Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology (1870) - Volume 1.djvu/743

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

orators being excluded. Prefixed, are some short, but graphic sketches, of the most renowned Grecian models; the whole discourse being interspersed with clever observations on the speculative principles of the art, and many important historical details connected with the public life and services of the individuals enumerated. Great taste and discrimination are displayed in pointing out the characteristic merits, and exposing the defects, of the various styles of composition reviewed in turn, and the work is most valuable as a contribution to the history of literature. But, from the desire to render it absolutely complete, and, at the same time, to confine it within moderate limits, the author is compelled to hurry from one individual to another, without dwelling upon any for a sufficient period to leave a distinct impression on the mind of the reader; and, while we complain of the space occupied by a mere catalogue of uninteresting names, by which we are wearied, we regret that our curiosity should have been excited, without being gratified, in regard to many of the shining lights which shed such a lustre over the last century of the commonwealth.

The Brutus was composed next in order, although at a long interval, after the De Republica, at a period when Caesar was already master of the state, it was written before the Cato, the Cato itself coming immediately before the Orator, a combination of circumstances which fixes it down to the year в. с. 46. (Brut. 1, 2, 5, 6, Orat. 7, de Divin. ii. 1.)

The Brutus was unknown until the discovery of the Codex Laudensis described above. Hence all the MSS. being confessedly derived from this source do not admit of being divided into families, although the text might probably be improved if the transcripts existing in various European libraries were more carefully examined and compared.

The Editio Princeps of the Brutus was that printed at Rome, by Sweynheym and Pannartz, 1469, 4to., in the same volume with the De Oratore and the Orator. The best edition is that by Ellendt, with very copious and useful prolegomena, Königsberg, 1826, 8vo., to which we may add an useful school edition by Billerbeck, Hannover, 1828.

5. Ad M. Brutum Orator.

Cicero having been frequently requested by M. Brutus to explain his views with regard to what constituted a faultless orator, this term being understood to denote a public speaker in the senate or in the forum, but to exclude the eloquence displayed by philosophers in their discourses, and by poets and historians in their writings, endeavours in the present essay to perform the task imposed on him. We must not, therefore, expect to find here a series of precepts, the result of observation and induction, capable of being readily applied in practice, or a description of anything actually existing in nature, but rather a fancy picture, in which the artist represents an object of ideal beauty, such as would spring from the union of all the prominent characteristic excellences of the most gifted individuals, fused together and concentrated into one harmonious whole.

He first points out that perfection must consist in absolute propriety of expression, and that this could be obtained only by occasional judicious transitions from one style to another, by assuming, according to the nature of the subject, at one time a plain, familiar, unpretending tone; by rising at another into lofty, impassioned, and highly ornamented declamation; and by observing in general a graceful medium between the two extremes; by ascending, as the Greeks expressed it, from the ἰσχνόν to the ἀδρόν, and falling back from the ἀδρόν to the μέσον, — instead of adhering steadfastly, after the fashion of most great orators, to one particular form. He next passes on to combat an error very prevalent among his countrymen, who, admitting that Athenian eloquence was the purest model for imitation, imagined that its essence consisted in avoiding with scrupulous care all copious, flowing, decorated periods, and in expressing every idea in highly polished, terse, epigrammatic sentences — a system which, however interesting as an effort of intellect, must necessarily produce results which will fall dull and cold upon the ear of an ordinary listener, and, if carried out to its full extent, degenerate into offensive mannerism. After dwelling upon these dangers and insisting upon the folly of neglecting the practice of Aeschines and Demosthenes and setting up such a standard as Thucydides, Cicero proceeds to shew that the orator must direct his chief attention to three points, which in fact comprehend the soul of the art, the what, the where, and the how ; the matter of his speech, the arrangement of that matter, the expression and enunciation of that matter each of which is in turn examined and discussed. The perfect orator being defined to be one who clearly demonstrates to his hearers the truth of the position he maintains, delights them by the beauty and fitness of his language, and wins them over to his cause (" is, qui in foro, causisque civilibus, ita dicet, ut probet, ut delectet, ut flectat"), we are led to consider the means by which these ends are reached. The groundwork and foundation of the whole is true wisdom, but true wisdom can be gained only by the union of all the highest natural endowments with a knowledge of philosophy and all the chief departments of literature and science; and thus Cicero brings us round to the conclusion, which is in fact the pervading idea of this and the two preceding works, that he who would be a perfect orator must be a perfect man. What follows (from c. 40 to the end) is devoted to a dissertation on the harmonious arrangement of words and the importance of rhythmical cadence in prose composition--a curious topic, which attracted much attention in ancient times, as may be seen from the elaborately minute dulness of Dionysius of Halicarnassus, but possesses comparatively little interest for the modern reader.

The Orator was composed about the beginning of в. с. 45, having been undertaken immediately after the completion of the Cato. Cicero declares, that he was willing to stake his reputation for knowledge and taste in his own art upon the merits of this work: " Mihi quidem sic persuadeo, me quidquid habuerim judicii de dicendo in illum librum contulisse ;" and every one must be charmed by the faultless purity of the diction, the dexterity manifested in the choice of appropriate phraseology, and the sonorous flow with which the periods roll gracefully onwards. There is now and then perhaps a little difficulty in tracing the connexion of the different divisions; and while some of the most weighty themes are touched upon very slightly, disproportionate space is assigned to the remarks upon the music of prose; but this probably arose