. M artha’s emendation of C. to P. is based on coins of this date, for references to which see M R R ii. 243. 26. C. Fimbria : O RF p. 206, RE Flavius no. 87, cos. 104. He was acquitted on a charge of extortion (168. 2, Font. 24, Val. Max. viii. 5. 2) and took part in the suppression of Satur­ ninus and Glaucia (100 b . c . ) (Rab. perd. 21). Of his speeches nothing is known. As longius aetate provectus suggests, Fimbria probably 1 2 9

COM M ENTARY became consul late in life: he was a novus homo (Verr. ii. 5. 181), he suffered a defeat in the tribunician elections {Plane. 52), he was dead before 91 (cf. the past tense in de or. ii. 91). He is placed here by date of birth, and my observations in A J Ph lxxvii (1956) 383 n. 23 are to be ignored. 27. habitus est . . . liber : the MSS. readings are defensible, despite the cumbrous repetition of patronus and virtute and apparent inconsistency of luculentus and tolerabilis. Per­ functory and careless writing is not uncommon in these sections where C. is in a hurry to get to Antonius and Crassus (cf. § 138), and the inconsistency is only apparent: luculentus goes with habitus est; what follows—the semicolon should come after patronus—is C.’s own comment. Nor is the inser­ tion of sane ut ita dicam, as is often urged, an argument against luculentus, which was in fact a colloquialism, common in comedy and the letters but first found in the speeches in Phil. vii. 17, xii. 19, to which C. likes to draw attention, e.g. with quidem (76. 13), by position (102. 9), or with sane (Tusc. i. 107, off. iii. 60, Q.f. iii. 5. 1). Jah n ’s lutulentus was surely introduced into literary criticism by Horace (serm. i. 4. i i , 10. 50) merely as part of an elaborate metaphor. I should therefore retain the MSS. readings and translate as follows : ‘ He was considered a top-class advocate, if I may so put it; he was harsh and vituperative, and in his general style a shade too passionate and excitable, yet his attention to detail and his excellent qualities and behaviour made his senatorial utterances authoritative. He was also a competent advocate with some training in civil law, and his actual style of oratory, like his character, was marked by candour.’28*30 28. asper . . . : cf. de or. ii. 91 (onthe Fufius of 222. 9) ‘nervos in dicendo C. Fimbriae, quos tamen habuit ille, non adsequitur, oris pravitatem et verborum latitudinem im ita tu r’. 30. bonus auctor : there is probably an allusion to the legal sense of auctor, ‘guarantor’, and esp. of a seller with good title, i.e. Fimbria was sound and reliable. i. virtute : on virtus as specially appropriate to the personal qualities to which a novus homo owed success, cf. D. C. Earl, The Political Thought of Sallust (Cambridge 1961) ch. iii. Yet the word is strange here. If it is right, C. is distinguishing outspokenness as part of a m an’s character and as a feature of oratorical style. On Fim bria’s character and behaviour cf. Plane. 12, off. iii. 77, Val. Max. vii. 2. 4.

§1 2 9 . 2 6 - § 1 3 0 . §

10

105

. 3. Atque et acri : Martha, citing Quintii, v. 13. 48 for the expression ingenium elegans, keeps L ’s atque etiam. 4. C. Sextius Calvinus : there was a cos. of this name in 124. ButM ünzer (RE Sextius nos. 20, 21) rejects the identification. If this is the Calvinus of de or. ii. 246, 249, as seems likety, he was probably a nearer contemporary of Antonius and Crassus, not otherwise known, a view which suits the chrono­ logical structure of this passage much better than the inter­ polation of a consul of 124. 1 3 0

5. remiserant : ' eased ’ abated ’. The rare intrans, use of remit­ tere is esp. found in medical contexts (Ter. hec. 349, Livy ii. 34. 6) and also of bad weather (Caes. b.c. iii. 26. 4, Livy xl. 33. 4). 6. id : i.e. adesse in causis, not the only example of slight loose­ ness of writing in these sections, cf. 132. 25, 135. 28. 8. M. Brutus : O RF pp. 207—8, R E Iunius no. 50. For some lively recollections of his encounter with Crassus in the case of Plancus (c. 91 b.c.) cf. de or. ii. 220 ff., Chi. 140 ff. [in quo] : the omission of fu it in the main sentence is pos­ sible in view of the abrupt style of the passage, and cf. 135. 28 ' Q. etiam Caepio ', so th a t in quo could be kept. Or should we read licebat. with the Curius, Turius, or Torius named by the MSS. of Att. i. 1. 2 among prospective consular candidates for 64. The proba­ bility th a t we have here a group of men born between c. 120 and c. n o allows both possibilities. § 2 3 8 .2 9 · C. M acer: O RF pp. 356—8, R E Licinius no. 112, tr. pi. 73 ; father of Licinius Calvus tlie orator and poet (§ 283). Accused before C. on a charge of extortion in 66, he com­ m itted suicide after (according to Val. Max. ix. 12. 7, before) his condemnation [Att. i. 4. 2, Plut. Cic. 9. 2). Besides the Sallustian oratio Macri on the restoration of tribunician powers [hist. iii. 48), we know of the prosecution of Rabirius [Rob. perd. 7) and a speech pro Tuscis from which Priscian [GL ii. 532) quotes the -words 'quos oportuit in amissa resti­ tuere, hisce etiam reliquias averrerunt'. On his historical writings cf. leg. i. 7 ‘nam quid Macrum numerem? cuius loquacitas habet aliquid argutiarum—nec id tamen ex illa erudita Graecorum copia sed ex librariolis Latinis—in ora­ tionibus m ulta sed inepta elatio, summa im pudentia’. The speeches referred to are those included in the history from which frr. 20 and 22 (Peter H R R i. 306) are drawn. He too (228. 14 n.) began with the foundation of Rome, but soon reached the third century. For the varied modern estimates of his work cf. Schanz pp. 319 if. 2. nomen : also to be taken -with huius at the beginning of the sentence. 7. veteratoriam : cf. 82. 29. § § 2 3 9 - 4 6 . Consulars [Piso-Silanus), non-consulars [Q. Pom­ peius—M . Pontidius). § 2 3 9 . 9. C. . . . Piso : O RF pp. 354-5, R E Calpurnius no. 63, cos. 67. Possibly identical with the iudex in the case pro Roscio comoedo, and the prosecutor in the case of Caecina, he was defended by C. in 63 on a charge of misgovemment.

i 76 io .

COM M ENTARY statariu s :

χ ι 6 . 12 n.

sermonis plenus : ‘conversational cf. or. 64 ' (oratio philo­ sophorum) . . . sermo potius quam oratio d icitur’, and sermo is contrasted with contentio in de or. iii. 177, off. i. 132, ii. 48. 13. M’. Glabrionem : R E Acilius no. 38, pr. 70, when hepresided a t Verres' trial, cos. 67. Scaevolae : possibly P. Mucius Scaevola the pontifex (cos. 133, cf· 98· 4< 108. 26) (so Schob Verr. i. 55), b u t Münzer favours identification with Q. Scaevola the augur. 15. L. Torquatus : O RF pp. 355-6, R E Manlius no. 79, cos. 65, in which year he defended Catiline de rebus repetundis, and the poet Horace was born, cf. carm. iii. 24. 1 ‘ O nata mecum consule Manlio . . . pia testa . . .’. He was an Epicurean, like his son who appears as Epicurean spokesman in de finibus i (fin. i. 3 9 )· in existimando . . . : ‘sound in judgement and in his whole style very polished’. 17. Cn. Pompeius : Pompey the Great, born like C. in 106 (so here placed by date of birth), cos. 70 and 55 ; O RF pp. 358-67. Several occasions of speeches are known, bu t of Pompey’s words there remain only the businesslike letters of which C. sent copies to Atticus in 49 (Att. viii. 11 a , c) and the state­ ment (GL vi. 8. 14) ‘ et scribebat et dicebat kadamitatem pro calamitate From the testimonia on Pompey’s oratory (O RF pp. 35960), apart from such formal compliments as imp. Pomp. 42, Balb. 2 (cf. Plut. Pomp. 1), a clear picture emerges of a reluc­ tant, almost inarticulate, speaker and writer; cf. Seneca’s surprising statem ent (epp. 11. 4) ‘nihil erat mollius ore Pompei: numquam non coram pluribus erubuit, utique in contionibus’. Quintii, iii. 8. 50 refers to speeches written by C. for Pompey. He also calls him ‘abunde disertus rerum suarum narrator’ (xi. 1. 36), which suggests a recognizable type of man of action, whose restricted powers of utterance give an exaggerated appearance of egotism. Perhaps C.’s constant criticisms of Pompey’s ‘unwillingness ’ to make his meaning and intentions clear should be read in the light of this. According to ‘quidam historici’ (Suet. rhet. 1) Pompey recognized his defects and was taking lessons in oratory ‘ sub ipsum civile bellum’, while early in 49 b .c . C. regrets th a t Pompey, though scriptor luculentus, entrusted to Sestius the drafting of an im portant communication (Att. vi. 17. 2).

§ 239 . 10-§ 241 . 2

§

2 4 0

§

2 4 1

177

. 22. D. Silanus : R E Iunius no. 163, cos. 62. As consul designate in 63, he was called on first to propose punishment for the Catilinarians, and suggested ‘supplicium’ i.e. execu­ tion. Influenced by Caesar, he later changed his mind, de­ fending himself with the plea th at by ‘supplicium’ he had m eant safe custody (Sail. Cat. 50. 4, Suet. Jul. 14). vitricus : Silanus married Brutus' mother Servilia, after the death of B rutus’ father: one of their daughters, B rutus’ half-sisters, was married to Cassius, another to Lepidus, a third to Servilius Vatia (cos. 48) (cf. Table, p. 162). 2 4 . Q. Pompeius : O RF pp. 347-8, R E Pompeius no. 25. He was entrusted as legatus with creating the Roman province of Bithynia when its last king Nicomedes bequeathed it to Rome (74 B.c.). He held no high office. He was killed in Egypt after Pharsalus. The brief letter fam. vi. 16 seems to belong to 44, and to have been written by his son. On the omission of the main verb cf. 130. 8, 135. 28, but here the digression (quod scire . . .) may have caused anacolu­ thon. 25. discendi : but the MSS. reading dicendi is satisfactory. 27. fuit enim . . . : cf. §§ 236, 310. 2 8 . non . . . orationem : ‘did not do justice to his style’, cf. 203. 14 n. .31. P. Autronius : R E Autronius no. 7; cos. des. for 65, he was convicted of ambitus, and was involved in the mysterious intrigues known as the ‘First Catilinarian Con­ spiracy’. Again implicated in the second conspiracy, he was exiled. 32. L. Octavius : otherwise unknown. 2. C. Staienus : like the Caepasii and perhaps Cosconius (below) he was concerned in the trial of Oppianicus, the corrupt iudicium Iunianum, of 74 b.c., and is mercilessly attacked for his venality in pro Cluentio (cf. also Verr. ii. 2. 79): 'Staieno . . . homine ad excogitandum acutissimo, ad audendum impudentissimo, ad efficiendum acerrimo (haec enim ille et aliqua ex parte habebat et maiore ex parte se habere simula­ bat) ’ (Clu. 67), ‘egens, sumptuosus, audax, callidus, perfidio­ sus’ (ib. 70), ‘qui esset totus ex fraude et mendacio factus, quique ea vitia quae a natura habebat, etiam studio atque artificio quodam malitiae condivisset’ (ib. 72). He spoke in a case de bonis Safini Atellae in 76 b.c. (Clu. 68). N 8X4437

178

COM M ENTARY

q u i. . . adoptaverat : cf. Clu. 72 ‘ “ quid tu ” inquit “ Paete ? ” hoc enim sibi Staienus cognomen ex imaginibus Aeliorum delegerat’, and C.’s jibe at Aelius Ligus (Sest. 69) . . qui cognomen sibi ex Aeliorum imaginibus arripuit, quo magis nationis eius esse quam generis videretur’. fervido . . . : 'fiery, aggressive, and hysterical’. All three Latin words are stronger than their English derivatives. 6. in facinore . . . : cf. Clu. 99 ff., top. 75 ‘u t Staieno nuper accidit qui ea locutus est bonis viris subauscultantibus pariete interposito quibus patefactis in iudiciumque prolatis ille rei capitalis iure damnatus e st’. 3.

Caepasii : O R F pp. 3 7 3 - 5 . The elder Caepasius defended Fabricius in the second of the series of trials before Iunius in 74, and the tale of his unhappy application of a stock rhetorical locus became a favourite: ‘cum ilia verba gravissima ex intimo artificio deprompsisset: "Respicite, iudices, hominum fortunas, respicite dubios variosque casus, respicite C. Fabrici senectutem ’’, cum hoc respicite ornandae orationis causa saepe dixisset, respexit ipse. A t C. Fabricius a subselliis demisso capite discesserat’ [Clu. 58, cf. Quintii, vi. 3. 40, R L M 39. 17, 428. 20). 8. opera : cf. Clu. 57 ‘ad Caepasios fratres confugit, homines industrios atque eo animo u t quaecumque dicendi potestas esset data in honore atque in beneficio ponerent’. repentini : ‘ upstarts ’. quaestores : in the middle 70’s. This group of non-consular orators was contemporary in age w ith the consuls preceding. C. has with Silanus reached consuls born in 106, and with Q. Pompeius begins a group of non-consulars born in 108 and the years immediately following. 9. oppidano : ‘small-town’, ‘provincial’, cf. de or. ii. 240, and the discussion of urbanitas above, §§ 170-2. 10. vocalem: 'w ith a voice’, ironically: vocalis is the stock antithesis of mutus. Xi. C. Cosconium : see R E Cosconius nos. 4, 12. Miinzer’s sug­ gested identification with a known praetor of 63 and xxvir of 59 fits well with the assumption th a t the reference here is to a man born c. 105. qui nullo . . . : ‘a man of no intelligence who p u t his fluency of utterance at the disposal of the people, who thronged to hear him and received his speeches with applause’. § 2 4 2 . 7.

§ 2 4 1 . 3 -§

243

. 23

179

14. Q. Arrius : an Arrius was praetor in 73. Plut. Cic. 15 men­ tions an Arrius who was praetorius by 63, and he is to be identified with the Arrius who failed to secure the backing necessary to achieve the consulship of 58 (A tt. ii. 5. 2, 7. 3), who gave the banquet at which Vatinius appeared in black (Vat. 30), who had trouble with his aspirates according to Catullus 84, th a t 'nobile epigramma' (Quintii, i. 5. 20)—but for doubts about the traditional text and interpretation of th a t poem cf. H. B. Rosen, Mnemos. n . s . xiv (1961) 224 ff.— and was, with his family, notorious for extravagant tastes (Hor. serm. ii. 3. 86, 243). Klebs (RE Arrius nos. 7, 8) and Broughton (M R R under 73 and 64 B.c.) distinguish the first Arrius from the other, M artha ad loc. and Syme, CPh 1 (1955) 132 identify them, rejecting the evidence of Schol. Gronov. p. 324 St. th a t Arrius, the praetor of 73, died on his way to Sicily to succeed Verres. B ut with C. still adhering to an order determined by dates of birth, the praetor of 73, born not later than 113, is too early for the present passage. There are two men who must be distinguished. 15. secundarum : sc. partium actor (δευτεραγω νιστής) ‘played second fiddle t o ’, cf. div.Caec. 48 ‘u t in actoribus Graecis fieri videmus, saepe illum qui est secundarum aut tertiarum par­ tium, cum possit aliquanto clarius dicere quam ipse primarum, m ultum submittere u t ille princeps quam maxime excellat'. The Arrius of Plut. Cic. 15 may be linked with Crassus in th a t both are mentioned as providing information about the Catilinarians. The description of the Arrius of Catullus 84 as ‘ misso in Syriam ’ has been taken to refer to Crassus’ Parthian expedition in 55. 16. oboedire tempori : ‘to serve in times of need’, cf. tempori(1bus) servire (Verr. ii. 3. 199, Cael. 13, Sest. 14), tempori parere (Vat. 2). 17. honori . . . : i.e. to advance their political prospects by support in elections, or help them when accused in the courts. For periculum cf. 278. 22, Cael. 16 ‘periculum am bitus’ (Austin ad loc. and on Quintii, xii. i. 40). §

. 21. Olympiorum cupidi : ‘in their eagerness to gain an Olympic victory’. 22. solem : the boxing at Olympia took place a t midday (Paus. vi. 24. 1) in midsummer. omni . . . : ‘enjoying consistent good luck’. Fungor is normally used of something within the agent’s power (munere. 2 4 3

ι8ο

COM M ENTARY

etc.), but cf. Auct. bell. Alex. 69. 1 ‘multis laboribus peri­ culisque functam ’, Lucr. 3. 734, 5. 358, TLL vi. 1. 1589. 49. The common Silver Latin expression fato fungi = ‘to die ’ is of course a special case. 24. illius . . . severitatem : this difficult phrase is always taken to refer to ‘the severe restrictions in the courts’, i.e. on the length of speeches (cf. § 324), imposed by Pompey’s law of 52. I t is difficult to see why an Arrius should be so strongly affected by such a restriction. I suggest th a t the allusion is to Pompey’s attem pts to restrict bribery and intimidation, and indeed very probably to a condemnation of Arrius on such counts. Severitas is the right word for such a context, and the strange expression iudicialis annus (descriptive adjectives of any sort are rarely attached to annus) is more easily inter­ preted as ‘th a t year of many trials ’ (cf. on 324. 8 cotidie) than as ‘th a t year in which new regulations were introduced for judicial proceedings’. The blows endured by the boxers represent the rough-and-tumble of Arrius’ discreditable politi­ cal life—so far he could look after himself. B ut Pompey’s law destroyed th a t kind of career, as the hot sun destroyed the hopes of boxers unused to Olympic conditions. §

2 4 4

. 29. memoriam . . . aequalem : cf. leg. i. 8 ‘ipse autem aequalem aetatis suae memoriam deposcit u t ea complectatur quibus ipse interfuit’. Here memoria, as often, = ‘period’.

§

2 4 5

. 2 . T. Torquatus: R E Manlius no. 85, M R R ii. 493 (a possible reference on an inscription from Delos). Other­ wise unknown. 3. Rhodia . . . Molonis : cf. 51. 12 n., 307. 15 n. 5. ambitu : we do not know why Torquatus is thus singled out as a likely beneficiary from the laws against ambitus, but since he appears to have been bom c. 104, the reference is probably to C.’s consular law rather than, as most editors think, to Pompey’s law of 52. §

2 4 6 . 8. M. Pontidius : an Arpinate (municeps noster), not otherwise known. 10. volvens : cf. 280. 15, or. 229 fin. The metaphor is from the flow of rivers, a common type, cf. 325. 28, or. 53 ‘flumen . . . verborum volubilitasque’, Hör. carm. iv. 2. 11 ‘verba devol­ v it’, serm. i. 4. 11.

§ 2 4 3 . 2 3 -§

247

.

19

ι8 ι

11. effervescens : ‘ boiling over always with the idea of exceed­ ing bounds, again a metaphor from the movement of water, cf. de or. ii. 88 'verbis effervescentibus et paulo nimium redundantibus’. 13. iudice : private cases were normally heard by a single iudex after decisions on th e formula by a magistrate in iure (275. 29 n.). Panels of recuperatores and larger juries, e.g. the centumviri, were also used (Greenidge pp. 263 ff.). § § 2 4 6 . 1 5 - 2 6 6 . Orators born c. 100. C. now discusses a group of consuls born after 105, but breaks into the group of nonconsulars which follows (C. Memmius, § 247, and then C. Sicinius, etc. §§ 263 ff.) with a long digression on two living orators, M. Marcellus and Caesar, who had been consuls in the 50’s (§§ 248-62). §

. 15. M. Messalla : O RF pp. 400-1, R E Valerius no. 266, cos. 61, when 'Messalla consul est egregius, fortis, constans, diligens, nostri laudator, amator, im itator’ (AU. i. 14. 6). He was censor in 55, and in 54 one of six advocates who spoke for Scaurus (Ascon. Scaur, p. 20 Cl.). In stating th a t his speeches were extant, Schol. Gronov. Rose. Am. 5 was doubtless con­ fusing him with Messalla Corvinus, the noted orator of Augustus’ time. 18. laboris . . . operae . . . causarum : ‘hard work ’ . . . ‘ attention to the interests of others’ . . .‘cases’. For a similar series of genitives of quality which passes from internal to external attributes cf. Gael. 77 ‘civem bonarum artium bonarum partium bonorum virorum ’; see 286. 20 n., Lebreton p. 84. § 2 4 7 . 19. Metelli : O R F pp. 379-83, R E Caecilius nos. 86, 96. Celer was cos. 60 and died in 59 : he was the famous Clodia’s husband. C. expresses admiration for him in Gael. 59, but was not always on the best of terms with him and his family (cf. fam. V . i, 2). Nepos (cos. 57) was a Pompeian who, as tribune in December 63, attacked C. for his suppression of the Catilinarians, but as consul helped in C.’s return from exile. He is presumed to have died soon after 56. No fragments survive of speeches by either Metellus, but there is one letter from each (fam. v. 1, 3). non nihil : non should not be added : there is an antithesis between causis and populare (i.e. in contionibus, 136. 2 n.). Of the causae associated with these Metelli (O RF p. 380), one was dropped a t an early stage, the other perhaps concerned the father of Celer. 2 4 6

i

82

COM M ENTARY

2i. Cn. . . . Lentulus : O RF pp. 416-18, R E Cornelius no. 234, cos. 56. He gave evidence against Verres (Verr. ii. 2. 103) and there are brief records of speeches in 57 (Q.f. ii. 1. 1) and 56, cf. Val. Max. vi. 2. 6 ‘cum in contione de Magni Pompei nimia potentia quereretur adsensusque ei clara voce universus populus esset, ‘adclam ate’ inquit ‘adclamate Quirites dum licet: iam enim vobis impune facere non licebit’. 24. C. Memmius : O RF pp. 401-4, R E Memmius no. 8, pr. 58. A son-in-law of Sulla, he was at first strongly antiCaesarian (Suet. Jul. 49. 2), but was later (having divorced his wife) supported by Caesar in his candidature for the consulship (ib. 73. 1). He was exiled for ambitus in 52. A few allusions to, and phrases from, his speeches survive (cf. Appendix A, 33, 34). He wrote erotic verse, cf. Ovid trist. ϋ· 4 3 3 'Quid referam Ticidae, quid Memmi carmen, apud quos / rebus abest omnis nominibusque pudor ? ’ He is also famous as the patron of poets. Catullus and Cinna were on his staff during his governorship of Bithynia (57 b.c.), and Lucretius dedicated his poem to him. In a letter written to him in exile (fam . xiii. 1) C. asks for his good offices in securing the restoration of Epicurus’ house a t Athens to followers of Epicureanism. The terms of the letter show th a t Memmius himself was not an Epicurean, and he may have been more directly the object of Lucretius’ missionary fervour than is customarily supposed. L. F. : A. Biedl in Wien Stud, xlix (1932) 113-14 argued th a t C. only uses the patronymic in Brutus to indicate the less or least im portant bearer of the name, and hence th a t the Memmius of this passage is not the well-known Memmius described in the last note. B ut of the dozen examples those at X09. 4 and 306. x and perhaps others do not seem to support Biedl’s generalization, and since in fact the distinction by patronymic seems to be often made between bearers of the same name in different generations (79. 3, 109. 4, 175. 4, 177. I 7 )> the contrast here may be witli C. Memmius tr. i n (136. 30). § § 2 4 8 - 6 2 . Brutus spoke ofM . Marcellus, and Atticus of Julius Caesar, stressing Ms interest in pure latinity and the tribute he paid me for my leading part in the development of the language. § 2 4 8 .2 9 . Hoc loco . . . : Brutus interrupts as C. passes to non-consulars of the early 50’s B.c. in order to introduce the

§ 2 4 7 . 2 1 -§

250

.

17

183

discussion of the most im portant consulars still living apart from Ser. Sulpicius, dealt with in §§ 152—7. Of other consuls of the 50’s Pompey and Crassus (coss. 55, and previously in 70) and Metellus Nepos have already been discussed; some further victims of the Civil W ar (but not A. Gabinius, cos. 58) appear in §§ 267 ff. Those still living whom in accordance with his declared principle (§ 231) C. omits were L. Piso (cos. 58) of whom C. says (Pis. fr. iii (Nisbet)) ‘Quid quod miser, cum loqui non posset, tacere non potuit ? ’, and the consuls of 53, Domitius Calvinus and Valerius Messalla. I. Marcello : O RF pp. 457-8, R E Claudius no. 229, cos. 51. Hostile to Caesar, he retired to Mytilene after Pharsalus. Caesar agreed to his return to Rome (cf. pro Marcello), but on the way home in 45 he was murdered at Athens (fam. iv. 12). A letter of his survives (fam. iv. 11), and he took part in some of the im portant cases of the 50’s b . c . 6. iudicare : ‘form a critical judgem ent ’. afuit : from 58 Caesar was in Gaul. §

2 4 9

. 8. id, quod . . . : for id quod introducing a clause, where an acc. inf. might be expected cf. har. resp. 62, fam. iii. 8. 6. similem tui : cf. fam . xv. 9. 1 (to Marcellus) ‘maximaque laetitia afficior cum ab hominibus prudentissimis virisque optimis omnibus dictis studiis institutis vel me tui similem audio vel te m ei’. Ne ego : the first of four closely grouped occurrences (cf. 251. I , 266. 24, 295. 2) of ne, ‘indeed’ (always in C. with a pronoun next to it), which are a good example of the tendency of authors to develop passing mannerisms—a phenomenon which has some bearing on the analysis of texts for evidence of authenticity, etc., and on textual criticism (cf. E. Laughton CPh xlv (1950) 73 ff.). I I . didicit : ‘ he studied ’, cf. de or. ii. 4, or. 146, ‘ego semper me didicisse prae me tu li’. §

2 5 0

. 13. lectis : his diction was ‘elegans’, cf. de or. i. 154, or. 227. 17. m aximeque . . . : ‘he, above all, merits praise in th a t a t this very time, as it is possible to do in the midst of the misfortunes inflicted by fate on us all, he comforts himself with the con­ sciousness of his patriotism and the practice and revival of intellectual interests’.

COM M ENTARY These words also refer by implication to C. himself. P eter’s quod is to be taken in the sense ‘ so far as but C. means th a t a good conscience and intellectual pursuits are available and appropriate consolations—without limitation : hence the change from L ’s cum is unnecessary. This interpretation accords with Sen. dial, xii (Helv. cons.). 8. 1 (the passage on which Hendr. relies for his identification of B rutus’ ‘le tte r’ with De Virtute, Intr. 3) ‘ M. Brutus satis hoc p u tat quod licet in exsilium euntibus virtutes suas secum ferre’, fatali : a hint th a t Caesar was not solely responsible. 20. Mytilenis : on B rutus’ return journey from Asia. plane virum : cf. Sen. dial, xii (Helv. cons.). 9.6 ‘idem Brutus ait C. Caesarem Mytilenas praetervectum quia non sustineret videre deformatum virum '. If B rutus’ letter was his De Vir­ tute he may have said there th a t Marcellus was not deformatus, but plane vir, and C. may be recalling th a t in ut dixi. 22. nunc : so of a past time contrasted with a still earlier one in Verr. ii. 3. 47 ‘ quos ego campos antea collesque nitidissimos viridissimosque vidissem, hos ita vastatos nunc ac desertos videbam ’. 23. Cratippo : the leading Peripatetic philosopher of the time and a friend of C. (div. i. 5, ii. 107, Tim . 1), whose lectures C.’s son Marcus attended (or cut) (off. i. 1, fam. xvi. 21. 3, 5). copia : either ‘with a complete rhetorical technique ’ or ‘with all his resources ' of philosophy generally. § 2 5 1 . 26. oblivionem : §§ 11, 266. 28. ille : Brutus. 29. tibi constas : ‘you are self-consistent’. 30. et hercule . . . : ‘ and certainly if you were to deal with them as you have dealt with the dead, leaving nobody out, you would indeed come across many orators of the calibre of Autronius and Staienus’. 2. Qua re . . . : C. avoids the living (i) so as to omit many inferior orators about whom he would have to be uncompli­ mentary, (ii) so as to avoid the risk of under-estimating the meritorious. But (i) Caesar was not an Autronius, and (ii) in fact C.'s opinion of him was so high th a t the second risk could not arise. § 2 5 2 . 7. Caesare: O RF pp. 383-97. C.’s account is one-sided, almost the whole being concerned with Caesar’s diction, and

§2 5 0 .

17

-§

253

.

16

185

the remainder with his delivery (§ 261), the famous judgement on the commentarii being added at the close (§ 262). Our other evidence for Caesar’s oratory, though considerable in quantity, adds little of substance to our picture, but note Quintii, x. 1. 114 ‘C. vero Caesar si foro tantum vacasset, non alius ex nostris contra Ciceronem nominaretur. Tanta in eo vis est, id acumen, ea concitatio ut illum eodem animo dixisse quo bellavit appareat: exornat tamen haec omnia mira ser­ monis, cuius proprie studiosus fuit, elegantia ’ ; also C. ’s letter to Nepos (ap. Suet. Jul. 55. 2) ‘Quid? oratorum quem huic antepones eorum qui nihil aliud egerunt ? quis sententiis aut acutior aut crebrior ? quis verbis aut ornatior aut elegantior ? ’ Verbatim quotations are few, but cf. Appendix A, 31, 32. 8. de hoc . . . : from Cicero. 11. Laeliorum : cf. §211, 12. id quoque : cf. Tac. dial. 28, esp. 6 ‘sic Corneliam Gracchorum, sic Aureliam Caesaris, sic Atiam Augusti praefuisse educationibus accepimus ’. § 2 5 3 .1 5 . occupationibus: cf. Suet. Jul. 56 ‘reliquit et de analogia duos libros . . . (quos) in transitu Alpium cum ex citeriore Gallia conventibus peractis ad exercitum rediret . . . fecit’, Fronto p. 221 N. ad te : the work, like Varro’s De Lingua Latina, was dedi­ cated to C. 16. de ratione . . . : the work is elsewhere (e.g. Suet. l.c. above) cited under the Greek title De Analogia (ratio = Aôyos). This passage (§§253-61) is concerned with the Hellenistic gram­ matical controversy over Analogy and Anomaly, on which our fullest information comes from Varro l.l. viii-x, cf. Quintii, i. 6, Sext. Emp. adv. math. i. c. 10. The proportions of Varro’s account suggest th a t the issue was primarily theoretical, i.e. the question was whether language in fact is ‘rational’ and ‘ systematic ’ (άνά λόγον), and Analogy was not so much an attem pt to prescribe how people should speak as a claim th at language as normally spoken was systematic. B ut since th at position was hardly tenable, there was inevitably a trend among pedants and purists towards (a) abnormal ‘analogistic ’ usage (cf. C.’s remarks on Sisenna, §§259-60), and (b) pre­ scriptive grammar based on a sharp contrast between ratio and consuetudo (the view attacked by Sextus). Cicero, Caesar, Quintilian, and Sextus all took the common-sense middle

ι86

COM M ENTARY

path. Consuetudo, the language actually used, is the given phenomenon from which appropriate principles m ust be deduced. B ut where there is a choice between consuetudines, as when through historical circumstances a language is ' cor­ ru p ted ’ by outside influence, ratio is the touchstone for selecting the better usage (cf. § 258, Varro l.l. ix. 17). On this view ‘analogical’ forms and words which were too far from common usage should be avoided : hence Caesar’s remark (ap. Geli. i. 10. 4) 'habe semper in memoria atque in pectore u t tamquam scopulum sic fugias inauditum atque insolens ver­ bum ’, and cf. Varro l.l. viii. 33, 60, ix. 10, 55 and esp. ix. 5-6, i i 4-15, for the interesting view th a t while the people as a whole ought to speak correctly (analogically), the orator, in this unlike the poet, is not free to do as he pleases (cf. or. 160 on a point of pronunciation where C. says 'usum loquendi populo concessi, scientiam mihi reservavi’). B ut obviously opinions could differ as to where the line m ust be drawn, and Caesar’s use of certain archaic forms is attested in Quintii, i. 5. 63, Gell. iv. 16. 8, xiii. 3. 5. 17. primoque . . . libro : ‘a t the beginning of the w ork’. The quotation th a t follows is from the dedication. 18. originem : cf. Arist. rhet. iii. 5. 1 Ιση δ’ αρχή τής λεξεως το ελλήνιζαν, delectus verborum is not simply ‘choice of w ords’ but includes grammatical correctness, the avoidance of sole­ cism and barbarism, in short Latinitas. 21. ac s i . . . : ‘ and if some have by study and practice achieved the ability to give noble and eloquent utterance to their thoughts—and you as the virtual founder and originator of this fluency we ought to regard as having performed a notable service to the fame and prestige of the Roman people— is acquaintance with this easy colloquial style to be left on one side ? ’ 25. facilem et cotidianum : sermo cotidianus can be a technical term for colloquial speech in contrast with more elevated style (e.g. fam. ix. 21. 1, Suet. Aug. 87, Quintii, xii. 10. 40), but here, as a t Tac. dial. 32. 3, the two do not exclude each other. For Caesar sermo cotidianus is the straightforward but correct everyday Latin which m ust be the basis of all Latin style. Some have detected in facilem an ironical allusion to C.’s claim in de oratore th a t Latinitas was not worth serious study as a p art of rhetorical training (cf. 140. 1 n.). I t has sometimes been suggested th a t the ‘Ciceronian’

§ 2 5 3 . 1 6 -§

256

.

12

187

rhythm s of this passage are an intentional compliment by Caesar. B ut C. had no monopoly of these rhythms, and even in the commentarii—while here we are dealing with an elabo­ rate formal dedication—Caesar’s rhythm s are surprisingly like those of Cicero, and unlike those of Sallust and Livy (Shewring in OCD art. Prose Rhythm 17). §

2 5 4

§

2 5 5

. 2. Quo . . . uno : i.e. copia loquendi.

. 5 . supplicationi : the public thanksgiving for the sup­ pression of the Catilinarian conspiracy, cf. Cat. iii. 15, 23, Pis. 6, fam . xv. 4. 11. non : for the word-order cf. Att. xiv. 12. 2, xvi. 9, Reid on fin. ii. 13. triumphis : C. could claim Caesar’s support for this view also, cf. Plin. n.h. vii. 117 (apostrophizing C.) ‘facundiae Latiarumque litterarum parens atque u t dictator Caesar hostis quondam tuus de te scripsit omnium triumphorum lauream adepte maiorem quanto plus est ingeni Romani ter­ minos in tantum promovisse quam im peri’, a passage in which Hendrickson, CPh i (1906) 118, first detected a frag­ m ent of De Analogia. 10. genuit : cf. Plin. n.h. l.c. ‘facundiae . . . parens’, Sen. epp. 40. II. Ligurum : the Romans were frequently engaged in fighting Ligurian tribes from the time of the Second Punic War, cf., e.g., Livy xxxv. 40, xxxix. 1, xl. 25, xliii. 9, and esp. xl. 59 ‘Q. Fulvius ex Liguribus triumphavit, quem triumphum magis gratiae quam rerum gestarum magnitudine datum constabat’. Other triumphs are recorded for the years 177, I 75> 158, 123, 122, 117, 115—and our records are far from complete. C.’s tone reflects his disappointment at the failure of his own long-maintained claim to a trium ph for his success over a stronghold of Cilician brigands (Att. v. 20, fam. xv. 4. 10), bu t it is often forgotten th a t triumphs were granted for achievements not less trivial. C.’s claim did not imply th a t he p u t himself on a level with the Scipios or Pompey. § 2 5 6 . 12. Verum . . . : ‘formule familière à Cicéron quand il avance quelque proposition contestable’ says Martha, com­ paring Att. xii. 41. 3, Tusc. ii. 55, off. i. 74 ‘vere autem si volumus iudicare multae res exstiterunt urbanae maiores clarioresque quam bellicae’.

ι88

COM M ENTARY

13. imperatorum sapientia : H. Fuchs in Navicula Chiloniensis (Leiden 1956) pp. 123—46 is generally much too enthusiastic about tidying away loose ends in C. ’s writing, b u t he may be right here in deleting these words as a gloss on divinis con­ siliis, since it is hard to think w hat C. means by imperatores who saved the state domi. C. is perhaps proposing to ignore all instances where the very existence (salus) of the state was involved—even the suppression of Catiline. 18. dictionem : so used for a speech in de or. i. 152, ii. 270, Quintii, ii. 4. 27, Tac. dial. 34. 2, cf. TLL v. i. 1006. 53, bu t note Fronto’s advice to M. Aurelius (p. 78 N) ‘unum verbum de oratione ablega et quaeso ne umquam eo utaris, dictionem pro oratione’. C. deliberately avoids the elevated oratio. L. Crassus’ speech (cf. §§ 144 ff., 195 ff.) may have been mere 'talk in g ’, but was worth two triumphs over p etty strong­ holds. Crassus, like C., was refused a triumph for minor successes (inv. ii. i n , Pis. 62, Ascon. p. 14 Cl.). §

2 5 7

. 2 2 . Minervae : Phidias’ statue of Athena Parthenos, of ivory covered with detachable gold plates, now known only from descriptions and unsatisfactory reproductions on coins or in the form of small statuettes. 2 4 . tignarium : ‘fabros tignarios dicimus non eos dum taxat qui tigna dolant sed omnes qui aedificant’ (dig. i. 16. 235). 2 6 . pingere . . . fingere : a favourite assonance (L & S s.v. fingo). 27. baiuli : lit. ‘bearers ’, 'p o rters’, cf. Gell. v. 3, bu t also Paul. Fest. 135 L ‘baiulos dicebant antiqui quos nunc dicimus operarios ’, and the two words are coupled, as here, a t parad. 23, cf. de or. ii. 40. §

2 5 8

. 29. Solum quidem . . . : “ 'Y ou observe” , he said, “ the orator’s base and foundation, a purified and correct latinity; those who have up to now enjoyed a reputation for th a t owed it not to science and reason but w hat may be termed sound usage.” ’ Solum . . . : ci. de or. iii. 151 'solum quoddam atque funda­ mentum est verborum usus et copia bonorum ’, where as here, C. means th a t sound latinity is a necessary foundation, b u t only a foundation, on which the edifice of oratory is reared. I. quasi : softens what is in this context a t.t., and further the distinction between bona consuetudo and prava (vitiosa) con­ suetudo, which plays a large p art in C.’s argument as th a t on

§ 256.

13

-§ 258.

12

189

which ratio adjudicates, was not accepted by those who re­ garded ratio as quite independent of consuetudo (cf. 253. 16 n.). 2. P. Scipionem : Hendr. accepts Heraeus’s Philum Scipionem. Rs. reads-L. Philum, P. Scipionem; cf. 108. 25 for the latinity of Furius Philus, a member of the Scipionic Circle. 3. aetatis . . . : ‘speaking good Latin was a merit of th a t age in the same way as integrity of character’, i.e. it could be taken for granted in the good old days, cf. off. ii. 76 ' laudat Africanum Panaetius quod fuerit abstinens . . . laus abstinen­ tiae non hominis est solum sed etiam temporum illorum’. 4. Caecilium : the comic poet who died in 168. 5. male locutos : cf. Att. vii. 3. 10 ‘Caecilium . . . malus enim auctor Latinitatis e s t’. On the harshness of Pacuvius’ style cf. or. 155, Quintii, i. 5. 67. 6. extra urbem : there may be a reference to the origins of the Insubrian Caecilius and of Pacuvius, who came from Brundi­ sium. neque eos : for the demonstrative pronoun instead of repeated relative cf. Lebreton p. 100, who cites from the speeches only Phil. i. 24, ii. 107. 7. barbaries : βαρβαρισμός, cf. rhet. Her. iv. 17, Quintii, i. 5. 5, which show th a t the term could be used of ‘provincialism ’ as opposed to urbanitas (§§ 170 ff.), or indeed of any grammatical fault; b u t the oxymoron barbaries domestica seems emphatic: is there an allusion to the influence of foreign slaves in the upbringing of Roman children ? 8. vetustas : ‘the passing of tim e’, 60. 29 n. 9. Athenas : cf. pS.-Xen. rep. Ath. ii. 8 επειτα φωνήν πάσαν άκοάεξελέξαντο τοΰτο μεν εκ τη ς, τοΰτο δε εκ τ η ς · και οι μεν "Ελληνες Ιδία μάλλον καί φωνή και διαίτη καί σ χ ή μ α τι χρω νται, Α θηναίοι δε κεκραμενη εζ απάντω ν των 'Ελλήνων και βαρβάρων.

ovtîs

in hanc urbem . . . : cf./am . ix. 15. 2 ‘accedun t. . . Romani veteres atque urbani sales, ego . . . mirifice capior facetiis maxime nostratibus praesertim cum eas videam primum oblitas Latio, tum cum in urbem nostram est infusa peregri­ nitas, nunc vero etiam bracatis et transalpinis nationibus 11. obrussa : ‘touchstone’, cf. Plin n.h. xxxiii. 59 ‘auri experi­ mentum ignis est u t simili colore rubeat ignescatque et ipsum: obrussam vo cant’, Sen. epp. 13. i. 12. pravissima . . . regula : an oxymoron: pravissima is quasiliteral, ‘crooked’, regula a straight-edge or rule.

190 §

COM M ENTARY

. 1 3 . F la m in in u m : T. Quinctius Flamininus cos. 123, cf. § log. Much of the argument is left implicit. Members of the Scipionic Circle lived before the corruption of Latin which necessitated the application of ratio, b u t even those who flourished after corruption set in did not owe their reputation for Latinitas to the use of ratio. Sisenna was an eccentric; Caesar, on the other hand, used ratio to achieve uncorrupted usage. 14. bene Latine: sc. loqui, cf. 108. 23: on such ellipses cf. K.-S. ii. 563. 15. litteras : he owed nothing to study of grammar and litera­ ture. Catulus . . . : unlike Flamininus, Catulus was learned, but his Latinitas (cf. § 133) was unconnected with his literary studies. 18. Cotta : cf. § 137. d ilatan d is : cf. de or. iii. 46 ‘ Cotta noster cuius tu illa lata, Sulpici, non numquam imitaris, u t iota litteram tollas et E plenissimum dicas . . .’. 19. Graecae . . . : the phrase has not been satisfactorily ex­ plained (but Simon’s rectae is unconvincing). I t may be th a t Cotta stressed the harsher ( ? consonantal as well as vocalic) sounds which were felt by sensitive Romans to make Latin less euphonious than Greek (cf. Quintii, xii. 10. 27 ff.). Catulus would have done the opposite. sonabatque : . . . : for this usage cf. rep. iii. 3, Arch. 26, K.-S. i. 281. 2 2 . S ise n n a : cf. § 228, 253. 16 n. On his linguistic eccentricity cf. Schanz p. 325, Bardon i. 255 ff. He affected archaic, poetical, and novel words and forms, categories allowed only sparingly by the best standards of the Ciceronian age. His oddities include plurals like fluvia, pecuda, rare adverbs in -im, e.g. vellicatim, praefestinatim, and compounds like postsubhorrescere. 2 3 . C. Rusio : unknown to us as to Brutus. 2 5 9

§ 2 6 0 .2 6 . accusator . . . vetus: ‘an habitual prosecutor of long standing’. C. Hirtilium : unknown. Some prefer the spelling Hirtuleium. 27. sputatilica : an attem pt to render κ α τα π τυ σ τά . Rusius affected to hear it as two separate words.

§ 259 . 13-§ 262 . 21

191

2. meus : Atticus is the speaker. §

. 6 . etiam si . . . : cf. § 141. The subjunctive sis is th at of the indefinite second person. 8. ornamenta : cf. de or. iii. 38 'neque sperare qui Latine non possit hunc ornate esse dicturum ’. 9. tamquam tabulas . . . : the ' oratorical adornments ’ brighten up Caesar’s choice diction like a good light falling on a paint­ ing, an elaborate variant on the use of lumen — ‘rhetorical figure’ (275. 25 n.). 10. Hanc cum . . . : 'W hile this distinction is peculiarly his, I cannot see anyone superior to him in the oratorical merits which he shares with others ’, i.e. ability in inventio etc. (cf. Cic. ap. Suet. Jul. 55. 2 cited on 251. 7). Martha, Rs., and Malcovati p u t the comma after communibus. ix. Splendidam . . . : ‘his oratorical method is brilliant, and free from all hackneyed tricks, and in voice, gesture, and physical presence noble and aristocratic’. Suet. Jul. 55. 1 cites this passage. §

2 6 1

. 16. quos idem : Barw. keeps L ’s quosdam and is prob­ ably right. 17. nudi . . . : C. is probably thinking of the human form as represented in sculpture. 18. veste detracta : on the metaphor cf. 274. 12 n., for the attraction of gender in detracta, attested also in Suetonius’ citation {Jul. 56), cf. off. i. 80 'nihil aliud nisi pax quaesita’. dum voluit . . . : commentarii (υπομνήματα) were any brief or summary records (cf. 55. 11, 60. 3, 72. 19) and in particular notes designed to be worked up, e.g. in a speech (164. 2), or as full-scale history (A tt. ii. 1. 2, fam. v. 12. 10); cf. Adcock Caesar as man of letters (Cambridge 1956) ch. i. Caesar’s choice of title, as C. and others saw, was not w ithout irony. 20. calam istris: ‘curling tongs’, cf. or. 78, Tac. dial. 26. 1 ‘calamistros Maecenatis'. 2x. sanos . . . : cf. Hirtius b.g. viii. pr. 4-5 ‘constat enim inter omnis nihil tam operose ab aliis esse perfectum quod non horum elegantia commentariorum superetur: qui sunt editi ne scientia tantarum rerum scriptoribus desit, adeoque pro­ bantur omnium iudicio u t praerepta non praebita facultas scriptoribus videbatur’. 2 6 2

COM M ENTARY 22. est enim . . . : C. usually required high oratorical elabora­ tion in history (de or. ii. 36, 51 if.), b u t he was critic enough to recognize the difference between the jejuneness of the early annalists and Caesar’s ‘pura et inlustris brevitas’. C. S icin iu s : O RF p. 438, known only from this passage: M R R ii. 128 puts his quaestorship c. 70 b . c . His maternal grandfather Q. Pompeius was censor in 131 (§ 96). C. here returns to the group of non-consular orators inter­ rupted a t § 248.

§ 2 6 3 .2 4 .

26. e x h a c . . . : ‘a product of Hermagoras’ training, which lacks resources for rhetorical adornment, bu t is a convenient and easy guide to invention. I t provides fixed and systematic instructions for oratory, which though devoid of stylistic elaboration—they are in fact baldly expressed—still are logi­ cally arranged, and provide pathways which keep the orator from going astray.’ On Hermagoras cf. Intr. 29 (b). He grouped dispositio and elocutio under the general heading of οικονομία (Quintii, iii. 3. 9), and the suggestion of the present passage th a t he paid little attention to them is confirmed by the fact th a t all surviving allusions to his works deal with aspects of inventio (cf. also §271). § 264. 4 . C. V iselliu s V arro : O RF pp. 438-9; son of C.’s aunt Helvia and C. Aculeo (de or. ii. 2, cf. prov. cons. 40), tr. mil. in Asia in 80-79 (Very. ii. 1. 70), qu. by 73, and perhaps the tr. pi. of c. 70 who passed a law de cura viarum.

6.

iu d ex q u a e stio n is : a quasi-magisterial, though non-elective office held for a year by ex-aediles acting as presidents in the quaestio de sicariis, cf. Staatsr. ii. 386, R E ix. 2 4 7 2 , 2 4 7 4 , Greenidge pp. 431 ff. fateor : because C. now flatly contradicts the view argued with such repetitive emphasis in §§ 183-200, cf. Intr. 8.

9.

ca e c a ta : ‘made obscure’, a very rare usage (cf. TLL iii. 41. 49) derived from the use of caecus = ‘ obscure ’, ‘ dark ’, which, though mainly poetical, occurs in C. ; cf. de or. ii. 329 ‘ obscura narratio totam occaecat orationem’. sed n eq u e . . . : this sentence repeats the criticism just made in a more favourable form and chiastic order, peracuta refer­ ring to sententiae, rapida to verba.

§ 2 6 2 . 2 2 -§

265

.

18

193

10. aptiorem : ‘more closely k n it’. For another use of aptus where its origins are again clearly reflected cf. 34. 21 n. 11. crebriorem: 29. 16 n. iurisque . . . : cf .d e or. i. 191 'nonne videtis equitem Romanum, hominem acutissimo omnium ingenio . . . C. Aculeonem . . . ita tenere ius civile u t ei, cum ab hoc (Scaevola) discesseritis, nemo de eis qui peritissimi sunt, anteponatur ? ’ He is not mentioned in Pomponius De Origine Iurio. Doubt­ less C.’s pietas influenced his judgement. §

. 13. L. Torquatus : O RF pp. 443—4, R E Manlius no. 80; son of the cos. 65 (§239), praetor in 49, killed at Thapsus (1b. Afr. 96. I, cf. Intr. 1) : the fact th a t he must have been an addition to the original scope of Brutus explains his ap­ pearance out of chronological sequence (and perhaps the anacoluthon reliqui .. . Torquatus) ; he was much younger than the orators just named. Something of his speech against P. Sulla in 62 can be reconstructed from C.’s reply. Other­ wise there are no fragments or records of speeches. He is the Epicurean spokesman in De Finibus, and may be the Tor­ quatus whose marriage to Vinia Aurunculeia was the occasion of Catullus’ epithalamium (Catuli. 61. 209 if. ‘Torquatus volo parvulus / . . . dulce rideat ad patrem / semihiante labello ’). 14. rhetorem : a trained orator contrasted with πολιτικόν, ‘ a par­ ticipant in affairs of s ta te ’. dixisses : this seems a clear case of the potential use of the pluperfect subjunctive (instead of the normal diceres), which is said by K.-S. i. 180 not to occur. Handford p. i n refers to ‘the almost invariable use of imperf. subj. (not plupf.) for the past form ’, and gives no example of the pluperfect. 15. litterae: cf. fin. i. 13, ib. 25 ‘Quid tibi, Torquate, . . . litterae, quid historiae cognitioque rerum, quid poetarium evolutio, quid tan ta to t versuum memoria voluptatis adfert ? ’ 16. interiores : ία ω τΐρ ικ α ί, ci. nat. d. iii. 42 (with Pease’s η.), fam . iii. 10. 9, vii. 33. 2. memoria : cf. fin. ii. 113 ‘nec id ex animi solum partibus, in quibus inest memoria rerum innumerabilium, in te quidem infinita’. 18. gravitas : on such repetitions cf. on 207. 24. M artha and Rs. accept dignitas, the making of O1. Torquatus’ gravitas is shown in a different light in Geli. i. 5. 3 ‘cum L. Torquatus subagresti homo ingenio et infestivo Ο 814437 2 6 5

COM M ENTARY

194

gravius acerbiusque . . . non iam histrionem eum esse diceret sed gesticulariam Dionysiamque eum notissimae saltatriculae nomine appellaret, tum voce molli atque demissa Hortensius, “ Dionysia” inquit “ Dionysia malo equidem esse quam quod tu, Torquate, άμουσος άναφρόδι,τος άπροσδιονυσος” iç. Triari : C. Valerius Triarius, O RF p. 444, R E Valerius no. 365, where his appearance in Brutus is taken to imply th a t he died before 46, i.e. at Pharsalus. But, like Torquatus, he too may have been killed at Thapsus, and inserted in the dialogue in the same way (265. 13 n.). The MSS. of Asconius name a P. Valerius Triarius as pro­ secutor of Scaurus (Ascon. Scaur, p. 18 Cl.). If the praenomen is sound, C. might have omitted him here as still being alive. B ut elsewhere the MSS. of Asconius (Scaur, p. 29 Cl.) give the praenomen as C., and several citations of the name without any praenomen (Ait. iv. 16. 6, 17. 2, Q.f. iii. 2. 3, cf. Scaur. passim) suggest th a t there was only one im portant bearer of the name. AU. xii. 28. 3, again without praenomen, cer­ tainly refers to a Triarius who died in the Civil W ar: ‘De Triario bene interpretaris voluntatem meam, tu vero nihil, nisi u t illi volent, amo illum mortuum; tutor sum liberis; totam domum diligo’. Perhaps our C. Triarius, the ‘gravis et doctus adulescens’ (cf. fin. i. 13), is also Asconius’ ‘adule­ scens paratus ad dicendum et notae industriae’ (p. 18 Cl.). in illa . . . : ‘ though he was young, his oratory was marked by the learning appropriate in an older m an ’, cf. the judge­ m ent on Crassus (160. 18). 21. quam nihil : cf. Att. ix. 2a. 1 ‘quam nihil praeterm ittis in consilio dando ! quam nihil tam en quod tibi ipsi placeat explicas ! ’, cf. Nägelsbach pp. 370 ff. § 2 6 6 . 25. tuam . . . : cf. 7. 30 and passages cited ad loc. 26. auctoritatem : ‘ expressed support ’, ‘ advocacy ’ ; so C. often calls himself ‘pacis auctor’ (last four refs, in 7. 30 n.). §§ §

2 6 7

- 7 0 . Victims of the Civil War and some other orators.

. 3. M. Bibulus : O RF pp. 398-9, R E Calpurnius no. 28, cos. 59 with Julius Caesar. He died of illness while in com­ mand of Pompey’s fleet (47 b.c.). 4. scriptitavit : probably refers to the edicts issued by Bibulus while shut up in his house for the greater part of his consul­ ship in protest against Caesar’s disregard of the auspices, of 2 6 7

§ 2 6 5 . 1 8 -§

268

.

11

195

Att. ii. 19. 5, 20. 4 (which also mentions contiones), Suet. Jul. 9 .2 , Plut. Pomp. 48. 5. There is only one other reference to utterances of his (Q.f. ii. 10 (9). 2). cum . . . : ‘particularly considering th a t he was no real o rato r’. 5. Appius Claudius : O R F pp. 419-20, R E Claudius no. 297, cos. 54, cens. 50, elder brother of P. Clodius. He died of ill­ ness just before the battle of Pharsalus. On his personality (‘proud, corrupt, and superstitions’) cf. Syme R R pp. 41, 45. He prosecuted M. Varro in 74 (ps.-Ascon. div. 24, p. 193 St.). On his ‘contiones tem erariae’ in his praetorship (57) cf. Att. iv. 3. 4. He was twice prosecuted in 50 (cf. § 230, fam. viii. 6. i, 12. 3). socer : Brutus married Claudia in 54, and divorced her in 45 in order to m arry Cato’s daughter Porcia. conlega : as augur. He was elected in 63, C. in 53. 6. familiaris : relations were sometimes strained, as is shown by many passages in fam . iii (esp. 6-10), which consists entirely of letters to Claudius, who was C.’s predecessor in Cilicia, and by frequent allusions in other letters. studiosus : cf .fam . ii. 13. 2 ‘et suavis amicus et studiosus studiorum etiam meorum ’. 7. auguralis : some fragments survive of a work on this topic which he dedicated to C. (fam. iii. 9. 3, 11. 4, leg. ii. 32, cf. Bremer Iurisprudentiae antehadrianae quae supersunt (Leip­ zig 1898) i. 243). Festus 386 L preserves Appius’ definition of solistimum as ‘ tripudium cum avi excidit ex ore quae illa fert, saxumve solidum aut arbos viviradix ruit quae nec prae vitio humanave vi caedanturve iacianturve pellanturve’. 9. L. Domitius : O RF p. 421, R E Domitius no. 27, cos. 54; the obstinate defender of Corfinium in 49, whose death a t Phar­ salus is vividly described by Lucan vii. 599 if. He had throughout his career bitterly opposed Caesar, in 58 attacking his disregard of the auspices (Suet. Nero 2. 2), and in 56 offering himself as a candidate for the consulship with a th reat to deprive Caesar of his command, both projects being frustrated by the conference a t Luca. He was involved, like App. Claudius (above), his consular colleague, in the great electoral scandal of 54 (Att. iv. 15. 7, etc.). The Emperor Nero was his great-great-grandson. §

. II. Publius : Lentulus Spinther, R E Cornelius no. 238 ; cos. 57. The circumstances of his death are unknown. I t is

2 6 8

196

COM M ENTARY

customary to cite vir. ill. 78. 9 (‘Lentulum tantum et Afra­ nium et Faustum Sullae filium iussit occidi (Caesar) ’) to show th a t he died like Afranius and Faustus Sulla after Thapsus. I t would follow th a t he was not dead when C. wrote or began writing Brutus (Intr. 1). ultor : as consul in 57 he proposed the motion for C.’s re­ call from exile, cf. red. sen. 8 ‘princeps P. Lentulus, parens ac deus nostrae vitae, fortunae, memoriae, nominis, hoc speci­ men virtutis, hoc indicium animi, hoc lumen consulatus sui fore putavit, si me mihi, si meis, si vobis, si rei publicae reddidisset’. The letters fam. i. 1—9 are addressed to him, the last being C.’s long apologia for his submission to the ‘ trium ­ virate ’ after Luca. 16. L. . . . Lentulus : Crus, O RF pp. 459-60, R E Cornelius no. 218, cos. 49; killed in Egypt after flight from Pharsalus. He prosecuted Clodius in the ‘Bona D ea’ case in 61, and violently attacked Caesar in the senate early in 49 (b.c. i. 1.2, 2. 4-6). 17. si modo . . . : ‘if he can be called an orator at a ll’. Like others mentioned here, Crus owes his inclusion to personal or political pietas which has little to do with oratory. The tribute in har. resp. 37 ‘gravem oratorem et disertum ’ is conventional and insignificant. 18. u t . . . : some words perhaps including a reference to gestus are surely missing between sane and ut, as Hendr. suggests. It is hard to believe with P.—F. th a t the construction is oratio (ea) ut .. .. Barw. brackets non. 19. terroris : the word, though unusual in rhetorical contexts (but cf. 44.18 ‘vim dicendi terroremque ’), is not inappropriate, cf. the passages from b.c. cited above. §

2 6 9 . 21. Postumius : the claim of the nineteenth-century editors th a t a T. Postumius was praetor in 57 appears to lack authority, though a man born in the early go’s would fit C.’s scheme. Münzer (RE Postumius nos. 15, 26) points out th a t the praenomen Titus is not otherwise attested among the Postumii, and would emend to L. identifying this Postumius with the one mentioned in Att. vii. 15. 2, [Sail.] ad Caes. ii. 9. 4, and possibly the one mentioned in Att. v. 21. 9. 27. ut m ih i. . . : ‘th a t I suppose th a t it is by accident th a t you have left out M. Servilius’, a neat way of implying contempt for Servilius.

§ 268 . l l - § 271 . 6

197

Servilium : R E no. 20; of uncertain identity, perhaps the defendant mentioned in Ait. vi. 3. 10, fam. viii. 8. 1—4 (51 B.c.), but not the tribune of 43; the reference must be to someone dead by 46.

28. M.

§ 2 7 0 . 30. fecissent : the pluperfect tense, on the face of things highly irregular, arises from the equivalence of istuc with id quod dixisti. Wetzel, De consecutione temporum Ciceroniana (Leipzig 1877) p. 31, has only one example, Phil. xiii. 50, where C. introduces with censeo a long formula in the historic tenses appropriate to the normal preamble ‘ita censuerunt’. 2. non multi . . . pauci : 'how small a number . . . and even of these how few’, cf. Cael. 46, where C. attributes the paucity to the austerity and rigours imposed on the serious aspirant to success in oratory. § 2 71- 9 . Some minor orators, M . Caelius, M . Calidius. § 2 7 1 . 4. equites : the two mentioned sought to make their m ark in politics by launching these prosecutions (159. 10 n.), bu t were unlucky in being opposed by C. in his best form, and achieved no office. Contrast M. Caelius (§ 273), also of eques­ trian origins, who was successful in his prosecution of C. Antonius, despite C.’s appearance for the defence. 5. P. Cominium : O RF pp. 439—40. Both he and his brother Lucius (again one may assume th a t the one omitted here was still alive in 46, cf. 265. 19 n.) were involved in the prosecu­ tions of Cornelius as they had been in the prosecution of Staienus (Clu. 100-2). The speech against Cornelius was known to and admired by Asconius. On the praenomina of the brothers cf. E. Badian J R S xlvi (1956) 220. Spoletinum : of Spoletium (Spoleto) in Umbria. 6. C. Cornelium : tr. pi. 67. Some of his proposed reforms were ultim ately accepted but only after riots and some proceedings questionable on strict constitutional grounds. He was pro­ secuted for maiestas in both 66 and 65, the first trial being abandoned because the prosecutors were threatened with violence. The trial took place the following year, when, despite strong optimate support for the prosecution, C.’s defence was successful. The two speeches which C. published, no longer extant, were greatly admired in antiquity (cf. Quintii, viii. 3. 3, Ascon. p. 61 Cl.), and there are many frag­ ments in addition to the passages in Asconius’ commentary (pp. 401-25 Schoell).

COM M ENTARY 7. T. Accium : O RF pp. 442-3, from Pisaurum (Pesaro) in Um­ bria. C. deals gently with him in Clu. 84 ‘tene hoc, Acci, dicere, tali prudentia etiam usu atque exercitatione prae­ ditum ! ' 9. Hermagorae : cf. 263. 26 n. i i . hastae . . . : ‘javelins fitted with thongs for the light-armed troops’. The thong, often illustrated on vases (cf. E. N. Gardiner, Athletics of the ancient world (Oxford 1930) pp. 170 ff.), was designed, like the rifling of a gun, to give a rotatory, and so faster and longer flight, cf. de or. i. 242 ' a quo (the jurist) cum amentatas hastas acceperit, ipse (the orator) eas oratoris lacertis viribusque torquebit', where the hastae amentatae are arguments based on points of law. §

2 7 2

. 13. Studio . . . : instead of continuing ‘quam C. Piso­ nem ’, C. has a slight and natural anacoluthon. 15. C. Pisoni : R E Calpurnius no. 93, betrothed to Tullia in 67 (Att. i. 3. 3), quaestor in 58, he worked energetically for C.’s recall (cf. n. on pietate below), but died before his return. 16. a forensi . . . : ‘speaking in public, practising at home, writing, or reflecting ’. Martha rightly points out th a t the last two are not subordinate to commentatione, which refers specifically to ‘ declamation', i.e. private rehearsal or practice (not in C.’s time a public entertainment). Quintii, x. 3-5 and 6 deal respectively with writing (stilus) and cogitatio. 19. apta : ‘well put together’. rotunda : so used of periodic structure in or. 40, fin. iv. 7, the metaphor also being implied in -neplohos and some of the Latin renderings, e.g. circumscriptio (34. 19), cf. Dion. Hal. Isocr. 12 (kvkXlos). On the other hand, στρογγυλός (ib. 2, 11 ,Lys. 6, cf. Arist. rhet. ii. 21. 7) is not parallel: it refers to a kind of conciseness (cf. G. M. A. Grube A Greek Critic : Demetrius on Style (Toronto 1961) p. 10 n. 9). 22. gestusque . . . : ' the natural grace of his gestures was such as to suggest—what was not the fact—th a t they owed some­ thing to conscious study and training’. 26. pietate : in particular cf. fam. xiv. 2. 2, Sest. 54, 68 for Piso’s activities during C.’s exile. §

2 7 3

. 2 8. M. Caelium : O RF pp. 480-9; defended by C. in 56, the speech pro Caelio giving a full but tendentious account of his career to th a t date, tr. pi. 52, praetor 48; late in 50 he

§ 2 7 1 . 7 -§

273

.

3

199

joined Caesar, but, disappointed by Caesar’s insufficiently revolutionary policies, he was involved in riots in Rome and then south Italy, where he was killed in 48 (b.c. iii. 20-22). Quintii. X . 1. ii5 ,x ii. 10. 11 speaks highly of his natural gifts and cites a fragment of a dozen lines (iv. 2.123 (see Appendix A, 36)) and a few shorter quotations, but he is not cited by grammarians. T hat his oratory reflected his passionate character is clear from Sen. de ira iii. 8. 6, Quintii, x. 2. 25, Tac. dial. 25. 4. On the recorded speeches see below. Seven­ teen letters which he wrote to C. in Cilicia make up fam. viii. Many modern scholars have questioned the statem ent of the elder Pliny (n.h. vii. 165) th at Caelius was born in 82—on the same day as Calvus—preferring to assign his birth to 88 and so to give him a normal cursus. This view suits admirably his position in Brutus, particularly if M. Calidius was bom in 87 (274. 9 n.). Curio and P. Crassus were both born c. 85. 29. mens : state of mind, with especial reference to his political outlook, cf. 250. 18, Quintii, x. i. 115 (of Caelius) ‘dignus vir cui mens melior et vita longior contigisset’. 30. talis . . . : but already in 52 there were signs of estrangement from Pompey (cf. Austin’s Intr. to pro Caelio pp. viii-x). 32. Antiquam : many emendations have been suggested, but it is best, with Kr., to obelize, though Malcovati’s view th a t actionem refers to Caelius’ political activity just described and th a t no emendation of the MSS. is called for merits attention. Certainly the attractions of antiquam are superficial. The references to Caelius’ old-fashioned oratory in Tac. dial. 18. 1, 21. 3 concern diction and style, not actio: Martha, realizing that, reads dictionem for actionem, but dictionem would be synonymous with oratio at the end of the sentence (cf. 203. 14 n.). B ut in any case to the speaker in Tacitus, all the orators of C.’s time were antiquated, not Caelius alone and in particular. 2. faceta . . . : cf. Quintii, x. 1. 115 and for examples, ib. vi. 3. 41 (see Appendix A, 37), viii. 6. 52-53 (of Clodia) ‘quadranta­ riam Clytemestram et in triclinio Coam in cubiculo N olam ’. Caelius’ wit is evident from his letters. 3. contiones : e.g. de aquis, a speech made as curule aedile (50 B.c.) on the diversion and misuse of the public watersupply {fam. viii. 6. 4, Frontinus aq. 76. 1). accusationes : of C. Antonius (59 B.c.), Calpurnius Bestia (56), and Pompeius Rufus (51, cf. Val. Max. iv. 2. 7).

COM M ENTARY 5. defensiones : of himself in 56, the case in which C. spoke, and M. Saufeius, the leader of the attack on the inn near Bovillae as a result of which Clodius was killed (52 B.c.) (Ascon. M il. pp. 32, 55 Cl.)· ilia . . . : the prosecutions, cf. Quintii, x. 1. 115 ‘praecipue in accusando multa urbanitas . . .’. 8. discessu . . . : ‘when I departed, he departed from his true self, so to speak’. Kr., Hendr. take nescio quo modo to imply ‘ I am sorry to say ’, but it simply apologizes for the strained ex­ pression, the nearest parallels to which are div. ii. 114 (of being beside oneself with fear) and fin. v. 33 (an argument per im ­ possibile) ‘prius poterit a se quisque discedere quam . . .’. On Caelius cf. Ait. vii. 3. 6 ‘ Unum etiam de Caelio, tantum abest u t meam ille sententiam moveat ut valde ego ipsi quod de sua sententia discesserit paenitendum putem ’. 9. perverterat: ‘overthrown’, like the supporters of Clodius; the word picks up the wrestling metaphor in cecidit. §

. 9. M. Calidio : O RF pp. 433—8. On the strength of red. sen. 21 ff. it has been taken for granted th a t Calidius and the other five men there named after him as having aided in Cicero’s recall were, with L. Caecilius just previously men­ tioned, praetors in 57. There are strong arguments for this view, notably the fact th a t seven of the praetors are known to have supported C. in th at way, and the eighth praetor of the year is identifiable as Clodius’ brother Appius (cos. 54). We thus have a very natural interpretation of C.'s words: ‘iam vero praetores quo animo in me fuerint vos existimare potuistis, cum L. Caecilius privatim me suis omnibus copiis studuerit sustentare, publice promulgarit de mea salute cum conlegis paene omnibus, direptoribus autem bonorum meo­ rum in ius adeundi potestatem non fecerit. M. autem Calidius statim designatus sententia sua quam esset cara sibi mea salus declaravit. Omnia officia C. Septimi, Q. Valeri, P. Crassi, Sex. Quinctili, C. Cornuti summa et in me et in rem publicam constiterunt ’. Yet it is consistent with this tex t th a t neither Calidius nor the others were praetors, and since Cicero’s theme is events of the year 57, th a t he is referring to an election of Calidius to an office for 56. We know th a t Calidius was defeated for an office in 51 (fa m . viii. 4. 1) and governed Cisalpine Gaul in 48 or 47 (Euseb. chron. ii. I37d Schoene). The reason for doubting the natural and easy interpretation of red. sen. l.c. is th a t these dates taken with

2 7 4

§ 2 7 3 . 5 -§

274

.

12

201

a birth-date of 87 suggested by his position in Brutus give exactly the sequence of minimum ages for quaestorship, aedileship (defeat for which did not necessarily interrupt a career), and praetorship. Opinions may differ as to which coincidence is the harder to swallow—th a t the seven men were not the seven praetors, or th a t Calidius’ career accidentally followed a pattern so suggestive. I am convinced th a t he was born in 87. He spoke in the case of C.’s house and the defences of Scaurus (54) and Milo (52) ; see also Q.f. ii. 9. 2, fam. viii. 4. 1. The common view th a t Calidius was in some way associated with, or a forerunner of, the Atticists I have attem pted to demolish in CQ n .s . v (1955) 241-7 by arguments both general and particular, which are briefly (i) th a t the Atticism of Calvus’ coterie had no history (cf. Intr. 5), (ii) th a t the description of Calidius’ oratory, in particular the stress on his artistry of style and use of rhythm, can be shown point by point to be almost exactly the opposite of the description of the Atticists or the master of the Plain Style (or. 28, 75 ff.). I would add th a t the emphatic Atticum of 284. 24 is almost enough on its own to dispose of the conventional view, and of course if I am right about his date, there is no question of his being a forerunner of the group: he was only five, not fifteen, years older than Calvus. The account of Calidius has its polemical aspect: for all the virtues which C. acknow­ ledges, Calidius lacked vis, emotional power. But C.’s state­ ment of his case—sound or not—is not disingenuous. I t is regrettable th a t we have only two frr., one very cor­ ru p t (for the other see Appendix A, 35), of an orator the merits of whose speeches might well have been apparent in the written record. 10. unus . . . : 'ju st one of a crowd’, cf. 320. 24, Tusc. i. 17 ‘homunculus e m ultis’, off. i. 109. 11. ita . . . : ‘in such fashion were his unusual and subtly thought-out ideas clothed in a flexible and translucent style ’. 12. vestiebat : on style as a garment cf. 262. 18, 327. 23, de or. i. 142, ii. 123, iii. 155. Here, as at 262.17, the image is prob­ ably derived from the visual arts rather than directly from the human form and its clothing. Clinging (mollis = easilyshaped) and apparently translucent garments met as techni­ cal triumphs in sculpture with an approval not accorded to their equivalents in real life, where they indicated foppishness or immorality.

COM M ENTARY 13. t e n e r u m : like mollis above = flexible, ‘easily modelled’, ‘pliable’, cf. de or. iii. 176 (of oratory in general) ‘nihil est enim tam tenerum neque tam flexibile neque quod tam facile sequatur quocumque ducas quam oratio’, or. 52. c o m p r e n s i o : cf. 34. 23. 15. q u a e p r i m u m . . . : C. deals with Calidius’ style under the headings of (i) its ‘flow’ generally (Intr. 26), (ii) the choice of individual words, literal and metaphorical, (iii) rhythm. 16. p u r a . . . : Kr. sees here further metaphors from clothing (as in Herrick’s ‘Then, then, methinks, how sweetly flows / That liquefaction of her clothes’), but Schiitz’s straight­ forward interpretation, as a simple metaphor from water, is preferable; for adhaeresceret cf. off. iii. 117 ‘aqua haeret ut a iu n t’, Q.f. ii. 8. 2; pura then = ‘clear-flowing’, ‘free from obstruction*. For the metaphor from water generally cf. §316. 3 2 5 · 28. liquidius : the first of several resemblances to the account (or. 92) of Demetrius of Phalerum as exponent of the Middle Style: ‘cuius oratio cum sedate placideque liquitur, tum inlustrant eam quasi stellae quaedam tralata verba atque immutata ’. 17. n u l l u m n i s i . . . : ‘every word fitted into its proper place “ as in a tessellated pavem ent”, to use Lucilius’ phrase’. Lucilius’ lines come from his account of Scaevola’s criti­ cism of Albucius (131. 20 n.), and are quoted more fully, and more appropriately, at or. 149 (cf. de or. iii. 171) where C. is discussing over-elaborate structura : ‘ Quam lepide Asfeis com­ postae ut tesserulae omnes / arte pavimento atque emblemate vermiculato ! ’ 18. s t r u c t u m : cf. de or. iii. 171, or. 20, 140, 219, 232, and structura in 33. 15, or. 149. In all these rhetorical contexts, as often elsewhere, the emphasis is on construction by fitting together. 19. a u t d u r u m . . . : ‘harsh, unusual, low, or far-fetched’, cf. opt. gen. 7 ‘ (est vitiosum) in verbis si inquinatum si abiectum si non aptum si durum si longe petitum ’. d u r u m : cf. or. 149-64 on the avoidance of harsh sounds, i n s o l e n s : cf. or. 25, Quintii, iv. 1. 58. h u m i l e : cf. or. 192 ‘humilem et abiectam orationem ’, and for the sort of thing regarded by C. as humile, ib. 235 'i s t i . . . non clupeum sed u t in proverbio est—etsi humilius dictum est, tamen simile est—scopas, u t ita dicam, mihi videntur

§2 7 4 .

13

-§

274

.

23

203

dissolvere ’, a comment which recalls Johnson’s strictures on Shakespeare’s use of the word 'knife’. ductum : so of simile and metaphor de or. iii. 163 ‘videndum est ne longe simile sit ductum ’, cf. Arist. rhet. iii. 2. 12 (ov πόρρωθεν Set. . . μ ετα φ έρ ΐΐν ) , 3> 4, Demetr. eloc. 78, and, of style generally, Quintii, viii. pr. 23 ‘ sunt optima minime arcessita ’; for a favourable use cf. de or. iii. 160. p ro p ria.. .translata : ‘literal’ . . . ‘metaphorical’, Intr. 26, de or. iii. 49, or. 80.

20.

sic tamen . . . : 'y e t in such a way th a t they seem not to have invaded some one else's territory but found their way into their ow n’—an intentional paradox: μεταφορά was by definition in alienum locum, cf. de or. iii. 149 ‘ eis (verbis) quae transferuntur et quasi alieno in loco conlocantur’, and ib. 165, where C. expresses the present idea less hyperbolically : 'verecunda debet esse tralatio ut deducta esse in alienum locum non inrupisse atque precario non vi venisse videatur’, Quintii, viii. 6. 18. For the metaphor of trespass cf. also de or. i. 41.

21.

nec vero . . . : ‘ nor did his words run free and loose, but were held bound by rhythms, which produced cadences not all obviously of the same type but varied and concealed’. The stress on Calidius’ rhythms makes him rather a fol­ lower of C. himself than a precursor of the Atticists, who eschewed rhythm . He is the first orator in Brutus whose prose rhythm is discussed, though certain allusions to periodic structure, which was closely connected with rhythm, have appeared (96. 12, 140. 11, 162. 12, cf. 303. 1, 317. 17). Our evidence for the practice of the early orators in this, as in all other respects, is sadly limited by the scantiness of their re­ mains, but in my view Bornecque was right, as against, e.g., De Groot and Shewring, in denying any conscious search for rhythm s by orators before at any rate 100 b .c. (Les Clausules métriques latines (Lille T906) p. 547, cf. 162. 15 n.).

22.

soluta : 'allowed to go free’ here the opposite of astricta, cf. or. 233 'si . . . dissipatam aliquam sententiam . . . ordine verborum paululum commutato in quadrum redigas, efficiatur aptum illud quod fuerit antea diffluens ac solutum ’. Con­ trast its use to mean ‘prose’ (32. 12). astricta : see also or. 187; de or. iii. 184 puts the m atter a little differently.

23.

COM M ENTARY aperte : resort to over-obvious hyperbata to secure rhyth­ mical effects is censured at or. 229, cf. ib. 149-50; and de or. iii. 192— 3 for the need to avoid m onotony and obviousness. §

. 2 5. lumina : figures of speech and thought, cf. Intr. 26, de or. iii. 201, or. 67, 135; so inluminare frequently means ‘to adorn with figures ’. C. also renders the Greek σχήμα (cf. 69. 12, 141. 16) by forma, conformatio, ornamentum, and flos; rhet. Her. uses exornatio. In this sense figura is Augustan and later. 26. σ χ ή μ α τ α : cf. or. 83 ' eis luminibus quae Graeci quasi aliquos gestus orationis σχήματα appellant'. insignibus : another term frequently used by C. in this sense, but never without apology, cf. de or. ii. 36, or. 134. 2 7 5

QVA . . . : ‘he discerned wherein lay “ the point at issu e ”, to use the phrase often found in the jurists’ form ulas’, cf. Mur. 28, fin. ii. 3 ‘omnis . . . oratio praescribere primum debet ut quibusdam in formulis ea res agetvr, ut inter quos disseritur, conveniat quid sit id de quo disseratur’. From the rhetorical as opposed to the juristic viewpoint, this was a m atter of status (Intr. 29), cf. top. 95 (written for the jurist Trebatius) ‘ sed quae ex statu contentio efficitur, eam Graeci κρινόμα’ον vocant, mihi placet id, quoniam quidem ad te scribo, QVA DE RE AGITVR VOCari’.

27.

formulis : cf. 156. 13 n„ 195. 17. The formula determined the point at issue in a civil case. I t was devised by the plaintiff, often with the help of-jurists (Jolowicz, pp. 205-9). (Some formulas were traditional, cf. Rose. com. 24.) I t had to be approved by a magistrate in iure (246. 13η.), and the case was then referred to a iudex for decision.

29.

§

. 31. suaviter : associated by C. with the Middle Style, cf. or. 91. 8. furere : cf. 233. 21, or. 99 'hic autem copiosissimus si nihil est aliud vix satis sanus videri solet, qui enim nihil potest tranquille nihil leniter . . . dicere, . . . furere apud sanos et quasi inter sobrios bacchari vinulentus v id etu r!’, har. resp. 39 'cum baccharis, cum furis’, Quintii, xii. 10. 73. arbitraretur : a common form of attraction in C. (K.-S. ii. 200-1), here extending to the following subjunctives. 9. natura . . . nosset : the justifications offered by editors for keeping L ’s posset are diverse and unsatisfactory: it could 2 7 6

§2 7 4 . 2 3 -§ 2 7 7 .

17

205

only be a feeble repetition of natura. The evident allusion to the triad (22. 22) of natural gifts, practice (consuesset), and theory supports Friedrich’s nosset. §

. 12. Q. Gallio : R E no. 6, pr. 65, Cic. or. fr. p. 399 Schoell. The date usually given for the trial, 6 6 b . c . , rests on comm. pet. 19, but one of the arguments against the osten­ sible date of 64 for th a t work is th at Ascon. p. 88 Cl. puts C.’s defence of Gallius some time after 64. There are other diffi­ culties (cf. M. I. Henderson in J R S xl (1950) 8 ff. esp. 11) which make it unlikely th a t the comm. pet. belongs to 64 or can be relied on as evidence of detail of this kind—its value as a source of general information on Roman electioneering in the late Republic is another question. 13. seseque . . . : ‘he declared th a t he was putting before the court handwritten documents, depositions of witnesses, in­ formations, examinations by torture, in fact the whole case proved beyond do u b t’. The passage gives a select list of άτεχνοι πίστεις, of which Arist. rhet. i. 15 includes μάρτυρες and βάσανοι ; rhet. Her. ii. 9 ff. deals with testes, quaestiones, argumenta et signa (circumstan­ tial arguments and evidence), and rumores, cf. also de or. ii. 116, part. or. 5, 48—50, 117—18, and the full treatm ent in Quintii, v. 1-7. chirographa : cf. Quintii, v. 13. 8 on the refutation of this and other kinds of evidence. 14. indicia : possibly ‘circumstantial evidence’ (as in line 18 below, cf. Quintii, v. 9. 9), but more probably the reference here is to evidence given by indices, i.e. information specifi­ cally incriminating a third party, while testificatio is evidence in general, cf. Suit. 36 ‘Allobrogibus nominatum Sullam esse dicis. Quis negat? Sed lege indicium et vide quem ad modum nominatus s it’, Livy xxxix. 8. 7 'falsi testes falsa signa testi­ monia et indicia ex eadem officina exibant’. quaestiones : torture of slaves. The value of evidence thus obtained was the subject of rhetorical debate and theory from early times (Antiphon 5. 31, cf. Arist. rhet. i. 15. 26, rhet. Alex. c. 16) but the procedure itself seems not to have been called in question. 17. quantum . . . : 'so far as the actual facts allowed’ (cf. 36. 10). B ut C. mainly rested his case (hoc ipsum etiam . . .) on the oldest established έντεχνος πίσης, th a t of εΐκός (Intr. 20). Rhetoric largely owed its origins to the ancient preference for 2 7 7

COM M ENTARY abstract or ‘ scientific ’ arguments, which (i) could be organ­ ized and expounded in a τέχνη—and there were those who excluded the άτεχνοι πίστας from Rhetoric altogether (Quintii. V . i. 2 ) , though most saw th a t a t least the confirmation or refutation of such external evidence was p art of the orator’s job—and (ii) could not be forged, browbeaten, or bribed. See Gael. 2 2 for a classic exposition of the belief in the theoretical argument (and ib. 55 for what amounts to a denial of it). For a modem statem ent cf. Dylan Thomas, ‘A Story’ (in A Prospect of the Sea, London 1955, P· I 3 ° ) : ‘“ I played for Aberavon in 1898 ”, said a stranger to Enoch Davies. “ L iar” said Enoch Davies. " I can show you photos ” said the stran­ ger. "F orged” said Enoch Davies. "A nd I ’ll show you my cap at home.” "Stolen.” “ I got friends to prove it ” said the stranger in a fury. “ Bribed” said Enoch Davies.’ C. appears to have got away with his feeble argument, bu t since Gallius was on trial for ambitus, Calidius’ point too was an irrelevance by modern standards. §

. 20. ‘Tu istuc . . : parts of the passage are cited by Val. Max. viii. 10. 3, Quintii, xi. 3. 123 (see below), 155. For other fragments of the speech cf. Schoell l.c. (above). 22. alienorum : not merely aliorum. Since Roman advocacy originated in the patronus-cliens relationship (cf. 206. 10), the greatest obligations of an advocate were to those closely con­ nected with him, and the defence of alieni was an extension of the original practice; cf. Att. viii. 4. 2 ‘quibus litteris ita respondit ut ego nemini cum causam non reciperem . . . numquam reo cuiquam tam humili tam sordido tam nocenti tam alieno tam praecise negavi quam hic m ihi’ (note th a t alieno is the climax), Clu. 57 ‘ rem enim integram hominis non alieni quamvis suspiciosam defendere humanitatis esse puta­ bamus ’. 23. d o lo r : emotion’, ‘indignation’. 2 4 . infantium : ‘the inarticulate’, cf. 77. 20. 2 5 . non frons . . . : cf. Quintii, xi. 3. 123 'fem ur ferire, quod Athenis primus fecisse creditur Cleon, et usitatum est, et indignantes decet, et excitat auditorem, idque in Calidio Cicero desiderat, "non frons” inquit “ percussa non fem ur”, quamquam, si licet, de fronte dissentio ’. 27. tantum . . . : for the parataxis in place of a second wGclause, cf. Att. xiii. 21. 5 ‘tantum porro aberat u t binos scriberent, vix singulos confecerunt’, fin. ii. 54, v. 57, K.-S. ii. 168, 238. 2 7 8

§277.

17

-§

280

.20

207

so m n u m . . . : somnum tenere is an unusual but natural collocation, in which somnus is treated as an expression of feeling like risus, lacrimae—which on this occasion it was: 'we could scarcely restrain an urge to go to sleep’. 28. sa n ita te . . . : C. is prepared to concede sanitas to Calidius (276. 31) (and the Atticists generally laid claim to the quality), bu t w ithout the ability to stir the audience it was no more than a vitium (cf. Intr. 35).

§

. 2. Q uis en im . . . : on the sentiment cf. 198. 15 ff., on its implausibility as an expression of the historical Brutus’ opinion, Intr. 13, 14.

2 7 9

§ § 2 8 0 - 9 1 . Curio the younger. Calvus and his Atticizing move­ ment. §

. 14. alter : Curio the younger, R E Scribonius no. 11, O RF pp. 510—12, q.v. for various testimonia in general terms to his eloquence and a few allusions to contiones. No frag­ ments remain. He was quaestor in 54, and tribune in 50, when he played a crucial part in the events leading to the outbreak of the Civil War, cf. Lucan iv. 819 ‘momentumque fuit m utatus Curio rerum ’. For a close analysis of his actions and especially of his transfer of allegiance to Caesar, a ttri­ buted later (e.g. by Lucan) to bribery (see below), cf. W. K. Lacey Historia x (1961) 318 ff. He was killed by Juba in Africa in 49. 16. o rn a tiu s . . . exp ed itiu s : normally terms of contrast, ‘ more elaborate . . . more swift or lightly-moving (lit. ‘unencum­ bered’) ’. 18. in d u stria m . . . : ' I cannot say from experience how hard he worked, but certainly he was enthusiastic ’. C. was away from Rome during 51-50, the crucial period of Curio’s career. 19. u t co ep era t : cf. Att. ii. 18. 1 and the letters to Curio (fam . ii. 1-7). 20. h o n o r es q u a m op es : ‘ the honour of office rather than power for its own sake’. The rendering of opes as wealth is ruled out by what follows, but one may wonder whether the phrase had anything to do with the later gossip th a t Curio went over to Caesar for money (Lucan iv. 820, Val. Max. ix. i. 6, Suet. Jul. 29). 2 8 0

2o8

COM M ENTARY

§

2 8 1 . 22. praemium virtutis : cf. Arist. eth. Nie. ii2 3 b35 τψ âpeTrjs yàp αθλον ή τιμή και άττονέμίται rots άγαθοίς. 29. g r a d ib u s: the normal cursus honorum) the im portant com­ mands which Curio held during the Civil W ar were of course unconstitutional. 3 1 . P . Crasso : R E Licinius no. 63, son of M. Crassus the ‘trium vir’, killed with his father a t Carrhae. a m icitia m : apparently a genuine personal attachm ent, cf. fam. V . 8. 4, xiii. 16. 1, Q.f. ii. 9. 2, Plut. Crass. 13, Cic. 33.

§

. 4. in stitu tu s : of upbringing in general, as opposed to eruditus, of more advanced and ‘ academic ’ study. P. Crassus studied with a certain Apollonius (fam. xiii. 16). 7. sine . . . v er ecu n d u s : ‘modest, but not lacking in initiative Sed h u n c . . . : the severity of this passage is unexplained. Neither our other sources for Crassus nor anything th a t we know of C.’s attitude accounts for it. W ith the elder Crassus C. was seldom on good terms. Yet C.’s account of M. Crassus (§ 23 3 ) is free from such aspersions, even though Plutarch in his life of M. Crassus attributes to him many of the faults here attributed to the son. One must suppose from cut . . . reliquit th a t P. Crassus wished to hold independent imperium in defiance of laws or conventions governing minimum ages and prescribing sortition or election. Nothing is known to account for these insinuations. 9. qui q u ia . . : P. Crassus had served with distinction under Caesar in Gaul (b.g. i. 52, iii. 20—27). 12. Cyri : Cyrus the Great, renowned as a conqueror in the East, and in particular over Babylon, in the region later oecupied by the Parthians. cu rsu m . . . : completed their careers with speed ’. 13. L. Crassi : the great orator. 2 8 2

§ 2 8 3 . 14. C alvum : C. Licinius Calvus, O RF pp. 492-500, R E Licinius no. I13 ; son of Licinius Macer (§ 238), born 82, dead by 47. He was a poet of the neoteric school and friend of Catullus (Catull. 14, 50, 53, 96), with whom he was often paired (e.g. Hor. serm. i. 10. 19, Ovid. am. iii. 9. 62). His poems are known to have included an elegy on his wife Quintilia, an Jo, and epigrams attacking politicians such as Pompey and Caesar (for frr. see Morel pp. 84-87). He was also an outstanding and much-admired orator, cf. Quintii, x.

§

2 8 1 . 2 2 ~ § 2 8 3 . 23

209

i. 115 ‘inveni qui Calvum praeferrent omnibus’. He left twenty-one speeches (Tac. dial. 21. 1); our fragments (see Appendix A, 38—41) total less than 100 words. He thrice prosecuted Vatinius and appeared with C. in defence of Sestius and C. Messius. The restraint of his style on which C. dwells did not prevent him from being vigorous in delivery, cf. Quintii, x. 1. 115 'e st (Calvi) et sancta et gravis oratio et castigata et frequenter vehemens quoque Sen. contr. vii. 4. 6 ‘ Calvus . . . usque eo violentus actor et concitatus fuit ut in media eius actione surgeret Vatinius reus et exclamaret “ Rogo vos, iudices, num si iste disertus est, ideo me damnari opor­ te t ? ” . . . Solebat praeterea excedere subsellia sua et impetu latus usque in adversariorum partem transcurrere’, Catuli. 53 ‘ Risi nescio quem modo e corona / qui cum mirifice Vatiniana / meus crimina Calvus explicasset / admirans ait haec manusque tollens / “ Di magni, salaputium disertum !” ’. 18. nimium tamen . . . : cf. Quintilian, x. 1. 115 ‘inveni qui Ciceroni crederent eum nimia contra se calumnia verum sanguinem perdidisse’. 20. sanguinem : cf. 36. 10 n., Tac. dial. 18. 5 ‘Calvum quidem Ciceroni visum exsanguem et aridum ’. 21. religione : ‘scruples’, cf. 284. 2, or. 25, Quintii, xii. 10. 11 ‘sanctitatem Calvi’, ib. 14 ‘haec manus (the Attici) quasi quibusdam sacris initiata u t alienigenam et parum super­ stitiosum devinctumque illis legibus (Ciceronem) inseque­ b a tu r’. C. repeats his judgement in a letter to Trebonius (/am. xv. 21. 4), in which he explains th a t a letter which he had written to Calvus in encouraging and complimentary terms had not been intended for public circulation : ‘ genus quoddam seque­ batur, in quo iudicio lapsus quo valebat tamen assequebatur quod probaret, multae erant et reconditae litterae; vis non erat, ad eam igitur adhortabar’. 22. cui nata . . . : echoed by Tac. dial. 21. 2 on the second speech against Vatinius ‘ est enim verbis ornata et sententiis, auribus iudicum accommodata, ut scias ipsum quoque Calvum intellexisse quid melius esset’. 23. devorabatur: ‘swallowed whole without tastin g ’; its subtlety was lost on the populace; contrast 236. 15. On public reaction to the Atticists, cf. Tusc. ii. 3 ‘genus A tti­ corum . . . qui iam conticuerunt paene ab ipso foro irrisi’. 814437

P

210

§

COM M ENTARY

. 24. Atticum : cf. or. 23 ‘i i . . . qui aut dici se desiderant Atticos aut ipsi Attice volunt dicere’. The present passage shows th a t Calvus was the originator and leader of the Atticist movement (‘isti novi A ttici’, or. 89), cf. Intr. 5. 25. exilitas : for this and other critical terms used in this passage cf. Intr. 35. 27. alios : unidentifiable, except in general terms cf., e.g., or. 30, 32. The conclusions of earlier scholars taken in combina­ tion would leave Cicero in isolation as the sole non-Atticist, except of course for Hortensius (cf. § 325). This view is prima facie unlikely, and on the evidence about the individual orators in relation to Atticism see my art. cited on 274. 9. 2 8 4

qui nec . . . : ‘whose oratory is neither mal à propos nor tiresome nor affected’. All these terms are broad in implication, and subjective in th a t they represent various ways of displeasing an audience by some form of excess. Thus ineptus is used of any one who lacks a sense of fitness, ‘ tact ’ in its widest sense (cf. de or. ii. 17) ; odiosus means ‘boring' with especial reference to tedious pedantry (de or. iii. 51, Quintii, i. 6. 19); putidus can also be used of extravagant pedantry (de or. iii. 51 and off. i. 133, of over-precise pronunciation), but refers to other kinds of affectation in or. 27 (of Aeschines’ criticisms of Demosthenes’ high-flown style), and in interesting contexts where ordinary social behaviour is concerned (Att. i. 14. 1, fam. vii. 5. 3). As C. points out, the need to avoid these faults was not at issue : the question was whether only the Plain Style succeeded in th a t aim. 29. Insulsitatem . . . : ‘tastelessness and preciosity he deplores as a kind of mental sickness in an orator, sanity and soundness he admires as showing the orator’s conscience and regard for decency’. Cf. or. go ‘quidquid est salsum aut salubre in oratione id proprium Atticorum e st’, and Quintii.’s comment on th a t passage as showing th a t salsum is not the same as ridiculum (vi. 3. 17 ff.). 28.

§

. 7 · videat ne . . . : ‘he must be aware of the differing stature and character and varied qualities of the Attic orators’. C. argues th a t while the term ‘A ttic’ may well be used for the best oratory, the variety of the Attic orators makes untenable the restriction of the term to the plain style of Lysias.

2 8 5

§ 2 8 4 . 2 4 -§

286

. 26

211

8. vim et varietatem : literally ‘their essential nature and its various form s’. II. Demosthenes . . . : on these orators cf. §§ 35-38 with nn. 13. aliquem : ‘some particular one’. 15· Phalereus : cf. §§37—38: on C.’s admiration for Demetrius cf. esp. de or. ii. 95, or. 92. On the word-order, normal in C., cf. 325. 30 ‘Milesius Aeschines’ and Sandys on or. l.c. 17· florid ior : ‘more highly coloured ’ in general, or ‘more given to the use of flores (figures) ’ in particular. For a non­ technical use cf. Quintii, ii. 5. 18, but C. may be attempting to render the Greek ανθηρόν ; ut ita dicam points to an innova­ tion ; floridus is first found here in this sense, and was never common ( T L L vi. i. 925. 72). On ανθηρόν, a difficult and controversial term, cf. Quintii, xii. 10. 58 (with Austin’s note) where it is associated with the Middle Style, and so would be appropriate to Demetrius and the contrast with Lysias and Hyperides. §

. 20 . Attici : this passage shows th a t the now familiar ‘canon’ of ten Attic orators had not yet been established, or a t any rate generally acknowledged. Quintilian’s use of the same argument, though with different names (xii. 10. 20—26) raises further difficulties for the conventional views of the origin and date of the canon, cf. my article cited at 36. 9 n. Charisius : a contemporary of Demosthenes. Some critics of Quintilian’s day thought th a t his speeches had been written by Menander (Quintii, x. 1. 70). Little is now known of them, apart from three fragments in Rutilius Lupus (i. 10, ii. 6, 16). multarum orationum : a striking example of a genitive of quality used of purely external attributes. Other examples are made easier by a transition from internal attributes (cf. 246. 18 n.), or by the presence of an adjective, cf., e.g., Cael. 64 ‘veteris et plurimarum fabularum poetriae’, Att. xiii. 29. 1 ‘Cornificiam . . . vetulam sane et multarum nuptiarum ’, cf. Lebreton p. 84. 22 . D e m o c h a r e s : c. 360-275 b . c ., an im portant figure in Athe­ nian politics fromc. 310, cf. de or. ii. 95, [Plut.] vit. %oratt. 847 c-E, Blass Die Attische Beredsamkeit (Leipzig 1887) iii. 2. 338. 2 3 . o ra tio n es : only one is known (cf. Blass l.c.). h isto r ia m : the fragments are in FGrH. ii. 79. 26 . H eg esia s : of Magnesia and Sipylum, flor. c. 250 b . c . A ttic u m : cf. or. 226 ‘ille quoque imitari Lysiam v u lt’, but 2 8 6

212

COM M ENTARY

he came to be regarded as the founder of the (Strabo xiv. i. 41).

Ασιανός ζήλος

At quid . . . : cf. or. 226 ‘Hegesias . . . saltat incidens particulas ’, ib. 230 ‘sunt etiam qui illo vitio quod ab Hegesia maxime fluxit infringendis concidendisque numeris in quod­ dam genus abiectum incidant versiculorum simillimum '. His style is illustrated in several fragments, e.g. Dion. Hal. comp, verb. 4 εξ αγαθής εορτής αγαθήν άγομεν ά λλη ν— από Μ αγνησίας

§ 2 8 7 . 2 7.

είμι τή ς μ εγά λη ς Σιττυλευς — où γάρ μικρόν εις Θηβαίων ΰ8ωρ επτυσεν ο Διόνυσος· ήδύς μεν γάρ εστι, π ο ιεί 8ε μαίνεσθαι, Strabo ix. 1. l6 όρώ την άκρόπολιν και το π ερ ιττή ς τριαίνης εκεΐθι σ η μ εΐο ν όρώ την Ε λευ σ ίν α και τω ν ιερών γεγο να μ ύ σ τη ς· εκείνο Λεωκόριον, τούτο Θ η σ εΐο ν ον δύναμαι δηλώσαι καθ’ εν έκαστον· ή γαρ Α τ τ ικ ή θεών αντοΐς κ α τα λαβόντων και τω ν προγόνων ηρώων εσ τι κ τή μ α , cf. A U . xii. 6. i 'D e

Caelio vide quaeso ne quae lacünä sït ïn aürô. ego ïsta non nôvï. sed certe in collubo est dëtrîmëntï sâtïs. huc aurum si accedit—sed quid löquör? tü vïdëbïs. Habes Hegesiae genus quod Varro laudat ’. Varro is Hegesias' only recorded admirer. fractum : ' broken up but with over-tones of the meaning ‘enfeebled’, 'effeminate', cf. Dion. Hal. Dem. 43 fin. τω ν ρυθμών πολλαχή μεν τους άνδρωδεις . . . σπανίως 8ε . . . τούς ύπορχηματικονς και Ίω ν ικ ώ ς διακλωμένονς.

minutum : used of Gorgias, whom Hegesias resembled, in or. 39, cf. de or. ii. 159. I t keeps the literal sense of minuere, ‘cut to pieces’. 30. suntne . . . : Martha and Hendr. prefer the punctuation which gives ‘ suntne . . . oratores ’ to the Atticist interlocutor, and ‘quis . . . po test’ to C. But it seems better to make C. extract the admission th a t the orators just mentioned, includ­ ing even Hegesias in his own estimation, are all Attic : hence the impossibility of imitating so many different models. I. Thucydidem : cf. or. 30-32, for an ironical comment on this school ‘ novum quoddam imperitorum et inauditum genus . . . cum mutila quaedam et hiantia locuti sunt, quae vel sine magistro facere potuerunt, germanos se pu tan t esse Thucydidas’. 4. concertatorium : found nowhere else, perhaps a rendering of εναγώνιον. 5· Orationes : ‘the speeches which he did include’ (being nonforensic). There is here and still more in or. 30 a shift in C.’s judgement. In de or. ii. 93 and even the early p a rt of Brutus

28.

§

28 6 . 26- § 289. 29

213

(§29), Thucydides is treated as evidence for the style of orators of his time. In the latter passages, C. implies that Thucydides has no place in the history of oratory. 7. neque possim . . . : commutatio, cf. 145. 24. 10. Opimium . . . Anicium : 121 and 160 b .c. According to Pliny n.h. xxiii. 34 Falernian was at its best ‘a quinto decimo anno’. Cf. ib. xiv. 55 on the vintage of 121 ‘inreliquis claritas generi non fuit alicui, anno fuit, omnium generum bonitate, L. Opimio consule; cum C. Gracchus tribunus plebem seditionibus agitans interemptus est, ea caeli tem­ peries fulsit—cocturam vocant—solis opere natali urbis D C X X X III durantque adhuc vina ducentis fere annis iam in speciem redacta mellis asperi’. notae : the ‘mark ’ indicating the vintage, cf. Hor. carni. ii. 3. 8, serm. i. 10. 24. §

. 13. dolio : the large earthenware jar in which newly fermented wine was kept until it was ready to be transferred to amphorae. 15. quasi de . . . : ‘the new style still fermenting in the v a t’. Thucydides is the old wine, Demosthenes the mature wine, bu t C. does not specify what corresponds to this very new wine, probably because he has nothing specific in mind and his simile does not really fit his argument at this point. 2 8 8

§ 2 8 9 .2 4 . necesse : ‘a logical necessity’, deducible from Demosthenes’ acknowledged supremacy, without specific evidence. 26. At cum . . . : cf. Tusc. ii. 3 (cited on 283. 23). 27. advocatis: in C. advocatus is never ' advocate ’, ‘counsel’, a sense first found in the elder Seneca and common in Quin­ tilian, but a man who attended court to lend moral support to a friend, cf. Peterson on Quintii, x. 1. h i . 29. comitium : the enclosed but unroofed area adjoining the forum, where private suits were heard. stantem . . . : i.e. let the Atticists go before the single iudex who stands as he decides private suits (they will be successful there); the criminal courts (where the jury sits on benches, subsellia) demand a bolder utterance. Editors, with the exception of Martha, start by assuming th a t veniant is a kind of threat ('L et them come . . . what a disaster th a t will be ! ’) and then impose unnatural interpretations on this passage,

2I4

COM M ENTARY

in particular ignoring the obvious antithesis of stantem . . . subsellia. For the suitability of the genus tenue for private lawsuits cf. Intr. 7. Note too the often misinterpreted peculiarities of style of pro Roscio comoedo, especially the quite abnormal lack of C.’s favoured rhythms. I t is in fact our only extant speech which was addressed to a single iudex. §

2 9 0

. i. compleatur: cf. Pliny epp. vi. 33. 4 ‘ad hoc stipatum tribunal’ (part of an account of an actual case which drew crowds similar to those described here by C.). The occupants of the tribunal would include advisers and assessors in addi­ tion to the president, cf. de or. i. 168 ‘nobis in tribunali Q. Pompei praetoris urbani familiaris nostri sedentibus’, Strafr. pp. 360-1. 3. multiplex : ‘of all sorts and conditions’. iudex : either collective for the jury, or the president of the court, cf. Strafr. p. 208, Greenidge pp. 426, 431, 495, Rose. Am. 84-85, Ball·. 52. 4. significetur . . . : the bystanders themselves call for silence, instead of having to be brought to order. 7. placere : so used of a successful actor in, e.g., Suet. Nero 42 ‘cuidam scaenico placenti nuntium m isit’. Roscium : ‘a Roscius’, the type of outstanding excellence in any sphere, cf. de or. i. 130 ‘itaque hoc iam diu est conse­ cutus u t in quo quisque artificio excelleret is in suo genere Roscius diceretur’. §

2 9 1

. i i . solidum : from the use of articles of solid gold, etc. comes the idea of things with no extrinsic ornamentation (cf. div. i. 48, Sen. dial, i (deprov.) 6.47, hence it resembles sincerus in meaning. 15. Ita fiet . . . : C. is not denying th a t all A ttic orators were good, but th a t the term ‘A ttic’ can be used to narrow the scope of good oratory : all good orators find a place within the all-embracing range of the ‘A ttic ’ style if th a t term is properly understood. 16. redeamus : as in §§ 147, 248 the intention is not a t once fulfilled, because of an interruption by another speaker. § § 2 9 2 - 3 0 0 . ‘Atticus intervened to say that I could not have been serious in praising early Roman orators so highly. I replied that we had better leave the question for the time being.'

§ 289. 29-§ 293.12

215

C. avails himself of the dialogue form to argue through Atticus th a t his predecessors fell far short of his own achieve­ ment, and th a t the earlier part of the dialogue must be read in th a t light. At the same time he makes clear a high regard for the elder Cato and L. Crassus. § 2 9 2 . 20. conatus : sc. aliquid dicere. 22. Tite : according to C. Axtell (CPh x (1915) 398), C. addresses Atticus only four times by his praenomen, on two occasions in Greek for humorous effect. 24. Platonis: cf., e.g., apol. 19E ff., symp. 216D, Hipp. ma. 286D. Xenophontis : b u t Socratic irony is not a feature of the Xenophon tic Socrates. Aeschini : Aeschines the Socratic, a devoted follower of Socrates, whose dialogues were well known in antiquity, cf. Diog. Laert. ii. 61, Demetr. de eloc. 297. 27. hanc sibi. . . : cf. ac. pr. 15, off. i. 108, and Quintii, ix. 2. 46 where he discusses ‘irony’ as a figure of speech. It could also be a ‘tro p e’ (ib. viii. 6. 54) and a form of wit {de or. ii. 270, Quintii, vi. 3. 68). The meaning of the term had widened to something near modem ‘irony’ and was no longer confined to feigned ignorance. On the word εϊρων cf. Ribbeck in RhM xxxi (1876) 381 ff. I. Epicuro : this view of Epicurus is not elsewhere attested. The Epicurean Atticus is the speaker. 3. vide . . . ne : ‘perhaps’, cf. 293. 12, dom. 92, K.-S. ii. 255. § 2 9 3 . 8. comparabas : §§ 63-68. 11. pictius : pictus connotes not so much ‘highly coloured’ as ‘sharply and clearly picked out in colour’ (cf. distinguere 69. 13, 275. 27, and the English metaphorical use of ‘etched’) and Dion. Hal. Ays. 13 speaks of η κοσμούσα re και άνθίζονσα την λίξιν αυτού χάρις. Yet the frequent application of the meta­ phor to adornment of style, especially by the use of figures (cf. 141. 17, or. 39, 65, 96, rhet. Her. iv. 16), would make this a surprising judgement on Lysias. I t may be th at C. makes Atticus overstate his case, but I suspect th a t we should with M artha treat the words ' quo . . . pictius ’ as a question refer­ ring to Cato, and C.’s opinion of him (cf. § 69). 12. adseveramus : 'we are in earnest’.

COMMENTARY

2I6

the ‘outlines’, a hint of natural ability, but without ars and doctrina; on the metaphor cf. 70. 27. 22. T u sc u la n u m : not even a city-bred Roman. § 2 9 4 , 17. fo r m a m :

G a lb a m : §82. C. has already acknowledged the lack of appeal in Galba’s written speeches (§§82, 91 ff.). principem : ‘a leading figure ’, w ithout any technical sense. 28. Lepidi : §§ 95-96. P a u lu m . . . : § 96 explains the qualified approval of ‘A tticus’, i.e. Cicero. Lepidus’ use of periodic structure pointed the way forward to C. 31. nescio quid : has the effect of putting augustius within quotation-marks, picking up the word from 83. 17: ‘and you say as well th a t nothing could be ‘‘ more reverend ” ’. Except in a few late passages, augustus is used only of objects of religious veneration: hence C. glances back at his extended use of the word. 2. ne . . . : ‘Why, th a t charming oration you speak of . . .’. The objection to taking ne as asseverative (249. 8 n.) is th a t the subjunctive is not found in good prose after the impera­ tive protasis. B ut the favoured alternative, th a t ne sit = μη fj, ‘perhaps’, is scarcely easier to parallel. Thus of examples cited fin. v. 8 could be jussive, and the best parallel, Verr. ii. 4. 15, has ne forte. § 2 9 5 .2 4 .

§

. 3. Carbonem : §§ 105-6. : §§ 103-4, 125-6. i i . Polycliti : cf. 70. 24. D o ry p h o ru m : the statue of a youth leaning on a spear, well known in ancient and modern copies, cf. or. 5. L ysip p us : late fourth century sculptor from Sicyon. Cf. Pliny n.h. xxxiv. 65 ' statuariae arti plurimum trad itu r con­ tulisse capillum exprimendo, capita minora faciendo quam antiqui, corpora graciliora siccioraque . . . vulgoque dicebat ab illis factos quales essent homines, a se quales viderentur esse’.

6.

2 9 6

G racchis

de h i s : Crassus and Antonius (§§138 ff.) ; on Cotta and Sulpicius cf. §§202—5, on Caelius cf. §273. 15. d ixeris : it is not possible to save the grammar by under­ standing quaerere or other verb of interrogation with omitto.

§ § 2 9 7 .1 4 .

§ 2 9 4 . 1 7 -§

3 0 0 .1 2

217

Atticus proposes to ignore the statements (quae dixisti), not to refrain from asking what they were. C. combines con­ structions, a t least in p art for the sake of rhythm. 17. tu videris : ‘th a t’s your affair’, cf. K.-S. i. 149. 18. ut mihi . . . : ‘th a t I think some people would have been glad to die so th a t . . .’, with reference to C.’s exclusion of living orators. 20. pepulisti: possibly a musical metaphor (cf. 199. 3): ‘you have struck the first chord’ (άνακρονεσθαι , ά να β ά λλεσ θ α ι) . L ’s depulisti cannot be right. 21. in aliud . . . : a convenient fiction of dialogue (Intr. 18). §

. 23. Intelleges . . . : cf, 294. 17, and for the source of the image 70. 27, and for the sense §§68—69, where note th at Cato’s deficiencies appear not as oratorical adornment in general, but (i) elegance of diction, (ii) rhythm—both developments of later times. 27. Nec : preferred to neve unless another prohibition precedes (K.-S. i. 192). 30. quid . . . : on the shortage of Latin exemplars cf. or. 132. I t is difficult tobe sure th a t C. is here observing the normally clear, if fine, distinction between habere quid ('to know what to copy’) and habere quod ('to have something to copy’) (cf. Reid on ac. ii. n o , K.-S. ii. 500). 2 9 8

§ 2 9 9 . 2 . paulo ante : §§270-1. 4. nomine : ‘m ention’, but Barw. very reasonably proposes to delete in before eo; eo then qualifies nomine', ‘how few emerged worthy of th a t name (of orator) which all long to have'. 5. Africanus: cf. de or. ii. 270 ‘in hoc genere Fannius in annalibus suis Africanum hunc Aemilianum dicit fuisse et Graeco eum verbo appellat ε ΐ ρ ω ν α ’. C. Fannius : cf. § 101. § 3OO.9. Vero : can appear first in its sentence in this cor­ roborative use, ‘certainly’ (cf. Tusc. ii. 26, div. i. 104, rep. i. 58), but not when adversative. 10. Cumano . . . : C. is at the time of speaking domi, in Rome (10. 15, Intr. 1). 12. unde : cf. §279, b u t the digression really begins a t §233.

2i 8

COMMENTARY

§ § 3 0 1 - 3 . A résumé of Hortensius' early career and his character as an orator. § 3 0 1 . 1 3 . orsus esset : in 95 at the age of 19 (§ 229). 18. memoria : for testimony to Hortensius’ remarkable powers of memory cf. Sen. contr. i, pr. 19 ‘Hortensius qui a Sisenna provocatus in auctione persedit per diem totum et omnes res et pretia et emptores ordine suo argentariis recognoscentibus ita u t in nulla re falleretur recensuit’, Quintii, x. 6. 4, xi. 2. 24. In de or. iii. 230 he is described as ‘ingenio peracri et studio flagranti et doctrina eximia et memoria singulari’, H orten­ sius’ memory there being singled out for mention in addition to the ‘tria d ’ (22. 22 n.). In the present passage, memory again is singled out, or perhaps regarded as an aspect of ingenium as a natural gift; then comes exercitatio (‘Ardebat . . . faciebat’), followed by the five parts of theory (ars), elocutio (‘E rat . . . copiosus’), inventio, dispositio and (again) memoria ('Rem . . . refellendum’), and actio (‘Vox . . . satis’). C. is much less mechanical in his application of these stock categories to Hortensius than he is in many of his other descriptions. 20. esset . . . cogitavisset : the subjunctive inside a consecutive clause is a common form of attraction (K.-S. ii. 202). 22. referente : Kr. assumes th a t this refers to a prompter who would have been called on, for instance, in the interjections in Verr. iv. 5 ‘ sed earum artificem—quem ? quemnam ? recte admones—Polyclitum esse dicebant’, but there is no hint elsewhere of the employment of such a person. Probably the sense is a combination of the two meanings of referre, ‘ record ’ and ' report '. Hortensius was independent of a written record of what was said on the other side. §

. 27. minime vulgare : ‘most original’. nemo alius . . . : a surprising statem ent: partitiones and contectiones under various names were established in rhetori­ cal theory, cf. inv. i. 32, 98, part. or. 59, rhet. Her. i. 17, ii. 47, Quintii, iv. 5, esp. 24 (on Hortensius), vi. 1. The summing-up is mentioned as early as rhet. Alex. c. 20. For Hortensius’ practice cf. Quinct. 35, div. Caec. 45. 29. memor : if L ’s reading is right, this is the first attested instance, and the only one in C., of memor with an indirect question; but we could dispense with yet another allusion to 3 0 2

28.

§3 0 1 .

13

-§

305

.

18

219

Hortensius’ memory, and Jahn’s [memor] eorum quae is attractive. §

. i . e le g a n s : as often, retains a hint of its derivation from eligere, and the phrase is equivalent to ‘in dilectu splendidus’, so th a t we have allusions to εκλογή and σΰνθεσις (compositio). Facultate has the sense ‘store’, ‘supply’ (rare in the singular, b u t cf. Tusc. i. 108), suggesting Greek κατασκευή, the third category in this part of Theophrastus' doctrine of style (Intr. 26). 4. d ivid eb a t : the first, and only Ciceronian, occurrence of the rhetorical t.t. freely used by the elder Seneca and Quintilian, and a curious echo of 227. 25 'rem videbat acute ’ (cf. 239. 20) with which the text of the present passage should perhaps be brought into line. 6. m o tu s . . . : cf. Quintii, xi. 3. 8 ‘hac (actione) Antonium e t Crassum multum valuisse, plurimum vero Q. Hortensium ’, Geli. i. 5. 2 ‘Q. Hortensius . . . quod multa munditia et circumspecte compositeque indutus et amictus esset ma­ nusque eius inter agendum forent argutae admodum et gestuosae, maledictis compellationibusque probrosis iactatus est, muitaque in eum quasi histrionem in ipsis causis atque iudiciis dicta su n t’, Val. Max. viii. 10. 2. 7. flo rescen te : ‘approaching his peak’. 8. C rassus . . . : Crassus died in 91, the Social W ar broke out and Cotta was exiled in 90, in which year C. came to Rome and as protégé of Scaevola the augur first saw something of Roman political life. 3 0 3

§ § 3 0 4 - 1 2 . ‘Hortensius’ heyday coincided with my first acquain­ tance with Roman politics. M y own career and studies were much affected by the political upheavals of the time. I made my first appearance in a public trial when I defended Sex. Roscius.’ § 3 0 4 . 12. V aria : cf. 205. 1 n. 14. L. M e m m iu s : customarily identified with a tribune of 90. B ut a tribune could not be brought to trial. Accordingly, A. Biedl (cf. 136. 30 n.) doubts the identification, while the difficulty is resolved in M R R ii. 38 n. 4 by transferring Memmius’ tribunate to 89. Q. P o m p e iu s : cf. 206. 11. On Philippus cf. 173. 11 n. §

. 18. c o n tio n ib u s : cf. in rostris below (23). There was no forensic oratory, b u t political oratory was still to be heard.

3 0 5

COM M ENTARY 19. C. Curio : cf. §§210 ff., 192. 26. 21. Q. Metellus Celer : R E Caecilius no. 85; the first bearer of the agnomen (Plut. Coriol. 11. 4), he adopted the better known Celer (cos. 60). 22. Q. Varius . . . : cf. §221. C. quotes a passage by Carbo (or. 213) cf. Appendix A, 30. 23. habitabant : 'h au n te d ’, cf. de or. i. 264 ‘is qui habitaret in subselliis’ (Wilkins ad loc.), Mur. 21. 24. contiones : cf. 177. 21 n. 2 8 . oratoriis tantum . . . : the following sections give a careful chronological account of C.’s oratorical interests in parallel with the development of his other studies. The beginning of his active political and oratorical career leads to a concentra­ tion of interest on these topics. B ut all culminates in § 322, where he indicates the debt of his own mature oratory to the variety of his early studies. 29. damnatus : cf. Val. Max. viii. 6. 4 ‘sua lex eum (sc. Varium) domesticis laqueis constrictum absum psit’. §

3 0 6

. i. Q. Scaevolae : the augur, cf. §§ 101-2, 212. 5. On C.’s connexion with him, cf. amic. 1, leg. i. 13 (which shows th a t C. m et Atticus a t Scaevola’s house). Plut. Cic. 3. 2, cf. de or. i. 200. 2. consulentibus . . . : the traditional method of legal instruc­ tion a t Rome, cf. 113. 21 n. 3. proximus : sc. annus, 88 b .c. 4. P. Sulpici : § 203. 6. Philo : of Larisa, from n o b .c. the head of the ‘New’ (sceptical) Academy founded by Arcesilas and Cameades, cf. Plut. Cic. 3. 7. Atheniensium . . . : Athens was occupied by M ithridates’ general Archelaus (Greenidge and Clay pp. 169—70). π . quod : L ’s sed should be retained; the anacoluthon is natural and lively. 12. ratio . . . : the system of the courts ’, a mere periphrasis for indicia, cf. L & S s.v. ratio p. 1526 col. 3. §

3 0 7

. 13. Occiderat : cf. 227. 5 n. proximo : 87 b .c.

§ 305 . 19 - § 308 . 21

221

: Catulus was born c. 150, Antonius in 143, Caesar Strabo c. 130. On their deaths cf. de or. iii. 8, Greenidge and Clay pp. 175-7; see also on 132. 24, 139. 25, 177. 17. 15. E o d e m ...: this passage has been much discussed. Because the subsequent reference to Molo (§ 312) does not refer back to this passage, and ‘actori . . . m agistro’ is repeated in expanded form in §316 where Molo appears again, some regard the present passage as an interpolation, saving the more circumstantial §312 to explain the back reference in § 316. Others have urged th a t C. wrote this passage, but later realizing th a t he had blundered in saying th a t he had at­ tended lectures by Molo in 87, he added §312 (Eodem . . . venerat), which reads much more like an inserted afterthought than the present passage, but failed to ensure th a t § 307 was deleted. (Gudeman B p h W (1915) 574 suggested th at Tacitus dial. 30 shows th a t Tacitus had a text lacking § 307, but Tacitus would not mention Molo there, whatever his text, since he is discussing C.’s wow-rhetorical studies.) The case for deletion is not proved. Plut. Mar. 45 mentions th a t Posidonius was in Rome as a Rhodian envoy, and if Molo, Rhodes’s leading orator, was with him, we may be sure th a t C. went to any lectures he gave. Schmid (RE Apollonius no. 85) and Gelzer (RE art. M. Tullius Cicero col. 831) accept the evidence of this passage. W ithout it the reference to Molo in § 312 would be very abrupt. M o lon i : cf. R E Apollonius no. 85. He was probably Apol­ lonius son of Molo, but was known by his father’s name to avoid confusion with the other well-known rhetorician of the same name and city (Alabanda) (cf. de or. i. 126, Strabo xiv. 2. 13). Caesar was a pupil of his (Suet. Jul. 4, Plut. Caes. 3), as was Favonius (AU. ii. i. 9). He wrote on rhetoric (Quintii, iii. 1. 16). Dion. Hal. Din. 8 treats him as a typical Rhodian follower of Hyperides (cf. 51. 12. See further the work of Portalupi cited ad loc. pp. 14-18). R h o d io : refers to his residence, not his birth-place. 18. d iversa : C. is supposed to be discussing Hortensius. 20. sp a tio : the race-course, cf. sen. 83, amic. 40, and cursum above (18). 14. a e ta tu m

§

. 2 1 . T rien n iu m . . . : on this period, and the lack of a good (ancient or modem) non-partisan account of it cf. E. Badian J R S Iii (1962) 47 ff.

3 0 8

COM M ENTARY 22. discessu . . . fuga : ' voluntary departure . . . exile ’. C. often refers to his own exile as discessus, cf. dam. 15 with N isbet’s n. 23. M. Crassus : cf. 233. 10 n. He fled to Spain: for a circum­ stantial and highly dramatic account of his adventures cf. Plut. Crass. 4. 24. Lentuli duo : i.e. Clodianus and Sura (cf. §§ 234-5). W hether they were with Sulla or waiting on events is not known. 25. cottidie : we might expect in dies, but cf. 320. 28 and Nägelsbach p. 370, Nisbet on dom. 113, for information about ‘similar surprises’. § 3 0 9 .2 9 . Diodoto: cf. ac. pr. 115 ‘Diodoto quid faciam Stoico quem a puero audivi? qui mecum vivit to t annos? qui habitat apud me ? quem et admiror et diligo ? ’ and on his fortitude in blindness, Tuse. v. 113; see also fam. ix. 4, xiii. 16. 4. habitavisset. . . : ‘ lived at my house and was a close friend of m ine’, habitare is merely ‘to reside’, vivere cum (L & S s.v. IIb) implies a close social relationship, cf. conviva. 30. nuper: in 59 b.c. (NW. ii. 20. 6). For nuper, ‘some time ago ’ cf. 223. 25 n. Holden on off. i. 26 shows th a t modo is nearer English ‘recently’, ‘lately’. 1. dialectica : cf. §§ 152-3. 2. quasi. . . : a favourite picture, cf. or. 113 (and Sandys’s refs.) ‘Zeno . .. cum compresserat digitos pugnumque fecerat, dialecticam aiebat eius modi esse; cum autem diduxerat et manum dilataverat palmae illius similem eloquentiam esse dicebat’. 3. etiam tu . . . : cf. 23. 1 n., or. 113 ‘esse igitur perfecte eloquentis puto non eam solam facultatem habere quae sit eius propria fuse lateque dicendi, sed etiam vicinam eius atque finitimam dialecticorum scientiam assumere’. 6. tamen : anticipatory, cf. 138. 19. §

. 7 . declamitans : on the group of terms from the root and their early usage cf. S. Bonner Roman Declamation (Liver­ pool 1949) ch. i, with my caveat (CQ n . s . x (1960) 76-77) about treating rhet. Her. iii. 20 ff. as certainly our earliest examples of their use : rhet. Her. may be much later than the conventionally accepted date before 80 b.c. Originally such words were used of (i) rehearsal of speeches which were to be

3 1 0

§3 0 8 . 2 2 -§ 3 1 1 .1 5

223

delivered, (ii) voice-training (so declamitare on its first appear­ ance in de or. i. 251). Use in the sense of ‘exercises on set themes which became a form of public entertainment in the time of Augustus, first appears here, with the qualifying sic . . . loquuntur, then in fam. ix. 16. 7 (46 b .c.) (see below) and Tusc. i. 7. Possibly the form as well as the sense occasions C.’s sic . . . loquuntur. Landgraf, Historische Grammatik der lat. Sprache pp. 605-6, states th a t there are no fréquentatives in -atare, from the supine stem of verbs in -are, because such verbs were themselves in origin durative. The forms from the present stems are a late development by analogy with those formed from the third conjugation. Certainly only a few (e.g. vocitare, volitare, rogitare, clamitare) were acceptable in ora­ tory. I t is noticeable th a t infam , ix. 16. 7 C. uses declamitare in a play with cenitare (‘to be a diner-out’), a word which first appears in 54 b .c. [fam. vii. 16. 2) in a light-hearted context, and is confined by C. to such contexts. 10. Latine : cf. off. i. 1 ‘semper cum Graecis Latina coniunxi neque id in philosophia solum sed etiam in dicendi exercita­ tione feci ’. C.’s son claims to have followed his father’s advice to do the same [fam. xvi. 21. 5). Att. ix. 4 (49 b.c.) shows C. still solacing himself in troubled times by declaiming in Greek and Latin, and there are several references to his declaiming (in what language is not stated) in 44, cf. Att. xiv. 12. 2, and see Suet. rhet. 1. Graece . . . : cf. Suet. rhet. 2 on the advice C. received to leave Plotius’ ‘L a tin ’ school, ‘continebar autem doctissi­ morum hominum auctoritate qui existimabant Graecis exer­ citationibus ali melius ingenia posse’. 13. nisi Graece . . . : on the astonishment of C.’s Greek teachers . in Rhodes at his fluency in their language cf. Plut. Cic. 4. 4-5. §

. 14. recuperanda . . . : a stock phrase for Sulla’s victory in the Civil War, cf. dom. 79 ‘ an vero Volaterranis . . . L. Sulla victor re publica recuperata comitiis centuriatis civitatem eripere non p o tu it? ’, Rose. Am. 141.

3 1 1

15. interitus : Carbo, tr. pl. 90 (221. 1), and Antistius were killed in the senate-house, Scaevola, pont, max., cos. 95 (145. 19 n.), in the vestibule of the temple of Vesta (App. b.c. i. 88, Livy per. lxxxvi). For Carbo and Scaevola earlier Marian sympathies are attested : for the suggestion th a t they were

224

COM M ENTARY

killed when on the point of deserting to Sulla, cf. E. Badian J R S lii (1962) 60. 18. P o m p o n iu s . . . : evidently victims of Sulla: note the euphemistic sublati as against the crudelis interitus inflicted by the Marian party. 19. p rim u m : C.'s first private case was th a t of Quinctius (81 B . c.), th a t of Roscius of Ameria (below) (80 b . c . ) the first public case. Turn primum is emphatic : C. delayed his appear­ ance until he felt himself fully trained. § 3 1 2 . 22. Eodem . . . : cf. on 307. 15. 23. R h od ioru m . . . : Rhodes was loyal to Rome during the Mithridatic W ar (App. Mithr. 24-26, Florus i. 40. 8, Greenidge and Clay pp. 168-70). Sulla rewarded it with control over neighbouring communities (Q.f,. i. 1. 33, App. Mithr. 61), who later raised objections: cf. Q.f. l.c. ‘ Caunii nuper omnesque ex insulis quae erant a Sulla Rhodiis attributae confugerunt ad senatum, nobis u t potius vectigal quam Rhodiis penderent ’. T hat these representations occasioned Molo’s embassy emerges from Strabo xiv. 2. 3 άπέστησαν δε ποτέ Καύνιοι των 'Ροδίων κριθέντες δ’ ëm των 'Ρωμαίων άπΐλήφθησαν πάλιν· και Ιση Aoyor Μόλωνος κατά Καυνίων. 26. n o n digna : ‘unsuitable ' because too im portant : so indignus can mean ‘undeserving’ of something bad as well as ‘un­ w orthy’ of something good. 27. m u lta e : including the cases pro muliere Arretina (Caecin. 97) and (perhaps) pro Titinia ’(§ 217). §

3 1 3

- 2 4 . 'But let me tell you the whole story of my career and relations with Hortensius’.

§

3 1 3

§

3 1 4

. 29. n a ev o . . . crepundiis : the birthm ark and the baby’s rattle were common means of identifying long-lost children in New Comedy: thus the plot of Plautus’ Rudens turns on the loss of a box containing crepundia, cf. 11. 1081, 1154, 1362—3. C. contrasts knowledge of some individual feature with know­ ledge of the whole person as a prelude to giving a full account of his further career. 5. la teru m : ‘lungs’, cf. 202. 2. Plut. Cic. 3 echoes the whole passage. . 8 . e t a m ici et m e d ic i: cf. Catuli. 41. 5-6 ‘propinqui quibus est puella cara / amicos medicosque convocate ’, Hor. epp. i. 8. 9 'fidis offendar medicis, irascar amicis'.

§ 311 . 15-§ 315 . 28

225

Ii. d isc e d e n d u m : normally the rejected alternative after potius quam is expressed by a subjunctive, but where the accepted alternative is infinitive or gerund (ive), there are many excep­ tions, cf. Att. ii. 20. 2, vii. 6. 2; see K.—S. ii. 301—2.

: not simply ‘more restrained’—so much has already been implied in ‘remissione . . . vocis’—but ‘better blended’, i.e. in this context ‘more varied’. In or. 108 C. claims th a t his early speeches had some moments of light relief. 14. ea c a u sa : it was, and still is, alleged th a t the real reason for C.’s departure from Rome was the dangerous situation arising from his attacks on the Sullan régime (cf. Plut. Cic. 3 δεδιώς

1 3 . tem p era tiu s

δε τον Σΰλλαν άπεδήμησεν είς την 'Ε λλάδα, διασπείρας λόγον, ώς του σώ ματος αύτω θεραπείας δεόμενου). B ut as C. possibly means to

indicate in the next sentence, he did not depart precipitately after the defence of Roscius (312. 27 n.). A. Afzelius (Class, et Med. viii (1946) 209 ff.) argues th a t many of Sulla’s own supporters favoured Roscius, and any risk C. incurred at this time was in connexion with his plea pro muliere Arretina. § 315. 18. A n tio c h o : succeeding Philo (306. 6n.), he claimed to restore the true doctrines of the original (‘old’) Academy. On the tru th of this claim cf. 119. 8 n. 22. D e m e tr iu m : unknown. 24. t cum : there is nothing intrinsically improbable in the picture of the rising young Roman politician accompanied for long periods of time and over considerable distances by lead­ ing ‘orators’ of the hellenized East, the itinerant public speaker being in any case a feature of Greek life from the fifthcentury sophists onwards : summis quidem and ipsis libentibus show th a t C. felt complimented, but in the aftermath of the Mithridatic War, the rhetoricians would not be blind to the advantages to themselves of the association. The obelus is thus not needed. Plut. Cic. 4 and Quintii, xii. 6. 7 borrow from this passage, but throw no light on the question of reading. 26. M en ip p u s : of Stratonicea in Caria, cf. Strabo xiv. 2. 25 κάνταΰθα άνηρ αξιόλογος γεγενη τα ι ρήτωρ Μ ενιππος . . . δν μά λισ τα επαινεί τω ν κατά την Α σίαν ρητόρων ών ηκροάσατο Κικερω ν ώς φησιν εν τινι γραφ ή αυτός συγκρίνων Ξ ενοκλεΐ καί το ΐς κ α τ’ εκείνον άκμάζουσι.

28. m o le stia r u m . . . : cf. 284. 28. C. does not mean (as Schissel R E Menippus no. 11 suggests) th a t Menippus was a ‘plain 814437

Q

226

COM M ENTARY

stylist’ in the narrow sense; he means what he says, or if he means more than he says, it is once again th a t any good orator can be called ‘Attic ’—even if he comes from Asia. § 3 1 6 . I. Dionysius . . . Aeschylus : both otherwise unknown. 2. Xenocles : Cf. Strabo Xiii. I . 66 ά νή ρ 8 ’ Ά 8 ρ α μ υ τ τ η ν ο ς ρ ή τ ω ρ ε π ιφ α ν ή ς γ ε γ ε ν η τ α ι Ξ ε ν ο κ λ ή ς τ ο υ μ ε ν Α σ ια ν ό ν χ α ρ α κ τ ή ρ ο ς α γ ω ν ισ τ ή ς

8 ’ ε ί τ ι ς ά λ λ ο ς κ α ι ε ίρ η κ ώ ς υ π έρ τ η ς Α σ ία ς ε π ί τ η ς σ υ γ κ λ ή τ ο υ κ α θ ' ον κ α ιρ ό ν α ιτ ία ν ε ί χ ε Μ ιθ ρ ώ α τ ισ μ ο ΰ .

3· Rhodum : C. is maintaining th a t he was not an ‘A sianist’: he studied in Athens, Asia, and Rhodes, and benefited most from his studies in Rhodes. On the Rhodian school cf. 51. 12 n. 5. veris causis : ‘real cases’ as opposed to declamations, and in some contexts, epideictic orations, cf. or. 221 ‘veris causis et forensibus’, ib. 38 ‘in veritate causarum ’. 8. redundantis : cf. 51. 12; Quintii, xii. 1. 20 refers to or. 108 where C. speaks of the ‘iuvenilis redundantia’ of the pro Roscio Amerino. See also de or. ii. 88 and the more elaborate discussion in Quintii, ii. 4. 4 if. for the view th a t it is better for the younger orator to show redundantia which can be checked ; C. argues th a t too early m aturity will not last, and Quintii, th a t ‘sterilia nullo labore vincuntur’. 1 3 . deferverat : ‘had simmered down ’, ‘ come off the boil ’, here a metaphor from the end of fermentation of wine (cf. § 288). For the same metaphor on the same topic, cf. or. 107 (with Sandys’s n.) ‘ quantis illa clamoribus adulescentuli diximus de supplicio parricidarum quae nequaquam satis defervisse post aliquanto sentire coepimus : “ quid enim tam commune (C. quotes Rose. Am . 72). Quintii, xii. 6. 4 refers to the pas­ sage from Orator. On the theme in general cf. leg. i. π ‘te ipse m utasti et aliud dicendi instituisti genus u t . . . a con­ tentionibus quibus summis uti solebas cotidie relaxes ali­ quid, ut iam oratio tua non multum a philosophorum lenitate ab sit’. corpori. . . : C. had put on a reasonable am ount of weight. § 3 1 7 . 16. alter : Cotta, cf. §202 nn. 17. propriis : cf. 274. 20 n. 2 3 . u t . . . consulari : of the case of Canuleius nothing is known. Cn. Dolabella (cos. 81) was unsuccessfully· prosecuted by

§ 3 1 5 . 2 8 -§

321

.

3

227

Julius Caesar for extortion in Macedonia (77B.C.) (Tac. dial. · 7, Suet. Jul. 4. i, O RF p. 386, Greenidgeand Clay p. 238). c u m . . . K o rte n s iu m : ' though Cotta was employed to lead for the defence, Hortensius played in fact the leading role’. 25. a g e n te m : δραστικοί (gloss, lat. ii. 280. 55), but in this pure intransitive use paralleled only in de or. ii. 358 (of mental images as an aid to memory) ‘imaginibus . . . agentibus, acribus, insignibus, quae occurrere celeriterque percutere animum possint’. 3 4

§ 3 1 8 . 27. V n u m . . . : 76 b . c . No cases are known unless the pro Roscio comoedo belongs to this year. 1. I n t e r im : 'for a tim e’. 2. S iciliensis : as quaestor a t Lilybaeum in 75 b .c . § 3 1 9 . 10. q u in q u e n n iu m : 74-70. The only known cases are the defence of Scamander, one of the many characters in the tangled story of Cluentius (Clu. 47, 49-55), and the civil case of M. Tullius. i i . p a tro c in io : C. prosecuted only Verres, and, if we tru st Dio xl. 55, Plancus (52) ; cf. the singular accusatio (the Verrines) in or. 131. Here even the Verres case is a ‘defence’. § 3 2 0 . 17. v id e re t : cf. 276. 8 n. 21. a b u n d a n tia : there are many references to Hortensius’ luxurious living, e.g. Varro r.r. iii. 6. 6, 13. 2, 17. 5, Pliny n.h. ix. 170, 172, X . 45. T hat a consular with no military ambitions should virtually retire after his consulship, though perhaps, as C, often implies in his letters, regrettable in a period of political turmoil, was not abnormal (cf. 8. 30, 3 n.). B ut (i) C. is here concerned w ith praecepta for oratory (319. 14) and stresses the impor­ tance of constant practice, (ii) he is explaining in detail why Brutus did not hear Hortensius a t his best (§§ 317, 327). 26. celeritate . . . : ‘ easy unbroken flow of words’. Continuatio, one of C.’s renderings for ‘period’ (cf. de or. i. 261, iii. 49, or. 204, 208), here implies th a t ‘the joins did not show’. § 3 2 1 . 3. p ra e to r p rim u s : for the year 66, cf. imp. Pomp. 2. Primus means th a t C. was the first candidate to gain a clear m ajority of votes (Nisbet on Pis. 2).

COM M ENTARY consul : since the opening sentence of § 323 reads like C.’s first mention of his consulship, and the insertion of consul spoils the rhythm of cretic-spondee, the word is best omitted. C.’s election as praetor could also be described as achieved incredibili populari voluntate. §

. 7. Nihil de me . . . : but C.'s attem pt to avoid blatant self-praise reads strangely if taken literally, since from plausible if exaggerated claims (no earlier orator had studied literature, law, philosophy, history) he passes to a denial in absolute terms th a t his predecessors and contemporaries had any ability in the other functions of the ideal orator. In the latter part of the paragraph the nemo qui . . . formula is in fact used quite mechanically to sketch th a t ideal. C. succeeds at all events in leaving open, on the face of it, the question of how far he himself represents the ideal. On C.'s view of the equipment of the ideal orator, cf. Intr. 33· 10. continetur : a favourite expression with C., especially in philosophical writings, ‘to consist in ’. 11. matrem : cf. de or. i. 9, Tusc. i. 64, for philosophy as mother of the ‘a rts ’. 13. prudentiam: ‘intellectual equipment' cf. 23. 1 n. 15. inferis : C.'s meaning is not necessarily confined to, though it includes, such things as the famous π ρ ο σ ω π ο π ο ΰ α of App. Claudius Caecus in Cael. 33, cf. or. 83, de or. i. 245, top. 45. All use of historical precedent was in a sense ‘ ab inferis testis excitare ’. 19. atque a . . . : ‘and pass from discussion confined to a par­ ticular person and occasion to a generalized and universal topic’. The division of topics into general and particular (θ έσ εις and υ π ο θ έ σ ε ις ) was favoured by some Hellenistic rhetoricians (de or. i. 138, ii. 65, 78) but C. maintains in de or. ii. 133 f., part. or. 61, that the distinction is unhelpful because all particular questions can be generalized. 3 2 2

§ 3 2 3 .2 5 . evanuisset: ‘faded aw ay’. Between 69 and 63 Hortensius is known to have spoken only on the bills of Gabinius and Manilius and in defence of Vargunteius (Sull. 6). 28. honore : both were now consulars.

§ 3 2 1 . 3 -§

3 2 4 .1 1

229

esse v id e re r : a classical example of a 19th-century emenda­ tion which is unacceptable because it replaces a MSS. reading which whatever its defects has a satisfying rhythm, with the one rhythm which C. sought to avoid above all. essemus must be an awkward example of the official 'w e', i.e. 'I was his equal and the reading of L should be kept. On such abrupt changes from first person singular to plural cf. Fordyce on Catull. 107. 3. 1. versati : for the cases cf. 2. 15 n. 2. perstrinxerat : because of C.’s novitas and support of Pompey. According to Sail. Cat. 23. 5-6, the optimates let C. reach the consulship only for fear of worse in Catiline. 3 . adm irabatur: C.’s actions against the Catilinarians were praised by Hortensius in his defence of Flaccus in 59 B.c. (A tt. ii. 23. 1). §

. 6. lege Pompeia : cf. 243. 24, fin. iv. 1 ‘cum ego te hac nova lege videam eodem die accusatori respondere et tribus horis perorare . . .’, Ascon. p. 36 Cl., Tac. dial. 38, and Dio xl. 52 which adds τον των συναγορευόντων εκατερω τω μέρα αριθμόν ωρισεν ώστε μη ΰττο τοΰ πλήθους αυτών τούς δικαστο,ς θορυβουμένους εκταραττεσθαι. 8. novi : i.e. they brought a fresh approach to many identical cases, cf. Dion. Hal. Lys. 17 οΰτοσΐ δέ ρήτωρ καινός iaτι καθ’ έκα­ στον των λόγων. cotidie : on the large number of cases brought under Pompey’s laws of 52 cf. Ascon. M il. pp. 55-56 CL, Dio xl. 55.1, and fam . vii. 2. 4 (Feb. 51) ‘nos hic multitudine et celebritate iudiciorum . . . distinem ur’. 9. complurisque : cf. 22. 23 n. 1 0 . qui: concessive:‘despite his premature death, Hortensius still completed the following career’. 11. sedecim : the MS. reading decem yields the date 85 for B rutus’ birth, since Hortensius’ first appearance in court was in 95 (§ 229). This date has one recommendation which many find decisive, th a t on th a t basis B rutus’ magistracies, e.g. the praetorship in 44, conform to the normal cursus honorum. Y et Veil. ii. 72. 1 gives the year of B rutus’ birth as 78, and most of the other evidence, though often vague or textually uncertain, implies th a t later date. Hence Nipperdey pro­ posed sedecim in the present passage, assuming th a t Brutus was appointed by Caesar in defiance of the Leges Annales. 3 2 4

230

COM M ENTARY

Against this there is the evidence of vir. ill. 82. 3-4 th a t Brutus was quaestor in 53, and so at least th irty years of age at th a t date—but neither the text nor the interpretation is absolutely secure. Further, (i) the early date makes B rutus’ entry into political life come rather late, (ii) Plutarch Brut. 3. i describes Brutus as a μ ε ιρ ά κ ιο ν in 58, which should mean th a t he was then under 20, (iii) Brut. 249. 5-6 above is? sur­ prising if Brutus was twenty-six when Caesar left for Gaul : surely a man in his early twenties could form a judgement of orators. Too little attention has been paid to th a t passage. 14. Dicendi . . . : but our quotations from Hortensius amount to eighteen words (O RF frr. 35, 39 (cf. 265. 18 n.), 55). His written works reflected inadequately the merits of his spoken oratory (or. 132, Quintii, xi. 3. 8). § § 3 2 5 - 8 . ‘ You did not hear Hortensius at his best, since his style was unsuitable in an older man, and he did not practise hard enough.’ §

. 19. Primam : Ernesti’s emendation of primum is un­ necessary. Asiaticum: 5 1 .1 0 η .

3 2 5

Timaeus : of Sicily ( 6 3 . 3 0 ) . The passage may merely use Timaeus as a convenient illustration, yet it seems also to contain a hint, perhaps the first, th a t ‘Asianism’ could lose its geographical connotation. Timaeus has come to stand as the typical ‘rhetorical historian’ in the worst sense of the term, yet, apart from Polybius, on whose prejudices cf. T. S. Brown Timaeus of Tauromenium (Berkeley 1 9 5 8 ) ch. v and F. W. W albank J R S lii ( 1 9 6 2 ) 1 ff., ancient critics saw good as well as bad in him, cf. de or. ii. 5 8 ‘longe eruditissimus et rerum copia et sententiarum varietate abundans et ipsa compositione verborum non impolitus’, ps.-Long. 4 . 1 τ ο ΰ

23.

ψ υ χ ρ ό ν π λ η ρ η ς ό Τ ίμ α ιο ς , ά νη ρ τ α μ έ ν ά λ λ α ικ α ν ο ί κ α ι π ρ ο ς λ ό γ ω ν έ ν ιό τ ε μ έ γ ε θ ο ς ο ύ κ ά φ ο ρ ο ς, π ο λ υ ίσ τ ω ρ ε π ιν ο η τ ικ ό ς , . . . υ π ό δ ε έ ρ ω τ ο ς τ ο ΰ ξ ε ν α ς ν ο ή σ ε ις α ει κ ιν ε ΐν π ο λ λ α κ ις ε κ π ίπ τ ω ν είς τ ό π α ιο α ρ ιω ό ε σ τ α τ ο ν . . . ε π α ί ­ νω ν Α λ έ ξ α ν δ ρ ο ν τ ο ν μ έ γ α ν , “ ος τ η ν Α σ ία ν δ λ η ν ” φ η σ ίν “ εν έ λ α τ τ ό σ ιν ε τ ε σ ιν π α ρ ε λ α β ε ν η ο σ ο ις τ ο ν υ π έ ρ τ ο ΰ π ρ ο ς Π έ ρ σ α ς π ο λ έ μ ο υ π α ν η γ υ ρ ικ ό ν λ ό γ ο ν 'Ι σ ο κ ρ ά τ η ς ε γ ρ α φ ε ν ” ; for another typical sententia cf. nat.

d. ii. 6 9 ‘ concinneque u t multa Timaeus, qui, cum in historia dixisset qua nocte natus esset Alexander, eadem Dianae Ephesiae templum deflagravisse, adiunxit minime id esse

§ 3 2 4 . ll- §

328

.

2

231

mirandum quod Diana, cum in partu Olympiadis adesse voluisset, abfuisset dom o’. 24. Hierocles . . . : ci. de or. ii. 95 ‘ut hodie (91 b . c .) etiam Alabandensem illum Meneclem et eius frater Hieroclem . . . to ta im itetur A sia’, or. 231, Strabo xiv. 2. 26. 28. flumine : cf. on 246. 10, Sandys on or. 21 (but see on 326. 10 below), 53. 29. faceto: cf. 63. 3 n. and Quintii, vi. 3. 20 there cited: Quintii.’s interpretation ‘decoris . . . et excultae cuiusdam elegantiae ’ shows how it can, as here, be nearly equivalent to the polita of 326. 10. I. Aeschines : R E no. 19, a βήτωρ (Strabo xiv. 1. 7) and πολιτικοί συγγραφεΰς (Diog. Laert. ii. 64) ; possibly the Aeschines of Sen. contr. i. 18, ii. 16. §

. 10. vibrans : ‘swift-flying’, a metaphor from javelins, etc., cf. Quintii, x. i. 60, xi. 3. 120, xii. 9. 3; ‘incitata et vibrans ’ corresponds to ' volucre atque incitatum ’ (above, 325. 27) as ‘accurata et polita’ to ‘exornato et faceto’ (325. 29). In or. 234 vibrare is used of Demosthenes’fulm ina ; in or. 21 fulmine, not flumine (pace Sandys), is almost certainly the correct reading—the MSS. have it, and flumine spoils the contrast with the description of the Middle Style which fol­ lows (‘uno tenore u t aiunt fluit, etc.’). 3 2 6

§ 3 2 7 . 16. forma : cf. 70. 27 n., 294. 17 n. 17. et exercitatio . . . : no two editors favour the same recon­ struction of L ’s et exercitatione perfecta verborum eratque astricta comprehensio. The simplest solution, is to delete que and translate ‘he had a control of ta u t periodic structure perfected by much practice’. 20. remanebat . . . : an echo of Hortensius’ manner? For a similar suggestion of parody cf. on 47. 5. quodque . . . : picks up the allusion to exercitatio in the preceding sentence, and also follows the primum of 325. 19 as the second reason for Hortensius’ decline. 23. vestitu : 274. 12 n. §

. 2. Messalla : M. Valerius Messalla, R E Valerius no. 268, cos. 53, Hortensius’ nephew, accused of ambitus in 51 (Val. Max. V . 9. 2, O RF p. 329).

3 2 8

COM M ENTARY totidem . . . : for the colloquial cliché totidem verbis cf. ac. pr. 40, fin. ii. 100, and in the sense ‘tit for t a t ’ Hor. serm. ii. 3. 298. On similar colloquial usages cf. Fordyce on Catull. 92. 3. Nothing of the speech survives. 4. Ergo . . . : Hortensius’ public career lasted from 95 to 50, C.’s from 81 to 50: he assumes th a t it is over.

3.

§ § 3 2 9 - 3 3 . ‘Hortensius was fortunate in the time of his death, but should favourable conditions return, I look to you, Brutus, to carry on the traditions of Roman eloquence.’ §

3 2 9

. 9. n o n tarn . . . : cf. § 22. The whole passage contains many echoes of the prologue : sed fortunatus, etc. recalls § 4, and the analysis of the causes of the Civil W ar looks back to § 7. 12. deflevimus : despite impendentis, only an apparent excep­ tion to the sense ‘weep for what is over’ (21. 18 n.). H orten­ sius and C. lamented what m ust befall now th a t the cause of peace was lost. §

3 3 0

. 17. N os autem . . . : the section begins with an elaborate simile. Eloquence is a young girl, orphaned by Hortensius’ death, and C. and Brutus must be her guardians, careful in particular to repel the advances of the upstarts of the Caesa­ rian party. For the same simile cf. fam. iii. 11. 3 ‘tan ta penuria est in omni vel honoris vel aetatis gradu u t tam orba civitas tales tutores complecti, debeat ’, or. 64. 19. domi: cf. §23: oratory must be practised at home; the forum is silent. liberali : ‘suitable for a free person’, ‘unoppressive’. 21. amatorum : a natural continuation of the simile, and L ’s armatorum has few defenders; yet the picture of Caesar’s supporters as armed gangsters trying to kidnap the heiress Eloquence is scarcely less apt. 2 6 . litteris : cf. §§ 11-12, Intr. 2. 28. viverentque . . . : L ’s mortuo viverentque is most easily im­ proved by deleting que (so Hendr.) ; the favoured emendations viverentque mortuo and mortuoque viverent, have a marked trochaic rhythm, which, though not unknown in C., should not be imported without strong reasons (Intr. 44). 29. si . . . : ‘if things went well’. Like most uses of adverbs with esse, recte esse is mainly colloquial (A tt. i. 7. 1, xiv. 16. 4).

§ 3 2 8 . 3 -§

332

. 21

233

§ 3 3 1 . i. Sed . . . : yet another echo of the prologue, cf. § 22. 2. q u asi. . . : the simile is surely from racing (cf. 173. 14) amid the plaudits of spectators, not (as many editors assert) from riding in a triumph. vehentem : for the intransitive use cf. nat. d. i. 78 ‘qualis ille maritimus Triton pingitur, natantibus invehens beluis’, Neue ii. 265. 6. generum : the Iunii Bruti and, on his m other’s side, the Servilii. Is this an innocent allusion to the political distinction of the two families? Since L. Brutus expelled the Tarquins (53. 20 n.) and Servilius Ahala was famous as a ‘tyrannicide’, J. P. V. D. Balsdon, Historia vii (1958) 91, sees here an incite­ m ent to Brutus to rid Rome of Caesar. I think th a t this distasteful suggestion is right. Brutus is to revive (renovare) past glories, and, by his eloquence, enhance them {augere). The whole passage, though it can be read as simply a com­ bined compliment and exhortation to Brutus as philosopher and orator, is perhaps less straightforward than it seems (cf. following nn.). io. graviorum artium : philosophy above all. C. may simply be turning into a compliment the fact th a t Brutus was more philosopher than orator (Intr. 13), but the stress on the virtus th at Brutus has added to eloquence may imply something more. §

3 3 2 . 12. Ex te : cf. fam . xvi. 21. 3 ‘quoniam igitur tum ex me doluisti . . .’. 16. e f f ic e ...: a striking contrast to the resigned tone of earlier passages, e.g. § 23. Yet it cannot be vague optimism designed merely to make an effective peroration: the news of Thapsus had arrived while C. was writing Brutus (Intr. 1). Rather th a t news stiffened C.’s resistance to Brutus’ advice to accept Caesar’s rule (Intr. 3), and he turns B rutus’ argument against him: ‘Yes, I am entitled to rest on my laurels (§330), but w hat about you ? W hat are you going to do to secure the scope and fame th a t is y our due ?’ (Parts of tu and tuus occur in emphatic positions ten times in as many lines). 19. domo : Rome, contrasted with urbe ea, Athens. On B rutus’ studies a t Athens cf. Plut. Brut. 24. 21. Pammenes : cf. or. 105 ‘quoniam et hunc tu oratorem (sc. Demosthenem) cum eius studiosissimo Pammene, cum esses Athenis, totum diligentissime cognovisti . . .’.

234

COM M ENTARY

22. vetus Academia : the school of Antiochus of Ascalon, cf. §§ 120, 149. 23. Aristus : Antiochus’ brother. On B rutus’ connexion with him, cf. Plut. Brut. 2, fin. v. 8; on C.’s, Tusc. v. 22, Att. v. 10. 5. §

. 24. Nonne . . . : a less optimistic estimate in de or. i. 8 ‘cum boni perdiu nulli, vix autem singulis aetatibus singuli tolerabiles oratores invenirentur’. 26. constitisse : 'existed', cf. red. sen. 23, Plane. 24. Galba . . . : some have seen in this list a partisan selection of ‘non-Atticizing’ orators. They are simply the acknow­ ledged masters of Roman oratory. C. claims, by tracing the sources of their mastery, to have established the case for his own style of oratory . 29. nam . . . : Carbo was the outstanding orator of his day, because the Gracchi achieved their greatest successes in contionibus : forensic oratory was the real test (Intr. 24). 2. si mihi . . . : the last phrase is usually interpreted as ‘if competition with better-placed rivals is burdensome’. B ut C. nowhere uses opportunus of persons, and conjecture of this sort is profitless. B ut the thought was no doubt th a t as C. would not have been content with anything less than supre­ macy in oratory, Brutus must be equally ambitious. There may have been a brief conclusion to the dialogue comparable to the closing sentences of de oratore and the philosophical dialogues. 3 3 3

A PPE N D IX A A S E L E C T IO N OF FR A G M E N TS ' E t nocuimus fortasse quod veteres orationes post nostras . . . a plerisque legi sunt desitae’ (§123). ‘Dicendi autem genus quod fuerit in utroque (sc. Hortensio et Cicerone) orationes utriusque etiam posteris nostris indicabunt’ (§ 324). In fact the orators of the second century b . c . were studied and quoted by the archaizing littérateurs and oddity-seeking grammarians of the second and later centuries of our era, and we have far more verbatim quotations of Cato and C. Gracchus than of Hortensius or even Julius Caesar. Our fragmentary record is thus not even balanced nor representative. I give below a selection of the more substantial fragments th a t are preserved, together with some unsubstantial ones where th a t is all we have of some im portant man. (A few of the briefer frag­ ments are also given in the commentary.) I t would be unwise to generalize from a record so random and scanty, yet this much may be said. Some of these fragments (e.g. nos. 13, 21, 23, 27, 28) show a measure of rude vigour; a few are genuinely moving or amusing (e.g. nos. 4, 7, 22, 29, 36). Beyond this I see little to justify the often-heard cry th at we would gladly surrender much of Cicero’s surviving oratory for speeches of Hortensius, Caesar, Calvus, and others, except simply for the sake of variety and an increase of our knowledge of political or literary history. In terms of literary merit there is no escaping Cicero’s supremacy.1 Cornelius Scipio Africanus i. Memoria, Quirites, repeto diem esse hodiernum, quo H an­ nibalem Poenum, imperio vestro inimicissimum, magno proelio vici in terra Africa pacemque et victoriam vobis peperi in­ spectabilem. non igitur simus adversum deos ingrati et censeo P.

1 I have in general followed Malcovati on matters of the text and orthography of the fragments.

236

A P P E N D IX A

relinquamus nebulonem hunc, eamus hinc protinus Iovi optimo maximo gratulatum. Geli. iv. 18. 3. O RF p. 8. M. P o rciu s Cato

2. Cogitate cum animis vestris: si quid vos per laborem recte feceritis, labor ille a vobis cito recedet, bene factum a vobis, dum vivitis, non abscedet; sed si qua per voluptatem nequiter feceritis, voluptas cito abibit, nequiter factum illud apud vos semper manebit. Geli. xvi. 1. 1. O RF p. 18. 3. Deinde postquam Massiliam praeterimus, inde omnem classem ventus auster lenis fert; mare velis florere videres, ultra angulum Gallicum ad Illiberim atque Ruscinonem deferi­ mur: inde nocte aura profecti sumus. Charisius p. 269. 8. O RF p. 21. 4. Dixit a decemviris parum bene sibi cibaria curata esse, iussit vestimenta detrahi atque flagro caedi, decemviros B ruttiani verberavere, videre multi mortales, quis hanc contumeliam, quis hoc imperium, quis hanc servitutem ferre potest ? nemo hoc rex ausus est facere : eane fieri bonis, bono genere gnatis, boni consultis ? ubi societas ? ubi fides maiorum ? insignitas iniurias, plagas, verbera, vibices, eos dolores atque carnificinas per dedecus atque maximam contumeliam, inspectantibus populari­ bus suis atque multis mortalibus te facere ausum esse ! set quantum luctum, quantum gemitum, quid lacrimarum, quan­ tum fletum factum audivi ! servi iniurias nimis aegre ferunt : quid illos bono genere gnatos magna virtute praeditos opinamini animi habuisse atque habituros dum vivent? Geli. x. 3. 14. O RF p. 26. 5. numquam tacet quem morbus tenet loquendi tam quam veternosum bibendi atque dormiendi, quod si non conveniatis, cum convocari iubet, ita cupidus orationis conducat qui auscultet, itaque auditis, non auscultatis, tamquam pharm a­ copolam. nam eius verba audiuntur ; verum se nemo committit si aeger est. Geli. i. 15. 8. O RF p. 46. 6. Atque ego quidem arbitror Rodienses noluisse nos ita depugnare uti depugnatum est, neque regem Persen vinci, sed non Rodienses modo id noluere, sed multos populos atque multas nationes idem noluisse arbitror atque haud scio an

A S E L E C T IO N O F F R A G M E N T S

237

partim eorum fuerint qui non nostrae contumeliae1causa id noluerint evenire: sed enim id metuere, si nemo esset homo quem vereremur, quidquid luberet faceremus, ne sub solo imperio nostro in servitute nostra essent libertatis suae causa in ea sententia fuisse arbitror, atque Rodienses tamen Persen publice numquam adiuvere. cogitate quanto nos inter nos privatim cautius facimus, nam unus quisque nostrum, si quis advorsus rem suam quid fieri arbitrantur, summa vi contra nititur, ne advorsus eam fiat; quod illi tamen perpessi. Geli, vi. 3. 15. O R F p. 64. 7. Nunc ita aiunt, in segetibus in herbis bona frumenta esse, nolite ibi nimiam spem habere, saepe audivi inter os atque offam m ulta intervenire posse; verumvero inter offam atque herbam, ibi vero longum intervallum est. Geli. xiii. 18. 1. O R F p. 88. L. A e m iliu s P a u lu s

8. Cum in maximo proventu felicitatis nostrae, Quirites, timerem ne quid mali fortuna moliretur, Iovem optimum maximum Iunonemque reginam et Minervam precatus sum ut si quid adversi populo Romano immineret, totum in meam domum converteretur, quapropter bene habet : annuendo enim votis meis id egerunt, u t vos potius meo casu doleatis quam ego vestro ingemescerem. Val. Max. v. 10. 2.1 O RF p. 101. Q. C aeciliu s M etellu s M aced on icu s

9. Si sine uxore vivere possemus, Quirites, omnes ea molestia careremus ; set quoniam ita natura tradidit u t nec cum illis satis commode nec sine illis ullo modo vivi possit, saluti perpetuae potius quam brevi voluptati consulendum est. Geli. i.'6. 1. O R F p. 108. 10. Di immortales plurimum possunt; sed non plus velle nobis debent quam parentes, a t parentes, si pergunt liberi errare, bonis exheredant, quid ergo nos divinitus exspectemus nisi malis rationibus finem facimus ? is demum deos propitios esse 1 q.v. for the context. Two of Paulus’ four sons were given in adoption to other families (one of course being Scipio ■Aemilianus) ; of the other two one died just before his father’s triumph in celebra­ tion of his victory at Pydna, the other a few days after. :

238

A P P E N D IX A

aecum est, qui sibi adversarii non sunt, dii immortales virtutem adprobare, non adhibere debent. Geli. i. 6. 7. O RF p. 108. C. Laelius 11. Quiapropter neque tanta diis immortalibus gratia haberi potest, quanta habenda est, quod is cum illo animo atque ingenio hac e civitate potissimum natus est neque tam moleste atque acre ferri quam ferundum est, cum eum morbus tum versavit et in eodem tempore periit, cum et vobis et omnibus, qui hanc rem publicam salvam volunt, maxime vivo opus est, Quirites. Schol. Bob. in MU. p. 218. O RF ρ. 121.1 P. Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus 12. Nam qui cotidie unguentatus adversus speculum ornetur, cuius supercilia radantur, qui barba vulsa feminibusque subvulsis ambulet, qui in conviviis adulescentulus cum amatore cum chiridota tunica inferior accubuerit, qui non modo vinosus sed virosus quoque sit, eumne quisquam dubitet quin idem fecerit quod cinaedi facere solent ? Geli. vii. 12. 1. O RF p. 127. 13. Omnia mala, probra, flagitia, quae homines faciunt, in duabus rebus sunt, malitia atque nequitia, utrum defendis, malitiam an nequitiam an utrum que simul? si nequitiam defendere vis, licet; si tu in uno scorto maiorem pecuniam ab­ sumpsisti quam quanti omne instrumentum fundi Sabini in censum dedicavisti, si hoc ita est : qui spondet mille nummum ? si tu plus tertia parte pecuniae paternae perdidisti atque ab­ sumpsisti in flagitiis, si hoc ita est : qui spondet mille nummum ? non vis nequitiam, age malitiam saltem defende, si tu verbis conceptis coniuravisti sciens sciente animo tuo, si hoc ita est: qui spondet mille nummum? Geli. vii. 11. 9. O R F p. 128. 14. Docentur praestigias inhonestas, cum cinaedulis et sam­ buca psalterioque eunt in ludum histrionum, discunt cantare, quae maiores nostri ingénuis probro ducier voluerunt: 'eunt, inquam, in ludum saltatorium inter cinaedos virgines puerique 1 The passage is from the laudatio funebris for Scipio Aemilianus (cf. 117. 16 n.). I have printed the reading suggested by Badian in the historically crucial passage (italicized) where the MSS. are corrupt. , .

A S E L E C T IO N O F F R A G M E N T S

239

ingenui, haec cum mihi quisquam narrabat, non poteram animum inducere ea liberos suos homines nobiles docere, sed cum ductus sum in ludum saltatorium, plus medius fidius in eo ludo vidi pueris virginibusque quingentis, in his unum (quod me rei publicae maxime miseritum est) puerum bullatum, petitoris filium non minorem annis duodecim, cum crotalis saltare, quam saltationem1 impudicus servulus honeste saltare non posset. Macrob. sat. iii. 1 4 . 6. O RF p. 1 3 3 . C. F a n n iu s

15. Si Latinis civitatem dederitis, credo existimatis vos ita u t nunc constitistis in contione habituros locum aut ludis et festis diebus interfuturos. nonne illos omnia occupaturos putatis ? Iui. Victor 6. 4 (R L M p. 4 0 2 ) . O RF p. 1 4 4 . 16. Si Phalaridi et Pisistrato et ceteris omnibus una res maxime, largitio, dominationem comparavit, quid est quod non idem Gracchum adfectare credatis, quem eadem quae illos facere videatis? Iui. Victor 1 1 (R L M p. 4 1 3 ) . O RF p. 1 4 5 . C. G racchu s

17. Ita versatus sum in provincia uti nemo posset vere dicere assem aut eo plus in muneribus me accepisse aut mea opera quemquam sumptum fecisse, biennium fui in provincia; si ulla meretrix domum meam introivit aut cuiusquam servulus pro­ pter me sollicitatus est, omnium nationum postremissimum nequissimumque existimatote, cum a servis eorum tam caste me habuerim, inde poteritis considerare, quo modo me putetis cum liberis vestris vixisse. Geli. xv. 1 2 . 1. O RF p. 1 8 1 . 1 8 . Nam vos, Quirites, si velitis sapientia atque virtute uti, etsi quaeritis neminem nostrum invenietis sine pretio huc prodire, omnes nos qui verba facimus aliquid petimus, neque ullius rei causa quisquam ad vos prodit, nisi u t aliquid auferat, ego ipse qui apud vos verba facio, u t vectigalia vestra augeatis quo facilius vestra commoda et rem publicam administrare possitis, non gratis prodeo; verum peto a vobis non pecuniam sed bonam existimationem atque honorem, qui prodeunt dissuasuri ne

1 Did Cicero consciously or otherwise recall this scornful repetition when writing about Sex. Titius (§ 225) ?

240

A P P E N D IX A

hanc legem accipiatis, petunt non honorem a vobis verum a Nicomede pecuniam; qui suadent u t accipiatis, hi quoque petunt non a vobis bonam existimationem, verum a Mithridate rei familiari suae pretium et praemium; qui autem ex eodem loco atque ordine tacent, hi vel acerrimi sunt ; nam ab omnibus pretium accipiuqt et omnes fallunt. . . . Geli. xi. 10. x. O RF p. 187. 19. Si vellem apud vos verba facere et a vobis postulare, cum genere summo ortus essem et cum fratrem propter vos amisis­ sem, nec quisquam de P. Africani et Tiberi Gracchi familia nisi ego et puer restaremus, u t pateremini hoc tempore me quiescere, ne a stirpe genus nostrum interiret et uti aliqua propago generis nostri reliqua esset, haud scio an lubentibus a vobis impetras­ sem. Schob Bob. in Süll. p. 81. O RF p. 191. 20. Nuper Teanum Sidicinum consul venit, uxor eius dixit se in balneis virilibus lavari velle, quaestori Sidicino M. Mario datum est negotium uti balneis exigerentur qui lavabantur, uxor renuntiat viro parum cito sibi balneas traditas et parum lautas fuisse, idcirco palus destitutus est in foro eoque adductus suae civitatis nobilissimus homo M. Marius, vestimenta detracta sunt, virgis caesus est. Caleni, ubi id audiverunt, edixerunt ne quis in balneis lavisse vellet cum magistratus Romanus ibi esset. Ferentini ob eandem causam praetor noster quaestores abripi iussit: alter se .de muro deiecit, alter prensus et virgis caesus est. Geli. x. 3. 2. O RF p. 191. 21. Quanta libido quantaque intemperantia sit hominum adule­ scentium, unum exemplum vobis ostendam, his annis paucis ex Asia missus est qui per id- tempus magistratum non ceperat, homo adulescens pro legato, is in lectica ferebatur, ei obviam bubulcus de plebe Venusina advenit et per iocum, cum ignoraret qui ferretur, rogavit num mortuum ferrent, ubi id audivit, lecticam iussit deponi, struppis quibus lectica deligata erat usque adeo verberari iussit, dum animam efflavit. Geli. x. 3. 5. O RF p. 192. 22. Quo me miser conferam? quo vertam? in Capitoliumne? a t fratris sanguine redundat, an domum ? matremne u t miseram lamentantem videam et abiectam ? Cic. de or. iii. 214. O RF p. 196. ;

A S E L E C T IO N O F F R A G M E N T S

241

C. T itiu s

23. Ludunt alea studiosa, delibuti unguentis, scortis stipati, ubi horae decem sunt, iubent puerum vocari u t comitium eat percontatum quid in foro gestum sit, qui suaserint, qui dis­ suaserint, quot tribus iusserint, quot vetuerint, inde ad comi­ tium vadunt, ne litem suam faciant, dum eunt, nulla est in angiporto amphora quam non impleant, quippe qui vesicam plenam vini habeant, veniunt in comitium, tristes iubent dicere, quorum negotium est, narrant, iudex testes poscit, ipsus it minctum, ubi redit, ait se omnia audivisse, tabulas poscit, litteras inspicit: vix prae vino sustinet palpebras, eunt in consilium, ibi haec oratio: ‘quid mihi negoti est cum istis nugatoribus, quin potius potamus mulsum mixtum vino Graeco, edimus turdum pinguem bonumque piscem, lupum germanum qui inter duos pontes captus fu it? ’ Macrob. iii. 16. 13. O RF p. 202. Q. C aeciliu s M etellu s N u m id icu s

24. Nunc quod ad illum attinet, Quirites, quoniam se ampliorem p u ta t esse, si se mihi inimicum dictitarit, quem ego mihi neque amicum recipio neque inimicum respicio, in eum ego non sum plura dicturus, nam cum indignissimum arbitror cui a viris bonis benedicatur, tum ne idoneum quidem, cui a probis maledicatur, nam si in eo tempore huius modi homunculum nomines, in quo punire non possis, maiore honore quam con­ tumelia adficias. Geli. vii. 11. 1. O RF p. 212. L. L icin iu s C rassus

25. Non si Opimium defendisti, Carbo, idcirco te isti bonum civem putabunt: simulasse te et aliquid quaesisse perspicuum est, quod Ti. Gracchi mortem saepe in contionibus deplorasti, quod P. Africani necis socius fuisti, quod eam legem in tribunatu tulisti, quod semper a bonis dissedisti. Cic. de or. ii. 170. O RF p. 241. 26. Eripite nos ex miseriis, eripite ex faucibus eorum quorum crudelitas nostro sanguine non potest expleri; nolite sinere nos quoiquam servire, nisi vobis universis, quibus et possumus et debemus. Cic. de or. i. 225. O RF p. 244. 814437

R

242

A P P E N D IX A

27. Brute, quid sedes ? quid illam anum patri nuntiare vis tuo ? quid illis omnibus quorum imagines duci vides ? quid maioribus tuis ? quid L. Bruto qui hunc populum dominatu regio libera­ vit? quid te agere? cui rei, cui gloriae, cui virtuti studere? patrimonione augendo ? a t id non est nobilitatis, sed fac esse, nihil superest: lubidines totum dissupaverunt. an iuri civili? est paternum, sed dicet te cum aedes venderes ne in rutis quidem et caesis solium tibi paternum recepisse, an rei militari ? qui numquam castra videris ! an eloquentiae ? quae neque est in te et, quidquid est vocis ac linguae, omne in istum turpis­ simum calumniae quaestum contulisti! tu lucem aspicere audes ? tu hos intueri ? tu in foro, tu in urbe, tu in civium esse conspectu ? tu illam mortuam, tu imagines ipsas non perhor­ rescis ? quibus non modo imitandis sed ne collocandis quidem tibi locum ullum reliquisti. Cic. de or. ii. 225. O RF p. 255. M . D u ro n iu s1

28. Freni sunt iniecti vobis, Quirites, nullo modo perpetiendi, alligati et constricti estis amaro vinculo servitutis : lex enim lata est quae vos esse frugi iubet. abrogemus igitur istud horridae vetustatis rubigine obsitum imperium : etenim quid opus liber­ tate, si volentibus luxu perire non licet? Val. Max. ii. 9. 5. O RF p. 263. H elv iu s M a n d a 1

29. Non mentiris, Pompei: venio enim ab inferis, in L. Libonem accusator venio, sed dum illic moror, vidi cruentum Cn. Domitium Ahenobarbum deflentem quod summo genere natus, integerrimae vitae, amantissimus patriae, in ipso iuventae flore tuo iussu esset occisus; vidi pari claritate conspicuum M.' Brutum ferro laceratum, querentem id sibi prius perfidia, deinde etiam crudelitate tua accidisse; vidi Cn. Carbonem acerrimum pueritiae tuae bonorumque patris tui defensorem in tertio 1 Neither Duronius nor Mancia is mentioned in Brutus. They may still have been alive—they would have been very old—in 46 b . c . Mancia was already ‘ultimae senectutis’ (230. 6 n.) in 55: hence Pompey’s taunt that he had ‘returned from the dead’ to prosecute Libo, which elicited the reply quoted above, outstandingly the most effective fragment that we have from any orator other than Cicero.

A S E L E C T I O N OF F R A G M E N T S

243

consulatu catenis quas tu ei inici iusseras vinctum, obtestantem se adversus omne fas ac nefas, cum in summo esset imperio, a te equite Romano trucidatum, vidi eodem habitu et quiritatu praetorium virum Perpennam saevitiam tuam exsecrantem, omnesque eos una voce indignantes quod indemnati sub te adulescentulo carnifice occidissent. Val. Max. ,vi. 2. 8. O RF p. 270. C. P ap iriu s Carbo A rv in a

30. O Marce Druse, patrem appello: tu dicere solebas sacram esse rem publicam: quicumque eam violavissent, ab omnibus esse ei poenas persolutas, patris dictum sapiens temeritas filii comprobavit. Cic. or. 213. O RF p. 304. C. Iu liu s Caesar

31. Amitae meae Iuliae maternum genus ab regibus ortum, paternum cum dis immortalibus coniunctum est. nam ab Anco Marcio sunt Marcii Reges quo nomine fuit m ater; a Venere Iulii, cuius gentis familia est nostra, est ergo in genere et sanctitas regum, qui plurimum inter homines pollent, et caeri­ monia deorum, quorum ipsi in potestate sunt reges. Suet. Jul. 6. O RF p. 390. 32. Vel pro hospitio regis Nicomedis vel pro horum necessitate quorum res agitur, refugere hoc munus, M. Iunce, non potui, nam neque hominum morte memoria deleri debet quin a proximis retineatur neque clientes sine summa infamia deseri possunt, quibus etiam a propinquis nostris opem ferre insti­ tuimus. Gell. V . 13. 2. O RF p. 395. C. M em m iu s

33. Syriaci calceoli gemmarum stellati coloribus. Serv. auct. ad Aen. iv. 261. O R F p. 402. 34. Quam stulte conficta, quam aperte sunt ementita. Prise. GL ii. 386. O R F p. 404. M . C alidius

35. Quarum iacent muri, navaliahorreae curiaque et tabulariae publicae. Non. p. 307. O RF p. 436.

244

APPENDIX A

M. C aelius

36. Namque ipsum offendunt temulento sopore profligatum, totis praecordiis stertentem ructuosos spiritus geminare, praeclarasque contubernales ab omnibus spondis transversas incu­ bare et reliquas circum iacere passim : quae tam en exanimatae terrore hostium adventu percepto excitare Antonium cona­ bantur, nomen inclamabant, frustra a cervicibus tollebant, blandius alia ad aurem invocabat, vehementius etiam nonnulla feriebat; quarum cum omnium vocem tactumque noscitaret, proximae cuiusque collum amplexu petebat: neque dormire excitatus neque vigilare ebrius poterat, sed semisomno sopore inter manus centurionum concubinarumque iactabatur. Quintii/ iv. 2. 123. O RF p. 483. 37. Hic subsecutus quo modo transierit utrum rati an piscatorio navigio nemo sciebat ; Siculi quidem, u t sunt lascivi et dicaces, aiebant in delphino sedisse et sic tamquam Ariona transvectum. Quintii, vi. 3. 41. O RF p. 489. C. L icin iu s Calvus

38. Factum esse ambitum scitis omnes et hoc vos scire omnes sciunt. Quintii, vi. 1. 13. O RF p. 497, 39. Perfrica frontem et dic te digniorem qui praetor fieres quam Catonem. Quintii, ix. 2. 25. O RF p. 497. 40. Non ergo pecuniarum magis repetundarum quam maiestatis, neque maiestatis magis quam Plautiae legis, neque Plautiae legis magis quam ambitus, neque ambitus magis quam omnium legum omnia iudicia perierunt. Quintii, ix. 3. 56. O RF p. 497. 41. Ad ita mihi Iovem deosque immortales velim bene fecisse, iudices, u t ego pro certo habeo si parvuli pueri de ambitu iudicarent. Charisius p. 296. O RF p. 498.

A PPEN D IX B A CONSPECTUS OF T E X T U A L PO IN TS I n this edition Wilkins’s text is reproduced with only minor changes (cf. Intr. 43). The following is a list of passages where I should prefer a different reading. In more than half of these I favour a return to the reading of L, and in three-quarters of such passages most or all of the editors whom I have consulted agree. Where I do not know of any other edition which favours this course, I have italicized the reference. Among emendations which I prefer to Wilkins’s reading, whether he followed L or adopted some other emendation, are a number of more or less tentative suggestions th a t I have not seen made elsewhere: against these I have placed the initial (D). 4. 3 cessit (L) 10. 16 venerat (L) 16. 5 flos siti (L) 17. 16 incommodo tuo (Corradus) 19. i veterum annalium (Pisa­ nus) 28. 7 Attici (L) 31. 26 fverbis (Barw.) 33. 18 casuque non numquam quam (vulg.) 38. 21 et (L) 39. 25 u t (L) 40. 6 idem (L) 47. 3 cum . . . conscripsisset (L) 72. 17 capto retinendum, lacu­ nam post invenimus statuen­ dam suspicor (D) 109. 7, 8 f facile agitavit f (D), paulum C. Gracchum (L) n o . 17 versatus (Madv.)

123. 5 inquam (L) 129. 28 luculentus patronus (L )

I 3°· 7 Post licebat exciderunt fortasse nonnulla (D) 131. 20 paene (L) 1:36. 3 fort, vectigalem (D) 140. 4 proprie (L) 162. 9 defensiuncula (Krüger) 169. i i illa (L) 274. 25 quam u t (L) 174. 26 Romanarum fort. delendum (D) 177. 22 eius sine (L) 181. 29 praetermittimus (L) 197. i hoc initium consecutus (D )

206. 11 Pio vel Pio Numidici F. (D )

213. i i f atque inluminatamf (Martha) 230. 6 Antonio et cum (L)

APPENDIX B 230, 12 se post multos in­ serendum (D) 234. 28 fadmirando . . . calebat I (D) 240. 25 dicendi (L) 247. 19 nihil (L) 250. 17 cum (L) 262. 16 quosdam (L) 2 7 3 · 32 fquam (Kr.) 302. 29 [memor] eorum quae (Jahn) 303. 4 fort, videbat (D)

306. i i sed (L) 315. 24 cum (L) 321. 3 voluntate sum factus

(L)

323. 28 superiores videremur

(L)

325. 19 primum (L) 327. 17 erat[que] : reliqua sicut L (D) 330. 21 armatorum (L) 330. 28 mortuo viverent (Hendr.)

For other textual comment cf. notes on 14.16,16. i (emetiar), 46. 26, 71. 7, 128. 20, 130. 3, 181. 27, 207. 24, 256. 13, 268. 18, 299. 4. Note. Changes to Wilkins’s apparatus are confined to any necessary corrections of (1) obvious slips or misprints, (2) his reports of readings and emendations affecting passages where there are im portant textual problems.

A P P E N D I X C1 THE L EX THORIA Sp.

T horivs

qu i ag ru m

satis

p u b licu m

v a lu it

in

p o p u la ri

genere

dicendi,

is

v itio sa e t in u tili lege vectigali le v av it

(§

1 3 6 )· This sentence is notorious for grammatical ambiguity. Is vectigali a noun, or is it (can it be) an adjective agreeing with lege ? Are the ablatives (or is the single ablative) instrumental or privative ? Historically the problem is to relate this passage to (a) the Lex Agraria of h i (CIL i. 2. 585) of which the relevant parts (or what are usually thought to be so, but cf. below), i.e. w . ι -io , make certain public land assigned by the Gracchan commissioners or retained after the end of the com­ mission’s work fully privatus and so rent-free, and (b) a series of three laws described by Appian b.c. i. 27 as demolishing the Gracchan land-legislation. The first of these laws made the lots of redistributed land alienable—and is no problem. The second ended the redistribution, while imposing a rent on ager publicus retained by the possessores above a maximum laid down by the Gracchi: for this law alone Appian names the proposer— according to the MSS. {Σπόριος) Βόριος or Bovplos, but the change to ©opto? (though Θώριος would be a more plausible form) is generally accepted. The third law abolished the rent, and Appian concludes his account with the following remarks, of which the closing words are generally conceded to be in some way corrupt or lacunose : όθεν εσπάνιζον ετι μάλλον όμοΰ πολιτών τε καί στρατιωτών και γης προσοδου καί διανομών fxaî νόμων

πεντεκαίδεκα μάλιστα ετεσιν από της Γράκχου νομοθεσίας επί δίκαις εν αργία γεγονότεςf.

In interpreting the sentence in Brutus almost every perm uta­ tion of grammatical and historical possibilities has had its advocates, and the controversy is by no means at an end. In A J P h lxxvii (1956) 376-95 I rejected in common with 1 For a fuller statement of the arguments set out here see my forthcoming article in AJPh for 1966.

248

APPENDIX C

most recent writers the view, formerly held by some, th a t Thorius passed a law in 119-18, fifteen years after Ti. Gracchus’ legislation. I rested my case chiefly on the chronological structure of Brutus, following the methods but, as I hoped, improving on the conclusions of E. D ’Arms (A J P h lvi (1935) 231—45). Cicero’s methods, as far as they could be discerned, ruled out a tribune of 119-18, but did not require, as D ’Arms suggested, a tribune of the period c. 100 or later: why not pu t him in h i ? E. Badian, in renewed attacks on the problem (GS pp. 209 ff.. Studies pp. 235-42), criticized my methods with characteristic trenchancy. That they had faults in substance and execution I admit, but Badian’s denial of all but the vaguest chronological principles in Brutus is unfounded. Further investigations show th a t for the latter part of Brutus a chronological sequence is very tightly observed: it is based not on magistracies bu t on birth-dates, a m atter of which the Leges Annales made Romans extremely conscious. The question remains whether Thorius and his associates in Brutus belong within such a scheme, or rather to the looser kind of grouping, mainly by association, which Cicero uses for the period down to the Gracchi. B ut the evident use of birth-dates to place M. Scaurus and P. Rutilius leads me to believe th a t Cicero had, even if we have not, precise information for Thorius too. It does not, however, help us much with the specific problems of the Lex Thoria to know th a t Thorius was one of a group of non-consulars bom shortly before 140 B.c. (except, once again, for ruling out iig -1 8 as a likely year for his tribunate). We return therefore to Brutus 136. Badian’s argument th a t only one translation of the passage [lege privative, vectigali instrumental) is linguistically feasible is refuted by the acknowledged dissensions among competent scholars. Like all those who concern themselves with Thorius— and the procedure is quite legitimate, indeed the only possible one, in my view—he favours an interpretation which supports the historical interpretation th a t he commends, th a t Thorius relieved the ager publicus (really the aerarium) by imposing a rent: traces of such a rent Badian suggests may be found in the Lex Agraria (v. 25) which may then be Thorius’ law and the second law in Appian. The abolition of the rents would have followed c. 109, fifteen years after the legislation of C. Gracchus.

THE LEX THORIA

249

Further, I am sceptial about Badian’s argument th a t Cicero could not have written carelessly and th a t his statements must have been readily intelligible to an audience not familiar with whatever it was th a t Thorius did. There is carelessness at several points precisely in these sections of Brutus above all, and is qui suggests an audience th a t was, or could be flattered by the use of deliberately casual allusion into believing th a t it was, familiar with the Lex Thoria. However th a t may be, I agree with Badian th a t lege is privative b u t should defend lex vectigalis as passable Latin—if we m ust accept the received tex t with its Renaissance emendation of L ’s vectigale to vectigali. B ut an emendation th a t has caused so much trouble ought long ago to have been suspected, however easy and long established it may be. I commend the equally easy change to vectigalem, which gives the clear sense ‘land made to bear a rent by a . . . law'. The Latin, if hardly in Cicero’s most mellifluous manner, is no more strained and clumsy than it is made by any of the inter­ pretations of vectigali; further ager vectigalis is unimpeachable Latin. Thorius, then, removed a rent, and, since I now agree with Badian th a t Bonus of Appian’s MSS. must go, I am reconciled to the belief th a t Thorius is the right name, but th a t he is the wrong man for the second law.1 As to the identification with the Lex Agraria as a rent-abolishing law, I am not convinced th a t it is wrong. A final point. Badian's use of Appian’s ‘fifteen years’ is extremely hazardous. If, as is usually thought, Appian is refer­ ring to the end of the whole business, the words από της Γράκχον νομοθεσίας m ust refer to Ti. Gracchus, which brings us to an answer th a t no one wants—the third of Appian’s laws in 119-18. B ut I think th a t they probably refer to the activities of the commissioners, and relate to the last words of the paragraph, which, though difficult, are perhaps not as hopelessly corrupt 1 Formerly I objected to the procedure of emending an author only to pronounce him guilty of error—that is the only point of mine which finds favour with Badian. Yet I think I must abandon it. I feel less guilty about treating Appian’s text like this since Badian has convinced me that what is being emended away is a sheer impossibility. The introduction of Thorius is a necessary change, not the imposition of preconceptions on a satisfactory text.

25 0

APPENDIX C

and unintelligible as Badian, with most others, avers. There may be a suggestion either that the commissioners were reduced to inactivity in fifteen years (so Gabba, postulating a lacuna referring to the commissioners) or th a t the Romans in general (the unspecified subject of the whole sentence) were in idleness (i.e. not working the land) while engaged in legal disputes: St/ccu is Appian’s word for the commissioners’ adjudications and he vividly describes the upheaval of the period in c. 18.

I N D E X NOMINVM Academia, 120,149,306,315,332. Academici, 120. Accius (L.), 72, 107, 229. Accius (T.) Pisaurensis, 271. Acilius Glabrio (M’.), 239. Aculeo (C.), 264. Aelius Catus (S.), 78. Aelius Paetus (Q.), 109. Aelius Stilo (L.), 169, 205. Aelius Tubero (Q.), 117, 118. Aemilius Lepidus (M.), 109. Aemilius Lepidus (Mam.), 175. Aemilius Lepidus Porcina (M.), 95 , 97 , iq 6 , 295, 333 · Aemilius Paullus (L.), 77, 8 0 ,117. Aemilius Paulus (L.) (cos. 50), 229, 328. Aemilius Scaurus (Μ.), 110-12, 116, 132. Aeschines Atheniensis, 36, 285, 290. Aeschines Milesius, 325. Aeschines Socraticus, 292. Aeschylus Cnidius, 316, 325. Aetion, 70. Aetolia, 79. Afranius (L.), 167. Albucius (T.), 102, 131. Alcibiades, 29. Alexander Magnus, 282. Anaxagoras, 44. Anicius Gallus (T.), 287. Anio amnis, 54. Annius Luscus (T.), 79. Annius Velina (T.), 178. Antigenidas, 187. Antimachus, 191. Antiochus, 315. Antipater, v. Caelius. Antiphon, 47. Antistius (P.), 182, 226, 308, 311

·

Antius Briso (M.), 97. Antonius (Μ.), 115, 138-42, 144,

161, 163, 165, 168, 173, 186, 189, 203, 207, 214, 230, 296, 301, 304, 307, 333. Apelles, 70. Apollinis ludi, 78; oraculum, 53. Appuleius Saturninue (L.), 224. Aquilius (M’.), 222. Aquilius Gallus (C.), 184. Argivus, 50. Aristoteles, 46, 121. Aristus, 332. Arrius (Q.), 242. Asculum, 169. Asia, i i , 51, 316 sq., 318, 325. Asiatici oratores, 51, 325. Athenae, 26, 27, 39, 44, 45, 49, 63, 130, 131, 172, 258, 285, 315

, 332.

Athenienses, 37, 39, 49, 257, Attica, 43. Attici oratores, 51, 67, 68, 172, 284, 289, 315. Atticorum comoediae, 224. Aufidius (T.), 179. Aurelius Cotta (C.), 115, 183, 201-5, 207, 215, 217,

306. 167,

182, 227,

297. 3 0 1 , 3 0 3 , 3 0 5 . 3 I L 3 1 7 .

318, 333. Aurelius Cotta (L.), 81, 82. Aurelius Cotta (L.) tr. pl., 137, 259.

Aurelius Orestes (C.), 94. Aurelius Orestes (L.), 94, 109. Aurelius Scaurus (M.), 135. Autronius Paetus (P.), 241, 244, 251. Betutius Barrus (T.), 169. Billienus (C.), 175. Caecilius Metellus (Q.) (Mace­ donici pater), 57, 77. Caecilius Metellus Balearicus (Q.) (Macedonici filius), 259.

252

IN D E X

N O M IN V M

Claudius Pulcher (C.), 166. Caecilius Metellus Celer (Q.) Claudius Pulcher (P.), 60. (cos. 60), 247. Cleon, 28. Caecilius Metellus Celer (Q·), Clisthenes, 27. (tr. pl. 90), 305. Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus Clitarchus, 42. Cluentius Habitus (A.), 271. (Q.) (cos. 143), 81, 212. Cominius (P.), 271. Caecilius Metellus Nepos (Q.) Coponius (M.), 194. , (cos. 98), 206. Corax, 46. Caecilius Metellus Nepos (Q.) Coriolanus, v. Marcius. (cos. 57), 247. Caecilius Metellus Numidicus Cornelia, 104, 211. Cornelius (C.), 271. (Q·). 135· Caecilius Metellus Pius Scipio Cornelius Cethegus (C.), 73. Cornelius Cethegus (M.), 57— (Q.), 212. Caecilius Statius, 258. 61. Cornelius Cethegus (P.), 178. Caelius Antipater (L.), 102. Cornelius Dolabella (Cn.), 317. Caelius Caldus (C.), 165. Cornelius Lentulus (P.), 108. Caelius Rufus (M.), 273, 297. Caepasius (C.), 242. Cornelius Lentulus Caudinus Caepasius (L.), 242. (P·). 77· Cornelius Lentulus Clodianus Caesulenus (L.), 131. Calamis, 70. (Cn.), 230, 234, 308, 311. Calidius (M.), 274 sq. Cornelius Lentulus Crus (L.), Calpurnius Bestia (L.), 128. 268. Cornelius Lentulus Lupus (L.), Calpurnius Bibulus (M.), 267. 79. Calpurnius Piso (C.), 239. Calpurnius Piso Frugi (C.), 272. Cornelius Lentulus Marcellinus (Cn.), 247. Calpurnius Piso Frugi (L.), 106. Canachus, 70. Cornelius Lentulus Marcellinus Cannensis calamitas, 12. (P·), 1 3 6 · Canuleius (M.), 317. ' Cornelius Lentulus Spinther (P.), 268. Canutius (P.), 205. Carmentalis flamen, 56. Cornelius Lentulus Sura (P.), Cassius Longinus (L.), 97, 106. 230. 235, 308, 311. Cato, V. Porcius. Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus Charisius, 286. Africanus minor, 77, 80, 82— Cilicia, i, 168. 85, 97, 100, 117, 258, 295, Claudius Caécus (Appius), 55, 61. 299. Claudius Cento (C.), 72. Cornelius Scipio Africanus maior Claudius Marcellus (C.), 229, 328. (P·). 77· Claudius Marcellus (M.), (cos. Cornelius Scipio Africanus filius 222) 12. (P·). 77· Claudius Marcellus (M.) (cos. Cornelius Scipio Asiagenus (L.), 51), 248-51.' 175 Claudius Marcellus Aeserninus Cornelius Scipio Nasica (P.) 212 (M.), 136. (cos. m ) , 128. Claudius Pulcher (Appius) (cos. Cornelius Scipio Nasica (filius) 143) 108. (P.), 211. Claudius Pulchér (Appius) (cos. Cornelius Scipio' Nasica Corcu54), 230, 267, 324. . Ium (P.), 79, 213. ·

I N D E X N O M I N VM Cornelius Scipio Nasica Serapio (P.), 85, 107, 212. Cornelius Sisenna (L.), 228, 259, 260. Cornelius Sulla Felix (L.), 179, 227, 306, 3x2, 328. Coruncanius (Ti.), 55. Cosconius Calidianus (C.), 242. Cratippus, 250. Critias, 29. Cumanum, 300. Curius (M’.), 144, 195-8, 256. Curius Dentatus (M'.), 55. Cyri vita, 112, Cyrus, 282. Daedalus, 71. Decius (P.), 108. Deiotarus, 21. Demades, 36. Demetrius Phalereus, 37, 285. Demetrius Syrus, 315. Demochares, 286. Demosthenes, 35, 66, 121, 138, 141, 142, 191, 285, 286, 28891. Dinarchus, 36. Diodotus, 309. Dionysius Magnes, 316. Diophanes, 104. Domitius Ahenobarbus (Cn.), . 164 sq. Domitius Ahenobarbus (L.), 267,

Ennius (Q.), 57, 59, 60, 72-76, 78, 79. Epaminondas, 50. Ephorus, 204. , Epicurus, 131, 292. Eupolis, 38, 59. Fabius Labeo (Q.). 81. Fabius Maximus Allobrogicus (Q.), 107. Fabius Maximus Verrucosus Cunctator (Q.), 57 , 72, 77 · Fabius Pictor (Ser.). 81. Fabricius Luscinus (C.), 55 · Falernum vinum, 287.

Fannius (C.) (C. f.), 99, 100.

253

Fannius (C.) (M. f.), 81, 99, 101, 118, 299. Fauni, 71, 75. Figulus, V. Marcius. Fimbria, v. Flavius. Flaccus, v. Valerius. Flamininus, v. Quinctius. Flaminius (C.), 57, 77. Flavius Fimbria (C.) (cos. 104), I2 9 , 168.

Flavius Fimbria (C.), 233. Fregellani, 170. Fufidius (L.), 112. Fufius (L.), 182, 222. Fulvius Flaccus (M.), 108. Fulvius Flaccus (Ser.), 81, 122. Fulvius Nobilior (M.), 79. Fulvius Nobilior (Q.), 79. Furius Antias (A.), 132. Furius Philus (L.), 108. Galba, v. Sulpicius. Gallia, 171, 218, 318. Gallicus ager, 57. Gallius (Q.), 277. Gargonius (C.), 180. Gellius (L.), 105, 174. Glabrio, v. Acilius. Glaucia, v'. Servilius. Gorgias, 30, 47, 292. Gracchi, 211, 224, 296, 333 (v. Sempronius). Graeci, 54, 59, 67, 68, 96, 118, 138, 141, 162, 265, 275, 294. Graecia, 26, 32, 41, 49, 5 1, io 4. 254, 258, 289, 332. Granius (Q.), 160, 172. Gratidius (M.), 168. Hegesias, 286. Herennius (M.), 166. Hermagoras, 263, 271. Hesiodium, 15. Hierocles, 325. Hippias, 30, 292. Hirtuleius (C.), 260. Homerus, 40, 50, 71. Hortensius (Q·), 1-6, 189, 190, 228, 229, 230, 232, 233, 279, 291, 301-4, 307, 3 ° 8, 317-33·

254

I N D E X NOMINVM

Hostilius Mancinus (C.), 106. Hybrida, v. Varius. Hyperbolus, 224. Hyperides, 36, 67, 68, 138, 285, 290. Isocrates, 32, 33, 48, 204. Iugurthina coniuratio, 127. Iulius Caesar (C.), 2x8, 219, 248, 251, 253, 254, 255, 258, 261, 262. Iulius Caesar Strabo Vopiscus (C.), 177, 182, 207, 216, 226, 3 0 1 , 3°5» 3 0 7 ·

Iunius (T.), 180. Iunius Brutus (D.) (cos. 138), 85, 107. Iunius Brutus (D.), 175. Iunius Brutus (L.), 53. Iunius Brutus (M.) (iuris con­ sultus), 130, 175. Iunius Brutus (M.) (filius), 130. Iunius Brutus (M.), 222 (pater τον τυραννοκτόνου).

Iunius Brutus (M.), 22, 120, 331 et passim. Iunius Pennus (M.), 109. Iunius Pennus (M.) (filius), 109. Iunius Silanus (D.), 240. Iunius Silanus (M.), 135. Iuppiter, 121. Iuventatis ludi, 73. Iuventius (T.), 178. Lacedaemonii, 40, 50. Laelia, 211. Laelii, 252. Laelius Sapiens (C.), 82-84, 86, 88, 89, 94, ιο ί, 161, 213, 252, 258, 295. Latinae coloniae, 170. Latini, 82, 298. Latinus sermo, 132, 133, 233. Latium, 170. Lepidus, v. Aemilius. Lex Aquilia, 131. Lex Cassia, 97, 106. Lex Licinia et Mucia, 63. Lex Maenia, 55. Lex Mamilia, 127, 128. Lex Octavia, 222.

Lex Pompeia, 324. Lex Sempronia, 136, 222. Lex Servilia , (Caepionis), 161, 164, 296. Lex Servilia (Glauciae), 224. Lex Thoria, 136. Lex Varia, 205, 304. Licinia Vestalis, 160. Liciniae, 211. Licinius Calvus (C.), 280, 283, 284-91. Licinius Crassus (L.), 102, 115, 138, 143 sq., .148 sq., 155, 15865. 173. 186, 189, 197 sq., 203, 207, 211 sq., 215, 229 sq., 256, 282, 296, 298, 301, 303, 328, 333·

Licinius Crassus Dives (M.), 230, 233, 242, 308, 311. Licinius Crassus Dives (P.) (cos. 205), 77· Licinius Crassus Dives (P.) (M. f.), 281 sq. Licinius Crassus Dives Mucianus (cos. 131), 98, 127. Licinius Crassus Scipio (L.), 212. Licinius Lucullus (L.), 81. Licinius Lucullus (M.),.222. Licinius Lucullus Ponticus (L.), 222. Licinius Macer (C.), 238. Licinius Murena (P.), 237, 311. Licinius Nerva (C.), 129. Ligures, 255, 256. Livius Andronicus, 71, 72. Livius Drusus (C.), 109. Livius Drusus (C.) (filius), 109. Livius Drusus M. (C. f.), 109. LiviusDrususM. (M. f.), 182,222. Livius Salinator (M.), 73. Lollius Palicanus (M.), 223. Lucilius (C.), 99, 160, 172, 274. Lucilius Balbus (L.), 154. Lucretius Ofella (Q·), 178. Lucretius Vespillo (Q.), 178. Lusitani, 89. Lutatius Catulus (Q.), 132-4, 259, 3 0 7 ·

Lutatius Catulus (Q.) (filius), 133,222.

I N D E X N O M IN VM

2 55

Lycurgus Spartanus, 40. Lycurgus Atheniensis, 36, 130. Lysias, 35, 48, 63, 64, 66, 67, 68, 285, 286,293. Lysippus, 296.

Mummius (Sp.), 94. Mummius Achaicus (L.), 85, 94. Musarum scopuli, 71. Myro, 70, 75. Mytilenae, 250.

Maecius Plautus (T.), 60, 73. Magius (P.), 179. Mancinus, v. Hostilius. Manilius (M!.), 61, 106, 108. Manlius Torquatus (L.), 239. Manlius Torquatus (L.) (filius), 265. Manlius Torquatus (T.), 245. Marcius Censorinus (C.), 237,

Naevius (Cn.), 60, 73, 76. Naevius (Serv.), 217. Narbonensis colonia, 160. Nestor, 40. Nicomachus, 70. Nola, 12. Numantinum foedus, 103.

311·

Marcius Censorinus (L.), 61, 106. Marcius Coriolanus (Cn.), 41-44. Marcius Figulus (C.), 79. Marcius Philippus (L.), 166, 173, 186, 207, 230, 301, 304, 308, 326. Marcius Philippus (Q.), 78. Marius (C.), 168, 224. Marius Gratidianus (M.), 168, 223. Marsi, 169. Memmius (C.) (tr. pl. m ) , 136. Memmius (C.) (tr. pl. 66), 247. Memmius (L.), 136, 304. Menecles, 325, 326. Menelaus, 50. Menelaus Marathenus, 100. Menippus, 315. Minerva, 257. Minucius Rufus (Q.), 73· Mithridaticum bellum, 306. Molo, 245, 312, 316. Muciae, 211. Mucii, 252. Mucius Scaevola (P.) (cos. 175), 98. Mucius Scaevola (P.) (cos. 133), 98, 108. Mucius Scaevola (Q.) augur, ιο ί sq., 212, 306. Mucius Scaevola (Q.) pont, max., 115, 145, 147, 148, 152, 155, 161,162,194,195.229, 311.328.

Octavius (Cn.) (cos. 87), 176. Octavius (Cn.) (cos. 76), 217, 222. Octavius (M.), 95. Octavius (M.) (Cn. f.), 222. Octavius Reatinus (L.), 241. Odyssia Latina, 71. Olympia, 243. Opimius (L.), 128, 287. Orbius, 179. Pacuvius (M.), 229, 258. Palicanus, v. Lollius. Pammenes, 332. Panaetius, ιο ί, 114. Pansa, v. Vibius. Papirius Carbo (C.), 96, 103, 104, 159, 296, 333 · Papirius Carbo (Cn.), 223. Papirius Carbo Arvina (C.) (C. f.), 221, 227, 305, 308, 311. Papirius Fregellanus (L.), 170. Πΐΐθώ, 59· Pericles, 27, 28, 38, 44, 59, 290. Peripatetici, 119, 149. Persarum bellum, 41. Persius (C.), 99, 100. Phaeaces, 71. Phalereus, v. Demetrius. Phidias, 228, 257. Philistus, 66, 294. Philo, 306. Philus, v. Furius. Picenus ager, 57. Piraeeus, 51. Pisaurensis, 271.

256

I N D E X NOMINVM

Pisistratus, 27, 3g, 41. Piso, V. Pupius. Plato, 24, 121, 191, 292. Plautus, V. Maecius. Polyclitus, 70, 296. Polygnotus, 70. Pompeius (Q.), 96, 263. Pompeius (Sextus), 175: cuius pater fuit Pompeius (Sextus), 97. Pompeius Bithynicus (Q.), 240, 310. Pompeius Magnus (Cn.), 230, 239 , 311· Pompeius Rufus (Q.), 206, 304, 306. Pompeius Strabo (Cn.) (Sex. f.),

175·

Pomponius (Cn.), i8z, 207, 221, 227, 305, 308, 311. Pomponius Atticus (T.), 10 sq., 13 sq., 72 sq. et passim. Pontidius (M.), 246. Popilius Laenas (C.), 95. Popilius Laenas (M.), 56. Popilius Laenas (P.), 95, 128. Porcius Cato (C.) (censoris nepos), 108, 128. Porcius Cato (M.) (censor), 60, 65, 68, 75, 77, 81 sq,, 89 sq., 293 sq., 298, 333. Porcius Cato (M.), 222: cuius filius fuit Porcius Cato (M.) (Vticensis), 118. Porcius Licinus (L.), 60. Postumius (T.), 269. Postumius Albinus (A.) (cos. 151), 81. Postumius Albinus (A.) (cos. 99 ), 135· . Postumius Albinus (Sp.) (cos. 148), 94. Postumius Albinus (Sp.) (cos. n o ), 128. Postumius Albinus flamen, 135. Prodicus, 30, 292. Protagoras, 30, 46, 292. Protogenes, 70. Punicum bellum, 57, 60, 75, 76.

Pupius Piso Frugi Calpurnianus (M.), 230, 236, 240, 308, 310. Pyrrhus rex Epiri, 55, 61. Quinctius (L.), 223. Quinctius Flamininus (T.), 109, 259 · Rhodii, 51, 79, 312. Rhodus, i, 151, 316: Roma, 39, 127, 169, 171, 258, 306, 307, 314, 316. Romulus, 40. Roscius (Q.), 290. Roscius (Sex.), 312. Rubrius Varro (Q.), 168. Rusius (C.), 259, 260. Rusticelius (C.), 169. Rutilius Rufus (C.), 147. Rutilius Rufus (P.), 85, 87, 89, n o , 113/116, 118. Sabellius (L.), 131. Sacer Mons, 54. Samos, 156. Scribonius Curio (C.), 110, 122, 123: cuius filius fuit Scribonius Curio (C.), 182, 192, 210, 213, 216, 217, 220, 227, 234> 3°5. 311: cuius filius fuit Scribonius Curio' (C.), 218, 280, 283. Scribonius Libo (L.), 89, go. Sempronius Gracchus (C.), 99 sq., 109 sq., 117, 125 sq., 128. Sempronius Gracchus (T.), 79: cuius filius fuit Sempronius Gracchus (Ti.), 81, 95 sq., 103 sq., 107, 212. Sempronius Tuditanus (C.); 95. Sempronius Tuditanus (M.), 72. Sempronius Tuditanus (P.), 58, 60. Senense proelium, 73. Sertorius (Q.), 180. Servilius (M.), 269. Servilius Caepio (Cn.) (cos. 169), 78. Servilius Caepio (Cn.) (cos. 141), , 97 ·

I N D E X N O M IN V M Servilius Caepio (Q.) (cos. 140), 97, 161. Servilius Caepio (Q.) (cos. 106), 135, 164. Servilius Caepio (Q.) (obiit A .c . 90), 109, 162, 169, 206, 223. Servilius Glaucia (C.), 224. Sestius (P.), 180. Sextius Calvinus (C.), 130. Sicilia, 46, 318. Sicinius (C.), 263, 264. Sicinius (Cn.), 216. Sila, 85. Sisenna, v. Cornelius. Smyrna, 85. Socrates, 31, 292, 299. Solon, 27, 39. Staienus (C.), 241, 244, 261. Stoici, 94, i i 7, 118. Stratocles, 42. Suada, 59. Sulpicius Camerinus (Ser.), 62. Sulpicius Galba (C.), 98, 127 sq.: cuius pater fuit Sulpicius Galba (Ser.), 80, 82, 86 sq., 94 sq·. 98 , 295, 333. Sulpicius Gallus (C.), 78, 90: cuius filius fuit Sulpicius Gallus (Q.), 90. Sulpicius Rufus (P.), 182 sq., 201 sq., 207, 214 sq., 226 sq., 230, 297. 3 OI>304. 3°6sq., 333 · Sulpicius Rufus (Ser.), 150 sq. Syracusae, 63.

Thrasymachus, 30. Thucydides, 27, 29, 287 sq., 294·

43, 47,

66,

Thyestes (Enni fabula), 78. Timaeus, 63, 325. Timanthes, 70. Tinca (T.), 172. Tisias, 46. Titinia, 217. Titius (C.), 167. Titius (Sex.), 225. Trasumennus lacus, 57. Triarius, v. Valerius. Troica tempora, 40. Tullius (Servius), 39. Tullius Cicero (M.), passim, 232, 305-18, 321, 323, 324. Tullius Longus (M’.), 62. Turius (L.), 237. Tusculanum, 20, 300. Valerius Flaccus (L.), 224. Valerius Maximus (M.), 54. Valerius Messalla (M.), 328. Valerius Messalla Niger (M.), 246. Valerius Potitus (L.), 54. Valerius Soranus (D.), 169. Valerius Soranus (Q.), 169. Valerius Triarius (C.), 265 sq. Varius Hybrida (Q.), 182, 221, 305·

Vergilius (M.), 179. Vestales virgines, 160, 236. Vettius Vettianus (Q·), 169. Veturius Philo (L.), 57. Vibius Pansa (C.), 218. Viriathus, 84. Visellius Varro (C.), 264. Vlixes, 40. Volsci, 41.

Tarentum, 72. Terentius Varro (C.), 77. Terentius Varro (M.), 60, 205. Thebanus orator, 50. Themistocles, 28, 41 sq. Theodorus, 48. Theophrastus, 37, 121, 172. Theopompus, 66, 204. Theramenes, 29. Thorius (Sp.), 136.

814437

257

Xanthippus, 44. Xenocles, 316. Xenophon, 292: cf. 132. Zeuxis, 70.

S

IND EX VERBORVM (References are by section and line to words discussed in the com­ mentary. See also the list of terms of rhetoric and criticism given in Introd. 35.) comperendinatus, 87. 20. abiectus, 221. 7. concertatorius, 287. 4. accusator, 130. 12. continere, 112. 5, 322. 10. acies, 222. 18. convertere (intr.), 141. 24. adsignare, 74. 26. advocatus, 289. 27. corona, 192. 30. aequum et bonum, 143. 12. corpus, 208. 3. cotidianus (sermo), 283. 25. agens, 327. 25. cotidie, 308. 25. agere (legal), 153-23ain t u ?, 152. i i . creber, 29. 16. alias res agere, 233. 22. crepundia, 313. 29. alienus, 278. 22. cumulatus, 15. 29. altercari, 157. 8. amentatae hastae, 271. 11. dare fabulam, 73. 24. debere, 8. 4, 39. 30. amplius (legal), 86. 9. decedere, 1. 1. an, 89. 21. angor (constr. with), 7. 22. declamitare, 310. 7. appellare, 133. 13. defensiuncula, 162. 9. architectus, 118. 27. defervescere, 316. 13. argutus, 42. 24. deflere, 21. 18. ars, 25. 14. .delibare, 58. 17. aspirare, 84. 22. delicatus, 197. 27. augustus, 295. 31. devorare, 236. 15. ausim, 18. 20. dicere . . . non, 219. 13. aut, 53. 20, 162. 7. dictio, 256. 8. dignitas, 1. 3. baiulus, 257. 27. discedere, 229. 22, a se d., 273. 8. barbaries, 258. 7. disertus, 39. 27. distinctus, 69. 13. cachinnus, 216. 8. docere fabulam, 72. 11. caecatus, 264. 9. doctus in, 117. 24. calamistri, 261. 20. dolium, 288. 13. canescere, 8. 7. dolor, 93. 17. canorus, 105. 30. capere (legal), 178. 4. ediscere, 127. 12. cavere, 18. 18. effector, 59. 22. censere (constr. writh), 212. 29. effervescere, 246. 11. centumviri, 144. 17. egere, 7. 23. coagmentare, 68. 8. egredi, 82. 5. commentarium, 164. 2, 261. 18. enucleate, 35. 3. communicare, 3-2. exarescere, 82. 11.

IN D E X VERBORVM exempla, 167. 23. exercere, 230. 12. existimantes, existimator, 12. exponere, 81. 26.

92.

facere (absol.), 192. 3. facetus, 63. 3. factitare, 130. 11. factus ad, 168. 31. facultas, 303. 1. familia, 85. 4. ferre, 27. 1, 36. 10. Fimbriatum, 233. 19. flagitium, 219. 9. floridus, 285. 17. flos, 66. 20. formulae, 195. 17, 275. 29. fractus, 287. 27. frigidus, 236. 12. fucatus, 36. 12. fungi, 243. 23. hodie, 217. 18. horridus, 68. 5. immo, 125. 23. immutatio, 69. 9. inambulare, 10. 15. inambulatio, 157. 4. ineptus, 284. 28. infans, 77. 20. inquinate, 140. 3. insignia, 275. 26. instar, 191. 22. insulsitas, 284. 29. intellegentes, 183. 14. inventae res et actae, 205. 4. inventum . . . perfectum, 26. 24. ipse (exactly), 61. 12: (merely) 140. 4, 152. 15. iudex quaestionis, 264. 6. iudicia populi, 106. i i . iudicialis annus, 243. 24. latrare, 58. 12. luculentus, 129. 27. lumen, 66. 23, 275. 25. manus extrema, 126. 30.

259

meditari, 88. 3. meditatio, 139. 29. membra (κωλα), 162. 14. memoria (period), 244. 29. mittere (dedicate), 132. 5. moratus, 7. 26. morose, 236. 16. mulcatus, 88. 1. nam, 48. 10. ne (intensifying), 249. 8. nempe, 24. 15. nervosus, 121. 21. nobilitas, 53. 20. non modo . . ., 157. 26. notatio, 74. 1. nullus (=non), 91. 1. nunc (of the past), 250. 22. nuper, 223. 25. obrussa, 258. 11. odiosus 284. 28. olle, 58. 15. operam dare, 154. 28. opinio, i. 2. oppidanus, 242. 9. orare causam, 47. 8. oratio (style), 8. 5, 203. 14. orator (envoy), 55. 11. ordiri, 22. 26. patronus, 108. 4. perorare, 190. 11. pictus, 293. i i . placere, 290. 7. potero/potuero, 21. 11. primae, 74. 24. princeps (senatus), 108. 22. producere, 217. 14. profecto, 7. 29. prudens, 23. 1. putidus, 284. 28. quaesitor, 200. 9. quaestiones perpetuae, 106. 5. qui (pron. interrog.), 123. 4. quidam (intensifying), 4. 3. quivis (inflected), 83. 15. quoi, 35. 28.

2ÖO

IN D E X VERBORVM

rabula, 180. 13. ratio dicendi, 120. 14, 163. 18. rationem habere, 224. 4. recipere, 87. 20. remittere (intr.), 130. 5. repetere, 63. 1. repromittere, 18. ig. respondere (legal), 113. 21. retinnire, 171. 26. rhetor, 265. 14. rotundus, 272. 19. seaena, 203. 13. scalmus, 197. 28. secundae, 242. 15. soluta oratio, 32. 17. splendor, 124. 18. sputatilica, 260. 27. statarius, 116. 12. statuere, 231. 17. stilus, 96. 14. strigosus, 64. 8. struere, 216. 7. Suada, 59. 21. suaviloquens, 58. 8.

supplosio, 141. 22. σχήματα, 141. l6. tamen (anticipatory), 138. 23. terror, 44. 18. testudo, 87. 26. tignarius, 257. 24. tragicus, 203. 13. unctus, 78. 29. urbanitas, 143. 9. vehens (intr.), 331. 2. vendibilis, 174. 24. verae causae, 316. 5. veritas (artistic), 70. 20. vestire (of style), 274. 12. veterator, 82. 29. vetustas, 60. 29. vibrans, 326. 10. vide ne, 292. 3. virtus, 129. i. vocalis, 242. 10. volvere, 246. 8. xystus, 10. 15.

IND EX RERVM ad sensum construction, 112. 3. adjective modified by adverb of quality, 205. 5. adverbs with esse, 330. 29. advocates, employment of sev­ eral in one case, 190. 10, 207. 27 analogy and anomaly, 253. 16. augurship, election to, 1. 7, 8. augurs, exemption from jury service, 117. 19. candidature for office, extra­ ordinary, 224. 4, 226. 21. canon of orators, 36. 9. censoria locatio, 85. 6. change, unexpected, of person, 209. 9 ; of tense, 35. 6 ; of voice, 196. 19. colours, four used by early pain­ ters, 70. 27. coming of age at Rome, 195. 15. confusion of constructions, 297. 15, 298. 30. consular jurisdiction, 85. 7. death as timely, § 5.

irony, 292. 27. ius civile, 78. 24, 143. 12; ponti­ ficium, 156. 131 publicum, 214. 8.

laudatio funebris, 61. 15, 62. 16. leges, for individual laws, see Index Nominum s.v. Lex. Magna Mater, reception of, 79. 8. parody, 45. 19, 47. 5, 327. 20. participles, as class-substantives, 45. 20. participles, present, as adjec­ tives, 141. 20. per-, adjectives prefixed by, 11. 28. periodic structure, 34. 23. plagiarism, 76. 15. praenomen separated from no­ men, 10. 16. priestly colleges, election to, 83. 14 (see also augurship). prose-rhythm, §§ 32-34. prosecution as first step in poli­ tical career, 159. 10. provincial dialect, 172. 28.

-enus, names ending in, 131. 15. evidence, types of, 272. 13 ff.

repetition of words, 207. 24.

fine arts, Roman attitude to, 3 - 17 genitive of quality, 246. 18. Gracchani iudices, 128. 24.

sub-, adjectives prefixed by, 29. 17. subjunctive, past jussive, 187. 14 ; pluperfect, 265. 14 ; poten­ tial, 25. 15; restrictive, 57. 1.

history, ancient view of, 205. 4; rhetorical, 42. 23. home background, importance of, 210. 17.

time, sending to find out, 200. 9. transitio ad plebem, 62. 23. triumphs for trivial achieve­ ments, 255. 10.

indirect question dependent on noun, 218. i. infinitive with facere, 142. 1. infinitive, ‘pluperfect’, 46. 29.

variation of construction, 97. 21. word-order, 39. 36, 82. 11, 189. 3, 255. 5.

PRINTED AT

THE

IN

GREAT

UNIVERSITY BY

PRINTER

VIVIAN TO

THE

BRITAIN

PRESS,

OXFORD

RIDLER UNIVERSITY