{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_15017/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_15017","id":"gutenberg_15017","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/15017","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Classical Antiquity","Dialogues, Latin","Oratory, Ancient"],"text":"Produced by Ted Garvin, Tom Martin and the PG Online Distributed\nProofreading Team\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE WORKS OF CORNELIUS TACITUS;\n\nWITH\n\nAN ESSAY ON HIS LIFE AND GENIUS,\nNOTES, SUPPLEMENTS, &c.\n\nBY\nARTHUR MURPHY, ESQ.\n\n\n     Pr\u00e6cipuum munus annalium reor, ne virtutes sileantur, utque pravis\n     dictis factisque ex posteritate et infami\u00e2 metus sit.\n                                          TACITUS, Annales, iii. s. 65.\n\n\nA NEW EDITION,\nWITH THE AUTHOR'S LAST CORRECTIONS.\n\nIN EIGHT VOLUMES.\n\nVOL. VIII.\n\n\nLONDON: PRINTED FOR JOHN STOCKDALE; F.C. AND J. RIVINGTON; J. WALKER;\nR. LEA; LONGMAN, HURST, REES, ORME, AND BROWN; CADELL AND DAVIES; J.\nMAWMAN; J. MURRAY; J. RICHARDSON; R. BALDWIN; AND J. FAULDER.\n\n1811.\n\n\n\n\nA DIALOGUE CONCERNING ORATORY,\n\nOR THE CAUSES OF CORRUPT ELOQUENCE.\n\nVOL. VIII.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\n\nI. General introduction, with the reasons for writing an account of\nthe following discourse.\n\nII. The persons engaged in the dialogue; at first, Curiatius Maternus,\nJulius Secundus, and Marcus Aper.\n\nIII. Secundus endeavours to dissuade Maternus from thinking any more\nof dramatic composition.\n\nIV. Maternus gives his reasons for persisting.\n\nV. Aper condemns his resolution, and, in point of utility, real\nhappiness, fame and dignity, contends that the oratorical profession\nis preferable to the poetical.\n\nVIII. He cites the example of Eprius Marcellus and Crispus Vibius, who\nraised themselves by their eloquence to the highest honours.\n\nIX. Poetical fame brings with it no advantage.\n\nX. He exhorts Maternus to relinquish the muses, and devote his whole\nto eloquence and the business of the bar.\n\nXI. Maternus defends his favourite studies; the pleasures arising from\npoetry are in their nature innocent and sublime; the fame is extensive\nand immortal. The poet enjoys the most delightful intercourse with his\nfriends, whereas the life of the public orator is a state of warfare\nand anxiety.\n\nXIV. Vipstanius Messala enters the room. He finds his friends engaged\nin a controversy, and being an admirer of ancient eloquence, he\nadvises Aper to adopt the model of the ancients in preference to the\nplan of the modern rhetoricians.\n\nXV. Hence a difference of opinion concerning the merit of the ancients\nand the moderns. Messala, Secundus, and Maternus, profess themselves\nadmirers of the oratory that flourished in the time of the republic.\nAper launches out against the ancients, and gives the preference to\nthe advocates of his own time. He desires to know who are to be\naccounted ancients.\n\nXVIII. Eloquence has various modes, all changing with the conjuncture\nof the times. But it is the nature of men to praise the past, and\ncensure the present. The period when Cassius Severus flourished, is\nstated to be the point of time at which men cease to be ancients;\nCassius with good reason deviated from the ancient manner.\n\nXX. Defects of ancient eloquence: the modern style more refined and\nelegant.\n\nXXI. The character of Calvus, C\u00e6lius, C\u00e6sar and Brutus, and also of\nAsinius Pollio, and Messala Corvinus.\n\nXXII. The praise and censure of Cicero.\n\nXXIII. The true rhetorical art consists in blending the virtues of\nancient oratory with the beauties of the modern style.\n\nXXIV. Maternus observes that there can be no dispute about the\nsuperior reputation of the ancient orators: he therefore calls upon\nMessala to take that point for granted, and proceed to an enquiry into\nthe causes that produced so great an alteration.\n\nXXV. After some observations on the eloquence of Calvus, Asinius\nPollio, C\u00e6sar, Cicero, and others, Messala praises Gracchus and Lucius\nCrassus, but censures M\u00e6cenas, Gallio, and Cassius Severus.\n\nXXVII. Maternus reminds Messala of the true point in question; Messala\nproceeds to assign the causes which occasioned the decay of eloquence,\nsuch as the dissipation of the young men, the inattention of their\nparents, the ignorance of rhetorical professors, and the total neglect\nof ancient discipline.\n\nXXXIV. He proceeds to explain the plan of study, and the institutions,\ncustoms, and various arts, by which orators were formed in the time of\nthe republic.\n\nXXXV. The defects and vices in the new system of education. In this\npart of the dialogue, the sequel of Messala's discourse is lost, with\nthe whole of what was said by Secundus, and the beginning of Maternus:\nthe supplement goes on from this place, distinguished by inverted\ncommas [transcriber's note: not used], and the sections marked with\nnumerical figures.\n\n1. Messala describes the presumption of the young advocates on their\nfirst appearance at the bar; their want of legal knowledge, and the\nabsurd habits which they contracted in the schools of the\nrhetoricians.\n\n2. Eloquence totally ruined by the preceptors. Messala concludes with\ndesiring Secundus and Maternus to assign the reasons which have\noccurred to them.\n\n4. Secundus gives his opinion. The change of government produced a new\nmode of eloquence. The orators under the emperors endeavoured to be\ningenious rather than natural. Seneca the first who introduced a false\ntaste, which still prevailed in the reign of Vespasian.\n\n8. Licinius Largus taught the advocates of his time the disgraceful\nart of hiring applauders by profession. This was the bane of all true\noratory, and, for that reason, Maternus was right in renouncing the\nforum altogether.\n\n10. Maternus acknowledges that he was disgusted by the shameful\npractices that prevailed at the bar, and therefore resolved to devote\nthe rest of his time to poetry and the muses.\n\n11. An apology for the rhetoricians. The praise of Quintilian. True\neloquence died with Cicero.\n\n13. The loss of liberty was the ruin of genuine oratory. Demosthenes\nflourished under a free government. The original goes on from this\nplace to the end of the dialogue.\n\nXXXVI. Eloquence flourishes most in times of public tumult. The crimes\nof turbulent citizens supply the orator with his best materials.\n\nXXXVII. In the time of the republic, oratorical talents were necessary\nqualifications, and without them no man was deemed worthy of being\nadvanced to the magistracy.\n\nXXXVIII. The Roman orators were not confined in point of time; they\nmight extend their speeches to what length they thought proper, and\ncould even adjourn. Pompey abridged the liberty of speech, and limited\nthe time.\n\nXXXIX. The very dress of the advocates under the emperors was\nprejudicial to eloquence.\n\nXL. True eloquence springs from the vices of men, and never was known\nto exist under a calm and settled government.\n\nXLI. Eloquence changes with the times. Every age has its own peculiar\nadvantages, and invidious comparisons are unnecessary.\n\nXLII. Conclusion of the dialogue.\n\n\nThe time of this dialogue was the sixth of Vespasian's reign.\n\n     Year of Rome--Of Christ     Consuls.\n\n         828           75        Vespasian, 6th time; Titus his son,\n                                                           4th time.\n\n\n\n\nA DIALOGUE CONCERNING ORATORY, OR THE CAUSES OF CORRUPT ELOQUENCE.\n\n\nI. You have often enquired of me, my good friend, Justus Fabius [a],\nhow and from what causes it has proceeded, that while ancient times\ndisplay a race of great and splendid orators, the present age,\ndispirited, and without any claim to the praise of eloquence, has\nscarcely retained the name of an orator. By that appellation we now\ndistinguish none but those who flourished in a former period. To the\neminent of the present day, we give the title of speakers, pleaders,\nadvocates, patrons, in short, every thing but orators.\n\nThe enquiry is in its nature delicate; tending, if we are not able to\ncontend with antiquity, to impeach our genius, and if we are not\nwilling, to arraign our judgement. An answer to so nice a question is\nmore than I should venture to undertake, were I to rely altogether\nupon myself: but it happens, that I am able to state the sentiments of\nmen distinguished by their eloquence, such as it is in modern times;\nhaving, in the early part of my life, been present at their\nconversation on the very subject now before us. What I have to offer,\nwill not be the result of my own thinking: it is the work of memory\nonly; a mere recital of what fell from the most celebrated orators of\ntheir time: a set of men, who thought with subtilty, and expressed\nthemselves with energy and precision; each, in his turn, assigning\ndifferent but probable causes, at times insisting on the same, and, in\nthe course of the debate, maintaining his own proper character, and\nthe peculiar cast of his mind. What they said upon the occasion, I\nshall relate, as nearly as may be, in the style and manner of the\nseveral speakers, observing always the regular course and order of the\ncontroversy. For a controversy it certainly was, where the speakers of\nthe present age did not want an advocate, who supported their cause\nwith zeal, and, after treating antiquity with sufficient freedom, and\neven derision, assigned the palm of eloquence to the practisers of\nmodern times.\n\n\nII. Curiatius Maternus [a] gave a public reading of his tragedy of\nCato. On the following day a report prevailed, that the piece had\ngiven umbrage to the men in power. The author, it was said, had\nlaboured to display his favourite character in the brightest colours;\nanxious for the fame of his hero, but regardless of himself. This soon\nbecame the topic of public conversation. Maternus received a visit\nfrom Marcus Aper [b] and Julius Secundus [c], both men of genius, and\nthe first ornaments of the forum. I was, at that time, a constant\nattendant on those eminent men. I heard them, not only in their scenes\nof public business, but, feeling an inclination to the same studies, I\nfollowed them with all the ardour of youthful emulation. I was\nadmitted to their private parties; I heard their debates, and the\namusement of their social hours: I treasured up their wit, and their\nsentiments on the various topics which they had discussed in\nconversation. Respected as they were, it must, however, be\nacknowledged that they did not escape the malignity of criticism. It\nwas objected to Secundus, that he had no command of words, no flow of\nlanguage; and to Aper, that he was indebted for his fame, not to art\nor literature, but to the natural powers of a vigorous understanding.\nThe truth is, the style of the former was remarkable for its purity;\nconcise, yet free and copious; and the latter was sufficiently versed\nin all branches of general erudition. It might be said of him, that he\ndespised literature, not that he wanted it. He thought, perhaps, that,\nby scorning the aid of letters, and by drawing altogether from his own\nfund, his fame would stand on a more solid foundation.\n\n\nIII. We went together to pay our visit to Maternus. Upon entering his\nstudy, we found him with the tragedy, which he had read on the\npreceding day, lying before him. Secundus began: And are you then so\nlittle affected by the censure of malignant critics, as to persist in\ncherishing a tragedy which has given so much offence? Perhaps you are\nrevising the piece, and, after retrenching certain passages, intend to\nsend your Cato into the world, I will not say improved, but certainly\nless obnoxious. There lies the poem, said Maternus; you may, if you\nthink proper, peruse it with all its imperfections on its head. If\nCato has omitted any thing, Thyestes [a], at my next reading, shall\natone for all deficiencies. I have formed the fable of a tragedy on\nthat subject: the plan is warm in my imagination, and, that I may give\nmy whole time to it, I now am eager to dispatch an edition of Cato.\nMarcus Aper interposed: And are you, indeed, so enamoured of your\ndramatic muse, as to renounce your oratorical character, and the\nhonours of your profession, in order to sacrifice your time, I think\nit was lately to Medea, and now to Thyestes? Your friends, in the mean\ntime, expect your patronage; the colonies [b] invoke your aid, and the\nmunicipal cities invite you to the bar. And surely the weight of so\nmany causes may be deemed sufficient, without this new solicitude\nimposed upon you by Domitius [c] or Cato. And must you thus waste all\nyour time, amusing yourself for ever with scenes of fictitious\ndistress, and still labouring to add to the fables of Greece the\nincidents and characters of the Roman story?\n\n\nIV. The sharpness of that reproof, replied Maternus, would, perhaps,\nhave disconcerted me, if, by frequent repetition, it had not lost its\nsting. To differ on this subject is grown familiar to us both. Poetry,\nit seems, is to expect no quarter: you wage an incessant war against\nthe followers of that pleasing art; and I, who am charged with\ndeserting my clients, have yet every day the cause of poetry to\ndefend. But we have now a fair opportunity, and I embrace it with\npleasure, since we have a person present, of ability to decide between\nus; a judge, who will either lay me under an injunction to write no\nmore verses, or, as I rather hope, encourage me, by his authority, to\nrenounce for ever the dry employment of forensic causes (in which I\nhave had my share of drudgery), that I may, for the future, be at\nleisure to cultivate the sublime and sacred eloquence of the tragic\nmuse.\n\n\nV. Secundus desired to be heard: I am aware, he said, that Aper may\nrefuse me as an umpire. Before he states his objections, let me follow\nthe example of all fair and upright judges, who, in particular cases,\nwhen they feel a partiality for one of the contending parties, desire\nto be excused from hearing the cause. The friendship and habitual\nintercourse, which I have ever cultivated with Saleius Bassus [a],\nthat excellent man, and no less excellent poet, are well known: and\nlet me add, if poetry is to be arraigned, I know no client that can\noffer such handsome bribes.\n\nMy business, replied Aper, is not with Saleius Bassus: let him, and\nall of his description, who, without talents for the bar, devote their\ntime to the muses, pursue their favourite amusement without\ninterruption. But Maternus must not think to escape in the crowd. I\nsingle him out from the rest, and since we are now before a competent\njudge, I call upon him to answer, how it happens, that a man of his\ntalents, formed by nature to reach the heights of manly eloquence, can\nthink of renouncing a profession, which not only serves to multiply\nfriendships, but to support them with reputation: a profession, which\nenables us to conciliate the esteem of foreign nations, and (if we\nregard our own interest) lays open the road to the first honours of\nthe state; a profession, which, besides the celebrity that it gives\nwithin the walls of Rome, spreads an illustrious name throughout this\nwide extent of the empire.\n\nIf it be wisdom to make the ornament and happiness of life the end and\naim of our actions, what can be more advisable than to embrace an art,\nby which we are enabled to protect our friends; to defend the cause of\nstrangers; and succour the distressed? Nor is this all: the eminent\norator is a terror to his enemies: envy and malice tremble, while they\nhate him. Secure in his own strength, he knows how to ward off every\ndanger. His own genius is his protection; a perpetual guard, that\nwatches him; an invincible power, that shields him from his enemies.\n\nIn the calm seasons of life, the true use of oratory consists in the\nassistance which it affords to our fellow-citizens. We then behold the\ntriumph of eloquence. Have we reason to be alarmed for ourselves, the\nsword and breast-plate are not a better defence in the heat of battle.\nIt is at once a buckler to cover yourself [b] and a weapon to brandish\nagainst your enemy. Armed with this, you may appear with courage\nbefore the tribunals of justice, in the senate, and even in the\npresence of the prince. We lately saw [c] Eprius Marcellus arraigned\nbefore the fathers: in that moment, when the minds of the whole\nassembly were inflamed against him, what had he to oppose to the\nvehemence of his enemies, but that nervous eloquence which he\npossessed in so eminent a degree? Collected in himself, and looking\nterror to his enemies, he was more than a match for Helvidius Priscus;\na man, no doubt, of consummate wisdom, but without that flow of\neloquence, which springs from practice, and that skill in argument,\nwhich is necessary to manage a public debate. Such is the advantage of\noratory: to enlarge upon it were superfluous. My friend Maternus will\nnot dispute the point.\n\n\nVI. I proceed to the pleasure arising from the exercise of eloquence;\na pleasure which does not consist in the mere sensation of the moment,\nbut is felt through life, repeated every day, and almost every hour.\nFor let me ask, to a man of an ingenuous and liberal mind, who knows\nthe relish of elegant enjoyments, what can yield such true delight, as\na concourse of the most respectable characters crowding to his levee?\nHow must it enhance his pleasure, when he reflects, that the visit is\nnot paid to him because he is rich, and wants an heir [a], or is in\npossession of a public office, but purely as a compliment to superior\ntalents, a mark of respect to a great and accomplished orator! The\nrich who have no issue, and the men in high rank and power, are his\nfollowers. Though he is still young, and probably destitute of\nfortune, all concur in paying their court to solicit his patronage for\nthemselves, or to recommend their friends to his protection. In the\nmost splendid fortune, in all the dignity and pride of power, is there\nany thing that can equal the heartfelt satisfaction of the able\nadvocate, when he sees the most illustrious citizens, men respected\nfor their years, and flourishing in the opinion of the public, yet\npaying their court to a rising genius, and, in the midst of wealth and\ngrandeur, fairly owning, that they still want something superior to\nall their possessions? What shall be said of the attendants, that\nfollow the young orator from the bar, and watch his motions to his own\nhouse? With what importance does he appear to the multitude! in the\ncourts of judicature, with what veneration! When he rises to speak,\nthe audience is hushed in mute attention; every eye is fixed on him\nalone; the crowd presses round him; he is master of their passions;\nthey are swayed, impelled, directed, as he thinks proper. These are\nthe fruits of eloquence, well known to all, and palpable to every\ncommon observer.\n\nThere are other pleasures more refined and secret, felt only by the\ninitiated. When the orator, upon some great occasion, comes with a\nwell-digested speech, conscious of his matter, and animated by his\nsubject, his breast expands, and heaves with emotions unfelt before.\nIn his joy there is a dignity suited to the weight and energy of the\ncomposition which he has prepared. Does he rise to hazard himself [b]\nin a sudden debate; he is alarmed for himself, but in that very alarm\nthere is a mingle of pleasure, which predominates, till distress\nitself becomes delightful. The mind exults in the prompt exertion of\nits powers, and even glories in its rashness. The productions of\ngenius, and those of the field, have this resemblance: many things are\nsown, and brought to maturity with toil and care; yet that, which\ngrows from the wild vigour of nature, has the most grateful flavour.\n\n\nVII. As to myself, if I may allude to my own feelings, the day on\nwhich I put on the manly gown [a], and even the days that followed,\nwhen, as a new man at Rome, born in a city that did not favour my\npretensions [b], I rose in succession to the offices of qu\u00e6stor,\ntribune, and pr\u00e6tor; those days, I say, did not awaken in my breast\nsuch exalted rapture, as when, in the course of my profession, I was\ncalled forth, with such talents as have fallen to my share, to defend\nthe accused; to argue a question of law before the centumviri [c], or,\nin the presence of the prince, to plead for his freedmen, and the\nprocurators appointed by himself. Upon those occasions I towered above\nall places of profit, and all preferment; I looked down on the\ndignities of tribune, pr\u00e6tor, and consul; I felt within myself, what\nneither the favour of the great, nor the wills and codicils [d] of the\nrich, can give, a vigour of mind, an inward energy, that springs from\nno external cause, but is altogether your own.\n\nLook through the circle of the fine arts, survey the whole compass of\nthe sciences, and tell me in what branch can the professors acquire a\nname to vie with the celebrity of a great and powerful orator. His\nfame does not depend on the opinion of thinking men, who attend to\nbusiness and watch the administration of affairs; he is applauded by\nthe youth of Rome, at least by such of them as are of a well-turned\ndisposition, and hope to rise by honourable means. The eminent orator\nis the model which every parent recommends to his children. Even the\ncommon people [e] stand at gaze, as he passes by; they pronounce his\nname with pleasure, and point at him as the object of their\nadmiration. The provinces resound with his praise. The strangers, who\narrive from all parts, have heard of his genius; they wish to behold\nthe man, and their curiosity is never at rest, till they have seen his\nperson, and perused his countenance.\n\n\nVIII. I have already mentioned Eprius Marcellus and Crispus Vibius\n[a]. I cite living examples, in preference to the names of a former\nday. Those two illustrious persons, I will be bold to say, are not\nless known in the remotest parts of the empire, than they are at\nCapua, or Vercell\u00e6 [b], where, we are told, they both were born. And\nto what is their extensive fame to be attributed? Not surely to their\nimmoderate riches. Three hundred thousand sesterces cannot give the\nfame of genius. Their eloquence may be said to have built up their\nfortunes; and, indeed, such is the power, I might say the inspiration,\nof eloquence, that in every age we have examples of men, who by their\ntalents raised themselves to the summit of their ambition.\n\nBut I waive all former instances. The two, whom I have mentioned, are\nnot recorded in history, nor are we to glean an imperfect knowledge of\nthem from tradition; they are every day before our eyes. They have\nrisen from low beginnings; but the more abject their origin, and the\nmore sordid the poverty, in which they set out, their success rises in\nproportion, and affords a striking proof of what I have advanced;\nsince it is apparent, that, without birth or fortune, neither of them\nrecommended by his moral character, and one of them deformed in his\nperson, they have, notwithstanding all disadvantages, made themselves,\nfor a series of years, the first men in the state. They began their\ncareer in the forum, and, as long as they chose to pursue that road of\nambition, they flourished in the highest reputation; they are now at\nthe head of the commonwealth, the ministers who direct and govern, and\nso high in favour with the prince, that the respect, with which he\nreceives them, is little short of veneration.\n\nThe truth is, Vespasian [c], now in the vale of years, but always open\nto the voice of truth, clearly sees that the rest of his favourites\nderive all their lustre from the favours, which his munificence has\nbestowed; but with Marcellus and Crispus the case is different: they\ncarry into the cabinet, what no prince can give, and no subject can\nreceive. Compared with the advantages which those men possess, what\nare family-pictures, statues, busts, and titles of honour? They are\nthings of a perishable nature, yet not without their value. Marcellus\nand Vibius know how to estimate them, as they do wealth and honours;\nand wealth and honours are advantages against which you will easily\nfind men that declaim, but none that in their hearts despise them.\nHence it is, that in the houses of all who have distinguished\nthemselves in the career of eloquence, we see titles, statues, and\nsplendid ornaments, the reward of talents, and, at all times, the\ndecorations of the great and powerful orator.\n\n\nIX. But to come to the point, from which we started: poetry, to which\nmy friend Maternus wishes to dedicate all his time, has none of these\nadvantages. It confers no dignity, nor does it serve any useful\npurpose. It is attended with some pleasure, but it is the pleasure of\na moment, springing from vain applause, and bringing with it no solid\nadvantage. What I have said, and am going to add, may probably, my\ngood friend Maternus, be unwelcome to your ear; and yet I must take\nthe liberty to ask you, if Agamemnon [a] or Jason speaks in your piece\nwith dignity of language, what useful consequence follows from it?\nWhat client has been defended? Who confesses an obligation? In that\nwhole audience, who returns to his own house with a grateful heart?\nOur friend Saleius Bassus [b] is, beyond all question, a poet of\neminence, or, to use a warmer expression, he has the god within him:\nbut who attends his levee? who seeks his patronage, or follows in his\ntrain? Should he himself, or his intimate friend, or his near\nrelation, happen to be involved in a troublesome litigation, what\ncourse do you imagine he would take? He would, most probably, apply to\nhis friend, Secundus; or to you, Maternus; not because you are a poet,\nnor yet to obtain a copy of verses from you; of those he has a\nsufficient stock at home, elegant, it must be owned, and exquisite in\nthe kind. But after all his labour and waste of genius, what is his\nreward?\n\nWhen in the course of a year, after toiling day and night, he has\nbrought a single poem to perfection, he is obliged to solicit his\nfriends and exert his interest, in order to bring together an audience\n[c], so obliging as to hear a recital of the piece. Nor can this be\ndone without expence. A room must be hired, a stage or pulpit must be\nerected; benches must be arranged, and hand-bills distributed\nthroughout the city. What if the reading succeeds to the height of his\nwishes? Pass but a day or two, and the whole harvest of praise and\nadmiration fades away, like a flower that withers in its bloom, and\nnever ripens into fruit. By the event, however flattering, he gains no\nfriend, he obtains no patronage, nor does a single person go away\nimpressed with the idea of an obligation conferred upon him. The poet\nhas been heard with applause; he has been received with acclamations;\nand he has enjoyed a short-lived transport.\n\nBassus, it is true, has lately received from Vespasian a present of\nfifty thousand sesterces. Upon that occasion, we all admired the\ngenerosity of the prince. To deserve so distinguished a proof of the\nsovereign's esteem is, no doubt, highly honourable; but is it not\nstill more honourable, if your circumstances require it, to serve\nyourself by your talents? to cultivate your genius, for your own\nadvantage? and to owe every thing to your own industry, indebted to\nthe bounty of no man whatever? It must not be forgotten, that the\npoet, who would produce any thing truly excellent in the kind, must\nbid farewell to the conversation of his friends; he must renounce, not\nonly the pleasures of Rome, but also the duties of social life; he\nmust retire from the world; as the poets say, \"to groves and grottos\nevery muse's son.\" In other words, he must condemn himself to a\nsequestered life in the gloom of solitude.\n\n\nX. The love of fame, it seems, is the passion that inspires the poet's\ngenius: but even in this respect, is he so amply paid as to rival in\nany degree the professors of the persuasive arts? As to the\nindifferent poet, men leave him to his own [a] mediocrity: the real\ngenius moves in a narrow circle. Let there be a reading of a poem by\nthe ablest master of his art: will the fame of his performance reach\nall quarters, I will not say of the empire, but of Rome only? Among\nthe strangers who arrive from Spain, from Asia, or from Gaul, who\nenquires [b] after Saleius Bassus? Should it happen that there is one,\nwho thinks, of him; his curiosity is soon satisfied; he passes on,\ncontent with a transient view, as if he had seen a picture or a\nstatue.\n\nIn what I have advanced, let me not be misunderstood: I do not mean to\ndeter such as are not blessed with the gift of oratory, from the\npractice of their favourite art, if it serves to fill up their time,\nand gain a degree of reputation. I am an admirer of eloquence [c]; I\nhold it venerable, and even sacred, in all its shapes, and every mode\nof composition. The pathetic of tragedy, of which you, Maternus, are\nso great a master; the majesty of the epic, the gaiety of the lyric\nmuse; the wanton elegy, the keen iambic, and the pointed epigram; all\nhave their charms; and Eloquence, whatever may be the subject which\nshe chooses to adorn, is with me the sublimest faculty, the queen of\nall the arts and sciences. But this, Maternus, is no apology for you,\nwhose conduct is so extraordinary, that, though formed by nature to\nreach the summit of perfection [d], you choose to wander into devious\npaths, and rest contented with an humble station in the vale beneath.\n\nWere you a native of Greece, where to exhibit in the public games [e]\nis an honourable employment; and if the gods had bestowed upon you the\nforce and sinew of the athletic Nicostratus [f]; do you imagine that I\ncould look tamely on, and see that amazing vigour waste itself away in\nnothing better than the frivolous art of darting the javelin, or\nthrowing the coit? To drop the allusion, I summon you from the theatre\nand public recitals to the business of the forum, to the tribunals of\njustice, to scenes of real contention, to a conflict worthy of your\nabilities. You cannot decline the challenge, for you are left without\nan excuse. You cannot say, with a number of others, that the\nprofession of poetry is safer than that of the public orator; since\nyou have ventured, in a tragedy written with spirit, to display the\nardour of a bold and towering genius.\n\nAnd for whom have you provoked so many enemies? Not for a friend; that\nwould have had alleviating circumstances. You undertook the cause of\nCato, and for him committed yourself. You cannot plead, by way of\napology, the duty of an advocate, or the sudden effusion of sentiment\nin the heat and hurry of an unpremeditated speech. Your plan was\nsettled; a great historical personage was your hero, and you chose\nhim, because what falls from so distinguished a character, falls from\na height that gives it additional weight. I am aware of your answer:\nyou will say, it was that very circumstance that ensured the success\nof your piece; the sentiments were received with sympathetic rapture:\nthe room echoed with applause, and hence your fame throughout the city\nof Rome. Then let us hear no more of your love of quiet and a state of\nsecurity: you have voluntarily courted danger. For myself, I am\ncontent with controversies of a private nature, and the incidents of\nthe present day. If, hurried beyond the bounds of prudence, I should\nhappen, on any occasion, to grate the ears of men in power, the zeal\nof an advocate, in the service of his client, will excuse the honest\nfreedom of speech, and, perhaps, be deemed a proof of integrity.\n\n\nXI. Aper went through his argument, according to his custom, with\nwarmth and vehemence. He delivered the whole with a peremptory tone\nand an eager eye. As soon as he finished, I am prepared, said Maternus\nsmiling, to exhibit a charge against the professors of oratory, which\nmay, perhaps, counterbalance the praise so lavishly bestowed upon them\nby my friend. In the course of what he said, I was not surprised to\nsee him going out of his way, to lay poor poetry prostrate at his\nfeet. He has, indeed, shewn some kindness to such as are not blessed\nwith oratorical talents. He has passed an act of indulgence in their\nfavour, and they, it seems, are allowed to pursue their favourite\nstudies. For my part, I will not say that I think myself wholly\nunqualified for the eloquence of the bar. It may be true, that I have\nsome kind of talent for that profession; but the tragic muse affords\nsuperior pleasure. My first attempt was in the reign of Nero, in\nopposition to the extravagant claims of the prince [a], and in\ndefiance of the domineering spirit of Vatinius [b], that pernicious\nfavourite, by whose coarse buffoonery the muses were every day\ndisgraced, I might say, most impiously prophaned. The portion of fame,\nwhatever it be, that I have acquired since that time, is to be\nattributed, not to the speeches which I made in the forum, but to the\npower of dramatic composition. I have, therefore, resolved to take my\nleave of the bar for ever. The homage of visitors, the train of\nattendants, and the multitude of clients, which glitter so much in the\neyes of my friend, have no attraction for me. I regard them as I do\npictures, and busts, and statues of brass; things, which indeed are in\nmy family, but they came unlooked for, without my stir, or so much as\na wish on my part. In my humble station, I find that innocence is a\nbetter shield than oratory. For the last I shall have no occasion,\nunless I find it necessary, on some future occasion, to exert myself\nin the just defence of an injured friend.\n\n\nXII. But woods, and groves [a], and solitary places, have not escaped\nthe satyrical vein of my friend. To me they afford sensations of a\npure delight. It is there I enjoy the pleasures of a poetic\nimagination; and among those pleasures it is not the least, that they\nare pursued far from the noise and bustle of the world, without a\nclient to besiege my doors, and not a criminal to distress me with the\ntears of affliction. Free from those distractions, the poet retires to\nscenes of solitude, where peace and innocence reside. In those haunts\nof contemplation, he has his pleasing visions. He treads on\nconsecrated ground. It was there that Eloquence first grew up, and\nthere she reared her temple. In those retreats she first adorned\nherself with those graces, which have made mankind enamoured of her\ncharms; and there she filled the hearts of the wise and good with joy\nand inspiration. Oracles first spoke in woods and sacred groves. As to\nthe species of oratory, which practises for lucre, or with views of\nambition; that sanguinary eloquence [b] now so much in vogue: it is of\nmodern growth, the offspring of corrupt manners, and degenerate times;\nor rather, as my friend _Aper_ expressed it, it is a _weapon_ in the\nhands of ill-designing men.\n\nThe early and more happy period of the world, or, as we poets call it,\nthe golden age, was the \u00e6ra of true eloquence. Crimes and orators were\nthen unknown. Poetry spoke in harmonious numbers, not to varnish evil\ndeeds, but to praise the virtuous, and celebrate the friends of human\nkind. This was the poet's office. The inspired train enjoyed the\nhighest honours; they held commerce with the gods; they partook of the\nambrosial feast: they were at once the messengers and interpreters of\nthe supreme command. They ranked on earth with legislators, heroes,\nand demigods. In that bright assembly we find no orator, no pleader of\ncauses. We read of Orpheus [c], of Linus, and, if we choose to mount\nstill higher, we can add the name of Apollo himself. This may seem a\nflight of fancy. Aper will treat it as mere romance, and fabulous\nhistory: but he will not deny, that the veneration paid to Homer, with\nthe consent of posterity, is at least equal to the honours obtained by\nDemosthenes. He must likewise admit, that the fame of Sophocles and\nEuripides is not confined within narrower limits than that of Lysias\n[d] or Hyperides. To come home to our own country, there are at this\nday more who dispute the excellence of Cicero than of Virgil. Among\nthe orations of Asinius or Messala [e], is there one that can vie with\nthe Medea of Ovid, or the Thyestes of Varius?\n\n\nXIII. If we now consider the happy condition of the true poet, and\nthat easy commerce in which he passes his time, need we fear to\ncompare his situation with that of the boasted orator, who leads a\nlife of anxiety, oppressed by business, and overwhelmed with care? But\nit is said, his contention, his toil and danger, are steps to the\nconsulship. How much more eligible was the soft retreat in which\nVirgil [a] passed his days, loved by the prince, and honoured by the\npeople! To prove this the letters of Augustus are still extant; and\nthe people, we know, hearing in the theatre some verses of that divine\npoet [b], when he himself was present, rose in a body, and paid him\nevery mark of homage, with a degree of veneration nothing short of\nwhat they usually offered to the emperor.\n\nEven in our own times, will any man say, that Secundus Pomponius [c],\nin point of dignity or extent of fame, is inferior to Domitius Afer\n[d]? But Vibius and Marcellus have been cited as bright examples: and\nyet, in their elevation what is there to be coveted? Is it to be\ndeemed an advantage to those ministers, that they are feared by\nnumbers, and live in fear themselves? They are courted for their\nfavours, and the men, who obtain their suit, retire with ingratitude,\npleased with their success, yet hating to be obliged. Can we suppose\nthat the man is happy, who by his artifices has wriggled himself into\nfavour, and yet is never thought by his master sufficiently pliant,\nnor by the people sufficiently free? And after all, what is the amount\nof all his boasted power? The emperor's freedmen have enjoyed the\nsame. But as Virgil sweetly sings, Me let the sacred muses lead to\ntheir soft retreats, their living fountains, and melodious groves,\nwhere I may dwell remote from care, master of myself, and under no\nnecessity of doing every day what my heart condemns. Let me no more be\nseen at the wrangling bar, a pale and anxious candidate for precarious\nfame; and let neither the tumult of visitors crowding to my levee, nor\nthe eager haste of officious freedmen, disturb my morning rest. Let me\nlive free from solicitude, a stranger to the art of promising legacies\n[e], in order to buy the friendship of the great; and when nature\nshall give the signal to retire, may I possess no more than may be\nsafely bequeathed to such friends as I shall think proper. At my\nfuneral let no token of sorrow be seen, no pompous mockery of woe.\nCrown [f] me with chaplets; strew flowers on my grave, and let my\nfriends erect no vain memorial, to tell where my remains are lodged.\n\n\nXIV. Maternus finished with an air of enthusiasm, that seemed to lift\nhim above himself. In that moment [a], Vipstanius Messala entered the\nroom. From the attention that appeared in every countenance, he\nconcluded that some important business was the subject of debate. I am\nafraid, said he, that I break in upon you at an unseasonable time. You\nhave some secret to discuss, or, perhaps, a consultation upon your\nhands. Far from it, replied Secundus; I wish you had come sooner. You\nwould have had the pleasure of hearing an eloquent discourse from our\nfriend Aper, who has been endeavouring to persuade Maternus to\ndedicate all his time to the business of the bar, and to give the\nwhole man to his profession. The answer of Maternus would have\nentertained you: he has been defending his art, and but this moment\nclosed an animated speech, that held more of the poetical than the\noratorical character.\n\nI should have been happy, replied Messala, to have heard both my\nfriends. It is, however, some compensation for the loss, that I find\nmen of their talents, instead of giving all their time to the little\nsubtleties and knotty points of the forum, extending their views to\nliberal science, and those questions of taste, which enlarge the mind,\nand furnish it with ideas drawn from the treasures of polite\nerudition. Enquiries of this kind afford improvement not only to those\nwho enter into the discussion, but to all who have the happiness of\nbeing present at the debate. It is in consequence of this refined and\nelegant way of thinking, that you, Secundus, have gained so much\napplause, by the life of Julius Asiaticus [b], with which you have\nlately obliged the world. From that specimen, we are taught to expect\nother productions of equal beauty from the same hand. In like manner,\nI see with pleasure, that our friend Aper loves to enliven his\nimagination with topics of controversy, and still lays out his leisure\nin questions of the schools [c], not, indeed, in imitation of the\nancient orators, but in the true taste of our modern rhetoricians.\n\n\nXV. I am not surprised, returned Aper, at that stroke of raillery. It\nis not enough for Messala, that the oratory of ancient times engrosses\nall his admiration; he must have his fling at the moderns. Our talents\nand our studies are sure to feel the sallies of his pleasantry [a]. I\nhave often heard you, my friend Messala, in the same humour. According\nto you, the present age has not a single orator to boast of, though\nyour own eloquence, and that of your brother, are sufficient to refute\nthe charge. But you assert roundly, and maintain your proposition with\nan air of confidence. You know how high you stand, and while in your\ngeneral censure of the age you include yourself, the smallest tincture\nof malignity cannot be supposed to mingle in a decision, which denies\nto your own genius, what by common consent is allowed to be your\nundoubted right.\n\nI have as yet, replied Messala, seen no reason to make me retract my\nopinion; nor do I believe, that my two friends here, or even you\nyourself (though you sometimes affect a different tone), can seriously\nmaintain the opposite doctrine. The decline of eloquence is too\napparent. The causes which have contributed to it, merit a serious\nenquiry. I shall be obliged to you, my friends, for a fair solution of\nthe question. I have often reflected upon the subject; but what seems\nto others a full answer, with me serves only to increase the\ndifficulty. What has happened at Rome, I perceive to have been the\ncase in Greece. The modern orators of that country, such as the priest\n[b] Nicetes, and others who, like him, stun the schools of Mytelene\nand Ephesus [c], are fallen to a greater distance from \u00c6schines and\nDemosthenes, than Afer and Africanus [d], or you, my friends, from\nTully or Asinius Pollio.\n\n\nXVI. You have started an important question, said Secundus, and who so\nable to discuss it as yourself? Your talents are equal to the\ndifficulty; your acquisitions in literature are known to be extensive,\nand you have considered the subject. I have no objection, replied\nMessala: my ideas are at your service, upon condition that, as I go\non, you will assist me with the lights of your understanding. For two\nof us I can venture to answer, said Maternus: whatever you omit, or\nrather, what you leave for us to glean after you, we shall be ready to\nadd to your observations. As to our friend Aper, you have told us,\nthat he is apt to differ from you upon this point, and even now I see\nhim preparing to give battle. He will not tamely bear to see us joined\nin a league in favour of antiquity.\n\nCertainly not, replied Aper, nor shall the present age, unheard and\nundefended, be degraded by a conspiracy. But before you sound to arms,\nI wish to know, who are to be reckoned among the ancients? At what\npoint of time [a] do you fix your favourite \u00e6ra? When you talk to me\nof antiquity, I carry my view to the first ages of the world, and see\nbefore me Ulysses and Nestor, who flourished little less than [b]\nthirteen hundred years ago. Your retrospect, it seems, goes no farther\nback than to Demosthenes and Hyperides; men who lived in the times of\nPhilip and Alexander, and indeed survived them both. The interval,\nbetween Demosthenes and the present age, is little more than [c] four\nhundred years; a space of time, which, with a view to the duration of\nhuman life, may be called long; but, as a portion of that immense\ntract of time which includes the different ages of the world, it\nshrinks into nothing, and seems to be but yesterday. For if it be\ntrue, as Cicero says in his treatise called Hortensius, that the great\nand genuine year is that period in which the heavenly bodies revolve\nto the station from which their source began; and if this grand\nrotation of the whole planetary system requires no less than twelve\nthousand nine hundred and fifty-four years [d] of our computation, it\nfollows that Demosthenes, your boasted ancient, becomes a modern, and\neven our contemporary; nay, that he lived in the same year with\nourselves; I had almost said, in the same month [e].\n\n\nXVII. But I am in haste to pass to our Roman orators. Menenius Agrippa\n[a] may fairly be deemed an ancient. I take it, however, that he is\nnot the person, whom you mean to oppose to the professors of modern\neloquence. The \u00e6ra, which you have in view, is that of [b] Cicero and\nC\u00e6sar; of C\u00e6lius [c] and Calvus; of Brutus [d], Asinius, and Messala.\nThose are the men, whom you place in the front of hour line; but for\nwhat reason they are to be classed with the ancients, and not, as I\nthink they ought to be, with the moderns, I am still to learn. To\nbegin with Cicero; he, according to the account of Tiro, his freedman,\nwas put to death on the seventh of the ides of December, during the\nconsulship of Hirtius and Pansa [e], who, we know, were both cut off\nin the course of the year, and left their office vacant for Augustus\nand Quintus Pedius. Count from that time six and fifty years to\ncomplete the reign of Augustus; three and twenty for that of Tiberius,\nfour for Caligula, eight and twenty for Claudius and Nero, one for\nGalba, Otho, and Vitellius, and finally six from the accession of\nVespasian to the present year of our felicity, we shall have from the\ndeath of Cicero a period of about [f] one hundred and twenty years,\nwhich may be considered as the term allotted to the life of man. I\nmyself remember to have seen in Britain a soldier far advanced in\nyears, who averred that he carried arms in that very battle [g] in\nwhich his countrymen sought to drive Julius C\u00e6sar back from their\ncoast. If this veteran, who served in the defence of his country\nagainst C\u00e6sar's invasion, had been brought a prisoner to Rome; or, if\nhis own inclination, or any other accident in the course of things,\nhad conducted him thither, he might have heard, not only C\u00e6sar and\nCicero, but even ourselves in some of our public speeches.\n\nIn the late public largess [h] you will acknowledge that you saw\nseveral old men, who assured us that they had received more than once,\nthe like distribution from Augustus himself. If that be so, might not\nthose persons have heard Corvinus [i] and Asinius? Corvinus, we all\nknow, lived through half the reign of Augustus, and Asinius almost to\nthe end. How then are we to ascertain the just boundaries of a\ncentury? They are not to be varied at pleasure, so as to place some\norators in a remote, and others in a recent period, while people are\nstill living, who heard them all, and may, therefore, with good reason\nrank them as contemporaries.\n\n\nXVIII. From what I have said, I assume it as a clear position, that\nthe glory, whatever it be, that accrued to the age in which those\norators lived, is not confined to that particular period, but reaches\ndown to the present time, and may more properly be said to belong to\nus, than to Servius Galba [a], or to Carbo [b], and others of the same\nor more ancient date. Of that whole race of orators, I may freely say,\nthat their manner cannot now be relished. Their language is coarse,\nand their composition rough, uncouth, and harsh; and yet your Calvus\n[c], your C\u00e6lius, and even your favourite Cicero, condescend to follow\nthat inelegant style. It were to be wished that they had not thought\nsuch models worthy of imitation. I mean to speak my mind with freedom;\nbut before I proceed, it will be necessary to make a preliminary\nobservation, and it is this: Eloquence has no settled form: at\ndifferent times it puts on a new garb, and changes with the manners\nand the taste of the age. Thus we find, that Gracchus [d], compared\nwith the elder Cato [e], is full and copious; but, in his turn, yields\nto Crassus [f], an orator more polished, more correct, and florid.\nCicero rises superior to both; more animated, more harmonious and\nsublime. He is followed by Corvinus [g], who has all the softer\ngraces; a sweet flexibility in his style, and a curious felicity in\nthe choice of his words. Which was the greatest orator, is not the\nquestion.\n\nThe use I make of these examples, is to prove that eloquence does not\nalways wear the same dress, but, even among your celebrated ancients,\nhas its different modes of persuasion. And be it remembered, that what\ndiffers is not always the worst. Yet such is the malignity of the\nhuman mind, that what has the sanction of antiquity is always admired;\nwhat is present, is sure to be condemned. Can we doubt that there have\nbeen critics, who were better pleased with Appius C\u00e6cus [h] than with\nCato? Cicero had his adversaries [i]: it was objected to him, that his\nstyle was redundant, turgid, never compressed, void of precision, and\ndestitute of Attic elegance. We all have read the letters of Calvus\nand Brutus to your famous orator. In the course of that\ncorrespondence, we plainly see what was Cicero's opinion of those\neminent men. The former [k] appeared to him cold and languid; the\nlatter [l], disjointed, loose, and negligent. On the other hand, we\nknow what they thought in return: Calvus did not hesitate to say, that\nCicero was diffuse luxuriant to a fault, and florid without vigour.\nBrutus, in express terms, says, he was weakened into length, and\nwanted sinew. If you ask my opinion, each of them had reason on his\nside. I shall hereafter examine them separately. My business at\npresent, is not in the detail: I speak of them in general terms.\n\n\nXIX. The \u00e6ra of ancient oratory is, I think, extended by its admirers\nno farther back than the time of Cassius Severus [a]. He, they tell\nus, was the first who dared to deviate from the plain and simple style\nof his predecessors. I admit the fact. He departed from the\nestablished forms, not through want of genius, or of learning, but\nguided by his own good sense and superior judgement. He saw that the\npublic ear was formed to a new manner; and eloquence, he knew, was to\nfind new approaches to the heart. In the early periods of the\ncommonwealth, a rough unpolished people might well be satisfied with\nthe tedious length of unskilful speeches, at a time when to make an\nharangue that took up the whole day, was the orator's highest praise.\nThe prolix exordium, wasting itself in feeble preparation; the\ncircumstantial narration, the ostentatious division of the argument\nunder different heads, and the thousand proofs and logical\ndistinctions, with whatever else is contained in the dry precepts of\nHermagoras [b] and Apollodorus, were in that rude period received with\nuniversal applause. To finish the picture, if your ancient orator\ncould glean a little from the common places of philosophy, and\ninterweave a few shreds and patches with the thread of his discourse,\nhe was extolled to the very skies. Nor can this be matter of wonder:\nthe maxims of the schools had not been divulged; they came with an air\nof novelty. Even among the orators themselves, there were but few who\nhad any tincture of philosophy. Nor had they learned the rules of art\nfrom the teachers of eloquence.\n\nIn the present age, the tenets of philosophy and the precepts of\nrhetoric are no longer a secret. The lowest of our popular assemblies\nare now, I will not say fully instructed, but certainly acquainted\nwith the elements of literature. The orator, by consequence, finds\nhimself obliged to seek new avenues to the heart, and new graces to\nembellish his discourse, that he may not offend fastidious ears,\nespecially before a tribunal where the judge is no longer bound by\nprecedent, but determines according to his will and pleasure; not, as\nformerly, observing the measure of time allowed to the advocate, but\ntaking upon himself to prescribe the limits. Nor is this all: the\njudge, at present, will not condescend to wait till the orator, in his\nown way, opens his case; but, of his own authority, reminds him of the\npoint in question, and, if he wanders, calls him back from his\ndigression, not without a hint that the court wishes to dispatch.\n\n\nXX. Who, at this time, would bear to hear an advocate introducing\nhimself with a tedious preface about the infirmities of his\nconstitution? Yet that is the threadbare exordium of Corvinus. We have\nfive books against Verres [a]. Who can endure that vast redundance?\nWho can listen to those endless arguments upon points of form, and\ncavilling exceptions [b], which we find in the orations of the same\ncelebrated advocate for Marcus Tullius [c] and Aulus C\u00e6cina? Our\nmodern judges are able to anticipate the argument. Their quickness\ngoes before the speaker. If not struck with the vivacity of his\nmanner, the elegance of his sentiments, and the glowing colours of his\ndescriptions, they soon grow weary of the flat insipid discourse. Even\nin the lowest class of life, there is now a relish for rich and\nsplendid ornament. Their taste requires the gay, the florid, and the\nbrilliant. The unpolished style of antiquity would now succeed as ill\nat the bar, as the modern actor who should attempt to copy the\ndeportment of Roscius [d], or Ambivius Turpio. Even the young men who\nare preparing for the career of eloquence, and, for that purpose,\nattend the forum and the tribunals of justice, have now a nice\ndiscriminating taste. They expect to have their imaginations pleased.\nThey wish to carry home some bright illustration, some splendid\npassage, that deserves to be remembered. What has struck their fancy,\nthey communicate to each other: and in their letters, the glittering\nthought, given with sententious brevity, the poetical allusion that\nenlivened the discourse, and the dazzling imagery, are sure to be\ntransmitted to their respective colonies and provinces. The ornaments\nof poetic diction are now required, not, indeed, copied from the rude\nobsolete style of Accius [e] and Pacuvius, but embellished with the\ngraces of Horace, Virgil, and [f] Lucan. The public judgement has\nraised a demand for harmonious periods, and, in compliance with the\ntaste of the age, our orators grow every day more polished and\nadorned. Let it not be said that what we gain in refinement, we lose\nin strength. Are the temples, raised by our modern architects, of a\nweaker structure, because they are not formed with shapeless stones,\nbut with the magnificence of polished marble, and decorations of the\nrichest gilding?\n\n\nXXI. Shall I fairly own to you the impression which I generally\nreceive from the ancient orators? They make me laugh, or lull me to\nsleep. Nor is this the case only, when I read the orations of Canutus\n[a], Arrius, Furnius, Toranius and others of the same school, or\nrather, the same infirmary [b]; an emaciated sickly race of orators;\nwithout sinew, colour, or proportion. But what shall be said of your\nadmired Calvus [c]? He, I think, has left no less than one and twenty\nvolumes: in the whole collection, there is not more than one or two\nshort orations, that can pretend to perfection in the kind. Upon this\npoint there is no difference of opinion. Who now reads his\ndeclamations against Asitius or Drusus? His speeches against Vatinius\nare in the hands of the curious, particularly the second, which must\nbe allowed to be a masterpiece. The language is elegant; the\nsentiments are striking, and the ear is satisfied with the roundness\nof the periods. In this specimen we see that he had an idea of just\ncomposition, but his genius was not equal to his judgement. The\norations of C\u00e6lius, though upon the whole defective, are not without\ntheir beauties. Some passages are highly finished. In those we\nacknowledge, the nice touches of modern elegance. In general, however,\nthe coarse expression, the halting period, and the vulgarity of the\nsentiments, have too much of the leaven of antiquity.\n\nIf C\u00e6lius [d] is still admired, it is not, I believe, in any of those\nparts that bear the mark of a rude illiterate age. With regard to\nJulius C\u00e6sar [e], engaged as he was in projects of vast ambition, we\nmay forgive him the want of that perfection which might, otherwise, be\nexpected from so sublime a genius. Brutus, in like manner, may be\nexcused on account of his philosophical speculations. Both he and\nC\u00e6sar, in their oratorical attempts, fell short of themselves. Their\nwarmest admirers acknowledge the fact, nor is there an instance to the\ncontrary, unless we except C\u00e6sar's speech for Decius the Samnite [f],\nand that of Brutus for king [g] Dejotarus. But are those performances,\nand some others of the same lukewarm temper, to be received as works\nof genius? He who admires those productions, may be left to admire\ntheir verses also. For verses they both made, and sent them into the\nworld, I will not say, with more success than Cicero, but certainly\nmore to their advantage; for their poetry had the good fortune to be\nlittle known.\n\nAsinius lived near our own times [h]. He, seems to have studied in the\nold school of Menenius and Appius. He composed tragedies as well as\norations, but in a style so harsh and ragged, that one would think him\nthe disciple of Accius and Pacuvius. He mistook the nature of\neloquence, which may then be said to have attained its true beauty,\nwhen the parts unite with smoothness, strength, and proportion. As in\nthe human body the veins should not swell too high, nor the bones and\nsinews appear too prominent; but its form is then most graceful, when\na pure and temperate blood gives animation [i] to the whole frame;\nwhen the muscles have their proper play, and the colour of health is\ndiffused over the several parts. I am not willing to disturb the\nmemory of Corvinus Messala [k]. If he did not reach the graces of\nmodern composition, the defect does not seem to have sprung from\nchoice. The vigour of his genius was not equal to his judgement.\n\n\nXXII. I now proceed to Cicero, who, we find, had often upon his hands\nthe very controversy, that engages us at present. It was the fashion\nwith his contemporaries to admire the ancients, while he, on the\ncontrary, contended for the eloquence of his own time. Were I to\nmention the quality that placed him at the head of his rivals I should\nsay it was the solidity of his judgement. It was he that first shewed\na taste for polished and graceful oratory. He was happy in his choice\nof words, and he had the art of giving weight and harmony to his\ncomposition. We find in many passages a warm imagination, and luminous\nsentences. In his later speeches, he has lively sallies of wit and\nfancy. Experience had then matured his judgement, and after long\npractice, he found the true oratorical style. In his earlier\nproductions we see the rough cast of antiquity. The exordium is\ntedious; the narration is drawn into length; luxuriant passages are\nnot retouched with care; he is not easily affected, and he rarely\ntakes fire; his sentiments are not always happily expressed [a], nor\nare the periods closed with energy. There is nothing so highly\nfinished, as to tempt you to avail yourself of a borrowed beauty. In\nshort, his speeches are like a rude building, which is strong and\ndurable, but wants that grace and consonance of parts which give\nsymmetry and perfection to the whole.\n\nIn oratory, as in architecture, I require ornament as well as use.\nFrom the man of ample fortune, who undertakes to build, we expect\nelegance and proportion. It is not enough that his house will keep out\nthe wind and the rain; it must strike the eye, and present a pleasing\nobject. Nor will it suffice that the furniture may answer all domestic\npurposes; it should be rich, fashionable, elegant; it should have gold\nand gems so curiously wrought, that they will bear examination, often\nviewed, and always admired. The common utensils, which are either mean\nor sordid, should be carefully removed out of sight. In like manner,\nthe true orator should avoid the trite and vulgar. Let him reject the\nantiquated phrase, and whatever is covered with the rust of time; let\nhis sentiments be expressed with spirit, not in careless,\nill-constructed, languid periods, like a dull writer of annals; let\nhim banish low scurrility, and, in short, let him know how to\ndiversify his style, that he may not fatigue the ear with a monotony,\nending for ever with the same unvaried cadence [b].\n\n\nXXIII. I shall say nothing of the false wit, and insipid play upon\nwords, which we find in Cicero's orations. His pleasant conceits about\nthe _wheel of fortune_ [a], and the arch raillery on the equivocal\nmeaning of the word _verres_ [b], do not merit a moment's attention. I\nomit the perpetual recurrence of the phrase, _esse videatur_ [c],\nwhich chimes in our ears at the close of so many sentences, sounding\nbig, but signifying nothing. These are petty blemishes; I mention them\nwith reluctance. I say nothing of other defects equally improper: and\nyet those very defects are the delight of such as affect to call\nthemselves ancient orators. I need not single them out by name: the\nmen are sufficiently known; it is enough to allude, in general terms,\nto the whole class.\n\nWe all are sensible that there is a set of critics now existing, who\nprefer Lucilius [d] to Horace, and Lucretius [e] to Virgil; who\ndespise the eloquence of Aufidius Bassus [f] and Servilius Nonianus,\nand yet admire Varro and [g] Sisenna. By these pretenders to taste,\nthe works of our modern rhetoricians are thrown by with neglect, and\neven fastidious disdain; while those of Calvus are held in the highest\nesteem. We see these men prosing in their ancient style before the\njudges; but we see them left without an audience, deserted by the\npeople, and hardly endured by their clients. The truth is, their cold\nand spiritless manner has no attraction. They call it sound oratory,\nbut it is want of vigour; like that precarious state of health which\nweak constitutions preserve by abstinence. What physician will\npronounce that a strong habit of body, which requires constant care\nand anxiety of mind? To say barely, that we are not ill, is surely not\nenough. True health consists in vigour, a generous warmth, and a\ncertain alacrity in the whole frame. He who is only not indisposed, is\nlittle distant from actual illness.\n\nWith you, my friends, the case is different: proceed, as you well can,\nand in fact, as you do, to adorn our age with all the grace and\nsplendour of true oratory. It is with pleasure, Messala, that I see\nyou selecting for imitation the liveliest models of the ancient\nschool. You too, Maternus, and you, my friend, Secundus [h], you both\npossess the happy art of adding to weight of sentiment all the dignity\nof language. To a copious invention you unite the judgement that knows\nhow to distinguish the specific qualities of different authors. The\nbeauty of order is yours. When the occasion demands it, you can expand\nand amplify with strength and majesty; and you know when to be concise\nwith energy. Your periods flow with ease, and your composition has\nevery grace of style and sentiment. You command the passions with\nresistless sway, while in yourselves you beget a temperance so truly\ndignified, that, though, perhaps, envy and the malignity of the times\nmay be unwilling to proclaim your merit, posterity will do you ample\njustice [i].\n\n\nXXIV. As soon as Aper concluded, You see, said Maternus, the zeal and\nardour of our friend: in the cause of the moderns, what a torrent of\neloquence! against the ancients, what a fund of invective! With great\nspirit, and a vast compass of learning, he has employed against his\nmasters the arts for which he is indebted to them. And yet all this\nvehemence must not deter you, Messala, from the performance of your\npromise. A formal defence of the ancients is by no means necessary. We\ndo not presume to vie with that illustrious race. We have been praised\nby Aper, but we know our inferiority. He himself is aware of it,\nthough, in imitation of the ancient manner [a], he has thought proper,\nfor the sake of a philosophical debate, to take the wrong side of the\nquestion. In answer to his argument, we do not desire you to expatiate\nin praise of the ancients: their fame wants no addition. What we\nrequest is, an investigation of the causes which have produced so\nrapid a decline from the flourishing state of genuine eloquence. I\ncall it rapid, since, according to Aper's own chronology, the period\nfrom the death of Cicero does not exceed one hundred and twenty years\n[b].\n\n\nXXV. I am willing, said Messala, to pursue the plan which you have\nrecommended. The question, whether the men who flourished above one\nhundred years ago, are to be accounted ancients, has been started by\nmy friend Aper, and, I believe, it is of the first impression. But it\nis a mere dispute about words. The discussion of it is of no moment,\nprovided it be granted, whether we call them ancients, or our\npredecessors, or give them any other appellation, that the eloquence\nof those times was superior to that of the present age. When Aper\ntells us, that different periods of time have produced new modes of\noratory, I see nothing to object; nor shall I deny, that in one and\nthe same period the style and manners have greatly varied. But this I\nassume, that among the orators of Greece, Demosthenes holds the first\nrank, and after him [a] \u00c6schynes, Hyperides, Lysias, and Lycurgus, in\nregular succession. That age, by common consent, is allowed to be the\nflourishing period of Attic eloquence.\n\nIn like manner, Cicero stands at the head of our Roman orators, while\nCalvus, Asinius, and C\u00e6sar, C\u00e6lius and Brutus, follow him at a\ndistance; all of them superior, not only to every former age, but to\nthe whole race that came after them. Nor is it material that they\ndiffer in the mode, since they all agree in the kind. Calvus is close\nand nervous; Asinius more open and harmonious; C\u00e6sar is distinguished\n[b] by the splendour of his diction; C\u00e6lius by a caustic severity; and\ngravity is the characteristic of Brutus. Cicero is more luxuriant in\namplification, and he has strength and vehemence. They all, however,\nagree in this: their eloquence is manly, sound, and vigorous. Examine\ntheir works, and you will see the energy of congenial minds, a\nfamily-likeness in their genius, however it may take a distinct colour\nfrom the specific qualities of the men. True, they detracted from each\nother's merit. In their letters, which are still extant, we find some\nstrokes of mutual hostility. But this littleness does not impeach\ntheir eloquence: their jealousy was the infirmity of human nature.\nCalvus, Asinius, and Cicero, might have their fits of animosity, and,\nno doubt, were liable to envy, malice, and other degrading passions:\nthey were great orators, but they were men.\n\nBrutus is the only one of the set, who may be thought superior to\npetty contentions. He spoke his mind with freedom, and, I believe,\nwithout a tincture of malice. He did not envy C\u00e6sar himself, and can\nit be imagined that he envied Cicero? As to Galba [c], L\u00e6lius, and\nothers of a remote period, against whom we have heard Aper's\ndeclamation, I need not undertake their defence, since I am willing to\nacknowledge, that in their style and manner we perceive those defects\nand blemishes which it is natural to expect, while art, as yet in its\ninfancy, has made no advances towards perfection.\n\n\nXXVI. After all, if the best form of eloquence must be abandoned, and\nsome, new-fangled style must grow into fashion, give me the rapidity\nof Gracchus [a], or the more solemn manner of Crassus [b], with all\ntheir imperfections, rather than the effeminate delicacy of [c]\nM\u00e6cenas, or the tinkling cymbal [d] of Gallio. The most homely dress\nis preferable to gawdy colours and meretricious ornaments. The style\nin vogue at present, is an innovation, against every thing just and\nnatural; it is not even manly. The luxuriant phrase, the inanity of\ntuneful periods, and the wanton levity of the whole composition, are\nfit for nothing but the histrionic art, as if they were written for\nthe stage. To the disgrace of the age (however astonishing it may\nappear), it is the boast, the pride, the glory of our present orators,\nthat their periods are musical enough either for the dancer's heel\n[e], or the warbler's throat. Hence it is, that by a frequent, but\npreposterous, metaphor, the orator is said to speak in melodious\ncadence, and the dancer to move with expression. In this view of\nthings, even [f] Cassius Severus (the only modern whom Aper has\nventured to name), if we compare him with the race that followed, may\nbe fairly pronounced a legitimate orator, though it must be\nacknowledged, that in what remains of his compositing, he is clumsy\nwithout strength, and violent without spirit. He was the first that\ndeviated from the great masters of his art. He despised all method and\nregular arrangement; indelicate in his choice of words, he paid no\nregard to decency; eager to attack, he left himself unguarded; he\nbrandished his weapons without skill or address; and, to speak\nplainly, he wrangled, but did not argue. And yet, notwithstanding\nthese defects, he was, as I have already said, superior to all that\ncame after him, whether we regard the variety of his learning, the\nurbanity of his wit, or the vigour of his mind. I expected that Aper,\nafter naming this orator, would have drawn up the rest of his forces\nin regular order. He has fallen, indeed, upon Asinius, C\u00e6lius, and\nCalvus; but where are his champions to enter the lists with them? I\nimagined that he had a phalanx in reserve, and that we should have\nseen them man by man giving battle to Cicero, C\u00e6sar, and the rest in\nsuccession. He has singled out some of the ancients, but has brought\nnone of his moderns into the field. He thought it enough to give them\na good character in their absence. In this, perhaps, he acted with\nprudence: he was afraid, if he selected a few, that the rest of the\ntribe would take offence. For among the rhetoricians of the present\nday, is there one to be found, who does not, in his own opinion, tower\nabove Cicero, though he has the modesty to yield to Gabinianus [g]?\n\n\nXXVII. What Aper has omitted, I intend to perform. I shall produce his\nmoderns by name, to the end that, by placing the example before our\neyes, we may be able, more distinctly, to trace the steps by which the\nvigour of ancient eloquence has fallen to decay. Maternus interrupted\nhim. I wish, he said, that you would come at once to the point: we\nclaim your promise. The superiority of the ancients is not in\nquestion. We want no proof of it. Upon that point my opinion is\ndecided. But the causes of our rapid decline from ancient excellence\nremain to be unfolded. We know that you have turned your thoughts to\nthis subject, and we expected from you a calm disquisition, had not\nthe violent attack which Aper made upon your favourite orators, roused\nyour spirit, and, perhaps, given you some offence. Far from it,\nreplied Messala; he has given me no offence; nor must you, my friends,\ntake umbrage, if at any time a word should fall from me, not quite\nagreeable to your way of thinking. We are engaged in a free enquiry,\nand you know, that, in this kind of debate, the established law allows\nevery man to speak his mind without reserve. That is the law, replied\nMaternus; you may proceed in perfect security. When you speak of the\nancients, speak of them with ancient freedom, which, I fear, is at a\nlower ebb than even the genius of those eminent men.\n\n\nXXVIII. Messala resumed his discourse: The causes of the decay of\neloquence are by no means difficult to be traced. They are, I believe,\nwell known to you, Maternus, and also to Secundus, not excepting my\nfriend Aper. It seems, however, that I am now, at your request, to\nunravel the business. But there is no mystery in it. We know that\neloquence, with the rest of the polite arts, has lost its former\nlustre: and yet, it is not a dearth of men, or a decay of talents,\nthat has produced this fatal effect. The true causes are, the\ndissipation of our young men, the inattention of parents, the\nignorance of those who pretend to give instruction, and the total\nneglect of ancient discipline. The mischief began at Rome, it has\nover-run all Italy, and is now, with rapid strides, spreading through\nthe provinces. The effects, however, are more visible at home, and\ntherefore I shall confine myself to the reigning vices of the capital;\nvices that wither every virtue in the bud, and continue their baleful\ninfluence through every season of life.\n\nBut before I enter on the subject, it will not be useless to look back\nto the system of education that prevailed in former times, and to the\nstrict discipline of our ancestors, in a point of so much moment as\nthe formation of youth. In the times to which I now refer, the son of\nevery family was the legitimate offspring of a virtuous mother. The\ninfant, as soon as born, was not consigned to the mean dwelling of a\nhireling nurse [a], but was reared and cherished in the bosom of a\ntender parent. To regulate all household affairs, and attend to her\ninfant race, was, at that time, the glory of the female character. A\nmatron, related to the family, and distinguished by the purity of her\nlife, was chosen to watch the progress of the tender mind. In her\npresence not one indecent word was uttered; nothing was done against\npropriety and good manners. The hours of study and serious employment\nwere settled by her direction; and not only so, but even the\ndiversions of the children were conducted with modest reserve and\nsanctity of manners. Thus it was that Cornelia [b], the mother of the\nGracchi, superintended the education of her illustrious issue. It was\nthus that Aurelia [c] trained up Julius C\u00e6sar; and thus Atia [d]\nformed the mind of Augustus. The consequence of this regular\ndiscipline was, that the young mind grew up in innocence, unstained by\nvice, unwarped by irregular passions, and, under that culture,\nreceived the seeds of science. Whatever was the peculiar bias, whether\nto the military art, the study of the laws, or the profession of\neloquence, that engrossed the whole attention, and the youth, thus\ndirected, embraced the entire compass of one favourite science.\n\n\nXXIX. In the present age, what is our practice? The infant is\ncommitted to a Greek chambermaid, and a slave or two, chosen for the\npurpose, generally the worst of the whole household train; all utter\nstrangers to every liberal notion. In that worshipful society [a] the\nyouth grows up, imbibing folly and vulgar error. Throughout the house,\nnot one servant cares what he says or does [b] in the presence of his\nyoung master: and indeed how should it be otherwise? The parents\nthemselves are the first to give their children the worst examples of\nvice and luxury. The stripling consequently loses all sense of shame,\nand soon forgets the respect he owes to others as well as to himself.\nA passion for horses, players, and gladiators [c], seems to be the\nepidemic folly of the times. The child receives it in his mother's\nwomb; he brings it with him into the world; and in a mind so\npossessed, what room for science, or any generous purpose?\n\nIn our houses, at our tables, sports and interludes are the topics of\nconversation. Enter the places of academical lectures, and who talks\nof any other subject? The preceptors themselves have caught the\ncontagion. Nor can this be wondered at. To establish a strict and\nregular discipline, and to succeed by giving proofs of their genius,\nis not the plan of our modern rhetoricians. They pay their court to\nthe great, and, by servile adulation, increase the number of their\npupils. Need I mention the manner of conveying the first elements of\nschool learning? No care is taken to give the student a taste for the\nbest authors [d]; the page of history lies neglected; the study of men\nand manners is no part of their system; and every branch of useful\nknowledge is left uncultivated. A preceptor is called in, and\neducation is then thought to be in a fair way. But I shall have\noccasion hereafter to speak more fully of that class of men, called\nrhetoricians. It will then be seen, at what period that profession\nfirst made its appearance at Rome, and what reception it met with from\nour ancestors.\n\n\nXXX. Before I proceed, let us advert for a moment to the plan of\nancient discipline. The unwearied diligence of the ancient orators,\ntheir habits of meditation, and their daily exercise in the whole\ncircle of arts and sciences, are amply displayed in the books which\nthey have transmitted to us. The treatise of Cicero, entitled Brutus\n[a], is in all our hands. In that work, after commemorating the\norators of a former day, he closes the account with the particulars of\nhis own progress in science, and the method he took in educating\nhimself to the profession of oratory. He studied the civil law under\n[b] Mucius Sc\u00e6vola; he was instructed in the various systems of\nphilosophy, by Philo [c] of the academic school, and by Diodorus the\nstoic; and though Rome, at that time, abounded with the best\nprofessors, he made a voyage to Greece [d], and thence to Asia, in\norder to enrich his mind with every branch of learning. Hence that\nstore of knowledge which appears in all his writings. Geometry, music,\ngrammar, and every useful art, were familiar to him. He embraced the\nwhole science of logic [e] and ethics. He studied the operations of\nnature. His diligence of enquiry opened to him the long chain of\ncauses and effects, and, in short, the whole system of physiology was\nhis own. From a mind thus replenished, it is no wonder, my good\nfriends, that we see in the compositions of that extraordinary man\nthat affluence of ideas, and that prodigious flow of eloquence. In\nfact, it is not with oratory as with the other arts, which are\nconfined to certain objects, and circumscribed within their own\npeculiar limits. He alone deserves the name of an orator, who can\nspeak in a copious style, with ease or dignity, as the subject\nrequires; who can find language to decorate his argument; who through\nthe passions can command the understanding; and, while he serves\nmankind, knows how to delight the judgement and the imagination of his\naudience.\n\n\nXXXI. Such was, in ancient times, the idea of an orator. To form that\nillustrious character, it was not thought necessary to declaim in the\nschools of rhetoricians [a], or to make a vain parade in fictitious\ncontroversies, which were not only void of all reality, but even of a\nshadow of probability. Our ancestors pursued a different plan: they\nstored their minds with just ideas of moral good and evil; with the\nrules of right and wrong, and the fair and foul in human transactions.\nThese, on every controverted point, are the orator's province. In\ncourts of law, just and unjust undergo his discussion; in political\ndebate, between what is expedient and honourable, it is his to draw\nthe line; and those questions are so blended in their nature, that\nthey enter into every cause. On such important topics, who can hope to\nbring variety of matter, and to dignify that matter with style and\nsentiment, if he has not, beforehand, enlarged his mind with the\nknowledge of human nature? with the laws of moral obligation? the\ndeformity of vice, the beauty of virtue, and other points which do not\nimmediately belong to the theory of ethics?\n\nThe orator, who has enriched his mind with these materials, may be\ntruly said to have acquired the powers of persuasion. He who knows the\nnature of indignation, will be able to kindle or allay that passion in\nthe breast of the judge; and the advocate who has considered the\neffect of compassion, and from what secret springs it flows, will best\nknow how to soften the mind, and melt it into tenderness. It is by\nthese secrets of his art that the orator gains his influence. Whether\nhe has to do with the prejudiced, the angry, the envious, the\nmelancholy, or the timid, he can bridle their various passions, and\nhold the reins in his own hand. According to the disposition of his\naudience, he will know when to check the workings of the heart, and\nwhen to raise them to their full tumult of emotion.\n\nSome critics are chiefly pleased with that close mode of oratory,\nwhich in a laconic manner states the facts, and forms an immediate\nconclusion: in that case, it is obvious how necessary it is to be a\ncomplete master of the rules of logic. Others delight in a more open,\nfree, and copious style, where the arguments are drawn from topics of\ngeneral knowledge; for this purpose, the peripatetic school [b] will\nsupply the orator with ample materials. The academic philosopher [c]\nwill inspire him with warmth and energy; Plato will give the sublime,\nand Xenophon that equal flow which charms us in that amiable writer.\nThe rhetorical figure, which is called exclamation, so frequent with\nEpicurus [d] and Metrodorus, will add to a discourse those sudden\nbreaks of passion, which give motion, strength, and vehemence.\n\nIt is not for the stoic school, nor for their imaginary wise man, that\nI am laying down rules. I am forming an orator, whose business it is,\nnot to adhere to one sect, but to go the round of all the arts and\nsciences. Accordingly we find, that the great master of ancient\neloquence laid their foundation in a thorough study of the civil law,\nand to that fund they added grammar, music, and geometry. The fact is,\nin most of the causes that occur, perhaps in every cause, a due\nknowledge of the whole system of jurisprudence is an indispensable\nrequisite. There are likewise many subjects of litigation, in which an\nacquaintance with other sciences is of the highest use.\n\n\nXXXII. Am I to be told, that to gain some slight information on\nparticular subjects, as occasion may require, will sufficiently answer\nthe purposes of an orator? In answer to this, let it be observed, that\nthe application of what we draw from our own fund, is very different\nfrom the use we make of what we borrow. Whether we speak from digested\nknowledge, or the mere suggestion of others, the effect is soon\nperceived. Add to this, that conflux of ideas with which the different\nsciences enrich the mind, gives an air of dignity to whatever we say,\neven in cases where that depth of knowledge is not required. Science\nadorns the speaker at all times, and, where it is least expected,\nconfers a grace that charms every hearer; the man of erudition feels\nit, and the unlettered part of the audience acknowledge the effect\nwithout knowing the cause. A murmur of applause ensues; the speaker is\nallowed to have laid in a store of knowledge; he possesses all the\npowers of persuasion, and then is called an orator indeed.\n\nI take the liberty to add, if we aspire to that honourable\nappellation, that there is no way but that which I have chalked out.\nNo man was ever yet a complete orator, and, I affirm, never can be,\nunless, like the soldier marching to the field of battle, he enters\nthe forum armed at all points with the sciences and the liberal arts.\nIs that the case in these our modern times? The style which we hear\nevery day, abounds with colloquial barbarisms, and vulgar phraseology:\nno knowledge of the laws is heard; our municipal policy is wholly\nneglected, and even the decrees of the senate are treated with\ncontempt and derision. Moral philosophy is discarded, and the maxims\nof ancient wisdom are unworthy of their notice. In this manner,\neloquence is dethroned; she is banished from her rightful dominions,\nand obliged to dwell in the cold regions of antithesis, forced\nconceit, and pointed sentences. The consequence is, that she, who was\nonce the sovereign mistress of the sciences, and led them as handmaids\nin her train, is now deprived of her attendants, reduced,\nimpoverished, and, stripped of her usual honours (I might say of her\ngenius), compelled to exercise a mere plebeian art.\n\nAnd now, my friends, I think I have laid open the efficient cause of\nthe decline of eloquence. Need I call witnesses to support my opinion?\nI name Demosthenes among the Greeks. He, we are assured, constantly\nattended [a] the lectures of Plato. I name Cicero among the Romans: he\ntells us (I believe I can repeat his words), that if he attained any\ndegree of excellence, he owed it, not so much to the precepts of\nrhetoricians, as to his meditations in the walks of the academic\nschool. I am aware that other causes of our present degeneracy may be\nadded; but that task I leave to my friends, since I now may flatter\nmyself that I have performed my promise. In doing it, I fear, that, as\noften happens to me, I have incurred the danger of giving offence.\nWere a certain class of men to hear the principles which I have\nadvanced in favour of legal knowledge and sound philosophy, I should\nexpect to be told that I have been all the time commending my own\nvisionary schemes.\n\n\nXXXIII. You will excuse me, replied Maternus, if I take the liberty to\nsay that you have by no means finished your part of our enquiry. You\nseem to have spread your canvas, and to have touched the outlines of\nyour plan; but there are other parts that still require the colouring\nof so masterly a hand. The stores of knowledge, with which the\nancients enlarged their minds, you have fairly explained, and, in\ncontrast to that pleasing picture, you have given us a true draught of\nmodern ignorance. But we now wish to know, what were the exercises,\nand what the discipline, by which the youth of former times prepared\nthemselves for the honours of their profession. It will not, I\nbelieve, be contended, that theory, and systems of art, are of\nthemselves sufficient to form a genuine orator. It is by practice, and\nby constant exertion, that the faculty of speech improves, till the\ngenius of the man expands, and flourishes in its full vigour. This, I\nthink, you will not deny, and my two friends, if I may judge by their\nlooks, seem to give their assent. Aper and Secundus agreed without\nhesitation.\n\nMessala proceeded as follows: Having, as I conceive, shewn the\nseed-plots of ancient eloquence, and the fountains of science, from\nwhich they drew such copious streams; it remains now to give some idea\nof the labour, the assiduity, and the exercises, by which they trained\nthemselves to their profession. I need not observe, that in the\npursuit of science, method and constant exercise are indispensable:\nfor who can hope, without regular attention, to master abstract\nschemes of philosophy, and embrace the whole compass of the sciences?\nKnowledge must be grafted in the mind by frequent meditation [a]; to\nthat must be added the faculty of conveying our ideas; and, to make\nsure of our impression, we must be able to adorn our thoughts with the\ncolours of true eloquence. Hence it is evident that the same arts, by\nwhich the mind lays in its stock of knowledge, must be still pursued,\nin order to attain a clear and graceful manner of conveying that\nknowledge to others. This may be thought refined and too abstruse. If,\nhowever, we are still to be told that science and elocution are things\nin themselves distinct and unrelated; this, at least, may be assumed,\nthat he, who, with a fund of previous knowledge, undertakes the\nprovince of oratory, will bring with him a mind well seasoned, and\nduly prepared for the study and exercise of real eloquence.\n\n\nXXXIV. The practice of our ancestors was agreeable to this theory. The\nyouth, who was intended for public declamation, went forth, under the\ncare of his father, or some near relation, with all the advantages of\nhome-discipline; his mind was expanded by the fine arts, and\nimpregnated with science. He was conducted to the most eminent orator\nof the time. Under that illustrious patronage he visited the forum; he\nattended his patron upon all occasions; he listened with attention to\nhis pleadings in the tribunals of justice, and his public harangues\nbefore the people; he heard him in the warmth of argument; he noted\nhis sudden replies, and thus, in the field of battle, if I may so\nexpress myself, he learned the first rudiments of rhetorical warfare.\nThe advantages of this method are obvious: the young candidate gained\ncourage, and improved his judgement; he studied in open day, amidst\nthe heat of the conflict, where nothing weak or idle could be said\nwith impunity; where every thing absurd was instantly rebuked by the\njudge, exposed to ridicule by the adversary, and condemned by the\nwhole bar.\n\nIn this manner the student was initiated in the rules of sound and\nmanly eloquence; and, though it be true, that he placed himself under\nthe auspices of one orator only, he heard the rest in their turn, and\nin that diversity of tastes which always prevails in mixed assemblies,\nhe was enabled to distinguish what was excellent or defective in the\nkind. The orator in actual business was the best preceptor: the\ninstructions which he gave, were living eloquence, the substance, and\nnot the shadow. He was himself a real combatant, engaged with a\nzealous antagonist, both in earnest, and not like gladiators, in a\nmock contest, fighting for prizes. It was a struggle for victory,\nbefore an audience always changing, yet always full; where the speaker\nhad his enemies as well as his admirers; and between both, what was\nbrilliant met with applause; what was defective, was sure to be\ncondemned. In this clash of opinions, the genuine orator flourished,\nand acquired that lasting fame, which, we all know, does not depend on\nthe voice of friends only, but must rebound from the benches filled\nwith your enemies. Extorted applause is the best suffrage.\n\nIn that school, the youth of expectation, such as I have delineated,\nwas reared and educated by the most eminent genius of the times. In\nthe forum, he was enlightened by the experience of others; he was\ninstructed in the knowledge of the laws, accustomed to the eye of the\njudges, habituated to the looks of a numerous audience, and acquainted\nwith the popular taste. After this preparation, he was called forth to\nconduct a prosecution, or to take upon himself the whole weight of the\ndefence. The fruit of his application was then seen at once. He was\nequal, in his first outset, to the most arduous business. Thus it was\nthat Crassus, at the age of nineteen [a], stood forth the accuser of\nPapirius Carbo: thus Julius C\u00e6sar, at one and twenty, arraigned\nDolabella; Asinius Pollio, about the same age, attacked Caius Cato;\nand Calvus, but a little older, flamed out against Vatinius. Their\nseveral speeches are still extant, and we all read them with\nadmiration.\n\n\nXXXV. In opposition to this system of education, what is our modern\npractice? Our young men are led [a] to academical prolusions in the\nschool of vain professors, who call themselves rhetoricians; a race of\nimpostors, who made their first appearance at Rome, not long before\nthe days of Cicero. That they were unwelcome visitors, is evident from\nthe circumstance of their being silenced by the two censors [b],\nCrassus and Domitius. They were ordered, says Cicero, to shut up their\nschool of impudence. Those scenes, however, are open at present, and\nthere our young students listen to mountebank oratory. I am at a loss\nhow to determine which is most fatal to all true genius, the place\nitself, the company that frequent it, or the plan of study universally\nadopted. Can the place impress the mind with awe and respect, where\nnone are ever seen but the raw, the unskilful, and the ignorant? In\nsuch an assembly what advantage can arise? Boys harangue before boys,\nand young men exhibit before their fellows. The speaker is pleased\nwith his declamation, and the hearer with his judgement. The very\nsubjects on which they display their talents, tend to no useful\npurpose. They are of two sorts, persuasive or controversial. The\nfirst, supposed to be of the lighter kind, are usually assigned to the\nyoungest scholars: the last are reserved for students of longer\npractice and riper judgement. But, gracious powers! what are the\ncompositions produced on these occasions?\n\nThe subject is remote from truth, and even probability, unlike any\nthing that ever happened in human life: and no wonder if the\nsuperstructure perfectly agrees with the foundation. It is to these\nscenic exercises that we owe a number of frivolous topics, such as the\nreward due to the slayer of a tyrant; the election to be made by [c]\nviolated virgins; the rites and ceremonies proper to be used during a\nraging pestilence; the loose behaviour of married women; with other\nfictitious subjects, hackneyed in the schools, and seldom or never\nheard of in our courts of justice. These imaginary questions are\ntreated with gaudy flourishes, and all the tumor of unnatural\nlanguage. But after all this mighty parade, call these striplings from\ntheir schools of rhetoric, into the presence of the judges, and to the\nreal business of the bar [d]:\n\n\n1. What figure will they make before that solemn judicature? Trained\nup in chimerical exercises, strangers to the municipal laws,\nunacquainted with the principles of natural justice and the rights of\nnations, they will bring with them that false taste which they have\nbeen for years acquiring, but nothing worthy of the public ear,\nnothing useful to their clients. They have succeeded in nothing but\nthe art of making themselves ridiculous. The peculiar quality of the\nteacher [a], whatever it be, is sure to transfuse itself into the\nperformance of the pupil. Is the master haughty, fierce, and arrogant;\nthe scholar swells with confidence; his eye threatens prodigious\nthings, and his harangue is an ostentatious display of the\ncommon-places of school oratory, dressed up with dazzling splendour,\nand thundered forth with emphasis. On the other hand, does the master\nvalue himself for the delicacy of his taste, for the foppery of\nglittering conceits and tinsel ornament; the youth who has been\neducated under him, sets out with the same artificial prettiness, the\nsame foppery of style and manner. A simper plays on his countenance;\nhis elocution is soft and delicate; his action pathetic; his sentences\nentangled in a maze of sweet perplexity; he plays off the whole of his\ntheatrical skill, and hopes to elevate and surprise.\n\n\n2. This love of finery, this ambition to shine and glitter, has\ndestroyed all true eloquence. Oratory is not the child of hireling\nteachers; it springs from another source, from a love of liberty, from\na mind replete with moral science, and a thorough knowledge of the\nlaws; from a due respect for the best examples, from profound\nmeditation [a], and a style formed by constant practice. While these\nwere thought essential requisites, eloquence flourished. But the true\nbeauties of language fell into disuse, and oratory went to ruin. The\nspirit evaporated; I fear, to revive no more. I wish I may prove a\nfalse prophet, but we know the progress of art in every age and\ncountry. Rude at first, it rises from low beginnings, and goes on\nimproving, till it reaches the highest perfection in the kind. But at\nthat point it is never stationary: it soon declines, and from the\ncorruption of what is good, it is not in the nature of man, nor in the\npower of human faculties, to rise again to the same degree of\nexcellence.\n\n\n3. Messala closed with a degree of vehemence, and then turning to\nMaternus and Secundus [a], It is yours, he said, to pursue this train\nof argument; or if any cause of the decay of eloquence lies still\ndeeper, you will oblige us by bringing it to light. Maternus, I\npresume, will find no difficulty: a poetic genius holds commerce with\nthe gods, and to him nothing will remain a secret. As for Secundus, he\nhas been long a shining ornament of the forum, and by his own\nexperience knows how to distinguish genuine eloquence from the corrupt\nand vicious. Maternus heard this sally of his friend's good humour\nwith a smile. The task, he said, which you have imposed upon us, we\nwill endeavour to execute. But though I am the interpreter of the\ngods, I must notwithstanding request that Secundus may take the lead.\nHe is master of the subject, and, in questions of this kind,\nexperience is better than inspiration.\n\n\n4. Secundus [a] complied with his friend's request. I yield, he said,\nthe more willingly, as I shall hazard no new opinion, but rather\nconfirm what has been urged by Messala. It is certain, that, as\npainters are formed by painters, and poets by the example of poets, so\nthe young orator must learn his art from orators only. In the schools\nof rhetoricians [b], who think themselves the fountain-head of\neloquence, every thing is false and vitiated. The true principles of\nthe persuasive art are never known to the professor, or if at any time\nthere may be found a preceptor of superior genius, can it be expected\nthat he shall be able to transfuse into the mind of his pupil all his\nown conceptions, pure, unmixed, and free from error? The sensibility\nof the master, since we have allowed him genius, will be an\nimpediment: the uniformity of the same dull tedious round will give\nhim disgust, and the student will turn from it with aversion. And yet\nI am inclined to think, that the decay of eloquence would not have\nbeen so rapid, if other causes, more fatal than the corruption of the\nschools, had not co-operated. When the worst models became the objects\nof imitation, and not only the young men of the age, but even the\nwhole body of the people, admired the new way of speaking, eloquence\nfell at once into that state of degeneracy, from which nothing can\nrecover it. We, who came afterwards, found ourselves in a hopeless\nsituation: we were driven to wretched expedients, to forced conceits,\nand the glitter of frivolous sentences; we were obliged to hunt after\nwit, when we could be no longer eloquent. By what pernicious examples\nthis was accomplished, has been explained by our friend Messala.\n\n\n5. We are none of us strangers to those unhappy times, when Rome,\ngrown weary of her vast renown in arms, began to think of striking\ninto new paths of fame, no longer willing to depend on the glory of\nour ancestors. The whole power of the state was centred in a single\nruler, and by the policy of the prince, men were taught to think no\nmore of ancient honour. Invention was on the stretch for novelty, and\nall looked for something better than perfection; something rare,\nfar-fetched, and exquisite. New modes of pleasure were devised. In\nthat period of luxury and dissipation, when the rage for new\ninventions was grown epidemic, Seneca arose. His talents were of a\npeculiar sort, acute, refined and polished; but polished to a degree\nthat made him prefer affectation and wit to truth and nature. The\npredominance of his genius was great, and, by consequence, he gave the\nmortal stab to all true eloquence [a]. When I say this, let me not be\nsuspected of that low malignity which would tarnish the fame of a\ngreat character. I admire the man, and the philosopher. The undaunted\nfirmness with which he braved the tyrant's frown, will do immortal\nhonour to his memory. But the fact is (and why should I disguise it?),\nthe virtues of the writer have undone his country.\n\n\n6. To bring about this unhappy revolution, no man was so eminently\nqualified [a]. His understanding was large and comprehensive; his\ngenius rich and powerful; his way of thinking ingenious, elegant, and\neven charming. His researches in moral philosophy excited the\nadmiration of all; and moral philosophy is never so highly praised, as\nwhen the manners are in a state of degeneracy. Seneca knew the taste\nof the times. He had the art to gratify the public ear. His style is\nneat, yet animated; concise, yet clear; familiar, yet seldom\ninelegant. Free from redundancy, his periods are often abrupt, but\nthey surprise by their vivacity. He shines in pointed sentences; and\nthat unceasing persecution of vice, which is kept up with uncommon\nardour, spreads a lustre over all his writings. His brilliant style\ncharmed by its novelty. Every page sparkles with wit, with gay\nallusions, and sentiments of virtue. No wonder that the graceful ease,\nand sometimes the dignity of his expression, made their way into the\nforum. What pleased universally, soon found a number of imitators. Add\nto this the advantages of rank and honours. He mixed in the splendour,\nand perhaps in the vices, of the court. The resentment of Caligula,\nand the acts of oppression which soon after followed, served only to\nadorn his name. To crown all, Nero was his pupil, and his murderer.\nHence the character and genius of the man rose to the highest\neminence. What was admired, was imitated, and true oratory was heard\nno more. The love of novelty prevailed, and for the dignified\nsimplicity of ancient eloquence no taste remained. The art itself, and\nall its necessary discipline, became ridiculous. In that black period,\nwhen vice triumphed at large, and virtue had every thing to fear, the\ntemper of the times was propitious to the corruptors of taste and\nliberal science. The dignity of composition was no longer of use. It\nhad no power to stop the torrent of vice which deluged the city of\nRome, and virtue found it a feeble protection. In such a conjuncture\nit was not safe to speak the sentiments of the heart. To be obscure,\nabrupt, and dark, was the best expedient. Then it was that the\naffected sententious brevity came into vogue. To speak concisely, and\nwith an air of precipitation, was the general practice. To work the\nruin of a person accused, a single sentence, or a splendid phrase, was\nsufficient. Men defended themselves in a short brilliant expression;\nand if that did not protect them, they died with a lively apophthegm,\nand their last words were wit. This was the fashion introduced by\nSeneca. The peculiar, but agreeable vices of his style, wrought the\ndownfall of eloquence. The solid was exchanged for the brilliant, and\nthey, who ceased to be orators, studied to be ingenious.\n\n\n7. Of late, indeed, we have seen the dawn of better times. In the\ncourse of the last six years Vespasian has revived our hopes [a]. The\nfriend of regular manners, and the encourager of ancient virtue, by\nwhich Rome was raised to the highest pinnacle of glory, he has\nrestored the public peace, and with it the blessings of liberty. Under\nhis propitious influence, the arts and sciences begin once more to\nflourish, and genius has been honoured with his munificence. The\nexample of his sons [b] has helped to kindle a spirit of emulation. We\nbeheld, with pleasure, the two princes adding to the dignity of their\nrank, and their fame in arms, all the grace and elegance of polite\nliterature. But it is fatally true, that when the public taste is once\ncorrupted, the mind which has been warped, seldom recovers its former\ntone. This difficulty was rendered still more insurmountable by the\nlicentious spirit of our young men, and the popular applause, that\nencouraged the false taste of the times. I need not, in this company,\ncall to mind the unbridled presumption, with which, as soon as genuine\neloquence expired, the young men of the age took possession of the\nforum. Of modest worth and ancient manners nothing remained. We know\nthat in former times the youthful candidate was introduced in the\nforum by a person of consular rank [c], and by him set forward in his\nroad to fame. That laudable custom being at an end, all fences were\nthrown down: no sense of shame remained, no respect for the tribunals\nof justice. The aspiring genius wanted no patronage; he scorned the\nusual forms of a regular introduction; and, with full confidence in\nhis own powers, he obtruded himself on the court. Neither the\nsolemnity of the place, nor the sanctity of laws, nor the importance\nof the oratorical character, could restrain the impetuosity of young\nambition. Unconscious of the importance of the undertaking, and less\nsensible of his own incapacity, the bold adventurer rushed at once\ninto the most arduous business. Arrogance supplied the place of\ntalents.\n\n\n8. To oppose the torrent, that bore down every thing, the danger of\nlosing all fair and honest fame was the only circumstance that could\nafford a ray of hope. But even that slender fence was soon removed by\nthe arts of [a] Largius Licinius. He was the first that opened a new\nroad to ambition. He intrigued for fame, and filled the benches with\nan audience suborned to applaud his declamations. He had his circle\nround him, and shouts of approbation followed. It was upon that\noccasion that Domitius Afer [b] emphatically said, Eloquence is now at\nthe last gasp. It had, indeed, at that time shewn manifest symptoms of\ndecay, but its total ruin may be dated from the introduction of a\nmercenary band [c] to flatter and applaud. If we except a chosen few,\nwhose superior genius has not as yet been seduced from truth and\nnature, the rest are followed by their partisans, like actors on the\nstage, subsisting altogether on the bought suffrages of mean and\nprostitute hirelings. Nor is this sordid traffic carried on with\nsecrecy: we see the bargain made in the face of the court; the bribe\nis distributed with as little ceremony as if they were in a private\nparty at the orator's own house. Having sold their voices, this venal\ncrew rush forward from one tribunal to another, the distributors of\nfame, and the sole judges of literary merit. The practice is, no\ndoubt, disgraceful. To brand it with infamy, two new terms have been\ninvented [d], one in the Greek language, importing the venders of\npraise, and the other in the Latin idiom, signifying the parasites who\nsell their applause for a supper. But sarcastic expressions have not\nbeen able to cure the mischief: the applauders by profession have\ntaken courage, and the name, which was intended as a stroke of\nridicule, is now become an honourable appellation.\n\n\n9. This infamous practice rages at present with increasing violence.\nThe party no longer consists of freeborn citizens; our very slaves are\nhired. Even before they arrive at full age, we see them distributing\nthe rewards of eloquence. Without attending to what is said, and\nwithout sense enough to understand, they are sure to crowd the courts\nof justice, whenever a raw young man, stung with the love of fame, but\nwithout talents to deserve it, obtrudes himself in the character of an\nadvocate. The hall resounds with acclamations, or rather with a kind\nof bellowing; for I know not by what term to express that savage\nuproar, which would disgrace a theatre.\n\nUpon the whole, when I consider these infamous practices, which have\nbrought so much dishonour upon a liberal profession, I am far from\nwondering that you, Maternus, judged it time to sound your retreat.\nWhen you could no longer attend with honour, you did well, my friend,\nto devote yourself entirely to the muses. And now, since you are to\nclose the debate, permit me to request, that, besides unfolding the\ncauses of corrupt eloquence, you will fairly tell us, whether you\nentertain any hopes of better times, and, if you do, by what means a\nreformation may be accomplished.\n\n\n10. It is true [a], said Maternus, that seeing the forum deluged by an\ninundation of vices, I was glad, as my friend expressed it, to sound\nmy retreat. I saw corruption rushing on with hasty strides, too\nshameful to be defended, and too powerful to be resisted. And yet,\nthough urged by all those motives, I should hardly have renounced the\nbusiness of the bar, if the bias of my nature had not inclined me to\nother studies. I balanced, however, for some time. It was, at first,\nmy fixed resolution to stand to the last a poor remnant of that\nintegrity and manly eloquence, which still lingered at the bar, and\nshewed some signs of life. It was my intention to emulate, not,\nindeed, with equal powers, but certainly with equal firmness, the\nbright models of ancient times, and, in that course of practice, to\ndefend the fortunes, the dignity, and the innocence of my\nfellow-citizens. But the strong impulse of inclination was not to be\nresisted. I laid down my arms, and deserted to the safe and tranquil\ncamp of the muses. But though a deserter, I have not quite forgot the\nservice in which I was enlisted. I honour the professors of real\neloquence, and that sentiment, I hope, will be always warm in my\nheart.\n\n\n11. In my solitary walks, and moments of meditation, it often happens,\nthat I fall into a train of thinking on the flourishing state of\nancient eloquence, and the abject condition to which it is reduced in\nmodern times. The result of my reflections I shall venture to unfold,\nnot with a spirit of controversy, nor yet dogmatically to enforce my\nown opinion. I may differ in some points, but from a collision of\nsentiments it is possible that some new light may be struck out. My\nfriend Aper will, therefore, excuse me, if I do not, with him, prefer\nthe false glitter of the moderns to the solid vigour of ancient\ngenius. At the same time, it is not my intention to disparage his\nfriends. Messala too, whom you, Secundus, have closely followed, will\nforgive me, if I do not, in every thing, coincide with his opinion.\nThe vices of the forum, which you have both, as becomes men of\nintegrity, attacked with vehemence, will not have me for their\napologist. But still I may be allowed to ask, have not you been too\nmuch exasperated against the rhetoricians?\n\nI will not say in their favour, that I think them equal to the task of\nreviving the honours of eloquence; but I have known among them, men of\nunblemished morals, of regular discipline, great erudition, and\ntalents every way fit to form the minds of youth to a just taste for\nscience and the persuasive arts. In this number one in particular [a]\nhas lately shone forth with superior lustre. From his abilities, all\nthat is in the power of man may fairly be expected. A genius like his\nwould have been the ornament of better times. Posterity will admire\nand honour him. And yet I would not have Secundus amuse himself with\nill-grounded hopes: neither the learning of that most excellent man,\nnor the industry of such as may follow him, will be able to promote\nthe interests of Eloquence, or to establish her former glory. It is a\nlost cause. Before the vices, which have been so ably described, had\nspread a general infection, all true oratory was at an end. The\nrevolutions in our government, and the violence of the times, began\nthe mischief, and, in the end, gave the fatal blow.\n\n\n12. Nor are we to wonder at this event. In the course of human affairs\nthere is no stability, nothing secure or permanent. It is with our\nminds as with our bodies: the latter, as soon as they have attained\ntheir full growth, and seem to flourish in the vigour of health,\nbegin, from that moment, to feel the gradual approaches of decay. Our\nintellectual powers proceed in the same manner; they gain strength by\ndegrees, they arrive at maturity, and, when they can no longer\nimprove, they languish, droop, and fade away. This is the law of\nnature, to which every age, and every nation, of which we have any\nhistorical records, have been obliged to submit. There is besides\nanother general law, hard perhaps, but wonderfully ordained, and it is\nthis: nature, whose operations are always simple and uniform, never\nsuffers in any age or country, more than one great example of\nperfection in the kind [a]. This was the case in Greece, that prolific\nparent of genius and of science. She had but one Homer, one Plato, one\nDemosthenes. The same has happened at Rome: Virgil stands at the head\nof his art, and Cicero is still unrivalled. During a space of seven\nhundred years our ancestors were struggling to reach the summit of\nperfection: Cicero at length arose; he thundered forth his immortal\nenergy, and nature was satisfied with the wonder she had made. The\nforce of genius could go no further. A new road to fame was to be\nfound. We aimed at wit, and gay conceit, and glittering sentences. The\nchange, indeed, was great; but it naturally followed the new form of\ngovernment. Genius died with public liberty.\n\n\n13. We find that the discourse of men always conforms to the temper of\nthe times. Among savage nations [a] language is never copious. A few\nwords serve the purpose of barbarians, and those are always uncouth\nand harsh, without the artifice of connection; short, abrupt, and\nnervous. In a state of polished society, where a single ruler sways\nthe sceptre, the powers of the mind take a softer tone, and language\ngrows more refined. But affectation follows, and precision gives way\nto delicacy. The just and natural expression is no longer the fashion.\nLiving in ease and luxury, men look for elegance, and hope by novelty\nto give a grace to adulation. In other nations, where the first\nprinciples of the civil union are maintained in vigour; where the\npeople live under the government of laws, and not the will of man;\nwhere the spirit of liberty pervades all ranks and orders of the\nstate; where every individual holds himself bound, at the hazard of\nhis life, to defend the constitution framed by his ancestors; where,\nwithout being guilty of an impious crime, no man dares to violate the\nrights of the whole community; in such a state, the national eloquence\nwill be prompt, bold, and animated. Should internal dissensions shake\nthe public peace, or foreign enemies threaten to invade the land,\nEloquence comes forth arrayed in terror; she wields her thunder, and\ncommands all hearts. It is true, that upon those occasions men of\nambition endeavour, for their own purposes, to spread the flame of\nsedition; while the good and virtuous combine their force to quell the\nturbulent, and repel the menaces of a foreign enemy. Liberty gains new\nstrength by the conflict, and the true patriot has the glory of\nserving his country, distinguished by his valour in the field, and in\ndebate no less terrible by his eloquence.\n\n\n14. Hence it is that in free governments we see a constellation of\norators. Hence Demosthenes displayed the powers of his amazing genius,\nand acquired immortal honour. He saw a quick and lively people,\ndissolved in luxury, open to the seductions of wealth, and ready to\nsubmit to a master; he saw a great and warlike monarch threatening\ndestruction to the liberties of his country; he saw that prince at the\nhead of powerful armies, renowned for victory, possessed of an opulent\ntreasury, formidable in battle, and, by his secret arts, still more so\nin the cabinet; he saw that king, inflamed by ambition and the lust of\ndominion, determined to destroy the liberties of Greece. It was that\nalarming crisis that called forth the powers of Demosthenes. Armed\nwith eloquence, and with eloquence only, he stood as a bulwark against\na combination of enemies foreign and domestic. He roused his\ncountrymen from their lethargy: he kindled the holy flame of liberty;\nhe counteracted the machinations of Philip, detected his clandestine\nfrauds, and fired the men of Athens with indignation. To effect these\ngenerous purposes, and defeat the policy of a subtle enemy, what\npowers of mind were necessary! how vast, how copious, how sublime! He\nthundered and lightened in his discourse; he faced every danger with\nundaunted resolution. Difficulties served only to inspire him with new\nardour. The love of his country glowed in his heart; liberty roused\nall his powers, and Fame held forth her immortal wreath to reward his\nlabours. These were the fine incentives that roused his genius, and no\nwonder that his mind expanded with vast conceptions. He thought for\nhis country, and, by consequence, every sentiment was sublime; every\nexpression was grand and magnificent.\n\n\nXXXVI. The true spirit of genuine eloquence [a], like an intense fire,\nis kept alive by fresh materials: every new commotion gives it vigour,\nand in proportion as it burns, it expands and brightens to a purer\nflame. The same causes at Rome produced the same effect. Tempestuous\ntimes called forth the genius of our ancestors. The moderns, it is\ntrue, have taken fire, and rose above themselves, as often as a quiet,\nsettled, and uniform government gave a fair opportunity; but\neloquence, it is certain, flourishes most under a bold and turbulent\ndemocracy, where the ambitious citizen, who best can mould to his\npurposes a fierce and contentious multitude, is sure to be the idol of\nthe people. In the conflict of parties, that kept our ancestors in\nagitation, laws were multiplied; the leading chiefs were the favourite\ndemagogues; the magistrates were often engaged in midnight debate;\neminent citizens were brought to a public trial; families were set at\nvariance; the nobles were split into factions, and the senate waged\nincessant war against the people. Hence that flame of eloquence which\nblazed out under the republican government, and hence that constant\nfuel that kept the flame alive.\n\nThe state, it is true, was often thrown into convulsions: but talents\nwere exercised, and genius opened the way to public honours. He who\npossessed the powers of persuasion, rose to eminence, and by the arts\nwhich gave him popularity, he was sure to eclipse his colleagues. He\nstrengthened his interest with the leading men, and gained weight and\ninfluence not only in the senate, but in all assemblies of the people.\nForeign nations [b] courted his friendship. The magistrates, setting\nout for their provinces, made it their business to ingratiate\nthemselves with the popular speaker, and, at their return, took care\nto renew their homage. The powerful orator had no occasion to solicit\nfor preferment: the offices of pr\u00e6tor and consul stood open to receive\nhim. He was invited to those exalted stations. Even in the rank of a\nprivate citizen he had a considerable share of power, since his\nauthority swayed at once the senate and the people. It was in those\ndays a settled maxim, that no man could either rise to dignities, or\nsupport himself in office, without possessing, in an eminent degree, a\npower of words, and dignity of language.\n\nNor can this be a matter of wonder, when we recollect, that persons of\ndistinguished genius were, on various occasions, called forth by the\nvoice of the people, and in their presence obliged to act an important\npart. Eloquence was the ruling passion of all. The reason is, it was\nnot then sufficient merely to vote in the senate; it was necessary to\nsupport that vote with strength of reasoning, and a flow of language.\nMoreover, in all prosecutions, the party accused was expected to make\nhis defence in person, and to examine the witnesses [c], who at that\ntime were not allowed to speak in written depositions, but were\nobliged to give their testimony in open court. In this manner,\nnecessity, no less than the temptation of bright rewards, conspired to\nmake men cultivate the arts of oratory. He who was known to possess\nthe powers of speech, was held in the highest veneration. The mute and\nsilent character fell into contempt. The dread of shame was a motive\nnot less powerful than the ambition that aimed at honours. To sink\ninto the humiliating rank of a client, instead of maintaining the\ndignity of a patron, was a degrading thought. Men were unwilling to\nsee the followers of their ancestors transferred to other families for\nprotection. Above all, they dreaded the disgrace of being thought\nunworthy of civil honours; and, if by intrigue they attained their\nwishes, the fear of being despised for incapacity was a spur to\nquicken their ardour in the pursuit of literary fame and commanding\neloquence.\n\n\nXXXVII. I do not know whether you have as yet seen the historical\nmemoirs which Mucianus [a] has collected, and lately published,\ncontaining, in eleven volumes, the transactions of the times, and, in\nthree more, the letters of eminent men who figured on the stage of\npublic business. This portion of history is well authenticated by the\noriginal papers, still extant in the libraries of the curious. From\nthis valuable collection it appears, that Pompey and Crassus [b] owed\ntheir elevation as much to their talents as to their fame in arms; and\nthat Lentulus [c], Metellus, Lucullus, Curio, and others of that\nclass, took care to enlarge their minds, and distinguish themselves by\ntheir powers of speech. To say all in one word, no man, in those\ntimes, rose to eminence in the state, who had not given proof of his\ngenius in the forum and the tribunals of justice.\n\nTo this it may be added, that the importance, the splendour, and\nmagnitude of the questions discussed in that period, served to animate\nthe public orator. The subject, beyond all doubt, lifts the mind above\nitself: it gives vigour to sentiment, and energy to expression. Let\nthe topic be a paltry theft, a dry form of pleading, or a petty\nmisdemeanor; will not the orator feel himself cramped and chilled by\nthe meanness of the question? Give him a cause of magnitude, such as\nbribery in the election of magistrates, a charge for plundering the\nallies of Rome, or the murder of Roman citizens, how different then\nhis emotions! how sublime each sentiment! what dignity of language!\nThe effect, it must be admitted, springs from the disasters of\nsociety. It is true, that form of government, in which no such evils\noccur, must, beyond all question, be allowed to be the best; but\nsince, in the course of human affairs, sudden convulsions must happen,\nmy position is, that they produced, at Rome, that flame of eloquence\nwhich at this hour is so much admired. The mind of the orator grows\nand expands with his subject. Without ample materials no splendid\noration was ever yet produced. Demosthenes, I believe, did not owe his\nvast reputation to the speeches which he made against his guardians\n[d]; nor was it either the oration in defence of Quinctius, or that\nfor Archias the poet, that established the character of Cicero. It was\nCatiline, it was Verres, it was Milo and Mark Antony, that spread so\nmuch glory round him.\n\nLet me not be misunderstood: I do not say, that for the sake of\nhearing a bright display of eloquence, it is fit that the public peace\nshould be disturbed by the machinations of turbulent and lawless men.\nBut, not to lose sight of the question before us, let it be\nremembered, that we are enquiring about an art which thrives and\nflourishes most in tempestuous times. It were, no doubt, better that\nthe public should enjoy the sweets of peace, than be harassed by the\ncalamities of war: but still it is war that produces the soldier and\ngreat commander. It is the same with Eloquence. The oftener she is\nobliged, if I may so express it, to take the field, the more frequent\nthe engagement, in which she gives and receives alternate wounds, and\nthe more formidable her adversary; the more she rises in pomp and\ngrandeur, and returns from the warfare of the forum crowned with\nunfading laurels. He, who encounters danger, is ever sure to win the\nsuffrages of mankind. For such is the nature of the human mind, that,\nin general, we choose a state of security for ourselves, but never\nfail to gaze with admiration on the man, whom we see, in the conflict\nof parties, facing his adversaries, and surmounting difficulties.\n\n\nXXXVIII. I proceed to another advantage of the ancient forum; I mean\nthe form of proceeding and the rules of practice observed in those\ndays. Our modern custom is, I grant, more conducive to truth and\njustice; but that of former times gave to eloquence a free career,\nand, by consequence, greater weight and splendour. The advocate was\nnot, as now, confined to a few hours [a]; he might adjourn as often as\nit suited his convenience; he might expatiate, as his genius prompted\nhim: and the number of days, like that of the several patrons, was\nunlimited. Pompey was the first who circumscribed the genius of men\nwithin narrower limits [b]. In his third consulship he gave a check to\neloquence, and, as it were, bridled its spirit, but still left all\ncauses to be tried according to law in the forum, and before the\npr\u00e6tors. The importance of the business, which was decided in that\ncourt of justice, will be evident, if we compare it with the\ntransactions before the centumvirs [c], who at present have cognizance\nof all matters whatever. We have not so much as one oration of Cicero\nor C\u00e6sar, of Brutus, C\u00e6lius, or Calvus, or any other person famous for\nhis eloquence, which was delivered before the last-mentioned\njurisdiction, excepting only the speeches of Asinius Pollio [d] for\nthe heirs of Urbinia. But those speeches were delivered about the\nmiddle of the reign of Augustus, when, after a long peace with foreign\nnations, and a profound tranquillity at home, that wise and politic\nprince had conquered all opposition, and not only triumphed over party\nand faction, but subdued eloquence itself.\n\n\nXXXIX. What I am going to say will appear, perhaps, too minute; it may\nborder on the ridiculous, and excite your mirth: with all my heart; I\nwill hazard it for that very reason. The dress now in use at the bar\nhas an air of meanness: the speaker is confined in a close robe [a],\nand loses all the grace of action. The very courts of judicature are\nanother objection; all causes are heard, at present, in little narrow\nrooms, where spirit and strenuous exertion are unnecessary. The\norator, like a generous steed, requires liberty and ample space:\nbefore a scanty tribunal his spirit droops, and the dullness of the\nscene damps the powers of genius. Add to this, we pay no attention to\nstyle; and indeed how should we? No time is allowed for the beauties\nof composition: the judge calls upon you to begin, and you must obey,\nliable, at the same time, to frequent interruptions, while documents\nare read, and witnesses examined.\n\nDuring all this formality, what kind of an audience has the orator to\ninvigorate his faculties? Two or three stragglers drop in by chance,\nand to them the whole business seems to be transacted in solitude. But\nthe orator requires a different scene. He delights in clamour, tumult,\nand bursts of applause. Eloquence must have her theatre, as was the\ncase in ancient times, when the forum was crowded with the first men\nin Rome; when a numerous train of clients pressed forward with eager\nexpectation; when the people, in their several tribes; when\nambassadors from the colonies, and a great part of Italy; attended to\nhear the debate; in short, when all Rome was interested in the event.\nWe know that in the cases of Cornelius, Scaurus, Milo, Bestia, and\nVatinius, the concourse was so great, that those several causes were\ntried before the whole body of the people. A scene so vast and\nmagnificent was enough to inflame the most languid orator. The\nspeeches delivered upon those occasions are in every body's hands,\nand, by their intrinsic excellence, we of this day estimate the genius\nof the respective authors.\n\n\nXL. If we now consider the frequent assemblies of the people, and the\nright of prosecuting the most eminent men in the state; if we reflect\non the glory that sprung from the declared hostility of the most\nillustrious characters; if we recollect, that even Scipio, Sylla, and\nPompey, were not sheltered from the storms of eloquence, what a number\nof causes shall we see conspiring to rouse the spirit of the ancient\nforum! The malignity of the human heart, always adverse to superior\ncharacters, encouraged the orator to persist. The very players, by\nsarcastic allusions to men in power, gratified the public ear, and, by\nconsequence, sharpened the wit and acrimony of the bold declaimer.\n\nNeed I observe to you, that in all I have said, I have not been\nspeaking of that temperate faculty [a] which delights in quiet times,\nsupported by its own integrity, and the virtues of moderation? I speak\nof popular eloquence, the genuine offspring of that licentiousness, to\nwhich fools and ill-designing men have given the name of liberty: I\nspeak of bold and turbulent oratory, that inflamer of the people, and\nconstant companion of sedition; that fierce incendiary, that knows no\ncompliance, and scorns to temporize; busy, rash, and arrogant, but, in\nquiet and well regulated governments, utterly unknown. Who ever heard\nof an orator at Crete or Laced\u00e6mon? In those states a system of\nrigorous discipline was established by the first principles of the\nconstitution. Macedonian and Persian eloquence are equally unknown.\nThe same may be said of every country, where the plan of government\nwas fixed and uniform.\n\nAt Rhodes, indeed, and also at Athens, orators existed without number,\nand the reason is, in those communities the people directed every\nthing; a giddy multitude governed, and, to say the truth, all things\nwere in the power of all. In like manner, while Rome was engaged in\none perpetual scene of contention; while parties, factions, and\ninternal divisions, convulsed the state; no peace in the forum, in the\nsenate no union of sentiment; while the tribunals of justice acted\nwithout moderation; while the magistrates knew no bounds, and no man\npaid respect to eminent merit; in such times it must be acknowledged\nthat Rome produced a race of noble orators; as in the wild\nuncultivated field the richest vegetables will often shoot up, and\nflourish with uncommon vigour. And yet it is fair to ask, Could all\nthe eloquence of the Gracchi atone for the laws which they imposed on\ntheir country? Could the fame which Cicero obtained by his eloquence,\ncompensate for the tragic end to which it brought him [b]?\n\n\nXLI. The forum, at present, is the last sad relic of ancient oratory.\nBut does that epitome of former greatness give the idea of a city so\nwell regulated, that we may rest contented with our form of\ngovernment, without wishing for a reformation of abuses? If we except\nthe man of guilt, or such as labour under the hard hand of oppression,\nwho resorts to us for our assistance? If a municipal city applies for\nprotection, it is, when the inhabitants, harassed by the adjacent\nstates, or rent and torn by intestine divisions, sue for protection.\nThe province, that addresses the senate for a redress of grievances,\nhas been oppressed and plundered, before we hear of the complaint. It\nis true, we vindicate the injured, but to suffer no oppression would\nsurely be better than to obtain relief. Find, if you can, in any part\nof the world a wise and happy community, where no man offends against\nthe laws: in such a nation what can be the use of oratory? You may as\nwell profess the healing art where ill health is never known. Let men\nenjoy bodily vigour, and the practice of physic will have no\nencouragement. In like manner, where sober manners prevail, and\nsubmission to the authority of government is the national virtue, the\npowers of persuasion are rendered useless. Eloquence has lost her\nfield of glory. In the senate, what need of elaborate speeches, when\nall good men are already of one mind? What occasion for studied\nharangues before a popular assembly, where the form of government\nleaves nothing to the decision of a wild democracy, but the whole\nadministration is conducted by the wisdom of a single ruler? And\nagain; when crimes are rare, and in fact of no great moment, what\navails the boasted right of individuals to commence a voluntary\nprosecution? What necessity for a studied defence, often composed in a\nstyle of vehemence, artfully addressed to the passions, and generally\nstretched beyond all bounds, when justice is executed in mercy, and\nthe judge is of himself disposed to succour the distressed?\n\nBelieve me, my very good, and (as far as the times will admit) my\neloquent friends, had it been your lot to live under the old republic,\nand the men whom we so much admire had been reserved for the present\nage; if some god had changed the period of theirs and your existence,\nthe flame of genius had been yours, and the chiefs of antiquity would\nnow be acting with minds subdued to the temper of the times. Upon the\nwhole, since no man can enjoy a state of calm tranquillity, and, at\nthe same time, raise a great and splendid reputation; to be content\nwith the benefits of the age in which we live, without detracting from\nour ancestors, is the virtue that best becomes us.\n\n\nXLII. Maternus concluded [a] his discourse. There have been, said\nMessala, some points advanced, to which I do not entirely accede; and\nothers, which I think require farther explanation. But the day is well\nnigh spent. We will, therefore, adjourn the debate. Be it as you think\nproper, replied Maternus; and if, in what I have said, you find any\nthing not sufficiently clear, we will adjust those matters in some\nfuture conference. Hereupon he rose from his seat, and embracing Aper,\nI am afraid, he said, that it will fare hardly with you, my good\nfriend. I shall cite you to answer before the poets, and Messala will\narraign you at the bar of the antiquarians. And I, replied Aper, shall\nmake reprisals on you both before the school professors and the\nrhetoricians. This occasioned some mirth and raillery. We laughed, and\nparted in good humour.\n\n\nEND OF THE DIALOGUE.\n\n\n\n\nNOTES ON THE DIALOGUE CONCERNING ORATORY.\n\n\nThe scene of the following Dialogue is laid in the sixth year of\nVespasian, A.U.C. 828. A.D. 75. The commentators are much divided in\ntheir opinions about the real author; his work they all agree is a\nmasterpiece in the kind; written with taste and judgement;\nentertaining, profound, and elegant. But whether it is to be ascribed\nto Tacitus, Quintilian, or any other person whom they cannot name, is\na question upon which they have exhausted a store of learning. They\nhave given us, according to their custom, much controversy, and little\ndecision. In this field of conjecture Lipsius led the way. He\npublished, in 1574, the first good edition of Tacitus, with\nemendations of the text, and not removed; he still remains in\nsuspense. _Cum multa dixerim, claudo tamen omnia hoc responso; MIHI\nNON LIQUERE._ Gronovius Pichena, Ryckius, Rhenanus, and others, have\nentered warmly into the dispute. An elegant modern writer has hazarded\na new conjecture. The last of Sir Thomas Fitzosborne's Letters is a\nkind of preface to Mr. Melmoth's Translation of the Dialogue before\nus. He says; of all the conversation pieces, whether ancient or\nmodern, either of the moral or polite kind, he knows not one more\nelegantly written than the little anonymous Dialogue concerning the\nrise and decline of eloquence among the Romans. He calls it anonymous,\nthough he is aware, that it has been ascribed not only to Tacitus and\nQuintilian, but even to Suetonius. The reasons, however, are so\ninconclusive, that he is inclined to give it to the younger Pliny. He\nthinks it perfectly coincides with Pliny's age; it is addressed to one\nof his particular friends, and is marked with similar expressions and\nsentiments. But, with all due submission to Mr. Melmoth, his new\ncandidate cannot long hold us in suspense. It appears in the account\nof the eruption of Mount Vesuvius, in which Pliny's uncle lost his\nlife. A.U.C. 832. A.D. 79, that Pliny was then eighteen years old,\nand, as the Dialogue was in 828, he could then be no more than\nfourteen; a time of life, when he was neither fit to be admitted to a\nlearned debate, nor capable of understanding it. Besides this, two\nletters to his friend FABIUS are still extant; one in the first book,\nepist. 11; the other, book vii. epist. 2. No mention of the Dialogue\noccurs in either of those letters, nor in any other part of his works;\na circumstance, which could scarce have happened to a writer so\ntenderly anxious about his literary character, if the work in question\nhad been the production of his part. Brotier, the last, and, it may be\nsaid, the best of all the editors of Tacitus, is of opinion that a\ntract, so beautiful and judicious, ought not, without better reasons\nthan have been as yet assigned, to be adjudged from Tacitus to any\nother writer. He relies much on the first edition, which was published\nat Venice (1468), containing the last six books of the Annals (the\nfirst six not being then found), the five books of the History, and\nthe Dialogue, intitled, _Cornelii Taciti Equitis Romani Dialogus de\nOratoribus claris._ There were also in the Vatican, manuscript copies\nof the Dialogue _de Oratoribus_. In 1515, when the six first Annals\nwere found in Germany, a new edition, under the patronage of Leo X.\nwas published by Beroaldus, carefully collated with the manuscript,\nwhich was afterwards placed in the Florentine Library. Those early\nauthorities preponderate with Brotier against all modern conjecture;\nmore especially, since the age of Tacitus agrees with the time of the\nDialogue. He was four years older than his friend Pliny, and, at\neighteen, might properly be allowed by his friends to be of their\nparty. In two years afterwards (A.U. 830), he married Agricola's\ndaughter, and he expressly says, (Life of Agricola, sect. ix.) that he\nwas then a very young man. The arguments, drawn by the several\ncommentators from the difference of style, Brotier thinks are of no\nweight. The style of a young author will naturally differ from what he\nhas settled by practice at an advanced period of life. This has been\nobserved in many eminent writers, and in none more than Lipsius\nhimself. His language, in the outset, was easy, flowing, and elegant;\nbut, as he advanced in years, it became stiff, abrupt, and harsh.\nTacitus relates a conversation on a literary subject; and in such a\npiece, who can expect to find the style of an historian or an\nannalist? For these reasons Brotier thinks that this Dialogue may,\nwith good reason, be ascribed to Tacitus. The translator enters no\nfarther into the controversy, than to say, that in a case where\ncertainty cannot be obtained, we must rest satisfied with the best\nevidence the nature of the thing will admit. The dispute is of no\nimportance; for, as Lipsius says, whether we give the Dialogue to\nQuintilian or to Tacitus, no inconvenience can arise. Whoever was the\nauthor, it is a performance of uncommon beauty.\n\nBefore we close this introduction, it will not be improper to say a\nword or two about Brotier's Supplement. In the wreck of ancient\nliterature a considerable part of this Dialogue has perished, and, by\nconsequence, a chasm is left, much to be lamented by every reader of\ntaste. To avoid the inconvenience of a broken context, Brotier has\nendeavoured to compensate for the loss. What he has added, will be\nfound in the progress of the work; and as it is executed by the\nlearned editor with great elegance, and equal probability, it is hoped\nthat the insertion of it will be more agreeable to the reader, than a\ndull pause of melancholy regret.\n\n\nSection I.\n\n[a] Justus Fabius was consul A.U.C. 864, A.D. 111. But as he did not\nbegin the year, his name does not appear in the FASTI CONSULARES.\nThere are two letters to him from his friend Pliny; the first, lib. i.\nepist. 11; the other, lib. vii. ep. 2. it is remarkable, that in the\nlast, the author talks of sending some of his writings for his\nfriend's perusal; _qu\u00e6ram quid potissimum ex nugis meis tibi\nexhibeam_; but not a word is said about the decline of eloquence.\n\n\nSection II.\n\n[a] Concerning Maternus nothing is known with any kind of certainty.\nDio relates that a sophist, of that name, was put to death by\nDomitian, for a school declamation against tyrants: but not one of the\ncommentators ventures to assert that he was the _Curiatius Maternus_,\nwho makes so conspicuous a figure in the Dialogue before us.\n\n[b] No mention is made of Marcus Aper, either by Quintilian or Pliny.\nIt is supposed that he was father of Marcus Flavius Aper, who was\nsubstituted consul A.U.C. 883, A.D. 130. His oratorical character, and\nthat of Secundus, as we find them drawn in this section, are not\nunlike what we are told by Cicero of Crassus and Antonius. Crassus, he\nsays, was not willing to be thought destitute of literature, but he\nwished to have it said of him, that he despised it, and preferred the\ngood sense of the Romans to the refinements of Greece. Antonius, on\nthe other hand, was of opinion that his fame would rise to greater\nmagnitude, if he was considered as a man wholly illiterate, and void\nof education. In this manner they both expected to increase their\npopularity; the former by despising the Greeks, and the latter by not\nknowing them. _Fuit hoc in utroque eorum, ut Crassus non tam\nexistimari vellet non didicisse, quam illa despicere, et nostrorum\nhominum in omni genere prudentiam Gr\u00e6cis anteferre. Antonius autem\nprobabiliorem populo orationem fore censebat suam, si omnin\u00f2 didicisse\nnunquam putaretur; atque ita se uterque graviorem fore, si alter\ncontemnere, alter ne nosse quidem Gr\u00e6cos videretur._ Cicero _De Orat._\nlib. ii. cap. 1.\n\n[c] Quintilian makes honourable mention of Julius Secundus, who, if he\nhad not been prematurely cut off, would have transmitted his name to\nposterity among the most celebrated orators. He would have added, and\nhe was daily doing it, whatever was requisite to complete his\noratorical genius; and all that could be desired, was more vigour in\nargument, and more attention to matter and sentiment, than to the\nchoice of words. But he died too soon, and his fame was, in some\ndegree, intercepted. He has, notwithstanding, left a considerable\nname. His diction was rich and copious; he explained every thing with\ngrace and elegance; his periods flowed with a suavity that charmed\nhis audience; his language, when metaphorical, was bold, yet accurate;\nand, if he hazarded an unusual phrase, he was justified by the energy\nwith which his meaning was conveyed. _Julio Secundo, si longior\ncontigisset \u00e6tas, clarissimum profecto nomen oratoris apud posteros\nforet. Adjecisset enim, atque adjiciebat, c\u00e6teris virtutibus suis,\nquod desiderari potest; id est autem, ut esset multo magis pugnax, et\ns\u00e6pius ad curam rerum ab elocutione respiceret. C\u00e6terum interceptus\nquoque magnum sibi vindicat locum. Ea est facundia, tanta in\nexplicando, quod velit, gratia; tam candidum, et lene, et speciosum\ndicendi genus; tanta verborum, etiam qu\u00e6 assumpta sunt, proprietas;\ntanta in quibusdam, ex periculo petitis, significantia._ Quintil. lib.\nx. s. 1. It is remarkable, that Quintilian, in his list of Roman\norators, has neither mentioned Maternus, nor Marcus Aper. The\nDialogue, for that reason, seems to be improperly ascribed to him: men\nwho figure so much in the enquiry concerning oratory, would not have\nbeen omitted by the critic who thought their conversation worth\nrecording.\n\n\nSection III.\n\n[a] Thyestes was a common and popular subject of ancient tragedy.\n\n     Indignatur item privatis, et prope socco\n     Dignis carminibus narrari coena Thyest\u00e6.\n                    HORAT. ARS POET. ver. 90.\n\n[b] It was the custom of the colonies and municipal towns, to pay\ntheir court to some great orator at Rome, in order to obtain his\npatronage, whenever they should have occasion to apply to the senate\nfor a redress of grievances.\n\n[c] Domitius was another subject of tragedy, taken from the Roman\nstory. Who he was, does not clearly appear. Brotier thinks it was\nDomitius, the avowed enemy of Julius C\u00e6sar, who moved in the senate\nfor a law to recall that general from the command of the army in Gaul,\nand, afterwards, on the breaking out of the civil war, fell bravely\nat the battle of Pharsalia. See Suetonius, Life of Nero, section 2.\nSuch a character might furnish the subject of a tragedy. The Roman\npoets were in the habit of enriching their drama with domestic\noccurrences, and the practice was applauded by Horace.\n\n     Nec minimum meru\u00eare decus, vestigia Gr\u00e6ca\n     Ausi deserere, et celebrare domestica facta.\n                              ARS POET. ver. 286.\n\n     No path to fame our poets left untried;\n     Nor small their merit, when with conscious pride\n     They scorn'd to take from Greece the storied theme,\n     But dar'd to sing their own domestic fame.\n                                       FRANCIS'S HORACE.\n\n\nSection V.\n\n[a] There were at Rome several eminent men of the name of Bassus.\nWith regard to the person here called Saleius Bassus, the commentators\nhave not been able to glean much information. Some have contended that\nit was to him Persius addressed his sixth satire:\n\n     Admovit jam bruma foco te, Basse, Sabino.\n\nBut if we may believe the old scholiast, his name was C\u00c6SIUS BASSUS, a\nmuch admired lyric poet, who was living on his own farm, at the time\nwhen Mount Vesuvius discharged its torrents of fire, and made the\ncountry round a scene of desolation. The poet and his house were\noverwhelmed by the eruption of the lava, which happened A.U. 832, in\nthe reign of Titus. Quintilian says of him (b. x. chap. 1.), that if\nafter Horace any poet deserves to be mentioned, C\u00e6sius Bassus was the\nman. _Si quem adjicere velis, is erit C\u00e6sius Bassus._ Saleius Bassus\nis mentioned by Juvenal as an eminent poet in distress:\n\n                ----At Serrano tenuique Saleio\n     Gloria quantalibet quid erit, si gloria tantum est?\n                                      SAT. vii. ver. 80.\n\n     But to poor Bassus what avails a name,\n     To starve on compliments and empty fame!\n                            DRYDEN'S JUVENAL.\n\nQuintilian says, he possessed a poetic genius, but so warm and\nvehement, that, even in an advanced age, his spirit was not under the\ncontrol of sober judgement. _Vehemens et poeticum ingenium SALEII\nBASSI fuit; nec ipsum senectute maturum._ This passage affords an\ninsuperable argument against Lipsius, and the rest of the critics who\nnamed Quintilian as a candidate for the honour of this elegant\ncomposition. Can it be imagined that a writer of fair integrity, would\nin his great work speak of Bassus as he deserved, and in the Dialogue\noverrate him beyond all proportion? Duplicity was not a part of\nQuintilian's character.\n\n[b] Tacitus, it may be presumed with good reason, was a diligent\nreader of Cicero, Livy, Sallust, and Seneca. He has, in various parts\nof his works, coincidences of sentiment and diction, that plainly shew\nthe source from which they sprung. In the present case, when he calls\neloquence a buckler to protect yourself, and a weapon to annoy your\nadversary, can anyone doubt but he had his eye on the following\nsentence in _Cicero de Oratore_? _Quid autem tam necessarium, quam\ntenere semper arma, quibus vel tectus ipse esse possis, vel provocare\nintegros, et te ulcisci lacessitus?_\n\n[c] Eprius Marcellus is often a conspicuous figure in the Annals and\nthe History of Tacitus. To a bad heart he united the gift of\neloquence. In the Annals, b. xvi. s. 28, he makes a vehement speech\nagainst P\u00e6tus Thrasea, and afterwards wrought the destruction of that\nexcellent man. For that exploit, he was attacked, in the beginning of\nVespasian's reign, by Helvidius Priscus. In the History (book iv. s. 7\nand 8) we see them both engaged in a violent contention. In the\nfollowing year (823), Helvidius in the senate opened an accusation in\nform; but Marcellus, by using his eloquence as his buckler and his\noffensive weapon, was able to ward off the blow. He rose from his\nseat, and, \"I leave you,\" he said, \"I leave you to give the law to the\nsenate: reign, if you will, even in the presence of the prince.\" See\nHist. iv. s. 43. See also, Life of Agricola, s. 11. notes a and b.\n\n\nSection VI.\n\n[a] To be rich and have no issue, gave to the person so circumstanced\nthe highest consequence at Rome. All ranks of men paid their court to\nhim. To discourage a life of celibacy, and promote population,\nAugustus passed a law, called _Papia Popp\u00e6a_, whereby bachelors were\nsubjected to penalties. Hence the compliment paid by Horace to his\npatron:\n\n     Diva producas sobolem, patrumque\n     Prosperes decreta super jugandis\n     Foeminis, prolisque nov\u00e6 feraci\n           Lege marita.\n                     CARMEN S\u00c6CULARE.\n\n     Bring the springing birth to light,\n       And with ev'ry genial grace\n       Prolific of an endless race,\n     Oh! crown our vows, and bless the nuptial rite.\n                                   FRANCIS'S HORACE.\n\nBut marriage was not brought into fashion. In proportion to the rapid\ndegeneracy of the manners under the emperors, celibacy grew into\nrespect; insomuch, that we find (Annals xii. s. 52) a man too strong\nfor his prosecutors, because he was rich, old, and childless.\n_Valuitque pecunios\u00e2 orbitate et senect\u00e2._\n\n[b] The faculty of speaking on a sudden question, with unpremeditated\neloquence, Quintilian says, is the reward of study and diligent\napplication. The speech, composed at leisure, will often want the\nwarmth and energy, which accompany the rapid emotions of the mind. The\npassions, when roused and animated, and the images which present\nthemselves in a glow of enthusiasm, are the inspirers of true\neloquence. Composition has not always this happy effect; the process\nis slow; languor is apt to succeed; the passions subside, and the\nspirit of the discourse evaporates. _Maximus vero studiorum fructus\nest, et velut pr\u00e6mium quoddam amplissimum longi laboris, ex tempore\ndicendi facultas. Pectus est enim quod disertos facit, et vis mentis.\nNam ben\u00e8 concepti affectus, et recentes rerum imagines, continuo\nimpetu feruntur, qu\u00e6 nonnunquam mor\u00e2 stili refrigescunt, et dilat\u00e6 won\nrevertuntur._ Quintilian. lib. x. cap. 7.\n\n\nSection VII.\n\n[a] The translation is not quite accurate in this place. The original\nsays, when I obtained the _laticlave_, and the English calls it the\n_manly gown_, which, it must be admitted, is not the exact sense. The\n_toga virilis_, or the _manly gown_, was assumed, when the youth came\nto man's estate, or the age of seventeen years. On that occasion the\nfriends of the young man conducted him to the _forum_ (or sometimes to\nthe capitol), and there invested him with the new gown. This was\ncalled _dies tirocinii_; the day on which he commenced a _tiro_, or a\ncandidate for preferment in the army. The _laticlave_, was an\nadditional honour often granted at the same time. The sons of senators\nand patricians were entitled to that distinction, as a matter of\nright: but the young men, descended from such as were not patricians,\ndid not wear the _laticlave_, till they entered into the service of\nthe commonwealth, and undertook the functions of the civil magistracy.\nAugustus C\u00e6sar changed that custom. He gave leave to the sons of\nsenators, in general, to assume the _laticlave_ presently after the\ntime of putting on the _toga virilis_, though they were not capable of\ncivil honours. The emperors who succeeded, allowed the same privilege,\nas a favour to illustrious families. _Ovid_ speaks of himself and his\nbrother assuming the _manly gown_ and the _laticlave_ at the same\ntime:\n\n     Interea, tacito passu labentibus annis,\n       Liberior fratri sumpta mihique toga;\n     Induiturque humeris cum lato purpura clavo.\n\nPliny the younger shews, that the _laticlave_ was a favour granted by\nthe emperor on particular occasions. He says, he applied for his\nfriend, and succeeded: _Ego Sexto latumclavum a C\u00e6sare nostro\nimpetravi._ Lib. ii. epist. 9. The _latusclavus_ was a robe worn by\nconsuls, pr\u00e6tors, generals in triumph, and senators, who were called\n_laticlavii_. Their sons were admitted to the same honour; but the\nemperors had a power to bestow this garment of distinction, and all\nprivileges belonging to it, upon such as they thought worthy of that\nhonour. This is what Marcus Aper says, in the Dialogue, that he\nobtained; and, when the translation mentions the _manly gown_, the\nexpression falls short of the speaker's idea. Dacier has given an\naccount of the _laticlave_, which has been well received by the\nlearned. He tells us, that whatever was made to be put on another\nthing, was called _clavus_, not because it had any resemblance to a\nnail, but because it was made an adjunct to another subject. In fact,\nthe _clavi_ were purple galloons, with which the Romans bordered the\nfore part of the tunic, on both sides, and when drawn close together,\nthey formed an ornament in the middle of the vestment. It was, for\nthat reason, called by the Greeks, [Greek: mesoporphuron]. The broad\ngalloons made the _laticlave_, and the narrow the _angusticlave_. The\n_laticlave_, Dacier adds, is not to be confounded with the _pr\u00e6texta_.\nThe latter was, at first, appropriated to the magistrates, and the\nsacerdotal order; but, in time, was extended to the sons of eminent\nfamilies, to be worn as a mark of distinction, till the age of\nseventeen, when it was laid aside for the _manly gown_. See Dacier's\n_Horace_, lib. i. sat. 5; and see Kennet's _Roman Antiquities_, p.\n306.\n\n[b] Marcus Aper, Julius Secundus, and Curiatius Maternus, according to\nBrotier and others, were natives of Gaul. Aper (section x.) mentions\nthe Gauls as their common countrymen: _Ne quid de Gallis nostris\nloquamur._ If that was the fact, a _new man_ at Rome would have\ndifficulties to surmount. Ammianus Marcellinus (a Latin historian of\nthe fourth century) says, that at Rome the people despised every thing\nthat did not grow before their eyes within the walls of the city,\nexcept the rich who had no children; and the veneration paid to such\nas had no heirs was altogether incredible. _Vile esse quidquid extra\nurbis pom\u00e6rium nascitur, \u00e6stimant; nec credi potest qua obsequiorum\ndiversitate coluntur homines sine liberis Rom\u00e6._ Lib. xiv. s. 5. In\nsuch a city a young man and a stranger could not expect to be\nfavoured.\n\n[c] All causes of a private nature were heard before the _centumviri_.\nThree were chosen out of every tribe, and the tribes amounted to five\nand thirty, so that in fact 105 were chosen; but, for the sake of a\nround number, they were called CENTUMVIRI. The causes that were heard\nbefore that jurisdiction are enumerated by Cicero, _De Orat._ lib. i.\ns. 38.\n\n[d] The translation says, _the wills and codicils of the rich_; but it\nis by no means certain that those words convey the meaning of the\ntext, which simply says, _nec codicillis datur_. After due enquiry, it\nappears that _codicillus_ was used by the Latin authors, for what we\nnow call _the letters patent of a prince_. Codicils, in the modern\nsense of the word, implying a supplement to a will, were unknown to\nthe intent Roman law. The Twelve Tables mention testaments only.\nCodicils, in aid to wills, were first introduced in the time of\nAugustus; but, whatever their operation was, legacies granted by those\nadditional writings were for some time of no validity. To confirm\nthis, we are told that the daughter of Lentulus discharged certain\nlegacies, which, being given by codicil, she was not bound to pay. In\ntime, however, codicils, as an addition made by the testator to his\nwill, grew into use, and the legacies thereby granted were confirmed.\nThis might be the case in the sixth year of Vespasian, when the\nDialogue passed between the parties; but it is, notwithstanding,\nhighly probable, that the word _codicilli_ means, in the passage\nbefore us, the _letters patent of the prince_. It is used in that\nsense by Suetonius, who relates, that Tiberius, after passing a night\nand two days in revelling with Pomponius Flaccus and Lucius Piso,\ngranted to the former the province of Syria, and made the latter\nprefect of the city; declaring them, _in the patents_, pleasant\ncompanions, and _the friends of all hours_. _Codicillis quoque\njucundissimos et omnium horarum amicos professus._ Suet. _in Tib._ s.\n42.\n\n[e] The common people are called, in the original, _tunicatus\npopulus_; that class of men, who wore the _tunic_, and not the _toga_,\nor the _Roman gown_. The _tunica_, or close coat, was the common\ngarment worn within doors, and abroad, under the _toga_. Kennet says,\nthe _proletarii_, the _capite censi_, and the rest of the dregs of the\ncity, could not afford to wear the _toga_, and therefore went in\ntheir _tunics_; whence Horace says (lib. i. epist. 7).\n\n     Vilia vendentem tunicato scruta popello.\n\nThe TOGA, however, was the peculiar dress of the Roman people. VIRGIL\ndistinguishes his countrymen by their mode of apparel:\n\n     Romanos rerum dominos, gentemque togatam.\n\nBut, though this was the Roman habit, the lower citizens were obliged\nto appear abroad is their _tunica_, or close garment. The love of\npraise is so eager a passion, that the public orator is here\nrepresented as delighting in the applause of the rabble. Persius, the\nsatirist, has said the same thing:\n\n     Pulchrum est digito monstrari, et dicier. HIC EST.\n\n\nSection VIII.\n\n[a] The character of Eprius Marcellus has been already stated, section\nv. note [c]. Crispus Vibius is mentioned as a man of weight and\ninfluence, _Annals_, book xiv. s. 28. Quintilian has mentioned him to\nhis advantage: he calls him, book v. chap. 13, a man of agreeable and\nelegant talents, _vir ingenii jucundi et elegantis_; and again, Vibius\nCrispus was distinguished by the elegance of his composition, and the\nsweetness of his manner; a man born to please, but fitter for private\nsuits, than for the importance of public causes. _Et VIBIUS CRISPUS,\ncompositus, et jucundus, et delectationi natus; privatis tamen causis,\nquam publicis, melior._ Lib. x. cap. 1.\n\n[b] Which of these two men was born at Capua, and which at Vercell\u00e6,\nis not clearly expressed in the original. Eprius Marcellus, who has\nbeen described of a prompt and daring spirit, ready to embark in\nevery mischief, and by his eloquence able to give colour to the worst\ncause, must at this time have become a new man, since we find him\nmentioned in this Dialogue with unbounded praise. He, it seems, and\nVibius Crispus were the favourites at Vespasian's court. Vercell\u00e6, now\n_Verceil_, was situated in the eastern part of Piedmont. _Capua_,\nrendered famous by Hannibal, was a city in Campania, always deemed the\nseat of pleasure.\n\n[c] Vespasian is said to have been what is uncommon among sovereign\nprinces, a patient hearer of truth. His attention to men of letters\nmay be considered as a proof of that assertion. The younger Pliny\ntells us, that his uncle, the author of the Natural History, used to\nvisit Vespasian before day-light, and gained admittance to the\nemperor, who devoted his nights to study. _Ante lucem ibat ad\nVespasianum imperatorem: nam ille quoque noctibus utebatur._ Lib. iii.\nepist. 5.\n\n\nSection IX.\n\n[a] Agamemnon and Jason were two favourite dramatic subjects with the\nRoman poets. After their example, the moderns seem to have been\nenamoured with those two Grecian heroes. Racine has displayed the\nformer, in his tragedy of Iphigenia, and the late Mr. Thomson in a\nperformance of great merit, entitled Agamemnon. Corneille, and, the\nlate Mr. Glover, thought Jason and Medea worthy of their talents.\n\n[b] Saleius Bassus has been already mentioned, s. v. note [a]. It may\nbe added in this place, that the critics of his time concurred in\ngiving him the warmest praise, not only as a good and excellent man,\nbut also as an eminent and admirable poet. He was descended from a\nfamily of distinction, but was poor and often distressed. Whether he\nor C\u00e6sius Bassus was the friend of Persius, is not perfectly clear. Be\nthe fact as it may, the satirist describes a fine poet, and his verses\nwere applicable to either of them:\n\n     Jamne lyr\u00e2, et tetrico vivunt tibi pectine chord\u00e6?\n     Mire opifex numeris veterum primordia rerum,\n     Atque marem strepitum fidis intendisse Latin\u00e6;\n     Mox juvenes agitare jocos, et pollice honesto\n     Egregios lusisse senes.\n                                      PERSIUS, sat. vi.\n\n\n[c] Before the invention of printing, copies were not easily\nmultiplied. Authors were eager to enjoy their fame, and the pen of the\ntranscriber was slow and tedious. Public rehearsals were the road to\nfame. But an audience was to be drawn together by interest, by\nsolicitation, and public advertisements. Pliny, in one of his letters,\nhas given a lively description of the difficulties which the author\nhad to surmount. This year, he says, has produced poets in great\nabundance. Scarce a day has passed in the month of April, without the\nrecital of a poem. But the greater part of the audience comes with\nreluctance; they loiter in the lobbies, and there enter into idle\nchat, occasionally desiring to know, whether the poet is in his\npulpit? has he begun? is his preface over? has he almost finished?\nThey condescended, at last, to enter the room; they looked round with\nan air of indifference, and soon retired, some by stealth, and others\nwith open contempt. Hence the greater praise is due to those authors,\nwho do not suffer their genius to droop, but, on the contrary, amidst\nthe most discouraging circumstances, still persist to cultivate the\nliberal arts. Pliny adds, that he himself attended all the public\nreadings, and, for that purpose, staid longer in the city than was\nusual with him. Being, at length, released, he intended, in his rural\nretreat, to finish a work of his own, but not to read it in public,\nlest he should be thought to claim a return of the civility which he\nhad shewn to others. He was a bearer, and not a creditor. The favour\nconferred, if redemanded, ceases to be a favour. _Magnum proventum\npoetarum annus hic attulit. Toto mense Aprili nullus fere dies, quo\nnon recitaret aliquis. Tametsi ad audiendum pigre coitur. Plerique in\nstationibus sedent, tempusque audiendis fabulis conterunt, ac subinde\nsibi nuntiari jubent, an jam recitator intraverit, an dixerit\npr\u00e6fationem, an ex magn\u00e1 parte evolverit librum? Tum demum, ac tune\nquoque lent\u00e8, cunctanterque veniunt, nec tamen remanent, sed ante\nfinem recedunt; alii dissimulanter, ac furtim, alii, simpliciter, ac\nliber\u00e8. Sed tanto magis laudandi probandique sunt, quos a scribendi\nrecitandique studio h\u00e6c auditorum vel desidia, vel superbia non\nretardat. Equidem prope nemini defui: his ex causis longius, quam\ndestinaveram, tempus in urbe consumpsi. Possum jam repetere secessum,\net scribere aliquid, quod non recitem, ne videar, quorum\nrecitationibus affui, non auditor fuisse, sed creditor. Nam, ut in\nc\u00e6teris rebus, ita in audiendi officio, perit gratia si reposcatur._\nPliny, lib. i. ep. 13. Such was the state of literature under the\nworst of the emperors. The Augustan age was over. In the reigns of\nTiberius and Caligula learning drooped, but in some degree revived\nunder the dull and stupid Claudius. Pliny, in the letter above cited,\nsays of that emperor, that, one day hearing a noise in his palace, he\nenquired what was the cause, and, being informed that Nonianus was\nreciting in public, went immediately to the place, and became one of\nthe audience. After that time letters met with no encouragement from\nthe great. Lord Shaftesbury says, he cannot but wonder how the Romans,\nafter the extinction of the _C\u00e6sarean_ and _Claudian_ family, and a\nshort interval of princes raised and destroyed with much disorder and\npublic ruin, were able to regain their perishing dominion, and\nretrieve their sinking state, by an after-race of wise and able\nprinces, successively adopted, and taken from a private state to rule\nthe empire of the world. They were men, who not only possessed the\nmilitary virtues, and supported that sort of discipline in the\nhighest degree; but as they sought the interest of the world, they\ndid what was in their power to restore liberty, and raise again the\nperishing arts, and the decayed virtue of mankind. But the season was\npast: _barbarity_ and _gothicism_ were already entered into the arts,\nere the savages made an impression on the empire. See _Advice to an\nAuthor_, part. ii. s. 1. The _gothicism_, hinted at by Shaftesbury,\nappears manifestly in the wretched situation to which the best authors\nwere reduced. The poets who could not hope to procure an audience,\nhaunted the baths and public walks, in order to fasten on their\nfriends, and, at any rate, obtain a hearing for their works. Juvenal\nsays, the plantations and marble columns of Julius Fronto resounded\nwith the vociferation of reciting poets:\n\n     Frontonis platani convulsaque marmora clamant\n     Semper, et assiduo rupt\u00e6 lectore column\u00e6.\n     Expectes eadem a summo minimoque poet\u00e2.\n                                  SAT. i. ver. 12.\n\nThe same author observes, that the poet, who aspired to literary\nfame, might borrow an house for the purpose of a public reading; and\nthe great man who accommodated the writer, might arrange his friends\nand freedmen on the back seats, with direction not to be sparing of\ntheir applause; but still a stage or pulpit, with convenient benches,\nwas to be procured, and that expence the patrons of letters would not\nsupply.\n\n                ----At si dulcedine fam\u00e6\n     Contentus recites, Maculonus commodat \u00e6des.\n     Scit dare libertos extrem\u00e2 in parte sedentes\n     Ordinis, et magnas comitum disponere voces.\n     Nemo dabit procerum, quanti subsellia constent.\n                                  SAT. vii. ver. 39.\n\nStatius, in Juvenal's time, was a favourite poet. If he announced a\nreading, his auditors went in crowds. He delighted all degrees and\nranks of men; but, when the hour of applause was over, the author was\nobliged to sell a tragedy to Paris, the famous actor, in order to\nprocure a dinner,\n\n     Curritur ad vocem jucundam, et carmen amic\u00e6?\n     Thebaidos, l\u00e6tam fecit cum Statius urbem?\n     Promisitque diem: tant\u00e2 dulcedine vulgi\n     Auditur; sed cum fregit subsellia versu,\n     Esurit, intactam Paridi nisi vendit Agaven.\n                               SAT. vii. ver. 82.\n\nThis was the hard lot of poetry, and this the state of public reading,\nwhich Aper describes to his friend Maternus.\n\n\nSection X.\n\n[a] Horace has the same observation:\n\n               ----Mediocribus esse poetis\n     Non Dii, non homines, non concessere column\u00e6.\n                          ART OF POETRY, ver. 372.\n\n     But God and man, and letter'd post denies,\n     That poets ever are of middling size.\n                              FRANCIS'S HORACE.\n\n[b] Notwithstanding all that is said, in this Dialogue, of Saleius\nBassus, it does not appear, in the judgement of Quintilian, that he\nwas a poet whose fame could extend itself to the distant provinces.\nPerfection in the kind is necessary. Livy, the historian, was at the\nhead of his profession. In consequence of his vast reputation, we know\nfrom Pliny, the consul, that a native of the city of Cadiz was so\nstruck with the character of that great writer, that he made a journey\nto Rome, with no other intent than to see that celebrated genius; and\nhaving gratified his curiosity, without staying to view the wonders of\nthat magnificent city, returned home perfectly satisfied. _Nunquamne\nlegisti Gaditanum quemdam Titi Livii nomine glori\u00e2que commotum, ad\nvisendum eum ab ultimo terrarum orbe venisse; statimque, ut viderat,\nabiisse?_ Lib. ii. epist. 3.\n\n[c] In Homer and Virgil, as well as in the dramatic poets of the first\norder, we frequently have passages of real eloquence, with the\ndifference which Quintilian mentions: the poet, he says, is a slave to\nthe measure of his verse; and, not being able at all times to make use\nof the true and proper word, he is obliged to quit the natural and\neasy way of expression, and avail himself of new modes and turns of\nphraseology, such as tropes, and metaphors, with the liberty of\ntransposing words, and lengthening or shortening syllables as he sees\noccasion. _Quod alligati ad certam pedum necessitatem non semper\npropriis uti possint, sed depulsi a rect\u00e2 vi\u00e2, necessario ad qu\u00e6dam\ndiverticula confugiant; nec mutare qu\u00e6dam modo verba, sed extendere,\ncorripere, convertere, dividere cogantur._ Quint, lib. x. cap. 1. The\nspeaker in the Dialogue is aware of this distinction, and, subject to\nit, the various branches of poetry are with him so many different\nmodes of eloquence.\n\n[d] The original has, the citadel of eloquence, which calls to mind an\nadmired passage in Lucretius:\n\n     Sed nil dulcius est bene quam munita tenere\n     Edita doctrin\u00e2 sapientum templa serena,\n     Despicere unde queas alios, passimque videre\n     Errare, atque viam pallantes qu\u00e6rere vit\u00e6.\n                                Lib. ii. ver. 7.\n\n[e] It is a fact well known, that in Greece the most illustrious of\nboth sexes thought it honourable to exercise themselves in the\nexhibitions of the theatre, and even to appear in the athletic games.\nPlutarch, it is true, will have it, that all scenic arts were\nprohibited at Sparta by the laws of Lycurgus; and yet Cornelius Nepos\nassures us, that no Laced\u00e6monian matron, however high her quality, was\nashamed to act for hire on the public stage. He adds, that throughout\nGreece, it was deemed the highest honour to obtain the prize in the\nOlympic games, and no man blushed to be a performer in plays and\npantomimes, and give himself a spectacle to the people. _Nulla\nLaced\u00e6moni tam est nobilis vidua, qu\u00e6 non in scenam eat mercede\nconducta. Magnis in laudibus tot\u00e2 fuit Gr\u00e6ci\u00e2, victorem Olympi\u00e6\ncitari. In scenam vero prodire, et populo esse spectaculo nemini in\niisdem gentibus fuit turpitudini._ Cor. Nep. _in Pr\u00e6fat._ It appears,\nhowever, from a story told by \u00c6lian and cited by Shaftesbury, _Advice\nto an Author_, part ii. s. 3, that the Greek women were by law\nexcluded from the Olympic games. Whoever was found to transgress, or\neven to cross the river Alpheus, during the celebration of that great\nspectacle, was liable to be thrown from a rock. The consequence was,\nthat not one female was detected, except _Callipatria_, or, as others\ncalled her, _Pherenic\u00e8_. This woman, disguised in the habit of a\nteacher of gymnastic exercises, introduced her son, _Pisidorus_, to\ncontend for the victor's prize. Her son succeeded. Transported with\njoy at a sight so glorious, the mother overleaped the fence, which\nenclosed the magistrates, and, in the violence of that exertion, let\nfall her garment. She was, by consequence, known to be a woman, but\nabsolved from all criminality. For that mild and equitable sentence,\nshe was indebted to the merit of her father, her brothers, and her\nson, who all obtained the victor's crown. The incident, however, gave\nbirth to a new law, whereby it was enacted, that the masters of the\ngymnastic art should, for the future, come naked to the Olympic games.\n_\u00c6lian_ lib. x. cap. 1; and see _Pausanias_, lib. v. cap. 6.\n\n[f] Nicostratus is praised by Pausanias (lib. v. cap. 20), as a great\nmaster of the athletic arts. Quintilian has also recorded his prowess.\n\"Nicostratus, whom in our youth we saw advanced in years, would\ninstruct his pupil in every branch of his art, and make him, what he\nwas himself, an invincible champion. Invincible he was, since, on one\nand the same day, he entered the lists as a wrestler and a boxer, and\nwas proclaimed conqueror in both.\" _Ac si fuerit qui docebitur, ille,\nquem adolescentes vidimus, Nicostratus, omnibus in eo docendi partibus\nsimiliter uteretur; efficietque illum, qualis hic fuit, luctando\npugnandoque quorum utroque in certamine iisdem diebus coronabatur\ninvictum._ Quint. lib, ii. cap. 8.\n\n\nSection XI.\n\n[a] Nero's ambition to excel in poetry was not only ridiculous, but,\nat the same time, destructive to Lucan, and almost all the good\nauthors of the age. See _Annals_, b. xv. According to the old\nscholiast on the Satires of Persius, the following verses were either\nwritten by Nero, or made in imitation of that emperor's style:\n\n     Torva Mimalloneis implerunt cornua bombis,\n     Et raptum vitulo caput ablatura superbo\n     Bassaris, et lyncem M\u00e6nas flexura corymbis,\n     Evion ingeminat: reparabilis adsonat echo.\n\nThe affectation of rhyme, which many ages afterwards was the\nessential part of monkish verse, the tumour of the words, and the\nwretched penury of thought, may be imputed to a frivolous prince, who\nstudied his art of poetry in the manner described by Tacitus,\n_Annals_, b. xiv. s. 16. And yet it may be a question, whether the\nsatirist would have the hardiness to insert the very words of an\nimperial poet, armed with despotic power. A burlesque imitation would\nanswer the purpose; and it may be inferred from another passage in the\nsame poem, that Persius was content to ridicule the mode of\nversification then in vogue at court.\n\n     Claudere sic versum didicit; Berecynthius Attin,\n     Et qui c\u00e6ruleum dirimebat Nerea Delphin.\n     Sic costam longo subduximus Apennino.\n\n[b] Vatinius was a favourite at the court of Nero. Tacitus calls him\nthe spawn of a cook's-shop and a tippling-house; _sutrin\u00e6 et tabern\u00e6\nalumnus_. He recommended himself to the favour of the prince by his\nscurrility and vulgar humour. Being, by those arts, raised above\nhimself, he became the declared enemy of all good men, and acted a\ndistinguished part among the vilest instruments of that pernicious\ncourt. See his character, _Annals_ xv. s. 34. When an illiberal and\nlow buffoon basks in the sunshine of a court, and enjoys exorbitant\npower, the cause of literature can have nothing to expect. The liberal\narts must, by consequence, be degraded by a corrupt taste, and\nlearning will be left to run wild and grow to seed.\n\n\nSection XII.\n\n[a] That poetry requires a retreat from the bustle of the world, has\nbeen so often repeated, that it is now considered as a truth, from\nwhich there can be no appeal. Milton, it is true, wrote his Paradise\nLost in a small house near _Bunhill Fields_; and Dryden courted the\nmuse in the hurry and dissipation of a town life. But neither of them\nfixed his residence by choice. Pope grew immortal on the banks of the\nThames. But though the country seems to be the seat of contemplation,\ntwo great writers have been in opposite opinions. Cicero says, woods\nand groves, and rivers winding through the meadows, and the refreshing\nbreeze, with the melody of birds, may have their attraction; but they\nrather relax the mind into indolence, than rouse our attention, or\ngive vigour to our faculties. _Sylvarum am\u00e6nitas, et pr\u00e6terlabentia\nflumina, et inspirantes ramis arborum aur\u00e6, volucrumque cantus, et\nipsa late circumspiciendi libertas ad se trahunt; at mihi remittere\npotius voluptas ista videtur cogitationem, quam intendere._ _De Orat._\nlib. ii. This, perhaps, may be true as applied to the public orator,\nwhose scene of action lay in the forum or the senate. Pliny, on the\nother hand, says to his friend Tacitus, there is something in the\nsolemnity of venerable woods, and the awful silence which prevails in\nthose places, that strongly disposes us to study and contemplation.\nFor the future, therefore, whenever you hunt, take along with you your\npen and paper, as well as your basket and bottle; for you will find\nthe mountains not more inhabited by Diana, than by Minerva. _Jam\nundique sylv\u00e6, et solitudo, ipsumque illud silentium, quod venationi\ndatur, magna cogitationis incitamenta sunt. Proinde, cum, venabere,\nlicebit, auctore me, ut panarium et lagunculam, sic etiam pugillares\nferas. Experiaris non Dianam magis montibus quam Minervam inerrare._\nLib. i. epist. 6. Between these two different opinions, a true poet\nmay be allowed to decide. Horace describes the noise and tumult of a\ncity life, and then says,\n\n     Scriptorum chorus omnis amat nemus, et fugit urbes.\n                        Epist. lib. ii. ep. ii. ver. 77.\n\n     Alas! to grottos and to groves we run,\n     To ease and silence, ev'ry muse's son.\n                                      POPE.\n\n[b] The expression in the original is full and expressive, _lucros\u00e6\nhujus et sanguinantis eloquenti\u00e6_; that gainful and blood-thirsty\neloquence. The immoderate wealth acquired by Eprius Marcellus has been\nmentioned in this Dialogue, section 8. Pliny gives us an idea of the\nvast acquisitions gained by Regulus, the notorious informer. From a\nstate of indigence, he rose, by a train of villainous actions, to such\nimmense riches, that he once consulted the omens, to know how soon he\nshould be worth sixty millions of sesterces, and found them so\nfavourable, that he had no doubt of being worth double that sum.\n_Aspice Regulum, qui ex paupere et tenui ad tantas opes per flagitia\nprocessit, ut ipse mihi dixerit, cum consuleret, quam cito sestertium\nsexcennies impleturus esset, invenisse se exta duplicata, quibus\nportendi millies et ducenties habiturum._ Lib. ii. ep. 20. In another\nepistle the same author relates, that Regulus, having lost his son,\nwas visited upon that occasion by multitudes of people, who all in\nsecret detested him, yet paid their court with as much assiduity as if\nthey esteemed and loved him. They retaliated upon this man his own\ninsidious arts: to gain the friendship of Regulus, they played the\ngame of Regulus himself. He, in the mean time, dwells in his villa on\nthe other side of the Tiber, where he has covered a large tract of\nground with magnificent porticos, and lined the banks of the river\nwith elegant statues; profuse, with all his avarice, and, in the depth\nof infamy, proud and vain-glorious. _Convenitur ad eum mir\u00e2\ncelebritate: cuncti detestantur, oderunt; et, quasi probent, quasi\ndiligant, cursant, frequentant, utque breviter, quod sentio, enunciem,\nin Regulo demerendo, Regulum imitantur. Tenet se trans Tyberim in\nhortis, in quibus latissimum solum porticibus immensis, ripam statuis\nsuis occupavit; ut est, in summ\u00e2 avaritia sumptuosus, in summ\u00e2\ninfami\u00e2 gloriosus._ Lib. iv. ep. 2. All this splendour, in which\nRegulus lived, was the fruit of a gainful and blood-thirsty eloquence;\nif that may be called eloquence, which Pliny says was nothing more\nthan a crazed imagination; _nihil pr\u00e6ter ingenium insanum_. Lib. iv.\nep. 7.\n\n[c] Orpheus, in poetic story, was the son of Calliope, and Linus\nboasted of Apollo for his father.\n\n            ----Nec Thracius Orpheus,\n     Nec Linus; huic mater quamvis, atque huic pater adsit,\n     Orphei Calliopea, Lino formosus Apollo.\n                                    VIRG. ECL. iv. ver. 55.\n\n     Not Orpheus' self, nor Linus, should exceed\n     My lofty lays, or gain the poet's meed,\n     Though Phoebus, though Calliope inspire,\n     And one the mother aid, and one the sire.\n                               WHARTON'S VIRGIL.\n\nOrpheus embarked in the Argonautic expedition. His history of it,\ntogether with his hymns, is still extant; but whether genuine, is much\ndoubted.\n\n[d] Lysias, the celebrated orator, was a native of Syracuse, the\nchief town in Sicily. He lived about four hundred years before the\nChristian \u00e6ra. Cicero says, that he did not addict himself to the\npractice of the bar; but his compositions were so judicious, so pure\nand elegant, that you might venture to pronounce him a perfect orator.\n_Tum fuit Lysias, ipse quidem in causis forensibus non versatus sed\negregi\u00e8 subtilis scriptor, atque elegans, quem jam prope audeas\noratorem perfectum dicere._ Cicero _De Claris Orat._ s. 35. Quintilian\ngives the same opinion. Lysias, he says, preceded Demosthenes: he is\nacute and elegant, and if to teach the art of speaking were the only\nbusiness of an orator, nothing more perfect can be found. He has no\nredundancy, nothing superfluous, nothing too refined, or foreign to\nhis purpose: his style is flowing, but more like a pure fountain, than\na noble river. _His \u00e6tate Lysias major, subtilis atque elegans, et quo\nnihil, si oratori satis sit docere, qu\u00e6ras perfectius. Nihil enim est\ninane, nihil arcessitum; puro tamen fonti, quam magno flumini\npropior._ Quint, lib. x. cap. 1. A considerable number of his orations\nis still extant, all written with exquisite taste and inexpressible\nsweetness. See a very pleasing translation by Dr. Gillies.\n\nHyperides flourished at Athens in the time of Demosthenes, \u00c6schynes,\nLycurgus, and other famous orators. That age, says Cicero, poured\nforth a torrent of eloquence, of the best and purest kind, without the\nfalse glitter of affected ornament, in a style of noble simplicity,\nwhich lasted to the end of that period. _Huic Hyperides proximus, et\n\u00c6schynes fuit, et Lycurgus, aliique plures. H\u00e6c enim \u00e6tas effudit hanc\ncopiam; et, ut opinio mea fert, succus ille et sanguis incorruptus\nusque ad hanc \u00e6tatem oratorum fuit, in qua naturalis inesset, non\nfucatus nitor._ _De Claris Orat._ s. 36. Quintilian allows to Hyperides a\nkeen discernment, and great sweetness of style; but he pronounces him\nan orator designed by nature to shine in causes of no great moment.\n_Dulcis in primis et acutus Hyperides; sed minoribus causis, ut non\ndixerim utilior, magis par._ Lib. x. cap. 1. Whatever might be the\ncase when this Dialogue happened, it is certain, at present, that the\nfame of Sophocles and Euripides has eclipsed the two Greek orators.\n\n[e] For an account of Asinius Pollio and Corvinus Messala, see\n_Annals_, b. xi. s. 6. Quintilian (b. xii. chap. 10) commends the\ndiligence of Pollio, and the dignity of Messala. In another part of\nhis Institutes, he praises the invention, the judgement, and spirit of\nPollio, but at the same time says, he fell so short of the suavity and\nsplendour of Cicero, that he might well pass for an orator of a former\nage. He adds, that Messala was natural and elegant: the grandeur of\nhis style seemed to announce the nobility of his birth; but still he\nwanted force and energy. _Malta in Asinio Pollione inventio, summa\ndiligentia, adeo ut quibusdam etiam nimia videatur; et consilii et\nanimi satis; a nitore et jucunditate Ciceronis ita longe abest, ut\nvideri possit s\u00e6culo prior. At Messala nitidus et candidus, et\nquodammodo pr\u00e6 se ferens in dicendo nobilitatem suam, viribus minor._\nQuintilian, lib. x. cap. 1. The two great poets of the Augustan age\nhave transmitted the name of Asinius Pollio to the latest posterity.\nVirgil has celebrated him as a poet, and a commander of armies, in the\nIllyrican and Dalmatic wars.\n\n     Tu mihi, seu magni superas jam saxa Timavi,\n     Sive oram Illyrici legis \u00e6quoris; en erit unquam\n     Ille dies, mihi cum liceat tua dicere facta?\n     En erit, ut liceat totum mihi ferre per orbem\n     Sola Sophocleo tua carmina digna cothurno?\n                                 ECLOG. viii. ver. 6.\n\n     O Pollio! leading thy victorious bands\n     O'er deep Timavus, or Illyria's sands;\n     O when thy glorious deeds shall I rehearse?\n     When tell the world how matchless is thy verse,\n     Worthy the lofty stage of laurell'd Greece,\n     Great rival of majestic Sophocles!\n                                   WHARTON'S VIRGIL.\n\nHorace has added the orator and the statesman:\n\n     Paulum sever\u00e6 musa tragedi\u00e6\n     Desit theatris; mox, ubi publicas\n       Res ordinaris, grande munus\n         Cecropio repetes cothurno,\n     Insigne moestis pr\u00e6sidium reis,\n     Et consulenti, Pollio, curi\u00e6,\n       Cui laurus \u00e6ternos honores\n         Dalmatico peperit triumpho.\n                       Lib. ii. ode 1.\n\n     Retard a while thy glowing vein,\n     Nor swell the solemn tragic scene;\n     And when thy sage, thy patriot cares\n     Have form'd the train of Rome's affairs,\n     With lofty rapture reinflam'd, diffuse\n     Heroic thoughts, and wake the buskin'd muse.\n                                FRANCIS'S HORACE.\n\nBut after all, the question put by Maternus, is, can any of their\norations be compared to the _Medea_ of Ovid, or the _Thyestes_ of\nVarius? Those two tragedies are so often praised by the critics of\nantiquity, that the republic of letters has reason to lament the loss.\nQuintilian says that the _Medea_ of Ovid was a specimen of genius,\nthat shewed to what heights the poet could have risen, had he thought\nfit rather to curb, than give the rein to his imagination. _Ovidii\nMedea videtur mihi ostendere quantum vir ille pr\u00e6stare potuisset, si\ningenio suo temperare, quam indulgere maluisset._ Lib. x. cap. 1.\n\nThe works of Varius, if we except a few fragments, are wholly lost.\nHorace, in his journey to Brundusium, met him and Virgil, and he\nmentions the incident with the rapture of a friend who loved them\nboth:\n\n     Plotius, et Varius Sinuess\u00e6, Virgiliusque\n     Occurrunt; anim\u00e6 quales neque candidiores\n     Terra tulit, neque queis me sit devinctior alter.\n                                       Lib. i. sat. 5.\n\nHorace also celebrates Varius as a poet of sublime genius. He begins\nhis Ode to Agrippa with the following lines:\n\n     Scriberis Vario fortis, et hostium\n     Victor, M\u00e6onii carminis alite,\n     Quam rem cumque ferox navibus, aut equis\n           Miles te duce gesserit.\n                               Lib. i. ode 6.\n\n     Varius, who soars on epic wing,\n     Agrippa, shall thy conquests sing,\n     Whate'er, inspir'd by thy command,\n     The soldier dar'd on sea or land.\n                           FRANCIS'S HORACE.\n\nA few fragments only of his works have reached posterity. His tragedy\nof THYESTES is highly praised by Quintilian. That judicious critic\ndoes not hesitate to say, that it may be opposed to the best\nproductions of the Greek stage. _Jam Varii Thyestes cuilibet Gr\u00e6corum\ncomparari potest._ Varius lived in high favour at the court of\nAugustus. After the death of Virgil, he was joined with _Plotinus_\nand _Tucca_ to revise the works of that admirable poet. The _Varus_ of\nVirgil, so often celebrated in the Pastorals, was, notwithstanding\nwhat some of the commentators have said, a different person from\nVarius, the author of Thyestes.\n\n\nSection XIII.\n\n[a] The rural delight of Virgil is described by himself:\n\n     Rura mihi et rigui placeant in vallibus amnes;\n     Flumina amem, sylvasque inglorius. O ubi campi,\n     Sperchiusque, et virginibus bacchata Lac\u00e6nis\n     Taygeta! O quis me gelidis sub montibus H\u00e6mi\n     Sistat, et ingenti ramorum protegat umbr\u00e2?\n                        GEORGICA, lib. ii. ver. 485.\n\n     Me may the lowly vales and woodland please,\n     And winding rivers, and inglorious ease;\n     O that I wander'd by Sperchius' flood,\n     Or on Taygetus' sacred top I stood!\n     Who in cool H\u00e6mus' vales my limbs will lay,\n     And in the darkest thicket hide from day?\n                                 WHARTON'S VIRG.\n\nBesides this poetical retreat, which his imagination could command at\nany time, Virgil had a real and delightful villa near Naples, where\nhe composed his Georgics, and wrote great part of the \u00c6neid.\n\n[b] When Augustus, or any eminent citizen, distinguished by his public\nmerit, appeared in the theatre, the people testified their joy by\nacclamations, and unbounded applause. It is recorded by Horace, that\nM\u00e6cenas received that public honour.\n\n               ----Datus in theatro\n            Cum tibi plausus,\n     Care M\u00e6cenas eques, ut paterni\n     Fluminis rip\u00e6, simul et jocosa\n     Redderet laudes tibi Vaticani\n            Montis imago.\n                    Lib. i. ode 20.\n\nWhen Virgil appeared, the audience paid the same compliment to a man\nwhose poetry adorned the Roman story. The letters from Augustus, which\nare mentioned in this passage, have perished in the ruins of ancient\nliterature.\n\n[c] Pomponius Secundus was of consular rank, and an eminent writer of\ntragedy. See _Annals_, b. ii. s. 13. His life was written by Pliny\nthe elder, whose nephew mentions the fact (book iii. epist. 5), and\nsays it was a tribute to friendship. Quintilian pronounces him the\nbest of all the dramatic poets whom he had seen; though the critics\nwhose judgement was matured by years, did not think him sufficiently\ntragical. They admitted, however, that his erudition was considerable,\nand the beauty of his composition surpassed all his contemporaries.\n_Eorum, quos viderim, longe princeps Pomponius Secundus, quem senes\nparum tragicum putabant, eruditione ac nitore pr\u00e6stare confitebantur._\nLib. x. cap. 1.\n\n[d] Quintilian makes honourable mention of Domitius Afer. He says,\nwhen he was a boy, the speeches of that orator for Volusenus Catulus\nwere held in high estimation. _Et nobis pueris insignes pro Voluseno\nCatulo Domitii Afri orationes ferebantur._ Lib. x. cap 1. He adds, in\nanother part of the same chapter, that Domitius Afer and Julius\nAfricanus were, of all the orators who flourished in his time, without\ncomparison the best. But Afer stands distinguished by the splendour\nof his diction, and the rhetorical art which he has displayed in all\nhis compositions. You would not scruple to rank him among the ancient\norators. _Eorum quos viderim, Domitius Afer et Julius Secundus longe\npr\u00e6stantissimi. Verborum arte ille, et toto genere dicendi\npr\u00e6ferendus, et quem in numero veterum locare non timeas._ Lib. x.\ncap. 1. Quintilian relates, that in a conversation which he had when a\nyoung man, he asked Domitius Afer what poet was, in his opinion, the\nnext to Homer? The answer was, _Virgil is undoubtedly the second epic\npoet, but he is nearer to the first than to the third. Utar enim\nverbis, qu\u00e6 ex Afro Domitio juvenis accepi; qui mihi interroganti,\nquem Homero crederet maxim\u00e8 accedere: Secundus, inquit, est Virgilius,\npropior tamen primo quam tertio._ Lib. x. cap. 1. We may believe that\nQuintilian thought highly of the man whose judgement he cites as an\nauthority. Quintilian, however, had in view nothing but the talents of\nthis celebrated orator. Tacitus, as a moral historian, looked at the\ncharacter of the man. He introduces him on the stage of public\nbusiness in the reign of Tiberius, and there represents him in haste\nto advance himself by any kind of crime. _Quoquo facinore properus\nclare cere._ He tells us, in the same passage (_Annals_, b. iv. s.\n52), that Tiberius pronounced him an orator in his own right, _suo\njure disertum_. Afer died in the reign of Nero, A.U.C. 812, A.D. 59.\nIn relating his death, Tacitus observes, that he raised himself by his\neloquence to the first civil honours; but he does not dismiss him\nwithout condemning his morals. _Annals_, b. xiv. s. 19.\n\n[e] We find in the Annals and the History of Tacitus, a number of\ninstances to justify the sentiments of Maternus. The rich found it\nnecessary to bequeath part of their substance to the prince, in order\nto secure the remainder for their families. For the same reason,\nAgricola made Domitian joint heir with his wife and daughter. _Life of\nAgricola_, section 43.\n\n[f] By a law of the Twelve Tables, a crown, when fairly earned by\nvirtue, was placed on the head of the deceased, and another was\nordered to be given to his father. The spirit of the law, Cicero says,\nplainly intimated, that commendation was a tribute due to departed\nvirtue. A crown was given not only to him who earned it, but also to\nthe father, who gave birth to distinguished merit. _Illa jam\nsignificatio est, laudis ornamenta ad mortuos pertinere, quod coronam\nvirtute partam, et ei qui peperisset, et ejus parenti, sine fraude lex\nimpositam esse jubet._ _De Legibus_, lib. ii. s. 24. This is the\nreward to which Maternus aspires; and, that being granted, he desires,\nas Horace did before him, to waive the pomp of funeral ceremonies.\n\n     Absint inani funere n\u00e6ni\u00e6,\n     Luctusque turpes et querimoni\u00e6;\n       Compesce clamorem, ac sepulchri\n         Mitte supervacuos honores.\n                      Lib. ii. ode 20.\n\n     My friends, the funeral sorrow spare,\n     The plaintive song, and tender tear;\n     Nor let the voice of grief profane,\n     With loud laments, the solemn scene;\n     Nor o'er your poet's empty urn\n     With useless idle sorrow mourn.\n                         FRANCIS'S HORACE.\n\n\nSection XIV.\n\n[a] Vipstanius Messala commanded a legion, and, at the head of it,\nwent over to Vespasian's party in the contention with Vitellius. He\nwas a man of illustrious birth, and equal merit; the only one, says\nTacitus, who entered into that war from motives of virtue. _Legioni\nVipstanius Messala pr\u00e6erat, claris majoribus, egregius ipse, et qui\nsolus ad id bellum artes bonas attulisset._ _Hist._ lib. iii. s. 9. He\nwas brother to Regulus, the vile informer, who has been mentioned. See\nLife of Agricola, section 2. note a, and this tract, s. xii. note [b].\nMessala, we are told by Tacitus, before he had attained the senatorian\nage, acquired great fame by pleading the cause of his profligate\nbrother with extraordinary eloquence, and family affection. _Magnam eo\ndie pietatis eloquenti\u00e6que famam Vipstanius Messala adeptus est;\nnondum senatori\u00e2 \u00e6tate, ausus pro fratre Aquilio Regulo deprecari._\n_Hist._ lib. iv. s. 42. Since Messala has now joined the company, the\nDialogue takes a new turn, and, by an easy and natural transition,\nslides into the question concerning the causes of the decline of\neloquence.\n\n[b] This is probably the same Asiaticus, who, in the revolt of the\nprovinces of Gaul, fought on the side of VINDEX. See _Hist._ b. ii. s.\n94. Biography was, in that evil period, a tribute paid by the friends\nof departed merit, and the only kind of writing, in which men could\ndare faintly to utter a sentiment in favour of virtue and public\nliberty.\n\n[c] In the declamations of Seneca and Quintilian, we have abundant\nexamples of these scholastic exercises, which Juvenal has placed in a\nridiculous light.\n\n     Et nos ergo manum ferul\u00e6 subduximus, et nos\n     Consilium dedimus Syll\u00e6, privatus ut altum\n     Dormiret.\n                                Sat. i. ver. 15.\n\n     Provok'd by these incorrigible fools,\n     I left declaiming in pedantic schools;\n     Where, with men-boys, I strove to get renown,\n     Advising Sylla to a private gown.\n                                 DRYDEN'S JUVENAL.\n\n\nSection XV.\n\n[a] The eloquence of Cicero, and the eminent orators of that age, was\npreferred by all men of sound judgement to the unnatural and affected\nstyle that prevailed under the emperors. Quintilian gives a decided\nopinion. Cicero, he says, was allowed to be the reigning orator of his\ntime, and his name, with posterity, is not so much that of a man, as\nof eloquence itself. _Quare non immerito ab hominibus \u00e6tatis su\u00e6,\nregnare in judiciis dictus est: apud posteros vero id consecutus, ut\nCicero jam non hominis, sed eloquenti\u00e6 nomen habeatur._ Lib. x. cap.\n1. Pliny the younger professed that Cicero was the orator with whom he\naspired to enter into competition. Not content with the eloquence of\nhis own times, he held it absurd not to follow the best examples of a\nformer age. _Est enim mihi cum Cicerone \u00e6mulatio, nec sum contentus\neloquenti\u00e2 s\u00e6culi nostri. Nam stultissimum credo, ad imitandum non\noptima qu\u00e6que pr\u00e6ponere._ Lib. i. epist. 5.\n\n[b] Nicetes was a native of Smyrna, and a rhetorician in great\ncelebrity. Seneca says (_Controversiarum_, lib. iv. cap. 25), that his\nscholars, content with hearing their master, had no ambition to be\nheard themselves. Pliny the younger, among the commendations which he\nbestows on a friend, mentions, as a praise-worthy part of his\ncharacter, that he attended the lectures of Quintilian and Nicetes\nSacerdos, of whom Pliny himself was at that time a constant follower.\n_Erat non studiorum tantum, verum etiam studiosorum amantissimus, ac\nprope quotidie ad audiendos, quos tunc ego frequentabam, Quintilianum\net Niceten Sacerdotem, ventitabat._ Lib. vi. epist. 6.\n\n[c] Mitylene was the chief city of the isle of Lesbos, in the \u00c6gean\nSea, near the coast of Asia. The place at this day is called\n_Metelin_, subject to the Turkish dominion. _Ephesus_ was a city of\n_Ionia_, in the Lesser Asia, now called _Ajaloue_ by the Turks, who\nare masters of the place.\n\n[d] Domitius Afer and Julius Africanus have been already mentioned,\nsection xiii. note [d]. Both are highly praised by Quintilian. For\nAsinius Pollio, see s. xii. note [e].\n\n\nSection XVI.\n\n[a] Quintilian puts the same question; and, according to him,\nDemosthenes is the last of the ancients among the Greeks, as Cicero\nis among the Romans. See _Quintilian_, lib. viii. cap. 5.\n\n[b] The siege of Troy is supposed to have been brought to a conclusion\neleven hundred and ninety-three years before Christian \u00e6ra. From that\ntime to the sixth year of Vespasian (A.U.C. 828), when this Dialogue\nwas had, the number of years that intervened was about 1268; a period\nwhich, with propriety, may be said to be little less than 1300 years.\n\n[c] Demosthenes died, before Christ 322 years, A.U.C. 432. From that\ntime to the sixth of Vespasian, A.U.C. 828, the intervening space was\nabout 396 years. Aper calls it little more than 400 years; but in a\nconversation-piece strict accuracy is not to be expected.\n\n[d] In the rude state of astronomy, which prevailed during many ages\nof the world, it was natural that mankind should differ in their\ncomputation of time. The ancient Egyptians, according to Diodorus\nSiculus, lib. i. and Pliny the elder, lib. vii. s. 48, measured time\nby the new moons. Some called the summer one year, and the winter\nanother. At first thirty days were a lunar year; three, four, and six\nmonths were afterwards added, and hence in the Egyptian chronology the\nvast number of years from the beginning of the world. Herodotus\ninforms us, that the Egyptians, in process of time, formed the idea of\nthe solar or solstitial year, subdivided into twelve months. The Roman\nyear at first was lunar, consisting, in the time of Romulus, of ten\nmonths. Numa Pompilius added two. Men saw a diversity in the seasons,\nand wishing to know the cause, began at length to perceive that the\ndistance or proximity of the sun occasioned the various operations of\nnature; but it was long before the space of time, wherein that\nluminary performs his course through the zodiac, and returns to the\npoint from which he set out, was called a year. The great year (_annus\nmagnus_), or the PLATONIC YEAR, is the space of time, wherein the\nseven planets complete their revolutions, and all set out again from\nthe same point of the heavens where their course began before.\nMathematicians have been much divided in their calculations. Brotier\nobserves, that Riccioli makes the great year 25,920 solar years;\nTycho Brahe, 25,816; and Cassini, 24,800. Cicero expressly calls it a\nperiod of 12,954 years. _Horum annorum, quos in fastis habemus, MAGNUS\nannos duodecim millia nonagentos quinquaginta quatuor amplectitur\nsolstitiales scilicet._ For a full and accurate dissertation on the\nANNUS MAGNUS, see the Memoirs of the Academy of Belles Lettres, tom.\nxxii. 4to edit. p. 82.\n\nBrotier, in his note on this passage, relates a fact not universally\nknown. He mentions a letter from one of the Jesuits on the mission,\ndated _Peking_, 25th October 1725, in which it is stated, that in the\nmonth of March preceding, when Jupiter, Mars, Venus, and Mercury were\nin conjunction, the Chinese mathematicians fancied that an\napproximation of Saturn was near at hand, and, in that persuasion,\ncongratulated the emperor YONG-TCHING on the renovation of the world,\nwhich was shortly to take place. The emperor received the addresses of\nthe nobility, and gave credit to the opinion of the philosophers in\nall his public edicts. Meanwhile, _Father Kegler_ endeavoured to\nundeceive the emperor, and to convince him that the whole was a\nmistake of the Chinese mathematicians: but he tried in vain; flattery\nsucceeded at court, and triumphed over truth.\n\n[e] The argument is this: If the great year is the measure of time;\nthen, as it consists, according to Cicero, of 12,954 solar years, the\nwhole being divided by twelve, every month of the great year would be\nclearly 1080 years. According to that calculation, Demosthenes not\nonly lived in the same year with the persons engaged in the Dialogue,\nbut, it may be said, in the same month. These are the months to which\nVirgil alludes in the fourth eclogue:\n\n     Incipient magni procedere menses.\n\n\nSection XVII.\n\n[a] Menenius Agrippa was consul A.U.C. 251. In less than ten years\nafterwards, violent dissensions broke out between the patrician order\nand the common people, who complained that they were harassed and\noppressed by their affluent creditors. One Sicinius was their\nfactious demagogue. He told them, that it was in vain they fought the\nbattles of their country, since they were no better than slaves and\nprisoners at Rome. He added, that men are born equal; that the fruits\nof the earth were the common birth-right of all, and an agrarian law\nwas necessary; that they groaned under a load of debts and taxes; and\nthat a lazy and corrupt aristocracy battened at ease on the spoils of\ntheir labour and industry. By the advice of this incendiary, the\ndiscontented citizens made a secession to the MONS SACER, about three\nmiles out of the city. The fathers, in the meantime, were covered with\nconsternation. In order, however, to appease the fury of the\nmultitude, they dispatched Menenius Agrippa to their camp. In the rude\nunpolished style of the times (_prisco illo dicendi et horrido modo_,\nsays Livy), that orator told them:\n\n     \"At the time when the powers of man did not, as at present,\n     co-operate to one useful end, and the members of the human\n     body had their separate interest, their factions, and\n     cabals; it was agreed among them, that the belly maintained\n     itself by their toil and labour, enjoying, in the middle of\n     all, a state of calm repose, pampered with luxuries, and\n     gratified with every kind of pleasure. A conspiracy\n     followed, and the several members of the body took the\n     covenant. The hand would no longer administer food; the\n     mouth would not accept it, and the drudgery of mastication\n     was too much for the teeth. They continued in this\n     resolution, determined to starve the TREASURY of the body,\n     till they began to feel the consequences of their\n     ill-advised revolt. The several members lost their former\n     vigour, and the whole body was falling into a rapid decline.\n     It was then seen that the belly was formed for the good of\n     the whole; that it was by no means lazy, idle, and inactive;\n     but, while it was properly supported, took care to\n     distribute nourishment to every part, and having digested\n     the supplies, filled the veins with pure and wholesome\n     blood.\"\n\nThe analogy, which this fable bore to the sedition of the Roman\npeople, was understood and felt. The discontented multitude saw that\nthe state of man described by Menenius, was _like to an\ninsurrection_. They returned to Rome, and submitted to legal\ngovernment. _Tempore, quo in homine non, ut nunc, omnia in unum\nconsentiebant, sed singulis membris suum cuique consilium, sum sermo\nfuerat, indignatas reliquas partes, su\u00e2 cur\u00e2, suo labore, ac\nministerio, ventri omnia qu\u00e6ri; ventrem in medio quietum, nihil aliud,\nquam datis voluptatibus frui; conspirasse inde, ne manus ad os cibum\nferrent, nec os acciperit datum, nec dentes conficerent. Hac ir\u00e2 dum\nventrem fame domare vellent, ipsa un\u00e2 membra, totumque corpus ad\nextremam tabem venisse. Inde apparuisse, ventris quoque haud segne\nministerium esse; nec magis ali quam alere eum; reddentem in omnes\ncorporis partes hunc, quo vivimus vigemusque, divisum, pariter in\nvenas, maturum confecto cibo sanguinem._ Livy, lib. ii. s. 32. St.\nPaul has made use of a similar argument;\n\n     \"The body is not one member, but many: if the foot shall\n     say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it,\n     therefore, not of the body? and if the ear shall say,\n     Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it,\n     therefore, not of the body? If the whole body were an eye,\n     where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where\n     were the smelling? But now hath God set the members everyone\n     of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. And if they\n     were all one member, where were the body? But now are they\n     many members, yet but one body: and the eye cannot say unto\n     the hand, I have no need of thee; nor again, the head to the\n     feet, I have no need of you. And whether one member suffer,\n     all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured,\n     all the members rejoice with it.\"\n                  _First Epistle to the Corinthians_, chap. xii.\n\nThis reasoning of St. Paul merits the attention of those friends of\ninnovation, who are not content with the station in which God has\nplaced them, and, therefore, object to all subordination, all ranks in\nsociety.\n\n[b] C\u00e6sar the dictator was, as the poet expresses it, graced with both\nMinervas. Quintilian is of opinion, that if he had devoted his whole\ntime to the profession of eloquence, he would have been the great\nrival of Cicero. The energy of his language, his strength of\nconception, and his power over the passions, were so striking, that he\nmay be said to have harangued with the same spirit that he fought.\n_Caius vero C\u00e6sar si foro tantum vacasset, non alius ex nostris contra\nCiceronem nominaretur. Tanta in eo vis est, id acumen, ea concitatio,\nut illum eodem animo dixisse, quo bellavit, appareat._ Lib. x. cap. 1.\nTo speak of Cicero in this place, were to hold a candle to the sun. It\nwill be sufficient to refer to Quintilian, who in the chapter above\ncited has drawn a beautiful parallel between him and Demosthenes. The\nRoman orator, he admits, improved himself by a diligent study of the\nbest models of Greece. He attained the warmth and the sublime of\nDemosthenes, the harmony of Plato, and the sweet flexibility of\nIsocrates. His own native genius supplied the rest. He was not\ncontent, as Pindar expresses it, to collect the drops that rained down\nfrom heaven, but had in himself the living fountain of that copious\nflow, and that sublime, that pathetic energy, which were bestowed upon\nhim by the bounty of Providence, that in one man eloquence might exert\nall her powers. _Nam mihi videtur Marcus Tullius, cum se totum ad\nimitationem Gr\u00e6corum contulisset, effinxisse vim Demosthenis, copiam\nPlatonis, jucunditatem Isocratis. Nec vero quod in quoque optimum fuit\nstudio consecutus est tantum, sed plurimas vel potius omnes ex se ipso\nvirtutes extulit immortalis ingenii beatissim\u00e2 ubertate. Non enim\npluvias (ut ait Pindarus) aquas colligit sed vivo gurgite exundat,\ndono quodam providenti\u00e6 genitus, in quo vires suas eloquentia\nexperiretur._ Lib. x. cap. 1.\n\n[c] Marcus C\u00e6lius Rufus, in the judgement of Quintilian, was an orator\nof considerable genius. In the conduct of a prosecution, he was\nremarkable for a certain urbanity, that gave a secret charm to his\nwhole speech. It is to be regretted that he was not a man of better\nconduct and longer life. _Multum ingenii in C\u00e6lio, et pr\u00e6cipu\u00e8 in\naccusando multa urbanitas; dignusque vir, cui et mens melior, et vita\nlongior contigisset._ Quint, lib. x. cap. 1. His letters to Cicero\nmake the eighth book of the _Epistol\u00e6 ad Familiares_. Velleius\nPaterculus says of him, that his style of eloquence and his cast of\nmind bore a resemblance to Curio, but raised him above that factious\norator. His genius for mischief and evil deeds was not inferior to\nCurio, and his motives were strong and urgent, since his fortune was\nworse than even his frame of mind. _Marcus C\u00e6lius, vir eloquio animoque\nCurioni simillimus, sed in utroque perfectior; nec minus ingenios\u00e8\nnequam, cum ne in modic\u00e2 quidem servari posset, quippe pejor illi res\nfamiliaris, quam mens._ Vell. Patere. lib. ii. s. 68.\n\nLicinius Macer Calvus, we are told by Seneca, maintained a long but\nunjust contention with Cicero himself for the palm of eloquence. He\nwas a warm and vehement accuser, insomuch that Vatinius, though\ndefended by Cicero, interrupted Calvus in the middle of his speech,\nand said to the judges, \"Though this man has a torrent of words, does\nit follow that I must be condemned?\" _Calvus diu cum Cicerone\niniquissimam litem de principatu eloquenti\u00e6 habuit; et usque e\u00f2\nviolentus accusator et concitatus fuit, ut in media actione ejus\nsurgeret Vatinius reus, et exclamaret, Rogo vos, judices, si iste\ndisertus est, ideo me damnari oportet?_ Seneca, _Controv._ lib. iii.\ncap. 19. Cicero could not dread him as a rival, and it may therefore\nbe presumed, that he has drawn his character with an impartial hand.\nCalvus was an orator more improved by literature than Curio. He spoke\nwith accuracy, and in his composition shewed great taste and delicacy;\nbut, labouring to refine his language, he was too attentive to little\nniceties. He wished to make no bad blood, and he lost the good. His\nstyle was polished with timid caution; but while it pleased the ear of\nthe learned, the spirit evaporated, and of course made no impression\nin the forum, which is the theatre of eloquence. _Ad Calvum\nrevertamur; qui orator fuisset cum literis eruditior quam Curio, tum\netiam accuratius quoddam dicendi, et exquisitius afferebat genus; quod\nquamquam scienter eleganterque tractabat, nimium tamen inquirens in\nse, atque ipse sese observans, metuensque ne vitiosum colligeret,\netiam verum sanguinem deperdebat. Itaque ejus oratio nimi\u00e2 religione\nattenuata, doctis et attent\u00e8 audientibus erat illustris, a multitudine\nautem, et a foro, cui nata eloquentia est, devorabatur._ _De Claris\nOrat._ s. 288. Quintilian says, there were, who preferred him to all\nthe orators of his time. Others were of opinion that, by being too\nsevere a critic on himself, he polished too much, and grew weak by\nrefinement. But his manner was grave and solid; his style was chaste,\nand often animated. To be thought a man of attic eloquence was the\nheight of his ambition. If he had lived to see his error, and to give\nto his eloquence a true and perfect form, not by retrenching (for\nthere was nothing to be taken away), but by adding certain qualities\nthat were wanted, he would have reached the summit of his art. By a\npremature death his fame was nipped in the bud. _Inveni qui Calvum\npr\u00e6ferrent omnibus; inveni qui contr\u00e0 crederent eum, nimi\u00e2 contra se\ncalumni\u00e2, verum sanguinem perdidisse. Sed est et sancta et gravis\noratio, et castigata, et frequenter vehemens quoque. Imitator est\nautem Atticorum; fecitque illi properata mors injuriam, si quid\nadjecturus, non si quid detracturus fuit._ Quintil. lib. x. cap. 1.\n\n[d] This was the famous Marcus Junius Brutus, who stood forth in the\ncause of liberty, and delivered his country from the usurpation of\nJulius C\u00e6sar. Cicero describes him in that great tragic scene,\nbrandishing his bloody dagger, and calling on Cicero by name, to tell\nhim that his country was free. _C\u00e6sare interfecto, statim cruentum\nalt\u00e8 extollens Marcus Brutus pugionem, Ciceronem nominatim exclamavit,\natque ei recuperatam libertatem est gratulatus._ Philippic, ii. s. 28.\nThe late Doctor Akenside has retouched this passage with all the\ncolours of a sublime imagination.\n\n     Look then abroad through nature, through the range\n     Of planets, suns, and adamantine spheres,\n     Wheeling unshaken through the void immense,\n     And speak, O man! does this capacious scene\n     With half that kindling majesty dilate\n     Thy strong conception, as when Brutus rose\n     Refulgent from the stroke of C\u00e6sar's fate,\n     Amid the crowd of patriots, and his arm\n     Aloft extending, like eternal Jove\n     When guilt brings down the thunder, call'd aloud\n     On Tully's name, and shook his crimson steel,\n     And bade the Father of his Country hail!\n     For, lo! the tyrant prostrate in the dust,\n     And Rome again is free.\n                     PLEASURES OF IMAG. b. i. ver. 487.\n\nAccording to Quintilian, Brutus was fitter for philosophical\nspeculations, and books of moral theory, than for the career of public\noratory. In the former he was equal to the weight and dignity of his\nsubject: you clearly saw that he believed what he said. _Egregius vero\nmultoque quam in orationibus pr\u00e6stantior Brutus, suffecit ponderi\nrerum; scias eum sentire qu\u00e6 dicit._ Quintil. lib. x. cap. 1.\n\nFor Asinius Pollio and Messala, see section xii. note [e].\n\n[e] Hirtius and Pansa were consuls A.U.C. 711; before the Christian\n\u00e6ra 43. In this year, the famous _triple league_, called the\nTRIUMVIRATE, was formed between Augustus, Lepidus, and Antony. The\n_proscription_, or the list of those who were doomed to die for the\ncrime of adhering to the cause of liberty, was also settled, and\nCicero was one of the number. A band of assassins went in quest of him\nto his villa, called _Astura_, near the sea-shore. Their leader was\none Popilius L\u00e6nas, a military tribune, whom Cicero had formerly\ndefended with success in a capital cause. They overtook Cicero in his\nlitter. He commanded his servants to set him down, and make no\nresistance; then looking upon his executioners with a presence and\nfirmness which almost daunted them, and thrusting his neck as forward\nas he could out of the litter, he bade them _do their work, and take\nwhat they wanted_. The murderers cut off his head, and both his hands.\nPopilius undertook to convey them to Rome, as the most agreeable\npresent to Antony; without reflecting on the _infamy of carrying that\nhead, which had saved his own_. He found Antony in the forum, and upon\nshewing the spoils which he brought, was rewarded on the spot with the\n_honour of a crown, and about eight thousand pounds sterling_. Antony\nordered the head to be _fixed upon the rostra, between the two\nhands_; a sad spectacle to the people, who beheld those mangled\nmembers, which used to exert themselves, from that place, in defence\nof the lives, the fortunes, and the liberties of Rome. Cicero was\nkilled on the seventh of December, about ten days from the settlement\nof the triumvirate, after he had lived _sixty-three years, eleven\nmonths, and five days_. See Middleton's _Life of Cicero_, 4to edit.\nvol. ii. p. 495 to 498. Velleius Paterculus, after mentioning Cicero's\ndeath, breaks out in a strain of indignation, that almost redeems the\ncharacter of that time-serving writer. He says to Antony, in a\nspirited apostrophe, you have no reason to exult: you have gained no\npoint by paying the assassin, who stopped that eloquent mouth, and cut\noff that illustrious head. You have paid the wages of murder, and you\nhave destroyed a consul who was the conservator of the commonwealth.\nBy that act you delivered Cicero from a distracted world, from the\ninfirmities of old age, and from a life which, under your usurpation,\nwould have been worse than death. His fame was not to be crushed: the\nglory of his actions and his eloquence still remains, and you have\nraised it higher than ever. He lives, and will continue to live in\nevery age and nation. Posterity will admire and venerate the torrent\nof eloquence, which he poured out against yourself, and will for ever\nexecrate the horrible murder which you committed. _Nihil tamen egisti,\nMarce Antoni (cogit enim excedere propositi formam operis erumpens\nanimo ac pectore indignatio): nihil, inquam, egisti; mercedem\nc\u00e6lestissimi oris, et clarissimi capitis abscissi numerando;\nauctoramentoque funebri ad conservatoris quondam reipublic\u00e6 tantique\nconsulis irritando necem. Rapuisti tu Marco Ciceroni lucem sollicitam\net \u00e6tatem senilem, et vitam miseriorem te principe, quam sub te\ntriumviro mortem. Famam vero, gloriamque factorum atque dictorum adeo\nnon abstulisti, ut auxeris. Vivit, vivetque per omnium s\u00e6culorum\nmemoriam; omnisque posteritas illius in te scripta mirabitur, tuum in\neum factum execrabitur._ Vell. Paterc. lib. ii. s. 66.\n\n[f] Between the consulship of Augustus, which began immediately after\nthe destruction of Hirtius and Pansa, A.U.C. 711, and the death of\nthat emperor, which was A.U. 767, fifty-six years intervened, and to\nthe sixth of Vespasian (A.U.C. 828), about 118 years. For the sake of\na round number, it is called in the Dialogue a space of 120 years.\n\n[g] Julius C\u00e6sar landed in Britain in the years of Rome 699 and 700.\nSee _Life of Agricola_, s. 13. note a. It does not appear when Aper\nwas in Britain; it could not be till the year of Rome 796, when Aulus\nPlautius, by order of the emperor Claudius, undertook the conquest of\nthe island. See _Life of Agricola_, s. 14. note a. At that time, the\nBriton who fought against C\u00e6sar, must have been far advanced in years.\n\n[h] A largess was given to the people, in the fourth year of\nVespasian, when Domitian entered on his second consulship. This,\nBrotier says, appears on a medal, with this inscription: CONG. II.\nCOS. II. _Congiarium alterum, Domitiano consule secund\u00f9m._ The custom\nof giving large distributions to the people was for many ages\nestablished at Rome. Brotier traces it from Ancus Martius, the fourth\nking of Rome, when the poverty of the people called for relief. The\nlike bounty was distributed by the generals, who returned in triumph.\nLucullus and Julius C\u00e6sar displayed, on those occasions, great pomp\nand magnificence. Corn, wine, and oil, were plentifully distributed,\nand the popularity, acquired by those means, was, perhaps, the ruin of\nthe commonwealth. C\u00e6sar lavished money. Augustus followed the example,\nand Tiberius did the same; but prodigality was not his practice. His\npolitic genius taught him all the arts of governing. The bounties thus\ndistributed, were called, when given to the people, CONGIARIA, and, to\nthe soldiers, DONATIVA. Whoever desires to form an idea of the number\nof Roman citizens who, at different times, received largesses, and the\nprodigious expence attending them, may see an account drawn up with\ndiligent attention by Brotier, in an elaborate note on this passage.\nHe begins with Julius C\u00e6sar; and pursues the enquiry through the\nseveral successive emperors, fixing the date and expence at every\nperiod, as low down as the consulship of Constantius and Galerius\nMaximianus; when, the empire being divided into the eastern and\nwestern, its former magnificence was, by consequence, much diminished.\n\n[i] The person here called Corvinus was the same as Corvinus Messala,\nwho flourished in the reign of Augustus, at the same time with Asinius\nPollio. See s. xii. note [e].\n\n\nSection XVIII.\n\n[a] Servius Sulpicius Galba was consul A.U.C. 610, before the\nChristian \u00e6ra 144. Cicero says of him, that he was, in his day, an\norator of eminence. When he spoke in public, the natural energy of his\nmind supported him, and the warmth of his imagination made him\nvehement and pathetic; his language was animated, bold, and rapid; but\nwhen he, afterwards, took his pen in hand to correct and polish, the\nfit of enthusiasm was over; his passions ebbed away, and the\ncomposition was cold and languid. _Galbam fortasse vis non ingenii\nsolum, sed etiam animi, et naturalis quidam dolor, dicentem\nincendebat, efficiebatque, ut et incitata, et gravis, et vehemens\nesset oratio; dein cum otiosus stilum prehenderat, motusque omnis\nanimi, tanquam ventus, hominem defecerat, flaccescebat oratio. Ardor\nanimi non semper adest, isque cum consedit, omnis illa vis, et quasi\nflamma oratoris extinguitur._ _De Claris Orat._ s. 93. Suetonius says,\nthat the person here intended was of consular dignity, and, by his\neloquence, gave weight and lustre to his family. _Life of Galba_, s.\niii.\n\n[b] Caius Papirius Carbo was consul A.U.C. 634. Cicero wishes that he\nhad proved himself as good a citizen, as he was an orator. Being\nimpeached for his turbulent and seditious conduct, he did not choose\nto stand the event of a trial, but escaped the judgement of the\nsenate by a voluntary death. His life was spent in forensic causes.\nMen of sense, who heard him have reported, that he was a fluent,\nanimated, and harmonious speaker; at times pathetic, always pleasing,\nand abounding with wit. _Carbo, quoad vita suppeditavit, est in multis\njudiciis causisque cognitus. Hunc qui audierant prudentes homines,\ncanorum oratorem, et volubilem, et satis acrem, atque eundem et\nvehementem, et valde dulcem, et perfacetum fuisse dicebant._ _De Claris\nOrat._ s. 105.\n\n[c] Calvus and C\u00e6lius have been mentioned already. See s. xvii. note\n[c].\n\n[d] Caius Gracchus was tribune of the people A.U.C. 633. In that\ncharacter he took the popular side against the patricians; and,\npursuing the plan of the agrarian law laid down by his brother,\nTiberius Gracchus, he was able by his eloquence to keep the city of\nRome in violent agitation. Amidst the tumult, the senate, by a decree,\nordered the consul, Lucius Opimius, _to take care that the\ncommonwealth received no injury_; and, says Cicero, not a single night\nintervened, before that magistrate put Gracchus to death. _Decrevit\nsenatus, ut Lucius Opimius, consul, videret, ne quid detrimenti\nrespublica caperet: nox nulla intercessit; interfectus est propter\nquasdam seditionum suspiciones Caius Gracchus, clarissimo patre natus,\navis majoribus. Orat. i. in Catilinam._ His reputation as an orator\ntowers above all his contemporaries. Cicero says, the commonwealth and\nthe interests of literature suffered greatly by his untimely end. He\nwishes that the love of his country, and not zeal for the memory of\nhis brother, had inspired his actions. His eloquence was such as left\nhim without a rival: in his diction, what a noble splendour! in his\nsentiments, what elevation! and in the whole of his manner, what\nweight and dignity! His compositions, it is true, are not retouched\nwith care; they want the polish of the last hand; what is well begun,\nis seldom highly finished; and yet he, if any one, deserves to be the\nstudy of the Roman youth. In him they will find what can, at once,\nquicken their genius, and enrich the understanding. _Damnum enim,\nillius immaturo interitu, res Roman\u00e6, Latin\u00e6que liter\u00e6 fecerunt.\nUtinam non tam fratri pietatem, quam patri\u00e6 pr\u00e6stare voluisset.\nEloquentia quidem nescio an habuisset parem: grandis est verbis,\nsapiens sententiis, genere toto gravis. Manus extrema non accessit\noperibus ejus; pr\u00e6clare inchoata multa, perfecta non plane. Legendus\nest hic orator, si quisquam alius, juventuti; non enim solum acuere,\nsed etiam alere ingenium potest._ _De Claris Orat._ s. 125, 126.\n\n[e] This is the celebrated Marcus Portius Cato, commonly known by the\nname of Cato the censor. He was qu\u00e6stor under Scipio, who commanded\nagainst the Carthaginians, A.U.C. 548. He rose through the regular\ngradations of the magistracy to the consulship. When pr\u00e6tor, he\ngoverned the province of Sardinia, and exerted himself in the reform\nof all abuses introduced by his predecessors. From his own person, and\nhis manner of living, he banished every appearance of luxury. When he\nhad occasion to visit the towns that lay within his government, he\nwent on foot, clothed with the plainest attire, without a vehicle\nfollowing him, or more than one servant, who carried the robe of\noffice, and a vase, to make libations at the altar. He sat in\njudgement with the dignity of a magistrate, and punished every offence\nwith inflexible rigour. He had the happy art of uniting in his own\nperson two things almost incompatible; namely, strict severity and\nsweetness of manners. Under his administration, justice was at once\nterrible and amiable. Plutarch relates that he never wore a dress that\ncost more than thirty shillings; that his wine was no better than what\nwas consumed by his slaves; and that by leading a laborious life, he\nmeant to harden his constitution for the service of his country. He\nnever ceased to condemn the luxury of the times. On this subject a\nremarkable apophthegm is recorded by Plutarch; _It is impossible_,\nsaid Cato, _to save a city, in which a single fish sells for more\nmoney than an ox._ The account given of him by Cicero in the Cato\nMajor, excites our veneration of the man. He was master of every\nliberal art, and every branch of science, known in that age. Some men\nrose to eminence by their skill in jurisprudence; others by their\neloquence; and a great number by their military talents. Cato shone in\nall alike. The patricians were often leagued against him, but his\nvirtue and his eloquence were a match for the proudest connections. He\nwas chosen CENSOR, in opposition to a number of powerful candidates,\nA.U.C. 568. He was the adviser of the third Punic war. The question\noccasioned several warm debates in the senate. Cato always insisted on\nthe demolition of Carthage: DELENDA EST CARTHAGO. He preferred an\naccusation against Servius Sulpicius Galba on a charge of peculation\nin Spain, A.U.C. 603; and, though he was then ninety years old,\naccording to Livy (Cicero says he lived to eighty-five), he conducted\nthe business with so much vigour, that Galba, in order to excite\ncompassion, produced his children before the senate, and by that\nartifice escaped a sentence of condemnation. Quintilian gives the\nfollowing character of Cato the censor: His genius, like his learning,\nwas universal: historian, orator, lawyer, he cultivated the three\nbranches; and what he undertook, he touched with a master-hand. The\nscience of husbandry was also his. Great as his attainments were, they\nwere acquired in camps, amidst the din of arms; and in the city of\nRome, amidst scenes of contention, and the uproar of civil discord.\nThough he lived in rude unpolished times, he applied himself, when far\nadvanced in the vale of years, to the study of Greek literature, and\nthereby gave a signal proof that even in old age the willing mind may\nbe enriched with new stores of knowledge. _Marcus Censorius Cato, idem\norator, idem histori\u00e6 conditor, idem juris, idem rerum rusticarum\nperitissimus fuit. Inter tot opera militi\u00e6, tantas domi contentions,\nridi s\u00e6culo literas Gr\u00e6cas, \u00e6tate jam declinat\u00e2 didicit, ut esset\nhominibus documento, ea quoque percipi posse, qu\u00e6 senes concupissent._\nLib. xii. cap. 11.\n\n[f] Lucius Licinius Crassus is often mentioned, and always to his\nadvantage, by Cicero DE CLARIS ORATORIBUS. He was born, as appears in\nthat treatise (sect. 161), during the consulship of L\u00e6lius and C\u00e6pio,\nA.U.C. 614: he was contemporary with Antonius, the celebrated orator,\nand father of Antony the triumvir. Crassus was about four and thirty\nyears older than Cicero. When Philippus the consul shewed himself\ndisposed to encroach on the privileges of the senate, and, in the\npresence of that body, offered indignities to Licinius Crassus, the\norator, as Cicero informs us, broke out in a blaze of eloquence\nagainst that violent outrage, concluding with that remarkable\nsentence: He shall not be to me A CONSUL, to whom I am not A SENATOR.\n_Non es mihi consul, quia nec ego tibi senator sum._ See _Valerius\nMaximus_, lib. xli. cap. 2. Cicero has given his oratorical character.\nHe possessed a wonderful dignity of language, could enliven his\ndiscourse with wit and pleasantry, never descending to vulgar humour;\nrefined, and polished, without a tincture of scurrility. He preserved\nthe true Latin idiom; in his selection of words accurate, with\napparent facility; no stiffness, no affectation appeared; in his train\nof reasoning always clear and methodical; and, when the cause hinged\nupon a question of law, or the moral distinctions of good and evil, no\nman possessed such a fund of argument, and happy illustration. _Crasso\nnihil statuo fieri potuisse perfectius: erat summa gravitas; erat cum\ngravitate junctus facetiarum et urbanitatis oratorius, non scurrilis,\nlepos. Latin\u00e8 loquendi accurata, et, sine molesti\u00e2, diligens\nelegantia; in disserendo mira explicatio; cum de jure civili, cum de\n\u00e6quo et bono disputaretur, argumentorum et similitudinum copia._ _De\nClaris Orat._ s. 143. In Cicero's books DE ORATORE, Licinius Crassus\nsupports a capital part in the dialogue; but in the opening of the\nthird book, we have a pathetic account of his death, written, as the\nItalians say, _con amore_. Crassus returned from his villa, where the\ndialogue passed, to take part in the debate against Philippus the\nconsul, who had declared to an assembly of the people, that he was\nobliged to seek new counsellors, for with such a senate he could not\nconduct the affairs of the commonwealth. The conduct of Crassus, upon\nthat occasion, has been mentioned already. The vehemence, with which\nhe exerted himself, threw him into a violent fever, and, on the\nseventh day following, put a period to his life. Then, says Cicero,\nthat tuneful swan expired: we hoped once more to hear the melody of\nhis voice, and went, in that expectation, to the senate-house; but all\nthat remained was to gaze on the spot where that eloquent orator spoke\nfor the last time in the service of his country. _Illud immortalitate\ndignum ingenium, illa humanitas, illa virtus Lucii Crassi morte\nextincta subit\u00e2 est, vix diebus decem post eum diem, qui hoc et\nsuperiore libra continetur. Illa tanquam cycnea fuit divini hominis\nvox, et oratio, quam quasi expectantes, post ejus interitum veniebamus\nin curiam, ut vestigium illud ipsum, in quo ille postremum\ninstitisset, contueremur._ _De Orat._ lib, iii. s. 1. and 6. This\npassage will naturally call to mind the death of the great earl of\nChatham. He went, in a feeble state of health, to attend a debate of\nthe first importance. Nothing could detain him from the service of his\ncountry. The dying notes of the BRITISH SWAN were heard in the House\nof Peers. He was conveyed to his own house, and on the eleventh of May\n1778, he breathed his last. The news reached the House of Commons late\nin the evening, when Colonel BARRE had the honour of being the first\nto shed a patriot tear on that melancholy occasion. In a strain of\nmanly sorrow, and with that unprepared eloquence which the heart\ninspires, he moved for a funeral at the public expence, and a monument\nto the memory of virtue and departed genius. By performing that pious\noffice, Colonel BARRE may be said to have made his own name immortal.\nHistory will record the transaction.\n\n[g] Messala Corvinus is often, in this Dialogue, called Corvinus only.\nSee s. xii. note [e].\n\n[h] Appius Claudius was censor in the year of Rome 442; dictator, 465;\nand, having at a very advanced age lost his sight, he became better\nknown by the name of Appius C\u00e6cus. Afterwards, A.U. 472, when Pyrrhus,\nby his ambassador, offered terms of peace, and a treaty of alliance,\nAppius, whom blindness, and the infirmities of age, had for some time\nwithheld from public business, desired to be conveyed in a litter to\nthe senate-house. Being conducted to his place, he delivered his\nsentiments in so forcible a manner, that the fathers resolved to\nprosecute the war, and never to hear of an accommodation, till Italy\nwas evacuated by Pyrrhus and his army. See Livy, b. xiii. s. 31.\nCicero relates the same fact in his CATO MAJOR, and further adds, that\nthe speech made by APPIUS C\u00c6CUS was then extant. Ovid mentions the\ntemple of Bellona, built and dedicated by Appius, who, when blind, saw\nevery thing by the light of his understanding, and rejected all terms\nof accommodation with Pyrrhus.\n\n     Hac sacrata die Tusco Bellona duello\n       Dicitur, et Latio prospera semper adest.\n     Appius est auctor, Pyrrho qui pace negat\u00e2\n       Multum animo vidit, lumine c\u00e6cus erat.\n                     FASTORUM lib vi. ver. 201.\n\n[i] Quintilian acknowledges this fact, with his usual candour. The\nquestion concerning Attic and Asiatic eloquence was of long standing.\nThe style of the former was close, pure, and elegant; the latter was\nsaid to be diffuse and ostentatious. In the ATTIC, nothing was idle,\nnothing redundant: the ASIATIC swelled above all bounds, affecting to\ndazzle by strokes of wit, by affectation and superfluous ornament.\nCicero was said by his enemies to be an orator of the last school.\nThey did not scruple to pronounce him turgid, copious to a fault,\noften redundant, and too fond of repetition. His wit, they said, was\nthe false glitter of vain conceit, frigid, and out of season; his\ncomposition was cold and languid; wire-drawn into amplification, and\nfuller of meretricious finery than became a man. _Et antiqua quidem\nilla divisio inter Asianos et Atticos fuit; cum hi pressi, et integri,\ncontra, inflati illi et inanes haberentur; et in his nihil\nsuperflueret, illis judicium maxim\u00e8 ac modus deesset. Ciceronem tamen\net suorum homines temporum incessere audebant ut tumidiorem, et\nAsianum, et redundantem, et in repetitionibus nimium, et in salibus\naliquando frigidum, et in compositione fractum, exultantem, ac pen\u00e8\n(quod procul absit) viro molliorem._ Quintil. lib. xii. cap. 10. The\nsame author adds, that, when the great orator was cut off by Marc\nAntony's proscription, and could no longer answer for himself, the men\nwho either personally hated him, or envied his genius, or chose to pay\ntheir court to the, triumvirate, poured forth their malignity without\nreserve. It is unnecessary to observe, that Quintilian, in sundry\nparts of his work, has vindicated Cicero from these aspersions. See s.\nxvii. note [b].\n\n[k] For Calvus, see s. xvii. note [c]. For Brutus, see the same\nsection, note [d]. What Cicero thought of Calvus has been already\nquoted from the tract _De Claris Oratoribus_, in note [c], s. xvii. By\nbeing too severe a critic on himself, he lost strength, while he aimed\nat elegance. It is, therefore, properly said in this Dialogue, that\nCicero thought Calvus cold and enervated. But did he think Brutus\ndisjointed, loose and negligent--_otiosum atque disjunctum_? That he\noften thought him disjointed is not improbable. Brutus was a close\nthinker, and he aimed at the precision and brevity of Attic eloquence.\nThe sententious speaker is, of course, full and concise. He has no\nstudied transitions, above the minute care of artful connections. To\ndiscard the copulatives for the sake of energy was a rule laid down by\nthe best ancient critics. Cicero has observed that an oration may be\nsaid to be disjointed, when the copulatives are omitted, and strokes\nof sentiment follow one another in quick succession. _Dissolutio sive\ndisjunctio est, qu\u00e6 conjunctionibus e medio sublatis, partibus\nseparatis effertur, hoc modo: Gere morem parenti; pare cognatis;\nobsequere amicis; obtempera legibus. Ad Herennium_, lib. iv. s. 41.\nIn this manner, Brutus might appear disjointed, and that figure, often\nrepeated, might grow into a fault. But how is the word OTIOSUS to be\nunderstood? If it means a neglect of connectives, it may, perhaps,\napply to Brutus. There is no room to think that Cicero used it in a\nworse sense, since we find him in a letter to Atticus declaring, that\nthe oratorical style of Brutus was, in language as well as sentiment,\nelegant to a degree that nothing could surpass. _Est enim oratio ejus\nscripta elegantissim\u00e8, sententiis et verbis, ut nihil possit ultra._ A\ngrave philosopher, like Brutus, might reject the graces of transition\nand regular connection, and, for that reason, might be thought\nnegligent and abrupt. This disjointed style, which the French call\n_style coup\u00e9_, was the manner cultivated by Seneca, for which Caligula\npronounced him, sand without lime; _arenam sine calce_. Sueton. _Life\nof Calig._ s. 53. We know from Quintilian, that a spirit of emulation,\nand even jealousy, subsisted between the eminent orators of Cicero's\ntime; that he himself was so far from ascribing perfection to\nDemosthenes, that he used to say, he often found him napping; that\nBrutus and Calvus sat in judgement on Cicero, and did not wish to\nconceal their objections; and that the two Pollios were so far from\nbeing satisfied with Cicero's style and manner, that their criticisms\nwere little short of declared hostility. _Quamquam neque ipsi Ciceroni\nDemosthenes videatur satis esse perfectus, quem dormitare interdum\ndicit; nec Cicero Bruto Calvoque, qui cert\u00e8 compositionem illius etiam\napud ipsum reprehendunt; ne Asinio utrique, qui vitia orationis ejus\netiam inimic\u00e8 pluribus locis insequuntur._ Quintil. lib. xii. cap. 1.\n\n\nSection XIX.\n\n[a] Cassius Severus lived in the latter end of the reign of Augustus,\nand through a considerable part of that of Tiberius. He was an orator,\naccording to Quintilian, who, if read with due caution, might serve as\na model worthy of imitation. It is to be regretted, that to the many\nexcellent qualities of his style he did not add more weight, more\nstrength and dignity, and thereby give colour and a body to his\nsentiments. With those requisites, he would have ranked with the most\neminent orators. To his excellent genius he united keen reflection,\ngreat energy, and a peculiar urbanity, which gave a secret charm to\nhis speeches. But the warmth of his temper hurried him on; he listened\nmore to his passions than to his judgement; he possessed a vein of\nwit, but he mingled with it too much acrimony; and wit, when it misses\nits aim, feels the mortification and the ridicule which usually attend\ndisappointed malice. _Multa, si cum judicio legatur, dabit imitatione\ndigna CASSIUS SEVERUS, qui, si c\u00e6teris virtutibus colorem et\ngravitatem orationis adjecisset, ponendus inter pr\u00e6cipuos foret, Nam\net ingenii plurimum est in eo, et acerbitas mira, et urbanitas, et vis\nsumma; sed plus stomacho qu\u00e0m consilio dedit; pr\u00e6terea ut amari sales,\nita frequenter amaritudo ipsa ridicula est._ Lib. x. cap. 1. We read\nin Suetonius (_Life of Octavius_, s. 56), that Cassius had the\nhardiness to institute a prosecution for the crime of poisoning\nagainst Asprenas Nonius, who was, at the time, linked in the closest\nfriendship with Augustus. Not content with accusations against the\nfirst men in Rome, he chose to vent his malevolence in lampoons and\ndefamatory libels, against the most distinguished of both sexes. It\nwas this that provoked Horace to declare war against Cassius, in an\node (lib, v. ode 6), which begins, _Quid immerentes hospites vexas,\ncanis_. See an account of his malevolent spirit, _Annals_, b, i. s.\n72. He was at length condemned for his indiscriminate abuse, and\nbanished by Augustus to the isle of Crete. But his satirical rage was\nnot to be controlled. He continued in exile to discharge his\nmalignity, till, at last, at the end of ten years, the senate took\ncognizance of his guilt, and Tiberius ordered him to be removed from\nCrete to the Rock of Seriphos, where he languished in old age and\nmisery. See _Annals_, b. iv. s. 21. The period of ancient oratory\nended about the time when Cassius began his career. He was the first\nof the new school.\n\n[b] These two rhetoricians flourished in the time of Augustus.\nApollodorus, we are told by Quintilian (b. iii. chap. 1), was the\npreceptor of Augustus. He taught in opposition to Theodorus Gadareus,\nwho read lectures at Rhodes, and was attended by Tiberius during his\nretreat in that island. The two contending masters were the founders\nof opposite sects, called the _Apollodorean_ and _Theodorian_. But\ntrue eloquence, which knows no laws but those of nature and good\nsense, gained nothing by party divisions. Literature was distracted by\nnew doctrines; rhetoric became a trick in the hands of sophists, and\nall sound oratory disappeared. Hermagoras, Quintilian says, in the\nchapter already cited, was the disciple of Theodorus.\n\n\nSection XX.\n\n[a] Doctor Middleton says, \"Of the seven excellent orations, which now\nremain on the subject of VERRES, the first two only were spoken; the\none called, _The Divination_; the other, _The first Action_, which is\nnothing more than a general preface to the whole cause. The other five\nwere published afterwards, as they were prepared and intended to be\nspoken, if Verres had made a regular defence: for as this was the only\ncause in which Cicero had yet been engaged, or ever designed to be\nengaged, as _an accuser_, so he was willing to leave those orations as\na specimen of his abilities in that way, and the _pattern of a just\nand diligent impeachment of a great and corrupt magistrate.\" Life of\nCicero_, vol. i. p. 86, 4to edit.\n\n[b] The Digest enumerates a multitude of rules concerning _exceptions_\nto persons, things, the form of the action, the niceties of pleading,\nand, as the phrase is, motions in arrest of judgement. _Formula_, was\nthe set of words necessary to be used in the pleadings. See the\n_Digest_, lib. xliv. tit. 1. _De Exceptionibus, Pr\u00e6scriptionibus, et\nPr\u00e6judiciis_. See also Cujacius, _observat._ xxiii.\n\n[c] The oration for Marcus Tullius is highly praised by Macrobius, but\nis not to be found in Cicero's works. The oration for Aulus C\u00e6cina is\nstill extant. The cause was about the right of succession to a private\nestate, which depended on a subtle point of law, arising from the\ninterpretation of the pr\u00e6tor's interdict. It shews Cicero's exact\nknowledge and skill in the civil law, and that his public character\nand employment gave no interruption to his usual diligence in pleading\ncauses. Middleton's _Life of Cicero_, vol. i. p. 116, 4to edit.\n\n[d] Roscius, in the last period of the republic, was the comedian,\nwhom all Rome admired for his talents. The great esteemed and loved\nhim for his morals. \u00c6sop, the tragedian, was his contemporary. Horace,\nin the epistle to Augustus, has mentioned them both with their proper\nand distinctive qualities.\n\n        ----Ea cum reprehendere coner\n     Qu\u00e6 GRAVIS \u00c6SOPUS, qu\u00e6 DOCTUS ROSCIUS egit.\n\nA certain measured gravity of elocution being requisite in tragedy,\nthat quality is assigned to the former, and the latter is called\nDOCTUS, because he was a complete master of his art; so truly learned\nin the principles of his profession, that he possessed, in a wonderful\ndegree, the secret charm that gave inimitable graces to his voice and\naction. Quintilian, in a few words, has given a commentary on the\npassage in Horace. Grief, he says, is expressed by slow and deliberate\naccents; for that reason, \u00c6sop spoke with gravity; Roscius with\nquickness; the former being a tragedian, the latter a comedian. _Plus\nautem affectus habent lentiora; ideoque Roscius citatior, \u00c6sopus\ngravior fuit, quod ille comoedias, his tragoedias egit._ Lib. xi. cap.\n1. Cicero was the great friend and patron of Roscius. An elegant\noration in his behalf is still extant. The cause was this: One FANNIUS\nhad made over to Roscius a young slave, to be formed by him to the\nstage, on condition of a partnership in the profits which the slave\nshould acquire by acting. The slave was afterwards killed. Roscius\nprosecuted the murderer for damages, and obtained, by composition, a\nlittle farm, worth about eight hundred pounds, for his particular\nshare. FANNIUS also sued separately, and was supposed to have gained\nas much; but, pretending to have recovered nothing, he sued ROSCIUS\nfor the moiety of what he had received. One cannot but observe, says\nDr. Middleton, from Cicero's pleading, the wonderful esteem and\nreputation in which Roscius then flourished. Has Roscius, says he,\ndefrauded his partner? Can such a stain stick upon such a man; a man\nwho, I speak it with confidence, has more integrity than skill, more\nveracity than experience? a man whom the people of Rome know to be a\nbetter citizen than he is an actor; and, while he makes the first\nfigure on the stage for his art, is worthy of a seat in the senate for\nhis virtue. _Quem populus Romanus meliorem virum quam histrionem esse\narbitratur; qui ita dignissimus est scen\u00e1 propter artificium, ut\ndignissimus sit curi\u00e1 propter abstinentiam. Pro Roscio Comoedo_, s. 17\nIn another place, Cicero says, he was such an artist, as to seem the\nonly one fit to appear on the stage; yet such a man, as to seem the\nonly one who should not come upon it at all. _Cum artifex ejusmodi\nsit, ut solus dignus videatur esse qui in scen\u00e1 spectetur; tum vir\nejusmodi est, ut solus dignus videatur, qui eo non accedat. Pro Publ.\nQuinctio_, s. 78. What Cicero has said in his pleadings might be\nthought oratorical, introduced merely to serve the cause, if we did\nnot find the comedian praised with equal warmth in the dialogue DE\nORATORE. It is there said of Roscius, that every thing he did was\nperfect in the kind, and executed with consummate grace, with a secret\ncharm, that touched, affected, and delighted the whole audience:\ninsomuch, that when a man excelled in any other profession, it was\ngrown into a proverb to call him, THE ROSCIUS OF HIS ART. _Videtisne,\nquam nihil ab eo nisi perfect\u00e8, nihil nisi cum summ\u00e2 venustate fiat?\nnihil, nisi ita ut deceat, et uti omnes moveat, atque delectet? Itaque\nhoc jam diu est consecutus, ut in quo quisque artificio excelleret, is\nin suo genere Roscius diceretur._ _De Orat._ lib. i. s. 130. After so\nmuch honourable testimony, one cannot but wonder why the DOCTUS\nROSCIUS of Horace is mentioned in this Dialogue with an air of\ndisparagement. It may be, that APER, the speaker in this passage, was\ndetermined to degrade the orators of antiquity; and the comedian was,\ntherefore, to expect no quarter. Dacier, in his notes on the Epistle\nto Augustus, observes that Roscius wrote a book, in which he undertook\nto prove to Cicero, that in all the stores of eloquence there were not\nso many different expressions for one and the same thing, as in the\ndramatic art there were modes of action, and casts of countenance, to\nmark the sentiment, and convey it to the mind with its due degree of\nemotion. It is to be lamented that such a book has not come down to\nus. It would, perhaps, be more valuable than the best treatise of\nrhetoric.\n\nAmbivius Turpio acted in most of Terence's plays, and seems to have\nbeen a manager of the theatre. Cicero, in the treatise _De Senectute_,\nsays: He, who sat near him in the first rows, received the greatest\npleasure; but still, those, who were at the further end of the\ntheatre, were delighted with him. _Turpione Ambivio magis delectatur,\nqui in prim\u00e2 cave\u00e2 spectat; delectatur tamen etiam qui in ultim\u00e2._\n\n[e] ACCIUS and PACUVIUS flourished at Rome about the middle of the\nsixth century from the foundation of the city. Accius, according to\nHorace, was held to be a poet of a sublime genius, and Pacuvius (who\nlived to be ninety years old) was respected for his age and profound\nlearning.\n\n     Ambigitur quoties uter utro sit prior, aufert\n     PACUVIUS docti famam senis, ACCIUS alti.\n                           EPIST. AD AUG. ver. 56.\n\nVelleius Paterculus says, that ACCIUS was thought equal to the best\nwriters of the Greek tragedy. He had not, indeed, the diligent touches\nof the polishing hand, which we see in the poets of Athens, but he had\nmore spirit and vigour. _Accius usque in Gr\u00e6corum comparationem\nerectus. In illis lim\u00e6 in hoc pen\u00e8 plus videri fuisse sanguinis._ He\nis often quoted by Cicero in his book _De Natur\u00e2 Deorum_. But after\nall, it is from the great critic, who gives the best account of the\nRoman poets, orators, and historians, that we are to take the genuine\ncharacter of ACCIUS and PACUVIUS, since their works are lost in the\ngeneral mass of ancient literature. They were both excellent tragic\npoets: elevation of sentiment, grandeur of expression, and dignity of\ncharacter, stamped a value on their productions; and yet, we must not\nexpect to find the grace and elegance of genuine composition. To give\nthe finishing hand to their works was not their practice: the defect,\nhowever, is not to be imputed to them; it was the vice of the age.\nForce and dignity are the characteristics of ACCIUS; while the\ncritics, who wish to be thought deep and profound, admire PACUVIUS for\nhis extensive learning. _Tragoedi\u00e6 scriptores Accius atque Pacuvius,\nclarissimi sententiarum verborumque pondere, et auctoritate\npersonarum. C\u00e6terum nitor, et summa in excolendis operibus manus,\nmagis videri potest temporibus, quam ipsis defuisse. Virium tamen\nAccio plus tribuitur; Pacuvium videri doctiorem, qui esse docti\naffectant, volunt._ Quintil. lib. x. cap. 1. It was the fashion in\nHorace's time to prefer the writers of the old school to the new race\nthat gave so much lustre to the Augustan age. In opposition to such\nerroneous criticism, the poet pronounces a decided judgement, which\nseems to be confirmed by the opinion of Quintilian.\n\n     Si qu\u00e6dam nimis antiqu\u00e8, si pleraque dur\u00e8\n     Dicere credit eos, ignav\u00e8 multa fatetur,\n     Et sapit, et mecum facit, et Jove judicat \u00e6quo.\n                          EPIST. AD AUGUST. ver. 66.\n\n     But that sometimes their style uncouth appears,\n     And their harsh numbers rudely hurt our ears;\n     Or that full flatly flows the languid line,\n     He, who owns this, has Jove's assent and mine.\n                                   FRANCIS'S HORACE.\n\n[f] Lucan was nephew to Seneca, and a poet of great celebrity. He was\nborn, in the reign of Caligula, at Corduba in Spain. His superior\ngenius made Nero his mortal enemy. He was put to death by that inhuman\nemperor, A.U.C. 818, in the twenty-seventh year of his age. See the\n_Annals_, b. xv. s. 70. As a writer, Quintilian says, that he\npossessed an ardent genius, impetuous, rapid, and remarkable for the\nvigour of his sentiments: but he chooses to class him with the\norators, rather than the poets. _Lucanus ardens, et concitatus, et\nsententiis clarissimus; et, ut dicam quod sentio, magis oratoribus\nquam poetis annumerandus._ Lib. x. cap. 1. Scaliger, on the other\nhand, contends that Lucan was a true poet, and that the critics do but\ntrifle, when they object that he wrote history, not an epic poem.\nSTRADA in his Prolusions, has given, among other imitations, a\nnarrative in Lucan's manner; and, though he thinks that poet has not\nthe skill of Virgil, he places him on the summit of Parnassus,\nmanaging his Pegasus with difficulty, often in danger of falling from\nthe ridge of a precipice, yet delighting his reader with the pleasure\nof seeing him escape. This is the true character of Lucan. The love of\nliberty was his ruling passion. It is but justice to add, that his\nsentiments, when free from _antithesis_ and the _Ovidian_ manner, are\nnot excelled by any poet of antiquity. From him, as well as from\nVirgil and Horace, the orator is required to cull such passages as\nwill help to enrich his discourse; and the practice is recommended by\nQuintilian, who observes, that Cicero, Asinius Pollio, and others,\nfrequently cited verses from Ennius, Accius, Pacuvius, and Terence, in\norder to grace their speeches with polite literature, and enliven the\nimagination of their hearers. By those poetic insertions, the ear is\nrelieved from the harsh monotony of the forum; and the poets, cited\noccasionally, serve by their authority to establish the proposition\nadvanced by the speaker. _Nam pr\u00e6cipue quidem apud Ciceronem,\nfrequenter tamen apud Asinium etiam, et c\u00e6teros, qui sunt proximi,\nvidimus ENNII, ACCII, PACUVII, TERENTII et aliorum inseri versus,\nsumm\u00e2 non eruditionis mod\u00f2 grati\u00e2, sed etiam jucunditatis; cum\npoeticis voluptatibus aures a forensi asperitate respirent, quibus\naccedit non mediocris utilitas, cum sententiis eorum, velut quibusdam\ntestimoniis, qu\u00e6 proposuere confirmant._ Quintil. lib. i. cap. 8.\n\n\nSection XXI.\n\n[a] There is in this place a blunder of the copyists, which almost\nmakes the sentence unintelligible. The translator, without entering\ninto minute controversies, has, upon all such occasions, adopted what\nappeared, from the context, to be the most probable sense. It remains,\ntherefore, to enquire, who were the several orators here enumerated.\nCANUTIUS may be the person mentioned by Suetonius _De Claris\nRhetoribus_. Cicero says of ARRIUS, that he was a striking proof of\nwhat consequence it was at Rome to be useful to others, and always\nready to be subservient to their honour, or to ward off danger. For,\nby that assiduity, Arrius raised himself from a low beginning to\nwealth and honours, and was even ranked in the number of orators,\nthough void of learning, and without genius, or abilities. _Loco\ninfimo natus, et honores, et pecuniam, et gratiam consecutus, etiam in\npatronorum, sine doctrin\u00e2, sine ingenio, aliquem numerum pervenerat.\nDe Claris Orat._ s. 243. FURNIUS may be supposed, not without\nprobability, to be the person with whom Cicero corresponded. _Epist.\nad Familiares_, lib. x. ep. 25, 26. With regard to Terrianus we are\nleft in the dark. The commentators offer various conjectures; but\nconjecture is often a specious amusement; the ingenious folly of men,\nwho take pains to bewilder themselves, and reason only to shew their\nuseless learning.\n\n[b] The puny orators are said to be in an infirmary, like sickly men,\nwho were nothing but skin and bone. These, says Cicero, were admirers\nof the Attic manner; but it were to be wished that they had the\nwholesome blood, not merely the bones, of their favourite declaimers.\n_Attico genere dicendi se gaudere dicunt; atqui utinam imitarentur nec\nossa solum, sed etiam et sanguinem._ Cicero _De Claris Oratoribus_.\n\n[c] What is here said of Calvus is not confirmed by the judgement of\nQuintilian. See s. xvii. note [c]. His orations, which were extant at\nthe time of this Dialogue, are now totally lost.\n\n[d] For Quintilian's opinion of C\u00e6lius, see s. xvii. note [c].\n\n[e] Here again Quintilian, that candid and able judge, has given a\ndifferent opinion. See s. xvii. note [b]. It may be proper to add the\ntestimony of Velleius Paterculus. C\u00e6sar, he says, had an elevation of\nsoul, that towered above humanity, and was almost incredible; the\nrapid progress of his wars, his firmness in the hour of danger, and\nthe grandeur of his vast conceptions, bore a near affinity to\nAlexander, but to Alexander neither drunk, nor mad with passion.\n_Animo super humanam et naturam, et fidem evectus, celeritate\nbellandi, patienti\u00e2 periculorum, magnitudine cogitationum; magno illi\nAlexandro, sed sobrio neque iracundo, simillimus. Vel. Patercul._ lib.\nii. s. 41. Even Cicero tells us, that, of all the eminent orators, he\nwas the person who spoke the Latin language in the greatest purity,\nand arrived at that consummate perfection by study, by diligent\napplication, and his thorough knowledge of all polite literature.\n_Illum omnium fer\u00e8 oratorum Latin\u00e8 loqui elegantissim\u00e8: ut esset\nperfecta illa ben\u00e8 loquendi laus, multis litteris, et iis quidem\nreconditis et exquisitis, summoque studio et diligenti\u00e2 est\nconsecutus._ _De Claris Orat._ s. 252.\n\n[f] C\u00e6sar's speech for Decius the Samnite, and all his other\nproductions (except the Commentaries), are totally lost.\n\n[g] This speech of Brutus is also lost with his other works. Cicero\nsays, he heard him plead the cause of Dejotarus with great elegance,\nand a flow of harmonious periods. _Causam Dejotari, fidelissimi atque\noptimi regis, ornatissim\u00e8 et copiosissim\u00e8 a Bruto me audisse defensam.\nDe Claris Orat._ s. 21. He tells us in another place, that C\u00e6sar\nobserved of Brutus, that whatever he desired, he desired with ardour;\nand therefore, in the cause of Dejotarus, he exerted himself with\nwarmth, with vehemence, and great freedom of language. _Quidquid vult,\nvald\u00e8 vult; ideoque, cum pro rege Dejotaro dixerit, vald\u00e8 vehementer\neum visum, et liber\u00e8 dicere. Ad Attic._ lib. xiv. ep. 1. The same\nDejotarus was afterwards defended by Cicero before C\u00e6sar himself. See\nthe Oration _pro Rege Dejotaro_.\n\n[h] See what is said of Asinius Pollio, s. xii. note [e].\n\n[i] Pliny the younger has the same metaphorical allusions, which we\nhere find in the Dialogue. Speaking of the difference between the\noratorial and historical style; the latter, he says, may be content\nwith the bones, the muscles, and the nerves; the former must have the\nprominence of the flesh, the brawny vigour, and the flowing mane.\n_Habent quidem oratio et historia multa communia, sed plura diversa in\nhis ipsis, qu\u00e6 communia videntur. Narrat sane illa, narrat h\u00e6c, sed\naliter. Huic pleraque humilia, et sordida, et ex medio petita: illi\nomnia recondita, splendida, excelsa conveniunt. Hanc s\u00e6pius ossa,\nmusculi, nervi; illam tori quidam, et quasi jub\u00e6 decent._ Lib. v. ep.\n8.\n\n[k] Messala Corvinus has been often mentioned. See for him s. xii.\nnote [e].\n\n\nSection XXII.\n\n[a] The words _sententia_ and _sensus_ were technical terms with the\ncritics of antiquity. Quintilian gives the distinct meaning of each,\nwith his usual precision. According to the established usage, the\nword _sensus_ signified our ideas or conceptions, as they rise in the\nmind: by _sententia_ was intended, a proposition, in the close of a\nperiod, so expressed, as to dart a sudden brilliancy, for that reason\ncalled _lumen orationis_. He says, these artificial ornaments, which\nthe ancients used but sparingly, were the constant practice of the\nmodern orators. _Consuetudo jam tenuit, ut mente concepta_, SENSUS\n_vocaremus; lumina autem, pr\u00e6cipu\u00e8que in clausulis posita_,\nSENTENTIAS. _Qu\u00e6 minus crebra apud antiquos, nostris temporibus modo\ncarent._ Lib. viii. cap. 5. These luminous sentences, Quintilian says,\nmay be called the eyes of an oration; but eyes are not to be placed in\nevery part, lest the other members should lose their function. _Ego\nvero h\u00e6c lumina orationis velut oculos quosdam esse eloquenti\u00e6 credo:\nsed neque oculos esse toto corpore velim, ne c\u00e6tera membra suum\nofficium perdant._ Lib. viii, cap. 5. As Cowley says,\n\n     Jewels at nose and lips but ill appear;\n     Rather than all things, wit let none be there.\n\n[b] In order to form a good style, the sentence should always be\nclosed with variety, strength, and harmony. The ancient rhetoricians\nheld this to be so essentially requisite, that Quintilian has given it\na full discussion. That, he says, which offends the ear, will not\neasily gain admission to the mind. Words should be fitted to their\nplaces, so that they may aptly coalesce with one another. In building,\nthe most ill shapen stones may be conveniently fixed; and in like\nmanner, a good style must have proper words in proper places, all\narranged in order, and closing the sentence with grace and harmony.\n_Nihil intrare potest in affectum, quod in aure, velut quodam\nvestibulo, statim offendit. Non enim ad pedes verba dimensa sunt;\nideoque ex loco transferuntur in locum, ut jungantur quo congruunt\nmaxim\u00e8; sicut in structur\u00e2 saxorum rudium etiam ipsa enormitas invenit\ncui applicari, et in quo possit insistere. Felicissimus tamen sermo\nest, cui et rectus ordo, et apta junctura, et cum his numerus\nopportun\u00e8 cadens contingit._ Quintil. lib. ix. cap. 4.\n\n\nSection XXIII.\n\n[a] The remark in this place alludes to a passage in the oration\nagainst PISO, where we find a frivolous stroke of false wit. Cicero\nreproaches Piso for his dissolute manners, and his scandalous\ndebauchery. Who, he says, in all that time, saw you sober? Who beheld\nyou doing any one thing, worthy of a liberal mind? Did you once appear\nin public? The house of your colleague resounded with songs and\nminstrels: he himself danced naked in the midst of his wanton company;\nand while he _wheeled_ about with alacrity in the _circular motion_ of\nthe dance, he never once thought of THE WHEEL OF FORTUNE. _Quis te\nillis diebus sobrium, quis agentem aliquid, quod esset libero dignum?\nQuis denique in publico vidit? Cum colleg\u00e6 tui domus cantu et cymbalis\npersonaret; cumque ipse nudus in convivio saltaret, in quo ne tum\nquidem, cum illum suum_ SALTATORIUM VERSARET ORBEM, FORTUN\u00c6 ROTAM\n_pertimescebat. Oratio in Pisonem_, prima pars, s. 22. Delph. edit.\nvol. iii.\n\n[b] The passage here alluded to, presents us with a double pun. The\nword _Verres_ is the name of a man, and also signifies a _boar pig_,\nas we read in Horace, _Verris obliquum meditantis ictum_. Lib. iii.\node 22. The word _jus_ is likewise of twofold meaning, importing _law_\nand _sauce_, or broth; _tepidumque ligurierit jus_. Lib. i. sat. 3. The\nobjection to Cicero is, that playing on both the words, and taking\nadvantage of their ambiguous meaning, he says it could not be matter\nof wonder that the _Verrian jus_ was such bad HOG-SOUP. The wit (if it\ndeserves that name) is mean enough; but, in justice to Cicero, it\nshould be remembered, that he himself calls it frigid, and says, that\nthe men, who in their anger could be so very facetious, as to blame\nthe priest who did not sacrifice such a hog (_Verres_), were idle and\nridiculous. He adds, that he should not descend to repeat such sayings\n(for they were neither witty, nor worthy of notice in such a cause),\nhad he not thought it material to shew, that the iniquity of VERRES\nwas, in the mouth of the vulgar, a subject of ridicule, and a\nproverbial joke. _Hinc illi homines erant, qui etiam ridiculi\ninveniebantur ex dolore: quorum alii, ut audistis, negabant mirandum\nesse_, JUS _tam nequam esse_ VERRINUM: _alii etiam frigidiores erant;\nsed quia stomachabantur, ridiculi videbantur esse, cum_ SACERDOTEM\n_execrabantur, qui_ VERREM _tam nequam reliquisset, Qu\u00e6 ego non\ncommemorarem (neque enim perfacet\u00e8 dicta, neque porro hac severitate\ndigna sunt) nisi vos id vellem recordari, istius nequitiam et\niniquitatem tum in ore vulgi, atque communibus proverbiis esse\nversatam. In Verrem_, lib. i. pars tertia, s. 121.\n\n[c] Quintilian acknowledges that the words _esse videatur (it seems to\nbe)_ occur frequently in Cicero's Orations. He adds, that he knew\nseveral, who fancied that they had performed wonders, when they placed\nthat phrase in the close of a sentence. _Noveram quosdam, qui se\npulchr\u00e8 expressisse genus illud c\u00e6lestis hujus in dicendo viri sibi\nviderentur, si in clausul\u00e2 posuissent esse videatur._ Quintil. lib. x.\ncap. 2.\n\n[d] The species of composition, called satire, was altogether of Roman\ngrowth. Lucilius had the honour of being the inventor; and he\nsucceeded so well, that even in Quintilian's time, his admirers\npreferred him not only to the writers who followed in the same way,\nbut to all poets of every denomination. _Lucilius quosdam ita deditos\nsibi adhuc habet imitatores, ut eum non ejusdem modo operis, sed\nomnibus poetis pr\u00e6ferre non dubitent._ Lib. x. cap. 1. The great\ncritic, however, pronounces judgement in favour of Horace, who, he\nsays, is more terse and pure; a more acute observer of life, and\nqualified by nature to touch the ridicule of the manners with the\nnicest hand. _Multo est tersior, ac purus magis Horatius, et ad\nnotandos hominum mores pr\u00e6cipuus._\n\n[e] Lucretius is not without his partisans at this hour. Many of the\nFrench critics speak of him with rapture; and, in England, Dr. Wharton\nof Winchester seems to be at the head of his admirers. He does not\nscruple to say that Lucretius had more spirit, fire, and energy, more\nof the _vivida vis animi_, than any of the Roman poets. It is neither\nsafe nor desirable to differ from so fine a genius as Dr. Wharton. The\npassages which he has quoted from his favourite poet, shew great taste\nin the selection. It should be remembered, however, that Quintilian\ndoes not treat Lucretius with the same passionate fondness. He places\nVirgil next to Homer; and the rest, he says, of the Roman poets\nfollow at a great distance. MACER and LUCRETIUS deserve to be read:\nthey have handled their respective subjects with taste and elegance;\nbut Macer has no elevation, and Lucretius is not easily understood.\n_C\u00e6teri omnes longe sequuntur. Nam MACER et LUCRETIUS legendi quidem;\nelegantes in su\u00e2 quisque materi\u00e2, sed alter humilis, alter\ndifficilis._ Lib. x. cap. 1. Statius, the poet, who flourished in the\nreign of Domitian, knew the value of Lucretius, and, in one line,\nseems to have given his true character; _et docti furor arduus\nLucreti_; but had he been to decide between him and Virgil, it is\nprobable, that he would say to Lucretius, as he did to himself,\n\n           ----Nec tu divinam \u00c6neida tenta,\n     Sed longe sequere, et vestigia semper adora.\n                    THEBAIDOS lib. xii. ver. 816.\n\n\n[f] Aufidius Bassus and Servilius Nonianus were writers of history.\nBassus, according to Quintilian, deserved great commendation,\nparticularly in his History of the German war. In some of his other\nworks he fell short of himself. Servilius Nonianus was known to\nQuintilian, and, in that critic's judgement, was an author of\nconsiderable merit, sententious in his manner, but more diffuse than\nbecomes the historic character. See Quintilian, lib. x. cap. 1. The\ndeath of SERVILIUS, an eminent orator and historian, is mentioned by\nTacitus in the _Annals_, b. xiv. s. 19; but the additional name of\nNONIANUS is omitted. The passage, however, is supposed to relate to\nthe person commended by Quintilian. He died in the reign of Nero,\nA.U.C. 812; of the Christian \u00e6ra 59.\n\n[g] Varro was universally allowed to be the most learned of the\nRomans. He wrote on several subjects with profound erudition.\nQuintilian says, he was completely master of the Latin language, and\nthoroughly conversant in the antiquities of Greece and Rome. His works\nwill enlarge our sphere of knowledge, but can add nothing to\neloquence. _Peritissimus lingu\u00e6 Latin\u00e6, et omnis antiquitatis, et\nrerum Gr\u00e6carum, nostrarumque; plus tamen scienti\u00e6 collaturus, quam\neloquenti\u00e6._ Lib. x. cap. 1.\n\nSisenna, we are told by Cicero, was a man of learning, well skilled in\nthe Roman language, acquainted with the laws and constitution of his\ncountry, and possessed of no small share of wit; but eloquence was not\nhis element, and his practice in the forum was inconsiderable. See _De\nClaris Oratoribus_, s. 228. In a subsequent part of the same work,\nCicero says, that Sisenna was of opinion, that to use uncommon words\nwas the perfection of style. To prove this he relates a pleasant\nanecdote. One Caius Rufus carried on a prosecution. Sisenna appeared\nfor the defendant; and, to express his contempt of his adversary, said\nthat many parts of the charge deserved to be spit upon. For this\npurpose he coined so strange a word, that the prosecutor implored the\nprotection of the judges. I do not, said he, understand Sisenna; I am\ncircumvented; I fear that some snare is laid for me. What does he mean\nby _sputatilica?_ I know that _sputa_ is spittle: but what is\n_tilica?_ The court laughed at the oddity of a word so strangely\ncompounded. _Rufio accusante Chritilium, Sisenna defendens dixit\nqu\u00e6dam ejus SPUTATILICA esse crimina. Tum Caius Rufius, Circumvenior,\ninquit, judices, nisi subvenitis. Sisenna quid dicat nescio; metuo\ninsidias. SPUTATILICA! quid est hoc?_ Sputa _quid sit, scio_; tilica\n_nescio. Maximi risus, De Claris Oratoribus_, s. 260. Whether this\nwas the same Sisenna, who is said in the former quotation to have been\na correct speaker, does not appear with any degree of certainty.\n\n[h] For the character of Secundus, see s. ii. note [c].\n\n[i] Quintilian says, the merit of a fine writer flourishes after his\ndeath, for envy does not go down to posterity. _Ad posteros enim\nvirtus durabit, nec perveniet invidia._ Lib. iii. c. 1. Envy is always\nsure to pursue living merit; and therefore, Cleo observes to\nAlexander, that Hercules and Bacchus were not numbered among the gods,\ntill they conquered the malignity of their contemporaries. _Nec\nHerculem, nec Patrem Liberum, prius dicatos deos, qu\u00e0m vicissent secum\nviventium invidiam._ Quintus Curtius, lib. viii. s. 18. Pliny the\nyounger has a beautiful epistle on this subject. After praising, in\nthe highest manner, the various works of Pompeius Saturninus, he says\nto his correspondent, Let it be no objection to such an author, that\nhe is still living. If he flourished in a distant part of the world,\nwe should not only procure his books, but we should have his picture\nin our houses: and shall his fame be tarnished, because we have the\nman before our eyes? Shall malignity make us cease to admire him,\nbecause we see him, hear him, esteem and love him? _Neque enim debet\noperibus ejus obesse, QUOD VIVIT. An si inter eos, quos nunquam\nvidimus, floruisset, non solum libros ejus, verum etiam imagines\nconquireremus, ejusdem nunc honor pr\u00e6sentis et gratia quasi satietate\nlanguescet? At hoc pravum malignumque est, non admirari hominem\nadmiratione dignissimum, quia videre, alloqui, audire, complecti, nec\nlaudare tantum, verum etiam amare contingit._ Lib. i. ep. 16.\n\n\nSection XXIV.\n\n[a] In the Dialogues of Plato, and others of the academic school, the\nablest philosophers occasionally supported a wrong hypothesis, in\norder to provoke a thorough discussion of some important question.\n\n[b] Cicero was killed on the seventh of December, in the consulship of\nHirtius and Pansa, A.U.C. 711; before Christ, 43. From that time to\nthe sixth of Vespasian the number of years is exactly 117; though in\nthe Dialogue said to be 120. See s. xvii. note [e].\n\n\nSection XXV.\n\n[a] See Plutarch's Lives of Lysias, Lycurgus, Demosthenes, and\nHyperides. See also the elegant translation of the Orations of Lysias,\nby Dr. Gillies.\n\n[b] For Quintilian's opinion of C\u00e6sar's eloquence, see s. xvii. note\n[b]. To what is there said may be added the authority of Cicero, who\nfairly owns, that C\u00e6sar's constant habit of speaking his language with\npurity and correctness, exempted him from all the vices of the\ncorrupt style adopted by others. To that politeness of expression\nwhich every well-bred citizen, though he does not aspire to be an\norator, ought to practise, when C\u00e6sar adds the splendid ornaments of\neloquence, he may then be said to place the finest pictures in the\nbest light. In his manner there is nothing mechanical, nothing of\nprofessional craft: his voice is impressive, and his action dignified.\nTo air these qualities he unites a certain majesty of mien and figure,\nthat bespeaks a noble mind. _C\u00e6sar autem rationem adhibens,\nconsuetudinem vitiosam et corruptam pur\u00e2 et incorrupt\u00e2 consuetudine\nemendat. Itaque cum ad hanc elegantiam verborum Latinorum, qu\u00e6 etiam\nsi orator non sis, et sis ingenuus civis Romanus, tamen necessaria\nest, adjungit illa oratorio, ornamenta dicendi; tum videtur tanquam\ntabulas bene pictas collocare in bono lumine. Hanc cum habeat\npr\u00e6cipuam laudem in communibus, non video cui debeat cedere.\nSplendidam quamdam, minimeque veteratoriam rationem dicendi tenet,\nvoce, motu: form\u00e2 etiam magnific\u00e2, et generos\u00e2 quodammodo._ _De Claris\nOratoribus_, s. 261.\n\nFor C\u00e6lius, see s. xvii. note [c]; and for Brutus, the same section,\nnote [d].\n\n[c] Servius Galba has been already mentioned, s. xviii. note [a].\nCaius L\u00e6lius was consul A.U.C. 614; before the Christian \u00e6ra, 140. He\nwas the intimate friend of Scipio, and the patron of Lucilius, the\nfirst Roman satirist. See Horace, lib. ii. sat. i. ver. 71.\n\n     Quin ubi se a vulgo et scen\u00e2 in secret\u00e2 rem\u00f4rant\n     Virtus Scipiad\u00e6, et mitis sapientia L\u00e6l\u00ee,\n     Nugari cum illo, et discincti ludere, donec\n     Decoqueretur olus, soliti.\n\n     When Scipio's virtue, and of milder vein\n     When L\u00e6lius' wisdom, from the busy scene\n     And crowd of life, the vulgar and the great.\n     Could with their favourite satirist retreat,\n     Lightly they laugh'd at many an idle jest,\n     Until their frugal feast of herbs was drest.\n                                FRANCIS'S HORACE.\n\nIt is probable, that the harsh manner of Lucilius, _durus componere\nversus_, infected the eloquence of L\u00e6lius, since we find in Cicero,\nthat his style was unpolished, and had much of the rust of antiquity.\n_Multo tamen vetustior et horridior ille quam Scipio, et, cum sint in\ndicendo vari\u00e6, voluntates, delectari mihi magis antiquitate videtur,\net lubenter verbis etiam uti paulo magis priscis L\u00e6lius._ _De Claris\nOratoribus_, s. 83.\n\n\nSection XXVI.\n\n[a] For an account of Caius Gracchus, see s. xviii. note [d].\n\n[b] For Lucius Crassus, see s. xviii. note [f].\n\n[c] The false taste of M\u00e6cenas has been noted by the poets and critics\nwho flourished after his death. His affected prettinesses are compared\nto the prim curls, in which women and effeminate men tricked out their\nhair. Seneca, who was himself tainted with affectation, has left a\nbeautiful epistle on the very question that makes the main subject of\nthe present Dialogue. He points out the causes of the corrupt taste\nthat debauched the eloquence of those times and imputes the mischief\nto the degeneracy of the manners. Whatever the man was, such was the\norator. _Talis oratio quails vita._ When ancient discipline relaxed,\nluxury succeeded, and language became delicate, brilliant, spangled\nwith conceits. Simplicity was laid aside, and quaint expressions grew\ninto fashion. Does the mind sink into languor, the body moves\nreluctantly. Is the man softened into effeminacy, you see it in his\ngait. Is he quick and eager, he walks with alacrity. The powers of the\nunderstanding are affected in the same manner. Having laid this down\nas his principle, Seneca proceeds to describe the soft delicacy of\nM\u00e6cenas, and he finds the same vice in his phraseology. He cites a\nnumber of the lady-like terms, which the great patron of letters\nconsidered as exquisite beauties. In all this, says he, we see the man\nwho walked the streets of Rome in his open and flowing robe. _Nonne\nstatim, cum h\u00e6c legis, occurrit hunc esse, qui solutis tunicis in urbe\nsemper incesserit?_ Seneca, epist. cxiv. What he has said of M\u00e6cenas\nis perfectly just. The fopperies of that celebrated minister are in\nthis Dialogue called CALAMISTRI; an allusion borrowed from Cicero,\nwho praises the beautiful simplicity of _C\u00e6sar's Commentaries_, and\nsays there were men of a vicious taste, who wanted to apply the\n_curling-iron_, that is, to introduce the glitter of conceit and\nantithesis in the place of truth and nature. _Commentarios quosdam\nscripsit rerum suarum, valde quidem probandos: nudi enim sunt, et\nrecti, et venusti, omni ornatu orationis, tanquam veste, detracto.\nIneptis gratum fortasse fecit, qui volunt illa_ CALAMISTRIS _inurere._\nCicero _De Claris Orat._ s. 262.\n\n[d] Who Gallio was, is not clearly settled by the commentators.\nQuintilian, lib. iii. cap. 1, makes mention of Gallio, who wrote a\ntreatise of eloquence; and in the _Annals_, b. xv. s. 73, we find\nJunius Gallio, the brother of Seneca; but whether either of them is\nthe person here intended, remains uncertain. Whoever he was, his\neloquence was a tinkling cymbal. Quintilian says of such orators, who\nare all inflated, tumid, corrupt, and jingling, that their malady does\nnot proceed from a full and rich constitution, but from mere\ninfirmity; for,\n\n     As in bodies, thus in souls we find,\n     What wants in blood and spirits, swell'd with wind.\n\n_Nam tumidos, et corruptos, et tinnulos, et quocumque alio cacozeli\u00e6\ngenere peccantes, certum habeo, non virium, sed infirmitatis vitio\nlaborare: ut corpora non robore, sed valetudine inflantur._ Quintil.\nlib. ii. cap. 3.\n\n[e] Pliny declares, without ceremony, that he was ashamed of the\ncorrupt effeminate style that disgraced the courts of justice, and\nmade him think of withdrawing from the forum. He calls it sing-song,\nand says that nothing but musical instruments could be added. _Pudet\nreferre, qu\u00e6 quam fract\u00e2 pronunciatione dicantur; quibus quam teneris\nclamoribus excipiantur. Plausus tantum, ac sola cymbala et tympana,\nillis canticis desunt._ Pliny, lib. ii. epist. 14. The chief aim of\nPersius in his first satire is levelled against the bad poets of his\ntime, and also the spurious orators, who enervated their eloquence by\nantithesis, far-fetched metaphors, and points of wit, delivered with\nthe softest tone of voice, and ridiculous airs of affectation.\n\n     Fur es, ait Pedio: Pedius quid? Crimina rasis\n     Librat in antithetis; doctus posuisse figuras\n     Laudatur. Bellum hoc! hoc bellum! an Romule ceves?\n     Men' moveat quippe, et, cantet si naufragus, assem\n     Protulerim? Cantas, cum fract\u00e2 te in trabe pictum\n     Ex humero portes?\n                              PERSIUS, sat. i. ver. 85.\n\n     Theft, says the accuser, to thy charge I lay,\n     O Pedius. What does gentle Pedius say?\n     Studious to please the genius of the times,\n     With periods, points, and tropes, he slurs his crimes.\n     He lards with flourishes his long harangue:\n     'Tis fine, say'st thou. What! to be prais'd, and hang?\n     Effeminate Roman! shall such stuff prevail,\n     To tickle thee, and make thee wag thy tail?\n     Say, should a shipwreck'd sailor sing his woe,\n     Wouldst thou be mov'd to pity, and bestow\n     An alms? What's more prepost'rous than to see\n     A merry beggar? wit in misery!\n                                          DRYDEN'S PERSIUS.\n\n[f] For Cassius Severus, see s. xix. note [a].\n\n[g] Gabinianus was a teacher of rhetoric in the reign of Vespasian.\nEusebius, in his Chronicon, eighth of Vespasian, says that Gabinianus,\na celebrated rhetorician, was a teacher of eloquence in Gaul.\n_Gabinianus, celeberrimi nominis rhetor, in Galli\u00e2 docuit._ His\nadmirers deemed him another Cicero, and, after him, all such orators\nwere called CICERONES GABISTIANI.\n\n\nSection XXVIII.\n\n[a] In order to brand and stigmatise the Roman matrons who committed\nthe care of their infant children to hired nurses, Tacitus observes,\nthat no such custom was known among the savages of Germany. See\n_Manners of the Germans_, s. xx. See also Quintilian, on the subject\nof education, lib. i. cap. 2 and 3.\n\n[b] Cornelia, the mother of the two Gracchi, was daughter to the first\nScipio Africanus. The sons, Quintilian says, owed much of their\neloquence to the care and institutions of their mother, whose taste\nand learning were fully displayed in her letters, which were then in\nthe hands of the public. _Nam Gracchorum eloquenti\u00e6 multum contulisse\naccepimus Corneliam matrem, cujus doctissimus sermo in posteros quoque\nest epistolis traditus._ Quint. lib. i. cap. 1. To the same effect\nCicero: _Fuit Gracchus diligenti\u00e2 Corneli\u00e6 matris a puero doctus, et\nGr\u00e6cis litteris eruditus._ _De Claris Orat._ s. 104. Again, Cicero says,\nWe have read the letters of Cornelia, the mother of the Gracchi, from\nwhich it appears, that the sons were educated, not so much in the lap\nof their mother, as her conversation. _Legimus epistolas Corneli\u00e6,\nmatris Gracchorum: apparet filios non tam in gremio educatos, quam in\nsermone matris._ _De Claris Orat._ s. 211. Pliny the elder informs us\nthat a statue was erected to her memory, though Cato the Censor\ndeclaimed against shewing so much honour to women, even in the\nprovinces. But with all his vehemence he could not prevent it in the\ncity of Rome. Pliny, lib. xxxiv. s. 14.\n\n[c] For Aurelia, the mother of Julius C\u00e6sar, see _The Genealogical\nTable of the C\u00e6sars_, No. 2.\n\n[d] For Atia, the mother of Augustus, see _Genealogical Table of the\nC\u00e6sars_, No. 14. As another instance of maternal care, Tacitus informs\nus that Julia Procilla superintended the education of her son. See\n_Life of Agricola_, s. iv.\n\n\nSection XXIX.\n\n[a] Quintilian thinks the first elements of education so highly\nmaterial, that he has two long chapters on the subject. He requires,\nin the first place, that the language of the nurses should be pure and\ncorrect. Their manners are of great importance, but, he adds, let them\nspeak with propriety. It is to them that the infant first attends; he\nlistens, and endeavours to imitate them. The first colour, imbibed by\nyarn or thread, is sure to last. What is bad, generally adheres\ntenaciously. Let the child, therefore, not learn in his infancy, what\nhe must afterwards take pains to unlearn. _Ante omnia, ne sit vitiosus\nsermo nutricibus. Et morum quidem in his haud dubi\u00e8 prior ratio est;\nrect\u00e8 tamen etiam loquantur. Has prim\u00f9m audiet puer; harum verba\neffingere imitando conabitur. Et natur\u00e2 tenacissimi sumus eorum, qu\u00e6\nrudibus annis percipimus; nec lanarum colores, quibus simplex ille\ncandor mutatus est, elui possunt. Et h\u00e6c ipsa magis pertinaciter\nh\u00e6rent, qu\u00e6 deteriora sunt. Non assuescat ergo, ne dum infans quidem\nest, sermoni, qui dediscendus est._ Quint. lib. i. cap. 1. Plutarch\nhas a long discourse on the breeding of children, in which all\nmistakes are pointed out, and the best rules enforced with great\nacuteness of observation.\n\n[b] Juvenal has one entire satire on the subject of education:\n\n     Nil dictu foedum visuque h\u00e6c limina tangat,\n     Intra qu\u00e6 puer est. Procul hinc, procul inde puell\u00e6\n     Lenonum, et cantus pernoctantis parasiti.\n     Maxima debetur puero reverentia.\n                                      SAT. xiv. ver. 44.\n\n     Suffer no lewdness, no indecent speech,\n     Th' apartment of the tender youth to reach.\n     Far be from thence the glutton parasite,\n     Who sings his drunken catches all the night.\n     Boys from their parents may this rev'rence claim.\n                                     DRYDEN'S JUVENAL.\n\n[c] The rage of the Romans for the diversions of the theatre, and\npublic spectacles of every kind, is often mentioned by Horace,\nJuvenal, and other writers under the emperors. Seneca says, that, at\none time, three ways were wanted to as many different theatres:\n_tribus eodem tempore theatris vi\u00e6 postulantur_. And again, the most\nillustrious of the Roman youth are no better than slaves to the\npantomimic performers. _Ostendam nobilissimos juvenes mancipia\npantomimorum._ Epist. 47. It was for this reason that Petronius lays\nit down as a rule to be observed by the young student, never to list\nhimself in the parties and factions of the theatre:\n\n         ----Neve plausor in scen\u00e2\n     Sedeat redemptus, histrioni\u00e6 addictus.\n\nIt is well known, that theatrical parties distracted the Roman\ncitizens, and rose almost to phrensy. They were distinguished by the\n_green_ and the _blue_, Caligula, as we read in Suetonius, attached\nhimself to the former, and was so fond of the charioteers, who wore\ngreen liveries, that he lived for a considerable time in the stables,\nwhere their horses were kept. _Prasin\u00e6 factioni ita addictus et\ndeditus, ut coenaret in stabulo assidue et maneret. Life of Caligula_,\ns. 55. Montesquieu reckons such party-divisions among the causes that\nwrought the downfall of the empire. Constantinople, he says, was split\ninto two factions, the _green_ and the _blue_, which owed their origin\nto the inclination of the people to favour one set of charioteers in\nthe circus rather than another. These two parties raged in every city\nthroughout the empire, and their fury rose in proportion to the number\nof inhabitants. Justinian favoured the _blues_, who became so elate\nwith pride, that they trampled on the laws. All ties of friendship,\nall natural affection, and all relative duties, were extinguished.\nWhole families were destroyed; and the empire was a scene of anarchy\nand wild contention. He, who felt himself capable of the most\natrocious deeds, declared himself a BLUE, and the GREENS were\nmassacred with impunity. _Montesquieu, Grandeur et D\u00e9cadence des\nRomains_, chap. xx.\n\n[d] Quintilian, in his tenth book, chap. 1. has given a full account\nof the best Greek and Roman poets, orators, and historians; and in b.\nii. ch. 6, he draws up a regular scheme for the young student to\npursue in his course of reading. There are, he says, two rocks, on\nwhich they may split. The first, by being led by some fond admirer of\nantiquity to set too high a value on the manner of Cato and the\nGracchi; for, in that commerce, they will be in danger of growing dry,\nharsh, and rugged. The strong conception of those men will be beyond\nthe reach of tender minds. Their style, indeed, may be copied; and the\nyouth may flatter himself, when he has contracted the rust of\nantiquity, that he resembles the illustrious orators of a former age.\nOn the other hand, the florid decorations and false glitter of the\nmoderns may have a secret charm, the more dangerous, and seductive, as\nthe petty flourishes of our new way of writing may prove acceptable to\nthe youthful mind. _Duo autem genera maxim\u00e8 cavenda pueris puto: unum,\nne quis eos antiquitatis nimius admirator in Gracchorum, Catonisque,\net aliorum similium lectione durescere velit. Erunt enim horridi atque\njejuni. Nam neque vim eorum adhuc intellectu consequentur; et\nelocutione, qu\u00e6 tum sine dubio erat optima, sed nostris temporibus\naliena, contenti, quod est pessimum, similes sibi magnis viris\nvidebuntur. Alterum, quod huic diversum est, ne recentis hujus\nlascivi\u00e6 flosculis capti, voluptate qu\u00e2dam prav\u00e2 deliniantur, ut\npr\u00e6dulce illud genus, et puerilibus ingeniis hoc gratius, quo propius\nest, adament._ Such was the doctrine of Quintilian. His practice, we\nmay be sure, was consonant to his own rules. Under such a master the\nyouth of Rome might be initiated in science, and formed to a just\ntaste for eloquence and legitimate composition; but one man was not\nequal to the task. The rhetoricians and pedagogues of the age\npreferred the novelty and meretricious ornaments of the style then in\nvogue.\n\n\nSection XXX.\n\n[a] This is the treatise, or history of the most eminent orators (DE\nCLARIS ORATORIBUS), which has been so often cited in the course of\nthese notes. It is also entitled BRUTUS; a work replete with the\nsoundest criticism, and by its variety and elegance always charming.\n\n[b] Quintus Mucius Sc\u00e6vola was the great lawyer of his time. Cicero\ndraws a comparison between him and Crassus. They were both engaged, on\nopposite sides, in a cause before the CENTUMVIRI. Crassus proved\nhimself the best lawyer among the orators of that day, and Sc\u00e6vola the\nmost eloquent of the lawyers. _Ut eloquentium juris peritissimus\nCrassus; jurisperitorum eloquentissimus Sc\u00e6vola putaretur._ _De Claris\nOrat._ s. 145. During the consulship of Sylla, A.U.C. 666, Cicero\nbeing then in the nineteenth year of his age, and wishing to acquire a\ncompetent knowledge of the principles of jurisprudence, attached\nhimself to Mucius Sc\u00e6vola, who did not undertake the task of\ninstructing pupils, but, by conversing freely with all who consulted\nhim, gave a fair opportunity to those who thirsted after knowledge.\n_Ego autem juris civilis studio, multum oper\u00e6 dabam Q. Sc\u00e6vol\u00e6, qui\nquamquam nemini se ad docendum dabat, tamen, consulentibus\nrespondendo, studiosos audiendi docebat._ _De Claris Orat._ s. 306.\n\n[c] Philo was a leading philosopher of the academic school. To avoid\nthe fury of Mithridates, who waged a long war with the Romans, he fled\nfrom Athens, and, with some of the most eminent of his\nfellow-citizens, repaired to Rome. Cicero was struck with his\nphilosophy, and became his pupil. _C\u00f9m princeps academi\u00e6 Philo, cum\nAtheniensium optimatibus, Mithridatico bello, domo profugisset,\nRomamque venisset, totum ei me tradidi, admirabili quodam ad\nphilosophiam studio concitatus._ _De Claris Orat._ s. 306.\n\nCicero adds, that he gave board and lodging, at his own house, to\nDiodotus the stoic, and, under that master, employed himself in\nvarious branches of literature, but particularly in the study of\nlogic, which may be considered as a mode of eloquence, contracted,\nclose, and nervous. _Eram cum stoico Diodoto: qui cum habitavisset\napud me, mecumque vixisset, nuper est domi me\u00e6 mortuus. A quo, cum in\naliis rebus, tum studiosissime in dialectic\u00e2 exercebar, qu\u00e6 quasi\ncontracta et adstricta eloquentia putanda est._ _De Claris Orat._ s.\n309.\n\n[d] Cicero gives an account of his travels, which he undertook, after\nhaving employed two years in the business of the forum, where he\ngained an early reputation. At Athens, he passed six months with\nAntiochus, the principal philosopher of the old academy, and, under\nthe direction of that able master, resumed those abstract\nspeculations which he had cultivated from his earliest youth. Nor did\nhe neglect his rhetorical exercises. In that pursuit, he was assisted\nby Demetrius, the Syrian, who was allowed to be a skilful preceptor.\nHe passed from Greece into Asia; and, in the course of his travels\nthrough that country, he lived in constant habits with Menippus of\nStratonica; a man eminent for his learning; who, if to be neither\nfrivolous, nor unintelligible, is the character of Attic eloquence,\nmight fairly be called a disciple of that school. He met with many\nother professors of rhetoric, such as Dionysius of Magnesia, \u00c6schylus\nof Cnidos, and Zenocles of Adramytus; but not content with their\nassistance, he went to Rhodes, and renewed his friendship with MOLO,\nwhom he had heard at Rome, and knew to be an able pleader in real\ncauses; a fine writer, and a judicious critic, who could, with a just\ndiscernment of the beauties as well as the faults of a composition,\npoint out the road to excellence, and improve the taste of his\nscholars. In his attention to the Roman orator, the point he aimed at\n(Cicero will not say that he succeeded) was, to lop away superfluous\nbranches, and confine within its proper channel a stream of\neloquence, too apt to swell above all bounds, and overflow its banks.\nAfter two years thus spent in the pursuit of knowledge, and\nimprovement in his oratorical profession, Cicero returned to Rome\nalmost a new man. _Is (MOLO) dedit operam (si modo id consequi potuit)\nut nimis redundantes nos, et superfluentes juvenili quadam dicendi\nimpunitate, et licenti\u00e2, reprimeret, et quasi extra ripas diffluentes\ncoerceret. Ita recepi me biennio post, non modo exercitatior, sed prop\u00e8\nmutatus._ See _De Claris Oratoribus_, s. 315 and 316.\n\n[e] Cicero is here said to have been a complete master of philosophy,\nwhich, according to Quintilian, was divided into three branches,\nnamely, physics, ethics, and logic. It has been mentioned in this\nsection, note [c], that Cicero called logic a contracted and close\nmode of eloquence. That observation is fully explained by Quintilian.\nSpeaking of logic, the use, he says, of that contentious art, consists\nin just definition, which presents to the mind the precise idea; and\nin nice discrimination, which marks the essential difference of\nthings. It is this faculty that throws a sudden light on every\ndifficult question, removes all ambiguity, clears up what was\ndoubtful, divides, develops, and separates, and then collects the\nargument to a point. But the orator must not be too fond of this close\ncombat. The minute attention, which logic requires, will exclude what\nis of higher value; while it aims at precision, the vigour of the mind\nis lost in subtlety. We often see men, who argue with wonderful craft;\nbut, when petty controversy will no longer serve their purpose, we see\nthe same men without warmth or energy, cold, languid, and unequal to\nthe conflict; like those little animals, which are brisk in narrow\nplaces, and by their agility baffle their pursuers, but in the open\nfield are soon overpowered. _H\u00e6c pars dialectica, sive illam dicere\nmalimus disputatricem, ut est utilis s\u00e6pe et finitionibus, et\ncomprehensionibus, et separandis qu\u00e6 sunt differentia, et resolvend\u00e2\nambiguitate, et distinguendo, dividendo, illiciendo, implicando; ita\nsi totum sibi vindicaverit in foro certamen, obstabit melioribus, et\nsectas ad tenuitatem vires ips\u00e2 subtilitate consumet. Itaque reperias\nquosdam in disputando mir\u00e8 callidos; cum ab ill\u00e2 ver\u00f2 cavillatione\ndiscesserint, non magis sufficere in aliquo graviori actu, quam parva\nqu\u00e6dam animalia, qu\u00e6 in angustiis mobilia, campo deprehenduntur._\nQuint. lib. xii. cap. 2.\n\nEthics, or moral philosophy, the same great critic holds to be\nindispensably requisite. _Jam quidem pars illa moralis, qu\u00e6 dicitur\nethice, cert\u00e8 tota oratori est accommodata. Nam in tant\u00e2 causarum\nvarietate, nulla fer\u00e8 dici potest, cujus non parte aliqu\u00e2 tractatus\n\u00e6qui et boni reperiantur._ Lib. xii. Unless the mind be enriched with\na store of knowledge, there may he loquacity, but nothing that\ndeserves the name of oratory. Eloquence, says Lord Bolingbroke, must\nflow like a stream that is fed by an abundant spring, and not spout\nforth a little frothy stream, on some gaudy day, and remain dry for\nthe rest of the year. See _Spirit of Patriotism_.\n\nWith regard to natural philosophy, Quintilian has a sentiment so truly\nsublime, that to omit it in this place would look like insensibility.\nIf, says he, the universe is conducted by a superintending Providence,\nit follows that good men should govern the nations of the earth. And\nif the soul of man is of celestial origin, it is evident that we\nshould tread in the paths of virtue, all aspiring to our native\nsource, not slaves to passion, and the pleasures of the world. These\nare important topics; they often occur to the public orator, and\ndemand all his eloquence. _Nam si regitur providenti\u00e2 mundus,\nadministranda cert\u00e8 bonis viris erit respublica. Si divina nostris\nanimis origo, tendendum ad virtutem, nec voluptatibus terreni corporis\nserviendum. An hoc non frequenter tractabit orator?_ Quint. lib. xii.\ncap. 2.\n\n\nSection XXXI.\n\n[a] Quintilian, as well as Seneca, has left a collection of\nschool-declamations, but he has given his opinion of all such\nperformances. They are mere imitation, and, by consequence, have not\nthe force and spirit which a real cause inspires. In public harangues,\nthe subject is founded in reality; in declamations, all is fiction.\n_Omnis imitatio ficta est; quo fit ut minus sanguinis ac virium\ndeclamationes habeant, quam orationes; quod in his vera, in illis\nassimulata materia est._ Lib. x. cap. 2. Petronius has given a lively\ndescription of the rhetoricians of his time. The consequence, he says,\nof their turgid style, and the pompous swell of sounding periods, has\never been the same: when their scholars enter the forum, they look as\nif they were transported into a new world. The teachers of rhetoric\nhave been the bane of all true eloquence. _H\u00e6c ipsa tolerabilia\nessent, si ad eloquentiam ituris viam facerent: nunc et rerum tumore,\net sententiarum vanissimo strepitu, hoc tantum proficiunt, ut quum in\nforum venerint, putent se in alium terrarum orbem delatos. Pace vestr\u00e2\nliceat dixisse, primi omnium eloquentiam perdidistis._ Petron. _in\nSatyrico_, cap. 1 and 2. That gay writer, who passed his days in\nluxury and voluptuous pleasures (see his character, _Annals_, b. xvi.\ns. 18), was, amidst all his dissipation, a man of learning, and, at\nintervals, of deep reflection. He knew the value of true philosophy,\nand, therefore, directs the young orator to the Socratic school, and\nto that plan of education which we have before us in the present\nDialogue. He bids his scholar begin with Homer, and there drink deep\nof the Pierian spring: after that, he recommends the moral system;\nand, when his mind is thus enlarged, he allows him to wield the arms\nof Demosthenes.\n\n                  ----Det primos versibus annos,\n     M\u00e6oniumque bibat felici pectore fontem:\n     Mox et Socratico plenus grege mutet habenas\n     Liber, et ingentis quatiat Demosthenis arma.\n\n[b] Cicero has left a book, entitled TOPICA, in which he treats at\nlarge of the method of finding proper arguments. This, he observes,\nwas executed by Aristotle, whom he pronounces the great master both of\ninvention and judgement. _Cum omnis ratio diligens disserendi duas\nhabeat partes; unam INVENIENDI, alteram JUDICANDI; utriusque princeps,\nut mihi quidem videtur, Aristoteles fuit._ Ciceronis _Topica_, s. vi.\nThe sources from which arguments may be drawn, are called LOCI\nCOMMUNES, COMMON PLACES. To supply the orator with ample materials,\nand to render him copious on every subject, was the design of the\nGreek preceptor, and for that purpose he gave his TOPICA. _Aristoteles\nadolescentes, non ad philosophorum morem tenuiter disserendi, sed ad\ncopiam rhetorum in utramque partem, ut ornatius et uberius dici\nposset, exercuit; idemque locos (sic enim appellat) quasi argumentorum\nnotas tradidit, unde omnis in utramque partem traheretur oratio._\nCicero, _De Oratore_. Aristotle was the most eminent of Plato's\nscholars: he retired to a _gymnasium_, or place of exercise, in the\nneighbourhood of Athens, called the _Lyceum_, where, from a custom,\nwhich he and his followers observed, of discussing points of\nphilosophy, as they walked in the _porticos_ of the place, they\nobtained the name of Peripatetics, or the walking philosophers. See\nMiddleton's _Life of Cicero_, vol. ii. p. 537, 4to edit.\n\n[c] The academic sect derived its origin from Socrates, and its name\nfrom a celebrated _gymnasium_, or place of exercise, in the suburbs of\nAthens, called the _Academy_, after _Ecademus_, who possessed it in\nthe time of the _Tyndarid\u00e6_. It was afterwards purchased, and\ndedicated to the public, for the convenience of walks and exercises\nfor the citizens of Athens. It was gradually improved with\nplantations, groves and porticos for the particular use of the\nprofessors or masters of the academic school; where several of them\nare said to have spent their lives, and to have resided so strictly,\nas scarce ever to have come within the city. See Middleton's _Life of\nCicero_, 4to edit. vol. ii. p. 536. Plato, and his followers,\ncontinued to reside in the porticos of the academy. They chose\n\n                        ----The green retreats\n     Of Academus, and the thymy vale,\n     Where, oft inchanted with Socratic sounds,\n     Ilyssus pure devolv'd his tuneful stream\n     In gentle murmurs.\n                      AKENSIDE, PLEAS. OF IMAG.\n\nFor dexterity in argument, the orator is referred to this school, for\nthe reason given by Quintilian, who says that the custom of supporting\nan argument on either side of the question, approaches nearest to the\norator's practice in forensic causes. _Academiam quidam utilissimam\ncredunt, quod mos in utramque partem disserendi ad exercitationem\nforensium causarum proxim\u00e8 accedat._ Lib. xii. cap. 2 Quintilian\nassures us that we are indebted to the academic philosophy for the\nablest orators, and it is to that school that Horace sends his poet\nfor instruction:\n\n     Rem tibi Socratic\u00e6 poterunt ostendere chart\u00e6,\n     Verbaque provisam rem non invita sequentur.\n                               ARS POET. ver. 310.\n\n     Good sense, that fountain of the muse's art,\n     Let the rich page of Socrates impart;\n     And if the mind with clear conception glow,\n     The willing words in just expressions flow.\n                                FRANCIS'S HORACE.\n\n[d] Epicurus made frequent use of the rhetorical figure called\nexclamation; and in his life, by Diogenes L\u00e6rtius, we find a variety\nof instances. It is for that manner of giving animation to a discourse\nthat Epicurus is mentioned in the Dialogue. For the rest, Quintilian\ntells us what to think of him. Epicurus, he says, dismisses the orator\nfrom his school, since he advises his pupil to pay no regard to\nscience or to method. _Epicurus imprimis nos a se ipse dimittit, qui\nfugere omnem disciplinam navigatione quam velocissima jubet._ Lib.\nxii. cap. 2. Metrodorus was the favourite disciple of Epicurus.\nBrotier says that a statue of the master and the scholar, with their\nheads joined together, was found at Rome in the year 1743.\n\nIt is worthy of notice, that except the stoics, who, without aiming at\nelegance of language, argued closely and with vigour, Quintilian\nproscribes the remaining sects of philosophers. Aristippus, he says,\nplaced his _summum bonum_ in bodily pleasure, and therefore could be\nno friend to the strict regimen of the accomplished orator. Much less\ncould Pyrrho be of use, since he doubted whether there was any such\nthing in existence as the judges before whom the cause must be\npleaded. To him the party accused, and the senate, were alike\nnon-entities. _Neque vero Aristippus, summum in voluptate corpora\nbonum ponens, ad hunc nos laborem adhortetur. Pyrrho quidem, quas in\nhoc opere partes habere potest? cui judices esse apud quos verba\nfaciat, et reum pro quo loquatur, et senatum, in quo sit dicenda\nsententia, non liquebat._ Quintil. lib. xii. cap. 2.\n\n\nSection XXXII.\n\n[a] We are told by Quintilian, that Demosthenes, the great orator of\nGreece, was an assiduous hearer of Plato: _Constat Demosthenem,\nprincipem omnium Gr\u00e6ci\u00e6 oratorum, dedisse operam Platoni._ Lib. xii.\ncap. 2. And Cicero expressly says, that, if he might venture to call\nhimself an orator, he was made so, not by the manufacture of the\nschools of rhetoric, but in the walks of the Academy. _Fateor me\noratorem, si modo sim, aut etiam quicumque sim, non ex rhetorum\nofficinis, sed ex Academi\u00e6 spatiis extitisse. Ad Brutum Orator_, s.\n12.\n\n\nSection XXXIII.\n\n[a] The ancient critics made a wide distinction, between a mere\nfacility of speech, and what they called the oratorical faculty. This\nis fully explained by Asinius Pollio, who said of himself, that by\npleading at first with propriety, he succeeded so far as to be often\ncalled upon; by pleading frequently, he began to lose the propriety\nwith which he set out; and the reason was, by constant practice he\nacquired rashness, not a just confidence in himself; a fluent\nfacility, not the true faculty of an orator. _Commod\u00e8 agenda factum\nest, ut s\u00e6pe agerem; s\u00e6pe agenda, ut minus commod\u00e8; quia scilicet\nnimia facilitas magis quam facultas, nec fiducia, sed temeritas,\nparatur._ Quintil. lib. xii.\n\n\nSection XXXIV.\n\n[a] There is in this place a trifling mistake, either in Messala, the\nspeaker, or in the copyists. Crassus was born A.U.C. 614. See s.\nxviii. note [f]. Papirius Carbo, the person accused, was consul A.U.C.\n634, and the prosecution was in the following year, when Crassus\nexpressly says, that he was then only one and twenty. _Quippe qui\nomnium maturrim\u00e8 ad publicas causas accesserim, annosque natus UNUM ET\nVIGINTI, nobilissimum hominem et eloquentissimum in judicium voc\u00e2rim._\nCicero, _De Orat._ lib. iii. s. 74. Pliny the consul was another\ninstance of early pleading. He says himself, that he began his career\nin the forum at the age of nineteen, and, after long practice, he\ncould only see the functions of an orator as it were in a mist.\n_Undevicessimo \u00e6tatis anno dicere in foro coepi, et nunc demum, quid\npr\u00e6stare debeat orator, adhuc tamen per caliginem video._ Lib. v.\nepist. 8. Quintilian relates of C\u00e6sar, Calvus, and Pollio, that they\nall three appeared at the bar, long before they arrived at their\nqu\u00e6storian age, which was seven and twenty. _Calvus, C\u00e6sar, Pollio,\nmultum ante qu\u00e6storiam omnes \u00e6tatem gravissima judicia susceperunt._\nQuintilian, lib. xii. cap. 6.\n\n\nSection XXXV.\n\n[a] Lipsius, in his note on this passage, says, that he once thought\nthe word _scena_ in the text ought to be changed to _schola_; but he\nafterwards saw his mistake. The place of fictitious declamation and\nspurious eloquence, where the teachers played a ridiculous part, was\nproperly called a theatrical scene.\n\n[b] Lucius Licinius Crassus and Domitius \u00c6nobarbus were censors A.U.C.\n662. Crassus himself informs us, that, for two years together, a new\nrace of men, called Rhetoricians, or masters of eloquence, kept open\nschools at Rome, till he thought fit to exercise his censorian\nauthority, and by an edict to banish the whole tribe from the city of\nRome; and this, he says, he did, not, as some people suggested, to\nhinder the talents of youth from being cultivated, but to save their\ngenius from being corrupted, and the young mind from being confirmed\nin shameless ignorance. Audacity was all the new masters could teach;\nand this being the only thing to be acquired on that stage of\nimpudence, he thought it the duty of a Roman censor to crush the\nmischief in the bud. _Latini (sic diis placet) hoc biennio magistri\ndicendi extiterunt; quos ego censor edicto meo sustuleram; non quo (ut\nnescio quos dicere aiebant) acui ingenia adolescentium nollem, sed,\ncontra, ingenia obtundi nolui, corroborari impudentiam. Hos vero novos\nmagistros nihil intelligebam posse docere, nisi ut auderent. Hoc cum\nunum traderetur, et cum impudenti\u00e6 ludus esset, putavi esse censoris,\nne longius id serperet, providere._ _De Orat._ lib. iii. s. 93 and 94.\nAulus Gellius mentions a former expulsion of the rhetoricians, by a\ndecree of the senate, in the consulship of Fannius Strabo and Valerius\nMessala, A.U.C. 593. He gives the words of the decree, and also of the\nedict, by which the teachers were banished by Crassus, several years\nafter. See _A. Gellius, Noctes Attic\u00e6_, lib. xv. cap. 2. See also\nSuetonius, _De Claris Rhet._ s. 1.\n\n[c] Seneca has left a collection of declamations in the two kinds,\nviz. the persuasive, and controversial. See his SUASORI\u00c6, and\nCONTROVERSI\u00c6. In the first class, the questions are, Whether Alexander\nshould attempt the Indian ocean? Whether he should enter Babylon, when\nthe augurs denounced impending danger? Whether Cicero, to appease the\nwrath of Marc Antony, should burn all his works? The subjects in the\nsecond class are more complex. A priestess was taken prisoner by a\nband of pirates, and sold to slavery. The purchaser abandoned her to\nprostitution. Her person being rendered venal, a soldier made his\noffers of gallantry. She desired the price of her prostituted charms;\nbut the military man resolved to use force and insolence, and she\nstabbed him in the attempt. For this she was prosecuted, and\nacquitted. She then desired to be restored to her rank of priestess:\nthat point was decided against her. These instances may serve as a\nspecimen of the trifling declamations, into which such a man as Seneca\nwas betrayed by his own imagination. Petronius has described the\nliterary farce of the schools. Young men, he says, were there trained\nup in folly, neither seeing nor hearing any thing that could be of\nuse in the business of life. They were taught to think of nothing, but\npirates loaded with fetters on the sea-shore; tyrants by their edicts\ncommanding sons to murder their fathers; the responses of oracles\ndemanding a sacrifice of three or more virgins, in order to abate an\nepidemic pestilence. All these discourses, void of common sense, are\ntricked out in the gaudy colours of exquisite eloquence, soft, sweet,\nand seasoned to the palate. In this ridiculous boy's-play the scholars\ntrifle away their time; they are laughed at in the forum, and still\nworse, what they learn in their youth they do not forget at an\nadvanced age. _Ego adolescentulos existimo in scholis stultissimos\nfieri, quia nihil ex iis, qu\u00e6 in usu habemus, aut audiunt aut vident;\nsed piratas cum catenis in littore stantes, et tyrannos edicta\nscribentes, quibus imperent filiis, ut patrum suorum capita pr\u00e6cidant;\nsed responsa in pestilenti\u00e2 data, ut virgines tres aut plures\nimmolentur; sed mellitos verborum globos, et omnia dicta factaque\nquasi papavere et sesamo sparsa. Nunc pueri in scholis ludunt; juvenes\nridentur in foro; et, quod utroque turpius est, quod quisque perperam\ndiscit, in senectute confiteri non vult._ Petron. _in Satyrico_, cap.\n3 and 4.\n\n[d] Here unfortunately begins a chasm in the original. The words are,\n_Cum ad veros judices ventum est, * * * * rem cogitare * * * * nihil\nhumile, nihil abjectum eloqui poterat._ This is unintelligible. What\nfollows from the words _magna eloquentia sicut flamma_, palpably\nbelongs to Maternus, who is the last speaker in the Dialogue. The\nwhole of what Secundus said is lost. The expedient has been, to divide\nthe sequel between Secundus and Maternus; but that is mere patch-work.\nWe are told in the first section of the Dialogue, that the several\npersons present spoke their minds, each in his turn assigning\ndifferent but probable causes, and at times agreeing on the same.\nThere can, therefore, be no doubt but Secundus took his turn in the\ncourse of the enquiry. Of all the editors of Tacitus, Brotier is the\nonly one who has adverted to this circumstance. To supply the loss, as\nwell as it can now be done by conjecture, that ingenious commentator\nhas added a Supplement, with so much taste, and such a degree of\nprobability, that it has been judged proper to adopt what he has\nadded. The thread of the discourse will be unbroken, and the reader,\nit is hoped, will prefer a regular continuity to a mere vacant space.\nThe inverted comma in the margin of the text [transcriber's note: not\nused, but numbered with decimal rather than Roman numerals] will mark\nthe supplemental part, as far as section 36, where the original\nproceeds to the end of the Dialogue. The sections of the Supplement\nwill be marked, for the sake of distinction, with figures, instead of\nthe Roman numeral letters.\n\n\nSUPPLEMENT.\n\nSection 1.\n\n[a] Petronius says, you may as well expect that the person, who is for\never shut up in a kitchen, should be sweet and fresh, as that young\nmen, trained up in such absurd and ridiculous interludes, should\nimprove their taste or judgement. _Qui inter h\u00e6c nutriuntur, non magis\nsapere possunt, quam bene olere, qui in culin\u00e1 habitant._ Petronius,\n_in Satyrico_, s. 2.\n\n\nSection 2.\n\n[a] The means by which an orator is nourished, formed, and raised to\neminence, are here enumerated. These are the requisites, that lead to\nthat distinguished eloquence, which is finely described by Petronius,\nwhen he says, a sublime oration, but sublime within due bounds, is\nneither deformed with affectation, nor turgid in any part, but,\ndepending on truth and simplicity, rises to unaffected grandeur.\n_Grandis, et, ut ita dicam, pudica oratio, non est maculosa, nec\nturgida, sed naturali pulchritudine exsurgit._ Petronius, _in\nSatyrico_, s. 2.\n\n\nSection 3.\n\n[a] Maternus engaged for himself and Secundus, that they would\ncommunicate their sentiments: see s. 16. In consequence of that\npromise, Messala now calls upon them both. They have already declared\nthemselves admirers of ancient eloquence. It now remains to be known,\nwhether they agree with Messala as to the cause that occasioned a\nrapid decline: or whether they can produce new reasons of their own.\n\n\nSection 4.\n\n[a] Secundus proceeds to give his opinion. This is managed by Brotier\nwith great art and judgement, since it is evident in the original text\nthat Maternus closed the debate. According to what is said in the\nintroduction to the Dialogue, Secundus agrees with Messala upon most\npoints, but still assigns different, but probable reasons. A\nrevolution, he says, happened in literature; a new taste prevailed,\nand the worst models were deemed worthy of imitation. The emotions of\nthe heart were suppressed. Men could no longer yield to the impulse of\ngenius. They endeavoured to embellish their composition with novelty;\nthey sparkled with wit, and amused their readers with point,\nantithesis, and forced conceits. They fell into the case of the man,\nwho, according to Martial, was ingenious, but not eloquent:\n\n     Cum sexaginta numeret Casselius annos;\n     Ingeniosus homo est: quando disertus erit?\n                             Lib. vii. epig. 8.\n\n[b] Enough, perhaps, has been already said in the notes, concerning\nthe teachers of rhetoric; but it will not be useless to cite one\npassage more from Petronius, who in literature, as well as convivial\npleasure, may be allowed to be _arbiter elegantiarum_. The\nrhetoricians, he says, came originally from Asia; they were, however,\nneither known to Pindar, and the nine lyric poets, nor to Plato, or\nDemosthenes. They arrived at Athens in evil hour, and imported with\nthem that enormous frothy loquacity, which at once, like a pestilence,\nblasted all the powers of genius, and established the rules of corrupt\neloquence. _Nondum umbraticus doctor ingenia deleverat, cum Pindarus\nnovemque lyrici Homericis versibus canere non timuerunt. Certe neque\nPlatona, neque Demosthenem, ad hoc genus exercitationis accessisse\nvideo. Nuper ventosa isth\u00e6c et enormis loquacitas Athenas ex Asia\ncommigravit, animosque juvenum ad magna surgentes veluti pestilenti\nquodam sidere afflavit; simulque corrupt\u00e6 eloquenti\u00e6 regula stetit et\nobtinuit._ Petron. _Satyricon_, s. 2.\n\n\nSection 5.\n\n[a] When the public taste was vitiated, and to _elevate and surprise_,\nas Bayes says, was the _new way of writing_, Seneca is, with good\nreason, ranked in the class of ingenious, but affected authors. Menage\nsays, if all the books in the world were in the fire, there is not\none, whom he would so eagerly snatch from the flames as Plutarch. That\nauthor never tires him; he reads him often, and always finds new\nbeauties. He cannot say the same of Seneca; not but there are\nadmirable passages in his works, but when brought to the test they\nlose their apparent beauty by a close examination. Seneca serves to be\nquoted in the warmth of conversation, but is not of equal value in the\ncloset. Whatever be the subject, he wishes to shine, and, by\nconsequence, his thoughts are too refined, and often _false.\nMenagiana_, tom. ii. p. 1.\n\n\nSection 6.\n\n[a] This charge against Seneca is by no means new. Quintilian was his\ncontemporary; he saw and heard the man, and, in less than twenty\nyears after his death, pronounced judgement against him. In the\nconclusion of the first chapter of his tenth book, after having given\nan account of the Greek and Roman authors, he says, he reserved Seneca\nfor the last place, because, having always endeavoured to counteract\nthe influence of a bad taste, he was supposed to be influenced by\nmotives of personal enmity. But the case was otherwise. He saw that\nSeneca was the favourite of the times, and, to check the torrent that\nthreatened the ruin of all true eloquence, he exerted his best efforts\nto diffuse a sounder judgement. He did not wish that Seneca should be\nlaid aside: but he could not in silence see him preferred to the\nwriters of the Augustan age, whom that writer endeavoured to\ndepreciate, conscious that, having chosen a different style, he could\nnot hope to please the taste of those who were charmed with the\nauthors of a former day. But Seneca was still in fashion; his\npartisans continued to admire, though it cannot be said that they\nimitated him. He fell short of the ancients, and they were still more\nbeneath their model. Since they were content to copy, it were to be\nwished that they had been able to vie with him. He pleased by his\ndefects, and the herd of imitators chose the worst. They acquired a\nvicious manner, and flattered themselves that they resembled their\nmaster. But the truth is, they disgraced him. Seneca, it must be\nallowed, had many great and excellent qualities; a lively imagination,\nvast erudition, and extensive knowledge. He frequently employed others\nto make researches for him, and was often deceived. He embraced all\nsubjects; in his philosophy, not always profound, but a keen censor of\nthe manners, and on moral subjects truly admirable. He has brilliant\npassages, and beautiful sentiments; but the expression is in a false\ntaste, the more dangerous, as he abounds with delightful vices. You\nwould have wished that he had written with his own imagination, and\nthe judgement of others. To sum up his character; had he known how to\nrate little things, had he been above the petty ambition of always\nshining, had he not been fond of himself, had he not weakened his\nforce by minute and dazzling sentences, he would have gained, not the\nadmiration of boys, but the suffrage of the judicious. At present he\nmay be read with safety by those who have made acquaintance with\nbetter models. His works afford the fairest opportunity of\ndistinguishing the beauties of fine writing from their opposite vices.\nHe has much to be approved, and even admired: but a just selection is\nnecessary, and it is to be regretted that he did not choose for\nhimself. Such was the judgement of Quintilian: the learned reader\nwill, perhaps, be glad to have the whole passage in the author's\nwords, rather than be referred to another book. _Ex industri\u00e2 Senecam,\nin omni genere eloquenti\u00e6 versatum, distuli, propter vulgatam falso de\nme opinionem, qu\u00e2 damnare eum, et invisum quoque habere sum creditus.\nQuod, accidit mihi, dum corruptum, et omnibus vitiis fractum dicendi\ngenus revocare ad severiora judicia contendo. Tum autem solus hic fere\nin manibus adolescentium fuit. Quem non equidem omnino conabar\nexcutere, sed potioribus pr\u00e6ferri non sinebam, quos ille non\ndestiterat incessere, cum, diversi sibi conscius generis, placere se\nin dicendo posse iis quibus illi placerent, diffideret. Amabant autem\neum magis, qu\u00e0m imitabantur; tantumque ab illo defluebant, quantum\nille ab antiquis descenderat. Foret enim optandum, pares, aut saltem\nproximos, illi viro fieri. Sed placebat propter sola vitia, et ad ea\nse quisque dirigebat effingenda, qu\u00e6 poterat. Deinde cum se jactaret\neodem modo dicere, Senecam infamabat. Cujus et mult\u00e6 alioqui et magn\u00e6\nvirtutes fuerunt; ingenium facile et copiosum; plurimum studii; et\nmultarum rerum cognitio, in qu\u00e2 tamen aliquando ab iis, quibus\ninquirenda qu\u00e6dam mandabat, deceptus est. Tractavit etiam omnem fer\u00e8\nstudiorum materiam; In philosophi\u00e2 parum diligens, egregius tamen\nvitiorum insectator. Multa in eo clar\u00e6que sententi\u00e6; multa etiam morum\ngrati\u00e2 legenda; sed in eloquendo corrupta pleraque, atque eo\nperniciosissima, quod abundat dulcibus vitiis. Velles eum suo ingenio\ndixisse, alieno judicio. Nam si aliqua contempsisset; si parum\nconcupisset, si non omnia sua amasset; si rerum pondera minutissimis\nsententiis non fregisset, consensu potius eruditorum, qu\u00e0m puerorum\namore comprobaretur. Ver\u00f9m sic quoque jam robustis, et severiore\ngenere satis firmatis, legendus, vel ideo, quod exercere potest\nutrimque judicium. Multa enim (ut dixi) probanda in eo, multa etiam\nadmiranda sunt; eligere modo cur\u00e6 sit, quod utinam ipse fecisset._\nQuintil. lib. x. cap. 1. From this it is evident, that Seneca, even in\nthe meridian of his fame and power, was considered as the grand\ncorrupter of eloquence. The charge is, therefore, renewed in this\nDialogue, with strict propriety. Rollin, who had nourished his mind\nwith ancient literature, and was, in his time, the Quintilian of\nFrance, has given the same opinion of Seneca, who, he says, knew how\nto play the critic on the works of others, and to condemn the strained\nmetaphor, the forced conceit, the tinsel sentence, and all the\nblemishes of a corrupt style, without desiring to weed them out of his\nown productions. In a letter to his friend (epist. 114), which has\nbeen mentioned section xxvi. note [c], Seneca admits a general\ndepravity of taste, and with great acuteness, and, indeed, elegance,\ntraces it to its source, to the luxury and effeminate manners of the\nage; he compares the florid orators of his time to a set of young\nfops, well powdered and perfumed, just issuing from their toilette:\n_Barb\u00e2 et com\u00e2 nitidos, de capsul\u00e2 totos_; he adds, that such affected\nfinery is not the true ornament of a man. _Non est ornamentum virile,\nconcinnitas._ And yet, says Rollin, he did not know that he was\nsitting to himself for the picture. He aimed for ever at something\nnew, far fetched, ingenious, and pointed. He preferred wit to truth\nand dignified simplicity. The marvellous was with him better than the\nnatural; and he chose to surprise and dazzle, rather than merit the\napprobation of sober judgement. His talents placed him at the head of\nthe fashion, and with those enchanting vices which Quintilian ascribes\nto him, he was, no doubt, the person who contributed most to the\ncorruption of taste and eloquence. See Rollin's _Belles Lettres_, vol.\ni. _sur le Gout_. Another eminent critic, L'ABBE GEDOYN, who has given\nan elegant translation of Quintilian, has, in the preface to that\nwork, entered fully into the question concerning the decline of\neloquence. He admits that Seneca did great mischief, but he takes the\nmatter up much higher. He traces it to OVID, and imputes the taste for\nwit and spurious ornament, which prevailed under the emperors, to the\nfalse, but seducing charms of that celebrated poet. Ovid was,\nundoubtedly, the greatest wit of his time; but his wit knew no bounds.\nHis fault was, exuberance. _Nescivit quod bene cessit relinquere_,\nsays Seneca, who had himself the same defect. Whatever is Ovid's\nsubject, the redundance of a copious fancy still appears. Does he\nbewail his own misfortunes; he seems to think, that, unless he is\nwitty, he cannot be an object of compassion. Does he write letters to\nand from disappointed lovers; the greatest part flows from fancy, and\nlittle from the heart. He gives us the brilliant for the pathetic.\nWith these faults, Ovid had such enchanting graces, that his style and\nmanner infected every branch of literature. The tribe of imitators had\nnot the genius of their master; but being determined to shine in spite\nof nature, they ruined all true taste and eloquence. This is the\nnatural progress of imitation, and Seneca was well aware of it. He\ntells us that the faults and blemishes of a corrupt style are ever\nintroduced by some superior genius, who has risen to eminence in bad\nwriting; his admirers imitate a vicious manner, and thus a false taste\ngoes round from one to another. _H\u00e6c vitia unus aliquis inducit, sub\nquo tunc eloquentia est: c\u00e6teri imitantur; et alter alteri tradunt._\nEpist. 114. Seneca, however, did not know that he was describing\nhimself. Tacitus says he had a genius suited to the taste of the age.\n_Ingenium amoenum et temporis ejus auribus accommodatum._ He adopted\nthe faults of Ovid, and was able to propagate them. For these reasons,\nthe Abb\u00e9 Gedoyn is of opinion, that Ovid began the mischief, and\nSeneca laid the axe to the root of the tree. It is certain, that,\nduring the remaining period of the empire, true eloquence never\nrevived.\n\n\nSection 7.\n\n[a] Historians have concurred in taxing Vespasian with avarice, in\nsome instances, mean and sordid; but they agree, at the same time,\nthat the use which he made of his accumulated riches, by encouraging\nthe arts, and extending liberal rewards to men of genius, is a\nsufficient apology for his love of money.\n\n[b] Titus, it is needless to say, was the friend of virtue and of\nevery liberal art. Even that monster Domitian was versed in polite\nlearning, and by fits and starts capable of intense application: but\nwe read in Tacitus, that his studies and his pretended love of poetry\nserved as a cloak to hide his real character. See _History_, b. iv. s.\n86.\n\n[c] Pliny the younger describes the young men of his time rushing\nforward into the forum without knowledge or decency. He was told, he\nsays, by persons advanced in years, that, according to ancient usage,\nno young man, even of the first distinction, was allowed to appear at\nthe bar, unless he was introduced by one of consular dignity. But, in\nhis time, all fences of respect and decency were thrown down. Young\nmen scorned to be introduced; they forced their way, and took\npossession of the forum without any kind of recommendation. _At\nhercule ante memoriam meam (majores natu ita solent dicere), ne\nnobilissimis quidem adolescentibus locus erat, nisi aliquo consulari\nproducente; tant\u00e2 veneratione pulcherrimum opus celebrabatur. Nunc\nrefractis pudoris et reverenti\u00e6 claustris, omnia patent omnibus. Nec\ninducuntur, sed irrumpunt._ Plin. lib. ii. epist. 14.\n\n\nSection 8.\n\n[a] This want of decorum before the tribunals of justice would appear\nincredible, were it not well attested by the younger Pliny. The\naudience, he says, was suited to the orators. Mercenary wretches were\nhired to applaud in the courts, where they were treated at the\nexpence of the advocate, as openly as if they were in a\nbanqueting-room. _Sequuntur auditores actoribus similes, conducti et\nredempti mancipes. Convenitur in medi\u00e2 basilic\u00e2, ubi tam palam\nsportul\u00e6 quam in triclinio dantur._ Plin. lib, ii. epist. 14. He adds\nin the same epistle, LARGIUS LICINIUS first introduced this custom,\nmerely that he might procure an audience. _Primus hunc audiendi morem\ninduxit Largius Licinius, hactenus tamen ut auditores corrogaret._\n\n[b] This anecdote is also related by Pliny, in the following manner:\nQuintilian, his preceptor, told him that one day, when he attended\nDomitius Afer in a cause before the _centumviri_, a sudden and\noutrageous noise was heard from the adjoining court. Afer made a\npause; the disturbance ceased, and he resumed the thread of his\ndiscourse. He was interrupted a second and a third time. He asked, who\nwas the advocate that occasioned so much uproar? Being told, that\nLicinius was the person, he addressed himself to the court in these\nwords: _Centumvirs! all true eloquence is now at an end. Ex\nQuintiliano, pr\u00e6ceptore meo, audisse memini: narrabat ille, Assectabar\nDomitium Afrum, cum apud centumviros diceret graviter et lent\u00e8 (hoc\nenim illi actionis genus erat), audiit ex proximo immodicum\ninsolitumque clamorem; admiratus reticuit; ubi silentium factum est,\nrepetit quod abruperat; iterum clamor, iterum reticuit; et post\nsilentium, coepit idem tertio. Novissim\u00e8 quis diceret qu\u00e6sivit.\nResponsum est, Licinius. Tum intermiss\u00e2 caus\u00e2_, CENTUMVIRI, _inquit_,\nHOC ARTIFICIUM PERIIT. Lib. ii. ep. 14. Domitius Afer has been\nmentioned, s. xiii. note [d]. To what is there said of him may be\nadded a fact related by Quintilian, who says that Afer, when old and\nsuperannuated, still continued at the bar, exhibiting the decay of\ngenius, and every day diminishing that high reputation which he once\npossessed. Hence men said of him, he had rather _decline_ than\n_desist_. _Malle eum deficere, quam desinere._ Quint. lib. xii. cap.\n11.\n\n[c] The men who applauded for hire, went from court to court to bellow\nforth their venal approbation. Pliny says, No longer ago than\nyesterday, two of my _nomenclators_, both about the age of seventeen,\nwere bribed to play the part of critics. Their pay was about three\n_denarii_: that at present is the price of eloquence. _Ex judicio in\njudicium pari mercede transitur. Heri duo nomenclatores mei (habent\nsane \u00e6tatem eorum, qui nuper togas sumpserunt), ternis denariis ad\nlaudandum trahebantur. Tanti constat, ut sis disertus._ Lib. ii.\nepist. 14.\n\n[d] The whole account of the trade of puffing is related in the\nDialogue, on the authority of Pliny, who tells us that those wretched\nsycophants had two nick-names; one in Greek, [Greek: Sophokleis], and\nthe other in Latin, LAUDIC\u00c6NI; the former from _sophos_, the usual\nexclamation of applause, as in Martial: _Quid tam grande sophos clamat\ntibi turba, togata_; the Latin word importing _parasites_ who sold\ntheir praise for a supper. _Inde jam non inurban\u00e8 [Greek: Sophokleis]\nvocantur; iisdem nomen Latinum impositum est_, LAUDIC\u00c6NI. _Et tamen\ncrescit indies foeditas utr\u00e2que lingu\u00e2 notata._ Lib. ii. epist. 14.\n\n\nSection 10.\n\n[a] Pliny tells us, that he employed much of his time in pleading\ncauses before the _centumviri_; but he grew ashamed of the business,\nwhen he found those courts attended by a set of bold young men, and\nnot by lawyers of any note or consequence. But still the service of\nhis friends, and his time of life, induced him to continue his\npractice for some while longer, lest he should seem, by quitting it\nabruptly, to fly from fatigue, not from the indecorum of the place. He\ncontrived however to appear but seldom, in order to withdraw himself\nby degrees. _Nos tamen adhuc et utilitas amicorum, et ratio \u00e6tatis,\nmoratur ac retinet. Veremur enim ne fort\u00e8 non has indignitates\nreliquisse, sed laborem fugisse videamur. Sumus tamen solito rariores,\nquod initium est gradatim desinendi._ Lib. ii. epist. 14.\n\n\nSection 11.\n\n[a] The person here distinguished from the rest of the rhetoricians,\nis the celebrated Quintilian, of whose elegant taste and superior\njudgement it were superfluous to say a word. Martial has given his\ncharacter in two lines:--\n\n     Quintiliane, vag\u00e6 moderator summe juvent\u00e6,\n       Gloria Roman\u00e6, Quintiliane, tog\u00e6.\n                             Lib. ii. epig. 90.\n\nIt is generally supposed that he was a native of _Calaguris_ (now\n_Calahorra_), a city in Spain, rendered famous by the martial spirit\nof Sertorius, who there stood a siege against Pompey. Vossius,\nhowever, thinks that he was born a Roman; and GEDOYN, the elegant\ntranslator mentioned section 6. note [a], accedes to that opinion,\nsince Martial does not claim him as his countryman. The same writer\nsays, that it is still uncertain when Quintilian was born, and when he\ndied; but, after a diligent enquiry, he thinks it probable that the\ngreat critic was born towards the latter end of Tiberius; and, of\ncourse, when Domitius Afer died in the reign of Nero, A.U.C. 812, A.D.\n59, that he was then two and twenty. His Institutions of an Orator\nwere written in the latter end of Domitian, when Quintilian, as he\nhimself says, was far advanced in years. The time of his death is no\nwhere mentioned, but it probably was under Nerva or Trajan. It must\nnot be dissembled, that this admirable author was not exempt from the\nepidemic vice of the age in which he lived. He flattered Domitian, and\nthat strain of adulation is the only blemish in his work. The love of\nliterature may be said to have been his ruling passion; but, in his\nestimation, learning and genius are subordinate to honour, truth, and\nvirtue.\n\n\nSection 12.\n\n[a] Maternus, without contradicting Messala or Secundus, gives his\nopinion, viz. that the decline of eloquence, however other causes\nmight conspire, was chiefly occasioned by the ruin of a free\nconstitution. To this he adds another observation, which seems to be\nfounded in truth, as we find that, since the revival of letters, Spain\nhas produced one CERVANTES; France, one MOLIERE; England, one\nSHAKSPEARE, and one MILTON.\n\n\nSection 13.\n\n[a] Examples of short, abrupt, and even sublime speeches out of the\nmouth of Barbarians, might, if the occasion required it, be produced\nin great abundance. Mr. Locke has observed, that the humours of a\npeople may be learned from their usage of words. Seneca has said the\nsame, and, in epistle cxiv. has explained himself on the subject with\nacute reasoning and beautiful illustration. The whole letter merits\nthe attention of the judicious critic. The remainder of this, and the\nwhole of the following section, serve to enforce the proposition of\nthe speaker, viz. that Roman eloquence died with public liberty. The\nSupplement ends here. The original text is resumed in the next\nsection, and proceeds unbroken to the end of the Dialogue.\n\n\nSection XXXVI.\n\n[a] When great and powerful eloquence is compared to a flame, that\nmust be supported by fresh materials, it is evident that the sentence\nis a continuation, not the opening of a new argument. It has been\nobserved, and it will not be improper to repeat, that the two former\nspeakers (Messala and Secundus) having stated, according to their way\nof thinking, the causes of corrupt eloquence, Maternus, as was\npromised in the outset of the Dialogue, now proceeds to give another\nreason, and, perhaps, the strongest of all; namely, the alteration of\nthe government from the old republican form to the absolute sway of a\nsingle ruler.\n\n[b] The colonies, the provinces, and the nations that submitted to the\nRoman arms, had their patrons in the capital, whom they courted with\nassiduity. It was this mark of distinction that raised the ambitious\ncitizen to the first honours in the state. To have a number of\nclients, as well at home as in the most important colonies, was the\nunremitting desire, the study, and constant labour of all who aimed at\npre-eminence; insomuch that, in the time of the old republic, the men\nwho wished to be distinguished patrons, impoverished, and often ruined\ntheir families, by their profusion and magnificence. They paid court\nto the common people, to the provinces, and states in alliance with\nRome; and, in their turn, they received the homage of their clients.\nSee _Annals_, b. iii. s. 55.\n\n[c] We read in Quintilian, that oral testimony, and depositions signed\nby the witnesses, were both in use in his time. Written evidence, he\nobserves, was easily combated; because the witness who chose to speak\nin the presence of a few who signed his attestation, might be guilty\nof a violation of truth with greater confidence; and besides, not\nbeing cited to speak, his being a volunteer in the cause was a\ncircumstance against him, since it shewed that he acted with ill-will\nto the opposite party. With regard to the witness who gives his\ntestimony in open court, the advocate has more upon his hands: he must\npress him with questions, and in a set speech observe upon his\nevidence. He must also support his own witnesses, and, therefore, must\ndraw up two lines of battle. _Maximus patronis circa testimonia sudor\nest. Ea dicuntur aut per tabulas, aut a pr\u00e6sentibus. Simplicior contra\ntabulas pugna. Nam et minus obstitisse videtur pudor inter paucos\nsignatores, et pro diffidenti\u00e2 premitur absentia. Tacit\u00e2 pr\u00e6terea\nqu\u00e2dam significatione refragatur his omnibus, quod nemo per tabulas\ndat testimonium, nisi su\u00e2 voluntate; quo ipso non esse amicum ei se,\ncontra quem dicit, fatetur. Cum pr\u00e6sentibus ver\u00f2 ingens dimicatio est:\nideoque velut duplici contra eos, proque his, acie confligitur,\nactionum et interrogationum._ Quint. lib. v. cap. 7.\n\n\nSection XXXVII.\n\n[a] For an account of Mucianus, see section 7, note c [transcriber's\nnote: reference does not match]; also _the History_, b. ii. s. 5.\nSuetonius relates that Vespasian, having undertaken to restore three\nthousand brazen plates, which had perished in the conflagration of the\ncapital (see the _Hist. of Tacitus_, b. iii. s. 71), ordered a\ndiligent search to be made for copies, and thereby furnished the\ngovernment with a collection of curious and ancient records,\ncontaining the decrees of the senate, acts of the commons, and\ntreaties of alliance, almost from the building of the city. Suetonius,\n_Life of Vespasian_, s. 8. This, with the addition of speeches and\nletters composed by men of eminence, was, most probably, the\ncollection published by Mucianus. We may be sure that it contained a\nfund of information, and curious materials for history; but the whole\nis unfortunately lost.\n\n[b] The person intended in this place must not be confounded with\nLucius Crassus, the orator celebrated by Cicero in the Dialogue DE\nORATORE. What is here said, relates to Marcus Crassus, who was joined\nin the triumvirate with Pompey and C\u00e6sar; a man famous for his riches,\nhis avarice, and his misfortunes. While C\u00e6sar was engaged in Gaul, and\nPompey in Spain, Crassus invaded Asia, where, in a battle with the\nParthians, his whole army was cut to pieces. He himself was in danger\nof being taken prisoner, but he fell by the sword of the enemy. His\nhead was cut off, and carried to Orodes, the Parthian king, who\nordered liquid gold to be infused into his mouth, that he, who\nthirsted for gold, might be glutted with it after his death. _Caput\nejus recisum ad regem reportatum, ludibrio fuit, neque indigno. Aurum\nenim liquidum in rictum oris infusum est, ut cujus animus arserat auri\ncupiditate, ejus etiam mortuum et exangue corpus auro uteretur._\nFlorus, lib. iii. cap. 11. Cicero says, that with slender talents, and\na small stock of learning, he was able for some years, by his\nassiduity and interest, to maintain his rank in the list of eminent\norators. _Mediocriter a doctrin\u00e2 instructus, angustius etiam a natur\u00e2,\nlabore et industri\u00e2, et quod adhibebat ad obtinendas causas curam\netiam, et gratiam, in principibus patronis aliquot annos fuit. In\nhujus oratione sermo Latinus erat, verba non abjecta, res composit\u00e6\ndiligenter; nullus flos tamen, neque lumen ullum: animi magna, vocis\nparva contentio; omnia fer\u00e8 ut similiter, atque uno modo dicerentur._\nCicero, _De Claris Oratoribus_, s. 233.\n\n[c] Lentulus succeeded more by his action than by real ability. With a\nquick and animated countenance, he was not a man of penetration;\nthough fluent in speech, he had no command of words. His voice was\nsweet and melodious; his action graceful; and with those advantages he\nwas able to conceal all other defects. _Cneius autem Lentulus multo\nmajorem opinionem dicendi actione faciebat, quam quanta in eo facultas\nerat; qui cum esset nec peracutus (quamquam et ex facie et ex vultu\nvidebatur) nec abundans verbis, etsi fallebat in eo ipso; sed voce\nsuavi et canor\u00e2 calebat in agendo, ut ea, qu\u00e6 deerant, non\ndesiderarentur._ Cicero, _De Claris Oratoribus_, s. 234. Metellus,\nLucullus, and Curio, are mentioned by Cicero in the same work. Curio\nwas a senator of great spirit and popularity. He exerted himself with\nzeal and ardour for the legal constitution and the liberties of his\ncountry against the ambition of Julius C\u00e6sar, but afterwards sold\nhimself to that artful politician, and favoured his designs. The\ncalamities that followed are by the best historians laid to his\ncharge. Lucan says of him,\n\n     Audax venali comitatur Curio lingu\u00e2;\n     Vox quondam populi, libertatemque tueri\n     Ausus, et armatos plebi miscere potentes.\n                             Lib. i. ver. 269.\n\nAnd again,\n\n     Mom\u00e9ntumque fuit mutatus Curio rerum,\n     Gallorum captus spoliis, et C\u00e6saris auro.\n                 PHARSALIA, lib. iv. ver. 819.\n\n[d] Demosthenes, when not more than seven years old, lost his father,\nand was left under the care of three guardians, who thought an orphan\nlawful prey, and did not scruple to embezzle his effects. In the mean\ntime Demosthenes pursued a plan of education, without the aid or\nadvice of his tutors. He became the scholar of Isocrates, and he was\nthe hearer of Plato. Under those masters his progress was such, that\nat the age of seventeen he was able to conduct a suit against his\nguardians. The young orator succeeded so well in that prelude to his\nfuture fame, that the plunderers of the orphan's portion were\ncondemned to refund a large sum. It is said that Demosthenes,\nafterwards, released the whole or the greatest part.\n\n\nSection XXXVIII.\n\n[a] The rule for allowing a limited space of time for the hearing of\ncauses, the extent of which could not be known, began, as Pliny the\nyounger informs us, under the emperors, and was fully established for\nthe reasons which he gives. The custom, he says, of allowing two\nwater-glasses (_i.e. two hour-glasses_) or only one, and sometimes\nhalf a one, prevailed, because the advocates grew tired before the\nbusiness was explained, and the judges were ready to decide before\nthey understood the question. Pliny, with some indignation, asks, Are\nwe wiser than our ancestors? are the laws more just at present? Our\nancestors allowed many hours, many days, and many adjournments, in\nevery cause; and for my part, as often as I sit in judgement, I allow\nas much time as the advocate requires; for would it not be rashness to\nguess what space of time is necessary in a cause which has not been\nopened? But some unnecessary things may be said; and is it not better,\nthat what is unnecessary should be spoken, than that what is necessary\nshould be omitted? And who can tell what is necessary, till he has\nheard? Patience in a judge ought to be considered as one of the chief\nbranches of his duty, as it certainly is of justice. See Plin. b. vi.\nep. 2. In England, there is no danger of arbitrary rules, to gratify\nthe impatience of the court, or to stifle justice. The province of\njuries, since the late declaratory act in the case of libels, is now\nbetter understood; and every judge is taught, that a cause is tried\n_before him_, not BY HIM. It is his to expound the law, and wait, with\ntemper, for the verdict of those whom the constitution has intrusted.\n\n[b] Pompey's third consulship was A.U.C. 702; before Christ, 52. He\nwas at first sole consul, and in six or seven months Metellus Scipio\nbecame his colleague.\n\n[c] The centumviri, as mentioned s. vii. note [c], were a body of men\ncomposed of three out of every tribe, for the decision of such matters\nas the pr\u00e6tors referred to their judgement. The nature of the several\ncauses, that came before that judicature, may be seen in the first book\nDE ORATORE.\n\n[d] The question in this cause before the centumviri was, whether\nClusinius Figulus, the son of Urbinia, fled from his post in battle,\nand, being taken prisoner, remained in captivity during a length of\ntime, till he made his escape into Italy; or, as was contended by\nAsinius Pollio, whether the defendant did not serve under two masters,\nwho practised physic, and, being discharged by them, voluntarily sell\nhimself as a slave? See Quintilian, lib. vii. cap. 2.\n\n\nSection XXXIX.\n\n[a] The advocates, at that time, wore a tight cloak, or mantle, like\nthat which the Romans used on a journey. Cicero, in his oration for\nMilo, argues that he who wore that inconvenient dress, was not likely\nto have formed a design against the life of any man. _Apparet uter\nesset insidiator; uter nihil cogitaret mali: cum alter veheretur in\nrheda, penulatus, un\u00e0 sederet uxor. Quid horum non impeditissimum?\nVestitus? an vehiculum? an comes?_ A travelling-cloak could give\nneither grace nor dignity to an orator at the bar. The business was\ntransacted in a kind of chat with the judges: what room for eloquence,\nand that commanding action which springs from the emotions of the\nsoul, and inflames every breast with kindred passions? The cold\ninanimate orator is described, by Quintilian, speaking with his hand\nunder his robe; _manum intra pallium continens._ Section XL.\n\n[a] Maternus is now drawing to a conclusion, and, therefore, calls to\nmind the proposition with which he set out; viz. that the flame of\noratory is kept alive by fresh materials, and always blazes forth in\ntimes of danger and public commotion. The unimpassioned style, which\nsuited the _areopagus_ of Athens, or the courts of Rome, where the\nadvocate spoke by an hour-glass, does not deserve the name of genuine\neloquence. The orations of Cicero for Marcellus, Ligarius, and king\nDejotarus, were spoken before C\u00e6sar, when he was master of the Roman\nworld. In those speeches, what have we to admire, except delicacy of\nsentiment, and elegance of diction? How different from the _torrent,\ntempest, and whirlwind of passion_, that roused, inflamed, and\ncommanded the senate, and the people, against Catiline and Marc\nAntony!\n\n[b] For the account of Cicero's death by Velleius Paterculus, see s.\nxvii. note [e]. Juvenal ascribes the murder of the great Roman orator\nto the second Philippic against Antony.\n\n                     ----Ridenda poemata malo,\n     Quam te conspicu\u00e6 divina Philippica fam\u00e6,\n     Volveris a prim\u00e2 qu\u00e6 proxima.\n                             SAT. x. ver. 124.\n\n     I rather would be M\u00e6vius, thrash for rhymes\n     Like his, the scorn and scandal of the times,\n     Than the _Philippic_, fatally divine,\n     Which is inscrib'd the second, should be mine.\n                                  DRYDEN'S JUVENAL.\n\nWhat Cicero says of Antonius, the celebrated orator, may be applied to\nhimself: That head, which defended the commonwealth, was shewn from\nthat very rostrum, where the heads of so many Roman citizens had been\nsaved by his eloquence. _In his ipsis rostris, in quibus ille\nrempublicam constantissime consul defenderat, positum caput illud\nfuit, a quo erant multorum civium capita servata._ Cicero _De\nOratore_, lib. iii. s. 10.\n\n\nSection XLII.\n\n[a] The urbanity with which the Dialogue is conducted, and the perfect\nharmony with which the speakers take leave of each other, cannot but\nleave a pleasing impression on the mind of every reader of taste. It\nhas some resemblance to the conclusion of Cicero's Dialogue DE NATURA\nDEORUM. In both tracts, we have a specimen of the politeness with\nwhich the ancients managed a conversation on the most interesting\nsubjects, and by the graces of style brought the way of instructing by\ndialogue into fashion. A modern writer, whose poetical genius cannot\nbe too much admired, chooses to call it a _frippery way of writing_.\nHe advises his countrymen to abandon it altogether; and this for a\nnotable reason: because the Rev. Dr. Hurd (now Bishop of Worcester)\nhas shewn the true use of it. That the dialogues of that amiable\nwriter have an intrinsic value, cannot be denied: they contain a fund\nof reflection; they allure by the elegance of the style, and they\nbring us into company with men whom we wish to hear, to know, and to\nadmire. While we have such conversation-pieces, not to mention others\nof the same stamp, both ancient and modern, the public taste, it may\nbe presumed, will not easily be tutored to reject a mode of\ncomposition, in which the pleasing and useful are so happily blended.\nThe present Dialogue, it is true, cannot be proved, beyond a\ncontroversy, to be the work of Tacitus; but it is also true, that it\ncannot, with equal probability, be ascribed to any other writer. It\nhas been retained in almost every edition of Tacitus; and, for that\nreason, claims a place in a translation which professes to give all\nthe works of so fine a writer.\n\n\n\n\nCONCLUSION.\n\n\nThe Author of these volumes has now gone through the difficult task\nof translating Tacitus, with the superadded labour of supplements to\ngive continuity to the narrative, and notes to illustrate such\npassages as seemed to want explanation; but he cannot lay down his\npen, without taking the liberty of addressing a few words to the\nreader. As what he has to offer relates chiefly to himself, it shall\nbe very short. He has dedicated many years of his life to this\nundertaking; and though, during the whole time, he had the pleasure\nand the honour of being acquainted with many gentlemen of taste and\nlearning, he had no opportunity of appealing to their opinion, or\nguiding himself by their advice. Amidst the hurry of life, and the\nvarious pursuits in which all are engaged, how could he hope that any\none would be at leisure to attend to the doubts, the difficulties, and\nminute niceties, which must inevitably occur in a writer of so\npeculiar a genius as Tacitus? He was unwilling to be a troublesome\nvisitor, and, by consequence, has been obliged, throughout the whole\nof his work, to trust to his own judgement, such as it is. He spared\nno pains to do all the justice in his power to one of the greatest\nwriters of antiquity; but whether he has toiled with fruitless\nindustry, or has in any degree succeeded, must be left to the\njudgement of others.\n\nHe is now at the end of his labours, and ready, after the example of\nMontesquieu, to cry out with the voyager in Virgil, _Italiam!\nItalian!_ But whether he is to land on a peaceful shore; whether the\nmen who delight in a wreck, are to rush upon him with hostile pens,\nwhich in their hands are pitch-forks; whether his cargo is to be\ncondemned, and he himself to be wounded, maimed, and lacerated; a\nlittle time will discover. Such critics will act as their nature\nprompts them. Should they _cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of war_,\nit may be said,\n\n       Quod genus hoc hominum, qu\u00e6ve hunc tam barbara morem\n     Permittit patria? Hospitio prohibemur aren\u00e6;\n     Bella cient, prim\u00e2que vetant consistere terr\u00e2.\n\nThis, they may say, is anticipating complaint; but, in the worst that\ncan happen, it is the only complaint this writer will ever make, and\nthe only answer they will ever receive from his pen.\n\nIt is from a very different quarter that the translator of Tacitus\nwaits for solid criticism. The men, as Pliny observes, who read with\nmalignity, are not the only judges. _Neque enim soli judicant, qui\nmalign\u00e8 legunt._ The scholar will see defects, but he will pronounce\nwith temper: he will know the difficulty, and, in some cases, perhaps\nthe impossibility, of giving in our language the sentiments of Tacitus\nwith the precision and energy of the original; and, upon the whole, he\nwill acknowledge that an attempt to make a considerable addition to\nEnglish literature, carries with it a plea of some merit. While the\nFrench could boast of having many valuable translations of Tacitus,\nand their most eminent authors were still exerting themselves, with\nemulation, to improve upon their predecessors, the present writer saw,\nwith regret, that this country had not so much as one translation\nwhich could be read, without disgust, by any person acquainted with\nthe idiom and structure of our language. To supply the deficiency has\nbeen the ambition of the translator. He persevered with ardour; but,\nhis work being finished, ardour subsides, and doubt and anxiety take\ntheir turn. Whatever the event may be, the conscious pleasure of\nhaving employed his time in a fair endeavour will remain with him.\nFor the rest, he submits his labours to the public; and, at that\ntribunal, neither flushed with hope, nor depressed by fear, he is\nprepared, with due acquiescence, to receive a decision, which, from\nhis own experience on former occasions, he has reason to persuade\nhimself will be founded in truth and candour.\n\n\n\n\nGEOGRAPHICAL TABLE:\n\nOR,\n\nINDEX OF THE NAMES OF PLACES, RIVERS, &c. MENTIONED IN THESE VOLUMES.\n\n\nA.\n\nACHAIA, often taken for part of Peloponnesus, but in Tacitus generally\nfor all Greece.\n\nACTIUM, a promontory of Epirus, now called the _Cape of Tigolo_,\nfamous for the victory of Augustus over M. Antony.\n\nADDUA, a river rising in the country of the _Grisons_, and in its\ncourse separating Milan from the territory of the Venetians, till it\nfalls into the Po, about six miles to the west of Cremona. It is now\ncalled the _Adda_.\n\nADIABENE, a district of Assyria, so called from the river Adiaba;\n_Adiabeni_, the people.\n\nADRANA, now the _Eder_; a river that flows near _Waldeck_, in the\nlandgravate of _Hesse_, and discharges itself into the _Weser_.\n\nADRIATIC, now the gulf of Venice.\n\nADRUMETUM, a Phoenician colony in Africa, about seventeen miles from\nLeptis Minor.\n\n\u00c6DUI, a people of Ancient Gaul, near what is now called _Autun_, in\nLower Burgundy.\n\n\u00c6GE\u00c6, a maritime town of Cilicia; now _Aias Kala_.\n\n\u00c6GEAN SEA, a part of the Mediterranean which lies between Greece and\nAsia Minor; now the _Archipelago_.\n\n\u00c6GIUM, a city of Greece, in the Peloponnesus; now the _Morea_.\n\n\u00c6NUS, a river rising in the country of the _Grisons_, and running\nthence into the Danube.\n\n\u00c6QUI, a people of Ancient Latium.\n\nAFRICA generally means in Tacitus that part which was made a\nproconsular province, of which Carthage was the capital; now the\nterritory of _Tunis_.\n\nAGRIPPINENSIS COLONIA, so called from Agrippina, the daughter of\nGermanicus, mother of Nero, and afterwards wife of the emperor\nClaudius. This place is now called _Cologne_, situate on the Rhine.\n\nALBA, a town of Latium, in Italy, the residence of the Alban kings;\ndestroyed by Tullus Hostilius.\n\nALBANIA, a country of Asia, bounded on the west by Iberia, on the east\nby the Caspian Sea, on the south by Armenia, and on the north by Mount\nCaucasus.\n\nALBINGANUM; now _Albinga_, to the west of the territory of Genoa, at\nthe mouth of the river _Cente_.\n\nALBIS, now the _Elbe_; a river that rises in the confines of\n_Silesia_, and, after a wide circuit, falls into the German sea below\n_Hamburgh_.\n\nALBIUM INTEMELIUM; now _Vintimiglia_, south-west of the territory of\nGenoa, with a port on the Mediterranean, between _Monaco_ and _S.\nRemo_.\n\nALESIA, a town in Celtic Gaul, situate on a hill. It was besieged by\nJulius C\u00e6sar. See his Commentaries, lib. vii. s. 77.\n\nALEXANDRIA, a principal city of Egypt, built by Alexander the Great,\non the Mediterranean; famous for the library begun by Ptolemy\nPhiladelphus, and consisting at last of seven hundred thousand\nvolumes, till in C\u00e6sar's expedition it was destroyed by fire.\n\nALISO, a fort built by Drusus, the father of Germanicus, in the part\nof Germany now called Westphalia, near the city of _Paderborn_.\n\nALLIA, river of Italy, running into the Tiber, about forty miles from\nRome; famous for the slaughter of the Romans by the Gauls, under\nBrennus.\n\nALLOBROGES, a people of Narbon Gaul, situate between the Rhodanus and\nthe Lacus Lemanus.\n\nALPS, a range of high mountains separating Italy from Gaul and\nGermany. They are distinguished into different parts, under several\nnames: such as the _Maritime Alps_, near Genoa; the _Cottian Alps_,\nseparating Dauphin\u00e9 from Piedmont; the _Graian Alps_, beginning from\nMount Cenis, where the _Cottian_ terminate, and extending to Great St.\nBernard; the _Pennine Alps_, extending from west to east to the\n_Rhetian Alps_, the _Alpes Noric\u00e6_, and the _Pannonian Alps_, as far\nas the springs of the _Kulpe_. Their height in some places is almost\nincredible. They are called _Alps_, from _Alpen_, a Celtic term for\nhigh mountains.\n\nALTINUM, a town in the territory of Venice, on the Adriatic; now in\nruins, except a tower, still retaining the name of _Altino_.\n\nAMANUS, a mountain of Syria, separating it from Cilicia; now called\n_Montagna Neros_ by the inhabitants; that is, the watery mountain,\nabounding in springs and rivulets.\n\nAMATHUS, a maritime town of Cyprus, consecrated to Venus, with an\nancient temple of Adonis and Venus: it is now called _Limisso_.\n\nAMAZONIA, a country near the river Thermodon, in Pontus.\n\nAMISIA, now the _Ems_; a river of Germany that falls into the German\nsea, near Embden.\n\nAMORGOS, an island in the Egean sea, now Amorgo.\n\nAMYDIS, a town near the gulf of that name, on the coast of Latium in\nItaly.\n\nANAGNIA, a town of ancient Latium, now _Anagni_, thirty-six miles to\nthe east of Rome.\n\nANCONA, a port town in Italy, situate on the gulf of Venice.\n\nANDECAVI, now _Anjou_.\n\nANEMURIUM, a promontory of Cilicia, with a maritime town of the same\nname near it. See Pomponius Mela.\n\nANGRIVARIANS, a German people, situate on the west side of the Weser,\nnear _Osnaburg_ and _Minden_.\n\nANSIBARII, a people of Germany.\n\nANTIOCH, or ANTIOCHIA, the capital of Syria, called _Epidaphne_, to\ndistinguish it from other cities of the name of Antioch. It is now\ncalled _Antakia_.\n\nANTIPOLIS, now _Antibes_, on the coast of Provence, about three\nleagues to the west of _Nice_.\n\nANTIUM, a city of the ancient Volsci, situate on the Tuscan Sea; the\nbirth-place of Nero. Two Fortunes were worshipped there, which\nSuetonius calls _Fortun\u00e6 Antiates_, and Martial, _Sorores Antii_.\nHorace's Ode to Fortune is well known--\n\n_O Diva gratum qu\u00e6 regis Antium._\n\nThe place is now called _Capo d'Anzo_.\n\nANTONA, now the _Avon_. See Camden.\n\nAORSI, a people inhabiting near the Palus M\u00e6otis; now the eastern part\nof Tartary, between the _Neiper_ and the _Don_.\n\nAPAMEA, a city of Phrygia, near the banks of the M\u00e6ander; now\n_Aphiom-Kara-Hisar_.\n\nAPENNINUS, now the _Apennine_, a ridge of mountains running through\nthe middle of Italy, extremely high, yet short of the _Alps_. Its name\nis Celtic, signifying a high mountain.\n\nAPHRODISIUM, a town of _Caria_ in Thrace, on the Euxine.\n\nAPOLLONIDIA, a city of Lydia.\n\nAPULIA, a territory of Italy, along the gulf of Venice; now\n_Capitanate, Otranto_, &c.\n\nAQUILEIA, a large city of the Veneti, and formerly a Roman colony,\nnear the river _Natiso_, which runs into the gulf of Venice.\n\nAQUINUM, a town of the Ancient Latins; now _Aquino_, but almost in\nruins.\n\nAQUITANIA, a division of Ancient Gaul, bounded by the _Garumna_ (now\n_Garonne_), by the Pyrenees, and the ocean.\n\nARABIA, an extensive country of Asia, reaching from Egypt to Chaldea.\nIt is divided into three parts, _Arabia Petr\u00e6a_, _Deserta_, and\n_Felix_.\n\nARAR, or ARARIS, a river of Gaul; now the _Saone_.\n\nARAXES, a river of Mesopotamia, which runs from north to south, and\nfalls into the Euphrates.\n\nARBELA, a city of Assyria, famous for the battle between Alexander and\nDarius.\n\nARCADIA, an inland district in the heart of Peloponnesus; mountainous,\nand only fit for pasture; therefore celebrated by bucolic or pastoral\npoets.\n\nARDEN, _Arduenna_, in Tacitus; the forest of Arden.\n\nARENACUM, an ancient town in the island of Batavia; now _Arnheim_, in\nGuelderland.\n\nARICIA, a town of Latium in Italy, at the foot of Mons Albanus, about\na hundred and sixty stadia from Rome. The grove, called _Aricinum\nNemus_, was in the vicinity.\n\nARII, a people of Asia.\n\nARIMINUM, a town of Umbria, at the mouth of the river Ariminus, on the\ngulf of Venice.\n\nARMENIA, a kingdom of Asia, having Albania and Iberia to the north,\nand Mount Taurus and Mesopotamia to the south: divided into the\nGREATER, which extends astward to the Caspian Sea; and the LESSER, to\nthe west of the GREATER, and separated from it by the Euphrates; now\ncalled _Turcomania_.\n\nARNUS, a river of Tuscany, which visits Florence in its course, and\nfalls into the sea near Pisa.\n\nARSANIAS, a river of the GREATER ARMENIA, running between Tigranocerta\nand Artaxata, and falling into the Euphrates.\n\nARTAXATA, the capital of Armenia, situate on the river Araxes.\n\nARVERNI, a people of Ancient Gaul, inhabiting near the Loire; their\nchief city _Arvernum_ now _Clermont_, the capital of _Auvergne_.\n\nASCALON, an ancient city of the Philistines, situate on the\nMediterranean; now _Scalona_.\n\nASCIBURGIUM, a citadel on the Rhine, where the Romans stationed a camp\nand a garrison.\n\nATESTE, a town in the territory of Venice, situate to the south of\nPatavium.\n\nATRIA, a town of the Veneti, on the river Tartarus, between the Padus\nand the Athesis, now the _Adige_.\n\nAUGUSTA TAURINORUM, a town of the Taurini, at the foot of the Alps;\nnow _Turin_, the capital of _Piedmont_.\n\nAUGUSTODUNUM, the capital of the \u00c6dui; now _Autun_, in the duchy of\nBurgundy. It took its name from Augustus C\u00e6sar.\n\nAURIA, an ancient town of Spain; now _Orense_, in Galicia.\n\nAUZEA, a strong castle in Mauritania.\n\nAVENTICUM, the capital of the Helvetii; by the Germans called\n_Wiflisburg_, by the French _Avenches_.\n\n\nB.\n\nBACTRIANI, a people inhabiting a part of Asia, to the south of the\nriver _Oxus_, which rains from east to west into the Caspian Sea.\n\nBAI\u00c6, a village of Campania, between the promontory of Misenum and\nPuteoli (now _Pozzuolo_), nine miles to the west of Naples.\n\nBALEARES, a cluster of islands in the Mediterranean, of which\n_Majorca_ and _Minorca_ are the chief.\n\nBASTARNI, a people of Germany, who led a wandering life in the vast\nregions between the Vistula and the Pontic sea.\n\nBATAVIA, an island formed by two branches of the Rhine and the German\nsea. See Annals, book ii. s. 6; and Manners of the Germans, s. 29.\nnote a.\n\nBATAVODURUM, a town in the island of Batavia; now, as some of the\ncommentators say, _Wyk-te-Duurstede_.\n\nBEBRYACUM, or BEDRYACUM, a village situate between Verona and Cremona;\nfamous for two successive defeats; that of Otho, and soon after that\nof Vitellius.\n\nBELGIC GAUL, the country between the Seine and the Marne to the west,\nthe Rhine to the east, and the German sea to the north.\n\nBERYTUS, now _Barut_, in Phoenicia.\n\nBETASII, the people inhabiting the country now called _Brabant_.\n\nBITHYNIA, a proconsular province of Asia Minor, bounded on the north\nby the Euxine and the Propontic, adjoining to Troas, over-against\nThrace; now _Becsangial_.\n\nBOETICA, one of the provinces into which Augustus C\u00e6sar divided the\nFarther Spain.\n\nBOII, a people of Celtic Gaul, in the country now called Bourbonnois.\nThere was also a nation of the same name in Germany. See Manners of\nthe Germans, s. 28.\n\nBONNA, now _Bonn_, in the electorate of _Cologne_.\n\nBONONIA, called by Tacitus _Bononiensis_; now _Bologna_, capital of\nthe _Bolognese_ in Italy.\n\nBOSPHORANI, a people bordering on the Euxine; the _Tartars_.\n\nBOSPHORUS, two straits of the sea so called; one _Bosphorus Thracius_,\nnow _the straits of Constantinople_; the other _Bosphorus Cimmerius_,\nnow _the straits of Caffa_.\n\nBOVILL\u00c6, a town of Latium, near Mount Albanus; about ten miles from\nRome, on the Appian Road.\n\nBRIGANTES, the ancient inhabitants of _Yorkshire_, _Lancashire_,\n_Durham_, _Westmoreland_, and _Cumberland_.\n\nBRIXELLUM, the town where Otho dispatched himself after the defeat at\n_Bedriacum_; now _Bresello_, in the territory of _Reggio_.\n\nBRIXIA, a town of Italy, on this side of the Po; now _Brescia_.\n\nBRUCTERIANS, a people of Germany, situate in Westphalia. See the\nManners of the Germans, s. 33. note a.\n\nBRUNDUSIUM, a town of Calabria, with an excellent harbour, at the\nentrance of the Adriatic, affording to the Romans a commodious passage\nto Greece. The Via Appia ended at this town. Now _Brindisi_, in the\nterritory of _Otranto_, in the kingdom of Naples.\n\nBYZANTIUM, a city of Thrace, on the narrow strait that separates\nEurope from Asia; now _Constantinople_. See Annals, xii. s. 63.\n\n\nC.\n\nC\u00c6LALET\u00c6, a people of Thrace, near Mount H\u00e6mus.\n\nC\u00c6RACATES, probably the diocese of _Mayence_.\n\nC\u00c6SAREA, a maritime town in Palestine; now _Kaisari\u00e9_.\n\nC\u00c6SIAN FOREST, now the Forest of _Heserwaldt_, in the duchy of Cleves.\nIt is supposed to be a part of the Hercynian Forest.\n\nCALABRIA, a peninsula of Italy, between Tarentum and Brundusium; now\nthe territory of Otranto, in the kingdom of Naples.\n\nCAMELODUNUM, said by some to be _Malden_ in Essex, but by Camden, and\nothers, _Colchester_. It was made a Roman colony under the emperor\nClaudius; a place of pleasure rather than of strength, adorned with\nsplendid works, a theatre, and a temple of Claudius.\n\nCAMERIUM, a city in the territory of the Sabines; now destroyed.\n\nCAMPANIA, a territory of Italy, bounded on the west by the Tuscan sea.\nThe most fertile and delightful part of Italy; now called _Terra di\nLavoro_.\n\nCANGI, the inhabitants of Cheshire, and part of Lancashire.\n\nCANINEFATES, a people of the Lower Germany, from the same origin as\nthe Batavians, and inhabitants of the west part of the isle of\nBatavia.\n\nCANOPUS, a city of the Lower Egypt, situate on a branch of the Nile\ncalled by the same name.\n\nCAPPADOCIA, a large country in Asia Minor, between Cilicia the Euxine\nsea. Being made a Roman province, the inhabitants had an offer made\nthem of a free and independent government; but their answer was,\nLiberty might suit the Romans, but the Cappadocians would neither\nreceive liberty, nor endure it.\n\nCAPREA, an island on the coast of Campania, about four miles in length\nfrom east to west, and about one in breadth. It stands opposite to the\npromontory of _Surrentum_, and has the bay of Naples in view. It was\nthe residence of Tiberius for several years.\n\nCAPUA, now _Capoa_, a city in the kingdom of Naples; the seat of\npleasure, and the ruin of Hannibal.\n\nCARMEL, a mountain in Galilee, on the Mediterranean.\n\nCARSUL\u00c6, a town of Umbria, about twenty miles from Mevania; now in\nruins.\n\nCARTHAGO, once the most famous city of Africa, and the rival of Rome;\nsupposed by some to have been built by queen Dido, seventy years after\nthe foundation of Rome; but Justin will have it before Rome. It was\nthe capital of what is now the kingdom of _Tunis_.\n\nCARTHAGO NOVA, a town of _Hispania Tarraconensis_, or the Hither\nSpain; now _Carthagena_.\n\nCASPIAN SEA, a vast lake between Persia, Great Tartary, Muscovy and\nGeorgia, said to be six hundred miles long, and near as broad.\n\nCASSIOPE, a town in the island of Corcyra (now _Corfou_), called at\npresent _St. Maria di Cassopo_.\n\nCATTI, a people of Germany, who inhabited part of the country now\ncalled _Hesse_, from the mountains of _Hartz_, to the Weser and the\nRhine.\n\nCAUCI. See CHAUCI.\n\nCELENDRIS, a place on the coast of Cilicia, near the confines of\nPamphylia.\n\nCENCHRI\u00c6, a port of Corinth, situate about ten miles towards the east;\nnow _Kenkri_.\n\nCENCHRIS, a river running through the Ortygian Grove.\n\nCEREINA, an island in the Mediterranean, to the north of the Syrtis\nMinor in Africa; now called _Kerkeni_.\n\nCHALCEDON, a city of Bithynia, situate at the mouth of the Euxine,\nover-against Byzantium. It was called the _City of the Blind_. See\nAnnals, xii. s. 63.\n\nCHAUCI, a people of Germany, inhabiting what we now call _East\nFriesland_, _Bremen_, and _Lunenburg_. See Manners of the Germans, s.\n35.\n\nCHERUSCANS, a great and warlike people of Ancient Germany, to the\nnorth of the _Catti_, between the _Elbe_ and the _Weser_.\n\nCIBYRA, formerly a town of Phrygia, near the banks of the M\u00e6ander, but\nnow destroyed.\n\nCILICIA, an extensive country in the Hither Asia, bounded by Mount\nTaurus to the north, by the Mediterranean to the south, by Syria to\nthe east, and by Pamphylia to the west. It was one of the provinces\nreserved for the management of the emperor.\n\nCINITHIANS, a people of Africa.\n\nCIRRHA, a town of Phocis, near Delphi, sacred to Apollo.\n\nCIRRHUS, a town of Syria, in the district of Commagene, and not far\nfrom Antioch.\n\nCIRTA, formerly the capital of Numidia, and the residence of the king.\nIt is now called _Constantina_, in the kingdom of Algiers.\n\nCLIT\u00c6, a people of Cilicia, near Mount Taurus.\n\nCLUNIA, a city in the Hither Spain.\n\nCOLCHOS, a country of Asia, on the east of the Euxine, famous for the\nfable of the Golden Fleece, the Argonautic Expedition, and the Fair\nEnchantress, Medea.\n\nCOLOPHON, a city of Ionia, in the Hither Asia. One of the places that\nclaimed the birth of Homer; now destroyed.\n\nCOMMAGENE, a district of Syria, bounded on the east by the Euphrates,\non the west by Amanus, and on the north by Mount Taurus.\n\nCOOS. See Cos.\n\nCORCYRA, an island in the Adriatic; now _Corfou_.\n\nCORINTHUS, a city of Achaia, on the south part of the isthmus which\njoins Peloponnesus to the continent. From its situation between two\nseas, Horace says,\n\n     _Bimarisve Corinthi moenia._\n\nThe city was taken and burnt to the ground by Mummius the Roman\ngeneral, A.U.C. 608. It was afterwards restored to its ancient\nsplendour, and made a Roman colony. It retains the name of _Corinth_.\n\nCORMA, a river in Asia; mentioned by Tacitus only.\n\nCORSICA, an island in the part of the Mediterranean called the Sea of\nLiguria, in length from north to south about a hundred and fifty\nmiles, and about fifty where broadest. To the south it is separated\nfrom Sardinia by a narrow channel.\n\nCOS, or COOS, one of the islands called the Cyclades, in the \u00c6gean\nsea, famous for being the birth-place of Apelles; now _Stan Co_.\n\nCOSA, a promontory of Etruria; now _Mont Argentaro_, in Tuscany.\n\nCREMERA, a river of Tuscany, falling into the Tiber a little to the\nnorth of Rome, rendered famous by the slaughter of the Fabii.\n\nCREMONA, a city of Italy, built A.U.C. 536, and afterwards, in the\nyear 822, rased to the ground by the army of Vespasian, in the war\nwith Vitellius. It was soon rebuilt by the citizens, with the\nexhortations of Vespasian. It is now a flourishing city in the duchy\nof Milan, and retains the name of Cremona.\n\nCUM\u00c6, a town of Campania, near Cape Misenum, famous for the cave of\nthe Cum\u00e6an Sibyl.\n\nCUSUS, a river in Hungary, that falls into the Danube.\n\nCYCLADES, a cluster of islands in the \u00c6gean sea, so called from\n_Cyclus_, the orb in which they lie. Their names and number are not\nascertained. Strabo reckons sixteen.\n\nCYME, a maritime town of \u00c6olia in Asia.\n\nCYPRUS, a noble island opposite to the coast of Syria, formerly sacred\nto Venus, whence she was called the Cyprian goddess.\n\nCYRENE (now called _Curin_), the capital of Cyrenaica, a district of\nAfrica, now the _Desert of Barca_. It stood about eleven miles from\nthe sea, and had an excellent harbour.\n\nCYTHERA, an island situated on the coast of Peloponnesus formerly\nsacred to Venus, and thence her name of _Cytherea_. The island is now\ncalled _Cerigo_.\n\nCYTHNUS, one of the islands called the Cyclades, in the \u00c6gean Sea.\n\nCYZICUS, a city of Mysia, in the Hither Asia, rendered famous by the\nlong siege of Mithridates, which at last was raised by Lucullus.\n\n\nD.\n\nDACIA, a country extending between the Danube and the Carpathian\nmountains to the mouth of the Danube, and to the Euxine, comprising a\npart of Upper Hungary, Transylvania, and Moldavia. The inhabitants to\nthe west, towards Germany, were called _Daci_; those to the east\ntowards the Euxine were called _Get\u00e6_. The whole country was reduced\nby Trajan to a Roman province.\n\nDAH\u00c6, a people of Scythia, to the south of the Caspian, with the\nMassaget\u00e6 on the east. Virgil calls them _indomitique Dah\u00e6_.\n\nDALMATIA, an extensive country bordering on Macedonia and M\u00e6sia, and\nhaving the Adriatic to the south.\n\nDANDARID\u00c6, a people bordering on the Euxine. Brotier says that some\nvestiges of the nation, and its name, still exist at a place called\n_Dandars_.\n\nDANUBE, the largest river in Europe. It rises in Suabia, and after\nvisiting Bavaria, Austria, Hungary, and taking thence a prodigious\ncircuit, falls at last into the Black or Euxine sea. See Manners of\nthe Germans, s. 1. note g.\n\nDELOS, the central island of the Cyclades, famous in mythology for the\nbirth of Apollo and Diana.\n\nDELPHI, a famous inland town of Phocis in Greece, with a temple and\noracle of Apollo, situate near the foot of Mount Parnassus.\n\nDENTHELIATE LANDS, a portion of the Peloponnesus that lay between\nLaconia and Messenia; often disputed by those states.\n\nDERMONA, a river of Gallia Transpadana; it runs into the Ollius (now\n_Oglio_), and through that channel into the Po.\n\nDIVODURUM, a town in Gallia Belgica, situate on the Moselle, on the\nspot where _Metz_ now stands.\n\nDONUSA, or DONYSA, an island in the \u00c6gean sea, not far from _Naxos_.\nVirgil has, _Bacchatamque jugis Naxon, viridemque Donysam_.\n\nDYRRACHIUM, a town on the coast of Illyricum. Its port answered to\nthat of Brundusium, affording a convenient passage to Italy.\n\n\nE.\n\nECBATANA, the capital of Media; now _Hamedan_.\n\nEDESSA, a town of Mesopotamia; now _Orrhoa_, or _Orfa_.\n\nELEPHANTINE, an island in the Nile, not far from Syene; at which last\nplace stood the most advanced Roman garrison, _Notitia Imperii_.\n\nELEUSIS, a district of Attica near the sea-coast, sacred to Ceres,\nwhere the Eleusinian mysteries were performed; now in ruins.\n\nELYM\u00c6I, a people bordering on the gulf of Persia.\n\nEMERITA, a city of Spain; now _Merida_ in the province of\n_Estramadoura_.\n\nEPHESUS, an ancient and celebrated city of Ionia, in Asia Minor; now\n_Efeso_. It was the birth-place of Heraclitus, the weeping\nphilosopher.\n\nEPIDAPHNE, a town in Syria, not far from Antioch.\n\nEPOREDIA, a town at the foot of the Alps, afterwards a Roman colony;\nnow _Jurea_, or _Jura_, a city of Piedmont.\n\nERINDE, a river of Asia, mentioned by Tacitus only.\n\nERITHR\u00c6, a maritime town of Ionia, in Asia Minor.\n\nETRURIA, a district of Italy, extending from the boundary of Liguria\nto the Tiber; now _Tuscany_.\n\nEUBOEA, an island near the coast of _Attica_; now _Negropont_.\n\nEUPHRATES, a river of Asia, universally allowed to take its rise in\nArmenia Major. It divides into two branches, one running through\nBabylon, and the other through Seleucia. It bounds Mesopotamia on the\nwest.\n\nEUXINE, or PONTUS EUXINUS; now the Black Sea.\n\n\nF.\n\nFERENTINUM, a town of Latium, in Italy; now _Ferentino_, in the\nCampania of Rome.\n\nFERENTUM, a town of Etruria; now _Ferenti_.\n\nFERONIA, a town in Etruria.\n\nFIDEN\u00c6, a small town in the territory of the Sabines, about six miles\nto the north of Rome. The place where the ruins of Fiden\u00e6 are seen, is\nnow called _Castello Giubileo_.\n\nFLAMMINIAN WAY, made by Flamminius A.U.C. 533, from Rome to\n_Ariminum_, a town of Umbria, or Romana, at the mouth of the river\nAriminus, on the gulf of Venice. It is now called _Rimini_.\n\nFLEVUS, a branch of the Rhine, that emptied itself into the lakes\nwhich have been long since absorbed by the _Zuyderzee_. A castle,\ncalled _Flevum Castellum_, was built there by Drusus, the father of\nGermanicus.\n\nFORMI\u00c6, a maritime town of Italy, to the south-east of _Cajeta_. The\nruins of the place are still visible.\n\nFOROJULIUM. See FORUM JULIUM.\n\nFORUM ALLIENI, now _Ferrare_, on the Po.\n\nFORUM JULIUM, a Roman colony in Gaul, founded by Julius C\u00e6sar, and\ncompleted by Augustus, with a harbour at the mouth of the river\n_Argens_, capable of receiving a large fleet. The ruins of two moles\nat the entrance of the harbour are still to be seen. See Life of\nAgricola, s. 4. note a. The place is now called _Frejus_.\n\nFRISII, the ancient inhabitants of _Friesland_. See Manners of the\nGermans.\n\nFUNDANI MONTES, now _Fondi_, a city of Naples, on the confines of the\nPope's dominions.\n\n\nG.\n\nGABII, a town of Latium, between Rome and Preneste. A particular\nmanner of tucking up the gown, adopted by the Roman consuls when they\ndeclared war or attended a sacrifice, was called _Cinctus Gabinus_.\nThe place now extinct.\n\nG\u00c6TULI, a people of Africa, bordering on Mauritania.\n\nGALATIA, or GALLOGR\u00c6CIA, a country of Asia Minor, lying between\n_Cappadocia, Pontus_, and _Pophlagonia_; now called _Chiangare_.\n\nGALIL\u00c6A, the northern part of Canaan, or Palestine, bounded on the\nnorth by _Phoenicia_, on the south by _Samaria_, on the east by the\n_Jordan_, and on the west by the _Mediterranean_.\n\nGALLIA, the country of ancient Gaul, now _France_. It was divided by\nthe Romans into _Gallia Cisalpina_, viz. Gaul on the Italian side of\nthe Alps, with the _Rubicon_ for its boundary to the south. It was\nalso called _Gallia Togata_, from the use made by the inhabitants of\nthe Roman _Toga_. It was likewise called _Gallia Transpadana_, or\n_Cispadana_, with respect to Rome. The second great division of Gaul\nwas _Gallia Transalpina_, or _Ulterior_, being, with respect to Rome,\non the other side of the Alps. It was also called _Gallia Comata_,\nfrom the people wearing their hair long, which the Romans wore short.\nThe southern part was GALLIA NARBONENSIS, _Narbon Gaul_, called\nlikewise _Braccata_, from the use of _bracc\u00e6_, or breeches, which were\nno part of the Roman dress; now _Languedoc_, _Dauphiny_, and\n_Provence_. For the other divisions of Gaul on this side of the Alps,\ninto the _Gallia Belgica, Celtica, Aquitanica_, further subdivided by\nAugustus, see the Manners of the Germans, s. 1. note a.\n\nGARAMANTES, a people in the interior part of Africa, extending over a\nvast tract of country at present little known.\n\nGARIZIM, a mountain of Samaria, famous for a temple built on it by\npermission of Alexander the Great.\n\nGELDUBA, not far from Novesium (now _Nuys_, in the electorate of\nCologne) on the west side of the Rhine.\n\nGEMONI\u00c6, a place at Rome, into which were thrown the bodies of\nmalefactors.\n\nGERMANIA, Ancient Germany, bounded on the east by the Vistula (the\n_Weissel_), on the north by the Ocean, on the west by the Rhine, and\non the south by the Danube. A great part of Gaul, along the west side\nof the Rhine, was also called Germany by Augustus C\u00e6sar, _Germania\nCisrhenana_, and by him distinguished into _Upper_ and _Lower\nGermany_.\n\nGOTHONES, a people of ancient Germany, who inhabited part of Poland,\nand bordered on the Vistula.\n\nGRAIAN ALPS, Grai\u00e6 Alpes, supposed to be so called from the Greeks who\nsettled there. See ALPS.\n\nGRINNES, a town of the Batavi, on the right side of the Vahalis (now\nthe _Waal_), in the territory of Utrecht.\n\nGUGERNI, a people originally from Germany, inhabiting part of the\nduchy of Cleves and Gueldre, between the Rhine and the Meuse.\n\nGYARUS, one of the islands called the _Cyclades_, rendered famous by\nbeing allotted for the banishment of Roman citizens. Juvenal says,\n_Aude aliquid brevibus Gyaris, et carcere dignum, si vis esse\naliquis._\n\n\nH.\n\nH\u00c6MUS, MOUNT, a ridge of mountains running from Illyricum towards the\nEuxine sea; now _Mont Argentaro_.\n\nH\u00c6MONADENSIANS, a people bordering on Cilicia.\n\nHALICARNASSUS, the capital of Caria, in Asia Minor, famous for being\nthe birth-place of Herodotus and Dionysius, commonly called _Dionysius\nHalicarnassensis_.\n\nHELVETII, a people in the neighbourhood of the Allobroges, situate on\nthe south-west side of the Rhine, and separated from Gaul by the\nRhodanus and Lacus Lemanus.\n\nHENIOCHIANS, a people dwelling near the Euxine Sea.\n\nHERCULANEUM, a town of Campania, near Mount Vesuvius, swallowed up by\nan earthquake. Several antiquities have been lately dug out of the\nruins.\n\nHERCYNIAN FOREST: in the time of Julius C\u00e6sar, the breadth could not\nbe traversed in less than nine days; and after travelling lengthways\nfor sixty days, no man reached the extremity. C\u00e6sar, De Bell. Gal.\nlib. vi. s. 29.\n\nHERMUNDURI, a people of Germany, in part of what is now called Upper\nSaxony, bounded on the north by the river _Sala_, on the east by the\n_Elbe_, and on the south by the _Danube_.\n\nHIERO-C\u00c6SAREA, a city in Lydia, famous for a temple to the Persian\nDiana, supposed to have been built by Cyrus.\n\nHISPALIS, a town of Boetica in the Farther Spain; now _Seville_ in\n_Andalusia_.\n\nHISPANIA, Spain, otherwise called _Iberia_, from the river _Iberus_.\nIt has the sea on every side except that next to _Gaul_, from which it\nis separated by the _Pyrenees_. During the time of the republic, the\nwhole country was divided into two provinces, _Ulterior_ and\n_Citerior_, the _Farther_ and _Hither_ Spain. Augustus divided the\nFarther Spain into two provinces; _Boetica_, and _Lusitania_. The\nHither Spain he called _Tarraconensis_, and then Spain was formed into\nthree provinces; _Boetica_, under the management of the senate; and the\nother two reserved for officers appointed by the prince.\n\nHOSTILIA, a village on the Po: now _Ostiglia_, in the neighbourhood of\nCremona.\n\nHYP\u00c6PA, a small city in _Lydia_, now rased to the ground.\n\nHYRCANIA, a country of the Farther Asia, to the east of the Caspian\nSea, with Media on the west, and Parthia on the south; famous for its\ntigers. There was a city of the same name in Lydia.\n\n\nI.\n\nIBERIA, an inland country of Asia, bounded by Mount Caucasus on the\nnorth, by Albania on the cast, by Colchis and part of Pontus on the\nwest, and by Armenia on the south. Spain was also called Iberia, from\nthe river Iberus; now the _Ebro_.\n\nIBERUS, a noble river of the Hither Spain; now the _Ebro_.\n\nICENI, a people of Britain; now _Essex, Suffolk_, and _Norfolk_.\n\nILIUM, another name for ancient Troy. A new city, nearer to the sea,\nwas built after the famous siege of Troy, and made a Roman colony.\nBut, as was said of the old city, _Etiam periere ruin\u00e6_.\n\nILLYRICUM, the country between Pannonia to the north, and the Adriatic\nto the south. It is now comprised by _Dalmatia_ and _Sclavonia_, under\nthe respective dominion of the Venetians and the Turks.\n\nINSUBRIA, a country of Gallia Cisalpina; now the _Milanese_.\n\nINTEMELIUM. See ALBIUM INTEMELIUM.\n\nINTERAMNA, an ancient town of the Volsci in Latium, not far from the\nriver Liris. It is now in ruins.\n\nIONIAN SEA, the sea that washes the western coast of Greece, opposite\nto the gulf of Venice.\n\nISICHI, a people bordering on the Euxine, towards the east.\n\nISTRIA, an island in the gulf of Venice, still retaining its ancient\nname. There was also a town of the same name near the mouth of the\nIster, on the Euxine Sea.\n\nITUR\u00c6A, a _Transjordan_ district of Palestine, now _Bacar_.\n\n\nJ.\n\nJAPHA, a strong place, both by nature and art, in the Lower Galilee,\nnot far from _Jotapata_; now _Saphet_.\n\nJAZYGES, a people of Sarmatia Europ\u00e6a, situate on this side of the\nPalus M\u00e6otis, near the territory of Maroboduus, the German king.\n\nJUGANTES, said by Camden to be the same as the _Brigantes_, but\nBrotier thinks it probable that they were a distinct, people.\n\n\nL.\n\nLACUS LEMANUS, now the _Lake of Geneva_.\n\nLANGOBARDI, a people of Germany, between the _Elbe_ and the _Oder_, in\npart of what is now called _Brandenburg_.\n\nLANUVIUM, a town of Latium, about sixteen miles from Rome; now _Civita\nLavinia_.\n\nLAODICEA, a town of Phrygia, called, to distinguish it from other\ncities of the same name, _Laodicea ad Lycum_. Spon, in his account of\nhis travels, says it is rased to the ground, except four theatres\nbuilt, with marble, finely polished, and in as good condition as if\nthey were modern structures; now called _Ladik_.\n\nLAODICEA AD MARE, a considerable town on the coast of Syria, well\nbuilt, with a commodious harbour.\n\nLATIUM, the country of the Latini, so called from king Latinus;\ncontained at first within narrow bounds, but greatly enlarged under\nthe Alban kings and the Roman consuls, by the accession of the \u00c6qui,\nVolsci, Hernici, &c.\n\nLECH\u00c6UM, the west port of Corinth, which the people used for their\nItalian trade, as they did _Cenchr\u00e6_ for their eastern or Asiatic.\n\nLEPTIS, there were in Africa two ancient cities of the name, _Leptis\nmagna_, and _Leptis parva_. The first (now called _Lebeda_) was in the\nterritory of Tripoli; the second, a town on the Mediterranean, not far\nfrom Carthage.\n\nLESBOS, an island in the Egean Sea, near the coast of Asia; the\nbirth-place of Sappho: now called _Metelin_.\n\nLEUCI, a people of Gallia Belgica, to the north of the Lingones,\nbetween the Moselle and the Meuse.\n\nLIBYA, the name given by the Greeks to all Africa; but, properly\nspeaking, it was an interior part of Africa.\n\nLIGERIS; now the _Loire_.\n\nLIGURIA, a country of Italy, divided into the maritime, _Ligus Ora_;\nand the inland _Liguria_; both between the Apennine to the south, the\nMaritime Alps to the west, and the Po to the north. It contained what\nis now called _Ferrara_, and the _territories of Genoa_.\n\nLINGONES, a people of Gallia Belgica, inhabiting the country about\n_Langres_ and _Dijon_.\n\nLONGOBARDI, or LANGOBORDI, a people of Germany, between the Elbe and\nthe Oder. See Manners of the Germans, s. 40 note a.\n\nLUCANIA, a country of ancient Italy; now called the _Basilicate_.\n\nLUGDUNUM, a city of ancient Gaul; now _Lyons_.\n\nLUGDUNUM BATAVORUM, a town of the Batavi, now _Leyden_ in Holland.\nThere was another town of the name in Gallia Celtica, at the\nconfluence of the Arar (the _Saone_) and the Rhodanus (the _Rhone_).\nThe place is now called Lyons.\n\nLUPPIA, a river of Westphalia; now the _Lippe_.\n\nLUSITANIA, now the kingdom of _Portugal_, on the west of Spain,\nformerly a part of it.\n\nLYCIA, a country in Asia Minor, bounded by Pamphylia, Phrygia, and the\nMediterranean.\n\nLYDIA, an inland country of Asia Minor, formerly governed by Croesus;\nnow _Carasia_.\n\nLYGII, an ancient people of Germany, who inhabited the country now\ncalled _Silesia_, and also part of _Poland_.\n\n\nM.\n\nMACEDONIA, a large country, rendered famous by Philip of Macedon and\nhis son Alexander; now a province of the Turkish empire, bounded by\nServia and Bulgaria to the north, by Greece to the south, by Thrace\nand the Archipelago to the east, and by Epirus to the west.\n\nM\u00c6OTIS PALUS, a lake of Sarmatia Europ\u00e6a, still known by the same\nname, and reaching from Crim Tartary to the mouth of the _Tanais_ (the\n_Don_).\n\nM\u00c6SIA, a district of the ancient Illyricum, bordering on Pannonia,\ncontaining what is now called _Bulgaria_, and part of _Servia_.\n\nMAGNESIA: there were anciently three cities of the name; one in Ionia,\non the M\u00e6ander, which, it is said, was given to Themistocles by\nArtaxerxes, with these words, _to furnish his table with bread_; it is\nnow called _Guzel-Hissard_, in Asiatic Turkey: the second was at the\nfoot of Mount Sipylus, in Lydia; but has been destroyed by\nearthquakes: the third Magnesia was a maritime town of Thessaly, on\nthe Egean Sea.\n\nMAGONTIACUM, a town of Gallia Belgica; now _Mentz_, situate at the\nconfluence of the Rhine and the Maine.\n\nMARCODURUM, a village of Gallia Belgica; now _Duren_ on the _Roer_.\n\nMARCOMANIANS, a people of Germany, between the Rhine, the Danube, and\nthe Neckar. They removed to the country of the Boii, and having\nexpelled the inhabitants, occupied the country now called _Bohemia_.\nSee Manners of the Germans, s. 42.\n\nMARDI, a people of the Farther Asia, near the Caspian Sea.\n\nMARITIME ALPS. See ALPS.\n\nMARSACI, a people in the north of Batavia, inhabiting the sea-coast.\n\nMARSI, a people of Italy, who dwelt round the Lacus Fucinus. Another\npeople called Marsi, in Germany, to the south of the Frisii, in the\ncountry now called _Paderborne_ and _Munster_.\n\nMASSILLIA, a town of Gallia Narbonensis, formerly celebrated for\npolished manners and learning; now _Marseilles_, a port town of\nProvence.\n\nMATTIACI, a branch of the Catti in Germany. Their capital town was\n\nMATTIUM, supposed now to be _Marpourg_ in _Hesse_.\n\nMAURITANIA, a large region of Africa, extending from east to west\nalong the Mediterranean, divided by the emperor Claudius into\n_C\u00e6sariensis_, the eastern part, and _Tingitana_, the western. It had\nNumidia to the east, and Getulia to the south; and was also bounded by\nthe Atlantic ocean, the straits of Gibraltar, and the Mediterranean to\nthe north. The natives were called Mauri, and thence the name of\n_Mauritania_; now _Barbary_.\n\nMEDIA, a country of the Farther Asia, bounded on the west by Armenia,\non the east by Parthia, on the north by the Caspian Sea, on the south\nby Persia. _Ecbatana_ was the capital.\n\nMEDIOLANUM, now _Milan_ in Italy.\n\nMEDIOMATRICI, a people of Gallia Belgica; now the diocese of _Metz_.\n\nMELITENE, a city of Cappadocia.\n\nMEMPHIS, a city of Egypt, famous for its pyramids.\n\nMENAPII, a people of Belgia; now _Brabant_ and _Flanders_.\n\nMESOPOTAMIA, a large country in the middle of Asia; so called, because\nit lies, [Greek: mesae potamon], between two rivers, the Euphrates on\nthe west, and the Tigris on the east.\n\nMESSENA, or MESSANA, an ancient and celebrated city of Sicily, on the\nstrait between that island and Italy. It still retains the name of\n_Messina_.\n\nMEVANIA, a town of Umbria, near the Clitumnus, a river that runs from\neast to west into the Tiber.\n\nMILETUS, an ancient city of Ionia, in Asia Minor; now totally\ndestroyed.\n\nMILVIUS PONS, a bridge over the Tiber, at the distance of two miles\nfrom Rome, on the _Via Flamminia_; now called _Ponte-Molle_.\n\nMINTURN\u00c6, a town on the confines of Campania, near the river Liris.\n\nMISENUM, a promontory of Campania, with a good harbour, near the\n_Sinus Puteolanus_, or the bay of Naples, on the north side. It was\nthe station for the Roman fleets. Now _Capo di Miseno_.\n\nMITYLENE, the capital city of the isle of Lesbos, and now gives name\nto the whole island.\n\nMONA, an island separated from the coast of the Ordovices by a narrow\nstrait, the ancient seat of the Druids. Now the isle of _Anglesey_.\n\nMON\u00c6CI PORTUS, now _Monaco_, a port town in the territory of _Genoa_.\n\nMORINI, a people of Belgia, inhabiting the diocese of _Tournay_, and\nthe country about _St. Omer_ and _Boulogne_.\n\nMOSA, a large river of Belgic Gaul; it receives a branch of the Rhine,\ncalled _Vahalis_, and falls into the German Ocean below the Briel. It\nis now the _M\u00e6se_, or _Meuse_.\n\nMOSELLA, a river, which, running through Lorrain, falls into the Rhine\nat _Coblentz_, now called the _Moselle_.\n\nMOSTENI, the common name of the people and their town on the river\nHermus, in Lydia.\n\nMUSULANI, an independent savage people in Africa, on the confines of\nCarthage, Numidia, and Mauritania.\n\nMUTINA, now _Modena_, a city of Lombardy, in Italy.\n\nMYRINA, a town of _\u00c6olis_, or _\u00c6olia_, in the Hither Asia; now\n_Sanderlik_.\n\n\nN.\n\nNABALIA, the name of the channel made by Drusus from the Rhine to the\nriver Sala; now the _Ysell_. See Annals, ii. s. 8.\n\nNABATH\u00c6I, a people between the Euphrates and the Red Sea;\ncomprehending Arabia Petr\u00e6a, and bounded by Palestine on the north.\n\nNAR, a river which rises in Umbria, and, falling into the lake\n_Velinus_, rushes thence with a violent and loud cascade, and empties\nitself into the Tiber.\n\nNARBON GAUL, the southern part of Gaul, bounded by the Pyrenees to the\nwest, the Mediterranean to the south, and the Alps and the Rhine to\nthe east.\n\nNARNIA, a town of Umbria, on the river _Nar_; now _Narni_, in the\nterritory of the Pope.\n\nNAUPORTUM, a town on a cognominal river in Pannonia.\n\nNAVA, a river of Gallia Belgica, which runs north-east into the west\nside of the Rhine; now the _Nahe_.\n\nNAVARIA, now _Novara_, a city of Milan.\n\nNEMETES, a people originally of Germany, removed to the diocese of\n_Spire_, on the Rhine.\n\nNICEPHORUS, a river of Asia that washes the walls of _Tigranocerta_,\nand runs into the _Tigris_; _D'Anville_ says, now called _Khabour_.\n\nNICOPOLIS: there were several towns of this name, viz. in Egypt,\nArmenia, Bithynia, on the Euxine, &c. A town of the same name was\nbuilt by Augustus, on the coast of Epirus, as a monument of his\nvictory at Actium.\n\nNINOS, the capital of _Assyria_; called also _Nineve_.\n\nNISIBIS, a city of Mesopotamia, at this day called _Nesibin_.\n\nNOLA, a city of Campania, on the north-east of Vesuvius. At this\nplace Augustus breathed his last: it retains its old name to this day.\n\nNORICUM, a Roman province, bounded by the Danube on the north, by the\n_Alpes Noric\u00e6_ on the south, by Pannonia on the east, and Vindelicia\non the west; now containing a great part of Austria, Tyrol, Bavaria,\n&c.\n\nNOVESIUM, a town of the Ubii in Gallia Belgica; now _Nuys_, on the\nwest side of the Rhine, in the electorate of _Cologne_.\n\nNUCERIA, a city of Campania; now _Nocera_.\n\nNUMIDIA, a celebrated kingdom of Africa, bordering on Mauritania, and\nbounded to the north by the Mediterranean; now _Algiers, Tunis,\nTripoli_, &c. the eastern part of the kingdom of _Algiers_. Syphax was\nking of one part, and Masinissa of the other.\n\n\nO.\n\nOCRICULUM, a town of Umbria, near the confluence of the Nar and the\nTiber; now _Otricoli_, in the duchy of _Spoletto_.\n\nODRYS\u00c6, a people situated in the western part of Thrace, how a\nprovince of European Turkey.\n\nOEENSES, a people of Africa, who occupied the country between the two\nSyrtes on the Mediterranean. Their city was called _Oea_, now\n_Tripoli_.\n\nOPITERGIUM, now _Oderzo_, in the territory of Venice.\n\nORDOVICES, a people who inhabited what we now call _Flintshire,\nDenbighshire, Carnarvon_, and _Merionethshire_, in North Wales.\n\nOSTIA, formerly a town of note, at the mouth of the Tiber (on the\nsouth side), whence its name; at this day it lies in ruins.\n\n\nP.\n\nPADUS, anciently called _Eridanus_ by the Greeks, famous for the\nfable of Ph\u00e6ton; it receives several rivers from the Alps and\nApennine, and, running from west to east, discharges itself into the\nAdriatic. It is now called the Po.\n\nPAGIDA, a river in Numidia; its modern name is not ascertained.\nD'Anville thinks it is now called _Fissato_, in the territory of\n_Tripoli_.\n\nPALUS M\u00c6OTIS; see M\u00c6OTIS.\n\nPAMPHYLIA, a country of the Hither Asia, bounded by Pisidia to the\nnorth, and by the Mediterranean to the south.\n\nPANDA, a river of Asia, in the territory of the _Siraci_; not well\nknown.\n\nPANDATARIA, an island of the Tuscan Sea, in the Sinus Puteolanus (now\n_il Golfo di Napoli_), the place of banishment for illustrious exiles,\nviz. Julia the daughter of Augustus, Agrippina the wife of Germanicus,\nOctavia the daughter of Claudius, and many others. It is now called\n_L'lsle Sainte-Marie_, or _Santa Maria_.\n\nPANNONIA, an extensive country of Europe, bounded by M\u00e6sia on the\neast, by Noricum on the west, Dalmatia on the south, and by the Danube\nto the north; containing part of _Austria_ and _Hungary_.\n\nPANNONIAN ALPS. See ALPS.\n\nPAPHOS: there were two towns of the name, both on the west side of the\nisland of Cyprus, and dedicated to Venus, who was hence the _Paphian_\nand the _Cyprian_ goddess.\n\nPARTHIA, a country of the Farther Asia, with Media on the west, Asia\non the east, and Hyrcania on the north.\n\nPATAVIUM, now _Padua_, in the territory of Venice.\n\nPELIGNI, a people of Samaium, near Naples.\n\nPELOPONNESUS, the large peninsula to the south of Greece, so called\nafter _Pelops_, viz. _Pelopis Nesus_. It is joined to the rest of\nGreece by the isthmus of Corinth, which lies between the Egean and\nIonian seas. It is now called the _Morea_.\n\nPENNIN\u00c6 ALPES. See ALPS.\n\nPERGAMOS, an ancient and famous city of _Mysia_, situate on the\nCaicus, which runs through it. It was the residence of Attalus and his\nsuccessors. This place was famous for a royal library, formed, with\nemulation, to vie with that of Alexandria in Egypt. The kings of the\nlatter, stung with paltry jealousy, prohibited the exportation of\npaper. Hence the invention of parchment, called _Pergamana charta_.\nPlutarch assures us, that the library at Pergamos contained two\nhundred thousand volumes. The whole collection was given by Marc\nAntony as a present to Cleopatra, and thus the two libraries were\nconsolidated into one. In about six or seven centuries afterwards, the\nvolumes of science, by order of the calif Omar, served for a fire to\nwarm the baths of Alexandria; and thus perished _all the physic of the\nsoul_. The town subsists at this day, and retains the name of\n_Pergamos_. See Spon's Travels, vol. i.\n\nPERINTHUS, a town of Thrace, situate on the Propontis, now called\n_Heraclea_.\n\nPERUSIA, formerly a principal city of Etruria, on the north side of\nthe Tiber, with the famous _Lacus Trasimenus_ to the east. It was\nbesieged by Augustus, and reduced by famine. Lucan has, _Perusina\nfames_. It is now called _Perugia_, in the territory of the Pope.\n\nPHARSALIA, a town in Thessaly, rendered famous by the last battle\nbetween Pompey and Julius C\u00e6sar.\n\nPHILADELPHIA: there were several ancient towns of this name. That\nwhich Tacitus mentions was in Lydia, built by Attalus Philadelphus; it\nis now called by the Turks, _Alah Scheyr_.\n\nPHILIPPI, a city of Macedonia, on the confines of Thrace; built by\nPhilip of Macedon, and famous for the battle fought on its plains\nbetween Augustus and the republican party. It is now in ruins.\n\nPHILIPPOPOLIS, a city of Thrace, near the river _Hebrus_. It derived\nits name from Philip of Macedon, who enlarged it, and augmented the\nnumber of inhabitants.\n\nPICENTIA, the capital of the _Picentini_, on the Tuscan Sea. not far\nfrom Naples.\n\nPICENUM, a territory of Italy, to the east of Umbria, and in some\nparts extending from the Apennine to the Adriatic. It is now supposed\nto be the _March of Ancona_.\n\nPIR\u00c6EUS, a celebrated port near Athens. It is much frequented at this\nday; its name, _Porto Lione_.\n\nPIS\u00c6, a town of Etruria, which gave name to the bay of Pisa, _Sinus\nPisanus_.\n\nPLACENTIA, a town in Italy, now called _Placenza_, in the duchy of\nParma.\n\nPLANASIA, a small island near the coast of Etruria, in the Tuscan Sea;\nnow _Pianosa_.\n\nPOMPEII, a town of Campania, near Herculaneum. It was destroyed by an\nearthquake in the reign of Nero.\n\nPOMPEIOPOLIS: there were anciently two cities of the name; one in\nCilicia, another in Paphlagonia.\n\nPONTIA, an island in the Tuscan sea; a place of relegation or\nbanishment.\n\nPONTUS, an extensive country of Asia Minor, lying between Bithynia and\nPaphlagonia, and extending along the _Pontus Euxinus_, the Euxine or\nthe Pontic Sea, from which it took its name. It had that sea to the\neast, the mouth of the Ister to the north, and Mount H\u00e6mus to the\nsouth. The wars between Mithridates, king of Pontus, and the Romans,\nare well known.\n\nPR\u00c6NESTE, a town of Latium to the south-east of Rome, standing very\nhigh, and said to be a strong place. The town that succeeded it,\nstands low in a valley, and is called _Palestrina_.\n\nPROPONTIS, near the Hellespont and the Euxine; now the Sea of\n_Marmora_.\n\nPUTEOLI, a town of Campania, so called from its number of wells; now\n_Pozzuolo_, nine miles to the west of Naples.\n\nPYRAMUS, a river of Cilicia, rising in Mount Taurus, and running from\neast to west into the Sea of Cilicia.\n\nPYRGI, a town of Etruria, on the Tuscan Sea; now St. _Marinella_,\nabout thirty-three miles distant from Rome.\n\n\nQ.\n\nQUADI, a people of Germany, situate to the south-east of Bohemia, on\nthe banks of the Danube. See Manners, of the Germans, s. 42. note b.\n\n\nR.\n\nRAVENNA, an ancient city of Italy, near the coast of the Adriatic. A\nport was constructed at the mouth of the river Bedesis, and by\nAugustus made a station for the fleet that guarded the Adriatic. It is\nstill called _Ravenna_.\n\nREATE, a town of the Sabines in Latium, situate near the lake Velinus.\n\nREGIUM. See RHEGIUM.\n\nREMI, a people of Gaul, who inhabited the northern part of\n_Champagne_; now the city of _Rheims_.\n\nRHACOTIS, the ancient name of Alexandria in Egypt.\n\nRH\u00c6TIA, a country bounded by the Rhine to the west, the Alps to the\neast, by Italy to the south, and _Vindelicia_ to the north. Horace\nsays _Videre Rh\u00e6ti bella sub Alpibus Drusum gerentem, et Vindelici_.\nNow the country of the _Grisons_.\n\nRHEGIUM, an ancient city at the extremity of the Apennine, on the\nnarrow strait between Italy and Sicily. It is now called _Reggio_, in\nthe farther Calabria.\n\nRHINE, the river that rises in the Rh\u00e6tian Alps, and divides Gaul from\nGermany. See Manners of the Germans, s. 1. note f; and s. 29. note\na.\n\nRHODANUS, a famous river of Gaul, rising on Mount Adula, not far from\nthe head of the Rhine. After a considerable circuit it enters the\n_Lake of Geneva_, and in its course visits the city of Lyons, and from\nthat place traverses a large tract of country, and falls into the\nMediterranean. It is now called the _Rhone_.\n\nRHODUS, a celebrated island in the Mediterranean, near the coast of\nAsia Minor, over-against _Caria_. The place of retreat for the\ndiscontented Romans. Tiberius made that use of it.\n\nRHOXOLANI, a people on the north of the _Palus M\u00e6otis_, situate along\nthe Tanais, now the _Don_.\n\nRICODULUM, a town of the Treviri on the Moselle.\n\n\nS.\n\nSABRINA, now the _Severn_; a river that rises in _Montgomeryshire_,\nand running by _Shrewsbury_, _Worcester_, and _Glocester_, empties\nitself into the Bristol Channel, separating Wales from England.\n\nSALA. It seems that two rivers of this name were intended by Tacitus,\nOne, now called the Issel, which had a communication with the Rhine,\nby means of the canal made by Drusus, the father of Germanicus. The\nother SALA was a river in the country now called _Thuringia_,\ndescribed by Tacitus as yielding salt, which the inhabitants\nconsidered as the peculiar favour of heaven. The salt, however, was\nfound in the salt springs near the river, which runs northward into\nthe Albis, or Elbe.\n\nSALAMIS, an island near the coast of Attica, opposite to _Eleusis_.\nThere was also a town of the name of Salamis, on the eastern coast of\nCyprus, built by Teucer, when driven by his father from his native\nisland. Horace says, _Ambiguam tellure nov\u00e2 Salamina futuram_.\n\nSAMARIA, the capital of the country of that name in Palestine; the\nresidence of the kings of Israel, and afterwards of Herod. Samaritans,\nthe name of the people. Some magnificent ruins of the place are still\nremaining.\n\nSAMBULOS, a mountain in the territory of the Parthians, with the river\n_Corma_ near it. The mountain and the river are mentioned by Tacitus\nonly.\n\nSAMNIS, or SAMNITES, a people of ancient Italy, extending on both\nsides of the Apennine, famous in the Roman wars.\n\nSAMOS, an island of Asia Minor, opposite to Ephesus; the birth-place\nof Pythagoras, who was thence called the _Samian Sage_.\n\nSAMOTHRACIA, an island of Thrace, in the Egean Sea, opposite to the\nmouth of the Hebrus. There were mysteries of initiation celebrated in\nthis island, held in as high repute as those of Eleusis; with a sacred\nand inviolable asylum.\n\nSARDES, the capital of Lydia, at the foot of Mount Tmolus, from which\nthe Pactolus ran down through the heart of the city. The inhabitants\nwere called _Sardicni_.\n\nSARDINIA, an island on the Sea of Liguria, lying to the south of\nCorsica. It is said that an herb grew there, which, when eaten,\nproduced a painful grin, called _Sardonius risus_. The island now\nbelongs to the Duke of Saxony, with the title of king.\n\nSARMATIA, called also _Scythia_, a northern country of vast extent,\nand divided into _Europ\u00e6a_ and _Asiatica_; the former beginning at the\nVistula (its western boundary), and comprising Russia, part of Poland,\nPrussia, and Lithuania; and the latter bounded on the west by Sarmatia\nEurop\u00e6a and the Tanais (the _Don_), extending south as far as Mount\nCaucasus and the Caspian Sea, containing Tartary, Circassia, &c.\n\nSAXA RUBRA, a place on the Flamminian road in Etruria, nine miles from\nRome.\n\nSCEPTEUCI, a people of Asiatic Sarmatia, between the Euxine and the\nCaspian Sea.\n\nSCYTHIA, a large country, now properly Crim Tartary; in ancient\ngeography divided in Scythia Asiatica, on either side of Mount Imaus;\nand Scythia Europ\u00e6a, about the Euxine Sea and the M\u00e6otic Lake. See\nalso SARMATIA.\n\nSEGESTUM, a town of Sicily, near Mount _Eryx_, famous for a temple\nsacred to the _Erycinian_ Venus.\n\nSELEUCIA, a city of Mesopotamia, situate at the confluence of the\n_Euphrates_ and the _Tigris_; now called _Bagdad_. We find in ancient\ngeography several cities of this name.\n\nSEMNONES, a people of Germany, called by Tacitus the most illustrious\nbranch of the Suevi. They inhabited between the Albis and Viadrus.\n\nSENENSIS COLONIA, now Sienna, in Tuscany.\n\nSENONES, inhabitants of Celtic Gaul, situate on the _Sequana_ (now the\nSeine); a people famous for their invasion of Italy, and taking and\nburning Rome A.U.C. 364.\n\nSEQUANI, a people of Belgic Gaul, inhabiting the country now called\n_Franche Comt\u00e9_ or the _Upper Burgundy_, and deriving their name from\nthe _Sequana_ (now the _Seine_), which, rising near _Dijon_ in\nBurgundy, runs through Paris, and, traversing Normandy, falls into the\nBritish Channel near _Havre de Grace_.\n\nSERIPHOS, a small island in the \u00c6gean Sea, one of the Cyclades: now\n_Serfo_, or _Serfanto_.\n\nSICAMBRI, an ancient people of Lower Germany, between the M\u00e6se and the\nRhine, where _Guelderland_ is. They were transplanted by Augustus to\nthe west side of the Rhine. Horace says to that emperor, _Te c\u00e6de\ngaudentes Sicambri compositis venerantur armis_.\n\nSILURES, a people of Britain, situate on the _Severn_ and the Bristol\nChannel; now _South Wales_, comprising _Glamorgan_, _Radnorshire_,\n_Hereford_, and _Monmouth_. See Camden.\n\nSIMBRUINI COLLES, the Simbruine Hills, so called from the _Simbruina\nStagna_, or lakes formed by the river _Anio_, which gave the name of\nSublaqueum to the neighbouring town.\n\nSINOPE, one of the most famous cities in the territory of Pontus. It\nwas taken by Lucullus in the Mithridatic war, and afterwards received\nRoman colonies. It was the birth-place of Diogenes the cynic, who was\nbanished from his country. The place is still called _Sinope_, a port\ntown of Asiatic Turkey, on the Euxine.\n\nSINUESSA, a town of Latium, on the confines of Campania, beyond the\nriver Liris (now called _Garigliano_). The place was much frequented\nfor the salubrity of its waters.\n\nSIPYLUS, a mountain of Lydia, near which Livy says the Romans obtained\na complete victory over Antiochas.\n\nSIRACI, a people of Asia, between the _Euxine_ and the _Caspian_ Seas.\n\nSMYRNA, a city of Ionia in the Hither Asia, which laid a claim to the\nbirth of Homer. The name of Smyrna still remains in a port town of\nAsiatic Turkey.\n\nSOPHENE, a country between the Greater and the Lesser Armenia; now\ncalled _Zoph_.\n\nSOZA, a city of the _Dandarid\u00e6_.\n\nSPELUNCA, a small town near _Fondi_, on the coast of Naples.\n\nST\u00c6CHADES, five islands, now called the _Hieres_, on the coast of\nProvence.\n\nSTRATONICE, a town of Caria in the Hither Asia, so called after\n_Stratonice_, the wife of Antiochus.\n\nSUEVI, a great and warlike people of ancient Germany, who occupied a\nprodigious tract of country. See Manners of the Germans, s. 38. and\nnote a.\n\nSUNICI, a people removed from Germany to Gallia Belgica. According to\nCluverius, they inhabited the duchy of _Limburg_.\n\nSWINDEN, a liver that flows on the confines of the _Dah\u00e6_. It is\nmentioned by Tacitus only. Brotier supposes it to be what is now\ncalled _Herirud_, or _La Riviere d'Herat_.\n\nSYENE, a town in the Higher Egypt, towards the borders of Ethiopia,\nsituate on the Nile. It lies under the tropic of Cancer, as is\nevident, says Pliny the elder, from there being no shadow projected at\nnoon at the summer solstice. It was, for a long time, the boundary of\nthe Roman empire. A garrison was stationed there: Juvenal was sent to\ncommand there by Domitian, who, by conferring that unlocked for\nhonour, meant, with covered malice, to punish the poet for his\nreflection on Paris the comedian, a native of Egypt, and a favourite\nat court.\n\nSYRACUSE, one of the noblest cities in Sicily. The Romans took it\nduring the second Punic war, on which occasion the great Archimedes\nlost his life. It is now destroyed, and no remains of the place are\nleft. _Etiam periere ruin\u00e6_.\n\nSYRIA, a country of the Hither Asia, between the Mediterranean and the\nEuphrates, so extensive that Palestine, or the Holy Land, was deemed a\npart of Syria.\n\nSYRTES, the _deserts of Barbary_: also two dangerous sandy gulfs in\nthe Mediterranean, on the coast of Barbary; one called _Syrtis Magna_,\nnow the _Gulf of Sidra_; the other _Syrtis Parva_, now the _Gulf of\nCassos_.\n\n\nT.\n\nTANAIS, the _Don_, a very large river in Scythia, dividing Asia from\nEurope. It rises in Muscovy, and flowing through _Crim Tartary_, runs\ninto the _Palus M\u00e6otis_, near the city now called Azoff, in the hands\nof the Turks.\n\nTARENTUM, now Tarento, in the province of _Otranto_. The Lacedemonians\nfounded a colony there, and thence it was called by Horace,\n_Laced\u00e6monium Tarentum_.\n\nTARICH\u00c6A, a town of Galilee. It was besieged and taken by Vespasian,\nwho sent six thousand of the prisoners to assist in cutting a passage\nthrough the isthmus of Corinth.\n\nTARRACINA, a city of the Volsci in Latium, near the mouth of the\n_Ufens_, in the Campania of Rome. Now _Terracina_, on the Tuscan Sea.\n\nTARRACO, the capital of a division of Spain, called by the Romans\n_Tarraconensis_; now Taragon, a port town in Catalonia, on the\nMediterranean, to the west of _Barcelona_. See HISPANIA.\n\nTARTARUS, a river running between the Po and the Athesis, (the\n_Adige_) from west to east, into the Adriatic; now _Tartaro_.\n\nTAUNUS, a mountain of Germany, on the other side of the Rhine; now\nMount _Heyrick_, over-against _Mentz_.\n\nTAURANNITII, a people who occupied a district of _Armenia Major_, not\nfar from _Tigranocerta_.\n\nTAURI, a people inhabiting the _Taurica Chersonesus_, on the _Euxine_.\nThe country is now called _Crim Tartary_.\n\nTAURINI, a people dwelling at the foot of the Alps. Their capital was\ncalled, after Augustus C\u00e6sar, who planted a colony, there, _Augusta\nTaurinorum_. The modern name is _Turin_, the capital of Piedmont.\n\nTAURUS, the greatest mountain in Asia, extending from the Indian to\nthe \u00c6gean Sea; said to be fifty miles over, and fifteen hundred long.\nIts extremity to the north is called _Imaus_.\n\nTELEBO\u00c6, a people of \u00c6olia or Acarnania in Greece, who removed to\nItaly, and settled in the isle of Capre\u00e6.\n\nTEMNOS, an inland town of \u00c6olia, in the Hither Asia.\n\nTENCTERI, a people of Germany. See the Manners of the Germans, s. 32.\n\nTENOS, one of the Cyclades.\n\nTERMES, a city in the Hither Spain; now a village called _Tiermes_, in\nCastille.\n\nTERRACINA, a city of the _Volsci_ in Latium, near the mouth of the\n_Ufens_, on the Tuscan Sea; now called _Terracina_, in the territory\nof Rome.\n\nTEUTOBURGIUM, a forest in Germany, rendered famous by the slaughter of\nVarus and his legions. It began in the country of the Marsi, and\nextended to Paderborn, Osnaburg, and Munster, between the _Ems_ and\nthe _Luppia_.\n\nTHALA, a town in Numidia, destroyed in the war of Julius C\u00e6sar against\nJuba.\n\nTHEB\u00c6, a very ancient town in the Higher Egypt, on the east side of\nthe Nile, famous for its hundred gates. Another city of the same name\nin Boeotia, in Greece, said to have been built by Cadmus. It had the\nhonour of producing two illustrious chiefs, Epaminondas and\nPelopidas, and Pindar the celebrated poet. Alexander rased it to the\nground; but spared the house and family of Pindar.\n\nTHERMES otherwise THERMA, a town in Macedonia, afterwards called\n_Thessalonica_, famous for two epistles of St. Paul to the\nThessalonians. The city stood at the head of a large bay, called\n_Therm\u00e6us Sinus_; now _Golfo di Salonichi_.\n\nTHESSALY, a country of Greece, formerly a great part of Macedonia.\n\nTHRACIA, an extensive region, bounded to the north by Mount H\u00e6mus, to\nthe south by the \u00c6gean Sea, and by the Euxine and Propontis to the\neast. In the time of Tiberius it was an independent kingdom, but\nafterwards made a Roman province.\n\nTHUBASCUM, a town of Mauritania in Africa.\n\nTHURII, a people of ancient Italy, inhabiting a part of Lucania,\nbetween the rivers Crathis (now _Crate_), and Sybaris (now _Sibari_).\n\nTIBER, a town of ancient Latium, situate on the Anio, about twenty\nmiles from Rome. Here Horace had his villa, and it was the frequent\nretreat of Augustus. Now _Tivoli_.\n\nTICINUM, a town of _Insubria_, situate on the river Ticinus, near its\nconfluence with the Po; now _Pavia_, in Milan.\n\nTICINUS, a river of Italy falling into the Po, near the city of\n_Ticinum_, or Pavia; now _Tesino_.\n\nTIGRANOCERTA, a town of Armenia Major, built by Tigranes in the time\nof the Mithridatic war. The river _Nicephorus_ washes one side of the\ntown. Brotier says, it is now called _Sert_ or _Sered_.\n\nTIGRIS, a great river bounding the country called Mesopotamia to the\neast, while the Euphrates incloses it to the west. Pliny gives an\naccount of the Tigris, in its rise and progress, till it sinks under\nground near Mount Taurus, and breaks forth again with a rapid current,\nfalling at last into the Persian Gulf. It divides into two channels at\nSeleucia.\n\nTMOLUS, a mountain of Lydia, commended for its vines, its saffron, its\nfragrant shrubs, and the fountain-head of the Pactolus. It appears\nfrom Tacitus, that there was a town of the same name, that stood near\nthe mountain.\n\nTOLBIACUM, a town of Gallia Belgica; now _Zulpich_, or _Zulch_, a\nsmall town in the duchy of Juliers.\n\nTRALLES, formerly a rich and populous city of Lydia, not far from the\nriver Meander. The ruins are still visible.\n\nTRAPEZUS, now _Trapezond_ or _Trebizond_, a city with a port in the\nLesser Asia, on the Euxine.\n\nTREVIRI, the people of _Treves_; an ancient city of the Lower Germany,\non the Moselle. It was made a Roman colony by Augustus, and became the\nmost famous city of Belgic Gaul. It is now the capital of an\nelectorate of the same name.\n\nTRIBOCI, a people of Belgica, originally Germans. They inhabited\n_Alsace_, and the diocese of _Strasbourg_.\n\nTRIMETUS, an island in the Adriatic; one of those which the ancients\ncalled _Insul\u00e6 Diomede\u00e6_; it still retains the name of _Tremiti_. It\nlies near the coast of the _Capitanate_, a province of the kingdom of\nNaples, on the Gulf of Venice.\n\nTRINOBANTES, a people of Britain, who inhabited _Middlesex_ and\n_Essex_.\n\nTUBANTES, an ancient people of Germany, about _Westphalia_.\n\nTUNGRI, a people of Belgia. Their city, according to C\u00e6sar, _Atuaca_;\nnow _Tongeren_, in the bishopric of Liege.\n\nTURONII, a people of ancient Gaul, inhabiting the east side of the\n_Ligeris_ (now the _Loire_). Hence the modern name of _Tours_.\n\nTUSCULUM, a town of Latium, to the north of _Alba_, about twelve miles\nfrom Rome. It gave the name of _Tusculanum_ to Cicero's villa, where\nthat great orator wrote his Tusculan Questions.\n\nTYRUS, an ancient city of Phoenicia, situate on an island so near the\ncontinent, that Alexander the Great formed it into a peninsula, by the\nmole or causey which he threw up during the siege. See Curtius, lib.\niv. s. 7.\n\n\nU.\n\nUBIAN ALTAR, an altar erected by the Ubii, on their removal to the\nwestern side of the Rhine, in honour of Augustus; but whether this was\nat a different place, or the town of the Ubii, is not known.\n\nUBII, a people originally of Germany, but transplanted by Augustus to\nthe west side of the Rhine, under the conduct of _Agrippa_. Their\ncapital was then for a long time called _Oppidum Ubiorum_, and, at\nlast, changed by the empress Agrippina to _Colonia Agrippinensis_; now\n_Cologne_, the capital of the electorate of that name.\n\nUMBRIA, a division of Italy, to the south-east of Etruria, between the\nAdriatic and the Nar.\n\nUNSINGIS, a river of Germany, running into the sea, near _Groningen_;\nnow the _Hunsing_.\n\nURBINUM, now _Urbino_, a city for ever famous for having given birth\nto Raphael, the celebrated painter.\n\nUSIPII, or USIPETES, a people of Germany, who, after their expulsion\nby the Catti, settled near _Paderborn_. See Manners of the Germans, s.\n32. and note a.\n\nUSPE, a town in the territory of the _Siraci_; now destroyed.\n\n\nV.\n\nVADA, a town on the left-hand side of the Nile, in the island of\nBatavia.\n\nVAHALIS, a branch of the Rhine; now the Waal. See Manners of the\nGermans, s. 29. and note a.\n\nVANGIONES, originally inhabitants of Germany, but afterwards settled\nin Gaul; now the diocese of _Worms_.\n\nVASCONES, a people who inhabited near the Pyrenees, occupying lands\nboth in Spain and Gaul.\n\nVELABRUM, a place at Rome, between Mount Aventine and Mount Palatine,\ngenerally under water, from the overflowing of the Tiber. Propertius\ndescribes it elegantly, lib. iv. eleg. x.\n\n     Qua Velabra suo stagnabant flumine, qu\u00e1que\n       Nauta per urbanas velificabat aquas.\n\nVELINUS, a lake in the country of the Sabines.\n\nVENETI, a people of Gallia Celtica, who inhabited what is now called\n_Vannes_, in the south of Britanny, and also a considerable tract on\nthe other side of the Alps, extending from the Po along the Adriatic,\nto the mouth of the _Ister_.\n\nVERCELL\u00c6, now _Vercelli_ in Piedmont.\n\nVERONA, now _Verona_, in the territory of Venice, on the _Adige_.\n\nVESONTIUM, the capital of the Sequani; now _Besan\u00e7on_, the chief city\nof Burgundy.\n\nVETERA, i.e. Vetera Castra. The Old Camp, which was a fortified\nstation for the legions; now _Santen_, in the duchy of Cleves, not far\nfrom the Rhine.\n\nVIA SALARIA, a road leading from the salt-works at Ostia to the\ncountry of the Sabines.\n\nVIADRUS, now the _Oder_, running through _Silesia_, _Brandenburg_,\n_Pomerania_, and discharging itself into the Baltic.\n\nVICETIA, now _Vicenza_, a town in the territory of Venice.\n\nVIENN\u00c6, a city of Narbonese Gaul; now _Vienne_, in _Dauphin\u00e9_.\n\nVINDELICI, a people inhabiting the country of _Vindelicia_, near the\nDanube, with the R\u00e6hti to the south; now part of _Bavaria_ and\n_Suabia_.\n\nVINDONISSA, now _Windisch_, in the canton of Bern, in Swisserland.\n\nVISURGIS, a river of Germany, made famous by the slaughter of Varus\nand his legions; now the _Weser_, running north between Westphalia and\nLower Saxony, into the German Sea.\n\nVOCETIUS MONS, a mountain of the Helvetii, thought to be the roughest\npart of Mount _Jura_, to which the Helvetii fled when defeated by\nC\u00e6cina. See Hist. i. s. 67.\n\nVOLSCI, a powerful people of ancient Latium, extending from _Antium_,\ntheir capital, to the _Upper Liris_, and the confines of _Campania_.\n\nVULSINII, or VOLSINII, a city of Etruria, the native place of Sejanus;\nnow _Bolseno_, or _Bolsenna_.\n\n\nZ.\n\nZEUGMA, a town on the _Euphrates_, famous for a bridge over the river.\nSee Pliny, lib, v. s. 24.","title":"A Dialogue Concerning Oratory, or the Causes of Corrupt Eloquence: The Works of Cornelius Tacitus, Volume 8 (of 8); With an Essay on His Life and Genius, Notes, Supplements","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":69191}