Johann Joachim Eschenburg.

Manual of classical literature : from the German of J.J. Eschenburg, with additions online

. (page 130 of 153)
Online LibraryJohann Joachim EschenburgManual of classical literature : from the German of J.J. Eschenburg, with additions → online text (page 130 of 153)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


at least with the Augustan age. The decline of liberty was unfavorable to the art.
The theatre for eloquence hitherto furnished by the assemblies of the people, was
chiefly closed. The debates of the senate degenerated, in a sad degree, into mere
eulogies of the reigning emperor. Even in the courts of justice, the pleader felt the
restraints of arbitrary power. The custom of reciting literary productions in meetings
of select friends, had been previously established. It now became common for orators
to declaim on imaginary subjects at such meetings, a practice calculated to cultivate a
fondness for sho%vy ornament rather than to foster the spirit of genuine eloquence.
Schools of rhetoric were still sustained, but they produced declaimers rather than great
orators, and contributed, it is said, to deprave the general taste and corrupt the lan-
guage (cf P. IV. § 128. 3. 5).

^ 400. The principal persons, who are commonly named among the speakers of this
oeriod, are Seneca. Quintilian, and Pliny the younger. But the two former may be
more properly considered as rhetoricians ; as their chief employment was that of
ieaching. The oratorical performances extant under their names are merely a sort
of school-exercises, of the class called declamations. Pliny was a pupil of Quintihan.
Before the age of 20, he appeared at the bar and soon acquired great distinction, con-
tipssedly surpassing every other speaker of the age. INIultitudes crowded to hear him ;
and he is said to have spoken sometimes seven hours without tiring any one in the
assembly but himself AH his orations are lost excepting the Panegyric (cf § 40.5).—
The only speaker who seems to have been in any decrree a rival to Pliny, was Taci-
tus, more generally known as an historian. While quite young, he obtained a high re-
putation by his eloquence at the bar. He continued to plead in the forum from the



I



^'^' ORATORY. 5S9

fc! years of Vespasian's reign until the accession of Trajan, shortly after which he
devoted himself wholly to the work of writing history. Pliny and Tacitus were inti-
;jnnVr/,'{ ; -^1 r '^ former, in one of his letters (£;,. ii. 11), gives an interesting ac-
count ot the trial of a provincial officer before the senate, in which Tacitus and hiniself
were employed to advocate the cause of the people of Africa against their proconsul
iviarius ^riscus ; Tacitus replied to his opponent Salvias Liberalis, a subtle and vehe-
ment orator, says Phny, most eloquently, and with that majesty which is an illustrious
11 ait in ins speaking {eloquent is sime, et, quod eximium oralioni ejus inest, aru.w,-).

J here is another name which ought to be here introduced, that of Cornelius Fronto
or rhronto, who flourished at the very close of the period under notice. He was a
pieceptor to Marcus Aur. Antomnus, and was honored, probably after his death, with
a statue erected by that emperor. He seems to have enjoved some distinction as an
advocate and orator, and is mentioned with commendation bv his contemporary Aulus
Grelluis i^oct. Att XIX. 8). He is said to have been the chief of a sect of orators or
rtietoricians cajed Frontomans, who wished to revive the simple style of eloquence
which prevailed in Rome before the time of Cicero.

The only remain, of the orator}- of this period now extant consist of the Panegj-ric of Pllny already named ; a number of paj-
iBges which Seneca has introduced into his declamations, fron, other speakers of comparatively liltle celebrity ; and a few fragmenU
of Fronto. The chief remains which we have of Fronto belong to the class of Letters (cf. § 443).

§ 401. In the last period of our glance, we find no orator of any distinguished emi-
nence. Apuleius, who was a pleader of some reputation, has left a singular specimen
ot his talents in his apology, delivered in self-defence on his own trial under the accusa-
tion ot having emploved magical arts to gain the affections of a rich widow whom he
had married. Of Calpurnius Flaccus, belonging to the same age (the latter part of the
^(l century), and called an orator, nothing is known except from a collection in his name
ot Declamations composed by different authors. In the latter part of the 3d century
lived Metius Falconius, or Voconius. who has received the title of Orator, and seems
to tiave been a speaker of considerable ability and address. An oration uttered by him
in the senate on the election of Tacitus as emperor, is preserved.— After this orator
It we may allow him the appellation, the history of Latin oratory furnishes nothing im
portant to be noticed, except the performances of the later Panegyrists.

The oration of Falconius is given by Vopiscus (^ 542. 6) in his Life of Tacitus ; also found in Chr. Thec^h. (Gctll.) Schwartz,

Miscellanea politioris humanitatis. Norimb. 1721. 4. The work of Calpurnius is entitled, E:tcerpt^ rhetarum min^m decla-

tnahones ; and conlains fifly-one pieces from ten orators ; it was first published with the minor declamatimu of Quintilian, by P.
PMceu, (ci-eJ § 415. 4) ; and is found in P. SunnaniVs ed. of Quintilian, and in others.-The apology of Apuleius is included in
the editions of his works (cf. § 471. 4).

f& Inr^' W ^^^ Panegyrists just mentioned, a slight account will be siven below
(v> 4Uo). Here we will merely advert to the nature and occasions of panegyrical orato-
ry. It was the same with what the Greeks called demonstrative ^iiniziKriKo;), a term
wmcti was applied to discourses that were designed to be delivered before assemblies
either ot triends specially invited for the purpose of literary recitals and hearintrs {iKpoa.
ctLi), or ot people promiscuously gathered for entertainment. The subjects were often
imagmary, and seldom could the subject or the occasion highlv excite the passions or
emotions. In order to remedy this deficiency and awaken admiration in the hearers,
It was natural to resort to rhetorical ornaments and a studied and artificial stvle.— Such
declamations were pronounced before large assemblies, sometimes before the crowds
collected at those public games which brought together all the Greeks ; and it is from
this circumstance, that they seem first to have received the name oi pane'r^rics, a terra
derived trom nav and dyoph. As the orators, with the desire of pleasing the multitude,
very Irequently took for their theme the praise of some god, hero, or city, the term
panegync gradually came to be synonymous with eulogy. Hence Cicero in specifvin<T
this kind of oratory designates it by the Latin word laudatio.

Among the Romans this kind does not appear to have been very much distinguished
Detore the time of the emperors. It is worthy of remark, howeVer, that the custom
ot delivering funera eulogies in the Forum must have presented many fine occasions
tor its exercise. There can be no doubt, that Cicero would have excelled in any at-
tempt in panegyric ; indeed, it has been with much propriety remarked that bis oration

1 *"|. ,^^^"'''an law is a finished masterpiece of demonstrative eloquence, beino- but a
splendid panegync on Pompey. The oration for the poet Archias is of a similar cast.
Under the emperors, as has been before observed, the loss of freedom occasioned the
dec ine ot genume eloquence. But the studv of rhetoric and the practice of speakincr
could not he renounced ; the schools were continued, and the declamations, which had
m earlier times usually been upon such subjects as might be brought into the actual
biisiness ol the forum or the senate, were now more frequently on imaginary themes.
1 his would naturally lead to the panegyrical style and manner of the Greeks. How
soon the praise of some emperor was made a formal theme is not knoun; perhaps the
panegyric on Trajan by PHny was the first of the kind. There can be little doubt thai
such themes were frequently taken ; although we have no specimens from the time of
I hny down to the authors of the twelve panegyrics, a space of nearly two centuries

o L)



590 HISTORY OF ROMAN LITERATURE.

^ 403. We give here a few additional references on the general subject.

On Roman oratory, SchW, Lill. Rom. i. 166. ii. 65, 395.— Duniop, Hist. Rom. Lit. ii. 109. ed. Phil. 1827.— RoJHn, Polite Learn,
ing, ch. iii. art. 2.—Ck. ^ug. Clodius, De Pr^idiis Roman. Eloquentise, in his Dissertat. Lips. 1787. S.—Burigny, L'eloquence

Chez les Romains, Mem. MaA. Imcr. xxxvi. 3^1.— Cicero De Claris oratoribus (cf. § ii3).—BiUtr, Gesch. Rftm. Ijt. p. 478. On

panegyrical oraiory, /. G. IValch, Diss, de orat. panegyr. veter. Jen. 1721. 4.

§ 404. Marcus Tullm.t Cicero was the most distinguished of the Roman orators.
He studied closely the Grecian models, and combined in himself the strength of De-
mosthenes, tlie copiousness of Plato and the suavity of Isocrates. He was born at
Arpinum. B. C. 106, and was put to death B. C. 43.— The poet Archias was his first
teacher; he was instructed in oratory by Apollonius Molo of Rhodes ; he also visited
Athens. After his return, he was appointed Quaestor, and at last Consul; in the lat-
ter office he rendered the stale the greatest service by suppressing the conspin
this sort of flattery ; since all the eulogies of the collection here described were com-
posed by GaUic orators. These performances are but poor imitations of the panegyric
of Phny. They contain revolting flatteries and frigid declamation mingled with ex-
aggerations and subtleties, and are wanting in genius, delicacy, and regard to truth.
Bui, although they can scarcely fail to produce disgust in the reader, they are highly
valuable as historic monuments illustrating the customs and spirit of the times." Nor
are they utterly worthless in rhetorical chawicter. "There is considerable talent m
these discourses^, with very fine thoughts, happy turns, lively descriptions, and just
commendations."

t The quotation is from SchSIl, Lift. Rom. iii. 191. ^From Rollin, Polite Learning, as cited § 412. Cf. C. G. Heyne, Cen-

sura duodeclm Panegyricorum veleruin. Gott. 1S05. fo!. ; also in his Optisc. Acadtm. p. 80 vol. vi.

2. Claudius Mamertinus was the atithor of two of the discourses' ; one of Ihem, eiiloeizing the
emperor Ma.xiinian. was pronounced at Treves, on the 20Ui of April, A D. 292, at a c^-lehration
of the founding of Rome ; the other, perhaps of an earlier date, was pronounced on the birth-
day of Maxiniian. Another of the panegyrics, delivered about 70 years later, is ascribed to a
Claudius Mauiertinus, snppo.«ed to he a son of the former.— Eumevius was a professor of rheto-
ric in the school of Auifustodununi, where he enjoyed a very liberal stipend from the emperor
Constantius Chlorus, whom he had previously served as secretary. Four panegyrics are from
him ; the last of them was delivered at Treves, A. D. 311, to Constantine, by appointment of the
citizens of Aueustodnnum, as an address of thanks for favors bestowed on them by that empe-
ror.— Aa:ar!«s was a professor at Burdisala (cf J 3S5) ; his panegyric was pronounced at Rome,
A. D. 321, and eulogizes Constantine th^ Great. — l.atiiius Pacatus Dr^pavius, author of another
of the Discourses, was a professor of the same place, who was sent to Rome A. D. 391, to con-
gratulate the emperor Theodosius. Optatiavus Porphyrius (cf $ 341) is included by Fuhrmatmo
among the authors of what are called the twelve Panegyrics; and also Ausunius, among whose
works is found a eulogy in prose on the emperor Gratian.

1 Respecting the authors, see Scholl, iii. 1S8, ss.—Fatrriciuf, BIbl. I^t. ii. 424. 2 Klein. Handbuch, p- 745, as cited § 7. 8.

3. Editions.— The best, by C. G. Schwartz, completed by IV. Jager (Jsgeriu). Norimb. 1779. 2 vols. 8. with an Appendix
(.Ippaidix oljstrvatimum, kc.) Norimb. 1790. 8.— In ralfy's \'3.t. k Dclph. Classics, No. 120-124.— The Pniiceps, by /Vane.
PiUeolanus, without name of place, 1476. 4. containing the Pinegyric of Pliny and devtn others. Those now commonly called
the twelve do not include Pliny's.— Cf Harles, Brev. Not. p. 40, 413. Fahricivs, Bibl. Lat. ii. 428.

4. Several Panegyrics were composed by Symmachvs, an orator of some renown in his times,
whose letters will be noticed below (5 444). Fragments of eieht orations by him were drawn
by Mai from the palimpsest manuscript of Pronto (cf. $ 443); three of them are imperial panegy-
rics (oratimies Augustales).

Mai published the same under the title Q. Aur. Symmachi octo orationum partes, &c Mil. 1815. 8. with a specimen of th«
chirography of the MS.



III. — Rhetoricians.



*} 407 u. It IS worthy of remark, that the Roman Rhetoricians had reference chiefly
to the art of the orator, and not of the prose writer in general. The beauties of style



p. V. RHETORIC. 593

in other species of composition, except orations properly so called, were investigated
by the grammarians and taught both orally and by written works.

§ 408. It has already been mentioned, that the attention of the young Romans was
first specially drawn to the art of speaking as such, by the Greek rhetoricians who
came to Rome with the embassy of Carneades, about B. C. 155. Lectures on rheto-
ric and grammar had been given somewhat earlier by one Crates, who had come to
Rome in the suite of Attalus an ambassador from Eumenes 2d, king of Pergamus.
Crates, being detained by tbe breaking of a leg, employed himself for amusement in
giving lectures {aKpoaaeXi) which attracted considerable attention. But much greater
interest seems to have been awakened by the embassy from Athens. The three men
(Carneades, Diogenes, and Critolaus) who composed this embassy^, were teachers of
rhetoric and philosophy. They introduced among the Romans schools, in which in-
struction in rhetoric was given after the manner taught in the Greek books. Some
of the Roman Fathers apprehended danger to the state from the new schools, and
at length the following edict against the rhetoricians^ was given by the Censors :
" Whereas we have been informed that certain men who call themselves Latin rheto-
ricians have instituted a new kind of learning, and opened schools in which young men
trifle away their time day after day ; we, judging this innovation to be inconsistent with
the purpose for which our ancestors established schools, contrary to ancient custom,
and injurious to our youth, do hereby warn both those who keep these schools and
those who frequent them, that they are herein acting contrary to our pleasure."

1 Cf. p. IV. § 120. 2 Cf. Suelonhis, De Rhetoribus.

•^i 409. But the art of speaking was so highly valued at Rome, that instruction in
rhetoric could not be wholly interdicted. Schools were opened, as has been mention-
ed {% 395), by Roman freedmen, when the Grecian masters were excluded. The ear-
liest of this description, in which rhetoric was taught in the Latin language, is said to
have been commenced about B. C. 90, by L. Ploiius Gallus, who was afterwards the
teacher of Cicero. L. Otacilius Pilitus is mentioned as another noted teacher. The-
oretical instruction in rhetoric became more and more valuable in the general estima-
tion, and the employment of rhetorician, it is stated, became highly Iflcrative.

•f* 410. The earliest works which we have in Latin, belonging strictly to the class
here denominated rhetorical, are from the pen of Cicero ; who, although his profes-
sional employment was that of the orator and not the rhetorician, devoted himself,
with the greatest assiduity, to study and explain everything belonging to the theory of
his art. The merit of his several treatises (cf. 'i 413) is universally acknowledged;
they are the only rhetorical works that we can refer properly to the Augustan age. —
The next important name in this department is that of Marcus Seneca, the father of
the philosopher. He was employed at Rome as an actual teacher of rhetoric and ora-
tory, and left some works which have come down to us (cf § 414). We refer them to
the 4th period of our division, although Seneca was born many years before the death
of Augustus, because they were chiefly written in the author's old age. M. Porcius
Latro was a contemporary and friend of Seneca, and also a professed rhetorician at
Rome ; two or three declamations ascribed to him (cf S> 414. 3) are extant. — Ruiilius
Lupus is another rhetorical writer belonging probably to the same age, although by
some assigned to a later time ; we have from him a treatise on figures (cf. % 414. 4).

% 411. The schools of rhetoric were sustained in the period following the time of
Augustus, although genuine eloquence declined. Many teachers of rhetoric are men-
tioned ; as Hermagoras, and Gabinianus, celebrated both at Rome and in Gaul ; Vir-
ginins Rufus, who wrote a treatise on rhetoric ; and others, whose names it is of little
importance to repeat. They are all entirely eclipsed by Quintilian, whose reputation
was deservedly very high as a living teacher, and whose treatise on the art of the ora-
tor (cf. § 415) has secured him lasting honor.

After Quintilian, we find no author of any eminence in th>s branch of literature. —
In our last period, subsequent to the Antonines, there were still numerous teachers of
rhetoric, both at Rome and elsewhere (cf P. TV. <5> 128. 5) ; but if they produced any-
thing of great importance, it is buried in oblivion. From several of them, however,
something is preserved.

We barely note tbe following remains of rhetoricians belonging to the latest period. Cnrius
Fortuva'ianus, about A I). *240 ; a work entitled v-Srs rhetorica scholica, in 3 books, by question
and answer; found in Pithccii/', as cited $ 412. — Jiquila Rnmanus, about A. D. 260; a Latin trans-
lation of the Greek treatise of Nnmeniiis (cf $ 112) Defa-uris sententiarum. Sec. found in Riihn-
ken's ed. of R. Lupus, cited } 41 1. 4.— Julius Kufininnus, Tibout A. D. 330 ; a continuation of the
work of Aquila ; also given in Ruhnken's edition just named. — F'ir.torin us, -a. lencher of rhetoric
at Rotnp, driven from his school on account of his being a Christian, by Julian (cf. P. IV. $ 128.
2), A. D. 362; a comnientarv (expnsitin) on Cicero's treatise de invtntione ; found in the collection
of Pithaus, above cited.— Cf. Scholl, Litt. Rom. iii. 197.

"5> 412. We insert the following for references on the subject of the Roman rhetori
cians.

Franc. Piihczus, Antiqui rhetores Latini. Par. 1594. i.—CIawHwi Capperrniiv*, Antiqui Rhetores Latini. Argent. 1756. 4. an

iniprovel e.t. of the preceding ; a col'ection containing the liier rhetoricians men:ione(i almve (i 411) and several others. F. A,

Hltdt-i/wg, Praecepta rhetorica. Brunsw. 1786. S. (cf. § 1 1^).—/ CA. Theoph. Emesti, Lexicou lechnologiae LalinoruQi rhetorical

75 3d3



504 HISTORY OF ROMAN LITERATURE.

Lpz. 1797. 8. con'ainin? pxplanptions of tlie teclinical language of the Latin Rhetoricians and Grammarians.— Cf. also Sulzer,
A\\%. Theorif, &c., iv. iT.—Rollin, Polite Learnini;, ch. iv. art. 2 ; in his Anc. History, p. 543-554. vol. 2d. ed. N. York, 1S36 —
Siutmiiiis, De Claris rhetoribus (cf. § 537. 2) —Quinlilian, lust. Oral. lib. ii. respecting the Roman schools of Rhetoric— /uucnal
S.il. vii. illustrating the state of learning, and particularly the rhetorical schools in the tinie of Domitian.— /. Harris, Philological
Ii'.quiries. Lond. 17SI 3 vols. 8. — <-G. D. Koler, Vergleichung d. alten und neuen Redekunst. Lemg. 1783. 8. — J. IMlebrand,
.^slhetica literaria antiqua Classica. Mngunt. 1828. 8.

§ 413. 31. T. Cicero, already named as a practical orator ($ 404), was likewise a
most thorough, copious, and instructive writer on his art. The following are included
in his rhetorical works : 1. Elietorica, ad Herennium, in 4 books, which is now thought
to he the work of another rhetorician, perhaps of Gnipho, one of Cicero's teachers;
2. De inventione rhetorica, in 2 books, a work said to have been written in his 18th
year in 4 books, of which only 2 remain ; 3. De Oratore, in 3 books, addressed to his
broiher, in the form of a dialogue ; 4. Brutus, or De Claris Oratoribus, being an ac-
count of the most distinguished orators ; 5, Orator, an ideal picture of a complete
speaker, addressed to M. Brutus ; 6. Topira, or the doctrine of evidence, addressed to
the lawyer Trebatius ; 7. De partitione rhetorica, a dialogue between himself and son
on rhetorical analysis and division ; 8. De optimo genere oratontm, designed as a pre-
face to his translation of the rival orations of vEschines and Demosthenes in the case
of Ctesiphon (cf. ^ 106. 3. "S> 107. 2). The most valuable of these works are the 3d,
4th, and 5th.

1. Various conjectures have been made by the learned respecting the real author of the books
addressed to Ilerenvius. Thai which ascribes the work to Cicero's master, Gnipho, was first
advanced by Scbiiiz, one of lh'» best editors of Cicero. — The treatise de claris oratnribus is a
most valuable iielp in learning the history of Roman eloquence. — In the book entitled I'upica,
Cicero treats of the method of finding proper arguments. The sources from which arguments
maybe drawn are called loci communes, cummos places. The work is based on that of Aris-
totle by the same title.

Cf. /. Q. Adams, Lectures on Oratory. Cambr. ISIO. 2 vols. 8.— For a further notice of the several works above named, sea
Dutdop, Hist. Rom. Lit. ii. 194, ss—Sdhr, Gesch. Rom. Lit. p. 501, ss.

2. Editions.— R hetorical Works collectively, the best ; C. G. Schdtz. Lpz. 1804-8. 3 vols. 8.—Princep>, by jJZrftM
(the. elder). Ven. 1514. 8.— R het. ad Herennium, best ; P. BHrmann ( jun.). Leyd. 1761. 8.— D e O r a t o r e, best ;
G. Ch. Hnrles (first published 1776 ; but a new impr. el. just before his death). Lpz. 1816. 8. with notes of Z. Pearce.— 0. H.
MUUer. l.pz. 1819. ?. pronounced by Dibdin (IS27) the best extant —Z. /. Billabtch. Hann. I82S. 8. " Zum Gebrauch for
Schulen, mit den nothwendigsten Worlund Ssch-Erl.iuterungen." — B r u t u s (de Claris oratoribus), /. C/l G. JVeliel. Hal.
1793. 8. and Brunsw. 1796. S.—F. Ellcndt. Reiiomnnf. lS-2.5. S. with notes of Ernesti and others: and a brief history of Roman
c\T7i\<ry.— Charles Beck. Canib. 1837. " well worthy of its author, one of the most accurate Latin acliolars in our country." BiU,
Rep. No. xxviii. p. 498.— ritor,J. G. H. Richler. Hal. 1816. 8 — /. C. Ortllius, Turici, 1831. 8. with Brutus and Topica.—
T o p i c a, /. Ch. F. Wetzel, M. T. Cic. opera rhetor, minora, impr'd 6A. Lpz. 1823. 8. containing the Witturica ad Herenniumt
de htven'ione, rfe jiartilione, and de optimo genere oratorum.

X Translations— German.— f. C. IVulff, De oralore. Alton. 1801.—/. L. H. Woller, Brutus. Hamb. 1787. 8. French.—

Abbe Cfi/in, De oratore, \vith the Utjn. Par. IS05. 12.— Ce VilUfort, Brutus. Par. 1726. 12. English.— fT. Guthrie, De Ora-
lore. Loud. 1742. 8. often repr.— £. Junes, Brutus. 1776. 8.

§ 414. JSLircus AnncBus Seneca, of Corduba in Spain, father of Seneca the poet (cf.
^ 374) and philosopher (cf. ^ 469), was a celebrated rhetorician under Augustus and
Tiberius. He wrote a work entitled Cont rover sice, or civil processes, or law-suits, in
10 books, of which we have only a part ; viz. the 1st, 2d, 7th, 9th, and lOth ; and these
not in a perfect state. It was a sort of Chrestomathy, and is properly ranked in the
class of rhetorical works, as it contains a review and comparison of Greek and Roman
orators with regard to invention, application, and style. We have also another work
by him, entitled Siiasoricp, consisting of declamations and discourses on imaginary
themes. It is an appendix to the former work, and also incomplete. The style in
both is concise, sometimes even to constraint.

1. Seneca was born B. C. 58, and died A. D. 32. Under Augustus, he lived at
Rome and taught rhetoric. At the age of 52, he returned to his native country, and
married Helvia, a woman of distingfuished beauty and talents. — By her he had three
sons ; Lucius, the philosopher ; Mela, father of the poet Lucan ; and Novatvs, who
afterwards took the name of Junius Gullio, and was the Gallio mentioned in the

history of Paul {Acts xviii. 12.) In both the works of Seneca, we find quesiions

which were discussed in the rhetorical schools for the sake of exercising the talents of
the speakers.

SchSU. Lilt. Rom. ii. 395.— SnAr, Gesch. Rom. Lit. p. 551.

2. Editions.— Both works are commonly given in the editions of his son L. Ann. Seneca (cf. § 469. 4). Separately, M. Jinn. Se-
neca rhel. Opera. Eip. 1783. 8. Repr. Bip. 1810. 8. The Controcersia was first printed, Ven, 1490. The Suajoria added, Ven.
1492. fol. Cf. Harles, Brev. Not. p. 320.



Online LibraryJohann Joachim EschenburgManual of classical literature : from the German of J.J. Eschenburg, with additions → online text (page 130 of 153)