summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/35751-h/35751-h.html
blob: 35b77cc28a54317b8b97ab1855626ee0b7f64eb5 (plain) 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
1141
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
1153
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168
1169
1170
1171
1172
1173
1174
1175
1176
1177
1178
1179
1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
1186
1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
1192
1193
1194
1195
1196
1197
1198
1199
1200
1201
1202
1203
1204
1205
1206
1207
1208
1209
1210
1211
1212
1213
1214
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
1221
1222
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
1228
1229
1230
1231
1232
1233
1234
1235
1236
1237
1238
1239
1240
1241
1242
1243
1244
1245
1246
1247
1248
1249
1250
1251
1252
1253
1254
1255
1256
1257
1258
1259
1260
1261
1262
1263
1264
1265
1266
1267
1268
1269
1270
1271
1272
1273
1274
1275
1276
1277
1278
1279
1280
1281
1282
1283
1284
1285
1286
1287
1288
1289
1290
1291
1292
1293
1294
1295
1296
1297
1298
1299
1300
1301
1302
1303
1304
1305
1306
1307
1308
1309
1310
1311
1312
1313
1314
1315
1316
1317
1318
1319
1320
1321
1322
1323
1324
1325
1326
1327
1328
1329
1330
1331
1332
1333
1334
1335
1336
1337
1338
1339
1340
1341
1342
1343
1344
1345
1346
1347
1348
1349
1350
1351
1352
1353
1354
1355
1356
1357
1358
1359
1360
1361
1362
1363
1364
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1372
1373
1374
1375
1376
1377
1378
1379
1380
1381
1382
1383
1384
1385
1386
1387
1388
1389
1390
1391
1392
1393
1394
1395
1396
1397
1398
1399
1400
1401
1402
1403
1404
1405
1406
1407
1408
1409
1410
1411
1412
1413
1414
1415
1416
1417
1418
1419
1420
1421
1422
1423
1424
1425
1426
1427
1428
1429
1430
1431
1432
1433
1434
1435
1436
1437
1438
1439
1440
1441
1442
1443
1444
1445
1446
1447
1448
1449
1450
1451
1452
1453
1454
1455
1456
1457
1458
1459
1460
1461
1462
1463
1464
1465
1466
1467
1468
1469
1470
1471
1472
1473
1474
1475
1476
1477
1478
1479
1480
1481
1482
1483
1484
1485
1486
1487
1488
1489
1490
1491
1492
1493
1494
1495
1496
1497
1498
1499
1500
1501
1502
1503
1504
1505
1506
1507
1508
1509
1510
1511
1512
1513
1514
1515
1516
1517
1518
1519
1520
1521
1522
1523
1524
1525
1526
1527
1528
1529
1530
1531
1532
1533
1534
1535
1536
1537
1538
1539
1540
1541
1542
1543
1544
1545
1546
1547
1548
1549
1550
1551
1552
1553
1554
1555
1556
1557
1558
1559
1560
1561
1562
1563
1564
1565
1566
1567
1568
1569
1570
1571
1572
1573
1574
1575
1576
1577
1578
1579
1580
1581
1582
1583
1584
1585
1586
1587
1588
1589
1590
1591
1592
1593
1594
1595
1596
1597
1598
1599
1600
1601
1602
1603
1604
1605
1606
1607
1608
1609
1610
1611
1612
1613
1614
1615
1616
1617
1618
1619
1620
1621
1622
1623
1624
1625
1626
1627
1628
1629
1630
1631
1632
1633
1634
1635
1636
1637
1638
1639
1640
1641
1642
1643
1644
1645
1646
1647
1648
1649
1650
1651
1652
1653
1654
1655
1656
1657
1658
1659
1660
1661
1662
1663
1664
1665
1666
1667
1668
1669
1670
1671
1672
1673
1674
1675
1676
1677
1678
1679
1680
1681
1682
1683
1684
1685
1686
1687
1688
1689
1690
1691
1692
1693
1694
1695
1696
1697
1698
1699
1700
1701
1702
1703
1704
1705
1706
1707
1708
1709
1710
1711
1712
1713
1714
1715
1716
1717
1718
1719
1720
1721
1722
1723
1724
1725
1726
1727
1728
1729
1730
1731
1732
1733
1734
1735
1736
1737
1738
1739
1740
1741
1742
1743
1744
1745
1746
1747
1748
1749
1750
1751
1752
1753
1754
1755
1756
1757
1758
1759
1760
1761
1762
1763
1764
1765
1766
1767
1768
1769
1770
1771
1772
1773
1774
1775
1776
1777
1778
1779
1780
1781
1782
1783
1784
1785
1786
1787
1788
1789
1790
1791
1792
1793
1794
1795
1796
1797
1798
1799
1800
1801
1802
1803
1804
1805
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
1811
1812
1813
1814
1815
1816
1817
1818
1819
1820
1821
1822
1823
1824
1825
1826
1827
1828
1829
1830
1831
1832
1833
1834
1835
1836
1837
1838
1839
1840
1841
1842
1843
1844
1845
1846
1847
1848
1849
1850
1851
1852
1853
1854
1855
1856
1857
1858
1859
1860
1861
1862
1863
1864
1865
1866
1867
1868
1869
1870
1871
1872
1873
1874
1875
1876
1877
1878
1879
1880
1881
1882
1883
1884
1885
1886
1887
1888
1889
1890
1891
1892
1893
1894
1895
1896
1897
1898
1899
1900
1901
1902
1903
1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911
1912
1913
1914
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
2051
2052
2053
2054
2055
2056
2057
2058
2059
2060
2061
2062
2063
2064
2065
2066
2067
2068
2069
2070
2071
2072
2073
2074
2075
2076
2077
2078
2079
2080
2081
2082
2083
2084
2085
2086
2087
2088
2089
2090
2091
2092
2093
2094
2095
2096
2097
2098
2099
2100
2101
2102
2103
2104
2105
2106
2107
2108
2109
2110
2111
2112
2113
2114
2115
2116
2117
2118
2119
2120
2121
2122
2123
2124
2125
2126
2127
2128
2129
2130
2131
2132
2133
2134
2135
2136
2137
2138
2139
2140
2141
2142
2143
2144
2145
2146
2147
2148
2149
2150
2151
2152
2153
2154
2155
2156
2157
2158
2159
2160
2161
2162
2163
2164
2165
2166
2167
2168
2169
2170
2171
2172
2173
2174
2175
2176
2177
2178
2179
2180
2181
2182
2183
2184
2185
2186
2187
2188
2189
2190
2191
2192
2193
2194
2195
2196
2197
2198
2199
2200
2201
2202
2203
2204
2205
2206
2207
2208
2209
2210
2211
2212
2213
2214
2215
2216
2217
2218
2219
2220
2221
2222
2223
2224
2225
2226
2227
2228
2229
2230
2231
2232
2233
2234
2235
2236
2237
2238
2239
2240
2241
2242
2243
2244
2245
2246
2247
2248
2249
2250
2251
2252
2253
2254
2255
2256
2257
2258
2259
2260
2261
2262
2263
2264
2265
2266
2267
2268
2269
2270
2271
2272
2273
2274
2275
2276
2277
2278
2279
2280
2281
2282
2283
2284
2285
2286
2287
2288
2289
2290
2291
2292
2293
2294
2295
2296
2297
2298
2299
2300
2301
2302
2303
2304
2305
2306
2307
2308
2309
2310
2311
2312
2313
2314
2315
2316
2317
2318
2319
2320
2321
2322
2323
2324
2325
2326
2327
2328
2329
2330
2331
2332
2333
2334
2335
2336
2337
2338
2339
2340
2341
2342
2343
2344
2345
2346
2347
2348
2349
2350
2351
2352
2353
2354
2355
2356
2357
2358
2359
2360
2361
2362
2363
2364
2365
2366
2367
2368
2369
2370
2371
2372
2373
2374
2375
2376
2377
2378
2379
2380
2381
2382
2383
2384
2385
2386
2387
2388
2389
2390
2391
2392
2393
2394
2395
2396
2397
2398
2399
2400
2401
2402
2403
2404
2405
2406
2407
2408
2409
2410
2411
2412
2413
2414
2415
2416
2417
2418
2419
2420
2421
2422
2423
2424
2425
2426
2427
2428
2429
2430
2431
2432
2433
2434
2435
2436
2437
2438
2439
2440
2441
2442
2443
2444
2445
2446
2447
2448
2449
2450
2451
2452
2453
2454
2455
2456
2457
2458
2459
2460
2461
2462
2463
2464
2465
2466
2467
2468
2469
2470
2471
2472
2473
2474
2475
2476
2477
2478
2479
2480
2481
2482
2483
2484
2485
2486
2487
2488
2489
2490
2491
2492
2493
2494
2495
2496
2497
2498
2499
2500
2501
2502
2503
2504
2505
2506
2507
2508
2509
2510
2511
2512
2513
2514
2515
2516
2517
2518
2519
2520
2521
2522
2523
2524
2525
2526
2527
2528
2529
2530
2531
2532
2533
2534
2535
2536
2537
2538
2539
2540
2541
2542
2543
2544
2545
2546
2547
2548
2549
2550
2551
2552
2553
2554
2555
2556
2557
2558
2559
2560
2561
2562
2563
2564
2565
2566
2567
2568
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
2574
2575
2576
2577
2578
2579
2580
2581
2582
2583
2584
2585
2586
2587
2588
2589
2590
2591
2592
2593
2594
2595
2596
2597
2598
2599
2600
2601
2602
2603
2604
2605
2606
2607
2608
2609
2610
2611
2612
2613
2614
2615
2616
2617
2618
2619
2620
2621
2622
2623
2624
2625
2626
2627
2628
2629
2630
2631
2632
2633
2634
2635
2636
2637
2638
2639
2640
2641
2642
2643
2644
2645
2646
2647
2648
2649
2650
2651
2652
2653
2654
2655
2656
2657
2658
2659
2660
2661
2662
2663
2664
2665
2666
2667
2668
2669
2670
2671
2672
2673
2674
2675
2676
2677
2678
2679
2680
2681
2682
2683
2684
2685
2686
2687
2688
2689
2690
2691
2692
2693
2694
2695
2696
2697
2698
2699
2700
2701
2702
2703
2704
2705
2706
2707
2708
2709
2710
2711
2712
2713
2714
2715
2716
2717
2718
2719
2720
2721
2722
2723
2724
2725
2726
2727
2728
2729
2730
2731
2732
2733
2734
2735
2736
2737
2738
2739
2740
2741
2742
2743
2744
2745
2746
2747
2748
2749
2750
2751
2752
2753
2754
2755
2756
2757
2758
2759
2760
2761
2762
2763
2764
2765
2766
2767
2768
2769
2770
2771
2772
2773
2774
2775
2776
2777
2778
2779
2780
2781
2782
2783
2784
2785
2786
2787
2788
2789
2790
2791
2792
2793
2794
2795
2796
2797
2798
2799
2800
2801
2802
2803
2804
2805
2806
2807
2808
2809
2810
2811
2812
2813
2814
2815
2816
2817
2818
2819
2820
2821
2822
2823
2824
2825
2826
2827
2828
2829
2830
2831
2832
2833
2834
2835
2836
2837
2838
2839
2840
2841
2842
2843
2844
2845
2846
2847
2848
2849
2850
2851
2852
2853
2854
2855
2856
2857
2858
2859
2860
2861
2862
2863
2864
2865
2866
2867
2868
2869
2870
2871
2872
2873
2874
2875
2876
2877
2878
2879
2880
2881
2882
2883
2884
2885
2886
2887
2888
2889
2890
2891
2892
2893
2894
2895
2896
2897
2898
2899
2900
2901
2902
2903
2904
2905
2906
2907
2908
2909
2910
2911
2912
2913
2914
2915
2916
2917
2918
2919
2920
2921
2922
2923
2924
2925
2926
2927
2928
2929
2930
2931
2932
2933
2934
2935
2936
2937
2938
2939
2940
2941
2942
2943
2944
2945
2946
2947
2948
2949
2950
2951
2952
2953
2954
2955
2956
2957
2958
2959
2960
2961
2962
2963
2964
2965
2966
2967
2968
2969
2970
2971
2972
2973
2974
2975
2976
2977
2978
2979
2980
2981
2982
2983
2984
2985
2986
2987
2988
2989
2990
2991
2992
2993
2994
2995
2996
2997
2998
2999
3000
3001
3002
3003
3004
3005
3006
3007
3008
3009
3010
3011
3012
3013
3014
3015
3016
3017
3018
3019
3020
3021
3022
3023
3024
3025
3026
3027
3028
3029
3030
3031
3032
3033
3034
3035
3036
3037
3038
3039
3040
3041
3042
3043
3044
3045
3046
3047
3048
3049
3050
3051
3052
3053
3054
3055
3056
3057
3058
3059
3060
3061
3062
3063
3064
3065
3066
3067
3068
3069
3070
3071
3072
3073
3074
3075
3076
3077
3078
3079
3080
3081
3082
3083
3084
3085
3086
3087
3088
3089
3090
3091
3092
3093
3094
3095
3096
3097
3098
3099
3100
3101
3102
3103
3104
3105
3106
3107
3108
3109
3110
3111
3112
3113
3114
3115
3116
3117
3118
3119
3120
3121
3122
3123
3124
3125
3126
3127
3128
3129
3130
3131
3132
3133
3134
3135
3136
3137
3138
3139
3140
3141
3142
3143
3144
3145
3146
3147
3148
3149
3150
3151
3152
3153
3154
3155
3156
3157
3158
3159
3160
3161
3162
3163
3164
3165
3166
3167
3168
3169
3170
3171
3172
3173
3174
3175
3176
3177
3178
3179
3180
3181
3182
3183
3184
3185
3186
3187
3188
3189
3190
3191
3192
3193
3194
3195
3196
3197
3198
3199
3200
3201
3202
3203
3204
3205
3206
3207
3208
3209
3210
3211
3212
3213
3214
3215
3216
3217
3218
3219
3220
3221
3222
3223
3224
3225
3226
3227
3228
3229
3230
3231
3232
3233
3234
3235
3236
3237
3238
3239
3240
3241
3242
3243
3244
3245
3246
3247
3248
3249
3250
3251
3252
3253
3254
3255
3256
3257
3258
3259
3260
3261
3262
3263
3264
3265
3266
3267
3268
3269
3270
3271
3272
3273
3274
3275
3276
3277
3278
3279
3280
3281
3282
3283
3284
3285
3286
3287
3288
3289
3290
3291
3292
3293
3294
3295
3296
3297
3298
3299
3300
3301
3302
3303
3304
3305
3306
3307
3308
3309
3310
3311
3312
3313
3314
3315
3316
3317
3318
3319
3320
3321
3322
3323
3324
3325
3326
3327
3328
3329
3330
3331
3332
3333
3334
3335
3336
3337
3338
3339
3340
3341
3342
3343
3344
3345
3346
3347
3348
3349
3350
3351
3352
3353
3354
3355
3356
3357
3358
3359
3360
3361
3362
3363
3364
3365
3366
3367
3368
3369
3370
3371
3372
3373
3374
3375
3376
3377
3378
3379
3380
3381
3382
3383
3384
3385
3386
3387
3388
3389
3390
3391
3392
3393
3394
3395
3396
3397
3398
3399
3400
3401
3402
3403
3404
3405
3406
3407
3408
3409
3410
3411
3412
3413
3414
3415
3416
3417
3418
3419
3420
3421
3422
3423
3424
3425
3426
3427
3428
3429
3430
3431
3432
3433
3434
3435
3436
3437
3438
3439
3440
3441
3442
3443
3444
3445
3446
3447
3448
3449
3450
3451
3452
3453
3454
3455
3456
3457
3458
3459
3460
3461
3462
3463
3464
3465
3466
3467
3468
3469
3470
3471
3472
3473
3474
3475
3476
3477
3478
3479
3480
3481
3482
3483
3484
3485
3486
3487
3488
3489
3490
3491
3492
3493
3494
3495
3496
3497
3498
3499
3500
3501
3502
3503
3504
3505
3506
3507
3508
3509
3510
3511
3512
3513
3514
3515
3516
3517
3518
3519
3520
3521
3522
3523
3524
3525
3526
3527
3528
3529
3530
3531
3532
3533
3534
3535
3536
3537
3538
3539
3540
3541
3542
3543
3544
3545
3546
3547
3548
3549
3550
3551
3552
3553
3554
3555
3556
3557
3558
3559
3560
3561
3562
3563
3564
3565
3566
3567
3568
3569
3570
3571
3572
3573
3574
3575
3576
3577
3578
3579
3580
3581
3582
3583
3584
3585
3586
3587
3588
3589
3590
3591
3592
3593
3594
3595
3596
3597
3598
3599
3600
3601
3602
3603
3604
3605
3606
3607
3608
3609
3610
3611
3612
3613
3614
3615
3616
3617
3618
3619
3620
3621
3622
3623
3624
3625
3626
3627
3628
3629
3630
3631
3632
3633
3634
3635
3636
3637
3638
3639
3640
3641
3642
3643
3644
3645
3646
3647
3648
3649
3650
3651
3652
3653
3654
3655
3656
3657
3658
3659
3660
3661
3662
3663
3664
3665
3666
3667
3668
3669
3670
3671
3672
3673
3674
3675
3676
3677
3678
3679
3680
3681
3682
3683
3684
3685
3686
3687
3688
3689
3690
3691
3692
3693
3694
3695
3696
3697
3698
3699
3700
3701
3702
3703
3704
3705
3706
3707
3708
3709
3710
3711
3712
3713
3714
3715
3716
3717
3718
3719
3720
3721
3722
3723
3724
3725
3726
3727
3728
3729
3730
3731
3732
3733
3734
3735
3736
3737
3738
3739
3740
3741
3742
3743
3744
3745
3746
3747
3748
3749
3750
3751
3752
3753
3754
3755
3756
3757
3758
3759
3760
3761
3762
3763
3764
3765
3766
3767
3768
3769
3770
3771
3772
3773
3774
3775
3776
3777
3778
3779
3780
3781
3782
3783
3784
3785
3786
3787
3788
3789
3790
3791
3792
3793
3794
3795
3796
3797
3798
3799
3800
3801
3802
3803
3804
3805
3806
3807
3808
3809
3810
3811
3812
3813
3814
3815
3816
3817
3818
3819
3820
3821
3822
3823
3824
3825
3826
3827
3828
3829
3830
3831
3832
3833
3834
3835
3836
3837
3838
3839
3840
3841
3842
3843
3844
3845
3846
3847
3848
3849
3850
3851
3852
3853
3854
3855
3856
3857
3858
3859
3860
3861
3862
3863
3864
3865
3866
3867
3868
3869
3870
3871
3872
3873
3874
3875
3876
3877
3878
3879
3880
3881
3882
3883
3884
3885
3886
3887
3888
3889
3890
3891
3892
3893
3894
3895
3896
3897
3898
3899
3900
3901
3902
3903
3904
3905
3906
3907
3908
3909
3910
3911
3912
3913
3914
3915
3916
3917
3918
3919
3920
3921
3922
3923
3924
3925
3926
3927
3928
3929
3930
3931
3932
3933
3934
3935
3936
3937
3938
3939
3940
3941
3942
3943
3944
3945
3946
3947
3948
3949
3950
3951
3952
3953
3954
3955
3956
3957
3958
3959
3960
3961
3962
3963
3964
3965
3966
3967
3968
3969
3970
3971
3972
3973
3974
3975
3976
3977
3978
3979
3980
3981
3982
3983
3984
3985
3986
3987
3988
3989
3990
3991
3992
3993
3994
3995
3996
3997
3998
3999
4000
4001
4002
4003
4004
4005
4006
4007
4008
4009
4010
4011
4012
4013
4014
4015
4016
4017
4018
4019
4020
4021
4022
4023
4024
4025
4026
4027
4028
4029
4030
4031
4032
4033
4034
4035
4036
4037
4038
4039
4040
4041
4042
4043
4044
4045
4046
4047
4048
4049
4050
4051
4052
4053
4054
4055
4056
4057
4058
4059
4060
4061
4062
4063
4064
4065
4066
4067
4068
4069
4070
4071
4072
4073
4074
4075
4076
4077
4078
4079
4080
4081
4082
4083
4084
4085
4086
4087
4088
4089
4090
4091
4092
4093
4094
4095
4096
4097
4098
4099
4100
4101
4102
4103
4104
4105
4106
4107
4108
4109
4110
4111
4112
4113
4114
4115
4116
4117
4118
4119
4120
4121
4122
4123
4124
4125
4126
4127
4128
4129
4130
4131
4132
4133
4134
4135
4136
4137
4138
4139
4140
4141
4142
4143
4144
4145
4146
4147
4148
4149
4150
4151
4152
4153
4154
4155
4156
4157
4158
4159
4160
4161
4162
4163
4164
4165
4166
4167
4168
4169
4170
4171
4172
4173
4174
4175
4176
4177
4178
4179
4180
4181
4182
4183
4184
4185
4186
4187
4188
4189
4190
4191
4192
4193
4194
4195
4196
4197
4198
4199
4200
4201
4202
4203
4204
4205
4206
4207
4208
4209
4210
4211
4212
4213
4214
4215
4216
4217
4218
4219
4220
4221
4222
4223
4224
4225
4226
4227
4228
4229
4230
4231
4232
4233
4234
4235
4236
4237
4238
4239
4240
4241
4242
4243
4244
4245
4246
4247
4248
4249
4250
4251
4252
4253
4254
4255
4256
4257
4258
4259
4260
4261
4262
4263
4264
4265
4266
4267
4268
4269
4270
4271
4272
4273
4274
4275
4276
4277
4278
4279
4280
4281
4282
4283
4284
4285
4286
4287
4288
4289
4290
4291
4292
4293
4294
4295
4296
4297
4298
4299
4300
4301
4302
4303
4304
4305
4306
4307
4308
4309
4310
4311
4312
4313
4314
4315
4316
4317
4318
4319
4320
4321
4322
4323
4324
4325
4326
4327
4328
4329
4330
4331
4332
4333
4334
4335
4336
4337
4338
4339
4340
4341
4342
4343
4344
4345
4346
4347
4348
4349
4350
4351
4352
4353
4354
4355
4356
4357
4358
4359
4360
4361
4362
4363
4364
4365
4366
4367
4368
4369
4370
4371
4372
4373
4374
4375
4376
4377
4378
4379
4380
4381
4382
4383
4384
4385
4386
4387
4388
4389
4390
4391
4392
4393
4394
4395
4396
4397
4398
4399
4400
4401
4402
4403
4404
4405
4406
4407
4408
4409
4410
4411
4412
4413
4414
4415
4416
4417
4418
4419
4420
4421
4422
4423
4424
4425
4426
4427
4428
4429
4430
4431
4432
4433
4434
4435
4436
4437
4438
4439
4440
4441
4442
4443
4444
4445
4446
4447
4448
4449
4450
4451
4452
4453
4454
4455
4456
4457
4458
4459
4460
4461
4462
4463
4464
4465
4466
4467
4468
4469
4470
4471
4472
4473
4474
4475
4476
4477
4478
4479
4480
4481
4482
4483
4484
4485
4486
4487
4488
4489
4490
4491
4492
4493
4494
4495
4496
4497
4498
4499
4500
4501
4502
4503
4504
4505
4506
4507
4508
4509
4510
4511
4512
4513
4514
4515
4516
4517
4518
4519
4520
4521
4522
4523
4524
4525
4526
4527
4528
4529
4530
4531
4532
4533
4534
4535
4536
4537
4538
4539
4540
4541
4542
4543
4544
4545
4546
4547
4548
4549
4550
4551
4552
4553
4554
4555
4556
4557
4558
4559
4560
4561
4562
4563
4564
4565
4566
4567
4568
4569
4570
4571
4572
4573
4574
4575
4576
4577
4578
4579
4580
4581
4582
4583
4584
4585
4586
4587
4588
4589
4590
4591
4592
4593
4594
4595
4596
4597
4598
4599
4600
4601
4602
4603
4604
4605
4606
4607
4608
4609
4610
4611
4612
4613
4614
4615
4616
4617
4618
4619
4620
4621
4622
4623
4624
4625
4626
4627
4628
4629
4630
4631
4632
4633
4634
4635
4636
4637
4638
4639
4640
4641
4642
4643
4644
4645
4646
4647
4648
4649
4650
4651
4652
4653
4654
4655
4656
4657
4658
4659
4660
4661
4662
4663
4664
4665
4666
4667
4668
4669
4670
4671
4672
4673
4674
4675
4676
4677
4678
4679
4680
4681
4682
4683
4684
4685
4686
4687
4688
4689
4690
4691
4692
4693
4694
4695
4696
4697
4698
4699
4700
4701
4702
4703
4704
4705
4706
4707
4708
4709
4710
4711
4712
4713
4714
4715
4716
4717
4718
4719
4720
4721
4722
4723
4724
4725
4726
4727
4728
4729
4730
4731
4732
4733
4734
4735
4736
4737
4738
4739
4740
4741
4742
4743
4744
4745
4746
4747
4748
4749
4750
4751
4752
4753
4754
4755
4756
4757
4758
4759
4760
4761
4762
4763
4764
4765
4766
4767
4768
4769
4770
4771
4772
4773
4774
4775
4776
4777
4778
4779
4780
4781
4782
4783
4784
4785
4786
4787
4788
4789
4790
4791
4792
4793
4794
4795
4796
4797
4798
4799
4800
4801
4802
4803
4804
4805
4806
4807
4808
4809
4810
4811
4812
4813
4814
4815
4816
4817
4818
4819
4820
4821
4822
4823
4824
4825
4826
4827
4828
4829
4830
4831
4832
4833
4834
4835
4836
4837
4838
4839
4840
4841
4842
4843
4844
4845
4846
4847
4848
4849
4850
4851
4852
4853
4854
4855
4856
4857
4858
4859
4860
4861
4862
4863
4864
4865
4866
4867
4868
4869
4870
4871
4872
4873
4874
4875
4876
4877
4878
4879
4880
4881
4882
4883
4884
4885
4886
4887
4888
4889
4890
4891
4892
4893
4894
4895
4896
4897
4898
4899
4900
4901
4902
4903
4904
4905
4906
4907
4908
4909
4910
4911
4912
4913
4914
4915
4916
4917
4918
4919
4920
4921
4922
4923
4924
4925
4926
4927
4928
4929
4930
4931
4932
4933
4934
4935
4936
4937
4938
4939
4940
4941
4942
4943
4944
4945
4946
4947
4948
4949
4950
4951
4952
4953
4954
4955
4956
4957
4958
4959
4960
4961
4962
4963
4964
4965
4966
4967
4968
4969
4970
4971
4972
4973
4974
4975
4976
4977
4978
4979
4980
4981
4982
4983
4984
4985
4986
4987
4988
4989
4990
4991
4992
4993
4994
4995
4996
4997
4998
4999
5000
5001
5002
5003
5004
5005
5006
5007
5008
5009
5010
5011
5012
5013
5014
5015
5016
5017
5018
5019
5020
5021
5022
5023
5024
5025
5026
5027
5028
5029
5030
5031
5032
5033
5034
5035
5036
5037
5038
5039
5040
5041
5042
5043
5044
5045
5046
5047
5048
5049
5050
5051
5052
5053
5054
5055
5056
5057
5058
5059
5060
5061
5062
5063
5064
5065
5066
5067
5068
5069
5070
5071
5072
5073
5074
5075
5076
5077
5078
5079
5080
5081
5082
5083
5084
5085
5086
5087
5088
5089
5090
5091
5092
5093
5094
5095
5096
5097
5098
5099
5100
5101
5102
5103
5104
5105
5106
5107
5108
5109
5110
5111
5112
5113
5114
5115
5116
5117
5118
5119
5120
5121
5122
5123
5124
5125
5126
5127
5128
5129
5130
5131
5132
5133
5134
5135
5136
5137
5138
5139
5140
5141
5142
5143
5144
5145
5146
5147
5148
5149
5150
5151
5152
5153
5154
5155
5156
5157
5158
5159
5160
5161
5162
5163
5164
5165
5166
5167
5168
5169
5170
5171
5172
5173
5174
5175
5176
5177
5178
5179
5180
5181
5182
5183
5184
5185
5186
5187
5188
5189
5190
5191
5192
5193
5194
5195
5196
5197
5198
5199
5200
5201
5202
5203
5204
5205
5206
5207
5208
5209
5210
5211
5212
5213
5214
5215
5216
5217
5218
5219
5220
5221
5222
5223
5224
5225
5226
5227
5228
5229
5230
5231
5232
5233
5234
5235
5236
5237
5238
5239
5240
5241
5242
5243
5244
5245
5246
5247
5248
5249
5250
5251
5252
5253
5254
5255
5256
5257
5258
5259
5260
5261
5262
5263
5264
5265
5266
5267
5268
5269
5270
5271
5272
5273
5274
5275
5276
5277
5278
5279
5280
5281
5282
5283
5284
5285
5286
5287
5288
5289
5290
5291
5292
5293
5294
5295
5296
5297
5298
5299
5300
5301
5302
5303
5304
5305
5306
5307
5308
5309
5310
5311
5312
5313
5314
5315
5316
5317
5318
5319
5320
5321
5322
5323
5324
5325
5326
5327
5328
5329
5330
5331
5332
5333
5334
5335
5336
5337
5338
5339
5340
5341
5342
5343
5344
5345
5346
5347
5348
5349
5350
5351
5352
5353
5354
5355
5356
5357
5358
5359
5360
5361
5362
5363
5364
5365
5366
5367
5368
5369
5370
5371
5372
5373
5374
5375
5376
5377
5378
5379
5380
5381
5382
5383
5384
5385
5386
5387
5388
5389
5390
5391
5392
5393
5394
5395
5396
5397
5398
5399
5400
5401
5402
5403
5404
5405
5406
5407
5408
5409
5410
5411
5412
5413
5414
5415
5416
5417
5418
5419
5420
5421
5422
5423
5424
5425
5426
5427
5428
5429
5430
5431
5432
5433
5434
5435
5436
5437
5438
5439
5440
5441
5442
5443
5444
5445
5446
5447
5448
5449
5450
5451
5452
5453
5454
5455
5456
5457
5458
5459
5460
5461
5462
5463
5464
5465
5466
5467
5468
5469
5470
5471
5472
5473
5474
5475
5476
5477
5478
5479
5480
5481
5482
5483
5484
5485
5486
5487
5488
5489
5490
5491
5492
5493
5494
5495
5496
5497
5498
5499
5500
5501
5502
5503
5504
5505
5506
5507
5508
5509
5510
5511
5512
5513
5514
5515
5516
5517
5518
5519
5520
5521
5522
5523
5524
5525
5526
5527
5528
5529
5530
5531
5532
5533
5534
5535
5536
5537
5538
5539
5540
5541
5542
5543
5544
5545
5546
5547
5548
5549
5550
5551
5552
5553
5554
5555
5556
5557
5558
5559
5560
5561
5562
5563
5564
5565
5566
5567
5568
5569
5570
5571
5572
5573
5574
5575
5576
5577
5578
5579
5580
5581
5582
5583
5584
5585
5586
5587
5588
5589
5590
5591
5592
5593
5594
5595
5596
5597
5598
5599
5600
5601
5602
5603
5604
5605
5606
5607
5608
5609
5610
5611
5612
5613
5614
5615
5616
5617
5618
5619
5620
5621
5622
5623
5624
5625
5626
5627
5628
5629
5630
5631
5632
5633
5634
5635
5636
5637
5638
5639
5640
5641
5642
5643
5644
5645
5646
5647
5648
5649
5650
5651
5652
5653
5654
5655
5656
5657
5658
5659
5660
5661
5662
5663
5664
5665
5666
5667
5668
5669
5670
5671
5672
5673
5674
5675
5676
5677
5678
5679
5680
5681
5682
5683
5684
5685
5686
5687
5688
5689
5690
5691
5692
5693
5694
5695
5696
5697
5698
5699
5700
5701
5702
5703
5704
5705
5706
5707
5708
5709
5710
5711
5712
5713
5714
5715
5716
5717
5718
5719
5720
5721
5722
5723
5724
5725
5726
5727
5728
5729
5730
5731
5732
5733
5734
5735
5736
5737
5738
5739
5740
5741
5742
5743
5744
5745
5746
5747
5748
5749
5750
5751
5752
5753
5754
5755
5756
5757
5758
5759
5760
5761
5762
5763
5764
5765
5766
5767
5768
5769
5770
5771
5772
5773
5774
5775
5776
5777
5778
5779
5780
5781
5782
5783
5784
5785
5786
5787
5788
5789
5790
5791
5792
5793
5794
5795
5796
5797
5798
5799
5800
5801
5802
5803
5804
5805
5806
5807
5808
5809
5810
5811
5812
5813
5814
5815
5816
5817
5818
5819
5820
5821
5822
5823
5824
5825
5826
5827
5828
5829
5830
5831
5832
5833
5834
5835
5836
5837
5838
5839
5840
5841
5842
5843
5844
5845
5846
5847
5848
5849
5850
5851
5852
5853
5854
5855
5856
5857
5858
5859
5860
5861
5862
5863
5864
5865
5866
5867
5868
5869
5870
5871
5872
5873
5874
5875
5876
5877
5878
5879
5880
5881
5882
5883
5884
5885
5886
5887
5888
5889
5890
5891
5892
5893
5894
5895
5896
5897
5898
5899
5900
5901
5902
5903
5904
5905
5906
5907
5908
5909
5910
5911
5912
5913
5914
5915
5916
5917
5918
5919
5920
5921
5922
5923
5924
5925
5926
5927
5928
5929
5930
5931
5932
5933
5934
5935
5936
5937
5938
5939
5940
5941
5942
5943
5944
5945
5946
5947
5948
5949
5950
5951
5952
5953
5954
5955
5956
5957
5958
5959
5960
5961
5962
5963
5964
5965
5966
5967
5968
5969
5970
5971
5972
5973
5974
5975
5976
5977
5978
5979
5980
5981
5982
5983
5984
5985
5986
5987
5988
5989
5990
5991
5992
5993
5994
5995
5996
5997
5998
5999
6000
6001
6002
6003
6004
6005
6006
6007
6008
6009
6010
6011
6012
6013
6014
6015
6016
6017
6018
6019
6020
6021
6022
6023
6024
6025
6026
6027
6028
6029
6030
6031
6032
6033
6034
6035
6036
6037
6038
6039
6040
6041
6042
6043
6044
6045
6046
6047
6048
6049
6050
6051
6052
6053
6054
6055
6056
6057
6058
6059
6060
6061
6062
6063
6064
6065
6066
6067
6068
6069
6070
6071
6072
6073
6074
6075
6076
6077
6078
6079
6080
6081
6082
6083
6084
6085
6086
6087
6088
6089
6090
6091
6092
6093
6094
6095
6096
6097
6098
6099
6100
6101
6102
6103
6104
6105
6106
6107
6108
6109
6110
6111
6112
6113
6114
6115
6116
6117
6118
6119
6120
6121
6122
6123
6124
6125
6126
6127
6128
6129
6130
6131
6132
6133
6134
6135
6136
6137
6138
6139
6140
6141
6142
6143
6144
6145
6146
6147
6148
6149
6150
6151
6152
6153
6154
6155
6156
6157
6158
6159
6160
6161
6162
6163
6164
6165
6166
6167
6168
6169
6170
6171
6172
6173
6174
6175
6176
6177
6178
6179
6180
6181
6182
6183
6184
6185
6186
6187
6188
6189
6190
6191
6192
6193
6194
6195
6196
6197
6198
6199
6200
6201
6202
6203
6204
6205
6206
6207
6208
6209
6210
6211
6212
6213
6214
6215
6216
6217
6218
6219
6220
6221
6222
6223
6224
6225
6226
6227
6228
6229
6230
6231
6232
6233
6234
6235
6236
6237
6238
6239
6240
6241
6242
6243
6244
6245
6246
6247
6248
6249
6250
6251
6252
6253
6254
6255
6256
6257
6258
6259
6260
6261
6262
6263
6264
6265
6266
6267
6268
6269
6270
6271
6272
6273
6274
6275
6276
6277
6278
6279
6280
6281
6282
6283
6284
6285
6286
6287
6288
6289
6290
6291
6292
6293
6294
6295
6296
6297
6298
6299
6300
6301
6302
6303
6304
6305
6306
6307
6308
6309
6310
6311
6312
6313
6314
6315
6316
6317
6318
6319
6320
6321
6322
6323
6324
6325
6326
6327
6328
6329
6330
6331
6332
6333
6334
6335
6336
6337
6338
6339
6340
6341
6342
6343
6344
6345
6346
6347
6348
6349
6350
6351
6352
6353
6354
6355
6356
6357
6358
6359
6360
6361
6362
6363
6364
6365
6366
6367
6368
6369
6370
6371
6372
6373
6374
6375
6376
6377
6378
6379
6380
6381
6382
6383
6384
6385
6386
6387
6388
6389
6390
6391
6392
6393
6394
6395
6396
6397
6398
6399
6400
6401
6402
6403
6404
6405
6406
6407
6408
6409
6410
6411
6412
6413
6414
6415
6416
6417
6418
6419
6420
6421
6422
6423
6424
6425
6426
6427
6428
6429
6430
6431
6432
6433
6434
6435
6436
6437
6438
6439
6440
6441
6442
6443
6444
6445
6446
6447
6448
6449
6450
6451
6452
6453
6454
6455
6456
6457
6458
6459
6460
6461
6462
6463
6464
6465
6466
6467
6468
6469
6470
6471
6472
6473
6474
6475
6476
6477
6478
6479
6480
6481
6482
6483
6484
6485
6486
6487
6488
6489
6490
6491
6492
6493
6494
6495
6496
6497
6498
6499
6500
6501
6502
6503
6504
6505
6506
6507
6508
6509
6510
6511
6512
6513
6514
6515
6516
6517
6518
6519
6520
6521
6522
6523
6524
6525
6526
6527
6528
6529
6530
6531
6532
6533
6534
6535
6536
6537
6538
6539
6540
6541
6542
6543
6544
6545
6546
6547
6548
6549
6550
6551
6552
6553
6554
6555
6556
6557
6558
6559
6560
6561
6562
6563
6564
6565
6566
6567
6568
6569
6570
6571
6572
6573
6574
6575
6576
6577
6578
6579
6580
6581
6582
6583
6584
6585
6586
6587
6588
6589
6590
6591
6592
6593
6594
6595
6596
6597
6598
6599
6600
6601
6602
6603
6604
6605
6606
6607
6608
6609
6610
6611
6612
6613
6614
6615
6616
6617
6618
6619
6620
6621
6622
6623
6624
6625
6626
6627
6628
6629
6630
6631
6632
6633
6634
6635
6636
6637
6638
6639
6640
6641
6642
6643
6644
6645
6646
6647
6648
6649
6650
6651
6652
6653
6654
6655
6656
6657
6658
6659
6660
6661
6662
6663
6664
6665
6666
6667
6668
6669
6670
6671
6672
6673
6674
6675
6676
6677
6678
6679
6680
6681
6682
6683
6684
6685
6686
6687
6688
6689
6690
6691
6692
6693
6694
6695
6696
6697
6698
6699
6700
6701
6702
6703
6704
6705
6706
6707
6708
6709
6710
6711
6712
6713
6714
6715
6716
6717
6718
6719
6720
6721
6722
6723
6724
6725
6726
6727
6728
6729
6730
6731
6732
6733
6734
6735
6736
6737
6738
6739
6740
6741
6742
6743
6744
6745
6746
6747
6748
6749
6750
6751
6752
6753
6754
6755
6756
6757
6758
6759
6760
6761
6762
6763
6764
6765
6766
6767
6768
6769
6770
6771
6772
6773
6774
6775
6776
6777
6778
6779
6780
6781
6782
6783
6784
6785
6786
6787
6788
6789
6790
6791
6792
6793
6794
6795
6796
6797
6798
6799
6800
6801
6802
6803
6804
6805
6806
6807
6808
6809
6810
6811
6812
6813
6814
6815
6816
6817
6818
6819
6820
6821
6822
6823
6824
6825
6826
6827
6828
6829
6830
6831
6832
6833
6834
6835
6836
6837
6838
6839
6840
6841
6842
6843
6844
6845
6846
6847
6848
6849
6850
6851
6852
6853
6854
6855
6856
6857
6858
6859
6860
6861
6862
6863
6864
6865
6866
6867
6868
6869
6870
6871
6872
6873
6874
6875
6876
6877
6878
6879
6880
6881
6882
6883
6884
6885
6886
6887
6888
6889
6890
6891
6892
6893
6894
6895
6896
6897
6898
6899
6900
6901
6902
6903
6904
6905
6906
6907
6908
6909
6910
6911
6912
6913
6914
6915
6916
6917
6918
6919
6920
6921
6922
6923
6924
6925
6926
6927
6928
6929
6930
6931
6932
6933
6934
6935
6936
6937
6938
6939
6940
6941
6942
6943
6944
6945
6946
6947
6948
6949
6950
6951
6952
6953
6954
6955
6956
6957
6958
6959
6960
6961
6962
6963
6964
6965
6966
6967
6968
6969
6970
6971
6972
6973
6974
6975
6976
6977
6978
6979
6980
6981
6982
6983
6984
6985
6986
6987
6988
6989
6990
6991
6992
6993
6994
6995
6996
6997
6998
6999
7000
7001
7002
7003
7004
7005
7006
7007
7008
7009
7010
7011
7012
7013
7014
7015
7016
7017
7018
7019
7020
7021
7022
7023
7024
7025
7026
7027
7028
7029
7030
7031
7032
7033
7034
7035
7036
7037
7038
7039
7040
7041
7042
7043
7044
7045
7046
7047
7048
7049
7050
7051
7052
7053
7054
7055
7056
7057
7058
7059
7060
7061
7062
7063
7064
7065
7066
7067
7068
7069
7070
7071
7072
7073
7074
7075
7076
7077
7078
7079
7080
7081
7082
7083
7084
7085
7086
7087
7088
7089
7090
7091
7092
7093
7094
7095
7096
7097
7098
7099
7100
7101
7102
7103
7104
7105
7106
7107
7108
7109
7110
7111
7112
7113
7114
7115
7116
7117
7118
7119
7120
7121
7122
7123
7124
7125
7126
7127
7128
7129
7130
7131
7132
7133
7134
7135
7136
7137
7138
7139
7140
7141
7142
7143
7144
7145
7146
7147
7148
7149
7150
7151
7152
7153
7154
7155
7156
7157
7158
7159
7160
7161
7162
7163
7164
7165
7166
7167
7168
7169
7170
7171
7172
7173
7174
7175
7176
7177
7178
7179
7180
7181
7182
7183
7184
7185
7186
7187
7188
7189
7190
7191
7192
7193
7194
7195
7196
7197
7198
7199
7200
7201
7202
7203
7204
7205
7206
7207
7208
7209
7210
7211
7212
7213
7214
7215
7216
7217
7218
7219
7220
7221
7222
7223
7224
7225
7226
7227
7228
7229
7230
7231
7232
7233
7234
7235
7236
7237
7238
7239
7240
7241
7242
7243
7244
7245
7246
7247
7248
7249
7250
7251
7252
7253
7254
7255
7256
7257
7258
7259
7260
7261
7262
7263
7264
7265
7266
7267
7268
7269
7270
7271
7272
7273
7274
7275
7276
7277
7278
7279
7280
7281
7282
7283
7284
7285
7286
7287
7288
7289
7290
7291
7292
7293
7294
7295
7296
7297
7298
7299
7300
7301
7302
7303
7304
7305
7306
7307
7308
7309
7310
7311
7312
7313
7314
7315
7316
7317
7318
7319
7320
7321
7322
7323
7324
7325
7326
7327
7328
7329
7330
7331
7332
7333
7334
7335
7336
7337
7338
7339
7340
7341
7342
7343
7344
7345
7346
7347
7348
7349
7350
7351
7352
7353
7354
7355
7356
7357
7358
7359
7360
7361
7362
7363
7364
7365
7366
7367
7368
7369
7370
7371
7372
7373
7374
7375
7376
7377
7378
7379
7380
7381
7382
7383
7384
7385
7386
7387
7388
7389
7390
7391
7392
7393
7394
7395
7396
7397
7398
7399
7400
7401
7402
7403
7404
7405
7406
7407
7408
7409
7410
7411
7412
7413
7414
7415
7416
7417
7418
7419
7420
7421
7422
7423
7424
7425
7426
7427
7428
7429
7430
7431
7432
7433
7434
7435
7436
7437
7438
7439
7440
7441
7442
7443
7444
7445
7446
7447
7448
7449
7450
7451
7452
7453
7454
7455
7456
7457
7458
7459
7460
7461
7462
7463
7464
7465
7466
7467
7468
7469
7470
7471
7472
7473
7474
7475
7476
7477
7478
7479
7480
7481
7482
7483
7484
7485
7486
7487
7488
7489
7490
7491
7492
7493
7494
7495
7496
7497
7498
7499
7500
7501
7502
7503
7504
7505
7506
7507
7508
7509
7510
7511
7512
7513
7514
7515
7516
7517
7518
7519
7520
7521
7522
7523
7524
7525
7526
7527
7528
7529
7530
7531
7532
7533
7534
7535
7536
7537
7538
7539
7540
7541
7542
7543
7544
7545
7546
7547
7548
7549
7550
7551
7552
7553
7554
7555
7556
7557
7558
7559
7560
7561
7562
7563
7564
7565
7566
7567
7568
7569
7570
7571
7572
7573
7574
7575
7576
7577
7578
7579
7580
7581
7582
7583
7584
7585
7586
7587
7588
7589
7590
7591
7592
7593
7594
7595
7596
7597
7598
7599
7600
7601
7602
7603
7604
7605
7606
7607
7608
7609
7610
7611
7612
7613
7614
7615
7616
7617
7618
7619
7620
7621
7622
7623
7624
7625
7626
7627
7628
7629
7630
7631
7632
7633
7634
7635
7636
7637
7638
7639
7640
7641
7642
7643
7644
7645
7646
7647
7648
7649
7650
7651
7652
7653
7654
7655
7656
7657
7658
7659
7660
7661
7662
7663
7664
7665
7666
7667
7668
7669
7670
7671
7672
7673
7674
7675
7676
7677
7678
7679
7680
7681
7682
7683
7684
7685
7686
7687
7688
7689
7690
7691
7692
7693
7694
7695
7696
7697
7698
7699
7700
7701
7702
7703
7704
7705
7706
7707
7708
7709
7710
7711
7712
7713
7714
7715
7716
7717
7718
7719
7720
7721
7722
7723
7724
7725
7726
7727
7728
7729
7730
7731
7732
7733
7734
7735
7736
7737
7738
7739
7740
7741
7742
7743
7744
7745
7746
7747
7748
7749
7750
7751
7752
7753
7754
7755
7756
7757
7758
7759
7760
7761
7762
7763
7764
7765
7766
7767
7768
7769
7770
7771
7772
7773
7774
7775
7776
7777
7778
7779
7780
7781
7782
7783
7784
7785
7786
7787
7788
7789
7790
7791
7792
7793
7794
7795
7796
7797
7798
7799
7800
7801
7802
7803
7804
7805
7806
7807
7808
7809
7810
7811
7812
7813
7814
7815
7816
7817
7818
7819
7820
7821
7822
7823
7824
7825
7826
7827
7828
7829
7830
7831
7832
7833
7834
7835
7836
7837
7838
7839
7840
7841
7842
7843
7844
7845
7846
7847
7848
7849
7850
7851
7852
7853
7854
7855
7856
7857
7858
7859
7860
7861
7862
7863
7864
7865
7866
7867
7868
7869
7870
7871
7872
7873
7874
7875
7876
7877
7878
7879
7880
7881
7882
7883
7884
7885
7886
7887
7888
7889
7890
7891
7892
7893
7894
7895
7896
7897
7898
7899
7900
7901
7902
7903
7904
7905
7906
7907
7908
7909
7910
7911
7912
7913
7914
7915
7916
7917
7918
7919
7920
7921
7922
7923
7924
7925
7926
7927
7928
7929
7930
7931
7932
7933
7934
7935
7936
7937
7938
7939
7940
7941
7942
7943
7944
7945
7946
7947
7948
7949
7950
7951
7952
7953
7954
7955
7956
7957
7958
7959
7960
7961
7962
7963
7964
7965
7966
7967
7968
7969
7970
7971
7972
7973
7974
7975
7976
7977
7978
7979
7980
7981
7982
7983
7984
7985
7986
7987
7988
7989
7990
7991
7992
7993
7994
7995
7996
7997
7998
7999
8000
8001
8002
8003
8004
8005
8006
8007
8008
8009
8010
8011
8012
8013
8014
8015
8016
8017
8018
8019
8020
8021
8022
8023
8024
8025
8026
8027
8028
8029
8030
8031
8032
8033
8034
8035
8036
8037
8038
8039
8040
8041
8042
8043
8044
8045
8046
8047
8048
8049
8050
8051
8052
8053
8054
8055
8056
8057
8058
8059
8060
8061
8062
8063
8064
8065
8066
8067
8068
8069
8070
8071
8072
8073
8074
8075
8076
8077
8078
8079
8080
8081
8082
8083
8084
8085
8086
8087
8088
8089
8090
8091
8092
8093
8094
8095
8096
8097
8098
8099
8100
8101
8102
8103
8104
8105
8106
8107
8108
8109
8110
8111
8112
8113
8114
8115
8116
8117
8118
8119
8120
8121
8122
8123
8124
8125
8126
8127
8128
8129
8130
8131
8132
8133
8134
8135
8136
8137
8138
8139
8140
8141
8142
8143
8144
8145
8146
8147
8148
8149
8150
8151
8152
8153
8154
8155
8156
8157
8158
8159
8160
8161
8162
8163
8164
8165
8166
8167
8168
8169
8170
8171
8172
8173
8174
8175
8176
8177
8178
8179
8180
8181
8182
8183
8184
8185
8186
8187
8188
8189
8190
8191
8192
8193
8194
8195
8196
8197
8198
8199
8200
8201
8202
8203
8204
8205
8206
8207
8208
8209
8210
8211
8212
8213
8214
8215
8216
8217
8218
8219
8220
8221
8222
8223
8224
8225
8226
8227
8228
8229
8230
8231
8232
8233
8234
8235
8236
8237
8238
8239
8240
8241
8242
8243
8244
8245
8246
8247
8248
8249
8250
8251
8252
8253
8254
8255
8256
8257
8258
8259
8260
8261
8262
8263
8264
8265
8266
8267
8268
8269
8270
8271
8272
8273
8274
8275
8276
8277
8278
8279
8280
8281
8282
8283
8284
8285
8286
8287
8288
8289
8290
8291
8292
8293
8294
8295
8296
8297
8298
8299
8300
8301
8302
8303
8304
8305
8306
8307
8308
8309
8310
8311
8312
8313
8314
8315
8316
8317
8318
8319
8320
8321
8322
8323
8324
8325
8326
8327
8328
8329
8330
8331
8332
8333
8334
8335
8336
8337
8338
8339
8340
8341
8342
8343
8344
8345
8346
8347
8348
8349
8350
8351
8352
8353
8354
8355
8356
8357
8358
8359
8360
8361
8362
8363
8364
8365
8366
8367
8368
8369
8370
8371
8372
8373
8374
8375
8376
8377
8378
8379
8380
8381
8382
8383
8384
8385
8386
8387
8388
8389
8390
8391
8392
8393
8394
8395
8396
8397
8398
8399
8400
8401
8402
8403
8404
8405
8406
8407
8408
8409
8410
8411
8412
8413
8414
8415
8416
8417
8418
8419
8420
8421
8422
8423
8424
8425
8426
8427
8428
8429
8430
8431
8432
8433
8434
8435
8436
8437
8438
8439
8440
8441
8442
8443
8444
8445
8446
8447
8448
8449
8450
8451
8452
8453
8454
8455
8456
8457
8458
8459
8460
8461
8462
8463
8464
8465
8466
8467
8468
8469
8470
8471
8472
8473
8474
8475
8476
8477
8478
8479
8480
8481
8482
8483
8484
8485
8486
8487
8488
8489
8490
8491
8492
8493
8494
8495
8496
8497
8498
8499
8500
8501
8502
8503
8504
8505
8506
8507
8508
8509
8510
8511
8512
8513
8514
8515
8516
8517
8518
8519
8520
8521
8522
8523
8524
8525
8526
8527
8528
8529
8530
8531
8532
8533
8534
8535
8536
8537
8538
8539
8540
8541
8542
8543
8544
8545
8546
8547
8548
8549
8550
8551
8552
8553
8554
8555
8556
8557
8558
8559
8560
8561
8562
8563
8564
8565
8566
8567
8568
8569
8570
8571
8572
8573
8574
8575
8576
8577
8578
8579
8580
8581
8582
8583
8584
8585
8586
8587
8588
8589
8590
8591
8592
8593
8594
8595
8596
8597
8598
8599
8600
8601
8602
8603
8604
8605
8606
8607
8608
8609
8610
8611
8612
8613
8614
8615
8616
8617
8618
8619
8620
8621
8622
8623
8624
8625
8626
8627
8628
8629
8630
8631
8632
8633
8634
8635
8636
8637
8638
8639
8640
8641
8642
8643
8644
8645
8646
8647
8648
8649
8650
8651
8652
8653
8654
8655
8656
8657
8658
8659
8660
8661
8662
8663
8664
8665
8666
8667
8668
8669
8670
8671
8672
8673
8674
8675
8676
8677
8678
8679
8680
8681
8682
8683
8684
8685
8686
8687
8688
8689
8690
8691
8692
8693
8694
8695
8696
8697
8698
8699
8700
8701
8702
8703
8704
8705
8706
8707
8708
8709
8710
8711
8712
8713
8714
8715
8716
8717
8718
8719
8720
8721
8722
8723
8724
8725
8726
8727
8728
8729
8730
8731
8732
8733
8734
8735
8736
8737
8738
8739
8740
8741
8742
8743
8744
8745
8746
8747
8748
8749
8750
8751
8752
8753
8754
8755
8756
8757
8758
8759
8760
8761
8762
8763
8764
8765
8766
8767
8768
8769
8770
8771
8772
8773
8774
8775
8776
8777
8778
8779
8780
8781
8782
8783
8784
8785
8786
8787
8788
8789
8790
8791
8792
8793
8794
8795
8796
8797
8798
8799
8800
8801
8802
8803
8804
8805
8806
8807
8808
8809
8810
8811
8812
8813
8814
8815
8816
8817
8818
8819
8820
8821
8822
8823
8824
8825
8826
8827
8828
8829
8830
8831
8832
8833
8834
8835
8836
8837
8838
8839
8840
8841
8842
8843
8844
8845
8846
8847
8848
8849
8850
8851
8852
8853
8854
8855
8856
8857
8858
8859
8860
8861
8862
8863
8864
8865
8866
8867
8868
8869
8870
8871
8872
8873
8874
8875
8876
8877
8878
8879
8880
8881
8882
8883
8884
8885
8886
8887
8888
8889
8890
8891
8892
8893
8894
8895
8896
8897
8898
8899
8900
8901
8902
8903
8904
8905
8906
8907
8908
8909
8910
8911
8912
8913
8914
8915
8916
8917
8918
8919
8920
8921
8922
8923
8924
8925
8926
8927
8928
8929
8930
8931
8932
8933
8934
8935
8936
8937
8938
8939
8940
8941
8942
8943
8944
8945
8946
8947
8948
8949
8950
8951
8952
8953
8954
8955
8956
8957
8958
8959
8960
8961
8962
8963
8964
8965
8966
8967
8968
8969
8970
8971
8972
8973
8974
8975
8976
8977
8978
8979
8980
8981
8982
8983
8984
8985
8986
8987
8988
8989
8990
8991
8992
8993
8994
8995
8996
8997
8998
8999
9000
9001
9002
9003
9004
9005
9006
9007
9008
9009
9010
9011
9012
9013
9014
9015
9016
9017
9018
9019
9020
9021
9022
9023
9024
9025
9026
9027
9028
9029
9030
9031
9032
9033
9034
9035
9036
9037
9038
9039
9040
9041
9042
9043
9044
9045
9046
9047
9048
9049
9050
9051
9052
9053
9054
9055
9056
9057
9058
9059
9060
9061
9062
9063
9064
9065
9066
9067
9068
9069
9070
9071
9072
9073
9074
9075
9076
9077
9078
9079
9080
9081
9082
9083
9084
9085
9086
9087
9088
9089
9090
9091
9092
9093
9094
9095
9096
9097
9098
9099
9100
9101
9102
9103
9104
9105
9106
9107
9108
9109
9110
9111
9112
9113
9114
9115
9116
9117
9118
9119
9120
9121
9122
9123
9124
9125
9126
9127
9128
9129
9130
9131
9132
9133
9134
9135
9136
9137
9138
9139
9140
9141
9142
9143
9144
9145
9146
9147
9148
9149
9150
9151
9152
9153
9154
9155
9156
9157
9158
9159
9160
9161
9162
9163
9164
9165
9166
9167
9168
9169
9170
9171
9172
9173
9174
9175
9176
9177
9178
9179
9180
9181
9182
9183
9184
9185
9186
9187
9188
9189
9190
9191
9192
9193
9194
9195
9196
9197
9198
9199
9200
9201
9202
9203
9204
9205
9206
9207
9208
9209
9210
9211
9212
9213
9214
9215
9216
9217
9218
9219
9220
9221
9222
9223
9224
9225
9226
9227
9228
9229
9230
9231
9232
9233
9234
9235
9236
9237
9238
9239
9240
9241
9242
9243
9244
9245
9246
9247
9248
9249
9250
9251
9252
9253
9254
9255
9256
9257
9258
9259
9260
9261
9262
9263
9264
9265
9266
9267
9268
9269
9270
9271
9272
9273
9274
9275
9276
9277
9278
9279
9280
9281
9282
9283
9284
9285
9286
9287
9288
9289
9290
9291
9292
9293
9294
9295
9296
9297
9298
9299
9300
9301
9302
9303
9304
9305
9306
9307
9308
9309
9310
9311
9312
9313
9314
9315
9316
9317
9318
9319
9320
9321
9322
9323
9324
9325
9326
9327
9328
9329
9330
9331
9332
9333
9334
9335
9336
9337
9338
9339
9340
9341
9342
9343
9344
9345
9346
9347
9348
9349
9350
9351
9352
9353
9354
9355
9356
9357
9358
9359
9360
9361
9362
9363
9364
9365
9366
9367
9368
9369
9370
9371
9372
9373
9374
9375
9376
9377
9378
9379
9380
9381
9382
9383
9384
9385
9386
9387
9388
9389
9390
9391
9392
9393
9394
9395
9396
9397
9398
9399
9400
9401
9402
9403
9404
9405
9406
9407
9408
9409
9410
9411
9412
9413
9414
9415
9416
9417
9418
9419
9420
9421
9422
9423
9424
9425
9426
9427
9428
9429
9430
9431
9432
9433
9434
9435
9436
9437
9438
9439
9440
9441
9442
9443
9444
9445
9446
9447
9448
9449
9450
9451
9452
9453
9454
9455
9456
9457
9458
9459
9460
9461
9462
9463
9464
9465
9466
9467
9468
9469
9470
9471
9472
9473
9474
9475
9476
9477
9478
9479
9480
9481
9482
9483
9484
9485
9486
9487
9488
9489
9490
9491
9492
9493
9494
9495
9496
9497
9498
9499
9500
9501
9502
9503
9504
9505
9506
9507
9508
9509
9510
9511
9512
9513
9514
9515
9516
9517
9518
9519
9520
9521
9522
9523
9524
9525
9526
9527
9528
9529
9530
9531
9532
9533
9534
9535
9536
9537
9538
9539
9540
9541
9542
9543
9544
9545
9546
9547
9548
9549
9550
9551
9552
9553
9554
9555
9556
9557
9558
9559
9560
9561
9562
9563
9564
9565
9566
9567
9568
9569
9570
9571
9572
9573
9574
9575
9576
9577
9578
9579
9580
9581
9582
9583
9584
9585
9586
9587
9588
9589
9590
9591
9592
9593
9594
9595
9596
9597
9598
9599
9600
9601
9602
9603
9604
9605
9606
9607
9608
9609
9610
9611
9612
9613
9614
9615
9616
9617
9618
9619
9620
9621
9622
9623
9624
9625
9626
9627
9628
9629
9630
9631
9632
9633
9634
9635
9636
9637
9638
9639
9640
9641
9642
9643
9644
9645
9646
9647
9648
9649
9650
9651
9652
9653
9654
9655
9656
9657
9658
9659
9660
9661
9662
9663
9664
9665
9666
9667
9668
9669
9670
9671
9672
9673
9674
9675
9676
9677
9678
9679
9680
9681
9682
9683
9684
9685
9686
9687
9688
9689
9690
9691
9692
9693
9694
9695
9696
9697
9698
9699
9700
9701
9702
9703
9704
9705
9706
9707
9708
9709
9710
9711
9712
9713
9714
9715
9716
9717
9718
9719
9720
9721
9722
9723
9724
9725
9726
9727
9728
9729
9730
9731
9732
9733
9734
9735
9736
9737
9738
9739
9740
9741
9742
9743
9744
9745
9746
9747
9748
9749
9750
9751
9752
9753
9754
9755
9756
9757
9758
9759
9760
9761
9762
9763
9764
9765
9766
9767
9768
9769
9770
9771
9772
9773
9774
9775
9776
9777
9778
9779
9780
9781
9782
9783
9784
9785
9786
9787
9788
9789
9790
9791
9792
9793
9794
9795
9796
9797
9798
9799
9800
9801
9802
9803
9804
9805
9806
9807
9808
9809
9810
9811
9812
9813
9814
9815
9816
9817
9818
9819
9820
9821
9822
9823
9824
9825
9826
9827
9828
9829
9830
9831
9832
9833
9834
9835
9836
9837
9838
9839
9840
9841
9842
9843
9844
9845
9846
9847
9848
9849
9850
9851
9852
9853
9854
9855
9856
9857
9858
9859
9860
9861
9862
9863
9864
9865
9866
9867
9868
9869
9870
9871
9872
9873
9874
9875
9876
9877
9878
9879
9880
9881
9882
9883
9884
9885
9886
9887
9888
9889
9890
9891
9892
9893
9894
9895
9896
9897
9898
9899
9900
9901
9902
9903
9904
9905
9906
9907
9908
9909
9910
9911
9912
9913
9914
9915
9916
9917
9918
9919
9920
9921
9922
9923
9924
9925
9926
9927
9928
9929
9930
9931
9932
9933
9934
9935
9936
9937
9938
9939
9940
9941
9942
9943
9944
9945
9946
9947
9948
9949
9950
9951
9952
9953
9954
9955
9956
9957
9958
9959
9960
9961
9962
9963
9964
9965
9966
9967
9968
9969
9970
9971
9972
9973
9974
9975
9976
9977
9978
9979
9980
9981
9982
9983
9984
9985
9986
9987
9988
9989
9990
9991
9992
9993
9994
9995
9996
9997
9998
9999
10000
10001
10002
10003
10004
10005
10006
10007
10008
10009
10010
10011
10012
10013
10014
10015
10016
10017
10018
10019
10020
10021
10022
10023
10024
10025
10026
10027
10028
10029
10030
10031
10032
10033
10034
10035
10036
10037
10038
10039
10040
10041
10042
10043
10044
10045
10046
10047
10048
10049
10050
10051
10052
10053
10054
10055
10056
10057
10058
10059
10060
10061
10062
10063
10064
10065
10066
10067
10068
10069
10070
10071
10072
10073
10074
10075
10076
10077
10078
10079
10080
10081
10082
10083
10084
10085
10086
10087
10088
10089
10090
10091
10092
10093
10094
10095
10096
10097
10098
10099
10100
10101
10102
10103
10104
10105
10106
10107
10108
10109
10110
10111
10112
10113
10114
10115
10116
10117
10118
10119
10120
10121
10122
10123
10124
10125
10126
10127
10128
10129
10130
10131
10132
10133
10134
10135
10136
10137
10138
10139
10140
10141
10142
10143
10144
10145
10146
10147
10148
10149
10150
10151
10152
10153
10154
10155
10156
10157
10158
10159
10160
10161
10162
10163
10164
10165
10166
10167
10168
10169
10170
10171
10172
10173
10174
10175
10176
10177
10178
10179
10180
10181
10182
10183
10184
10185
10186
10187
10188
10189
10190
10191
10192
10193
10194
10195
10196
10197
10198
10199
10200
10201
10202
10203
10204
10205
10206
10207
10208
10209
10210
10211
10212
10213
10214
10215
10216
10217
10218
10219
10220
10221
10222
10223
10224
10225
10226
10227
10228
10229
10230
10231
10232
10233
10234
10235
10236
10237
10238
10239
10240
10241
10242
10243
10244
10245
10246
10247
10248
10249
10250
10251
10252
10253
10254
10255
10256
10257
10258
10259
10260
10261
10262
10263
10264
10265
10266
10267
10268
10269
10270
10271
10272
10273
10274
10275
10276
10277
10278
10279
10280
10281
10282
10283
10284
10285
10286
10287
10288
10289
10290
10291
10292
10293
10294
10295
10296
10297
10298
10299
10300
10301
10302
10303
10304
10305
10306
10307
10308
10309
10310
10311
10312
10313
10314
10315
10316
10317
10318
10319
10320
10321
10322
10323
10324
10325
10326
10327
10328
10329
10330
10331
10332
10333
10334
10335
10336
10337
10338
10339
10340
10341
10342
10343
10344
10345
10346
10347
10348
10349
10350
10351
10352
10353
10354
10355
10356
10357
10358
10359
10360
10361
10362
10363
10364
10365
10366
10367
10368
10369
10370
10371
10372
10373
10374
10375
10376
10377
10378
10379
10380
10381
10382
10383
10384
10385
10386
10387
10388
10389
10390
10391
10392
10393
10394
10395
10396
10397
10398
10399
10400
10401
10402
10403
10404
10405
10406
10407
10408
10409
10410
10411
10412
10413
10414
10415
10416
10417
10418
10419
10420
10421
10422
10423
10424
10425
10426
10427
10428
10429
10430
10431
10432
10433
10434
10435
10436
10437
10438
10439
10440
10441
10442
10443
10444
10445
10446
10447
10448
10449
10450
10451
10452
10453
10454
10455
10456
10457
10458
10459
10460
10461
10462
10463
10464
10465
10466
10467
10468
10469
10470
10471
10472
10473
10474
10475
10476
10477
10478
10479
10480
10481
10482
10483
10484
10485
10486
10487
10488
10489
10490
10491
10492
10493
10494
10495
10496
10497
10498
10499
10500
10501
10502
10503
10504
10505
10506
10507
10508
10509
10510
10511
10512
10513
10514
10515
10516
10517
10518
10519
10520
10521
10522
10523
10524
10525
10526
10527
10528
10529
10530
10531
10532
10533
10534
10535
10536
10537
10538
10539
10540
10541
10542
10543
10544
10545
10546
10547
10548
10549
10550
10551
10552
10553
10554
10555
10556
10557
10558
10559
10560
10561
10562
10563
10564
10565
10566
10567
10568
10569
10570
10571
10572
10573
10574
10575
10576
10577
10578
10579
10580
10581
10582
10583
10584
10585
10586
10587
10588
10589
10590
10591
10592
10593
10594
10595
10596
10597
10598
10599
10600
10601
10602
10603
10604
10605
10606
10607
10608
10609
10610
10611
10612
10613
10614
10615
10616
10617
10618
10619
10620
10621
10622
10623
10624
10625
10626
10627
10628
10629
10630
10631
10632
10633
10634
10635
10636
10637
10638
10639
10640
10641
10642
10643
10644
10645
10646
10647
10648
10649
10650
10651
10652
10653
10654
10655
10656
10657
10658
10659
10660
10661
10662
10663
10664
10665
10666
10667
10668
10669
10670
10671
10672
10673
10674
10675
10676
10677
10678
10679
10680
10681
10682
10683
10684
10685
10686
10687
10688
10689
10690
10691
10692
10693
10694
10695
10696
10697
10698
10699
10700
10701
10702
10703
10704
10705
10706
10707
10708
10709
10710
10711
10712
10713
10714
10715
10716
10717
10718
10719
10720
10721
10722
10723
10724
10725
10726
10727
10728
10729
10730
10731
10732
10733
10734
10735
10736
10737
10738
10739
10740
10741
10742
10743
10744
10745
10746
10747
10748
10749
10750
10751
10752
10753
10754
10755
10756
10757
10758
10759
10760
10761
10762
10763
10764
10765
10766
10767
10768
10769
10770
10771
10772
10773
10774
10775
10776
10777
10778
10779
10780
10781
10782
10783
10784
10785
10786
10787
10788
10789
10790
10791
10792
10793
10794
10795
10796
10797
10798
10799
10800
10801
10802
10803
10804
10805
10806
10807
10808
10809
10810
10811
10812
10813
10814
10815
10816
10817
10818
10819
10820
10821
10822
10823
10824
10825
10826
10827
10828
10829
10830
10831
10832
10833
10834
10835
10836
10837
10838
10839
10840
10841
10842
10843
10844
10845
10846
10847
10848
10849
10850
10851
10852
10853
10854
10855
10856
10857
10858
10859
10860
10861
10862
10863
10864
10865
10866
10867
10868
10869
10870
10871
10872
10873
10874
10875
10876
10877
10878
10879
10880
10881
10882
10883
10884
10885
10886
10887
10888
10889
10890
10891
10892
10893
10894
10895
10896
10897
10898
10899
10900
10901
10902
10903
10904
10905
10906
10907
10908
10909
10910
10911
10912
10913
10914
10915
10916
10917
10918
10919
10920
10921
10922
10923
10924
10925
10926
10927
10928
10929
10930
10931
10932
10933
10934
10935
10936
10937
10938
10939
10940
10941
10942
10943
10944
10945
10946
10947
10948
10949
10950
10951
10952
10953
10954
10955
10956
10957
10958
10959
10960
10961
10962
10963
10964
10965
10966
10967
10968
10969
10970
10971
10972
10973
10974
10975
10976
10977
10978
10979
10980
10981
10982
10983
10984
10985
10986
10987
10988
10989
10990
10991
10992
10993
10994
10995
10996
10997
10998
10999
11000
11001
11002
11003
11004
11005
11006
11007
11008
11009
11010
11011
11012
11013
11014
11015
11016
11017
11018
11019
11020
11021
11022
11023
11024
11025
11026
11027
11028
11029
11030
11031
11032
11033
11034
11035
11036
11037
11038
11039
11040
11041
11042
11043
11044
11045
11046
11047
11048
11049
11050
11051
11052
11053
11054
11055
11056
11057
11058
11059
11060
11061
11062
11063
11064
11065
11066
11067
11068
11069
11070
11071
11072
11073
11074
11075
11076
11077
11078
11079
11080
11081
11082
11083
11084
11085
11086
11087
11088
11089
11090
11091
11092
11093
11094
11095
11096
11097
11098
11099
11100
11101
11102
11103
11104
11105
11106
11107
11108
11109
11110
11111
11112
11113
11114
11115
11116
11117
11118
11119
11120
11121
11122
11123
11124
11125
11126
11127
11128
11129
11130
11131
11132
11133
11134
11135
11136
11137
11138
11139
11140
11141
11142
11143
11144
11145
11146
11147
11148
11149
11150
11151
11152
11153
11154
11155
11156
11157
11158
11159
11160
11161
11162
11163
11164
11165
11166
11167
11168
11169
11170
11171
11172
11173
11174
11175
11176
11177
11178
11179
11180
11181
11182
11183
11184
11185
11186
11187
11188
11189
11190
11191
11192
11193
11194
11195
11196
11197
11198
11199
11200
11201
11202
11203
11204
11205
11206
11207
11208
11209
11210
11211
11212
11213
11214
11215
11216
11217
11218
11219
11220
11221
11222
11223
11224
11225
11226
11227
11228
11229
11230
11231
11232
11233
11234
11235
11236
11237
11238
11239
11240
11241
11242
11243
11244
11245
11246
11247
11248
11249
11250
11251
11252
11253
11254
11255
11256
11257
11258
11259
11260
11261
11262
11263
11264
11265
11266
11267
11268
11269
11270
11271
11272
11273
11274
11275
11276
11277
11278
11279
11280
11281
11282
11283
11284
11285
11286
11287
11288
11289
11290
11291
11292
11293
11294
11295
11296
11297
11298
11299
11300
11301
11302
11303
11304
11305
11306
11307
11308
11309
11310
11311
11312
11313
11314
11315
11316
11317
11318
11319
11320
11321
11322
11323
11324
11325
11326
11327
11328
11329
11330
11331
11332
11333
11334
11335
11336
11337
11338
11339
11340
11341
11342
11343
11344
11345
11346
11347
11348
11349
11350
11351
11352
11353
11354
11355
11356
11357
11358
11359
11360
11361
11362
11363
11364
11365
11366
11367
11368
11369
11370
11371
11372
11373
11374
11375
11376
11377
11378
11379
11380
11381
11382
11383
11384
11385
11386
11387
11388
11389
11390
11391
11392
11393
11394
11395
11396
11397
11398
11399
11400
11401
11402
11403
11404
11405
11406
11407
11408
11409
11410
11411
11412
11413
11414
11415
11416
11417
11418
11419
11420
11421
11422
11423
11424
11425
11426
11427
11428
11429
11430
11431
11432
11433
11434
11435
11436
11437
11438
11439
11440
11441
11442
11443
11444
11445
11446
11447
11448
11449
11450
11451
11452
11453
11454
11455
11456
11457
11458
11459
11460
11461
11462
11463
11464
11465
11466
11467
11468
11469
11470
11471
11472
11473
11474
11475
11476
11477
11478
11479
11480
11481
11482
11483
11484
11485
11486
11487
11488
11489
11490
11491
11492
11493
11494
11495
11496
11497
11498
11499
11500
11501
11502
11503
11504
11505
11506
11507
11508
11509
11510
11511
11512
11513
11514
11515
11516
11517
11518
11519
11520
11521
11522
11523
11524
11525
11526
11527
11528
11529
11530
11531
11532
11533
11534
11535
11536
11537
11538
11539
11540
11541
11542
11543
11544
11545
11546
11547
11548
11549
11550
11551
11552
11553
11554
11555
11556
11557
11558
11559
11560
11561
11562
11563
11564
11565
11566
11567
11568
11569
11570
11571
11572
11573
11574
11575
11576
11577
11578
11579
11580
11581
11582
11583
11584
11585
11586
11587
11588
11589
11590
11591
11592
11593
11594
11595
11596
11597
11598
11599
11600
11601
11602
11603
11604
11605
11606
11607
11608
11609
11610
11611
11612
11613
11614
11615
11616
11617
11618
11619
11620
11621
11622
11623
11624
11625
11626
11627
11628
11629
11630
11631
11632
11633
11634
11635
11636
11637
11638
11639
11640
11641
11642
11643
11644
11645
11646
11647
11648
11649
11650
11651
11652
11653
11654
11655
11656
11657
11658
11659
11660
11661
11662
11663
11664
11665
11666
11667
11668
11669
11670
11671
11672
11673
11674
11675
11676
11677
11678
11679
11680
11681
11682
11683
11684
11685
11686
11687
11688
11689
11690
11691
11692
11693
11694
11695
11696
11697
11698
11699
11700
11701
11702
11703
11704
11705
11706
11707
11708
11709
11710
11711
11712
11713
11714
11715
11716
11717
11718
11719
11720
11721
11722
11723
11724
11725
11726
11727
11728
11729
11730
11731
11732
11733
11734
11735
11736
11737
11738
11739
11740
11741
11742
11743
11744
11745
11746
11747
11748
11749
11750
11751
11752
11753
11754
11755
11756
11757
11758
11759
11760
11761
11762
11763
11764
11765
11766
11767
11768
11769
11770
11771
11772
11773
11774
11775
11776
11777
11778
11779
11780
11781
11782
11783
11784
11785
11786
11787
11788
11789
11790
11791
11792
11793
11794
11795
11796
11797
11798
11799
11800
11801
11802
11803
11804
11805
11806
11807
11808
11809
11810
11811
11812
11813
11814
11815
11816
11817
11818
11819
11820
11821
11822
11823
11824
11825
11826
11827
11828
11829
11830
11831
11832
11833
11834
11835
11836
11837
11838
11839
11840
11841
11842
11843
11844
11845
11846
11847
11848
11849
11850
11851
11852
11853
11854
11855
11856
11857
11858
11859
11860
11861
11862
11863
11864
11865
11866
11867
11868
11869
11870
11871
11872
11873
11874
11875
11876
11877
11878
11879
11880
11881
11882
11883
11884
11885
11886
11887
11888
11889
11890
11891
11892
11893
11894
11895
11896
11897
11898
11899
11900
11901
11902
11903
11904
11905
11906
11907
11908
11909
11910
11911
11912
11913
11914
11915
11916
11917
11918
11919
11920
11921
11922
11923
11924
11925
11926
11927
11928
11929
11930
11931
11932
11933
11934
11935
11936
11937
11938
11939
11940
11941
11942
11943
11944
11945
11946
11947
11948
11949
11950
11951
11952
11953
11954
11955
11956
11957
11958
11959
11960
11961
11962
11963
11964
11965
11966
11967
11968
11969
11970
11971
11972
11973
11974
11975
11976
11977
11978
11979
11980
11981
11982
11983
11984
11985
11986
11987
11988
11989
11990
11991
11992
11993
11994
11995
11996
11997
11998
11999
12000
12001
12002
12003
12004
12005
12006
12007
12008
12009
12010
12011
12012
12013
12014
12015
12016
12017
12018
12019
12020
12021
12022
12023
12024
12025
12026
12027
12028
12029
12030
12031
12032
12033
12034
12035
12036
12037
12038
12039
12040
12041
12042
12043
12044
12045
12046
12047
12048
12049
12050
12051
12052
12053
12054
12055
12056
12057
12058
12059
12060
12061
12062
12063
12064
12065
12066
12067
12068
12069
12070
12071
12072
12073
12074
12075
12076
12077
12078
12079
12080
12081
12082
12083
12084
12085
12086
12087
12088
12089
12090
12091
12092
12093
12094
12095
12096
12097
12098
12099
12100
12101
12102
12103
12104
12105
12106
12107
12108
12109
12110
12111
12112
12113
12114
12115
12116
12117
12118
12119
12120
12121
12122
12123
12124
12125
12126
12127
12128
12129
12130
12131
12132
12133
12134
12135
12136
12137
12138
12139
12140
12141
12142
12143
12144
12145
12146
12147
12148
12149
12150
12151
12152
12153
12154
12155
12156
12157
12158
12159
12160
12161
12162
12163
12164
12165
12166
12167
12168
12169
12170
12171
12172
12173
12174
12175
12176
12177
12178
12179
12180
12181
12182
12183
12184
12185
12186
12187
12188
12189
12190
12191
12192
12193
12194
12195
12196
12197
12198
12199
12200
12201
12202
12203
12204
12205
12206
12207
12208
12209
12210
12211
12212
12213
12214
12215
12216
12217
12218
12219
12220
12221
12222
12223
12224
12225
12226
12227
12228
12229
12230
12231
12232
12233
12234
12235
12236
12237
12238
12239
12240
12241
12242
12243
12244
12245
12246
12247
12248
12249
12250
12251
12252
12253
12254
12255
12256
12257
12258
12259
12260
12261
12262
12263
12264
12265
12266
12267
12268
12269
12270
12271
12272
12273
12274
12275
12276
12277
12278
12279
12280
12281
12282
12283
12284
12285
12286
12287
12288
12289
12290
12291
12292
12293
12294
12295
12296
12297
12298
12299
12300
12301
12302
12303
12304
12305
12306
12307
12308
12309
12310
12311
12312
12313
12314
12315
12316
12317
12318
12319
12320
12321
12322
12323
12324
12325
12326
12327
12328
12329
12330
12331
12332
12333
12334
12335
12336
12337
12338
12339
12340
12341
12342
12343
12344
12345
12346
12347
12348
12349
12350
12351
12352
12353
12354
12355
12356
12357
12358
12359
12360
12361
12362
12363
12364
12365
12366
12367
12368
12369
12370
12371
12372
12373
12374
12375
12376
12377
12378
12379
12380
12381
12382
12383
12384
12385
12386
12387
12388
12389
12390
12391
12392
12393
12394
12395
12396
12397
12398
12399
12400
12401
12402
12403
12404
12405
12406
12407
12408
12409
12410
12411
12412
12413
12414
12415
12416
12417
12418
12419
12420
12421
12422
12423
12424
12425
12426
12427
12428
12429
12430
12431
12432
12433
12434
12435
12436
12437
12438
12439
12440
12441
12442
12443
12444
12445
12446
12447
12448
12449
12450
12451
12452
12453
12454
12455
12456
12457
12458
12459
12460
12461
12462
12463
12464
12465
12466
12467
12468
12469
12470
12471
12472
12473
12474
12475
12476
12477
12478
12479
12480
12481
12482
12483
12484
12485
12486
12487
12488
12489
12490
12491
12492
12493
12494
12495
12496
12497
12498
12499
12500
12501
12502
12503
12504
12505
12506
12507
12508
12509
12510
12511
12512
12513
12514
12515
12516
12517
12518
12519
12520
12521
12522
12523
12524
12525
12526
12527
12528
12529
12530
12531
12532
12533
12534
12535
12536
12537
12538
12539
12540
12541
12542
12543
12544
12545
12546
12547
12548
12549
12550
12551
12552
12553
12554
12555
12556
12557
12558
12559
12560
12561
12562
12563
12564
12565
12566
12567
12568
12569
12570
12571
12572
12573
12574
12575
12576
12577
12578
12579
12580
12581
12582
12583
12584
12585
12586
12587
12588
12589
12590
12591
12592
12593
12594
12595
12596
12597
12598
12599
12600
12601
12602
12603
12604
12605
12606
12607
12608
12609
12610
12611
12612
12613
12614
12615
12616
12617
12618
12619
12620
12621
12622
12623
12624
12625
12626
12627
12628
12629
12630
12631
12632
12633
12634
12635
12636
12637
12638
12639
12640
12641
12642
12643
12644
12645
12646
12647
12648
12649
12650
12651
12652
12653
12654
12655
12656
12657
12658
12659
12660
12661
12662
12663
12664
12665
12666
12667
12668
12669
12670
12671
12672
12673
12674
12675
12676
12677
12678
12679
12680
12681
12682
12683
12684
12685
12686
12687
12688
12689
12690
12691
12692
12693
12694
12695
12696
12697
12698
12699
12700
12701
12702
12703
12704
12705
12706
12707
12708
12709
12710
12711
12712
12713
12714
12715
12716
12717
12718
12719
12720
12721
12722
12723
12724
12725
12726
12727
12728
12729
12730
12731
12732
12733
12734
12735
12736
12737
12738
12739
12740
12741
12742
12743
12744
12745
12746
12747
12748
12749
12750
12751
12752
12753
12754
12755
12756
12757
12758
12759
12760
12761
12762
12763
12764
12765
12766
12767
12768
12769
12770
12771
12772
12773
12774
12775
12776
12777
12778
12779
12780
12781
12782
12783
12784
12785
12786
12787
12788
12789
12790
12791
12792
12793
12794
12795
12796
12797
12798
12799
12800
12801
12802
12803
12804
12805
12806
12807
12808
12809
12810
12811
12812
12813
12814
12815
12816
12817
12818
12819
12820
12821
12822
12823
12824
12825
12826
12827
12828
12829
12830
12831
12832
12833
12834
12835
12836
12837
12838
12839
12840
12841
12842
12843
12844
12845
12846
12847
12848
12849
12850
12851
12852
12853
12854
12855
12856
12857
12858
12859
12860
12861
12862
12863
12864
12865
12866
12867
12868
12869
12870
12871
12872
12873
12874
12875
12876
12877
12878
12879
12880
12881
12882
12883
12884
12885
12886
12887
12888
12889
12890
12891
12892
12893
12894
12895
12896
12897
12898
12899
12900
12901
12902
12903
12904
12905
12906
12907
12908
12909
12910
12911
12912
12913
12914
12915
12916
12917
12918
12919
12920
12921
12922
12923
12924
12925
12926
12927
12928
12929
12930
12931
12932
12933
12934
12935
12936
12937
12938
12939
12940
12941
12942
12943
12944
12945
12946
12947
12948
12949
12950
12951
12952
12953
12954
12955
12956
12957
12958
12959
12960
12961
12962
12963
12964
12965
12966
12967
12968
12969
12970
12971
12972
12973
12974
12975
12976
12977
12978
12979
12980
12981
12982
12983
12984
12985
12986
12987
12988
12989
12990
12991
12992
12993
12994
12995
12996
12997
12998
12999
13000
13001
13002
13003
13004
13005
13006
13007
13008
13009
13010
13011
13012
13013
13014
13015
13016
13017
13018
13019
13020
13021
13022
13023
13024
13025
13026
13027
13028
13029
13030
13031
13032
13033
13034
13035
13036
13037
13038
13039
13040
13041
13042
13043
13044
13045
13046
13047
13048
13049
13050
13051
13052
13053
13054
13055
13056
13057
13058
13059
13060
13061
13062
13063
13064
13065
13066
13067
13068
13069
13070
13071
13072
13073
13074
13075
13076
13077
13078
13079
13080
13081
13082
13083
13084
13085
13086
13087
13088
13089
13090
13091
13092
13093
13094
13095
13096
13097
13098
13099
13100
13101
13102
13103
13104
13105
13106
13107
13108
13109
13110
13111
13112
13113
13114
13115
13116
13117
13118
13119
13120
13121
13122
13123
13124
13125
13126
13127
13128
13129
13130
13131
13132
13133
13134
13135
13136
13137
13138
13139
13140
13141
13142
13143
13144
13145
13146
13147
13148
13149
13150
13151
13152
13153
13154
13155
13156
13157
13158
13159
13160
13161
13162
13163
13164
13165
13166
13167
13168
13169
13170
13171
13172
13173
13174
13175
13176
13177
13178
13179
13180
13181
13182
13183
13184
13185
13186
13187
13188
13189
13190
13191
13192
13193
13194
13195
13196
13197
13198
13199
13200
13201
13202
13203
13204
13205
13206
13207
13208
13209
13210
13211
13212
13213
13214
13215
13216
13217
13218
13219
13220
13221
13222
13223
13224
13225
13226
13227
13228
13229
13230
13231
13232
13233
13234
13235
13236
13237
13238
13239
13240
13241
13242
13243
13244
13245
13246
13247
13248
13249
13250
13251
13252
13253
13254
13255
13256
13257
13258
13259
13260
13261
13262
13263
13264
13265
13266
13267
13268
13269
13270
13271
13272
13273
13274
13275
13276
13277
13278
13279
13280
13281
13282
13283
13284
13285
13286
13287
13288
13289
13290
13291
13292
13293
13294
13295
13296
13297
13298
13299
13300
13301
13302
13303
13304
13305
13306
13307
13308
13309
13310
13311
13312
13313
13314
13315
13316
13317
13318
13319
13320
13321
13322
13323
13324
13325
13326
13327
13328
13329
13330
13331
13332
13333
13334
13335
13336
13337
13338
13339
13340
13341
13342
13343
13344
13345
13346
13347
13348
13349
13350
13351
13352
13353
13354
13355
13356
13357
13358
13359
13360
13361
13362
13363
13364
13365
13366
13367
13368
13369
13370
13371
13372
13373
13374
13375
13376
13377
13378
13379
13380
13381
13382
13383
13384
13385
13386
13387
13388
13389
13390
13391
13392
13393
13394
13395
13396
13397
13398
13399
13400
13401
13402
13403
13404
13405
13406
13407
13408
13409
13410
13411
13412
13413
13414
13415
13416
13417
13418
13419
13420
13421
13422
13423
13424
13425
13426
13427
13428
13429
13430
13431
13432
13433
13434
13435
13436
13437
13438
13439
13440
13441
13442
13443
13444
13445
13446
13447
13448
13449
13450
13451
13452
13453
13454
13455
13456
13457
13458
13459
13460
13461
13462
13463
13464
13465
13466
13467
13468
13469
13470
13471
13472
13473
13474
13475
13476
13477
13478
13479
13480
13481
13482
13483
13484
13485
13486
13487
13488
13489
13490
13491
13492
13493
13494
13495
13496
13497
13498
13499
13500
13501
13502
13503
13504
13505
13506
13507
13508
13509
13510
13511
13512
13513
13514
13515
13516
13517
13518
13519
13520
13521
13522
13523
13524
13525
13526
13527
13528
13529
13530
13531
13532
13533
13534
13535
13536
13537
13538
13539
13540
13541
13542
13543
13544
13545
13546
13547
13548
13549
13550
13551
13552
13553
13554
13555
13556
13557
13558
13559
13560
13561
13562
13563
13564
13565
13566
13567
13568
13569
13570
13571
13572
13573
13574
13575
13576
13577
13578
13579
13580
13581
13582
13583
13584
13585
13586
13587
13588
13589
13590
13591
13592
13593
13594
13595
13596
13597
13598
13599
13600
13601
13602
13603
13604
13605
13606
13607
13608
13609
13610
13611
13612
13613
13614
13615
13616
13617
13618
13619
13620
13621
13622
13623
13624
13625
13626
13627
13628
13629
13630
13631
13632
13633
13634
13635
13636
13637
13638
13639
13640
13641
13642
13643
13644
13645
13646
13647
13648
13649
13650
13651
13652
13653
13654
13655
13656
13657
13658
13659
13660
13661
13662
13663
13664
13665
13666
13667
13668
13669
13670
13671
13672
13673
13674
13675
13676
13677
13678
13679
13680
13681
13682
13683
13684
13685
13686
13687
13688
13689
13690
13691
13692
13693
13694
13695
13696
13697
13698
13699
13700
13701
13702
13703
13704
13705
13706
13707
13708
13709
13710
13711
13712
13713
13714
13715
13716
13717
13718
13719
13720
13721
13722
13723
13724
13725
13726
13727
13728
13729
13730
13731
13732
13733
13734
13735
13736
13737
13738
13739
13740
13741
13742
13743
13744
13745
13746
13747
13748
13749
13750
13751
13752
13753
13754
13755
13756
13757
13758
13759
13760
13761
13762
13763
13764
13765
13766
13767
13768
13769
13770
13771
13772
13773
13774
13775
13776
13777
13778
13779
13780
13781
13782
13783
13784
13785
13786
13787
13788
13789
13790
13791
13792
13793
13794
13795
13796
13797
13798
13799
13800
13801
13802
13803
13804
13805
13806
13807
13808
13809
13810
13811
13812
13813
13814
13815
13816
13817
13818
13819
13820
13821
13822
13823
13824
13825
13826
13827
13828
13829
13830
13831
13832
13833
13834
13835
13836
13837
13838
13839
13840
13841
13842
13843
13844
13845
13846
13847
13848
13849
13850
13851
13852
13853
13854
13855
13856
13857
13858
13859
13860
13861
13862
13863
13864
13865
13866
13867
13868
13869
13870
13871
13872
13873
13874
13875
13876
13877
13878
13879
13880
13881
13882
13883
13884
13885
13886
13887
13888
13889
13890
13891
13892
13893
13894
13895
13896
13897
13898
13899
13900
13901
13902
13903
13904
13905
13906
13907
13908
13909
13910
13911
13912
13913
13914
13915
13916
13917
13918
13919
13920
13921
13922
13923
13924
13925
13926
13927
13928
13929
13930
13931
13932
13933
13934
13935
13936
13937
13938
13939
13940
13941
13942
13943
13944
13945
13946
13947
13948
13949
13950
13951
13952
13953
13954
13955
13956
13957
13958
13959
13960
13961
13962
13963
13964
13965
13966
13967
13968
13969
13970
13971
13972
13973
13974
13975
13976
13977
13978
13979
13980
13981
13982
13983
13984
13985
13986
13987
13988
13989
13990
13991
13992
13993
13994
13995
13996
13997
13998
13999
14000
14001
14002
14003
14004
14005
14006
14007
14008
14009
14010
14011
14012
14013
14014
14015
14016
14017
14018
14019
14020
14021
14022
14023
14024
14025
14026
14027
14028
14029
14030
14031
14032
14033
14034
14035
14036
14037
14038
14039
14040
14041
14042
14043
14044
14045
14046
14047
14048
14049
14050
14051
14052
14053
14054
14055
14056
14057
14058
14059
14060
14061
14062
14063
14064
14065
14066
14067
14068
14069
14070
14071
14072
14073
14074
14075
14076
14077
14078
14079
14080
14081
14082
14083
14084
14085
14086
14087
14088
14089
14090
14091
14092
14093
14094
14095
14096
14097
14098
14099
14100
14101
14102
14103
14104
14105
14106
14107
14108
14109
14110
14111
14112
14113
14114
14115
14116
14117
14118
14119
14120
14121
14122
14123
14124
14125
14126
14127
14128
14129
14130
14131
14132
14133
14134
14135
14136
14137
14138
14139
14140
14141
14142
14143
14144
14145
14146
14147
14148
14149
14150
14151
14152
14153
14154
14155
14156
14157
14158
14159
14160
14161
14162
14163
14164
14165
14166
14167
14168
14169
14170
14171
14172
14173
14174
14175
14176
14177
14178
14179
14180
14181
14182
14183
14184
14185
14186
14187
14188
14189
14190
14191
14192
14193
14194
14195
14196
14197
14198
14199
14200
14201
14202
14203
14204
14205
14206
14207
14208
14209
14210
14211
14212
14213
14214
14215
14216
14217
14218
14219
14220
14221
14222
14223
14224
14225
14226
14227
14228
14229
14230
14231
14232
14233
14234
14235
14236
14237
14238
14239
14240
14241
14242
14243
14244
14245
14246
14247
14248
14249
14250
14251
14252
14253
14254
14255
14256
14257
14258
14259
14260
14261
14262
14263
14264
14265
14266
14267
14268
14269
14270
14271
14272
14273
14274
14275
14276
14277
14278
14279
14280
14281
14282
14283
14284
14285
14286
14287
14288
14289
14290
14291
14292
14293
14294
14295
14296
14297
14298
14299
14300
14301
14302
14303
14304
14305
14306
14307
14308
14309
14310
14311
14312
14313
14314
14315
14316
14317
14318
14319
14320
14321
14322
14323
14324
14325
14326
14327
14328
14329
14330
14331
14332
14333
14334
14335
14336
14337
14338
14339
14340
14341
14342
14343
14344
14345
14346
14347
14348
14349
14350
14351
14352
14353
14354
14355
14356
14357
14358
14359
14360
14361
14362
14363
14364
14365
14366
14367
14368
14369
14370
14371
14372
14373
14374
14375
14376
14377
14378
14379
14380
14381
14382
14383
14384
14385
14386
14387
14388
14389
14390
14391
14392
14393
14394
14395
14396
14397
14398
14399
14400
14401
14402
14403
14404
14405
14406
14407
14408
14409
14410
14411
14412
14413
14414
14415
14416
14417
14418
14419
14420
14421
14422
14423
14424
14425
14426
14427
14428
14429
14430
14431
14432
14433
14434
14435
14436
14437
14438
14439
14440
14441
14442
14443
14444
14445
14446
14447
14448
14449
14450
14451
14452
14453
14454
14455
14456
14457
14458
14459
14460
14461
14462
14463
14464
14465
14466
14467
14468
14469
14470
14471
14472
14473
14474
14475
14476
14477
14478
14479
14480
14481
14482
14483
14484
14485
14486
14487
14488
14489
14490
14491
14492
14493
14494
14495
14496
14497
14498
14499
14500
14501
14502
14503
14504
14505
14506
14507
14508
14509
14510
14511
14512
14513
14514
14515
14516
14517
14518
14519
14520
14521
14522
14523
14524
14525
14526
14527
14528
14529
14530
14531
14532
14533
14534
14535
14536
14537
14538
14539
14540
14541
14542
14543
14544
14545
14546
14547
14548
14549
14550
14551
14552
14553
14554
14555
14556
14557
14558
14559
14560
14561
14562
14563
14564
14565
14566
14567
14568
14569
14570
14571
14572
14573
14574
14575
14576
14577
14578
14579
14580
14581
14582
14583
14584
14585
14586
14587
14588
14589
14590
14591
14592
14593
14594
14595
14596
14597
14598
14599
14600
14601
14602
14603
14604
14605
14606
14607
14608
14609
14610
14611
14612
14613
14614
14615
14616
14617
14618
14619
14620
14621
14622
14623
14624
14625
14626
14627
14628
14629
14630
14631
14632
14633
14634
14635
14636
14637
14638
14639
14640
14641
14642
14643
14644
14645
14646
14647
14648
14649
14650
14651
14652
14653
14654
14655
14656
14657
14658
14659
14660
14661
14662
14663
14664
14665
14666
14667
14668
14669
14670
14671
14672
14673
14674
14675
14676
14677
14678
14679
14680
14681
14682
14683
14684
14685
14686
14687
14688
14689
14690
14691
14692
14693
14694
14695
14696
14697
14698
14699
14700
14701
14702
14703
14704
14705
14706
14707
14708
14709
14710
14711
14712
14713
14714
14715
14716
14717
14718
14719
14720
14721
14722
14723
14724
14725
14726
14727
14728
14729
14730
14731
14732
14733
14734
14735
14736
14737
14738
14739
14740
14741
14742
14743
14744
14745
14746
14747
14748
14749
14750
14751
14752
14753
14754
14755
14756
14757
14758
14759
14760
14761
14762
14763
14764
14765
14766
14767
14768
14769
14770
14771
14772
14773
14774
14775
14776
14777
14778
14779
14780
14781
14782
14783
14784
14785
14786
14787
14788
14789
14790
14791
14792
14793
14794
14795
14796
14797
14798
14799
14800
14801
14802
14803
14804
14805
14806
14807
14808
14809
14810
14811
14812
14813
14814
14815
14816
14817
14818
14819
14820
14821
14822
14823
14824
14825
14826
14827
14828
14829
14830
14831
14832
14833
14834
14835
14836
14837
14838
14839
14840
14841
14842
14843
14844
14845
14846
14847
14848
14849
14850
14851
14852
14853
14854
14855
14856
14857
14858
14859
14860
14861
14862
14863
14864
14865
14866
14867
14868
14869
14870
14871
14872
14873
14874
14875
14876
14877
14878
14879
14880
14881
14882
14883
14884
14885
14886
14887
14888
14889
14890
14891
14892
14893
14894
14895
14896
14897
14898
14899
14900
14901
14902
14903
14904
14905
14906
14907
14908
14909
14910
14911
14912
14913
14914
14915
14916
14917
14918
14919
14920
14921
14922
14923
14924
14925
14926
14927
14928
14929
14930
14931
14932
14933
14934
14935
14936
14937
14938
14939
14940
14941
14942
14943
14944
14945
14946
14947
14948
14949
14950
14951
14952
14953
14954
14955
14956
14957
14958
14959
14960
14961
14962
14963
14964
14965
14966
14967
14968
14969
14970
14971
14972
14973
14974
14975
14976
14977
14978
14979
14980
14981
14982
14983
14984
14985
14986
14987
14988
14989
14990
14991
14992
14993
14994
14995
14996
14997
14998
14999
15000
15001
15002
15003
15004
15005
15006
15007
15008
15009
15010
15011
15012
15013
15014
15015
15016
15017
15018
15019
15020
15021
15022
15023
15024
15025
15026
15027
15028
15029
15030
15031
15032
15033
15034
15035
15036
15037
15038
15039
15040
15041
15042
15043
15044
15045
15046
15047
15048
15049
15050
15051
15052
15053
15054
15055
15056
15057
15058
15059
15060
15061
15062
15063
15064
15065
15066
15067
15068
15069
15070
15071
15072
15073
15074
15075
15076
15077
15078
15079
15080
15081
15082
15083
15084
15085
15086
15087
15088
15089
15090
15091
15092
15093
15094
15095
15096
15097
15098
15099
15100
15101
15102
15103
15104
15105
15106
15107
15108
15109
15110
15111
15112
15113
15114
15115
15116
15117
15118
15119
15120
15121
15122
15123
15124
15125
15126
15127
15128
15129
15130
15131
15132
15133
15134
15135
15136
15137
15138
15139
15140
15141
15142
15143
15144
15145
15146
15147
15148
15149
15150
15151
15152
15153
15154
15155
15156
15157
15158
15159
15160
15161
15162
15163
15164
15165
15166
15167
15168
15169
15170
15171
15172
15173
15174
15175
15176
15177
15178
15179
15180
15181
15182
15183
15184
15185
15186
15187
15188
15189
15190
15191
15192
15193
15194
15195
15196
15197
15198
15199
15200
15201
15202
15203
15204
15205
15206
15207
15208
15209
15210
15211
15212
15213
15214
15215
15216
15217
15218
15219
15220
15221
15222
15223
15224
15225
15226
15227
15228
15229
15230
15231
15232
15233
15234
15235
15236
15237
15238
15239
15240
15241
15242
15243
15244
15245
15246
15247
15248
15249
15250
15251
15252
15253
15254
15255
15256
15257
15258
15259
15260
15261
15262
15263
15264
15265
15266
15267
15268
15269
15270
15271
15272
15273
15274
15275
15276
15277
15278
15279
15280
15281
15282
15283
15284
15285
15286
15287
15288
15289
15290
15291
15292
15293
15294
15295
15296
15297
15298
15299
15300
15301
15302
15303
15304
15305
15306
15307
15308
15309
15310
15311
15312
15313
15314
15315
15316
15317
15318
15319
15320
15321
15322
15323
15324
15325
15326
15327
15328
15329
15330
15331
15332
15333
15334
15335
15336
15337
15338
15339
15340
15341
15342
15343
15344
15345
15346
15347
15348
15349
15350
15351
15352
15353
15354
15355
15356
15357
15358
15359
15360
15361
15362
15363
15364
15365
15366
15367
15368
15369
15370
15371
15372
15373
15374
15375
15376
15377
15378
15379
15380
15381
15382
15383
15384
15385
15386
15387
15388
15389
15390
15391
15392
15393
15394
15395
15396
15397
15398
15399
15400
15401
15402
15403
15404
15405
15406
15407
15408
15409
15410
15411
15412
15413
15414
15415
15416
15417
15418
15419
15420
15421
15422
15423
15424
15425
15426
15427
15428
15429
15430
15431
15432
15433
15434
15435
15436
15437
15438
15439
15440
15441
15442
15443
15444
15445
15446
15447
15448
15449
15450
15451
15452
15453
15454
15455
15456
15457
15458
15459
15460
15461
15462
15463
15464
15465
15466
15467
15468
15469
15470
15471
15472
15473
15474
15475
15476
15477
15478
15479
15480
15481
15482
15483
15484
15485
15486
15487
15488
15489
15490
15491
15492
15493
15494
15495
15496
15497
15498
15499
15500
15501
15502
15503
15504
15505
15506
15507
15508
15509
15510
15511
15512
15513
15514
15515
15516
15517
15518
15519
15520
15521
15522
15523
15524
15525
15526
15527
15528
15529
15530
15531
15532
15533
15534
15535
15536
15537
15538
15539
15540
15541
15542
15543
15544
15545
15546
15547
15548
15549
15550
15551
15552
15553
15554
15555
15556
15557
15558
15559
15560
15561
15562
15563
15564
15565
15566
15567
15568
15569
15570
15571
15572
15573
15574
15575
15576
15577
15578
15579
15580
15581
15582
15583
15584
15585
15586
15587
15588
15589
15590
15591
15592
15593
15594
15595
15596
15597
15598
15599
15600
15601
15602
15603
15604
15605
15606
15607
15608
15609
15610
15611
15612
15613
15614
15615
15616
15617
15618
15619
15620
15621
15622
15623
15624
15625
15626
15627
15628
15629
15630
15631
15632
15633
15634
15635
15636
15637
15638
15639
15640
15641
15642
15643
15644
15645
15646
15647
15648
15649
15650
15651
15652
15653
15654
15655
15656
15657
15658
15659
15660
15661
15662
15663
15664
15665
15666
15667
15668
15669
15670
15671
15672
15673
15674
15675
15676
15677
15678
15679
15680
15681
15682
15683
15684
15685
15686
15687
15688
15689
15690
15691
15692
15693
15694
15695
15696
15697
15698
15699
15700
15701
15702
15703
15704
15705
15706
15707
15708
15709
15710
15711
15712
15713
15714
15715
15716
15717
15718
15719
15720
15721
15722
15723
15724
15725
15726
15727
15728
15729
15730
15731
15732
15733
15734
15735
15736
15737
15738
15739
15740
15741
15742
15743
15744
15745
15746
15747
15748
15749
15750
15751
15752
15753
15754
15755
15756
15757
15758
15759
15760
15761
15762
15763
15764
15765
15766
15767
15768
15769
15770
15771
15772
15773
15774
15775
15776
15777
15778
15779
15780
15781
15782
15783
15784
15785
15786
15787
15788
15789
15790
15791
15792
15793
15794
15795
15796
15797
15798
15799
15800
15801
15802
15803
15804
15805
15806
15807
15808
15809
15810
15811
15812
15813
15814
15815
15816
15817
15818
15819
15820
15821
15822
15823
15824
15825
15826
15827
15828
15829
15830
15831
15832
15833
15834
15835
15836
15837
15838
15839
15840
15841
15842
15843
15844
15845
15846
15847
15848
15849
15850
15851
15852
15853
15854
15855
15856
15857
15858
15859
15860
15861
15862
15863
15864
15865
15866
15867
15868
15869
15870
15871
15872
15873
15874
15875
15876
15877
15878
15879
15880
15881
15882
15883
15884
15885
15886
15887
15888
15889
15890
15891
15892
15893
15894
15895
15896
15897
15898
15899
15900
15901
15902
15903
15904
15905
15906
15907
15908
15909
15910
15911
15912
15913
15914
15915
15916
15917
15918
15919
15920
15921
15922
15923
15924
15925
15926
15927
15928
15929
15930
15931
15932
15933
15934
15935
15936
15937
15938
15939
15940
15941
15942
15943
15944
15945
15946
15947
15948
15949
15950
15951
15952
15953
15954
15955
15956
15957
15958
15959
15960
15961
15962
15963
15964
15965
15966
15967
15968
15969
15970
15971
15972
15973
15974
15975
15976
15977
15978
15979
15980
15981
15982
15983
15984
15985
15986
15987
15988
15989
15990
15991
15992
15993
15994
15995
15996
15997
15998
15999
16000
16001
16002
16003
16004
16005
16006
16007
16008
16009
16010
16011
16012
16013
16014
16015
16016
16017
16018
16019
16020
16021
16022
16023
16024
16025
16026
16027
16028
16029
16030
16031
16032
16033
16034
16035
16036
16037
16038
16039
16040
16041
16042
16043
16044
16045
16046
16047
16048
16049
16050
16051
16052
16053
16054
16055
16056
16057
16058
16059
16060
16061
16062
16063
16064
16065
16066
16067
16068
16069
16070
16071
16072
16073
16074
16075
16076
16077
16078
16079
16080
16081
16082
16083
16084
16085
16086
16087
16088
16089
16090
16091
16092
16093
16094
16095
16096
16097
16098
16099
16100
16101
16102
16103
16104
16105
16106
16107
16108
16109
16110
16111
16112
16113
16114
16115
16116
16117
16118
16119
16120
16121
16122
16123
16124
16125
16126
16127
16128
16129
16130
16131
16132
16133
16134
16135
16136
16137
16138
16139
16140
16141
16142
16143
16144
16145
16146
16147
16148
16149
16150
16151
16152
16153
16154
16155
16156
16157
16158
16159
16160
16161
16162
16163
16164
16165
16166
16167
16168
16169
16170
16171
16172
16173
16174
16175
16176
16177
16178
16179
16180
16181
16182
16183
16184
16185
16186
16187
16188
16189
16190
16191
16192
16193
16194
16195
16196
16197
16198
16199
16200
16201
16202
16203
16204
16205
16206
16207
16208
16209
16210
16211
16212
16213
16214
16215
16216
16217
16218
16219
16220
16221
16222
16223
16224
16225
16226
16227
16228
16229
16230
16231
16232
16233
16234
16235
16236
16237
16238
16239
16240
16241
16242
16243
16244
16245
16246
16247
16248
16249
16250
16251
16252
16253
16254
16255
16256
16257
16258
16259
16260
16261
16262
16263
16264
16265
16266
16267
16268
16269
16270
16271
16272
16273
16274
16275
16276
16277
16278
16279
16280
16281
16282
16283
16284
16285
16286
16287
16288
16289
16290
16291
16292
16293
16294
16295
16296
16297
16298
16299
16300
16301
16302
16303
16304
16305
16306
16307
16308
16309
16310
16311
16312
16313
16314
16315
16316
16317
16318
16319
16320
16321
16322
16323
16324
16325
16326
16327
16328
16329
16330
16331
16332
16333
16334
16335
16336
16337
16338
16339
16340
16341
16342
16343
16344
16345
16346
16347
16348
16349
16350
16351
16352
16353
16354
16355
16356
16357
16358
16359
16360
16361
16362
16363
16364
16365
16366
16367
16368
16369
16370
16371
16372
16373
16374
16375
16376
16377
16378
16379
16380
16381
16382
16383
16384
16385
16386
16387
16388
16389
16390
16391
16392
16393
16394
16395
16396
16397
16398
16399
16400
16401
16402
16403
16404
16405
16406
16407
16408
16409
16410
16411
16412
16413
16414
16415
16416
16417
16418
16419
16420
16421
16422
16423
16424
16425
16426
16427
16428
16429
16430
16431
16432
16433
16434
16435
16436
16437
16438
16439
16440
16441
16442
16443
16444
16445
16446
16447
16448
16449
16450
16451
16452
16453
16454
16455
16456
16457
16458
16459
16460
16461
16462
16463
16464
16465
16466
16467
16468
16469
16470
16471
16472
16473
16474
16475
16476
16477
16478
16479
16480
16481
16482
16483
16484
16485
16486
16487
16488
16489
16490
16491
16492
16493
16494
16495
16496
16497
16498
16499
16500
16501
16502
16503
16504
16505
16506
16507
16508
16509
16510
16511
16512
16513
16514
16515
16516
16517
16518
16519
16520
16521
16522
16523
16524
16525
16526
16527
16528
16529
16530
16531
16532
16533
16534
16535
16536
16537
16538
16539
16540
16541
16542
16543
16544
16545
16546
16547
16548
16549
16550
16551
16552
16553
16554
16555
16556
16557
16558
16559
16560
16561
16562
16563
16564
16565
16566
16567
16568
16569
16570
16571
16572
16573
16574
16575
16576
16577
16578
16579
16580
16581
16582
16583
16584
16585
16586
16587
16588
16589
16590
16591
16592
16593
16594
16595
16596
16597
16598
16599
16600
16601
16602
16603
16604
16605
16606
16607
16608
16609
16610
16611
16612
16613
16614
16615
16616
16617
16618
16619
16620
16621
16622
16623
16624
16625
16626
16627
16628
16629
16630
16631
16632
16633
16634
16635
16636
16637
16638
16639
16640
16641
16642
16643
16644
16645
16646
16647
16648
16649
16650
16651
16652
16653
16654
16655
16656
16657
16658
16659
16660
16661
16662
16663
16664
16665
16666
16667
16668
16669
16670
16671
16672
16673
16674
16675
16676
16677
16678
16679
16680
16681
16682
16683
16684
16685
16686
16687
16688
16689
16690
16691
16692
16693
16694
16695
16696
16697
16698
16699
16700
16701
16702
16703
16704
16705
16706
16707
16708
16709
16710
16711
16712
16713
16714
16715
16716
16717
16718
16719
16720
16721
16722
16723
16724
16725
16726
16727
16728
16729
16730
16731
16732
16733
16734
16735
16736
16737
16738
16739
16740
16741
16742
16743
16744
16745
16746
16747
16748
16749
16750
16751
16752
16753
16754
16755
16756
16757
16758
16759
16760
16761
16762
16763
16764
16765
16766
16767
16768
16769
16770
16771
16772
16773
16774
16775
16776
16777
16778
16779
16780
16781
16782
16783
16784
16785
16786
16787
16788
16789
16790
16791
16792
16793
16794
16795
16796
16797
16798
16799
16800
16801
16802
16803
16804
16805
16806
16807
16808
16809
16810
16811
16812
16813
16814
16815
16816
16817
16818
16819
16820
16821
16822
16823
16824
16825
16826
16827
16828
16829
16830
16831
16832
16833
16834
16835
16836
16837
16838
16839
16840
16841
16842
16843
16844
16845
16846
16847
16848
16849
16850
16851
16852
16853
16854
16855
16856
16857
16858
16859
16860
16861
16862
16863
16864
16865
16866
16867
16868
16869
16870
16871
16872
16873
16874
16875
16876
16877
16878
16879
16880
16881
16882
16883
16884
16885
16886
16887
16888
16889
16890
16891
16892
16893
16894
16895
16896
16897
16898
16899
16900
16901
16902
16903
16904
16905
16906
16907
16908
16909
16910
16911
16912
16913
16914
16915
16916
16917
16918
16919
16920
16921
16922
16923
16924
16925
16926
16927
16928
16929
16930
16931
16932
16933
16934
16935
16936
16937
16938
16939
16940
16941
16942
16943
16944
16945
16946
16947
16948
16949
16950
16951
16952
16953
16954
16955
16956
16957
16958
16959
16960
16961
16962
16963
16964
16965
16966
16967
16968
16969
16970
16971
16972
16973
16974
16975
16976
16977
16978
16979
16980
16981
16982
16983
16984
16985
16986
16987
16988
16989
16990
16991
16992
16993
16994
16995
16996
16997
16998
16999
17000
17001
17002
17003
17004
17005
17006
17007
17008
17009
17010
17011
17012
17013
17014
17015
17016
17017
17018
17019
17020
17021
17022
17023
17024
17025
17026
17027
17028
17029
17030
17031
17032
17033
17034
17035
17036
17037
17038
17039
17040
17041
17042
17043
17044
17045
17046
17047
17048
17049
17050
17051
17052
17053
17054
17055
17056
17057
17058
17059
17060
17061
17062
17063
17064
17065
17066
17067
17068
17069
17070
17071
17072
17073
17074
17075
17076
17077
17078
17079
17080
17081
17082
17083
17084
17085
17086
17087
17088
17089
17090
17091
17092
17093
17094
17095
17096
17097
17098
17099
17100
17101
17102
17103
17104
17105
17106
17107
17108
17109
17110
17111
17112
17113
17114
17115
17116
17117
17118
17119
17120
17121
17122
17123
17124
17125
17126
17127
17128
17129
17130
17131
17132
17133
17134
17135
17136
17137
17138
17139
17140
17141
17142
17143
17144
17145
17146
17147
17148
17149
17150
17151
17152
17153
17154
17155
17156
17157
17158
17159
17160
17161
17162
17163
17164
17165
17166
17167
17168
17169
17170
17171
17172
17173
17174
17175
17176
17177
17178
17179
17180
17181
17182
17183
17184
17185
17186
17187
17188
17189
17190
17191
17192
17193
17194
17195
17196
17197
17198
17199
17200
17201
17202
17203
17204
17205
17206
17207
17208
17209
17210
17211
17212
17213
17214
17215
17216
17217
17218
17219
17220
17221
17222
17223
17224
17225
17226
17227
17228
17229
17230
17231
17232
17233
17234
17235
17236
17237
17238
17239
17240
17241
17242
17243
17244
17245
17246
17247
17248
17249
17250
17251
17252
17253
17254
17255
17256
17257
17258
17259
17260
17261
17262
17263
17264
17265
17266
17267
17268
17269
17270
17271
17272
17273
17274
17275
17276
17277
17278
17279
17280
17281
17282
17283
17284
17285
17286
17287
17288
17289
17290
17291
17292
17293
17294
17295
17296
17297
17298
17299
17300
17301
17302
17303
17304
17305
17306
17307
17308
17309
17310
17311
17312
17313
17314
17315
17316
17317
17318
17319
17320
17321
17322
17323
17324
17325
17326
17327
17328
17329
17330
17331
17332
17333
17334
17335
17336
17337
17338
17339
17340
17341
17342
17343
17344
17345
17346
17347
17348
17349
17350
17351
17352
17353
17354
17355
17356
17357
17358
17359
17360
17361
17362
17363
17364
17365
17366
17367
17368
17369
17370
17371
17372
17373
17374
17375
17376
17377
17378
17379
17380
17381
17382
17383
17384
17385
17386
17387
17388
17389
17390
17391
17392
17393
17394
17395
17396
17397
17398
17399
17400
17401
17402
17403
17404
17405
17406
17407
17408
17409
17410
17411
17412
17413
17414
17415
17416
17417
17418
17419
17420
17421
17422
17423
17424
17425
17426
17427
17428
17429
17430
17431
17432
17433
17434
17435
17436
17437
17438
17439
17440
17441
17442
17443
17444
17445
17446
17447
17448
17449
17450
17451
17452
17453
17454
17455
17456
17457
17458
17459
17460
17461
17462
17463
17464
17465
17466
17467
17468
17469
17470
17471
17472
17473
17474
17475
17476
17477
17478
17479
17480
17481
17482
17483
17484
17485
17486
17487
17488
17489
17490
17491
17492
17493
17494
17495
17496
17497
17498
17499
17500
17501
17502
17503
17504
17505
17506
17507
17508
17509
17510
17511
17512
17513
17514
17515
17516
17517
17518
17519
17520
17521
17522
17523
17524
17525
17526
17527
17528
17529
17530
17531
17532
17533
17534
17535
17536
17537
17538
17539
17540
17541
17542
17543
17544
17545
17546
17547
17548
17549
17550
17551
17552
17553
17554
17555
17556
17557
17558
17559
17560
17561
17562
17563
17564
17565
17566
17567
17568
17569
17570
17571
17572
17573
17574
17575
17576
17577
17578
17579
17580
17581
17582
17583
17584
17585
17586
17587
17588
17589
17590
17591
17592
17593
17594
17595
17596
17597
17598
17599
17600
17601
17602
17603
17604
17605
17606
17607
17608
17609
17610
17611
17612
17613
17614
17615
17616
17617
17618
17619
17620
17621
17622
17623
17624
17625
17626
17627
17628
17629
17630
17631
17632
17633
17634
17635
17636
17637
17638
17639
17640
17641
17642
17643
17644
17645
17646
17647
17648
17649
17650
17651
17652
17653
17654
17655
17656
17657
17658
17659
17660
17661
17662
17663
17664
17665
17666
17667
17668
17669
17670
17671
17672
17673
17674
17675
17676
17677
17678
17679
17680
17681
17682
17683
17684
17685
17686
17687
17688
17689
17690
17691
17692
17693
17694
17695
17696
17697
17698
17699
17700
17701
17702
17703
17704
17705
17706
17707
17708
17709
17710
17711
17712
17713
17714
17715
17716
17717
17718
17719
17720
17721
17722
17723
17724
17725
17726
17727
17728
17729
17730
17731
17732
17733
17734
17735
17736
17737
17738
17739
17740
17741
17742
17743
17744
17745
17746
17747
17748
17749
17750
17751
17752
17753
17754
17755
17756
17757
17758
17759
17760
17761
17762
17763
17764
17765
17766
17767
17768
17769
17770
17771
17772
17773
17774
17775
17776
17777
17778
17779
17780
17781
17782
17783
17784
17785
17786
17787
17788
17789
17790
17791
17792
17793
17794
17795
17796
17797
17798
17799
17800
17801
17802
17803
17804
17805
17806
17807
17808
17809
17810
17811
17812
17813
17814
17815
17816
17817
17818
17819
17820
17821
17822
17823
17824
17825
17826
17827
17828
17829
17830
17831
17832
17833
17834
17835
17836
17837
17838
17839
17840
17841
17842
17843
17844
17845
17846
17847
17848
17849
17850
17851
17852
17853
17854
17855
17856
17857
17858
17859
17860
17861
17862
17863
17864
17865
17866
17867
17868
17869
17870
17871
17872
17873
17874
17875
17876
17877
17878
17879
17880
17881
17882
17883
17884
17885
17886
17887
17888
17889
17890
17891
17892
17893
17894
17895
17896
17897
17898
17899
17900
17901
17902
17903
17904
17905
17906
17907
17908
17909
17910
17911
17912
17913
17914
17915
17916
17917
17918
17919
17920
17921
17922
17923
17924
17925
17926
17927
17928
17929
17930
17931
17932
17933
17934
17935
17936
17937
17938
17939
17940
17941
17942
17943
17944
17945
17946
17947
17948
17949
17950
17951
17952
17953
17954
17955
17956
17957
17958
17959
17960
17961
17962
17963
17964
17965
17966
17967
17968
17969
17970
17971
17972
17973
17974
17975
17976
17977
17978
17979
17980
17981
17982
17983
17984
17985
17986
17987
17988
17989
17990
17991
17992
17993
17994
17995
17996
17997
17998
17999
18000
18001
18002
18003
18004
18005
18006
18007
18008
18009
18010
18011
18012
18013
18014
18015
18016
18017
18018
18019
18020
18021
18022
18023
18024
18025
18026
18027
18028
18029
18030
18031
18032
18033
18034
18035
18036
18037
18038
18039
18040
18041
18042
18043
18044
18045
18046
18047
18048
18049
18050
18051
18052
18053
18054
18055
18056
18057
18058
18059
18060
18061
18062
18063
18064
18065
18066
18067
18068
18069
18070
18071
18072
18073
18074
18075
18076
18077
18078
18079
18080
18081
18082
18083
18084
18085
18086
18087
18088
18089
18090
18091
18092
18093
18094
18095
18096
18097
18098
18099
18100
18101
18102
18103
18104
18105
18106
18107
18108
18109
18110
18111
18112
18113
18114
18115
18116
18117
18118
18119
18120
18121
18122
18123
18124
18125
18126
18127
18128
18129
18130
18131
18132
18133
18134
18135
18136
18137
18138
18139
18140
18141
18142
18143
18144
18145
18146
18147
18148
18149
18150
18151
18152
18153
18154
18155
18156
18157
18158
18159
18160
18161
18162
18163
18164
18165
18166
18167
18168
18169
18170
18171
18172
18173
18174
18175
18176
18177
18178
18179
18180
18181
18182
18183
18184
18185
18186
18187
18188
18189
18190
18191
18192
18193
18194
18195
18196
18197
18198
18199
18200
18201
18202
18203
18204
18205
18206
18207
18208
18209
18210
18211
18212
18213
18214
18215
18216
18217
18218
18219
18220
18221
18222
18223
18224
18225
18226
18227
18228
18229
18230
18231
18232
18233
18234
18235
18236
18237
18238
18239
18240
18241
18242
18243
18244
18245
18246
18247
18248
18249
18250
18251
18252
18253
18254
18255
18256
18257
18258
18259
18260
18261
18262
18263
18264
18265
18266
18267
18268
18269
18270
18271
18272
18273
18274
18275
18276
18277
18278
18279
18280
18281
18282
18283
18284
18285
18286
18287
18288
18289
18290
18291
18292
18293
18294
18295
18296
18297
18298
18299
18300
18301
18302
18303
18304
18305
18306
18307
18308
18309
18310
18311
18312
18313
18314
18315
18316
18317
18318
18319
18320
18321
18322
18323
18324
18325
18326
18327
18328
18329
18330
18331
18332
18333
18334
18335
18336
18337
18338
18339
18340
18341
18342
18343
18344
18345
18346
18347
18348
18349
18350
18351
18352
18353
18354
18355
18356
18357
18358
18359
18360
18361
18362
18363
18364
18365
18366
18367
18368
18369
18370
18371
18372
18373
18374
18375
18376
18377
18378
18379
18380
18381
18382
18383
18384
18385
18386
18387
18388
18389
18390
18391
18392
18393
18394
18395
18396
18397
18398
18399
18400
18401
18402
18403
18404
18405
18406
18407
18408
18409
18410
18411
18412
18413
18414
18415
18416
18417
18418
18419
18420
18421
18422
18423
18424
18425
18426
18427
18428
18429
18430
18431
18432
18433
18434
18435
18436
18437
18438
18439
18440
18441
18442
18443
18444
18445
18446
18447
18448
18449
18450
18451
18452
18453
18454
18455
18456
18457
18458
18459
18460
18461
18462
18463
18464
18465
18466
18467
18468
18469
18470
18471
18472
18473
18474
18475
18476
18477
18478
18479
18480
18481
18482
18483
18484
18485
18486
18487
18488
18489
18490
18491
18492
18493
18494
18495
18496
18497
18498
18499
18500
18501
18502
18503
18504
18505
18506
18507
18508
18509
18510
18511
18512
18513
18514
18515
18516
18517
18518
18519
18520
18521
18522
18523
18524
18525
18526
18527
18528
18529
18530
18531
18532
18533
18534
18535
18536
18537
18538
18539
18540
18541
18542
18543
18544
18545
18546
18547
18548
18549
18550
18551
18552
18553
18554
18555
18556
18557
18558
18559
18560
18561
18562
18563
18564
18565
18566
18567
18568
18569
18570
18571
18572
18573
18574
18575
18576
18577
18578
18579
18580
18581
18582
18583
18584
18585
18586
18587
18588
18589
18590
18591
18592
18593
18594
18595
18596
18597
18598
18599
18600
18601
18602
18603
18604
18605
18606
18607
18608
18609
18610
18611
18612
18613
18614
18615
18616
18617
18618
18619
18620
18621
18622
18623
18624
18625
18626
18627
18628
18629
18630
18631
18632
18633
18634
18635
18636
18637
18638
18639
18640
18641
18642
18643
18644
18645
18646
18647
18648
18649
18650
18651
18652
18653
18654
18655
18656
18657
18658
18659
18660
18661
18662
18663
18664
18665
18666
18667
18668
18669
18670
18671
18672
18673
18674
18675
18676
18677
18678
18679
18680
18681
18682
18683
18684
18685
18686
18687
18688
18689
18690
18691
18692
18693
18694
18695
18696
18697
18698
18699
18700
18701
18702
18703
18704
18705
18706
18707
18708
18709
18710
18711
18712
18713
18714
18715
18716
18717
18718
18719
18720
18721
18722
18723
18724
18725
18726
18727
18728
18729
18730
18731
18732
18733
18734
18735
18736
18737
18738
18739
18740
18741
18742
18743
18744
18745
18746
18747
18748
18749
18750
18751
18752
18753
18754
18755
18756
18757
18758
18759
18760
18761
18762
18763
18764
18765
18766
18767
18768
18769
18770
18771
18772
18773
18774
18775
18776
18777
18778
18779
18780
18781
18782
18783
18784
18785
18786
18787
18788
18789
18790
18791
18792
18793
18794
18795
18796
18797
18798
18799
18800
18801
18802
18803
18804
18805
18806
18807
18808
18809
18810
18811
18812
18813
18814
18815
18816
18817
18818
18819
18820
18821
18822
18823
18824
18825
18826
18827
18828
18829
18830
18831
18832
18833
18834
18835
18836
18837

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en"><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" /><meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" /><link rel="schema.DC" href="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" /><meta name="DC.Creator" content="John Dunlop" /><meta name="DC.Title" content="History of Roman Literature from its Earliest Period to the Augustan Age. Volume II" /><meta name="DC.Date" content="April 1, 2011" /><meta name="DC.Language" content="English" /><meta name="DC.Publisher" content="Project Gutenberg" /><meta name="DC.Identifier" content="http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/35751" /><meta name="DC.Rights" content="This text is in the public domain." /><title>The Project Gutenberg EBook of History of Roman Literature from its Earliest Period to the Augustan Age. Volume II by John Dunlop</title><style type="text/css">/* 
The Gnutenberg Press - default CSS2 stylesheet

Any generated element will have a class "tei" and a class "tei-elem"
where elem is the element name in TEI. 
The order of statements is important !!! 
*/

.tei                            { margin: 0; padding: 0; 
                                  font-size: 100%; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal }

.block                          { display: block; }
.inline                         { display: inline; }
.floatleft                      { float: left;  margin: 1em 2em 1em 0; }
.floatright                     { float: right; margin: 1em 0 1em 2em; }
.shaded                         { margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em; 
                                  padding: 1em; background-color: #eee; }
.boxed                          { margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em; 
                                  padding: 1em; border: 1px solid black; }

body.tei		        { margin: 4ex 10%; text-align: justify }
div.tei              	        { margin: 2em 0em }
p.tei              	        { margin: 0em 0em 1em 0em; text-indent: 0em; }
blockquote.tei	     	        { margin: 2em 4em }

div.tei-lg                      { margin: 1em 0em; }
div.tei-l		        { margin: 0em; text-align: left; }
div.tei-tb                      { text-align: center; }
div.tei-epigraph     	        { margin: 0em 0em 1em 10em; }
div.tei-dateline	        { margin: 1ex 0em; text-align: right }
div.tei-salute                  { margin: 1ex 0em; }
div.tei-signed                  { margin: 1ex 0em; text-align: right }
div.tei-byline                  { margin: 1ex 0em; }

                                /* calculate from size of body = 80% */
div.tei-marginnote		{ margin: 0em 0em 0em -12%; width: 11%; float: left; }

div.tei-sp                      { margin: 1em 0em 1em  2em }
div.tei-speaker	                { margin: 0em 0em 1em -2em;
                        	  font-weight: bold; text-indent: 0em }
div.tei-stage                   { margin: 1em 0em; font-weight: normal; font-style: italic }
span.tei-stage	     	        { font-weight: normal; font-style: italic }

div.tei-eg             	        { padding: 1em; 
                     	          color: black; background-color: #eee }

hr.doublepage	     	        { margin: 4em 0em; height: 5px; }
hr.page            	        { margin: 4em 0em; height: 2px; }

ul.tei-index                    { list-style-type: none }

dl.tei                          { margin: 1em 0em }

dt.tei-notelabel                { font-weight: normal; text-align: right; 
                     	          float: left; width: 3em }
dd.tei-notetext                 { margin: 0em 0em 1ex 4em }

span.tei-pb                     { position: absolute; left: 1%; width: 8%;
                                  font-style: normal; }

span.code          	        { font-family: monospace; font-size: 110%; }

ul.tei-castlist 		{ margin: 0em; list-style-type: none }
li.tei-castitem		        { margin: 0em; }
table.tei-castgroup     	{ margin: 0em; }
ul.tei-castgroup		{ margin: 0em; list-style-type: none; 
				  padding-right: 2em; border-right: solid black 2px; }
caption.tei-castgroup-head	{ caption-side: right; width: 50%; text-align: left; 
				  vertical-align: middle; padding-left: 2em; }
*.tei-roledesc  		{ font-style: italic }
*.tei-set			{ font-style: italic }

table.rules                     { border-collapse: collapse; }
table.rules caption,
table.rules th,
table.rules td                  { border: 1px solid black; }

table.tei                       { border-collapse: collapse; }
table.tei-list                  { width: 100% }

th.tei-head-table	        { padding: 0.5ex 1em }

th.tei-cell		        { padding: 0em 1em }
td.tei-cell		        { padding: 0em 1em }

td.tei-item		        { padding: 0; font-weight: normal; 
                                  vertical-align: top; text-align: left; }
th.tei-label,
td.tei-label                    { width: 3em; padding: 0; font-weight: normal; 
                                  vertical-align: top; text-align: right; }

th.tei-label-gloss,
td.tei-label-gloss              { text-align: left }

td.tei-item-gloss,
th.tei-headItem-gloss           { padding-left: 4em; }       

img.tei-formula                 { vertical-align: middle; }

</style></head><body class="tei">
    

    
      
        
        
        
        
    

<div lang="en" class="tei tei-text" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em" xml:lang="en">
<div class="tei tei-front" style="margin-bottom: 6.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
    <div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
      <div id="pgheader" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em"><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em">The Project Gutenberg EBook of History of Roman Literature from its Earliest Period to the Augustan Age. Volume II by John Dunlop</p></div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost
          and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it,
          give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project
          Gutenberg License <a href="#pglicense" class="tei tei-ref">included with this
          eBook</a> or online at <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/license" class="tei tei-xref">http://www.gutenberg.org/license</a></p></div><pre class="pre tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em">Title: History of Roman Literature from its Earliest Period to the Augustan
       Age. Volume II

Author: John Dunlop

Release Date: April 1, 2011 [Ebook #35751]

Language: English

Character set encoding: UTF-8


***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HISTORY OF ROMAN LITERATURE FROM ITS EARLIEST PERIOD TO THE AUGUSTAN AGE. VOLUME II***
</pre></div>
    </div>
    <div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
      
    </div>
    <hr class="doublepage" /><div class="tei tei-titlePage" style="text-align: center">
    <div class="tei tei-pb" style="text-align: center"></div><a name="Pg001" id="Pg001" class="tei tei-anchor" style="text-align: center"></a>
    
<span class="tei tei-docTitle" style="text-align: center">
<span class="tei tei-titlePart" style="text-align: center"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 173%; font-weight: 700">HISTORY</span></span><br /><br />
OF<br /><br />
<span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 173%; font-weight: 700">ROMAN LITERATURE,</span></span></span>
    <br /><br />
<span class="tei tei-titlePart" style="text-align: center">FROM<br /><br />
<span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 144%; font-weight: 700">ITS EARLIEST PERIOD</span></span><br />
TO<br /><br />
<span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 120%">THE AUGUSTAN AGE.</span></span><br /><br /><br />
IN TWO VOLUMES.</span>

</span>
    <br /><br />
<div class="tei tei-byline" style="text-align: center">BY<br />
    <span class="tei tei-docAuthor" style="text-align: center"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 120%">JOHN DUNLOP</span></span></span>,<br />
    AUTHOR OF THE HISTORY OF FICTION.</div>
    <br />
    <span class="tei tei-docEdition" style="text-align: center">FROM THE LAST LONDON EDITION.</span>
    <br /><br />
    <span class="tei tei-docTitle" style="text-align: center">
        <span class="tei tei-titlePart" style="text-align: center">
            <span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 120%">VOL. II.</span></span>
        </span>
    </span>
    <br /><br />
    <span class="tei tei-docImprint" style="text-align: center">PUBLISHED BY<br />
E. LITTELL, CHESTNUT STREET, PHILADELPHIA.<br />
G. &amp; C. CARVILL, BROADWAY, NEW YORK.</span>
        <br />
    <span class="tei tei-docDate" style="text-align: center"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 120%">1827</span></span></span>
    </div>
    <hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
        <div class="tei tei-pb"></div><a name="Pg002" id="Pg002" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
        <p class="tei tei-p" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: center"><span style="font-style: italic">James Kay, Jun. Printer,</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic">S. E. Corner of Race &amp; Sixth Streets,</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic">Philadelphia.</span></span>
                
        </p>
    </div>
    <hr class="doublepage" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
        <h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Contents.</span></h1>
        <ul class="tei tei-index tei-index-toc"><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc1">[Agriculture]</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc3">Marcus Porcius Cato</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc5">Marcus Terentius Varro</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc7">Nigidius Figulus</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc9">History</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc11">Quintus Fabius Pictor</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc13">Sallust</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc15">Julius Cæsar</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc17">Cicero</a></li><li><a href="#toc19">Appendix</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc21">Livius Andronicus, Nævius</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc23">Ennius</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc25">Plautus</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc27">Terence</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc29">Lucilius</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc31">Lucretius</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc33">Catullus</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc35">Laberius—Publilius Syrus</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc37">Cato—Varro</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc39">Sallust</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc41">Cæsar</a></li><li style="margin-left: 2em"><a href="#toc43">Cicero</a></li><li><a href="#toc45">Chronological Table</a></li><li><a href="#toc47">Index</a></li><li><a href="#toc49">Transcriber's note</a></li></ul>
    </div>
</div>

<hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-body" style="margin-bottom: 6.00em; margin-top: 6.00em">
<div class="tei tei-pb"></div><a name="Pg003" id="Pg003" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
    <h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em">
<span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 173%; font-weight: 700">HISTORY</span></span>
</h1>

<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">
OF
</span></h1>

<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em">
<span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 173%; font-weight: 700">ROMAN LITERATURE, &amp;c.</span></span>
</h1>

<div class="tei tei-pb"></div><a name="Pg004" id="Pg004" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
<hr class="doublepage" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page5">[pg 5]</span><a name="Pg005" id="Pg005" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
    <a name="toc1" id="toc1"></a><a name="pdf2" id="pdf2"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em">
<span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 144%; font-weight: 700">HISTORY</span></span>
</h2>

<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">
OF
</span></h2>

<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em">
<span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 144%; font-weight: 700">ROMAN LITERATURE, &amp;c.</span></span>
</h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In almost all States, poetical composition has been employed
and considerably improved before prose. First, because
the imagination expands sooner than reason or judgment;
and, secondly, because the early language of nations is best
adapted to the purposes of poetry, and to the expression of
those feelings and sentiments with which it is conversant.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Thus, in the first ages of Greece, verse was the ordinary
written language, and prose was subsequently introduced as an
art and invention. In like manner, at Rome, during the early
advances of poetry, the progress of which has been detailed in
the preceding volume, prose composition continued in a state
of neglect and barbarism.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The most ancient prose writer, at least of those whose works
have descended to us, was a man of little feeling or imagination,
but of sound judgment and inflexible character, who
exercised his pen on the subject of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Agriculture</span></span>, which, of
all the peaceful arts, was most highly esteemed by his countrymen.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The long winding coast of Greece, abounding in havens,
and the innumerable isles with which its seas were studded,
rendered the Greeks, from the earliest days, a trafficking, seafaring,
piratic people: And many of the productions of their
oldest poets, are, in a great measure, addressed to what may
be called the maritime taste or feeling which prevailed among
their countrymen. This sentiment continued to be cherished
as long as the chief literary state in Greece preserved
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page6">[pg 6]</span><a name="Pg006" id="Pg006" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>the sovereignty of the seas—compelled its allies to furnish
vessels of war, and trusted to its naval armaments for the supremacy
it maintained during the brightest ages of Greece. In
none either of the Doric or Ionian states, was agriculture of
such importance as to exercise much influence on manners or
literature. Their territories were so limited, that the inhabitants
were never removed to such a distance from the capital
as to imbibe the ideas of husbandmen. In Thessaly and Lacedæmon,
agriculture was accounted degrading, and its cares
were committed to slaves. The vales of Bœotia were fruitful,
but were desolated by floods. Farms of any considerable extent
could scarcely be laid down on the limited, though lovely
isles of the Ægean and Ionian seas. The barren soil and
mountains of the centre of Peloponnesus confined the Arcadians
to pasturage—an employment bearing some analogy to
agriculture, but totally different in its mental effects, leading
to a life of indolence, contemplation, and wandering, instead
of the industrious, practical, and settled habits of husbandmen.
Though the Athenians breathed the purest air beneath the
clearest skies, and their long summer was gilded by the
brightest beams of Apollo, the soil of Attica was sterile and
metallic; while, from the excessive inequalities in its surface,
all the operations of agriculture were of the most difficult and
hazardous description. The streams were overflowing torrents,
which stripped the soil, leaving nothing but a light sand, on
which grain would scarcely grow. But it was with the commencement
of the Peloponnesian war that the exercise of agriculture
terminated in Attica. The country being left unprotected,
owing to the injudicious policy of Pericles, was
annually ravaged by the Spartans, and the husbandmen were
forced to seek refuge within the walls of Athens. In the
early part of the age of Pericles, the Athenians possessed
ornamented villas in the country; but they always returned to
the city in the evening<a id="noteref_1" name="noteref_1" href="#note_1"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">1</span></span></a>. We do not hear that the great men
in the early periods of the republic, as Themistocles and Aristides,
were farmers; and the heroes of its latter ages, as Iphicrates
and Timotheus, chose their retreats in Thrace, the
islands of the Archipelago, or coast of Ionia.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
A picture, in every point of view the reverse of this, is presented
to us by the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Agreste Latium</span></span>. The ancient Italian
mode of life was almost entirely agricultural and rural; and
with exception, perhaps, of the Etruscans, none of the Italian
states were in any degree maritime or commercial. Italy
was well adapted for every species of agriculture, and was
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page7">[pg 7]</span><a name="Pg007" id="Pg007" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>most justly termed by her greatest poet, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">magna parens frugum</span></span>.
Dionysius of Halicarnassus<a id="noteref_2" name="noteref_2" href="#note_2"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">2</span></span></a>,
    Strabo<a id="noteref_3" name="noteref_3" href="#note_3"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">3</span></span></a>,
    and Pliny<a id="noteref_4" name="noteref_4" href="#note_4"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">4</span></span></a>, talk with
enthusiasm of its fertile soil and benignant climate. Where
the ground was most depressed and marshy, the meadows were
stretched out for the pasturage of cattle. In the level country,
the rich arable lands, such as the Campanian and Capuan
plains, extended in vast tracts, and produced a profusion of
fruits of every species, while on the acclivities, where the skirts
of the mountains began to break into little hills and sloping
fields, the olive and vine basked on soils famed for Messapian
oil, and for wines of which the very names cheer and revive
us. The mountains themselves produced marble and timber,
and poured from their sides many a delightful stream, which
watered the fields, gladdened the pastures, and moistened the
meads to the very brink of the shore. Well then might Virgil
exclaim, in a burst of patriotism and poetry which has never
been surpassed,—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Sed neque Medorum sylvæ, ditissima terra,</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Nec pulcher Ganges, atque auro turbidus Hermus,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Laudibus Italiæ certent; non Bactra, neque Indi,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Totaque thuriferis Panchaia pinguis arenis.</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Hic ver assiduum, atque alienis mensibus æstas;</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Bis gravidæ pecudes, bis pomis utilis arbor.</div>
    <div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">  *  *  *  *</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Salve, magna parens frugum, Saturnia tellus<a id="noteref_5" name="noteref_5" href="#note_5"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">5</span></span></a>!”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
One would not suppose that agricultural care was very consistent,
at least in a small state, with frequent warfare. But
in no period of their republic did the Romans neglect the
advantages which the land they inhabited presented for husbandry.
Romulus, who had received a rustic education, and
had spent his youth in hunting, had no attachment to any
peaceful arts, except to rural labours; and this feeling pervaded
his legislation. His Sabine successor, Numa Pompilius,
who well understood and discharged the duties of sovereignty,
divided the whole territory of Rome into different cantons.
An exact account was rendered to him of the manner in which
these were cultivated; and he occasionally went in person to
survey them, in order to encourage those farmers whose lands
were well tilled, and to reproach others with their want of
industry<a id="noteref_6" name="noteref_6" href="#note_6"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">6</span></span></a>. By the institution, too, of various religious festivals,
connected with agriculture, it came to be regarded with
a sort of sacred reverence. Ancus Martius, who trod in the
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page8">[pg 8]</span><a name="Pg008" id="Pg008" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>steps of Numa, recommended to his people the assiduous cultivation
of their lands. After the expulsion of the kings, an
Agrarian law, by which only seven acres were allotted to each
citizen, was promulgated, and for some time rigidly enforced.
Exactness and economy in the various occupations of agriculture
were the natural consequences of such regulations. Each
Roman having only a small portion of land assigned to him,
and the support of his family depending entirely on the produce
which it yielded, its culture necessarily engaged his
whole attention.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In these early ages of the Roman commonwealth, when the
greatest men possessed but a few acres, the lands were laboured
by the proprietors themselves. The introduction of commerce,
and the consequent acquisition of wealth, had not yet
enabled individuals to purchase the estates of their fellow-citizens,
and to obtain a revenue from the rent of land rather than
from its cultivation.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The patricians, who, in the city, were so distinct from the
plebeian orders, were thus confounded with them in the country,
in the common avocations of husbandry. After having
presided over the civil affairs of the republic, or commanded
its armies, the most distinguished citizens returned, without
repining, to till the lands of their forefathers. Cincinnatus,
who was found at labour in his fields by those who came to
announce his election to the dictatorship, was not a singular
example of the same hand which held the plough guiding
also the helm of the state, and erecting the standard of its
legions. So late as the time of the first Carthaginian war,
Regulus, in the midst of his victorious career in Africa, asked
leave from the senate to return to Italy, in order to cultivate his
farm of seven acres, which had been neglected during his absence<a id="noteref_7" name="noteref_7" href="#note_7"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">7</span></span></a>.
Many illustrious names among the Romans originated
in agricultural employments, or some circumstances of rustic
skill and labour, by which the founders of families were distinguished.
The Fabii and Lentuli were supposed to have been
celebrated for the culture of pulses, and the Asinii and Vitellii
for the art of rearing animals. In the time of the elder Cato,
though the manual operations were performed for the most
part by servants, the great men resided chiefly on their farms<a id="noteref_8" name="noteref_8" href="#note_8"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">8</span></span></a>;
and they continued to apply to the study and practice of agriculture
long after they had carried the victorious arms of their
country beyond the confines of Italy. They did not, indeed,
follow agriculture as their sole avocation; but they 
prose<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page9">[pg 9]</span><a name="Pg009" id="Pg009" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>cuted it during the intervals of peace, and in the vacations of
the Forum. The art being thus exercised by men of high
capacity, received the benefit of all the discoveries, inventions,
or experiments suggested by talents and force of intellect.
The Roman warriors tilled their fields with the same intelligence
as they pitched their camps, and sowed corn with the
same care with which they drew up their armies for battle.
Hence, as a modern Latin poet observes, dilating on the expression
of Pliny, the earth yielded such an exuberant return,
that she seemed as it were to delight in being ploughed with
a share adorned with laurels, and by a ploughman who had
earned a triumph:—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Hanc etiam, ut perhibent, sese formabat ad artem,</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Cùm domito Fabius Dictator ab hoste redibat:</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Non veritus, medio dederat qui jura Senatu,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Ferre idem arboribusque suis, terræque colendæ,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Victricesque manus ruri præstare serendo.</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Ipsa triumphales tellus experta colonos,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Atque ducum manibus quondam versata suorum,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Majores fructus, majora arbusta ferebat<a id="noteref_9" name="noteref_9" href="#note_9"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">9</span></span></a>.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Nor were the Romans contented with merely labouring the
ground: They also delivered precepts for its proper cultivation,
which, being committed to writing, formed, as it were,
a new science, and, being derived from actual experience,
had an air of originality rarely exhibited in their literary
productions. Such maxims were held by the Romans in high
respect, since they were considered as founded on the observation
of men who had displayed the most eminent capacity
and knowledge in governing the state, in framing its laws, and
leading its armies.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
These precepts which formed the works of the agricultural
writers—the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rusticæ rei scriptores</span></span>—are extremely interesting
and comprehensive. The Romans had a much greater variety
than we, of grain, pulse, and roots; and, besides, had vines,
olives, and other plantations, which were regarded as profitable
crops. The situation, too, and construction of a villa, with
the necessary accommodation for slaves and workmen, the
wine and oil cellars, the granaries, the repositories for preserving
fruit, the poultry yard, and aviaries, form topics of
much attention and detail. These were the appertenancies
of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">villa rustica</span></span>, or complete farm-house, which was built
for the residence only of an industrious husbandman, and with
a view towards profit from the employments of agriculture.
As luxury, indeed, increased, the villa was adapted to the
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page10">[pg 10]</span><a name="Pg010" id="Pg010" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>accommodation of an opulent Roman citizen, and the country
was resorted to rather for recreation than for the purpose of
lucrative toil. What would Cato the Censor, distinguished
for his industry and unceasing attention to the labours of the
field, have thought of the following lines of Horace?
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“O rus, quando ego te aspiciam? quandoque licebit</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Nunc veterum libris, nunc somno et inertibus horis,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Ducere sollicitæ jucunda oblivia vitæ?”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It was this more refined relish for the country, so keenly
enjoyed by the Romans in the luxurious ages of the state, that
furnished the subject for the finest passages and allusions in
the works of the Latin poets, who seem to vie with each other
in their praises of a country life, and the sweetness of the
numbers in which they celebrate its simple and tranquil
enjoyments. The Epode of Horace, commencing,
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Beatus ille, qui procul negotiis,”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
which paints the charms of rural existence, in the various
seasons of the year—the well-known passages in Virgil’s
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Georgics</span></span>, and those in the second book of Lucretius, are the
most exquisite and lovely productions of these triumvirs of
Roman poetry. But the ancient prose writers, with whom we
are now to be engaged, regarded agriculture rather as an art
than an amusement, and a country life as subservient to profitable
employment, and not to elegant recreation. In themselves,
however, these compositions are highly curious; they
are curious, too, as forming a commentary and illustration of
the subjects,
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Quas et facundi tractavit Musa Maronis.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is likewise interesting to compare them with the works of
the modern Italians on husbandry, as the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Liber Ruralium
Commodorum</span></span> of Crescenzio, written about the end of the
thirteenth century,—the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Coltivazione Toscana</span></span> of Davanzati,—Vittorio’s
treatise, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Degli Ulivi</span></span>,—and even Alamanni’s poem
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Coltivazione</span></span>, which closely follows, particularly as to the
situation and construction of a villa, the precepts of Cato,
Varro, and Columella. The plough used at this day by the
peasantry in the Campagna di Roma, is of the same form as
that of the ancient Latian husbandmen<a id="noteref_10" name="noteref_10" href="#note_10"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">10</span></span></a>; and many other
points of resemblance may be discovered, on a perusal of the
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page11">[pg 11]</span><a name="Pg011" id="Pg011" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>most recent writers on the subject of Italian cultivation<a id="noteref_11" name="noteref_11" href="#note_11"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">11</span></span></a>.
Dickson, too, who, in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Husbandry of the Ancients</span></span>, gives
an account of Roman agriculture so far as connected with
the labours of the British farmer, has shown, that, in spite of
the great difference of soil and climate, many maxims of the
old Roman husbandmen, as delivered by Cato and Varro,
corresponded with the agricultural system followed in his day
in England.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Of the distinguished Roman citizens who practised agriculture,
none were more eminent than Cato and Varro; and by
them the precepts of the art were also committed to writing.
Their works are original compositions, founded on experience,
and not on Grecian models, like so many other Latin productions.
Varro, indeed, enumerates about fifty Greek authors,
who, previous to his time, had written on the subject of agriculture;
and Mago, the Carthaginian, composed, in the Punic
language, a much-approved treatise on the same topic, in
thirty-two books, which was afterwards translated into Latin
by desire of the senate. But the early Greek works, with the
exception of Xenophon’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Œconomics</span></span> and the poem of Hesiod
called <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Works and Days</span></span>, have been entirely lost; the tracts
published in the collection entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Geoponica</span></span>, being subsequent
to the age of Varro.
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
    <a name="toc3" id="toc3"></a><a name="pdf4" id="pdf4"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">MARCUS PORCIUS CATO,</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
better known by the name of Cato the Censor, wrote the earliest
book on husbandry which we possess in the Latin language.
This distinguished citizen was born in the 519th
year of Rome. Like other Romans of his day, he was brought
up to the profession of arms. In the short intervals of peace
he resided, during his youth, at a small country-house in the
Sabine territory, which he had inherited from his father. Near
it there stood a cottage belonging to Manius Curius Dentatus,
who had repeatedly triumphed over the Sabines and Samnites,
and had at length driven Pyrrhus from Italy. Cato was accustomed
frequently to walk over to the humble abode of this
renowned commander, where he was struck with admiration
at the frugality of its owner, and the skilful management of the
farm which was attached to it. Hence it became his great
object to emulate his illustrious neighbour, and adopt him as
his model<a id="noteref_12" name="noteref_12" href="#note_12"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">12</span></span></a>. Having made an estimate of his house, lands, slaves,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page12">[pg 12]</span><a name="Pg012" id="Pg012" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>and expenses, he applied himself to husbandry with new ardour,
and retrenched all superfluity. In the morning he went
to the small towns in the vicinity, to plead and defend the causes
of those who applied to him for assistance. Thence he returned
to his fields; where, with a plain cloak over his shoulders
in winter, and almost naked in summer, he laboured with
his servants till they had concluded their tasks, after which he
sat down along with them at table, eating the same bread,
and drinking the same wine<a id="noteref_13" name="noteref_13" href="#note_13"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">13</span></span></a>. At a more advanced period of
life, the wars, in which he commanded, kept him frequently
at a distance from Italy, and his forensic avocations detained
him much in the city; but what time he could spare was still
spent at the Sabine farm, where he continued to employ himself
in the profitable cultivation of the land. He thus became
by the universal consent of his contemporaries, the best farmer
of his age, and was held unrivalled for the skill and success
of his agricultural operations<a id="noteref_14" name="noteref_14" href="#note_14"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">14</span></span></a>. Though everywhere a
rigid economist, he lived, it is said, more hospitably at his
farm than in the city. His entertainments at his villa were at
first but sparing, and seldom given; but as his wealth increased,
he became more nice and delicate. <span class="tei tei-q">“At first,”</span> says Plutarch,
<span class="tei tei-q">“when he was but a poor soldier, he was not difficult in anything
which related to his diet; but afterwards, when he grew
richer, and made feasts for his friends, presently, when supper
was done, he seized a leathern thong, and scourged those
who had not given due attendance, or dressed anything carelessly<a id="noteref_15" name="noteref_15" href="#note_15"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">15</span></span></a>.”</span>
Towards the close of his life, he almost daily invited
some of his friends in the neighbourhood to sup with him; and
the conversation at these meals turned not chiefly, as might
have been expected, on rural affairs, but on the praises of
great and excellent men among the Romans<a id="noteref_16" name="noteref_16" href="#note_16"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">16</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It may be supposed, that in the evenings after the agricultural
labours of the morning, and after his friends had left him,
he noted down the precepts suggested by the observations and
experience of the day. That he wrote such maxims for his
own use, or the instruction of others, is unquestionable; but
the treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Re Rustica</span></span>, which now bears his name, appears
to have been much mutilated, since Pliny and other writers
allude to subjects as treated of by Cato, and to opinions as delivered
by him in this book, which are nowhere to be found in
any part of the work now extant.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In its present state, it is merely the loose unconnected journal
of a plain farmer, expressed with rude, sometimes with
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page13">[pg 13]</span><a name="Pg013" id="Pg013" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>almost oracular brevity; and it wants all those elegant topics
of embellishment and illustration which the subject might have
so naturally suggested. It solely consists of the dryest rules
of agriculture, and some receipts for making various kinds of
cakes and wines. Servius says, it is addressed to the author’s
son; but there is no such address now extant. It begins rather
abruptly, and in a manner extremely characteristic of the simple
manners of the author: <span class="tei tei-q">“It would be advantageous to seek
profit from commerce, if that were not hazardous; or by usury,
if that were honest: but our ancestors ordained, that the thief
should forfeit double the sum he had stolen, and the usurer
quadruple what he had taken, whence it may be concluded,
that they thought the usurer the worst of the two. When
they wished highly to praise a good man, they called him a
good farmer. A merchant is zealous in pushing his fortune,
but his trade is perilous and liable to reverses. But farmers
make the bravest men, and the stoutest soldiers. Their gain
is the most honest, the most stable, and least exposed to envy.
Those who exercise the art of agriculture, are of all others
least addicted to evil thoughts.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Our author then proceeds to his rules, many of which are
sufficiently obvious. Thus, he advises, that when one is about
to purchase a farm, he should examine if the climate, soil, and
exposure be good: he should see that it can be easily supplied
with plenty of water,—that it lies in the neighbourhood of a
town,—and near a navigable river, or the sea. The directions
for ascertaining the quality of the land are not quite so clear
or self-evident. He recommends the choice of a farm where
there are few implements of labour, as this shews the soil to
be easily cultivated; and where there are, on the other hand,
a number of casks and vessels, which testify an abundant produce.
With regard to the best way of laying out a farm when
it is purchased, supposing it to be one of a hundred acres, the
most profitable thing is a vineyard; next, a garden, that can
be watered; then a willow grove; 4th, an olive plantation; 5th,
meadow-ground; 6th, corn fields; and, lastly, forest trees and
brushwood. Varro cites this passage, but he gives the preference
to meadows: These required little expense; and, by his
time, the culture of vines had so much increased in Italy, and
such a quantity of foreign wine was imported, that vineyards
had become less valuable than in the days of the Censor.
Columella, however, agrees with Cato: He successively compares
the profits accruing from meadows, pasture, trees, and
corn, with those of vineyards; and, on an estimate, prefers the
last.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
When a farm has been purchased, the new proprietor should
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page14">[pg 14]</span><a name="Pg014" id="Pg014" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>perambulate the fields the day he arrives, or, if he cannot do
so, on the day after, for the purpose of seeing what has been
done, and what remains to be accomplished. Rules are given
for the most assiduous employment without doors, and the
most rigid economy within. When a servant is sick he will
require less food. All the old oxen and the cattle of delicate
frame, the old wagons, and old implements of husbandry, are
to be sold off. The sordid parsimony of the Censor leads
him to direct, that a provident <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">paterfamilias</span></span> should sell such
of his slaves as are aged and infirm; a recommendation which
has drawn down on him the well-merited indignation of
Plutarch<a id="noteref_17" name="noteref_17" href="#note_17"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">17</span></span></a>. These are some of the duties of the master; and
there follows a curious detail of the qualifications and duties
of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">villicus</span></span>, or overseer, who, in particular, is prohibited
from the exercise of religious rites, and consultation of augurs.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is probable that, in the time of Cato, the Romans had
begun to extend their villas considerably, which makes him
warn proprietors of land not to be rash in building. When a
landlord is thirty-six years of age he may build, provided his
fields have been brought into a proper state of cultivation.
His direction with regard to the extent of the villa is concise,
but seems a very proper one;—he advises, to build in such a
manner that the villa may not need a farm, nor the farm a
villa. Lucullus and Scævola both violated this golden rule,
as we learn from Pliny; who adds, that it will be readily
conjectured, from their respective characters, that it was the
farm of Scævola which stood in need of the villa, and the
villa of Lucullus which required the farm.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
A vast variety of crops was cultivated by the Romans, and
the different kinds were adapted by them, with great care, to
the different soils. Cato is very particular in his injunctions
on this subject. A field that is of a rich and genial soil
should be sown with corn; but, if wet or moist, with turnips
and raddish. Figs are to be planted in chalky land; and
willows in watery situations, in order to serve as twigs for
tying the vines. This being the proper mode of laying out
a farm, our author gives a detail of the establishment necessary
to keep it up;—the number of workmen, the implements of
husbandry, and the farm-offices, with the materials necessary
for their construction.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
He next treats of the management of vineyards and olives;
the proper mode of planting, grafting, propping, and fencing:
And he is here naturally led to furnish directions for making
and preserving the different sorts of wine and oil; as also to
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page15">[pg 15]</span><a name="Pg015" id="Pg015" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>specify how much of each is to be allowed to the servants of
the family.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In discoursing of the cultivation of fields for corn, Cato
enjoins the farmer to collect all sorts of weeds for manure.
Pigeons’ dung he prefers to that of every animal. He gives
orders for burning lime, and for making charcoal and ashes
from the branches or twigs of trees. The Romans seem to
have been at great pains in draining their fields; and Cato
directs the formation both of open and covered drains. Oxen
being employed in ploughing the fields, instructions are added
for feeding and taking due care of them. The Roman plough
has been a subject of much discussion: Two sorts are mentioned
by Cato, which he calls <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Romanicum</span></span>, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Campanicum</span></span>—the
first being proper for a stiff, and the other for a light
soil. Dickson conjectures, that the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Romanicum</span></span> had an iron
Share, and the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Campanicum</span></span> a piece of timber, like the
Scotch plough, and a sock driven upon it. The plough, with
other agricultural implements, as the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">crates</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">rastrum</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ligo</span></span>,
and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">sarculum</span></span>, most of which are mentioned by Cato, form a
curious point of Roman antiquities.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The preservation of corn, after it has been reaped, is a
subject of much importance, to which Cato has paid particular
attention. This was a matter of considerable difficulty in
Italy, in the time of the Romans; and all their agricultural
writers are extremely minute in their directions for preserving
it from rot, and from the depredations of insects, by which it
was frequently consumed.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
A great part of the work of Cato is more appropriate to the
housewife than the farmer. We have receipts for making all
sorts of cakes and puddings, fattening hens and geese, preserving
figs during winter; as also medical prescriptions for
the cure of various diseases, both of man and beast. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mala
punica</span></span>, or pomegranates, are the chief ingredient, in his
remedies, for Diarrhœa, Dyspepsia, and Stranguary. Sometimes,
however, his cures for diseases are not medical recipes,
but sacrifices, atonements, or charms. The prime of all is
his remedy for a luxation or fracture.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Take,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“a
green reed, and slit it along the middle—throw the knife
upwards, and join the two parts of the reed again, and tie it
so to the place broken or disjointed, and say this charm—<span class="tei tei-q">‘Daries,
Dardaries, Astataries, Dissunapiter.’</span> Or this—<span class="tei tei-q">‘Huat,
Hanat, Huat, Ista, Pista, Fista, Domiabo, Damnaustra.’</span> This
will make the part sound again<a id="noteref_18" name="noteref_18" href="#note_18"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">18</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The most remarkable feature in the work of Cato, is its
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page16">[pg 16]</span><a name="Pg016" id="Pg016" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>total want of arrangement. It is divided, indeed, into chapters,
but the author, apparently, had never taken the trouble
of reducing his precepts to any sort of method, or of following
any general plan. The hundred and sixty-two chapters,
of which his work consists, seem so many rules committed to
writing, as the daily labours of the field suggested. He gives
directions about the vineyard, then goes to his corn-fields,
and returns again to the vineyard. His treatise was, therefore,
evidently not intended as a regular or well-composed book,
but merely as a journal of incidental observations. That this
was its utmost pretensions, is farther evinced by the brevity
of the precepts, and deficiency of all illustration or embellishment.
Of the style, he of course would be little careful, as
his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memoranda</span></span> were intended for the use only of his family
and slaves. It is therefore always simple,—sometimes even
rude; but it is not ill adapted to the subject, and suits our
notion of the severe manners of its author, and character of
the ancient Romans.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Besides this book on agriculture, Cato left behind him
various works, which have almost entirely perished. He left
a hundred and fifty orations<a id="noteref_19" name="noteref_19" href="#note_19"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">19</span></span></a>, which were existing in the time
of Cicero, though almost entirely neglected, and a book on
military discipline<a id="noteref_20" name="noteref_20" href="#note_20"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">20</span></span></a>, both of which, if now extant, would be
highly interesting, as proceeding from one who was equally
distinguished in the camp and forum. A good many of his
orations were in dissuasion or favour of particular laws and
measures of state, as those entitled—<span class="tei tei-q">“Ne quis iterum Consul
fiat—De bello Carthaginiensi,”</span> of which war he was a vehement
promoter—<span class="tei tei-q">“Suasio in Legem Voconiam,—Pro Lege
Oppia,”</span> &amp;c. Nearly a third part of these orations were pronounced
in his own defence. He had been about fifty times
accused<a id="noteref_21" name="noteref_21" href="#note_21"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">21</span></span></a>, and as often acquitted. When charged with a
capital crime, in the 85th year of his age, he pleaded his own
cause, and betrayed no failure in memory, no decline of
vigour, and no faltering of voice<a id="noteref_22" name="noteref_22" href="#note_22"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">22</span></span></a>. By his readiness, and
pertinacity, and bitterness, he completely wore out his adversaries<a id="noteref_23" name="noteref_23" href="#note_23"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">23</span></span></a>,
and earned the reputation of being, if not the most
eloquent, at least the most stubborn speaker among the Romans.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cato’s oration in favour of the <a name="corr016" id="corr016" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Oppian</span> law, which was a
sumptuary restriction on the expensive dresses of the Roman
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page17">[pg 17]</span><a name="Pg017" id="Pg017" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>matrons, is given by Livy<a id="noteref_24" name="noteref_24" href="#note_24"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">24</span></span></a>. It was delivered in opposition to
the tribune Valerius, who proposed its abrogation, and affords
us some notion of his style and manner, since, if not copied
by the historian from his book of orations, it was doubtless
adapted by him to the character of Cato, and his mode of
speaking. Aulus Gellius cites, as equally distinguished for
its eloquence and energy, a passage in his speech on the
division of spoil among the soldiery, in which he complains
of their unpunished peculation and licentiousness. One of
his most celebrated harangues was that in favour of the Rhodians,
the ancient allies of the Roman people, who had fallen
under the suspicion of affording aid to Perseus, during the
second Macedonian war. The oration was delivered after the
overthrow of that monarch, when the Rhodian envoys were
introduced into the Senate, in order to explain the conduct of
their countrymen, and to deprecate the vengeance of the
Romans, by throwing the odium of their apparent hostility on
the turbulence of a few factious individuals. It was pronounced
in answer to those Senators, who, after hearing the supplications
of the Rhodians, were for declaring war against them;
and it turned chiefly on the ancient, long-tried fidelity of that
people,—taking particular advantage of the circumstance,
that the assistance rendered to Perseus had not been a national
act, proceeding from a public decree of the people. Tiro,
the freedman of Cicero, wrote a long and elaborate criticism
on this oration. To the numerous censures it contains, Aulus
Gellius has replied at considerable length, and has blamed
Tiro for singling out from a speech so rich, and so happily
connected, small and insulated portions, as objects of his
reprehensive satire. All the various topics, he adds, which
are enlarged on in this oration, if they could have been introduced
with more perspicuity, method, and harmony, could not
have been delivered with more energy and strength<a id="noteref_25" name="noteref_25" href="#note_25"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">25</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Both Cicero and Livy have expressed themselves very fully
on the subject of Cato’s orations. The former admits, that
his <span class="tei tei-q">“language is antiquated, and some of his phrases harsh
and inelegant: but only change that,”</span> he continues, <span class="tei tei-q">“which
it was not in his power to change—add number and cadence—give
an easier turn to his sentences—and regulate the
structure and connection of his words, (an art which was as
little practised by the older Greeks as by him,) and you will
find no one who can claim the preference to Cato. The Greeks
themselves acknowledge, that the chief beauty of composition
results from the frequent use of those forms of expression,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page18">[pg 18]</span><a name="Pg018" id="Pg018" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>which they call tropes, and of those varieties of language
and sentiment, which they call figures; but it is almost incredible
with what copiousness, and with what variety, they are
all employed by Cato<a id="noteref_26" name="noteref_26" href="#note_26"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">26</span></span></a>.”</span> Livy principally speaks of the facility,
asperity, and freedom of his tongue<a id="noteref_27" name="noteref_27" href="#note_27"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">27</span></span></a>. Aulus Gellius has
instituted a comparison of Caius Gracchus, Cato, and Cicero,
in passages where these three orators declaimed against the
same species of atrocity—the illegal scourging of Roman
citizens; and Gellius, though he admits that Cato had not
reached the splendour, harmony, and pathos of Cicero, considers
him as far superior in force and copiousness to Gracchus<a id="noteref_28" name="noteref_28" href="#note_28"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">28</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Of the book on Military Discipline, a good deal has been
incorporated into the work of Vegetius; and Cicero’s orations
may console us for the want of those of Cato. But the loss
of the seven books, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Originibus</span></span>, which he commenced in
his vigorous old age, and finished just before his death, must
ever be deeply deplored by the historian and antiquary. Cato
is said to have begun to inquire into the history, antiquities,
and language of the Roman people, with a view to counteract
the influence of the Greek taste, introduced by the Scipios;
and in order to take from the Greeks the honour of having
colonized Italy, he attempted to discover on the Latin soil
the traces of ancient national manners, and an indigenous
civilization. The first book of the valuable work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Originibus</span></span>,
as we are informed by Cornelius Nepos, in his short
life of Cato, contained the exploits of the kings of Rome.
Cato was the first author who attempted to fix the era of the
foundation of Rome, which he calculated in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Origines</span></span>,
and determined it to have been in the first year of the 7th
Olympiad. In order to discover this epoch, he had recourse
to the memoirs of the Censors, in which it was noted, that the
taking of Rome by the Gauls, was 119 years after the expulsion
of the kings. By adding this period to the aggregate
duration of the reigns of the kings, he found that the amount
answered to the first of the 7th Olympiad. This is the computation
followed by Dionysius of Halicarnassus, in his great
work on Roman antiquities. It is probably as near the truth
as we can hope to arrive; but even in the time of Cato, the
calculated duration of the reigns of the kings was not founded
on any ancient monuments then extant, or on the testimony
of any credible historian. The second and third books treated
of the origin of the different states of Italy, whence the whole
work has received the name of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Origines</span></span>. The fourth and
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page19">[pg 19]</span><a name="Pg019" id="Pg019" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>fifth books comprehended the history of the first and second
Punic wars; and in the two remaining books, the author discussed
the other campaigns of the Romans till the time of
Ser. Galba, who overthrew the Lusitanians.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In his account of these later contests, Cato merely related
the facts, without mentioning the names of the generals or
leaders; but though he has omitted this, Pliny informs us that
he did not forget to take notice, that the elephant which fought
most stoutly in the Carthaginian army was called Surus, and
wanted one of his teeth<a id="noteref_29" name="noteref_29" href="#note_29"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">29</span></span></a>. In this same work he incidentally
treated of all the wonderful and admirable things which existed
in Spain and Italy. Some of his orations, too, as we learn
from Livy, were incorporated into it, as that for giving freedom
to the Lusitanian hostages; and Plutarch farther mentions,
that he omitted no opportunity of praising himself, and extolling
his services to the state. The work, however, exhibited
great industry and learning, and, had it descended to us, would
unquestionably have thrown much light on the early periods
of Roman history and the antiquities of the different states of
Italy. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, himself a sedulous inquirer
into antiquities, bears ample testimony to the research and accuracy
of that part which treats of the origin of the ancient
Italian cities. The author lived at a time which was favourable
to this investigation. Though the Samnites, Etruscans,
and Sabines, had been deprived of their independence, they
had not lost their monuments or records of their history, their
individuality and national manners. Cicero praises the simple
and concise style of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Origines</span></span>, and laments that the
work was neglected in his day, in consequence of the inflated
manner of writing which had been recently adopted; in the
same manner as the tumid and ornamented periods of Theopompus
had lessened the esteem for the concise and unadorned
narrative of Thucydides, or as the lofty eloquence of Demosthenes
impaired the relish for the extreme attic simplicity of
Lysias<a id="noteref_30" name="noteref_30" href="#note_30"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">30</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the same part of the dialogue, entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, Cicero
asks what flower or light of eloquence is wanting to the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Origines</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-q">“Quem
florem, aut quod lumen eloquentiæ non habent?”</span>
But on Atticus considering the praise thus bestowed as excessive,
he limits it, by adding, that nothing was required to complete
the strokes of the author’s pencil but a certain lively
glow of colours, which had not been discovered in his age.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Intelliges,
nihil illius lineamentis, nisi eorum pigmentorum,
quæ inventa nondum erant, florem et calorem defuisse<a id="noteref_31" name="noteref_31" href="#note_31"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">31</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page20">[pg 20]</span><a name="Pg020" id="Pg020" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The pretended fragments of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Origines</span></span>, published by the
Dominican, Nanni, better known by the name of Annius Viterbiensis,
and inserted in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Antiquitates Variæ</span></span>, printed at
Rome in 1498, are spurious, and the imposition was detected
soon after their appearance. The few remains first collected
by Riccobonus, and published at the end of his Treatise on
History, (Basil, 1579,) are believed to be genuine. They have
been enlarged by Ausonius Popma, and added by him, with
notes, to the other writings of Cato, published at Leyden in
1590.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Any rudeness of style and language which appears either in
the orations of Cato, or in his agricultural and historical works,
cannot be attributed to total carelessness or neglect of the
graces of composition, as he was the first person in Rome who
treated of oratory as an art<a id="noteref_32" name="noteref_32" href="#note_32"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">32</span></span></a>, in a tract entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore
ad Filium</span></span>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cato was also the first of his countrymen who wrote on the
subject of medicine<a id="noteref_33" name="noteref_33" href="#note_33"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">33</span></span></a>. Rome had existed for 500 years without
professional physicians<a id="noteref_34" name="noteref_34" href="#note_34"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">34</span></span></a>. A people who as yet were
strangers to luxury, and consisted of farmers and soldiers,
(though surgical operations might be frequently necessary,)
would be exempt from the inroads of the <span class="tei tei-q">“grisly troop,”</span> so
much encouraged by indolence and debauchery. Like all
semi-barbarous people, they believed that maladies were to be
cured by the special interposition of superior beings, and that
religious ceremonies were more efficacious for the recovery
of health than remedies of medical skill. Deriving, as they
did, much of their worship from the Etruscans, they probably
derived from them also the practice of attempting to overcome
disease by magic and incantation. The Augurs and Aruspices
were thus the most ancient physicians of Rome. In epidemic
distempers the Sibylline books were consulted, and the cures
they prescribed were superstitious ceremonies. We have seen
that it was to free the city from an attack of this sort that
scenic representations were first introduced at Rome. During
the progress of another epidemic infliction a temple was built
to Apollo<a id="noteref_35" name="noteref_35" href="#note_35"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">35</span></span></a>; and as each periodic pestilence naturally abated
in course of time, faith was confirmed in the efficacy of the
rites which were resorted to. Every one has heard of the
pomp wherewith Esculapius was transported under the form of
a serpent, from Epidaurus to an islet in the Tiber, which was
thereafter consecrated to that divine physician. The apprehension
of diseases raised temples to Febris and Tussis, and
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page21">[pg 21]</span><a name="Pg021" id="Pg021" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>other imaginary beings belonging to the painful family of
death in order to avert the disorders which they were supposed
to inflict. It was perceived, however, that religious professions
and lustrations and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">lectisterniums</span></span> were ineffectual for
the cure of those complaints, which, in the 6th century, luxury
began to exasperate and render more frequent at Rome. At
length, in 534, Archagatus, a free-born Greek, arrived in Italy,
where he practised medicine professionally as an art, and received
in return for his cures the endearing appellation of
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Carnifex</span></span><a id="noteref_36" name="noteref_36" href="#note_36"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">36</span></span></a>. But though Archagatus was the first who practised
medicine, Cato was the first who wrote of diseases and
their treatment as a science, in his work entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Commentarius
quo Medetur Filio, Servis, Familiaribus</span></span>. In this book
of domestic medicine—duck, pigeons, and hare, were the foods
he chiefly recommended to the sick<a id="noteref_37" name="noteref_37" href="#note_37"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">37</span></span></a>. His remedies were principally
extracted from herbs; and colewort, or cabbage, was
his favourite cure<a id="noteref_38" name="noteref_38" href="#note_38"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">38</span></span></a>. The recipes, indeed, contained in his
work on agriculture, show that his medical knowledge did not
exceed that which usually exists among a semi-barbarous race,
and only extended to the most ordinary simples which nature
affords. Cato hated the compound drugs introduced by the
Greek physicians—considering these foreign professors of
medicine as the opponents of his own system. Such, indeed,
was his antipathy, that he believed, or pretended to believe,
that they had entered into a league to poison all the barbarians,
among whom they classed the Romans.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Jurarunt
inter se,”</span> says he, in a passage preserved by Pliny, <span class="tei tei-q">“barbaros
necare omnes medicina: Et hoc ipsum mercede faciunt, ut
fides iis sit, et facile disperdant<a id="noteref_39" name="noteref_39" href="#note_39"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">39</span></span></a>.”</span> Cato, finding that the patients
lived notwithstanding this detestable conspiracy, began
to regard the Greek practitioners as impious sorcerers, who
counteracted the course of nature, and restored dying men to
life, by means of unholy charms; and he therefore advised his
countrymen to remain stedfast, not only by their ancient Roman
principles and manners, but also by the venerable unguents
and salubrious balsams which had come down to them
from the wisdom of their grandmothers. Such as they were,
Cato’s old medical saws continued long in repute at Rome.
It is evident that they were still esteemed in the time of Pliny,
who expresses the same fears as the Censor, lest hot baths and
potions should render his countrymen effeminate, and corrupt
their manners<a id="noteref_40" name="noteref_40" href="#note_40"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">40</span></span></a>.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page22">[pg 22]</span><a name="Pg022" id="Pg022" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Every one knows what was the consequence of Cato’s dislike
to the Greek philosophers, who were expelled <a name="corr022" id="corr022" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">from</span> the city by a decree
of the senate. But it does not seem certain what became
of Archagatus and his followers. The author of the
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Diogene Moderne</span></span>, as cited by Tiraboschi, says that Archagatus
was stoned to death<a id="noteref_41" name="noteref_41" href="#note_41"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">41</span></span></a>, but the literary historian who
quotes him doubts of his having any sufficient authority for
the assertion. Whether the physicians were comprehended
in the general sentence of banishment pronounced on the
learned Greeks, or were excepted from it, has been the
subject of a great literary controversy in modern Italy and in
France<a id="noteref_42" name="noteref_42" href="#note_42"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">42</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Aulus Gellius<a id="noteref_43" name="noteref_43" href="#note_43"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">43</span></span></a> mentions Cato’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Libri quæstionum Epistolicarum</span></span>,
and Cicero his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apophthegmata</span></span><a id="noteref_44" name="noteref_44" href="#note_44"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">44</span></span></a>, which was probably
the first example of that class of works which, under the
appellation of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ana</span></span>, became so fashionable and prevalent in
France.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The only other work of Cato which I shall mention, is the
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Carmen de Moribus</span></span>. This, however, was not written in verse,
as might be supposed from the title. Precepts, imprecations,
and prayers, or any set <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">formulæ</span></span> whatever, were called <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Carmina</span></span>.
I do not know what maxims were inculcated in this
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">carmen</span></span>, but they probably were not of very rigid morality, at
least if we may judge from the <span class="tei tei-q">“Sententia Dia Catonis,”</span> mentioned
by Horace:
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Quidam notus homo cùm exiret fornice, Macte</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Virtute esto, inquit sententia dia Catonis<a id="noteref_45" name="noteref_45" href="#note_45"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">45</span></span></a>.”</span></div>
</div>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page23">[pg 23]</span><a name="Pg023" id="Pg023" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Misled by the title, some critics have erroneously assigned to
the Censor the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Disticha de Moribus</span></span>, now generally attributed
to Dionysius Cato, who lived, according to Scaliger in the age
of Commodus and Septimius Severus<a id="noteref_46" name="noteref_46" href="#note_46"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">46</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The work of
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
    <a name="toc5" id="toc5"></a><a name="pdf6" id="pdf6"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">MARCUS TERENTIUS VARRO,</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
On agriculture, has descended to us more entire than that of
Cato on the same subject; yet it does not appear to be complete.
In the early times of the republic, the Romans, like
the ancient Greeks, being constantly menaced with the incursions
of enemies, indulged little in the luxury of expensive and
ornamental villas. Even that of Scipio Africanus, the rival
and contemporary of Cato the Censor, and who in many other
respects anticipated the refinements of a later age, was of the
simplest structure. It was situated at Liternum, (now Patria,)
a few miles north from <a name="corr023" id="corr023" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Cumæ</span>, and was standing in the time
of Seneca. This philosopher paid a visit to a friend who resided
in it during the age of Nero, and he afterwards described
it in one of his epistles with many expressions of wonder and
admiration at the frugality of the great Africanus<a id="noteref_47" name="noteref_47" href="#note_47"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">47</span></span></a>. When,
however, the scourge of war was removed from their immediate
vicinity, agriculture and gardening were no longer exercised
by the Romans as in the days of the Censor, when great
crops of grain were raised for profit, and fields of onions sown
for the subsistence of the labouring servants. The patricians
now became fond of ornamental gardens, fountains, terraces,
artificial wildernesses, and grottos, groves of laurel for shelter
in winter, and oriental planes for shade in summer. Matters,
in short, were fast approaching to the state described in one
of the odes of Horace—
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page24">[pg 24]</span><a name="Pg024" id="Pg024" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Jam pauca aratro jugera regiæ,</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Moles relinquent: undique latius</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">Extenta visentur Lucrino</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 4.00em">Stagna lacu: platanusque cœlebs</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Evincet ulmos: tum violaria, et</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Myrtus, et omnis copia narium,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">Spargent olivetis odorem</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 4.00em">Fertilibus domino priori.</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Tum spissa ramis laurea fervidos</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Excludet ictus. Non ita Romuli</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">Præscriptum, et intonsi Catonis</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 4.00em"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Auspiciis, veterumque norma<a id="noteref_48" name="noteref_48" href="#note_48"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">48</span></span></a>.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Agriculture, however, still continued to be so respectable an
employment, that its practice was not considered unworthy
the friend of Cicero and Pompey, nor its precepts undeserving
to be delivered by one who was indisputably the first scholar
of his age—who was renowned for his profound erudition and
thorough insight into the laws, the literature, and antiquities
of his country,—and who has been hailed by Petrarch as the
third great luminary of Rome, being only inferior in lustre to
Cicero and Virgil:—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Qui’ vid’ io nostra gente aver per duce</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Varrone, il terzo gran lume Romano,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Che quanto ’l miro più, tanto più luce<a id="noteref_49" name="noteref_49" href="#note_49"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">49</span></span></a>.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Varro was born in the 637th year of Rome, and was descended
of an ancient senatorial family. It is probable that his youth,
and even the greater part of his manhood, were spent in literary
pursuits, and in the acquisition of that stupendous knowledge,
which has procured to him the appellation of the most
learned of the Romans, since his name does not appear in the
civil or military history of his country, till the year 680, when
he was Consul along with Cassius Varus. In 686, he served
under Pompey, in his war against the pirates, in which he
commanded the Greek ships<a id="noteref_50" name="noteref_50" href="#note_50"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">50</span></span></a>. To the fortunes of that Chief
he continued firmly attached, and was appointed one of his
lieutenants in Spain, along with Afranius and Petreius, at the
commencement of the war with Cæsar. Hispania Ulterior
was specially confided to his protection, and two legions were
placed under his command. After the surrender of his colleagues
in Hither Spain, Cæsar proceeded in person against
him. Varro appears to have been little qualified to cope with
such an adversary. One of the legions deserted in his own
sight, and his retreat to Cadiz, where he had meant to retire,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page25">[pg 25]</span><a name="Pg025" id="Pg025" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>having been cut off, he surrendered at discretion, with the
other, in the vicinity of Cordova<a id="noteref_51" name="noteref_51" href="#note_51"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">51</span></span></a>. From that period he despaired
of the salvation of the republic, or found, at least, that
he was not capable of saving it; for although, after receiving
his freedom from Cæsar, he proceeded to Dyracchium, to give
Pompey a detail of the disasters which had occurred, he left
it almost immediately for Rome. On his return to Italy he
withdrew from all political concerns, and indulged himself during
the remainder of his life in the enjoyment of literary leisure.
The only service he performed for Cæsar, was that of
arranging the books which the Dictator had himself procured,
or which had been acquired by those who preceded him in
the management of public affairs<a id="noteref_52" name="noteref_52" href="#note_52"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">52</span></span></a>. He lived during the reign
of Cæsar in habits of the closest intimacy with Cicero; and
his feelings, as well as conduct, at this period, resembled those
of his illustrious friend, who, in all his letters to Varro, bewails,
with great freedom, the utter ruin of the state, and proposes
that they should live together, engaged only in those studies
which were formerly their amusement, but were then their
chief support. <span class="tei tei-q">“And, should none require our services for
repairing the ruins of the republic, let us employ our time and
thoughts on moral and political inquiries. If we cannot benefit
the commonwealth in the forum or the senate, let us endeavour,
at least, to do so by our studies and writings; and,
after the example of the most learned among the ancients,
contribute to the welfare of our country, by useful disquisitions
concerning laws and government.”</span> Some farther notion
of the manner in which Varro spent his time during this period
may be derived from another letter of Cicero, written in June,
707. <span class="tei tei-q">“Nothing,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“raises your character higher in
my esteem, than that you have wisely retreated into harbour—that
you are enjoying the happy fruits of a learned leisure,
and employed in pursuits, which are attended with more public
advantage, as well as private satisfaction, than all the ambitious
exploits, or voluptuous indulgences, of these licentious
victors. The contemplative hours you spend at your Tusculan
villa, are, in my estimation, indeed, what alone deserves to be
called life<a id="noteref_53" name="noteref_53" href="#note_53"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">53</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Varro passed the greatest portion of his time in the various
villas which he possessed in Italy. One of these was at Tusculum,
and another in the neighbourhood of Cumæ. The
latter place had been among the earliest Greek establishments
in Italy, and was long regarded as pre-eminent in power and
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page26">[pg 26]</span><a name="Pg026" id="Pg026" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>population. It spread prosperity over the adjacent coasts;
and its oracle, Sibyl, and temple, long attracted votaries and
visitants. As the Roman power increased, that of Cumæ
decayed; and its opulence had greatly declined before the
time of Varro. Its immediate vicinity was not even frequently
selected as a situation for villas. The Romans had a well-founded
partiality for the coasts of Puteoli, and Naples, so
superior in beauty and salubrity to the flat, marshy neighbourhood
of Cumæ. The situation of Varro’s other villa, at Tusculum,
must have been infinitely more agreeable, from its
pure air, and the commanding prospect it enjoyed.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Besides immense flocks of sheep in Apulia, and many horses
in the Sabine district of Reate<a id="noteref_54" name="noteref_54" href="#note_54"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">54</span></span></a>, Varro had considerable farms
both at his Cuman and Tusculan villas, the cultivation of
which, no doubt, formed an agreeable relaxation from his
severe and sedentary studies. He had also a farm at a third
villa, where he occasionally resided, near the town of Casinum,
in the territory of the ancient Volsci<a id="noteref_55" name="noteref_55" href="#note_55"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">55</span></span></a>, and situated on the
banks of the Cassinus, a tributary stream to the Liris. This
stream, which was fifty-seven feet broad, and both deep and
clear, with a pebbly channel, flowed through the middle of
his delightful domains. A bridge, which crossed the river
from the house, led directly to an island, which was a little
farther down, at the confluence of the Cassinus with a rivulet
called the Vinius<a id="noteref_56" name="noteref_56" href="#note_56"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">56</span></span></a>. Along the banks of the larger water
there were spacious pleasure-walks which conducted to the
farm; and near the place where they joined the fields, there
was an extensive aviary<a id="noteref_57" name="noteref_57" href="#note_57"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">57</span></span></a>. The site of Varro’s villa was visited
by Sir R. C. Hoare, who says, that it stood close to Casinum,
now St Germano: Some trifling remains still indicate its site;
but its memory, he adds, will shortly survive only in the page
of the historian<a id="noteref_58" name="noteref_58" href="#note_58"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">58</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
After the assassination of Cæsar, this residence, along with
almost all the wealth of Varro, which was immense, was forcibly
seized by Marc Antony<a id="noteref_59" name="noteref_59" href="#note_59"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">59</span></span></a>. Its lawless occupation by that
profligate and blood-thirsty triumvir, on his return from his
dissolute expedition to Capua, is introduced by Cicero into
one of his Philippics, and forms a topic of the most eloquent
and bitter invective. The contrast which the orator draws
between the character of Varro and that of Antony—between
the noble and peaceful studies prosecuted in that delightful
residence by the rightful proprietor, and the shameful 
debau<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page27">[pg 27]</span><a name="Pg027" id="Pg027" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>cheries of the wretch by whom it had been usurped, forms a
picture, to which it would be difficult to find a parallel in
ancient or modern oratory.—<span class="tei tei-q">“How many days did you shamefully
revel, Antony, in that villa? From the third hour, it
was one continued scene of drinking, gambling, and uproar.
The very roofs were to be pitied. O, what a change of
masters! But how can he be called its master? And, if
master—gods! how unlike to him he had dispossessed! Marcus
Varro made his house the abode of the muses, and a retreat
for study—not a haunt for midnight debauchery. Whilst he
was there, what were the subjects discussed—what the topics
debated in that delightful residence? I will answer the
question—The rights and liberties of the Roman people—the
memorials of our ancestors—the wisdom resulting from reason
combined with knowledge. But whilst you, Antony, was its
occupant, (for you cannot be called its master,) every room
rung with the cry of drunkenness—the pavements were
swimming with wine, and the walls wet with riot.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Antony was not a person to be satisfied with robbing Varro
of his property. At the formation of the memorable triumvirate,
the name of Varro appeared in the list of the proscribed,
among those other friends of Pompey whom the
clemency of Cæsar had spared. This illustrious and blameless
individual had now passed the age of seventy; and nothing
can afford a more frightful proof of the sanguinary spirit which
guided the councils of the triumvirs, than their devoting to
the dagger of the hired assassin a man equally venerable by
his years and character, and who ought to have been protected,
if not by his learned labours, at least by his retirement, from
such inhuman persecution. But, though doomed to death as
a friend of law and liberty, his friends contended with each
other for the dangerous honour of saving him. Calenus
having obtained the preference, carried him to his country-house,
where Antony frequently came, without suspecting
that it contained a proscribed inmate. Here Varro remained
concealed till a special edict was issued by the consul, M.
Plancus, under the triumviral seal, excepting him and Messala
Corvinus from the general slaughter<a id="noteref_60" name="noteref_60" href="#note_60"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">60</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But though Varro thus passed in security the hour of danger,
he was unable to save his library, which was placed in the
garden of one of his villas, and fell into the hands of an illiterate
soldiery.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
After the battle of Actium, Varro resided in tranquillity at
Rome till his decease, which happened in 727, when he was
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page28">[pg 28]</span><a name="Pg028" id="Pg028" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>ninety years of age. The tragical deaths, however, of Pompey
and Cicero, with the loss of others of his friends,—the ruin of
his country,—the expulsion from his villas,—and the loss of
those literary treasures, which he had stored up as the solace
of his old age, and the want of which would be doubly felt
by one who wished to devote all his time to study,—must have
cast a deep shade over the concluding days of this illustrious
scholar. His wealth was restored by Augustus, but his books
could not be supplied.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is not improbable, that the dispersion of this library,
which impeded the prosecution of his studies, and prevented
the composition of such works as required reference and consultation,
may have induced Varro to employ the remaining
hours of his life in delivering those precepts of agriculture,
which had been the result of long experience, and which
needed only reminiscence to inculcate. It was some time
after the loss of his books, and when he had nearly reached
the age of eighty, that Varro composed the work on husbandry,
as he himself testifies in the introduction. <span class="tei tei-q">“If I had
leisure, I might write these things more conveniently, which
I will now explain as well as I am able, thinking that I must
make haste; because, if a man be a bubble of air, much more
so is an old man, for now my eightieth year admonishes me to
get my baggage together before I leave the world. Wherefore,
as you have bought a farm, which you are desirous to
render profitable by tillage, and as you ask me to take this
task upon me, I will try to advise you what must be done, not
only during my stay here, but after my departure.”</span> The
remainder of the introduction forms, in its ostentatious display
of erudition, a remarkable contrast to Cato’s simplicity.
Varro talks of the Syrens and Sibyls,—invokes all the Roman
deities, supposed to preside over rural affairs,—and enumerates
all the Greek authors who had written on the subject of
agriculture previous to his own time.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The first of the three books which this agricultural treatise
comprehends, is addressed, by Varro, to Fundanius, who had
recently purchased a farm, in the management of which he
wished to be instructed. The information which Varro undertakes
to give, is communicated in the form of dialogue. He
feigns that, at the time appointed for rites to be performed in
the sowing season, (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">sementivis feriis</span></span>,) he went, by invitation
of the priest, to the temple of Tellus. There he met his
father-in-law, C. Fundanius, the knight Agrius, and Agrasius,
a farmer of imposts, who were gazing on a map of Italy,
painted on the inner walls of the temple. The priest, whose
duty it was to officiate, having been summoned by the <a name="corr028" id="corr028" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">ædile</span>
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page29">[pg 29]</span><a name="Pg029" id="Pg029" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>to attend him on affairs of importance, they were awaiting
his return; and, in order to pass the time till his arrival,
Agrasius commences a conversation, (suggested by the map
of Italy,) by inquiring at the others present in the temple,
whether they, who had travelled so much, had ever visited
any country better cultivated than Italy. This introduces an
eulogy on the soil and climate of that favoured region, and
of its various abundant productions,—the Apulian wheat, the
Venafrian olive, and the Falernian grape. All this, again,
leads to the inquiry, by what arts of agricultural skill and
industry, aiding the luxuriant soil, it had reached such unexampled
fecundity. These questions are referred to Licinius
Stolo, and Tremellius Scrofa, who now joined the party, and
who were well qualified to throw light on the interesting discussion—the
first being of a family distinguished by the pains
it had taken with regard to the Agrarian laws, and the second
being well known for possessing one of the best cultivated
farms in Italy. Scrofa, too, had himself written on husbandry,
as we learn from Columella; who says, that he had first rendered
agriculture eloquent. This first book of Varro is
accordingly devoted to rules for the cultivation of land, whether
for the production of grain, pulse, olives, or vines, and
the establishment necessary for a well-managed and lucrative
farm; excluding from consideration what is strictly the business
of the grazier and shepherd, rather than of the farmer.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
After some general observations on the object and end of
agriculture, and the exposition of some general principles
with regard to soil and climate, Scrofa and Stolo, who are the
chief prolocutors, proceed to settle the size, as also the situation
of the villa. They recommend that it should be placed
at the foot of a well-wooded hill, and open to the most healthful
breeze. An eastern exposure seems to be preferred, as it
will thus have shade in summer, and sun in winter. They
farther advise, that it should not be placed in a hollow valley,
as being there subject to storms and inundations; nor in front
of a river, as that situation is cold in winter, and unwholesome
in summer; nor in the vicinity of a marsh, where it would
be liable to be infested with small insects, which, though
invisible, enter the body by the mouth or nostrils, and occasion
obstinate diseases. Fundanius asks, what one ought to
do who happens to inherit such a villa; and is answered,
that he should sell it for whatever sum it may bring; and if it
will bring nothing, he should abandon it. After this follow
the subjects of enclosure—the necessary implements of husbandry—the
number of servants and oxen required—and the
soil in which different crops should be sown. We have then
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page30">[pg 30]</span><a name="Pg030" id="Pg030" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>a sort of calendar, directing what operations ought to be performed
in each season of the year. Thus, the author recommends
draining betwixt the winter solstice and approach of
the zephyrs, which was reckoned to be about the beginning
of February. The sowing of grain should not be commenced
before the autumnal equinox, nor delayed after the winter
solstice; because the seeds which are sown previous to the
equinox spring up too quickly, and those sown subsequent to
the solstice scarcely appear above ground in forty days. A
taste for flowers had begun to prevail at Rome in the time of
Varro; he accordingly recommends their cultivation, and
points out the seasons for planting the lily, violet and crocus.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The remainder of the first book of Varro is well and naturally
arranged. He considers his subject from the choice of the
seed, till the grain has sprung up, ripened, been reaped,
secured, and brought to market. The same course is followed
in treating of the vine and the olive. While on the subject
of selling farm-produce to the best advantage, the conversation
is suddenly interrupted by the arrival of the priest’s
freedman, who came in haste to apologize to the guests for
having been so long detained, and to ask them to attend on
the following day at the obsequies of his master, who had
been just assassinated on the public street by an unknown
hand. The party in the temple immediately separate.—<span class="tei tei-q">“De
casu humano magis querentes, quam admirantes id Romæ
factum.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The subject of agriculture, strictly so called, having been
discussed in the first book, Varro proceeds in the second,
addressed to Niger Turranus, to treat of the care of flocks
and cattle, (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Re Pecuaria</span></span>). The knowledge which he here
communicates is the result of his own observations, blended
with the information he had received from the great pasturers
of Epirus, at the time when he commanded the Grecian ships
on its coast, in Pompey’s naval war with the pirates. As in
the former book, the instruction is delivered in the shape of
dialogue. Varro being at the house of a person called Cossinius,
his host refuses to let him depart till he explain to him
the origin, the dignity, and the art of pasturage. Our author
undertakes to satisfy him as to the first and second points,
but as to the third, he refers him to Scrofa, another of the
guests, who had the management of extensive sheep-walks in
the territory of the Brutii. Varro makes but a pedantic figure
in the part which he has modestly taken to himself. His
account of the origin of pasturage is nothing but some very
common-place observations on the early stages of society;
and its dignity is proved from several signs of the zodiac being
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page31">[pg 31]</span><a name="Pg031" id="Pg031" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>called after animals, as also some of the most celebrated spots
on the globe,—Mount Taurus, the Bosphorus, the Ægean sea,
and Italy, which Varro derives from Vitulus. Scrofa, in commencing
his part of the dialogue, divides the animals concerning
which he is to treat into three classes: 1. the lesser; of
which there are three sorts—sheep, goats, and swine; 2. the
larger; of which there are also three—oxen, asses, and horses;
and, lastly, those which do not themselves bring profit, but are
essential to the care of the others—the dog, the mule, and
the shepherd. With regard to all animals, four things are to be
considered in purchasing or procuring them—their age, shape,
pedigree, and price. After they have been purchased, there
are other four things to be attended to—feeding, breeding,
rearing, and curing distempers. According to this methodical
division of the subject, Scrofa proceeds to give rules for
choosing the best of the different species of animals which he
has enumerated, as also directions for tending them after they
have been bought, and turning them to the best profit. It is
curious to hear what were considered the good points of a
goat, a hog, or a horse, in the days of Pompey and Cæsar;
in what regions they were produced in greatest size and perfection;
what was esteemed the most nutritive provender for
each; and what number constituted an ordinary flock or herd.
The qualities specified as best in an ox may perhaps astonish
a modern grazier; but it must be remembered, that they are
applicable to the capacity for labour, not of carrying beef.
Hogs were fed by the Romans on acorns, beans, and barley;
and, like our own, indulged freely in the luxury of mire,
which, Varro says, is as refreshing to them as the bath to
human creatures. The Romans, however, did not rear, as we
do, a solitary ill-looking pig in a sty, but possessed great
herds, sometimes amounting to the number of two or three
hundred.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
From what the author records while treating of the pasturage
of sheep, we learn that a similar practice prevailed in
Italy, with that which at this day exists in Spain, in the management
of the Merinos belonging to the Mêstà. Flocks of
sheep, which pastured during the winter in Apulia, were
driven to a great distance from that region, to pass the summer
in Samnium; and mules were led from the champaign grounds
of Rosea, at certain seasons, to the high Gurgurian mountains.
With much valuable and curious information on all these various
topics, there are interspersed a great many strange superstitions
and fables, or what may be called vulgar errors, as that
swine breathe by the ears instead of the mouth or nostrils—that
when a wolf gets hold of a sow, the first thing he does is to
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page32">[pg 32]</span><a name="Pg032" id="Pg032" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>plunge it into cold water, as his teeth cannot otherwise bear
the heat of the flesh—that on the shore of Lusitania, mares
conceive from the winds, but their foals do not live above three
years—and what is more inexplicable, one of the speakers in
the dialogue asserts, that he himself had seen a sow in Arcadia
so fat, that a field-mouse had made a comfortable nest in
her flesh, and brought forth its young.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This book concludes with what forms the most profitable
part of pasturage—the dairy and sheep-shearing.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The third book, which is by far the most interesting and
best written in the work, treats <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de villicis pastionibus</span></span>, which
means the provisions, or moderate luxuries, which a plain farmer
may procure, independent of tillage or pasturage,—as
the poultry of his barn-yard—the trouts in the stream, by
which his farm is bounded—and the game, which he may enclose
in parks, or chance to take on days of recreation. If
others of the agricultural writers have been more minute with
regard to the construction of the villa itself, it is to Varro we
are chiefly indebted for what lights we have received concerning
its appertenancies, as warrens, aviaries, and fish-ponds.
The dialogue on these subjects is introduced in the following
manner:—At the comitia, held for electing an <a name="corr032" id="corr032" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Ædile</span>, Varro
and the Senator Axius, having given their votes for the candidate
whom they mutually favoured, and wishing to be at his
house to receive him on his return home, after all the suffrages
had been taken, resolved to wait the issue in the shade of a
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">villa publica</span></span>. There they found Appius Claudius, the augur,
whom Axius began to rally on the magnificence of his villa, at
the extremity of the Campus Martius, which he contrasts with
the profitable plainness of his own farm in the Reatine district.
<span class="tei tei-q">“Your sumptuous mansion,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“is adorned with painting,
sculpture, and carving; but to make amends for the want
of these, I have all that is necessary to the cultivation of lands,
and the feeding of cattle. In your splendid abode, there is
no sign of the vicinity of arable lands, or vineyards. We find
there neither ox nor horse—there is neither vintage in the cellars,
nor corn in the granary. In what respect does this resemble
the villa of your ancestors? A house cannot be
called a farm or a villa, merely because it is built beyond the
precincts of the city.”</span> This polite remonstrance gives rise to
a discussion with regard to the proper definition of a villa,
and whether that appellation can be applied to a residence,
where there is neither tillage nor pasturage. It seems to be
at length agreed, that a mansion which is without these, and
is merely ornamental, cannot be called a villa; but that it is
properly so termed, though there be neither tillage nor pastu<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page33">[pg 33]</span><a name="Pg033" id="Pg033" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>rage,
    if fish-ponds, pigeon-houses, and bee-hives, be kept for
the sake of profit; and it is discussed whether such villas, or
agricultural farms, are most lucrative.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Our author divides the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Villaticæ pastiones</span></span> into poultry, game,
and fish. Under the first class, he comprehends birds, such
as thrushes, which are kept in aviaries, to be eaten, but not
any birds of game. Rules and directions are given for their
management, of the same sort with those concerning the animals
mentioned in the preceding book. The aviaries in the
Roman villas were wonderfully productive and profitable. A
very particular account is given of the construction of an
aviary. Varro himself had one at his farm, near Casinum, but
it was intended more for pleasure and recreation than profit.
The description he gives of it is very minute, but not very
distinct. The pigeon-house is treated of separately from the
aviary. As to the game, the instructions do not relate to
field-sports, but to the mode of keeping wild animals in enclosures
or warrens. In the more simple and moderate ages of
the republic, these were merely hare or rabbit warrens of no
great extent; but as wealth and luxury increased, they were
enlarged to the size of 40 or 50 acres, and frequently contained
within their limits goats, wild boars, and deer. The author
even descends to instructions with regard to keeping and fattening
snails and dormice. On the subject of fish he is extremely
brief, because that was rather an article of expensive
luxury than homely fare; and the candidate, besides, was now
momentarily expected. Fish-ponds had increased in the same
proportion as warrens, and in the age of Varro were often
formed at vast expense. Instances are given of the great
depth and extent of ponds belonging to the principal citizens,
some of which had subterraneous communications with the
sea, and others were supplied by rivers, which had been turned
from their course. At this part of the dialogue, a shout and
unusual bustle announced the success of the candidate whom
Varro favoured: on hearing this tumult, the party gave up
their agricultural disquisitions, and accompanied him in triumph
to the Capitol.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This work of Varro is totally different from that of Cato on
the same subject, formerly mentioned. It is not a journal,
but a book; and instead of the loose and unconnected manner
in which the brief precepts of the Censor are delivered, it is
composed on a plan not merely regular, but perhaps somewhat
too stiff and formal. Its exact and methodical arrangement
has particularly attracted the notice of Scaliger.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Unicum
Varronem inter Latinos habemus, libris tribus de Re
Rustica, qui vere ac <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">μεθοδικως</span></span> philosophatus sit. Immo nullus
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page34">[pg 34]</span><a name="Pg034" id="Pg034" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>est Græcorum qui tam bene, inter eos saltem qui ad nos pervenerunt<a id="noteref_61" name="noteref_61" href="#note_61"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">61</span></span></a>.”</span>
Instead, too, of that directness and simplicity
which never deviate from the plainest precepts of agriculture,
the work of Varro is embellished and illustrated by much of
the erudition which might be expected from the learning of
its author, and of one acquainted with fifty Greek writers who
had treated of the subject before him. <span class="tei tei-q">“Cato, the famous
Censor,”</span> says Martyne, <span class="tei tei-q">“writes like an ancient country gentleman
of much experience: He abounds in short pithy sentences,
intersperses his book with moral precepts, and was
esteemed a sort of oracle. Varro writes more like a scholar
than a man of much practice: He is fond of research into
antiquity, and inquires into the etymology of the names of
persons and things. Cato, too, speaks of a country life, and
of farming, merely as it may be conducive to gain. Varro
also speaks of it as of a wise and happy state, inclining to
justice, temperance, sincerity, and all the virtues, which shelters
from evil passions, by affording that constant employment,
which leaves little leisure for those vices which prevail in
cities, where the means and occasions for them are created
and supplied.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There were other Latin works on agriculture, besides those
of Cato and Varro, but they were subsequent to the time which
the present volumes are intended to embrace. Strictly speaking,
indeed, even the work of Varro was written after the battle
of Actium: the knowledge, however, on which its precepts
were founded, was acquired long before. The style, too, is
that of the Roman republic, not of the Augustan age. I have
therefore considered Varro as belonging to the period on
which we are at present engaged.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Indeed, the history of his life and writings is almost identified
with the literary history of Rome, during the long period
through which his existence was protracted. But the treatise
on agriculture is the only one of his multifarious works which
has descended to us entire. The other writings of this celebrated
polygraph, as Cicero calls him<a id="noteref_62" name="noteref_62" href="#note_62"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">62</span></span></a>, may be divided into
philological, critical, historical, mythological, philosophic,
and satiric; and, after all, it would probably be necessary, in
order to form a complete catalogue, to add the convenient
and comprehensive class of miscellaneous.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Lingua Latina</span></span>, though it has descended to
us incomplete, is by much the most entire of Varro’s writings,
except the Treatise on Agriculture. It is on account of this
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page35">[pg 35]</span><a name="Pg035" id="Pg035" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>philological production, that Aulus Gellius ranks him among
the grammarians, who form a numerous and important class in
the History of Latin Literature. They were called <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">grammatici</span></span>
by the Romans—a word which would be better rendered
philologers than grammarians. The grammatic science,
among the Romans, was not confined to the inflections of
words or rules of syntax. It formed one of the great divisions
of the art of criticism, and was understood to comprehend all
those different inquiries which philology includes—embracing
not only grammar, properly so called, but verbal and literal
criticism, etymology, the explication and just interpretation
of authors, and emendation of corrupted passages. Indeed
the name of grammarian (grammaticus) is frequently applied
by ancient authors<a id="noteref_63" name="noteref_63" href="#note_63"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">63</span></span></a> to those whom we should now term critics
and commentators, rather than grammarians.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It will be readily conceived that a people, who, like the
first Romans, were chiefly occupied with war, and whose
relaxation was agriculture, did not attach much importance
to a science, of which the professed object was, teaching how
to speak and write with propriety. Accordingly, almost six
hundred years elapsed before they formed any idea of such a
study<a id="noteref_64" name="noteref_64" href="#note_64"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">64</span></span></a>. Crates Mallotes, who was a contemporary of Aristarchus,
and was sent as ambassador to Rome, by Attalus,
King of Pergamus, towards the end of the sixth century<a id="noteref_65" name="noteref_65" href="#note_65"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">65</span></span></a>, was
the first who excited a taste for grammatical inquiries.
Having accidentally broken his leg in the course of his
embassy, he employed the period of his convalescence in
receiving visitors, to whom he delivered lectures, containing
grammatic disquisitions: and he also read and commented on
poets hitherto unknown in Rome<a id="noteref_66" name="noteref_66" href="#note_66"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">66</span></span></a>. These discussions, however,
probably turned solely on Greek words, and the interpretation
of Greek authors. It is not likely that Crates had
such a knowledge of the Latin tongue, as to give lectures on
a subject which requires minute and extensive acquaintance
with the language. His instructions, however, had the effect
of fixing the attention of the Romans on their own language,
and on their infant literature. Men sprung up who commented
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page36">[pg 36]</span><a name="Pg036" id="Pg036" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>on, and explained, the few Latin poems which at that time
existed. C. Octavius Lampadius illustrated the Punic War
of Nævius; and also divided that poem into seven books.
About the same time, Q. Vargunteius lectured on the Annals
of Ennius, on certain fixed days, to crowded audiences.
Q. Philocomus soon afterwards performed a similar service
for the Satires of his friend Lucilius. Among these early
grammarians, Suetonius particularly mentions Ælius Preconinus
and Servius Clodius. The former was the master of
Varro and Cicero; he was also a rhetorician of eminence, and
composed a number of orations for the Patricians, to whose
cause he was so ardently attached, that, when Metellus Numidicus
was banished in 654, he accompanied him into exile.
Serv. Clodius was the son-in-law of Lælius, and fraudulently
appropriated, it is said, a grammatical work, written by his
distinguished relative, which shows the honour and credit by
this time attached to such pursuits at Rome. Clodius was a
Roman knight; and, from his example, men of rank did not
disdain to write concerning grammar, and even to teach its
principles. Still, however, the greater number of grammarians,
at least of the verbal grammarians, were slaves. If well
versed in the science, they brought, as we learn from Suetonius,
exorbitant prices. Luctatius Daphnis was purchased by
Quintus Catulus for 200,000 pieces of money, and shortly
afterwards set at liberty. This was a strong encouragement
for masters to instruct their slaves in grammar, and for them
to acquire its rules. Sævius Nicanor, and Aurelius Opilius,
who wrote a commentary, in nine books, on different writers,
were freedmen, as was also Antonius Gnipho, a Gaul, who
had been taught Greek at Alexandria, whither he was carried
in his youth, and was subsequently instructed in Latin literature
at Rome. Though a man of great learning in the science
he professed, he left only two small volumes on the Latin
language—his time having been principally occupied in
teaching. He taught first in the house of the father of Julius
Cæsar, and afterwards lectured at home to those who chose
to attend him. The greatest men of Rome, when far advanced
in age and dignity, did not disdain to frequent his school.
Many of his precepts, indeed, extended to rhetoric and declamation,
the arts, of all others, in which the Romans were
most anxious to be initiated. These were now taught in the
schools of almost all grammarians, of whom there were, at
one time, upwards of twenty in Rome. For a long while,
only the Greek poets were publicly explained, but at length
the Latin poets were likewise commented on and illustrated.
About the same period, the etymology of Latin words began
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page37">[pg 37]</span><a name="Pg037" id="Pg037" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>to be investigated: Ælius Gallus, a jurisconsult quoted by
Varro, wrote a work on the origin and proper signification
of terms of jurisprudence, which in most languages remain
unvaried, till they have become nearly unintelligible; and
Ælius Stilo attempted, though not with perfect success, to
explain the proper meaning of the words of the Salian verses,
by ascertaining their derivations<a id="noteref_67" name="noteref_67" href="#note_67"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">67</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The science of grammar and etymology was in this stage of
progress and in this degree of repute at the time when Varro
wrote his celebrated treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Lingua Latina</span></span>. That work
originally consisted of twenty-four books—the first three being
dedicated to Publius Septimius, who had been his quæstor in
the war with the pirates, and the remainder to Cicero. This
last dedication, with that of Cicero’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span> to Varro, has
rendered their friendship immortal. The importance attached
to such dedications by the great men of Rome, and the value,
in particular, placed by Cicero on a compliment of this nature
from Varro, is established by a letter of the orator to Atticus—<span class="tei tei-q">“You
know,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“that, till lately, I composed nothing
but orations, or some such works, into which I could not
introduce Varro’s name with propriety. Afterwards, when I
engaged in a work of more general erudition, Varro informed
me, that his intention was, to address to me a work of considerable
extent and importance. Two years, however, have
passed away without his making any progress. Meanwhile,
I have been making preparations for returning him the compliment<a id="noteref_68" name="noteref_68" href="#note_68"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">68</span></span></a>.”</span>
Again, <span class="tei tei-q">“I am anxious to know how you came to
be informed that a man like Varro, who has written so much,
without addressing anything to me, should wish me to pay
him a compliment<a id="noteref_69" name="noteref_69" href="#note_69"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">69</span></span></a>.”</span> The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span> were dedicated to
Varro before he fulfilled his promise of addressing a work to
Cicero; and it appears, from Cicero’s letter to Varro, sent
along with the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span>, how impatiently he expected its
performance, and how much he importuned him for its execution.—<span class="tei tei-q">“To
exact the fulfilment of a promise,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“is a
sort of ill manners, of which the populace themselves are
seldom guilty. I cannot, however, forbear—I will not say, to
demand, but remind you, of a favour, which you long since
gave me reason to expect. To this end, I have sent you four
admonitors, (the four books of the Academica,) whom,
perhaps, you will not consider as extremely modest<a id="noteref_70" name="noteref_70" href="#note_70"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">70</span></span></a>.”</span> It is
curious, that, when Varro did at length come forth with his
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page38">[pg 38]</span><a name="Pg038" id="Pg038" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>dedication, although he had been highly extolled in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span>,
he introduced not a single word of compliment to
Cicero—whether it was that Varro dealt not in compliment,
that he was disgusted with his friend’s insatiable appetite for
praise, or that Cicero was considered as so exalted that he
could not be elevated higher by panegyric.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
We find in the work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Lingua Latina</span></span>, which was written
during the winter preceding Cæsar’s death, the same methodical
arrangement that marks the treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Re Rustica</span></span>. The
twenty-four books of which it consisted, were divided into
three great parts. The first six books were devoted to etymological
researches, or, as Varro himself expresses it, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">quemadmodum
vocabula essent imposita rebus in lingua Latina</span></span>.
In the first, second, and third books, of this division of his
work, all of which have perished, the author had brought forward
what an admirer of etymological science could advance
in its favour—what a depreciator might say against it; and what
might be pronounced concerning it without enthusiasm or prejudice.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Quæ
contra eam dicentur, quæ pro ea, quæ de ea.”</span>
The fragments remaining of this great work of Varro, commence
at the fourth book, which, with the two succeeding books, is occupied
with the origin of Latin terms and the poetical licenses that
have been taken in their use: He first considers the origin
of the names of places, and of those things which are in them.
His great division of places is, into heaven and earth—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Cœlum</span></span>
he derives from <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">cavum</span></span>, and that, from <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">chaos</span></span>; <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">terra</span></span> is so called
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">quia teritur</span></span>. The derivation of the names of many terrestrial
regions is equally whimsical. The most rational are those
of the different spots in Rome, which are chiefly named after
individuals, as the Tarpeian rock, from Tarpeia, a vestal virgin
slain by the Sabines—the Cœlian Mount, from Cœlius, an
Etrurian chief, who assisted Romulus in one of his contests
with his neighbours. Following the same arrangement with
regard to those things which <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">are in</span></span> places, he first treats of the
immortals, or gods of heaven and earth. Descending to mortal
things, he treats of animals, whom he considers as in three
places—air, water, and earth. The creatures inhabiting earth
he divides into men, cattle, and wild beasts. Of the appellations
proper to mankind, he speaks first of public honours, as
the office of Prætor, who was so called, <span class="tei tei-q">“quod præiret exercitui.”</span>
We have then the derivations both of the generic and
special names of animals. Thus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Armenta</span></span> (quasi <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">aramenta</span></span>)
is from <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">aro</span></span>, because oxen are used for ploughing; <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lepus</span></span> is
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">quasi Levipes</span></span>. The remainder of the book is occupied with
those words which relate to food, clothing, and various sorts
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page39">[pg 39]</span><a name="Pg039" id="Pg039" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>of utensils. Of these, the derivation is given, and it is generally
far-fetched. But of all his etymologies, the most whimsical
is that contained in his book of Divine Things, where he
deduces <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">fur</span></span> from <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">furvus</span></span>, (dusky,) because thieves usually steal
during the darkness of night<a id="noteref_71" name="noteref_71" href="#note_71"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">71</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The fifth book relates to words expressive of time and its divisions,
and to those things which are done in the course of time.
He begins with the months and days consecrated to the service
of the gods, or performance of accustomed rites. Things
which happen during the lapse of time, are divided into three
classes, according to the three great human functions of
thought, speech, and act. The third class, or actions, are performed
by means of the external senses; the mention of which
introduces the explication of those terms which express the
various operations of the senses; and the book terminates with
a list of vocables derived from the Greek. These two books
relate the common employment of words. In the sixth, the
author treats of poetic words, and the poetic or metaphoric use
of ordinary terms, of which he gives examples. Here he follows
the same arrangement already adopted—speaking first of
places, and then of time, and showing, as he proceeds, the manner
in which poets have changed or corrupted the original
signification of words.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Such is the first division of the work of Varro, forming what
he himself calls the etymological part. He admits that it was
a subject of much difficulty and obscurity, since many original
words had become obsolete in course of time, and of those
which survived, the meaning had been changed or had never
been imposed with exactness. The second division, which
extended from the commencement of the seventh to the end of
the twelfth book, comprehended the accidents of words, and
the different changes which they undergo from declension,
conjugation, and comparison. The author admits but of two
kinds of words—nouns and verbs, to which he refers all the
other parts of speech. He distinguishes two sorts of declensions,
of which he calls one arbitrary, and the other natural or
necessary; and he is thenceforth alternately occupied with
analogy and anomaly. In the seventh book he discusses the
subject of analogy in general, and gives the arguments which
may be adduced against its existence in nouns proper: In the
eighth, he reasons like those who find analogies everywhere.
Book ninth treats of the analogy and anomaly of verbs, and
with it the fragment we possess of Varro’s treatise terminates.
The three other books, which completed the second part, were
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page40">[pg 40]</span><a name="Pg040" id="Pg040" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>of course occupied with comparison and the various inflections
of words.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The third part of the work, which contained twelve books,
treated of syntax, or the junction of words, so as to form a
phrase or sentence. It also contained a sort of glossary, which
explained the true meaning of Latin vocables.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This, which may be considered as one of the chief works of
Varro, was certainly a laborious and ingenious production; but
the author is evidently too fond of deriving words from the ancient
dialects of Italy, instead of recurring to the Greek, which,
after the capture of Tarentum, became a great source of Latin
terms. In general, the Romans, like the Greeks before them,
have been very unfortunate in their etymologies, being but
indifferent critics, and inadequately informed of everything
that did not relate to their own country. Blackwell, in his
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Court of Augustus</span></span>, while he admits that the sagacity of Varro
is surprising in the use which he has made of the knowledge
he possessed of the Sabine and Tuscan dialects, remarks, that
his work, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Lingua Latina</span></span>, is faulty in two particulars; the
first, arising from the author having recourse to far-fetched
allusions and metaphors in his own language, to illustrate his
etymology of words, instead of going at once to the Greek.
The second, proceeding from his ignorance of the eastern and
northern languages, particularly the Aramean and Celtic<a id="noteref_72" name="noteref_72" href="#note_72"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">72</span></span></a>;
the former of which, in Blackwell’s opinion, had given names
to the greater number of the gods, and the latter, to matters
occurring in war and rustic life.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is not certain whether the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Libri De Similitudine Verborum</span></span>,
and those <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Utilitate Sermonis</span></span>, cited by Priscian and
Charisius as philological works of Varro, were parts of his
great production, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Lingua Latina</span></span>, or separate compositions.
There was a distinct treatise, however, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Sermone Latino</span></span>,
addressed to Marcellus, of which a very few fragments are
preserved by Aulus Gellius.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">critical</span></span> works of this universal scholar, were entitled,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Proprietate Scriptorum</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Poetis</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Poematis</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><a name="corr040" id="corr040" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr"><span style="font-style: italic">Theatrales</span></span><span style="font-style: italic">,
sive de Actionibus Scenicis</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Scenicis Originibus</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
Plautinis Comœdiis</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Plautinis Quæstionibus</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
Compositione Satirarum</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetoricorum Libri</span></span>. These works
are praised or mentioned by Gellius, Nonius Marcellus, and
Diomedes; but almost nothing is known of their contents.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Somewhat more may be gathered concerning Varro’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">mythological</span></span>
or <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">theological</span></span> works, as they were much studied, and
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page41">[pg 41]</span><a name="Pg041" id="Pg041" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>very frequently cited by the early fathers, particularly St Augustine
and Lactantius. Of these the chief is the treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
Cultu Deorum</span></span>, noticed by St Augustine in his seventh book,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Civitate Dei</span></span>, where he says that Varro considers God to
be not only the soul of the world, but the world itself. In this
work he also treated of the origin of hydromancy, and other
superstitious divinations. Sixteen books of the treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
Rerum Humanarum et Divinarum Antiquitatibus</span></span>, addressed
to Julius Cæsar, as Pontifex Maximus, related to theological,
or at least what we might call ecclesiastical subjects. He
divides theology into three sorts—mythic, physical, and civil.
The first is chiefly employed by poets, who have feigned many
things contrary to the nature and dignity of the immortals, as
that they sprung from the head, or thigh, or from drops of
blood—that they committed thefts and impure actions, and
were the servants of men. The second species of theology is
that which we meet with in the books of philosophers, in which
it is discussed, whether the gods have been from all eternity,
and what is their essence, whether of fire, or numbers, or atoms.
Civil, or the third kind of theology, relates to the institutions
devised by men, for the worship of the Gods. The first sort
is most appropriate to the stage; the second to the world; the
third to the city. Varro was a zealous advocate for the physical
explication of the mythological fables, to which he always
had recourse, when pressed by the difficulties of their literal
meaning<a id="noteref_73" name="noteref_73" href="#note_73"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">73</span></span></a>. He also seems to have been of opinion that the
images of the gods were originally intended to direct such
as were acquainted with the secret doctrines, to the contemplation
of the real gods, and of the immortal soul with its
constituent parts<a id="noteref_74" name="noteref_74" href="#note_74"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">74</span></span></a>. The first book of this work, as we learn
from St Augustine, was introductory. The three following
treated of the ministers of religion, the Pontiffs, Augurs, and
Sibyls; in mentioning whom, he relates the well-known story
of her who offered her volumes for sale to Tarquinius Priscus.
In the next ternary of chapters, he discoursed concerning
places appointed for religious worship, and the celebration of
sacred rites. The third ternary related to holidays; the fourth
to consecrations, and to private as well as public sacrifices; and
the fifth contained an enumeration of all the deities who watch
over man, from the moment when Janus opens to him the gates
of life, till the dirges of Nænia conduct him to the tomb. The
whole universe, he says, in conclusion, is divided into heaven
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page42">[pg 42]</span><a name="Pg042" id="Pg042" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>and earth; the heavens, again, into æther and air; earth, into
the ground and water. All these are full of souls, mortal in
earth and water, but immortal in air and æther. Between the
highest circle of heaven and the orbit of the moon, are the
ethereal souls of the stars and planets, which are understood,
and in fact seem, to be celestial deities; between the sphere
of the moon and the highest region of tempests, dwell those
aerial spirits, which are conceived by the mind though not
seen by the eye—departed heroes, Lares, and Genii.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This work, which is said to have chiefly contributed to the
splendid reputation of Varro, was extant as late as the beginning
of the fourteenth century. Petrarch, to whom the
world has been under such infinite obligations for his ardent
zeal in discovering the learned works of the Romans, had seen
it in his youth. It continued ever after to be the object of his
diligent search, and his bad success was a source to him of
constant mortification. Of this we are informed in one of the
letters, which that enthusiastic admirer of the ancients addressed
to them as if they been alive, and his contemporaries.
<span class="tei tei-q">“Nullæ tamen exstant,”</span> says he to Varro, <span class="tei tei-q">“vel admodum
laceræ, tuorum operum reliquiæ; licet divinarum et humanarum
rerum libros, ex quibus sonantius nomen habes, puerum
me vidisse meminerim, et recordatione torqueor, summis, ut
aiunt, labiis gustatæ dulcedinis. Hos alicubi forsitan latitare
suspicor, eaque, multos jam per annos, me fatigat cura, quoniam
longâ quidem ac sollicitâ spe nihil est laboriosius in <a name="corr042" id="corr042" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">vitâ.</span>”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Plutarch, in his life of Romulus, speaks of Varro as a man
of all the Romans most versed in history. The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">historical</span></span> and
political works are the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Annales Libri</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Belli Punici Secundi
Liber</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Initiis Urbis Romanæ</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Gente Populi Romani</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Libri
de Familiis Trojanis</span></span>, which last treated of the families
that followed Æneas into Italy. With this class we may rank
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hebdomadum, sive de Imaginibus Libri</span></span>, containing the
panegyrics of 700 illustrious men. There was a picture of
each, with a legend or verse under it, like those in the children’s
histories of the Kings of England. That annexed to
the portrait of Demetrius Phalereus, who had upwards of 300
brazen statues erected to him by the Athenians, is still preserved:—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Hic Demetrius æneis tot aptus est</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Quot luces habet annus absolutus.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There were seven pictures and panegyrics in each book,
whence the whole work has been called Hebdomades. Varro
had adopted the superstitious notions of the ancients concern<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page43">[pg 43]</span><a name="Pg043" id="Pg043" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>ing
    particular numbers, and the number seven seems specially
to have commanded his veneration. There were in the world
seven wonders—there were seven wise men among the Greeks—there
were seven chariots in the Circensian games—and
seven chiefs were chosen to make war on Thebes: All which
he sums up with remarking, that he himself had then entered
his twelfth period of seven years, on which day he had written
seventy times seven books, many of which, in consequence of
his proscription, had been lost in the plunder of his library. It
appears from Ausonius, that the tenth book of this work was
occupied with pictures and panegyrics of distinguished architects,
since, in his Eidyllium, entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mosella</span></span>, he observes,
that the buildings on the banks of that river would not have
been despised by the most celebrated architects; and that
those who planned them might well deserve a place in the
tenth book of the Hebdomas of Varro:—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Forsan et insignes hominumque operumque labores</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Hic habuit decimo celebrata volumine Marci</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Hebdomas.”</span> ——</div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is evident, however, from one of the letters of Symmachus,
addressed to his father, that though this was a professed work
of panegyric, Varro was very sparing and niggardly of his
praise even to the greatest characters: <span class="tei tei-q">“Ille Pythagoram qui
animas in æternitatem primus asseruit; ille Platonem qui deos
esse persuasit; ille Aristotelem qui naturam bene loquendi in
artem redegit; ille pauperem Curium sed divitibus imperantem;
ille severos Catones, gentem Fabiam, decora Scipionum,
totumque illum triumphalem Senatum parca laude perstrinxit.”</span>
Varro also wrote an eulogy on Porcia, the wife of Brutus,
which is alluded to by Cicero in one of his letters to Atticus.
Among his notices of celebrated characters, it is much to be
regretted that the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Liber de Vita Sua</span></span>, cited by Charisius, has
shared the same fate as most of the other valuable works of
Varro. The treatise entitled, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Sisenna, sive de Historia</span></span>, was
a tract on the composition of history, inscribed to Sisenna, the
Roman historian, who wrote an account of the civil wars of
Marius and Sylla. It contained, it is said, many excellent precepts
with regard to the appropriate style of history, and the
accurate investigation of facts. But the greatest service rendered
by Varro to history was his attempt to fix the chronology
of the world. Censorinus informs us that he was the first who
regulated chronology by eclipses. That learned grammarian
has also mentioned the division of three great periods established
by Varro. He did not determine whether the earliest
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page44">[pg 44]</span><a name="Pg044" id="Pg044" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>of them had any beginning, but he fixed the end of it at the
Ogygian deluge. To this period of absolute historical darkness,
he supposed that a kind of twilight succeeded, which
continued from that flood till the institution of the Olympic
games, and this he called the fabulous age. From that date
the Greeks pretend to digest their history with some degree of
order and clearness. Varro, therefore, looked on it as the
break of day, or commencement of the historical age. The
chronology, however, of those events which occurred at the beginning
of this second period, is as uncertain and confused as
of those which immediately preceded it. Thus, the historical
æra is evidently placed too high by Varro. The earliest writers
of history did not live till long after the Olympian epoch,
and they again long preceded the earliest chronologers.
Timæus, about the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, was the first
who digested the events recorded by these ancient historians,
according to a computation of the Olympiads<a id="noteref_75" name="noteref_75" href="#note_75"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">75</span></span></a>. Preceding
writers, indeed, mention these celebrated epochs, but the
mode of reckoning by them was not brought into established use
for many centuries after the Olympic æra. Arnobius farther
informs us, that Varro calculated that not quite 2000 years had
elapsed from the Ogygian flood to the consulship of Hirtius
and Pansa. The building of Rome he placed two years higher
than Cato had done in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Origines</span></span>, founding his computation
on the eclipse which had a short while preceded the birth of
Romulus; but unfortunately this eclipse is not attested by contemporary
authors, nor by any historian who could vouch for
it with certainty. It was calculated a long time after the
phænomenon was supposed to have appeared, by Tarrutius
Firmanus, the judicial astrologer, who amused himself with
drawing horoscopes. Varro requested him to discover the
date of Romulus’s birth, by divining it from the known events
of his life, as geometrical problems are solved by analysis; for
Tarrutius considered it as belonging to the same art, (and
doubtless the conclusions are equally certain,) when a child’s
nativity is given to predict its future life, and when the incidents
of life are given to cast up the nativity. Tarrutius, accordingly,
having considered the actions of Romulus, and the
manner of his death, and having combined all the incidents,
pronounced that he was conceived in the first year of the
second Olympiad, on the 23d of the Egyptian month Choiok,
on which day there had been a total eclipse of the sun.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Pompey, when about to enter for the first time on the office
of Consul, being ignorant of city manners and senatorial
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page45">[pg 45]</span><a name="Pg045" id="Pg045" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>forms, requested Varro to frame for him a written commentary
or manual, from which he might learn the duties to be discharged
by him when he convened the Senate. This book,
which was entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Isagogicum de Officio Senatus habendi</span></span>,
Varro says, in the letters which he wrote to Oppianus, had
been lost. But in these letters he repeated many things on
the subject, as what he had written before had perished<a id="noteref_76" name="noteref_76" href="#note_76"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">76</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">philosophical</span></span> writings of Varro are not numerous; but
his chief work of that description, entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Philosophia
Liber</span></span>, appears to have been very comprehensive. St Augustine
informs us that Varro examined in it all the various sects
of philosophers, of which he enumerated upwards of 280.
The sect of the old Academy was that which he himself
followed, and its tenets he maintained in opposition to all
others. He classed these numerous sects in the following
curious manner: All men chiefly desire, or place their happiness
in, four things—pleasure—rest—these two united, (which
Epicurus, however, termed pleasure,) or soundness of body
and mind. Now, philosophers have contended that virtue is
to be sought after for the sake of obtaining one or other of
these four; or, that some one of these four is to be sought
after for the sake of virtue; or, that they and virtue also are
to be sought after for their own sake, and from these different
opinions each of the four great objects of human desire being
sought after with three different views, there are formed
twelve sects of philosophers. These twelve sects are doubled,
in consequence of the different opinions created by the considerations
of social intercourse—some maintaining that the
four great desires should be gratified for our own sake, and
others, that they should be indulged only for the sake of our
neighbours. The above twenty-four sects become forty-eight,
from each system being defended as certain truth, or as
merely the nearest approximation to probability—twenty-four
sects maintaining each hypothesis as certain, and twenty-four
as only probable. These again were doubled, from the difference
of opinion with regard to the suitable garb and external
habit and demeanour of philosophers.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
We have now got ninety-six sects by a very strange sort of
computation, and all these are to be tripled, according to the
different opinions entertained concerning the best mode of
spending life—in literary leisure, in business, or in both<a id="noteref_77" name="noteref_77" href="#note_77"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">77</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Varro having followed the sect of the old Academy, in
preference to all others, proceeded to refute the principles of
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page46">[pg 46]</span><a name="Pg046" id="Pg046" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>the sects he had enumerated. He cleared the way, by dismissing,
as unworthy the name of philosophical, all those sects
whose differences did not turn on what is the supreme final
good; for there is no use in philosophizing, unless it be to
make us happy, and that which makes us happy is the final
good. But those who dispute, for example, whether a wise
man should follow virtue, tranquillity, &amp;c. partly for the sake
of others, or solely for his own, do not dispute concerning
what is the final good, but whether that good should be
shared. In like manner, the Cynic does not dispute with
regard to the supreme good, but in what dress or habit he who
follows the supreme good should be clad. So also as to the
controversy concerning the uncertainty of knowledge. The
number of sects were thus reduced to the twelve with which
our author set out, and in which the whole question relates
to what is the final good. From these, however, he abstracted
the sects which place the final good in pleasure, rest, or the
union of both—not that he altogether disdained these, but he
thought they might be included in soundness of body and
mind, or what he called the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">prima Naturæ</span></span>. There are thus
only three questions which merit full discussion. Whether
these <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">prima Naturæ</span></span> should be desired for the sake of virtue,
or virtue for their sake, or if they and virtue also should be
desired for their own sake.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Now, since in philosophy we seek the supreme felicity of
man, we must inquire what man is. His nature is compounded
of soul and body. Hence the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">summum bonum</span></span> necessarily
consists in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">prima Naturæ</span></span> or perfect soundness of mind
and body. These, therefore, must be sought on their own
account; and under them may be included virtue, which is
part of soundness of mind, being the great director and prime
former of the felicity of life.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Such were the doctrines of the old Academy, which Varro
was also introduced as supporting in Cicero’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span>.—<span class="tei tei-q">“I
have comprehended,”</span> says that illustrious orator and philosopher,
in a letter to Atticus, <span class="tei tei-q">“the whole Academic system in
four books, instead of two, in the course of which Varro is
made to defend the doctrines of Antiochus<a id="noteref_78" name="noteref_78" href="#note_78"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">78</span></span></a>. I have put into
his mouth all the arguments which were so accurately collected
by Antiochus against the opinion of those who contend
that there is no certainty to be attained in human knowledge.
These I have answered myself. But the part assigned to
Varro in the debate is so good, that I do not think the cause
which I support appears the better.”</span>
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page47">[pg 47]</span><a name="Pg047" id="Pg047" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
I am not certain under what class Varro’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Novem libri
Disciplinarum</span></span> should be ranked, as it probably comprehended
instructive lessons in the whole range of arts and sciences.
One of the chapters, according to Vitruvius, was on the subject
of architecture. Varro was particularly full and judicious
in his remarks on the construction and situation of Roman
villas, and seems to have laid the foundation for what Palladius
and Columella subsequently compiled on that interesting topic.
Another chapter was on arithmetic; and Fabricius mentions,
that Vetranius Maurus has declared, in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Life of Varro</span></span>, that
he saw this part of the work, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Disciplinis</span></span>, at Rome, in the
library of the Cardinal Lorenzo Strozzi.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Varro derived much notoriety from his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">satirical</span></span> compositions.
His <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Tricarenus</span></span>, or <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Tricipitina</span></span>, was a satiric history
of the triumvirate of Cæsar, Pompey, and Crassus. Much
pleasantry and sarcasm were also interspersed in his books
entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Logistorici</span></span>; but his most celebrated production in
that line was the satire which he himself entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Menippean</span></span>.
It was so called from the cynic Menippus of Gadara, a city in
Syria, who, like his countryman Meleager, was in the habit
of expressing himself jocularly on the most grave and important
subjects. He was the author of a <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Symposium</span></span>, in the
manner of Xenophon. His writings were interspersed with
verses, parodied from Homer and the tragic poets, or ludicrously
applied, for the purpose of burlesque. It is not known,
however, that he wrote any professed satire. The appellation,
then, of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Menippean</span></span>, was given to his satire by Varro, not from
any production of the same kind by Menippus, but because
he imitated his general style of humour. In its external form
it appears to have been a sort of literary anomaly. Greek
words and phrases were interspersed with Latin; prose was
mingled with verses of various measures; and pleasantry with
serious remark. As to its object and design, Cicero introduces
Varro himself explaining this in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span>. After
giving his reasons for not writing professedly on philosophical
subjects, he continues,—<span class="tei tei-q">“In those ancient writings of ours,
we, imitating Menippus, without translating him, have infused
a degree of mirth and gaiety along with a portion of our most
secret philosophy and logic, so that even our unlearned readers
might more easily understand them, being, as it were, invited
to read them with some pleasure. Besides, in the discourses
we have composed in praise of the dead, and in the introductions
to our antiquities, it was our wish to write in a manner
worthy of philosophers, provided we have attained the desired
object.”</span> From what Cicero afterwards says in this dialogue,
while addressing himself to Varro, it would appear, that he
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page48">[pg 48]</span><a name="Pg048" id="Pg048" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>had indeed touched on philosophical subjects in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Menippean</span></span>
satire, but that, learned as he was, his object was more to
amuse his readers than instruct them: <span class="tei tei-q">“You have entered on
topics of philosophy in a manner sufficient to allure readers to
its study, but inadequate to convey full instruction, or to advance
its progress.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Many fragments of this <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Menippean</span></span> satire still remain, but
they are much broken and corrupted. The heads of the different
subjects, or chapters, contained in it, amounting to near
one hundred and fifty, have been given by Fabricius in alphabetical
order. Some of them are in Latin, others in Greek.
A few chapters have double titles; and, though little remains
of them but the titles, these show what an infinite variety of
subjects was treated by the author. As a specimen, I subjoin
those ranged under the letter A. Aborigines,—<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">Περι Ανθρωπων φυσεως</span></span>,—De Admirandis, vel Gallus Fundanius,—Agatho,—Age
modo,—<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">Αιει διβυη</span></span>,
    vel <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">περι Αἱρεσεων</span></span>,—Ajax
    Stramentitius,—<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">Αλλος ὁυτος Ἡρακλης</span></span>,—Andabatæ,—Anthropopolis,—<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">περι Αρχης</span></span>,
seu Marcopolis,—<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">περι Αρχαιρεσιων</span></span>,
    seu Serranus,—<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">περι Αρετης κτησεως</span></span>,—<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">περι Αφροδισιων</span></span>, seu vinalia,—Armorum judicium,—<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">περι Αρρενοτητος</span></span>, seu Triphallus,—Autumedus,—Mæonius,—Baiæ,
&amp;c.<a id="noteref_79" name="noteref_79" href="#note_79"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">79</span></span></a>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There is a chapter concerning the duty of a husband, (De
officio Mariti,) in which the author observes, that the errors of
a wife are either to be cured or endured: He who extirpates
them makes his wife better, but he who bears with them improves
himself. Another is inscribed, <span class="tei tei-q">“You know not what a
late evening, or supper, may bring with it,”</span> (Nescis quid vesper
serus vehat.) In this chapter he remarks, that the number
of guests should not be less than that of the Graces, or
more than that of the Muses. To render an entertainment
perfect, four things must concur—agreeable company, suitable
place, convenient time, and careful preparation. The
guests should not be loquacious or taciturn. Silence is for the
bed-chamber, and eloquence for the Forum, but neither for a
feast. The conversation ought not to turn on anxious or difficult
subjects, but should be cheerful and inviting, so that
utility may be combined with a certain degree of pleasure and
allurement. This will be best managed, by discoursing of
those things which relate to the ordinary occurrences or affairs
of life, concerning which one has not leisure to talk in the
Forum, or while transacting business. The master of the feast
should rather be neat and clean than splendidly attired; and
if he introduce reading into the entertainment, it should be so
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page49">[pg 49]</span><a name="Pg049" id="Pg049" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>selected as to amuse, and to be neither troublesome nor tedious<a id="noteref_80" name="noteref_80" href="#note_80"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">80</span></span></a>.
A third chapter is entitled, <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">περι ἐδεσματων</span></span>; and treats
of the rarer delicacies of an entertainment, especially foreign
luxuries. Au. Gellius has given us the import of some verses,
in which Varro mentioned the different countries which supplied
the most exquisite articles of food. Peacocks came from
Samos; cranes from Melos; kids from Ambracia; and the best
oysters from Tarentum<a id="noteref_81" name="noteref_81" href="#note_81"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">81</span></span></a>. Part of the chapter
    <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">γνωθι σεαυτον</span></span> was
directed against the Latin tragic poets.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
What remains of the verses interspersed in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Menippean</span></span>
satire, is too trifling to enable us to form any accurate judgment
of the poetical talents of Varro.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The style of satire introduced by Varro was imitated by
Lucius Annæus Seneca, in his satire on the deification of
Claudius Cæsar, who was called on earth Divus Claudius.
The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Satyricon</span></span> of Petronius Arbiter, in which that writer
lashed the luxury, and avarice, and other vices of his age, is a
satire of the Varronian species, prose being mingled with verse,
and jest with serious remark. Such, too, are the Emperor
Julian’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Symposium of the Cæsars</span></span>, in which he characterizes
his predecessors; and his <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">Μισοπωγων</span></span>, directed against the luxurious
manners of the citizens of Antioch.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Besides the works of Varro above mentioned, there is a miscellaneous
collection of sentences or maxims which have been
attributed to him, though it is not known in what part of his
numerous writings they were originally introduced. Barthius
found seventeen of these sentences in a MS. of the middle
age, and printed them in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Adversaria</span></span>. Schneider afterwards
discovered, in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Speculum Historiale</span></span> of Vincent de
Beauvais, a monk of the thirteenth century, a much more ample
collection of them, which he has inserted in his edition of
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Scriptores rei Rusticæ</span></span><a id="noteref_82" name="noteref_82" href="#note_82"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">82</span></span></a>. They consist of moral maxims, in
the style of those preserved from the Mimes of Publius Syrus,
and had doubtless been culled as flowers from the works of
Varro, at a time when the immense garden of taste and learning
which he planted, had not yet been laid waste by the
hand of time, or the spoiler<a id="noteref_83" name="noteref_83" href="#note_83"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">83</span></span></a>.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page50">[pg 50]</span><a name="Pg050" id="Pg050" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Though the above list of the works of Varro is far from
complete, a sufficient number has been mentioned to justify
the exclamation of Quintilian,—<span class="tei tei-q">“Quam multa, immo pene
omnia tradidit Varro!”</span> and the more full panegyric of Cicero,—<span class="tei tei-q">“His
works brought us home, as it were, while we were
foreigners in our own city, and wandering like strangers, so that
we might know who and where we were; for in them are laid
open the chronology of his country,—a description of the seasons,—the
laws of religion,—the ordinances of the priests,—domestic
and military occurrences,—the situations of countries
and places,—the names of all things divine and human,—the
breed of animals,—moral duties,—and the origin of
things<a id="noteref_84" name="noteref_84" href="#note_84"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">84</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Nor did Varro merely delight and instruct his fellow-citizens
by his writings. By his careful attention, in procuring the
most valuable books, and establishing libraries, he provided,
perhaps, still more effectually than by his own learned compositions,
for the progressive improvement and civilization of
his countrymen. The formation of either private or public
libraries was late of taking place at Rome, for the Romans
were late in attending to literary studies. Tiraboschi quotes
a number of writers who have discovered a library in the public
records preserved at
Rome<a id="noteref_85" name="noteref_85" href="#note_85"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">85</span></span></a>, and in the books of the
    Sibyls<a id="noteref_86" name="noteref_86" href="#note_86"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">86</span></span></a>.
But these, he observes, may be classed with the
library which Madero found to have existed before the flood,
and that belonging to Adam, of which Hilscherus has made
out an exact catalogue<a id="noteref_87" name="noteref_87" href="#note_87"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">87</span></span></a>. From Syracuse and Corinth the
Romans brought away the statues and pictures, and other
monuments of the fine arts; but we do not learn that they carried
to the capital any works of literature or science. Some
agricultural books found their way to Rome from Africa, on
the destruction of Carthage; but the other treasures of its
libraries, though they fell under the power of a conqueror not
without pretensions to taste and erudition, were bestowed on
the African princes in alliance with the Romans<a id="noteref_88" name="noteref_88" href="#note_88"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">88</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Paulus Emilius is said by Plutarch to have allowed his sons
to choose some volumes from the library of Perseus, King of
Macedon<a id="noteref_89" name="noteref_89" href="#note_89"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">89</span></span></a>, whom he led captive to Rome in 585. But the
honour of first possessing a library in Rome is justly due to
Sylla; who, on the occupation of Athens, in 667, acquired the
library of Apellicon, which he discovered in the temple of
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page51">[pg 51]</span><a name="Pg051" id="Pg051" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>Apollo. This collection, which contained, among various
other books, the works of Aristotle and Theophrastus, was
reserved to himself by Sylla from the plunder; and, having
been brought to Rome, was arranged by the grammarian Tyrannio,
who also supplied and corrected the mutilated text of
Aristotle<a id="noteref_90" name="noteref_90" href="#note_90"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">90</span></span></a>. Engaged, as he constantly was, in domestic strife
or foreign warfare, Sylla could have made little use of this
library, and he did not communicate the benefit of it to scholars,
by opening it to the public; but the example of the Dictator
prompted other commanders not to overlook the libraries,
in the plunder of captured cities, and books thus became a
fashionable acquisition. Sometimes, indeed, these collections
were rather proofs of the power and opulence of the Roman
generals, than of their literary taste or talents. A certain value
was now affixed to manuscripts; and these were, in consequence,
amassed by them, from a spirit of rapacity, and the
principle of leaving nothing behind which could be carried
off by force or stratagem. In one remarkable instance, however,
the learning of the proprietor fully corresponded to the
literary treasures which he had collected. Lucullus, a man
of severe study, and wonderfully skilled in all the fine arts,
after having employed many years in the cultivation of literature,
and the civil administration of the republic, was unexpectedly
called, in consequence of a political intrigue, to
lead on the Roman army in the perilous contest with Mithridates;
and, though previously unacquainted with military
affairs, he became the first captain of the age, with little
farther experience, than his study of the art of war, during
the voyage from Rome to Asia. His attempts to introduce a
reform in the corrupt administration of the Asiatic provinces,
procured him enemies, through whose means he was superseded
in the command of the army, by one who was not superior
to him in talents, and was far inferior in virtue. After his
recall from Pontus, and retreat to a private station, he offered
a new spectacle to his countrymen. He did not retire, like
Fabricius and Cincinnatus, to plough his farm, and eat turnips
in a cottage—he did not, like Africanus, quit his country in
disgust, because it had unworthily treated him; nor did he
spend his wealth and leisure, like Sylla, in midnight debauchery
with buffoons and parasites. He employed the
riches he had acquired during his campaigns in the construction
of delightful villas, situated on the shore of the sea, or
hanging on the declivities of hills. Gardens and spacious
porticos, which he adorned with all the elegance of painting
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page52">[pg 52]</span><a name="Pg052" id="Pg052" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>and sculpture, made the Romans ashamed of their ancient
rustic simplicity. These would doubtless be the objects of
admiration to his contemporaries; but it was his library, in
which so many copies of valuable works were multiplied or
preserved, and his distinguished patronage of learning, that
claim the gratitude of posterity. <span class="tei tei-q">“His library,”</span> says Plutarch,
<span class="tei tei-q">“had walks, galleries, and cabinets belonging to it, which
were open to all visitors; and the ingenious Greeks resorted
to this abode of the muses to hold literary converse, in which
Lucullus delighted to join them<a id="noteref_91" name="noteref_91" href="#note_91"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">91</span></span></a>.”</span> Other Roman patricians
had patronized literature, by extending their protection to a
favoured few, as the elder Scipio Africanus to Ennius, and
the younger to Terence; but Lucullus was the first who encouraged
all the arts and sciences, and promoted learning
with princely munificence.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But the slave Tyrannio vied with the most splendid of the
Romans in the literary treasures he had amassed. A native
of Pontus, he was taken prisoner by Lucullus, in the course
of the war with Mithridates; and, having been brought to
Rome, he was given to Muræna, from whom he received freedom<a id="noteref_92" name="noteref_92" href="#note_92"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">92</span></span></a>.
He spent the remainder of his life in teaching rhetoric
and grammar. He also arranged the library of Cicero
at Antium<a id="noteref_93" name="noteref_93" href="#note_93"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">93</span></span></a>, and taught his nephew, Quintus, in the house of
the orator<a id="noteref_94" name="noteref_94" href="#note_94"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">94</span></span></a>. These various employments proved so profitable,
that they enabled him to acquire a library of 30,000 volumes<a id="noteref_95" name="noteref_95" href="#note_95"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">95</span></span></a>.
Libraries of considerable extent were also formed by Atticus
and Cicero; and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Varro</span></span> was not inferior to any of his learned
contemporaries, in the industry of collecting and transcribing
manuscripts, both in the Greek and Latin language.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The library of Varro, however, and all the others which we
have mentioned, were private—open, indeed, to literary men,
from the general courtesy of the possessors, but the access to
them still dependent on their good will and indulgence.
Julius Cæsar was the first who formed the design of establishing
a great public library; and to Varro he assigned the task
of arranging the books which he had procured. This plan,
which was rendered abortive by the untimely fate of Cæsar,
was carried into effect by Asinius Pollio, who devoted part of
the wealth he had acquired from the spoils of war, to the
construction of a magnificent gallery, adjacent to the Temple
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page53">[pg 53]</span><a name="Pg053" id="Pg053" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>of Liberty, which he filled with books, and the busts of the
learned. Varro was the only living author who, in this public
library, had the honour of an image<a id="noteref_96" name="noteref_96" href="#note_96"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">96</span></span></a>, which was erected to
him as a testimony of respect for his universal erudition. He
also aided Augustus with his advice, in the formation of the
two libraries which that emperor established, and which was
part of his general system for the encouragement of science
and learning. When tyrants understand their trade, and when
their judgment is equal to their courage or craft, they become
the most zealous and liberal promoters of the interests of
learning; for they know that it is for their advantage to withdraw
the minds of their subjects from political discussion and
to give them, in exchange, the consoling pleasures of imagination,
and the inexhaustible occupations of scientific curiosity.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Were I writing the history of Roman arts, it would be
necessary to mention that Varro excelled in his knowledge of
all those that are useful, and in his taste for all those that are
elegant. He was the contriver of what may be considered as
the first hour clock that was made in Rome, and which measured
time by a hand entirely moved by mechanism. That
he also possessed a Museum, adorned with exquisite works of
sculpture, we learn from Pliny, who mentions, that it contained
an admirable group, by the statuary Archelaus, formed out
of one block of marble, and representing a lioness, with Cupids
sporting around her—some giving her drink from a horn;
some in the attitude of putting socks on her paws, and others
in the act of binding her. The same writer acquaints us, that,
in the year 692, Varro, who was then Curule Ædile, caused a
piece of painting, in fresco, to be brought from Sparta to
Rome, in order to adorn the Comitium—the whole having
been cut out entire, and enclosed in cases of wood. The
painting was excellent, and much admired; but what chiefly
excited astonishment, was that it should have been taken from
the wall without injury, and transported safe to Italy<a id="noteref_97" name="noteref_97" href="#note_97"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">97</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
I fear I have too long detained the reader with this account
of the life and writings of Varro; yet it is not unpleasing to
dwell on such a character. He was the contemporary of
Marius and Sylla, of Cæsar and Pompey, of Antony and Octavius,
these men of contention and massacre; and amid the
convulsions into which they threw their country, it is not
ungrateful to trace the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Secretum Iter</span></span>, which he silently pursued
through a period unparalleled in anarchy and crimes.
Uninterrupted, save for a moment, by strife and ambition, he
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page54">[pg 54]</span><a name="Pg054" id="Pg054" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>prosecuted his literary labours till the extreme term of his
prolonged existence. <span class="tei tei-q">“In eodem enim lectulo,”</span> says Valerius
Maximus, with a spirit and eloquence beyond his usual strain of
composition—<span class="tei tei-q">“In eodem enim lectulo, et spiritus ejus, et
egregiorum operum cursus extinctus est.”</span>
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
    <a name="toc7" id="toc7"></a><a name="pdf8" id="pdf8"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">NIGIDIUS FIGULUS</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
was a man much resembling Varro, and next to him was accounted
the most learned of the Romans<a id="noteref_98" name="noteref_98" href="#note_98"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">98</span></span></a>. He was the contemporary
of Cicero, and one of his chief advisers and associates
in suppressing the conspiracy of Catiline<a id="noteref_99" name="noteref_99" href="#note_99"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">99</span></span></a>. Shortly
afterwards he arrived at the dignity of Prætor, but having
espoused the part of Pompey in the civil wars, he was driven
into banishment on the accession of Cæsar to the supreme
power, and died in 709, before Cicero could obtain his recall
from exile<a id="noteref_100" name="noteref_100" href="#note_100"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">100</span></span></a>. He was much addicted to judicial astrology;
and ancient writers relate a vast number of his predictions,
particularly that of the empire of the world to Augustus, which
he presaged immediately after the birth of that prince<a id="noteref_101" name="noteref_101" href="#note_101"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">101</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Nigidius vied with Varro in multifarious erudition, and the
number of his works—grammar, criticism, natural history, and
the origin of man, having successively employed his pen. His
writings are praised by Cicero, Pliny, Aulus Gellius, and Macrobius;
but they were rendered almost entirely unfit for popular
use by their subtlety, mysteriousness, and obscurity<a id="noteref_102" name="noteref_102" href="#note_102"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">102</span></span></a>—defects
to which his cultivation of judicial astrology, and
adoption of the Pythagorean philosophy, may have materially
contributed. Aulus Gellius gives many examples of the obscurity,
or rather unintelligibility, of his grammatical writings<a id="noteref_103" name="noteref_103" href="#note_103"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">103</span></span></a>.
His chief work was his Grammatical Commentaries, in thirty
books, in which he attempted to show, that names and words
were fixed not by accidental application, but by a certain
power and order of nature. One of his examples, of terms
being rather natural than arbitrary, was taken from the word
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vos</span></span>, in pronouncing which, he observed, that we use a certain
motion of the mouth, agreeing with what the word itself expresses:
We protrude, by degrees, the tips of our lips, and
thrust forward our breath and mind towards those with whom
we are engaged in conversation. On the other hand, when
we say <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">nos</span></span>, we do not pronounce it with a broad and expan<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page55">[pg 55]</span><a name="Pg055" id="Pg055" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>ded
    blast of the voice, nor with projecting lips, but we restrain
our breath and lips, as it were, within ourselves. The like
natural signs accompany the utterance of the words <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">tu</span></span> and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ego</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">tibi</span></span>
and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">mihi</span></span><a id="noteref_104" name="noteref_104" href="#note_104"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">104</span></span></a>. Nigidius also wrote works, entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
Animalibus</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Ventis</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Extis</span></span>, and a great many treatises
on the nature of the gods. All these have long since perished,
except a very few fragments, which have been collected and
explained by Janus Rutgersius, in the third book of his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Variæ
Lectiones</span></span>, published at Leyden in 1618; 4to. In this collection
he has also inserted a Greek translation of another lost
work of Nigidius, on the presages to be drawn from thunder.
The original Latin is said to have been taken from books
which bore the name of the Etruscan Tages, the supposed
founder of the science of divination. The Greek version was
executed by Laurentius, a philosopher of the age of Justinian,
and his translation was discovered by Meursius, about the
beginning of the seventeenth century, in the Palatine library.
It is a sort of Almanack, containing presages of thunder for
each particular day of the year, and beginning with June.
If it thunder on the 13th of June, the life or fortunes of some
great person are menaced—if on the 19th of July, war is announced—if
on the 5th of August, it is indicated that those
women, with whom we have any concern, will become somewhat
more reasonable than they have hitherto proved<a id="noteref_105" name="noteref_105" href="#note_105"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">105</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
With Varro and Nigidius Figulus, may be classed Tiro, the
celebrated freedman of Cicero, and constant assistant in all
his literary pursuits. He wrote many books on the use and
formation of the Latin language, and others on miscellaneous
subjects, which he denominated <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pandectas</span></span><a id="noteref_106" name="noteref_106" href="#note_106"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">106</span></span></a>, as comprehending
every sort of literary topic.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Quintus Cornificius, the elder, was also a very general
scholar. He composed a curious treatise on the etymology
of the names of things in heaven and earth, in which he
discovered great knowledge, both of Roman antiquities, and
the most recondite Grecian literature. It was here he introduced
an explication of Homer’s dark fable, where Jupiter and
all the gods proceed to feast for twelve days in Ethiopia.
The work was written in 709, during the time of Cæsar’s last
expedition to Spain, and was probably intended as a supplement
to Varro’s treatise on a similar topic.
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page56">[pg 56]</span><a name="Pg056" id="Pg056" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
<a name="toc9" id="toc9"></a><a name="pdf10" id="pdf10"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">HISTORY.</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
From our supposing that those things which affected our
ancestors may affect us, and that those which affect us must
affect posterity, we become fond of collecting memorials of
prior events, and also of preserving the remembrance of incidents
which have occurred in our own age. The historic
passion, if it may be so termed, thus naturally divides itself
into two desires—that of indulging our own curiosity, and of
relating what has occurred to ourselves or our contemporaries.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Monuments accordingly have been raised, and rude hymns
composed, for this purpose, by people who had scarcely acquired
the use of letters. Among civilized nations, the passion
grows in proportion to the means of gratifying it, and the
force of example comes to be so strongly felt, that its power
and influence are soon historically employed.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The Romans were, in all ages, particularly fond of giving
instruction, by every sort of example. They placed the images
of their ancestors in the Forum and the vestibules of their
houses, so that these venerable forms everywhere met their
eyes; and by recalling the glorious actions of the dead, excited
the living to emulate their forefathers. The virtue of one
generation was thus transfused, by the magic of example, into
those by which it was succeeded, and the spirit of heroism
was maintained through many ages of the republic—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Has olim virtus crevit Romana per artes:</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Namque foro in medio stabant spirantia signa</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Magnanimûm heroum; hîc Decios, magnosque Camillos</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Cernere erat: vivax heroum in imagine virtus,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Invidiamque ipsis factura nepotibus, acri</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Urgebat stimulo Romanum in prælia robur<a id="noteref_107" name="noteref_107" href="#note_107"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">107</span></span></a>.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
History, therefore, among the Romans, was not composed
merely to gratify curiosity, or satiate the historic passion, but
also to inflame, by the force of example, and urge on to emulation,
in warlike prowess. An insatiable thirst of military fame—an
unlimited ambition of extending their empire—an unbounded
confidence in their own force and courage—an impetuous
overbearing spirit, with which all their enterprises
were pursued, composed, in the early days of the Republic,
the characteristics of Romans. To foment, and give fresh
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page57">[pg 57]</span><a name="Pg057" id="Pg057" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>vigour to these, was a chief object of history.—<span class="tei tei-q">“I have recorded
these things,”</span> says an old Latin annalist, after giving
an account of Regulus, <span class="tei tei-q">“that they who read my commentaries
may be rendered, by his example, greater and better.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Accordingly, the Romans had journalists or annalists, from
the earliest periods of the state. The Annals of the Pontiffs
were of the same date, if we may believe Cicero, as the foundation
of the city<a id="noteref_108" name="noteref_108" href="#note_108"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">108</span></span></a>; but others have placed their commencement
    in the reign of Numa<a id="noteref_109" name="noteref_109" href="#note_109"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">109</span></span></a>, and Niebuhr not till after the
battle of Regillus, which terminated the hopes of Tarquin<a id="noteref_110" name="noteref_110" href="#note_110"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">110</span></span></a>.
In order to preserve the memory of public transactions, the
Pontifex Maximus, who was the official historian of the Republic,
annually committed to writing, on wooden tablets, the
leading events of each year, and then set them up at his own
house for the instruction of the people<a id="noteref_111" name="noteref_111" href="#note_111"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">111</span></span></a>. These Annals were
continued down to the Pontificate of Mucius, in the year 629,
and were called <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Annales Maximi</span></span>, as being periodically compiled
and kept by the Pontifex Maximus, or <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Publici</span></span>, as
recording public transactions. Having been inscribed on
wooden tablets, they would necessarily be short, and destitute
of all circumstantial detail; and being annually formed by
successive Pontiffs, could have no appearance of a continued
history. They would contain, as Lord Bolingbroke remarks,
little more than short minutes or memoranda, hung up in the
Pontiff’s house, like the rules of the game in a billiard room:
their contents would resemble the epitome prefixed to the
books of Livy, or the Register of Remarkable Occurrences in
modern Almanacks.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But though short, jejune, and unadorned, still, as records of
facts, these annals, if spared, would have formed an inestimable
treasure of early history. The Roman territory, in the first
ages of the state, was so confined, that every event may be
considered as having passed under the immediate observation
of the sacred annalist. Besides, the method which, as Cicero
informs us, was observed in preparing these Annals, and the
care that was taken to insert no fact, of which the truth had
not been attested by as many witnesses as there were citizens
at Rome, who were all entitled to judge and make their remarks
on what ought either to be added or retrenched, must
have formed the most authentic body of history that could be
desired. The memory of transactions which were yet recent,
and whose concomitant circumstances every one could remember,
was therein transmitted to posterity. By these means,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page58">[pg 58]</span><a name="Pg058" id="Pg058" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>the Annals were proof against falsification, and their veracity
was incontestibly fixed.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
These valuable records, however, were, for the most part,
consumed in the conflagration of the city, consequent on its
capture by the Gauls—an event which was to the early history
of Rome what the English invasion by Edward I. proved to the
history of Scotland. The practice of the Pontifex Maximus
preserving such records was discontinued after that eventful
period. A feeble attempt was made to revive it towards the
end of the second Punic war; and, from that time, the custom
was not entirely dropped till the Pontificate of Mucius, in the
year 629. It is to this second series of Annals, or to some
other late and ineffectual attempt to revive the ancient Roman
history, that Cicero must allude, when he talks of the Great
Annals, in his work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span><a id="noteref_112" name="noteref_112" href="#note_112"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">112</span></span></a>, since it is undoubted that
the pontifical records of events previous to the capture of Rome
by the Gauls, almost entirely perished in the conflagration of
the city<a id="noteref_113" name="noteref_113" href="#note_113"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">113</span></span></a>. Accordingly, Livy never cites these records, and
there is no appearance that he had any opportunity of consulting
them; nor are they mentioned by Dionysius of Halicarnassus,
in the long catalogue of records and memorials which he
had employed in the composition of his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Historical Antiquities</span></span>.
The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">books</span></span> of the Pontiffs, some of which were recovered in
the search made to find what the flames had spared, are, indeed,
occasionally mentioned. But these were works explaining
the mysteries of religion, with instructions as to the ceremonies
to be observed in its practical exercise, and could have
been of no more service to Roman, than a collection of
breviaries or missals to modern history.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Statues, inscriptions, and other public monuments, which
aid in perpetuating the memory of illustrious persons, and
transmitting to posterity the services they have rendered their
country, were accounted, among the Romans, as the most
honourable rewards that could be bestowed on great actions;
and virtue, in those ancient times, thought no recompense
more worthy of her than the immortality which such monuments
seemed to promise. Rome having produced so many
examples of a disinterested patriotism and valour must have
been filled with monuments of this description when taken by
the Gauls. But these honorary memorials were thrown down
along with the buildings, and buried in the ruins. If any
escaped, it was but a small number; and the greatest part of
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page59">[pg 59]</span><a name="Pg059" id="Pg059" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>those that were to be seen at Rome in the eighth century of
the city, were founded on fabulous traditions which proved that
the loss of the true monuments had occasioned the substitution
of false ones. Had the genuine monuments been preserved at
Rome, even till the period when the first regular annals began
to be composed, though they would not have sufficed to restore
the history entirely, they would have served at least to
have perpetuated incontestably the memory of various important
facts, to have fixed their dates, and transmitted the glory
of great men to posterity.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
On what then, it will be asked, was the Roman history founded,
and what authentic records were preserved as materials
for its composition? There were first the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Leges Regiæ</span></span>.
These were diligently searched for, and were discovered
along with the Twelve Tables, after the sack of the city: And
all those royal laws which did not concern sacred matters,
were publicly exposed to be seen and identified by the people<a id="noteref_114" name="noteref_114" href="#note_114"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">114</span></span></a>,
that no suspicion of forgery or falsification might descend
to posterity. These precautions leave us little room to
doubt that the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Leges Regiæ</span></span>, and Laws of the Tables, were
preserved, and that they remained as they had been originally
promulgated by the kings and decemvirs. Such laws, however,
would be of no greater service to Roman history, than
what the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Regiam Majestatem</span></span> has been to that of Scotland.
They might be useful in tracing the early constitution of the
state, the origin of several customs, ceremonies, public offices,
and other points of antiquarian research, but they could be of
little avail in fixing dates, ascertaining facts, and setting events
in their true light, which form the peculiar objects of civil
history.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Treaties of peace, which were the pledges of the public
tranquillity from without, being next to the laws of the greatest
importance to the state, much care was bestowed, after
the expulsion of the Gauls, in recovering as many of them as
the flames had spared. Some of them were the more easily
restored, from having been kept in the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus,
which the fury of the enemy could not reach<a id="noteref_115" name="noteref_115" href="#note_115"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">115</span></span></a>.
Those which had been saved, continued to be very carefully
preserved, and there is no reason to suspect them of having
been falsified. Among the treaties which were rescued from
destruction, Horace mentions those of the Kings, with the
Gabii and the Sabines (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Fœdera Regum</span></span><a id="noteref_116" name="noteref_116" href="#note_116"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">116</span></span></a>.) The former was
that concluded by Tarquinius Superbus, and which, Dionysius
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page60">[pg 60]</span><a name="Pg060" id="Pg060" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>of Halicarnassus informs us, was still preserved at Rome in his
time, in the temple of Jupiter Fidius, on a buckler made of
wood, and covered with an ox’s hide, on which the articles of
the treaty were written in ancient characters<a id="noteref_117" name="noteref_117" href="#note_117"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">117</span></span></a>. Dionysius
mentions two treaties with the Sabines—the first was between
Romulus and their king Tatius<a id="noteref_118" name="noteref_118" href="#note_118"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">118</span></span></a>; and the other, the terms of
which were inscribed on a column erected in a temple, was
concluded with them by Tullus Hostilius, at the close of a
Sabine war<a id="noteref_119" name="noteref_119" href="#note_119"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">119</span></span></a>. Livy likewise cites a treaty made with the Ardeates<a id="noteref_120" name="noteref_120" href="#note_120"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">120</span></span></a>;
and Polybius has preserved entire another entered
into with the Carthaginians, in the year of the expulsion of the
kings<a id="noteref_121" name="noteref_121" href="#note_121"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">121</span></span></a>. Pliny has also alluded to one of the conditions of a
treaty which Porsenna, the ally of Tarquin, granted to the
Roman people<a id="noteref_122" name="noteref_122" href="#note_122"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">122</span></span></a>. Now these leagues with the Gabii, Sabines,
Ardeates, and one or two with the Latins, are almost the only
treaties we find anywhere referred to by the ancient Latin historians;
who thus seem to have employed but little diligence
in consulting those original documents, or drawing from them,
in compiling their histories, such assistance as they could have
afforded. The treaties quoted by Polybius and Pliny, completely
contradict the relations of the Latin annalists; those
cited by Polybius proving, in opposition to their assertions,
that the Carthaginians had been in possession of a great part
of Sicily about a century previous to the date which Livy has
fixed to their first expedition to that island; and those quoted
by Pliny, that Porsenna, instead of treating with the Romans
on equal terms, as represented by their historians, had actually
prohibited them from employing arms,—permitting them the
use of iron only in tilling the ground<a id="noteref_123" name="noteref_123" href="#note_123"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">123</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Libri Lintei</span></span> (so called because written on linen) are
cited by Livy after the old annalist Licinius Macer, by whom
they appear to have been carefully studied. These books were
kept in the temple of Juno Moneta, but were probably of less
importance than the other public records, which were inscribed
on rolls of lead. They were obviously a work of no great
extent, since Livy, who appeals to them on four different
occasions in the space of ten years, just after the degradation
of the decemvirs, had not quoted them before, and never refers
to them again. There also appear to have been different
copies of them which did not exactly agree, and Livy seems
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page61">[pg 61]</span><a name="Pg061" id="Pg061" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>far from considering their authority as decisive even on the
points on which reference is made to them<a id="noteref_124" name="noteref_124" href="#note_124"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">124</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memoirs of the Censors</span></span> were journals preserved by
those persons who held the office of Censor. They were
transmitted by them to their descendants as so many sacred
pledges, and were preserved in the families which had been
rendered illustrious by that dignity. They formed a series of
eulogies on those who had thus exalted the glory of their
house, and contained a relation of the memorable actions performed
by them in discharge of the high censorial office with
which they had been invested<a id="noteref_125" name="noteref_125" href="#note_125"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">125</span></span></a>. Hence they must be considered
as part of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Family Memoirs</span></span>, which were unfortunately
the great and corrupt sources of early Roman history.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It was the custom of the ancient families of Rome to preserve
with religious care everything that could contribute to
perpetuate the glory of their ancestry, and confer honour on
their lineage. Thus, besides the titles which were placed
under the smoky images of their forefathers, there were likewise
tables in their apartments on which lay books and memoirs
recording, in a style of general panegyric, the services they
had performed for the state during their exercise of the employments
with which they had been dignified<a id="noteref_126" name="noteref_126" href="#note_126"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">126</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Had these Family Memoirs been faithfully composed, they
would have been of infinite service to history; and although all
other monuments had perished, they alone would have supplied
the defect. They were a record, by those who had the
best access to knowledge, of the high offices which their ancestors
had filled, and of whatever memorable was transacted
during the time they had held the exalted situations of Prætor
or Consul: Even the dates of events, as may be seen by a
fragment which Dionysius of Halicarnassus cites from them,
were recorded with all the appearance of accuracy. Each set
of family memoirs thus formed a series of biographies, which,
by preserving the memory of the great actions of individuals,
and omitting nothing that could tend to their illustration,
comprehended also the principal affairs of state, in which they
had borne a share. From the fragments of the genealogical
book of the Porcian family, quoted by Aulus Gellius, and the
abstract of the Memoirs of the Claudian and Livian families,
preserved by Suetonius, in the first chapters of his Life of
Tiberius, we may perceive how important such memoirs would
have been, and what light they would have thrown on history,
had they possessed the stamp of fidelity. But unfor<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page62">[pg 62]</span><a name="Pg062" id="Pg062" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>tunately, in their composition more regard was paid to family
reputation than to historical truth. Whatever tended to
exalt its name was embellished and exaggerated. Whatever
could dim its lustre was studiously withdrawn. Circumstances,
meanwhile, became peculiarly favourable for
these high family pretensions. The destruction of the public
monuments and annals of the Pontiffs, gave ample scope
for the vanity or fertile imagination of those who chose to
fabricate titles and invent claims to distinction, the falsity
of which could no longer be demonstrated. <span class="tei tei-q">“All the monuments,”</span>
says Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-q">“being destroyed at the taking of Rome,
others were substituted, which were forged out of complaisance
to private persons, who pretended to be of illustrious
families, though in fact they had no relation to them<a id="noteref_127" name="noteref_127" href="#note_127"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">127</span></span></a>.”</span> So
unmercifully had the great families availed themselves of this
favourable opportunity, that Livy complains that these private
memoirs were the chief cause of the uncertainty in which he
was forced to fluctuate during the early periods of his history.
<span class="tei tei-q">“What has chiefly confounded the history,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“is each
family ascribing to itself the glory of great actions and honourable
employments. Hence, doubtless, the exploits of
individuals and public monuments have been falsified; nor
have we so much as one writer of these times whose authority
can be depended on<a id="noteref_128" name="noteref_128" href="#note_128"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">128</span></span></a>.”</span> Those funeral orations on the dead,
which it was the custom to deliver at Rome, and which were
preserved in families as carefully as the memoirs, also contributed
to augment this evil. Cicero declares, that history had
been completely falsified by these funeral panegyrics, many
things being inserted in them which never were performed, or
existed—False triumphs, supernumerary consulships, and forged
pedigrees<a id="noteref_129" name="noteref_129" href="#note_129"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">129</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Connected with these prose legends, there were also the old
heroic ballads formerly mentioned, on which the annals of
Ennius were in a great measure built, and to which may be
traced some of those wonderful incidents of Roman history,
chiefly contrived for the purpose of exalting the military
achievements of the country. Many things which of right belong
to such ancient poems, still exist under the disguise of an
historical clothing in the narratives of the Roman annalists.
Niebuhr, the German historian of Rome, has recently analysed
these legends, and taken much from the Roman history, by
detecting what incidents rest on no other foundation than
their chimerical or embellished pictures, and by shewing how
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page63">[pg 63]</span><a name="Pg063" id="Pg063" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>incidents, in themselves unconnected, have by their aid been
artificially combined. Such, according to him, were the stories
of the birth of Romulus, of the treason of Tatia, the death
of the Fabii, and the incidents of an almost complete Epopée,
from the succession of Tarquinius Priscus to the battle of Regillus.
These old ballads, being more attractive and of easier
access than authentic records and monuments, were preferred
to them as authorities; and even when converted into prose,
retained much of their original and poetic spirit. For example,
it was feigned in them that Tullus Hostilius was the son of
Hostus Hostilius, who perished in the war with the Sabines,
which, according to chronology, would make Tullus at least
eighty years old when he mounted the throne; but it was
thought a fine thing to represent him as the son of a genuine
Roman hero, who had fallen in the service of his country.
Niebuhr, probably, as I have already shown, has attributed
too much to these old heroic ballads, and has assigned to
them an extent and importance of which there are no adequate
proofs. But I strongly suspect that the heroic or historical
poems of Ennius had formed a principal document to the Roman
annalists for the transactions during the Monarchy and
earlier times of the Republic, and had been appealed to, like
Ferdousi’s Shad-Nameh, for occurrences which were probably
rather fictions of fancy than events of history.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The Greek writers, from whom several fables and traditions
were derived concerning the infancy of Rome, lived not much
higher than the age of Fabius Pictor, and only mention its
affairs cursorily, while treating of Alexander or his successors.
Polybius, indeed, considers their narratives as mere vulgar
traditions<a id="noteref_130" name="noteref_130" href="#note_130"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">130</span></span></a>, and Dionysius says they have written some few
things concerning the Romans, which they have compiled from
common reports, without accuracy or diligence. To them
have been plausibly attributed those fables, concerning the
exploits of Romans, which bear so remarkable an analogy to
incidents in Grecian history<a id="noteref_131" name="noteref_131" href="#note_131"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">131</span></span></a>. Like to these in all respects
are the histories which some Romans published in Greek concerning
the ancient transactions of their own nation.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
We thus see that the authentic materials for the early history
of Rome were meagre and imperfect—that the annals of
the Pontiffs and public monuments had perished—that the
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Leges Regiæ</span></span>, Twelve Tables, and remains of the religious or
ritual books of the Pontiffs, could throw no great light on history,
and that the want of better materials was supplied by false,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page64">[pg 64]</span><a name="Pg064" id="Pg064" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>and sometimes incredible relations, drawn from the family
traditions—<span class="tei tei-q">“<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ad ostentationem scenæ gaudentis miraculis aptiora
quàm ad fidem</span></span><a id="noteref_132" name="noteref_132" href="#note_132"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">132</span></span></a>.”</span> The mutilated inscriptions, too, the
scanty treaties, and the family memoirs, became, from the
variations in the language, in a great measure unintelligible to
the generation which succeeded that in which they were composed.
Polybius informs us, that the most learned Romans of
his day could not read a treaty with the Carthaginians, concluded
after the expulsion of the kings. Hence, the documents
for history, such as they were, became useless to the
historian, or, at least, were of such difficulty, that he would
sometimes mistake their import, and be, at others, deterred
from investigation.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
When all this is considered, and also that Rome, in its commencement,
was the dwelling of a rude and ignorant people,
subsisting by rapine—that the art of writing, the only sure
guardian of the remembrance of events, was little practised—that
critical examination was utterly unknown; and that the
writers of no other nation would think of accurately transmitting
to posterity events, which have only become interesting
from the subsequent conquests and extension of the Roman
empire, it must be evident, that the materials provided for the
work of the historian would necessarily be obscure and uncertain.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The great general results recorded in Roman history, during
the first five centuries, cannot, indeed, be denied. It
cannot be doubted that Rome ultimately triumphed over the
neighbouring nations, and obtained possession of their territories;
for Rome would not have been what we know it was
in the sixth century, without these successes. But there exists,
in the particular events recorded in the Roman history, sufficient
internal evidence of its uncertainty, or rather falsehood;
and here I do not refer to the lying fables, and absurd prodigies,
which the annalists may have inserted in deference to the
prejudices of the people, nor to the almost incredible daring
and endurance of Scævola, Cocles, or Curtius, which may
be accounted for from the wild spirit of a half-civilized nation,
and are not unlike the acts we hear of among Indian
tribes; but I allude to the total improbability of the historic
details concerning transactions with surrounding tribes, and
the origin of domestic institutions. How, for example, after
so long a series of defeats, with few intervals of prosperity
interposed, could the Italian states have possessed resources
sufficient incessantly to renew hostilities, in which they were
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page65">[pg 65]</span><a name="Pg065" id="Pg065" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>always the aggressors? And how, on the other hand, should
the Romans, with their constant preponderance of force and
fortune, (if the repetition and magnitude of their victories can
be depended on,) have been so long employed in completely
subjugating them? The numbers slain, according to Livy’s
account, are so prodigious, that it is difficult to conceive how
the population of such moderate territories, as belonged to the
independent Italian communities, could have supplied such
losses. We, therefore, cannot avoid concluding, that the frequency
and importance of these campaigns were magnified by
the consular families indulging in the vanity of exaggerating
the achievements of their ancestors<a id="noteref_133" name="noteref_133" href="#note_133"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">133</span></span></a>. Sometimes these campaigns
are represented as carried on against the whole nation
of Volsci, Samnites, or Etruscans, when, in fact, only a part
was engaged; and, at other times, battles, which never were
fought, have been extracted from the family memoirs, where
they were drawn up to illustrate each consulate; for what would
a consul have been without a triumph or a victory? It would
exceed my limits were I to point out the various improbabilities
and evident inconsistencies of this sort recorded in the early
periods of Roman history. With regard, again, to the domestic
institutions of Rome, everything (doubtless for the sake
of effect and dignity) is represented as having at once originated
in the refined policy and foresight of the early kings.
The division of the people into tribes and curiæ—the relations
of patron and client—the election of senators—in short, the
whole fabric of the constitution, is exhibited as a preconcerted
plan of political wisdom, and not (as a constitution has been
in every other state, and must have been in Rome) the gradual
result of contingencies and progressive improvements, of assertions
of rights, and struggles for power.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The opinion entertained by Polybius of the uncertainty of the
Roman history, is sufficiently manifest from a passage in the
fourth book of his admirable work, which is written with all
the philosophy and profound inquiry of Tacitus, without any
of his apparent affectation.—<span class="tei tei-q">“The things which I have undertaken
to describe,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“are those which I myself have
seen, or such as I have received from men who were eye-witnesses
of them. For, had I gone back to a more early period,
and borrowed my accounts from the report of persons who
themselves had only heard them before from others, as it
would scarcely have been possible that I should myself be able
to discern the true state of the matters that were then transacted,
so neither could I have written anything concerning
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page66">[pg 66]</span><a name="Pg066" id="Pg066" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>them with confidence.”</span> What, indeed, can we expect to
know with regard to the Kings of Rome, when we find so
much uncertainty with regard to the most memorable events
of the republic, as the period of the first creation of a dictator
and tribunes of the people? The same doubt exists in the
biography of illustrious characters. Cicero says, that Coriolanus,
having gone over to the Volsci, repressed the struggles
of his resentment by a voluntary death; <span class="tei tei-q">“for, though you,
my Atticus,”</span> he continues, <span class="tei tei-q">“have represented his death in a
different manner, you must pardon me if I do not subscribe to
the justness of your representations<a id="noteref_134" name="noteref_134" href="#note_134"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">134</span></span></a>.”</span> Atticus, I presume,
gave the account as we now have it, that he was killed in a
tumult of the Volsci, and Fabius Pictor had written that he
lived till old age<a id="noteref_135" name="noteref_135" href="#note_135"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">135</span></span></a>. Of the reliance to be placed on the events
between the death of Coriolanus and the termination of the
second Punic war, we may judge from the uncertainty which
prevailed with regard to Scipio Africanus, a hero, of all others,
the most distinguished, and who flourished, comparatively, at
a recent period. Yet some of the most important events of
his life are involved in contradiction and almost hopeless obscurity.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Cicero,”</span>
says Berwick, in his Memoirs of Scipio,
<span class="tei tei-q">“speaks with great confidence of the year in which he died,
yet Livy found so great a difference of opinion among historians
on the subject, that he declares himself unable to ascertain it.
From a fragment in Polybius, we learn, that, in his time, the
authors who had written of Scipio were ignorant of some circumstances
of his life, and mistaken in others; and, from
Livy, it appears, that the accounts respecting his life, trial,
death, funeral, and sepulchre, were so contradictory, that he
was not able to determine what tradition, or whose writings,
he ought to credit.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But, although the early events of Roman history were of
such a description, that Cicero and Atticus were not agreed
concerning them—that Polybius could write nothing about
them with confidence; and that Livy would neither undertake
to affirm nor refute them, every vestige of Roman antiquity
had not perished. Though the annals of the Pontiffs were
destroyed,—those who wrote, who kept, and had read them,
could not have lost all recollection of the facts they recorded.
Even from the family memoirs, full of falsehoods as they were,
much truth might have been extracted by a judicious and
acute historian. The journals of different rival families must
often have served as historical checks on each other, and
much real information might have been gathered, by compar<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page67">[pg 67]</span><a name="Pg067" id="Pg067" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>ing
    and contrasting the vain-glorious lies of those
    family-legends<a id="noteref_136" name="noteref_136" href="#note_136"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">136</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Such was the state of the materials for Roman history, in
the middle of the sixth century, from the building of the city,
at which time regular annals first began to be composed; and
notwithstanding all unfavourable circumstances, much might
have been done, even at that period, towards fixing and ascertaining
the dates and circumstances of previous events, had the
earliest annalist of Rome been in any degree fitted for this
difficult and important task; but, unfortunately,
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
    <a name="toc11" id="toc11"></a><a name="pdf12" id="pdf12"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">QUINTUS FABIUS PICTOR,</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
who first undertook to relate the affairs of Rome from its foundation,
in a formal and regular order, and is thence called by
Livy <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Scriptorum antiquissimus</span></span>, appears to have been
wretchedly qualified for the labour he had undertaken, either
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page68">[pg 68]</span><a name="Pg068" id="Pg068" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>in point of fidelity or research: and to his carelessness and inaccuracy,
more even than to the loss of monuments, may be
attributed the painful uncertainty, which to this day hangs
over the early ages of Roman history.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Fabius Pictor lived in the time of the second Punic war.
The family received its <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">cognomen</span></span> from Caius Fabius, who,
having resided in Etruria, and there acquired some knowledge
of the fine arts, painted with figures the temple of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Salus</span></span>,
in the year 450<a id="noteref_137" name="noteref_137" href="#note_137"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">137</span></span></a>. Pliny mentions having seen this piece of
workmanship, which remained entire till the building itself
was consumed, in the reign of the Emperor Claudius. The
son of the painter rose to the highest honours of the state,
having been Consul along with Ogulnius Gallus, in the year
485. From him sprung the historian, who was consequently
grandson of the first Fabius Pictor. He was a provincial
quæstor in early youth, and in 528 served under the Consul
Lucius Æmilius, when sent to repel a formidable incursion of
the Gauls, who, in that year, had passed the Alps in vast hordes.
He also served in the second Punic war, which commenced
in 534, and was present at the battle of Thrasymene. After
the defeat at Cannæ, he was despatched by the senate to inquire
from the oracle of Delphos, what would be the issue of
the war, and to learn by what supplications the wrath of the
gods might be appeased<a id="noteref_138" name="noteref_138" href="#note_138"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">138</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The Annals of Fabius Pictor commenced with the foundation
of the city, and brought down the series of Roman affairs
to the author’s own time—that is, to the end of the second
Punic war. We are informed by Dionysius of Halicarnassus,
that for the great proportion of events which preceded his
own age, Fabius Pictor had no better authority than vulgar
tradition<a id="noteref_139" name="noteref_139" href="#note_139"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">139</span></span></a>. He probably found, that if he had confined himself
to what was certain in these early times, his history would
have been dry, insipid, and incomplete. This may have induced
him to adopt the fables, which the Greek historians had
<a name="corr068" id="corr068" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">invented</span> concerning the origin of Rome, and to insert whatever
he found in the family traditions, however contradictory or
uncertain. Dionysius has also given us many examples of his
improbable narrations—his inconsistencies—his negligence in
investigating the truth of what he relates as facts—and his
inaccuracy in chronology. <span class="tei tei-q">“I cannot refrain,”</span> says he, when
speaking of the age of Tarquinius Priscus, <span class="tei tei-q">“from blaming
Fabius Pictor for his little exactness in chronology<a id="noteref_140" name="noteref_140" href="#note_140"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">140</span></span></a>;”</span> and it
appears from various other passages, that all the ancient his<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page69">[pg 69]</span><a name="Pg069" id="Pg069" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>tory
    of Fabius which was not founded on hearsay, was taken
from Greek authors, who had little opportunity of being informed
of Roman affairs, and had supplied their deficiency in
real knowledge, by the invention of <a name="corr068a" id="corr068a" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">fables.</span> In particular, as
we are told by Plutarch<a id="noteref_141" name="noteref_141" href="#note_141"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">141</span></span></a>, he followed an obscure Greek author,
Diocles the Peparethian, in his account of the foundation
of Rome, and from this tainted source have flowed all the
stories concerning Mars, the Vestal, the Wolf, Romulus, and
Remus.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is thus evident, that no great reliance can be placed on
the history given by Fabius Pictor, of the events which preceded
his own age, and which happened during a period of
500 years from the building of the city; but what must be
considered as more extraordinary and lamentable, is, that
although a senator, and of a distinguished family, he gave a
prejudiced and inaccurate account of affairs occurring during
the time he lived, and in the management of which he had
some concern. Polybius, who flourished shortly after that
time, and was at pains to inform himself accurately concerning
all the events of the second Punic war, apologizes for
quoting Fabius on one occasion as an authority. <span class="tei tei-q">“It will
perhaps be asked,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“how I came to make mention
of Fabius: It is not that I think his relation probable enough
to deserve credit: What he writes is so absurd, and has so
little appearance of truth, that the reader will easily remark,
without my taking notice of it, the little reliance that is to be
placed on that author, whose inconsistency is palpable of itself.
It is, therefore, only to warn such as shall read his history, not
to judge by the title of the book, but by the things it contains—for
there are many people, who, considering the author more
than what he writes, think themselves obliged to believe
everything he says, because a senator and contemporary<a id="noteref_142" name="noteref_142" href="#note_142"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">142</span></span></a>.”</span>
Polybius also accuses him of gross partiality to his own nation,
in the account of the Punic war—allowing to the enemy
no praise, even where they deserved it, and uncandidly aggravating
their faults.<a id="noteref_143" name="noteref_143" href="#note_143"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">143</span></span></a> In particular, he charges him with falsehood
in what he has delivered, with regard to the causes of
the second contest with the Carthaginians. Fabius had alleged,
that the covetousness of Hannibal, which he inherited from
Asdrubal, and his desire of ultimately ruling over his own
country, to which he conceived a Roman war to be a necessary
step, were the chief causes of renewing hostilities, to which
the Carthaginian government was totally averse. Now,
Po<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page70">[pg 70]</span><a name="Pg070" id="Pg070" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>lybius asks him, if this were true, why the Carthaginian Senate
did not deliver up their general, as was required, after the
capture of Saguntum; and why they supported him, during
fourteen years continuance in Italy, with frequent supplies of
money, and immense reinforcements<a id="noteref_144" name="noteref_144" href="#note_144"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">144</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The sentiments expressed by Dionysius of Halicarnassus,
concerning Fabius Pictor’s relation of events, in the early
ages of Rome, and those of Polybius<a id="noteref_145" name="noteref_145" href="#note_145"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">145</span></span></a>, on the occurrences of
which he was himself an eye-witness, enable us to form a
pretty accurate estimate of the credit due to his whole history.
Dionysius having himself written on the antiquities of Rome,
was competent to deliver an opinion as to the works of those
who had preceded him in the same undertaking; and it would
rather have been favourable to the general view which he has
adopted, to have established the credibility of Fabius. We
may also safely rely on the judgment which Polybius has passed,
concerning this old annalist’s relation of the events of the
age in which he lived, since Polybius had spared no pains to
be thoroughly informed of whatever could render his own account
of them complete and unexceptionable.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The opinion which must now be naturally formed from the
sentiments entertained by these two eminent historians, is
rather confirmed by the few and unconnected fragments that
remain of the Annals of Fabius Pictor, as they exhibit a spirit
of trifling and credulity quite unworthy the historian of a great
republic. One passage is about a person who saw a magpie;
another about a man who had a message brought to him by a
swallow; and a third concerning a party of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">loup garous</span></span>, who,
after being transformed into wolves, recovered their own
figures, and, what is more, got back their cast-off clothes,
provided they had abstained for nine years from preying on
human flesh!
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page71">[pg 71]</span><a name="Pg071" id="Pg071" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Such were the merits of the earliest annalist of Rome, whom
all succeeding historians of the state copied as far as he had
proceeded, or at least implicitly followed as their authority
and guide in facts and chronology. Unfortunately, his character
as a senator, and an eye-witness of many of the events
he recorded, gave the stamp of authenticity to his work, which
it did not intrinsically deserve to have impressed on it. His
successors accordingly, instead of <a name="corr071" id="corr071" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">giving</span> themselves the pains
to clear up the difficulties with which the history of former
ages was embarrassed, and which would have led into long
and laborious discussions, preferred reposing on the authority
of Fabius. They copied him on the ancient times, without
even consulting the few monuments that remained, and then
contented themselves with adding the transactions subsequent
to the period which his history comprehends. Thus, Dionysius
of Halicarnassus<a id="noteref_146" name="noteref_146" href="#note_146"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">146</span></span></a> informs us that Cincius, Cato the
Censor, Calpurnius Piso, and most of the other historians who
succeeded him, implicitly adopted Fabius’ story of the birth
and education of Romulus; and he adds many glaring instances
of the little discernment they showed in following him on
points where, by a little investigation, they might have discovered
how egregiously he had erred. Even Livy himself
admits, that his own account of the second Punic war was
chiefly founded on the relations of Fabius Pictor<a id="noteref_147" name="noteref_147" href="#note_147"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">147</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This ancient and dubious annalist was succeeded by Scribonius
Libo, and by Calpurnius Piso. Libo served under
Ser. Galba in Spain, and on his return to Rome impeached
his commander for some act of treachery towards the natives
of that province. Piso was Consul along with Mucius Scævola
in 620, the year in which Tib. Gracchus was slain. Like
Fabius, he wrote Annals of Rome, from the beginning of the
state, which Cicero pronounces to be <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">exiliter scripti</span></span><a id="noteref_148" name="noteref_148" href="#note_148"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">148</span></span></a>: But
although his style was jejune, he is called a profound writer,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">gravis auctor</span></span>, by Pliny<a id="noteref_149" name="noteref_149" href="#note_149"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">149</span></span></a>; and Au. Gellius says, that there is
an agreeable simplicity in some parts of his work—the brevity
which displeased Cicero appearing to him <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">simplicissima suavitas
et rei et orationis</span></span><a id="noteref_150" name="noteref_150" href="#note_150"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">150</span></span></a>. He relates an anecdote of Romulus,
who, being abroad at supper, drank little wine, because he
was to be occupied with important affairs on the following
day. One of the other guests remarked, <span class="tei tei-q">“that if all men did
as he, wine would be cheap.”</span>—<span class="tei tei-q">“No,”</span> replied Romulus, <span class="tei tei-q">“I
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page72">[pg 72]</span><a name="Pg072" id="Pg072" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>have drunk as much as I liked, and wine would be dearer than
it is now if every one did the same.”</span> This annalist first suggested
Varro’s famous derivation of the word Italy, which he
deduced from <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vitulus</span></span>. He is also frequently quoted by
Plutarch and Dionysius of Halicarnassus<a id="noteref_151" name="noteref_151" href="#note_151"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">151</span></span></a>. Niebuhr thinks,
that of all the Roman annalists he is chiefly responsible for
having introduced into history the fables of the ancient heroic
ballads<a id="noteref_152" name="noteref_152" href="#note_152"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">152</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
About the same time with Piso, lived two historians, who
were both called Caius Fannius, and were nearly related to
each other. One of them was son-in-law of Lælius, and
served under the younger Scipio at the final reduction of
Carthage. Of him Cicero speaks favourably, though his style
was somewhat harsh<a id="noteref_153" name="noteref_153" href="#note_153"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">153</span></span></a>; but his chief praise is, that Sallust, in
mentioning the Latin historians, while he gives to Cato the
palm for conciseness, awards it to Fannius for accuracy in
facts<a id="noteref_154" name="noteref_154" href="#note_154"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">154</span></span></a>. Heeren also mentions, that he was the authority
chiefly followed by Plutarch in his lives of the Gracchi<a id="noteref_155" name="noteref_155" href="#note_155"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">155</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cœlius Antipater was contemporary with the Gracchi, and
was the master of Lucius Crassus, the celebrated orator, and
other eminent men of the day. We learn from Valerius Maximus,
that he was the authority for the story of the shade of
Tiberius Gracchus having appeared to his brother Caius in a
dream, to warn him that he would suffer the same fate which
he had himself experienced<a id="noteref_156" name="noteref_156" href="#note_156"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">156</span></span></a>; and the historian testifies that
he had heard of this vision from many persons during the lifetime
of Caius Gracchus. The chief subject of Antipater’s
history, which was dedicated to Lælius, consisted in the events
that occurred during the second Punic war. Cicero says,
that he was for his age <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Scriptor luculentus</span></span><a id="noteref_157" name="noteref_157" href="#note_157"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">157</span></span></a>; that he raised
himself considerably above his predecessors, and gave a more
lofty tone to history; but he seems to think that the utmost
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page73">[pg 73]</span><a name="Pg073" id="Pg073" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>praise to which he was entitled, is, that he excelled those who
preceded him, for still he possessed but little eloquence or
learning, and his style was yet unpolished. Valerius Maximus,
however, calls him an authentic writer, (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">certus auctor</span></span><a id="noteref_158" name="noteref_158" href="#note_158"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">158</span></span></a>;) and
the Emperor Hadrian thought him superior to Sallust, consistently
with that sort of black-letter taste which led him to
prefer Cato the Censor to Cicero, and Ennius to Virgil<a id="noteref_159" name="noteref_159" href="#note_159"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">159</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Sempronius Asellio served as military tribune under the
younger Scipio Africanus, in the war of Numantia<a id="noteref_160" name="noteref_160" href="#note_160"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">160</span></span></a>, which
began in 614, and ended in 621, with the destruction of that
city. He wrote the history of the campaigns in which he
fought under Scipio, in Spain, in at least 40 books, since the
40th is cited by Charisius. His work, however, was not written
for a considerable time after the events he recorded had happened:
That he wrote subsequently to Antipater, we have the
authority of Cicero, who says <span class="tei tei-q">“that Cœlius Antipater was
succeeded by Asellio, who did not imitate his improvements,
but relapsed into the dulness and unskilfulness of the earliest
historians<a id="noteref_161" name="noteref_161" href="#note_161"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">161</span></span></a>.”</span> This does not at all appear to have been Asellio’s
own opinion, as, from a passage extracted by Aulus Gellius
from the first book of his Annals, he seems to have considered
himself as the undisputed father of philosophic history<a id="noteref_162" name="noteref_162" href="#note_162"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">162</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Quintus Lutatius Catulus, better known as an accomplished
orator than a historian, was Consul along with Marius in the
year 651, and shared with him in his distinguished triumph
over the Cimbrians. Though once united in the strictest
friendship, these old colleagues quarrelled at last, during the
civil war with Sylla; and Catulus, it is said, in order to avoid
the emissaries despatched by the unrelenting Marius, to put
him to death, shut himself up in a room newly plastered, and
having kindled a fire, was suffocated by the noxious vapours.
He wrote the history of his own consulship, and the various
public transactions in which he had been engaged, particularly
the war with the Cimbrians. Cicero<a id="noteref_163" name="noteref_163" href="#note_163"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">163</span></span></a>, who has spoken
so disadvantageously of the style of the older annalists, admits
that Catulus wrote very pure Latin, and that his language had
some resemblance to the sweetness of Xenophon.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Q. Claudius Quadrigarius composed Annals of Rome in
twenty-four books, which, though now almost entirely lost,
were in existence as late as the end of the 12th century,
being referred to by John of Salisbury in his book <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Nugis
Curialibus</span></span>. Some passages, however, are still preserved,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page74">[pg 74]</span><a name="Pg074" id="Pg074" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>particularly the account of the defiance by the gigantic Gaul,
adorned with a chain, to the whole Roman army, and his
combat with Titus Manlius, afterwards sirnamed Torquatus,
from this chain which he took from his antagonist. <span class="tei tei-q">“Who
the enemy was,”</span> says Au. Gellius, <span class="tei tei-q">“of how great and formidable
stature, how audacious the challenge, and in what kind
of battle they fought, Q. Claudius has told with much purity
and elegance, and in the simple unadorned sweetness of
ancient language<a id="noteref_164" name="noteref_164" href="#note_164"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">164</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There is likewise extant from these Annals the story of the
Consul Q. Fabius Maximus making his father, who was then
Proconsul, alight from his horse when he came out to meet
him. We have also the letter of the Roman Consuls, Fabricius
and Q. Emilius, to Pyrrhus, informing him of the treachery
of his confident, Nicias, who had offered to the Romans to
make away with his master for a reward. It merits quotation,
as a fine example of ancient dignity and simplicity.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Nos,
pro tuis injuriis, continuo animo, strenue commoti, inimiciter
tecum bellare studemus. Sed communis exempli et fidei ergo
visum est, uti te salvum velimus; ut esset quem armis vincere
possimus. Ad nos venit Nicias familiaris tuus, qui sibi pretium
a nobis peteret, si te clam interfecisset: Id nos negavimus
velle; neve ob eam rem quidquam commodi expectaret: Et
simul visum est, ut te certiorem faceremus, nequid ejusmodi,
si accidisset, nostro consilio putares factum: et, quid nobis non
placet, pretio, aut premio, aut dolis pugnare.”</span>—The Annals
of Quadrigarius must at least have brought down the history
to the civil wars of Marius and Sylla, since, in the nineteenth
book, the author details the circumstances of the defence of
the Piræus against Sylla, by Archelaus, the prefect of Mithridates.
As to the style of these annals, Aulus Gellius reports,
that they were written in a conversational manner<a id="noteref_165" name="noteref_165" href="#note_165"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">165</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Quintus Valerius Antias also left Annals, which must have
formed an immense work, since Priscian cites the seventy-fourth
book. They commenced with the foundation of the
city; but their accuracy cannot be relied on, as the author
was much addicted to exaggeration. Livy, mentioning, on
the authority of Antias, a victory gained by the Proconsul Q.
Minucius, adds, while speaking of the number of slain on the
part of the enemy, <span class="tei tei-q">“Little faith can be given to this author,
as no one was ever more intemperate in such exaggerations;”</span>
and Aulus Gellius mentions a circumstance which he had
affirmed, contrary to the records of the Tribunes, and the
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page75">[pg 75]</span><a name="Pg075" id="Pg075" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>authors of the ancient Annals<a id="noteref_166" name="noteref_166" href="#note_166"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">166</span></span></a>. This history also seems to
have been stuffed with the most absurd and superstitious
fables. A nonsensical tale is told with regard to the manner
in which Numa procured thunder from Jupiter; and stories
are likewise related about the conflagration of the lake Thrasimene,
before the defeat of the Roman Consul, and the flame
which played round the head of Servius Tullius in his childhood.
It also appears from him, that the Romans had judicial
trials, as horrible as those of the witches which disgraced
our criminal record. Q. Nævius, before setting out for Sardinia,
held <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Questions</span></span> of incantation through the towns of
Italy, and condemned to death, apparently without much
investigation, not less than two thousand persons. This annalist
denies, in another passage, the well-known story of the continence
of Scipio, and alleges that the lady whom he is generally
said to have restored to her lover, was <span class="tei tei-q">“<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in deliciis
amoribusque usurpata</span></span><a id="noteref_167" name="noteref_167" href="#note_167"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">167</span></span></a>.”</span> His opinion of the moral character
of Scipio seems founded on some satirical verses of Nævius,
with regard to a low intrigue in which he was detected in his
youth. But whatever his private amours may have been, it
does not follow that he was incapable of a signal exertion of
generosity and continence in the presence of his army, and
with the eyes of two great rival nations fixed upon his conduct.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Licinius Macer, father of Licin. Calvus, the distinguished
poet and orator formerly mentioned<a id="noteref_168" name="noteref_168" href="#note_168"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">168</span></span></a>, was author of Annals,
entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Libri Rerum Romanarum</span></span>. In the course of these
he frequently quotes the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Libri Lintei</span></span>. He was not considered
as a very impartial historian, and, in particular, he is accused
by Livy of inventing stories to throw lustre over his own
family.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
L. Cornelius Sisenna was the friend of Macer, and coeval
with Antias and Quadrigarius; but he far excelled his contemporaries,
as well as predecessors, in the art of historical
narrative. He was of the same family as Sylla, the dictator,
and was descended from that Sisenna who was Prætor in 570.
In his youth he practised as an orator, and is characterized
by Cicero as a man of learning and wit, but of no great industry
or knowledge in business<a id="noteref_169" name="noteref_169" href="#note_169"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">169</span></span></a>. In more advanced life he
was Prætor of Achaia, and a friend of Atticus. Vossius says
his history commenced after the taking of Rome by the Gauls,
and ended with the wars of Marius and Sylla. Now, it is
possible that he may have given some sketch of Roman affairs
from the burning of the city by the Gauls, but it is evident he
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page76">[pg 76]</span><a name="Pg076" id="Pg076" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>had touched slightly on these early portions of the history, for
though his work consisted of twenty, or, according to others,
of twenty-two books, it appears from a fragment of the second,
which is still preserved, that he had there advanced in his
narrative as far as the Social War, which broke out in the
year 663. The greater part, therefore, I suspect, was devoted
to the history of the civil wars of Marius; and indeed Velleius
Paterculus calls his work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Opus Belli Civilis Sullani</span></span><a id="noteref_170" name="noteref_170" href="#note_170"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">170</span></span></a>.
The great defect of his history consisted, it is said, in not
being written with sufficient political freedom, at least concerning
the character and conduct of Sylla, which is regretted
by Sallust in a passage bearing ample testimony to the merits
of Sisenna in other particulars.—<span class="tei tei-q">“L. Sisenna,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“optume
et diligentissime omnium, qui eas res dixere persecutus,
parum mihi libero ore locutus videtur<a id="noteref_171" name="noteref_171" href="#note_171"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">171</span></span></a>.”</span> Cicero, while he
admits his superiority over his predecessors, adds, that he was
far from perfection<a id="noteref_172" name="noteref_172" href="#note_172"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">172</span></span></a>, and complains that there was something
puerile in his Annals, as if he had studied none of the Greek
historians but Clitarchus<a id="noteref_173" name="noteref_173" href="#note_173"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">173</span></span></a>. I have quoted these opinions,
since we must now entirely trust to the sentiments of others,
in the judgment which we form of the merits of Sisenna; for
although the fragments which remain of his history are more
numerous than those of any other old Latin annalist, being
about 150, they are also shorter and more unconnected. Indeed,
there are scarcely two sentences anywhere joined
together.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The great defect, then, imputed to the class of annalists
above enumerated, is the meagerness of their relations, which
are stript of all ornament of style—of all philosophic observation
on the springs or consequences of action—and all
characteristic painting of the actors themselves. That they
often perverted the truth of history, to dignify the name of
their country at the expense of its foes, is a fault common to
them with many national historians—that they sometimes exalted
one political faction or chief to depreciate another, was
almost unavoidable amid the anarchy and civil discord of
Rome—that they were credulous in the extreme, in their relations
of portents and prodigies, is a blemish from which
their greater successors were not exempted: The easy faith
of Livy is well known. Even the philosophic Tacitus seems
to give credit to those presages, which darkly announced the
fate of men and empires; and Julius Obsequens, a grave writer
in the most enlightened age of Rome, collected in one
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page77">[pg 77]</span><a name="Pg077" id="Pg077" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>work all the portents observed from its foundation to the age
of Augustus.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The period in which the ancient annalists flourished, also
produced several biographical works; and these being lives of
men distinguished in the state, may be ranked in the number
of histories.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Lucius Emilius Scaurus, who was born in 591, and died in
666, wrote memoirs of his own life, which Tacitus says were
accounted faithful and impartial. They are unfortunately
lost, but their matter may be conjectured from the well-known
incidents of the life of Scaurus. They embraced a very
eventful period, and were written without any flagrant breach
of truth. We learn from Cicero, that these memoirs, however
useful and instructive, were little read, even in his days, though
his contemporaries carefully studied the Cyropædia; a work,
as he continues, no doubt sufficiently elegant, but not so
connected with our affairs, nor in any respect to be preferred
to the merits of Scaurus<a id="noteref_174" name="noteref_174" href="#note_174"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">174</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Rutilius Rufus, who was Consul in the year 649, also wrote
memoirs of his own life. He was a man of very different character
from Scaurus, being of distinguished probity in every
part of his conduct, and possessing, as we are informed by
Cicero, something almost of sanctity in his demeanour. All
this did not save him from an unjust exile, to which he was
condemned, and which he passed in tranquillity at Smyrna.
These biographical memoirs being lost, we know their merits
only from the commendations of Livy<a id="noteref_175" name="noteref_175" href="#note_175"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">175</span></span></a>, Plutarch<a id="noteref_176" name="noteref_176" href="#note_176"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">176</span></span></a>, Velleius
Paterculus<a id="noteref_177" name="noteref_177" href="#note_177"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">177</span></span></a>, and Valerius Maximus<a id="noteref_178" name="noteref_178" href="#note_178"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">178</span></span></a>. As the author
served under Scipio in Spain—under Scævola in Asia, and
under Metellus in his campaign against Jugurtha, the loss of
this work is severely to be regretted.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But the want of Sylla’s Memoirs of his own Life, and of the
affairs in which he had himself been engaged, is still more
deeply to be lamented than the loss of those of Scaurus or
Rutilius Rufus. These memoirs were meant to have been dedicated
to Lucullus, on condition that he should arrange and
correct them<a id="noteref_179" name="noteref_179" href="#note_179"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">179</span></span></a>. Sylla was employed on them the evening before
his death, and concluded them by relating, that on the
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page78">[pg 78]</span><a name="Pg078" id="Pg078" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>preceding night he had seen in a dream one of his children,
who had died a short while before, and who, stretching out
his hand, showed to him his mother Metella, and exhorted
him forthwith to leave the cares of life, and hasten to enjoy
repose along with them in the bosom of eternal rest. <span class="tei tei-q">“Thus,”</span>
adds the author, who accounted nothing so certain as what
was signified to him in dreams, <span class="tei tei-q">“I finish my days, as was
predicted to me by the Chaldeans, who announced that I
should surmount envy itself by my glory, and should have the
good fortune to fall in the full blossom of my prosperity<a id="noteref_180" name="noteref_180" href="#note_180"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">180</span></span></a>.”</span>
These memoirs were sent by Epicadus, the freedman of Sylla,
to Lucullus, in order that he might put to them the finishing
hand. If preserved, they would have thrown much light on
the most important affairs of Roman history, as they proceeded
from the person who must, of all others, have been the best
informed concerning them. They are quoted by Plutarch as
authority for many curious facts, as—that in the great battle
by which the Cimbrian invasion was repelled, the chief execution
was done in that quarter where Sylla was stationed; the
main body, under Marius, having been misled by a cloud of dust,
and having in consequence wandered about for a long time without
finding the enemy<a id="noteref_181" name="noteref_181" href="#note_181"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">181</span></span></a>. Plutarch also mentions that, in these
Commentaries, the author contradicted the current story of his
seeking refuge during a tumult at the commencement of the civil
wars with Marius, in the house of his rival, who, it had been
reported, sheltered and dismissed him in safety. Besides their
importance for the history of events, the Memoirs of Sylla
must have been highly interesting, as developing, in some
degree, the most curious character in Roman history. <span class="tei tei-q">“In
the loss of his Memoirs,”</span> says Blackwell, in his usual inflated
style, <span class="tei tei-q">“the strongest draught of human passions, in the highest
wheels of fortune and sallies of power, is for ever vanished<a id="noteref_182" name="noteref_182" href="#note_182"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">182</span></span></a>.”</span>
The character of Cæsar, though greater, was less incomprehensible
than that of Sylla; and the mind of Augustus, though
unfathomable to his contemporaries, has been sounded by the
long line of posterity; but it is difficult to analyse the disposition
which inspired the inconsistent conduct of Sylla. Gorged
with power, and blood, and vengeance, he seems to have
retired from what he chiefly coveted, as if surfeited; but neither
this retreat, nor old age, could mollify his heart; nor could
disease, or the approach of death, or the remembrance of his
past life, disturb his tranquillity. No part of his existence was
more strange than its termination; and nothing can be more
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page79">[pg 79]</span><a name="Pg079" id="Pg079" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>singular than that he, who, on the day of his decease, caused
in mere wantonness a provincial magistrate to be strangled in
his presence, should, the night before, have enjoyed a dream
so elevated and tender. It is probable that the Memoirs were
well written, in point of style, as Sylla loved the arts and
sciences, and was even a man of some learning, though Cæsar
is reported to have said, on hearing his literary acquirements
extolled, that he must have been but an indifferent scholar
who had resigned a dictatorship.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The characteristic of most of the annals and memoirs
which I have hitherto mentioned, was extreme conciseness.
Satisfied with collecting a mass of facts, their authors adopted
a style which, in the later ages of Rome, became proverbially
meagre and jejune. Cicero includes Claudius Quadrigarius
and Asellio in the same censure which he passes on their predecessors,
Fabius Pictor, Piso, and Fannius. But though,
perhaps, equally barren in style, much greater trust and reliance
may be placed on the annalists of the time of Marius and
Sylla than of the second Punic war.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Some of these more modern annalists wrote the History of
Rome from the commencement of the state; others took up
the relation from the burning of Rome by the Gauls, or confined
themselves to events which had occurred in their own
time. Their narratives of all that passed before the incursion
of the Gauls, were indeed as little authentic as the relations
of Fabius Pictor, since they implicitly followed that writer, and
made no new researches into the mouldering monuments of
their country. But their accounts of what happened subsequently
to the rebuilding of Rome, are not liable to the same
suspicion and uncertainty; the public monuments and records
having, from that period, been duly preserved, and having
been in greater abundance than those of almost any other
nation in the history of the world. The Roman authors possessed
all the auxiliaries which aid historical compilation—decrees
of the senate, chiefly pronounced in affairs of state—leagues
with friendly nations—terms of the surrender of cities—tables
of triumphs, and treaties, which were carefully preserved
in the treasury or in temples. There were even rolls
kept of the senators and knights, as also of the number of the
legions and ships employed in each war; but the public despatches
addressed to the Senate by commanders of armies, of
which we have specimens in Cicero’s Epistles, were the documents
which must have chiefly aided historical composition.
These were probably accurate, as the Senate, and people in
general, were too well versed in military affairs to have been
easily deluded, and legates were often commissioned by them
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page80">[pg 80]</span><a name="Pg080" id="Pg080" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>to ascertain the truth of the relations. The immense multitude
of such documents is evinced by the fact, that Vespasian,
when restoring the Capitol, found in its ruins not fewer than
3000 brazen tablets, containing decrees of the Senate and
people, concerning leagues, associations, and immunities to
whomsoever granted, from an early period of the state, and
which Suetonius justly styles, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">instrumentum imperii pulcherrimum
ac vetustissimum</span></span><a id="noteref_183" name="noteref_183" href="#note_183"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">183</span></span></a>. Accordingly, when the later annalists
came to write of the affairs of their own time, they found
historical documents more full and satisfactory than those of
almost any other country. But, in addition to these copious
sources of information, it will be remarked, that the annalists
themselves had often personal knowledge of the facts they
related. It is true, indeed, that historians contemporary with
the events which they record, are not always best qualified
to place them in an instructive light, since, though they may
understand how they spring out of prior incidents, they cannot
foresee their influence on future occurrences. Of some
things, the importance is overrated, and of others undervalued,
till time, which has the same effect on events as distance on
external objects, obscures all that is minute, while it renders
the outlines of what is vast more distinct and perceptible.
But though the reach of a contemporary historian’s mind may
not extend to the issue of the drama which passes before him,
he is no doubt best aware of the detached incidents of each
separate scene and act, and most fitted to detail those particulars
which posterity may combine into a mass, exhibiting at
one view the grandeur and interest of the whole. Now, it
will have been remarked from the preceding pages, that all the
Roman annalists, from the time of Fabius Pictor to Sylla,
were Consuls and Prætors, commanders of armies, or heads of
political parties, and consequently the principal sharers in the
events which they recorded. In Greece, there was an earlier
separation than at Rome, between an active and a speculative
life. Many of the Greek historians had little part in those
transactions, the remembrance of which they have transmitted.
They wrote at a distance, as it were, from the scene of affairs,
so that they contemplated the wars and dissensions of their
countrymen with the unprejudiced eye of a foreigner, or of
posterity. This naturally diffuses a calm philosophic spirit
over the page of the historian, and gives abundant scope for
conjecture concerning the motives and springs of action. The
Roman annalists, on the other hand, wrote from perfect knowledge
and remembrance; they were the persons who had
plan<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page81">[pg 81]</span><a name="Pg081" id="Pg081" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>ned and executed every project; they had fought the battles
they described, or excited the war, the vicissitudes of which
they recorded. Hence the facts which their pages disclosed,
might have borne the genuine stamp of truth, and the analysis
of the motives and causes of actions might have been absolute
revelations. Yet, under these, the most favourable circumstances
for historic composition, prejudices from which the
Greek historians were exempt, would unconsciously creep in:
Writers like Sylla or Æmilius Scaurus, had much to extenuate,
and strong temptations to set down much in malice<a id="noteref_184" name="noteref_184" href="#note_184"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">184</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Nor is it always sufficient to have witnessed a great event
in order to record it well, and with that fulness which converts
it into a lesson in legislation, ethics, or politics. Now, the
Roman annals had hitherto been chiefly a dry register of facts,
what Lord Bolingbroke calls the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Nuntia Vetustatis</span></span>, or Gazette
of Antiquity. A history properly so termed, and when
considered as opposed to such productions, forms a complete
series of transactions, accompanied by a deduction of their immediate
and remote causes, and of the consequences by which
they were attended,—all related, in their full extent, with such
detail of circumstances as transports us back to the very time,
makes us parties to the counsels, and actors, as it were, in
the whole scene of affairs. It is then alone that history becomes
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">magistra vitæ</span></span>; and in this sense
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
    <a name="toc13" id="toc13"></a><a name="pdf14" id="pdf14"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">SALLUST</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
has been generally considered as the first among the Romans
who merited the title of historian. This celebrated writer was
born at Amiternum, in the territory of the Sabines, in the year
668. He received his education at Rome, and, in his early
youth, appears to have been desirous to devote himself to literary
pursuits. But it was not easy for one residing in the
capital to escape the contagious desire of military or political
distinction. At the age of twenty-seven, he obtained the
situation of Quæstor, which entitled him to a seat in the
Senate, and about six years afterwards he was elected Tribune
of the people. While in this office, he attached himself to the
fortunes of Cæsar, and along with one of his colleagues in the
tribunate, conducted the prosecution against Milo for the
murder of Clodius. In the year 704, he was excluded from
the Senate, on pretext of immoral conduct, but more probably
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page82">[pg 82]</span><a name="Pg082" id="Pg082" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>from the violence of the patrician party, to which he was opposed.
Aulus Gellius, on the authority of Varro’s treatise,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pius aut de Pace</span></span>, informs us that he incurred this disgrace in
consequence of being surprised in an intrigue with Fausta, the
wife of Milo, by the husband, who made him be scourged
by his slaves<a id="noteref_185" name="noteref_185" href="#note_185"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">185</span></span></a>. It has been doubted, however, by modern
critics, whether it was the historian Sallust who was thus detected
and punished, or his nephew, Crispus Sallustius, to whom
Horace has addressed the second ode of the second book. It
seems, indeed, unlikely, that in such a corrupt age, an amour
with a woman of Fausta’s abandoned character, should have
been the real cause of his expulsion from the Senate. After
undergoing this ignominy, which, for the present, baffled all
his hopes of preferment, he quitted Rome, and joined his patron,
Cæsar, in Gaul. He continued to follow the fortunes of
that commander, and, in particular bore a share in the expedition
to Africa, where the scattered remains of Pompey’s
party had united. That region being finally subdued, Sallust
was left by Cæsar as Prætor of Numidia; and about the same
time he married Terentia, the divorced wife of Cicero. He
remained only a year in his government, but during that period
he enriched himself by despoiling the province. On his return
to Rome, he was accused by the Numidians, whom he
had plundered, but escaped with impunity, by means of the
protection of Cæsar, and was quietly permitted to betake himself
to a luxurious retirement with his ill-gotten wealth. He
chose for his favourite retreat a villa at Tibur, which had belonged
to Cæsar; and he also built a magnificent palace in
the suburbs of Rome, surrounded by delightful pleasure-grounds,
which were afterwards well known and celebrated
by the name of the Gardens of Sallust. One front of this
splendid mansion faced the street, where he constructed a
spacious market-place, in which every article of luxury was
sold in abundance. The other front looked to the gardens,
which were contiguous to those of Lucullus, and occupied the
valley between the extremities of the Quirinal and Pincian
Hills<a id="noteref_186" name="noteref_186" href="#note_186"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">186</span></span></a>. They lay, in the time of Sallust, immediately beyond
the walls of Rome, but were included within the new wall of
Aurelian. In them every beauty of nature, and every embellishment
of art, that could delight or gratify the senses, seem
to have been assembled. Umbrageous walks, open parterres,
and cool porticos, displayed their various attractions. Amidst
shrubs and flowers of every hue and odour, interspersed with
statues of the most exquisite workmanship, pure streams of
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page83">[pg 83]</span><a name="Pg083" id="Pg083" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>water preserved the verdure of the earth and the temperature
of the air; and while, on the one hand, the distant prospect
caught the eye, on the other, the close retreat invited to repose
or meditation<a id="noteref_187" name="noteref_187" href="#note_187"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">187</span></span></a>. These gardens included within their precincts
the most magnificent baths, a temple to Venus, and a circus,
which Sallust repaired and ornamented. Possessed of such
attractions, the Sallustian palace and gardens became, after
the death of their original proprietor, the residence of successive
emperors. Augustus chose them as the scene of his most
sumptuous entertainments. The taste of Vespasian preferred
them to the palace of the Cæsars. Even the virtuous Nerva,
and stern Aurelian, were so attracted by their beauty, that,
while at Rome, they were their constant abode. <span class="tei tei-q">“The palace,”</span>
says Eustace, <span class="tei tei-q">“was consumed by fire on the fatal night
when Alaric entered the city. The temple, of singular beauty,
sacred to Venus, was discovered about the middle of the sixteenth
century, in opening the grounds of a garden, and was
destroyed for the sale of the materials: Of the circus little
remains, but masses of walls that merely indicate its site;
while statues and marbles, found occasionally, continue to
furnish proofs of its former magnificence<a id="noteref_188" name="noteref_188" href="#note_188"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">188</span></span></a>.”</span> Many statues of
exquisite workmanship have been found on the same spot; but
these may have been placed there by the magnificence of the
imperial occupiers, and not of the original proprietor.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In his urban gardens, or villa at Tibur, Sallust passed the
close of his life, dividing his time between literary avocations
and the society of his friends—among whom he numbered
Lucullus, Messala, and Cornelius Nepos.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Such having been his friends and studies, it seems highly
improbable that he indulged in that excessive libertinism
which has been attributed to him, on the erroneous supposition
that he was the Sallust mentioned by Horace, in the first
book of his Satires<a id="noteref_189" name="noteref_189" href="#note_189"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">189</span></span></a>. The subject of Sallust’s character is
one which has excited some investigation and interest, and on
which very different opinions have been formed. That he
was a man of loose morals is evident; and it cannot be denied
that he rapaciously plundered his province, like other Roman
governors of the day. But it seems doubtful if he was that
monster of iniquity he has been sometimes represented. He
was extremely unfortunate in the first permanent notice taken
of his character by his contemporaries. The decided enemy
of Pompey and his faction, he had said of that celebrated chief,
in his general history, that he was a man <span class="tei tei-q">“oris probi, animo
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page84">[pg 84]</span><a name="Pg084" id="Pg084" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>inverecundo.”</span> Lenæus, the freedman of Pompey, avenged
his master, by the most virulent abuse of his enemy<a id="noteref_190" name="noteref_190" href="#note_190"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">190</span></span></a>, in a
work, which should rather be regarded as a frantic satire than
an historical document. Of the injustice which he had done
to the life of the historian we may, in some degree, judge,
from what he said of him as an author. He called him, as
we learn from Suetonius, <span class="tei tei-q">“Nebulonem, vitâ scriptisque monstrosum:
præterea, priscorum Catonisque ineruditissimum furem.”</span>
The life of Sallust, by Asconius Pedianus, which was
written in the age of Augustus, and might have acted, in the
present day, as a corrective, or palliative, of the unfavourable
impression produced by this injurious libel, has unfortunately
perished; and the next work on the subject now extant, is a
professed rhetorical declamation against the character of Sallust,
which was given to the world in the name of Cicero, but
was not written till long after the death of that orator, and is
now generally assigned by critics, to a rhetorician, in the reign
of Claudius, called Porcius Latro. The calumnies invented
or exaggerated by Lenæus, and propagated in the scholiastic
theme of Porcius Latro, have been adopted by Le Clerc, professor
of Hebrew at Amsterdam, and by Professor Meisner, of
Prague<a id="noteref_191" name="noteref_191" href="#note_191"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">191</span></span></a>, in their respective accounts of the Life of Sallust.
His character has received more justice from the prefatory
Memoir and Notes of De Brosses, his French translator, and
from the researches of Wieland in Germany.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
From what has been above said of Fabius Pictor, and his
immediate successors, it must be apparent, that the art of historic
composition at Rome was in the lowest state, and that
Sallust had no model to imitate among the writers of his own
country. He therefore naturally recurred to the productions
of the Greek historians. The native exuberance, and loquacious
familiarity of Herodotus, were not adapted to his taste;
and simplicity, such as that of Xenophon, is, of all things, the
most difficult to attain: He therefore chiefly emulated Thucydides,
and attempted to transplant into his own language the
vigour and conciseness of the Greek historian; but the strict
imitation, with which he has followed him, has gone far to
lessen the effect of his own original genius.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The first book of Sallust was the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Conspiracy of Catiline</span></span>.
There exists, however, some doubt as to the precise period of
its composition. The general opinion is, that it was written
immediately after the author went out of office as Tribune of
the People, that is, in the year 703: And the composition of
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Jugurthine War</span></span>, as well as of his general history, are fixed
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page85">[pg 85]</span><a name="Pg085" id="Pg085" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>by Le Clerc between that period and his appointment to the
Prætorship of Numidia. But others have supposed that they
were all written during the space which intervened between
his return from Numidia, in 708, and his death, which happened
in 718, four years previous to the battle of Actium.
It is maintained by the supporters of this last idea, that he was
too much engaged in political tumults previous to his administration
of Numidia, to have leisure for such important compositions—that,
in the introduction to Catiline’s Conspiracy, he
talks of himself as withdrawn from public affairs, and refutes
accusations of his voluptuous life, which were only applicable
to this period; and that, while instituting the comparison between
Cæsar and Cato, he speaks of the existence and competition
of these celebrated opponents as things that had
passed over—<span class="tei tei-q">“Sed mea memoria, ingenti virtute, diversis moribus,
fuere viri duo, Marcus Cato et Caius Cæsar.”</span> On this
passage, too, Gibbon in particular argues, that such a flatterer
and party tool as Sallust would not, during the life of Cæsar,
have put Cato so much on a level with him in the comparison
instituted between them. De Brosses agrees with Le Clerc in
thinking that the Conspiracy of Catiline at least must have
been written immediately after 703, as Sallust would not, subsequently
to his marriage with Terentia, have commemorated
the disgrace of her sister, for she, it seems, was the vestal virgin
whose intrigue with Catiline is recorded by our historian.
But whatever may be the fact as to Catiline’s Conspiracy, it
is quite clear that the Jugurthine War was written subsequent
to the author’s residence in Numidia, which evidently suggested
to him this theme, and afforded him the means of collecting
the information necessary for completing his work.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The subjects chosen by Sallust form two of the most important
and prominent topics in the history of Rome. The
periods, indeed, which he describes, were painful, but they
were interesting. Full of conspiracies, usurpations, and civil
wars, they chiefly exhibit the mutual rage and iniquity of embittered
factions, furious struggles between the patricians and
plebeians, open corruption in the senate, venality in the courts
of justice, and rapine in the provinces. This state of things,
so forcibly painted by Sallust, produced the Conspiracy, and
even in some degree formed the character of Catiline: But it
was the oppressive debts of individuals, the temper of Sylla’s
soldiers, and the absence of Pompey with his army, which
gave a possibility, and even prospect of success to a plot
which affected the vital existence of the commonwealth, and
which, although arrested in its commencement, was one of
those violent shocks which hasten the fall of a state. The
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page86">[pg 86]</span><a name="Pg086" id="Pg086" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>History of the Jugurthine War, if not so important or menacing
to the vital interests and immediate safety of Rome, exhibits
a more extensive field of action, and a greater theatre of
war. No prince, except Mithridates, gave so much employment
to the arms of the Romans. In the course of no war in
which they had ever been engaged, not even the second Carthaginian,
were the people more desponding, and in none were
they more elated with ultimate success. Nothing can be more
interesting than the account of the vicissitudes of this contest.
The endless resources, and hair-breadth escapes of Jugurtha—his
levity, his fickle faithless disposition, contrasted with the
perseverance and prudence of the Roman commander, Metellus,
are all described in a manner the most vivid and picturesque.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Sallust had attained the age of twenty-two when the conspiracy
of Catiline broke out, and was an eyewitness of the
whole proceedings. He had therefore, sufficient opportunity
of recording with accuracy and truth the progress and termination
of the conspiracy. Sallust has certainly acquired the
praise of a veracious historian, and I do not know that he has
been detected in falsifying any fact within the sphere of his
knowledge. Indeed there are few historical compositions of
which the truth can be proved on such evidence as the Conspiracy
of Catiline. The facts detailed in the orations of Cicero,
though differing in some minute particulars, coincide in
everything of importance, and highly contribute to illustrate
and verify the work of the historian. But Sallust lived too
near the period of which he treated, and was too much engaged
in the political tumults of the day, to give a faithful account,
unvarnished by animosity or predilection; he could not have
raised himself above all hopes, fears, and prejudices, and
therefore could not in all their extent have fulfilled the duties
of an impartial writer. A contemporary historian of such turbulent
times would be apt to exaggerate through adulation, or
conceal through fear, to instil the precepts not of the philosopher
but partizan, and colour facts into harmony with his own
system of patriotism or friendship. An obsequious follower of
Cæsar, he has been accused of a want of candour in varnishing
over the views of his patron; yet I have never been able
to persuade myself that Cæsar was deeply engaged in the
conspiracy of Catiline, or that a person of his prudence should
have leagued with such rash associates, or followed so desperate
an adventurer. But the chief objection urged against Sallust’s
impartiality, is the feeble and apparently reluctant
commendation which he bestows on Cicero, who is now acknowledged
to have been the principal actor in detecting and
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page87">[pg 87]</span><a name="Pg087" id="Pg087" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>frustrating the conspiracy. Though fond of displaying his
talent for drawing characters, he exercises none of it on Cicero,
whom he merely terms <span class="tei tei-q">“homo egregius et optumus
Consul,”</span> which was but cold applause for one who had saved
the commonwealth. It is true, that, in the early part of the
history, praise, though sparingly bestowed, is not absolutely
withheld. The election of Cicero to the Consulship is fairly
attributed to the high opinion entertained of his capacity,
which overcame the disadvantage of his obscure birth. The
mode adopted for gaining over one of Catiline’s accomplices,
and fixing his own wavering and disaffected colleague,—the
dexterity manifested in seizing the Allobrogian deputies with
the letters, and the irresistible effect produced, by confronting
them with the conspirators, are attributed exclusively to Cicero.
It is in the conclusion of these great transactions that
the historian withholds from him his due share of applause,
and contrives to eclipse him by always interposing the character
of Cato, though it could not be unknown to any witness
of the proceedings that Cato himself, and other senators, publicly
hailed the Consul as the Father of his country, and that
a public thanksgiving to the gods was decreed in his name,
for having preserved the city from conflagration, and the citizens
from massacre<a id="noteref_192" name="noteref_192" href="#note_192"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">192</span></span></a>. This omission, which may have originated
partly in enmity, and partly in disgust at the ill-disguised
vanity of the Consul, has in all times been regarded as the
chief defect, and even stain, in the history of the Catilinarian
conspiracy.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Although not an eye-witness of the war with Jugurtha <a name="corr087" id="corr087" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Sallust’s</span>
situation as Prætor of Numidia, which suggested the
composition, was favourable to the authority of the work, by
affording opportunity of collecting materials and procuring
information. He examined into the different accounts, written
as well as traditionary, concerning the history of Africa<a id="noteref_193" name="noteref_193" href="#note_193"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">193</span></span></a>,
particularly the documents preserved in the archives of King
Hiempsal, which he caused to be translated for his own use,
and which proved peculiarly serviceable for his detailed description
of the continent and inhabitants of Africa. He has
been accused of showing, in this history, an undue partiality
towards the character of Marius, and giving, for the sake of
his favourite leader, an unfair account of the massacre at
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page88">[pg 88]</span><a name="Pg088" id="Pg088" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>Vacca. But he appears to me to do even more than ample
justice to Metellus, as he represents the war as almost finished
by him previous to the arrival of Marius, though it was, in
fact, far from being concluded.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Veracity and fidelity are the chief, and, indeed, the indispensable
duties of an historian. Of all the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ornaments</span></span> of historic
composition, it derives its chief embellishment from a graceful
and perspicuous style. That of the early annalists, as we
have already seen, was inelegant and jejune; but style came
to be considered, in the progress of history, as a matter of
primary importance. It is unfortunate, perhaps, that so
much value was at length attached to it, since the ancient
historians seldom gave their authorities, and considered the
excellence of history as consisting in fine writing, more than
in an accurate detail of facts. Sallust evidently regarded an
elegant style as one of the chief merits of an historical work.
His own style, on which he took so much pains, was carefully
formed on that of Thucydides, whose manner of writing was in
a great measure original, and, till the time of Sallust, peculiar
to himself. The Roman has wonderfully succeeded in imitating
the vigour and conciseness of the Greek historian, and
infusing into his composition something of that dignified austerity,
which distinguishes the works of his great model; but
when I say that Sallust has imitated the conciseness of Thucydides,
I mean the rapid and compressed manner in which
his narrative is conducted,—in short, brevity of idea, rather
than language. For Thucydides, although he brings forward
only the principal idea, and discards what is collateral, yet
frequently employs long and involved periods. Sallust, on
the other hand, is abrupt and sententious, and is generally
considered as having carried this sort of brevity to a vicious
excess. The use of copulatives, either for the purpose of
connecting his sentences with each other, or uniting the
clauses of the same sentence, is in a great measure rejected.
This omission produces a monotonous effect, and a total want
of that flow and that variety, which are the principal charms
of the historic period. Seneca accordingly talks of the
<span class="tei tei-q">“Amputatæ sententiæ, et verba ante expectatum cadentia<a id="noteref_194" name="noteref_194" href="#note_194"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">194</span></span></a>,”</span>
which the practice of Sallust had rendered fashionable. Lord
Monboddo calls his style incoherent, and declares that there
is not one of his short and uniform sentences which deserves
the name of a period; so that supposing each sentence were
in itself beautiful, there is not variety enough to constitute
fine writing.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page89">[pg 89]</span><a name="Pg089" id="Pg089" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It was, perhaps, partly in imitation of Thucydides, that
Sallust introduced into his history a number of words almost
considered as obsolete, and which were selected from the
works of the older authors of Rome, particularly Cato the
Censor. It is on this point he has been chiefly attacked by
Pollio, in his letters to Plancus. He has also been taxed with
the opposite vice, of coining new words, and introducing
Greek idioms; but the severity of judgment which led him to
imitate the ancient and austere dignity of style, made him reject
those sparkling ornaments of composition, which were
beginning to infect the Roman taste, in consequence of the
increasing popularity of the rhetoric schools of declamation,
and the more frequent intercourse with Asia. On the whole,
in the style of Sallust, there is too much appearance of study,
and a want of that graceful ease, which is generally the effect
of art, but in which art is nowhere discovered. The opinion
of Sir J. Checke, as reported by Ascham in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Schoolmaster</span></span>,
contains a pretty accurate estimate of the merits of the style
of Sallust. <span class="tei tei-q">“Sir J. Checke said, that he could not recommend
Sallust as a good pattern of style for young men, because in
his writings there was more art than nature, and more labour
than art; and in his labour, also, too much toil, as it were,
with an uncontented care to write better than he could—a fault
common to very many men. And, therefore, he doth not express
the matter lively and naturally with common speech, as
ye see Xenophon doth in Greek, but it is carried and driven
forth artificially, after too learned a sort, as Thucydides doth
in his orations. <span class="tei tei-q">‘And how cometh it to pass,’</span> said I, <span class="tei tei-q">‘that
Cæsar’s and Cicero’s talk is so natural and plain, and Sallust’s
writing so artificial and dark, when all the three lived in one
time?’</span>—<span class="tei tei-q">‘I will freely tell you my fancy herein,’</span> said he;
<span class="tei tei-q">‘Cæsar and Cicero, beside a singular prerogative of natural eloquence
given unto them by God, were both, by use of life,
daily orators among the common people, and greatest councillors
in the Senate-house; and therefore gave themselves to
use such speech as the meanest should well understand, and
the wisest best allow, following carefully that good council of
Aristotle, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Loquendum ut multi; sapiendum ut pauci</span></span>. But
Sallust was no such man.’</span> ”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Of all departments of history, the delineation of character is
that which is most trying to the temper and impartiality of the
writer, more especially when he has been contemporary with
the individuals he portrays, and in some degree engaged in
the transactions he records. Five or six of the characters
drawn by Sallust have in all ages been regarded as masterpieces:
He has seized the delicate shades, as well as the
pro<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page90">[pg 90]</span><a name="Pg090" id="Pg090" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>minent features, and thrown over them the most lively and appropriate
colouring. Those of the two principal actors in his
tragic histories are forcibly given, and prepare us for the incidents
which follow. The portrait drawn of Catiline conveys
a vivid idea of his mind and person,—his profligate untameable
spirit, infinite resources, unwearied application, and prevailing
address. We behold, as it were, before us the deadly paleness
of his countenance, his ghastly eye, his unequal troubled
step, and the distraction of his whole appearance, strongly indicating
the restless horror of a guilty conscience. I think,
however, it might have been instructive and interesting had
we seen something more of the atrocities perpetrated in early
life by this chief conspirator. The historian might have shown
him commencing his career as the chosen favourite of Sylla,
and the instrument of his monstrous cruelties. The notice of
the other conspirators is too brief, and there is too little discrimination
of their characters. Perhaps the outline was the
same in all, but each might have been individuated by distinctive
features. The parallel drawn between Cato and Cæsar is
one of the most celebrated passages in the history of the
conspiracy. Of both these famed opponents we are presented
with favourable likenesses. Their defects are thrown into
shade; and the bright qualities of each different species which
distinguished them, are contrasted for the purpose of showing
the various merits by which men arrive at eminence.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The introductory sketch of the genius and manners of Jugurtha
is no less able and spirited than the character of Catiline.
We behold him, while serving under Scipio, as brave,
accomplished, and enterprizing; but imbued with an ambition,
which, being under no control of principle, hurried him into
its worst excesses, and rendered him ultimately perfidious and
cruel. The most singular part of his character was the mixture
of boldness and irresolution which it combined; but the
lesson we receive from it, lies in the miseries of that suspicion
and that remorse which he had created in his own mind by his
atrocities, and which rendered him as wretched on the throne,
or at the head of his army, as in the dungeon where he terminated
his existence. The portraits of the other principal
characters, who figured in the Jugurthine War, are also well
brought out. That of Marius, in particular, is happily touched.
His insatiable ambition is artfully disguised under the mask of
patriotism,—his cupidity and avarice are concealed under that
of martial simplicity and hardihood; but, though we know from
his subsequent career the hypocrisy of his pretensions, the
character of Marius is presented to us in a more favourable
light than that in which it can be viewed on a survey of his
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page91">[pg 91]</span><a name="Pg091" id="Pg091" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>whole life. We see the blunt and gallant soldier, and not that
savage whose innate cruelty of soul was just about to burst
forth for the destruction of his countrymen. In drawing the
portrait of Sylla, the memorable rival of Marius, the historian
represents him also such as he appeared at that period, not
such as he afterwards proved himself to be. We behold him
with pleasure as an accomplished and subtle commander, eloquent
in speech, and versatile in resources; but there is no
trace of the cold-blooded assassin, the tyrant, buffoon, and
usurper.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In general, Sallust’s painting of character is so strong, that
we almost foresee how each individual will conduct himself in
the situation in which he is placed. Tacitus attributes all the
actions of men to policy,—to refined, and sometimes imaginary
views; but Sallust, more correctly, discovers their chief springs
in the passions and dispositions of individuals. <span class="tei tei-q">“Salluste,”</span>
says St Evremond, <span class="tei tei-q">“donne autant au naturel, que Tacite <a name="corr091" id="corr091" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">à</span> la
politique. Le plus grand soin du premier est de bien connoitre
le génie des hommes; les affaires viennent après naturellement,
par des actions peu recherchées de ces mêmes personnes
qu’il a depeintes.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
History, in its original state, was confined to narrative; the
reader being left to form his own reflections on the deeds or
events recorded. The historic art, however, conveys not complete
satisfaction, unless these actions be connected with their
causes,—the political springs, or private passions, in which
they originated. It is the business, therefore, of the historian,
to apply the conclusions of the politician in explaining the
causes and effects of the transactions he relates. These
transactions the author must receive from authentic monuments
or records, but the remarks deduced from them must be
the offspring of his own ingenuity. The reflections with which
Sallust introduces his narrative, and those he draws from it,
are so just and numerous that he has by some been considered
as the father of philosophic history. It must always, however,
be remembered, that the proper object of history is the detail
of national transactions,—that whatever forms not a part of
the narrative is episodical, and therefore improper, if it be too
long, and do not grow naturally out of the subject. Now,
some of the political and moral digressions of Sallust are neither
very immediately connected with his subject, nor very
obviously suggested by the narration. The discursive nature
and inordinate length of the introductions to his histories have
been strongly censured. The first four sections of Catiline’s
conspiracy have indeed little relation to that topic. They
might as well have been prefixed to any other history, and
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page92">[pg 92]</span><a name="Pg092" id="Pg092" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>much better to a moral or philosophic treatise. In fact, a
considerable part of them, descanting on the fleeting nature
of wealth and beauty, and all such adventitious or transitory
possessions, is borrowed from the second oration of Isocrates.
Perhaps the eight following sections are also disproportioned
to the length of the whole work; but the preliminary essay
they contain, on the degradation of Roman manners and decline
of virtue, is not an unsuitable introduction to the conspiracy,
as it was this corruption of morals which gave birth
to it, and bestowed on it a chance of success. The preface
to the Jugurthine War has much less relation to the subject
which it is intended to introduce. The author discourses at
large on his favourite topics the superiority of mental endowments
over corporeal advantages, and the beauty of virtue
and genius. He contrasts a life of listless indolence with one
of honourable activity; and, finally, descants on the task of
the historian as a suitable exercise for the highest faculties of
the mind.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Besides the conspiracy of Catiline and the Jugurthine War,
which have been preserved entire, and from which our estimate
of the merits of Sallust must be chiefly formed, he was
author of a civil and military history of the republic, in five
books, entitled, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Historia rerum in Republica Romana Gestarum</span></span>.
This work, inscribed to Lucullus, the son of the celebrated
commander of that name, was the mature fruit of the
genius of Sallust, having been the last history he composed.
It included, properly speaking, only a period of thirteen years,—extending
from the resignation of the dictatorship by Sylla,
till the promulgation of the Manilian law, by which Pompey
was invested with authority equal to that which Sylla had relinquished,
and obtained, with unlimited power in the east,
the command of the army destined to act against Mithridates.
This period, though short, comprehends some of the most interesting
and luminous points which appear in the Roman Annals.
During this interval, and almost at the same moment, the republic
was attacked in the east by the most powerful and
enterprizing of the monarchs with whom it had yet waged war;
in the west, by one of the most skilful of its own generals;
and in the bosom of Italy, by its gladiators and slaves. This
work also was introduced by two discourses—the one presenting
a picture of the government and manners of the Romans,
from the origin of their city to the commencement of the civil
wars, the other containing a general view of the dissensions
of Marius and Sylla; so that the whole book may be considered
as connecting the termination of the Jugurthine war, and
the breaking out of Catiline’s conspiracy. The loss of this
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page93">[pg 93]</span><a name="Pg093" id="Pg093" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>valuable production is the more to be regretted, as all the accounts
of Roman history which have been written, are defective
during the interesting period it comprehended. Nearly
700 fragments belonging to it have been amassed, from scholiasts
and grammarians, by De Brosses, the French translator of
Sallust; but they are so short and unconnected, that they
merely serve as land-marks, from which we may conjecture
what subjects were treated of, and what events were recorded.
The only parts of the history which have been preserved in any
degree entire, are four orations and two letters. Pomponius
Lætus discovered the orations in a MS. of the Vatican, containing
a collection of speeches from Roman history. The
first is an oration pronounced against Sylla by the turbulent
Marcus Æmilius Lepidus; who, (as is well known,) being desirous,
at the expiration of his year, to be appointed a second
time Consul, excited, for that purpose, a civil war, and rendered
himself master of a great part of Italy. His speech which
was preparatory to these designs, was delivered after Sylla
had abdicated the dictatorship, but was still supposed to retain
great influence at Rome. He is accordingly treated as
being still the tyrant of the state; and the people are exhorted
to throw off the yoke completely, and to follow the speaker to
the bold assertion of their liberties. The second oration,
which is that of Lucius Philippus, is an invective against the
treasonable attempt of Lepidus, and was calculated to rouse
the people from the apathy with which they beheld proceedings
that were likely to terminate in the total subversion of
the government. The third harangue was delivered by the
Tribune Licinius: It was an effort of that demagogue to depress
the patrician, and raise the tribunitial power, for which
purpose he alternately flatters the people, and reviles the Senate.
The oration of Marcus Cotta is unquestionably a fine
one. He addressed it to the people, during the period of
his Consulship, in order to calm their minds, and allay their
resentment at the bad success of public affairs, which, without
any blame on his part, had lately, in many respects, been
conducted to an unprosperous issue. Of the two letters
which are extant, the one is from Pompey to the Senate, complaining,
in very strong terms, of the deficiency in the supplies
for the army which he commanded in Spain against Sertorius;
the other is feigned to be addressed from Mithridates
to Arsaces, King of Parthia, and to be written when the affairs
of the former monarch were proceeding <a name="corr093" id="corr093" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">unsuccessfully.</span> It
exhorts him, nevertheless, with great eloquence and power of
argument, to join him in an alliance against the Romans: for
this purpose, it places in a strong point of view their
unprin<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page94">[pg 94]</span><a name="Pg094" id="Pg094" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>cipled policy, and ambitious desire of universal empire—all
which could not, without this device of an imaginary letter by
a foe, have been so well urged by a national historian. It concludes
with showing the extreme danger which the Parthians
would incur from the hostility of the Romans, should they succeed
in finally subjugating Pontus and Armenia. The only
other fragment, of any length, is the description of a splendid
entertainment given to Metellus, on his return, after a year’s
absence, to his government of Farther Spain. It appears,
from several other fragments, that Sallust had introduced, on
occasion of the Mithridatic war, a geographical account of
the shores and countries bordering on the Euxine, in the same
manner as he enters into a topographical description of Africa,
in his history of the Jugurthine war. This part of his work
has been much applauded by ancient writers for exactness and
liveliness; and is frequently referred to, as the highest authority,
by Strabo, Pomponius Mela, and other geographers.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Besides his historical works, there exist two political discourses,
concerning the administration of the government, in
the form of letters to Julius Cæsar, which have generally,
though not on sufficient grounds, been attributed to the pen
of Sallust<a id="noteref_195" name="noteref_195" href="#note_195"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">195</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
As Sallust has obviously imitated, and, in fact, resembles
Thucydides, so has
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
    <a name="toc15" id="toc15"></a><a name="pdf16" id="pdf16"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">JULIUS CÆSAR,</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
in his historical works, been compared to Xenophon, the first
memoir writer among the Greeks. Simplicity is the characteristic
of both, but Xenophon has more rhetorical flow and
sweetness of style, and he is sometimes, I think, a little
mawkish; while the simplicity of Cæsar, on the other hand,
borders, perhaps, on severity. Cæsar, too, though often circumstantial,
is never diffuse, while Xenophon is frequently
prolix, without being minute or accurate. <span class="tei tei-q">“In the Latin
work,”</span> says Young, in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">History of Athens</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-q">“we have the
commentaries of a general vested with supreme command, and
who felt no anxiety about the conduct or obedience of his
army—in the Greek, we possess the journal of an officer in
subordinate rank, though of high estimation. Hence the
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page95">[pg 95]</span><a name="Pg095" id="Pg095" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>speeches of the one are replete with imperatorial dignity,
those of the other are delivered with the conciliatory arts of
argument and condescension. Hence, too, the mind of Xenophon
was absorbed in the care and discipline of those under
his command; but thence we are better acquainted with the
Greek army than with that of Cæsar. Cæsar’s attention was
ever directed to those he was to attack, to counteract, or to oppose—Xenophon’s
to those he was to conduct. For the same
reason, Xenophon is superficial with respect to any peculiarities
of the nations he passed through; while in Cæsar we
have a curious, and well authenticated detail, relative to the
Gauls, the Britons, and every other enemy. The comparison,
however, holds in this, that Cæsar, like Xenophon, was properly
a writer of Memoirs. Like him, he aimed at nothing
farther than communicating facts in a plain familiar manner;
and the account of his campaign was only drawn up as materials
for future history, not having leisure to bestow that
ornament and dress which history requires.”</span> In the opinion
of his contemporaries, however, and all subsequent critics, he
has rendered desperate any attempt to write the history of the
wars of which he treats. <span class="tei tei-q">“Dum voluit,”</span> says Cicero, <span class="tei tei-q">“alios
habere parata, unde sumerent, qui vellent scribere historiam,
sanos quidem homines a scribendo deterruit.”</span> A similar
opinion is given by his continuator Hirtius,—<span class="tei tei-q">“Adeo probantur
omnium judicio ut prærepta, non præbita, facultas scriptoribus
videatur.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cæsar’s Commentaries consist of seven books of the Gallic,
and three of the civil wars. Some critics, however, particularly
Floridus Sabinus<a id="noteref_196" name="noteref_196" href="#note_196"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">196</span></span></a>, deny that he was the author of the books
on the latter war, while Carrio and Ludovicus Caduceus doubt
of his being the author even of the Gallic war,—the last of
these critics attributing the work to Suetonius. Hardouin,
who believed that most of the works now termed classical,
were forgeries of the monks in the thirteenth century, also
tried to persuade the world, that the whole account of the
Gallic campaigns was a fiction, and that Cæsar had never
drawn a sword in Gaul in his life. The testimony, however,
of Cicero and Hirtius, who were contemporary with Cæsar,—of
many authentic writers, who lived after him, as Suetonius,
Strabo, and Plutarch,—and of all the old grammarians, must
be considered as settling the question; for if such evidence is
not implicitly trusted, there seems to be an end of all reliance
on ancient authority.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Though these Commentaries comprehend but a small extent
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page96">[pg 96]</span><a name="Pg096" id="Pg096" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>of time, and are not the general history of a nation, they embrace
events of the highest importance, and they detail, perhaps,
the greatest military operations to be found in ancient
story. We see in them all that is great and consummate in
the art of war. The ablest commander of the most martial
people on the globe records the history of his own campaigns.
Placed at the head of the finest army ever formed in the world,
and one devoted to his fortunes, but opposed by military skill
and prowess only second to its own, he, and the soldiers he
commanded, may be almost extolled in the words in which
Nestor praised the heroes who had gone before him:—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
    <div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" style="text-align: left" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">Καρτισοι δη κεινοι ἐπιχθονιων τραφεν ανδρων,</span></span></span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left"><span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" style="text-align: left" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">Καρτισοι μεν ἐσαν και καρτισοις ἐμαχοντο</span></span>,”</span> ——</div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
for the Gauls and Germans were among the bravest and most
warlike nations then on earth, and Pompey was accounted the
most consummate general of his age. No commander, it is
universally admitted, ever had such knowledge of the mechanical
part of war: He possessed the complete empire of the
sea, and was aided by all the influence derived from the constituted
authority of the state.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Perhaps the most interesting part of the whole Commentaries,
is the account of the campaign in Spain against Afranius
and Petreius, in which Cæsar, being reduced to extremities
for want of provisions and forage, (in consequence of the
bridges over the rivers, between which he had encamped, being
broken down,) extricated himself from this situation, after
a variety of skilful manœuvres, and having pursued Pompey’s
generals into Celtiberia, and back again to Lerida, forced
their legions to surrender, by placing them in those very
difficulties from which he had so ably relieved his own army.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is obvious that the greater part of such Commentaries
must be necessarily occupied with the detail of warlike operations.
The military genius of Rome breathes through the
whole work, and it comprehends all the varieties which warfare
offers to our interest, and perhaps, undue admiration—pitched
battles, affairs of posts, encampments, retreats, marches
in face of the foe through woods and over plains or mountains,
passages of rivers, sieges, defence of forts, and those still more
interesting accounts of the spirit and discipline of the enemies’
troops, and the talents of their generals. In his clear
and scientific details of military operations, Cæsar is reckoned
superior to every writer, except, perhaps, Polybius. Some
persons have thought he was too minute, and that, by describing
every evolution performed in a battle, he has rendered his
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page97">[pg 97]</span><a name="Pg097" id="Pg097" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>relations somewhat crowded. But this was his principle, and
it served the design of the author.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
As he records almost nothing at which he was not personally
present, or heard of from those acting under his immediate
directions, he possessed the best information with regard to
everything of which he wrote<a id="noteref_197" name="noteref_197" href="#note_197"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">197</span></span></a>. In general, when he speaks
of himself, it is without affectation or arrogance. He talks of
Cæsar as of an indifferent person, and always maintains the
character which he has thus assumed; indeed, it can hardly
be conceived that he had so small a share in the great actions
he describes, as appears from his own representations. With
exception of the false colours with which he disguises his ambitious
projects against the liberties of his country, everything
seems to be told with fidelity and candour. Nor is there any
very unfair concealment of the losses he may have sustained:
he ingenuously acknowledges his own disaster in the affair at
Dyracchium; he admits the loss of 960 men, and the complete
frustration of his whole plan for the campaign. When he
relates his successes, on the other hand, it is with moderation.
There is the utmost caution, reserve, and modesty, in his account
of the battle of Pharsalia; and one would hardly conceive
that the historian had any share in the action or victory.
He in general acknowledges, that the events of war are beyond
human control, and ascribes the largest share of success
to the power of fortune. The rest he seems willing to attribute
to the valour of his soldiers, and the good conduct of his
military associates. Thus he gives the chief credit and glory
of the great victory over Ariovistus to the presence of mind
displayed by Crassus, who promptly made the signal to a body
of men to advance and support one of the wings which was
overpowered by the multitude of the enemy, and was beginning
to give way. He does not even omit to do justice to the
distinguished and generous valour of the two centurions, Pulfio
and Varenus, or of the centurion Sextius Baculus, during
the alarming attack by the Sicambri. On the other hand,
when he has occasion to mention the failure of his friends, as
in relating Curio’s defeat and death in Africa, he does it with
tenderness and indulgence. Of his enemies, he speaks without
insult or contempt; and even in giving his judgment upon
a great military question, though he disapproves Pompey’s
mode of waiting for the attack at Pharsalia, his own reasons
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page98">[pg 98]</span><a name="Pg098" id="Pg098" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>for a contrary opinion are urged with deference and candour.
The confident hopes which were entertained in Pompey’s
camp—the pretensions and disputes of the leading senators,
about the division of patronage and officers, and the confiscations
which were supposed to be just falling within their
grasp, furnished him with some amusing anecdotes, which it
must have been difficult to resist inserting; nor can we wonder,
that while all the preparations for celebrating the anticipated
victory with luxury and festivity, were matters of ocular
observation, he should have devoted some few passages in his
Commentaries, to recording the vanity and presumption of
such fond expectations. Labienus, who had deserted him,
and Scipio, who gave him so much trouble, by rekindling the
war, are those of whom he speaks with the greatest rancour,
in relating the cruelty of the former, and the tyrannical ingenious
rapacity of the latter<a id="noteref_198" name="noteref_198" href="#note_198"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">198</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Whatever concerns the events of the civil war could not
easily have been falsified or misrepresented. So many enemies,
who had been eye-witnesses of everything, survived that
period, that the author could scarcely have swerved from the
truth without detection. But in his contests with the Gauls,
and Germans, and Britons, there was no one to contradict him.
Those who accompanied him were devoted to his fame and
fortunes, and interested like himself in exalting the glory of
these foreign exploits. That he has varnished over the real
motives, and also the issue, of his expedition to Britain has been
frequently suspected. The reason he himself assigns for the undertaking
is, that he understood supplies had been thence furnished
to the enemy, in almost all the Gallic wars; but Suetonius
asserts, that the information he had received of the
quantity and size of the pearls on the British coast, was his
real inducement. Fourteen short chapters in the fourth book
of the Gallic war, relate his first visit, and his hasty return;
and sixteen in the fifth, detail his progress in the following
summer. These chapters have derived importance from containing
the earliest authentic memorials of the inhabitants and
state of this island; and there has, of course, been much discussion
on the genuine though imperfect notices they afford.
Various tracts, chiefly published in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Archæologia</span></span>, have
topographically followed the various steps of Cæsar’s progress,
particularly his passage across the Thames, and have debated
the situation of the Portus Iccius, from which he embarked for
Britain.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cæsar’s occasional digressions concerning the manners of
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page99">[pg 99]</span><a name="Pg099" id="Pg099" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>the Gauls and Germans, are also highly interesting and instructive,
and are the only accounts to be at all depended on with
regard to the institutions and customs of these two great nations,
at that remote period. In Gaul he had remained so
long, and had so thoroughly studied the habits and customs
of its people for his own political purposes, that whatever is
delivered concerning that country, may be confidently relied
on. His intercourse with the German tribes was occasional,
and chiefly of a military description. Some of his observations
on their manners—as their hospitality, the continence of their
youth, and the successive occupation of different lands by the
same families—are confirmed by Tacitus; but in other particulars,
especially in what relates to their religion, he is contradicted
by that great historian. Cæsar declares that they
have no sacrifices, and know no gods, but those, like the Sun
or Moon, which are visible, and whose benefits they enjoy<a id="noteref_199" name="noteref_199" href="#note_199"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">199</span></span></a>.
Tacitus informs us, that their chief god is Mercury, whom they
appease by human victims; that they also sacrifice animals to
Hercules and Mars; and adore that Secret Intelligence, which
is only seen in the eye of mental veneration<a id="noteref_200" name="noteref_200" href="#note_200"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">200</span></span></a>. The researches
of modern writers have also thrown some doubts on the accuracy
of Cæsar’s German topography; and Cluverius, in particular,
has attempted to show, that he has committed many errors
in speaking both of the Germans and Batavians<a id="noteref_201" name="noteref_201" href="#note_201"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">201</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
As the Commentaries of Cæsar do not pretend to the elaborate
dignity of history, the author can scarcely be blamed if
he has detailed his facts without mingling many reflections or
observations. He seldom inserts a political or characteristic
remark, though he had frequent opportunities for both, in describing
such singular people as the Gauls, Germans, and
Britons. But his object was not, like Sallust or Tacitus, to
deduce practical reflections for the benefit of his reader, or to
explain the political springs of the transactions he relates.
His simple narrative was merely intended for the gratification
of those Roman citizens, whom he had already persuaded to
favour his ambitious projects; yet even they, I think, might
have wished to have heard something more of what may be
called the military motives of his actions. He tells us of his
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page100">[pg 100]</span><a name="Pg100" id="Pg100" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>marches, retreats, and encampments, but seldom sufficiently
explains the grounds on which these warlike measures were
undertaken—how they advanced his own plans, or frustrated
the designs of the enemy. More insight into the military views
by which he was prompted, would have given additional interest
and animation to his narrative, and afforded ampler lessons
of instruction.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
No person, I presume, wishes to be told, for the twentieth
time, that the style of Cæsar is remarkable for clearness and
ease, and a simplicity more truly noble than the pomp of
words. Perhaps the most distinguishing characteristic of his
style, is its perfect equality of expression. There was, in the
mind of Cæsar, a serene and even dignity. In temper, nothing
appeared to agitate or move him—in conduct, nothing diverted
him from the attainment of his end. In like manner, in his
style, there is nothing swelling or depressed, and not one word
occurs which is chosen for the mere purpose of embellishment.
The opinion of Cicero, who compared the style of Cæsar to
the unadorned simplicity of an ancient Greek statue, may be
considered as the highest praise, since he certainly entertained
no favourable feelings towards the author; and the style was
very different from that which he himself employed in his harangues,
or philosophical works, or even in his correspondence.
<span class="tei tei-q">“Nudi sunt,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“recti, et venusti, omni ornatu orationis
tanquam veste detracto.”</span> This exquisite purity was
not insensibly obtained, as the Lælian and Mucian Families
are said to have acquired it, by domestic habit and familiar
conversation, but by assiduous study and thorough knowledge
of the Latin language<a id="noteref_202" name="noteref_202" href="#note_202"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">202</span></span></a>, and the practice of literary composition,
to which Cæsar had been accustomed from his earliest youth<a id="noteref_203" name="noteref_203" href="#note_203"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">203</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But, however admirable for its purity and elegance, the
style of Cæsar seems to be somewhat deficient, both in vivacity
and vigour. Walchius, too, has pointed out a few words,
which he considers not of pure Latinity, as <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ambactus</span></span>, a term
employed by the Gauls and Germans to signify a servant—also
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ancorarii</span></span> funes, a word nowhere else used as an adjective—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Antemittere</span></span>
for <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">premittere</span></span>, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">summo magistratu præiverat</span></span>
for <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">magistratui</span></span><a id="noteref_204" name="noteref_204" href="#note_204"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">204</span></span></a>. The use of such words as <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">collabefieret</span></span>,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">contabulatio</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">detrimentosum</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">explicitius</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">materiari</span></span>, would
lead us to suspect that Cæsar had not <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">always</span></span> attended to the
rule which he so strongly laid down in his book, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Analogia</span></span>,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page101">[pg 101]</span><a name="Pg101" id="Pg101" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>to avoid, as a rock, every unusual word or expression. Bergerus,
in an immense quarto, entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Naturali pulchritudine
Orationis</span></span> has at great length attempted to show that Cæsar
had anticipated all the precepts subsequently delivered by
Longinus, for reaching the utmost excellence and dignity of
composition. He points out his conformity to these rules, in
what he conceives to be the abridgments, amplifications,
transitions, gradations,—in short, all the various figures and
ornaments of speech, which could be employed by the most
pedantic rhetorician; and he also critically examines those few
words and phrases of questionable purity, which are so thinly
scattered through the Commentaries.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Mankind usually judge of a literary composition by its intrinsic
merit, without taking into consideration the age of the
author, the celerity with which it was composed, or the various
circumstances under which it was written; and in this, perhaps,
they act not unjustly, since their business is with the
work, and not with the qualities of the author. But were such
things to be taken into view, it should be remembered, that
these Memoirs were hastily drawn up during the tumult and
anxiety of campaigns, and were jotted down from day to day,
without care or premeditation. <span class="tei tei-q">“Ceteri,”</span> says Hirtius, the
companion of Cæsar’s expeditions, and the continuator of his
Commentaries,—<span class="tei tei-q">“Ceteri quam bene atque emendate; nos
etiam quam facile atque celeriter eos perscripserit scimus.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The Commentaries, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Bello Gallico</span></span>, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Bello Civili</span></span>,
are the only productions of Cæsar which remain to us. Several
ancient writers speak of his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ephemeris</span></span>, or Diary; but it
has been doubted whether the work, so termed by Plutarch,
Servius, Symmachus, and several others, be the same book as
the Commentaries, or a totally different production. The
former opinion is adopted by Fabricius, who thinks that <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ephemeris</span></span>,
or <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ephemerides</span></span>, is only another name for the Commentaries,
which in fact may be considered as having been written
in the manner and form of a diary. He acknowledges, that
several passages, cited by Servius, as taken from these <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ephemerides</span></span>,
are not now to be found in the Commentaries; but
then he maintains that there are evidently defects (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">lacunæ</span></span>)
in the latter work; and he conjectures that the words quoted
by Servius are part of the lost passages of the Commentaries.
This opinion is followed by Vossius, who cites a sort of Colophon
at the end of one of the oldest MSS. of the Commentaries
which he thinks decisive of the question, as it shows
that the term <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ephemeris</span></span> was currently applied to them.—<span class="tei tei-q">“C.
J. Cæsaris, P. M. Ephemeris rerum Gestarum Belli Gallici, Lib.
VIII. explicit feliciter.”</span>
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page102">[pg 102]</span><a name="Pg102" id="Pg102" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Bayle, in his Dictionary, has supported the opposite theory.
He believes the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ephemeris</span></span> to have been a journal of the author’s
life. He admits, that a passage which Plutarch quotes
as from the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ephemeris</span></span>, occurs also in the fourth book of the
Commentaries; but then he maintains, that it was impossible
for Cæsar not to have frequently mentioned the same thing in
his Commentaries and Journal, and he thinks, that had Plutarch
meant to allude to the former, he would have called
them, not <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ephemeris</span></span>, but <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">ὑπομνηματα</span></span> as Strabo has termed
them. Besides, Polyænus mentions divers warlike stratagems,
as recorded by Cæsar, which are not contained in the Commentaries,
and which, therefore, could have been explained
only in the separate work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ephemeris</span></span>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There are still some fragments remaining of the letters
which Cæsar addressed to the Senate and his friends, and also
of his orations, which were considered as inferior only to those
of Cicero. Of his rhetorical talents, something may be hereafter
said. It appears that his qualities as an orator and
historian, were very different, since vehemence and the power
of exciting emotion, (concitatio,) are mentioned as the characteristics
of his harangues. Some of them were delivered
in behalf of clients, and on real business, in the Forum; but
the two orations entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Anticatones</span></span> were merely written in
the form and manner of accusations before a judicial tribunal.
These rhetorical declamations, which were composed about
the time of the battle of Munda, were intended as an answer
to the laudatory work of Cicero, called <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laus Catonis</span></span>. The
author particularly considered in them the last act of Cato at
Utica, and has raked up all the vices and defects of his character,
whether real or imputed, public or private,—his ambition,
affectation of singularity, churlishness, and avarice; but
as the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Anticatones</span></span> were seasoned with lavish commendations
of Cicero, whose panegyric on Cato they were intended to
confute, the orator felt much flattered with the dictatorial incense,
and greatly admired the performances in which it was
offered,—<span class="tei tei-q">“Collegit vitia Catonis, sed cum maximis laudibus
meis<a id="noteref_205" name="noteref_205" href="#note_205"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">205</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
These two rival works were much celebrated at Rome; and
both of them had their several admirers, as different parties
and interests disposed men to favour the subject, or the author
of each. It seems also certain, that they were the principal
cause of establishing and promoting that veneration which
posterity has since paid to the memory of Cato; for his name
being thrown into controversy in that critical period of the
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page103">[pg 103]</span><a name="Pg103" id="Pg103" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>fate of Rome, by the patron of liberty on one side, and its oppressor
on the other, it became a kind of political test to all
succeeding ages, and a perpetual argument of dispute between
the friends of freedom, and the flatterers of power<a id="noteref_206" name="noteref_206" href="#note_206"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">206</span></span></a>. The
controversy was taken up by Brutus, the nephew, and Fabius
Gallus, an admirer of Cato: it was renewed by Augustus, who
naturally espoused the royal side of the question, and by
Thraseas Pætus, who ventured on this dangerous topic during
the darkest days of imperial despotism.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cæsar’s situation as Pontifex Maximus probably led him to
write the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Auguralia</span></span> and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Libri Auspiciorum</span></span>, which, as their
names import, were books explaining the different auguries and
presages derived from the flight of birds. To the same circumstance
we may attribute his work on the motions of the stars, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
Motu Siderum</span></span>, which explains what he had learned in Egypt
on that subject from Sosigenes, a peripatetic philosopher of
Alexandria, and in which, if we may credit the elder Pliny,
he prognosticated his own death on the ides of March<a id="noteref_207" name="noteref_207" href="#note_207"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">207</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The composition of the works hitherto mentioned naturally
enough suggested itself to a high-priest, warrior, and politician,
who was also fond of literature, and had the same command
of his pen as of his sword. But it appears singular, that
one so much occupied with war, and with political schemes
for the ruin of his country, should have seriously employed
himself in writing formal and elaborate treatises on grammar.
There is no doubt, however, that he composed a work, in two
books, on the analogies of the Latin tongue, which was addressed
to Cicero, and was entitled, like the preceding work
of Varro on the same subject, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Analogia</span></span>. It was written,
as we are informed by Suetonius, while crossing the Alps, on
his return to the army from Hither Gaul, where he had gone
to attend the assemblies of that province<a id="noteref_208" name="noteref_208" href="#note_208"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">208</span></span></a>. In this book, the
great principle established by him was, that the proper choice
of words formed the foundation of eloquence<a id="noteref_209" name="noteref_209" href="#note_209"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">209</span></span></a>; and he cautioned
authors and public speakers to avoid as a rock every
unusual word or unwonted expression<a id="noteref_210" name="noteref_210" href="#note_210"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">210</span></span></a>. His declensions, however,
of some nouns, appear, at least to us, not a little strange—as
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">turbo</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">turbonis</span></span>, instead of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">turbinis</span></span><a id="noteref_211" name="noteref_211" href="#note_211"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">211</span></span></a>; and likewise his
inflections of verbs,—as, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">mordeo</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">memordi</span></span>; <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">pungo,</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">pepugi</span></span>;
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">spondeo</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">spepondi</span></span><a id="noteref_212" name="noteref_212" href="#note_212"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">212</span></span></a>. He also treated of derivatives; as we are
informed, that he derived ens from the verb <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">sum</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">es</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">est</span></span>; and
of rules of grammar,—as that the dative and ablative singular
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page104">[pg 104]</span><a name="Pg104" id="Pg104" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>of neuters in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e</span></span> are the same, as also of neuters in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ar</span></span>, except
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">far</span></span> and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">jubar</span></span>. It appears that he even descended to the most
minute consideration of orthography and the formation of letters;
Thus, he was of opinion, that the letter V should be
formed like an inverted F,—thus Ⅎ,—because it has the force
of the Æolic digamma. Cassiodorus farther mentions, that, in
the question with regard to the use of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">u</span></span> or <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i</span></span> in such words
as <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">maxumus</span></span> or <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">maximus</span></span>, Cæsar gave the preference to <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i</span></span>; and,
from such high authority, this spelling was adopted in general
practice.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It has been said, that Cæsar also made a collection of
apophthegms and anecdotes, in the style of our modern <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ana</span></span>;
but Augustus prevented these from being made public. That
emperor likewise, in a letter to Pompeius Macrus, to whom he
had given the charge of arranging his library, prohibited the
publication of several poetical effusions of Cæsar’s youth.
These are said to have consisted of a tragedy on the subject
of Œdipus, and a poem in praise of Hercules<a id="noteref_213" name="noteref_213" href="#note_213"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">213</span></span></a>. Another
poem, entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Iter</span></span> was written by him in maturer age. It is
said, by Suetonius, to have been composed when he reached
Farther Spain, on the twenty-fourth day after his departure
from Rome<a id="noteref_214" name="noteref_214" href="#note_214"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">214</span></span></a>; and it may therefore be conjectured to have
been a poetical relation of the incidents which occurred during
that journey, embellished, perhaps, with descriptions of
the most striking scenery through which he passed. Two
epigrams, which are still extant, have also been frequently attributed
to him; one on the dramatic character of Terence,
already quoted<a id="noteref_215" name="noteref_215" href="#note_215"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">215</span></span></a>, and another on a Thracian boy, who, while
playing on the ice, fell into the river Hebrus,—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Thrax puer, astricto glacie dum luderet Hebro,”</span> &amp;c.</div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But this last is, with more probability, supposed by many to
have been the production of Cæsar Germanicus.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There were also several useful and important works accomplished
under the eye and direction of Cæsar, such as the graphic
survey of the whole Roman empire. Extensive as their
conquests had been, the Romans hitherto had done almost
nothing for geography, considered as a science. Their knowledge
was confined to the countries they had subdued, and
them they regarded only with a view to the levies they could
furnish, and the taxations they could endure. Cæsar was the
first who formed more exalted plans. Æthicus, a writer of the
fourth century, informs us, in the preface to his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Cosmographia</span></span>,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page105">[pg 105]</span><a name="Pg105" id="Pg105" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>that this great man obtained a <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">senatusconsultum</span></span>, by which a
geometrical survey and measurement of the whole Roman empire
was enjoined to three geometers. Xenodoxus was charged
with the eastern, Polycletus with the southern, and Theodotus
with the northern provinces. Their scientific labour was immediately
commenced, but was not completed till more than
thirty years after the death of him with whom the undertaking
had originated. The information which Cæsar had received
from the astronomer Sosigenes in Egypt, enabled him to alter
and amend the Roman calendar. It would be foreign from
my purpose to enter into an examination of this system of the
Julian year, but the computation he adopted has been explained,
as is well known, by Scaliger and Gassendi<a id="noteref_216" name="noteref_216" href="#note_216"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">216</span></span></a>; and it
has been since maintained, with little farther alteration than
that introduced by Pope Gregory XIII. When we consider
the imperfection of all mathematical instruments in the time of
Cæsar, and the total want of telescopes, we cannot but view
with admiration, not unmixed with astonishment, that comprehensive
genius, which, in the infancy of science, could surmount
such difficulties, and compute a system, that experienced
but a trifling derangement in the course of sixteen
centuries.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Although Cæsar wrote with his own hand only seven books
of the Gallic campaigns, and the history of the civil wars till
the death of his great rival, it seems highly probable, that he
revised the last or eighth book of the Gallic war, and communicated
information for the history of the Alexandrian and
African expeditions, which are now usually published along
with his own Commentaries, and may be considered as their
supplement, or continuation. The author of these works,
which nearly complete the interesting story of the campaigns
of Cæsar, was Aulus Hirtius, one of his most zealous followers,
and most confidential friends. He had been nominated Consul
for the year following the death of his master; and, after
that event, having espoused the cause of freedom, he was slain
in the attack made by the forces of the republic on Antony’s
camp, near Modena.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The eighth book of the Gallic war contains the account of
the renewal of the contest by the states of Gaul, after the surrender
of Alesia, and of the different battles which ensued, at
most of which Hirtius was personally present, till the final
pacification, when Cæsar, learning the designs which were
forming against him at Rome, set out for Italy.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page106">[pg 106]</span><a name="Pg106" id="Pg106" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cæsar, in the conclusion of the third book of the Civil War,
mentions the commencement of the Alexandrian war. Hirtius
was not personally present at the succeeding events of
this Egyptian contest, in which Cæsar was involved with the
generals of Ptolemy, nor during his rapid campaigns in Pontus
against Pharnaces, and against the remains of the Pompeian
party in Africa, where they had assembled under Scipio, and
being supported by Juba, still presented a formidable appearance.
He collected, however, the leading events from the
conversation of Cæsar<a id="noteref_217" name="noteref_217" href="#note_217"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">217</span></span></a>, and the officers who were engaged in
these campaigns. He has obviously imitated the style of his
master; and the resemblance which he has happily attained,
has given an appearance of unity and consistence to the whole
series of these well-written and authentic memoirs. It appears
that Hirtius carried down the history even to the death of
Cæsar, for in his preface addressed to Balbus, he says, that he
had brought down what was left imperfect from the transactions
at Alexandria, to the end, not of the civil dissensions, to
a termination of which there was no prospect, but of the life
of Cæsar<a id="noteref_218" name="noteref_218" href="#note_218"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">218</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This latter part, however, of the Commentaries of Hirtius,
has been lost, as it seems now to be generally acknowledged
that he was not the author of the book <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Bello Hispanico</span></span>,
which relates Cæsar’s second campaign in Spain, undertaken
against young Cneius Pompey, who, having assembled, in the
ulterior province of that country, those of his father’s party
who had survived the disasters in Thessaly and Africa, and
being joined by some of the native states, presented a formidable
resistance to the power of Cæsar, till his hopes were
terminated by the decisive battle of Munda. Dodwell, indeed,
in a Dissertation on this subject, maintains, that it was originally
written by Hirtius, but was interpolated by Julius Celsus,
a Constantinopolitan writer of the 6th or 7th century. Vossius,
however, whose opinion is that more commonly received,
attributes it to Caius Oppius<a id="noteref_219" name="noteref_219" href="#note_219"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">219</span></span></a>, who wrote the Lives of Illustrious
Captains, and also a book to prove that the Ægyptian
Cæsario was not the son of Cæsar. Oppius was Cæsar’s confidential
friend, and companion in many of his enterprizes; and
it was to him, as we are informed by Suetonius, that Cæsar
gave up the only apartment at an inn, while they were
travel<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page107">[pg 107]</span><a name="Pg107" id="Pg107" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>ling in Gaul, and lay himself on the ground, and in the open
air<a id="noteref_220" name="noteref_220" href="#note_220"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">220</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
A fragment has been added at the end of this book, on the
Spanish war, by Jungerman, from a MS. of Petavius. Vossius
thinks that this fragment was taken from the Commentaries,
called those of Julius Celsus, on the Life of Cæsar, published
in 1473. These Commentaries, however, were the work of a
Christian writer; but Julius Celsus, a Constantinopolitan of the
6th century, already mentioned, having revised the Commentaries
of Cæsar, the work on his life came, (from the confusion
of names, or perhaps from a fiction devised, to give the stamp
of authority,) to be attributed to Julius Celsus, who was contemporary
with Cæsar, and was reported to have written a history
of his campaigns; just in the same way as a fabulous life
of Alexander, produced in the middle ages, passes to this day
under the name of Callisthenes, the historiographer of the
Macedonian monarch.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There is no other historian of the period on which we are now
engaged, of whose works even any fragments have descended
to us. Atticus, however, wrote Memoirs of Rome from the earliest
periods, and also memoirs of its principal families, as the
Junian, Cornelian, and Fabian,—tracing their origin, enumerating
their honours, and recording their exploits. At the same
time Lucceius composed Histories of the Social War, and of
the Civil Wars of Sylla, which were so highly esteemed by
Cicero, that he urges him in one of his letters to undertake a
history of his consulship, in which he discovered and suppressed
the conspiracy of Catiline<a id="noteref_221" name="noteref_221" href="#note_221"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">221</span></span></a>. From a subsequent letter to
Atticus we learn that Lucceius had promised to accomplish
the task suggested to him<a id="noteref_222" name="noteref_222" href="#note_222"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">222</span></span></a>. It is probable, however, that it
never was completed,—his labour having been interrupted by
the civil wars, in which he followed the fortunes of Pompey,
and was indeed one of his chief advisers in adopting the fatal
resolution of quitting Italy.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The Annals of Procilius, which appeared at this period, may
be conjectured to have comprehended the whole series of Roman
history, from the building of the city to his own time;
since Varro quotes him for the account of Curtius throwing
himself into the gulf<a id="noteref_223" name="noteref_223" href="#note_223"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">223</span></span></a> and Pliny refers to him for some remarks
with regard to the elephants which appeared at Pompey’s
African triumph<a id="noteref_224" name="noteref_224" href="#note_224"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">224</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Brutus is also said to have written epitomes of the meagre
and barren histories of Fannius and Antipater. That he should
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page108">[pg 108]</span><a name="Pg108" id="Pg108" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>have thought of abridging narratives so proverbially dry and
jejune, seems altogether inexplicable.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The works of an historian called Cæcina have also perished,
and if we may trust to his own account of them, their loss is
not greatly to be deplored. In one of his letters to Cicero he
says, <span class="tei tei-q">“From much have I been compelled to refrain, many
things I have been forced to pass over lightly, many to curtail,
and very many absolutely to omit. Thus circumscribed, restricted,
and broken as it is, what pleasure or what useful information
can be expected from the recital<a id="noteref_225" name="noteref_225" href="#note_225"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">225</span></span></a>?”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
We have thus traced the progress of historical composition
among the Romans, from its commencement to the time of
Augustus. There is no history so distinguished and adorned
as the Roman, by illustrious characters; and the circumstances
which it records produced the greatest as well as most permanent
empire that ever existed on earth. The interest of the
early events, and the value of the conclusions to be drawn
from them, are much diminished by their uncertainty. Subsequently,
however, to the second Punic war, the Roman historians
were, for the most part, themselves engaged in the
affairs of which they treat, and had therefore, at least, the
most perfect <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">means</span></span> of communicating accurate information.
But this advantage, which, in one point of view, is so prodigious,
was attended with concomitant evils. Lucian, in his
treatise, How History ought to be Written, says, that the author
of this species of composition should be abstracted from
all connection with the persons and things which are its subjects;
that he should be of no country and no party; that he
should be free from all passion, and unconcerned who is pleased
or offended with what he writes. Now, the Roman historians
of the era on which we are engaged were the slaves of
party or the heads of factions; and even when superior to all
petty interests or prejudices, they still show plainly that they
are Romans. None of them stood impartially aloof from their
subject, or supplied the want of historians of Carthage and of
Gaul, by whom their narratives might be corrected, and their
colouring softened.
</p>

<div class="tei tei-tb"> </div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Of all the arts next to war, Eloquence was of most importance
in Rome; since, if the former led to the conquest of foreign
states, the latter opened to each individual a path to
empire and dominion over the minds of his fellow citizens<a id="noteref_226" name="noteref_226" href="#note_226"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">226</span></span></a>.
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page109">[pg 109]</span><a name="Pg109" id="Pg109" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>Without this art, wisdom itself, in the estimation of Cicero,
could be of little avail for the advantage or glory of the commonwealth<a id="noteref_227" name="noteref_227" href="#note_227"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">227</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
During the existence of the monarchy, and in the early age
of the republic, law proceedings were not numerous. Many
civil suits were prevented by the absolute dominion which a
Roman father exercised over his family; and the rigour of the
decemviral laws, in which all the proceedings were extreme,
frequently concussed parties into an accommodation; while, at
the same time, the purity of ancient manners had not yet given
rise to those criminal questions of bribery and peculation at
home, or of oppression and extortion in the provinces, which
disgraced the closing periods of the commonwealth, and furnished
themes for the glowing invective of Cicero and Hortensius.
Hence there was little room for the exercise of legal
oratory; and whatever eloquence may have shone forth in the
early ages of Rome, was probably of a political description,
and exerted on affairs of state.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
From the earliest times of the republic, history records the
wonderful effects which Junius Brutus, Publicola, and Appius
Claudius, produced by their harangues, in allaying seditions,
and thwarting pernicious counsels. Dionysius of Halicarnassus
gives us a formal speech, which Romulus, by direction of
his grandfather, made to the people after the building of the
city, on the subject of the government to be established<a id="noteref_228" name="noteref_228" href="#note_228"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">228</span></span></a>.
There are also long orations of Servius Tullius; and great part
of the Antiquities of Dionysius is occupied with senatorial
debates during the early ages of the republic. But though
the orations of these fathers of Roman eloquence were doubtless
delivered with order, gravity, and judgment, and may have
possessed a masculine vigour, well calculated to animate the
courage of the soldier, and protect the interests of the state,
we must not form our opinion of them from the long speeches
in Dionysius and Livy, or suppose that they were adorned
with any of that rhetoric art with which they have been
invested by these historians. A nation of outlaws, destined
from their cradle to the profession of arms,—taught only to
hurl the spear or javelin, and inure their bodies to other martial
exercises,—with souls breathing only conquest,—and regarded
as the enemies of every state till they had become its
masters, could have possessed but few topics of illustration or
embellishment, and were not likely to cultivate any species of
rhetorical refinement. To convince by solid arguments when
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page110">[pg 110]</span><a name="Pg110" id="Pg110" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>their cause was good, and to fill their fellow-citizens with
passions corresponding to those with which they were themselves
animated, would be the great objects of an eloquence
supplied by nature and unimproved by study. Quintilian accordingly
informs us, that though there appeared in the ancient
orations some traces of original genius, and much force of argument,
they bore, in their rugged and unpolished periods, the
signs of the times in which they were delivered.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
With exception of the speech of Appius Claudius to oppose
a peace with Pyrrhus, there are no harangues mentioned by
the Latin critics or historians as possessing any charms of
oratory, previously to the time of Cornelius Cethegus, who
flourished during the second Punic war, and was Consul about
the year 550. Cethegus was particularly distinguished for
his admirable sweetness of elocution and powers of persuasion,
whence he is thus characterized by Ennius, a contemporary
poet, in the 9th book of his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Annals</span></span>:
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Additur orator Cornelius suaviloquenti</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Ore Cethegus Marcus, Tuditano collega;</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Flos delibatus populi, suadæque medulla.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The orations of Cato the Censor have been already mentioned
as remarkable for their rude but masculine eloquence.
When Cato was in the decline of life, a more rich and copious
mode of speaking at length began to prevail. Ser. Galba, by
the warmth and animation of his delivery, eclipsed Cato and
all his contemporaries. He was the first among the Romans
who displayed the distinguishing talents of an orator, by embellishing
his subject,—by digressing, amplifying, entreating,
and employing what are called topics, or common-places of
discourse. On one occasion, while defending himself against
a grave accusation, he melted his judges to compassion, by
producing an orphan relative, whose father had been a favourite
of the people. When his orations, however, were afterwards
reduced to writing, their fire appeared extinguished, and they
preserved none of that lustre with which his discourses are
said to have shone when given forth by the living orator.
Cicero accounts for this from his want of sufficient study and
art in composition. While his mind was occupied and warmed
by the subject, his language was bold and rapid; but when he
took up the pen, his emotion ceased, and the periods fell languid
from its point; <span class="tei tei-q">“which,”</span> continues he, <span class="tei tei-q">“never happened
to those who, having cultivated a more studied and polished
style of oratory, wrote as they spoke. Hence the mind of Lælius
yet breathes in his writings, though the force of Galba has
failed.”</span> It appears, however, from an anecdote recorded by
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page111">[pg 111]</span><a name="Pg111" id="Pg111" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>Cicero, that Galba was esteemed the first orator of his age by
the judges, the people, and Lælius himself.—Lælius, being
intrusted with the defence of certain persons suspected of
having committed a murder in the Silian forest, spoke for two
days, correctly, elegantly, and with the approbation of all,
after which the Consuls deferred judgment. He then recommended
the accused to carry their cause to Galba, as it would
be defended by him with more heat and vehemence. Galba,
in consequence, delivered a most forcible and pathetic harangue,
and after it was finished, his clients were absolved as if
by acclamation<a id="noteref_229" name="noteref_229" href="#note_229"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">229</span></span></a>. Hence Cicero surmises, that though Lælius
might be the more learned and acute disputant, Galba possessed
more power over the passions; he also conjectures, that
the former had more elegance, but the latter more force; and
he concludes, that the orator who can move or agitate his
judges, farther advances his cause than he who can instruct
them.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Lælius is also compared by Cicero with his friend, the
younger Scipio Africanus, in whose presence, this question
concerning the Silian murder was debated. They were almost
equally distinguished for their eloquence; and they resembled
each other in this respect, that they both invariably
delivered themselves in a smooth manner, and never, like
Galba, exerted themselves with loudness of speech or violence
of gesture<a id="noteref_230" name="noteref_230" href="#note_230"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">230</span></span></a>; but their style of oratory was different,—Lælius
affecting a much more ancient phraseology than that adopted
by his friend. Cicero himself seems inclined most to admire
the rhetoric of Scipio; but he says, that, being so renowned
a captain, and mankind being unwilling to allow supremacy
to one individual, in what are considered as the two greatest
of arts, his contemporaries for the most part awarded to Lælius
the palm of eloquence.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The intercourse which was by this time opening up with
Greece, and the encouragement now afforded to Greek teachers,
who always possessed the undisputed privilege of dictating
the precepts of the arts, produced the same improvement
m oratory that it had effected in every branch of literature.
Marcus Emilius Lepidus was a little younger than Galba or
Scipio, and was Consul in 617. From his orations, which
were extant in the time of Cicero, it appeared that he was the
first who, in imitation of the Greeks, gave harmony and sweetness
to his periods, or the graces of a style regularly polished
and improved by art.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cicero mentions a number of other orators of the same age
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page112">[pg 112]</span><a name="Pg112" id="Pg112" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>with Lepidus, and minutely paints their peculiar styles of
rhetoric. We find among them the names of almost all the
eminent men of the period, as Emilius Paulus, Scipio Nasica,
and Mucius Scævola. The importance of eloquence for the
purposes of political aggrandizement, is sufficiently evinced,
from this work of Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Claris Oratoribus</span></span>, since there
is scarcely an orator mentioned, even of inferior note, who
did not at this time rise to the highest offices in the state.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The political situation of Rome, and the internal inquietude
which now succeeded its foreign wars, were the great promoters
of eloquence. We hear of no orators in Sparta or Crete,
where the severest discipline was exercised, and where the
people were governed by the strictest laws. But Rhodes and
Athens, places of popular rule, where all things were open
to all men, swarmed with orators. In like manner, Rome,
when most torn with civil dissensions, produced the brightest
examples of eloquence. Cicero declares, that wisdom
without eloquence was of little service to the state<a id="noteref_231" name="noteref_231" href="#note_231"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">231</span></span></a>; and from
the political circumstances of the times, that sort of oratory was
most esteemed which had most sway over a restless and ungovernable
multitude. The situation of public affairs occasioned
those continual debates concerning the Agrarian Laws,
and the consequent popularity acquired by the most factious
demagogues. Hence, too, those frequent impeachments of
the great—those ambitious designs of the patricians—those
hereditary enmities in particular families—in fine, those incessant
struggles between the Senate and plebeians, which,
though all prejudicial to the commonwealth, contributed to
swell and ramify that rich vein of eloquence, which now flowed
so profusely through the agitated frame of the state. During
the whole period previous to the actual breaking out of the
civil wars, when the Romans turned the sword against each
other, and the mastery of the world depended on its edge, oratory
continued to open the most direct path to dignities.
The farther a Roman citizen advanced in this career, so much
nearer was he to preferment, so much the greater his reputation
with the people; and when elevated to the dignified
offices of the state, so much the higher his ascendancy over
his colleagues.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The Gracchi were the genuine offspring, and their eloquence
the natural fruits of these turbulent times. Till their
age, oratory had been a sort of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Arcanum imperii</span></span>,—an instrument
of government in the power of the Senate, who used
every precaution to retain its exclusive exercise. It was the
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page113">[pg 113]</span><a name="Pg113" id="Pg113" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>great bulwark that withstood the tide of popular passion, and
weakened it so as not to beat too high or strongly on their
own order and authority. The Gracchi not only broke down
the embankment, but turned the flood against the walls of the
Senate itself. The interests of the people had never yet been
espoused by men endued with eloquence equal to theirs. Cicero,
while blaming their political conduct, admits that both
were consummate orators; and this he testifies from the recollection
of persons still surviving in his day, and who remembered
their mode of speaking. Indeed, the wonderful power
which both brothers exercised over the people is a sufficient
proof of their eloquence. Tiberius Gracchus was the first
who made rhetoric a serious study and art. In his boyhood,
he was carefully instructed in elocution by his mother Cornelia:
he also constantly attended the ablest and most eloquent
masters from Greece, and, as he grew up, he bestowed much
time on the exercise of private declamation. It is not likely,
that, gifted as he was by nature, and thus instructed, the
powers of eloquence should long have remained dormant in his
bosom. At the time when he first appeared on the turbulent
stage of Roman life, the accumulation of landed property
among a few individuals, and the consequent abuse of exorbitant
wealth, had filled Italy with slaves instead of citizens—had
destroyed the habits of rural industry among the people at
large, and leaving only rich masters at the head of numerous
and profligate servants, gradually rooted out those middle
classes of society which constitute the strength, the worth, and
the best hopes of every well-regulated commonwealth. It is
said, that while passing through Etruria on his way to Numantia,
Tiberius Gracchus found the country almost depopulated
of freemen, and thence first formed the project of his Agrarian
law, which was originally intended to correct the evils arising
from the immense landed possessions of the rich, by limiting
them to the number of acres specified in the ancient enactments<a id="noteref_232" name="noteref_232" href="#note_232"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">232</span></span></a>,
and dividing the conquered territories among the
poorer citizens. Preparatory to its promulgation, he was
wont to assemble the people round the rostrum, where he
pleaded for the poor, in language of which we have a specimen
in Plutarch: <span class="tei tei-q">“The wild beasts of Italy have their dens to
retire to—their places of refuge and repose; while the brave
men who shed their blood in the cause of their country, have
nothing left but fresh air and sunshine. Without houses,
without settled habitations, they wander from place to place
with their wives and children; and their commanders do but
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page114">[pg 114]</span><a name="Pg114" id="Pg114" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>mock them, when, at the head of their armies, they exhort
their soldiers to fight for their sepulchres and altars. For,
among such numbers, there is not one Roman who has an
altar which belonged to his ancestors, or a tomb in which their
ashes repose. The private soldiers fight and die to increase
the wealth and luxury of the great; and they are styled sovereigns
of the world, while they have not a foot of ground they
can call their own<a id="noteref_233" name="noteref_233" href="#note_233"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">233</span></span></a>.”</span> By such speeches as these, the people
were exasperated to fury, and the Senate was obliged to have
recourse to Octavius, who, as one of the tribunes, was the colleague
of Gracchus, to counteract the effects of his animated
eloquence. Irritated by this opposition, Gracchus abandoned
the first plan of his law, which was to give indemnification
from the public treasury to those who should be deprived of
their estates, and proposed a new bill, by which they were enjoined
forthwith to quit those lands which they held contrary
to previous enactments. On this subject there were daily
disputes between him and Octavius on the rostrum. Finding
that his plans could not otherwise be accomplished he resolved
on the expedient of deposing his colleague; and thenceforth,
to the period of his death, his speeches (one of which is preserved
by Plutarch) were chiefly delivered in persuasion or
justification of that violent measure.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Caius Gracchus was endued with higher talents than Tiberius,
but the resentment he felt on account of his brother’s
death, and eager desire for vengeance, led him into measures
which have darkened his character with the shades of the
demagogue. At the time of his brother’s death he had only
reached the age of twenty. In early youth, he distinguished
himself by the defence of one of his friends named Vettius, and
charmed the people by the eloquence which he exerted. He
appears soon afterwards to have been impelled, as it were, by
a sort of destiny, to the same political course which had proved
fatal to his brother, and which terminated in his own destruction.
His speeches were all addressed to the people, and
were delivered in proposing laws, calculated to increase their
authority, and lessen that of the Senate,—as those for colonizing
the public lands, and dividing them among the poor; for
regulating the markets, so as to diminish the price of bread,
and for vesting the judicial power in the knights. A fragment
of his speech, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus Promulgatis</span></span>, is said to have been
recently discovered, with other classical remains, in the Ambrosian
Library. Aulus Gellius also quotes from this harangue,
a passage, in which the orator complained that some
respect<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page115">[pg 115]</span><a name="Pg115" id="Pg115" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>able citizens of a municipal town in Italy had been scourged
with rods by a Roman magistrate. Gellius praises the conciseness,
neatness, and graceful ease of the narrative, resembling
dramatic dialogue, in which this incident was related.
Similar, but only similar qualities, appear in his accusation of
the Roman legate, who, while travelling to Asia in a litter,
caused a peasant to be scourged to death, for having asked
his slaves if it was a corpse they were carrying. <span class="tei tei-q">“The relation
of these events,”</span> says Gellius, <span class="tei tei-q">“does not rise above the
level of ordinary conversation. It is not a person complaining
or imploring, but merely relating what had occurred;”</span>
and he contrasts this tameness with the energy and ardour
with which Cicero has painted the commission of a like enormity
by Verres<a id="noteref_234" name="noteref_234" href="#note_234"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">234</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Though similar in many points of character and also in their
political conduct, there was a marked difference in the style of
eloquence, and forensic demeanour, of the two brothers. Tiberius,
in his looks and gestures, was mild and composed—Caius,
earnest and vehement; so that when they spoke in public,
Tiberius had the utmost moderation in his action, and
moved not from his place: whereas Caius was the first of the
Romans, who, in addressing the people, walked to and fro in
the rostrum, threw his gown off his shoulder, smote his thigh,
and exposed his arm bare<a id="noteref_235" name="noteref_235" href="#note_235"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">235</span></span></a>. The language of Tiberius was
laboured and accurate, that of Caius bold and figurative. The
oratory of the former was of a gentle kind, and pity was the
emotion it chiefly raised—that of the latter was strongly impassioned,
and calculated to excite terror. In speaking, indeed,
Caius was often so hurried away by the violence of his
passion, that he exalted his voice above the regular pitch,
indulged in abusive expressions, and disordered the whole
tenor of his oration. In order to guard against such excesses,
he stationed a slave behind him with an ivory flute, which was
modulated so as to lead him to lower or heighten the tone of
his voice, according as the subject required a higher or a
softer key. <span class="tei tei-q">“The flute,”</span> says Cicero, <span class="tei tei-q">“you may as well leave
at home, but the meaning of the practice you must remember
at the bar<a id="noteref_236" name="noteref_236" href="#note_236"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">236</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the time of the Gracchi, oratory became an object of
assiduous and systematic study, and of careful education. A
youth, intended for the profession of eloquence, was usually
introduced to one of the most distinguished orators of the city,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page116">[pg 116]</span><a name="Pg116" id="Pg116" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>whom he attended when he had occasion to speak in any public
or private cause, or in the assemblies of the people, by
which means he heard not only him, but every other famous
speaker. He thus became practically acquainted with business
and the courts of justice, and learned the arts of oratoric
conflict, as it were, in the field of battle. <span class="tei tei-q">“It animated,”</span> says
the author of the dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Causis Corruptæ Eloquentiæ</span></span>,—<span class="tei tei-q">“it
animated the courage, and quickened the judgment of
youth, thus to receive their instructions in the eye of the world,
and in the midst of affairs, where no one could advance an
absurd or weak argument, without being exposed by his adversary,
and despised by the audience. Hence, they had also
an opportunity of acquainting themselves with the various sentiments
of the people, and observing what pleased or disgusted
them in the several orators of the Forum. By these means
they were furnished with an instructor of the best and most
improving kind, exhibiting not the feigned resemblance of
eloquence, but her real and lively manifestation—not a pretended
but genuine adversary, armed in earnest for the combat—an
audience ever full and ever new, composed of foes
as well as of friends, and amongst whom not a single expression
could fall but was either censured or applauded.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The minute attention paid by the younger orators to all the
proceedings of the courts of justice, is evinced by the fragment
of a Diary, which was kept by one of them in the time
of Cicero, and in which we have a record, during two days, of
the various harangues that were delivered, and the judgments
that were pronounced<a id="noteref_237" name="noteref_237" href="#note_237"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">237</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Nor were the advantages to be derived from fictitious oratorical
contests long denied to the Roman youth. The practice
of declaiming on feigned subjects, was introduced at Rome
about the middle of its seventh century. The Greek rhetoricians,
indeed, had been expelled, as well as the philosophers,
towards the close of the preceding century; but, in the year
661, Plotius Gallus, a Latin rhetorician, opened a declaiming
school at Rome. At this period, however, the declamations
generally turned on questions of real business, and it was not
till the time of Augustus, that the rhetoricians so far prevailed,
as to introduce common-place arguments on fictitious subjects.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The eloquence which had originally been cultivated for
seditious purposes, and for political advancement, began now
to be considered by the Roman youth as an elegant accomplishment.
It was probably viewed in the same light that we
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page117">[pg 117]</span><a name="Pg117" id="Pg117" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>regard horsemanship or dancing, and continued to be so in
the age of Horace—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Namque, et nobilis, et decens,</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">Et pro sollicitis non tacitus reis,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Et centum puer artium,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Latè signa feret militiæ suæ<a id="noteref_238" name="noteref_238" href="#note_238"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">238</span></span></a>.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Under all these circumstances it is evident, that in the middle
of the seventh century oratory would be neglected by
none; and in an art so sedulously studied, and universally
practised, many must have been proficients. It would be
endless to enumerate all the public speakers mentioned by
Cicero, whose catalogue is rather extensive and dry. We
may therefore proceed to those two orators, whom he commemorates
as having first raised the glory of Roman eloquence
to an equality with that of Greece—Marcus Antonius, and
Lucius Crassus.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The former, sirnamed <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Orator</span></span>, and grandfather of the celebrated
triumvir, was the most employed patron of his time;
and, of all his contemporaries, was chiefly courted by clients,
as he was ever willing to undertake any cause which was proposed
to him. He possessed a ready memory, and remarkable
talent of introducing everything where it could be placed
with most effect. He had a frankness of manner which precluded
any suspicion of artifice, and gave to all his orations
an appearance of being the unpremeditated effusions of an
honest heart. But though there was no apparent preparation
in his speeches, he always spoke so well, that the judges were
never sufficiently prepared against the effects of his eloquence.
His language was not perfectly pure, or of a constantly sustained
elegance, but it was of a solid and judicious character,
well adapted to his purpose—his gesture, too, was <a name="corr117" id="corr117" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">appropriate</span>,
and suited to the sentiments and language—his voice was strong
and durable, though naturally hoarse—but even this defect he
turned to advantage, by frequently and easily adopting a
mournful and querulous tone, which, in criminal questions,
excited compassion, and more readily gained the belief of the
judges. He left, however, as we are informed by Cicero,
hardly any orations behind him<a id="noteref_239" name="noteref_239" href="#note_239"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">239</span></span></a>, having resolved never to
publish any of his pleadings, lest he should be convicted of
maintaining in one cause something which was inconsistent
with what he had alleged in another<a id="noteref_240" name="noteref_240" href="#note_240"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">240</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The first oration by which Antony distinguished himself,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page118">[pg 118]</span><a name="Pg118" id="Pg118" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>was in his own defence. He had obtained the quæstorship of
a province of Asia, and had arrived at Brundusium to embank
there, when his friends informed him that he had been summoned
before the Prætor Cassius, the most rigid judge in
Rome, whose tribunal was termed the rock of the accused.
Though he might have pleaded a privilege, which forbade the
admission of charges against those who were absent on the
service of the republic, he chose to justify himself in due form.
Accordingly, he returned to Rome, stood his trial, and was acquitted
with honour<a id="noteref_241" name="noteref_241" href="#note_241"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">241</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
One of the most celebrated orations which Antony pronounced,
was that in defence of Norbanus, who was accused
of sedition, and a violent assault on the magistrate, Æmilius
Cæpio. He began by attempting to show from history, that
seditions may sometimes be justifiable from necessity; that
without them the kings would not have been expelled, or the
tribunes of the people created. The orator then proceeded
to insinuate, that his client had not been seditious, but that all
had happened through the just indignation of the people; and
he concluded with artfully attempting to renew the popular
odium against Cæpio, who had been an unsuccessful commander<a id="noteref_242" name="noteref_242" href="#note_242"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">242</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
What Cicero relates concerning Antony’s defence of Aquilius,
is an example of his power in moving the passions, and
is, at the same time, extremely characteristic of the manner of
Roman pleading. Antony, who is one of the speakers in the
dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, is introduced relating it himself. Seeing
his client, who had once been Consul and a leader of armies,
reduced to a state of the utmost dejection and peril, he
had no sooner begun to speak, with a view towards melting
the compassion of others, than he was melted himself. Perceiving
the emotion of the judges when he raised his client
from the earth, on which he had thrown himself, he instantly
took advantage of this favourable feeling. He tore open the
garments of Aquilius, and showed the scars of those wounds
which he had received in the service of his country. Even
the stern Marius wept. Him the orator then apostrophized;
imploring his protection, and invoking with many tears the
gods, the citizens, and the allies of Rome. <span class="tei tei-q">“But whatever I
could have said,”</span> remarks he in the dialogue, <span class="tei tei-q">“had I delivered
it without being myself moved, it would have excited the derision,
instead of the sympathy, of those who heard me<a id="noteref_243" name="noteref_243" href="#note_243"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">243</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page119">[pg 119]</span><a name="Pg119" id="Pg119" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Antony, in the course of his life, had passed through all the
highest offices of the state. The circumstances of his death,
which happened in 666, during the civil wars of Marius and
Sylla, were characteristic of his predominant talent. During
the last proscription by Marius, he sought refuge in the house
of a poor person, whom he had laid under obligations to him
in the days of his better fortune. But his retreat being discovered,
from the circumstance of his host procuring for him
some wine nicer than ordinary, the intelligence was carried to
Marius, who received it with a savage shout of exultation, and,
clapping his hands for joy, he would have risen from table,
and instantly repaired to the place where his enemy was concealed;
but, being detained by his friends, he immediately
despatched a party of soldiers, under a tribune, to slay him.
The soldiers having entered his chamber for this purpose, and
Antony suspecting their errand, addressed them in terms of
such moving and insinuating eloquence, that his assassins burst
into tears, and had not sufficient resolution to execute their
mission. The officer who commanded them then went in, and
cut off his head<a id="noteref_244" name="noteref_244" href="#note_244"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">244</span></span></a>, which he carried to Marius, who affixed it
to that rostrum, whence, as Cicero remarks, he had ably defended
the lives of so many of his fellow-citizens<a id="noteref_245" name="noteref_245" href="#note_245"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">245</span></span></a>; little aware
that he would soon himself experience, from another Antony,
a fate similar to that which he deplores as having befallen the
grandsire of the triumvir.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Crassus, the forensic rival of Antony, had prepared himself
in his youth, for public speaking, by digesting in his memory
a chosen number of polished and dignified verses, or a certain
portion of some oration which he had read over, and then delivering
the same matter in the best words he could select<a id="noteref_246" name="noteref_246" href="#note_246"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">246</span></span></a>.
Afterwards, when he grew a little older, he translated into
Latin some of the finest Greek orations, and, at the same time,
used every mental and bodily exertion to improve his voice,
his action, and memory. He commenced his oratorical career
at the early age of nineteen, when he acquired much
reputation by his accusation of C. Carbo; and he, not long
afterwards, greatly heightened his fame, by his defence of the
virgin Licinia. Another of the best speeches of Crassus, was
that addressed to the people in favour of the law of Servilius
Cæpio, restoring in part the judicial power to the Senate,
of which they had been recently deprived, in order to vest it
solely in the body of knights. But the most, splendid of all
the appearances of Crassus, was one that proved the immediate
cause of his death, which happened in 662, a short while
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page120">[pg 120]</span><a name="Pg120" id="Pg120" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>before the commencement of the civil wars of Marius and
Sylla; and a few days after the time in which he is supposed
to have borne his part in the dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>. The Consul
Philippus had declared, in one of the assemblies of the
people, that some other advice must be resorted to, since,
with such a Senate as then existed, he could no longer direct
the affairs of the government. A full Senate being immediately
summoned, Crassus arraigned, in terms of the most glowing
eloquence, the conduct of this Consul, who, instead of
acting as the political parent and guardian of the Senate,
sought to deprive its members of their ancient inheritance of
respect and dignity. Being farther irritated by an attempt on
the part of Philippus, to force him into compliance with his
designs, he exerted, on this occasion, the utmost efforts of
his genius and strength; but he returned home with a pleuritic
fever, of which he died in the course of seven days. This oration
of Crassus, followed as it was by his almost immediate
death, made a deep impression on his countrymen; who, long
afterwards, were wont to repair to the senate-house, for the
purpose of viewing the spot where he had last stood, and fallen,
as it may be said, in defence of the privileges of his order.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Crassus left hardly any orations behind him, and he died
while Cicero was still in his boyhood; yet that author, having
collected the opinions of those who had heard him, speaks with
a minute and apparently perfect intelligence of his mode of
oratory. He was what may be called the most ornamental
speaker that had hitherto appeared in the Forum. Though not
without force, gravity, and dignity, these were happily blended
with the most insinuating politeness, urbanity, ease, and gaiety.
He was master of the most pure and accurate language, and
of perfect elegance of expression, without any affectation, or
unpleasant appearance of previous study. Great clearness of
exposition distinguished all his harangues, and, while descanting
on topics of law or equity, he possessed an inexhaustible
fund of argument and illustration. In speaking, he showed
an uncommon modesty, which went even the length of
bashfulness. When a young man, he was so intimidated
at the opening of a speech, that Q. Maximus, perceiving
him overwhelmed and disabled by confusion, adjourned the
court, which the orator always remembered with the highest
sense of gratitude. This diffidence never entirely forsook
him; and, after the practice of a long life at the
bar, he was frequently so much agitated in the exordium
of his discourse, that he was observed to grow pale, and to
tremble in every part of his frame<a id="noteref_247" name="noteref_247" href="#note_247"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">247</span></span></a>. Some persons considered
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page121">[pg 121]</span><a name="Pg121" id="Pg121" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>Crassus as only equal to Antony; others preferred him as the
more perfect and accomplished orator: Antony chiefly trusted
to his intimate acquaintance with affairs and ordinary life:
He was not, however, so destitute of knowledge as he seemed;
but he thought the best way to recommend his eloquence to
the people, was to appear as if he had never learned anything<a id="noteref_248" name="noteref_248" href="#note_248"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">248</span></span></a>.
Crassus, on the other hand, was well instructed in literature,
and showed off his information to the best advantage. Antony
possessed the greater power of promoting conjecture,
and of allaying or exciting suspicion, by opposite and well-timed
insinuations; but no one could have more copiousness
or facility than Crassus, in defining, interpreting, and discussing,
the principles of equity. The language of Crassus was
indisputably preferable to that of Antony; but the action and
gesture of Antony were as incontestably superior to those of
Crassus.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Sulpicius and Cotta, who were both born about 630, were
younger orators than Antony or Crassus, but were for some
time their contemporaries, and had risen to considerable reputation
before the death of the latter and assassination of the
former. Sulpicius lived for some years respected and admired;
but, about the year 665, at the first breaking out of the
dissensions between Sylla and Marius, being then a tribune of
the people, he espoused the part of Marius. Plutarch gives a
memorable account of his character and behaviour at this
conjuncture, declaring that he was second to none in the most
atrocious villainies. Alike unrestrained in avarice and cruelty,
he committed the most criminal and enormous actions without
hesitation or reluctance. He sold by public auction the freedom
of Rome to foreigners—telling out the purchase-money
on counters erected for that purpose in the Forum! He kept
3000 swordsmen in constant pay, and had always about him
a company of young men of the equestrian order, ready on
every occasion to execute his commands; and these he styled
his anti-senatorian band<a id="noteref_249" name="noteref_249" href="#note_249"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">249</span></span></a>. Cicero touches on his crimes with
more tenderness; but says, that when he came to be tribune,
he stript of all their dignities those with whom, as a private individual,
he had lived in the strictest friendship<a id="noteref_250" name="noteref_250" href="#note_250"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">250</span></span></a>. Whilst
Marius kept his ground against his rival, Sulpicius transacted
all public affairs, in his capacity of tribune, by violence and
force of arms. He decreed to Marius the command in the
Mithridatic war: He attacked the Consuls with his band
while they were holding an assembly of the people in the 
Tem<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page122">[pg 122]</span><a name="Pg122" id="Pg122" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>ple of Castor and Pollux, and deposed one of them<a id="noteref_251" name="noteref_251" href="#note_251"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">251</span></span></a>. Marius,
however, having been at length expelled by the ascendancy of
Sylla, Sulpicius was betrayed by one of his slaves, and immediately
seized and executed. <span class="tei tei-q">“Thus,”</span> says Cicero, <span class="tei tei-q">“the chastisement
of his rashness went hand in hand with the misfortunes
of his country; and the sword cut off the thread of that life,
which was then blooming to all the honours that eloquence can
bestow<a id="noteref_252" name="noteref_252" href="#note_252"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">252</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cicero had reached the age of nineteen, at the period of
the death of Sulpicius. He had heard him daily speak in the
Forum, and highly estimates his oratoric powers<a id="noteref_253" name="noteref_253" href="#note_253"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">253</span></span></a>. He was
the most lofty, and what Cicero calls the most tragic, orator
of Rome. His attitudes, deportment, and figure, were of supreme
dignity—his voice was powerful and sonorous—his elocution
rapid; his action variable and animated.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The constitutional weakness of Cotta prevented all such
oratorical vehemence. In his manner he was soft and relaxed;
but every thing he said was sober and in good taste, and he
often led the judges to the same conclusion to which Sulpicius
impelled them. <span class="tei tei-q">“No two things,”</span> says Cicero, <span class="tei tei-q">“were
ever more unlike than they are to each other. The one, in a
polite, delicate manner, sets forth his subject in well-chosen
expressions. He still keeps to his point; and, as he sees with
the greatest penetration what he has to prove to the court, he
directs to that the whole strength of his reasoning and eloquence,
without regarding other arguments. But Sulpicius,
endued with irresistible energy, with a full strong voice, with
the greatest vehemence, and dignity of action, accompanied
with so much weight and variety of expression, seemed, of all
mankind, the best fitted by nature for eloquence.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It was supposed that Cotta wished to resemble Antony, as
Sulpicius obviously imitated Crassus; but the latter wanted
the agreeable pleasantry of Crassus, and the former the force
of Antony. None of the orations of Sulpicius remained in the
time of Cicero—those circulated under his name having been
written by Canutius after his death. The oration of Cotta for
himself, when accused on the Varian law, was composed, it is
said, at his request by Lucius Ælius; and, if this be true, nothing
can appear to us more extraordinary, than that so accomplished
a speaker as Cotta should have wished any of the
trivial harangues of Ælius to pass for his own.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The renown, however, of all preceding orators, was now
about to be eclipsed at Rome; and Hortensius burst forth in
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page123">[pg 123]</span><a name="Pg123" id="Pg123" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>eloquence at once calculated to delight and astonish his fellow-citizens.
This celebrated orator was born in the year
640, being thus ten years younger than Cotta and Sulpicius.
His first appearance in the Forum was at the early age of
nineteen—that is, in 659; and his excellence, says Cicero, was
immediately acknowledged, like that of a statue by Phidias,
which only requires to be seen in order to be admired<a id="noteref_254" name="noteref_254" href="#note_254"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">254</span></span></a>. The
case in which he first appeared was of considerable responsibility
for one so young and inexperienced, being an accusation,
at the instance of the Roman province of Africa, against
its governors for rapacity. It was heard before Scævola and
Crassus, as judges—the one the ablest lawyer, the other the
most accomplished speaker, of his age; and the young orator
had the good fortune to obtain their approbation, as well as
that of all who were present at the trial<a id="noteref_255" name="noteref_255" href="#note_255"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">255</span></span></a>. His next pleading
of importance was in behalf of Nicomedes, King of Bithynia,
in which he even surpassed his former speech for the Africans<a id="noteref_256" name="noteref_256" href="#note_256"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">256</span></span></a>.
After this we hear little of him for several years. The imminent
perils of the Social War, which broke out in 663, interrupted,
in a great measure, the business of the Forum. Hortensius
served in this alarming contest for one year as a
volunteer, and in the following season as a military tribune<a id="noteref_257" name="noteref_257" href="#note_257"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">257</span></span></a>.
When, on the re-establishment of peace in Italy in 666, he
returned to Rome, and resumed the more peaceful avocations
to which he had been destined from his youth, he found himself
without a rival<a id="noteref_258" name="noteref_258" href="#note_258"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">258</span></span></a>. Crassus, as we have seen, died in 662, before
the troubles of Marius and Sylla. Antony, with other
orators of inferior note, perished in 666, during the temporary
and last ascendancy of Marius, in the absence of Sylla.
Sulpicius was put to death in the same year, and Cotta driven
into banishment, from which he was not recalled until the
return of Sylla to Rome, and his election to the dictatorship
in 670. Hortensius was thus left for some years without a
competitor; and, after 670, with none of eminence but Cotta,
whom also he soon outshone. His splendid, warm, and animated
manner, was preferred to the calm and easy elegance
of his rival. Accordingly, when engaged in a cause on the
same side, Cotta, though ten years senior, was employed to
open the case, while the more important parts were left to the
management of Hortensius<a id="noteref_259" name="noteref_259" href="#note_259"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">259</span></span></a>. He continued the undisputed
sovereign of the Forum, till Cicero returned from his quæstorship
in Sicily, in 679, when the talents of that orator first
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page124">[pg 124]</span><a name="Pg124" id="Pg124" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>displayed themselves in full perfection and maturity. Hortensius
was thus, from 666 till 679, a space of thirteen years,
at the head of the Roman bar; and being, in consequence,
engaged during that long period, on one side or other, in every
cause of importance, he soon amassed a prodigious fortune.
He lived, too, with a magnificence corresponding to his
wealth. An example of splendour and luxury had been set to
him by the orator Crassus, who inhabited a sumptuous palace
in Rome, the hall of which was adorned with four pillars of
Hymettian marble, twelve feet high, which he brought to
Rome in his ædileship, at a time when there were no pillars
of foreign marble even in public buildings<a id="noteref_260" name="noteref_260" href="#note_260"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">260</span></span></a>. The court of
this mansion was ornamented by six lotus trees, which Pliny
saw in full luxuriance in his youth, but which were afterwards
burned in the conflagration in the time of Nero. He had also
a number of vases, and two drinking-cups, engraved by the
artist Mentor, but which were of such immense value that he
was ashamed to use them<a id="noteref_261" name="noteref_261" href="#note_261"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">261</span></span></a>. Hortensius had the same tastes
as Crassus, but surpassed him and all his contemporaries in
magnificence. His mansion stood on the Palatine Hill, which
appears to have been the most fashionable situation in Rome,
being at that time covered with the houses of Lutatius Catulus,
Æmilius Scaurus, Clodius, Catiline, Cicero, and Cæsar<a id="noteref_262" name="noteref_262" href="#note_262"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">262</span></span></a>.
The residence of Hortensius was adjacent to that of Catiline;
and though of no great extent, it was splendidly furnished.
After the death of the orator, it was inhabited by Octavius
Cæsar<a id="noteref_263" name="noteref_263" href="#note_263"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">263</span></span></a>, and formed the centre of the chief imperial palace,
which increased from the time of Augustus to that of Nero,
till it covered a great part of the Palatine Mount, and branched
over other hills. Besides his mansion in the capital, he
possessed sumptuous villas at Tusculum, Bauli, and Laurentum,
where he was accustomed to give the most elegant and
expensive entertainments. He had frequently peacocks at his
banquets, which he first served up at a grand augural feast,
and which, says Varro, were more commended by the luxurious,
than by men of probity and austerity<a id="noteref_264" name="noteref_264" href="#note_264"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">264</span></span></a>. His olive plantations
he is said to have regularly moistened and bedewed
with wine; and, on one occasion, during the hearing of an
important case, in which he was engaged along with Cicero,
begged that he would change with him the previously arranged
order of pleading, as he was obliged to go to the country to
pour wine on a favourite <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">platanus</span></span>, which grew near his
    Tus<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page125">[pg 125]</span><a name="Pg125" id="Pg125" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>culan villa<a id="noteref_265" name="noteref_265" href="#note_265"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">265</span></span></a>. Notwithstanding this profusion, his heir found
not less than 10,000 casks of wine in his cellar after his death<a id="noteref_266" name="noteref_266" href="#note_266"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">266</span></span></a>.
Besides his taste for wine, and fondness for plantations, he
indulged a passion for pictures and fish-ponds. At his Tusculan
villa, he built a hall for the reception of a painting of
the expedition of the Argonauts, by the painter Cydias, which
cost the enormous sum of a hundred and forty-four thousand
sesterces<a id="noteref_267" name="noteref_267" href="#note_267"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">267</span></span></a>. At his country-seat, near Bauli, on the sea shore,
he vied with Lucullus and Philippus in the extent of his fish-ponds,
which were constructed at immense cost, and so formed
that the tide flowed into them<a id="noteref_268" name="noteref_268" href="#note_268"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">268</span></span></a>. Under the promontory of
Bauli, travellers are yet shown the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Piscina Mirabilis</span></span>, a subterraneous
edifice, vaulted and divided by four rows of arcades,
and which is supposed by some antiquarians to have been a
fish-pond of Hortensius. Yet such was his luxury, and his reluctance
to diminish his supply, that when he gave entertainments
at Bauli, he generally sent to the neighbouring town of
Puteoli to buy fish for supper<a id="noteref_269" name="noteref_269" href="#note_269"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">269</span></span></a>. He had a vast number of
fishermen in his service, and paid so much attention to the
feeding of his fish, that he had always ready a large stock of
small fish to be devoured by the great ones. It was with the
utmost difficulty he could be prevailed on to part with any of
them; and Varro declares, that a friend could more easily get
his chariot mules out of his stable, than a mullet from his ponds.
He was more anxious about the welfare of his fish than the
health of his slaves, and less solicitous that a sick servant might
not take what was unfit for him, than that his fish might not
drink water which was unwholesome<a id="noteref_270" name="noteref_270" href="#note_270"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">270</span></span></a>. It is even said, that
he was so passionately fond of a particular lamprey, that he
shed tears for her untimely death<a id="noteref_271" name="noteref_271" href="#note_271"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">271</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The gallery at the villa, which was situated on the little
promontory of Bauli, and looking towards Puteoli, commanded
one of the most delightful views in Italy. The inland
prospect towards Cumæ was extensive and magnificent. Puteoli
was seen along the shore at the distance of 30 <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">stadia</span></span>, in
the direction of Pompeii; and Pompeii itself was invisible only
from its distance. The sea view was unbounded; but it was
enlivened by the numerous vessels sailing across the bay, and
the ever changeful hue of its waters, now saffron, azure, or
purple, according as the breeze blew, or as the sun ascended
or declined<a id="noteref_272" name="noteref_272" href="#note_272"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">272</span></span></a>.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page126">[pg 126]</span><a name="Pg126" id="Pg126" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Hortensius possessed another villa in Italy, which rivalled
in its sylvan pomp the marine luxuries of Bauli. This mansion
lay between Ostia and Lavinium, (now Pratica,) near to
the town of Laurentum, so well remembered from ancient
fable and poetry, as having been the residence of King Latinus,
at the time of the arrival of Æneas in Italy, and at present
known by the name of Torre di Paterno. The town of
Laurentum was on the shore, but the villa of Hortensius stood
to the north-east at some distance from the coast,—the grounds
subsequently occupied by the villa of the younger Pliny intervening
between it and Laurentum, and also between it and the
Tuscan sea. Around were the walks and gardens of patrician
villas; on one side was seen the town of Laurentum, with its public
baths; on the other, but at a greater distance, the harbour
of Ostia. Near the house were groves, and fields covered with
herds—beyond were hills clothed with woods. The horizon
to the north-east was bounded by magnificent mountains, and
beyond the low maritime grounds, which lay between the port
of Ostia and Laurentum, there was a distant prospect of the
Tuscan sea<a id="noteref_273" name="noteref_273" href="#note_273"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">273</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Hortensius had here a wooded park of fifty acres, encompassed
with a wall. This enclosure he called a nursery of
wild beasts, all which came for their provender at a certain
hour, on the blowing of a horn—an exhibition with which he
was accustomed to amuse the guests who visited him at his
Laurentian villa. Varro mentions an entertainment, where
those invited supped on an eminence, called a <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Triclinium</span></span>, in
this sylvan park. During the repast, Hortensius summoned
his Orpheus, who, having come with his musical instruments,
and being ordered to display his talents, blew a trumpet, when
such a multitude of deer, boars, and other quadrupeds, rushed
to the spot from all quarters, that the sight appeared to the
delighted spectators as beautiful as the courses with wild animals
in the great Circus of the Ædiles<a id="noteref_274" name="noteref_274" href="#note_274"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">274</span></span></a>!</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The eloquence of Hortensius procured him not only all this
wealth and luxury, but the highest official honours of the state.
He was Ædile in 679, Prætor in 682, and Consul two years
afterwards. The wealth and dignities he had obtained, and
the want of competition, made him gradually relax from that
assiduity by which they had been acquired, till the increasing
fame of Cicero, and particularly the glory of his consulship,
stimulated him to renew his exertions. But his habit of labour
had been in some degree lost, and he never again recovered
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page127">[pg 127]</span><a name="Pg127" id="Pg127" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>his former reputation. Cicero partly accounts for this decline,
from the peculiar nature and genius of his eloquence<a id="noteref_275" name="noteref_275" href="#note_275"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">275</span></span></a>. It was
of that showy species called Asiatic, which flourished in the
Greek colonies of Asia Minor, and was infinitely more florid
and ornamental than the oratory of Athens, or even Rhodes,
being full of brilliant thoughts and of sparkling expressions.
This glowing style of rhetoric, though deficient in solidity and
weight, was not unsuitable in a young man; and being farther
recommended by a beautiful cadence of periods, met with the
utmost applause. But Hortensius, as he advanced in life, did
not prune his exuberance, or adopt a chaster eloquence; and
this luxury, and glitter of phraseology, which, even in his earliest
years, had occasionally excited ridicule or disgust among
the graver fathers of the senatorial order, being totally inconsistent
with his advanced age and consular dignity, which required
something more serious and composed, his reputation
diminished with increase of years; and though the bloom of
his eloquence might be in fact the same, it appeared to be
somewhat withered<a id="noteref_276" name="noteref_276" href="#note_276"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">276</span></span></a>. Besides, from his declining health and
strength, which greatly failed in his latter years, he may not
have been able to give full effect to that showy species of rhetoric
in which he indulged. A constant toothache, and swelling
in the jaws, greatly impaired his power of elocution and
utterance, and became at length so severe as to accelerate his
end—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Ægrescunt teneræ fauces, quum frigoris atri</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Vis subiit, vel quum ventis agitabilis aër</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Vertitur, atque ipsas flatus gravis inficit auras,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Vel rabidus clamor fracto quum forte sonore</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Planum radit iter. Sic est Hortensius olim</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Absumptus: caussis etenim confectus agendis</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Obticuit, quum vox, domino vivente, periret,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Et nondum exstincti moreretur lingua diserti<a id="noteref_277" name="noteref_277" href="#note_277"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">277</span></span></a>.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
A few months, however, before his death, which happened
in 703, he pleaded for his nephew, Messala, who was accused
of illegal canvassing, and who was acquitted, more in consequence
of the astonishing exertions of his advocate, than the
justice of his cause. So unfavourable, indeed, was his case
esteemed, that however much the speech of Hortensius had
been admired, he was received on entering the theatre of Curio
on the following day, with loud clamour and hisses, which
were the more remarked, as he had never met with similar
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page128">[pg 128]</span><a name="Pg128" id="Pg128" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>treatment in the whole course of his forensic career<a id="noteref_278" name="noteref_278" href="#note_278"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">278</span></span></a>. The
speech, however, revived all the ancient admiration of the
public for his oratorical talents, and convinced them, that had
he always possessed the same perseverance as Cicero, he would
not have ranked second to that orator. Another of his most
celebrated harangues was that against the Manilian law, which
vested Pompey with such extraordinary powers, and was so
warmly supported by Cicero. That against the sumptuary
law proposed by Crassus and Pompey, in the year 683, which
tended to <a name="corr128" id="corr128" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">restrain</span> the indulgence of his own taste, was well
adapted to Hortensius’ style of eloquence; and his speech was
highly characteristic of his disposition and habits of life. He
declaimed, at great length, on the glory of Rome, which required
splendour in the mode of living followed by its citizens<a id="noteref_279" name="noteref_279" href="#note_279"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">279</span></span></a>.
He frequently glanced at the luxury of the Consuls themselves,
and forced them at length, by his eloquence and sarcastic declamation,
to relinquish their scheme of domestic retrenchment.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The speeches of Hortensius, it has been already mentioned,
lost part of their effect by the orator’s advance in years, but
they suffered still more by being transferred to paper. As his
chief excellence consisted in action and delivery, his writings
were much inferior to what was expected from the high fame
he had enjoyed; and, accordingly, after death, he retained
little of that esteem, which he had so abundantly possessed
during his life<a id="noteref_280" name="noteref_280" href="#note_280"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">280</span></span></a>. Although, therefore, his orations had been
preserved, they would have given us but an imperfect idea of
the eloquence of Hortensius; but even this aid has been denied
us, and we must, therefore, now chiefly trust for his oratorical
character to the opinion of his great but unprejudiced rival.
The friendship and honourable competition of Hortensius and
Cicero, present an agreeable contrast to the animosities of
Æschines and Demosthenes, the two great orators of Greece.
It was by means of Hortensius that Cicero was chosen one of
the college of Augurs—a service of which his gratified vanity
ever appears to have retained an agreeable recollection. In
a few of his letters, indeed, written during the despondency of
his exile, he hints a suspicion that Hortensius had been instrumental
in his banishment, with a view of engrossing to himself
the whole glory of the bar<a id="noteref_281" name="noteref_281" href="#note_281"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">281</span></span></a>; but this mistrust ended with his
recall, which Hortensius, though originally he had advised him
to yield to the storm, urged on with all the influence of which
he was possessed. Hortensius also appears to have been free
from every feeling of jealousy or envy, which in him was still
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page129">[pg 129]</span><a name="Pg129" id="Pg129" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>more creditable, as his rival was younger than himself, and
yet ultimately forced him from the supremacy. Such having
been their sentiments of mutual esteem, Cicero has done his
oratoric talents ample justice—representing him as endued
with <a name="corr129" id="corr129" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">almost</span> all the qualities necessary to form a distinguished
speaker. His imagination was fertile—his voice was sweet
and harmonious—his demeanour dignified—his language rich
and elegant—his acquaintance with literature extensive. So
prodigious was his memory, that, without the aid of writing, he
recollected every word he had meditated, and every sentence
of his adversary’s oration, even to the titles and documents
brought forward to support the case against him—a faculty
which greatly aided his peculiarly happy art of recapitulating
the substance of what had been said by his antagonists or by
himself<a id="noteref_282" name="noteref_282" href="#note_282"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">282</span></span></a>. He also originally possessed an indefatigable application;
and scarcely a day passed in which he did not speak
in the Forum, or exercise himself in forensic studies or preparation.
But, of all the various arts of oratory, he most remarkably
excelled in a happy and perspicuous arrangement of his
subject. Cicero only reproaches him, and that but slightly,
with showing more study and art in his gestures than was
suitable for an orator. It appears, however, from Macrobius,
that he was much ridiculed by his contemporaries, on account
of his affected gestures. In pleading, his hands were constantly
in motion, whence he was often attacked by his adversaries
in the Forum for resembling an actor; and, on one
occasion, he received from his opponent the appellation of
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dionysia</span></span>, which was the name of a celebrated dancing girl<a id="noteref_283" name="noteref_283" href="#note_283"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">283</span></span></a>.
Æsop and Roscius frequently attended his pleadings, to catch
his gestures, and imitate them on the stage<a id="noteref_284" name="noteref_284" href="#note_284"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">284</span></span></a>. Such, indeed,
was his exertion in action, that it was commonly said that it
could not be determined whether people went to hear or to see
him<a id="noteref_285" name="noteref_285" href="#note_285"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">285</span></span></a>. Like Demosthenes, he chose and put on his dress with
the most studied care and neatness. He is said, not only to
have prepared his attitudes, but also to have adjusted the plaits
of his gown before a mirror, when about to issue forth to the
Forum; and to have taken no less care in arranging them, than
in moulding the periods of his discourse. He so tucked up
his gown, that the folds did not fall by chance, but were
form<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page130">[pg 130]</span><a name="Pg130" id="Pg130" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>ed with great care, by means of a knot artfully tied, and concealed
in the plies of his robe, which apparently flowed carelessly
around him<a id="noteref_286" name="noteref_286" href="#note_286"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">286</span></span></a>. Macrobius also records a story of his
instituting an action of damages against a person who had
jostled him, while walking in this elaborate dress, and had
ruffled his toga, when he was about to appear in public with
his drapery adjusted according to the happiest arrangement<a id="noteref_287" name="noteref_287" href="#note_287"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">287</span></span></a>—an
anecdote, which, whether true or false, shows, by its
currency, the opinion entertained of his finical attention to
everything that concerned the elegance of his attire, or the
gracefulness of his figure and attitudes. He also bathed himself
in odoriferous waters, and daily perfumed himself with the
most precious essences<a id="noteref_288" name="noteref_288" href="#note_288"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">288</span></span></a>. This too minute attention to his
person, and to gesticulation, appears to have been the sole
blemish in his oratorical character; and the only stain on his
moral conduct, was his practice of corrupting the judges of
the causes in which he was employed—a practice which must
be, in a great measure, imputed to the defects of the judicial
system at Rome; for, whatever might be the excellence of the
Roman laws, nothing could be worse than the procedure under
which they were administered<a id="noteref_289" name="noteref_289" href="#note_289"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">289</span></span></a>.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page131">[pg 131]</span><a name="Pg131" id="Pg131" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Hortensius has received more justice from Cicero than another
orator, Licinius Calvus, who, for a few years, was also considered
as his rival in eloquence. Calvus has already been
mentioned as an elegant poet; but Seneca calls his competition
with Cicero in oratory, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">iniquissimam litem</span></span>. His style of
speaking was directly the reverse of that of Hortensius: he
affected the Attic taste in eloquence, such as it appeared in
what he conceived to be its purest form—the orations of
Lysias. Hence that correct and slender delicacy at which he
so studiously aimed, and which he conducted with great skill
and elegance; but, from being too much afraid of the faults
of redundance and unsuitable ornament, he refined and attenuated
his discourse till it lost its raciness and spirit. He
compensated, however, for his sterility of language, and diminutive
figure, by his force of elocution, and vivacity of action.
<span class="tei tei-q">“I have met with persons,”</span> says Quintilian, <span class="tei tei-q">“who preferred
Calvus to all our orators; and others who were of opinion,
that the too great rigour which he exercised on himself, in
point of precision, had debilitated his oratorical talents.
Nevertheless, his speeches, though chaste, grave, and correct,
are frequently also vehement. His taste of writing was Attic;
and his untimely death was an injury to his reputation, if he
designed to add to his compositions, and not to retrench
them.”</span> His most celebrated oration, which was against the
unpopular Vatinius, was delivered at the age of twenty. The
person whom he accused, overpowered and alarmed, interrupted
him, by exclaiming to the judges, <span class="tei tei-q">“Must I be condemned
because he is eloquent?”</span> The applause he obtained in this
case may be judged of from what is mentioned by Catullus,
of some one in the crowd clapping his hands in the middle of
his speech, and exclaiming, <span class="tei tei-q">“O what an eloquent little darling<a id="noteref_290" name="noteref_290" href="#note_290"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">290</span></span></a>!”</span>
Calvus survived only ten years after this period,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page132">[pg 132]</span><a name="Pg132" id="Pg132" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>having died at the early age of thirty. He left behind him
twenty-one books of orations, which are said to have been
much studied by the younger Pliny, and were the models he
first imitated<a id="noteref_291" name="noteref_291" href="#note_291"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">291</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Calvus, though a much younger man than Cicero, died many
years before him, and previous to the composition of the dialogue
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>. Most of the other contemporaries, whom
Cicero records in that treatise on celebrated orators, were
dead also. Among an infinite variety of others, he particularly
mentions Marcus Crassus, the wealthy triumvir, who
perished in the ill-fated expedition against the Parthians; and
who, though possessed but of moderate learning and capacity,
was accounted, in consequence of his industry and popular
arts, among the chief forensic patrons. His language was
pure, and his subject well arranged; but in his harangues there
were none of the lights and flowers of eloquence,—all things
were expressed in the same manner, and the same tone.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Towards the conclusion of the dialogue, Cicero mentions so
many of his predeceased contemporaries, that Atticus remarks,
that he is drawing up the dregs of oratory. Calidius, indeed,
seems the only other speaker who merits distinguished notice.
He is characterized as different from all other orators,—such
was the soft and polished language in which he arrayed his
exquisitely delicate sentiments. Nothing could be more easy,
pliable, and ductile, than the turn of his periods; his words
flowed like a pure and limpid stream, without anything hard
or muddy to impede or pollute their course; his action was
genteel, his mode of address sober and calm, his arrangement
the perfection of art. <span class="tei tei-q">“The three great objects of an orator,”</span>
says Cicero, while discussing the merits of Calidius, <span class="tei tei-q">“are to
instruct, delight, and move. Two of these he admirably accomplished.
He rendered the most abstruse subject clear by
illustration, and enchained the minds of his hearers with delight.
But the third praise of moving and exciting the soul
must be denied him; he had no force, pathos, or animation<a id="noteref_292" name="noteref_292" href="#note_292"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">292</span></span></a>.”</span>
Such, indeed, was his want of emotion, where it was most appropriate,
and most to be expected, that, while pleading his
own cause against Q. Gallius for an attempt to poison him,
though he stated his case with elegance and perspicuity, yet
it was so smoothly and listlessly detailed, that Cicero, who
spoke for the person accused, argued, that the charge must be
false and an invention of his own, as no one could talk so
calmly, and with such indifference, of a recent attempt which
threatened his own existence<a id="noteref_293" name="noteref_293" href="#note_293"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">293</span></span></a>.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page133">[pg 133]</span><a name="Pg133" id="Pg133" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
These were the most renowned orators who preceded the
age of Cicero, or were contemporaries with him; and before
proceeding to consider the oratorical merits of him by whom
they have been all eclipsed, at least in the eye of posterity, it
may be proper, for a single moment, to remind the reader of
the state of the Roman law,—of the judicial procedure, and of
the ordinary practice of the Forum, at the time when he commenced
and pursued his brilliant career of eloquence.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The laws of the first six kings of Rome, called the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Leges
Regiæ</span></span>, chiefly related to sacred subjects,—regulations of
police,—divisions of the different orders in the state,—and
privileges of the people. Tarquinius Superbus having laid a
plan for the establishment of despotism at Rome, attempted to
abolish every law of his predecessors which imposed control
on the royal prerogative. About the time of his expulsion<a id="noteref_294" name="noteref_294" href="#note_294"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">294</span></span></a>,
the Senate and people, believing that the disregard of the laws
was occasioned by their never having been reduced in writing,
determined to have them assembled and recorded in one
volume; and this task was intrusted by them to Sextus Papyrius,
a <a name="corr133" id="corr133" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">patrician.</span> Papyrius accordingly collected, with great
assiduity, all the laws of the monarchs who had governed
Rome previously to the time of Tarquin. This collection,
which is sometimes called the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Leges Regiæ</span></span>, and sometimes
the Papyrian Code, did not obtain that confirmation and permanence
which might have been expected. Many of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Leges
Regiæ</span></span> were the result of momentary emergencies, and
inapplicable to future circumstances. Being the ordinances,
too, of a detested race, and being in some respects but ill
adapted to the genius and temper of a republican government,
a great number of them soon fell into desuetude<a id="noteref_295" name="noteref_295" href="#note_295"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">295</span></span></a>. The new
laws promulgated immediately after the expulsion of the kings,
related more to those constitutional modifications which were
rendered necessary by so important a revolution, than to the
civil rights of the citizen. In consequence of the dissensions
of the patricians and plebeians, every <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Senatusconsultum</span></span> proceeding
from the deliberations of the Senate was negatived by
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">veto</span></span> of the Tribunes, while the Senate, in return, disowned
the authority of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Plebiscita</span></span>, and denied the right of the
Tribunes to propose laws. There was thus a sort of legal interregnum
at Rome; at least, there were no fixed rules to
which all classes were equally subjected: and the great body
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page134">[pg 134]</span><a name="Pg134" id="Pg134" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>of the people were too often the victims of the pride of the
patricians and tyranny of the consular government. In this
situation, C. Terentius Arsa brought forward the law known
by the name of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Terentilla</span></span>, of which the object was the election
by the people of ten persons, who should compose and
arrange a body of laws for the administration of public affairs,
as well as decision of the civil rights of individuals according
to established rules. The Senate, who maintained that the
dispensation of justice was solely vested in the supreme magistrates,
contrived, for five years, to postpone execution of this
salutary measure; but it was at length agreed, that, as a preparatory
step, and before the creation of the Decemvirs, who were
to form this code, three deputies should be sent to Greece,
and the Greek towns of Italy, to select such enactments as they
might consider best adapted to the manners and customs of the
Roman people.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The delegates, who departed on this embassy towards the
close of the year 300, were occupied two years in their important
mission. From what cities of Greece, or Magna Græcia,
they chiefly borrowed their laws, has been a topic of much
discussion, and seems to be still involved in much uncertainty<a id="noteref_296" name="noteref_296" href="#note_296"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">296</span></span></a>;
though Athens is most usually considered as having been the
great fountain of their legislation.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
On the return of the deputies to Rome, the office of Consul
was suppressed, and ten magistrates, called Decemvirs, among
whom these deputies were included, were immediately created.
To them was confided the care of digesting the prodigious
mass of laws which had been brought from Greece.
This task they accomplished with the aid of Hermodorus, an
exile of Ephesus, who then happened to be at Rome, and acted
as their interpreter. But although the importation from
Greece formed the chief part of the twelve tables, it cannot
be supposed that the ancient laws of Rome were entirely superseded.
Some of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Leges Regiæ</span></span>, which had no reference
to monarchical government, as the laws of Romulus,
concerning the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Patria potestas</span></span>, those concerning parricides,
the removal of landmarks, and insolvent debtors, had, by tacit
consent, passed into consuetudinary law; and all those which
were still in observance were incorporated in the Decemviral
Code; in the same manner as the institutions of the heroic
ages of Greece formed a part of the laws of Solon and Lycurgus.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Before a year had elapsed from the date of their creation,
the Decemvirs had prepared ten books of laws; which, being
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page135">[pg 135]</span><a name="Pg135" id="Pg135" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>engraved on wooden or ivory tables, were presented to the
people, and received the sanction of the Senate, and ratification
of the Comitia Centuriata. Two supplementary tables
were soon afterwards added, in consequence of some omissions
which were observed and pointed out to the Decemvirs. In
all these tables the laws were briefly expressed. The first
eight related to matters of private right, the ninth to those of
public, and the tenth to those of religious concern. These
ten tables established very equitable rules for all different
ranks, without distinction; but in the two supplemental tables
some invidious distinctions were introduced, and many exclusive
privileges conferred on the patricians.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
On the whole, the Decemvirs appear to have been very
well versed in the science of legislation. Those who, like
Cicero<a id="noteref_297" name="noteref_297" href="#note_297"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">297</span></span></a> and Tacitus, possessed the Twelve Tables complete,
and who were the most competent judges of how far they
were adapted to the circumstances and manners of the people,
have highly commended the wisdom of these laws. Modern
detractors have chiefly objected to the sanguinary punishments
they inflicted, the principles of the law of retaliation
which they recognized, and the barbarous privileges permitted
to creditors on the persons of their debtors. The severer
enactments, however, of the Twelve Tables, were evidently
never put in force, or so soon became obsolete, that the Roman
laws were at length esteemed remarkable for the mildness
of their punishments—the penalties of scourging, or death,
being scarcely in any case inflicted on a Roman citizen.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The tables on which the Decemviral Code had been inscribed,
were destroyed by the Gauls at the sack of the city;
but such pains were taken in recovering copies, or making
them out from recollection, that the laws themselves were almost
completely re-established.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It might reasonably have been expected that a system of
jurisprudence, carefully extracted from the whole legislative
wisdom of Italy and Greece, should have restored in the commonwealth
that good order and security which had been overthrown
by the uncertainty of the laws, and the disputes of the
patricians and plebeians. But the event did not justify the
well-founded expectation. The ambition and lawless passions
of the chief Decemvir had rendered it necessary for him
and his colleagues to abdicate their authority before they had
settled with sufficient precision how their enactments were to
be put in practice or enforced. It thus became essential to
introduce certain <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">formulæ</span></span>, called <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Legis Actiones</span></span>, in order
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page136">[pg 136]</span><a name="Pg136" id="Pg136" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>that the mode of procedure might not remain arbitrary and
uncertain. These, consisting chiefly of certain symbolical
gestures, adapted to a legal claim or defence, were prepared by
Claudius Cœcus about the middle of the fifth century of Rome,
but were intended to be kept private among the pontiffs
and patrician Jurisconsults, that the people might not have
the benefit of the law without their assistance. Cl. Flavius,
however, a secretary of Claudius, having access to these
formularies, transcribed and communicated them to the people
about the middle of the fifth century of Rome. From
this circumstance they were called the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Jus civile Flavianum</span></span>.
This discovery was so disagreeable to the patricians, that
they devised new legal forms, which they kept secret with
still more care than the others. But in 553, Sextus Ælius
Catus divulged them again, and in consequence, these last
prescripts obtained the name of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Jus Ælium</span></span>, which may be regarded
as the last part and completion of the Decemviral
laws; and it continued to be employed as the form of process
during the whole remaining period of the existence of the
commonwealth.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
As long as the republic survived, the Twelve Tables formed
the foundation of the Roman law, though they were interpreted
and enlarged by such new enactments as the circumstances
of the state demanded<a id="noteref_298" name="noteref_298" href="#note_298"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">298</span></span></a>. Thus the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lex Aquilia</span></span> and
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Alinia</span></span> were mere modifications of different heads of the
twelve tables. Most of the new laws were introduced in
consequence of the increase of empire and luxury, and the
conflicting interests of the various orders in the state. Laws,
properly so called, were proposed by a superior magistrate,
as the Consul, Dictator, or Prætor, with consent of the Senate;
they were passed by the whole body of the people, patricians
and plebeians, assembled in the Comitia Centuriata,
and bore ever after the name of the proposer.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Plebiscita</span></span> were enacted by the plebeians in the Comitia
Tributa, apart from the patricians, and independently of
the sanction of the Senate, at the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">rogation</span></span> of their own Tribunes,
instead of one of the superior magistrates. The patricians
generally resisted these decrees, as they were chiefly
directed against the authority of the Senate, and the privileges
of the higher orders of the state. But, by the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lex Horatia</span></span>,
the same weight and authority were given to them as to
laws properly so termed, and thenceforth they differed only in
name, and the manner in which they were enacted.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page137">[pg 137]</span><a name="Pg137" id="Pg137" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
A <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Senatusconsultum</span></span> was an ordinance of the Senate on
those points concerning which it possessed exclusive authority;
but rather referred to matters of state, as the distribution of
provinces, the application of public money, and the like, than
to the ordinary administration of justice.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The patricians, being deprived by the Twelve Tables of the
privilege of arbitrarily pronouncing decisions, as best suited
their interests; and being frustrated in their miserable attempts
to maintain an undue advantage in matters of form,
by secreting the rules of procedure held in courts of justice,
they had now reserved to them only the power of interpreting
to others the scope and spirit of the laws. Till the age, at
least, of Augustus, the civil law was completely unconnected
and dissipated; and no systematic, accessible, or authoritative
treatise on the subject, appeared during the existence of the
republic<a id="noteref_299" name="noteref_299" href="#note_299"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">299</span></span></a>. The laws of the Twelve Tables were extremely
concise and elliptical; and it seems highly probable that they
were written in this style, not for the sake of perspicuity, but
to leave all that required to be supplied or interpreted in the
power of the Patricians<a id="noteref_300" name="noteref_300" href="#note_300"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">300</span></span></a>. The changes, too, in the customs
and language of the Romans, rendered the style of the Twelve
Tables less familiar to each succeeding generation; and the
ambiguous passages were but imperfectly explained by the
study of legal antiquarians. It was the custom, likewise, for
each successive Prætor to publish an edict, announcing the
manner in which justice was to be distributed by him—the
rules which he proposed to follow in the decision of doubtful
cases; and the degree of relief which his equity would afford
from the precise rigour of ancient statutes. This annual alteration
in forms, and sometimes even in the principles of law,
introduced a confusion, which persons engrossed with other
occupations could not unravel. The obscurity of old laws,
and fluctuating jurisdiction of the Prætors, gave rise to that
class of men called Jurisconsults, whose business it was to explain
legal difficulties, and reconcile statutory contradictions.
It was the relation of patron and client, which was coeval almost
with the city itself, and was invested with a sacred, inviolable
character, that gave weight to the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">dicta</span></span> of those who,
in some measure, came in place of the ancient patrons, and
usually belonged to the patrician order.—<span class="tei tei-q">“On the public
days of market or assembly,”</span> says Gibbon, <span class="tei tei-q">“the masters of
the art were seen walking in the Forum, ready to impart the
needful advice to the meanest of their fellow-citizens, from
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page138">[pg 138]</span><a name="Pg138" id="Pg138" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>whose votes, on a future occasion, they might solicit a grateful
return. As their years and honours increased, they seated
themselves at home on a chair or throne, to expect with
patient gravity the visits of their clients, who, at the dawn of
day, from the town and country, began to thunder at their
door. The duties of social life, and incidents of judicial proceedings,
were the ordinary subject of these consultations;
and the verbal or written opinions of the jurisconsults were
framed according to the rules of prudence and law. The
youths of their own order and family were permitted to listen;
their children enjoyed the benefit of more private lessons; and
the Mucian race was long renowned for the hereditary knowledge
of the civil law<a id="noteref_301" name="noteref_301" href="#note_301"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">301</span></span></a>.”</span> Though the judges and prætors
were not absolutely obliged, till the time of the emperors, to
follow the recorded opinions of the Jurisconsults, they possessed
during the existence of the republic a preponderating
weight and authority. The province of legislation was thus
gradually invaded by these expounders of ancient statutes, till
at length their recorded opinions, the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Responsa Prudentum</span></span>,
became so numerous, and of such authority, that they formed
the greatest part of the system of Roman jurisprudence,
whence they were styled by Cicero, in his oration for Cæcina,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Jus Civile</span></span>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is perfectly evident, however, that the civil law was neither
much studied nor known by the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">orators</span></span> of the Senate,
and Forum. Cicero, in his treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, informs us,
that Ser. Galba, the first speaker of his day, was ignorant of
law, inexperienced in civil rights, and uncertain as to the institutions
of his ancestors. In his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span> he says nearly the
same thing of Antony and Sulpicius, who were the two greatest
orators of their age, and who, he declares, knew nothing of
public, private, or civil law. Antony in particular, always
expressed a contempt for the study of the civil law<a id="noteref_302" name="noteref_302" href="#note_302"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">302</span></span></a>. Accordingly,
in the dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, he is made to say, <span class="tei tei-q">“I never
studied the civil law, nor have I been sensible of any loss from
my ignorance of it in those causes which I was capable of
managing in our courts<a id="noteref_303" name="noteref_303" href="#note_303"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">303</span></span></a>.”</span> In the same dialogue, Scævola
says, <span class="tei tei-q">“The present age is totally ignorant of the laws of the
Twelve Tables, except you, Crassus, who, led by curiosity,
rather than from its being any province annexed to eloquence,
studied civil law under me.”</span> In his oration for Muræna, Cicero
talks lightly of the study of the civil law, and treats his opponent
with scorn on account of his knowledge of its words of
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page139">[pg 139]</span><a name="Pg139" id="Pg139" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>style and forms of procedure<a id="noteref_304" name="noteref_304" href="#note_304"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">304</span></span></a>. With exception, then, of Crassus,
and of Scævola, who was rather a jurisconsult than a speaker,
the orators of the age of Cicero, as well as those who
preceded it, were uninstructed in law, and considered it as no
part of their duty to render themselves masters, either of the
general principles of jurisprudence, or the municipal institutions
of the state. Crassus, indeed, expresses his opinion,
that it is impossible for an orator to do justice to his client
without some knowledge of law, particularly in questions tried
before the Centumviri, who had cognizance of points with regard
to egress and regress in property, the interests of minors,
and alterations in the course of rivers; and he mentions several
cases, some of a criminal nature, which had lately occurred at
Rome, where the question hinged entirely on the civil law,
and required constant reference to precedents and authorities.
Antony, however, explains how all this may be managed. A
speaker, for example, ignorant of the mode of drawing up an
agreement, and unacquainted with the forms of a contract, might
defend the rights of a woman who has been contracted in
marriage, because there were persons who brought everything
to the orator or patron, ready prepared,—presenting him with
a brief, or memorial, not only on matters of fact, but on the
decrees of the Senate, the precedents and the opinions of the
jurisconsults. It also appears that there were solicitors, or
professors of civil law, whom the orators consulted on any
point concerning which they wished to be instructed, and the
knowledge of which might be necessary previous to their appearance
in the Forum. In this situation, the harangue of the
orator was more frequently an appeal to the equity, common
sense, or feelings of the judge, than to the laws of his country.
Now, where a pleader addresses himself to the equity of his
judges, he has much more occasion, and also much more scope,
to display his eloquence, than where he must draw his arguments
from strict law, statutes, and precedents. In the former
case, many circumstances must be taken into account; many
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page140">[pg 140]</span><a name="Pg140" id="Pg140" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>personal considerations regarded; and even favour and inclination,
which it belongs to the orator to conciliate, by his
art and eloquence, may be disguised under the appearance of
equity. Accordingly, Cicero, while speaking in his own person,
only says, that the science of law and civil rights should
not be neglected; but he does not seem to consider it as essential
to the orator of the Forum, while he enlarges on the
necessity of elegance of language, the erudition of the scholar,
a ready and popular wit, and a power of moving the passions<a id="noteref_305" name="noteref_305" href="#note_305"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">305</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
That these were the arts to which the Roman orators chiefly
trusted for success in the causes of their clients, is apparent
from the remains of their discourses, and from what is said of
the mode of pleading in the rhetorical treatises of Cicero.
<span class="tei tei-q">“Pontius,”</span> says Antony, in the dialogue so often quoted, <span class="tei tei-q">“had
a son, who served in the war with the Cimbri, and whom he
had destined to be his heir; but his father, believing a false report
which was spread of his death, made a will in favour of
another child. The soldier returned after the decease of his
parent; and, had you been employed to defend his cause, you
would not have discussed the legal doctrine as to the priority
or validity of testaments; you would have raised his father
from the grave, made him embrace his child, and recommend
him, with many tears, to the protection of the Centumviri.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Antony, speaking of one of his own most celebrated orations,
says, that his whole address consisted, 1st, in moving
the passions; 2d, in recommending <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">himself</span></span>; and that it was
thus, and not by convincing the understanding of the judges,
that he baffled the impeachment against his clients<a id="noteref_306" name="noteref_306" href="#note_306"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">306</span></span></a>. Valerius
Maximus has supplied, in his eighth book, many examples
of unexpected and unmerited acquittals, as well as condemnations,
from bursts of compassion and theatrical incidents. The
wonderful influence, too, of a ready and popular wit in the
management of causes, is apparent from the instances given
in the second book <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span> of the effects it had produced
in the Forum. The jests which are there recorded, though
not very excellent, may be regarded as the finest flowers of
wit of the Roman bar. Sometimes they were directed against
the opposite party, his patron, or witnesses; and, if sufficiently
impudent, seldom failed of effect.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
That the principles and precepts of the civil law were so
little studied by the Roman orators, and hardly ever alluded
to in their harangues, while, on the other hand, the arts of persuasion,
and wit, and excitement of the passions, were 
all-pow<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page141">[pg 141]</span><a name="Pg141" id="Pg141" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>erful, and were the great engines of legal discussion, must be
attributed to the constitution of the courts of law, and the
nature of the judicial procedure, which, though very imperfect
for the administration of justice, were well adapted to promote
and exercise the highest powers of eloquence. It was the
forms of procedure—the description of the courts before which
questions were tried—and the nature of these questions themselves<a id="noteref_307" name="noteref_307" href="#note_307"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">307</span></span></a>—that
gave to Roman oratory such dazzling splendour,
and surrounded it with a glory, which can never shine on the
efforts of rhetoric in a better-regulated community, and under
a more sober dispensation of justice.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The great exhibitions of eloquence were, 1st, In the civil
and criminal causes tried before the Prætor, or judges appointed
under his eye. 2d, The discussions on laws proposed in
the assemblies of the people. 3d, The deliberations of the
Senate.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The Prætor sat in the Forum, the name given to the great
square situated between Mount Palatine and the Capitol, and
there administered justice. Sometimes he heard causes in
the Basilicæ, or halls which were built around the Forum;
but at other times the court of the Prætor was held in the area
of the Forum, on which a tribunal was hastily erected, and a
certain space for the patron, client, and witnesses, was railed
off, and protected from the encroachment of surrounding
spectators. This space was slightly covered above for the
occasion with canvass, but being exposed to the air on all
sides, the court was an open one, in the strictest sense of the
term<a id="noteref_308" name="noteref_308" href="#note_308"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">308</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
From the time of the first Punic war there were two Prætors,
to whom the cognizance of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">civil</span></span> suits was committed,—the
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Prætor urbanus</span></span> and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Prætor peregrinus</span></span>. The former
tried the causes of citizens according to the Roman laws;
the latter judged the cases of allies and strangers by the principles
of natural equity; but as judicial business multiplied, the
number of Prætors was increased to six. The Prætor was the
chief judge in all questions that did not fall under the immediate
cognizance of the assemblies of the people or the Senate.
Every action, therefore, came, in the first instance, before the
Prætor; but he decided only in civil suits of importance: and
if the cause was not of sufficient magnitude for the immediate
investigation of his tribunal, or hinged entirely on matters of
fact, he appointed one or more persons to judge of it. These
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page142">[pg 142]</span><a name="Pg142" id="Pg142" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>were chosen from a list of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">judices selecti</span></span>, which was made up
from the three orders of senators, knights, and people. If but
one person was appointed, he was properly called a <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">judex</span></span>, or
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">arbiter</span></span>. The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">judex</span></span> determined only such cases as were easy,
or of small importance; and he was bound to proceed according
to an express law, or a certain form prescribed to him by
the Prætor. The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">arbiter</span></span> decided in questions of equity
which were not sufficiently defined by law, and his powers
were not so restricted by the Prætor as those of the ordinary
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">judex</span></span>. When more persons than one were nominated by the
Prætor, they were termed <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Recuperatores</span></span>, and they settled
points of law or equity requiring much deliberation. Certain
cases, particularly those relating to testaments or successions,
were usually remitted by the Prætor to the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Centumviri</span></span>, who
were 105 persons, chosen equally from the thirty-five tribes.
The Prætor, before sending a case to any of those, whom I
may call by the general name of judges, though, in fact, they
more nearly resembled our jury, made up a <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">formula</span></span>, as it was
called, or issue on which they were to decide; as, for example,
<span class="tei tei-q">“If it be proved that the field is in possession of Servilius, give
sentence against Catulus, unless he produce a testament, from
which it shall appear to belong to him.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It was in presence of these judges that the patrons and
orators, surrounded by a crowd of friends and retainers, pleaded
the causes of their clients. They commenced with a brief
exposition of the nature of the points in dispute. Witnesses
were afterwards examined, and the arguments on the case
were enforced in a formal harangue. A decision was then
given, according to the opinion of a majority of the judges.
The Centumviri continued to act as judges for a whole year;
but the other <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">judices</span></span> only sat till the particular cause was determined
for which they had been appointed. They remained,
however, on the numerous list of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">judices selecti</span></span>, and were
liable to be again summoned till the end of the year, when a
new set was chosen for the judicial business of the ensuing
season. The Prætor had the power of reversing the decisions
of the judges, if it appeared that any fraud or gross error had
been committed. If neither was alleged, he charged himself
with the duty of seeing the sentence which the judges had pronounced
carried into execution. Along with his judicial and
ministerial functions, the Prætor possessed a sort of legislative
power, by which he supplied the deficiency of laws that were
found inadequate for many civil emergencies. Accordingly,
each new Prætor, as we have already seen, when he entered
on his office, issued an edict, announcing the supplementary
code which he intended to follow. Every Prætor had a
to<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page143">[pg 143]</span><a name="Pg143" id="Pg143" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>tally different edict; and, what was worse, none thought of
adhering to the rules which he had himself traced; till at
length, in the year 686, the Cornelian law, which met with
much opposition, prohibited the Prætor from departing in
practice from those principles, or regulations, he had laid down
in his edict.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Capital trials, that is, all those which regarded the life or
liberty of a Roman citizen, had been held in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Comitia
Centuriata</span></span>, after the institution of these assemblies by Servius
Tullius; but the authority of the people had been occasionally
delegated to Inquisitors, (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Quæsitores</span></span>,) in points previously
fixed by law. For some time, all criminal matters of consequence
were determined in this manner: But from the multiplicity
of trials, which increased with the extent and vices of
the republic, other means of despatching them were necessarily
resorted to. The Prætors, originally, judged only in civil
suits; but in the time of Cicero, and indeed from the beginning
of the seventh century, four of the six Prætors were nominated
to preside at criminal trials—one taking cognizance of questions
of extortion—a second of peculation—a third of illegal
canvass—and the last, of offences against the state, as the
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Crimen majestatis</span></span>, or treason. To these, Sylla, in the middle
of the seventh century, added four more, who inquired
into acts of public or private violence. In trials of importance,
the Prætor was assisted by the counsel of select judges or
jurymen, who originally were all chosen from the Senate, and
afterwards from the order of Knights; but in Cicero’s time, in
consequence of a law of Cotta, they were taken from the Senators,
Knights, and Tribunes of the treasury. The number
of these assessors, who were appointed for the year, and nominated
by the Prætor, varied from 300 to 600; and from them
a smaller number was chosen by lot for each individual case.
Any Roman citizen might accuse another before the Prætor;
and not unfrequently the young patricians undertook the
prosecution of an obnoxious magistrate, merely to recommend
themselves to the notice or favour of their countrymen. In
such cases there was often a competition between two persons
for obtaining the management of the impeachment, and the
preference was determined by a previous trial, called <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Divinatio</span></span>.
This preliminary point being settled, and the day of the
principal trial fixed, the accuser, in his first speech, explained
the nature of the case,—fortifying his statements as he proceeded
by proofs, which consisted in the voluntary testimony
of free citizens, the declarations of slaves elicited by torture,
and written documents. Cicero made little account of the
evidence of slaves; but the art of extracting truth from a free
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page144">[pg 144]</span><a name="Pg144" id="Pg144" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>witness—of exalting or depreciating his character—and of
placing his deposition in a favourable light, was considered
among the most important qualifications of an orator. When
the evidence was concluded, the prosecutor enforced the
proofs by a set speech, after which the accused entered on his
defence.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But though the cognizance of crimes was in ordinary cases
delegated to the Prætors, still the Comitia reserved the power
of judging; and they actually did judge in causes, in which
the people, or tribunes, who dictated to them, took an interest,
and these were chiefly impeachments of public magistrates,
for bribery or peculation. It was not understood, in any
case, whether tried before the whole people or the Prætor, that
either party was to be very scrupulous in the observance of
truth. The judges, too, were sometimes overawed by an
array of troops, and by menaces. Canvassing for acquittal
and condemnation, were alike avowed, and bribery, at least
for the former purpose, was currently resorted to. Thus the
very crimes of the wretch who had plundered the province
intrusted to his care, afforded him the most obvious means of
absolution; and, to the wealthy peculator, nothing could be
more easy than an escape from justice, except the opportunity
of accusing the innocent and unprotected. <span class="tei tei-q">“Foreign
nations,”</span> says Cicero, <span class="tei tei-q">“will soon solicit the repeal of the law,
which prohibits the extortions of provincial magistrates; for
they will argue, that were all prosecutions on this law abolished,
their governors would take no more than what satisfied
their own rapacity, whereas now they exact over and above
this, as much as will be sufficient to gratify their patrons, the
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Prætor and the judges</span></span>; and that though they can furnish
enough to glut the avarice of one man, they are utterly unable
to pay for his impunity in guilt<a id="noteref_309" name="noteref_309" href="#note_309"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">309</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The organization of the judicial tribunals was wretched,
and their practice scandalous. The Senate, Prætors, and
Comitia, all partook of the legislative and judicial power, and
had a sort of reciprocal right of opposition and reversal, which
they exercised to gratify their avarice or prejudices, and not
with any view to the ends of justice. But however injurious
this system might be to those who had claims to urge, or
rights to defend, it afforded the most ample field for the excursions
of eloquence. The Prætors, though the supreme
judges, were not men bred to the law—advanced in years—familiarized
with precedents—secure of independence—and
fixed in their stations for life. They were young men of
lit<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page145">[pg 145]</span><a name="Pg145" id="Pg145" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>tle experience, who held the office for a season, and proceeded
through it, to what were considered as the most important
situations of the republic. Though their procedure was
strict in some trivial points of preliminary form, devised by
the ancient Jurisconsults, they enjoyed, in more essential matters,
a perilous latitude. On the dangerous pretext of equity,
they eluded the law by various subtilties or fictions; and
thus, without being endued with legislative authority, they
abrogated ancient enactments according to caprice. It was
worse when, in civil cases, the powers of the Prætor were
intrusted to the judges; or when, in criminal trials, the jurisdiction
was assumed by the whole people. The inexperience,
ignorance, and popular prejudices of those who were to
decide them, rendered litigations extremely uncertain, and
dependent, not on any fixed law or principle, but on the
opinions or passions of tumultuary judges, which were to be
influenced and moved by the arts of oratory. This furnished
ample scope for displaying all that interesting and various
eloquence, with which the pleadings of the ancient orators
abounded. The means to be employed for success, were
conciliating favour, rousing attention, removing or fomenting
prejudice, but, above all, exciting compassion. Hence we
find, that in the defence of a criminal, while a law or precedent
was seldom mentioned, every thing was introduced
which could serve to gain the favour of the judges, or move
their pity. The accused, as soon as the day of trial was fixed,
assumed an apparently neglected garb; and although allowed,
whatever was the crime, to go at large till sentence was
pronounced, he usually attended in court surrounded by his
friends, and sometimes accompanied by his children, in order
to give a more piteous effect to the lamentations and exclamations
of his counsel, when he came to that part of the oration,
in which the fallen and helpless state of his client was
to be suitably bewailed. Piso, justly accused of oppression
towards the allies, having prostrated himself on the earth in
order to kiss the feet of his judges, and having risen with his
face defiled with mud, obtained an immediate acquittal.
Even where the cause was good, it was necessary to address
the passions, and to rely on the judge’s feelings of compassion,
rather than on his perceptions of right. Rutilius prohibited
all exclamations and entreaties to be used in his defence:
He even forbade the accustomed and expected excitement of
invocations, and stamping with the feet; and <span class="tei tei-q">“he was condemned,”</span>
says Cicero, <span class="tei tei-q">“though the most virtuous of the Romans,
because his counsel was compelled to plead for him as
he would have done in the republic of Plato.”</span> It thus
ap<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page146">[pg 146]</span><a name="Pg146" id="Pg146" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>pears, that it was dangerous to trust to innocence alone, and
the judges were the capricious arbiters of the fate of their
fellow-citizens, and not (as their situation so urgently required)
the inflexible interpreters of the laws of their exalted
country.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But if the manner of treating causes was favourable to the
exertions of eloquence, much also must be allowed for the
nature of the questions themselves, especially those of a criminal
description, tried before the Prætor or people. One can
scarcely figure more glorious opportunities for the display of
oratory, than were afforded by those complaints of the oppressed
and plundered provinces against their rapacious governors.
From the extensive ramifications of the Roman
power, there continually arose numerous cases of a description
that can rarely occur in other countries, and which are
unexampled in the history of Britain, except in a memorable
impeachment, which not merely displayed, but created such
eloquence as can be called forth only by splendid topics,
without which rhetorical indignation would seem extravagant,
and attempted pathos ridiculous.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The spot, too, on which the courts of justice assembled,
was calculated to inspire and heighten eloquence. The Roman
Forum presented one of the most splendid spectacles that
eye could behold, or fancy conceive. This space formed an
oblong square between the Palatine and Capitoline hills, composed
of a vast assemblage of sumptuous though irregular
edifices. On the side next the Palatine hill stood the ancient
Senate-house, and Comitium, and Temple of Romulus the
Founder. On the opposite quarter, it was bounded by the
Capitol, with its ascending range of porticos, and the temple
of the tutelar deity on the summit. The other sides of the
square were adorned with basilicæ, and piazzas terminated by
triumphal arches; and were bordered with statues, erected
to the memory of the ancient heroes or preservers of their
country<a id="noteref_310" name="noteref_310" href="#note_310"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">310</span></span></a>. Having been long the theatre of the factions, the
politics, the intrigues, the crimes, and the revolutions of the
capital, every spot of its surface was consecrated to the
recollection of some great incident in the domestic history of
the Romans; while their triumphs over foreign enemies were
vividly called to remembrance by the Rostrum itself, which
stood in the centre of the vacant area, and by other trophies
gained from vanquished nations:—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Et cristæ capitum, et portarum ingentia claustra,</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Spiculaque, clipeique, ereptaque rostra carinis<a id="noteref_311" name="noteref_311" href="#note_311"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">311</span></span></a>.”</span></div>
</div>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page147">[pg 147]</span><a name="Pg147" id="Pg147" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
A vast variety of shops, stored with a profusion of the most
costly merchandize, likewise surrounded this heart and centre
of the world, so that it was the mart for all important commercial
transactions. Being thus the emporium of law,
politics, and trade, it became the resort of men of business,
as well as of those loiterers whom Horace calls <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Forenses</span></span>.
Each Roman citizen, regarding himself as a member of the
same vast and illustrious family, scrutinized with jealous
watchfulness the conduct of his rulers, and looked with anxious
solicitude to the issue of every important cause. In all
trials of oppression or extortion, the Roman multitude took a
particular interest,—repairing in such numbers to the Forum,
that even its spacious square was hardly sufficient to contain
those who were attracted to it by curiosity; and who, in the
course of the trial, were in the habit of expressing their feelings
by shouts and acclamations, so that the orator was ever
surrounded by a crowded and tumultuary audience. This
numerous assembly, too, while it inspired the orator with
confidence and animation, after he had commenced his harangue,
created in prospect that anxiety which led to the most
careful preparation previous to his appearance in public.
The apprehension and even trepidation felt by the greatest
speakers at Rome on the approach of the day fixed for the
hearing of momentous causes, is evident from many passages
of the rhetorical works of Cicero. The Roman orator thus
addressed his judges with all the advantages derived both
from the earnest study of the closet, and the exhilaration imparted
to him by unrestrained and promiscuous applause.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
2. Next to the courts of justice, the great theatre for the
display of eloquence, was the Comitia, or assemblies of the
people, met to deliberate on the proposal of passing a new
law, or abrogating an old one. A law was seldom offered
for consideration but some orator was found to dissuade its
adoption; and as in the courts of justice the passions of the
judges were addressed, so the favourers or opposers of a law
did not confine themselves to the expediency of the measure,
but availed themselves of the prejudices of the people, alternately
confirming their errors, indulging their caprices, gratifying
their predilections, exciting their jealousies, and fomenting
their dislikes. Here, more than anywhere, the many were
to be courted by the few—here, more than anywhere, was
created that excitement which is most favourable to the influence
of eloquence, and forms indeed the element in which
alone it breathes with freedom.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
3. Finally, the deliberations of the Senate, which was the
great council of the state, afforded, at least to its members,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page148">[pg 148]</span><a name="Pg148" id="Pg148" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>the noblest opportunities for the exertions of eloquence.
This august and numerous body consisted of individuals who
had reached a certain age, and who were possessed of a certain
extent of property, who were supposed to be of unblemished
reputation, and most of whom had passed through the
annual magistracies of the state. They were consulted upon
almost everything that regarded the administration or safety
of the commonwealth. The power of making war and peace,
though it ultimately lay with the people assembled in the
Comitia Centuriata, was generally left by them entirely to the
Senate, who passed a decree of peace or war previous to the
suffrages of the Comitia. The Senate, too, had always reserved
to itself the supreme direction and superintendance of
the religion of the country, and the distribution of the public
revenue—the levying or disbanding troops, and fixing the
service on which they should be employed—the nomination
of governors for the provinces—the rewards assigned to successful
generals for their victories, and the guardianship of
the state in times of civil dissension. These were the great
subjects of debate in the Senate, and they were discussed on
certain fixed days of the year, when its members assembled of
course, or when they were summoned together for any emergency.
They invariably met in a temple, or other consecrated
place, in order to give solemnity to their proceedings,
as being conducted under the immediate eye of Heaven.
The Consul, who presided, opened the business of the day,
by a brief exposition of the question which was to be considered
by the assembly. He then asked the opinions of the
members in the order of rank and seniority. Freedom of debate
was exercised in its greatest latitude; for, though no senator
was permitted to deliver his sentiments till it came to his
turn, he had then a right to speak as long as he thought proper,
without being in the smallest degree confined to the point in
question. Sometimes, indeed, the Conscript Fathers consulted
on the state of the commonwealth in general; but
even when summoned to deliberate on a particular subject,
they seem to have enjoyed the privilege of talking about anything
else which happened to be uppermost in their minds.
Thus we find that Cicero took the opportunity of delivering
his seventh Philippic when the Senate was consulted concerning
the Appian Way, the coinage, and Luperci—subjects
which had no relation to Antony, against whom he inveighed
from one end of his oration to the other, without taking the
least notice of the only points which were referred to the
consideration of the
senators<a id="noteref_312" name="noteref_312" href="#note_312"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">312</span></span></a>. The resolution of the
    major<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page149">[pg 149]</span><a name="Pg149" id="Pg149" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>ity was expressed in the shape of a decree, which, though not
properly a law, was entitled to the same reverence on the
point to which it related; and, except in matters where the
interests of the state required concealment, all pains were
taken to give the utmost publicity to the whole proceedings
of the Senate.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The number of the Senate varied, but in the time of Cicero,
it was nearly the same as the British House of Commons; but
it required a larger number to make a quorum. Sometimes
there were between 400 and 500 members present; but 200,
at least during certain seasons of the year, formed what was
accounted a full house. This gave to senatorial eloquence
something of the spirit and animation created by the presence
of a popular assembly, while at the same time the deliberative
majesty of the proceedings required a weight of argument
and dignity of demeanour, unlooked for in the Comitia,
or Forum. Accordingly, the levity, ingenuity, and wit,
which were there so often crowned with success and applause,
were considered as misplaced in the Senate, where the consular,
or prætorian orator, had to prevail by depth of reasoning,
purity of expression, and an apparent zeal for the public
good.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It was the authority of the Senate, with the calm and
imposing aspect of its deliberations, that gave to Latin oratory
a somewhat different character from the eloquence of
Greece, to which, in consequence of the Roman spirit of imitation,
it bore, in many respects, so close a resemblance.
The power of the Areopagus, which was originally the most
dignified assembly at Athens, had been retrenched amid the
democratic innovations of Pericles. From that period, everything,
even the most important affairs of state, depended entirely,
in the pure democracy of Athens, on the opinion, or
rather the momentary caprice of an inconstant people, who
were fond of pleasure and repose, who were easily swayed by
novelty, and were confident in their power. As their precipitate
decisions thus often hung on an instant of enthusiasm,
the orator required to dart into their bosoms those electric
sparks of eloquence which inflamed their passions, and left
no corner of the mind fitted for cool consideration. It was
the business of the speaker to allow them no time to recover
from the shock, for its force would have been spent had they
been permitted to occupy themselves with the beauties of
style and diction. <span class="tei tei-q">“Applaud not the orator,”</span> says
Demos<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page150">[pg 150]</span><a name="Pg150" id="Pg150" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>thenes, at the end of one of his Philippics, <span class="tei tei-q">“but do what I
have recommended. I cannot save you by my words, you
must save yourselves by your actions.”</span> When the people
were persuaded, every thing was accomplished, and their decision
was embodied in a sort of decree by the orator. The
people of Rome, on the other hand, were more reflective and
moderate, and less vain than the Athenians; nor was the whole
authority of the state vested in them. There was, on the
contrary, an accumulation of powers, and a complication of
different interests to be managed. Theoretically, indeed, the
sovereignty was in the people, but the practical government
was intrusted to the Senate. As we see from Cicero’s third
oration, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Lege Agraria</span></span>, the same affairs were often treated
at the same time in the Senate and on the Rostrum. Hence,
in the judicial and legislative proceedings, in which, as we
have seen, the feelings of the judges and prejudices of the
vulgar were so frequently appealed to, some portion of the
senatorial spirit pervaded and controlled the popular assemblies,
restrained the impetuosity of decision, and gave to those
orators of the Forum, or Comitia, who had just spoken, or
were to speak next day in the Senate, a more grave and temperate
tone, than if their tongues had never been employed
but for the purpose of impelling a headlong multitude.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But if the Greeks were a more impetuous and inconstant,
they were also a more intellectual people than the Romans.
Literature and refinement were more advanced in the age of
Pericles than of Pompey. Now, in oratory, a popular audience
must be moved by what corresponds to the feelings and taste
of the age. With such an intelligent race as the Greeks, the
orator was obliged to employ the most accurate reasoning, and
most methodical arrangement of his arguments. The flowers
of rhetoric, unless they grew directly from the stem of his discourse,
were little admired. The Romans, on the other hand,
required the excitation of fancy, of comparisons, and metaphors,
and rhetorical decoration. Hence, the Roman orator
was more anxious to seduce the imagination than convince
the understanding; his discourse was adorned with frequent
digressions into the field of morals and philosophy, and he
was less studious of precision than of ornament.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
On the whole, the circumstances in the Roman constitution
and judicial procedure, appear to have wonderfully
conspired to render
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page151">[pg 151]</span><a name="Pg151" id="Pg151" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
<a name="toc17" id="toc17"></a><a name="pdf18" id="pdf18"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">CICERO</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
an accomplished orator. He was born and educated at a
period when he must have formed the most exalted idea of his
country. She had reached the height of power, and had not
yet sunk into submission or servility. The subjects to be
discussed, and characters to be canvassed, were thus of the
most imposing magnitude, and could still be treated with
freedom and independence. The education, too, which Cicero
had received, was highly favourable to his improvement. He
had the first philosophers of the age for his teachers, and he
studied the civil law under Scævola, the most learned jurisconsult
who had hitherto appeared in Rome. When he came
to attend the Forum, he enjoyed the advantage of daily hearing
Hortensius, unquestionably the most eloquent speaker who
had yet shone in the Forum or Senate. The harangues of
this great pleader formed his taste, and raised his emulation,
and, till near the conclusion of his oratorical career, acted as
an incentive to exertions, which might have abated, had he
been left without a competitor in the Forum. The blaze of
Hortensius’s rhetoric would communicate to his rival a brighter
flame of eloquence than if he had been called on to refute a
cold and inanimate adversary. Still, however, the great
secret of his distinguished oratorical eminence was, that notwithstanding
his vanity, he never fell into the apathy with regard
to farther improvement, by which self-complacency is so
often attended. On the contrary, Cicero, after he had delivered
two celebrated orations, which filled the Forum with his
renown, so far from resting satisfied with the acclamations of
the capital, abandoned, for a time, the brilliant career on
which he had entered, and travelled, during two years, through
the cities of Greece, in quest of philosophical improvement
and rhetorical instruction.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
With powers of speaking beyond what had yet been known
in his own country, and perhaps not inferior to those which had
ever adorned any other, he possessed, in a degree superior to
all orators, of whatever age or nation, a general and discursive
acquaintance with philosophy and literature, together
with an admirable facility of communicating the fruits of his
labours, in a manner the most copious, perspicuous, and attractive.
To this extensive knowledge, by which his mind was
enriched and supplied with endless topics of illustration—to
the lofty ideas of eloquence, which perpetually revolved in his
thoughts—to that image which ever haunted his breast, of
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page152">[pg 152]</span><a name="Pg152" id="Pg152" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>such infinite and superhuman perfection in oratory, that even
the periods of Demosthenes did not fill up the measure of his
conceptions<a id="noteref_313" name="noteref_313" href="#note_313"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">313</span></span></a>, we are chiefly indebted for those emanations of
genius, which have given, as it were, an immortal tongue to
the now desolate Forum and ruined Senate of Rome.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The first oration which Cicero pronounced, at least of those
which are extant, was delivered in presence of four judges
appointed by the Prætor, and with Hortensius for his opponent.
It was in the case of Quintius, which was pleaded in the year
672, when Cicero was 26 years of age, at which time he came
to the bar much later than was usual, after having studied civil
law under Mucius Scævola, and having further qualified himself
for the exercise of his profession by the study of polite literature
under the poet Archias, as also of philosophy under
the principal teachers of each sect who had resorted to Rome.
This case was undertaken by Cicero, at the request of the
celebrated comedian Roscius, the brother-in-law of Quintius;
but it was not of a nature well adapted to call forth or display
any of the higher powers of eloquence. It was a pure question
of civil right, and, in a great measure, a matter of form;
the dispute being whether his client had forfeited his recognisances,
and whether his opponent Nævius had got legal
possession of his effects by an edict which the Prætor had
pronounced, in consequence of the supposed forfeiture. But
even here, where the point was more one of dry legal discussion
than in any other oration of Cicero, we meet with much
invective, calculated to excite the indignation of the judges
against the adverse party, and many pathetic supplications,
interspersed with high-wrought pictures of the distresses of
his client, in order to raise their sympathy in his favour.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Sext. Roscio</span></span>. In the year following that in which he
pleaded the case of Quintius, Cicero undertook the defence of
Roscius of Ameria, which was the first public or criminal trial
in which he spoke. The father of Roscius had two mortal
enemies, of his own name and district. During the proscriptions
of Sylla, he was assassinated one evening at Rome,
while returning home from supper; and, on pretext that he
was in the list proscribed, his estate was purchased for a
mere nominal price by Chrysogonus, a favourite slave, to whom
Sylla had given freedom, and whom he had permitted to buy
the property of Roscius as a forfeiture. Part of the valuable
lands thus acquired, were made over by Chrysogonus to the
Roscii. These new proprietors, in order to secure themselves
in the possession, hired Erucius, an informer and prosecutor
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page153">[pg 153]</span><a name="Pg153" id="Pg153" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>by profession, to charge the son with the murder of his father,
and they, at the same time, suborned witnesses, in order to
convict him of the parricide. From dread of the power of
Sylla, the accused had difficulty in prevailing on any patron
to undertake his cause; but Cicero eagerly embraced this opportunity
to give a public testimony of his detestation of oppression
and tyranny. He exculpates his client, by enlarging
on the improbability of the accusation, whether with respect
to the enormity of the crime charged, or the blameless character
and innocent life of young Roscius. He shows, too, that
his enemies had completely failed in proving that he laboured
under the displeasure of his father, or had been disinherited
by him; and, in particular, that his constant residence in the
country was no evidence of this displeasure—a topic which
leads him to indulge in a beautiful commendation of a rural
life, and the ancient rustic simplicity of the Romans. But
while he thus vindicates the innocence of Roscius, the orator
has so managed his pleading, that it appears rather an artful
accusation of the two Roscii, than a defence of his own client.
He tries to fix on them the guilt of the murder, by showing
that they, and not the son, had reaped all the advantages of
the death of old Roscius, and that, availing themselves of the
strict law, which forbade slaves to be examined in evidence
against their masters, they would not allow those who were
with Roscius at the time of his assassination, but had subsequently
fallen into their own possession, to be put to the torture.
The whole case seems to have been pleaded with much
animation and spirit, but the oration was rather too much in
that florid Asiatic taste, which Cicero at this time had probably
adopted from imitation of Hortensius, who was considered
as the most perfect model of eloquence in the Forum; and
hence the celebrated passage on the punishment of parricide,
(which consisted in throwing the criminal, tied up in a sack,
into a river,) was condemned by the severer taste of his more
advanced years. <span class="tei tei-q">“Its intention,”</span> he declares, <span class="tei tei-q">“was to strike
the parricide at once out of the system of nature, by depriving
him of air, light, water, and earth, so that he who had destroyed
the author of his existence might be excluded from
those elements whence all things derived their being. He
was not thrown to wild beasts, lest their ferocity should be
augmented by the contagion of such guilt—he was not committed
naked to the stream, lest he should contaminate that
sea which washed away all other pollutions. Everything in
nature, however common, was accounted too good for him to
share in; for what is so common as air to the living, earth to
the dead, the sea to those who float, the shore to those who are
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page154">[pg 154]</span><a name="Pg154" id="Pg154" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>cast up. But the parricide lives so as not to breathe the air of
heaven, dies so that the earth cannot receive his bones, is tossed
by the waves so as not to be washed by them, so cast on the
shore as to find no rest on its rocks.”</span> This declamation was
received with shouts of applause by the audience; yet Cicero,
referring to it in subsequent works, calls it the exuberance of
a youthful fancy, which wanted the control of his sounder
judgment, and, like all the compositions of young men, was
not applauded so much on its own account, as for the promise
it gave of more improved and ripened talents<a id="noteref_314" name="noteref_314" href="#note_314"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">314</span></span></a>. This pleading
is also replete with severe and sarcastic declamation on
the audacity of the Roscii, as well as the overgrown power
and luxury of Chrysogonus; the orator has even hazarded an
insinuation against Sylla himself, which, however, he was
careful to palliate, by remarking, that through the multiplicity
of affairs, he was obliged to connive at many things which
his favourites did against his inclination.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cicero’s courage in defending and obtaining the acquittal
of Roscius, under the circumstances in which the case was
undertaken, was applauded by the whole city. By this public
opposition to the avarice of an agent of Sylla, who was
then in the plenitude of his power, and by the energy with
which he resisted an oppressive proceeding, he fixed his character
for a fearless and zealous patron of the injured, as
much as for an accomplished orator. The defence of Roscius,
which acquired him so much reputation in his youth, was remembered
by him with such delight in his old age, that he
recommends to his son, as the surest path to true honour, to
defend those who are unjustly oppressed, as he himself had
done in many causes, but particularly in that of Roscius of
Ameria, whom he had protected against Sylla himself, in the
height of his authority<a id="noteref_315" name="noteref_315" href="#note_315"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">315</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Immediately after the decision of this cause, Cicero, partly
on account of his health, and partly for improvement, travelled
into Greece and Asia, where he spent two years in the assiduous
study of philosophy and eloquence, under the ablest
teachers of Athens and Asia Minor. Nor was his style alone
formed and improved by imitation of the Greek rhetoricians:
his pronunciation also was corrected, by practising under
Greek masters, from whom he learned the art of commanding
his voice, and of giving it greater compass and variety than it
had hitherto attained<a id="noteref_316" name="noteref_316" href="#note_316"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">316</span></span></a>. The first cause which he pleaded
after his return to Rome, was that of Roscius, the celebrated
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page155">[pg 155]</span><a name="Pg155" id="Pg155" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>comedian, in a dispute, which involved a mere matter of civil
right, and was of no peculiar interest or importance. All the
orations which he delivered during the five following years,
are lost, of which number were those for Marcus Tullius, and
L. Varenus, mentioned by Priscian as extant in his time. At
the end of that period, however, and when Cicero was now in
the thirty-seventh year of his age, a glorious opportunity was
afforded for the display of his eloquence, in the prosecution
instituted against Verres, the Prætor of Sicily, a criminal infinitely
more hateful than Catiline or Clodius, and to whom the
Roman <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">republic</span></span>, at least, never produced an equal in turpitude
and crime. He was now accused by the Sicilians of many
flagrant acts of injustice, rapine, and cruelty, committed by
him during his triennial government of their island, which he
had done more to ruin than all the arbitrary acts of their native
tyrants, or the devastating wars between the Carthaginians
and Romans.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the advanced ages of the republic, extortion and violence
almost universally prevailed among those magistrates
who were exalted abroad to the temptations of regal power,
and whose predecessors, by their moderation, had called forth
in earlier times the applause of the world. Exhausted in fortune
by excess of luxury, they now entered on their governments
only to enrich themselves with the spoils of the
provinces intrusted to their administration, and to plunder the
inhabitants by every species of exaction. The first laws
against extortion were promulgated in the beginning of the
seventh century. But they afforded little relief to the oppressed
nations, who in vain sought redress at Rome; for the
decisions there depending on judges generally implicated in
similar crimes, were more calculated to afford impunity to the
guilty, than redress to the aggrieved. This undue influence
received additional weight in the case of Verres, from the
high quality and connections of the culprit.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Such were the difficulties with which Cicero had to struggle,
in entering on the accusation of this great public delinquent.
This arduous task he was earnestly solicited to
undertake, by a petition from all the towns of Sicily, except
Syracuse and Messina, both which cities had been occasionally
allowed by the plunderer to share the spoils of the province.
Having accepted this trust, so important in his eyes
to the honour of the republic, neither the far distant evidence,
nor irritating delays of all those guards of guilt with which
Verres was environed, could deter or slacken his exertions.
The first device on the part of the criminal, or rather of his
counsel, Hortensius, to defeat the ends of justice, was an
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page156">[pg 156]</span><a name="Pg156" id="Pg156" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>attempt to wrest the conduct of the trial from the hands of
Cicero, by placing it in those of Cæcilius<a id="noteref_317" name="noteref_317" href="#note_317"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">317</span></span></a>, who was a creature
of Verres, and who now claimed a preference to Cicero,
on the ground of personal injuries received from the accused,
and a particular knowledge of the crimes of his pretended
enemy. The judicial claims of these competitors had therefore
to be first decided in that kind of process called <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Divinatio</span></span>, in
which Cicero delivered his oration, entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Contra Cæcilium</span></span>,
and shewed, with much power of argument and sarcasm, that
he himself was in every way best fitted to act as the impeacher
of Verres.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Having succeeded in convincing the judges that Cæcilius
only wished to get the cause into his own hands, in order to
betray it, Cicero was appointed to conduct the prosecution,
and was allowed 110 days to make a voyage to Sicily, in order
to collect information for supporting his charge. He finished
his progress through the island in less than half the time which
had been granted him. On his return he found that a plan
had been laid by the friends of Verres, to procrastinate the
trial, at least till the following season, when they expected to
have magistrates and judges who would prove favourable to
his interests. In this design they so far succeeded, that time
was not left to go through the cause according to the ordinary
forms and practice of oratorical discussion in the course of
the year: Cicero, therefore, resolved to lose no time by enforcing
or aggravating the several articles of charge, but to
produce at once all his documents and witnesses, leaving the
rhetorical part of the performance till the whole evidence was
concluded. The first oration, therefore, against Verres, which
is extremely short, was merely intended to explain the motives
which had induced him to adopt this unusual mode of procedure.
He accordingly exposes the devices by which the culprit
and his cabal were attempting to pervert the course of
justice, and unfolds the eternal disgrace that would attach to
the Roman law, should their stratagems prove successful. This
oration was followed by the deposition of the witnesses, and
recital of the documents, which so clearly established the
guilt of Verres, that, driven to despair, he submitted, without
awaiting his sentence, to a voluntary exile<a id="noteref_318" name="noteref_318" href="#note_318"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">318</span></span></a>. It therefore appears,
that of the six orations against Verres, only one was
pronounced. The other five, forming the series of harangues
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page157">[pg 157]</span><a name="Pg157" id="Pg157" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>which he intended to deliver after the proof had been completed,
were subsequently published in the same shape as if
the delinquent had actually stood his trial, and was to have
made a regular defence.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The first of these orations, which to us appears rather foreign
to the charge, but was meant to render the proper part
of the accusation more probable, exposes the excesses and
malversations committed by Verres in early life, before his
appointment to the Prætorship of Sicily—his embezzlement
of public money while Quæstor of Gaul—his extortions under
Dolabella in Asia, and, finally, his unjust, corrupt, and partial
decisions while in the office of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Prætor Urbanus</span></span> at Rome,
which, forming a principal part of the oration, the whole has
been entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Prætura Urbana</span></span>. In the following harangue,
entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Jurisdictione Siciliensi</span></span>, the orator commences
with an elegant eulogy on the dignity, antiquity, and
usefulness of the province, which was not here a mere idle or
rhetorical embellishment, but was most appropriately introduced,
as nothing could be better calculated to excite indignation
against the spoiler of Sicily, than the picture he draws
of its beauty; after which, he proceeds to give innumerable
instances of the flagrant sale of justice, offices, and honours,
and, among the last, even of the priesthood of Jupiter. The
next oration is occupied with the malversations of Verres
concerning grain, and the new ordinances, by which he had
contrived to put the whole corps of the island at the disposal
of his officers. In this harangue the dry statements of the
prices of corn are rather fatiguing; but the following oration,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Signis</span></span>, is one of the most interesting of his productions,
particularly as illustrating the history of ancient art. For
nearly six centuries Rome had been filled only with the spoils
of barbarous nations, and presented merely the martial spectacle
of a warlike and conquering people. Subsequently,
however, to the campaigns in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Magna Græcia</span></span>, Sicily, and
Greece, the Roman commanders displayed at their triumphs
costly ornaments of gold, pictures, statues, and vases, instead
of flocks driven from the Sabines or Volsci, the broken arms
of the Samnites, and empty chariots of the Gauls. The statues
and paintings which Marcellus transported from Syracuse
to Rome, first excited that cupidity which led the Roman
provincial magistrates to pillage, without scruple or distinction,
the houses of private individuals, and temples of the
gods<a id="noteref_319" name="noteref_319" href="#note_319"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">319</span></span></a>. Marcellus and Mummius, however, despoiled only
hostile and conquered countries. They had made over their
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page158">[pg 158]</span><a name="Pg158" id="Pg158" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>plunder to the public, and, after it was conveyed to Rome,
devoted it to the embellishment of the capital; but subsequent
governors of provinces having acquired a taste for
works of art, began to appropriate to themselves those masterpieces
of Greece, which they had formerly neither known nor
esteemed. Some contrived plausible pretexts for borrowing
valuable works of art from cities and private persons, without
any intention of restoring them; while others, less cautious,
or more shameless, seized whatever pleased them, whether
public or private property, without excuse or remuneration.
But though this passion was common to most provincial
governors, none of them ever came up to the full measure of
the rapacity of Verres, who, allowing much for the high colouring
of the counsel and orator, appears to have been infected
with a sort of disease, or mania, which gave him an irresistible
propensity to seize whatever he saw or heard of, which
was precious either in materials or workmanship. For this
purpose he retained in his service two brothers from Asia
Minor, on whose judgment he relied for the choice of statues
and pictures, and who were employed to search out everything
of this sort which was valuable in the island. Aided by
their suggestions, he seized tapestry, pictures, gold and silver
plate, vases, gems, and Corinthian bronzes, till he literally
did not leave a single article of value of these descriptions in
the whole island. The chief objects of this pillage were the
statues and pictures of the gods, which the Romans regarded
with religious veneration; and they, accordingly, viewed such
rapine as sacrilege. Hence the frequent adjurations and
apostrophes to the deities who had been insulted, which are
introduced in the oration. The circumstances of violence
and circumvention, under which the depredations were committed,
are detailed with much vehemence, and at considerable
length. Some description is given of the works of
sculpture; and the names of the statuaries by whom they were
executed, are also frequently recorded. Thus, we are told
that Verres took away from a private gentleman of Messina
the marble Cupid, by Praxiteles: He sacrilegiously tore a
figure of Victory from the temple of Ceres—he deprived the
city Tyndaris of an image of Mercury, which had been restored
to it from Carthage, by Scipio, and was worshipped by
the people with singular devotion and an annual festival.
Some of the works of art were openly carried off—some borrowed
under plausible pretences, but never restored, and
others forcibly purchased at an inadequate value. If the
speech <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Signis</span></span> be the most curious, that <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Suppliciis</span></span> is
incomparably the finest of the series of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Verrine</span></span> orations. The
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page159">[pg 159]</span><a name="Pg159" id="Pg159" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>subject afforded a wider field than the former for the display
of eloquence, and it presents us with topics of more general
and permanent interest. Such, indeed, is the vehement
pathos, and such the resources employed to excite pity in
favour of the oppressed, and indignation against the guilty,
that the genius of the orator is nowhere more conspicuously
displayed—not even in the Philippics or Catilinarian harangues.
It was now proved that Verres had practiced every
species of fraud and depredation, and on these heads no room
was left for defence. But as the duties of provincial Prætors
were twofold—the administration of the laws, and the direction
of warlike operations—it was suspected that the counsel of
Verres meant to divert the attention of the judges from his
avarice to his military conduct and valour. This plea the orator
completely anticipates. His misconduct, indeed, in the course
of the naval operations against the pirates, forms one of the
chief topics of Cicero’s bitter invective. He demonstrates
that the fleet had been equipped rather for show than for
service; that it was unprovided with sailors or stores, and
altogether unfit to act against an enemy. The command was
given to Cleomenes, a Syracusan, who was ignorant of naval
affairs, merely that Verres might enjoy the company of his
wife during his absence. The description of the sailing of
the fleet from Syracuse is inimitable, and it is so managed
that the whole seems to pass before the eyes. Verres, who
had not been seen in public for many months, having retired
to a splendid pavilion, pitched near the fountain of Arethusa,
where he passed his time in company of his favourites, amidst
all the delights that arts and luxury could administer, at length
appeared, in order to view the departure of the squadron; and
a Roman Prætor exhibited himself, standing on the shore in
sandals, with a purple cloak flowing to his heels, and leaning
on the shoulder of a harlot! The fleet, as was to be expected,
was driven on shore, and there burned by the pirates, who
entered Syracuse in triumph, and retired from it unmolested.
Verres, in order to divert public censure from himself, put the
captains of the ships to death; and this naturally leads on to
the subject which has given name to the oration,—the cruel
and illegal executions, not merely of Sicilians, but Roman
citizens. The punishments of death and torture usually
reserved for slaves, but inflicted by Verres on freemen of
Rome, formed the climax of his atrocities, which are detailed
in oratorical progression. After the vivid description of his
former crimes, one scarcely expects that new terms of indignation
will be found; but the expressions of the orator become
more glowing, in proportion as Verres grows more daring in
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page160">[pg 160]</span><a name="Pg160" id="Pg160" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>his guilt. The sacred character borne over all the world by
a Roman citizen, must be fully remembered, in order to read
with due feeling the description of the punishment of Gavius,
who was scourged, and then nailed to a cross, which, by a
refinement in cruelty, was erected on the shore, and facing
Italy, that he might suffer death with his view directed towards
home and a land of liberty. The whole is poured
forth in a torrent of the most rapid and fervid composition;
and had it actually flowed from the lips of the speaker, we
cannot doubt the prodigious effect it would have had on a
Roman audience, and on Roman judges. In the oration <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
Signis</span></span>, something, as we have seen, is lost to a modern reader,
by the diminished reverence for the mythological deities; and,
in like manner, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">we</span></span> cannot enter fully into the spirit of the
harangue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Suppliciis</span></span>, which is planned with a direct
reference to national feeling, to that stern decorum which
could not be overstepped without shame, and that adoration
of the majesty of Rome, which invested its citizens with inexpressible
dignity, and bestowed on them an almost inviolable
nature. Hence the appearance of Verres in public, in a long
purple robe, is represented as the climax of his enormities,
and the punishment of scourging inflicted on a Roman citizen
is treated (without any discussion concerning the justice of
the sentence) as an unheard-of and unutterable crime. Yet
even those parts least attractive to modern readers, are perfect
in their execution; and the whole series of orations will
ever be regarded as among the most splendid monuments of
Tully’s transcendent genius.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the renowned cause against Verres, there can be no doubt
that the orator displayed the whole resources of his vast talents.
Every circumstance concurred to stimulate his exertions
and excite his eloquence. It was the first time he had appeared
as an accuser in a public trial—his clients were the
injured people of a mighty province, rivalling in importance
the imperial state—the inhabitants of Sicily surrounded the
Forum, and an audience was expected from every quarter of
Italy, of all that was exalted, intelligent, and refined. But,
chiefly, he had a subject, which, from the glaring guilt of the
accused, and the nature of his crimes, was so copious, interesting,
and various, so abundant in those topics which an orator
would select to afford full scope for the exercise of his
powers, that it was hardly possible to labour tamely or listlessly
in so rich a mine of eloquence. Such a wonderful assemblage
of circumstances never yet prepared the course for the
triumphs of oratory; so great an opportunity for the exhibition
of forensic art will, in all probability, never again occur.
Suf<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page161">[pg 161]</span><a name="Pg161" id="Pg161" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>fice it to say, that the orator surpassed by his workmanship
the singular beauty of his materials; and instead of being
overpowered by their magnitude, derived from the vast resources
which they supplied the merit of an additional excellence,
in the skill and discernment of his choice.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The infinite variety of entertaining anecdotes with which the
series of pleadings against Verres abounds—the works of art
which are commemorated—the interesting topographical descriptions—the
insight afforded into the laws and manners of
the ancient Sicilians—the astonishing profusion of ironical
sallies, all conspire to dazzle the imagination and rivet the
attention of the reader; yet there is something in the idea that
they were not actually delivered, which detracts from the
effect of circumstances which would otherwise heighten our
feelings. It appears to us even preposterous to read, in the
commencement of the second oration, of a report having been
spread that Verres was to abandon his defence, but that there
he sat braving his accusers and judges with his characteristic
impudence. The exclamations on his effrontery, and the adjurations
of the judges, lose their force, when we cannot help
recollecting that before one word of all this could be pronounced,
the person against whom they were directed as present
had sneaked off into voluntary exile. Whatever effect
this recollection may have had on the ancients, who regarded
oratory as an art, and an oration as an elaborate composition,
nothing can be more grating or offensive to the taste and feelings
of a modern reader, whose idea of eloquence is that of
something natural, heart-felt, inartificial, and extemporaneous.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The Sicilians, though they could scarcely have been satisfied
with the issue of the trial, appear to have been sufficiently
sensible of Cicero’s great exertions in their behalf. Blainville,
in his Travels, mentions, that while at Grotta Ferrata, a convent
built on the ruins of Cicero’s Tusculan Villa, he had been
shown a silver medal, unquestionably antique, struck by the
Sicilians in gratitude for his impeachment of Verres. One
side exhibits a head of Cicero, crowned with laurel, with the
legend <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">M. T. Ciceroni</span></span>—on the reverse, there is the representation
of three legs extended in a triangular position, in the
form of the three great capes or promontories of Sicily, with
the motto,—<span class="tei tei-q">“<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Prostrato Verre Trinacria</span></span>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Fonteio</span></span>. It is much to be regretted, that the oration
for Fonteius, the next which Cicero delivered, has descended
to us incomplete. It was the defence of an unpopular governor,
accused of oppression by the province intrusted to his administration;
and, as such, would have formed an interesting
contrast to the accusation of Verres.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page162">[pg 162]</span><a name="Pg162" id="Pg162" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Cæcina</span></span>. This was a mere question of civil right, turning
on the effect of a Prætorian edict.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Lege Manilia</span></span>. Hitherto Cicero had only addressed
the judges in the Forum in civil suits or criminal prosecutions.
The oration for the Manilian law, which is accounted one of
the most splendid of his productions, was the first in which he
spoke to the whole people from the rostrum. It was pronounced
in favour of a law proposed by Manilius, a tribune
of the people, for constituting Pompey sole general, with extraordinary
powers, in the war against Mithridates and Tigranes,
in which Lucullus at that time commanded. The chiefs
of the Senate regarded this law as a dangerous precedent in
the republic; and all the authority of Catulus, and eloquence
of Hortensius, were directed against it. It has been conjectured,
that in supporting pretensions which endangered the
public liberty, Cicero was guided merely by interest, since an
opposition to Pompey might have prevented his own election
to the consulship, which was now the great object of his ambition.
His life, however, and writings, will warrant us in
ascribing to him a different, though perhaps less obvious motive.
With the love of virtue and the republic, which glowed
so intensely in the breast of this illustrious Roman, that less
noble passion, the immoderate desire of popular fame, was
unfortunately mingled. <span class="tei tei-q">“Fame,”</span> says a modern historian,
<span class="tei tei-q">“was the prize at which he aimed; his weakness of bodily
constitution sought it through the most strenuous labours—his
natural timidity of mind pursued it through the greatest
dangers. Pompey, who had fortunately attained it, he contemplated
as the happiest of men, and was led, from this illusion
of fancy, not only to speak of him, but really to think of
him,”</span> (till he became unfortunate,) <span class="tei tei-q">“with a fondness of respect
bordering on enthusiasm. The glare of glory that surrounded
Pompey, concealed from Cicero his many and great
imperfections, and seduced an honest citizen, and finest genius
in Rome, a man of unparalleled industry, and that generally
applied to the noblest purposes, into the prostitution of his
abilities and virtues, for exalting an ambitious chief, and investing
him with such exorbitant and unconstitutional powers,
as virtually subverted the commonwealth<a id="noteref_320" name="noteref_320" href="#note_320"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">320</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In defending this pernicious measure, Cicero divided his discourse
into two parts—showing, first, that the importance and
imminent dangers of the contest in which the state was engaged,
required the unusual remedy proposed—and, secondly, that
Pompey was the fittest person to be intrusted with the conduct
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page163">[pg 163]</span><a name="Pg163" id="Pg163" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>of the war. This leads to a splendid panegyric on that renowned
commander, in which, while he does justice to the merits
of his predecessor, Lucullus, he enlarges on the military skill,
valour, authority, and good fortune of this present idol of his
luxuriant imagination, with all the force and beauty which
language can afford. He fills the imagination with the immensity
of the object, kindles in the breast an ardour of affection
and gratitude, and, by an accumulation of circumstances
and proofs, so aggrandizes his hero, that he exalts him to
something more than mortal in the minds of his auditory;
while, at the same time, every word inspires the most perfect
veneration for his character, and the most unbounded confidence
in his integrity and judgment. The whole world is
exhibited as an inadequate theatre for the actions of such a
superior genius; while all the nations, and potentates of the
earth, are in a manner called as witnesses of his valour and
his truth. By enlarging on these topics, by the most solemn
protestations of his own sincerity, and by adducing examples
from antiquity, of the state having been benefited or saved,
by intrusting unlimited power to a single person, he allayed
all fears of the dangers which it was apprehended might result
to the constitution, from such extensive authority being vested
in one individual—and thus struck the first blow towards the
subversion of the republic!
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Cluentio</span></span>. This is a pleading for Cluentius, who, at
his mother’s instigation, was accused of having poisoned his
stepfather, Oppianicus. Great part of the harangue appears
to be but collaterally connected with the direct subject of the
prosecution. Oppianicus, it seems, had been formerly accused
by Cluentius, and found guilty of a similar attempt against his
life; but after his condemnation, a report became current that
Cluentius had prevailed in the cause by corrupting the judges,
and, to remove the unfavourable impression thus created
against his client, Cicero recurs to the circumstances of that
case. In the second part of the oration, which refers to the
accusation of poisoning Oppianicus, he finds it necessary to
clear his client from two previous charges of attempts to poison.
In treating of the proper subject of the criminal proceedings,
which does not occupy above a sixth part of the
whole oration, he shows that Cluentius could have had no
access or opportunity to administer poison to his father, who
was in exile; that there was nothing unusual or suspicious in
the circumstances of his death; and that the charge originated
in the machinations of Cluentius’ unnatural mother, against
whom he inveighs with much force, as one hurried along blindfold
by guilt—who acts with such folly that no one can
ac<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page164">[pg 164]</span><a name="Pg164" id="Pg164" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>count her a rational creature—with such violence that none
can imagine her to be a woman—with such cruelty, that none
can call her a mother. The whole oration discloses such a
scene of enormous villainy—of murders, by poison and assassination—of
incest, and subornation of witnesses, that the
family history of Cluentius may be regarded as the counterpart
in domestic society, of what the government of Verres
was in public life. Though very long, and complicated too,
in the subject, it is one of the most correct and forcible of all
Cicero’s judicial orations; and, under the impression that it
comes nearer to the strain of a modern pleading than any of
the others, it has been selected by Dr Blair as the subject of
a minute analysis and criticism<a id="noteref_321" name="noteref_321" href="#note_321"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">321</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Lege Agraria contra Rullum</span></span>. In his discourse <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro
Lege Manilia</span></span>, the first of the deliberative kind addressed to
the assembly of the people, Cicero had the advantage of
speaking for a favourite of the multitude, and against the chiefs
of the Senate; but he was placed in a very different situation
when he came to oppose the Agrarian law. This had been
for 300 years the darling object of the Roman tribes—the
daily attraction and rallying word of the populace—the signal
of discord, and most powerful engine of the seditious tribunate.
The first of the series of orations against the Agrarian
law, now proposed by Rullus, was delivered by Cicero in the
Senate-house, shortly after his election to the consulship:
The second and third were addressed to the people from the
rostrum. The scope of the present Agrarian law was, to appoint
Decemvirs for the purpose of selling the public domains
in the provinces, and to recover from the generals the spoils
acquired in foreign wars, by which a fund might be formed
for the purchase of lands in Italy, particularly Campania—to
be equally divided among the people. Cicero, in his first
oration, of which the commencement is now wanting, quieted
the alarms of the Senate, by assuring them of his resolution
to oppose the law with his utmost power. When the question
came before the people, he did not fear to encounter
the Tribunes on their own territory, and most popular subject;
he did not hesitate to make the rabble judges in their
own cause, though one in which their passions, interests, and
prejudices, and those of their fathers, had been engaged for
so many centuries. Conscious of his superiority, he invited
the Tribunes to ascend the rostrum, and argue the point with
him before the assembled multitude; but the field was left
clear to his argument and eloquence, and by alternately
flat<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page165">[pg 165]</span><a name="Pg165" id="Pg165" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>tering the people, and ridiculing the proposer of the law, he
gave such a turn to their inclinations, that they rejected the
proposition as eagerly as they had before received it.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But although the Tribunes were unable to cope with Cicero
in the Forum, they subsequently contrived to instil suspicions
into the minds of the populace, with regard to his motives in
opposing the Agrarian law. These imputations made such an
impression on the city, that he found it necessary to defend
himself against them, in a short speech to the people. It has
been disputed, whether this third oration was the last which
Cicero pronounced on occasion of this Agrarian law. In the
letters to Atticus, while speaking of his consular orations, he
says, <span class="tei tei-q">“that among those sent, was that pronounced in the
Senate, and that addressed to the people, on the Agrarian
law<a id="noteref_322" name="noteref_322" href="#note_322"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">322</span></span></a>.”</span> These are the first and second of the speeches, which
we now have against Rullus; but he also mentions, that there
were two <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">apospasmatia</span></span>, as he calls them, concerning the
Agrarian law. Now, what is at present called the third, was
probably the first of these two, and the last must have perished.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Rabirio</span></span>. About the year 654, Saturninus, a seditious
Tribune, had been slain by a party attached to the interests of
the Senate. Thirty-six years afterwards, Rabirius was accused
of accession to this murder, by Labienus, subsequently
well known as Cæsar’s lieutenant in Gaul. Hortensius had
pleaded the cause before the Duumvirs, Caius and Lucius
Cæsar, by whom Rabirius being condemned, appealed to the
people, and was defended by Cicero in the Comitia. The
Tribune, it seems, had been slain in a tumult during a season
of such danger, that a decree had been passed by the Senate,
requiring the Consuls to be careful that the republic received
no detriment. This was supposed to sanction every proceeding
which followed in consequence; and the design of the
popular party, in the impeachment of Rabirius, was to attack
this prerogative of the Senate. Cicero’s oration on this contention
between the Senatorial and Tribunitial power, gives
us more the impression of prompt and unstudied eloquence
than most of his other harangues. It is, however, a little obscure,
partly from the circumstance that the accuser would
not permit him to exceed half an hour in the defence. The
argument seems to have been, that Rabirius did not kill Saturninus;
but that even if he had slain him, the action was not
merely legal, but praiseworthy, since all citizens had been required
to arm in aid of the Consuls.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page166">[pg 166]</span><a name="Pg166" id="Pg166" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It was believed, that in spite of the exertions of Cicero,
Rabirius would have been condemned, had not the Prætor
Metellus devised an expedient for dissolving the Comitia, before
sentence could be passed. The cause was neither farther
prosecuted at this time, nor subsequently revived; the
public attention being now completely engrossed by the imminent
dangers of the Catilinarian Conspiracy, which was discovered
during the Consulship of Cicero.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Contra Catilinam</span></span>. The detection and suppression of that
nefarious plot, form the most glorious part of the political
life of Cicero; and the orations he pronounced against the
chief conspirator, are still regarded as the most splendid
monuments of his eloquence. It was no longer to defend the
rights and prerogatives of a municipal town or province, nor
to move and persuade a judge in favour of an unfortunate
client, but to save his country and the republic, that Cicero
ascended the Rostrum. The conspiracy of Catiline tended to
the utter extinction of the city and government. Cicero, having
discovered his design, (which was to leave Rome and join
his army, assembled in different parts of Italy, while the other
conspirators remained within the walls, to butcher the Senators
and fire the capital,) summoned the Senate to meet in the
Temple of Jupiter Stator, with the intention of laying before
it the whole circumstances of the plot. But Catiline having
unexpectedly appeared in the midst of the assembly, his audacity
impelled the consular orator into an abrupt invective,
which is directly addressed to the traitor, and commences
without the preamble by which most of his other harangues are
introduced. In point of effect, this oration must have been
perfectly electric. The disclosure to the criminal himself of
his most secret purposes—their flagitious nature, threatening
the life of every one present—the whole course of his villainies
and treasons, blazoned forth with the fire of incensed eloquence—and
the adjuration to him, by flying from Rome, to
free his country from such a pestilence, were all wonderfully
calculated to excite astonishment, admiration, and horror.
The great object of the whole oration, was to drive Catiline
into banishment; and it appears somewhat singular, that so
dangerous a personage, and who might have been so easily
convicted, should thus have been forced, or even allowed, to
withdraw to his army, instead of being seized and punished.
Catiline having escaped unmolested to his camp, the conduct
of the Consul in not apprehending, but sending away this
formidable enemy, had probably excited some censure and
discontent; and the second Catilinarian oration was in consequence
delivered by Cicero, in an assembly of the people, in
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page167">[pg 167]</span><a name="Pg167" id="Pg167" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>order to justify his driving the chief conspirator from Rome.
A capital punishment, he admits, ought long since to have
overtaken Catiline, but such was the spirit of the times, that the
existence of the conspiracy would not have been believed, and
he had therefore resolved to place his guilt in a point of view
so conspicuous, that vigorous measures might without hesitation
be adopted, both against Catiline and his accomplices.
He also takes this opportunity to warn his audience against
those bands of conspirators who still lurked within the city,
and whom he divides into various classes, describing, in the
strongest language, the different degrees of guilt and profligacy
by which they were severally characterized.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Manifest proofs of the whole plot having been at length
obtained, by the arrest of the ambassadors from the Allobroges,
with whom the conspirators had tampered, and who were
bearing written credentials from them to their own country,
Cicero, in his third oration, laid before the people all the particulars
of the discovery, and invited them to join in celebrating
a thanksgiving, which had been decreed by the Senate to
his honour, for the preservation of his country.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The last Catilinarian oration was pronounced in the Senate,
on the debate concerning the punishment to be inflicted on
the conspirators. Silanus had proposed the infliction of instant
death, while Cæsar had spoken in favour of the more
lenient sentence of perpetual imprisonment. Cicero does not
precisely declare for any particular punishment; but he shows
that his mind evidently inclined to the severest, by dwelling
on the enormity of the conspirators’ guilt, and aggravating all
their crimes with much acrimony and art. His sentiments
finally prevailed; and those conspirators, who had remained
in Rome, were strangled under his immediate superintendence.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In these four orations, the tone and style of each of them,
particularly of the first and last, is very different, and accommodated
with a great deal of judgment to the occasion, and to
the circumstances under which they were delivered. Through
the whole series of the Catilinarian orations, the language of
Cicero is well calculated to overawe the wicked, to confirm the
good, and encourage the timid. It is of that description
which renders the mind of one man the mind of a whole assembly,
or a whole people<a id="noteref_323" name="noteref_323" href="#note_323"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">323</span></span></a>.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page168">[pg 168]</span><a name="Pg168" id="Pg168" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Muræna</span></span>.—The Comitia being now held in order to
choose Consuls for the ensuing year, Junius Silanus and Muræna
were elected. The latter candidate had for his competitor
the celebrated jurisconsult Sulpicius Rufus; who,
being assisted by Cato, charged Muræna with having prevailed
by bribery and corruption. This impeachment was
founded on the Calpurnian law, which had lately been rendered
more strict, on the suggestion of Sulpicius, by a <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Senatusconsultum</span></span>.
Along with this accusation, the profligacy of Muræna’s
character was objected to, and also the meanness of his rank,
as he was but a knight and soldier, whereas Sulpicius was a
patrician and lawyer. Cicero therefore shows, in the first
place, that he amply merited the consulship, from his services
in the war with Mithridates, which introduces a comparison
between a military and forensic life. While he pays his usual
tribute of applause to cultivated eloquence, he derides the
forms and phraseology of the jurisconsults, by whom the civil
law was studied and practised. As to the proper subject of
the accusation, bribery in his election, it seems probable that
Muræna had been guilty of some practices which, strictly
speaking, were illegal, yet were warranted by custom. They
seem to have consisted in encouraging a crowd to attend him
on the streets, and in providing shows for the entertainment
of the multitude; which, though expected by the people, and
usually overlooked by the magistrates, appeared heinous offences
in the eye of the rigid and stoical Cato. Aware of the
weight added to the accusation by his authority, Cicero, in
order to obviate this influence, treats his stoical principles in
the same tone which he had already used concerning the profession
of Sulpicius. In concluding, he avails himself of the
difficulties of the times, and the yet unsuppressed conspiracy
of Catiline, which rendered it unwise to deprive the city of a
Consul well qualified to defend it in so dangerous a crisis.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This case was one of great expectation, from the dignity of
the prosecutors, and eloquence of the advocates for the accused.
Before Cicero spoke, it had been pleaded by Hortensius,
and Crassus the triumvir; and Cicero, in engaging in the
cause, felt the utmost desire to surpass these rivals of his
eloquence. Such was his anxiety, that he slept none during
the whole night which preceded the hearing of the cause; and
being thus exhausted with care, his eloquence on this occasion
fell short of that of Hortensius<a id="noteref_324" name="noteref_324" href="#note_324"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">324</span></span></a>. He shows, however, much
delicacy and art in the manner in which he manages the attack
on the philosophy of Cato, and profession of Sulpicius,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page169">[pg 169]</span><a name="Pg169" id="Pg169" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>both of whom were his particular friends, and high in the
estimation of the judges he addressed<a id="noteref_325" name="noteref_325" href="#note_325"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">325</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Valerio Flacco</span></span>.—Flaccus had aided Cicero in his discovery
of the conspiracy of Catiline, and, in return, was
defended by him against a charge of extortion and peculation,
brought by various states of Asia Minor, which he had governed
as Pro-prætor.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Cornelio Sylla</span></span>.—Sylla, who was afterwards a great
partizan of Cæsar’s, was prosecuted for having been engaged
in Catiline’s conspiracy; but his accuser, Torquatus, digressing
from the charge against Sylla, turned his raillery on
Cicero; alleging, that he had usurped the authority of a king;
and asserting, that he was the third foreign sovereign who had
reigned at Rome after Numa and Tarquin. Cicero, therefore,
in his reply, had not only to defend his client, but to answer the
petulant raillery by which his antagonist attempted to excite
envy and odium against himself. He admits that he was a
foreigner in one sense of the word, having been born in a
municipal town of Italy, in common with many others who
had rendered the highest services to the city; but he repels
the insinuation that he usurped any kingly authority; and being
instigated by this unmerited attack, he is led on to the
eulogy of his own conduct and consulship,—a favourite subject,
from which he cannot altogether depart, even when he
enters more closely into the grounds of the prosecution.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
For this defence of Cornelius Sylla, Cicero privately received
from his client the sum of 20,000 sesterces, which
chiefly enabled him to purchase his magnificent house on the
Palatine Hill.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Archia</span></span>.—This is one of the orations of Cicero on which
he has succeeded in bestowing the finest polish, and it is perhaps
the most <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">pleasing</span></span> of all his harangues. Archias had been
his preceptor, and, after having obtained much reputation by
his Greek poems, on the triumphs of Lucullus over Mithridates,
and of Marius over the Cimbri, was now attempting to
celebrate the consulship of Cicero; so that the orator, in pleading
his cause, expected to be requited by the praises of his
muse.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This poet was a native of Antioch, and, having come to
Italy in early youth, was rewarded for his learning and genius
with the friendship of the first men in the state, and with
the citizenship of Heraclea, a confederate and enfranchised
town of Magna Græcia. A few years afterwards, a law was
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page170">[pg 170]</span><a name="Pg170" id="Pg170" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>enacted, conferring the rights of Roman citizens on all who
had been admitted to the freedom of federate states, provided
they had a settlement in Italy at the time when the law was
passed, and had asserted the privilege before the Prætor within
sixty days from the period at which it was promulgated. After
Archias had enjoyed the benefit of this law for more than
twenty years, his claims were called in question by one
Gracchus, who now attempted to drive him from the city, under
the enactment expelling all foreigners who usurped, without
due title, the name and attributes of Roman citizens.
The loss of records, and some other circumstances, having
thrown doubts on the legal right of his client, Cicero chiefly
enlarged on the dignity of literature and poetry, and the various
accomplishments of Archias, which gave him so just a
claim to the privileges he enjoyed. He beautifully describes
the influence which study and a love of letters had exercised
on his own character and conduct. He had thence imbibed
the principle, that glory and virtue should be the darling objects
of life, and that to attain these, all difficulties, or even
dangers, were to be despised. But, of all names dear to literature
and genius, that of poet was the most sacred: hence it
would be an extreme of disgrace and profanation, to reject a
bard who had employed the utmost efforts of his art to make
Rome immortal by his muse, and had possessed such prevailing
power as to touch with pleasure even the stubborn and intractable
soul of Marius.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The whole oration is interspersed with beautiful maxims
and sentences, which have been quoted with delight in all
ages. There appears in it, however, perhaps too much, and
certainly more than in the other orations, of what Lord Monboddo
calls <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">concinnity</span></span>. <span class="tei tei-q">“We have in it,”</span> observes he, speaking
of this oration, <span class="tei tei-q">“strings of antitheses, the figure of like
endings, and a perfect similarity of the structure, both as to
the grammatical form of the words, and even the number of
them<a id="noteref_326" name="noteref_326" href="#note_326"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">326</span></span></a>.”</span> The whole, too, is written in a style of exaggeration
and immoderate praise. The orator talks of the poet Archias,
as if the whole glory of Rome, and salvation of the commonwealth,
depended on his poetical productions, and as if the
smallest injury offered to him would render the name of Rome
execrable and infamous in all succeeding generations.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Cn. Plancio</span></span>.—The defence of Plancius was one of the
first orations pronounced by Cicero after his return from banishment.
Plancius had been Quæstor of Macedon when
Cicero came to that country during his exile, and had received
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page171">[pg 171]</span><a name="Pg171" id="Pg171" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>him with honours proportioned to his high character, rather
than his fallen fortunes. In return for this kindness, Cicero
undertook his defence against a charge, preferred by a disappointed
competitor, of bribery and corruption in suing for the ædileship.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Sextio</span></span>.—This is another oration produced by the gratitude
of Cicero, and the circumstances of his banishment.
Sextius, while Tribune of the people, had been instrumental
in procuring his recall, and Cicero requited this good office
by one of the longest and most elaborate of his harangues.
The accusation, indeed, was a consequence of his interposition
in favour of the illustrious exile; for when about to propose
his recall to the people, he was violently attacked by the
Clodian faction, and left for dead on the street. His enemies,
however, though obviously the aggressors, accused him of
violence, and exciting a tumult. This was the charge against
which Cicero defended him. The speech is valuable for the
history of the times; as it enters into all the recent political
events in which Cicero had borne so distinguished a part.
The orator inveighs against his enemies, the Tribune Clodius,
and the Consuls Gabinius and Piso, and details all the circumstances
connected with his own banishment and return,
occasionally throwing in a word or two about his client Sextius.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Contra Vatinium</span></span>.—Vatinius, who belonged to the Clodian
faction, appeared, at the trial of Sextius, as a witness against
him. This gave Cicero an opportunity of interrogating him;
and the whole oration being a continued invective on the
conduct of Vatinius, poured forth in a series of questions,
without waiting for an answer to any of them, has been
entitled, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Interrogatio</span></span>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Cælio</span></span>.—Middleton has pronounced this to be the most
entertaining of the orations which Cicero has left us, from the
vivacity of wit and humour with which he treats the gallantries
of Clodia, her commerce with Cælius, and in general the
gaieties and licentiousness of youth.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cælius was a young man of considerable talents and accomplishments,
who had been intrusted to the care of Cicero on
his first introduction to the Forum; but having imprudently
engaged in an intrigue with Clodia, the well-known sister of
Clodius, and having afterwards deserted her, she accused him
of an attempt to poison her, and of having borrowed money
from her in order to procure the assassination of Dio, the
Alexandrian ambassador. In this, as in most other prosecutions
of the period, a number of charges, unconnected with
the main one, seem to have been accumulated, in order to
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page172">[pg 172]</span><a name="Pg172" id="Pg172" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>give the chief accusation additional force and credibility.
Cicero had thus to defend his client against the suspicions
arising from the general libertinism of his conduct. He justifies
that part of it which related to his intercourse with
Clodia, by enlarging on the loose character of this woman,
whom he treats with very little ceremony; and, in order to
place her dissolute life in a more striking point of view, he
conjures up in fancy one of her grim and austere ancestors
of the Clodian family reproaching her with her shameful degeneracy.
All this the orator was aware would not be
sufficient for the complete vindication of his client; and it is
curious to remark the ingenuity with which the strenuous
advocate of virtue and regularity of conduct palliates, on this
occasion, the levities of youth,—not, indeed, by lessening the
merits of strict morality, but by representing those who withstand
the seductions of pleasure as supernaturally endued.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This oration was a particular favourite of one who was
long a distinguished speaker in the British Senate. <span class="tei tei-q">“By
the way,”</span> says Mr Fox, in a letter to Wakefield, <span class="tei tei-q">“I know
no speech of Cicero more full of beautiful passages than
this is, nor where he is more in his element. Argumentative
contention is what he by no means excels in; and he is never,
I think, so happy as when he has an opportunity of exhibiting
a mixture of philosophy and pleasantry; and especially when
he can interpose anecdotes and references to the authority of
the eminent characters in the history of his country. No man
appears, indeed, to have had such real respect for authority
as he; and therefore, when he speaks upon that subject, he is
always natural and in earnest; and not like those among <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">us</span></span>,
who are so often declaiming about the wisdom of our ancestors,
without knowing what they mean, or hardly ever citing
any particulars of their conduct, or of their <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">dicta</span></span><a id="noteref_327" name="noteref_327" href="#note_327"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">327</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Provinciis Consularibus</span></span>. The government of Gaul
was continued to Cæsar, in consequence of this oration,
so that it may be considered as one of the immediate causes
of the ruin of the Roman Republic, which it was incontestibly
the great wish of Cicero to protect and maintain inviolate.
But Cicero had evidently been duped by Cæsar, as he formerly
had nearly been by Catiline, and as he subsequently was by
Octavius, Pollio, and every one who found it his interest to
cajole him, by proclaiming his praises, and professing ardent
zeal for the safety of the state. So little had he penetrated
the real views of Cæsar, that we find him asking the Senate,
in his oration, what possible motive or inducement Cæsar
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page173">[pg 173]</span><a name="Pg173" id="Pg173" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>could have to remain in the province of Gaul, except the public
good. <span class="tei tei-q">“For would the amenity of the regions, the beauty
of the cities, or civilization of the inhabitants, detain him
there—or can a return to one’s native country be so distasteful?”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Cornelio Balbo</span></span>.—Balbus was a native of Cadiz, who
having been of considerable service to Pompey, during his
war in Spain, against Sertorius, had, in return, received the
freedom of Rome from that commander, in virtue of a special
law, by which he had obtained the power of granting this benefit
to whom he chose. The validity of Pompey’s act, however,
was now questioned, on the ground that Cadiz was not
within the terms of that relation and alliance to Rome, which
could, under any circumstances, entitle its citizens to such a
privilege. The question, therefore, was, whether the inhabitants
of a federate state, which had not adopted the institutions
and civil jurisprudence of Rome, could receive the rights of
citizenship. This point was of great importance to the municipal
towns of the Republic, and the oration throws considerable
light on the relations which existed between the provinces
and the capital.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Pisonem</span></span>.—Piso having been recalled from his government
of Macedon, in consequence of Cicero’s oration, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
Provinciis Consularibus</span></span>, he complained, in one of his first
appearances in the Senate, of the treatment he had received,
and attacked the orator, particularly on the score of his poetry,
ridiculing the well known line,
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Cedant arma togæ—concedat laurea linguæ.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cicero replied in a bitter invective, in which he exposed the
whole life and conduct of his enemy to public contempt and
detestation. The most singular feature of this harangue is
the personal abuse and coarseness of expression it contains,
which appear the more extraordinary when we consider that
it was delivered in the Senate-house, and directed against an
individual of such distinction and consequence as Piso. Cicero
applies to him the opprobrious epithets of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">bellua</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">furia</span></span>,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">carnifex</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">furcifer</span></span>, &amp;c.; he banters him on his personal deformities,
and upbraids him with his ignominious descent on one
side of the family, while, on the other, he had no resemblance
to his ancestors, except to the sooty complexion of their images.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Milone</span></span>.—When Milo was candidate for the Consulship,
the notorious demagogue Clodius supported his competitors,
and during the canvass, party spirit grew so violent, that the
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page174">[pg 174]</span><a name="Pg174" id="Pg174" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>two factions often came to blows within the walls of the city.
While these dissensions were at their height, Clodius and
Milo met on the Appian Way—the former returning from the
country towards Rome, and the latter setting out for Lanuvium,
both attended by a great retinue. A quarrel arose among
their followers, in which Clodius was wounded and carried
into a house in the vicinity. By order of Milo, the doors were
broken open, his enemy dragged out, and assassinated on the
highway. The death of Clodius excited much confusion and
tumult at Rome, in the course of which the courts of justice
were burned by a mob. Milo having returned from the banishment
into which he had at first withdrawn, was impeached
for the crime by the Tribunes of the people; and Pompey, in
virtue of the authority conferred on him by a decree of the Senate,
nominated a special commission to inquire into the murder
committed on the Appian Way. In order to preserve the
tranquillity of the city, he placed guards in the Forum, and
occupied all its avenues with troops. This unusual appearance,
and the shouts of the Clodian faction, which the military
could not restrain, so discomposed the orator, that he fell
short of his usual excellence. The speech which he actually
delivered, was taken down in writing, and is mentioned by
Asconius Pedianus as still extant in his time. But that beautiful
harangue which we now possess, is one which was retouched
and polished, as a gift for Milo, after he had retired
in exile to Marseilles.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the oration, as we now have it, Cicero takes his exordium
from the circumstances by which he was so much, though,
as he admits, so causelessly disconcerted; since he knew that
the troops were not placed in the Forum to overawe, but to
protect. In entering on the defence, he grants that Clodius
was killed, and by Milo; but he maintains that homicide is,
on many occasions, justifiable, and on none more so than when
force can only be repelled by force, and when the slaughter
of the aggressor is necessary for self-preservation. These
principles are beautifully illustrated, and having been, as the
orator conceives, sufficiently established, are applied to the
case under consideration. He shows, from the circumstantial
evidence of time and place—the character of the deceased—the
retinue by which he was accompanied—his hatred to Milo—the
advantages which would have resulted to him from the
death of his enemy, and the expressions proved to have been
used by him, that Clodius had laid an ambush for Milo. Cicero,
it is evident, had here the worst of the cause. The encounter
appears, in fact, to have been accidental; and though
the servants of Clodius may, perhaps, have been the assailants,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page175">[pg 175]</span><a name="Pg175" id="Pg175" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>Milo had obviously exceeded the legitimate bounds of self
defence. The orator accordingly enforces the argument, that
the assassination of Clodius was an act of public benefit,
which, in a consultation of Milo’s friends, was the only one
intended to have been advanced, and was the sole defence
adopted in the oration which Brutus is said to have prepared
for the occasion. Cicero, while he does not forego the advantage
of this plea, maintains it hypothetically, contending
that <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">even if</span></span> Milo had openly pursued and slain Clodius as a
common enemy, he might well boast of having freed the state
from so pernicious and desperate a citizen. To add force to
this argument, he takes a rapid view of the various acts of
atrocity committed by Clodius, and the probable situation of
the Republic, were he to revive. When the minds of the
judges were thus sufficiently prepared, he ascribes his tragical
end to the immediate interposition of the providential powers,
specially manifested by his fall near the temple of Bona Dea,
whose mysteries he had formerly profaned. Having excited
sufficient indignation against Clodius, he concludes with moving
commiseration for Milo, representing his love for his country
and fellow-citizens,—the sad calamity of exile from Rome,—and
his manly resignation to whatever punishment might
be inflicted on him.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The argument in this oration was perhaps as good as the
circumstances admitted; but we miss through the whole that
reference to documents and laws, which gives the stamp of
truth to the orations of Demosthenes. Each ground of defence,
taken by itself, is deficient in argumentative force.
Thus, in maintaining that the death of Clodius was of no
benefit to Milo, he has taken too little into consideration the
hatred and rancour mutually felt by the heads of political factions:
but he supplies his weakness of argument by illustrative
digressions, flashes of wit, bursts of eloquence, and appeals
to the compassion of the judges, on which he appears to
have placed much reliance<a id="noteref_328" name="noteref_328" href="#note_328"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">328</span></span></a>. On the whole, this oration was
accounted, both by Cicero himself and by his contemporaries,
as the finest effort of his genius; which confirms what indeed
is evinced by the whole history of Roman eloquence, that the
judges were easily satisfied on the score of reasoning, and
attached more importance to pathos, and wit, and sonorous
periods, than to fact or law.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Rabirio Postumo</span></span>.—This is the defence of Rabirius,
who was prosecuted for repayment of a sum which he was
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page176">[pg 176]</span><a name="Pg176" id="Pg176" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>supposed to have received, in conjunction with the Proconsul
Gabinius, from King Ptolemy, for having placed him on the
throne of Egypt, contrary to the injunctions of the Senate.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Ligario</span></span>.—This oration was pronounced after Cæsar,
having vanquished Pompey in Thessaly, and destroyed the remains
of the Republican party in Africa, assumed the supreme
administration of affairs at Rome. Merciful as the conqueror
appeared, he was understood to be much exasperated against
those who, after the rout at Pharsalia, had renewed the war in
Africa. Ligarius, when on the point of obtaining a pardon,
was formally accused by his old enemy Tubero, of having
borne arms in that contest. The Dictator himself presided at
the trial of the case, much prejudiced against Ligarius, as was
known from his having previously declared, that his resolution
was fixed, and was not to be altered by the charms of eloquence.
Cicero, however, overcame his prepossessions, and
extorted from him a pardon. The countenance of Cæsar, it
is said, changed, as the orator proceeded in his speech; but
when he touched on the battle of Pharsalia, and described
Tubero as seeking his life, amid the ranks of the army, the
Dictator became so agitated, that his body trembled, and the
papers which he held dropped from his hand<a id="noteref_329" name="noteref_329" href="#note_329"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">329</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This oration is remarkable for the free spirit which it
breathes, even in the face of that power to which it was addressed
for mercy. But Cicero, at the same time, shows much
art in not overstepping those limits, within which he knew he
might speak without offence, and in seasoning his freedom
with appropriate compliments to Cæsar, of which, perhaps,
the most elegant is, that he forgot nothing but the injuries
done to himself. This was the person whom, in the time of
Pompey, he characterized as <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">monstrum et portentum tyrannum</span></span>,
and whose death he soon afterwards celebrated as <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">divinum
in rempublicam beneficium</span></span>!
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The oration of Tubero against Ligarius, was extant in
Quintilian’s time, and probably explained the circumstances
which induced a man, who had fought so keenly against
Cæsar at Pharsalia, to undertake the prosecution of Ligarius.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Rege Dejotaro</span></span>.—Dejotarus was a Tetrarch of Galatia,
who obtained from Pompey the realm of Armenia, and from
the Senate the title of King. In the civil war he had espoused
the cause of his benefactors. Cæsar, in consequence,
deprived him of Armenia, but was subsequently reconciled to
him, and, while prosecuting the war against Pharnaces, visited
him in his original states of Galatia. Some time
after<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page177">[pg 177]</span><a name="Pg177" id="Pg177" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>wards, Phidippus, the physician of the king, and his grandson
Castor, accused him of an attempt to poison Cæsar, during the
stay which the Dictator had made at his <a name="corr177" id="corr177" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">court.</span> Cicero defended
him in the private apartments of Cæsar, and adopted
the same happy union of freedom and flattery, which he had
so successfully employed in the case of Ligarius. Cæsar,
however, pronounced no decision on the one side or other.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Philippica</span></span>.—The remaining orations of Cicero are those
directed against Antony, of whose private life and political
conduct they present us with a full and glaring picture. The
character of Antony, next to that of Sylla, was the most singular
in the Annals of Rome, and in some of its features bore
a striking resemblance to that of the fortunate Dictator. Both
were possessed of uncommon military talents—both were imbued
with cruelty which makes human nature shudder—both
were inordinately addicted to luxury and pleasure—and both,
for men of their powers of mind and habits, had apparently,
at least, a strange superstitious reliance on destiny, portents,
and omens. Yet there were strong shades of distinction even
in those parts of their characters in which we trace the closest
resemblance: The cruelty of Sylla was more deliberate and
remorseless—that of Antony, more regardless and unthinking—and
amid all the atrocities of the latter, there burst forth
occasional gleams of generosity and feeling. But then Sylla
was a man of much greater discernment and penetration—a
much more profound and successful dissembler—and he was
possessed of many refined and elegant accomplishments, of
which the coarser Antony was destitute. Sylla gratified his
voluptuousness, but Antony was ruled by it. The former
indulged in pleasure when within his grasp, but ease, power,
and revenge, were his great and ultimate objects: The chief
aim of the latter, was the sensual pleasure to which he was
subservient. Sylla would never have been the slave of Cleopatra,
or the dupe of Octavius. Hence the wide difference
between the destiny of the triumphant Dictator, whose chariot
rolled on the wheels of Fortune to the close of his career,
and the sad fate of Antony. Yet that very fate has mitigated
the abhorrence of posterity, and weakness having been added
to wickedness, has unaccountably palliated, in our eyes, the
faults of the soft Triumvir, now more remembered as the devoted
lover of Cleopatra, than as the chief promoter of the
Proscriptions.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The Philippics against Antony, like those of Demosthenes,
derive their chief beauty from the noble expression of just
indignation, which indeed composes many of the most splendid
and admired passages of ancient eloquence. They were all
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page178">[pg 178]</span><a name="Pg178" id="Pg178" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>pronounced during the period which elapsed between the
assassination of Cæsar, and the defeat of Antony at Modena.
Soon after Cæsar’s death, Cicero, fearing danger from Antony,
who held a sort of military possession of the city, resolved on
a voyage to Greece. Being detained, however, by contrary
winds, after he had set out, and having received favourable
intelligence from his friends at Rome, he determined to return
to the capital. The Senate assembled the day after his arrival,
in order, at the suggestion of Antony, to consider of some new
and extraordinary honours to the memory of Cæsar. To this
meeting Cicero was specially summoned by Antony, but he
excused himself on pretence of indisposition, and the fatigue
of his journey. He appeared, however, in his place, when the
Senate met on the following day, in absence of Antony, and
delivered the first of the orations, afterwards termed Philippics,
from the resemblance they bore to those invectives which
Demosthenes poured forth against the great foe of the independence
of Greece. Cicero opens his speech by explaining
the motives of his recent departure from Rome—his sudden
return, and his absence on the preceding day—declaring, that
if present, he would have opposed the posthumous honours
decreed to the usurper. His next object, after vindicating
himself, being to warn the Senate of the designs of Antony,
he complains that he had violated the most solemn and
authentic even of Cæsar’s laws; and at the same time enforced,
as ordinances, what were mere jottings, found, or pretended
to have been found, among the Dictator’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memoranda</span></span>, after
his death.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Antony was highly incensed at this speech, and summoned
another meeting of the Senate, at which he again required
the presence of Cicero. These two rivals seem to have been
destined never to meet in the Senate-house. Cicero, being
apprehensive of some design against his life, did not attend;
so that the Oration of Antony, in his own justification, which he
had carefully prepared in intervals of leisure at his villa, near
Tibur, was unanswered in the Senate. The second <a name="corr178" id="corr178" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Philippic</span>
was penned by Cicero in his closet, as a reply to this speech
of Antony, in which he had been particularly charged with
having been not merely accessary to the murder of Cæsar, but
the chief contriver of the plot against him. Some part of
Cicero’s oration was thus necessarily defensive, but the larger
portion, which is accusatory, is one of the severest and most
bitter invectives ever composed, the whole being expressed in
terms of the most thorough contempt and strongest detestation
of Antony. By laying open his whole criminal excesses from
his earliest youth, he exhibits one continued scene of
debauch<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page179">[pg 179]</span><a name="Pg179" id="Pg179" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>ery, faction, rapine, and violence; but he dwells with peculiar
horror on his offer of the diadem to Cæsar, at the festival of
the Lupercalia—his drunken debauch at the once classic
villa of Terentius Varro—and his purchase of the effects that
belonged to the great Pompey—on which last subject he
pathetically contrasts the modesty and decorum of that renowned
warrior, once the Favourite of Fortune, and darling
of the Roman people, with the licentiousness of the military
adventurer who now rioted in the spoils of his country. In
concluding, he declares, on his own part, that in his youth he
had defended the republic, and, in his old age, he would not
abandon its cause.—<span class="tei tei-q">“The sword of Catiline I despised; and
never shall I dread that of Antony.”</span> This oration is adorned
with all the charms of eloquence, and proves, that in the decline
of life Cicero had not lost one spark of the fire and
spirit which animated his earlier productions. Although not
delivered in the Senate, nor intended to be published till
things were actually come to an extremity, and the affairs of
the republic made it necessary to render Antony’s conduct
and designs manifest to the people, copies of the oration were
sent to Brutus, Cassius, and other friends of the commonwealth:
hence it soon got into extensive circulation, and, by exciting
the vengeance of Antony, was a chief cause of the tragical
death of its author.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The situation of Antony having now become precarious,
from the union of Octavius with the party of the Senate, and
the defection of two legions, he abruptly quitted the city, and
placing himself at the head of his army, marched into Cisalpine
Gaul, which, since the death of Cæsar, had been occupied by
Decimus Brutus, one of the conspirators. The field being
thus left clear for Cicero, and the Senate being assembled, he
pronounced the third Philippic, of which the great object was
to induce it to support Brutus, by placing an army at the disposal
of Octavius, along with the two Consuls elect, Hirtius
and Pansa. He exhorts the Senate to this measure, by enlarging
on the merits of Octavius and Brutus, and concludes with
proposing public thanks to these leaders, and to the legions
which had deserted the standard of Antony.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
From the Senate, Cicero proceeded directly to the Forum,
where, in his fourth Philippic, he gave an account to the
people of what had occurred, and explained to them, that
Antony, though not nominally, had now been actually declared
the enemy of his country. This harangue was so well received
by an audience the most numerous that had ever listened
to his orations, that, speaking of it afterwards, he declares he
would have reaped sufficient fruit from the exertions of his
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page180">[pg 180]</span><a name="Pg180" id="Pg180" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>whole life, had he died on the day it was pronounced, when
the whole people, with one voice and mind, called out that he
had twice saved the republic<a id="noteref_330" name="noteref_330" href="#note_330"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">330</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Brutus being as yet unable to defend himself in the field,
withdrew into Modena, where he was besieged by Antony.
Intelligence of this having been brought to Rome, Cicero, in
his fifth Philippic, endeavoured to persuade the Senate to
proclaim Antony an enemy of his country, in opposition to
Calenus, who proposed, that before proceeding to acts of hostility,
an embassy should be sent for the purpose of admonishing
Antony to desist from his attempt on Gaul, and submit
himself to the authority of the Senate. After three days’ successive
debate, Cicero’s proposal would have prevailed, had
not one of the Tribunes interposed his negative, in consequence
of which the measure of the embassy was resorted to.
Cicero, nevertheless, before any answer could be received, persisted,
in his sixth and seventh Philippics, in asserting that
any accommodation with a rebel such as Antony, would be
equally disgraceful and dangerous to the republic. The deputies
having returned, and reported that Antony would consent
to nothing which was required of him, the Senate declared
war against him—employing, however, in their decree, the
term tumult, instead of war or rebellion. Cicero, in his eighth
Philippic, expostulated with them on their timorous and impolitic
lenity of expression. In the ninth Philippic, pronounced
on the following day, he called on the Senate to erect
a statue to one of the deputies, Servius Sulpicius, who, while
labouring under a severe distemper, had, at the risk of his
life, undertaken the embassy, but had died before he could
acquit himself of the commission with which he was charged.
The proposal met with considerable opposition, but it was at
length agreed that a brazen statue should be erected to him
in the Forum, and that an inscription should be placed on the
base, importing that he had died in the service of the republic.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The Philippics, hitherto mentioned, related chiefly to the
affairs of Cisalpine Gaul, the scene of the contest between D.
Brutus and Antony. A long period was now elapsed since the
Senate had received any intelligence concerning the chiefs of
the conspiracy, Marcus Brutus and Cassius, the former of
whom had seized on the province of Macedonia, while the latter
occupied Syria. Public despatches, however, at length
arrived from M. Brutus, giving an account of his successful
proceedings in Greece. The Consul Pansa having communicated
the contents at a meeting of the Senate, and having
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page181">[pg 181]</span><a name="Pg181" id="Pg181" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>proposed for him public thanks and honours, Calenus, a creature
of Antony, objected, and moved, that as what he had
done was without lawful authority, he should be required to
deliver up his army to the Senate, or the proper governor of
the province. Cicero, in his tenth Philippic, replied, in a
transport of eloquent and patriotic indignation, to this most
unjust and ruinous proposal, particularly to the assertion by
which it was supported, that veterans would not submit to be
commanded by Brutus. He thus succeeded in obtaining from
the Senate an approbation of the conduct of Brutus, a continuance
of his command, and pecuniary assistance.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
About the same time accounts arrived from Asia, that Dolabella,
on the part of Antony, had taken possession of Smyrna,
and there put Trebonius, one of the conspirators, to death.
On receiving this intelligence, a debate arose concerning the
choice of a general to be employed against Dolabella, and
Cicero, in his eleventh Philippic, strenuously maintained the
right of Cassius, who was then in Greece, to be promoted to
that command. In the twelfth and thirteenth, he again
warmly and successfully opposed the sending a deputation
to Antony. All further mention of pacification was terminated
by the joyful tidings of the total defeat of Antony before Modena,
by the army under Octavius, and the Consuls Hirtius
and Pansa—the latter of whom was mortally wounded in the
conflict. The intelligence excited incredible joy at Rome,
which was heightened by the unfavourable reports that had
previously prevailed. The Senate met to deliberate on the
despatches of the Consuls communicating the event. Never
was there a finer opportunity for the display of eloquence,
than what was afforded to Cicero on this occasion; of which
he most gloriously availed himself in the fourteenth Philippic.
The excitation and tumult consequent on a great recent victory,
give wing to high flights of eloquence, and also prepare
the minds of the audience to follow the ascent. The success
at Modena terminated a long period of anxiety. It was for
the time supposed to have decided the fate of Antony and the
Republic; and the orator, who thus saw all his measures justified,
must have felt the exultation, confidence, and spirit, so
favourable to the highest exertions of eloquence. This, with
the detestable character of the conquered foe,—the wounds
of Pansa, who was once suspected by the Republic, but by
his faithful zeal had gradually obtained its confidence, and at
length sealed his fidelity with his blood,—the rewards due to
the surviving victors,—the honours to be paid to those who
had fallen in defence of their country,—the thanksgivings to
be rendered to the immortal gods,—all afforded topics of
tri<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page182">[pg 182]</span><a name="Pg182" id="Pg182" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>umph, panegyric, and pathos, which have been seldom supplied
to the orator in any age or country. In extolling those
who had fallen, Cicero dwells on two subjects; one appertaining
to the glory of the heroes themselves, the other to the
consolation of their friends and relatives. He proposes that a
splendid monument should be erected, in common to all who
had perished, with an inscription recording their names and
services; and in recommending this tribute of public gratitude,
he breaks out into a funeral panegyric, which has formed
a more lasting memorial than the monument he suggested.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This was the last Philippic and last oration which Cicero
delivered. The union of Antony and Octavius soon after
annihilated the power of the Senate; and Cicero, like Demosthenes,
fell the victim of that indignant eloquence with which
he had lashed the enemies of his country:—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Eloquio sed uterque periit orator; utrumque</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Largus et exundans letho dedit ingenii fons.</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Ingenio manus est et cervix cæsa, nec unquam</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Sanguine causidici maduerunt rostra pusilli<a id="noteref_331" name="noteref_331" href="#note_331"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">331</span></span></a>.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Besides the complete orations above mentioned, Cicero delivered
many, of which only fragments remain, or which are
now entirely lost. All those which he pronounced during
the five years intervening between his election to the Quæstorship
and the Ædileship have perished, except that for M.
Tullius, of which the exordium and narrative were brought to
light at the late celebrated discovery by Mai, in the Ambrosian
library at Milan. Tullius had been forcibly dispossessed (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">vi
armata</span></span>) by one of the Fabii of a farm he held in Lucania;
and the whole Fabian race were prosecuted for damages,
under a law of Lucullus, whereby, in consequence of depredations
committed in the municipal states of Italy, every
family was held responsible for the violent aggressions of any
of its tribe. A large fragment of the oration for Scaurus
forms by far the most valuable part of the discovery in the
Ambrosian library. The oration, indeed, is not entire, but
the part we have of it is tolerably well connected. The
charge was one of provincial embezzlement, and in the exordium
the orator announces that he was to treat, 1st, of the
general nature of the accusation itself; 2d, of the character
of the Sardinians; 3d, of that of Scaurus; and, lastly, of the
special charge concerning the corn. Of these, the first two
heads are tolerably entire; and that in which he exposes the
faithless character of the Sardinians, and thus shakes the
cred<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page183">[pg 183]</span><a name="Pg183" id="Pg183" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>ibility of the witnesses for the prosecution is artfully managed.
The other fragments discovered in the Ambrosian library
consist merely of detached sentences, of which it is almost
impossible to make a connected meaning. Of this description
is the oration <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In P. Clodium</span></span>; yet still, by the aid of the
Commentary found along with it, we are enabled to form
some notion of the tenor of the speech. The well-known
story of Clodius finding access to the house of Cæsar, in female
disguise, during the celebration of the mysteries of Bona
Dea, gave occasion to this invective. A sort of altercation
had one day passed in the Senate between Cicero and Clodius,
soon after the acquittal of the latter for this offence, which
probably suggested to Cicero the notion of writing a connected
oration, inveighing against the vices and crimes of
Clodius, particularly his profanation of the secret rites of the
goddess, and the corrupt means by which he had obtained his
acquittal. In one of his epistles to Atticus, Cicero gives a
detailed account of this altercation, which certainly does not
afford us a very dignified notion of senatorial gravity and
decorum.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Of those orations of Cicero which have entirely perished,
the greatest loss has been sustained by the disappearance of
the defence of Cornelius, who was accused of practices against
the state during his tribuneship. This speech, which was
divided into two great parts, was continued for four successive
days, in presence of an immense concourse of people, who
testified their admiration of its bright eloquence by repeated
applause<a id="noteref_332" name="noteref_332" href="#note_332"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">332</span></span></a>. The orator himself frequently refers to it as
among the most finished of his compositions<a id="noteref_333" name="noteref_333" href="#note_333"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">333</span></span></a>; and the old
critics cite it as an example of genuine eloquence. <span class="tei tei-q">“Not
merely,”</span> says Quintilian, <span class="tei tei-q">“with strong, but with shining armour
did Cicero contend in the cause of Cornelius.”</span> We have also
to lament the loss of the oration for C. Piso, accused of oppression
in his government—of the farewell discourse delivered
to the Sicilians, (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Quum Quæstor Lilybæo discederet</span></span>,) in which
he gave them an account of his administration, and promised
them his protection at Rome—of the invective pronounced in
the Senate against Metellus, in answer to a harangue which
that Tribune had delivered to the people concerning Cicero’s
conduct, in putting the confederates of Catiline to death without
trial; and, finally, of the celebrated speech <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Proscriptorum
Liberis</span></span>, in which, on political grounds, he opposed,
while admitting their justice, the claims of the children of
those whom Sylla had proscribed and disqualified from holding
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page184">[pg 184]</span><a name="Pg184" id="Pg184" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>any honours in the state, and who now applied to be relieved
from their disabilities. The success which he obtained in resisting
this demand, is described in strong terms by Pliny:
<span class="tei tei-q">“Te orante, proscriptorum liberos honores petere puduit<a id="noteref_334" name="noteref_334" href="#note_334"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">334</span></span></a>.”</span>
A speech which is now lost, and which, though afterwards reduced
to writing, must have been delivered extempore, afforded
another strong example of the persuasiveness of his eloquence.
The appearance of the Tribune, Roscius Otho, who had set
apart seats for the knights at the public spectacles, having one
day occasioned a disturbance at the theatre, Cicero, on being
informed of the tumult, hastened to the spot, and, calling out
the people to the Temple of Bellona, he so calmed them by
the magic of his eloquence, that, returning immediately to the
theatre, they clapped their hands in honour of Otho, and vied
with the knights in giving him demonstrations of respect<a id="noteref_335" name="noteref_335" href="#note_335"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">335</span></span></a>.
One topic which he touched on in this oration, and the only
one of which we have any hint from antiquity, was the rioters’
want of taste, in creating a tumult, while Roscius was performing
on the stage<a id="noteref_336" name="noteref_336" href="#note_336"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">336</span></span></a>. This speech, the orations against the
Agrarian law, and that <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Proscriptorum Liberis</span></span>, have long
been cited as the strongest examples of the power of eloquence
over the passions of mankind: And it is difficult to
say, whether the highest praise be due to the orator, who could
persuade, or to the people, who could be thus induced to
relinquish the most tempting expectations of property and
honours, and the full enjoyment of their favourite amusements.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the age of that declamation which prevailed at Rome
from the time of Tiberius to the fall of the empire, it
was the practice of rhetoricians to declaim on similar topics
with those on which Cicero had delivered, or was supposed
to have delivered, harangues. It appears from Aulus Gellius<a id="noteref_337" name="noteref_337" href="#note_337"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">337</span></span></a>,
that in the age of Marcus Aurelius doubts were
entertained with regard to the authenticity of certain orations
circulated as productions of Cicero. He was known
to have delivered four speeches almost immediately after his
recall from banishment, on subjects closely connected with
his exile. The first was addressed to the Senate<a id="noteref_338" name="noteref_338" href="#note_338"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">338</span></span></a>, and the
second to the people, a few days subsequently to his return<a id="noteref_339" name="noteref_339" href="#note_339"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">339</span></span></a>;
the third to the college of Pontiffs, in order to obtain restitution
of a piece of ground on the Palatine hill, on which his
house had formerly stood, but had been demolished, and a
temple erected on the spot, with a view, as he feared, to alienate
it irretrievably from the proprietor, by thus consecrating
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page185">[pg 185]</span><a name="Pg185" id="Pg185" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>it to religious purposes<a id="noteref_340" name="noteref_340" href="#note_340"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">340</span></span></a>. The fourth was pronounced in consequence
of Clodius declaring that certain menacing prodigies,
which had lately appeared, were indubitably occasioned by
the desecration of this ground, which the Pontiffs had now
discharged from religious uses. Four orations, supposed to
have been delivered on those occasions, and entitled, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Post
Reditum in Senatu</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ad Quirites post Reditum</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro domo sua
ad Pontifices</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Haruspicum Responsis</span></span>, were published in
all the early editions of Cicero, without any doubts of their
authenticity being hinted by the commentators, and were also
referred to as genuine authorities by Middleton in his Life of
Cicero. At length, about the middle of last century, the well-known
dispute having arisen between Middleton and Tunstall,
concerning the letters to Brutus, Markland engaged in the
controversy; and his remarks on the correspondence of Cicero
and Brutus were accompanied with a <span class="tei tei-q">“Dissertation on the
Four Orations ascribed to M. T. Cicero,”</span> published in 1745,
which threw great doubts on their authenticity. Middleton
made no formal reply to this part of Markland’s observations;
but he neither retracted his opinion nor changed a word in his
subsequent edition of the Life of Cicero.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Soon afterwards, Ross, the editor of Cicero’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epistolæ Familiares</span></span>,
and subsequently Bishop of Exeter, ironically showed,
in his <span class="tei tei-q">“Dissertation, in which the defence of P. Sulla, ascribed
to Cicero, is clearly proved to be spurious, after the manner
of Mr Markland,”</span> that, on the principles and line of argument
adopted by his opponent, the authenticity of any one of the
orations might be contested. This <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">jeu d’esprit</span></span> of Bishop Ross
was seriously confuted in a <span class="tei tei-q">“Dissertation, in which the Objections
of a late Pamphlet to the Writings of the Ancients,
after the manner of Mr Markland, are clearly Answered; and
those Passages in Tully corrected, on which some of the Objections
are founded.—1746.”</span> This dissertation was printed
by Bowyer, and he is generally believed to have been the author
of it<a id="noteref_341" name="noteref_341" href="#note_341"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">341</span></span></a>. In Germany, J. M. Gesner, with all the weight
attached to his opinion, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Thesaurus</span></span>, strenuously defended
these orations in two prelections, held in 1753 and 1754, and
inserted in the 3d volume of the new series of the Transactions
of the Royal Academy at Gottingen, under the title <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Cicero
Restitutus</span></span>, in which he refuted, one by one, all the objections
of Markland.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page186">[pg 186]</span><a name="Pg186" id="Pg186" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
After this, although the Letters of Brutus were no longer
considered as authentic, literary men in all countries—as De
Brosses, the French Translator of Sallust, Ferguson, Saxius,
in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Onomasticon</span></span>, and Rhunkenius—adopted the orations as
genuine. Ernesti, in his edition of Cicero, makes no mention
of the existence of any doubts respecting them; and, in his
edition of Fabricius<a id="noteref_342" name="noteref_342" href="#note_342"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">342</span></span></a>, alludes to the controversy concerning
them as a foolish and insignificant dispute. A change of opinion,
however, was produced by an edition of the four orations
which Wolfius published at Berlin in 1801, to which he prefixed
an account of the controversy, and a general view of the
arguments of Markland and Gesner. The observations of each,
relating to particular words and phrases, are placed below the
passages as they occur, and are followed by Wolf’s own remarks,
refuting, to the utmost of his power, the opinions of
Gesner, and confirming those of Markland. Schütz, the late
German editor of Cicero, has completely adopted the notions
of Wolf; and by printing these four harangues, not in their
order in the series, but separately, and at the end of the whole,
along with the discarded correspondence between Cicero and
Brutus, has thrown them without the classical pale as effectually
as Lambinus excluded the once recognized orations, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In
pace</span></span>, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Antequam iret in Exilium</span></span>. In the fourth volume
of his new edition of the works of Cicero now proceeding in
Germany, Beck has followed the opinion of Wolf, after an impartial
examination of the different arguments in his notes,
and in an <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">excursus criticus</span></span> devoted to this subject.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Markland and Wolf believe, that these harangues were
written as a rhetorical exercise, by some declaimer, who lived
not long after Cicero, probably in the time of Tiberius, and
who had before his eyes some orations of Cicero now lost,
(perhaps those which he delivered on his return from exile,)
from which the rhetorician occasionally borrowed ideas or
phrases, not altogether unworthy of the orator’s genius and
eloquence. But, though they may contain some insulated Ciceronian
expressions, it is utterly denied that these orations
can be the continued composition of Cicero. The arguments
against their authenticity are deduced, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">first</span></span> from their matter;
and, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">secondly</span></span>, from their style. These critics dwell much on
the numerous thoughts and ideas inconsistent with the known
sentiments, or unsuitable to the disposition of the author,—on
the relation of events, told in a different manner from that
in which they have been recorded by him in his undoubted
works,—and, finally, on the gross ignorance shown of the laws,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page187">[pg 187]</span><a name="Pg187" id="Pg187" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>institutions, and customs of Rome, and even of the events
passing at the time. Thus it is said, in one of these four orations,
that, on some political occasion, all the senators changed
their garb, as also the Prætors and Ædiles, which proves,
that the author was ignorant that all Ædiles and Prætors were
necessarily senators, since, otherwise, the special mention of
them would be superfluous and absurd. What is still stronger,
the author, in the oration <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ad Quirites post reditum</span></span>, refers to
the speech in behalf of Gabinius, which was not pronounced
till 699, three years subsequently to Cæsar’s recall; whereas
the real oration, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ad Quirites</span></span>, was delivered on the second or
third day after his return. With regard to the style of these
harangues, it is argued, that the expressions are affected, the
sentences perplexed, and the transitions abrupt; and that their
languor and want of animation render them wholly unworthy
of Cicero. Markland particularly points out the absurd repetition
of what the declaimer had considered Ciceronian
phrases,—as, <span class="tei tei-q">“Aras, focos, penates—Deos immortales—Res
incredibiles—Esse videatur.”</span> Of the orations individually he
remarks, and justly, that the one delivered by Cicero in the
Senate immediately after his return, was known to have been
prepared with the greatest possible care, and to have been
committed to writing before it was pronounced; while the
fictitious harangue which we now have in its place, is at all
events, quite unlike anything that Cicero would have produced
with elaborate study. The second is a sort of compendium
of the first, and the same ideas and expressions are slavishly
repeated; which implies a barrenness of invention, and sterility
of language, that cannot be supposed in Cicero. Of the
third oration he speaks, in his letters to Atticus, as one of his
happiest efforts<a id="noteref_343" name="noteref_343" href="#note_343"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">343</span></span></a>; but nothing can be more wretched than that
which we now have in its stead,—the first twelve chapters, indeed,
being totally irrelevant to the question at issue.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The oration for Marcellus, the genuineness of which has also
been called in question, is somewhat in a different style from
the other harangues of Cicero; for, though entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Marcello</span></span>,
it is not so much a speech in his defence, as a panegyric
on Cæsar, for having granted the pardon of Marcellus at
the intercession of the Senate. Marcellus had been one of
the most violent opponents of the views of Cæsar. He had
recommended in the Senate, that he should be deprived of the
province of Gaul: he had insulted the magistrates of one of
Cæsar’s new-founded colonies; and had been present at Pharsalia
on the side of Pompey. After that battle he retired to
Mitylene, where he was obliged to remain, being one of the
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page188">[pg 188]</span><a name="Pg188" id="Pg188" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>few adversaries to whom the conqueror refused to be reconciled.
The Senate, however, one day when Cæsar was present,
with an united voice, and in an attitude of supplication, having
implored his clemency in favour of Marcellus, and their request
having been granted, Cicero, though he had resolved to
preserve eternal silence, being moved by the occasion, delivered
one of the most strained encomiums that has ever been
pronounced.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the first part he extols the military exploits of Cæsar; but
shows, that his clemency to Marcellus was more glorious than
any of his other actions, as it depended entirely on himself,
while fortune and his army had their share in the events of the
war. In the second part he endeavours to dispel the suspicions
which it appears Cæsar still entertained of the hostile intentions
of Marcellus, and takes occasion to assure the Dictator
that his life was most dear and valuable to all, since on it
depended the tranquillity of the state, and the hopes of the
restoration of the commonwealth.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This oration, which Middleton declares to be superior
to anything extant of the kind in all antiquity, and which
a celebrated French critic terms, <span class="tei tei-q">“Le discours le plus noble,
le plus pathetique, et en meme tems le plus patriotique,
que la reconnaissance, l’amitié, et la vertu, puissent inspirer
<a name="corr188" id="corr188" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">à</span> une ame elevée et sensible,”</span> continued to be not only of
undisputed authenticity, but one of Cicero’s most admired
productions, till Wolf, in the preface and notes to a new
edition of it, printed in 1802, attempted to show, that it was a
spurious production, totally unworthy of the orator whose
name it bore, and that it was written by some declaimer, soon
after the Augustan age, not as an imposition upon the public,
but as an exercise,—according to the practice of the rhetoricians,
who were wont to choose, as a theme, some subject on
which Cicero had spoken. In his letters to Atticus, Cicero
says, that he had returned thanks to Cæsar <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">pluribus verbis</span></span>.
This Middleton translates a <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">long speech</span></span>; but Wolf alleges it
can only mean a few words, and never can be interpreted to
denote a full oration, such as that which we now possess for
Marcellus. That Cicero did not deliver a long or formal
speech, is evident, he contends, from the testimony of Plutarch,
who mentions, in his life of Cicero, that, a short time
afterwards, when the orator was about to plead for Ligarius,
Cæsar asked, how it happened that he had not heard Cicero
speak for so long a period,—which would have been absurd if
he had heard him, a few months before, pleading for Marcellus.
Being an extemporary effusion, called forth by an unforeseen
occasion, it could not (he continues to urge) have been
pre<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page189">[pg 189]</span><a name="Pg189" id="Pg189" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>pared and written beforehand; nor is it at all probable, that,
like many other orations of Cicero, it was revised and made
public after being delivered. The causes which induced the
Roman orators to write out their speeches at leisure, were the
magnitude and public importance of the subject, or the wishes
of those in whose defence they were made, and who were
anxious to possess a sort of record of their vindication. But
none of these motives existed in the present case. The matter
was of no importance or difficulty; and we know that
Marcellus, who was a stern republican, was not at all gratified
by the intervention of the senators, or conciliated by the clemency
of Cæsar. As to internal evidence, deduced from the
oration, Wolf admits, that there are interspersed in it some
Ciceronian sentences; and how otherwise could the learned
have been so egregiously deceived? but the resemblance is
more in the varnish of the style than in the substance. We
have the words rather than the thoughts of Cicero; and the
rounding of his periods, without their energy and argumentative
connection. He adduces, also, many instances of phrases
unusual among the classics, and of conceits which betray the
rhetorician or sophist. His extolling the act of that day on
which Cæsar pardoned Marcellus as higher than all his warlike
exploits, would but have raised a smile on the lips of the
Dictator; and the slighting way in which the cause of the republic
and Pompey are mentioned, is totally different from the
manner in which Cicero expressed himself on these delicate
topics, even in presence of Cæsar, in his authentic orations for
Deiotarus and Ligarius.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is evident, at first view, that many of Wolf’s observations
are hypercritical; and that in his argument concerning the
encomiums on Cæsar, and the overrated importance of his
clemency to Marcellus, he does not make sufficient allowance
for Cicero’s habit of exaggeration, and the momentary enthusiasm
produced by one of those transactions,
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">—— <span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Quæ, dum geruntur,</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Percellunt animos.”</span> ——</div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Accordingly, in the year following that of Wolf’s edition,
Olaus Wormius published, at Copenhagen, a vindication of
the authenticity of this speech. To the argument adduced
from Plutarch, he answers, that some months had elapsed between
the orations for Marcellus and Ligarius, which might
readily be called a long period, by one accustomed to hear
Cicero harangue almost daily in the Senate or Forum. Besides,
the phrase of Plutarch, <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">λεγοντος</span></span> may mean pleading
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page190">[pg 190]</span><a name="Pg190" id="Pg190" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>for some one, which was not the nature of the speech for Marcellus.
As to the motive which led to write and publish the
oration, Cicero, above all men, was delighted with his own
productions, and nothing can be more probable than that he
should have wished to preserve the remembrance of that memorable
day, which he calls in his letters, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">diem illam pulcherrimam</span></span>.
It was natural to send the oration to Marcellus, in
order to hasten his return to Rome, and it must have been an
acceptable thing to Cæsar, thus to record his fearlessness and
benignity. With regard to the manner in which Pompey and
the republican party are talked of, it is evident, from his letters,
that Cicero was disgusted with the political measures of
that faction, that he wholly disapproved of their plan of the
campaign, and foreseeing a renewal of Sylla’s proscriptions in
the triumph of the aristocratic power, he did not exaggerate
in so highly extolling the humanity of Cæsar.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The arguments of Wormius were expanded and illustrated
by Weiske, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Commentario perpetuo et pleno in Orat. Ciceronis
pro Marcello</span></span>, published at Leipsic, in 1805<a id="noteref_344" name="noteref_344" href="#note_344"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">344</span></span></a>, while,
on the other hand, Spalding, in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratione pro Marcello
Disputatio</span></span>, published in 1808, supported the opinions of
Wolfius.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The controversy was in this state, and was considered as
involved in much doubt and obscurity, when Aug. Jacob, in
an academical exercise, printed at Halle and Berlin, in 1813,
and entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratione quæ inscribitur pro Marcello, Ciceroni
vel abjudicata vel adjudicata, Quæstio novaque conjectura</span></span>,
adopted a middle course. Finding such dissimilarity in
the different passages of the oration, some being most powerful,
elegant, and beautiful, while others were totally futile and
frigid, he was led to believe that part had actually flowed from
the lips of Cicero, but that much had been subsequently interpolated
by some rhetorician or declaimer. He divides his
whole treatise into four heads, which comprehend all the various
points agitated on the subject of this oration: 1. The
testimony of different authors tending to prove the authenticity
or spuriousness of the production: 2. The history of the
period, with which every genuine oration must necessarily
concur: 3. The genius and manner of Cicero, from which no
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page191">[pg 191]</span><a name="Pg191" id="Pg191" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>one of his orations could be entirely remote: 4. The style
and phraseology, which must be correct and classical. In the
prosecution of his inquiry in these different aspects of the
subject, the author successively reviews the opinions and
judgments of his predecessors, sometimes agreeing with Wolf
and his followers, at other times, and more frequently, with
their opposers. He thinks that the much-contested phrase
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">pluribus verbis</span></span>, may mean a long oration, as Cicero elsewhere
talks of having pleaded for Cluentius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">pluribus verbis</span></span>, though
the speech in his defence consists of 58 chapters. Besides,
Cicero only says that he had <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">returned thanks</span></span> to Cæsar, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">pluribus
verbis</span></span>. Now, the whole speech does not consist of
thanks to Cæsar, being partly occupied in removing the suspicions
which he entertained of Marcellus. With regard to
encomiums on Cæsar, which Spalding has characterized as
abject and fulsome, and totally different from the delicate
compliments addressed to him in the oration for Deiotarus or
Ligarius, Jacob reminds his readers that the harangues could
have no resemblance to each other, the latter being pleadings
in behalf of the accused, and the former a professed panegyric.
Nor can any one esteem the eulogies on Cæsar too extravagant
for Cicero, when he remembers the terms in which the
orator had formerly spoken of Roscius, Archias, and Pompey.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Schütz, the late German editor of Cicero, has subscribed to
the opinion of Wolf, and has published the speech for Marcellus,
along with the other four doubtful harangues at the
end of the genuine orations.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<a name="corr191" id="corr191" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">But</span> supposing that these five contested speeches are spurious,
a sufficient number of genuine orations remain to enable
us to distinguish the character of Cicero’s eloquence. Ambitious
from his youth of the honours attending a fine speaker,
he early travelled to Greece, where he accumulated all the
stores of knowledge and rules of art, which could be gathered
from the rhetoricians, historians, and philosophers, of that
intellectual land. While he thus extracted and imbibed the
copiousness of Plato, the sweetness of Isocrates, and force of
Demosthenes, he, at the same time, imbued his mind with a
thorough knowledge of the laws, constitution, antiquities, and
literature, of his native country. Nor did he less study the
peculiar temper, the jealousies, and enmities of the Roman
people, both as a nation and as individuals, without a knowledge
of which, his eloquence would have been unavailing in
the Forum or Comitia, where so much was decided by favouritism
and cabal. By these means he ruled the passions and
deliberations of his countrymen with almost resistless
sway—<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page192">[pg 192]</span><a name="Pg192" id="Pg192" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>upheld the power of the Senate—stayed the progress of tyranny—drove
the audacious Catiline from Rome—directed the feelings
of the state in favour of Pompey—shook the strong mind
of Cæsar—and kindled a flame by which Antony had been
nearly consumed. But the main secret of his success lay in
the warmth and intensity of his feelings. His heart swelled
with patriotism, and was dilated with the most magnificent
conceptions of the glory of Rome. Though it throbbed with
the fondest anticipations of posthumous fame, the momentary
acclaim of a multitude was a chord to which it daily and most
readily vibrated; while, at the same time, his high conceptions
of oratory counteracted the bad effect which this exuberant
vanity might otherwise have produced. Thus, when two
speakers were employed in the same cause, though Cicero was
the junior, to him was assigned the peroration, in which he
surpassed all his contemporaries; and he obtained this pre-eminence
not so much on account of his superior genius or
knowledge of law, as because he was more moved and affected
himself, without which he would never have moved or affected
his judges.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
With such natural endowments, and such acquirements, he
early took his place as the refuge and support of his fellow-citizens
in the Forum, as the arbiter of the deliberations of
the Senate, and as the most powerful defender from the Rostrum
of the political interests of the commonwealth.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cicero and Demosthenes have been frequently compared.
Suidas says, that one Cicilus, a native of Sicily, whose works
are now lost, was the first to institute the parallel, and they
have been subsequently compared, in due form, by Plutarch
and Quintilian, and, (as far as relates to sublimity,) by Longinus,
among the ancients; and among the moderns, by Herder,
in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Philosophical History of Man</span></span>, and by Jenisch, in a
German work devoted to the subject<a id="noteref_345" name="noteref_345" href="#note_345"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">345</span></span></a>. Rapin, and all other
French critics, with the exception of Fenelon, give the preference
to Cicero.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
From what has already been said, it is sufficiently evident
that Cicero had not to contend with any of those obstructions
from nature which Demosthenes encountered; and his youth,
in place of being spent like that of the Greek orator, in remedying
and supplying defects, was unceasingly employed in
pursuit of the improvements auxiliary to his art. But if Cicero
derived superior advantages from nature, Demosthenes possessed
other advantages, in the more advanced progress of his
country in refinement and letters, at the era in which he
ap<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page193">[pg 193]</span><a name="Pg193" id="Pg193" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>peared. Greek literature had reached its full perfection before
the birth of Demosthenes, but Cicero was, in a great
measure, himself the creator of the literature of Rome, and no
prose writer of eminence had yet existed, after whom he could
model his phraseology. In other external circumstances, they
were placed in situations not very dissimilar. But Cicero had
a wider, and perhaps more beautiful field, in which to expatiate
and to exercise his powers. The wide extent of the Roman
empire, the striking vices and virtues of its citizens, the
memorable events of its history, supplied an endless variety of
great and interesting topics; whereas many of the orations of
Demosthenes are on subjects unworthy of his talents. Their
genius and capacity were in many respects the same. Their
eloquence was of that great and comprehensive kind, which
dignifies every subject, and gives it all the force and beauty it
is capable of receiving. <span class="tei tei-q">“I judge Cicero and Demosthenes,”</span>
says Quintilian, <span class="tei tei-q">“to be alike in most of the great qualities they
possessed. They were alike in design, in the manner of dividing
their subject, and preparing the minds of the audience;
in short, in every thing belonging to invention.”</span> But while
there was much similarity in their talents, there was a wide
difference in their tempers and characters. Demosthenes was
of an austere, harsh, melancholy disposition, obstinate and resolute
in all his undertakings: Cicero was of a lively, flexible,
and wavering humour. This seems the chief cause of the
difference in their eloquence; but the contrasts are too obvious,
and have been too often exhibited to be here displayed.
No person wishes to be told, for the twentieth time, that Demosthenes
assumes a higher tone, and is more serious, vehement,
and impressive, than Cicero; while Cicero is more
insinuating, graceful, and affecting: That the Greek orator
struck on the soul by the force of his argument, and ardour of
his expressions; while the Roman made his way to the heart,
alternately moving and allaying the passions of his hearers, by
all the arts of rhetoric, and by conforming to their opinions
and prejudices.
</p>

<div class="tei tei-tb"> </div>
<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cicero was not only a great orator, but has also left the fullest
instructions and the most complete historical details on
the art which he so gloriously practised. His precepts are
contained in the dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span> and the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Orator</span></span>; while
the history of Roman eloquence is comprehended in the dialogue
entitled, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus, sive De Claris Oratoribus</span></span>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In his youth, Cicero had written and published some undigested
observations on the subject of eloquence; but
consi<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page194">[pg 194]</span><a name="Pg194" id="Pg194" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>dering these as unworthy of the character and experience he
afterwards acquired, he applied himself to write a treatise on
the art which might be more commensurate to his matured talents.
He himself mentions several Sicilians and Greeks, who
had written on oratory<a id="noteref_346" name="noteref_346" href="#note_346"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">346</span></span></a>. But the models he chiefly followed,
were Aristotle, in his books of rhetoric<a id="noteref_347" name="noteref_347" href="#note_347"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">347</span></span></a>; and Isocrates, the
whole of whose theories and precepts he has comprehended in
his rhetorical works. He has thrown his ideas on the subject
into the form of dialogue or conference, a species of composition,
which, however much employed by the Greeks, had not
hitherto been attempted at Rome. This mode of writing presented
many advantages: By adopting it he avoided that dogmatical
air, which a treatise from him on such a subject would
necessarily have worn, and was enabled to instruct without
dictating rules. Dialogue, too, relieved monotony of style, by
affording opportunity of varying it according to the characters
of the different speakers—it tempered the austerity of precept
by the cheerfulness of conversation, and developed each opinion
with the vivacity and fulness naturally employed in the
oral discussion of a favourite topic. Add to this, the facility
which it presented of paying an acceptable compliment to the
friends who were introduced as interlocutors, and its susceptibility
of agreeable description of the scenes in which the persons
of the dialogue were placed—a species of embellishment,
for which ample scope was afforded by the numerous villas of
Cicero, situated in the most beautiful spots of Italy, and in
every variety of landscape, from the Alban heights to the shady
banks of the Liris, or glittering shore of Baiæ. As a method
of communicating knowledge, however, (except in discussions
which are extremely simple, and susceptible of much delineation
of character,) the mode of dialogue is, in many respects,
extremely inconvenient. <span class="tei tei-q">“By the interruptions which are
given,”</span> says the author of the life of Tasso, in his remarks on
the dialogues of that poet,—<span class="tei tei-q">“By the interruptions which are
given, if a dialogue be at all dramatic—by the preparations
and transitions, order and precision must, in a great degree,
be sacrificed. In reasoning, as much brevity must be used as
is consistent with perspicuity; but in dialogue, so much verbiage
must be employed, that the scope of the argument is
generally lost. The replies, too, to the objections of the opponent,
seem rather arguments <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ad hominem</span></span>, than possessed of
the value of abstract truth; so that the reader is perplexed
and bewildered, and concludes the inquiry, beholding one of
the characters puzzled, indeed, and perhaps subdued, but not
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page195">[pg 195]</span><a name="Pg195" id="Pg195" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>at all satisfied that the battle might not have been better
fought, and more victorious arguments adduced.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span> was written in the year 698, when
Cicero, disgusted with the political dissensions of the capital,
had retired, during part of the summer, to the country: But,
according to the supposition of the piece, the dialogue <a name="corr195" id="corr195" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">occurred</span>
in 662. The author addresses it to his brother in a dedication,
strongly expressive of his fondness for study; and, after
some general observations on the difficulty of the oratoric art,
and the numerous accomplishments requisite to form a complete
orator, he introduces his dialogue, or rather the three
dialogues, of which the performance consists. Dialogue writing
may be executed either as direct conversation, in which
none but the speakers appear, and where, as in the scenes of
a play, no information is afforded except from what the persons
of the drama say to each other; or as the recital of the
conversation, where the author himself appears, and after a
preliminary detail concerning the persons of the dialogue, and
the circumstances of time and place in which it was held, proceeds
to give an account of what passed in the discourse at
which he had himself been present, or the import of which
was communicated to him by some one who had attended and
borne his part in the conference. It is this latter method that
has been followed by Cicero, in his dialogues <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>.
He mentions in his own person, that during the celebration of
certain festivals at Rome, the orator Crassus retired to his villa
at Tusculum, one of the most delightful retreats in Italy, whither
he was accompanied by Antony, his most intimate friend
in private life, but most formidable rival in the Forum; and by
his father-in-law, Scævola, who was the greatest jurisconsult
of his age, and whose house in the city was resorted to as an
oracle, by men of the highest rank and dignity. Crassus was
also attended by Cotta and Sulpicius, at that time the two
most promising orators of Rome, the former of whom afterwards
related to Cicero (for the author is not supposed to be
personally present) the conversation which passed among
these distinguished men, as they reclined on the benches under
a planetree, that grew on one of the walks surrounding the
villa. It is not improbable, that some such conversation may
have been actually held, and that Cicero, notwithstanding his
age, and the authority derived from his rhetorical reputation,
may have chosen to avail himself of the circumstance, in order
to shelter his opinions under those of two ancient masters,
who, previously to his own time, were regarded as the chief
organs of Roman eloquence.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Crassus, in order to dissipate the gloom which had been
oc<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page196">[pg 196]</span><a name="Pg196" id="Pg196" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>casioned by a serious and even melancholy conversation, on
the situation of public affairs, turned the discourse on oratory.
The sentiments which he expresses on this subject are supposed
to be those which Cicero himself entertained. In
order to excite the two young men, Cotta and Sulpicius, to
prosecute with ardour the career they had so successfully
commenced, he first enlarges on the utility and excellence of
oratory; and then, proceeding to the object which he had
principally in view, he contends that an almost universal knowledge
is essentially requisite to perfection in this noble art.
He afterwards enumerates those branches of knowledge which
the orator should acquire, and the purposes to which he should
apply them: he inculcates the necessity of an acquaintance
with the antiquities, manners, and constitution of the republic—the
constant exercise of written composition—the study of
gesture at the theatre—the translation of the Greek orators—reading
and commenting on the philosophers, reading and
criticizing the poets. The question hence arises, whether a
knowledge of the civil law be serviceable to the orator? Crassus
attempts to prove its utility from various examples of cases,
where its principles required to be elucidated; as also from the
intrinsic nobleness of the study itself, and the superior excellence
of the Roman law to all other systems of jurisprudence.
Antony, who was a mere practical pleader, considered philosophy
and civil law as useless to the orator, being foreign to
the real business of life. He conceived that eloquence might
subsist without them, and that with regard to the other accomplishments
enumerated by Crassus, they were totally distinct
from the proper office and duty of a public speaker. It
is accordingly agreed, that on the following day Antony should
state his notions of the acquirements appropriate to an orator.
Previous to the commencement of the second conversation, the
party is joined by Catulus and Julius Cæsar, (grand-uncle to
the Dictator,) two of the most eminent orators of the time, the
former being distinguished by his elegance and purity of diction,
the latter by his turn for pleasantry. Having met Scævola,
on his way from Tusculum to the villa of Lælius, and
having heard from him of the interesting conversation which
had been held, the remainder of which had been deferred till
the morrow, they came over from a neighbouring villa to partake
of the instruction and entertainment. In their presence,
and in that of Crassus, Antony maintains his favourite system,
that eloquence is not an art, because it depends not on knowledge.
Imitation of good models, practice, and minute attention
to each particular case, which should be scrupulously
examined in all its bearings, are laid down by him as the
foun<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page197">[pg 197]</span><a name="Pg197" id="Pg197" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>dations of forensic eloquence. The great objects of an orator
being, in the first place, to recommend himself to his clients,
and then to prepossess the audience and judges in their favour,
Antony enlarges on the practice of the bar, in conciliating,
informing, moving, and undeceiving those on whom the decision
of causes depends; all which is copiously illustrated by
examples drawn from particular questions, which had occurred
at Rome in cases of proof, strict law, or equity. The chief
weight and importance is attributed to moving the springs of
the passions. Among the methods of conciliation and prepossession,
humour and drollery are particularly mentioned. Cæsar
being the oratorical wit of the party, is requested to give
some examples of forensic jests. Those he affords are for the
most part wretched quibbles, or personal reflections on the
opposite parties, and their witnesses. The length of the dissertation,
however, on this topic, shows the important share it
was considered as occupying among the qualifications of the
ancient orator.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Antony having thus explained the mechanical part of the
orator’s duty, it is agreed, that in the afternoon Crassus should
enter on the embellishments of rhetoric. In the execution
of the task assigned him, he treats of all that relates to what
may be called the ornamental part of oratory—pronunciation,
elocution, harmony of periods, metaphors, sentiments, action,
(which he terms the predominant power in eloquence,) expression
of countenance, modulation of voice, and all those
properties which impart a finished grace and dignity to a public
discourse.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cicero himself highly approved of this treatise on Oratory,
and his friends regarded it as one of his best productions. The
style of the dialogue is copious, without being redundant, as is
sometimes the case in the orations. It is admirable for the
diversity of character in the speakers, the general conduct of
the piece, and the variety of matter it contains. It comprehends,
I believe, everything valuable in the Greek works on
rhetoric, and also many excellent observations, suggested by
the author’s long experience, acquired in the numerous causes,
both public and private, which he conducted in the Forum,
and the important discussions in which he swayed the counsels
of the Senate. As a composition, however, I cannot consider
the dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span> altogether faultless. It is too
little dramatic for a dialogue, and occasionally it expands into
continued dissertation; while, at the same time, by adopting
the form of dialogue, a rambling and desultory effect is produced
in the discussion of a subject, where, of all others, method
and close connection were most desirable. There is also
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page198">[pg 198]</span><a name="Pg198" id="Pg198" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>frequently an assumed liveliness of manner, which seems
forced and affected in these grave and consular orators.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The dialogue entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus, sive De Claris Oratoribus</span></span>,
was written, and is also feigned to have taken place, after Cæsar
had attained to sovereign power, though he was still engaged
in the war against Scipio in Africa. The conference
is supposed to be held among Cicero, Atticus, and Brutus,
(from whom it has received its name,) near a statue of Plato,
which stood in the pleasure-grounds of Cicero’s mansion, at
Rome.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Brutus having experienced the clemency of the conqueror,
whom he afterwards sacrificed, left Italy, in order to amuse
himself with an agreeable tour through the cities of Greece
and Asia. In a few months he returned to Rome, resigned
himself to the calm studies of history and rhetoric, and passed
many of his leisure hours in the society of Cicero and Atticus.
The first part of the dialogue, among these three friends, contains
a few slight, but masterly sketches, of the most celebrated
speakers who had flourished in Greece; but these are
not so much mentioned with an historical design, as to support
by examples the author’s favourite proposition, that perfection
in oratory requires proficiency in all the arts. The
dialogue is chiefly occupied with details concerning Roman
orators, from the earliest ages to Cicero’s own time. He first
mentions such speakers as Appius Claudius and Fabricius, of
whom he knew nothing certain, whose harangues had never
been committed to writing, or were no longer extant, and concerning
whose powers of eloquence he could only derive conjectures,
from the effects which they produced on the people
and Senate, as recorded in the ancient annals. The second
class of orators are those, like Cato the Censor, and the Gracchi,
whose speeches still survived, or of whom he could speak traditionally,
from the report of persons still living who had heard
them. A great deal of what is said concerning this set of
orators, rests on the authority of Hortensius, from whom Cicero
derived his information<a id="noteref_348" name="noteref_348" href="#note_348"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">348</span></span></a>. The third class are the deceased
contemporaries of the author, whom he had himself seen and
heard; and he only departs from his rule of mentioning no
living orator at the special request of Brutus, who expresses
an anxiety to learn his opinion of the merits of Marcellus and
Julius Cæsar. Towards the conclusion, he gives some account
of his own rise and progress, of the education he had
received, and the various methods which he had practised in
order to reach those heights of eloquence he had attained.</p>
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page199">[pg 199]</span><a name="Pg199" id="Pg199" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
    <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This work is certainly of the greatest service to the history
of Roman eloquence; and it likewise throws considerable
light on the civil transactions of the republic, as the author
generally touches on the principal incidents in the lives of
those eminent orators whom he mentions. It also gives additional
weight and authority to the oratorical precepts contained
in his other works, since it shows, that they were
founded, not on any speculative theories, but on a minute
observation of the actual faults and excellencies of the most
renowned speakers of his age. Yet, with all these advantages,
it is not so entertaining as might be expected. The author
mentions too many orators, and says too little of each, which
gives his treatise the appearance rather of a dry catalogue,
than of a literary essay, or agreeable dialogue. He acknowledges,
indeed, in the course of it, that he had inserted in his
list of orators many who possessed little claim to that appellation,
since he designed to give an account of all the Romans,
without exception, who had made it their study to excel in
the arts of eloquence.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Orator</span></span>, addressed to Brutus, and written at his solicitation,
was intended to complete the subjects examined in the
dialogues, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Claris Oratoribus</span></span>. It contains
the description of what Cicero conceived necessary to
form a perfect orator,—a character which, indeed, nowhere
existed, but of which he had formed the idea in his own imagination.
He admits, that Attic eloquence approached the
nearest to perfection; he pauses, however, to correct a prevailing
error, that the only genuine Atticism is a correct,
plain, and slender discourse, distinguished by purity of style,
and delicacy of taste, but void of all ornaments and redundance.
In the time of Cicero, there was a class of orators,
including several men of parts and learning, and of the first
quality, who, while they acknowledged the superiority of his
genius, yet censured his diction as not truely Attic, some calling
it loose and languid, others tumid and exuberant. These
speakers affected a minute and fastidious correctness, pointed
sentences, short and concise periods, without a syllable to
spare in them—as if the perfection of oratory consisted in
frugality of words, and the crowding of sentiments into the
narrowest possible compass. The chief patrons of this taste
were Brutus and Licinius Calvus. Cicero, while he admitted
that correctness was essential to eloquence, contended, that a
nervous, copious, animated, and even ornate style, may be
truely Attic; since, otherwise, Lysias would be the only Attic
orator, to the exclusion of Isocrates, and even Demosthenes
himself. He accordingly opposed the system of these
ultra-<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page200">[pg 200]</span><a name="Pg200" id="Pg200" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>Attic orators, whom he represents as often deserted in the
midst of their harangues; for although their style of rhetoric
might please the ear of a critic, it was not of that sublime, pathetic,
or sonorous species, of which the end was not only to
instruct, but to move an audience,—whose excitement and
admiration form the true criterions of eloquence.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The remainder of the treatise is occupied with the three
things to be attended to by an orator,—what he is to say, in
what order his topics are to be arranged, and how they are to
be expressed. In discussing the last point, the author enters
very fully into the collocation of words, and that measured
cadence, which, to a certain extent, prevails even in prose;—a
subject on which Brutus wished particularly to be instructed,
and which he accordingly treats in detail.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This tract is rather confusedly arranged; and the dissertation
on prosaic harmony, though curious, appears to us somewhat
too minute in its object for the attention of an orator.
Cicero, however, set a high value on this production; and, in
a letter to Lepta, he declares, that whatever judgment he possessed
on the subject of oratory, he had thrown it all into that
work, and was ready to stake his reputation on its merits<a id="noteref_349" name="noteref_349" href="#note_349"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">349</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Topica</span></span> may also be considered as another work on the
subject of rhetoric. Aristotle, as is well known, wrote a book
with this title. The lawyer, Caius Trebatius, a friend of Cicero,
being curious to know the contents and import of the
Greek work, which he had accidentally seen in Cicero’s Tusculan
library, but being deterred from its study by the obscurity
of the writer, (though it certainly is not one of the most difficult
of Aristotle’s productions,) requested Cicero to draw up
this extract, or commentary, in order to explain the various
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">topics</span></span>, or common-places, which are the foundation of rhetorical
argument. Of this request Cicero was some time afterwards
reminded by the view of Velia, (the marine villa of
Trebatius,) during a coasting voyage which he undertook,
with the intention of retiring to Greece, in consequence of the
troubles which followed the death of Cæsar. Though he had
neither Aristotle nor any other book at hand to assist him, he
drew it up from memory as he sailed along, and finished it before
he arrived at Rhegium, whence he sent it to Trebatius<a id="noteref_350" name="noteref_350" href="#note_350"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">350</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This treatise shows, that Cicero had most diligently studied
Aristotle’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Topics</span></span>. It is not, however, a translation, but an
extract or explanation of that work; and, as it was addressed
to a lawyer, he has taken his examples chiefly from the civil
law of the Romans, which he conceived Trebatius would
un<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page201">[pg 201]</span><a name="Pg201" id="Pg201" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>derstand better than illustrations drawn, like those of Aristotle,
from the philosophy of the Greeks.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is impossible sufficiently to admire Cicero’s industry and
love of letters, which neither the inconveniences of a sea voyage,
which he always disliked, nor the harassing thoughts of
leaving Italy at such a conjuncture, could divert from the calm
and regular pursuit of his favourite studies.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Partitione Rhetorica</span></span>, is written in the form
of a dialogue between Cicero and his son; the former replying
to the questions of the latter concerning the principles and
doctrine of eloquence. The tract now entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Optimo
genere Oratorum</span></span>, was originally intended as a preface to a
translation which Cicero had made from the orations of
Æschines and Demosthenes in the case of Ctesipho, in which
an absurd and trifling matter of ceremony has become the basis
of an immortal controversy. In this preface he reverts to
the topic on which he had touched in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Orator</span></span>—the mistake
which prevailed in Rome, that Attic eloquence was
limited to that accurate, dry, and subtle manner of expression,
adopted in the orations of Lysias. It was to correct this
error, that Cicero undertook a free translation of the two
master-pieces of Athenian eloquence; the one being an example
of vehement and energetic, the other of pathetic and ornamental
oratory. It is probable that Cicero was prompted to
these repeated inquiries concerning the genuine character of
Attic eloquence, from the reproach frequently cast on his own
discourses by Brutus, Calvus, and other sterile, but, as they
supposed themselves, truely Attic orators, that his harangues
were not in the Greek, but rather in the Asiatic taste,—that is,
nerveless, florid, and redundant.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It appears, that in Rome, as well as in Greece, oratory was
generally considered as divided into three different styles—the
Attic, Asiatic, and Rhodian. Quintilian, at least, so
classes the various sorts of oratory in a passage, in which he
also shortly characterizes them by those attributes from which
they were chiefly distinguishable. <span class="tei tei-q">“Mihi autem,”</span> says he,
<span class="tei tei-q">“orationis differentiam fecisse et dicentium et audientium naturæ
videntur, quod <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Attici</span></span> limati quidem et emuncti nihil inane
aut redundans ferebant. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Asiana</span></span> gens, tumidior alioquin et
jactantior, vaniore etiam dicendi gloria inflata est. Tertium
mox qui hæc dividebant adjecerunt genus <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhodium</span></span>, quod
velut medium esse, atque ex utroque mixtum volunt<a id="noteref_351" name="noteref_351" href="#note_351"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">351</span></span></a>.”</span> Brutus
and Licinius Calvus, as we have seen, affected the slender,
polished, and somewhat barren conciseness of Attic eloquence.
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page202">[pg 202]</span><a name="Pg202" id="Pg202" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>The speeches of Hortensius, and a few of Cicero’s earlier
harangues, as that for Sextus Roscius, afforded examples of
the copious, florid, and sometimes tumid style of Asiatic oratory.
The latter orations of Cicero, refined by his study and
experience, were, I presume, nearly in the Rhodian taste.
That celebrated school of eloquence had been founded by
Æschines, the rival of Demosthenes, when, being banished
from his native city by the influence of his competitor, he had
retired to the island of Rhodes. Inferior to Demosthenes in
power of argument and force of expression, he surpassed him
in copiousness and ornament. The school which he founded,
and which subsisted for centuries after his death, admitted not
the luxuries of Asiatic diction; and although the most ornamental
of Greece, continued ever true to the principles of its
great Athenian master. A chief part of the two years during
which Cicero travelled in Greece and Asia was spent at
Rhodes, and his principal teacher of eloquence at Rome was
Molo the Rhodian, from whom he likewise afterwards received
lessons at Rhodes. The great difficulty which that rhetorician
encountered in the instruction of his promising disciple,
was, as Cicero himself informs us, the effort of containing
within its due and proper channel the overflowings of a youthful
imagination<a id="noteref_352" name="noteref_352" href="#note_352"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">352</span></span></a>. Cicero’s natural fecundity, and the bent of
his own inclination, preserved him from the risk of dwindling
into ultra-Attic slenderness; but it is not improbable, that
from the example of Hortensius and his own copiousness, he
might have swelled out to Asiatic pomp, had not his exuberance
been early reduced by the seasonable and salutary discipline
of the Rhodian.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cicero, in his youth, also wrote the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetorica, seu de Inventione
Rhetorica</span></span>, of which there are still extant two books,
treating of the part of rhetoric that relates to invention. This
is the work mentioned by Cicero, in the commencement of the
treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, as having been published by him in his
youth. It is generally believed to have been written in 666,
when Cicero was only twenty years of age, and to have originally
contained four books. Schütz, however, the German
editor of Cicero, is of opinion, that he never wrote, or at least,
never published, more than the two books we still possess.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
A number of sentences in these two books of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetorica,
seu de Inventione</span></span>, coincide with passages in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetoricum
ad Herennium</span></span>, which is usually published along with the
works of Cicero, but is not of his composition. Purgold thinks
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page203">[pg 203]</span><a name="Pg203" id="Pg203" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>that the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetor. ad Herennium</span></span> was published first, and that
Cicero copied from it those corresponding passages<a id="noteref_353" name="noteref_353" href="#note_353"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">353</span></span></a>. It appears,
however, a little singular, that Cicero should have borrowed
so largely, and without acknowledgment, from a recent
publication of one of his contemporaries. To account for this
difficulty some critics have supposed, that the anonymous author
of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetor. ad Herennium</span></span> was a rhetorician, whose
lectures Cicero had attended, and had inserted in his own
work notes taken by him from these prelections, before they
were edited by their author<a id="noteref_354" name="noteref_354" href="#note_354"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">354</span></span></a>. Some, again, have imagined,
that Cicero and the anonymous author were fellow-students
under the same rhetorician, and that both had thus adopted
his ideas and expressions; while others believe, that both copied
from a common Greek original. But then, in opposition
to this last theory, it has been remarked, that the Latin words
employed by both are frequently the same; and there are the
same references to the history of Rome, and of its ancient native
poets, with which no Greek writer can be supposed to
have had much acquaintance.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Who the anonymous author of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetor. ad Herennium</span></span>
actually was, has been the subject of much learned controversy,
and the point remains still undetermined. Priscian repeatedly
cites it as the work of Cicero; whence it was believed
to be the production of Cicero by Laurentius Valla, George
of Trebizond, Politian, and other great restorers of learning
in the fifteenth century; and this opinion was from time to
time, though feebly, revived by less considerable writers in
succeeding periods. It seems now, however, entirely abandoned;
but, while all critics and commentators agree in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">abjudicating</span></span>
the work from Cicero, they differ widely as to the
person to whom the production should be assigned. Aldus
Manutius, Sigonius, Muretus, and Riccobonus, were of opinion,
that it was written by Q. Cornificius the elder, who was
Cæsar’s Quæstor during the civil war, and subsequently his
lieutenant in Africa, of which province, after the Dictator’s
death, he kept possession for the republican party, till he was
slain in an engagement with one of the generals of Octavius.
The judgment of these scholars is chiefly founded on some
passages in Quintilian, who attributes to Cornificius several
critical and philological definitions which coincide with those
introduced in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetorica ad Herennium</span></span>. Gerard Vossius,
however, has adopted an opinion, that if at all written by a
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page204">[pg 204]</span><a name="Pg204" id="Pg204" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>person of that name, it must have been by the younger Cornificius<a id="noteref_355" name="noteref_355" href="#note_355"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">355</span></span></a>,
who was born in 662, and, having followed the party
of Octavius, was appointed Consul by favour of the Triumvirate
in 718. Raphael Regius also seems inclined to attribute
the work to Cornificius the son<a id="noteref_356" name="noteref_356" href="#note_356"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">356</span></span></a>. But if the style be considered
too remote from that of the age of Cicero, to be ascribed
to any of his contemporaries, he conceives it may be plausibly
conjectured to have been the production of Timolaus, one of
the thirty tyrants in the reign of Gallienus. Timolaus had a
brother called Herenianus, to whom his work may have been
dedicated, and he thinks that <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Timolaus ad Herenianum</span></span> may
have been corrupted into <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Tullius ad Herennium</span></span>. J. C. Scaliger
attributes the work to Gallio, a rhetorician in the time of
Nero<a id="noteref_357" name="noteref_357" href="#note_357"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">357</span></span></a>—an opinion which obtained currency in consequence
of the discovery of a MS. copy of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetorica ad Herennium</span></span>,
    with the name of Gallio prefixed to it<a id="noteref_358" name="noteref_358" href="#note_358"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">358</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Sufficient scope being thus left for new conjectures, Schütz,
the German editor of Cicero, has formed a new hypothesis on
the subject. Cicero’s tract <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Inventione</span></span> having been written
in his early youth, the period of its composition may be placed
about 672. From various circumstances, which he discusses
at great length, Schütz concludes that the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetorica ad Herennium</span></span>
was the work which was first written, and consequently
previous to 672. Farther, the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetorica ad Herennium</span></span>
must have been written subsequently to 665, as it mentions the
death of Sulpicius, which happened in that year. The time
thus limited corresponds very exactly with the age of M. Ant.
Gnipho, who was born in the year 640; and him Schütz considers
as the real author of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetorica ad Herennium</span></span>. This
he attempts to prove, by showing, that many things which
Suetonius relates of Gnipho, in his work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Claris Rhetoribus</span></span>,
agree with what the author of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetorica ad Herennium</span></span>
delivers concerning himself in the course of that production.
It is pretty well established, that both Gnipho and the anonymous
author of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetorica ad Herennium</span></span> were free-born,
had good memories, understood Greek, and were voluminous
authors. It is unfortunate, however, that these characteristics,
except the first, were probably common to almost all
rhetoricians; and Schütz does not allude to any of the more
particular circumstances mentioned by Suetonius, as that
Gnipho was a Gaul by birth, that he studied at Alexandria,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page205">[pg 205]</span><a name="Pg205" id="Pg205" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>and that he taught rhetoric in the house of the father of Julius
Cæsar.
</p>

<div class="tei tei-tb"> </div>
<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cicero, who was unquestionably the first orator, was as decidedly
the most learned philosopher of Rome; and while he
eclipsed all his contemporaries in eloquence, he acquired, towards
the close of his life, no small share of reputation as a writer
on ethics and metaphysics. His wisdom, however, was founded
entirely on that of the Greeks, and his philosophic writings
were chiefly occupied with the discussion of questions which
had been agitated in the Athenian schools, and from them had
been transmitted to Italy. The disquisition respecting the
certainty or uncertainty of human knowledge, with that concerning
the supreme good and evil, were the inquiries which
he chiefly pursued; and the notions which he entertained of
these subjects, were all derived from the Portico, Academy, or
Lyceum.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The leading principles of the chief philosophic sects of
Greece flowed originally from Socrates—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">—— <span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“From whose mouth issued forth</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Mellifluous streams, that watered all the schools</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Of Academics, Old and New<a id="noteref_359" name="noteref_359" href="#note_359"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">359</span></span></a>;”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
and who has been termed by Cicero<a id="noteref_360" name="noteref_360" href="#note_360"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">360</span></span></a> the perennial source of
philosophy, much more justly than Homer has been styled the
fountain of all poetry. Though somewhat addicted to them
from education and early habit, Socrates withdrew philosophy
from those obscure and intricate physical inquiries, in which
she had been involved by the founders and followers of the
Ionic school, and from the subtle paradoxical hypotheses of
the sophists who established themselves at Athens in the time
of Pericles. It being his chief aim to improve the condition
of mankind, and to incline them to discharge the several duties
of the stations in which they had been placed, this moral
teacher directed his examinations to the nature of vice and
virtue, of good and evil. To accomplish the great object he
had in view, his practice was to hazard no opinion of his own,
but to refute prevalent errors and prejudices, by involving the
pretenders to knowledge in manifest absurdity, while he himself,
as if in contrast to the presumption of the sophists, always
professed that he knew nothing. This confession of ignorance,
which amounted to no more than a general acknowledgment
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page206">[pg 206]</span><a name="Pg206" id="Pg206" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>of the imbecility of the human understanding, and was merely
designed to convince his followers of the futility of those speculations
which do not rest on the firm basis of experience, or
to teach them modesty in their inquiries, and diffidence in
their assertions, having been interpreted in a different sense
from that in which it was originally intended, gave rise to the
celebrated dispute concerning the certainty of knowledge.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The various founders of the philosophic sects of Greece,
imbibed that portion of the doctrines of Socrates which suited
their own tastes and views, and sometimes perverted his high
authority even to dogmatical or sophistical purposes. It is
from Plato we have derived the fullest account of his system;
but this illustrious disciple had also greatly extended his knowledge
by his voyages to Egypt, Sicily, and Magna Græcia.
Hence in the Academy which he founded, (while, as to morals,
he continued to follow Socrates,) he superadded the metaphysical
doctrines of Pythagoras; in physics, which Socrates
had excluded from philosophy, he adopted the system of Heraclitus;
and he borrowed his dialectics from Euclid of Megara.
The recondite and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">eisoteric</span></span> tenets of Pythagoras—the obscure
principles of Heraclitus—the superhuman knowledge of Empedocles,
and the sacred <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Arcana</span></span> of Egyptian priests, have
diffused over the page of Plato a majesty and mysticism very
different from what we suppose to have been the familiar tone
of instruction employed by his great master, of whose style at
least, and manner, Xenophon probably presents us with a more
faithful image.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In Greece, the heads of sects were succeeded in their
schools or academies as in a domain or inheritance. Speusippus,
the nephew of Plato, continued to deliver lectures in the
Academy, as did also four other successive masters, Xenocrates,
Polemo, Crates, and Crantor, all of whom retained the
name of Academics, and taught the doctrines of their master
without mixture or corruption. But on the appointment of
Xenocrates to the chair of the Academy, Aristotle, the most
eminent of Plato’s scholars, had betaken himself to another
Gymnasium, called the Lyceum, which became the resort of the
Peripatetics. The commanding genius of their founder enlarged
the sphere of knowledge and intellect, devised the rules of
logic, and traced out the principles of rhetorical and poetical
criticism: But the sect which he exalted to unrivalled celebrity,
though differing in name from the contemporary Academics,
coincided with them generally in all the principal points of
physical and moral philosophy, and particularly in those concerning
which the Romans chiefly inquired. <span class="tei tei-q">“Though they
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page207">[pg 207]</span><a name="Pg207" id="Pg207" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>differed in terms,”</span> says Cicero, <span class="tei tei-q">“they agreed in things<a id="noteref_361" name="noteref_361" href="#note_361"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">361</span></span></a>, and
those persons are grossly mistaken who imagine that the old
Academics, as they are called, are any other than the Peripatetics.”</span>
Accordingly, we find that both believed in the superintending
care of Providence, the immortality of the soul, and
a future state of reward and punishment. The supreme good
they placed in virtue, with a sufficiency of the chief external
advantages of nature, as health, riches, and reputation. Such
enjoyments they taught, when united with virtue, make the
felicity of man perfect; but if virtuous, he is capable of being
happy, (though not entirely so,) without them.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Plato, in his mode of communicating instruction, and promulgating
his opinions, had not strictly adhered to the method
of his master Socrates. He held the concurrence of memory,
with a recent impression, to be a criterion of truth, and he
taught that opinions might be formed from the comparison of
a present with a recollected perception. But his successors,
both in the Academy and Lyceum, departed from the Socratic
method still more widely. They renounced the maxim, of
affirming nothing; and instead of explaining everything with
a doubting reserve, they converted philosophy, as it were, into
an art, and formed a system of opinions, which they delivered
to their disciples as the peculiar tenets of their sect. They
inculcated the belief, that our knowledge has its origin in the
senses—that the senses themselves do not judge of truth, but
the mind through them beholds things as they really are—that
is, it perceives the ideas which always subsist in the same
state, without change; so that the senses, through the medium
of the mind, may be relied on for the ascertainment of truth.
Such was the state of opinions and instruction in the Academy
when Arcesilaus, who was the sixth master of that school from
Plato, and in his youth had heard the lessons of Pyrrho the
sceptic, resolved to reform the dogmatic system into which his
predecessors had fallen, and to restore, as he conceived, in all
its purity, the Socratic system of affirming nothing with certainty.
This founder of the New, or Middle Academy as it is
sometimes called, denied even the certain truth of the proposition
that we know nothing, which Socrates had reserved as
an exception to his general principle. While admitting that
there is an actual certainty in the nature of things, he rejected
the evidence both of the senses and reason as positive testimony;
and as he denied that there existed any infallible criterion
of truth or falsehood, he maintained that no wise man ought to
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page208">[pg 208]</span><a name="Pg208" id="Pg208" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>give any proposition whatever the sanction of his assent. He
differed from the Sceptics or Pyrrhonists only in this, that he
admitted degrees of probability, whereas the Sceptics fluctuated
in total uncertainty.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
As Arcesilaus renounced all pretensions to the certain determination
of any question, he was chiefly employed in examining
and refuting the sentiments of others. His principal
opponent was his contemporary, Zeno, the founder of the stoical
philosophy, which ultimately became the chief of those
systems which flourished at Rome. The main point in dispute
between Zeno and Arcesilaus, was the evidence of the senses.
Arcesilaus denied that truth could be ascertained by their assistance,
because there is no criterion by which to distinguish
false and delusive objects from such as are real. Zeno, on the
other hand, maintained that the evidence of the senses is certain
and clear, provided they be perfect in themselves, and
without obstacle to prevent their effect. Thus, though on
different principles, the founder of the Stoics agreed with the
Peripatetics and old Academicians, that there existed certain
means of ascertaining truth, and consequently that there was
evident and certain knowledge. Arcesilaus, though he did not
deny that truth existed, would neither give assent nor entertain
opinions, because appearances could never warrant his
pronouncing on any object or proposition whatever. Nor did
the Stoics entertain opinions; but they refrained from this,
because they thought that everything might be perceived with
certainty.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Arcesilaus, while differing widely from the teachers of the
old Platonic Academy in his ideas as to the certainty of knowledge,
retained their system concerning the supreme good,
which, like them, he placed in virtue, accompanied by external
advantages. This was another subject of contest with
Zeno, who, as is well known, placed the supreme good in virtue
alone,—health, riches, and reputation, not being by him
accounted essential, nor disease, poverty, and ignominy, injurious
to happiness.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The systems promulgated in the old and new Academy, and
the stoical Portico, were those which became most prevalent
in Rome. But the Epicurean opinions were also fashionable
there. The philosophy of Epicurus has been already mentioned
while speaking of Lucretius. Moschus of Phœnicia,
who lived before the Trojan war, is said to have been the inventor
of the Atomic system, which was afterwards adopted
and improved by Leucippus and Democritus, whose works, as
Cicero expresses it, were the source from which flowed the
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page209">[pg 209]</span><a name="Pg209" id="Pg209" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>streams that watered the gardens of Epicurus<a id="noteref_362" name="noteref_362" href="#note_362"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">362</span></span></a>. To the evidence
of the senses this teacher attributed such weight, that
he considered them as an infallible rule of truth. The supreme
good he placed in pleasure, and the chief evil in pain. His
scholars maintained, that by pleasure, or rather happiness, he
meant a life of wisdom and temperance; but a want of clearness
and explicitness in the definition of what constituted pleasure,
has given room to his opponents for alleging that he
placed consummate felicity in sensual gratification.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It was long before a knowledge of any portion of Greek
philosophy was introduced at Rome. For 600 years after the
building of the city, those circumstances did not arise in that
capital which called forth and promoted philosophy in Greece.
The ancient Romans were warriors and agriculturists. Their
education was regulated with a view to an active life, and
rearing citizens and heroes, not philosophers. The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Campus
Martius</span></span> was their school; the tent their Lyceum, and the traditions
of their ancestors, and religious rites, their science,—they
were taught to act, to believe, and to obey, not to reason
or discuss. Among them a class of men may indeed have existed
not unlike the seven sages of Greece—men distinguished
by wisdom, grave saws, and the services they had rendered
to their country; but these were not philosophers in our
sense of the term. The wisdom they inculcated was not sectarian,
but resembled that species of philosophy cultivated by
Solon and Lycurgus, which has been termed political by Brucker,
and which was chiefly adapted to the improvement of
states, and civilization of infant society. At length, however,
in the year 586, when Perseus, King of Macedon, was finally
vanquished, his conqueror brought with him to Rome the philosopher
Metrodorus, to aid in the instruction of his children<a id="noteref_363" name="noteref_363" href="#note_363"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">363</span></span></a>.
Several philosophers, who had been retained in the court of
that unfortunate monarch, auguring well from this incident,
followed Metrodorus to Italy; and about the same time a number
of Achæans, of distinguished merit, who were suspected
to have favoured the Macedonians, were summoned to Rome,
in order to account for their conduct. The younger Scipio
Africanus, in the course of the embassy to which he was appointed
by the Senate, to the kings of the east, who were in
alliance with the republic, having landed at Rhodes, took
under his protection the Stoic philosopher Panætius<a id="noteref_364" name="noteref_364" href="#note_364"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">364</span></span></a>, who was
a native of that island, and carried him back to Rome, where
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page210">[pg 210]</span><a name="Pg210" id="Pg210" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>he resided in the house of his patron. Panætius afterwards
went to Athens, where he became one of the most distinguished
teachers of the Portico<a id="noteref_365" name="noteref_365" href="#note_365"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">365</span></span></a>, and composed a number
of philosophical treatises, of which the chief was that on the
Duties of Man.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But though the philosophers were encouraged and cherished
by Scipio, Lælius, Scævola, and others of the more mild and
enlightened Romans, they were viewed with an eye of suspicion
by the grave Senators and stern Censors of the republic.
Accordingly, in the year 592, only six years after their first
arrival in Rome, the philosophers were banished from the city
by a formal decree of the Senate<a id="noteref_366" name="noteref_366" href="#note_366"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">366</span></span></a>. The motives for issuing
this rigorous edict are not very clearly ascertained. A notion
may have been entertained by the severer members of the
commonwealth, that the established religion and constitution
of Rome might suffer by the discussion of speculative theories,
and that the taste for science might withdraw the minds of
youth from agriculture and arms. This dread, so natural to a
rigid, laborious, and warlike people, would be increased by
the degraded and slavish character of the Greeks, which, having
been an accompaniment, might be readily mistaken for a
consequence, of their progress in philosophy. As most of the
philosophers, too, had come from the states of a hostile monarch,
the Senate may have feared, lest they should inspire sentiments
in the minds of youth, not altogether patriotic or purely
republican.
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Sed vetuere patres quod non potuere vetare.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Though driven from Rome, many of the Greek philosophers
took up their residence in the municipal towns of Italy. By
the intercession likewise of Scipio Africanus, an exception
was made in favour of Panætius and the historian Polybius,
<a name="corr210" id="corr210" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">who</span> were permitted to remain in the capital. The spirit of
inquiry, too, had been raised, and the mind had received an
impulse which could not be arrested by any senatorial decree,
and on which the slightest incident necessarily bestowed an
accelerated progress.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The Greek philosophers returned to Rome in the year 598,
under the sacred character of ambassadors, on occasion of a
political complaint which had been made against the Athenians,
and from which they found it necessary to defend
them<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page211">[pg 211]</span><a name="Pg211" id="Pg211" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>selves. Notwithstanding the disrespect with which philosophers
had recently been treated in Italy, the Athenians resolved
to dazzle the Romans by a grand scientific embassy. The
three envoys chosen were at that time the heads of the three
leading sects of Greek philosophers,—Diogenes, the Stoic,
Critolaus, the Peripatetic, and Carneades of Cyrene, who now
held the place of Arcesilaus in the new Academy. Besides
their philosophical learning, they were well qualified by their
eloquence, (a talent which had always great influence with
the Romans,) to persuade and bring over the minds of men
to their principles. Such, indeed, were their extraordinary
powers of speaking and reasoning, that it was commonly
said at Rome that the Athenians had sent orators, not to persuade,
but to compel<a id="noteref_367" name="noteref_367" href="#note_367"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">367</span></span></a>. During the period of their embassy
at Rome they lectured to crowded audiences in the most public
parts of the city. The immediate effect of the display
which these philosophic ambassadors made of their eloquence
and wisdom, was to excite in the Roman youth an ardent
thirst after knowledge, which now became a rival in their
breasts to the love of military glory<a id="noteref_368" name="noteref_368" href="#note_368"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">368</span></span></a>. 
    <a name="corr211" id="corr211" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Scipio,</span> Lælius, and
Furius, showed the strongest inclination for these new studies,
and profited most by them; but there was scarcely a young
patrician who was not in some degree attracted by the modest
simplicity of Diogenes, the elegant, ornamental, and polished
discourse of Critolaus, or the vehement, rapid, and argumentative
eloquence of Carneades<a id="noteref_369" name="noteref_369" href="#note_369"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">369</span></span></a>. The principles inculcated
by Diogenes, who professed to teach the art of reasoning, and
of separating truth from falsehood, received their strongest
support from the jurisconsults, most of whom became Stoics;
and in consequence of their responses, we find at this day that
the stoical philosophy exercised much influence on Roman
jurisprudence, and that many principles and divisions of the
civil law have been founded on its favourite maxims. Of
these philosophic ambassadors, however, Carneades was the
most able man, and the most popular teacher. <span class="tei tei-q">“He was
blessed,”</span> says Cicero, <span class="tei tei-q">“with a divine quickness of understanding
and command of expression<a id="noteref_370" name="noteref_370" href="#note_370"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">370</span></span></a>.”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“In his disputations,
he never defended what he did not prove, and never attacked
what he did not overthrow<a id="noteref_371" name="noteref_371" href="#note_371"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">371</span></span></a>.”</span> By some he has been considered
and termed the founder of a third Academy, but there
appears to be no solid ground for such a distinction. In his
lectures, which chiefly turned on ethics, he agreed with both
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page212">[pg 212]</span><a name="Pg212" id="Pg212" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>Academies as to the supreme good, placing it in virtue and
the primary gifts of nature. Like Arcesilaus, he was a zealous
advocate for the uncertainty of human knowledge, but he did
not deny, with him, that there were truths, but only maintained
that we could not clearly discern them<a id="noteref_372" name="noteref_372" href="#note_372"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">372</span></span></a>. The sole
other difference in their tenets, is one not very palpable, mentioned
by Lucullus in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span>. Arcesilaus, it seems,
would neither assent to anything nor opine. Carneades, though
he would not assent, declared that he would opine; under the
constant reservation, however, that he was merely opinionating,
and that there was no such thing as positive comprehension
or perception<a id="noteref_373" name="noteref_373" href="#note_373"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">373</span></span></a>. In this, Lucullus, who was a follower of the
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">old</span></span> Academy, thinks Carneades the most absurd and inconsistent
of the two. Carneades succeeded to the old dispute
between the Academics and Stoics, and in his prelections he
combated the arguments employed by Chrysippus<a id="noteref_374" name="noteref_374" href="#note_374"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">374</span></span></a>, in his age
the chief pillar of the Portico, as Arcesilaus had formerly maintained
the controversy with Zeno, its founder. He differed
from the Pyrrhonists, by admitting the real existence of good
and evil, and by allowing different degrees of probability<a id="noteref_375" name="noteref_375" href="#note_375"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">375</span></span></a>,
while his sceptical opponents contended that there was no
ground for embracing or rejecting one opinion more than another.
Carneades was no less distinguished by his artful and
versatile talents for disputation, than his vehement and commanding
oratory. But his extraordinary powers of persuasion,
and of maintaining any side of an argument, for which the academical
philosophy peculiarly qualified him, were at length
abused by him, to the scandal of the serious and inflexible Romans.
Thus, we are told, that he one day delivered a discourse
before Cato, with great variety of thought and copiousness
of diction, on the advantages of a rigid observance of the
rules of justice. Next day, in order to fortify his doctrine of
the uncertainty of human knowledge, he undertook to refute
all his former arguments<a id="noteref_376" name="noteref_376" href="#note_376"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">376</span></span></a>. It is likely that his attack on justice
was a piece of pleasantry, like Erasmus’ Encomium of
Folly; and many of his audience were captivated by his ingenuity;
but the Censor immediately insisted, that the affairs
which had brought these subtle ambassadors to Rome, should
be forthwith despatched by the Senate, in order that they
might be dismissed with all possible expedition<a id="noteref_377" name="noteref_377" href="#note_377"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">377</span></span></a>. Whether
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page213">[pg 213]</span><a name="Pg213" id="Pg213" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>Cato entertained serious apprehensions, as is alleged by Plutarch,
that the military virtues of his country might be enfeebled,
and its constitution undermined, by the study of philosophy,
may, I think, be questioned. It is more probable that
he dreaded the influence of the philosophers themselves on the
opinions of his fellow-citizens, and feared lest their eloquence
should altogether unsettle the principles of his countrymen, or
mould them to whatever form they chose. Lactantius, too,
in a quotation from Cicero’s treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republica</span></span>, affords
what may be considered as an explanation of the reason why
Carneades’ lecture against justice was so little palatable to the
Censor, and probably to many others of the Romans. One of
the objections which he urged against justice, or rather against
the existence of a due sense of that quality, was, that if such
a thing as justice were to be found on earth, the Romans
would resign their conquests, and return to their huts and original
poverty<a id="noteref_378" name="noteref_378" href="#note_378"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">378</span></span></a>. Cato likewise appears to have had a considerable
spirit of personal jealousy and rivalry; while, at the same
time, his national pride led him to scorn all the arts of a country
which the Roman arms had subdued.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Carneades promulgated his opinions only in his eloquent
lectures; and it is not known that he left any writings of importance
behind him<a id="noteref_379" name="noteref_379" href="#note_379"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">379</span></span></a>. But his oral instructions had made a
permanent impression on the Roman youth, and the want of
a written record of his principles was amply supplied by his
successor Clitomachus, who was by birth a Carthaginian, and
was originally called Asdrubal. He had fled from his own
country to Athens during the siege of Carthage, by the Romans,
in the third Punic war<a id="noteref_380" name="noteref_380" href="#note_380"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">380</span></span></a>; and in the year 623 he went
from Greece to Italy, to succeed Carneades in the school
which he had there established. Clitomachus was a most
voluminous author, having written not less than four ample
treatises on the necessity of withholding the assent from
every proposition whatever. One of these tracts was dedicated
to Lucilius, the satiric poet<a id="noteref_381" name="noteref_381" href="#note_381"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">381</span></span></a>, and another to the Consul
Censorinus. The essence of the principles which he maintained
in these works, has been extracted by Cicero, and
handed down to us in a passage inserted in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span>.
It is there said, that the resemblances of things are of such a
nature that some of them appear probable, and others not;
but this is no sufficient ground for supposing that some
objects may be correctly perceived, since many falsities are
probable, whereas no falsity can be accurately perceived or
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page214">[pg 214]</span><a name="Pg214" id="Pg214" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>known: The Academy never attempted to deprive mankind
of the use of their senses, by denying that there are such things
as colour, taste, and sound; but it denied that there exists in
these qualities any criterion or characteristic of truth and certainty.
A wise man, therefore, is said, in a double sense, to
withhold his assent; in one sense, when it is understood that
he absolutely assents to no proposition; in another, when he
suspends answering a question, without either denying or
affirming. He ought never to assent implicitly to any proposition,
and his answer should be withheld until, according to
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">probability</span></span>, he is in a condition to reply in the affirmative or
negative. But as Cicero admits, that a wise man, who, on
every occasion, suspends his assent, may yet be impelled and
moved to action, he leaves him in full possession of those motives
which excite to action, together with a power of answering
in the affirmative or negative to certain questions, and of
following the probability of objects; yet still without giving
them his assent<a id="noteref_382" name="noteref_382" href="#note_382"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">382</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Clitomachus was succeeded by Philo of Larissa, who fled
from Greece to Italy, during the Mithridatic war, and revived
at Rome a system of philosophy, which by this time began to
be rather on the decline. Cicero attended his lectures, and
imbibed from them the principles of the new Academy, to
which he ultimately adhered. Philo published two treatises,
explanatory of the doctrines of the new Academy, which were
answered in a work entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Sosus</span></span>, by Antiochus of Ascalon,
who had been a scholar of Philo, but afterwards abjured the
innovations of the new Academy, and returned to the old, as
taught by Plato and his immediate successors,—uniting with
it, however, some portion of the systems of Aristotle and
Zeno<a id="noteref_383" name="noteref_383" href="#note_383"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">383</span></span></a>. In his own age, Antiochus was the chief support of
the original principles of the Academy, and was patronized by
all those at Rome, who were still attached to them, particularly
by Lucullus, who took the philosopher along with him
to Alexandria, when he went there as Quæstor of Egypt.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the circumstances of Rome, the first steps towards philosophical
improvement, were a general abatement of that contempt
which had been previously entertained for philosophical
studies—a toleration of instruction—the power of communicating
wisdom without shame or restraint, and its cordial
reception by the Roman youth. This proficiency, which
necessarily preceded speculation or invention, had already
taken place. Partly through the instructions of Greek
philo<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page215">[pg 215]</span><a name="Pg215" id="Pg215" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>sophers who resided at Rome, and partly by means of the
practice which now began to prevail, of sending young men
for education to the ancient schools of wisdom, philosophy
made rapid progress, and almost every sect found followers
or patrons among the higher order of the Roman citizens.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
From the earliest times, however, till that of Cicero, Greek
philosophy was chiefly inculcated by Greeks. There was no
Roman who devoted himself entirely to metaphysical contemplation,
and who, like Epicurus, Aristotle, and Zeno, lounged
perpetually in a garden, paced about in a Lyceum, or stood
upright in a portico. The Greek philosophers passed their
days, if not in absolute seclusion, at least in learned leisure
and retirement. Speculation was the employment of their
lives, and their works were the result of a whole age of study
and reflection<a id="noteref_384" name="noteref_384" href="#note_384"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">384</span></span></a>. The Romans, on the other hand, regarded
philosophy, not as the business of life, but as an elegant relaxation,
or the means of aiding their advancement in the state.
They heard with attention the ingenious disputes agitated
among the Greeks, and perused their works with pleasure; but
with all this taste for philosophy, they had not sufficient leisure
to devise new theories. The philosophers of Rome were
Scipio, Cato, Brutus, Lucullus—men who governed their
country at home, or combated her enemies abroad. They had,
indeed, little motive to invent new systems, since so many were
presented to them, ready formed, that every one found in the
doctrines of some Greek sect, tenets which could be sufficiently
accommodated to his own disposition and situation. In
the same manner as the plunder of Syracuse or Corinth supplied
Rome with her statues and pictures, and rendered unnecessary
the exertions of native artists; and as the dramas of
Euripides and Menander provided sufficient materials for the
Roman stage; so the Garden, Porch, and Academy, furnished
such variety of systems, that new inventions or speculations
could easily be dispensed with. The prevalence, too, of the
principles of that Academy, which led to doubt of all things,
must have discouraged the formation of new and original theories.
Nor were even the Greek systems, after their introduction
into Italy, classed and separated as they had been in
Greece. Most of the distinguished men of Rome, however, in
the time of Cicero, were more inclined to one school than
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page216">[pg 216]</span><a name="Pg216" id="Pg216" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>another, and they applied the lessons of the sect which they
followed with more success, perhaps, than their masters, to
the practical purposes of active life. The jurisconsults, chief
magistrates, and censors, adopted the Stoical philosophy,
which had some affinity to the principles of the Roman constitution,
and which they considered best calculated for ruling
their fellow-citizens, as well as meliorating the laws and morals
of the state. The orators who aspired to rise by eloquence
to the highest honours of the republic, had recourse to the
lessons of the new Academy, which furnished them with weapons
for disputation; while those who sighed for the enjoyment
of tranquillity, amid the factions and dangers of the
commonwealth, retired to the Gardens of Epicurus. But
while subscribing to the leading tenets of a sect, they did not
strive to gain followers with any of the spirit of sectarism;
and it frequently happened, that neither in principle nor practice
did they adopt all the doctrines of the school to which
they chiefly resorted. Thus Cæsar, who was accounted an
Epicurean, and followed the Epicurean system in some things,
as in his belief of the materiality and mortality of the soul,
doubtless held in little reverence those ethical precepts, according
to which,
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">—— <span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Nihil in nostro corpore prosunt,</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Nec fama, neque nobilitas, nec gloria regni.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Lucretius was a sounder Epicurean, and gave to the precepts
of his master all the dignity and grace which poetical
embellishment could bestow. But Atticus, the well-known
friend and correspondent of Cicero, was perhaps the most
perfect example ever exhibited of genuine and practical Epicurism.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The rigid and inflexible Cato, was, both in his life and principles,
the great supporter of the Stoical philosophy—conducting
himself, according to an expression of Cicero, as if he
had lived in the polity of Plato, and not amid the dregs of
Romulus. The old Academy boasted among its adherents
Lucullus, the conqueror of Mithridates—the Lorenzo of Roman
arts and literature—whose palaces rivalled the porticos
of Greece, and whose library, with its adjacent schools and
galleries, was the resort of all who were distinguished for their
learning and accomplishments. Whilst Quæstor of Macedonia,
and subsequently, while he conducted the war against
Mithridates, Lucullus had enjoyed frequent opportunities of
conversing with the Greek philosophers, and had acquired
such a relish for philosophical studies, that he devoted to
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page217">[pg 217]</span><a name="Pg217" id="Pg217" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>them all the leisure he could command<a id="noteref_385" name="noteref_385" href="#note_385"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">385</span></span></a>. At Rome, his constant
companion was Antiochus of Ascalon, who, though a
pupil of Philo, became himself a zealous supporter of the old
Academy; and accordingly, Lucullus, who favoured that system,
often repaired to his house, to partake in the private
disputations which were there carried on against the advocates
for the new or middle Academy. The old Academy
also numbered among its votaries Varro, the most learned of
the Romans, and Brutus, who was destined to perform so tragic
a part on the ensanguined stage of his country.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Little was done by these eminent men to illustrate or enforce
their favourite systems by their writings. Even the
productions of Varro were calculated rather to excite to the
study of philosophy, than to aid its progress. The new Academy
was more fortunate in the support of Cicero, who has
asserted and vindicated its principles with equal industry and
eloquence. From their first introduction, the doctrines of
the new Academy had been favourably received at Rome.
The tenets of the dogmatic philosophers were so various and
contradictory, were so obstinately maintained, and rested on
such precarious foundations, that they afforded much scope
and encouragement to scepticism. The plausible arguments
by which the most discordant opinions were supported, led to
a distrust of the existence of absolute truth, and to an acquiescence
in such probable conclusions, as were adequate to
the practical purposes of life. The speculations, too, of the
new Academy, were peculiarly fitted to the duties of a public
speaker, as they left free the field of disputation, and habituated
him to the practice of collecting arguments from all quarters,
on every doubtful question. Hence it was that Cicero
addicted himself to this sect, and persuaded others to follow
his example. It has been disputed, if Cicero was really attached
to the new Academic system, or had merely resorted
to it as being best adapted for furnishing him with oratorical
arguments suited to all occasions. At first, its adoption was
subsidiary to his other plans. But, towards the conclusion of
his life, when he no longer maintained the place he was wont
to hold in the Senate or the Forum, and when philosophy
formed the occupation <span class="tei tei-q">“with which existence was just tolerable,
and without which it would have been intolerable<a id="noteref_386" name="noteref_386" href="#note_386"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">386</span></span></a>,”</span> he
doubtless became convinced that the principles of the new
Academy, illustrated as they had been by Carneades and
Philo, formed the soundest system which had descended to
mankind from the schools of Athens.
</p>
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page218">[pg 218]</span><a name="Pg218" id="Pg218" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The attachment, however, of Cicero to the Academic philosophy,
was free from the exclusive spirit of sectarism, and
hence it did not prevent his extracting from other systems
what he found in them conformable to virtue and reason. His
ethical principles, in particular, appear Eclectic, having been,
in a great measure, formed from the opinions of the Stoics.
Of most Greek sects he speaks with respect and esteem. For
the Epicureans alone, he seems (notwithstanding his friendship
for Atticus) to have entertained a decided aversion and
contempt.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The general purpose of Cicero’s philosophical works, was
rather to give a history of the ancient philosophy, than dogmatically
to inculcate opinions of his own. It was his great
aim to explain to his fellow-citizens, in their own language,
whatever the sages of Greece had taught on the most important
subjects, in order to enlarge their minds and reform their
morals; while, at the same time, he exercised himself in the
most useful employment which now remained to him—a
superior force having deprived him of the privilege of serving
his country as an orator or Consul.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cicero was in many respects well qualified for the arduous
but noble task which he had undertaken, of naturalizing philosophy
in Rome, and exhibiting her, according to the expression
of Erasmus, on the Stage of life. He was a man of
fertile genius, luminous understanding, sound judgment, and
indefatigable industry—qualities adequate for the cultivation
of reason, and sufficient for the supply of subjects of meditation.
Never <a name="corr218" id="corr218" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">was a</span> philosopher placed in a situation more
favourable for gathering the fruits of an experience employed
on human nature and civil society, or for observing the effects
of various qualities of the mind on public opinion and on the
actions of men. He lived at the most eventful crisis in the
fate of his country, and in the closest connection with men of
various and consummate talents, whose designs, when fully
developed by the result, must have afforded on reflection, a
splendid lesson in the philosophy of mind. But this situation,
in some respects so favourable, was but ill calculated for
revolving abstract ideas, or for meditating on those abstruse
and internal powers, of which the consequences are manifested
in society and the transactions of life. Accordingly,
Cicero appears to have been destitute of that speculative disposition
which leads us to penetrate into the more recondite
and original principles of knowledge, and to mark the internal
operations of thought. He had cultivated eloquence as
clearing the path to political honours, and had studied philosophy,
as the best auxiliary to eloquence. But the
contem<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page219">[pg 219]</span><a name="Pg219" id="Pg219" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>plative sciences only attracted his attention, in so far as they
tended to elucidate ethical, practical, and political subjects,
to which he applied a philosophy which was rather that of
life than of speculation.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the writings of Cicero, accordingly, everything deduced
from experience and knowledge of the world—every observation
on the duties of society, is clearly expressed, and remarkable
for justness and acuteness. But neither Cicero, nor
any other Roman author, possessed sufficient subtlety and
refinement of spirit, for the more abstruse discussions, among
the labyrinths of which the Greek philosophers delighted to
find a fit exercise for their ingenuity. Hence, all that required
research into the ultimate foundation of truths, or a more
exact analysis of common ideas and perceptions—all, in short,
that related to the subtleties of the Greek schools, is neither
so accurately expressed, nor so logically connected.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In theoretic investigation, then,—in the explication of
abstract ideas—in the analysis of qualities and perceptions,
Cicero cannot be regarded as an inventor or profound original
thinker, and cannot be ranked with Plato and Aristotle, those
mighty fathers of ancient philosophy, who carried back their
inquiries into the remotest truths on which philosophy rests.
Where he does attempt fixing new principles, he is neither
very clear nor consistent; and it is evident, that his general
study of all systems had, in some degree, unsettled his belief,
and had better qualified him to dispute on either side with
the Academics, than to examine the exact weight of evidence
in the scale of reason, or to exhibit a series of arguments, in
close and systematic arrangement, or to deduce accurate conclusions
from established and certain principles. His philosophic
dialogues are rather to be considered as popular
treatises, adapted to the ordinary comprehension of well-informed
men, than profound disquisitions, suited only to a
Portico or Lyceum. They bespeak the orator, even in the
most serious inquiries. Elegance and fine writing, their
author appears to have considered as essential to philosophy;
and historic, or even poetical illustration, as its brightest
ornament. The peculiar merit, therefore, of Cicero, lay in the
happy execution of what had never been before attempted—the
luminous and popular exposition of the leading principles
and disputes of the ancient schools of philosophy, with judgments
concerning them, and the application of results, deduced
from their various doctrines to the peculiar manners or
employments of his countrymen. Hence, though it may be
honouring Cicero too highly, to term his works, with Gibbon,
a Repository of Reason, they are at least a Miscellany of
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page220">[pg 220]</span><a name="Pg220" id="Pg220" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>Philosophic Information, which has become doubly valuable,
from the loss of the writings of many of those philosophers,
whose opinions he records; and though the merit of originality
rests with the Greek schools, no compositions transmitted
from antiquity present so concise and comprehensive a view
of the opinions of the Greek philosophers<a id="noteref_387" name="noteref_387" href="#note_387"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">387</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
That the mind of Cicero was most amply stored with the
learning of the Greek philosophers, and that he had the whole
circle of their wisdom at his command, is evident, from the rapidity
with which his works were composed—having been all
written, except the treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>, during the period
which elapsed from the battle of Pharsalia till his death; and
the greater part of them in the course of the year 708.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is justly remarked by Goerenz, in the introduction to his
edition of the book <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Finibus</span></span><a id="noteref_388" name="noteref_388" href="#note_388"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">388</span></span></a>, and assented to by Schütz<a id="noteref_389" name="noteref_389" href="#note_389"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">389</span></span></a>,
that it seems scarcely possible, that those numerous philosophical
works, which are asserted to have been composed by
Cicero in the year 708, could have been begun and finished
in one year; and that such speed of execution leads us to suppose,
that either the materials had been long collected, or
that the productions themselves were little more than versions.
In his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span>, Cicero remarks,—<span class="tei tei-q">“Ego autem, dum me
ambitio, dum honores, dum causæ, dum reipublicæ non solum
cura, sed quædam etiam procuratio multis officiis implicatum
et constrictum tenebat, hæc inclusa habebam; et, ne obsolescerent,
renovabam, quum licebat, legendo. Nunc vero et fortunæ
gravissimo percussus vulnere, et administratione reipublicæ
liberatus, doloris medicinam a philosophiâ peto, et otii
oblectationem hanc, honestissimam judico.”</span> It is not easy to
determine, as Schütz remarks, whether, by the expression
<span class="tei tei-q">“hæc inclusa habebam,”</span> Cicero means merely the writings
of philosophical authors, or treatises and materials for treatises
by himself. <span class="tei tei-q">“We ought, however,”</span> proceeds Schütz, <span class="tei tei-q">“the
less to wonder that Cicero composed so many works in so
short a time, when we read the following passage in a letter
to Atticus, written in July 708—<span class="tei tei-q">‘De linguâ Latinâ securi es
animi, dices, qui talia conscribis! <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">ἀπογραφα</span></span> sunt; minore labore
fiunt: verba tantum affero, quibus abundo<a id="noteref_390" name="noteref_390" href="#note_390"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">390</span></span></a>’</span><a name="corr220" id="corr220" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">;</span> which words,
according to Gronovius, imply, that the philosophic writings
of Cicero are little more than versions from the Greek.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the laudable attempt of naturalizing philosophy at Rome,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page221">[pg 221]</span><a name="Pg221" id="Pg221" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>the difficulty which Lucretius had encountered, in embodying
in Latin verse the precepts of Epicurus,—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Propter egestatem linguæ rerumque novitatem,”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
must have been almost as powerfully felt by Cicero. Philosophy
was still little cultivated among the Romans; and no
people will invent terms for thoughts or ideas with which it is
little occupied. One of his letters to Atticus is strongly expressive
of the trouble which he had in interpreting the philosophic
terms of Greece in his native tongue<a id="noteref_391" name="noteref_391" href="#note_391"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">391</span></span></a>. Thus, for
example, he could find no Latin word equivalent to the <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">ἐποχη</span></span>,
or that withholding of assent from all propositions, which
the new Academy professed. The language of the Greeks
had been formed along with their philosophy. Their terms
of physics had their origin in the ancient Theogonies, or the
speculations of the Milesian sage; and Plato informs us, that
one might make a course of moral philosophy in travelling
through Attica and reading the inscriptions engraved on the
tombs, pillars, and monuments, erected in the earliest ages
near the public ways and centre of villages<a id="noteref_392" name="noteref_392" href="#note_392"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">392</span></span></a>. Hence, in
Greece, words naturally became the apposite signs of speculative
and moral ideas; but in Rome, a foreign philosophy
had to be inculcated in a tongue which was already completely
formed, which was greatly inferior in flexibility and precision
to the Greek; and which, though Cicero certainly used some
liberties in this respect, had too nearly reached maturity, to
admit of much innovation. Its words, accordingly, did not
always precisely express the subtle notions signified in the
original language, whence there was often an appearance of
obscurity in the idea, and of a defect in conclusions, drawn
from premises which were indefinite, or which differed by a
shade of meaning from those established in Greece.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Aware of this difficulty, and conscious, perhaps, that he
possessed not precision and originality of thinking sufficient
to recommend a formal treatise, Cicero adopted the mode of
writing in dialogues, in which rhetorical diffuseness, and
looseness of definition, might be overlooked, and in which
ample scope would be afforded for the ornaments of language.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It was by oral discourse that knowledge was chiefly communicated
at the dawn of science, when books either did not
exist, or were extremely rare. In the Porch, in the Garden,
or among the groves of the Academy, the philosopher conferred
with his disciples, listened to their remarks, and replied
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page222">[pg 222]</span><a name="Pg222" id="Pg222" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>to their objections. Socrates, in particular, was accustomed
thus to inculcate his moral lessons; and it was natural for the
scholars, who recorded them, to follow the manner in which
they had been disclosed. Of these disciples, Plato, who was
the most distinguished, readily adopted a form of composition,
which gave scope to his own fertile and poetical imagination;
while, at the same time, it enabled him more accurately to
paint his great master. One of his chief objects, too, was to
represent the triumph of Socrates over the Sophists; and if a
writer wish to cover an opponent with ridicule, perhaps no
better mode could be devised, than to set him up as a man of
straw in a dialogue. As argumentative victory, or the embarrassment
of the antagonist of Socrates, was often all that
was aimed at, it was unnecessary to be very scrupulous about
the means, and, considered in this view, the agreeable irony
of that philosopher—the address with which, by seeming to
yield, he ensnares the adversary—his quibbles—his subtle
distinctions, and perplexing interrogatories, display consummate
skill, and produce considerable dramatic effect; while,
at the same time, the scenery and circumstances of the dialogue
are often described with a richness and beauty of imagination,
which no philosophic writer has as yet surpassed<a id="noteref_393" name="noteref_393" href="#note_393"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">393</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
When Cicero, towards the close of his long and meritorious
life, employed himself in transferring to Rome the philosophy
of Greece, he appears to have been chiefly attracted by the
diffusive majesty of Plato, whose intellectual character was in
many respects congenial to his own. His dialogues in so far
resemble those of Plato, that the personages are real, and of
various characters and opinions; while the circumstances of
time and place are, for the most part, as completely fictitious
as in his Greek models. Yet there is a considerable difference
in the manner of Cicero’s Dialogues, from those of the great
founder of the Academy. Plato ever preserved something of
the Socratic method of giving birth to the thoughts of others—of
awakening, by interrogatories, the sense of truth, and
supplanting errors. But Cicero himself, or the person who
speaks his sentiments, always takes the lead in the conference,
and gives us long, and often uninterrupted dissertations. His
object, too, appears to have been not so much to cover his
adversaries with ridicule, or even to prevail in the argument,
as to pay a complimentary tribute to his numerous and illustrious
friends, or to recall, as it were, from the tomb, the departed
heroes and sages of his country.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the form of dialogue, Cicero has successively treated of
Law, Metaphysics, Theology, and Morals.
</p>
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page223">[pg 223]</span><a name="Pg223" id="Pg223" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>.—Of this dialogue there are only three books
now extant, and even in these considerable chasms occur. A
conjecture has been recently hazarded by a learned German,
in an introduction to a translation of the dialogue, that these
three books, as we now have them, were not written by Cicero,
but that they are mere excerpts taken from his lost writings,
by some monk or father of the church<a id="noteref_394" name="noteref_394" href="#note_394"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">394</span></span></a>. There are few works,
however, in which more genuine marks of the master-hand of
Cicero may be traced, than in the tract <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>; and the
connection between the different parts is too closely preserved,
to admit of the notion that it has been made up in the manner
which this critic supposes. Another conjecture is, that it
formed part of the third, fourth, and fifth books of Cicero’s lost
treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republica</span></span>. This surmise, however, was highly improbable,
since Cicero, in the course of the work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>,
refers to that <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republica</span></span> as a separate production, and it is
now proved to be chimerical by the discovery of Mai. The
dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>, however, seems to have been drawn up
as a kind of supplement to that <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republica</span></span>, being intended
to point out what laws would be most suitable to the perfect
republic, which the author had previously described<a id="noteref_395" name="noteref_395" href="#note_395"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">395</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
As to the period of composition, it thus manifestly appears
to have been written subsequently to the dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republica</span></span>;
and it is evident, from his letters to his brother Quintus,
that the work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republica</span></span> was begun in 699, and finished in
700<a id="noteref_396" name="noteref_396" href="#note_396"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">396</span></span></a>, so that the dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span> could not have been
composed before that year. It is further clear, that it was
written after the year 701, since he obviously alludes in it to
the murder of Clodius,—boasting that his chief enemy was
now not only deprived of life, but wanted sepulture, and the
accustomed funeral obsequies<a id="noteref_397" name="noteref_397" href="#note_397"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">397</span></span></a>. Now, it is well known that
Clodius was slain in 701, and that his dead body was dragged
naked by a lawless mob into the Forum, where it was consumed
amid the conflagration raised in the Senate-house. It
is equally evident that the treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span> was written before
that <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Finibus</span></span>, composed in 708, since, in the former
work, the author alludes to the questions which we find discussed
in the latter, as controversies which he is one day to
take up<a id="noteref_398" name="noteref_398" href="#note_398"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">398</span></span></a>. But it is demonstrable that the dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>
was written even previous to the battle of Pharsalia, which
was fought in 705, since the author talks in it of Pompey as of
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page224">[pg 224]</span><a name="Pg224" id="Pg224" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>a person still alive, and in the plenitude of glory<a id="noteref_399" name="noteref_399" href="#note_399"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">399</span></span></a>. Chapman,
in his dissertation <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Ætate Librorum de Legibus</span></span>, subjoined
to Tunstall’s Latin letter to Middleton, concerning the epistles
to Brutus, thinks that it was not written till the year 709.
He is of opinion, that what is said of Pompey, and the allusions
to the murder of Clodius, as to a recent event, were only
intended to suit the time in which the dialogue takes place:
But then it so happens, that no historical period whatever is
assigned by the author of the dialogue, as the date of its actual
occurrence. Chapman also maintains, that this is the
only mode of accounting for the work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span> not being
mentioned in the treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Divinatione</span></span>, where Cicero’s other
philosophical productions are enumerated. The reason of this
omission, however, might be, that the work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span> never
was made public by the author; and, indeed, with exception
of the first book, the whole is but a sketch or outline of what
he intended to write, and is far from having received the polish
and perfection of those performances which he circulated
himself.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The discussion <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span> is carried on, in the shape of
dialogue, by Cicero, his brother Quintus, and Atticus. Of
these Cicero is the chief interlocutor. The scene is laid amid
the walks and pleasure-grounds of Cicero’s villa of Arpinum,
which lay about three miles from the town of that name, and
was situated in a mountainous but picturesque region of the
ancient territory of the Samnites, now forming part of the
kingdom of Naples. This house was the original seat of the
family of Cicero, who was born in it during the life of his
grandfather, while it was yet small and humble as the Sabine
cottage of Curius or Cincinnatus; but his father had gradually
enlarged and embellished it, till it became a spacious and elegant
mansion, where, as his health was infirm, he passed the
greater part of his life in literary retirement<a id="noteref_400" name="noteref_400" href="#note_400"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">400</span></span></a>. Cicero was
thus equally attracted to this villa by the many pleasing and
tender recollections with which it was associated, and by the
amenity of the situation, which was the most retired and delightful,
even in that region of enchanting landscape. It was
closely surrounded by a grove, and stood not far from the confluence
of the Fibrenus with the Liris. The former stream,
which murmured over a rocky channel, was remarkable for its
clearness, rapidity, and coolness; and its sloping verdant
banks were shaded with lofty poplars<a id="noteref_401" name="noteref_401" href="#note_401"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">401</span></span></a>. <span class="tei tei-q">“Many streams,”</span>
says Mr. Kelsall, one of our latest Italian tourists, <span class="tei tei-q">“which are
celebrated in story and song, disappoint the traveller,—

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page225">[pg 225]</span><a name="Pg225" id="Pg225" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

</span></p><div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">‘Dumb are their fountains, and their channels dry,’</span>—</div>
</div><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class="tei tei-q">

but, in the course of long travels, I never met with so abundant
and lucid a current as the Fibrenus; the length of the
stream considered, which does not exceed four miles and a
half. It flows with great rapidity, and is about thirty or thirty-five
feet in width near the Ciceronian isles. It is generally
fifteen and even twenty in depth; <span class="tei tei-q">‘largus et exundans,’</span> like
the genius of him who had so often trodden its banks. The
water even in the intensest heats, still retains its icy coldness;
and, although the thermometer was above 80° in the shade,
the hand, plunged for a few seconds into the Fibrenus, caused
a complete numbness<a id="noteref_402" name="noteref_402" href="#note_402"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">402</span></span></a>.”</span> Near to the house, the Fibrenus
was divided into equal streams by a little island, which was
fringed with a few plane-trees, and on which stood a portico<a id="noteref_403" name="noteref_403" href="#note_403"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">403</span></span></a>,
where Cicero often retired to read or meditate, and composed
some of his sublimest harangues. Just below this islet, each
branch of the stream rushed by a sort of cascade, into the cerulean
Liris<a id="noteref_404" name="noteref_404" href="#note_404"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">404</span></span></a>, on which the Fibrenus bestowed additional
freshness and coolness, and after this union received the name
of the more noble river<a id="noteref_405" name="noteref_405" href="#note_405"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">405</span></span></a>. The epithet <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">taciturnus</span></span>, applied to
the Liris by Horace, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">quietus</span></span>, by Silius Italicus, must be
understood only of the lower windings of its course. No river
in Italy is so noisy as the Liris about Arpino and Cicero’s
villa; for the space of a mile and a half after receiving the
Fibrenus, it formed no less than six cascades, varying in height
from three to twenty feet<a id="noteref_406" name="noteref_406" href="#note_406"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">406</span></span></a>. This spot, embellished with all
the ornaments of hills and valleys, and wood and water-falls,
was one of Cicero’s most favourite retreats. When Atticus
first visited it, he was so charmed, that, instead of wondering
as before that it was such a favourite residence of his friend,
he expressed his surprise that he ever retired elsewhere<a id="noteref_407" name="noteref_407" href="#note_407"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">407</span></span></a>; declaring,
at the same time, his contempt of the marble pavements,
arched ceilings, and artificial canals of magnificent
villas, compared with the tranquillity and natural beauties of
Arpinum. Cicero, indeed, appears at one time to have thought
of the island, formed by the Fibrenus, as the place most suitable
for the monument which he intended to raise to his beloved
daughter Tullia<a id="noteref_408" name="noteref_408" href="#note_408"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">408</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The situation of this villa was close to the spot where now
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page226">[pg 226]</span><a name="Pg226" id="Pg226" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>stands the city of Sora<a id="noteref_409" name="noteref_409" href="#note_409"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">409</span></span></a>. <span class="tei tei-q">“The Liris,”</span> says Eustace, <span class="tei tei-q">“still
bears its ancient name till it passes Sora, when it is called the
Garigliano. The Fibrenus, still so called, falls into it a little
below Sora, and continues to encircle the island in which Cicero
lays the scene of the dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>. Arpinum,
also, still retains its name<a id="noteref_410" name="noteref_410" href="#note_410"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">410</span></span></a>.”</span> Modern travellers bear ample
testimony to the scenery round Sora being such as fully justifies
the fond partiality of Cicero, and the admiration of Atticus.
<span class="tei tei-q">“Nothing,”</span> says Mr Kelsall, <span class="tei tei-q">“can be imagined finer
than the surrounding landscape. The deep azure of the sky,
unvaried by a single cloud—Sora on a rock at the foot of the
precipitous Apennines—both banks of the Garigliano covered
with vineyards—the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">fragor aquarum</span></span>, alluded to by Atticus in
the work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>—the coolness, rapidity, and ultramarine
hue of the Fibrenus,—the noise of its cataracts—the rich turquoise
colour of the Liris—the minor Apennines round Arpino,
crowned with umbrageous oaks to their very summits,
present scenery hardly elsewhere to be equalled, certainly not
to be surpassed, even in Italy<a id="noteref_411" name="noteref_411" href="#note_411"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">411</span></span></a>.”</span> The spot where Cicero’s
villa stood, was, in the time of Middleton, possessed by a convent
of monks, and was called the villa of St Dominic. It was
built in the year 1030, from the fragments of the Arpine
villa!
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Art, Glory, Freedom, fail—but Nature still is fair.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The first conference, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>, is held in a walk on the
banks of the Fibrenus; the other two in the island which it
formed, and which Cicero called Amalthea, from a villa belonging
to Atticus in Epirus. These three books are all that
are now extant. It appears, however, that, at the commencement
of the fifth dialogue, the sun having then passed the meridian,
and its beams striking in such a direction that the
speakers were no longer sheltered from its rays by the young
plane-trees, which had been recently planted, they left the
island, and descending to the banks of the Liris, finished their
discourse under the shade of the alder-trees, which stretched
their branches over its margin<a id="noteref_412" name="noteref_412" href="#note_412"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">412</span></span></a>.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page227">[pg 227]</span><a name="Pg227" id="Pg227" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
An ancient oak, which stood in Cicero’s pleasure-grounds,
led Atticus to inquire concerning the augury which had been
presented to Marius, a native of Arpinum, from that very oak,
and which Cicero had celebrated in a poem devoted to the exploits
of his ferocious countryman, Cicero hints, that the
portent was all a fiction; which leads to a discussion on the
difference between poetry and history, and the poverty of
Rome in the latter department. As Cicero, owing to the multiplicity
of affairs, had not then leisure to supply this deficiency,
he is requested by his guests, to give them, in the
meanwhile, a dissertation on Laws—a subject with which he
was so conversant, that he could require no previous preparation.
It is agreed, that he should not treat of particular or
arbitrary laws,—as those concerning <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Stillicide</span></span>, and the forms
of judicial procedure—but should trace the philosophic principles
of jurisprudence to their remotest sources. From this
recondite investigation he excludes the Epicureans, who decline
all care of the republic, and bids them retire to their gardens.
He entreats that the new Academy should be silent,
since her bold objections would soon destroy the fair and
well-ordered structure of his lofty system. Zeno, Aristotle,
and the immediate followers of Plato, he represents as the
teachers who best prepare a citizen for performing the duties
of social life. Them he professes chiefly to follow; and, in
conformity with their system, he announces in the first book,
which treats of laws in general, that man being linked to a
supreme God by reason and virtue, and the whole species
being associated by a communion of feelings and interests,
laws are alike founded on divine authority and natural benevolence.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
According to this sublime hypothesis, the whole universe
forms one immense commonwealth of gods and men, who participate
of the same essence, and are members of the same
community. Reason prescribes the law of nature and nations;
and all positive institutions, however modified by accident or
custom, are drawn from the rule of right which the Deity has
inscribed on every virtuous mind. Some actions, therefore, are
just in their own nature, and ought to be performed, not because
we live in a society where positive laws punish those
who pay no regard to them, but for the sake of that equity
which accompanies them, independently of human ordinances.
These principles may be applicable to laws in a certain
sense; but, in fact, it is rather moral right and justice than
laws that the author discusses—for bad or pernicious laws he
does not admit to be laws at all. To do justice, to love
mer<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page228">[pg 228]</span><a name="Pg228" id="Pg228" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>cy, and to worship God with a pure heart, were, doubtless,
laws in his meaning, (that is, they were right,) previous to
their enactment, and no human enactment to the contrary
could abrogate them. His principles, however, apply to laws
in this sense, and not to arbitrary civil institutions.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Having, in the first discourse, laid open the origin of laws,
and source of obligations, he proceeds, in the remaining books,
to set forth a body of laws conformable to his own plan and
ideas of a well-ordered state;—announcing, in the first place,
those which relate to religion and the worship of the gods;
secondly, such as prescribe the duties and powers of magistrates.
These laws are, for the most part, taken from the ancient
government and customs of Rome, with some little modification
calculated to obviate or heal the disorders to which
the republic was liable, and to give its constitution a stronger
bias in favour of the aristocratic faction. The species of instruction
communicated in these two books, has very little reference
to the sublime and general principles with which the
author set out. Many of his laws are arbitrary municipal regulations.
The number of the magistrates, the period of the
duration of their offices, with the suffrages and elections in the
Comitia, were certainly not founded in the immutable laws of
God or nature; and the discussion concerning them has led
to the belief, that the second and third books merely comprehended
a collection of facts, from which general principles
were to be subsequently deduced.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
At the end of the third book it is mentioned, that the executive
power of the magistracy, and rights of the Roman citizens,
still remain to be discussed. In what number of books this
plan was accomplished, is uncertain. Macrobius, as we have
seen, quotes the fifth book<a id="noteref_413" name="noteref_413" href="#note_413"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">413</span></span></a>; and Goerenz thinks it probable
there were six,—the fourth being on the executive power, the
fifth on public, and the sixth on private rights.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
What authors Cicero chiefly followed and imitated in his
work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>, has been a celebrated controversy since the
time of Turnebus. It seems now to be pretty well settled, that,
in substance and principles, he followed the Stoics; but that
he imitated Plato in the style and dress in which he arrayed
his sentiments and opinions. That philosopher, as is well
known, after writing on government in general, drew up a body
of laws adapted to that particular form of it which he had delineated.
In like manner, Cicero chose to deliver his sentiments,
not by translating Plato, but by imitating his manner
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page229">[pg 229]</span><a name="Pg229" id="Pg229" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>in the explication of them, and adapting everything to the constitution
of his own country. The Stoic whom he principally
followed, was probably Chrysippus, who wrote a book <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">Περι Νομου</span></span><a id="noteref_414" name="noteref_414" href="#note_414"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">414</span></span></a>,
some passages of which are still extant, and exhibit the outlines
of the system adopted in the first book <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>.
What of general discussion appears in the third book is taken
from Theophrastus, Dio, and Panætius the Stoic.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Finibus Bonorum et Malorum</span></span>.—This work is a philosophical
account of the various opinions entertained by the
Greeks concerning the Supreme Good and Extreme Evil, and
is by much the most subtle and difficult of the philosophic writings
of Cicero. It consists of five books, of that sort of dialogue,
in which, as in the treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, the discourse is
not dramatically represented, but historically related by the
author. The constant repetition of <span class="tei tei-q">“said I,”</span> and <span class="tei tei-q">“says he,”</span>
is tiresome and clumsy, and not nearly so agreeable as the
dramatic form of dialogue, where the names of the different
speakers are alternately prefixed, as in a play. The whole is
addressed to Marcus Brutus in an Introduction, where the author
excuses his study of philosophy, which some persons had
blamed as unbecoming his character and dignity. The conference
in the first two books is supposed to be held at Cicero’s
Cuman villa, which was situated on the hills of old Cumæ,
and commanded a prospect of the Campi Phlegræi, the bay of
Puteoli, with its islands, the Portus Misenus the harbour of the
Roman fleet, and Baiæ, the retreat of the most wealthy patricians.
Here Cicero received a visit from Lucius Torquatus,
a confirmed Epicurean, and from a young patrician, Caius
Triarius, who is a mute in the ensuing colloquy. Torquatus
engages their host in philosophical discussion, by requesting
to know his objections to the Epicurean system. These Cicero
states generally; but Torquatus, in his answer, confines himself
to the question of the Supreme Good, which he placed in
pleasure. This tenet he supports on the principle, that, of all
things, Virtue is the most pleasurable; that we ought to follow
its laws, in consequence of the serenity and satisfaction
arising from its practice; and that honourable toil, or even
pain, are not always to be avoided, as they often prove necessary
means towards obtaining the most exquisite gratifications.
Cicero, in his refutation, which is contained in the second
book, gives rather a different representation of the philosophy
of Epicurus, from his great poetic contemporary Lucretius.
The term <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">ἡδονη</span></span>, (voluptas,) used by Epicurus to express his
Supreme Good, can only, as Cicero maintains, mean sensual
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page230">[pg 230]</span><a name="Pg230" id="Pg230" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>enjoyment, and can never be so interpreted as to denote tranquillity
of mind. But supposing virtue to be cultivated merely
as productive of pleasure, or as only valuable because agreeable—a
cheat, who had no remorse or conscience, might enjoy
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">summum bonum</span></span> in defrauding a rightful owner of his
property; and no act would thus be accounted criminal, if it
escaped the brand of public infamy. On the other hand, if
pain be accounted the Supreme Evil, how can any man enjoy
felicity, when this greatest of all misfortunes may at any moment
seize him!
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the third and fourth books, the scene of the dialogue is
changed. In order to inspect some books of Aristotelian philosophy,
Cicero walks over to the villa of young Lucullus, to
whom he had been appointed guardian, by the testament of
his illustrious father. Here he finds Cato employed in perusing
certain works of Stoical authors; and a discussion arises on
that part of the Stoical system, relating to the Supreme Good,
which Cato placed in virtue alone. Cicero, in his answer to
Cato, attempts to reconcile this tenet with the doctrines of the
Academic philosophy, which he himself professed, by showing
that the difference between them consisted only in the import
affixed to the term <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">good</span></span>—the Academic sect assigning a pre-eminence
to virtue, but admitting that external advantages
are good also in their decree. Now, the Stoics would not
allow them to be good, but merely valuable, eligible, or preferable;
so that the sects could be reconciled in sentiments, if the
terms were a little changed. The Academical system is fully
developed in the fifth book, in a dialogue held within the
Academy; and, at the commencement, the associations which
that celebrated, though then solitary spot, was calculated to
awaken are finely described. <span class="tei tei-q">“I see before me,”</span> says Piso,
<span class="tei tei-q">“the perfect form of Plato, who was wont to dispute in this
very place: These gardens not only recall him to my memory,
but present his very person to my senses—I fancy to
myself that here stood Speusippus—there Xenocrates—and
here, on this bench, sat his disciple Polemo. To me, our ancient
Senate-house seems peopled with the like visionary
forms; for often when I enter it, the shades of Scipio, of Cato,
and of Lælius, and, in particular, of my venerable grandfather,
rise up to my imagination.”</span> Here Piso, who was a great
Platonist, gives an account, in the presence of Cicero and
Cicero’s brother Quintus, of the hypothesis of the old Academy
concerning moral good, which was also that adopted by
the Peripatetics. According to this system, the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">summum bonum</span></span>
consists in the highest improvement of all the mental
and bodily faculties. The perfection, in short, of everything
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page231">[pg 231]</span><a name="Pg231" id="Pg231" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>consistent with nature, enters into the composition of supreme
felicity. Virtue, indeed, is the highest of all things, but other
advantages must also be valued according to their worth.
Even pleasures become ingredients of happiness, if they be
such as are included in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">prima naturæ</span></span>, or primary advantages
of nature. Cicero seems to approve this system, and
objects only to one of the positions of Piso, That a wise man
must be always happy. Our author thus contrasts with each
other the different systems of Greek philosophy, particularly
the Epicurean with the Stoical tenets; and hence, besides,
refuting them in his own person, he makes the one baffle the
other, till he arrives at what is most probable, the utmost
length to which the middle or new Academy pretended to
reach. The chief part of the work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Finibus</span></span>, is taken from
the best writings of the different philosophers whose doctrines
he explains. The first book closely follows the tract of Epicurus,
<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">Κυριων δοξων</span></span>. Cicero’s second book, in which he refutes
Epicurism, is borrowed from the stoic Chrysippus, who wrote
ten books Of the beautiful, and of pleasure, (<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">Περι τοῦ καλοῦ και της ἡδονης</span></span>,) wherein he canvassed the Epicurean tenets concerning
the Supreme Good and Evil. His third book is derived
from a treatise of the same Chrysippus, entitled <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">Περι τελων</span></span><a id="noteref_415" name="noteref_415" href="#note_415"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">415</span></span></a>.
The fourth, where he refutes the Stoics, is from the writings
of Polemo, who, following the example of his master Xenocrates,
amended the Academic doctrines, and nearly accommodated
them on this subject of Good and Evil to the opinions
of the ancient Peripatetics. Some works of Antiochus of Ascalon,
who, in the time of Cicero, was the head of the old
Academy, supplied the materials for the concluding dialogue.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Finibus</span></span> was written in 708, and though begun
subsequently to the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span>, was finished before it. The
period, however, of the three different conferences of which it
consists, is laid a considerable time before the date of its publication.
It is evident that the first dialogue is supposed to be
held in 703, since Torquatus, the principal speaker, who perished
in the civil war, is mentioned as <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Prætor Designatus</span></span>,
and this prætorship he bore in the year 704. The following
conference is placed subsequently, at least, to the death of
the great Lucullus, who died in 701. The last dialogue is
carried more than thirty years back, being laid in 674, when
Cicero was in his twenty-seventh year, and was attending the
lessons of the Athenian philosophers. For this change, the
reason seems to have been, that as Piso was the fittest person
whom the author could find to support the doctrines of the
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page232">[pg 232]</span><a name="Pg232" id="Pg232" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>old Academy, and as he had renounced his friendship during
the time of the disturbances occasioned by the Clodian faction,
it became necessary to place the conference at a period
when they were fellow-students at Athens. The critics have
observed some anachronisms in this last book, in making Piso
refer to the other two dialogues, of which he had no share, and
could have had no knowledge, as being held at a later period
than that of the conference he attended.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span>.—This work is termed Academica, either because
it chiefly relates to the Academic philosophy, or because
it was composed at the villa of Puteoli, where a grove and
portico were called by Cicero, from an affected imitation of
the Athenians, his Academy<a id="noteref_416" name="noteref_416" href="#note_416"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">416</span></span></a>. There evidently existed what
may be termed two editions of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span>, neither of
which we now possess perfect—what we have being the second
book of the first edition, and the first of the second. In
the first edition, the speakers were Cicero himself, Catulus,
Lucullus, and Hortensius. The first book was inscribed Catulus,
and the second Lucullus, these persons being the chief
interlocutors in their respective divisions. The first dialogue,
or Catulus, was held in the villa of that senator. Every word of it
is unfortunately lost, but the import may be gathered, from the
references to it in the Lucullus, or second book, which is still
extant. It appears to have contained a sketch of the history
of the old and the new Academy, and then to have entered
minutely into the doctrines and principles of the latter, to
which Catulus was attached. Catulus explained them as they
had been delivered by Carneades, whose lectures his father
had attended, and in his old age imparted their substance to
his son. He refuted the philosophy of Philo, where that writer
differed from Carneades, (which, though of the new Academy,
he did in some particulars,) and also the opinions of
Antiochus, who followed the old Academy. Hortensius seems
to have made a short reply, but the more ample discussion of
the system of the old Academy was reserved for Lucullus.
Previous, however, to entering on this topic, our philosophers
pass over from the Cuman villa of Catulus to that of Hortensius,
at Bauli, one of the many magnificent seats belonging to
that orator, and situated a little above the luxurious Baiæ, in
the direction towards Cumæ, on an inlet of the Bay of Naples.
Here they had resolved to remain till a favourable breeze should
spring up, which might carry Lucullus to his Neapolitan, and
Cicero to his Pompeian villa. While awaiting this opportunity,
they repaired to an open gallery, which looked towards
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page233">[pg 233]</span><a name="Pg233" id="Pg233" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>the sea, whence they descried the vessels sailing across the
bay, and the ever changeful hue of its waters, which appeared
of a saffron colour under the morning beam, but became
azure at noon, till, as the day declined, they were rippled by
the western breeze, and empurpled by the setting sun<a id="noteref_417" name="noteref_417" href="#note_417"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">417</span></span></a>.
Here Lucullus commenced his defence of the old Academy,
and his disputation against Philo, according to what he had
learned from the philosopher Antiochus, who had accompanied
him to Alexandria, when he went there as Quæstor of
Egypt. While residing in that city, two books of Philo
arrived, which excited the philosophic wrath of Antiochus,
and gave rise to much oral discussion, as well as to a book
from his pen, entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Sosus</span></span>, in which he attempted to refute
the doctrines so boldly promulgated by Philo. Lucullus was
thus enabled fully and faithfully to detail the arguments of the
chief supporter and reviver in those later ages of the old
Platonic Academy. His discourse is chiefly directed against
that leading principle of the new Academy, which taught that
nothing can be known or ascertained. Recurring to nature,
and the constitution of man, he confirms the faith we have in
our external senses, and the mental conclusions deduced from
them. To this Cicero replies, from the writings of Clitomachus,
and of course enlarges on the delusion of the senses—the
false appearances we behold in sleep, or while under the
influence of phrensy, and the uncertainty of everything so
fully demonstrated by the different opinions of the great philosophers,
on the most important of all subjects, the Providence
of the Gods—the Supreme Good and Evil, and the formation
of the world.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
These two books, the Catulus and Lucullus, of which, as
already mentioned, the last alone is extant, were written after
the termination of the civil wars, and a copy of them sent by
Cicero to Atticus. It occurred, however, to the author soon
afterwards, that the characters introduced were not very suitable
to the subjects discussed, since Catulus and Lucullus,
though both ripe scholars, and well-educated men, could not,
as statesmen and generals, be supposed to be acquainted with
all the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">minutiæ</span></span> of philosophic controversy contained in the
books bearing their names. While deliberating if he should
not rather put the dialogue into the lips of Cato and Brutus,
he received a letter <a name="corr233" id="corr233" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">from</span> Atticus, acknowledging the present
of his work, but mentioning that their common friend, Varro,
was displeased to find that none of his treatises were addressed
to him, or inscribed with his name. This intimation, and the
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page234">[pg 234]</span><a name="Pg234" id="Pg234" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>incongruity of the former characters with the subject, determined
the author to dedicate the work to Varro, and to make
him the principal speaker in the dialogue<a id="noteref_418" name="noteref_418" href="#note_418"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">418</span></span></a>. This change,
and the reflection, perhaps, on certain defects in the arrangement
of the old work, as also the discovery of considerable
omissions, particularly with regard to the tenets of Arcesilaus,
the founder of the new academy, induced him to remodel the
whole, to add in some places, to abridge in others, and to bestow
on it more lustre and polish of style. In this new form,
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span> consisted of four books, a division which was
better adapted for treating his subject: But of these four,
only the first remains. The dialogue it contains is supposed
to be held during a visit which Atticus and Cicero paid to
Varro, in his villa near Cumæ. His guests entreat him to
give an account of the principles of the old Academy, from
which Cicero and Atticus had long since withdrawn, but to
which Varro had continued steadily attached. This first
book probably comprehends the substance of what was contained
in the Catulus of the former edition. Varro, in complying
with the request preferred to him, deduces the origin
of the old Academy from Socrates; he treats of its doctrines
as relating to physics, logic, and morals, and traces its progress
under Plato and his legitimate successors. Cicero takes
up the discourse when this historical account is brought down
to Arcesilaus, the founder of the new Academy. But the
work is broken off in the most interesting part, and just as the
author is entering on the life and lectures of Carneades, who
introduced the new Academy at Rome. Cicero, however,
while he styles it the new Academy, will scarcely allow it to
be new, as it was in fact the most genuine exposition of those
sublime doctrines which Plato had imbibed from Socrates.
The historical sketch of the Academic philosophy having
been nearly concluded in the first book, the remaining books,
which are lost, contained the disputatious part. In the second
book the doctrines of Arcesilaus were explained; and from
one of the few short fragments preserved, there appears to
have been a discussion concerning the remarkable changes
that occur in the colour of objects, and the complexion of individuals,
in consequence of the alterations they undergo in
position or age, which was one of Arcesilaus’ chief arguments
against the certainty of evidence derived from the senses.
The third and fourth books probably contained the doctrines
of Carneades and Philo, with Varro’s refutation of them, according
to the principles of Antiochus. From a fragment of
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page235">[pg 235]</span><a name="Pg235" id="Pg235" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>the third book, preserved by Nonius, it appears that the scene
of the dialogue was there transferred to the banks of the Lucrine
lake, which lay in the immediate vicinity of Varro’s
Cuman villa<a id="noteref_419" name="noteref_419" href="#note_419"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">419</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
These four books formed the work which Cicero wished to
be considered as the genuine and improved Academics. The
former edition, however, which he had sent to Atticus, had
gone abroad, and as he could not recall it, he resolved to complete
it, by prefixing an introductory eulogy of Catulus to the
first, and of Lucullus to the second book,—extolling, in particular,
the incredible genius of the latter, which enabled him,
though previously inexperienced in the art of war, merely by
conversation and study, during his voyage from Rome, to land
on the coast of Asia, with the acquirements of a consummate
commander, and to extort the admission from his antagonist,
Mithridates, who had coped with Sylla, that he was the first of
warriors.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This account of the two editions of the Academics, which
was first suggested by Talæus<a id="noteref_420" name="noteref_420" href="#note_420"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">420</span></span></a>, has been adopted by
    Goerenz<a id="noteref_421" name="noteref_421" href="#note_421"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">421</span></span></a>;
and it appears to me completely confirmed by the series
of Cicero’s letters to Atticus, contained in the 13th book of his
Epistles. It is by no means, however, unanimously assented
to by the French and German commentators. Lambinus, seeing
that Nonius quoted, as belonging to the fourth book of
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span>, passages which we find in the Lucullus, or
second book of the first edition, considered and inscribed it
as the fourth of the new edition, instead of the second of the
old, in which he was followed by many subsequent editors;
but this is easily accounted for, since the new edition, being
remodelled on the old, many things in the last or second book
of the old edition would naturally be transferred to the fourth
or last of the new, and be so cited by those grammarians who
wrote when the whole work was extant. Ranitz denies that
there ever were two editions of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span> made public,
or preserved, and that, so far from the last three books being
lost, the Lucullus contains the whole of these three, but from
the error of transcribers they have been run into each other<a id="noteref_422" name="noteref_422" href="#note_422"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">422</span></span></a>.
This critic is right, indeed, in the notion he entertains, that
Cicero wished the first edition of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span> to be destroyed,
or to fall into oblivion, but it does not follow that
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page236">[pg 236]</span><a name="Pg236" id="Pg236" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>either of these wishes was accomplished; and indeed it is
proved, from Cicero’s own letters, that the older edition had
passed into extensive circulation.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Tusculanæ Disputationes</span></span>, are so called by Cicero, from
having been held at his seat near Tusculum—a town which
stood on the summit of the Alban hill, about a mile higher up
than the modern Frescati, and communicated its name to all
the rural retreats in its neighbourhood. This was Cicero’s
chief and most favourite villa. <span class="tei tei-q">“It is,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“the only
spot in which I completely rest from all my uneasiness, and
all my toils.”</span>—<span class="tei tei-q">“It stood,”</span> says Eustace, <span class="tei tei-q">“on one of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Tumuli</span></span>,
or beautiful hills grouped together on the Alban Mount.
It is bounded on the south by a deep dell, with a streamlet
that falls from the rock, then meanders through the recess, and
disappears in its windings. Eastward rises the lofty eminence,
once crowned with Tusculum—Westward, the view descends,
and passing over the Campagna, fixes on Rome, and the distant
mountains beyond it.—On the south, a gentle swell presents
a succession of vineyards and orchards; and behind it
towers the summit of the Alban Mount, once crowned with the
temple of Jupiter Latiaris. Thus Cicero, from his portico, enjoyed
the noblest and most interesting view that could be imagined
to a Roman and a Consul; the temple of the tutelary
divinity of the empire, the seat of victory and triumph, and the
theatre of his glorious labours,—the Capital of the World<a id="noteref_423" name="noteref_423" href="#note_423"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">423</span></span></a>.”</span>
A yet more recent traveller informs us, that <span class="tei tei-q">“the situation of
the ancient Tusculum is delightful. The road which leads to
it is shaded with umbrageous woods of oak and ilex. The ancient
trees and soft verdant meadows around it, almost remind
us of some of the loveliest scenes of England; and the little
brook that babbles by, was not the less interesting from the
thought, that its murmurs might perchance have once soothed
the ear of Cicero<a id="noteref_424" name="noteref_424" href="#note_424"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">424</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The distance of Tusculum from Rome, which was only four
leagues, afforded Cicero an easy retreat from the fatigues of
the Senate and Forum. Being the villa to which he most frequently
resorted, he had improved and adorned it beyond all
his other mansions, and rendered its internal elegance suitable
to its majestic situation. It had originally belonged to Sylla,
by whom it was highly ornamented. In one of its apartments
there was a painting of his victory near Nola, during the Marsic
war, in which Cicero had served under him as a volunteer.
But its new master had bestowed on this seat a more classical
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page237">[pg 237]</span><a name="Pg237" id="Pg237" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>and Grecian air. He had built several halls and galleries in
imitation of the schools and porticos of Athens, which he
termed Gymnasia. One of these, which he named the Academia,
was erected at a little distance from the villa, on the
declivity of the hill facing the Alban Mount<a id="noteref_425" name="noteref_425" href="#note_425"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">425</span></span></a>. Another Gymnasium,
which he called the Lyceum, stood higher up the hill
than the Academy: It was adjacent to the villa, and was chiefly
designed for philosophical conferences. Cicero had given a
general commission to Atticus, who spent much of his time in
Greece, to purchase any elegant or curious piece of Grecian
art, in painting or sculpture, which his refined taste might
select as a suitable ornament for his Tusculan villa. He, in
consequence, received from his friend a set of marble Mercuries,
with brazen heads, with which he was much pleased;
but he was particularly delighted with a sort of compound
emblematical figures called <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hermathenæ</span></span> and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hermeraclæ</span></span> 
    <a name="corr237" id="corr237" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">representing</span>
Mercury and Minerva, or Mercury and Hercules,
jointly on one base; for, Hercules being the proper deity of
the Gymnasium, Minerva of the Academy, and Mercury common
to both, they precisely suited the purpose for which he
desired them to be procured. One of these Minerval Mercuries
pleased him so wonderfully, and stood in such an advantageous
position, that he declared the whole Academy at Tusculum
appeared to have been contrived in order to receive
it<a id="noteref_426" name="noteref_426" href="#note_426"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">426</span></span></a>. So intent was he on embellishing this Tusculan villa
with all sorts of Grecian art, that he sent over to Atticus the
plans and devices for his ceilings, which were of stucco-work,
in order to bespeak various pieces of sculpture and painting
to be inserted in the compartments; as also the covers for two
of his wells or fountains, which, by the custom of those times,
were often formed after some elegant pattern, and adorned with
figures in relief<a id="noteref_427" name="noteref_427" href="#note_427"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">427</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
La Grotta Ferrata, a convent of Basilian friars, is now, according
to Eustace, built on the site of Cicero’s Tusculan villa.
Nardini, who wrote about the year 1650, says, that there had
been recently found, among the ruins of Grotta Ferrata, a
piece of sculpture, which Cicero himself mentions in one of
his Familiar Epistles. In the middle of last century, there yet
remained vast subterranean apartments, as well as a great circumference
and extent of ruins<a id="noteref_428" name="noteref_428" href="#note_428"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">428</span></span></a>. But these, it would appear,
have been still farther dilapidated since that period. <span class="tei tei-q">“Scarce
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page238">[pg 238]</span><a name="Pg238" id="Pg238" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>a trace,”</span> says Eustace, <span class="tei tei-q">“of the ruins of Tusculum is now discoverable:
Great part remained at the end of the 10th century,
when a Greek monk from Calabria demolished it, and
erected on the site, the monastery of Grotta Ferrata. At each
end of the portico is fixed in the wall a fragment of basso relievo.
One represents a philosopher sitting with a scroll in
his hand, in a thinking posture—in the other, are four figures
supporting the feet of a fifth of colossal size, supposed to
represent Ajax. These, with the beautiful pillars which support
the church, are the only remnants of the decorations and
furniture of the ancient villa. <span class="tei tei-q">‘<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Conjiciant</span></span>,’</span> says an inscription
near the spot, <span class="tei tei-q">‘<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">quæ et quanta fuerunt</span></span>.’</span><a id="noteref_429" name="noteref_429" href="#note_429"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">429</span></span></a>”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
When Cæsar had attained the supremacy at Rome, and
Cicero no longer gave law to the Senate, he became the head
of a sort of literary or philosophical society. Filelfo, who delivered
public lectures at Rome, on the Tusculan Disputations,
attempted to prove that he had stated meetings of learned
men at his house, and opened a regular Academy at Tusculum<a id="noteref_430" name="noteref_430" href="#note_430"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">430</span></span></a>.
This notion was chiefly founded on a letter of Cicero
to Pætus, where he says that he had followed the example of
the younger Dionysius, who, being expelled from Syracuse,
taught a school at Athens. At all events, it was his custom,
in the opportunities of his leisure, to carry some friends with
him from Rome to the country, where the entertainments they
enjoyed were chiefly speculative. In this manner, Cicero, on
one occasion, spent five days at his Tusculan villa; and after
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page239">[pg 239]</span><a name="Pg239" id="Pg239" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>employing the morning in declamation and rhetorical exercises,
retired in the afternoon with his friends to the gallery,
called the Academy, which he had constructed for the purpose
of philosophical conference. Here Cicero daily offered
to maintain a thesis on any topic proposed to him by his
guests; and the five dialogues thus introduced, were, as we
are informed by the author, afterwards committed to writing,
nearly in the words which had actually passed<a id="noteref_431" name="noteref_431" href="#note_431"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">431</span></span></a>. They were
completed early in 709, and, like so many of his other works,
are dedicated to Brutus—each conference being at the same
time furnished with an introduction expatiating on the excellence
of philosophy, and the advantage of naturalizing the wisdom
of the Greeks, by transfusing it into the Latin language.
In the first dialogue, entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Contemnenda Morte</span></span>, one of
the guests, who is called the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Auditor</span></span> through the remainder
of the performance, asserts, that death is an evil. This proposition
Cicero immediately proceeds to refute, which naturally
introduces a disquisition on the immortality of the soul—a subject
which, in the pages of Cicero, continued to be involved
in the same doubt and darkness that had veiled it in the
schools of Greece.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is true, that in the ancient world some notion had been entertained,
and by a few some hope had been cherished, that we
are here only in the infancy of our existence, and that the grave
might be the porch of immortality, and not the goal of our
career. The natural love that we have for life, amidst all its
miseries—the grief that we sometimes feel at being torn from
all that is dear to us—the desire for posterity and for posthumous
fame—the humiliating idea, that the thoughts which
wander through eternity, should be the operations of a being
destined to flutter for a moment on the surface of the earth,
and then for ever to be buried in its bosom—all, in short, that
is selfish, and all that is social in our nature, combined in giving
importance to the inquiry, If the thinking principle was
to be destroyed by death, or if that great change was to be an
introduction to a future state of existence. Having thus a natural
desire for the truth of this doctrine, the philosophers of
antiquity anxiously devised arguments, which might justify
their hopes. Sometimes they deduced them from metaphysical
speculations—the spirituality, unity, and activity of the
soul—sometimes from its high ideas of things moral and intellectual.
Is it possible, they asked, that a being of such excellence
should be here imprisoned for a term of years, only to
be the sport of the few pleasures and the many pains which
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page240">[pg 240]</span><a name="Pg240" id="Pg240" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>chequer this mortal life? Is not its future destination seen
in that satiety and disrelish, which attend all earthly enjoyments—in
those desires of the mind for things more pure and
intellectual than are here supplied—in that longing and endeavour,
which we feel after something above us, and perfective
of our nature? At other times, they have found arguments
in the unequal distribution of rewards and punishments;
and in our sighs over the misfortunes of virtue, they have recognized
a principle, which points to a future state of things,
where that shall be discovered to be good which we now lament
as evil, and where the consequences of vice and virtue
shall be more fully and regularly unfolded, than in this inharmonious
scene. They have then looked abroad into nature,
and have seen, that if death follows life, life seemingly emanates
from death, and that the cheerful animations of spring
succeed to the dead horrors of winter. They have observed
the wonderful changes that take place in some sentient
beings—they have considered those which man himself has
undergone—and, charmed by all these speculations, they have
indulged in the pleasing hope, that our death may, like our
birth, be the introduction to a new state of existence. But all
these fond desires—all these longings after immortality, were
insufficient to dispel the doubts of the sage, or to fill the moralist
with confidence and consolation. The wisest and most
virtuous of the philosophers of antiquity, and who most strongly
indulged the hope of immortality, is represented by an illustrious
disciple as expressing himself in a manner which discloses
his sad uncertainty, whether he was to be released from
the tomb, or for ever confined within its barriers.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the age of Cicero, the existence of a world beyond the
grave was still covered with shadows, clouds, and darkness.
<span class="tei tei-q">“Whichsoever of the opinions concerning the substance of
the soul be true,”</span> says he, in his first Tusculan Disputation,
<span class="tei tei-q">“it will follow, that death is either a good, or at least not an
evil—for if it be brain, blood, or heart, it will perish with the
whole body—if fire, it will be extinguished—if breath, it will
be dissipated—if harmony, it will be broken—not to speak of
those who affirm that it is nothing; but other opinions give
hope, that the vital spark, after it has left the body, may mount
up to Heaven, as its proper habitation.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cicero then proceeds to exhaust the whole Platonic reasoning
for the soul’s immortality, and its ascent to the celestial
regions, where it will explore and traverse all space—receiving,
in its boundless flight, infinite enjoyment. From his
system of future existence, Cicero excludes all the gloomy
fables feigned of the descent to Avernus, the pale murky
re<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page241">[pg 241]</span><a name="Pg241" id="Pg241" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>gions, the sluggish stream, the gaunt hound, and the grim
boatman. But even if death is to be considered as the total
extinction of sense and feeling, our author still denies that it
should be accounted an evil. This view he strongly supports,
from a consideration of the insignificance of those pleasures
of which we are deprived, and beautifully illustrates, from the
fate of many characters distinguished in history, who, by an
earlier death, would have avoided the greatest ills of life.
Had <a name="corr241" id="corr241" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Metellus</span> died sooner, he would not have laid his sons on
the funeral pile—had Pompey expired, when the inhabitants
of all Italy were decked with wreaths and garlands, as testimonies
of joy for his restoration to health from the fever with
which he was seized in Campania, he would not have taken
arms unprepared for the contest, nor fled his home and country;
nor, having lost a Roman army, would he have fallen on
a foreign shore by the sword of a slave<a id="noteref_432" name="noteref_432" href="#note_432"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">432</span></span></a>. He completes these
illustrations by reference to his own misfortunes; and the arguments
which he deduced from them, received, in a few
months, a strong and melancholy confirmation.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Etiam ne
mors nobis expedit? qui et domesticis et forensibus solatiis
ornamentisque privati, certe, si ante occidissemus, mors nos a
malis, non a bonis abstraxisset.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The same unphilosophical guest, who had asserted that
death was a disadvantage, and whom Cicero, in charity to his
memory, does not name, is doomed, in the second dialogue,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Tolerando Dolore</span></span>, to announce the still more untenable
proposition, that pain is an evil. But Cicero demonstrated,
that its sufferings may be overcome, not by remembrance of
the silly Epicurean maxims,—<span class="tei tei-q">“Short if severe, and light if
long,”</span> but by fortitude and patience; and he accordingly censures
those philosophers, who have represented pain in too
formidable colours, and reproaches those poets, who have described
their heroes as yielding to its influence.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the third book, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Ægritudine Lenienda</span></span>, the author
treats of the best alleviations of sorrow. To foresee calamities,
and be prepared for them, is either to repel their assaults, or
to mitigate their severity. After they have occurred, we ought
to remember, that grieving is a folly which cannot avail us,
and that misfortunes are not peculiar to ourselves, but are the
common lot of humanity. The sorrow of which Cicero here
treats, seems chiefly that occasioned by deprivation of friends
and relatives, to which the recent loss of his daughter Tullia,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page242">[pg 242]</span><a name="Pg242" id="Pg242" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>and the composition of his treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Consolatione</span></span>, had probably
directed his attention.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The fourth book treats <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Reliquis animi Perturbationibus</span></span>,
including all those passions and vexations, which the author
considers as diseases of the soul. These he classes and defines—pointing
out, at the same time, the remedy or relief appropriate
to each disquietude. In the fifth book, in which he
attempts to prove that virtue alone is sufficient for perfect
felicity—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Virtutem ad beate vivendum se ipsâ esse contentam</span></span>—he
coincides more completely with the opinions of the
Stoics, than in his work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Finibus</span></span>, where he seems to assent,
to the Peripatetic doctrine, <span class="tei tei-q">“that though virtue be the
chief good, the perfection of the other qualities of nature enters
into the composition of supreme happiness.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In these Tusculan Disputations, which treat of the subjects
most important and subservient to the happiness of life, the
whole discourse is in the mouth of Tully himself;—the Auditor,
whose initial letter some editors have whimsically mistaken
for that of Atticus, being a mere man of straw. He is
set up to announce what is to be represented as an untenable
proposition: but after this duty is performed, no English hearer
or Welsh uncle could have listened with less dissent and interruption.
The great object of Cicero’s continued lectures, is
by fortifying the mind with practical and philosophical lessons,
adapted to the circumstances of life, to elevate us above
the influence of all its passions and pains.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The first conference, which is intended to diminish the
dread of death, is the best; but they are all agreeable, chiefly
from the frequent allusion to ancient fable, the events of Greek
and Roman history, and the memorable sayings of heroes and
sages. There is something in the very names of such men as
Plato and Epaminondas, which bestows a sanctity and fervour
on the page. The references also to the ancient Latin poets,
and the quotations from their works, particularly the tragic
dramas, give a beautiful richness to the whole composition;
and even on the driest topics, the mind is relieved by the recurrence
of extracts characteristic of the vigour of the Roman
Melpomene, who, though unfit, as in Greece,
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“To wake the soul by tender strokes of art,”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
long trod the stage with dignity and elevation.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Paradoxa</span></span>.—This tract contains a defence of six peculiar
opinions or paradoxes of the Stoics, somewhat of the description
of those which Cato was wont to promulgate in the Senate.
These are, that what is morally fitting (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">honestum</span></span>) is
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page243">[pg 243]</span><a name="Pg243" id="Pg243" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>alone good,—that the virtuous can want nothing for complete
happiness—that there are no degrees in crimes or good actions—that
every fool is mad—that the wise alone are wealthy—that
the wise man alone is free, and that every fool is a slave.
These absurd and quibbling positions the author supports, in
a manner certainly more ingenious than philosophical. The
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Paradoxa</span></span>, indeed, seem to have been written as a sort of exercise
of rhetorical wit, rather than as a serious disquisition in
philosophy; and each paradox is personally applied or directed
against an individual. There is no precision whatever
in the definitions; the author plays on the ambiguity of the
words, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">bonum</span></span> and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">dives</span></span>, and his arguments frequently degenerate
into particular examples, which are by no means adequate
to support his general proposition.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Naturâ Deorum</span></span>.—Of the various philosophical works
of Cicero, the most curious perhaps, and important, is that on
the Nature of the Gods. It is addressed to Brutus, and is written
in dialogue. This form of composition, besides the advantages
already pointed out, is peculiarly fitted for subjects
of delicacy and danger, where the author dreads to expose himself
to reproach or persecution. On this account chiefly it
seems to have been adopted by the disciples of Socrates.
That philosopher had fallen a victim to popular fury,—to
those imputations of impiety which have so often and so successfully
been repeated against philosophers. In the schools
of his disciples, a double doctrine seems to have been adopted
for the purpose of escaping persecution, and Plato probably
considered the form of dialogue as best calculated to secure
him from the imputations of his enemies. It was thus, in
later times, that Galileo endeavoured to shield himself from
the attacks of error and injustice, and imagined, that by presenting
his conclusions in the Platonic manner, he would shun
the malignant vigilance of the Court of Inquisition<a id="noteref_433" name="noteref_433" href="#note_433"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">433</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Naturâ Deorum</span></span>, the author presents
the doctrines of three of the most distinguished sects among
the ancients—the Epicureans, the Stoics, and the Academics—on
the important subject of the Nature of the Divine Essence,
and of Providence. He introduces three illustrious
persons of his country, each elucidating the tenets of the sect
that he preferred, and contending for them, doubtless, with
the chief arguments which the learning or talents of the author
himself could supply. Cicero represents himself as
hav<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page244">[pg 244]</span><a name="Pg244" id="Pg244" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>ing gone to the house of C. Cotta the Pontifex Maximus, whom
he found sitting in his study with C. Velleius, a Senator, who
professed the principles of Epicurus, and Q. Lucilius Balbus,
a supporter of the doctrines of the Stoics.—<span class="tei tei-q">“As soon as Cotta
saw me, <span class="tei tei-q">‘You are come,’</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">‘very seasonably, for I have
a dispute with Velleius upon an important subject, in which,
considering the nature of your studies, it is not improper for
you to join.’</span>—<span class="tei tei-q">‘Indeed,’</span> said I, <span class="tei tei-q">‘I am come very seasonably,
as you say, for here are three chiefs of the three principal
sects met together.’</span> ”</span> Cotta himself is a new Academic, and
he proceeds to inform Cicero that they were discoursing on
the nature of the gods, a topic which had always appeared to
him very obscure, and that therefore he had prevailed on Velleius
to state the sentiments of Epicurus upon the subject.
Velleius is requested to go on with his arguments; and after
recapitulating what he had already said, <span class="tei tei-q">“with the confidence
peculiar to his sect, dreading nothing so much as to seem to
doubt about anything, he began, as if he had just then descended
from the council of the gods<a id="noteref_434" name="noteref_434" href="#note_434"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">434</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The discourse of Velleius consists, in a considerable degree,
of raillery and declamations directed against the doctrines of
different sects, of which he enumerates a great variety, and
which supposes in Cicero extensive philosophical erudition, or
rather, perhaps, from the slight manner in which they are
passed over, that he had taken his account of them from some
ancient Diogenes Laertius, or Stanley<a id="noteref_435" name="noteref_435" href="#note_435"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">435</span></span></a>.—<span class="tei tei-q">“I have hitherto,”</span>
says Velleius, <span class="tei tei-q">“rather exposed the dreams of dotards than the
opinions of philosophers; and whoever considers how rashly
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page245">[pg 245]</span><a name="Pg245" id="Pg245" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>and inconsiderately their tenets are advanced, must entertain
a veneration for Epicurus, and rank him in the number of
those beings who are the subject of this dispute, for he alone
first founded the existence of the gods, on the impression
which nature herself hath made on the minds of men.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Velleius having concluded his discourse, (the remainder of
which can now have little interest as relating to the form of
the gods and their apathy,) Cotta, after some compliments to
him, enters on a confutation of what he had advanced; and,
while admitting that there are gods, he pronounces the reasons
given by Velleius for their existence to be altogether insufficient.
He then proceeds to attack the other positions of Velleius,
with regard to the form of the gods, and their exemption
from the labours of creation and providence. His arguments
against Anthropomorphism are excellent; and in reply to the
hypothesis of Epicurus concerning the indolence of the gods,
he inquires, <span class="tei tei-q">“What reason is there that men should worship
the gods, when the gods, as you say, not only do not regard
men, but are entirely careless of everything, and absolutely do
nothing? But they are, you say, of so glorious a nature, that
a wise man is induced by their excellence to adore them. Can
there be any glory in that nature, which only contemplates its
own happiness, and neither will do, nor does, nor ever did
anything? Besides, what piety is due to a being from whom
you receive nothing, or how are you indebted to him who bestows
no benefits?”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
When Cotta has concluded his refutation of Velleius, with
which the first book closes, Balbus is next requested to give
the sentiments of the Stoics, on the subject of the gods, to
which, making a slight excuse, he consents. His first argument
for their existence, after shortly alluding to the magnificence
of the world, and the prevalence of the doctrine, is <span class="tei tei-q">“the
frequent appearance of the gods themselves. In the war with
the Latins,”</span> he continues, <span class="tei tei-q">“when A. Posthumius, the Dictator,
attacked Octavius Mamilius, the Tusculan, at Regillus, Castor
and Pollux were seen fighting in our army on horseback,
and since that time the same offspring of Tyndarus gave notice
of the defeat of Perseus; for P. Vatienus, grandfather of
the present youth of that name, coming in the night to Rome,
from his government of Reate, two young men on white horses
appeared to him, and told him King Perseus was that day taken
prisoner. This news he carried to the Senate, who immediately
threw him into prison, for speaking inconsiderately on
a state affair; but when it was confirmed by letters from Paullus,
he was recompensed by the Senate with land and exemption.
The voices of the Fauns have been often heard, and
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page246">[pg 246]</span><a name="Pg246" id="Pg246" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>deities have appeared in forms so visible, that he who doubts
must be hardened in stupidity or impiety.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Balbus, after farther arguing for the existence of the gods,
from events consequent on auguries and auspices, proceeds to
what is more peculiarly the doctrine of the Stoics. He remarks,—<span class="tei tei-q">“that
Cleanthes, one of the most distinguished philosophers
of that sect, imputes the idea of the gods implanted
in the minds of men, to four causes—The first is, what I just
now mentioned, a pre-knowledge of future things: The second
is, the great advantages we enjoy from the temperature of the
air, the fertility of the earth, and the abundance of various
kinds of benefits: The third is, the terror with which the mind
is affected by thunder, tempests, snow, hail, devastation,
pestilence, earthquakes, often attended with hideous noises,
showers of stones, and rain like drops of blood. His fourth
cause,”</span> continues Balbus, <span class="tei tei-q">“and that the strongest, is drawn
from the regularity of the motion, and revolution of the heavens,
the variety, and beauty, and order of the sun, moon, and
stars; the appearance only of which is sufficient to convince
us they are not the effects of chance; as when we enter
into a house, a school, or court, and observe the exact order,
discipline, and method therein, we cannot suppose they are so
regulated without a cause, but must conclude there is some
one who commands, and to whom obedience is paid; so we
have much greater reason to think that such wonderful motions,
revolutions, and order of those many and great bodies,
no part of which is impaired by the vast infinity of age, are
governed by some intelligent being.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This argument is very well stated, but Balbus, in a considerable
degree, weakens its effect, by proceeding to contend,
that the world, or universe itself, (the stoical deity,) and its
most distinguished parts, the sun, moon, and stars, are possessed
of reason and wisdom. This he founds partly on a
metaphysical argument, and partly on the regularity, beauty,
and order of their motions.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Balbus, after various other remarks, enters on the topic of
the creation of the world, and its government by the providence
of the gods. He justly observes, that nothing can be
more absurd than to suppose that a world, so beautifully adorned,
could be formed by chance, or by a fortuitous concourse
of atoms<a id="noteref_436" name="noteref_436" href="#note_436"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">436</span></span></a>. <span class="tei tei-q">“He who believes this possible,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“may
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page247">[pg 247]</span><a name="Pg247" id="Pg247" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>as well believe, that if a great number of the one-and-twenty
letters, composed either of gold, or any other metal, were
thrown on the ground, they would fall into such order as legibly
to form the Annals of Ennius. I doubt whether fortune
could make a single verse of them.”</span> He quotes a very beautiful
passage from a now lost work of Aristotle, in which that
philosopher urges the argument that may be deduced from
providential design, with more soundness and imagination than
are usual with him. Balbus then proceeds to display the
marks of deliberate plan in the universe, beginning with astronomy.
In treating of the constellations, he makes great
use of Cicero’s poetical version of Aratus, much of which he
is supposed, perhaps with little probability, or modesty in the
author, to have by heart; and, accordingly, we are favoured
with a considerable number of these verses. He also adduces
manifold proofs of design and sovereign wisdom, from a consideration
of plants, land animals, fishes, and the structure of
the human body; a subject on which Cicero discovers more
anatomical knowledge than one should have expected. Balbus
also contends that the gods not only provide for mankind
universally, but for individuals. <span class="tei tei-q">“The frequent appearances
of the gods,”</span> he observes, <span class="tei tei-q">“demonstrate their regard for cities
and particular men. This, indeed, is also apparent from the
foreknowledge of events, which we receive either sleeping or
waking.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cicero makes Balbus, in the conclusion of his discourse, express
but little confidence in his own arguments.—<span class="tei tei-q">“This is
almost the whole,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“that has occurred to my mind,
on the nature of the gods, and that I thought proper to advance.
Do you, Cotta, if I may advise, defend the same cause.
Remember that in Rome you keep the first rank—remember
you are Pontifex. It is a pernicious and impious custom, either
seriously or seemingly to argue against the gods.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the third book of this very remarkable work, Cicero exhibits
Cotta as refuting the doctrines of Balbus. <span class="tei tei-q">“But before
I enter on the subject,”</span> says Cotta, <span class="tei tei-q">“I have a word to say concerning
myself; for I am greatly influenced by your authority,
and your exhortation at the conclusion of your discourse, to
remember I was Cotta, and Pontifex; by which, I presume,
you intimated that I should defend the religion and
ceremo<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page248">[pg 248]</span><a name="Pg248" id="Pg248" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>nies which we received from our ancestors: Truly, I always
have, and always will defend them, nor shall the arguments,
either of the learned or unlearned, ever remove the opinions I
have imbibed concerning the worship of the immortal gods.
In matters of religion, I submit to the rules of the High Priests,
T. Coruncanius, P. Scipio, and P. Scævola. These, Balbus,”</span>
continues he, <span class="tei tei-q">“are my sentiments, both as a priest and Cotta.
But you must bring me to your opinion by the force of your
reason; for a philosopher should prove to me the religion he
would have me embrace; but I must believe without proof the
religion of our ancestors.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The Pontifex thus professing to believe the existence of the
gods merely on the authority of his ancestors, proceeds to ridicule
this very authority. He represents the appearances of
Castor and Pollux, and those others adduced by Balbus, as idle
tales. <span class="tei tei-q">“Do you take these for fabulous stories?”</span> says Balbus.
<span class="tei tei-q">“Is not the temple built by Posthumius, in honour of Castor
and Pollux, to be seen in the Forum? Is not the decree of
the Senate concerning Vatienus still subsisting? Ought not
such authorities to move you?”</span>—<span class="tei tei-q">“You oppose me,”</span> replies
Cotta, <span class="tei tei-q">“with stories; but I ask reasons of you.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
A chasm here follows in the original, in which Cotta probably
stated the reasons of his scepticism, in spite of the acts of
the Senate, and so many public memorials of supernatural
facts. <span class="tei tei-q">“You believe,”</span> continues Cotta, <span class="tei tei-q">“that the Decii, in
devoting themselves to death, appeased the gods. How great,
then, was the iniquity of the gods, that they could not be appeased,
but at the price of such noble blood!—As to the voice
of the Fauns, I never heard it; if you assure me you have, I
shall believe you; though I am absolutely ignorant what a
Faun is. Truly, Balbus, you have not yet proved the existence
of the gods. I believe it, indeed, but not from any arguments
of the Stoics. Cleanthes, you said, attributes the idea that
men have of the gods to four causes. The first is a foreknowledge
of future events; the second,—tempests and other
shocks of nature; the third,—the utility and plenty of things
we enjoy; the fourth,—the invariable order of the stars
and heavens. Foreknowledge I have already answered. With
regard to tempests in the air, the sea, and the earth, I own, that
many people are affrighted by them, and imagine that the
immortal gods are the authors of them. But the question is
not, whether there be people who believe there are gods, but
whether there are gods or not. As to the two other causes of
Cleanthes, one of which is derived from the plenty we enjoy,
the other from the invariable order of the seasons and heavens,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page249">[pg 249]</span><a name="Pg249" id="Pg249" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>I shall treat on them when I answer your discourse concerning
the providence of the gods.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the meantime, Cotta goes on to refute the Stoical notions
with regard to the reason and understanding attributed to the
sun, moon, and stars. He then proceeds to controvert, and
occasionally to ridicule, the opinions entertained of numerous
heathen gods; the three Jupiters, and other deities, and sons
of deities.—<span class="tei tei-q">“You call Jupiter and Neptune gods,”</span> says he;
<span class="tei tei-q">“their brother Pluto, then, is one; Charon, also, and Cerberus,
are gods, but that cannot be allowed. Nor can Pluto be placed
among the deities; how then can his brothers?”</span> Cotta next
ridicules the Stoics for the delight they take in the explication
of fables, and in the etymology of names; after which he says,
<span class="tei tei-q">“Let us proceed to the two other parts of our dispute. 1st,
Whether there is a Divine Providence that governs the world?
and, lastly, Whether that Providence particularly regards mankind?
For these are the remaining propositions of your
discourse.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There follows a considerable <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">hiatus</span></span> in the original, so that
we are deprived of all the arguments of Cotta on the proposition
maintained by Balbus, that there is a Divine Providence
which governs the world. At the end of this chasm, we find
him quoting long passages from tragedies, and arguing
against the advantages of reason, from the ill use which has
been made of it. He then adduces a number of instances,
drawn from history and observation, of fortunate vice, and of
wrecked and ruined virtue, in order to overturn the doctrine of
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">particular providence</span></span>; contending, that as no family or state
can be supposed to be formed with any judgment or discipline,
if there are no rewards for good actions, or punishment
for bad, so we cannot believe that a Divine Providence regulates
the world, when there is no distinction between the honest
and the wicked.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-q">“This,”</span> concludes Cotta, <span class="tei tei-q">“is the purport of what I had to
say concerning the nature of the gods, not with a design to
destroy their existence, but merely to show what an obscure
point it is, and with what difficulties an explanation of it is
attended.”</span> Balbus observing that Cotta had finished his discourse,
<span class="tei tei-q">“You have been very severe,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“against the
being of a Divine Providence, a doctrine established by the
Stoics, with piety and wisdom; but, as it grows too late, I
shall defer my answer to another day.”</span>—<span class="tei tei-q">“There is nothing,”</span>
replied Cotta, <span class="tei tei-q">“I desire more than to be confuted.”</span>—<span class="tei tei-q">“The
conversation ended here, and we parted. Velleius judged that
the arguments of Cotta were the truest, but those of Balbus
seemed to me to have the greater probability.”</span>
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page250">[pg 250]</span><a name="Pg250" id="Pg250" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It seems likely that this profession or pretext, that the discourse
is left unfinished, may (like the occasional apologies
of Cotta) be introduced to save appearances<a id="noteref_437" name="noteref_437" href="#note_437"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">437</span></span></a>. It is evident,
however, that Cicero intended to add, at least, new prefaces
to the two latter books of this work, probably from suspecting,
as he went on, that the discourses are too long to have
taken place in one day, as they are now represented. Balbus
says, in the second book, <span class="tei tei-q">“Velut a te ipso, hesterno die dictum
est<a id="noteref_438" name="noteref_438" href="#note_438"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">438</span></span></a>.”</span> Fulvius Ursinus had remarked that this was an
inadvertence, either in Cicero or a transcriber, as the discourse
is continued throughout the same day. That it was
not owing to a transcriber, or to any inadvertence in Cicero,
but to a design of altering the introductions to the second and
third books, appears from a passage in book third, where
Cotta says to Balbus, <span class="tei tei-q">“Omniaque, quæ a te <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">nudiustertius</span></span>
dicta sunt<a id="noteref_439" name="noteref_439" href="#note_439"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">439</span></span></a>.”</span> Now, it is extremely unlikely that there should
have been two such instances of inadvertency in the author,
or carelessness in the copyist.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The work on the Nature of the Gods, though in many
respects a most valuable production, and a convincing proof
of the extensive learning of its author, gives a melancholy
picture of the state of his mind. Unfitted to bear adversity,
and borne down by the calamities of his country, and the
death of his beloved daughter, (misfortunes of which he often
complains,) Cicero seems to have become a sceptic, and
occasionally to have doubted even of a superintending Providence.
Warburton appears to be right in supposing, that
Cicero was advanced in years before he seriously adopted the
sceptical opinions of the new Academy. <span class="tei tei-q">“This farther appears,”</span>
says he, after some remarks on this head, <span class="tei tei-q">“from a
place in his Nature of the Gods, where he says, that his
espousing the new Academy of a sudden, was a thing altogether
unlooked for<a id="noteref_440" name="noteref_440" href="#note_440"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">440</span></span></a>. The change, then, was late, and after
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page251">[pg 251]</span><a name="Pg251" id="Pg251" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>the ruin of the republic, when Cicero retired from business,
and had leisure in his recess to plan and execute this noble
undertaking. So that a learned critic appears to have been
mistaken, when he supposed the choice of the new Academy
was made in his youth. <span class="tei tei-q">‘This sect,’</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">‘did best agree
with the vast genius, and ambitious spirit, of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">young Cicero</span></span><a id="noteref_441" name="noteref_441" href="#note_441"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">441</span></span></a>.’</span> ”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It appears not, however, to have been, as Warburton supposes,
altogether from a systematic plan, of explaining to his
countrymen the philosophy of the Greeks, that Cicero became
a sceptic; but partly from gloomy views of nature and providence.
It seems difficult otherwise to account for the circumstance,
that Cotta, an ancient and venerable Consul, the
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pontifex</span></span> of the metropolis of the world, should be introduced
as contending, even against an Epicurean, for the non-existence
of the gods. Lord Bolingbroke has justly remarked,
<span class="tei tei-q">“that Cotta disputes so vehemently, and his arguments extend
so far, that Tully makes his own brother accuse him directly,
and himself by consequence indirectly, of atheism.—<span class="tei tei-q">‘Studio
contra Stoicos disserendi deos mihi videtur funditus tollere.’</span>
Now, what says Tully in his own name? He tells his brother
that Cotta disputes in that manner, rather to confute the
Stoics than to destroy the religion of mankind.—<span class="tei tei-q">‘Magis quam
ut hominum deleat religionem.’</span> But Quintus answers, that
is, Tully makes him answer, he was not the bubble of an artifice,
employed to save the appearance of departing from the
public religious institutions. <span class="tei tei-q">‘Ne communi jure migrare
videatur<a id="noteref_442" name="noteref_442" href="#note_442"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">442</span></span></a>.’</span> ”</span> Cotta, indeed, goes so far in his attack on Providence,
that Lord Bolingbroke, who is not himself a model
of orthodoxy, takes up the other side of the question against
the Roman Pontiff, and pleads the cause of Providence with
no little reason and eloquence.<a id="noteref_443" name="noteref_443" href="#note_443"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">443</span></span></a>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the foregoing analysis, or abridgment of the work on the
Nature of the Gods, it will have been remarked, that two chasms
occur in the argument of Cotta. Olivet enters into some discussion
with regard to the latter and larger chasm. <span class="tei tei-q">“I cannot,”</span>
says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“see any justice in the accusation against the primitive
Christians, of having torn this passage out of all the MSS.
What appearance is there, that through a pious motive they
should have erased this any more than many others in the
same book, which they must undoubtedly have looked upon
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page252">[pg 252]</span><a name="Pg252" id="Pg252" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>as no less pernicious?”</span> Olivet seems inclined to suspect the
Pagans; but, in my opinion, the chasms in the discourse of
Cotta, if not accidental, are to be attributed rather to Christian
than pagan zeal. Arnobius, indeed, speaking of this
work, says, That many were of opinion that it ought to have
been destroyed by the Roman Senate, as the Christian faith
might be approved by it, and the authority of antiquity subverted<a id="noteref_444" name="noteref_444" href="#note_444"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">444</span></span></a>.
There is no evidence, however, that any such destruction
or mutilation was attempted by the Pagans; and we
find that the satire directed against the heathen deities has
been permitted to remain, while the chasms intervene in portions
of the work, which might have been supposed by a pious
zealot, to bear, in some measure, against the Christian, as well
as the Pagan faith. In the first of them, the Pontifex begins,
and is proceeding to contend, that in spite of Acts of the
Senate, temples, statues, and other commemorations of miraculous
circumstances, all such prodigies were nothing but
mere fables, however solemnly attested, or generally believed.
Now, the transcriber might fear, lest a similar inference should
be drawn by the sceptic, to that which has in fact been deduced
by the English translator of this work, in the following
passage of a note:—<span class="tei tei-q">“Hence we see what little credit ought
to be paid to facts, said to be done out of the ordinary course
of nature. These miracles are well attested: They were
recorded in the annals of a great people—believed by many
learned and otherwise sagacious persons, and received as
religious truths by the populace; but the testimonies of ancient
records, the credulity of some learned men, and the implicit
faith of the vulgar, can never prove that to have been, which
is impossible in the nature of things ever to be.”</span> At the
beginning of the other and larger chasm, Cotta was proceeding
to argue against the proposition of the Stoics, that there is a
Divine Providence which governs the world. Now, there is
a considerable analogy between the system of the ancient
Stoics, and the Christian scheme of Providence, both in the
theoretical doctrine, and in the practical inference, of the propriety
of a cheerful and unqualified submission to the chain
of events—to the dispensations of nature in the Stoical, and
of God in the purer doctrine. To Christian zeal, therefore,
rather than to pagan prudence, we must attribute the two
chasms which now intervene in the discourse of Cotta.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the remarks which have been now offered on this work,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Naturâ Deorum</span></span>, I trust I have brought no unfounded or
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page253">[pg 253]</span><a name="Pg253" id="Pg253" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>uncharitable accusation against Cicero. He was a person, at
least in his own age and country, of unrivalled talents and
learning—he was a great, and, on the whole, a good man—but
his mind was sensitive, and feeble against misfortune.
There are æras, and monuments perhaps in every æra, when
we are ready to exclaim with Brutus, <span class="tei tei-q">“That virtue is an
empty name:”</span> And the doubts and darkness of such a mind
as that of Cicero, enriched with all the powers of genius, and
all the treasures of philosophy, afford a new proof of the
necessity for the appearance of that Divine Messenger, who
was then on the eve of descending upon earth.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Divinatione</span></span>.—The long account which has been given
of the dialogue on the Nature of the Gods, renders it unnecessary
to say much on the work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Divinatione</span></span>. This treatise
may be considered, in some measure, as a supplement to
that <span class="tei tei-hi"><a name="corr253" id="corr253" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr"><span style="font-style: italic">De Naturâ Deorum</span></span></span>. The religion of the Romans consisted
of two different branches—the worship of the gods, and
the observation of the signs by which their will was supposed
to be revealed. Cicero having already discussed what related
to the nature and worship of the gods, a treatise on Divination
formed a natural continuation of the subject<a id="noteref_445" name="noteref_445" href="#note_445"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">445</span></span></a>. In his work
on this topic, which was one almost peculiar to the Romans,
Cicero professes to relate the substance of a conversation held
at Tusculum with his brother, in which Quintus, on the principles
of the Stoics, supported the credibility of divination,
while Cicero himself controverted it. The dialogue consists
of two books, the first of which comprehends an enumeration
by Quintus of the different kinds or classes of divination, with
the reasons or presumptions in their favour. The second
book contains a refutation by Cicero of his brother’s arguments.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Quintus, while walking with his brother in the Lyceum at
Tusculum, begins his observations by stating, that he had
read the third book which Cicero had lately written, on the
Nature of the Gods, in which Cotta seemed to contend for
atheism, but had by no means been able to refute Balbus.
He remarks, at the same time, that the subject of divination
had not been treated of in these books, perhaps in order that
it might be separately discussed more fully, and that he would
gladly, if his brother had leisure and inclination, state his own
opinions on the subject. The answer of Cicero is very
noble.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Ego vero, inquam, Philosophiæ, Quinte, semper
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page254">[pg 254]</span><a name="Pg254" id="Pg254" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>vaco. Hoc autem tempore, quum sit nihil aliud quod libenter
agere possim multo magis aveo audire de divinatione quid
sentias.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Quintus, after observing that divinations of various kinds
have been common among all people, remarks, and afterwards
frequently repeats, that it is no argument against different
modes of divination, that we cannot explain how or why certain
things happen. It is sufficient, that we know from experience
and history, that they do happen<a id="noteref_446" name="noteref_446" href="#note_446"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">446</span></span></a>. He contends that
Cicero himself supports the doctrine of divination, in the poem
on his Consulship, from which he quotes a long passage, sufficient
to console us for the loss of that work. He argues, that
although events may not always succeed as predicted, it does
not follow that divination is not an art, more than that medicine
is not an art, because cures may not always be effected. In
the course of this book we have a complete account of the
state contrivances which were practised by the Roman government,
to instil among the people those hopes and fears whereby
it regulated public opinion, in which view it has been justly
termed a chapter in the history of man. The great charm,
however, of the first book, consists in the number of histories
adduced by Quintus, in proof of the truth of different kinds of
omens, dreams, portents, and divinations.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Negemus omnia,”</span>
says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“comburamus annales.”</span> He states various circumstances
consistent with his and his brother’s own knowledge;
and, among others, two remarkable dreams, one of which had
occurred to Cicero, and one to himself. He asks if the Greek
history be also a fable.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Num etiam Græcorum historia
mentita est?”</span> and, in short, throughout takes the following
high ground:—<span class="tei tei-q">“Quid est, igitur, cur dubitandum sit, quin sint
ea, quæ disputavi, verissima? Si ratio mecum facit, si eventa,
si populi, si nationes, si Græci, si barbari, si majores etiam
nostri, si summi philosophi, si poetæ, et sapientissimi viri qui
res publicas constituerunt, qui urbes condiderunt; si denique
hoc semper ita putatum est: an dum bestiæ loquantur, expectamus,
hominum consentiente auctoritate, contenti non sumus<a id="noteref_447" name="noteref_447" href="#note_447"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">447</span></span></a>?”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The second book of this work is introduced by a preface, in
which Cicero enumerates the philosophical treatises which he
had lately written. He then proceeds to state, that at the conclusion
of the discourse of Quintus, which was held while they
were walking in the Lyceum, they sat down in the library, and
he began to reply to his brother’s arguments. His commencement
is uncommonly beautiful.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Atque ego; Accurate tu
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page255">[pg 255]</span><a name="Pg255" id="Pg255" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>quidem, inquam, Quinte, et Stoice Stoicorum sententiam
defendisti: quodque me maxime delectat, plurimis nostris
exemplis usus es, et iis quidem claris et illustribus. Dicendum
est mihi igitur ad ea, quæ sunt a te dicta, sed ita, nihil ut
affirmem, quæram omnia, dubitans plerumque, et mihi ipse
diffidens<a id="noteref_448" name="noteref_448" href="#note_448"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">448</span></span></a>.”</span> It is unnecessary to give any summary of the
arguments of Cicero against auguries, auspices, astrology, lots,
dreams, and every species of omens and prodigies. His discourse
is a masterpiece of reasoning; and if sufficiently studied
during the dark ages of Europe, would have sufficed, in a great
degree, to have prevented or dispelled the superstitious gloom.
Nothing can be finer than the concluding chapter on the evils
of superstition, and Cicero’s efforts to extirpate it, without
injuring religion. The whole thread, too, of his argumentative
eloquence, is interwoven and strengthened by curious and
interesting stories. As a specimen of the agreeable manner
in which these are introduced, the twenty-fourth chapter may
be cited:—<span class="tei tei-q">“Vetus autem illud Catonis admodum scitum est,
qui mirari se aiebat, quod non rideret haruspex, haruspicem
quum vidisset. Quota enim quæque res evenit prædicta ab
ipsis? Aut si evenit quippiam, quid afferri potest, cur non
casu id evenerit? Rex Prusias, quum Annibali apud eum
exsulanti depugnari placeret, negabat se audere, quod exta
prohiberent. An tu, inquit, carunculæ vitulinæ mavis, quam
imperatori veteri, credere? Quid? Ipse Cæsar, quum a summo
haruspice moneretur, ne in Africam ante brumam transmitteret,
nonne transmisit? Quod ni fecisset, uno in loco omnes
adversariorum copiæ convenissent. Quid ego haruspicum
responsa commemorem, (possum equidem innumerabilia,) quæ
aut nullos habuerunt exitus, aut contrarios? Hoc civili bello,
Dii Immortales! Quam multa luserunt—quæ nobis in Græciam
Româ responsa haruspicum missa sunt? Quæ dicta
Pompeio? Etenim ille admodum extis et ostentis movebatur.
Non lubet commemorare, nec vero necesse est, tibi præsertim,
qui interfuisti. Vides tamen, omnia fere contra, ac dicta sunt,
evenisse.”</span> One great charm of all the philosophical works of
Cicero, and particularly of this treatise, consists in the anecdotes
with which they abound. This practice of intermingling
histories, might have been partly owing to Tully’s habits as
a pleader—partly to the works having been composed in <span class="tei tei-q">“narrative
old age.”</span> His moral conclusions seem thus occasionally
to have the certainty of physical experiments, by the support
which they receive from occurrences, suggested to him by
his wide experience; while, at the same time,—
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page256">[pg 256]</span><a name="Pg256" id="Pg256" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“His candid style, like a clean stream doth slide,</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">And his bright fancy, all the way,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Doth like the sun-shine on it play<a id="noteref_449" name="noteref_449" href="#note_449"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">449</span></span></a>.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Fato</span></span>.—This tract, which is the last of Cicero’s philosophical
works, treats of a subject which occupied as important
a place in the metaphysics and theology of the ancients, as
free will and necessity have filled in modern speculation. The
dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Fato</span></span> is held in the villa of Cicero, called the
Puteolan or the Academia, which was situated on the shore of
Baiæ, between the lake Avernus and the harbour of Puteoli.
It stood in the curve of the bay, and almost on the beach, so
as to enjoy the breezes and murmurs of the sea. The house
was built according to the plan of the Academy at Athens,
being adorned with a portico and grove, for the purposes of
philosophical conference<a id="noteref_450" name="noteref_450" href="#note_450"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">450</span></span></a>; and with a gallery, which surrounded
a square court in the centre. <span class="tei tei-q">“Twelve or thirteen
arches of the Puteolan villa,”</span> says Mr Kelsall, <span class="tei tei-q">“are still seen
on the side next the vineyard, and, intermixed as they are with
trees, are very picturesque seen from the sea. These ruins
are about one mile from Pozzuolo, and have always been styled
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">l’Academia di Cicerone</span></span>. Pliny is very circumstantial in the
description of the site, <span class="tei tei-q">‘<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ab Averno lacu Puteolos tendentibus
imposita littori</span></span>.’</span> The classical traveller will not forget that the
Puteolan villa is the scene of some of the orator’s philosophical
works. I searched in vain for the mineral spring commemorated
by Laurea Tullius, in the well-known complimentary
verses preserved by Pliny; for it was defaced by the convulsions
which the whole of this tract experienced in the 16th
century, so poetically described in Gray’s hexameters.”</span> After
the death of Cicero, the villa was acquired by Antistius Vetus,
who repaired and improved it. It was subsequently possessed
by the Emperor Hadrian, who, while expiring here<a id="noteref_451" name="noteref_451" href="#note_451"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">451</span></span></a>, breathed
out the celebrated address to his fleeting, fluttering soul, on
its approaching departure for those cold and pallid regions,
that must have formed in his fancy such a gloomy contrast to
the glowing sunshine and animated shore which he left with
so much reluctance.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The dialogue is held between Cicero and Hirtius, on one
of the many occasions on which they met to consult concerning
the situation of public affairs. Hirtius was the author of
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page257">[pg 257]</span><a name="Pg257" id="Pg257" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>the Commentaries on the Civil Wars, and perished a few
months afterwards, at the battle of Modena, in the moment of
victory. The wonderful events which had recently occurred,
and the miserable fate of so many of the greatest and most
powerful of the Romans, naturally introduced a conversation
on destiny. We have now neither the commencement nor
conclusion of the dialogue; but some critics have supposed
that it originally consisted of two books, and that the fragment
we at present possess formed part of the second book—an
opinion which seems justified by a passage in the seventeenth
chapter of the second book, where the first conversation
is cited. Others, however, refer these words to a separate and
previous work on Fate. The part of the dialogue now extant,
contains a refutation of the doctrine of Chrysippus the Stoic,
which was that of fatality. <span class="tei tei-q">“The spot,”</span> says Eustace, <span class="tei tei-q">“the
subject, the speakers, both fated to perish in so short a time,
during the contest which they both foresaw, and endeavoured
in vain to avert, were circumstances which give a peculiar interest
to this dialogue, and increase our regret that it has not
reached us in a less mutilated state<a id="noteref_452" name="noteref_452" href="#note_452"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">452</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
I have now enumerated what may be strictly regarded as the
philosophical and theological writings of Cicero. Some of
the advantages to be derived from these productions, have
already been pointed out during our progress. But on a consideration
of the whole, it is manifest that the chief profit accruing
from them, is the satisfactory evidence which they
afford of the little reason we have to regret the loss of the
writings of Zeno, Cleanthes, Chrysippus, and other Greek philosophers.
The intrinsic value of these works of Cicero, consists
chiefly in what may be called the Roman portion of them—in
the anecdotes of distinguished Romans, and of the customs
and opinions of that sovereign people.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
We now proceed to the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">moral</span></span> writings of Cicero, of which
the most important is the work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Officiis</span></span>. The ancient
Romans had but an imperfect notion of moral obligations;
their virtues were more stern than amiable, and their ardent
exclusive patriotism restricted the wide claims of philanthropy,
on the one hand, and of domestic duties, on the other. Panætius,
a Greek philosopher, who resided at Rome, in the time of
Scipio, wrote a book entitled <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">Περι Καθηκοντος</span></span>. He divided his
subject according to the threefold considerations which he
conceived should operate in determining our resolutions with
regard to the performance of moral duties; 1. Whether the
thing itself be virtuous or shameful; 2. Whether it conduce to
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page258">[pg 258]</span><a name="Pg258" id="Pg258" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>utility and the enjoyment of life; 3. What choice is to be
made when an apparent utility seems to clash with virtue.
Cicero followed nearly the same arrangement. In the first
book he treats of what is virtuous in itself, and shows in what
manner our duties are founded in morality and virtue—in the
right perception of truth, justice, fortitude, and decorum;
which four qualities are referred to as the constituent parts of
virtue, and the sources from which all our duties are drawn.
In the second book, the author enlarges on those duties which
relate to utility, the improvement of life, and the means employed
for the attainment of wealth and power. This division
of the work principally regards political advancement, and the
honourable means of gaining popularity, as generosity, courtesy,
and eloquence. Thus far Cicero had, in all probability,
closely followed the steps of Panætius. Garve, in his commentary
on this work<a id="noteref_453" name="noteref_453" href="#note_453"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">453</span></span></a>, remarks, that it is quite clear, when he
comes to the more subtle and philosophic parts of his subject,
that Cicero translates from the Greek, and that he has not
always found words in his own language to express the nicer
distinctions of the Greek schools. The work of Panætius,
however, was left imperfect, and did not treat of the third
part of the subject, the choice and distinction to be made when
there was a jarring or inconsistency between virtue and utility.
On this topic, accordingly, Cicero was left to his own
resources. The discussion, of course, relates only to the subordinate
duties, as the true and undoubted <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">honestum</span></span> never
can be put in competition with private advantage, or be violated
for its sake. As to the minor duties, the great maxim
inculcated is that nothing should be accounted useful or profitable
but what is strictly virtuous, and that, in fact, there
ought to be no separation of the principles of virtue and utility.
Cicero enters into some discussion, however, and affords
some rules to enable us to form a just estimate of both in cases
of doubt, where seeming utility comes into competition with
virtue. Accordingly, he proposes and decides a good many
questions in casuistry, in order to fix in what situations one
may seek private gain with honour. He takes his examples
from Roman history, and particularly considers the case of
Regulus in the obligation of his oath, and the advice which he
gave to the Roman Senate. The author disclaims having been
indebted to any preceding writers on this subject; but it appears,
from what he afterwards states, that the sixth book of
the work of Hecato, a scholar of Panætius, was full of
ques<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page259">[pg 259]</span><a name="Pg259" id="Pg259" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>tions of this kind: As, for example—If something must be
thrown into the sea to lighten a vessel in a storm, whether one
should sacrifice a valuable horse, or a worthless slave? Whether,
if, during a shipwreck, a fool has got hold of a plank, a
wise man ought to take it from him, if he be able? If one,
unknowingly, receives bad money for his goods, may he pay it
away to a third hand, after he is aware that it is bad? Diogenes,
it seems, one of the three philosophic ambassadors who
came to Rome from Athens, in the end of the sixth century,
maintained the affirmative of this last proposition.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The subject being too extensive for dialogue, (the form of
his other philosophical treatises,) the author has addressed
the work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Officiis</span></span> to his son, and has represented it as written
for his instruction. <span class="tei tei-q">“It is,”</span> says Kelsall, <span class="tei tei-q">“the noblest
present ever made by a parent to a child.”</span> Cicero declares,
that he intended to treat in it of all the duties<a id="noteref_454" name="noteref_454" href="#note_454"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">454</span></span></a>; but it is generally
considered to have been chiefly drawn up as a manual
of political morality, and as a guide to young Romans of his
son’s age and distinction, which might enable them to attain
political eminence, and to tread with innocence and safety
<span class="tei tei-q">“the slippery steeps of power.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Senectute</span></span>.——
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“O Thou all eloquent, whose mighty mind</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Streams from the depths of ages on mankind,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Streams like the day—who angel-like hast shed</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Thy full effulgence on the hoary head;</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Speaking in Cato’s venerable voice—</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Look up and faint not—faint not, but rejoice”</span>—</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">From thy Elysium guide us<a id="noteref_455" name="noteref_455" href="#note_455"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">455</span></span></a>.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Senectute</span></span> is not properly a dialogue, but a
continued discourse, delivered by Cato the Censor, at the request
of Scipio and Lælius. It is, however, one of the most
interesting pieces of the kind which have descended to us
from antiquity; and no reader can wonder that Cicero experienced
such pleasure in its composition, that the delightful
employment, not only, as he says, made him forget the infirmities
of old age, but rendered that portion of existence
agreeable. In consequence of the period of life to which Cicero
had attained, at the time of its composition, and the
circumstances in which he was then placed, it must, indeed,
have been penned with peculiar interest and feeling. It was
written by him in his 63d year, and is addressed to his friend
Atticus, (who reached the same term of existence,) with a
view of rendering to both the accumulating burdens of age as
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page260">[pg 260]</span><a name="Pg260" id="Pg260" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>light as possible. In order to give his precepts the greater
force, he represents them as delivered by the elder Cato,
(while flourishing in the eighty-fourth year of a vigorous and
useful old age,) on occasion of young Scipio and Lælius expressing
their admiration at the wonderful ease with which
he still bore the load of life. This affords the author an opportunity
of entering into a full explanation of his ideas on
the subject. His great object is to show that the closing period
of life may be rendered, not only tolerable, but comfortable,
by internal resources of happiness. He reduces those
causes which are commonly supposed to constitute the infelicity
of advanced age, under four general heads:—That it
incapacitates from mingling in the affairs of the world—that
it produces infirmities of body—that it disqualifies for the enjoyment
of sensual gratifications—and that it brings us to the
verge of death. Some of these supposed disadvantages, he
maintains, are imaginary, and for any real pleasures of which
old men are deprived, others more refined and higher may be
substituted. The whole work is agreeably diversified and
illustrated by examples of eminent Roman citizens, who had
passed a respected and agreeable evening of life. Indeed, so
much is said of those individuals who reached a happy old
age, that it may rather be styled a Treatise on Old Men, than
on Old Age. On the last point, the near approach of death,
it is argued, conformably to the first book of the Tusculan
Questions, that if death extinguish the soul’s existence, it is
utterly to be disregarded, but much to be desired, if it convey
her to a happier region. The apprehension of future
punishment, as in the Tusculan Disputations, is laid entirely
aside, and it is assumed as a principle, that, after death, we
either shall not be miserable, or be superlatively happy. In
other respects, the tract <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Senectute</span></span> almost seems a confutation
of the first book of the Tusculan Questions, which is
chiefly occupied in showing the wretchedness of long-protracted
existence. The sentiments put into the mouth of Cato,
are acknowledged by Cicero as his own; but, notwithstanding
this, and also a more elegant and polished style of composition
than could be expected from the Censor, many characteristics
of his life, conversation, and manners, are brought
before us—his talk is a little boastful, and his sternness, though
softened down by old age into an agreeable gossipping garrulity,
is still visible; and, on the whole, the discourse is so
managed, that we experience, in reading it, something of that
complaisant respect, which we feel in intercourse with a venerable
old man, who has around him so much of the life to
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page261">[pg 261]</span><a name="Pg261" id="Pg261" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>come, as to be purified at least from the grosser desires of
this lower world.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It has been remarked as extraordinary, that, amidst the anxious
enumeration of the comforts of age, those arising from
domestic society are not mentioned by Cicero; but his favourite
daughter Tullia was now no more, and the husband of
Terentia, the father of Marcus Cicero, and the father-in-law
of Dolabella, may have felt something on that subject, of
which he was willing to spare himself the recollection. But
though he has omitted what we number among its chief consolations,
still he has represented advanced age under too
favourable a view. He denies, for instance, that the memory
is impaired by it—asserting, that everything continues to be
remembered, in which we take an interest, for that no old
man ever forgot where he had concealed his treasure. He
has, besides, only treated of an old age distinguished by deeds
or learning, terminating a life great and glorious in the eyes
of men. The table of the old man whom he describes, is
cheered by numerous friends, and his presence, wherever he
appears, is hailed by clients and dependants. All his examples
are drawn from the higher and better walks of life. In
the venerable picture of the Censor, we have no traces of
second childhood, or of the slippered pantaloon, or of that
melancholy and almost frightful representation, in the tenth
satire of Juvenal. But even persons of the station, and dignity,
and talents of Cato, are, in old age, liable to weaknesses
and misfortunes, with which the pleasing portrait, that Tully
has drawn, is in no way disfigured:—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“In life’s last scene, what prodigies surprise,</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Fears of the brave, and follies of the wise!</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">From Marlborough’s eyes the tears of dotage flow,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">And Swift expires a driveller and a show.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Senectute</span></span> has been versified by Denham,
under the title of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Cato Major</span></span>. The subject of the evils of
old age is divided, as by Cicero, into four parts. <span class="tei tei-q">“I can neither,”</span>
says he, in his preface, <span class="tei tei-q">“call this piece Tully’s nor my
own, being much altered from the original, not only by the
change of the style, but by addition and subtraction.”</span> In
fact, the fine sentiments are Cicero’s—the doggerel English
verse, into which he has converted Cicero’s classical prose,
his own. The fourth part, on the approach of death, is that
which is best versified.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This tract is also the model of the dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Spurinna, or
the Comforts of Old Age</span></span>, by Sir Thomas Bernard. Hough,
Bishop of Worcester, who is in his ninetieth year at the date
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page262">[pg 262]</span><a name="Pg262" id="Pg262" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>of the conference, supposed to be held in 1739, is the Cato
of the dialogue. The other interlocutors are Gibson, Bishop
of London, and Mr Lyttleton, subsequently Lord Lyttleton.
After considering, in the same manner as Cicero, the disadvantages
of old age, the English author proceeds to treat of
its advantages, and the best mode of increasing its comforts.
Many ideas and arguments are derived from Cicero; but
among the consolations of advanced age, the promises of revelation
concerning a future state of happiness, to which the
Roman was a stranger, are prominently brought forward, and
the illustrations are chiefly drawn from British, instead of
Grecian or Roman history.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Amicitiâ</span></span>.—In this, as in all his other dialogues, Cicero
has most judiciously selected the persons whom he introduces
as speakers. They were men of eminence in the state; and
though deceased, the Romans had such a just veneration for
their ancestors, that they would listen with the utmost interest
even to the supposed conversation of the ancient heroes or
sages of their country. Such illustrious names bestowed additional
dignity on what was delivered, and even now affect
us with sentiments of veneration far superior to that which is
felt for the itinerant sophists, who, with the exception of Socrates,
are the chief speakers in the dialogues of Plato.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The memorable and hereditary friendship which subsisted
between Lælius and the younger Scipio Africanus, rendered
them the most suitable characters from whom the sentiments
expressed on this delightful topic could be supposed to flow.
Their mutual and unshaken attachment threw an additional
lustre over the military glory of the one, and the contemplative
wisdom of the other. <span class="tei tei-q">“Such,”</span> says Cicero in the
introduction to the treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-q">“was the common
law of friendship between them, that Lælius adored
Africanus as a god, on account of his transcendent
military fame; and that Scipio, when they were at home,
revered his friend, who was older than himself, as a father<a id="noteref_456" name="noteref_456" href="#note_456"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">456</span></span></a><a name="corr262" id="corr262" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">.</span>”</span>
The kindred soul of Cicero appears to have been
deeply struck with this delightful assemblage of all the
noblest and loveliest qualities of our nature. The friendship
which subsisted between himself and Atticus was another
beautiful example of a similar kind: And the dialogue
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Amicitiâ</span></span> is accordingly addressed with peculiar propriety
to Atticus, who, as Cicero tells him in his dedication,
could not fail to discover his own portrait in the delineation of
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page263">[pg 263]</span><a name="Pg263" id="Pg263" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>a perfect friend. This treatise approaches nearer to dialogue
than that <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Senectute</span></span>, for there is a story, with the circumstances
of time and place. Fannius, the historian, and Mucius
Scævola, the Augur, both sons-in-law of Lælius, paid him
a visit immediately after the sudden and suspicious death of
Scipio Africanus. The recent loss which Lælius had thus
sustained, leads to an eulogy on the inimitable virtues of the
departed hero, and to a discussion on the true nature of that
tie by which they had been so long connected. Cicero, while
in his earliest youth, had been introduced by his father to
Mucius Scævola; and hence, among other interesting matters
which he enjoyed an opportunity of hearing, he was one
day present while Scævola related the substance of the conference
on Friendship, which he and Fannius had held with
Lælius a few days after the death of Scipio. Many of the
ideas and sentiments which the mild Lælius then uttered, are
declared by Scævola to have originally flowed from Scipio,
with whom the nature and laws of friendship formed a favourite
topic of discourse. This, perhaps, is not entirely a
fiction, or merely told to give the stamp of authenticity to the
dialogue. Some such conversation was probably held and related;
and I doubt not, that a few of the passages in this celebrated
dialogue reflect the sentiments of Lælius, or even of
Africanus himself.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The philosophical works of Cicero, which have been hitherto
enumerated, are complete, or nearly so. But it is well
known that he was the author of many other productions
which have now been entirely lost, or of which only fragments
remain.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Of these, the most important was the Treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span>,
which, in the general wreck of learning, shared the fate
of the institutions it was intended to celebrate. The greater
part of this dialogue having disappeared along with the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Origines</span></span>
of Cato, the works of Varro, and the History of Sallust,
we have been deprived of all the writings which would have
thrown the most light on the Roman institutions, manners,
and government—of everything, in short, which philosophically
traced the progress of Rome, from its original barbarism
to the perfection which it had attained in the age of the
second Scipio Africanus.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There are few monuments of ancient literature, of which
the disappearance had excited more regret, than that of the
work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span>, which was long believed to have been
the grand repository of all the political wisdom of the ancients.
The great importance of the subject—treated, too,
by a writer at once distinguished by his genius and former
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page264">[pg 264]</span><a name="Pg264" id="Pg264" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>official dignity; the pride and predilection with which the author
himself speaks of it, and the sublimity and beauty of the
fragment entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Somnium Scipionis</span></span>, preserved from it by
Macrobius, all concurred to exalt this treatise in the imagination
of the learned, and to exasperate their vexation at its loss.
The fathers of the church, particularly Lactantius, had afforded
some insight into the arguments employed in it on different
topics; several fragments existed in the works of the
grammarians, and a complete copy was extant as late as the
11th century. Since that time the literary world have been
flattered at different periods with hopes of its discovery; but
it is only within the last few years that such a portion of it has
been recovered, as may suffice, in a considerable degree, to
satisfy curiosity, though not perhaps to fulfil expectation.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is well known to many, and will be mentioned more fully
in the <a href="#appendix" class="tei tei-ref"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Appendix</span></span></a>, that owing to a scarcity of papyrus and
parchment, it was customary, at different times, to erase old,
in order to admit new, writing. To a MS. of this kind, the
name of Palimpsest has been given—a term made use of by
Cicero himself. In a letter to the lawyer Trebatius, who had
written to him on such a sheet, Cicero says, <span class="tei tei-q">“that while he
must praise him for his parsimony in employing a palimpsest,
he cannot but wonder what he had erased to scribble such a
letter, except it were his law notes: For I cannot think,”</span> adds
he, <span class="tei tei-q">“that you would efface my letter to substitute your own<a id="noteref_457" name="noteref_457" href="#note_457"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">457</span></span></a>.”</span>
This practice became very common in the middle ages, when
both the papyrus and parchment were scarce, and when the
classics were, with few exceptions, no longer the objects of
interest. Montfaucon had remarked, that these obliterated
MSS. were perhaps more numerous than those which had been
written on for the first time<a id="noteref_458" name="noteref_458" href="#note_458"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">458</span></span></a>. But though in some cases the
original writing was still visible on close observation, no practical
use was made of such inspection till Angelo Mai published
some fragments recovered from palimpsest MSS. in the
Ambrosian library, of which he was keeper. Encouraged by
his success, he persevered in this new pursuit, and published
at intervals fragments of considerable value. At length, being
called to Rome as a recompense for his learned labours,
Mai prosecuted in the Vatican those noble researches which
he had commenced at Milan; and it is to him we now owe the
discovery and publication of a considerable portion of Cicero
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span>, which had been expunged, (it is supposed in
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page265">[pg 265]</span><a name="Pg265" id="Pg265" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>the 6th century,) and crossed by a new writing, which contained
a commentary by St Augustine on the Psalms<a id="noteref_459" name="noteref_459" href="#note_459"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">459</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span> was begun by Cicero in the month
of May, in the year 699, when the author was in the fifty-second
year of his age, so that, of all his philosophical writings,
it was at least the earliest commenced. In a letter to his brother
Quintus, he tells him that he had employed himself in his
Cuman and Pompeian villas, in writing a large and laborious
political work; that, should it succeed to his mind, it would
be well, but, if not, he would cast it into that sea which was in
view when he wrote it; and, as it was impossible for him to be
idle, commence some other undertaking<a id="noteref_460" name="noteref_460" href="#note_460"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">460</span></span></a>. He had proceeded,
however, but a little way, when he repeatedly changed the
whole plan of the work; and it is curious to perceive, that an
author of so perfect a genius as Cicero, had similar advices
from friends, and the same discouragement, and doubts, and
irresolution, which agitate inferior writers.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
When he had finished the first and second books, they were
read to some of his friends at his Tusculan villa. Sallust,
who was one of the company present, advised him to change
his plan, and to treat the subject in his own person—alleging
that the introduction of those ancient philosophers and statesmen,
to whom Cicero had assigned parts in the dialogue,
instead of adding gravity, gave a fictitious air to the argument,
which would have greater weight if delivered from Cicero
himself, as being the work, not of a sophist or contemplative
theorist, but of a consular senator and statesman, conversant
in the greatest affairs, and writing only what his own experience
had taught him to be true. These reasons seemed to
Cicero very plausible, and for some time made him think of
altering his plan, especially since, by placing the scene of the
dialogue so far back, he had precluded himself from touching
on those important revolutions in the Republic, which were
later than the period to which he had confined himself. But
after some deliberation, feeling reluctant to throw away the
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page266">[pg 266]</span><a name="Pg266" id="Pg266" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>two books which were already finished, and with which he was
much pleased, he resolved to adhere to his original plan<a id="noteref_461" name="noteref_461" href="#note_461"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">461</span></span></a>.
And as he had preferred it from the first, for the sake of
avoiding offence, so he pursued it without any other alteration
than that he now limited to six what he had before proposed
to extend to nine books. These six were made public previously
to his departure for the government of Cilicia. While
there, he received the epistolary congratulations of his friends
on their success<a id="noteref_462" name="noteref_462" href="#note_462"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">462</span></span></a>, and in his answers he discloses all the delight
of a gratified and successful author<a id="noteref_463" name="noteref_463" href="#note_463"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">463</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Mai discusses at considerable length the question, To whom
the treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span> was dedicated. The beginning of
the proœmium to the first book, which might have determined
this point, is lost; but the author says, <span class="tei tei-q">“Disputatio repetenda
memoriâ est, quæ mihi, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">tibique quondam adolescentulo</span></span>, est a
P. Rutilio Rufo, Zmyrnæ cùm simul essemus, complures dies
exposita.”</span> Cicero was at Smyrna in the twenty-ninth year of
his age, and it is evident that his companion, to whom this
treatise is dedicated, was younger than himself, as he says,
<span class="tei tei-q">“Mihi, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">tibique</span></span> quondam <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">adolescentulo</span></span>.”</span> Atticus was two
years older than Cicero, and therefore could not be the person.
In fact, there is every reason to suppose that the treatise
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span> was dedicated to its author’s younger brother
Quintus, who, as we know from the proœmium of the
last book, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Finibus</span></span>, was with Cicero at Athens during the
voyage, in the course of which he touched at Smyrna—who
probably attended him to Asia,—and whose age suited the
expression <span class="tei tei-q">“mihi, tibique adolescentulo.”</span> Add to this, that
Cicero, when he mentions to his brother, (in the passage of
the letter above referred to,) that he meant to alter the plan
of his work, says, <span class="tei tei-q">“Nunc loquar ipse <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">tecum</span></span>, et tamen illa quæ
institueram ad te, si Romam venero, mittam<a id="noteref_464" name="noteref_464" href="#note_464"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">464</span></span></a>.”</span> The work in
its first concoction, therefore, was addressed to Quintus, and,
as the author, after some hesitation, published it nearly in its
original form, it can scarcely be doubted that it was still dedicated
to his brother.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The first book <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span>, which was one of those read
by Cicero to Sallust and some other friends, in his Tusculan
villa, is, as already mentioned, imperfect at the commencement.
Not much, however, seems to be wanting, and a prologue
of considerable length still remains, in which the author
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page267">[pg 267]</span><a name="Pg267" id="Pg267" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>(pleading, perhaps, his own cause) combats the opinions of
philosophers, who, preferring a contemplative to an active life,
blame those who engage in public affairs. To the former he
opposes the example of many wise and great men, and answers
those objections to a busy political life, which have been repeatedly
urged against it. This prologue contains some good
reasoning, and, like all the writings of its illustrious author,
displays a noble patriotic feeling. He remarks, that he had
entered into this discussion as introductory to a book concerning
the republic, since it seemed proper, as prefatory to such
a work, to combat the sentiments of those who deny that a
philosopher should be a statesman. <span class="tei tei-q">“As to the work itself,”</span>
says he, addressing (as I have supposed) his brother, <span class="tei tei-q">“I shall
lay down nothing new or peculiar to myself, but shall repeat
a discussion which once took place among the most illustrious
men of their age, and the wisest of our state, such as it was
related to myself, and to you when a youth, by P. Rutilius
Rufus, when we were with him some days at Smyrna—in
which discussion nothing of importance to the right constitution
of a commonwealth, appears to have been omitted.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The author then proceeds to mention, that during the consulship
of Tuditanus and Aquilius, (as he had heard from Rufus,)
the younger Scipio Africanus determined to pass the
Latin festivals (Latinæ Feriæ) in his gardens, where some of
his most intimate friends had promised to visit him. The first
of these who makes his appearance is his nephew, Quintus
Tubero, a person devoted to the Stoical philosophy, and noted
for the austerity of his manners. A remark which Tubero
makes about two suns, a prodigy which, it seems, had lately
appeared in the heavens, leads Scipio to praise Socrates for
his abandonment of physical pursuits, as neither very useful
to man, nor capable of being thoroughly investigated—a
sentiment (by the way) which, with all due submission to the
Greek philosopher, does little credit to his sagacity, as physical
inquiries have been not only highly useful to mankind,
but are almost the only subjects in which accurate science has
been attained. Furius, Philus, and Rutilius, who is stated to
have related the discussion to Cicero, now enter, and, at last,
comes Lælius, attended by his friend, Spurius Mummius, (brother
to the well-known connoisseur in the fine arts who took
Corinth,) and by his two sons-in-law, C. Fannius and Q. Scævola.
After saluting them, Scipio, as it was now winter, takes
them to a sunny spot, in a meadow, and in proceeding thither
the party is joined by M. Manilius.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-q">“In this choice of his principal speakers, Cicero,”</span> as has
been well remarked, <span class="tei tei-q">“was extremely judicious and happy. It
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page268">[pg 268]</span><a name="Pg268" id="Pg268" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>was necessary that the persons selected should have been distinguished
both as statesmen and as scholars, in order that a
philosophical discussion might appear consistent with <a name="corr268a" id="corr268a" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">their</span> known characters, and that a high political reputation
might give authority to their remarks on government. Scipio
and Lælius united both these requisites in a remarkable degree.
They were among the earliest of the Romans who
added the graces of Grecian taste and learning to the manly
virtues of their own ruder country. These accomplishments
had refined and polished their characters, without at all detracting
from their force and purity. The very name of the
Scipios, the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">duo fulmina belli</span></span>, was the symbol of military
talent, patriotism, and magnanimity: Lælius was somewhat
less distinguished in active life; but enjoyed, on the other
hand, a still higher reputation for contemplative wisdom<a id="noteref_465" name="noteref_465" href="#note_465"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">465</span></span></a><a name="corr268" id="corr268" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">.</span>”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
After the party had been all seated, the subject of the two
suns is resumed; and Lælius, while he remarks that they had
enough to occupy attention in matters more at hand, adds,
that since they were at present idle, he for his part, had no
objection to hear Philus, who was fond of astronomical pursuits,
on the subject. Philus, thus encouraged, proceeds to
give an account of a kind of Orrery, which had been formed
by Archimedes, and having been brought to Rome by Marcellus,
its structure, as well as uses, had on one occasion, when
Philus was present, been explained by C. Sulpicius Gallus.
The application of this explanation to the phenomenon of the
two suns is lost, as a <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">hiatus</span></span> of eight pages here occurs in the
palimpsest. Probably, the solution of the problem would not,
if extant, make a great figure in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Philosophical Transactions</span></span>.
But one cannot fail to admire the discursive and active
genius of Cicero, who considered all knowledge as an object
deserving ardent pursuit<a id="noteref_466" name="noteref_466" href="#note_466"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">466</span></span></a>.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page269">[pg 269]</span><a name="Pg269" id="Pg269" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
At the end of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">hiatus</span></span>, we find Scipio, in reference to
Gallus’s astronomical knowledge, which had been celebrated
by Philus, relating, that when his father, Paulus Æmilius,
commanded in Macedonia, the army being terrified by an
eclipse, Gallus had calmed their fears by explaining the phænomenon—an
anecdote, which, with another similar to it here
told of Pericles, proves the value of physical pursuits, and their
intimate connection with the affairs of life. This inference
seems to have been drawn in a passage which is lost; and
several beautiful sentiments follow, similar to some of those in
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Somnium Scipionis</span></span>, on the calm exquisite delights of meditation
and science, and on the littleness of all earthly things,
when compared with immortality or the universe. <span class="tei tei-q">“Quid
porro,”</span> says Scipio, in the most elevated tone of moral and
intellectual grandeur—<span class="tei tei-q">“quid porro aut præclarum putet in
rebus humanis, qui hæc deorum regna perspexerit? aut diuturnum,
qui cognoverit quid sit æternum? aut gloriosum, qui
viderit quàm parva sit terra, primum universa, deinde ea pars
ejus quam homines incolant, quamque nos in exiguâ ejus parte
adfixi, plurimis ignotissimi gentibus, speremus tamen nostrum
nomen volitare et vagari latissime? Agros, vero, et ædificia,
et pecudes, et immensum argenti pondus atque auri, qui bona
nec putare nec appellare soleat, quod earum rerum videatur
ei, levis fructus, exiguus usus, incertus dominatus, sæpe etiam
teterrimorum hominum immensa possessio. Quàm est hic
fortunatus putandus, cui soli vere liceat omnia non Quiritium
sed sapientium jure pro suis vindicare! nec civili nexo, sed
communi lege naturæ, quæ vetat ullam rem esse cujusquam
nisi ejus qui tractare et uti sciat: qui imperia consulatusque
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page270">[pg 270]</span><a name="Pg270" id="Pg270" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>nostros in necessariis non in expetendis rebus muneris fungendi
gratiâ subeundos, non præmiorum aut gloriæ causâ adpetendos
putet: qui denique ut Africanum avum meum scribit Cato
solitum esse dicere, possit idem de se prædicare, nunquam se
plus agere, quàm nihil cùm ageret; nunquam minus solum
esse, quàm cùm solus esset.</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-q">“Quis enim putare vere potest plus egisse Dionysium tum
cùm omnia moliendo eripuerit civibus suis libertatem, quàm
ejus civem Archimedem, cùm istam ipsam Sphæram, nihil cùm
agere videretur, effecerit? Quis autem non magis solos esse
qui in foro turbâque quicum conloqui libeat non habeant, quam
qui nullo arbitro vel secum ipsi loquantur, vel quasi doctissimorum
hominum in concilio adsint cùm eorum inventis scriptisque
se oblectent? Quis vero divitiorem quemquam putet,
quàm eum cui nihil desit, quod quidem natura desideret? aut
potentiorem quàm illum, qui omnia quæ expetat, consequatur?
aut beatiorem quàm qui sit omni perturbatione animi
liberatus?”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Lælius, however, is no way moved by these sonorous arguments;
and still persists in affirming, that the most important
of all studies are those which relate to the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Republic</span></span>, and that
it concerned them to inquire, not why two suns had appeared
in heaven, but why, in the present circumstances, (alluding to
the projects of the Gracchi,) there were two senates, and
almost two peoples. In this state of things, therefore, and
since they had now leisure, their fittest object would be to
learn from Scipio what he deemed the best condition of a
commonwealth. Scipio complies with this request, and begins
with defining a republic; <span class="tei tei-q">“Est igitur respublica res populi—populus
    autem non omnis hominum cœtus quoquo modo congregatus,
sed cœtus multitudinis juris consensu.”</span> In entering
on the nature of what he had thus defined, he remounts to the
origin of society, which he refers entirely to that social spirit
which is one of the principles of our nature, and not to hostility,
or fear, or compact. A people, when united, may be
governed by <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">one</span></span>, by <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">several</span></span>, or by a <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">multitude</span></span>, any one of
which simple forms may be tolerable if well administered, but
they are liable to corruptions peculiar to themselves. Of these
three simple forms, Scipio prefers the monarchical; and for
this choice he gives his reasons, which are somewhat metaphysical
and analogical. But though he more approves of a
pure regal government than of the two other simple forms, he
thinks that none of them are good, and that a perfect constitution
must be compounded of the three. <span class="tei tei-q">“Quod cùm ita sit,
tribus primis generibus longe præstat, meâ sententiâ, regium;
regio autem ipsi præstabit id quod erit æquatum et
tempera<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page271">[pg 271]</span><a name="Pg271" id="Pg271" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>tum ex tribus optimis rerum publicarum modis. Placet enim
esse quiddam in re publicâ præstans et regale; esse aliud
auctoritate principum partum ac tributum; esse quasdam res
servatas judicio voluntatique multitudinis. Hæc constitutio
primum habet æqualitatem quamdam magnam, quâ carere
diutius vix possunt liberi; deinde firmitudinem.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In this panegyric on a mixed constitution, Cicero has taken
his idea of a perfect state from the Roman commonwealth—from
its consuls, senate, and popular assemblies. Accordingly,
Scipio proceeds to affirm, that of all constitutions which had
ever existed, no one, either as to the distribution of its parts
or discipline, was so perfect as that which had been established
by their ancestors; and that, therefore, he will constantly
have his eye on it as a model in all that he means to
say concerning the best form of a state.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This explains what was the chief scope of Cicero in his
work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republica</span></span>—an eulogy on the Roman government,
such as it was, or he supposed it to have been, in the early
ages of the commonwealth. In the time of Cicero, when
Rome was agitated by the plots of Catiline, and factions of
Clodius, with the proscriptions of Sylla but just terminated,
and the usurpation of Cæsar impending, the Roman constitution
had become as ideal as the polity of Plato; and in its
best times had never reached the perfection which Cicero
attributes to it. But when a writer is disgusted with the present,
and fearful for the future, he is ever ready to form an
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Utopia</span></span> of the past<a id="noteref_467" name="noteref_467" href="#note_467"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">467</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">second</span></span> book, which, like the first, is imperfect at the
beginning, (though Mai seems to think that only a few words
are wanting;) Scipio records a saying of Cato the Censor, that
the constitution of Rome was superior to that of all other
states, because <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">they</span></span> had been modelled by single legislators,
as Crete by Minos, and Sparta by Lycurgus, whereas the
Roman commonwealth was the result of the gradually improved
experience and wisdom of ages. <span class="tei tei-q">“To borrow, therefore,”</span>
says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“a word from Cato, I shall go back to the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">origin</span></span>
of the Roman state; and show it in its birth, childhood,
youth, and maturity—a plan which seems preferable to the
delineation of an imaginary republic like that of Plato.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Scipio now begins with Romulus, whose birth, indeed, he
seems to treat as a fable; but in the whole succeeding development
of the Roman history, he, or, in other words, Cicero,
exercises little criticism, and indulges in no scepticism. He
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page272">[pg 272]</span><a name="Pg272" id="Pg272" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>admires the wisdom with which Romulus chose the site of his
capital—not placing it in a maritime situation, where it would
have been exposed to many dangers and disadvantages, but
on a navigable river, with all the conveniences of the sea.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Quî
potuit igitur divinitus et utilitates complecti maritimas
Romulus et vitia vitare? quàm quòd urbem perennis amnis
et æquabilis et in mare late influentis posuit in ripâ, quo
posset urbs et accipere ex mari quo egeret, et reddere quo
redundaret: eodemque ut flumine res ad victum cultumque
maxime necessarias non solum mari absorberet sed etiam advectas
acciperet ex terrâ: ut mihi jam tum divinâsse ille videatur,
hanc urbem sedem aliquando ut domum summo esse imperio
    <a name="corr272" id="corr272" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">præbituram</span>: nam hanc rerum tantam potentiam non
ferme facilius aliâ in parte Italiæ posita urbs tenere potuisset.”</span>—In
like manner he praises the sagacity of the succeeding
rulers of the Roman state. <span class="tei tei-q">“Faithful to his plan,”</span> says M.
Villemain, <span class="tei tei-q">“of referring all to the Roman constitution, and of
forming rather a history than a political theory, Cicero proceeds
to examine, as it were chronologically, the state of
Rome at the different epochs of its duration, beginning with
its kings. This plan, if it produced any new light on a very
dark subject, would have much more interest for us than ideas
merely speculative. But Cicero scarcely deviates from the
common traditions, which have often exercised the scepticism
of the learned. He takes the Roman history nearly as we
now have it, and his reflections seem to suppose no other facts
than those which have been so eloquently recorded by Livy.”</span>
But although, for the sake of illustration, and in deference to
common opinion, he argues on the events of early Roman history,
as delivered by vulgar tradition, it is evident that, in his
own belief, they were altogether uncertain; and if any new
authority on that subject were wanting, Cicero’s might be
added in favour of their total uncertainty; for Lælius thus interrupts
his account of Ancus Martius—<span class="tei tei-q">“Laudandus etiam
iste rex—sed obscura est historia Romana;”</span> and Scipio replies,
<span class="tei tei-q">“Ita est: sed temporum illorum tantum fere regum illustrata
sunt nomina.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
At the close of Scipio’s discourse, which is a perpetual
panegyric on the successive governments of Rome, and, with
exception of the above passage, an uncritical acquiescence in
its common history, Tubero remarks, that Cicero had rather
praised the Roman government, than examined the constitution
of commonwealths in general, and that hitherto he had
not explained by what discipline, manners, and laws, a state
is to be constituted or preserved. Scipio replies, that this is
to be a farther subject of discussion; and he seems now to
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page273">[pg 273]</span><a name="Pg273" id="Pg273" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>have adopted a more metaphysical tone: But of the remainder
of the book only a few fragments exist; from which, however,
it appears, that a question was started, how far the exact observance
of justice in a state is politic or necessary. This
discussion, at the suggestion of Scipio, is suspended till the
succeeding day<a id="noteref_468" name="noteref_468" href="#note_468"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">468</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
As the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">third</span></span> book of Cicero’s treatise began a second day’s
colloquy, it was doubtless furnished with a proœmium, the
greater part of which is now lost, as also a considerable portion
of the commencement of the dialogue. Towards the
conclusion of the preceding book, Scipio had touched on the
subject, how far the observance of justice is useful to a state,
and Philus had proposed that this topic should be treated
more fully, as an opinion was prevalent, that policy occasionally
required injustice. Previously to the discovery of Mai,
we knew from St Augustine, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Civitate Dei</span></span>, that in the
third book of the treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span>, Philus, as a disputant,
undertook the cause of injustice, and was answered by Lælius.
In the fragment of the third book, Philus excuses himself from
becoming (so to speak) the devil’s advocate; but at length
agrees to offer, not his own arguments on the subject, but
those of Carneades, who, some years before, had one day
pleaded the cause of justice at Rome, and next day overturning
his own arguments, became the patron of injustice.
Philus accordingly proceeds to contend, that if justice were
something real, it would be everywhere the same, whereas, in
one nation, that is reckoned equitable and holy, which in another
is unjust and impious; and, in like manner, in the same
city, what is just at one period, becomes unjust at another.
In the palimpsest, these sophisms, which have been revived
in modern times by Mandeville and others, are interrupted by
frequent chasms in the MS. Lælius, as we learn from St Augustine,
and from a passage in Aulus Gellius, was requested
by all present to undertake the defence of justice; but his
discourse, with the exception of a few sentences, is wholly
wanting in the palimpsest. At the close he is highly complimented
by Scipio, but a large <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">hiatus</span></span> again intervenes. After
this, Scipio is found contending, that wealth and power, Phidian
statues, or the most magnificent public works, do not
constitute a republic, but the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">res populi</span></span>, the good of the whole,
and not of any single governing portion of the state. He then
concludes with affirming, that of all forms of government, the
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page274">[pg 274]</span><a name="Pg274" id="Pg274" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>purely democratic is the worst, and next to that, an unmixed
aristocracy.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">fourth</span></span> book only one leaf remains in the palimpsest,
the contents of which seem to confirm what we learn from
other sources, that it treated of Education and Morals. It is
particularly to be regretted that this book has disappeared.
It is easy to supply abstract discussions about justice, democracy,
and power, and, if they be not supplied, little injury is
sustained; but the loss of details relating to manners and customs,
from such a hand as that of Cicero, is irreparable. The
fifth book is nearly as much mutilated as the fourth, and of
the sixth not a fragment remains in the palimpsest, so that
Mai’s discovery has added nothing to the beautiful extract
from this book, entitled the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Somnium Scipionis</span></span>, preserved by
Macrobius. The conclusion of the work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span>, had
turned on immortality of fame here, and eternity of existence
elsewhere. The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Somnium Scipionis</span></span> is intended to establish,
under the form of a political fiction, the sublime dogma of the
soul’s immortality, and was probably introduced at the conclusion
of the work, for the purpose of adding the hopes and
fears of future retribution to the other motives to virtuous exertion.
In illustration of this sublime topic, Scipio relates
that, in his youth, when he first served in Africa, he visited the
court of Massinissa, the steady friend of the Romans, and particularly
of the Cornelian family. During the feasts and entertainments
of the day, the conversation turned on the words
and actions of the first great Scipio. His adopted grandchild
having retired to rest, the shade of the departed hero appeared
to him in sleep, darkly foretold the future events of his life,
and encouraged him to tread in the paths of patriotism and
true glory, by announcing the reward provided in Heaven for
those who have deserved well of their country.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
I have thought it proper to give this minute account of the
treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span>, for the sake of those who may not have
had an opportunity of consulting Mai’s publication, and who
may be curious to know somewhat of the value and extent of
his discovery. On the whole, I suspect that the treatise will disappoint
those whose expectations were high, especially if they
thought to find in it much political or statistical information.
It corresponds little to the idea that one would naturally form
of a political work from the pen of Cicero—a distinguished
statesman, always courted by the chiefs of political parties,
and at one time himself at the head of the government of his
country. But, on reflection, it will not appear surprising that
we receive from this work so little insight into the doubtful
and disputed points of Roman polity. Those questions, with
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page275">[pg 275]</span><a name="Pg275" id="Pg275" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>regard to the manner in which the Senate was filled up—the
force of degrees of the people, and the rank of the different
jurisdictions, which in modern times have formed subjects of
discussion, had not become problems in the time of Cicero.
The great men whom he introduces in conversation together,
understood each other on such topics, by a word or suggestion;
and I am satisfied that those parts of the treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span>,
which are lost, contained as little that could contribute
to the solution of such difficulties, as the portions that
have been recovered.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But though the work of Cicero will disappoint those who
expect to find in it much political information, still, as in his
other productions, every page exhibits a rich and glowing magnificence
of style, ever subjected to the controul of a taste the
most correct and pure. It contains, like all his writings, some
passages of exquisite beauty, and everywhere breathes an
exalted spirit of virtue and patriotism. The Latin language,
so noble in itself, and dignified, assumes additional majesty in
the periods of the Roman Consul, and adds an inexpressible
beauty and loftiness to the natural sublimity of his sentiments.
No writings, in fact, are so full of moral and intellectual grandeur
as those of Cicero, none are more calculated to elevate
and purify our nature—to inculcate the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">tu vero enitere</span></span>, in
the path of knowledge and virtue, and to excite not merely
a fond desire, or idle longing, but strenuous efforts after immortality.
Indeed, the whole life of the Father of his Country
was a noble fulfilment, and his sublime philosophic works
are but an expansion of that golden precept, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">tu vero enitere</span></span>,
enjoined from on high, to his great descendant, by the Spirit
of the first Africanus<a id="noteref_469" name="noteref_469" href="#note_469"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">469</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
About a century after the revival of letters, when mankind
had at length despaired of any farther discovery of the philosophic
writings of Cicero, the learned men of the age employed
themselves in collecting the scattered fragments of his
lost works, and arranging them according to the order of the
books from which they had been extracted. Sigonius had
thus united the detached fragments of the work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span>,
and he made a similar attempt to repair another lost treatise of
Cicero, entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Consolatione</span></span>. But in this instance he not
merely collected the fragments, but connected them by sentences
of his own composition. The work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Consolatione</span></span>
was written by Cicero in the year 708, on occasion of the
death of his much-loved Tullia, with the design of relieving
his own mind, and consecrating to all posterity the virtues
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page276">[pg 276]</span><a name="Pg276" id="Pg276" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>and memory of his daughter<a id="noteref_470" name="noteref_470" href="#note_470"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">470</span></span></a>. In this treatise, he set out with
the paradoxical propositions, that human life is a punishment,
and that men are brought into the world only to pay the forfeit
of their sins<a id="noteref_471" name="noteref_471" href="#note_471"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">471</span></span></a>. Cicero chiefly followed Crantor the
    Academic<a id="noteref_472" name="noteref_472" href="#note_472"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">472</span></span></a>,
who had left a celebrated piece on the same topic;
but he inserted whatever pleased him in any other author who
had written on the subject. He illustrated his precepts, as he
proceeded, by examples from Roman history, of eminent
characters who had borne a similar loss with that which he
had himself sustained, or other severe misfortunes, with remarkable
constancy<a id="noteref_473" name="noteref_473" href="#note_473"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">473</span></span></a>,—dwelling particularly on the domestic
calamities of Q. Maximus, who buried a consular son; of
Æmilius Paullus, who lost two sons in two days; and of M.
Cato, who had been deprived of a son, who was Prætor-Elect<a id="noteref_474" name="noteref_474" href="#note_474"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">474</span></span></a>.
Sigonius pretended, that the patched-up treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Consolatione</span></span>,
which he gave to the public, was the lost work of
Cicero, of which he had discovered a MS. The imposture
succeeded for a considerable time, but was at length detected
and pointed out by Riccoboni<a id="noteref_475" name="noteref_475" href="#note_475"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">475</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cicero also wrote a treatise in two books, addressed to
Atticus, on the subject of Glory, which was the predominant
and most conspicuous passion of his soul. It was composed
in the year 710, while sailing along the delightful coast of the
Campagna, on his voyage to Greece:—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“On as he moved along the level shore,</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">These temples, in their splendour eminent</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Mid arcs, and obelisks, and domes, and towers,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Reflecting back the radiance of the west,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Well might he dream of <span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">glory</span></span><a id="noteref_476" name="noteref_476" href="#note_476"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">476</span></span></a>!”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This treatise was extant in the 14th century. A copy had
been presented to Petrarch, from his vast collection of books,
by Raymond Soranzo, a Sicilian lawyer<a id="noteref_477" name="noteref_477" href="#note_477"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">477</span></span></a>. Petrarch long preserved
this precious volume with great care, and valued it
highly. Unfortunately a man called Convenoli, who resided
at Avignon, and who had formerly been his preceptor, begged
and obtained the loan of it; and having afterwards fallen into
indigent circumstances, pawned it for the relief of his necessities,
to some unknown person, from whom Petrarch never
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page277">[pg 277]</span><a name="Pg277" id="Pg277" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>could regain its possession. Two copies, however, were still
extant in the subsequent century, one in a private library at
Nuremburg, and another in that of a Venetian nobleman,
Bernard Giustiniani, who, dying in 1489, bequeathed his books
to a monastery of nuns, to whom Petrus Alcyonius was physician.
Filelfo was accused, though on no good foundation,
of having burned the Nuremburg copy, after inserting passages
from it in his treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Contemptu Mundi</span></span><a id="noteref_478" name="noteref_478" href="#note_478"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">478</span></span></a>. But the
charge of destroying the original MS. left by Giustiniani to the
nuns, has been urged against Alcyonius on better grounds,
and with more success. Paulus Manutius, of whose printing-press
Alcyonius had been at one time corrector, charged him
with having availed himself of his free access to the library of
the nuns, whose physician he was, to purloin the treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
Gloria</span></span>, and with having destroyed it, to conceal his plagiarisms,
after inserting from it various passages in his dialogue
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Exilio</span></span><a id="noteref_479" name="noteref_479" href="#note_479"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">479</span></span></a>. The assertion of Manutius is founded only on
the disappearance of the MS.,—the opportunities possessed
by Alcyonius of appropriating it, and his own critical opinion
of the dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Exilio</span></span>, in which he conceives that there
are many passages composed in a style evincing a writer of
talents, far superior to those of its nominal author. This accusation
was repeated by Paulus Jovius and others<a id="noteref_480" name="noteref_480" href="#note_480"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">480</span></span></a>. Mencken,
in the preface to his edition of the dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Exilio</span></span>,
has maintained the innocence of Alcyonius, and has related
a conversation which he had with Bentley on the subject, in
the course of which that great scholar declared, that he found
nothing in the work of Alcyonius which could convict him of
the imputed plagiarism<a id="noteref_481" name="noteref_481" href="#note_481"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">481</span></span></a>. He has been defended at greater
length by Tiraboschi, on the strong grounds that Giustiniani
lived after the invention of printing, and that had he actually
been in possession of Cicero’s treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Gloriâ</span></span>, he would
doubtless have published it—that it is not said to what monastery
of nuns Giustiniani bequeathed this precious MS.—that
the charge against Alcyonius was not advanced till after his
death, although his dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Exilio</span></span> was first printed in
1522, and he survived till 1527; and, finally, that so great a
proportion of it relates to modern events, that there are not
more than a few pages which could possibly have been pilfered
from Cicero, or any writer of his age<a id="noteref_482" name="noteref_482" href="#note_482"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">482</span></span></a>. M. Bernardi, in a
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page278">[pg 278]</span><a name="Pg278" id="Pg278" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>dissertation subjoined to a work above mentioned, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De la Republique</span></span>,
has revived the accusation, at least to a certain extent,
by quoting various passages from the work of Alcyonius,
which are not well connected with the others, and which, being
of a superior order of composition, may be conjectured to
be those he had detached from the treatises of Cicero. On the
whole, the question of the theft and plagiarism of Alcyonius
still remains undecided, and will probably continue so till
the discovery of some perfect copy of the tract <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Gloriâ</span></span>—an
event rather to be earnestly desired than reasonably anticipated.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
A fourth lost work of Cicero, is his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hortensius sive de Philosophia</span></span>.
Besides the orator after whom it is named, Catulus,
Lucullus, and Cicero himself, were speakers in the dialogue.
In the first part, where Hortensius discourses, it was
intended to exalt eloquence above philosophy. To his arguments
Cicero replied, showing the service that philosophy
rendered to eloquence, even in an imperfect state of the
social progress, and its superior use in an improved condition
of society, in which there should be no wrong, and consequently
no tribunals of justice. All this appears from the
account given of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hortensius</span></span> by St Augustine, who has
also quoted from it many beautiful passages—declaring, at
the same time, that it was the perusal of this work which first
inspired him with a love of wisdom.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Viluit mihi repente
omnis vana spes, et immortalitatem sapientiæ concupiscebam
æstu cordis incredibili<a id="noteref_483" name="noteref_483" href="#note_483"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">483</span></span></a>.”</span> This dialogue continued to be
preserved for a long period after the time of St Augustine,
since it is cited as extant in his own age by the famous Roger
Bacon<a id="noteref_484" name="noteref_484" href="#note_484"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">484</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It was not till after the æra of Augustus, that works originally
destined for the public assumed the name and form of
letters. But several collections of epistles, written, during
the period on which we are now engaged, to relatives or
friends in private confidence, were afterwards extensively circulated.
Those of Cornelia, the daughter of the elder Scipio
Africanus, and mother of the Gracchi, addressed chiefly to
her sons, were much celebrated; but the most ample collection
now extant, is that of the Letters of Cicero.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
These may be divided into four parts,—1. The Epistolæ
Familiares, or Miscellaneous Correspondence; 2. Those to
Atticus; 3. To his brother Quintus; 4. To Brutus.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The correspondence, usually entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ad Familiares</span></span>,
    in<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page279">[pg 279]</span><a name="Pg279" id="Pg279" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>cludes a period of about twenty years, commencing immediately
after Cicero’s consulate, and ending a few months before
his death. The letters which this collection comprehends,
are so extremely miscellaneous, that it is impossible even to
run over their contents. Previous to the battle of Pharsalia,
it chiefly consists of epistles concerning the distribution of
consular provinces, and the political intrigues relating to that
constantly recurring subject of contention,—recommendatory
letters sent with acquaintances going into the provinces—details
to absent friends, with regard to the state of parties at
Rome, particularly the designs of Pompey and Cæsar, and the
factions of Milo and Clodius; and, finally, entertaining anecdotes
concerning the most popular and fashionable amusements
of the Capital.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Subsequently to the battle of Pharsalia, and during the
supremacy of Cæsar, the letters are principally addressed to
the chiefs of the Pompeian party, who were at that time in
banishment for their adherence to the same cause in which
Cicero had been himself engaged. These epistles are chiefly
occupied with consolatory reflections on the adverse circumstances
in which they were placed, and accounts of his own
exertions to obtain their recall. In the perusal of these letters,
it is painful and humiliating to observe the gratification which
Cicero evidently appears to have received at this period, from
the attentions, not merely of Cæsar, but of his creatures and
favourites, as Balbus, Hirtius, and Pansa.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
After the assassination of Cæsar, the correspondence for the
most part relates to the affairs of the Republic, and is directed
to the heads of the conspiracy, or to leading men in the state,
as Lepidus and Asinius Pollio, who were then in the command
of armies, and whom he anxiously exhorts to declare for the
commonwealth, and stand forward in opposition to Antony.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There are a good many letters inserted in this collection,
addressed to Cicero by his friends. The greatest number are
from his old client <a name="corr279" id="corr279" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Cælius</span>, who appears to have been an admirable
gossip. They are written to Cicero, during his absence
from Rome, in his government of Cilicia, and give him news
of party politics—intelligence of remarkable cases tried in
the Forum—and of the fashionable scandal of the day. The
great object of <span class="tei tei-corr">Cælius</span> seems to have been to obtain in return,
the dedication of one of Cicero’s works, and a cargo of panthers
from Asia, for his exhibition of games to the Roman people.
Towards the conclusion, there are a good many letters from
generals, who were at the head of armies in the provinces at
the death of Cæsar, and continued their command during the
war which the Senate waged against Antony. All of them,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page280">[pg 280]</span><a name="Pg280" id="Pg280" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>but particularly Asinius Pollio, and Lepidus, appear to have
acted with consummate treachery and dissimulation towards
Cicero and the Senate. On the whole, though the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epistolæ
Familiares</span></span> were private letters, and though some private
affairs are treated of in them, they chiefly relate to public
concerns, comprehending, in particular, a very full history of
Cicero’s government in Cilicia, the civil dissensions of Rome,
and the war between Pompey and Cæsar. Seldom, however,
do they display any flashes of that eloquence with which the
orator was so richly endued; and no transaction, however important,
elevated his style above the level of ordinary conversation.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epistolæ ad Atticum</span></span>, are also of great service for the
History of Rome. <span class="tei tei-q">“Whoever,”</span> says Cornelius Nepos, <span class="tei tei-q">“reads
these letters of Cicero, will not want for a connected history
of the times. So well does he describe the views of the leading
men, the faults of generals, and the changes of parties in
the state, that nothing is wanting for our information; and
such was his sagacity, we are almost led to believe that it was
a kind of divination; for Cicero not only foretold what afterwards
happened in his own lifetime, but, like a prophet, predicted
events which are now come to pass<a id="noteref_485" name="noteref_485" href="#note_485"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">485</span></span></a>.”</span> Along with
this knowledge, we obtain more insight into Cicero’s private
character, than from the former series of letters, where he is
often disguised in the political mask of the great theatre on
which he acted, and where many of his defects are concealed
under the graceful folds of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">toga</span></span>. It was to Atticus that
he most freely unbosomed his thoughts—more completely than
even to Tullia, Terentia, or Tiro. Hence, while he evinces
in these letters much affection for his family—ardent zeal for
the interests of his friends—strong feelings of humanity and
justice—warm gratitude to his benefactors, and devoted love
to his country, he has not repressed his vanity, or concealed
the faults of a mental organization too susceptible of every
impression. His sensibility, indeed, was such, that it led him
to think his misfortunes were peculiarly distinguished from
those of all other men, and that neither himself nor the world
could ever sufficiently deplore them: hence the querulous and
plaintive tone which pervades the whole correspondence, and
which, in the letters written during his exile, resembles more
the wailings of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Tristia</span></span> of Ovid, than what might be expected
from the first statesman, orator, and philosopher of the
Roman Republic. In every page of them, too, we see traces
of his inconsistencies and irresolution—his political, if not his
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page281">[pg 281]</span><a name="Pg281" id="Pg281" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>personal timidity—his rash confidence in prosperity, his alarm
in danger, his despondence in adversity—his too nice jealousies
and delicate suspicions—his proneness to offence, and his
unresisting compliance with those who had gained him by
flattery, and hypocritical professions of attachment to the
commonwealth. Atticus, it is clear, was a bad adviser for his
fame, and perhaps for his ultimate safety; and to him may be
in a great measure attributed that compromising conduct
which has detracted so much from the dignity of his character.
<span class="tei tei-q">“You succeeded,”</span> says Cicero, speaking of Cæsar and
Pompey, <span class="tei tei-q">“in persuading me to keep well with the one, because
he had rendered me services, and with the other, because
he possessed great power<a id="noteref_486" name="noteref_486" href="#note_486"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">486</span></span></a>.”</span> Again, <span class="tei tei-q">“I followed your advice
so punctually, that neither of them had a favourite beyond
myself;”</span> and after the war had actually broken out, <span class="tei tei-q">“I take
it very kind that you, in so friendly a manner, advise me to
declare as little as possible for either party<a id="noteref_487" name="noteref_487" href="#note_487"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">487</span></span></a>.”</span> Such fatal
counsels, it is evident, accorded too well with his own inclinations,
and palliated, perhaps, to himself the weaknesses to
which he gave way. These weaknesses of Cicero it would,
indeed, be in vain to deny; but <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">his</span></span> feelings are little to be envied
who can think of them without regret, or speak of them
without indulgence.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is these letters, however, which have handed down the
remembrance of Atticus to posterity, and have rendered his
name almost as universally known as that of his illustrious
correspondent. <span class="tei tei-q">“Nomen Attici perire,”</span> says Seneca, <span class="tei tei-q">“Ciceronis
Epistolæ non sinunt. Nihil illi profuissent gener Agrippa,
et Tiberius progener, et Drusus Cæsar pronepos. Inter tam
magna nomina taceretur nisi Cicero illum applicuisset.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Perhaps the most interesting correspondence of Cicero is
that with his brother Quintus, who was some years younger
than the orator. He attained the dignity of Prætor in 693,
and afterwards held a government in Asia as Pro-prætor for
four years. He returned to Rome at the moment in which his
brother was driven into exile; and for some time afterwards,
was chiefly employed in exerting himself to obtain his recall.
As Cæsar’s lieutenant, he served with credit in Gaul; but espoused
the republican party at the breaking out of the civil
war. He was pardoned, however, by Cæsar, and was slain
by the blood-thirsty triumvirate established after his death.
Quintus was a man of warm affections, and of some military
talents, but of impatient and irritable temper. The orator
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page282">[pg 282]</span><a name="Pg282" id="Pg282" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>had evidently a high opinion of his qualifications, and has
introduced him as an interlocutor in the dialogues <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>
and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Divinatione</span></span>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The correspondence with Quintus is divided into three
books. The first letter in the collection, is one of the noblest
productions of the kind which has ever been penned. It is
addressed to Quintus on occasion of his government in Asia
being prolonged for a third year. Availing himself of the
rights of an elder brother, as well as of the authority derived
from his superior dignity and talents, Cicero counsels and exhorts
his brother concerning the due administration of his
province, particularly with regard to the choice of his subordinate
officers, and the degree of trust to be reposed in them.
He earnestly reproves him, but with much fraternal tenderness
and affection, for his proneness to resentment; and he
concludes with a beautiful exhortation, to strive in all respects
to merit the praise of his contemporaries, and bequeath to posterity
an untainted name. The second letter transmits to
Quintus an account of some complaints which Cicero had
heard in Rome, with regard to his brother’s conduct in the administration
of his government. The two following epistles,
which conclude the first book, are written from Thessalonica,
in the commencement of his exile. The first of these, beginning,
<span class="tei tei-q">“Mi frater, mi frater, mi frater,”</span> written in a sad state
of agitation and depression, is a fine specimen of eloquent and
pathetic expostulation. It is full of strong and almost unbounded
expressions of attachment, and exhibits much of that
exaggeration, both in sentiment and language, in which Cicero
indulged so frequently in his orations.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The second and third books of letters, addressed to his brother
in Sardinia and Gaul, give an interesting account of the
state of public affairs during the years 697, 698, and part of
699, as also of his subsisting domestic relations during the
same period.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Along with his letters to Quintus, there is usually printed
an epistle or memoir, which Quintus addressed to his brother
when he stood candidate for the consulship, and which is entitled
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Petitione Consulatûs</span></span>. It gives advice with regard to
the measures he should pursue to attain his object, particularly
inculcating the best means to gain private friends, and acquire
general popularity. But though professedly drawn up merely
for the use of his brother, it appears to have been intended by
the author as a guide, or manual, for all who might be placed
in similar circumstances. It is written with considerable elegance,
and perfect purity of style, and forms an important
document for the history of the Roman republic, as it affords
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page283">[pg 283]</span><a name="Pg283" id="Pg283" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>us a clearer insight than we can derive from any other work
now extant, into the intrigues resorted to by the heads of parties
to gain the suffrages of the people.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The authenticity of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Correspondence between Cicero and
Brutus</span></span>, has formed the subject of a literary controversy, perhaps
the most celebrated which has ever occurred, except that
concerning the Epistles of Phalaris.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is quite ascertained, that a correspondence had been carried
on between Cicero and Brutus; and a collection of the
letters which had passed between them, extending to not less
than eight books, existed for several ages after Cicero’s death.
They were all written during the period which elapsed from
the assassination of Cæsar to the tragical end of the orator,
which comprehended about a year and a half; and it appears
from the fragments of them, cited by Plutarch and the grammarians,
that they chiefly related to the memorable political
events of that important interval, and to a literary controversy
which subsisted between Cicero and Brutus, with regard to
the attributes of perfect eloquence<a id="noteref_488" name="noteref_488" href="#note_488"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">488</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This collection is mentioned, and passages cited from it,
by Quintilian, Plutarch, and even Nonius Marcellus<a id="noteref_489" name="noteref_489" href="#note_489"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">489</span></span></a>, who
lived about the year 400. After this, all trace of it is lost,
till, in the fourteenth century, we find some of the disputed letters
in the possession of Petrarch; and it has been conjectured
that Petrarch himself was the discoverer of them<a id="noteref_490" name="noteref_490" href="#note_490"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">490</span></span></a>. Eighteen
of these letters, which were all that were then known, were
published at Rome in 1470. Many years afterwards, five more,
but in a mutilated state, were found in Germany, and these, in
all subsequent editions, were printed along with the original
eighteen. All the letters relate to the situation of public affairs
after the death of Cæsar. They contain a good deal of recrimination:
Brutus blaming Cicero for his dangerous elevation
of Octavius, and conferring honours on him too profusely;
Cicero censuring Brutus for having spared the life of Antony
at the time of the conspiracy.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Now the point in dispute is, If these twenty-three letters be
parts of the original eight books of the genuine correspondence
of Cicero and Brutus, so often cited by Plutarch, Quintilian,
and Nonius; or if they be the forgery of some monk or
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page284">[pg 284]</span><a name="Pg284" id="Pg284" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>sophist, during the dark ages which elapsed between the time
of Nonius and Petrarch.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
From their very first appearance, the eighteen letters, which
had come into the possession of Petrarch, passed among the
learned for original epistles of Cicero and Brutus; and the five
discovered in Germany, though doubted for a while, were soon
received into the same rank with the others. Erasmus seems
to have been the first who suspected the whole to be the declamatory
composition of some rhetorician or sophist. They
continued, however, to be cited by every other commentator,
critic, and historian, as the unquestionable remains of the
great author to whom they were ascribed. Middleton, in
particular, in his Life of Cicero, freely referred to them as
biographical authorities, along with the Familiar Epistles, and
those to Atticus.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Matters were in this situation, when Tunstall, in 1741, addressed
a Latin Epistle to Middleton, written professedly to
introduce a proposal for a new edition of Cicero’s letters to
Atticus, and his brother Quintus. In the first part of this
epistle, he attempted to retrieve the original readings of these
authentic treasures of Ciceronian history, and asserted their
genuine sense against the corruptions or false interpretations of
them, which had led to many erroneous conclusions in Middleton’s
Life of Cicero. In the second part, he denies the
authenticity of the whole correspondence <a name="corr284" id="corr284" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">between</span> Cicero and
Brutus, which he alleges is the production of some sophist or
scholiast of the middle ages, who probably wrote them, according
to the practice of those days, as an exercise for his rhetorical
talents, and with the view either of drawing up a supplement
to the Epistles to Atticus, so as to carry on the history
from the period at which they terminate, or to vindicate
Cicero’s character from the imputation of rashness, in throwing
too much power into the hands of Octavius. Tunstall farther
thinks, that the leading subject of these letters was suggested
to the sophist by a passage in Plutarch’s Life of Brutus,
where it is mentioned that Brutus had remonstrated with
Cicero, and complained of him to their mutual friend Atticus,
for the court he paid to Octavius, which showed that
his aim was not to procure liberty for his country, but a kind
master to himself.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Middleton soon afterwards published an English translation
of the whole correspondence between Brutus and Cicero, with
notes; and, in a prefatory dissertation, written with considerable
and unprovoked asperity, he attempted to vindicate the
authority of the epistles, and to answer the objections of Tunstall.
His adversary replied in an immense English work, of
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page285">[pg 285]</span><a name="Pg285" id="Pg285" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>more than 400 pages, entitled, <span class="tei tei-q">“Observations on the present
Collection of Epistles between Cicero and Brutus, representing
several evident marks of Forgery in those Epistles, in answer
to the late pretences of Dr Middleton: 1744.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is difficult to give any sketch of the argumentative part
of this famed controversy, as the merit of all such discussion
consists in the extreme accuracy and minuteness of investigation.
The main scope, however, of the objections, is thus
generally exhibited by Tunstall in his Latin epistle. He declares,
<span class="tei tei-q">“that as he came fresh from the perusal of Cicero’s
genuine letters, he perceived that those to Brutus wanted the
beauty and copiousness of the Ciceronian diction—that the
epistles, both of Brutus and Cicero, were drawn in the same
style and manner of colouring, and trimmed up with so much
art and diligence, that they seemed to proceed rather from
scholastic subtlety and meditation, than from the genuine acts
and affairs of life—that when, both before and after the date
of the letters to Atticus, several epistles had been addressed
from Brutus to Cicero, and from Cicero to Brutus, it was
strange that those which preceded the letters to Atticus should
have been lost, and those alone remain which appear to have
been industriously designed for an epilogue to the Epistles to
Atticus—that such reasons induced him to suspect, but on
looking farther into the letters themselves, he discovered many
absurdities in the sense, many improprieties in the language,
many remarkable predictions of future events, both on Brutus’s
side and Cicero’s; but what was most material, a great number
of historical facts, not only quite new, but wholly altered, and
some even apparently false, and contradictory to the genuine
works of Cicero.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Such was the state of the controversy, as it stood between
Tunstall and Middleton. In 1745, the year after Middleton
had published his translation of the epistles, Markland engaged
in this literary contest, and came forward in opposition to the
authenticity of the letters, by publishing his <span class="tei tei-q">“Remarks on the
Epistles of Cicero to Brutus, and of Brutus to Cicero, in a
Letter to a Friend.”</span> The arguments of Tunstall had chiefly
turned on historical inconsistencies—those of Markland principally
hinge on phrases to be found in the letters, which are
not Ciceronian, or even of pure <a name="corr285a" id="corr285a" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Latinity</span>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
I must here close this long account of the writings of Cicero—of
Cicero, distinguished as the Consul of the republic—as
the father and saviour of his country—but not less distinguished
as the orator, philosopher, and moralist of Rome.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Salve
    primus omnium Parens Patriæ <a name="corr285" id="corr285" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">appellate</span>,—primus in togâ triumphum
linguæque lauream merite, et facundiæ, Latiarumque
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page286">[pg 286]</span><a name="Pg286" id="Pg286" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>Literarum parens: atque (ut Dictator Cæsar, hostis quondam
tuus, de te scripsit,) omnium triumphorum lauream adopte majorem;
quanto plus est, ingenii Romani terminos in tantum promovisse,
quàm imperii<a id="noteref_491" name="noteref_491" href="#note_491"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">491</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<div class="tei tei-tb"><hr style="width: 60%" /></div>
<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the former volume of this work, I had traced the progress
of the language of the Romans, and treated of the different
poets by whom it was adorned till the era of Augustus.
I had chiefly occasion, in the course of that part of my inquiry,
to compare the poetical productions of Rome with those of
Greece, and to show that the Latin poetry of this early age,
being modelled on that of Athens or Alexandria, had acquired
an air of preparation and authorship, and appeared to have
been written to obtain the cold approbation of the public, or
smiles of a Patrician patron, while the native lines of the
Grecian bards seem to be poured fourth like the Delphic oracles,
because the god which inspired them was too great to be
contained within the bosom. In the prose compositions of
the Romans, which have been considered in the present volume,
though the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">exemplaria Græca</span></span> were still the models of
style, we have not observed the same servility of imitation.
The agricultural writers of Latium treated of a subject in a
great measure foreign to the maritime feelings and commercial
occupations of the Greeks; while, in the Latin historians, orators,
and philosophers, we listen to a tone of practical utility,
derived from the familiar acquaintance which their authors
exercised with the affairs of life. The old Latin historians
were for the most part themselves engaged in the affairs they
related, and almost every oration of Cicero was actually delivered
in the Senate or Forum. Among the Romans, philosophy
was not, as it had been with many of the Greeks, an
academic dream or speculation, which was substituted for the
realities of life. In Rome, philosophic inquiries were chiefly
prosecuted as supplying arguments and illustrations to the
patron for his conflicts in the Forum, and as guiding the citizen
in the discharge of his duties to the commonwealth.
Those studies, in short, alone were valued, which, as it is beautifully
expressed by Cicero, in the person of Lælius—<span class="tei tei-q">“Efficiant
ut usui civitati simus: id enim esse præclarissimum
sapientiæ munus, maximumque virtutis documentum puto.”</span>
</p>

</div>
    </div>     
        <hr class="doublepage" /><div class="tei tei-back" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 6.00em">
    <span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-1">[pg A-1]</span><a name="PgA01" id="PgA01" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
    <div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"><h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">APPENDIX.</span></h1>
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-2">[pg A-2]</span><a name="PgA02" id="PgA02" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Some felt the silent stroke of mouldering age,</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Some hostile fury, some religious rage:</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Barbarian blindness, Christian zeal conspire,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">And Papal piety, and Gothic fire.”</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 16.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Pope’s</span></span> <span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Epistle to Addison</span></span>.</div>
</div></div>

<hr class="doublepage" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
        <a name="toc19" id="toc19"></a><a name="pdf20" id="pdf20"></a>
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-3">[pg A-3]</span><a name="PgA03" id="PgA03" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
<a name="appendix" id="appendix" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">APPENDIX.</span></h1>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In order to be satisfied as to the authenticity of the works commonly called Classical,
it is important to ascertain in what manner they were given to the public by
their respective authors—to trace how they were preserved during the long night
of the dark ages—and to point out by whom their perishing remains were first discovered
at the return of light. Nor will it be uninteresting to follow up this sketch
by an enumeration of the principal Editions of the Classics mentioned in the preceding
pages, and of the best Translations of them which, from time to time, have
appeared in the Italian, French, and English languages.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The manuscripts of the Latin Classics, during the existence of the Roman republic
and empire, may be divided into what have been called <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">notata</span></span> and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">perscripta</span></span>.
The former were those written by the author himself, or his learned slaves, in
contractions or signs which stood for syllables and words; the latter, those which
were fully transcribed in the ordinary characters by the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">librarius</span></span>, who was employed
by the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">bibliopolæ</span></span>, or booksellers, to prepare the productions of an author for public
sale.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The books written in the hand of the authors were probably not very legible, at
least if we may judge of others by Cicero. His brother Quintus had complained
that he could not read his letters, and Cicero says in reply: <span class="tei tei-q">“Scribis te meas literas
superiores vix legere potuisse; hoc facio semper ut quicumque calamus in manus
meas venerit, eo sic utar tamquam bono<a id="noteref_492" name="noteref_492" href="#note_492"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">492</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But the works,—at least the prose works,—of the Romans were seldom written
out in the hand of the author, and were generally dictated by him to some slave or
freedman instructed in penmanship. It is well known that many of the orations of
Cicero, Cato, and their great rhetorical contemporaries, were taken down by
short-hand writers stationed in the Senate or Forum. But even the works most
carefully prepared in the closet were <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">notata</span></span>, in a similar manner, by slaves and
freedmen. There was no part of his learned compositions on which Cicero took
more pains, or about which his thoughts were more occupied<a id="noteref_493" name="noteref_493" href="#note_493"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">493</span></span></a>, than the dedication
of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span> to Varro, and even this he <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">dictated</span></span> to his slave Spintharus, though
he did so slowly, word by word, and not in whole sentences to Tiro, as was his
practice in his other productions. <span class="tei tei-q">“Male mihi sit,”</span> says he in a letter to Atticus,
<span class="tei tei-q">“si umquam quidquam tam enitar. Ergo ne Tironi quidem dictavi, qui totas <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">periochas</span></span>
persequi solet, sed Spintharo syllabatim<a id="noteref_494" name="noteref_494" href="#note_494"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">494</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This practice of authors dictating their works created a necessity, or at least a
conveniency, of writing with rapidity, and of employing contractions, or conventional
marks, in almost every word.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Accordingly, from the earliest periods of Roman literature, words were contracted,
or were signified by notes, which sometimes stood for more than one letter,
sometimes for syllables, and at other times for whole words. Funccius, who
main<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-4">[pg A-4]</span><a name="PgA04" id="PgA04" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>tains that Adam was the first short-hand writer<a id="noteref_495" name="noteref_495" href="#note_495"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">495</span></span></a>, has asserted, with more truth, that
the Romans contracted their words from the remotest ages of the republic, and to a
greater degree than any other ancient nation. Sometimes the abbreviations consisted
merely in writing the initial letter instead of the whole word. Thus P. C. stood
for Patres Conscripti; C. R., for Civis Romanus; S. N. L., for Socii Nominis Latini.
This sort of contraction being employed in words frequently recurring, and
which in one sense might be termed public, and being also universally recognized,
would rarely produce any misapprehension or mistake. But frequently the abbreviations
were much more complex, and the leading letters of words in less common
use being <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">notata</span></span>, the contractions became of much more difficult and dubious interpretation.
For example, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Meit.</span></span> expressed meminit; <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Acus.</span></span>, Acerbus; <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Quit.</span></span>, quærit;
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ror.</span></span>, Rhetor.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
For the sake, however, of yet greater expedition in writing, and perhaps, in some
few instances for the purpose of secrecy, signs or marks, which could be currently
made with one dash or scratch with the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">stylus</span></span>, and without lifting or turning it,
came to be employed, instead of those letters which were themselves the abbreviations
of words. Some writers have supposed that these signs were entirely arbitrary<a id="noteref_496" name="noteref_496" href="#note_496"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">496</span></span></a>,
whilst others have, with more probability, maintained that their forms can be
resolved or analysed into the figures, or parts of the figures, of the letters themselves
which they were intended to represent, though they have often departed far from
the shape of the original characters<a id="noteref_497" name="noteref_497" href="#note_497"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">497</span></span></a>. Ennius is said to have invented 1100 of
these signs<a id="noteref_498" name="noteref_498" href="#note_498"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">498</span></span></a>, which he no doubt employed in his multifarious compositions. Others
came into gradual use in the manual operation of writing with rapidity to dictation.
Tiro, the favourite freedman of Cicero, greatly increased the number, and brought
this sort of tachygraphy to its greatest perfection among the Romans. In consequence
of this fashion of authors dictating their works, expedition came to be considered
of the utmost importance; it was regarded as the chief accomplishment of
an amanuensis; and he alone was considered as perfect in his art, whose pen could
equal the rapidity of utterance:
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Hic et scriptor erit felix, cui litera verbum est,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Quique notis linguam superet, cursumque loquentis,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Excipiens longas per nova compendia voces<a id="noteref_499" name="noteref_499" href="#note_499"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">499</span></span></a>.</div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
These lines were written by a poet of the age of Augustus, and it appears from Martial<a id="noteref_500" name="noteref_500" href="#note_500"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">500</span></span></a>,
Ausonius<a id="noteref_501" name="noteref_501" href="#note_501"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">501</span></span></a>, and Prudentius, that this system of dictation by the author, and
rapid notation by his amanuensis, continued in practice during the later ages of the
empire.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Such was the mode in which most of the writings of the ancients came originally
from their authors, and were delivered to those friends who were desirous to possess
copies, or to the booksellers to be <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">perscripta</span></span>, or transcribed, for publication.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There exists sufficient proof of the high estimation in which accurate transcriptions
of the works of their own writers were held by the Romans. The correctness
of printing, however, could not be expected. In the original notation, some mistakes
might probably be made from carelessness of pronunciation in the author who
dictated, and haste in his amanuensis; but the great source of errors in MSS. was
the blunders made by the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">librarius</span></span> in copying out from the noted exemplar. There
was the greatest ambiguity and doubt in the interpretation, both of words contracted
in the ordinary character and in the artificial signs. Sometimes the same word was
expressed by different letters; thus MR. MT. MTR. all expressed <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mater</span></span>. Sometimes,
on the other hand, the same set of letters expressed different words; for
instance, ACT. signified <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Actor</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Auctoritas</span></span>, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hactenus</span></span>. The collocation of the
letters was often inverted from the order in which they stood in the word when fully
expressed; and frequently one letter had not merely its own power, but that of several
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-5">[pg A-5]</span><a name="PgA05" id="PgA05" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>others. Thus AMO. signified <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">animo</span></span>, because M had there not only its own force,
but, as its shape in some measure announces, the power of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ni</span></span> also. Matters were
still worse, when not only abbreviations, but signs had been resorted to. These
were variously employed by different writers, and were also differently interpreted
by transcribers. Some of these signs were extremely similar in form: it was scarcely
possible to discriminate the sign which denoted the syllable <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ab</span></span> from that which
expressed the syllable <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">um</span></span>; and the signs of the syllables <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">is</span></span> and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">it</span></span> were nearly undistinguishable;
while <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ad</span></span> and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">at</span></span> were precisely the same. The mark which expressed
the word <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">talis</span></span>, being a little more sloped or inclined, expressed <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">qualis</span></span>;
and the difference in the Tironian signs which stood for the complete words <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ager</span></span>
and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Amicus</span></span>, was scarcely perceptible<a id="noteref_502" name="noteref_502" href="#note_502"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">502</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The ancient Latin writers also employed a number of marks to denote the accents
of words, and the quantities of syllables. The oldest writers, as Livius Andronicus
and Nævius, always placed two vowels when a syllable was to be pronounced long<a id="noteref_503" name="noteref_503" href="#note_503"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">503</span></span></a>.
Attius, the great tragic author, was the first to relinquish this usage; and after his
time, in conformity to the new practice which he had adopted, a certain mark was
placed over the long vowels. When this custom also (which is stigmatised by
Quintilian as <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ineptissimus</span></span><a id="noteref_504" name="noteref_504" href="#note_504"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">504</span></span></a>) fell into disuse, the mark was frequently misunderstood,
and Funccius has given several examples of corruptions and false readings
from the mistake of transcribers, who supposed that it was intended to express an <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">m</span></span>,
an <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">n</span></span>, or other letters<a id="noteref_505" name="noteref_505" href="#note_505"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">505</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In addition to all this, little attention was paid to the separation of words and
sentences, and the art of punctuation was but imperfectly understood.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Finally, and above all, the orthography of Latin was extremely fluctuating and
uncertain. We have seen, in an early part of this work, how it varied in the time
of the republic, and it, in fact, never became fixed. Mai talks repeatedly, in his
preface, of the strange inconsistencies of spelling in the Codex, which contained
Cicero’s work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republica</span></span>; and Cassiodorus, who of all his contemporaries chiefly
cultivated literature during the reign of the barbarians in Italy, often regrets that the
ancient Romans had left their orthography encumbered with the utmost difficulties.
<span class="tei tei-q">“Orthographia,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“apud Græcos plerumque sine ambiguitate probatur
expressa; inter Latinos vero sub ardua difficultate relicta monstratur; unde etiam
modo studium magnum lectoris inquiret.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In consequence of this dictation to short-hand, and this uncertain orthography,
we find that the corruption of the classics had begun at a very early period. The
ninth Satire of Lucilius was directed against the ridiculous blunders of transcribers,
and contained rules for greater correctness. Cicero, in his letters to his brother
Quintus, bitterly complains of the errors of copyists,—<span class="tei tei-q">“De Latinis vero, quo me
vertam, nescio; ita mendose et scribuntur, et 
veneunt<a id="noteref_506" name="noteref_506" href="#note_506"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">506</span></span></a>.”</span> Strabo says, that in his
time booksellers employed ignorant transcribers, who neglected to compare what
they wrote with the exemplar; which, he adds, has occurred in many works, copied
for the purpose of being sold, both at Rome and Alexandria<a id="noteref_507" name="noteref_507" href="#note_507"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">507</span></span></a>. Martial, too, thus
cautions his reader against the mistakes occasioned by the inaccuracy and haste of
the venders of books, and the transcribers whom they employed:
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Si qua videbuntur chartis tibi, lector, in istis,</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">Sive obscura nimis, sive Latina parum;</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Non meus est error: nocuit Librarius illis,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Dum properat versus annumerare tibi<a id="noteref_508" name="noteref_508" href="#note_508"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">508</span></span></a>.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Aulus Gellius repeatedly complains of the inaccuracy of copies in his time: We
learn from him, that the writings of the greatest Classics were already corrupted
and falsified, not only by the casual errors of copyists, but by the deliberate perversions
of critics, who boldly altered everything that was too elegant or poetical
for their own taste and understanding<a id="noteref_509" name="noteref_509" href="#note_509"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">509</span></span></a>. To the numerous corruptions in the text
of Sallust he particularly refers<a id="noteref_510" name="noteref_510" href="#note_510"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">510</span></span></a>.
</p>
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-6">[pg A-6]</span><a name="PgA06" id="PgA06" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The practice, too, of abridging larger works, particularly histories, and extracting
from them, was injurious to the preservation of MSS. This practice, occasioned
by the scarcity of paper, began as early as the time of Brutus, who extracted even
from the meagre annals of his country. These excerpts seldom compensated for
the originals, but made them be neglected, and in consequence they were lost.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It seems also probable, that the destruction of the treasures of classical literature
commenced at a very early period. Varro’s library, which was the most extensive
private collection of books in Italy, was ruined and dispersed when his villa was
occupied by Antony<a id="noteref_511" name="noteref_511" href="#note_511"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">511</span></span></a>; and some of his own treatises, as that addressed to Pompey
on the duties of the Consulship, were irretrievably lost. Previous to the art of
printing, books, in consequence of their great scarcity and value, were chiefly
heaped up in public libraries. Several of these were consumed in the fire, by
which so many temples were burned to the ground in the reign of Nero<a id="noteref_512" name="noteref_512" href="#note_512"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">512</span></span></a>, particularly
the library in the temple of Apollo, on the Palatine Hill, which was founded
by Augustus, and contained all the Roman poets and historians previous to his age.
This literary establishment having been restored as far as was possible by Domitian,
suffered a second time by the flames; and the extensive library of the Capitol perished
in a fire during the reign of Commodus<a id="noteref_513" name="noteref_513" href="#note_513"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">513</span></span></a>. When it is considered, that at these
periods the copies of Latin works were few, and chiefly confined within the walls
of Rome, some notion may be formed of the extent of the loss sustained by these
successive conflagrations.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
From the portentous æra of the death of Pertinax, the brief reign of each succeeding
emperor ended in assassination, civil war, and revolution. The imperial throne
was filled by soldiers of fortune, who came like shadows, and like shadows departed.
Rome at length ceased to be the fixed and habitual residence of her sovereigns, who
were now generally employed at a distance in the field, in repelling foreign enemies,
or repressing usurpers. While it is certain, that during this period many of the finest
monuments of the arts were destroyed, and some of the most splendid works of
architecture defaced, it can hardly be supposed that the frail texture of the parchment,
or papyrus, should have resisted the stroke of sudden ruin, or the gradual
mouldering of neglect.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But the chief destruction took place after the removal of the seat of empire by
Constantine. The loss of so many classical works subsequently to that æra, has
been attributed chiefly to the irruption of the northern barbarians; but it was fully
as much owing to the blind zeal of the early Christians. Many of the public libraries
were placed in temples, and hence were the more exposed to the fury of the
proselytes to the new faith. This devastation began in Italy in the fourth century,
before the barbarians had penetrated to the heart of the empire; and, in the same
century, if Sulpicius Severus may be credited, Bishop Martin undertook a crusade
against the temples of the Gauls<a id="noteref_514" name="noteref_514" href="#note_514"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">514</span></span></a>. St Augustine, St Jerome, and Lactantius,
indeed, knew the classics well; but they considered them as a sort of forbidden
fruit: and St Jerome, as he himself informs us, was whipped by an angel for
perusing Plautus and Cicero<a id="noteref_515" name="noteref_515" href="#note_515"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">515</span></span></a>. The following or fifth century, was distinguished
by the first capture of Rome, and its successive devastations by Alaric, Genseric,
and Attila. In the latter part of the century, Milan, too, was plundered; which,
next to Rome, was the chief repository of books in Italy.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Monachism, which, in its first institution, particularly in the east, had been so
destructive of literary works, became, when more advanced in its progress, a chief
cause of their preservation. When the monks were at length united, in a species
of civil union, under the fixed rules of St Benedict, in the beginning of the sixth
century, the institution contributed, if not to the diffusion of literature, at least to
the preservation of literary works. There was no prohibition in the ordinances of
St Benedict against the reading of classical writings, as in those of St Isidore: and
the consequence was, that wherever any abbot, or even monk, had a taste for
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-7">[pg A-7]</span><a name="PgA07" id="PgA07" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>letters, books were introduced into the convent. We have a remarkable example
of this in the instance of Cassiodorus, whose genius, learning, and virtue, shed a
lustre on one of the darkest periods of Italian history. After his pre-eminent services
as minister of state during the reign of Theodoric, and regency of Amalasuntha,
he retired, in the year 540, when he had reached the age of seventy, to the
monastery of Monte Casino, situated in a most delightful spot, near the place of his
birth, in Calabria. There he became as serviceable to literature as he had formerly
been to the state; and the convent to which he betook himself deserves to be first
mentioned in any future history of the preservation of the Classics. Before his
entrance into it, he possessed an extensive library, with which he enriched the
cloister<a id="noteref_516" name="noteref_516" href="#note_516"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">516</span></span></a>; and subsequently enlarged it by a collection of MSS., which he caused
to be brought to him from various quarters of Italy. There is still extant his order
to a monk to procure for him Albinus’ treatise on Music; which shows, that his
collection was not entirely confined to theological treatises: while his work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
Artibus ac Disciplinis liberalium Literarum</span></span>, is an ample testimony of his classical
learning, and of the value which he attached to it. His library contained, at least,
Ennius, Terence, Lucretius, Varro, Cicero, and Sallust<a id="noteref_517" name="noteref_517" href="#note_517"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">517</span></span></a>. The monks of his convent
were excited by him to the transcription of MSS.; and, in his work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
Orthographia</span></span>, he did not disdain to give minute directions for copying with
facility and correctness.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Thus, in collecting an ample library—in diffusing copies of ancient MSS.—in
verbal instructions, written lectures, and the composition of voluminous works—he
closed, in the service of religion and learning, a long and meritorious life.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The example of Cassiodorus was followed in other convents. About half a century
after his death, Columbanus founded a monastery of Benedictines at Bobbio, a
town situated among the northern Apennines. This religious society, as Tiraboschi
informs us, was remarkable, not only for the sanctity of its manners, but the
cultivation of literature. It was fortunate that receptacles for books had now been
thus provided, as otherwise the treasures of classical literature in Italy would, in all
likelihood, have perished during the wars of Belisarius, and Narses, and the invasion
of Totila. It is in the age of Cassiodorus,—that is, the beginning and middle of the
sixth century,—that Tiraboschi places the serious and systematic commencement of
the transcription of the classics<a id="noteref_518" name="noteref_518" href="#note_518"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">518</span></span></a>. He mentions the names of some of the most
eminent copyists; but a fuller list had been previously furnished by Fabricius<a id="noteref_519" name="noteref_519" href="#note_519"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">519</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In Gregory the Great, who was Pope at the end of the sixth and beginning of the
seventh century, literature, according to popular belief, found an enemy in the west,
as fatal to its interests as the Caliph Omar had been in the east. This pontiff was
accused of burning a classical library, and also some valuable works, which had replaced
those formerly consumed in the Palatine library. John of Salisbury is the
sole authority for this charge; and even he, who lived six centuries after the age of
Gregory, only mentions it as a tradition and report: <span class="tei tei-q">“Fertur Beatus Gregorius
bibliothecam combussisse gentilem, quo divinæ paginæ gratior esset locus, et major
auctoritas, et diligentia studiosior<a id="noteref_520" name="noteref_520" href="#note_520"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">520</span></span></a>;”</span> and again, <span class="tei tei-q">“Ut traditur a majoribus, incendio
dedit probatæ lectionis scripta, Palatinus quæcunque tenebat Apollo<a id="noteref_521" name="noteref_521" href="#note_521"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">521</span></span></a>.”</span> Cardan informs
us, that Gregory also caused the plays of Nævius, Ennius, and Afranius, to be
burned. That he suppressed the works of Cicero, rests on the authority of a passage
in an edict published by Louis XI., dated 1473, and quoted by Lyron in his
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Singularitéz Historiques</span></span><a id="noteref_522" name="noteref_522" href="#note_522"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">522</span></span></a>. St Antonius, who was Archbishop of Florence in the
middle of the fifteenth century, is cited by Vossius as the most ancient author who
has asserted that he burned the decades of Livy<a id="noteref_523" name="noteref_523" href="#note_523"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">523</span></span></a>. These charges have been
strenuously supported by Brucker<a id="noteref_524" name="noteref_524" href="#note_524"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">524</span></span></a>, while Tiraboschi, on the other hand, has endeavoured
to vindicate the memory of the pontiff from all such aspersions<a id="noteref_525" name="noteref_525" href="#note_525"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">525</span></span></a>. Bayle
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-8">[pg A-8]</span><a name="PgA08" id="PgA08" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>has adopted a prudent neutrality<a id="noteref_526" name="noteref_526" href="#note_526"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">526</span></span></a>.
    Dendina<a id="noteref_527" name="noteref_527" href="#note_527"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">527</span></span></a>
    and Ginguené<a id="noteref_528" name="noteref_528" href="#note_528"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">528</span></span></a>, the most recent
authors who have touched on the subject, seem to consider the question, after all
that has been written on it, as still doubtful, and not likely to receive any farther
elucidation. It appears certain, that Gregory disliked classical, or profane literature,
on account of the oracles, idolatry, and rites, with which it is associated, and that
he prohibited its study by the clergy<a id="noteref_529" name="noteref_529" href="#note_529"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">529</span></span></a>;—whence may, perhaps, have originated
the reports of his wilfully destroying the then surviving libraries and books of Rome.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
During the course of the two centuries which followed the death of Gregory, Italy
was divided between the Greeks and Lombards, and was torn by spiritual dissensions.
The most numerous and barbarous swarm which had yet crossed the Alps
was the Lombards, who descended on Italy, under their king, Alboinus, in 568, immediately
after the death of Narses. It was no longer a tribe or army by which Italy
was invaded; but a whole nation of old men, women, and children, covered its
plains. This ignorant and ferocious race spread themselves from the Alps to Rome
during the seventh and eighth centuries. And although Rome itself escaped the
Lombard dominion, the horrors of a perpetual siege can alone convey an adequate
idea of its distressed situation. The feuds of the Lombard chiefs, their wars with
the Greeks, who still remained masters of Rome, and at length with the Franks,
(all which contests were marked with fire and massacre,) made a desert of the
Peninsular garden<a id="noteref_530" name="noteref_530" href="#note_530"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">530</span></span></a>. Hitherto the superstitious feelings of the northern hordes
had inspired them with some degree of respect for the sacerdotal order which they
found established in Italy. Reverence for the person of the priest had extended
itself to the security of his property, and while the palace and castle were wrapt in
flames, the convent escaped sacrilege. But the Lombards extended their fury
to objects which their rude predecessors had generally respected; and learning
was now attacked in her most vulnerable part. Amid the general destruction,
the monasteries and their libraries were no longer spared; and with others, that
of Monte Casino, one of the most valuable and extensive in Italy, was plundered
by the Lombards<a id="noteref_531" name="noteref_531" href="#note_531"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">531</span></span></a>. Some books preserved in the sack of the libraries were carried
back by these invaders to their native country, and a few were saved by monks,
who sought refuge in other kingdoms, which accounts for the number of classical
MSS. subsequently discovered in France and Germany<a id="noteref_532" name="noteref_532" href="#note_532"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">532</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Amid the ruin of taste and letters in these ages, it is probable that but few new
copies were made from the MSS. then extant. Some of the classics, however,
were still spared, and remained in the monastic libraries. Anspert, who was Abbot
of Beneventum, in the eighth century, declares that he had never studied Homer,
Cicero, or Virgil, which implies, that they were still preserved, and accessible to his
perusal<a id="noteref_533" name="noteref_533" href="#note_533"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">533</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The division of Italy between the Lombards and Greeks continued till the end of
the eighth century, when Charlemagne put an end to the kingdom of the former, and
founded his empire. Whether this monarch himself had any pretensions to the
character of a scholar, is more than doubtful; but whether he possessed learning or
not, he was a generous patron of those who did. He assembled round his court
such persons as were most distinguished for talents and erudition; he established
schools and pensioned scholars; and he founded also a species of Academy, of which
Alcuin was the head, and in which every one adopted a scriptural or classic appellation.
This tended to multiply the MSS. of the classics, and many of them found a
place in the imperial library mentioned by Eginhard. Charlemagne also established
the monastery of Fulda, and, in consequence, copies of these MSS. found their way
to Germany in the beginning of the ninth century<a id="noteref_534" name="noteref_534" href="#note_534"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">534</span></span></a>. The more recent Latin writers,
as Boethius, Macrobius, and Capella, were chiefly popular in his age; but Virgil,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-9">[pg A-9]</span><a name="PgA09" id="PgA09" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>Cicero, and Livy, were not unknown. Alcuin’s poetical account of the library at
York, founded by Archbishop Egbert, and of which he had been the first librarian,
affords us some notion of the usual contents of the libraries at that time.—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Illic invenies veterum vestigia patrum;</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Quicquid habet pro se Latio Romanus in orbe,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Græcia vel quicquid transmisit clara Latinis.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Then, after enumerating the works of all the Fathers which had a place in the
library, he proceeds with his catalogue.—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Historici veteres, Pompeius, Plinius, ipse</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Acer Aristoteles rhetor, atque Tullius ingens;</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Quid quoque Sedulius, vel quid canit ipse Juvencus,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Alcuinus, et Clemens Prosper, Paulinus orator;</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Quid Fortunatus vel quid Lactantius edunt.</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Quæ Maro Virgilius, Statius, Lucanus et auctor,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Artis grammaticæ vel quid scripsere magistri.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But though there were libraries in other countries, Italy always contained the greatest
number of classical MSS. In the ninth century, Lupus, who was educated at
Fulda, and afterwards became Abbot of Ferrieres, a monastery in the Orleanois, requested
Pope Benedict III. to send him Cicero <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de Oratore</span></span> and Quintilian, of
both of which he possessed parts, but had neither of them complete<a id="noteref_535" name="noteref_535" href="#note_535"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">535</span></span></a>; and in another
letter he begs from Italy a copy of Suetonius<a id="noteref_536" name="noteref_536" href="#note_536"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">536</span></span></a>. The series of his letters gives us a
favourable impression of the state of profane literature in his time. In his very first
letter to Einhart, who had been his preceptor, he quotes Horace and the Tusculan
Questions. Virgil is repeatedly cited in the course of his epistles, and the lines of
Catullus are familiarly referred to as authorities for the proper quantities of syllables.
Lupus did not confine his care to the mere transcription of MSS. He bestowed
much pains on the rectification of the texts, as is evinced by his letter to Ansbald,
Abbot of Prum, where he acknowledges having received from him a copy of the
epistles of Cicero, which would enable him to correct the MSS. of them which he
himself possessed<a id="noteref_537" name="noteref_537" href="#note_537"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">537</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It was a rule in convents, that those who embraced the monasteric life should
employ some hours each day in manual labour; but as all were not fit for those occupations
which require much corporeal exertion, many of the monks fulfilled their
tasks by copying MSS. Transcription thus became a favourite exercise in the ninth
century, and was much encouraged by the Abbots<a id="noteref_538" name="noteref_538" href="#note_538"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">538</span></span></a>. In every great convent there
was an apartment called the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Scriptorium</span></span>, in which writers were employed in transcribing
such books as were deemed proper for the library. The heads of monasteries
borrowed their classics from each other, and, having copied, returned them<a id="noteref_539" name="noteref_539" href="#note_539"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">539</span></span></a>.—By
this means, books were wonderfully multiplied. Libraries became the constant
appendages of cloisters, and in Italy existed nowhere else. We do not hear, during
this period, of either royal or private libraries. There was little information among
the priests or parochial clergy, and almost every man of learning was a member of
a convent.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But while MSS. thus increased in the monasteries, there were, at the same time,
during this century, many counteracting causes, which rendered them more scarce
than they would otherwise have been. During the Norman invasion, the convents
were the chief objects of plunder. From the time, too, of the conquest of Alexandria
by the Saracens, in the seventh century, when the Egyptian papyrus almost
ceased to be imported into Europe, till the close of the tenth, when the art of making
paper from cotton rags seems to have been introduced, there were no materials for
writing except parchment, a substance too expensive to be readily spared for mere
purposes of literature<a id="noteref_540" name="noteref_540" href="#note_540"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">540</span></span></a>. The scarcity of paper, too, not only prevented the increase
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-10">[pg A-10]</span><a name="PgA10" id="PgA10" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>of classical MSS., but occasioned the loss of some which were then in existence,
from the characters having been deleted, in order to make way for a more favourite
production. The monkish scribes were accustomed to peel off the surface of parchment
MSS., or to obliterate the ink by a chemical process, for the purpose of fitting
them to receive the works of some Christian author; so that, by a singular and fatal
metamorphosis, a classic was frequently translated into a vapid homily or monastic
legend. That many valuable works of antiquity perished in this way, is evinced by
the number of MSS. which have been discovered, evidently written on erased parchments.
Thus the fragments of Cicero’s Orations, lately found in the Ambrosian
library, had been partly obliterated, to make room for the works of Sedulius, and the
Acts of the Council of Chalcedon; and Cicero’s treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de Republica</span></span> had been
effaced, in order to receive a commentary of St Augustine on the Psalms.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The tenth century has generally been accounted the age of deepest darkness in
the west of Europe. During its course, Italy was united by Otho I. with the
German empire, and was torn by civil dissensions. Muratori gives a detailed
account of the plundering of Italian convents, which was the consequence of these
commotions, and of the irruption of the Huns in 899<a id="noteref_541" name="noteref_541" href="#note_541"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">541</span></span></a>. Still, however, Italy continued
to be the great depository of classical MSS.; and in that country they were
occasionally sought with the utmost avidity. Gerbert, who became Pope in the
last year of the tenth century, by name of Silvester II., spared neither pains nor
expense in procuring transcriptions of MSS. This extraordinary man, impelled by
a thirst of science, had left his home and country at an early period of life: He had
visited various nations of Europe, but it was in Spain, then partly subject to the
Arabs, that he had chiefly obtained an opportunity of gratifying his mathematical
talent, and desire of general information. Being no less ready to communicate
than eager to acquire learning, he founded a school on his return to Italy, and
greatly increased the library at Bobbio, in Lombardy, to the abbacy of which he
had been promoted. While Archbishop of Rheims, in France, that kingdom
experienced the effects of his enlightened zeal. During his papacy, obtained for
him by his pupil Otho III., he persevered in his love of learning. In his generosity
to scholars, and his expenditure of wealth for the employment of copyists, as well
as for exploring the repositories in which the mouldering relics of ancient learning
were yet to be found, we trace a liberality, bordering on profusion.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Nosti,”</span> says
he, in one of his epistles to the monk Rainaldo, <span class="tei tei-q">“quanto studio librorum exemplaria
undique conquiram; nosti quot scriptores in urbibus, aut in agris Italiæ passim
habeantur. Age ergo, et te solo conscio, ex tuis sumptibus fac ut mihi scribantur
Manilius de Astronomia, et Victorinus. Spondeo tibi, et certum teneo quod,
quicquid erogaveris, cumulatim remittam<a id="noteref_542" name="noteref_542" href="#note_542"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">542</span></span></a>.”</span> Having by this means exhausted
Italy, Silvester directed his researches to countries beyond the Alps, as we perceive
from his letter to Egbert, Abbot of Tours.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Cui rei preparandæ bibliothecam
assidue comparo; et sicut Romæ dudum, et in aliis partibus Italiæ, in Germanià
quoque, et Belgicà, scriptores auctorumque exemplaria multitudine nummorum
redemi; adjutus benevolentia et studio amicorum comprovincialium: sic identidem
apud vos per vos fieri sinite ut exorem. Quos scribi velimus, in fine epistolæ
designabimus<a id="noteref_543" name="noteref_543" href="#note_543"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">543</span></span></a>.”</span> This list, however, is not printed in any of the editions of Gerbert’s
Letters, which I have had an opportunity of consulting.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It thus appears that there were zealous researches for the classics, and successful
discoveries of them, long before the age of Poggio, or even of Petrarch; but so
little intercourse existed among different countries, and the monks had so little
acquaintance with the treasures of their own libraries, that a classical author might
be considered as lost in Italy, though familiar to a few learned men, and still
lurking in many of the convents.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Gerbert, previous to his elevation to the Pontificate, had, as already mentioned,
been Abbot of Bobbio; and the catalogue which Muratori has given of the library
in that convent, may be taken as an example of the description and extent of the
classical treasures contained in the best monastic libraries of the tenth century.
While the collection, no doubt, chiefly consists of the works of the saints and
fathers, we find Persius, Valerius Flaccus, and Juvenal, contained in one volume.
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-11">[pg A-11]</span><a name="PgA11" id="PgA11" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>There are also enumerated in the list Cicero’s Topica, and his Catilinarian orations,
Martial, parts of Ausonius and Pliny, the first book of Lucretius, four books of
Claudian, the same number of Lucan, and two of Ovid<a id="noteref_544" name="noteref_544" href="#note_544"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">544</span></span></a>. The monastery of Monte
Casino, which was the retreat, as we have seen, of Cassiodorus, was distinguished
about the same period for its classical library.—<span class="tei tei-q">“The monks of Casino, in Italy,”</span>
observes Warton, <span class="tei tei-q">“were distinguished before the year 1000, not only for their
knowledge of the sciences, but their attention to polite learning, and an acquaintance
with the classics. Their learned Abbot, Desiderius, collected the best of the
Roman writers. This fraternity not only composed learned treatises on music,
logic, astronomy, and the Vitruvian architecture, but likewise employed a portion
of their time in transcribing Tacitus, Jornandes, Ovid’s Fasti, Cicero, Seneca,
Donatus the grammarian, Virgil, Theocritus, and Homer.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
During the eleventh century, the Benedictines having excited scandal by their
opulence and luxury, the Carthusian and Cistertian orders attracted notice and
admiration, by a self-denying austerity; but they valued themselves not less than
the Benedictines, on the elegance of their classical transcriptions; and about the
same period, translations from the Classics into the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lingua volgare</span></span>, first commenced
in Italy.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
At the end of the eleventh century, the Crusades began; and during the whole
course of the twelfth century, they occupied the public mind, to the exclusion of
almost every other object or pursuit. Schools and convents were affected with this
religious and military mania: All sedentary occupations were suspended, and a
mark of reproach was affixed to every undertaking which did not promote the
contagion of the times.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
About the middle of the thirteenth century, and after the death of the Emperor
Frederic II., Italy was for the first time divided into a number of petty sovereignties,
unconnected by any system of general union, except the nominal allegiance
still due to the Emperor. This separation, while it excited rivalry in arms, also
created some degree of emulation in learning. Many Universities were established
for the study of theology and the exercise of scholastic disputation; and though the
classics were not publicly diffused, they existed within the walls of the convent,
and were well known to the learned men of the period. Brunetto Latini, the
teacher of Dante, and author of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Tesoro</span></span>, translated into Italian several of
Cicero’s orations, some parts of his rhetorical works, and considerable portions of
Sallust<a id="noteref_545" name="noteref_545" href="#note_545"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">545</span></span></a>. Dante, in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Amoroso Convito</span></span>, familiarly quotes Livy, Virgil, and
Cicero <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de Officiis</span></span>; and Mehus mentions various translations of Seneca, Ovid, and
Virgil, which had been executed in the age of Dante, and which he had seen in
MSS. in the different libraries of Italy<a id="noteref_546" name="noteref_546" href="#note_546"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">546</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It was Petrarch, however, who, in the fourteenth century, led the way in drawing
forth the classics from the dungeons where they had been hitherto immured,
and holding up their light and glory to the eyes of men. While enjoying the reputation
of having perfected the most melodious and poetical language of Europe, Petrarch
has acquired a still higher title to fame, by his successful exertions in rousing
his country from a slumber of ignorance which threatened to be eternal. In his earliest
youth, instead of the dry and dismal works which at that time formed the general
reading, he applied himself to the reading of Virgil and Cicero; and when he
first commenced his epistolary correspondence, he strongly expressed his wish that
their fame should prevail over the authority of Aristotle and his commentators; and
declared his belief of the high advantages the world would enjoy if the monkish philosophy
should give place to classical literature. Petrarch, as is evinced by his letters,
was the most assiduous recoverer and restorer of ancient MSS. that had yet existed.
He was an enthusiast in this as he was in every thing else that merited enthusiasm—love,
friendship, glory, patriotism, and religion. He never passed an old convent
without searching its library, or knew of a friend travelling into those quarters
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-12">[pg A-12]</span><a name="PgA12" id="PgA12" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>where he supposed books to be concealed, without entreaties to procure for him some
classical MS. It is evident that he came just in time to preserve from total ruin
many of the mouldering remains of classical antiquity, and to excite among his countrymen
a desire for the preservation of those treasures when its gratification was on
the very eve of being rendered for ever impracticable. He had seen, in his youth,
several of Cicero’s now lost treatises, and Varro’s great work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rerum Divinarum et
Humanarum</span></span><a id="noteref_547" name="noteref_547" href="#note_547"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">547</span></span></a>, which has forever disappeared from the world; and it is probable
that had not some one, endued with his ardent love of letters, and indefatigable research,
arisen, many similar works which we now enjoy, would soon have sunk into
a like oblivion.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
About the same period, Boccaccio also collected several Latin MSS., and copied
such as he could not purchase. He transcribed so many of the Latin poets, orators,
and historians, that it would appear surprising had a copyist by profession performed
so much. In a journey to Monte Casino, a place generally considered as remarkably
rich in MSS., he was both astonished and afflicted to find the library exiled from
the monastery into a barn, which was accessible only by a ladder. He opened many
of the books, and found much of the writing effaced by damp. His grief was
redoubled when the monks told him, that when they wanted money, they erased
an ancient writing, wrote psalters and legends on the parchment, and sold the new
MSS. to women and children<a id="noteref_548" name="noteref_548" href="#note_548"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">548</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But though, in the fourteenth century, copies of the classics were multiplied and
rendered more accessible to the world, and though a few were made by such hands
as those of Petrarch and Boccaccio, the transcriptions in general were much less
accurate than those of a former period. The Latin tongue, which had received
more stability than could otherwise have been expected, from having been consecrated
in the service of the church, had now at length become a dead language, and many
of the transcribers did not understand what they wrote. Still more mistakes than
those produced by ignorance, were occasioned by the presumption of pretenders to
learning, who were often tempted to alter the text, in order to accommodate the
sense to their own slender capacity and defective taste. Whilst a remedy has been
readily found for the gross oversight or neglect of the ignorant and idle, in substituting
one letter for another, or inserting a word without meaning, errors affecting the
sense of the author, which were thus introduced, have been of the worst species,
and have chiefly contributed to compose that mass of various readings, on which
the sagacity of modern scholars has been so copiously exercised. In a passage of
Coluccio Salutati’s treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Fato</span></span>, published by the <a name="corr298" id="corr298" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Abbé</span> Mehus, the various
modes in which MSS. were depraved by copyists are fully pointed out<a id="noteref_549" name="noteref_549" href="#note_549"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">549</span></span></a>. To such
extent had these corruptions proceeded, that Petrarch, talking of the MSS. of his
own time, and those immediately preceding it, asks, <span class="tei tei-q">“Quis scriptorum inscitiæ medebitur,
inertiæque corrumpenti omnia ac miscenti? Non quæro jam aut queror
Orthographiam, quæ jam dudum interiit; qualitercunque utinam scriberent quod jubentur.
An si redeat Cicero aut Livius, ante omnes Plinius Secundus, sua scripta
religentes intelligent?”</span> So sensible was Coluccio Salutati of the injury which had
been done to letters by the ignorance or negligence of transcribers, that he proposed,
as a check to the evil, that public libraries should be every where formed, the superintendence
of which should be given to men of learning, who might carefully
collate the MSS. intrusted to them, and ascertain the most correct readings<a id="noteref_550" name="noteref_550" href="#note_550"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">550</span></span></a>. To
this labour, and to the detection of counterfeit works, of which many, from various
motives, now began to be circulated, Coluccio devoted a considerable portion of his
own time and studies. His plan for the institution of public libraries did not succeed;
but he amassed a private one, which, in that age, was second only to the
library of Petrarch. A considerable classical library, though consisting chiefly of the
later classics, particularly Seneca, Macrobius, Apuleius, and Suetonius, was amassed
by Tedaldo de Casa, whose books, with many remarks and emendations in his own
hand, were inspected by the Abbé Mehus in the library of Santa-Croce at Florence<a id="noteref_551" name="noteref_551" href="#note_551"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">551</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The path which had been opened up by Petrarch, Boccaccio, and Coluccio Salutati,
in the fourteenth century, was followed out in the ensuing century with wonderful
assiduity and success by Poggio Bracciolini, Filelfo, and Ambrosio
Traver<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-13">[pg A-13]</span><a name="PgA13" id="PgA13" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>sari, Abbott of Camaldoli, under the guidance and protection of the Medicean Family
and Niccolo Niccoli.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Of all the learned men of his time, Poggio seems to have devoted himself with
the greatest industry to the search for classical MSS. No difficulties in travelling,
or indifference in the heads of convents to his literary inquiries, could damp his zeal.
His ardour and exertions were fortunately crowned with most complete success.
The number of MSS. discovered by him in different parts of Europe, during the
space of nearly fifty years, will remain a lasting proof of his unceasing perseverance,
and of his sagacity in these pursuits. Having spent his youth in travelling through
different countries, he at length settled at Rome, where he continued as secretary,
in the service of eight successive Pontiffs. In this capacity he, in the year 1414, accompanied
Pope John XXIII. to the Council of Constance, which was opened in
that year. While residing at Constance, he made several expeditions, most interesting
to letters, in intervals of relaxation during the prosecutions of Jean Hus and
Jerome of Prague, of which he had the official charge. His chief excursion was to
the monastery of St Gal, about twenty miles distance from Constance, where his
information led him to expect that he might find some MSS. of the ancient Roman
writers<a id="noteref_552" name="noteref_552" href="#note_552"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">552</span></span></a>. The earliest Abbots, and many of the first monks of St Gal, had
been originally transferred to that monastery from the literary establishment founded
by Charlemagne at Fulda. Werembert and Helperic, who were sent to St Gal
from Fulda in the ninth century, introduced in their new residence a strong taste for
letters, and the practice of transcribing the classics. In examining the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Histoire Litteraire
de la France</span></span>, by the Benedictines, we find that no monastery in the middle
ages produced so many distinguished scholars as St Gal. In this celebrated convent,
which, (as Tenhove expresses it) had been so long the Dormitory of the Muses,
Poggio discovered some of the most valuable classics,—not, however, in the library
of the cloister, but covered with dust and filth, and rotting at the bottom of a dungeon,
where, according to his own account, no criminal condemned to death would have
been thrown<a id="noteref_553" name="noteref_553" href="#note_553"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">553</span></span></a>. This evinces that whatever care may at one time have been taken
of classical MSS. by the monks, they had subsequently been shamefully neglected.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The services rendered to literature by Ambrosio of Camaldoli were inferior only to
those of Poggio. Ambrosio was born at Forli in 1386, and was a disciple of Emanuel
Chrysoloras. At the age of fourteen, he entered into the convent of Camaldoli
at Florence, and thirty years afterwards became the Superior of his order. In the kind
conciliatory disposition of Ambrosio, manifested by his maintaining an uninterrupted
friendship with Niccolo Niccoli, Poggio, and Filelfo, and by moderating the quarrels
of these irascible <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Literati</span></span>—in his zeal for the sacred interests, discipline, and
purity of his convent, to which his own moral conduct afforded a spotless example—and,
finally, in his enthusiastic love of letters, in which he was second only to
Petrarch, we behold the brightest specimen of the monastic character, of which the
memory has descended to us from the middle ages. Though chiefly confined within
the limits of a cloister, Ambrosio had perhaps the best pretensions of any man of
his age, to the character of a polite scholar. The whole of the early part of his life,
and the leisure of its close, were employed in collecting ancient MSS. from every
quarter where they could be procured, and in maintaining a constant correspondence
with the most distinguished men of his age. His letters which have been published
in 1759, at Florence, with a long preface and life by the Abbé Mehus, contain the
fullest information that can be any where found with regard to the recovery of ancient
classical MSS. and the state of literature at Florence in the fifteenth century.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It would appear from these Epistles, that though the monks had been certainly instrumental
in preserving the precious relics of classical antiquity, their avarice and
bigotry now rather obstructed the prosecution of the researches undertaken for the
purpose of bringing them to light. It was their interest to keep these treasures to
themselves, because it was a maxim of their policy to impede the diffusion of
knowledge, and because the transcription of MSS. was to them a source of considerable
emolument. Hence they often threw obstacles in the way of the inquiries of
the learned, who were obliged to have recourse to various artifices, in order to draw
classical MSS. from the recesses of the cloister<a id="noteref_554" name="noteref_554" href="#note_554"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">554</span></span></a>.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-14">[pg A-14]</span><a name="PgA14" id="PgA14" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The exertions of Poggio and Ambrosio, however, were stimulated and aided by
the munificent patronage of many opulent individuals of that period, who spared no
expense in reimbursing and rewarding those who had made successful researches
after these favourite objects of pursuit. <span class="tei tei-q">“To such an enthusiasm,”</span> says Tiraboschi,
<span class="tei tei-q">“was this desire carried, that long journeys were undertaken, treasures were levied,
and enmities were excited, for the sake of an ancient MS.; and the discovery of a
book was regarded as almost equivalent to the conquest of a kingdom.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The most zealous promoters of these researches, and most eager collectors of
MSS. during the fifteenth century, were the Cardinal Ursini, Niccolo Niccoli and
the Family of Medici.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Niccolo Niccoli, who was an humble citizen of Florence, devoted his whole
time and fortune to the acquisition of ancient MSS. In this pursuit he had been
eminently successful, having collected together 800 volumes, of which a great proportion
contained Roman authors. Poggio, in his funeral oration of Niccolo, bears
ample testimony to his liberality and zeal, and attributes the successful discovery of
so many classical MSS. to the encouragement which he had afforded. <span class="tei tei-q">“Quod autem,”</span>
says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“egregiam laudem meretur, summam operam, curamque adhibuit
ad pervestigandos auctores, qui culpâ temporum perierant. Quâ in re verè possum
dicere, omnes libros fere, qui noviter tum ab aliis reperti sunt, tum a me ipso, qui integrum
Quintilianum, Ciceronis nostri orationes, Silium Italicum, Marcellinum,
Lucretii partem, multosque præterea e Germanorum Gallorumque ergastulis, meâ
diligentiâ eripui, atque in lucem extuli, Nicholai suasu, impulsu, cohortatione, et
pæne verborum molestiâ esse Latinis literis restitutos<a id="noteref_555" name="noteref_555" href="#note_555"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">555</span></span></a>.”</span> Several of these classical
works Niccolo copied with his own hand, and with great accuracy, after he had received
them<a id="noteref_556" name="noteref_556" href="#note_556"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">556</span></span></a>. The MSS. in his hand-writing were long known and distinguished
by the beauty and distinctness of the characters. Nor did he content himself with
mere transcription: He diligently employed himself in correcting the errors of the
MSS. which were transmitted to him, and arranging the text in its proper order.
<span class="tei tei-q">“Quum eos auctores,”</span> says Mehus, <span class="tei tei-q">“ex vetustissimis codicibus exscriberet, qui
suo potissimum consilio, aliorum vero operâ inventi sunt, non solum mendis, quibus
obsiti erant, expurgavit, sed etiam distinxit, capitibusque locupletavit<a id="noteref_557" name="noteref_557" href="#note_557"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">557</span></span></a>.”</span> Such was
the judgment of Niccolo, in this species of emendation, that Politian always placed
the utmost reliance on his MS. copies<a id="noteref_558" name="noteref_558" href="#note_558"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">558</span></span></a>; and, indeed, from a complimentary poem
addressed to him in his own time, it would seem that he had carefully collated
different MSS. of the same work, before he transcribed his own copy—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Ille hos errores, unâ exemplaribus actis</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Pluribus ante oculos, ne postera oberret et ætas,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Corrigit.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Previous to the time of Niccolo, the only libraries of any extent or value in Italy,
were those of Petrarch, Coluccio Salutati, and Boccaccio. The books which had
belonged to Petrarch and Coluccio, were sold or dispersed after the decease of their
illustrious possessors. Boccaccio’s library had been bequeathed by him to a religious
order, the Hermits of St Augustine; and this library was repaired and arranged
by Niccolo, for the use of the convent, and a proper hall built for its reception<a id="noteref_559" name="noteref_559" href="#note_559"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">559</span></span></a>.
Niccolo was likewise the first person in modern times who conceived the idea of
forming a public library. Previous to his death, which happened in 1437, he directed
that his books should be devoted to the use of the public; and for this purpose he
appointed sixteen curators, among whom was Cosmo de Medici. After his demise,
it appeared that he was greatly in debt, and that his liberal intentions were likely to
be frustrated by the insolvency of his circumstances. Cosmo therefore offered to his
associates, that if they would resign to him the exclusive right of the disposal of the
books, he would himself discharge all the debts of Niccolo, to which proposal they
readily acceded. Having thus obtained the sole direction of the MSS., he deposited
them for public use in the Dominican Monastery of St Marco, at Florence, which he
had himself erected at an enormous expense<a id="noteref_560" name="noteref_560" href="#note_560"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">560</span></span></a>. This library, for some time celebrated
under the name of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bibliotheca Marciana</span></span>, or library of St Marc, was
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-15">[pg A-15]</span><a name="Pga15" id="Pga15" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>arranged and catalogued by Tommaso da Sarzana Calandrino, at that time a poor
but zealous scholar in the lower orders of the clergy, and afterwards Pope, by the
name of Nicholas V. The building which contained the books of Niccolo having
been destroyed by an earthquake in 1454, Cosmo rebuilt it on such a plan, as to admit
a more extensive collection. After this it was enriched by private donations
from citizens of Florence, who, catching the spirit of the reigning family, vied with
each other in the extent and value of their gifts<a id="noteref_561" name="noteref_561" href="#note_561"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">561</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
When Cosmo, having finally triumphed over his enemies, was recalled from banishment,
and became the first citizen of Florence, <span class="tei tei-q">“which he governed without arms or
a title,”</span> he employed his immense wealth in the encouragement of learned men,
and in collecting, under his own roof, the remains of the ancient Greek and Roman
writers. His riches, and extensive mercantile intercourse with different parts of
Europe and Asia, enabled him to gratify a passion of this kind beyond any other individual.
He gave injunctions to all his friends and correspondents, to search for
and procure ancient MSS., in every language, and on every subject. From these
beginnings arose the celebrated library of the Medici, which, in the time of Cosmo,
was particularly distinguished for MSS. of Latin classics—possessing, in particular,
full and accurate copies of Virgil, Cicero, Seneca, Ovid, and Tibullus<a id="noteref_562" name="noteref_562" href="#note_562"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">562</span></span></a>. This collection,
after the death of its founder, was farther enriched by the attention of his
descendants, particularly his grandson, Lorenzo, under whom it acquired the name
of the Medicean-Laurentian Library. <span class="tei tei-q">“If there was any pursuit,”</span> says the biographer
of Lorenzo, <span class="tei tei-q">“in which he engaged more ardently, and persevered more diligently,
than the rest, it was in that of enlarging his collections of books and antiquities.
His emissaries were dispersed through every part of the globe, for the purpose of
collecting books, and he spared no expense in procuring, for the learned, the materials
necessary for the prosecution of their studies<a id="noteref_563" name="noteref_563" href="#note_563"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">563</span></span></a>.”</span> In the execution of his
noble design, he was assisted by Ermolao Barbaro, and Paulo Cortesi; but his principal
coadjutor was Politian, to whom he committed the care and arrangement of
his collection, and who made excursions, at intervals, through Italy, to discover
and purchase such remains of antiquity as suited the purposes of his patron. An
ample treasure of books was expected, during his last illness, under the care of
Lascaris. When the vital spark was nearly extinguished, he called Politian to his
side, and grasping his hand, told him he could have wished to have lived to see the
library completed<a id="noteref_564" name="noteref_564" href="#note_564"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">564</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
After the death of Lorenzo, some of the volumes were dispersed, when Charles
VIII. of France invaded Italy; and, on the expulsion of the Medici family from
Florence, in 1496, the remaining volumes of the Laurentian collection were united
with the books in the library of St Mark.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It being the great object of Lorenzo to diffuse the spirit of literature as extensively
as possible, he permitted the Duke of Urbino, who particularly distinguished himself
as a patron of learning, to copy such of his MSS. as he wished to possess.
The families, too, of Visconti at Milan, of Este at Ferrara, and Gonzaga at Mantua,
excited by the glorious example set before them, emulated the Medici in their patronage
of classical literature, and formation of learned establishments. <span class="tei tei-q">“The division
of Italy,”</span> says Mr Mills, <span class="tei tei-q">“into many independent principalities, was a circumstance
highly favourable to the nourishing and expanding learning. Every city had a
Mæcenas sovereign. The princes of Italy rivalled each other in literary patronage
as much as in political power, and changes of dominion did not affect letters<a id="noteref_565" name="noteref_565" href="#note_565"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">565</span></span></a>.”</span>
Eight Popes, in succession, employed Poggio as their secretary, which greatly aided
the promotion of literature, and the collecting of MSS. at Rome. The last Pontiff
he served was Nicholas V., who, before his elevation, as we have seen, had arranged
the library of St Mark at Florence. From his youth he had shown the most
wonderful avidity for copies of ancient MSS., and an extraordinary turn for elegant
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-16">[pg A-16]</span><a name="PgA16" id="PgA16" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>and accurate transcription, with his own hand. By the diligence and learning
which he exhibited in the schools of Bologna, he secured the patronage of many
literary characters. Attached to the family of Cardinal Albergati, he accompanied
him in several embassies, and seldom returned without bringing back with him
copies of such ancient works as had been previously unknown in Italy. The titles
of some of these are mentioned by his biographer, who adds, that there was no Latin
author, with whose writings he was unacquainted. This enabled him to be
useful in the arrangement of many libraries formed at this period<a id="noteref_566" name="noteref_566" href="#note_566"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">566</span></span></a>. His promotion
to the Pontifical chair, in 1447, was, in the circumstances of the times, peculiarly
auspicious to the cause of letters. With the assistance of Poggio, he founded the
library of the Vatican. The scanty collection of his predecessors had been nearly
dissipated or destroyed, by frequent removals from Rome to Avignon: But Nicholas
more than repaired these losses; and before his death, had collected upwards of
5000 volumes of Greek and Roman authors—and the Vatican being afterwards increased
by Sixtus IV. and Leo X. became, both in extent and value, the first library
in the world.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is with Poggio, that the studies peculiar to the commentator may be considered
as having commenced, at least so far as regards the Latin classics. Poggio lived
from 1380 to 1459. He was succeeded towards the close of the fifteenth century,
and during the whole course of the sixteenth, by a long series of Italian commentators,
among whom the highest rank may be justly assigned to Politian.—(Born,
1454–died, 1494.) To him the world has been chiefly indebted for corrections
and elucidations of the texts of Roman authors, which, from a variety of causes,
were, when first discovered, either corrupt, or nearly illegible. In the exercise of
his critical talents, Politian did not confine himself to any one precise method, but
adopted such as he conceived best suited his purpose—on some occasions only comparing
different copies, diligently marking the variations, rejecting spurious readings,
and substituting the true. In other cases he proceeded farther, adding <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">scholia</span></span> and
notes, illustrative of the text, either from his own conjecture, or the authority of
preceding writers. To the name of Politian, I may add those of his bitter rival
and contemporary, Georgius Merula, (born, 1420–died, 1494); Aldus Manutius,
(1447–1516); his son Paullus; Landini, author of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Disputationes Camaldulenses</span></span>,
(1424–1504); Philippus Beroaldus, (1453–1505); Petrus Victorius,
(1498–1585); Robortellus, (1516–1567). Most of these commentators were
entirely verbal critics; but this was by far the most useful species of criticism which
could be employed at the period in which they lived. We have already seen, that
in the time of Petrarch, classical manuscripts had been very inaccurately transcribed;
and, therefore, the first great duty of a commentator, was to amend and
purify the text. Criticisms on the general merits of the author, or the beauties of
particular passages, and even expositions of the full import of his meaning, deduced
from antiquities, mythology, history, or geography, were very secondary considerations.
Nor, indeed, was knowledge far enough advanced at the time, to supply
such illustrations. Grammar, and verbal criticism, formed the porch by which it
was necessary to enter that temple of sublimity and beauty which had been reared
by the ancients; and without this access, philosophy would never have enlightened
letters, or letters ornamented philosophy. <span class="tei tei-q">“I cannot, indeed, but think,”</span> says Mr
Payne Knight, in his Analytical Essay on the Greek Alphabet, <span class="tei tei-q">“that the judgment
of the public, on the respective merits of the different classes of critics, is peculiarly
partial and unjust. Those among them who assume the office of pointing out the
beauties, and detecting the faults, of literary composition, are placed with the orator
and historian, in the highest ranks, whilst those who undertake the more laborious
task of washing away the rust and canker of time, and bringing back those forms
and colours, which are the objects of criticism, to their original purity and brightness,
are degraded with the index-maker and antiquary among the pioneers of literature,
whose business it is to clear the way for those who are capable of more splendid
and honourable enterprizes. Nevertheless, if we examine the effects produced by
those two classes of critics, we shall find that the first have been of no use whatever,
and that the last have rendered the most important services to mankind. All
persons of taste and understanding know, from their own feelings, when to approve
and disapprove, and therefore stand in no need of instructions from the critic. But
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-17">[pg A-17]</span><a name="PgA17" id="PgA17" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>whatever may be the taste or discernment of a reader, or the genius and ability of a
writer, neither the one nor the other can appear while the text remains deformed by
the corruptions of blundering transcribers, and obscured by the glosses of ignorant
grammarians. It is then that the aid of the verbal critic is required; and though
his minute labour in dissecting syllables and analysing letters may appear contemptible
in its operation, it will be found important in its effect.”</span> It is to those early
critics, then, who washed away the rust and canker of time, and brought back those
forms and colours which are the subject of criticism, that classical literature has been
chiefly indebted. The newly discovered art of printing, which was itself the offspring
of the general ardour for literary improvement, and of the daily experience of
difficulties encountered in prosecuting classical studies, contributed, in an eminent
degree, to encourage this species of useful criticism. At the instigation of Lorenzo,
and other patrons of learning in Italy, many scholars in that country were induced
to bestow their attention on the collation and correction of the MSS. of ancient
authors, in order that they might be submitted to the press with the greatest possible
accuracy, and in their original purity. Nor was it a slight inducement to the industrious
scholar, that his commentaries were no longer to be hid in the recesses of a
few vast libraries, but were to be now placed in the view of mankind, and enshrined,
as it were, for ever in the immortal page of the poet or historian whose works he
had preserved or elucidated.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
With Fulvius Ursinus, who died in the year 1600, the first school of Italian commentators
may be considered as terminating. In the following century, classical
industry was chiefly directed to translation; and in the eighteenth century, the
list of eminent commentators was increased only by the name of Vulpius, who introduced
a new style in classical criticism, by an amusing collection of verses, both
in ancient and modern poets, which were parallel to passages in his author, not
merely in some words, but in the poetical idea.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The career which had so gloriously commenced in Italy in the end of the fifteenth
century, was soon followed in France and Germany. Julius Scaliger, a
native of Verona, had been naturalized in France, and he settled there in the commencement
of the sixteenth century. In that country classical studies were introduced,
under the patronage of Francis I., and were prosecuted in his own and the
six following reigns, by a long succession of illustrious scholars, among whom Turnebus
(1512–1565), Lambrinus (1526–1572), the family of the Stephenses, who rivalled
the Manutii of Italy, Muretus (1526–1585), <a name="corra17" id="corra17" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Casaubon</span> (1559–1614), Joseph
Scaliger (1540–1609), and Salmasius (1588–1653), distinguished themselves by the
illustration of the Latin classics, and the more difficult elucidation of those studies
which assist and promote a full intelligence of their meaning and beauties. Our geographical
and historical knowledge of the ancient world, was advanced by Charles Stephens—its
chronology was ascertained by Scaliger, and the whole circle of antiquities
was extended by Salmasius. After the middle of the <a name="corr303" id="corr303" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">seventeenth</span> century, a new taste in
the illustration of classical literature sprung up in France—a lighter manner and more
philosophic spirit being then introduced. The celebrated controversy on the comparative
merit of the ancients and moderns, aided a more popular elucidation of the
classics; and as the preceptors of the royal family were on the side of the ancients,
they promoted the famed Delphin edition, which commenced under the auspices of
the Duke De Montausier, and was carried on by a body of learned Jesuits, under the
superintendence of Bossuet and Huetius. Elegance and taste were required for the
instruction of a young French Prince; and accordingly, instead of profound philological
learning, or the assiduous collation of MSS., light notes were appended, explanatory
of the mythological and historical allusions contained in the works of the
author, as also remarks on his most prominent defects and excellencies.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Joseph Scaliger and Salmasius, who were French Protestants, found shelter for
their heretical principles, and liberal reward for their learning, in the University of
Leyden; and with Douza (1545–1604), and Justus Lipsius (1547–1606), became
the fathers and founders of classical knowledge in the Netherlands. As the inhabitants
of that territory spoke and wrote a language which was but ill adapted for
the expression of original thought, their whole force of mind was directed to
throwing their humorous and grand conceptions on canvass, or to the elucidation
of the writings of those who had been gifted with a more propitious tongue.
These studies and researches were continued by Heinsius (1582–1655), Gerard
and Isaac Vossius (1577–1689), and Gronovius (1611–1671). At this period
Schrevelius (1615–1664) commenced the publication of the Classics, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">cum Notis
</span><span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-18">[pg A-18]</span><a name="PgA18" id="PgA18" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span style="font-style: italic">Variorum</span></span>; and in the end of the seventeenth century, his example was followed
by some of the most distinguished editors. The merit of these editions was very
different, and has been variously estimated. Morhoff, while he does justice to the
editorial works of Gronovius and other learned men, in which parts of the commentaries
of predecessors, judiciously extracted, were given at full length, has indulged
himself in an invective against other <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">variorum</span></span> editions, in which everything was
mutilated and incorrect. <span class="tei tei-q">“Sane ne comparandæ quidem illi”</span> (the editions of
Aldus) <span class="tei tei-q">“sunt ineptæ Variorum editiones; quam nuper pestem bonis auctoribus
Bibliopolæ Batavi inducere cœperunt, reclamantibus frustra viris doctis<a id="noteref_567" name="noteref_567" href="#note_567"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">567</span></span></a>.”</span> In the
course of the eighteenth century, the Burmans (1668–1778), Oudendorp (1696–1761),
and Havercamp (1684–1742), continued to support the honour of a school,
which as yet had no parallel in certainty, copiousness, and depth of illustration.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In Germany, the school which had been established by Charlemagne at Fulda,
and that at Paderborn, long flourished under the superintendence of Meinwerk.
The author of the Life of that scholar, speaking of these establishments, says, <span class="tei tei-q">“Ibi
viguit Horatius, magnus atque Virgilius, Crispus et Sallustius, et Urbanus Statius.”</span>
During the ninth century, Rabin Maur, a scholar of Alcuin, and head of the cathedral
school at Fulda, became a celebrated teacher; and profane literature was not
neglected by him amid the importance of his sacred lessons. Classical learning,
however, was first thoroughly awakened in Germany, by the scholars of Thomas
A’Kempis, in the end of the fifteenth century. A number of German youths, who
were associated in a species of literary fraternity, travelled into Italy, at the time
when the search for classical MSS. in that country was most eagerly prosecuted.
Rudolph Agricola, afterwards Professor of Philosophy at Worms, was one of the most
distinguished of these scholars. Living immediately after the invention of printing,
and at a time when that art had not yet entirely superseded the transcription of
MSS., he possessed an extensive collection of these, as well as of the works which
had just issued resplendent from the press. Both were illustrated by him with
various readings on the margin; and we perceive from the letters of Erasmus the
value which even he attached to these notes, and the use which he made of the
variations. Rudolph was succeeded by Herman von Busche, who lectured on the
classics at Leipsic. He had in his possession a number of the Latin classics; but
it is evident from his letters that some, as for instance Silius Italicus, were still
inaccessible to him, or could only be procured with great difficulty. The German
scholars did not bring so many MSS. to light, or multiply copies of them, so much
as the Italians, because, in fact, their country was less richly stored than Italy with
the treasures bequeathed to us by antiquity; but they exercised equal critical
acuteness in amending the errors of the MSS. which they possessed. The sixteenth
century was the age which produced in Germany the most valuable and
numerous commentaries on the Latin classics. That country, in common with the
Netherlands, was enlightened, during this period, by the erudition of Erasmus
(1467–1536). In the same and succeeding age, Camerarius (1500–1574),
Taubmann (1565–1613), Acidalius (1567–1595), and Gruterus (1560–1627),
enriched the world with some of the best editions of the classics which had hitherto
appeared. Towards the close of the seventeenth century, classical literature
had for some time rather declined in Germany—polemical theology and religious
wars having at this period exhausted and engrossed the attention of her universities.
But it was revived again about the middle of the eighteenth by J.
Math. Gesner (1691–1761), and Ernesti (1707–1781), who created an epoch
in Germany for the study of the ancient authors. These two scholars surpassed
all their predecessors in taste, in a philosophical spirit, and in a wide
acquaintance with the subsidiary branches of erudition: They made an advantageous
use of their critical knowledge of the languages; they looked at once to the
words and to the subject of the ancient writers, established and applied the rules of
a legitimate interpretation, and carefully analysed the meaning as well as the form
of the expression. Their task was extended from words to things; and what has
been called Æsthetic annotations, were combined with philological discussion.
<span class="tei tei-q">“Non volui,”</span> says Gesner, in the Preface to his edition of Claudian, <span class="tei tei-q">“commentarios
scribere, collectos undique, aut locos communes: Non volui dictionem poetæ,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-19">[pg A-19]</span><a name="PgA19" id="PgA19" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>congestis aliorum poetarum formulis illustrare; sed cum illud volui efficere poeta ut
intelligatur, tum judicio meo juvare volui juniorum judicium, quid pulchrum, atque
decens, et summorum poetarum simile putarem ostendendo, et contra, ea, ubi errâsse
illum a naturâ, a magnis exemplis, a decoro arbitrarer, cum fide indicando.”</span> J.
Ernesti considers Gesner as unquestionably the first who introduced what he terms
the Æsthetic mode of criticism<a id="noteref_568" name="noteref_568" href="#note_568"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">568</span></span></a>. But the honour of being the founder of this new
school, has perhaps, with more justice, been assigned by others to Heyne<a id="noteref_569" name="noteref_569" href="#note_569"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">569</span></span></a> (1729–1811).
<span class="tei tei-q">“From the middle of last century,”</span> it is remarked, in a late biographical
sketch of Heyne, <span class="tei tei-q">“several intelligent philologers of Germany displayed a more refined
and philosophic method in their treatment of the different branches of classical
learning, who, without neglecting either the grammatical investigation of the
language, or the critical constitution of the text, no longer regarded a Greek or Roman
writer as a subject for the mere grammarian and critic; but, considering the
study of the ancients as a school for thought, for feeling, and for taste, initiated us
into the great mystery of reading every thing in the same spirit in which it had originally
been written. They demonstrated, both by doctrine and example, in what
manner it was necessary for us to enter into the thoughts of the writer, to pitch ourselves
in unison with his peculiar tone of conception and expression, and to investigate
the circumstances by which his mind was affected—the motives by which he
was animated—and the influences which co-operated in giving the intensity and
character of his feelings. At the head of this school stands Heyne; and it must be
admitted, that nothing has contributed so decisively to maintain or promote the
study of classical literature, as the combination which he has effected of philosophy
with erudition, both in his commentaries on ancient authors, and those works in
which he has illustrated various points of antiquity, or discussed the habit of thinking
and spirit of the ancient world.”</span> From the time of Heyne, almost the whole
grand inheritance of Roman literature has been cultivated by commentators, who
have raised the Germans to undisputed pre-eminence among the nations of Europe,
for profound classical learning, and all the delightful researches connected with literary
history. I have only space to mention the names of Zeunius (1736–1788),
Jani (1743–1790), Wernsdorff (1723–1793); and among those who still survive,
Harles (born 1738), Schütz (1747), Schneider (1751), Wolf (1757), Beck,
(1757), Doering (1759), Mitscherlich (1760), Wetzel (1762), <a name="corr305" id="corr305" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Goerenz</span> (1765),
Eichstädt (1771), Hermann (1772).
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
While classical literature and topography were so highly cultivated abroad, England,
at the revival of literature, remained greatly behind her continental neighbours
in the elucidation and publication of the precious remains of ancient learning. It appears
from Ames’ Typographical Antiquities, that the press of our celebrated ancient
printers, as Caxton, Wynkin de Worde, and Pynson, was rarely employed in giving
accuracy or embellishment to the works of the classics; and, indeed, so late as the
middle of the sixteenth century, only Terence and Cicero’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Offices</span></span> had been published
in this country, in their original tongue. Matters had by no means improved
in the seventeenth century. Evelyn, who had paid great attention to the subject,
gives the following account of the state of classical typography and editorship in
England, in a letter to the Lord Chancellor Clarendon, dated November 1666:
<span class="tei tei-q">“Our booksellers,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“follow their own judgment in printing the ancient authors,
according to such text as they found extant when first they entered their
copy; whereas, out of the <a name="corr305a" id="corr305a" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">MSS.</span> collated by the industry of later critics, those authors
are exceedingly improved. For instance, about thirty years since, Justin was
corrected by Isaac Vossius, in many hundreds of places, most material to sense and
elegancy, and has since been frequently reprinted in Holland, after the purer copy;
but with us still according to the old reading. The like has Florus, Seneca’s Tragedies,
and near all the rest, which have, in the meantime, been castigated abroad
by several learned hands, which, besides that it makes ours to be rejected, and dishonours
our nation, so does it no little detriment to learning, and to the treasure of
the nation in proportion. The cause of this is principally the stationer driving as
hard and cruel a bargain with the printer as he can, and the printer taking up any
smatterer in the tongues, to be the less loser; an exactness in this no ways
import<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-20">[pg A-20]</span><a name="PgA20" id="PgA20" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>ing the stipulation, by which means errors repeat and multiply in every
    edition<a id="noteref_570" name="noteref_570" href="#note_570"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">570</span></span></a>.”</span>
Since the period in which this letter is dated, Bentley, who bears the greatest name
in England as a critic, however acute and ingenious, did more by his slashing alterations
to injure than amend the text, at least of the Latin authors on whom he commented.
He substituted what he thought best for what he actually found; and
such was his deficiency in taste, that what he thought best (as is evinced by his
changes on the text of Lucretius), was frequently destructive of the poetical idea,
and almost of the sense of his author.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
I have thought it right, before entering into detail concerning the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Codices</span></span> and
editions of the works of the early classics mentioned in the text, briefly to remind
the reader of the general circumstances connected with the loss and recovery of
the classical MSS. of Rome, and to recall to his recollection the names of a few
of the most celebrated commentators in Italy, France, Holland, and Germany.
This will render the following Appendix, in which there must be constant reference
to the discovery of MSS. and the labours of commentators, somewhat more distinct
and perspicuous than I could otherwise make it.
</p>
<div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em">
    <a name="toc21" id="toc21"></a><a name="pdf22" id="pdf22"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">LIVIUS ANDRONICUS, NÆVIUS.</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The fragments of these old writers are so inconsiderable, that no one has thought
of editing them separately. They are therefore to be found only in the general collections
of the whole Latin poets; as Maittaires <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Opera et Fragmenta Veterum
Poetarum Latinorum</span></span>, London, 1713. 2 Tom. fo., (to some copies of which a
new title-page has been printed, bearing the date, Hag. Comit. 1721;) or in the collections
of the Latin tragic poets, as Delrio’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Syntagma Tragœdiæ Latinæ</span></span>, Paris,
1620, and <a name="corra20" id="corra20" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Scriverius’</span> <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Collectanea Veterum Tragicorum</span></span>, Lugd. Bat. 1620. It is
otherwise with
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em">
    <a name="toc23" id="toc23"></a><a name="pdf24" id="pdf24"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">ENNIUS,</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
of whose writings, as we have seen, more copious fragments remain than from those
of his predecessors. The whole works of this poet were extant in the time of Cassiodorus;
but no copy of them has since appeared. The fragments, however,
found in Cicero, Macrobius, and the old grammarians, are so considerable, that they
have been frequently collected together, and largely commented on. They were
first printed in Stephen’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Fragmenta Veterum Poetarum Latinorum</span></span>, but without
any proper connection or criticism. Ludovicus Vives had intended to collect and
arrange them, as we are informed in one of his notes to St Augustine, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Civitate
Dei</span></span>: But this task he did not live to accomplish<a id="noteref_571" name="noteref_571" href="#note_571"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">571</span></span></a>. The first person who
arranged these scattered fragments, united them together, and classed them under
the books to which they belonged, was Hier. Columna. He adopted the orthography
which, from a study of the ancient Roman monuments and inscriptions, he
found to be that of the Latin language in the age of Ennius. He likewise added a
commentary, and prefixed a life of the poet. The edition which he had thus fully
prepared, was first published at Naples in 1590, four years after his death, by his
son Joannes Columna<a id="noteref_572" name="noteref_572" href="#note_572"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">572</span></span></a>. This <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio Princeps</span></span> of Ennius is very rare, but it was
reprinted under the care of Fr. Hesselius at Amsterdam in 1707. To the original
commentary of Columna there are added the annotations on Ennius which had
been inserted in Delrio and Scriverius’ collection of the Latin tragic poets; and
Hesselius himself supplied a very complete <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Index Verborum</span></span>. The ancient
authors, who quote lines from Ennius, sometimes mention the book of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Annals</span></span>,
or the name of the tragedy to which they belonged, but sometimes this information
is omitted. The arrangement, therefore, of the verses of the latter description
(which are marked with an asterisk in Columna’s edition), and indeed the precise
collocation of the whole, is in a great measure conjectural. Accordingly, we find
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-21">[pg A-21]</span><a name="PgA21" id="PgA21" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>that the order of the lines in the edition of Paulus Merula is very different from
that adopted by Columna. The materials for Merula’s edition, which comprehends
only the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Annals</span></span> of Ennius, had already been collected and prepared at the time
when Columna’s was first given to the world. Merula, however, conceived that
while the great object of Columna had been to compare and contrast the lines of
Ennius with those of other heroic poets, he himself had been more happy in the
arrangement of the verses, and the restoration of the ancient orthography, which is
much more antiquated in the edition of Merula than in that of Columna. He had
also discovered some fragments of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Annals</span></span>, unknown to Columna, in the MS.
of a work of L. Calp. Piso, a writer of the age of Trajan, entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Continentiâ
Veterum Poetarum</span></span>, and preserved in the library of St Victor at Paris. In these
circumstances, Merula was not deterred by the appearance of the edition of Columna,
from proceeding with his own, which at length came forth at Leyden in the
year 1595. The same sort of discrepance which exists between Columna and
Merula’s arrangement of the Annals, appears in the collocation of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Tragic Fragments</span></span>
adopted by Columna, and that which has been preferred by Delrio, in his
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Syntagma Tragœdiæ Latinæ</span></span>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
H. Planck published at Gottingen, in 1807, the fragments of Ennius’s tragedy of
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Medea</span></span>. These comprehend all the verses belonging to this drama, collected by
Columna, and some newly extracted by the editor from old grammarians. The
whole are compared with the parallel passages in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Medea</span></span> of Euripides. Two
dissertations are prefixed; one on the Origin and Nature of Tragedy among the
Romans; and the other, on the question, whether Ennius wrote two tragedies, or
only a single tragedy, entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Medea</span></span>. A commentary is also supplied, in which,
as Fuhrmann remarks, one finds many things, but not much:—<span class="tei tei-q">“Man findet in
demselben <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">multa</span></span>, aber nicht 
    <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">multum</span></span><a id="noteref_573" name="noteref_573" href="#note_573"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">573</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Some fine passages of the fragments of Ennius have been filled up, and the old
readings corrected, by the recent discovery of the work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span> of Cicero,
who is always quoting from the ancient poets. Thus the passage in the Annals,
where the Roman people are described as lamenting the death of Romulus, stands
thus in Columna’s edition:—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">—— <span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“O Romole, Romole, <span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">dic ô</span></span></span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Qualem te patriæ custodem dii genuerunt,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Tu produxisti nos intra luminis oras,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">O pater, ô genitor, ô sanguen diis oriundum.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This fragment may be now supplied, and the verses arranged and corrected, from
the quotation in the first book <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span>—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Pectora pia tenet desiderium; simul inter</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Sese sic memorant—O Romule, Romule <span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">die</span></span>,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Qualem te patriæ custodem di genuerunt,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">O pater, ô genitor, ô sanguen dîs oriundum!</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Tu produxisti nos intra luminis oras.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The fragments of the Annals of Ennius, as the text is arranged by Merula, have
been translated into Italian by Bernardo Philippini, and published at Rome in 1659,
along with his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Poesie</span></span>. I know of no other translations of these fragments.
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em">
    <a name="toc25" id="toc25"></a><a name="pdf26" id="pdf26"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">PLAUTUS.</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There can be no doubt that even the oldest MSS. of Plautus were early corrupted
by transcribers, and varied essentially from each other. Varro, in his book <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
Analogiâ</span></span>, ascribes some phrase of which he did not approve, in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Truculentus</span></span>,
to the negligence of copyists. The Latin comedies, written in the age of Plautus,
were designed to be represented on the stage, and not to be read at home. It is
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-22">[pg A-22]</span><a name="PgA22" id="PgA22" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>therefore, probable, that, during the reign of the Republic at least, there were few
copies of Plautus’s plays, except those delivered to the actors. The dramas were
generally purchased by the Ædiles, for the purpose of amusing the people during
the celebration of certain festivals. As soon as the poet’s agreement was concluded
with the Ædile, he lost his right of property in the play, and frequently all concern
in its success. It seems probable, therefore, that even during the life of the
author, these magistrates, or censors employed by them, altered the verses at their
own discretion, or sent the comedy for alteration to the author: But there is no
doubt that, after his death, the actors changed and modelled the piece according to
their own fancy, or the prevailing taste of the public, just as Cibber and Garrick
wrought on the plays of Shakspeare. Hence new prologues, adapted to circumstances,
were prefixed—whole verses were suppressed, and lines properly belonging
to one play, were often transferred to another. This corruption of MSS. is
sufficiently evinced by the circumstance, that the most ancient grammarians frequently
cite verses as from a play of Plautus, which can now no longer be found in
the drama quoted. Thus, a line cited by Festus and Servius, from the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Miles</span></span>, does
not appear in any MSS. or ancient edition of that comedy, though, in the more
recent impressions, it has been inserted in what was judged to be its proper place<a id="noteref_574" name="noteref_574" href="#note_574"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">574</span></span></a>,
Farther—Plautus, and indeed the old Latin writers in general, were much corrupted
by transcribers in the middle ages, who were not fully acquainted with the variations
which had taken place in the language, and to whom the Latin of the age of
Constantine was more familiar than that of the Scipios. They were often
puzzled and confused by finding a letter, as c, for example, introduced into a word
which they had been accustomed to spell with a g, and they not unfrequently were
totally ignorant of the import or signification of ancient words. In a fragment of
Turpilius, a character in one of the comedies says, <span class="tei tei-q">“Qui mea verba venatur pestis
arcedat;”</span> now, the transcriber being ignorant of the verb <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">arcedat</span></span>, wrote <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ars cedat</span></span>,
which converts the passage into nonsense<a id="noteref_575" name="noteref_575" href="#note_575"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">575</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The comedies of Plautus are frequently cited by writers of the fourteenth century,
particularly by Petrarch, who mentions the amusement which he had derived from
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Casina</span></span><a id="noteref_576" name="noteref_576" href="#note_576"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">576</span></span></a>. Previous, however, to the time of Poggio, only eight of them were
known, and we consequently find that the old MSS. of the fourteenth century just
contain eight comedies<a id="noteref_577" name="noteref_577" href="#note_577"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">577</span></span></a>. By means, however, of Nicolas of Treves, whom Poggio
had employed to search the monasteries of Germany, twelve more were discovered.
The plays thus brought to light were the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bacchides</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Menæchmi</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mostellaria</span></span>,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Miles Gloriosus</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mercator</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pseudolus</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pœnulus</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Persa</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rudens</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Stichus</span></span>,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Trinummus</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Truculentus</span></span>. As soon as Poggio heard of this valuable and important
discovery, he urged the Cardinal Ursini to despatch a special messenger, in
order to convey the treasure in safety to Rome. His instances, however, were not
attended to, and the MSS. of the comedies did not arrive till two years afterwards,
in the year 1428, under the charge of Nicolas of Treves himself<a id="noteref_578" name="noteref_578" href="#note_578"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">578</span></span></a>. They were seized
by the Cardinal immediately after they had been brought to Italy. This proceeding
Poggio highly resented; and having in vain solicited their restoration, he accused
Ursini of attempting to make it be believed that Plautus had been recovered by his
exertions, and at his own expense<a id="noteref_579" name="noteref_579" href="#note_579"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">579</span></span></a>. At length, by the intervention of Lorenzo,
the brother of Cosmo de Medici, the Cardinal was persuaded to intrust the precious
volume to Niccolo Niccoli, who got it carefully transcribed. Niccolo, however,
detained it at Florence long after the copy from it had been made; and we find his
friend Ambrosio of Camaldoli using the most earnest entreaties on the part of the
Cardinal for its restitution.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Cardinalis Ursinus Plautum suum recipere cupit. Non
video quam ob causam, Plautum illi restituere non debeas, quem olim transcripsisti.
Oro, ut amicissimo homini geratur mos<a id="noteref_580" name="noteref_580" href="#note_580"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">580</span></span></a>.”</span> The original MS. was at length restored
to the Cardinal, after whose death it fell into the possession of Lorenzo de
Medici, and thus came to form a part of the Medicean library. The copy taken by
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-23">[pg A-23]</span><a name="PgA23" id="PgA23" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>Niccolo Niccoli was transferred, on his decease, along with his other books, to the
convent of St Mark.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
From a transcript of this copy, which contained the twelve newly-recovered
plays, and from MSS. of the other eight comedies, which were more common and
current, Georgius Merula, the disciple of Filelfo, and one of the greatest Latin scholars
of the age, formed the first edition of the plays of Plautus, which was printed by J.
de Colonia and Vindelin de Spira, at Venice, 1472, folio, and reprinted in 1482 at
Trevisa. It would appear that Merula had not enjoyed direct access to the original
MS. brought from Germany, or to the copy deposited in the Marcian library; for
he says, in his dedication to the Bishop of Pavia, <span class="tei tei-q">“that there was but one MS. of
Plautus, from which, as an archetype, all the copies which could be procured were
derived; and if, by any means,”</span> he continues, <span class="tei tei-q">“I could have laid my hands on it, the
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bacchides</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mostellaria</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Menæchmi</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Miles</span></span>, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mercator</span></span>, might have been rendered
more correct; for the copies of these comedies, taken from the original MS.,
had been much corrupted in successive transcriptions; but the copies I have procured
of the last seven comedies have not been so much tampered with by the critics,
and therefore will be found more accurate.”</span> Merula then compares his toil, in
amending the corrupt text, to the labours of Hercules. His edition has usually been
accounted the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">editio princeps</span></span> of Plautus; but I think it is clear, that at least eight
of the comedies had been printed previously: Harles informs us, that Morelli, in
one of his letters, had thus written to him:—<span class="tei tei-q">“There is an edition of Plautus which
I think equally ancient with the Venetian one of 1472; it is <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">sine ullâ notâ</span></span>, and
has neither numerals, signatures, nor catch-words. It contains the following
plays: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Amphitryo</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Asinaria</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Aulularia</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Captivi</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Curculio</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Casina</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Cistellaria</span></span>,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epidicus</span></span><a id="noteref_581" name="noteref_581" href="#note_581"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">581</span></span></a>.”</span> Now, it will be remarked, that these were the eight comedies current
in Italy before the important discovery of the remaining twelve, made by Nicholas
of Treves, in Germany; and the presumption is, that they were printed previous to
the date of the edition of Merula, because by that time the newly-recovered comedies
having got into circulation, it is not likely that any editor would have given to
the world an imperfect edition of only eight comedies, when the whole dramas were
accessible, and had excited so much interest in the mind of the public.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Eusebius Scutarius, a scholar of Merula, took charge of an edition, which was
amended from that of his master, and was printed in 1490, Milan, folio, and reprinted
at Venice 1495.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In 1499, an edition was brought out at Venice, by the united labour of Petrus
Valla, and Bernard Saracenus. To these, succeeded the edition of Jo. Bapt. Pius,
at Milan, 1500, with a preface by Phillip Beroald. Taubman says, that <span class="tei tei-q">“omnes
editiones mangonum manus esse passas ex quo Saracenus et Pius regnum et tyrannidem
in literis habuere.”</span> In the Strasburg impression, 1508, the text of Scutari
has been followed, and about the same time there were several reprints of the editions
of Valla and Pius.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The edition of Charpentier, in 1513, was prepared from a collation of different
editions, as the editor had no MSS.; but the editions of Pius and Saracenus were
chiefly employed. Charpentier has prefixed arguments, and has divided the lines
better than any of his predecessors; and he has also arranged the scenes, particularly
those of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mostellaria</span></span>, to greater advantage.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Few Latin classics have been more corrupted than Plautus, by those who wished
to amend his text. In all the editions which had hitherto appeared, the perversions
were chiefly occasioned by the anxiety of the editors to bend his lines to the supposed
laws of metre. Nic. Angelius, who superintended an edition printed by the
Giunta at Florence, 1514, was the first who observed that the corruptions had arisen
from a desire <span class="tei tei-q">“ad implendos pedum numeros.”</span> He accordingly threw out, in his
edition, all the words which had been unauthorizedly inserted to fill up the verses.
From some MSS. which had not hitherto been consulted, he added several prologues
to the plays; and also the commencement of the first act of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bacchides</span></span>,
which Lascaris, in one of his letters to Cardinal Bembo, says he had himself found
at Messina, in Sicily. These, however, though they have been inserted into all
subsequent editions of Plautus, are evidently written by a more modern hand than
that of Plautus. Two editions were superintended and printed by the Manutii,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-24">[pg A-24]</span><a name="PgA24" id="PgA24" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>1516 and 1522; that in 1522, though prepared by F. Asulanus, from a MS. corrected
in the hand of the elder Aldus and Erasmus, is not highly valued<a id="noteref_582" name="noteref_582" href="#note_582"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">582</span></span></a>. Two
editions, by R. Stephens, 1529 and 1530, were formed on the edition of the Giunta,
with the correction of a few errors. These were followed by many editions in Italy,
France, and Germany, some of which were merely reimpressions, but others were
accompanied with new and learned commentaries.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
To no one, however, has Plautus been so much indebted as to Camerarius, whose
zeal and diligence were such, that there was scarcely a verse of Plautus which did
not receive from him some emendation. In 1535, there had appeared at Magdeburg
six comedies (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Aulularia</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Captivi</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Miles Gloriosus</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Menæchmi</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mostellaria</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Trinummus</span></span>,)
which he had revised and commented on, but which were published
from his MS. without his knowledge or authority. The privilege of the first complete
edition printed under his own direction, is dated in 1538.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The text and annotations of Camerarius now served as the basis for most of the
subsequent editions. The Plantin editions, of which Sambucus was the editor, and
which were printed at Antwerp 1566, and Basil 1568, contain the notes and corrections
of Camerarius, with about 300 verses more than any preceding impression.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Lambinus, in preparing the Paris edition, 1577, collated a number of MSS. and
amassed many passages from the ancient grammarians. He only lived, however, to
complete thirteen of the comedies; but his colleague, Helias, put the finishing hand
to the work, and added an index, after which it came forth with a prefatory dedication
by Lambinus’s son. On this edition, (in which great critical learning and
sagacity, especially in the discovery of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">double entendres</span></span>, were exhibited,) the subsequent
impressions, Leyden, 1581<a id="noteref_583" name="noteref_583" href="#note_583"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">583</span></span></a>, Geneva, 1581, and Paris 1587, were chiefly
formed.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Lambinus, in preparing his edition, had chiefly trusted to his own ingenuity and
learning. Taubman, the next editor of Plautus of any note, compiled the commentaries
of others. The text of Camerarius was principally employed by him, but he
collated it with two MSS. in the Palatine library, which had once belonged to Camerarius;
and he received the valuable assistance of Gruterus, who was at that
time keeper of the library at Heidelberg. Newly-discovered fragments—the various
opinions of ancient and modern writers concerning Plautus—a copious <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">index
verborum</span></span>—a preface—a dedication to the triumvirs of literature of the day, Joseph
Scaliger, Justus Lipsius, and Casaubon—in short, every species of literary apparatus
accompanied the edition of Taubman, which first appeared at Frankfort in 1605. It
was very inaccurately printed, however; so incorrectly indeed, that the editor, in a letter
addressed to Jungerman, in September 1606, acknowledges that he was ashamed
of it. Philip Pareus, who had long been pursuing similar studies with those of Taubman,
embraced the opportunity, afforded by the inaccuracy of this edition, of publishing
in Frankfort, in 1610, a Plautus, which was professedly the rival of that which had
been produced by the united efforts of Taubman and Gruterus, and which had not
only disappointed the expectations of the public, but of the learned editors themselves.
Their feelings on this subject, and the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">opposition Plautus</span></span> edited by
Pareus, stimulated Taubman to give an amended edition of his former one. This
second impression, which is much more accurate than the first, was printed at Wittenberg
in 1612, and was accompanied with the dissertation of Camerarius <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Fabulis
Plautonicis</span></span>, and that of Jul. Scaliger, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Versibus Comicis</span></span>. Taubman died the
year after the appearance of this edition: Its fame, however, survived him, and not
only retrieved his character, which had been somewhat sullied by the bad ink and
dirty paper of the former edition, but completely eclipsed the classical reputation of
Pareus. Envious of the renown of his rivals, that scholar obtained an opportunity of
inspecting the MSS. which had been collated by Taubman and Gruterus. These
he now compared more minutely than his predecessors had done, and published the
fruits of his labour at Neustadt, in 1617. This was considered as derogating from
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-25">[pg A-25]</span><a name="PgA25" id="PgA25" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>the accuracy and critical ingenuity of Gruterus, and insulting to the manes of
Taubman.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Hinc jurgium, tumultus Grutero et Pareo.”</span> Gruterus attacked Pareus in
a little tract, entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Asini Cumani fraterculus e Plauto electis electus per Eustathium
Schwarzium puerum</span></span>, 1619, and was answered by Pareus not less bitterly,
in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Provocatio ad Senatum Criticum adversus personatos Pareomastigos</span></span>.
From this time Pareus and Gruterus continued to print successive editions of Plautus,
in emulation and odium of each other. Gruterus printed one at Wittenberg in
1621, with a prefatory invective against Pareus, and with the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Euphemiæ amicorum
in Plautum Gruteri</span></span>. Pareus then attempted to surpass his rival, by comprehending
in his edition a collection of literary miscellanies—as Bullengerus’ description
of Greek and Roman theatres. At length Pareus got the better of his obstinate
opponent, in the only way in which that was possible—by surviving him;
he then enjoyed an opportunity of publishing, unmolested, his last edition of
Plautus, printed at Frankfort, 1641, containing a Dissertation on the Life and
Writings of Plautus; the Eulogies pronounced on him; Remarks on his Versification;
a diatribe <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de jocis et salibus Plautinis</span></span>; an exhibition of his Imitations from
the Greek Poets; and, finally, the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Euphemiæ</span></span> of Learned Friends. Being now relieved
of all apprehensions from the animadversions of Gruterus, he boldly termed his
edition <span class="tei tei-q">“Absolutissimam, perfectissimam, omnibusque virtutibus suis ornatissimam.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
I have now brought the history of this notable controversy to a conclusion.
During its subsistence, various other editions of Plautus had been published—that
of Isaac Pontanus, Amsterdam, 1620, from a MS. in his own possession—that of
Nic. Heinsius, Leyden, 1635, and that of Buxhornius, 1645, who had the advantage
of consulting a copy of Plautus, enriched with MS. notes, in the handwriting of
Joseph Scaliger.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Gronovius at length published the edition usually called the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Variorum</span></span>. Bentley,
in his critical emendations on Menander, speaks with great contempt of the notes
which Gronovius had compiled. The first Variorum edition was printed at Leyden
in 1664, the second in 1669, and the third, which is accounted the best, at Amsterdam,
1684.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The Delphin edition was nearly coeval with these Variorum editions, having been
printed at Paris, 1679. It was edited under care of Jacques l’Œuvre or Operarius,
but is not accounted one of the best of the class to which it belongs. The text
was principally formed on the last edition of Gruterus, and the notes of Taubman
were chiefly employed. The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Prolegomena</span></span> on the Life and Writings of Plautus,
is derived from various sources, and is very copious. None of the old commentators
could publish an edition of Plautus, without indulging in a dissertation <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Obscœnis</span></span>.
In every Delphin edition of the classics we are informed, that <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">consultum
est pudori Serenissimi Delphini</span></span>; but this has been managed in various ways.
Sometimes the offensive lines are allowed to remain, but the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">interpretatio</span></span> is
omitted, and in its place star lights are hung out alongside of the passage: but in
the Delphin Plautus they are concentrated in one focus, <span class="tei tei-q">“<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in gratiam</span></span>,”</span> as it is
expressed, <span class="tei tei-q">“<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">provectioris ætatis</span></span>,”</span> at the end of the volume, under the imposing
title <span class="tei tei-q">“<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Plauti Obscœna</span></span>:”</span>
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“And there we have them all at one full swoop;</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">Instead of being scattered through the pages,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">They stand forth marshalled in a handsome troop,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">To meet the ingenuous youth of future ages.</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Till some less rigid editor shall stoop</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">To call them back into their separate cages;</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Instead of standing staring all together,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Like garden gods, and not so decent either<a id="noteref_584" name="noteref_584" href="#note_584"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">584</span></span></a>.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
What is termed the Ernesti edition of Plautus, and which is commonly accounted
the best of that poet, was printed at Leipsic, 1760. It was chiefly prepared by
Aug. Otho, but Ernesti wrote the preface, containing a full account of the previous
editions of Plautus.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The two editions by the Vulpii were printed at Padua, 1725 and 1764.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The text of the second Bipontine edition, 1788, was corrected by Brunck. The
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-26">[pg A-26]</span><a name="PgA26" id="PgA26" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>plan of the Bipontine editions of the Latin classics is well known. There are
scarcely any annotations or commentary subjoined; but the text is carefully corrected,
and an account of previous editions is prefixed.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the late edition by Schmieder (Gottingen, 1804), the text of Gronovius has
been principally followed; but the editor has also added some conjectural emendations
of his own. The commentary appears to have been got up in considerable
haste. The preliminary notices concerning the Life and Writings of Plautus, and
the previous editions of his works, are very brief and unsatisfactory. There is yet a
more recent German edition by Bothe, which has been published in volumes from
time to time at Berlin. Two MSS. never before consulted, and which the editor
believes to be of the eleventh or twelfth century, were collated by him. His principal
aim in this new edition is to restore the lines of Plautus to their proper metrical
arrangement.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
With a similar view of restoring the proper measure to the verses, various editions
of single plays of Plautus have, within these few years, been printed in Germany.
Of this sort is the edition of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Trinummus</span></span>, by Hermann (Leipsic, 1800), and of
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Miles</span></span> (Weimar, 1804), by Danz, who has made some very bold alterations on
the text of his author.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Italy</span></span> having been the country in which learning first revived,—in which the
MSS. of the Classics were first discovered, and the first editions of them printed,—it
was naturally to be expected, that, of all the modern tongues of Europe, the
classics should have been earliest translated into the Italian language. Accordingly
we find, that the most celebrated and popular of them appeared in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lingua
Volgare</span></span>, previous to the year 1500<a id="noteref_585" name="noteref_585" href="#note_585"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">585</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
With regard to Plautus, Maffei mentions, as the first translation of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Amphitryon</span></span>,
a work in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ottava rima</span></span>, printed without a date. This work was long believed
to be a production of Boccaccio<a id="noteref_586" name="noteref_586" href="#note_586"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">586</span></span></a>, but it was in fact written by Ghigo Brunelleschi,
an author of equal or superior antiquity, and whose initials were mistaken for those
of Giovanni Boccaccio. Though spoken of by Maffei as a dramatic version, it is in
fact a tale or novel founded on the comedy of Plautus, and was called <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Geta e Birria</span></span><a id="noteref_587" name="noteref_587" href="#note_587"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">587</span></span></a>.
Pandolfo Collenuccio was the first who translated the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Amphitryon</span></span> in its proper
dramatic form, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">terza rima</span></span>. He was in the service of Hercules, first Duke
of Ferrara, who made this version be represented, in January, 1487, in the splendid
theatre which he had recently built, and on occasion of the nuptials of his daughter
Lucretia. The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span class="tei tei-sic"><span style="font-style: italic">Menechmi</span></span></span>, partly translated in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ottava</span></span> and partly in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">terza rima</span></span>, was
the first piece ever acted on that theatre. The Este family were great promoters
of these versions; which, though not printed till the sixteenth century, were for
the most part made and represented before the close of the fifteenth. The dramatic
taste of Duke Hercules descended to his son Alphonso, by whose command
Celio Calcagnino translated the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Miles Gloriosus</span></span>. Paitoni enumerates four different
translations of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Asinaria</span></span>, in the course of the sixteenth century, one of
which was acted in the monastery of St Stephen’s, at Venice.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There were also a few versions of particular plays in the course of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">eighteenth</span></span>
century; but Paitoni, whose work was printed in 1767, mentions no complete Italian
translation of Plautus, nor any version whatever of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Truculentus</span></span>, or <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Trinummus</span></span>.
The first version of all the comedies was that of Nic. Eug. Argelio, which was
accompanied by the Latin text, and was printed at Naples, 1783, in 10 volumes 8vo.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The subject of translation was early attended to in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">France</span></span>. In the year 1540, a
work containing rules for it was published by Steph. Dolet, which was soon followed
by similar productions; and, in the ensuing century, its principles became a
great topic of controversy among critics and scholars. Plautus, however, was not
one of the classics earliest rendered. Though Terence had been repeatedly translated
while the language was almost in a state of barbarism, Plautus did not appear
in a French garb, till clothed in it by the Abbé Marolles, at the solicitation of Furetiere,
in 1658. The Abbé, being more anxious to write many than good books,
completed his task in a few months, and wrote as the sheets were throwing off.
His translation is dedicated to the King, Louis XIV., and is accompanied by the
Latin text. We shall find, as we proceed, that almost all the Latin authors of this
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-27">[pg A-27]</span><a name="PgA27" id="PgA27" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>period were translated into French by the indefatigable Abbé de Marolles. He was
unfortunately possessed of the opulence and leisure which Providence had denied
to Plautus, Terence, and Catullus; and the leisure he enjoyed was chiefly devoted
to translation. <span class="tei tei-q">“Translation,”</span> says D’Israeli, <span class="tei tei-q">“was the mania of the Abbé de
Marolles; sometimes two or three classical victims in a season were dragged into
his slaughter-house. The notion he entertained of his translations was their closeness;
he was not aware of his own spiritless style and he imagined that poetry
only consisted in the thoughts, and not in the grace and harmony of verse<a id="noteref_588" name="noteref_588" href="#note_588"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">588</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
De Coste’s translation of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Captivi</span></span>, in prose, 1716, has been already mentioned.
This author was not in the same hurry as Marolles, for he kept his version ten
years before he printed it. He has prefixed a Dissertation, in which he maintains,
that Plautus, in this comedy, has rigidly observed the dramatic unities of time and
place.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Mad. Dacier has translated the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Amphitryon</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rudens</span></span>, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epidicus</span></span>. Her version,
which is accompanied by the Latin text, and is dedicated to Colbert, was first
printed 1683. An examination of the defects and beauties of these comedies, particularly
in respect of the dramatic unities, is prefixed, and remarks by no means
deficient in learning are subjoined. Some changes from the printed Latin editions
are made in the arrangement of the scenes. In her dissertation on the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epidicus</span></span>,
which was a favourite play of Plautus himself, Mad. Dacier attempts to justify this
preference of the poet, and wishes indeed to persuade us, that it is a faultless production.
Goujet remarks that one is not very forcibly struck with all the various
beauties which she enumerates in perusing the original, and still less sensible of
them in reading her translation.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
M. de Limiers, who published a version of the whole plays of Plautus in 1719,
has not rendered anew those which had been translated by Mad. Dacier and by De
Coste, but has inserted their versions in his work. These are greatly better than
the others, which are translated by Limiers himself. All of them are in prose, except
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Stichus</span></span> and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Trinummus</span></span>, which the author has turned into verse, in
order to give a specimen of his poetic talents. In the versifications, he has
placed himself under the needless restraint of rendering each Latin line by only one
in French, so that there should not be a verse more in the translation than the original;
the consequence of which is, that the whole is constrained and obscure. Examinations
and analyses of each piece, expositions of the plots, with notices of Plautus’
imitations of the ancient writers, and those of the moderns after him, are inserted
in this work.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the same year in which Limiers published his version, Gueudeville brought out
a translation of Plautus. It is a very free one; and Goujet says, it is <span class="tei tei-q">“Plaute travesti,
plutot que traduit.”</span> He attempts to make his original more burlesque by exaggerations;
and by singular hyperbolical expressions; the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">obscœna</span></span> are a good
deal enhanced; and he has at the end formed a sort of table, or index, of the obscene
passages, referring to their proper page, which may thus be found without perusing
any other part of the drama. The professed object of the table is, that the reader
may pass them over if he choose.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
A contemporary journal, comparing the two translations, observes,—<span class="tei tei-q">“Il semble
que M. Limiers s’attache davantage à son original, et qu’il en fait mieux sentir le
véritable caractère; et que le Sieur Gueudeville est plus badin, plus vif, plus bouffon<a id="noteref_589" name="noteref_589" href="#note_589"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">589</span></span></a>.”</span>
Fabricius passes on them nearly the same judgment<a id="noteref_590" name="noteref_590" href="#note_590"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">590</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">English</span></span> were early acquainted with the plays of Plautus. It appears from
Holinshed, that in the eleventh year of King Henry VIII.—that is, in 1520—a
comedy of Plautus was played before the King<a id="noteref_591" name="noteref_591" href="#note_591"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">591</span></span></a>. We are informed by Miss Aikin,
in her <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memoirs of the Court of Elizabeth</span></span>, that when that Queen visited Cambridge
in 1564, she went on a Sunday morning to King’s Chapel, to hear a Latin sermon,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ad clerum</span></span>; <span class="tei tei-q">“and in the evening, the body of this solemn edifice being converted
into a temporary theatre, she was there gratified with a representation of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Aulularia</span></span>
of Plautus<a id="noteref_592" name="noteref_592" href="#note_592"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">592</span></span></a>.”</span> It has been mentioned in the text, that, in 1595, there appeared
a translation of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Menæchmi</span></span> of Plautus, by W. W.—initials which have
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-28">[pg A-28]</span><a name="PgA28" id="PgA28" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>generally been supposed to stand for William Warner, author of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Albion’s England</span></span>.
In 1694, Echard published a prose translation of the three comedies which had been
selected by Mad. Dacier—the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Amphitryon</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epidicus</span></span>, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rudens</span></span>. It is obvious,
however, that he has more frequently translated from the French, than from his
original author. His style, besides, is coarse and inelegant; and, while he aims at
being familiar, he is commonly low and vulgar. Some passages of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Amphitryon</span></span>
he has translated in the coarsest dialogue of the streets:—<span class="tei tei-q">“By the mackins, I believe
Phœbus has been playing the good fellow, and’s asleep too! I’ll be hanged if
he ben’t in for’t, and has took a little too much of the creature.”</span> In every page,
also, we find the most incongruous jumble of ancient and of modern manners. He
talks of the Lord Chief Justice of Athens, of bridewell, and aldermen; and makes
his heathen characters swear British and Christian oaths, such as, <span class="tei tei-q">“By the Lord
Harry!—’Fore George!—’Tis as true as the Gospel!”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In the year 1746, Thomas Cooke, the well-known translator of Hesiod, published
proposals for a complete translation of Plautus, but he printed only the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Amphitryon</span></span>.
Dr Johnson has told, that Cooke lived twenty years on this translation of Plautus,
for which he was always taking in subscriptions<a id="noteref_593" name="noteref_593" href="#note_593"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">593</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In imitation of Colman, who, in his Terence, had introduced a new and elegant
mode of translation in familiar blank verse, Mr Thornton, in 1667, published a version
of seven of the plays after the same manner,—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Amphitryon</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Miles Gloriosus</span></span>,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Captivi</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Trinummus</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mercator</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Aulularia</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rudens</span></span>. Of these, the translation of
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mercator</span></span> was furnished by Colman, and that of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Captivi</span></span> by Mr Warner.
Thornton intended to have translated the remaining thirteen, but was prevented by
death. The work, however, was continued by Mr. Warner, who had translated the
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Captivi</span></span>. To both versions, there were subjoined remarks, chiefly collected from the
best commentators, and from the notes of the French translators of Plautus.
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em">
    <a name="toc27" id="toc27"></a><a name="pdf28" id="pdf28"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">TERENCE.</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The MSS. of Terence which were coeval with the age of the author, or shortly
posterior to it, were corrupted from the same cause as the MSS. of Plautus. Varro
says, that, in his time, the copies of Terence then existing were extremely corrupt.
He is, however, one of the classics whose works cannot properly be said to have
been discovered at the revival of literature, as, in fact, his comedies never were lost.
They were commented on, during the later ages of the empire, by Æmilius Asper,
Valerius Probus, Martius Salutaris, Flavius Caper, and Helenius Acro; and towards
the end of the fifth century, Rufinus wrote a diatribe on the metres of Terence.
Sulpicius Apollinaris, a grammarian of the second century, composed arguments to
the plays, and Ælius Donatus commented on them in the fourth century. The person
styling himself Calliopius, revised and amended, in the eighth century, a MS.
which was long preserved in the Vatican. Eugraphius commented on Terence,
again, in the tenth, and Calpurnius in the middle of the fifteenth century. Guiniforte
delivered lectures on Terence at Novarra in 1430, and Filelfo at Florence about
the same period<a id="noteref_594" name="noteref_594" href="#note_594"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">594</span></span></a>. Petrarch, too, when Leontius Pilatus, disgusted with Italy, returned
to his native country, gave him a copy of Terence as his travelling companion,—a
foolish present, as Petrarch adds, for there is no resemblance between
the most gloomy of all the Greeks, and the most lively of the Africans. As Petrarch
at this time seems to have cordially disliked Leontius, it is not probable that the
copy of Terence he gave him was very scarce. All this shows, that the six plays of
Terence were not merely extant, but very common in Italy, during the dark ages.
One of the oldest MSS. of Terence, and that which was probably used in the earliest
printed editions, was preserved in the Vatican library: Fabricius has described
it as written by Hrodogarius in the time of Charlemagne, and as revised by Calliopius<a id="noteref_595" name="noteref_595" href="#note_595"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">595</span></span></a>.
Another MS. of Terence in the Vatican library, is one which, in the sixteenth
century, had fallen into the possession of Cardinal Bembo. It had been
revised by Politian<a id="noteref_596" name="noteref_596" href="#note_596"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">596</span></span></a>, who wrote on it, in his own hand, that he had never seen one
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-29">[pg A-29]</span><a name="PgA29" id="PgA29" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>more ancient:—<span class="tei tei-q">“Ego, Angelus Politianus, homo vetustatis minime incuriosus,
nullum me vidisse, ad hanc diem, codicem vetustiorem fateor.”</span> Its age, when
Fabricius wrote, in 1698, was, as that author testifies, more than a thousand years,
which places its transcription at the latest in 698. In this MS. there is a division of
verses which is not employed in that above mentioned, written by Hrodogarius.
Politian corrected from it, with his own hand, a copy which was in the Laurentian
library, and collated with it another, which subsequently belonged to Petrus Victorius.
After the death of Cardinal Bembo, this ancient MS. came into the possession
of Fulvius Ursinus, and was by him bequeathed to the Vatican library<a id="noteref_597" name="noteref_597" href="#note_597"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">597</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There is much uncertainty with regard to the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio Princeps</span></span> of Terence, and,
indeed, with regard to most of the editions of his works which appeared during the
fifteenth century. That printed by Mentelin at Strasburg, without date, but supposed
to be 1468, seems now to be considered as having the best claims to priority<a id="noteref_598" name="noteref_598" href="#note_598"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">598</span></span></a>.
The Terence printed by Pynson in 1497, was, I believe, the first Latin classic published
in this country. The earliest editions of Terence are without any separation
of verses, the division of them having been first introduced in the edition of 1487,
according to the arrangement made by Politian from Cardinal Bembo’s copy.
Westerhovius, in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">prolegomena</span></span> to his edition, 1726, enumerates not fewer than
248 editions of Terence previous to his time. Though the presses of the Aldi
(1517–21), the Stephenses (1529–52, &amp;c.), and the Elzevirs (1635), were successively
employed in these editions, the text of Terence does not seem to have
engaged the attention of any of the most eminent scholars or critics of the sixteenth
and seventeenth centuries, with the exception of Muretus. The edition of Faernus,
(Florence, 1565,) for which various valuable MSS. were collated, became the
foundation of almost all subsequent impressions, particularly that of Westerhovius,
which is usually accounted the best edition of Terence. It is nevertheless declared,
by Mr Dibdin, <span class="tei tei-q">“to be more admirable for elaborate care and research, than the
exhibition of any critical niceties in the construction of the text, or the illustration
of difficult passages.”</span> It contains the Commentaries of Donatus, Calpurnius, and
Eugraphius, and there are prefixed the Life of Terence, attributed to Suetonius,—a
dissertation of D. Heinsius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ad Horatii de Plauto et Terentio judicium</span></span>,—Evanthius,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Tragœdiâ et Comœdiâ</span></span>,—and a treatise, compiled by the editor from the
best authorities, concerning the scenic representations of the Romans.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Bentley’s first edition of Terence was printed at Cambridge in the same year
with that of Westerhovius. One of Bentley’s great objects was the reformation of
the metres of Terence, concerning which he prefixed a learned dissertation. The
boldness of his alterations on the text, which were in a great measure calculated to
serve this purpose, drew down on him, in his own age, the appellation of <span class="tei tei-q">“slashing
Bentley,”</span> and repeated castigation from subsequent editors.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Of the more recent editions, that of Zeunius (Leipsic, 1774) is deservedly accounted
the best in point of critical excellence. There are, however, three German
editions still more recent; that by <a name="corra29" id="corra29" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Schmieder</span>, (Halle, 1794,) by Bothe, (Magdeburg,
1806,) and by Perlet, (Leipsic, 1821;) which last is chiefly remarkable for its
great number of typographical errors—about as numerous as those in one of the old
English <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pearl Bibles</span></span>.
</p>

<div class="tei tei-tb"> </div>
<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The plays of Terence being much less numerous than those of Plautus, translations
of the whole of them appeared at an earlier period, both in Italian and French.
The first complete <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Italian</span></span> translation of Terence was in prose. It is dedicated to
Benedetto Curtio, by a person calling himself Borgofranco; but from the ambiguity
of some expressions in this dedication, there has been a dispute, whether he be
the author, or only the editor of the version—Fontanini supporting the former, and
Apostolo Zeno the latter proposition<a id="noteref_599" name="noteref_599" href="#note_599"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">599</span></span></a>. It was first printed at Venice, 1533; and
Paitoni enumerates six subsequent editions of it in the course of the sixteenth
century. The next version was that of Giovanni Fabrini, which, as we learn by
the title, is rendered word for word from the original; it was printed at Venice,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-30">[pg A-30]</span><a name="PgA30" id="PgA30" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>1548. A third prose translation, published at Rome, 1612, is dedicated to the
Cardinal Borghese by the printer Zanetti, who mentions, that it was the work of
an unknown author, which had fallen accidentally into his hands: Fontanini, however,
and Apost. Zeno, have long since discovered, that the author was called
Cristoforo Rosario. Crescimbeni speaks favourably of a version by the Marchioness
of Malespini. Another lady, Luisa Bergalli, had translated in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">verso sciolto</span></span>,
and printed separately, some of the plays of Terence: These she collected, and,
having completed the remainder, published them together at Venice, in 1733. In
1736, a splendid edition of a poetical translation of Terence, and accompanied by
the Latin, was printed at Urbino, with figures of the actors, taken from a MS. preserved
in the Vatican. It is written in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">verso sciolto</span></span>, except the prologues, which
are in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">versi sdruccioli</span></span>. The author, who was Nicholas Fortiguerra, and who died
before his version was printed, says, that the comedies are <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">nunc primum Italicis
versibus redditæ</span></span><a id="noteref_600" name="noteref_600" href="#note_600"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">600</span></span></a>; but in this he had not been sufficiently informed, as his version
was preceded by that of Luisa Bergalli, and by many separate translations of each
individual play. A translation of two of Terence’s plays, the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Andria</span></span> and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Eunuchus</span></span>,
into <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">versi sdruccioli</span></span>, by Giustiano de Candia, was printed by Paullus Manutius
in 1544<a id="noteref_601" name="noteref_601" href="#note_601"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">601</span></span></a>.
    Three of Terence’s plays, the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Andria</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Eunuchus</span></span>, 
    and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Heautontimorumenos</span></span>,
were subsequently translated in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">versi sdruccioli</span></span>, by the Abbé
Bellaviti, and published at Bassan in 1758.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is not certain who was the author of the first <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">French</span></span> translation of Terence, or
even at what period he existed. Du Verdier and Fabricius say, he was Octavien
de Saint Gelais, Bishop of Angouleme, who lived in the reign of Charles VIII.
This, however, is doubtful, since Pierre Grosnet, a French poet, contemporary with
the Bishop, while mentioning the other classics which he had translated, says
nothing of any version of Terence by him, but expressly mentions one by Gilles
Cybile—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Maistre Gilles nommé Cybile,</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Il s’est montré très-fort habile:</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Car il a tout traduit Therence</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Ou il y a mainte sentence<a id="noteref_602" name="noteref_602" href="#note_602"><span class="tei tei-noteref" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">602</span></span></a>.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The author, whoever he may be, mentions, that the translation was made by order
of the King; but he does not specify by which of the French monarchs the command
was given. His work was first printed, but without date, by Anthony <a name="corra30" id="corra30" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Verard</span>,
so well known as the printer of some of the earliest romances of chivalry; and
as Verard died in 1520, it must have been printed before that date<a id="noteref_603" name="noteref_603" href="#note_603"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">603</span></span></a>. It is in one
volume folio, ornamented with figures in wood-cuts, and is entitled, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Le Grant
Therence en François, tant en rime qu’en prose, avecques le Latin</span></span>. As this
title imports, there is both a prose and verse translation; and the Latin text is likewise
given. It is difficult to say which of the translations is worst; that in verse,
which is in lines of eight syllables, is sometimes almost unintelligible, and the variation
of masculine and feminine rhymes, is scarcely ever attended to.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The translation, printed 1583, with the Latin text, and of which the author is
likewise unknown, is little superior to that by which it was preceded. Beauchamp,
in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Recherches sur les Théatres de France</span></span>, mentions two other translations of
the sixteenth century—one in 1566, the other in 1584. The first by Jean Bourlier,
is in prose—the second is in rhyme, and is translated verse for verse. Mad. Dacier
includes all the versions of the sixteenth century in one general censure, only excepting
that of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Eunuch</span></span> by Baif, printed 1573, in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">jeux poëtiques</span></span>. It is in
lines of eight and ten syllables, and was undertaken by order of Queen Catharine,
mother of Charles IX. Mad. Dacier pronounces it to be a good translation, except
that, in about twenty passages, the sense of the original author has been mistaken.
It is remarked by Goujet, in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bibliothéque Françoise</span></span>, that if Mad. Dacier had
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-31">[pg A-31]</span><a name="PgA31" id="PgA31" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>been acquainted with the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Andrian</span></span>, by Bonaventure des Perriers, printed in 1537,
she would have made an exception in favour of it also. Bonaventure was the valet
of Margaret, Queen of Navarre, and after her death the editor of her tales, and himself
the author of a collection in a similar taste. He wrote at a time when the
French language was at its highest perfection, being purified from the coarseness
which appeared in the romances of chivalry, and yet retaining that energy and simplicity,
which it in a great measure lost, soon after the accession of the Bourbons.
This version was one of Bonaventure’s first productions, as, in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Avis aux Lecteurs</span></span>,
he says, <span class="tei tei-q">“Que c’etait son apprentissage:”</span> he intended to have translated
the whole plays of Terence, but was prevented by his tragical death. The same
comedy chosen by Bonaventure des Perriers, was translated into prose by Charles
Stephens, brother of the celebrated printers.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The Abbé Marolles has succeeded no better in his translation of Terence, than
in that of Plautus. We recognize in it the same heaviness—the same want of elegance
and fidelity to the original. Chapelain remarks, <span class="tei tei-q">“Que ce traducteur etoit
l’Antipode du bon sens, et qu’il s’eloignoit partout de l’intelligence des auteurs qui
avoient le malheur de passer par ses mains.”</span> His translation appeared in 1659, in
two volumes 8vo, accompanied by remarks, in the same taste as those with which
he had loaded his Plautus.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
About this period, the Gentlemen of the Port-Royal, in France, paid considerable
attention to the education of youth, and to the cultivation of classical learning. M.
de Sacy, a distinguished member of that religious association, and well known in his
day as the author of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Heures de Port-Royal</span></span>, translated into prose the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Andria</span></span>,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Adelphi</span></span>, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Phormio</span></span><a id="noteref_604" name="noteref_604" href="#note_604"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">604</span></span></a>. This version, which he printed in 1647, under the assumed
name of M. de Saint-Aubin, is much praised in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Parnasse Reformé</span></span>, and
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Jugemens des Sçavans</span></span>. There were many subsequent editions of it, and some
even after the appearance of the translation by Mad. Dacier. The version of the
other three comedies, by the Sieur de Martignac, was intended, and announced as
a supplement, or continuation of the work of M. de Sacy.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It still remains for me to mention the translation of Terence by Mad. Dacier.
This lady was advised against the undertaking by her friends, but she was determined
to persevere<a id="noteref_605" name="noteref_605" href="#note_605"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">605</span></span></a>. She rose at five o’clock every morning, during a whole winter,
in the course of which she completed four comedies; but having perused them
at the end of some months, she thought them too much laboured and deficient in
ease. She therefore threw them into the fire, and, with more moderation, recommenced
her labour, which she at length completed, with satisfaction to herself and
the public. Her translation was printed in 1688, 3 vols. 12mo, accompanied with
the Latin text, a preface, a life of the poet, and remarks on each of his
pieces. She has not entered, as in her translations of Plautus, into a particular examination
of every scene, but has contented herself with some general observations.
This lady has also made considerable changes as to the commencement and termination
of the scenes and acts; and her conjectures on these points are said to have
been afterwards confirmed by an authoritative and excellent MS., discovered in the
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bibliothéque de Roi</span></span><a id="noteref_606" name="noteref_606" href="#note_606"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">606</span></span></a>. The first edition was improved on, in one subsequently
printed at Rotterdam in 1717, which was also ornamented with figures from two
MSS. There is yet a more recent translation by Le Monnier, 1771, which is now
accounted the best.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The first translation which appeared in this country, and which is entitled
<span class="tei tei-q">“Terence in Englysh,”</span> is without date, but is supposed to have been printed in
1520. It was followed by Bernard’s translation, 1598—Hoole’s, 1670—Echard’s,
1694—and Dr Patrick’s, 1745. All those prose versions are flat and obsolete, and
in many places unfaithful to their original. At length Colman published a translation
in familiar blank verse, in which he has succeeded extremely well. He has
seldom mistaken the sense of his author, and has frequently attained to his polished
ease of style and manner. The notes, which have been judiciously selected from
former commentators, with some observations of his own, form a valuable part of the
work.
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em">
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-32">[pg A-32]</span><a name="PgA32" id="PgA32" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
<a name="toc29" id="toc29"></a><a name="pdf30" id="pdf30"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">LUCILIUS.</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
F. Douza was the first who collected the fragments of this satiric poet, and
formed them into a <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">cento</span></span>. Having shewn his MS. and notes to Joseph Scaliger, he
was encouraged to print them, and an edition accordingly came forth at Leyden, in
1597. It soon, however, became very scarce. A single copy of it was accidentally
discovered by Vulpius, in one of the principal public libraries of Italy; but, owing to
the place which it had occupied, it had been so destroyed by constant eaves-dropping
from the roof of the house, that when he laid his hands on it, it was scarcely
legible. Having restored, however, and amended the text as far as possible, he reprinted
it at Padua in 1735.
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em">
    <a name="toc31" id="toc31"></a><a name="pdf32" id="pdf32"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">LUCRETIUS.</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The work of Lucretius, like the Æneid of Virgil, had not received the finishing
hand of its author, at the period of his death. The tradition that Cicero revised it,
and gave it to the public, does not rest on any authority more ancient than that of
Eusebius; and, had the story been true, it would probably have been mentioned in
some part of Cicero’s voluminous writings, or those of the early critics. Eichstädt<a id="noteref_607" name="noteref_607" href="#note_607"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">607</span></span></a>,
while he denies the revisal by Cicero, is of opinion that it had been corrected by some
critic or grammarian; and that thus two MSS., differing in many respects from each
other, had descended to posterity—the one as it came from the hand of the poet,
and the other as amended by the reviser. This he attempts to prove from the
great inequality of the language—now obsolete and rugged—now polished and
refined—which difference can only, he thinks, be accounted for, from the
original and corrected copies having been mixed together in some of those
middle-age transcriptions, on which the first printed editions were formed. The old
grammarians, too, he alleges, frequently quote verses of Lucretius, which no longer
compose parts of his poem, and which therefore must have been altogether omitted
by the corrector; and, finally, the readings in the different MSS. are so widely different,
that it is incredible that the variations could have proceeded from the transcribers
or interpolators, and could have been occasioned only by the author or reviser
of the poem.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But though not completely polished by the author, there is no ground for the
conjecture, that the poem ever consisted of more than the present six books—an
opinion which seems to have originated in an orthographical error, and which is
contradictory to the very words of the poet himself.<a id="noteref_608" name="noteref_608" href="#note_608"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">608</span></span></a>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The work of Lucretius does not appear to have been popular at Rome, and the
MSS. of it were probably not very numerous in the latter ages of the empire. It is
quoted by Raban Maur, Abbot of Fulda, in his book <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Universo</span></span><a id="noteref_609" name="noteref_609" href="#note_609"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">609</span></span></a>, which was written
in the ninth century. The copies of it, however, seem to have totally disappeared,
previous to the revival of literature; but at length Poggio Bracciolini, while attending
the Council of Constance, whither he repaired in 1414, discovered a MS. in
the monastery of St Gal, about twenty miles from that city<a id="noteref_610" name="noteref_610" href="#note_610"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">610</span></span></a>. It is from the following
lines, in a Latin elegy, by Cristoforo Landini, on the death of this celebrated
ornament of his age, that we learn to whom we are indebted for the first of philosophic
poems. Landini, recording the discoveries of his friend, exclaims—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Illius manu, nobis, doctissime rhetor,</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">Integer in Latium, Quintiliane, redis;</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Et te, Lucreti, longo post tempore, tandem</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Civibus et Patriæ reddit habere tuæ.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Poggio sent the newly-discovered treasure to Niccolo Niccoli, who kept the original
MS. fourteen years. Poggio earnestly demanded it back, and at length
ob<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-33">[pg A-33]</span><a name="PgA33" id="PgA33" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>tained it; but before it was restored, Niccoli made from it, with his own hand, a
transcript, which is still extant in the Laurentian library<a id="noteref_611" name="noteref_611" href="#note_611"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">611</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The edition published at Verona, 1486, which is not a very correct one, was long
accounted the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio Princeps</span></span> of Lucretius. A more ancient impression, however,
printed at Brescia, 1473, has recently become known to bibliographers. It was
edited by Ferrandus from a single MS. copy, which was the only one he could
procure. But though he had not the advantage of collating different MSS., the
edition is still considered valuable, for its accuracy and excellent readings. There
are, I believe, only three copies of it now extant, two of which are at present in
England. The text of Lucretius was much corrupted in the subsequent editions of
the fifteenth century, and even in that of Aldus, published at Venice in 1500, of
which Avancius was the editor, and which was the first <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Latin</span></span> classic printed by
Aldus<a id="noteref_612" name="noteref_612" href="#note_612"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">612</span></span></a>. This was partly occasioned by the second edition of 1486 being unfortunately
chosen as the basis of all of them, instead of the prior and preferable edition,
printed at Brescia. In a few, but very few readings, the second edition has improved
on the first, as, for example, in the beautiful description of the helplessness
of a new-born infant—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Navita, nudus humi jacet infans, <span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">indigus</span></span> omni</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Vitali auxilio,”</span> ——</div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
where the Brescian edition reads <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">indignus</span></span>, instead of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">indigus</span></span>. And again, in the
fifth book—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Nec poterat quenquam placidi pellacia ponti,</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Subdola <span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">pellicere</span></span> in fraudem, ridentibus undis,”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
where the Brescian edition reads <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">pollicere</span></span>, instead of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">pellicere</span></span>, which seems to be
wrong. At length Baptista Pius, by aid of some emendations of his preceptor,
Philippus Beroaldus, to which he had access, and by a laborious collation of MSS.,
succeeded in a great measure in restoring the depraved text of his author to its
original purity. His edition, printed at Bologna in 1511, and the two Aldine
editions, published in 1515, under the superintendence of Nevagero, who was a
much better editor than Avancius, continued to be regarded as those of highest authority
till 1563, when Lambinus printed at Paris an edition, prepared from the collation
of five original MSS., and all the previous editions of any note, except the first
and second, which seem to have been unknown to him. The text, as he boasts in
the preface, was corrected in 800 different places, and was accompanied by a very
ample commentary. Lambinus was succeeded by Gifanius, who was more a
grammarian than an acute or tasteful critic. He amassed together, without discrimination,
the notes and conjectures on Lucretius, of all the scholars of his own
and the preceding age. Douza, in a sot of satirical verses, accused him of having
appropriated and published in his edition, without acknowledgment, some writings
of L. Fruterius, which had been committed to him on death-bed, in order to be
printed. His chief merit lies in what relates to grammatical interpretation, and the
explanation of ancient customs, and in a more ample collection of parallel passages
than had hitherto been made. The editions of D. Pareus, (Frankfort, 1631,) and
of Nardius, (Florence, 1647,) were not better than that of Gifanius; and the Delphin
edition of Lucretius, by M. Le Fay, has long been known as the very worst of the
class to which it belongs. <span class="tei tei-q">“Notæ ejus,”</span> says Fabricius, <span class="tei tei-q">“plenæ sunt pudendis
hallucinationibus.”</span> Indeed, so much ashamed of it were his colleagues, and those
who directed this great undertaking of the Delphin classics, that they attempted,
though unsuccessfully, to suppress it.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Nearly a century and a half had elapsed, from the first publication of the edition
of Lambinus, without a tolerable new impression of Lucretius being offered to the
public, when Creech, better known as the translator of Lucretius, printed, in 1695, a
Latin edition of the poet, to whose elucidation he had devoted his life. His study
of the Epicurean system, and intimate acquaintance with the works of Gassendi,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-34">[pg A-34]</span><a name="PgA34" id="PgA34" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>fully qualified him for the philosophic illustration of his favourite author. On the
whole, however, Havercamp’s edition, Leyden, 1725, is the best which has yet appeared
of Lucretius. It was prepared from the collation of twenty-five <a name="corr320" id="corr320" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">MSS.</span>, as
well as of the most ancient editions, and contained not only the whole annotations
of Creech and Lambinus, but also some notes of Isaac Vossius, which had not previously
been printed. The prefaces of the most important editions are prefixed;
and the only fault which has been found with it is, that in his new readings the editor
has sometimes injured the harmony of the versification. Lucretius certainly can
not be considered as one of the classics who have been most fortunate in their editors
and commentators. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, he failed to
obtain the care of the most pre-eminent critics of the age, and was thus left to the
conjectures of second-rate scholars. It was his lot to be assigned to the most ignorant
and barbarous of the Delphin editors; and his catastrophe has been completed
by falling into the hands of Wakefield, whose edition is one of the most injudicious
and tasteless that ever issued from the press. In preparing this work, which is dedicated
to Mr Fox, the editor had the use of several MSS. in the University of Cambridge
and the British Museum; and also some MS. notes of Bentley, found in a
copy of a printed edition, which originally belonged to Dr Mead. In his preface,
he expresses himself with much asperity against Mr Cumberland, for withholding
from him some other MS. notes of Bentley, which were in his possession. It would
have been fortunate for him if he had never seen any of Bentley’s annotations, since
many of his worst readings are derived from that source. By an assiduous perusal of
MSS. and the old editions, he has restored as much of the ancient Latin orthography,
as renders the perusal of the poet irksome, though, by his own confession, he has not in
this been uniform and consistent; and he has most laboriously amassed, particularly
from Virgil, a multitude of supposed parallel passages, many of which have little
resemblance to the lines with which they are compared. The long Latin poem, addressed
to Fox, lamenting the horrors of war, does not compensate for the very
brief and unsatisfactory notices, as to every thing that regards the life and writings
of the poet, and the previous editions of his works. The commentary is dull, beyond
the proverbial dulness of commentaries; and wherever there was a disputed or
doubtful reading, that one is generally selected, which is most tame and unmeaning—most
grating to the ear, and most foreign, both to the spirit of the poet, and of
poetry in general. I shall just select one instance from each book, as an example of
the manner in which the finest lines have been utterly destroyed by the alteration of
a single word, or even letter, and I shall choose such passages as are familiar to every
one. In his magnificent eulogy of Epicurus, in the first book, Lucretius, in admiration
of the enlightened boldness of that philosopher, described him as one—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Quem neque fama Deûm, nec fulmina, nec minitanti</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Murmure compressit cœlum.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The expression <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Fama Deûm</span></span> implies, that Epicurus could not be restrained by that
imposing character, with which deep-rooted prejudice, and the authority of fable,
had invested the gods of Olympus—a thought highly poetical, and at the same time
panegyrical of the mighty mind which had disregarded all this superstitious renown.
But Wakefield, by the alteration of a single letter, strips the passage both of its
sense and poetry—he reads,
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Quem neque <span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">fana</span></span> Deûm, nec fulmina, nec minitanti,”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
which imports that the determined mind of Epicurus could not be controlled by the
temples of the gods, which, if it has any meaning at all, is one most frigid and
puerile. This innovation, which the editor calls, in the note, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">egregiam emendationem</span></span>,
is not supported, as far as he informs us, by the authority of any ancient MS.
or edition whatever, but it was so written on the margin of the copy of Lucretius,
which had belonged to Bentley, where it was placed, as Wakefield admits, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">nude
ascripta et indefensa</span></span>. In the second book, Lucretius maintaining that absence of
splendour is no diminution of happiness, says,
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-35">[pg A-35]</span><a name="PgA35" id="PgA35" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Si non aurea sunt juvenum simulacra per ædes, &amp;c.</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">  * * * * *</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Nec citharæ reboant laqueata aurataque <span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">tecta</span></span>.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
But Wakefield, instead of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">tecta</span></span>, reads <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">templa</span></span>, and justifies his reading, not on the
authority of any ancient MSS., but by showing that <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">templa</span></span> is used for <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">tecta</span></span> by
some authors, and applied to private dwellings! The third book commences very
spiritedly with an eulogy of Epicurus:
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“E tenebris tantis tam clarum extollere lumen</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Qui primus potuisti, illustrans commoda vitæ,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Te sequor, O Graiæ gentis decus!”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This sudden and beautiful apostrophe is weakened and destroyed by a change to
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“O tenebris tantis tam clarum extollere lumen.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The lines are rendered worse by the interjection being thus twice repeated in the
course of three verses. In the fourth book, Lucretius, alluding to the merits of his
own work, says,
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Deinde, quod obscurâ de re tam lucida <span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">pango</span></span></span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Carmina, Musæo contingens cuncta lepore.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Here the word <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">pango</span></span> presents us with the image of the poet at his lyre, pouring
forth his mellifluous verses, and it has besides, in its sound, something of the twang
of a musical instrument. Wakefield, however, has changed the word into <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">pando</span></span>,
which reminds us only of transcription and publication. Lucretius, in book fifth,
assigns as the reason why mankind supposed that the abode of the gods was in heaven,
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Per cœlum volvi quia nox et luna videtur,</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Luna, dies, et nox, et noctis signa <span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">serena</span></span>!”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This last word Wakefield has changed into <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">severa</span></span>, which greatly impairs the beauty
of the line. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noctis signa serena</span></span>, are the stars and planets; but if instead of these
be substituted the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">signa severa</span></span>, the passage becomes tautological, for the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">signa
severa</span></span> are introduced immediately afterwards in the line
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Noctivagæque faces cœli flammæque volantes.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
I have only selected passages where Wakefield has departed from the usual
readings, without support from any ancient edition or authoritative MS. whatever.
The instances where, in a variation of the MSS. and editions, he has chosen the
worse reading, are innumerable.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The first edition of Wakefield’s Lucretius was printed at London in 1796; the
second at Glasgow, 1813, which is rendered more valuable than the first, by a running
collation in the last volume of the readings of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio Princeps</span></span>, printed at
Brescia; that of Verona, 1486—Venice 1495—the Aldine edition, 1500—and the
Bipontine, 1782, which places in a very striking point of view the superiority of the
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio Princeps</span></span> over those by which it was immediately succeeded. At the end of
this edition, there are published some MS. notes and emendations, taken from
Bentley’s own copy of Faber’s edition of Lucretius, in the library of the British
Museum. They are not of much consequence, and though a few of them are
doubtless improvements on Faber’s text, yet, taken as a whole, they would injure
the lines of the poet, should they be unfortunately adopted in subsequent editions.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Eichstädt, in his recent impression, published at Leipsic, has chiefly followed the
text of Wakefield, but has occasionally deviated from it when he thought the innovations
too bold. He had the advantage of consulting the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio Princeps</span></span>, which
no modern editor enjoyed. He has prefixed Wakefield’s prefaces, and a long dissertation
of his own, on the Life and Poetical Writings of Lucretius, in which he
scarcely does justice to the poetical genius of his author. The first volume, containing
the text and a very copious verbal index, was printed at Leipsic in 1801. It
is intended that the second volume should comprise the commentary, but it has not
yet been published.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-36">[pg A-36]</span><a name="PgA36" id="PgA36" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There is hardly any poet more difficult to translate happily than Lucretius. In the
abstruse and jejune philosophical discussions which occupy so large a proportion of
the poem, it is hardly possible, without a sacrifice of perspicuity, to retain the harmony
of versification; and, in the ornamental passages, the diction is so simple,
pure, and melodious, that it is an enterprize of no small difficulty to translate with
fidelity and elegance.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In consequence, perhaps, of the freedom of his philosophical, and a misrepresentation
of his moral tenets, Lucretius was longer of being rendered into the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Italian</span></span> language
than almost any other classic. It was near the end of the seventeenth century,
before any version was executed, when a translation into <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">verso sciolto</span></span>, was undertaken
by Marchetti, Professor of Mathematics and Philosophy in the University of Pisa.
Marchetti has evidently translated from the edition of Lambinus—the best which had
at that time appeared. His version, however, though completed in the seventeenth
century, was not published till 1717, three years after his death, when it was printed,
with the date of London, under the care of a person styling himself Antinoo Rullo,
with a prefatory dedication to the great Prince Eugene, in which the editor terms
it, <span class="tei tei-q">“la più grande, e la più bella poetic’ opera che nel passato secolo nascesse ad
accrescere un nuovo lume di gloria ad Italia.”</span> Public opinion, both in Italy and
other countries, has confirmed that of the editor, and it is universally admitted, that
the translator has succeeded in faithfully preserving the spirit and meaning of the
Latin original, without forfeiting any of the beauties of the Italian language. It has
been said, that such was the freedom and freshness of this performance, that unless
previously informed as to the fact, no one could distinguish whether the Latin or
Italian Lucretius was the original. Graziana, himself a celebrated poet, who had
perused it in MS., thus justly characterizes its merits, in a letter addressed to the
author:—<span class="tei tei-q">“you have translated this poem with great felicity and ease; unfolding its
sublime and scientific materials in a delicate style and elegant manner; and, what
is still more to be admired, your diction seldom runs into a lengthened paraphrase,
and never without the greatest judgment.”</span> The perusal of this admirable translation
was forbidden by the inquisition, but the prohibition did not prevent a subsequent
impression of it from being printed at Lausanne, in 1761. This edition, which
is in two volumes, contains an Italian translation of Polignac’s Anti-Lucretius, by
F. Maria Ricci. The editor, Deregni, indeed declares that he would not have
ventured to publish any translation of Lucretius, however excellent, unless accompanied
by this powerful antidote. There are prefixed to this edition historical and
critical notices; as also the preface, and the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Protesta del Traduttore</span></span>, which had
been inserted in the first edition.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Most of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">French</span></span> translations of Lucretius are in prose. Of all sorts of poetry,
that called didactic, which consists in the detail of a regular system, or in rational
precepts, which flow from each other in a connected train of thought, suffers least
by being transfused into prose. Almost every didactic poet, however, enriches his
work with such ornaments as spring out of his subject, though not strictly attached
to it; but in no didactic poem are these passages so numerous and so charming as
in that of Lucretius; and, accordingly, in a prose translation, while all that is systematic
or preceptive may be rendered with propriety, all that belongs to embellishment,
and which forms the principal grace of the original, appears impertinent and
misplaced. The earliest translation of Lucretius into the French language, was by
Guillaume des Autels, about the middle of the sixteenth century. The Abbé
Morolles, already mentioned as the translator of Plautus and Terence, turned Lucretius
into French prose: Of this version there were two editions, the first of
which was printed in 1650. It was addressed to Christina, Queen of Sweden; and,
as the author had been very liberal to this princess in compliment, he hoped she
would be equally liberal in reward; but he was much deceived, and of this disappointment
he bitterly complains in his Memoirs. Of this translation, Goujet
remarks, that one is constantly obliged to have recourse to the Latin text, in order
to comprehend its meaning<a id="noteref_613" name="noteref_613" href="#note_613"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">613</span></span></a>. It was a good deal amended, however, in the second
edition, 1659, under circumstances of which the author introduces an account in
the list of his works subjoined to his translation of Virgil. Gassendi, who had profoundly
studied the system of Epicurus and Lucretius, having procured a copy of
Ma<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-37">[pg A-37]</span><a name="PgA37" id="PgA37" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>rolles’ first edition, he sent a few days before his death for the author, and pointed out
to him, with his own hand, those passages in which he thought his translation defective,
and also supplied him with a number of notes in illustration of the poet. The
Abbé was thus provided with ample materials for the improvement of his work, and
so pleased was he with his second edition, that he got a prohibition against reprinting
the first introduced into the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Privilége</span></span> of the second. He inserted in it a
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Discours Apologetique</span></span>, defending the translating and reading of Lucretius, and
prefixed a dedication to M. Lamoignon, President of the Parliament, whom he now
substituted for Queen Christina. Moliere having seen the first edition of Marolles’
prose translation, was thereby induced to render Lucretius into French verse. His
original intention was to have versified the whole poem, but he afterwards confined
his rhymes to the more decorative parts, and delivered the rest in plain prose. As he
proceeded with his version, he uniformly rehearsed it both to Chapelle and Rohaut,
who jointly testified their approbation of the performance. But it was destined to
perish when brought very near its completion. A valet of the translator, who had
charge of his dress-wig, being in want of paper to put it into curl, laid hold of a
loose sheet of the version, which was immediately rent to pieces, and thrown into
the fire as soon as it had performed its office. Moliere was one of the most irritable
of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">genus irritabile vatum</span></span>, and the accident was too provoking to be endured.
He resolved never to translate another line, and threw the whole remainder
of his version into the flames, which had thus consumed a part of it<a id="noteref_614" name="noteref_614" href="#note_614"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">614</span></span></a>. This
abortive attempt of Moliere incited the Abbé Marolles to render the whole of Lucretius
into verse. He completed this task in less than four months, and published
the fruits of his labour in 1677. Rapidity of execution, however, is the only merit
of which he has to boast. His translation is harsh, flat, and inverted; and it is
also very diffuse: The poem of Lucretius consists of 7389 lines, and the version of
not less than 12338<a id="noteref_615" name="noteref_615" href="#note_615"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">615</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Lucretius was subsequently translated into prose by the Baron des Coutures. His
version, printed at Paris 1685, is somewhat better in point of style than those of
Marolles, but is not more faithful to the original, being extremely paraphrastic. A
Life of Lucretius, drawn up from the materials furnished by Hubert, Gifanius, Lambinus,
and other commentators, is prefixed, and to every book is appended a small
body of notes, which shew that the author was better acquainted with his subject
than Marolles. Still, however, the poem of Lucretius was not much known in
France during the seventeenth century, either in the original or translated form.
Chaulieu, one of the most elegant and polished poets of that age, was so little acquainted
with the moral lessons which it inculcated, as to write the following
lines:—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">—— <span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Epicure et Lucrece</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">M’ont appris que la Sagesse</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Veut qu’au sortir d’un repas,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Ou des bras de sa maîtresse,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Content l’on aille là bas.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
At length La Grange translated Lucretius in 1768, and Le Blanc de Guillet in
1788. Brunet speaks highly of the version of La Grange, which he seems to think
is the best in the French language, and he says that of Le Blanc de Guillet is <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">peu
recherché</span></span>. Mr Good, in mentioning the various translations of Lucretius, does not
allude to the production of La Grange, but speaks highly of the version of Le Blanc
de Guillet. He is sometimes, he admits, incorrect, and still more frequently obscure:
<span class="tei tei-q">“On the whole, however,”</span> he continues, <span class="tei tei-q">“it is a work of great merit, and
ranks second amid the translations of Lucretius, which have yet appeared in any
nation:”</span> Of course, it ranges immediately next to that of Marchetti. This version
is accompanied with the Latin text in alternate pages. It is decorated with plates,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-38">[pg A-38]</span><a name="PgA38" id="PgA38" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>illustrated by notes, and introduced by a comprehensive preliminary discourse,
which contains a biography of the original author, drawn up from Gifanius and
Creech, and also some general observations on the Epicurean philosophy.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The first attempt to transfer the poem of Lucretius into the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">English</span></span> language,
was made by Evelyn, the celebrated author of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Sylva</span></span>. It was one of his earliest
productions, having been printed in 1656. It was accompanied by an appendix
of notes, which show considerable acquaintance with his subject, and there are prefixed
to it complimentary letters or verses by Waller, Fanshaw, Sir Richard Brown,
and Christopher Wasse. Evelyn commenced his arduous task with great enthusiasm,
a due admiration of his original, and anxious desire to do it full justice. On
actual trial, however, he became conscious of his own inability to produce, as he
expresses it, <span class="tei tei-q">“any traduction to equal the elegancy of the original;”</span> and he accordingly
closed his labours with the first book. To this resolution, the negligent
manner in which his specimen of the translation was printed, contributed, as he
alleges, in no small degree. Prefixed to the copy in the library at Wotton, is this
note in his own handwriting: <span class="tei tei-q">“Never was book so abominably misused by the
printer; never copy so negligently surveyed, by one who undertook to look over
the proof-sheets with all exactness and care, namely, Dr Triplet, well known for his
ability, and who pretended to oblige me in my absence, and so readily offered himself.
This good I received by it, that publishing it vainly, its ill success at the printer’s
discouraged me with troubling the world with the rest<a id="noteref_616" name="noteref_616" href="#note_616"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">616</span></span></a>.”</span> This pretended disgust,
however, at the typography of his Lucretius, was probably a pretext. It is
more likely that he was deterred from the farther execution of his version, either by
its want of success, or by the hints which he received from some of his friends concerning
the moral and religious danger of his undertaking. <span class="tei tei-q">“For your Lucretius,”</span>
says Jeremy Taylor, in a letter to him, dated 16th April, 1656, <span class="tei tei-q">“I perceive you have
suffered the importunity of your too kind friends to prevail with you. I will not
say to you that your Lucretius is as far distant from the severity of a Christian as
the fair Ethiopian was from the duty of Bishop Heliodorus; for indeed it is nothing
but what may become the labours of a Christian gentleman, those things only
abated which our evil age needs not: for which also I hope you either have by
notes, or will by preface, prepare a sufficient antidote; but since you are engaged
in it, do not neglect to adorn it, and take what care of it it can require or need; for
that neglect will be a reproof of your own act, and look as if you did it with an unsatisfied
mind; and then you may make that to be wholly a sin, from which, only by prudence
and charity, you could before be advised to abstain. But, sir, if you will give
me leave, I will impose such a penance upon you, for your publication of Lucretius,
as shall neither displease God nor you; and since you are busy in these things which
may minister directly to learning, and indirectly to error, or the confidences of men,
who, of themselves, are apt enough to hide their vices in irreligion, I know you
will be willing, and will suffer to be entreated, to employ the same pen in the glorification
of God, and the ministries of eucharist and prayer<a id="noteref_617" name="noteref_617" href="#note_617"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">617</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
In 1682, Creech, who was deterred by no such religious scruples, published his
translation of the whole poem of Lucretius. As a scholar, he was eminently qualified
for the arduous undertaking in which he had engaged: but he wrote with such
haste, that his production everywhere betrays the inaccuracies of an author who acquiesces
in the first suggestions of his mind, and who is more desirous of finishing,
than ambitious of finishing well. Besides, he is at all times rather anxious to communicate
the simple meaning of his original, than to exhibit any portion of the ornamental
garb in which it is arrayed. Hence, though generally faithful to his
author, he is almost everywhere deficient in one of the most striking characteristics
of the Roman poet—grandeur and felicity of expression. He is often tame, prosaic,
and even doggerel; and he sometimes discovers the conceits of a vitiated taste, in
the most direct opposition to the simple character and majestic genius of his Roman
original. Pope said, <span class="tei tei-q">“that Creech had greatly hurt his translation of Lucretius, by
imitating Cowley, and bringing in turns even into some of the most grand parts<a id="noteref_618" name="noteref_618" href="#note_618"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">618</span></span></a>.”</span>
It is also remarked by Dr Drake, <span class="tei tei-q">“that in this version the couplet has led in almost
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-39">[pg A-39]</span><a name="PgA39" id="PgA39" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>every page to the most ridiculous redundancies. A want of taste, however, in the
selection of language, is as conspicuous in Creech as a deficiency of skill and address
in the management of his versification<a id="noteref_619" name="noteref_619" href="#note_619"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">619</span></span></a>.”</span> The ample notes with which the
translation is accompanied, are chiefly extracted from the works of Gassendi. A
number of commendatory poems are prefixed, and among others one from Evelyn,
in which he acknowledges, that Creech had succeeded in the glorious enterprize
in which he himself had failed. Dryden was also much pleased with Creech’s translation,
but this did not hinder him from versifying some of the higher and more ornamental
passages, to which Creech had hardly done justice, as those at the beginning
of the first and second books, the concluding part of the third book, against the
fear of death, and of the fourth concerning the nature of love. On these fine passages
Dryden bestowed the ease, the vigour, and harmony of his muse; but though
executed with his accustomed spirit, his translations want the majestic solemn colouring
of Lucretius, and are somewhat licentious and paraphrastic. For this, however,
he accounts in his Poetical Miscellanies, in mentioning his translations in
comparison with the version of Creech. <span class="tei tei-q">“The ways of our translation,”</span> he observes,
<span class="tei tei-q">“are very different—he follows Lucretius more closely than I have done, which
became an interpreter to the whole poem, I take more liberty, because it best suited
with my design, which was to make him as pleasing as I could. He had been too
voluminous had he used my method in so long a work, and I had certainly taken his,
had I made it my business to translate the whole.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The translations by Creech and Dryden are both in rhyme. That of Mr Good,
printed in 1805, is in blank verse, and it may well be doubted if this preference was
conducive to the successful execution of his purpose. The translation is accompanied
with the original text of Lucretius, printed from Wakefield’s edition, and
very full notes are subjoined, containing passages exhibiting imitations of Lucretius
by succeeding poets. The preface includes notices of preceding editions of
his author, and the explanation of his own plan. Then follow a Life of Lucretius,
and an Appendix to the Life, comprehending an analysis and defence of the system
of Epicurus, with a comparative sketch of most other philosophical theories, both
ancient and modern.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The translation of Mr Good was succeeded, in 1813, by that of Dr Busby, which
is in rhyme, and is introduced by enormous <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">prolegomena</span></span> on the Life and Genius of
Lucretius, and the Philosophy and Morals of his Poem.
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em">
    <a name="toc33" id="toc33"></a><a name="pdf34" id="pdf34"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">CATULLUS.</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The MSS. of Catullus were defaced and imperfect, as far back as the time of
Aulus Gellius<a id="noteref_620" name="noteref_620" href="#note_620"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">620</span></span></a>, who lived in the reigns of Adrian and the Antonines; and there were
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">variæ lectiones</span></span> in his age, as well as in the fifteenth century. There was a MS. of
Catullus extant at Verona in the tenth century which was perused by the Bishop
Raterius, who came from beyond the Alps, and who refers to it in his Discourses as
a work he had never seen till his arrival at Verona. Another was possessed in the
fourteenth century by Pastrengo, a Veronese gentleman, and a friend of Petrarch<a id="noteref_621" name="noteref_621" href="#note_621"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">621</span></span></a>,
who quotes it twice in his work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Originibus</span></span>; but these and all other MSS. had
entirely disappeared amid the confusions with which Italy was at that time agitated,
and Catullus may, therefore, be considered as one of the classics brought to light at
the revival of literature. The MS. containing the poems of Catullus was not found
in Italy, but in one of the monasteries of France or Germany, (Scaliger says of
France,) in the course of the fifteenth century, and according to Maffei, in 1425<a id="noteref_622" name="noteref_622" href="#note_622"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">622</span></span></a>.
All that we know concerning its discovery is contained in a barbarous Latin epigram,
written by Guarinus of Verona, who chose to give his information on the subject
in an almost unintelligible riddle. It was prefixed to an edition of Catullus,
printed in Italy 1472, where it is entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hextichum Guarini Veronensis Oratoris
Clariss. in libellum V. Catulli ejus concivis</span></span>:
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-40">[pg A-40]</span><a name="PgA40" id="PgA40" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Ad Patriam venio longis de finibus exul:</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">Causa mei reditûs compatriota fuit.</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Scilicet a calamis tribuit cui Francia nomen,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">Quique notat turbæ prætereuntis iter.</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Quo licet ingenio vestrum celebrate Catullum</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Quovis sub modio clausa papyrus erat.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The first line explains that the MS. was brought to Italy from beyond the Alps, and
the second that it was discovered by a countryman of Catullus, that is, by a citizen
of Verona. The third line contains the grand <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">conundrum</span></span>. Some critics have supposed
that it points out the name of a monastery where the MS. was discovered;
others, that it designates the name of the person who found it. Lessing is of this
last opinion; and, according to his interpretation, the line implies, that it was discovered
by some one whose name is the French word for quills or pens, that is,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">plumes</span></span>. The name nearest this is Plumatius, on which foundation Lessing attributes
the discovery of Catullus to Bernardinus Plumatius, a great scholar and physician
of Verona, who flourished during the last half of the fifteenth century<a id="noteref_623" name="noteref_623" href="#note_623"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">623</span></span></a>. This
conjecture of Lessing was better founded than he himself seems to have been aware,
as the second syllable in the name Plumatius is not remote from the French verb
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">hater</span></span>, which, in one sense, as the epigram expresses it—
</p>

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Notat turbæ prætereuntis iter.”</span></div>
</div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Lucius Pignorius, who thinks that these lines were not written by Guarinus of
Verona, but that the MS. was discovered by him, also conjectures that it was found
in a barn, since it is said in the last line, that it was concealed <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">sub modio</span></span>, and
bushels are nowhere but in barns<a id="noteref_624" name="noteref_624" href="#note_624"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">624</span></span></a>. This is taking the line in its most literal signification,
but the expression probably was meant only as proverbial.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The wretched situation in which this MS. was found, and the circumstance of
its being the only one of any antiquity extant, sufficiently accounts for the numerous
and evident corruptions of the text of Catullus, and for the editions of that poet
presenting a greater number of various and contradictory readings than those of
almost any other classic.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
After this MS. was brought to Italy, it fell into the hands of Guarinus of Verona,
who took much pains in correcting it, and it was further amended by his son Baptista
Guarinus, as a third person of the family, Alexander Guarinus, informs us, in
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">proœmium</span></span> to his edition of Catullus, 1521, addressed to Alphonso, third
Duke of Ferrara. Baptista Guarinus, as Alexander farther mentions in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">proœmium</span></span>,
published an edition of Catullus from the MS. which he had taken
so much pains to correct, but without any commentary. This edition, however,
has now entirely disappeared; and that of 1472, printed by Spira, at Venice, in
which Catullus is united with Tibullus and Propertius, is accounted the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio
Princeps</span></span>. The different editions in which these poets have appeared conjoined,
will be more conveniently enumerated hereafter: both in them, and in the impressions
of Catullus printed separately, the editors had departed widely from the corrected
text of Baptista Guarinus. Accordingly, Alexander Guarinus, in 1521,
printed an edition of Catullus, with the view of restoring the genuine readings of his
father and grandfather, who had wrought on the ancient MS. which was the prototype
of all the others. It would appear, however, that the erroneous readings had
become inveterate. Maffei, in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Verona Illustrata</span></span><a id="noteref_625" name="noteref_625" href="#note_625"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">625</span></span></a>, points out the absurd and
unauthorized alterations of Vossius and Scaliger on the pure readings of the Guarini.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Muretus took charge of an edition of Catullus, which was printed by the younger
Aldus Manutius in 1558. This production is not accounted such as might be
expected from the consummate critic and scholar by whom it was prepared. Isaac
Vossius had commented on Catullus; but his annotations lay concealed for many
years after his death, till they were at length brought to light by his amanuensis
Beverland, who, by means of this valuable acquisition, was enabled to prepare the
best edition which had yet appeared of Catullus, and which was first printed in
London in 1684. His commentary was on every point profoundly learned.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Poetam,”</span>
says Harles, <span class="tei tei-q">“commentario eruditissimo, ita tamen ut inverecundiâ illi
interdum haud cederet, illustravit.”</span> Vulpius published a yet better edition at
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-41">[pg A-41]</span><a name="PgA41" id="PgA41" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>Padua, in 1737, in the preparation of which he made great use of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio Princeps</span></span>.
In the notes, he has introduced a new and most agreeable species of commentary,—illustrating
his author by parallel passages from the ancient and modern
poets, particularly the Italian; not such parallel passages as Wakefield has amassed,
where the words <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">qui</span></span> or <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">atque</span></span> occur in both, but where there is an obvious imitation
or resemblance in the thought or image. He has also prefixed a diatribe <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Metris
Catullianis</span></span>. In the year 1738, a curious fraud was practised with regard to Catullus.
Carradini de Allio, a scholar of some note, published at Venice an edition, which he
pretended to have printed from an ancient MS. accidentally discovered by him in a
pottery, without a cover or title-page, and all besmeared with filth. It was dedicated
to the Elector of Bavaria; and though one of the most impudent cheats of the
sort that had been practised since the time of Sigonius and Annius Viterbiensis, it
imposed on many learned men. The credit it obtained, introduced new disorders
into the text of Catullus; and when the fraud was at length detected, the contriver
of it only laughed at the temporary success of his imposture.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Doering, in early life, had printed an edition of the principal poem of Catullus,
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epithalamium of Peleus and Thetis</span></span>. Encouraged by the success of this publication,
he subsequently prepared a complete edition of Catullus, which came
forth at Leipsic in 1788.
</p>

<div class="tei tei-tb"> </div>
<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epithalamium of Peleus and Thetis</span></span>, the chief production of Catullus, was
translated into <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Italian</span></span> by Ludovico Dolce, and printed in 1538, at the end of a
small volume of miscellaneous works dedicated to Titian. In the colophon it is
said, <span class="tei tei-q">“Il fine dell’ epitalamio tradotto per M. Lod. Dolce, in verso sciolto.”</span> This
Epithalamium was also translated in the eighteenth century, into <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ottava Rima</span></span>, by
Parisotti, with a long preface, in which he maintains that the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ottava</span></span>, or <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">terza rima</span></span>,
is better adapted for the translation of the Latin classics than <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">versi sciolti</span></span>. Ginguené,
in the preface to his French translation of this Epithalamium, mentions three
other Italian versions of the last century, those of Neruci, Torelli, and the Count
d’Ayano, all of which, he says, possess considerable merit. He also informs us, that
Antonio Conti had commenced a translation of this poem, which was found incomplete
at his death; but it was accompanied by many valuable criticisms and annotations,
which have been much employed in a Memoir inserted in the transactions of
the French Academy, by M. D’Arnaud, whose plagiarisms from the Italian author
have been pointed out at full length by M. Ginguené, in his preface. Conti completed
a translation of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Coma Berenices</span></span> in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">versi sciolti</span></span>, accompanied by an explanation
of the subject, and learned notes, which was printed along with his works
at Venice, in 1739. The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Coma Berenices</span></span> was also translated in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">terza rima</span></span> by the
Neapolitan Saverio Mattei, and by Pagnini in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">versi sdruccioli</span></span>. At length, in
1803, M. Ugo Foscolo, now well known in this country as the author of the Letters
of Jacopo Ortis, printed at Milan a translation of this elegy, in blank verse, under
the title of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">La Chioma di Berenice, poema di Callimaco, tradotto da Valerio Catullo,
volgarizzato ed illustrato da Ugo Foscolo</span></span>. The version is preceded by four
dissertations; the text is accompanied with notes, and followed by fourteen <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">considerazioni</span></span>,
as they are called, in which the author severely censures and satirizes
the pedantic commentators and philologers of his country. Mr Hobhouse, in his
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Illustrations of Childe Harold</span></span><a id="noteref_626" name="noteref_626" href="#note_626"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">626</span></span></a>, says, that the whole lucubration, extending to
nearly 300 pages of large octavo, is a grave and continued irony on the verbal criticisms
of commentators. <span class="tei tei-q">“Some of the learned,”</span> he continues, <span class="tei tei-q">“fell into the
snare, and Foscolo, who had issued only a few copies, now added a Farewell to his
readers, in which he repays their praises, by exposing the mysteries and abuses of
the philological art. Those whom he had deceived must have been not a little
irritated to find that his frequent citations were invented for the occasion, and that
his commentary had been purposely sprinkled with many of the grossest faults.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The whole works of Catullus were first translated into Italian by the Abbot
Francis Maria Biacca of Parma, who concealed his real designation, according to
the affected fashion of the times, under the appellation of Parmindo Ibichense,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pastor Arcade</span></span>. The Abbot died in 1735, and his version was printed at Milan
after his death, in 1740, in the twenty-first volume of the General Collection of
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-42">[pg A-42]</span><a name="PgA42" id="PgA42" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>Italian Translations from the Ancient Latin Poets. The most recent Italian version
is that of Puccini, printed at Pisa in 1805. It is very deficient in point of spirit;
and the last English translator of Catullus observes, <span class="tei tei-q">“that it is chiefly remarkable
for the squeamishness with which it omits all warmth in the love verses, while it
unblushingly retains some of the most disgusting passages.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">French</span></span> have at all times dealt much in prose translations of the Classics.
These did not suit very well for the epic poems, or even comedies or the Romans;
and were totally abhorrent from the lyrical or epigrammatic productions of Catullus.
A great deal of the beauty of every poem consists in the melody of its numbers.
But there are certain species of poetry, of which the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">chief</span></span> merit lies in the sweetness
and harmony of versification. A boldness of figures, too—a luxuriance of
imagery—a frequent use of metaphors—a quickness of transition—a freedom of
digression, which are allowable in every sort of poetry, are to many species of it
essential. But these are quite unsuitable to the character of prose, and when seen
in a prose translation, they appear preposterous and out of place, because they are
never found in any original prose composition. Now, the beauties of Catullus are
precisely of that nature, of which it is impossible to convey the smallest idea in a
prose translation. Many of his poems are of a lyric description, in which a greater
degree of irregularity of thought, and a more unrestrained exuberance of fancy, are
permitted than in any other kind of composition. To attempt, therefore, a translation
of a lyric poem into prose, is the most absurd of all undertakings; for those very
characters of the original, which are essential to it, and which constitute its highest
beauty, if transferred to a prose translation, become unpardonable blemishes. What
could be more ridiculous than a French prose translation of the wild dithyrambics of
Atis, or the fervent and almost phrenzied love verses to Lesbia? It is from poetry
that the elegies of Catullus derive almost all their tenderness—his amorous verses
all their delicacy, playfulness, or voluptuousness—and his epigrams all their sting.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
That indefatigable translator of the Latin poets, the Abbé Marolles, was the first
person who <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">traduced</span></span> Catullus in French. He was an author, of all others, the worst
qualified to succeed in the task which he had undertaken, as his heavy and leaden
pen was ill adapted to express the elegant light graces of his original. His prose
translation was printed in 1653. It was succeeded, in 1676, by one in verse, also
by Marolles, but of which only thirty copies were thrown off and distributed among
the translator’s friends. La Chapelle (not the author of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Voyage</span></span>) translated
most of the poems of Catullus, and inserted them in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Histoire Galante</span></span>, entitled
the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Amours de Catulle</span></span>, printed in 1680, which relates, in the style of an amatory
prose romance, the adventures and intrigues of Catullus, his friends, and mistresses.
The next translation, though not of the whole of his pieces, is by M. Pezay, printed
1771, who misses no opportunity of ridiculing Marolles and his work. It is in prose,
as is also a more recent French translation by M. Noel, Paris, 1806. The first
volume of Noel’s work contains the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Discours Preliminaire</span></span> on the Life, Poetry,
Editions, and Translations of Catullus; and the version itself, which is accompanied
with the Latin text. The second volume comprises a very large body of notes,
chiefly exhibiting the imitations of Catullus by French poets. Brunet mentions a
translation still more recent, by M. Mollevaut, which is in verse, and proves that
more justice may be done to Catullus in rhyme than prose.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
An <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">English</span></span> translation of Catullus, usually ascribed to Dr Nott, was published
anonymously in 1795, accompanied with some valuable annotations. He was the
first to give, as he himself says, the whole of Catullus, without reserve, and in some
way or other, to translate all his indecencies. This version adheres very closely to
the original, and has the merit of being simple and literal, but it is meagre and inelegant:
it is defective in ease and freedom, and but seldom presents us with any of
those graces of poetry, and indeed almost unattainable felicities of diction, which
characterize the original. While writing this, the poetical translation by Mr Lamb
has come to my hands. It is also furnished with a long preface and notes, which
appear to be tasteful and amusing. The chief objections to the translation are quite
the reverse of those which have been stated to the version by which it was preceded—it
seems defective in point of fidelity, and is too diffuse and redundant. No
author suffers so much by being diluted as Catullus, and he can only be given with
effect by a brevity as condensed and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">piquant</span></span> as his own. Indeed, the thoughts and
language of Catullus throw more difficulties in the way of a translator, than those of
almost any other classic author. His peculiarities of feeling—his idiomatic delicacies
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-43">[pg A-43]</span><a name="PgA43" id="PgA43" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>of style—that light ineffable grace—that elegant ease and spirit, with which he was
more richly endued than almost any other poet, can hardly pass through the hands
of a translator without being in some degree sullied or alloyed.
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em">
    <a name="toc35" id="toc35"></a><a name="pdf36" id="pdf36"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">LABERIUS—PUBLIUS SYRUS.</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The only fragment of any length or importance which we possess of Laberius,
has been saved by Macrobius, in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Saturnalia</span></span>. The fragments of Publius Syrus
were chiefly preserved by Seneca and Au. Gellius, and the scattered maxims which
they had recorded, were collected in various MSS. of the fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries. They were first printed together, under the superintendence of Erasmus,
in 1502, as revised and corrected from a MS. in the University of Cambridge. Fabricius
published some additional maxims, which had not previously been printed,
in 1550. Stephens edited them at the end of his Fragments from the Greek and
Latin Comic Poets, 1564; and Bentley published them along with Terence and the
Fables of Phædrus, at Cambridge, in 1726. An improved edition, which had been
prepared by Gruter, was printed under the superintendence of Havercamp, from
a MS. after his death. The most complete edition, however, which has yet
appeared, is that published by Orellius, at Leipsic, 1822. It contains 879 maxims,
arranged in alphabetical order, from which, at least as the editor asserts, all those
which are spurious have been rejected, and several that are genuine added. A
Greek version of the maxims, by Jos. Scaliger, is given by him on the opposite side
of the page, and he has appended a long commentary, in which he has quoted all
the maxims of preceding or subsequent authors, who have expressed sentiments
similar to those of Publius Syrus.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The sentences were translated into <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">English</span></span> from the edition of Erasmus, under
the following title: <span class="tei tei-q">“Proverbs or Adagies, with newe Additions, gathered out of the
Chiliades of Erasmus, by Richard Taverner. Hereunto be also added, Mimi Publiani.
Imprinted at Lo’don, in Fletstrete, at the signe of the Whyte Harte. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Cum
privilegio ad imprimendum solum.</span></span>”</span> On the back of the title is <span class="tei tei-q">“the Prologe of
the author, apologizing for his slender capacitie;”</span> and concluding, <span class="tei tei-q">“yet my harte
is not to be blamed.”</span> It contains sixty-four leaves, the last blank. On the last
printed page are the <span class="tei tei-q">“Faultes escaped in printynge,”</span> which are seven in number.
Beneath is the colophon, <span class="tei tei-q">“Imprinted at London by Richarde Bankes, at the Whyte
Harte, 1539.”</span> This book was frequently reprinted. James Elphinston, long known
to the public by his unsuccessful attempt to introduce a new and uniform mode of
spelling into the English language, translated, in 1794, <span class="tei tei-q">“The Sentencious Poets—Publius
dhe Syrrian—Laberius dhe Roman Knight, &amp;c. arrainged and translated
into correspondent Inglish Mezzure<a id="noteref_627" name="noteref_627" href="#note_627"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">627</span></span></a>.”</span>
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em">
    <a name="toc37" id="toc37"></a><a name="pdf38" id="pdf38"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">CATO—VARRO.</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It appears from Aulus Gellius, that, even in his time, the works of Cato had begun
to be corrupted by the ignorance of transcribers. As mentioned in the text,
his book on Agriculture, the only one of his numerous writings which survives, has
come down to us in a very imperfect and mutilated state. A MS. of Cato, but very
faulty and incomplete, was in possession of Niccolo Niccoli; and a letter from him is
extant, requesting one of his correspondents, called Michelotius, to borrow for him
a very ancient copy from the Bishop Aretino, in order that his own might be rendered
more perfect<a id="noteref_628" name="noteref_628" href="#note_628"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">628</span></span></a>. Most of the editions we now have, follow a MS. which is
said to have been discovered at Paris by the architect Fra Giocondo of Verona, and
was brought by him to Italy. Varro’s treatise on Agriculture was first discovered
by Candidi, as he himself announces in a letter to Niccolo Niccoli<a id="noteref_629" name="noteref_629" href="#note_629"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">629</span></span></a>.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-44">[pg A-44]</span><a name="PgA44" id="PgA44" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The agricultural works of Cato and Varro have generally been printed together,
and also along with those of Columella and Palladius, under the title of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rei
Rusticæ Scriptores</span></span>. There is no ancient MS. known, in which all the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rei Rusticæ
Scriptores</span></span> are collected together. They were first combined in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio
Princeps</span></span>, edited by Georgius Merula, and printed at Venice, in 1470. The next
edition, superintended by Bruschius, and printed in 1482, has almost entirely disappeared.
In many passages, its readings were different from those of all other
editions, as appears from the annotations communicated from Rome, by Pontedera
to Gesner, while he was preparing his celebrated edition<a id="noteref_630" name="noteref_630" href="#note_630"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">630</span></span></a>. Philippus Beroaldus
corrected a good many faults and errors which had crept into the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio Princeps</span></span>.
His emendations were made use of in the edition of Bologna, 1494, by Benedict
Hector. Gesner has assiduously collated that edition with the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio princeps</span></span>,
and he informs us, that it contained many important corrections. Though differing
in some respects, he considers all the editions previous to that of Aldus, as belonging
to the same class or family. The Aldine edition, printed 1514, was superintended
by Fra Giocondo of Verona, who, having procured at Paris some MSS. not previously
consulted, introduced from them many new readings, and filled up several chasms in
the text, particularly the fifty-seventh chapter<a id="noteref_631" name="noteref_631" href="#note_631"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">631</span></span></a>. This edition, however, is not highly
esteemed; <span class="tei tei-q">“Sequitur,”</span> says Fabricius, <span class="tei tei-q">“novi nec optimi generis editio Aldina:”</span>
And Schneider, the most recent editor of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rei Rusticæ Scriptores</span></span>, affirms that
Giocondo corrupted and perverted almost every passage which he changed. Nicholas
Angelius took charge of the edition published by the Giunta at Florence, in
1515. His new readings are ingenious; but many of them are quite unauthorized
and conjectural. The Aldine continued to form the basis of all subsequent editions,
till the time of Petrus Victorius, who was so great a restorer and amender of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rei
Rusticæ Scriptores</span></span>, that he is called their <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Æsculapius</span></span> by Gesner, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Sospitator</span></span>
by Fabricius. Victorius had got access to a set of MSS. which Politian had collated
with the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio Princeps</span></span>. The most ancient and important of these MSS.,
containing Cato, and almost the whole of Varro, was found by Victorius in the
library of St Mark; another in French characters was in the Medicean library; and
a third had belonged to Franciscus Barbarus, and was transcribed by him from an
excellent exemplar at Padua<a id="noteref_632" name="noteref_632" href="#note_632"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">632</span></span></a>. But though Victorius had the advantage of consulting
these MSS., it does not appear that he possessed the collation by the able
hand of Politian; because that was inserted, not in the MSS., but in his own printed
copy of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio Princeps</span></span>; and Gesner shows at great length that Petrus Victorius
had never consulted any copy whatever of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio Princeps</span></span><a id="noteref_633" name="noteref_633" href="#note_633"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">633</span></span></a>. Victorius
first employed his learning and critical talents on Varro. Some time afterwards,
Giovanni della Casa being sent by the Pope on some public affairs to Florence,
where Victorius at that time resided, brought him a message from the Cardinal Marcellus
Cervinus, requesting that he should exert on Cato some part of that diligence
which he had formerly employed on Varro. Victorius soon completed the task assigned
him. He also resumed Varro, and attentively revised his former labours on
that author<a id="noteref_634" name="noteref_634" href="#note_634"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">634</span></span></a>. At last he determined to collate whatever MSS. of the Rustic writers
he could procure. Those above-mentioned, as having been inspected by Politian,
were the great sources whence he derived new and various readings.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It is not known that Victorius printed any edition containing the text of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rei
Rusticæ Scriptores</span></span> in Italy. His letter to Cervinus speaks as if he was just about
to <a name="corra44" id="corra44" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">edit</span> them; but whether he did so is uncertain. <span class="tei tei-q">“Quartam classem,”</span> says
Harles, <span class="tei tei-q">“constituit Victorius, sospitator horum scriptorum: qui quidem num primum
in Italiâ recensitos dederit eos cum Gesnero et Ernesti ignoro<a id="noteref_635" name="noteref_635" href="#note_635"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">635</span></span></a>.”</span> As far as
now appears, his corrections and emendations were first printed in the edition of
Leyden, 1541, where the authors it contains, are said in the title to be <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Restituti per
Petrum Victorium, ad veterum exemplarium fidem, suæ integritati</span></span>. His castigations
were printed in the year following, but without the text of the authors, at
Florence. The Leyden edition was reprinted at Paris, in 1543, by Robert Stephens,
and was followed by the edition of Hier. Commellinus, 1595.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-45">[pg A-45]</span><a name="PgA45" id="PgA45" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
At length Gesner undertook a complete edition of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rei Rusticæ Scriptores</span></span>,
under circumstances of which he has given us some account in his preface. The
eminent bookseller, Fritschius, had formed a plan of printing these authors; and to
aid in this object, he had employed Schoettgenius, a young, but even then a distinguished
scholar. A digest of the best commentators, and a collection of various
readings, were accordingly prepared by him. The undertaking, however, was then
deferred, in expectation of the arrival of MSS. from Italy; and Schoettgenius was
meanwhile called to a distance to some other employment, leaving the fruits of his
labour in the hands of Fritschius. In 1726, that bookseller came to Gesner, and informed
him, that Politian’s collations, written on his copy of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio Princeps</span></span>,
had at length reached him, as also some valuable observations on the rustic writers,
communicated from Italy by Pontedera and Facciolati. Fritschius requested that
Gesner should now arrange the whole materials which had been compiled. Selections
from the commentaries, and the various readings previous to the time of
Victorius, were prepared to his hand; but he commenced an assiduous study of
every thing that was valuable in more recent editions. At length his ponderous
edition came out with a preface, giving a full detail of the labours of others and his
own, and with the prefaces to the most celebrated preceding editions. Some of the
notes had been previously printed, as those of Meursius, Scaliger, and Fulvius Ursinus—others,
as those of Schoettgenius, Pontedera, and Gesner himself, had never
yet seen the light. Though Gesner never names Pontedera without duly styling
him Clarissimus Pontedera, that scholar was by no means pleased with the result of
Gesner’s edition, and attacked it with much asperity, in his great work, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Antiquitatum
Rusticarum</span></span>. Gesner’s first edition was printed at Leipsic, 1735. Ernesti
took charge of the publication of the second edition; and, in addition to the dissertation
of Ausonius Popma, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Instrumento Fundi</span></span>, which formed an appendix to
the first, he has inserted Segner’s description and explanation of the aviary of
Varro.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The most recent edition of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Scriptores Rei Rusticæ</span></span>, is that of Schneider, who
conceives that he has perfected the edition of Gesner, by having collated the ancient
edition of Bruschius, and the first Aldine edition, neither of which had been
consulted by his predecessor.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Besides forming parts of every collection of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rei Rusticæ Scriptores</span></span>, the
agricultural treatises of Cato and Varro have been repeatedly printed by themselves,
and apart from those of Columella and Palladius. Ausonius Popma, in his separate
edition of Cato, 1590, has chiefly, and without much acknowledgment, employed
some valuable annotations and remarks contained in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Adversaria</span></span> of Turnebus.
This edition was accompanied by some other fragments of Cato. These, however,
were of small importance; and the principal part of the publication being the work
on Agriculture, its sale was much impeded by Commellinus’ full edition of the agricultural
writers, published five years afterwards. Raphellengius, however, reprinted
it in 1598, with a new title; and with the addition of the notes of Meursius.
Popma again revised his labours, and published an improved edition in 1620. Varro’s
treatise, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Re Rusticâ</span></span>, was published alone in 1545, and with his other writings,
by Stephens, in 1569. Ausonius Popma also edited it in 1601, appropriating,
according to his custom, the notes and observations of others.
</p>
<div class="tei tei-tb"> </div>
<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cato’s work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Re Rusticâ</span></span>, has been translated into <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Italian</span></span> by Pagani, whose
version was printed at Venice, 1792; and into <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">French</span></span> by Saboureux, Paris, 1775.
I am not aware of any full <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">English</span></span> translation of Cato, but numerous extracts are
made from it in Dickson’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Husbandry of the Ancients</span></span>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Italy has produced more translations of the Latin writers than any other country;
and one would naturally suppose, that the agricultural writings of those who had
cultivated the same soil as themselves, would be peculiarly interesting to the Italians.
I do not know, however, of any version of Varro in their language. There
is an <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">English</span></span> translation, by the Rev. Mr Owen, printed at Oxford in 1800. In
his preface, the author says,—<span class="tei tei-q">“Having collated many copies of this work of the
Roman writer in my possession, and the variations being very numerous, I found it
no easy task to make a translation of his treatise on agriculture. To render any
common Arabic author into English, would have been a labour less difficult to me
some years ago, than it has been to translate this part of the works of this celebrated
writer.”</span>
</p>

</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em">
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-46">[pg A-46]</span><a name="PgA46" id="PgA46" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
<a name="toc39" id="toc39"></a><a name="pdf40" id="pdf40"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">SALLUST.</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This historian was criticized in a work of Asinius Pollio, particularly on account
of his affected use of obsolete words and expressions. Sulpicius Apollinaris, the
grammarian, who lived in the reigns of the Antonines, boasted that he was the only
person of his time who could understand Sallust. His writings were illustrated by
many of the ancient grammarians, as Asper and Statilius Maximus. In the course
of the ninth century, we find Lupus, Abbot of Ferriers, in one of his letters, praying
his friend Regimbertus to procure for him a copy of Sallust<a id="noteref_636" name="noteref_636" href="#note_636"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">636</span></span></a>; and there was a
copy of his works in the Library of Glastonbury Abbey, in the year 1240<a id="noteref_637" name="noteref_637" href="#note_637"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">637</span></span></a>. The
style of Sallust is very peculiar: He often omits words which other writers would
insert, and inserts those which they would omit. Hence his text became early, and
very generally, corrupted, from transcribers and copyists leaving out what they naturally
enough supposed to be redundancies, and supplying what they considered as
deficiencies.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There appeared not less than three editions of Sallust in the course of the year
1470. It has been much disputed, and does not seem to be yet ascertained, which
of them is the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio Princeps</span></span>. One was printed under the care of Merula, by
Spira, at Venice; but the other two are without name of place or printer: It has been
conjectured, that of these two, the one which is in folio was printed at Rome<a id="noteref_638" name="noteref_638" href="#note_638"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">638</span></span></a>; and
the other, in quarto, at Paris, by Gering, Crantz, and Friburg<a id="noteref_639" name="noteref_639" href="#note_639"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">639</span></span></a>. The Venice Edition
is usually accounted the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio Princeps</span></span><a id="noteref_640" name="noteref_640" href="#note_640"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">640</span></span></a>, but Fuhrmann considers both the
Paris and Roman editions as prior to it. The Roman, he thinks, in concurrence
with the opinion of Harles, is the earliest of all. The Bipontine editors style the
Parisian impression the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Primaria Princeps</span></span>. Besides these three, upwards of thirty
other editions were published in the course of the fifteenth century. One of them
was printed at Venice, 1493, from the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Recension</span></span> of Pomponius Lætus, who has
been accused by subsequent editors of introducing many of the corruptions which
have crept into the text of Sallust<a id="noteref_641" name="noteref_641" href="#note_641"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">641</span></span></a>. There were also a number of commentaries in
this century, by scholars, who did not themselves publish editions of the historian,
but greatly contributed to the assistance of those who prepared them in the next.
The commentary of Laurentius Valla, in particular, which was first printed at Rome
in 1490, and in which scarcely a single word is passed over without remark or explanation,
enriched most of the editions which appeared in the end of the fifteenth,
and the beginning of the subsequent century<a id="noteref_642" name="noteref_642" href="#note_642"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">642</span></span></a>. The first of any note in the sixteenth
century, were those of Aldus, Venice, 1509, and 1521. Carrio, who published
an edition at Antwerp in 1579, collected many of the fragments of Sallust’s
great History of Rome; and he amended the text of the Catilinarian and Jugurthine
Wars, as he himself boasts, in several thousand places. The edition of Gruter, in
1607, in which the text received considerable alterations, on the authority of the
Palatine MS., obtained in its time considerable reputation. The earliest <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Variorum</span></span>
edition is in 1649; but the best is that printed at Leyden, with the notes of Gronovius,
in 1690. An immense number of MSS., and copies of the most ancient editions,
were collated by Wasse for the Cambridge edition, 1710. He chiefly followed
the text of Gruter, but he has added the notes of various commentators, and also
some original observations of his own, particularly comparisons, which he has instituted
between his author and the ancient Greek writers. The editions of Cortius
(Leipsic, 1724), and of Havercamp (Amsterdam, 1742), are both excellent. The
former, in preparing his work, consulted not less than thirty MSS., fifteen of which
were preserved in the Wolfenbuttel library. He also assiduously collated most of
the old editions, and found some good readings in those of Venice, 1470–1493, and
that of Leipsic, 1508. Most of the editions, however, of the fifteenth century, he
affirms, are very bad; and, according to him, a greater number of the errors, which
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-47">[pg A-47]</span><a name="PgA47" id="PgA47" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>had crept into the text of Sallust, are to be attributed to them, than to the corruptions
of Pomponius Lætus. Cortius chiefly erred in conceiving that Sallust’s conciseness
consisted solely in paucity of words, so that he always preferred the readings
where the greatest number of them were thrown out, though the meaning was
thereby obscured, and sometimes altogether lost. The readings in Havercamp’s
edition are all founded on those of Wasse and Gruter. The text is overloaded with
notes: <span class="tei tei-q">“Textus,”</span> says Ernesti, <span class="tei tei-q">“velut cymba in oceano, ita in notis natat.”</span> The
various readings are separated from the notes, being inserted between the text and
the commentary. In the first volume, we have the text of Sallust, and the annotations—in
the second, the prefaces of different editors of Sallust—his life—the fragments
of his works—and the judgments pronounced by ancient authors on his writings.
The text of Teller’s edition, Berlin, 1790, is formed on that of Cortius, but
departs from it, where the editor conceived himself justified by the various readings
of a rare and ancient edition, published at Brescia, 1495, which he had consulted.
It is totally unprovided with <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">prolegomena</span></span>, or notices, with regard to the life and
writings of the author, or his works; but there is appended to it a recension of the
celebrated Spanish Translation, executed under the auspices of the Infant Don Gabriel,
and a very full <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Index Latinitatis</span></span>. The best of the recent German editions, is
that of Lange, Halle, 1815. In this work, the editor chiefly follows Havercampus.
His great object was to restore the purity of the text, which he believed to have
been greatly corrupted by the rash and unauthorized alterations of preceding editors,
more particularly of Cortius. Notes are subjoined, partly illustrative of Sallust’s
genius and talents, and partly of that portion of Roman history, of which he
treated.
</p>
<div class="tei tei-tb"> </div>
<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Sallust has been translated into <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Italian</span></span>, by a Genoese of the name of Agost.
Ortica, (Venice, 1518). The work of Ortica also comprehends a version of
Cicero’s fourth Catilinarian orations, and the supposed reply of Catiline. The style
is barbarous, involved, and obscure, and in some passages nearly unintelligible.
In point of style, the translation of Lelio Carani (Florence, 1530) is purer, but it is
too paraphrastic, and has not always accurately expressed the meaning of the
original. The version of Paulo Spinola (1564) was scarcely more happy. These
three translations having become scarce by the middle of last century,
and being defective in many of the most essential qualities of a translation, the
Doctor Battista Bianchi, Professor of Latin at Sienna, undertook an improved
translation, in which he attempted to imitate the brevity of Sallust, though he did
not, like some of his predecessors, insert obsolete Italian words, corresponding to
the antique Latin expressions adopted by his original. To this translation, first
printed at Venice, 1761, there is prefixed a long and elaborate preface, in which
the author discusses the historical and literary merits of Sallust, and enumerates
the translations of his works which had at that time appeared in the different
languages of Europe. After this follows the life of the Latin author. There are
likewise annotations at the foot of the page, and an index at the end of the whole.
The next Italian translation of any note which appeared, was that by Alfieri, which
is considered in Italy as a masterpiece: His prose style, which was founded on that
of the classic writers, qualified him admirably for the task.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There have been more translations of Sallust in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">French</span></span>, than in any other language.
It was translated, it is said, as far back as the reign of King John of France,
who died in 1364. <span class="tei tei-q">“Le Roi Jean,”</span> says Villaret, <span class="tei tei-q">“ainsi qu’on l’a rapporté, avoit
fait entreprendre des versions de quelques auteurs Latins, tels que Salluste et Tite-Live<a id="noteref_643" name="noteref_643" href="#note_643"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">643</span></span></a>.”</span>
I do not suppose, however, that this translation was given to the press on
the invention of printing. The first version printed was that of Baudoin, in 1617;
which was succeeded, in the course of the same century, by the futile attempts of
Cassagne and Du Teil. The version of the Abbé Le Masson, which appeared in
the commencement of the ensuing century, was accompanied with a defence of
the moral character of the historian. It was followed, in a few years afterwards, by
that of the Abbé Thyvon, which, though it does not convey an adequate idea of
the strength and sententious brevity of the original, is for the most part extremely
faithful to the meaning of the author. Its deficiency in the former qualities, seems
to have induced M Dotteville to attempt a new translation, as he appears to be
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-48">[pg A-48]</span><a name="PgA48" id="PgA48" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>always striving at terseness and conciseness of style. <span class="tei tei-q">“His Sallust,”</span> says the
most recent English translator, <span class="tei tei-q">“like his Tacitus, is harsh and dry; and his fruitless
endeavours to vie in brevity with either historian, are sufficient to prove, if
such proof were needful, how absurd an attempt it is in any translator, for the sake
of seizing some peculiar feature of resemblance, or some fancied grace of diction,
to violate the genius of his native language.”</span> A similar criticism is extended, in
the following paragraph, to the version of M. Beauzie, though it is admitted to be
the most faithful and accurate that ever appeared in the French language. The
translation of Dotteville was first printed in 1760, and that of Beauzie fifteen years
afterwards. About the same time M. de Brosses, President of the Parliament of
Dijon, published a History of Rome during the Seventh Century, which professes
to be chiefly made up from the fragments of Sallust. The War of Jugurtha comes
first in the historical arrangement—then follow the events which intervened between
that contest and the Conspiracy of Catiline, taken from the fragments of Sallust,
which are interwoven with the body of the narrative—and, lastly, the Conspiracy.
The work, which extends to three volumes 4to, comprehends very full notes, and
includes a life of Sallust, which, though written in an indifferent style, displays considerable
learning and research. Although the version of De Brosses was generally
accounted one of the best translations of the Classics, which had appeared in the
French, or any other language, it does not seem to have been considered as precluding
subsequent attempts. A translation by Dureau Delamalle appeared in
1808, and one by Mollevaut, yet more recent, which has gone through at least
three editions. Still, however, many persons in France prefer the version of
Dotteville to the more modern translations.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
It would appear, that the writings of Sallust became known and popular in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">England</span></span>
soon after the revival of literature. A translation of the Jugurthine War,
executed by <span class="tei tei-q">“Sir Alexander Barclay, Priest, at the command of the Duke of Norfolke,
and printed by Richard Pynson,”</span> in folio, was published as early as the reign
of Henry VIII. It bears on the title-page—<span class="tei tei-q">“Here begynneth the famous Cronycle
of the Warre which the Romaynes had against Jugurth, usurper of the Kyngdome
of Numidy: Which Cronycle was compyled in Latin by the renowned Sallust. And
translated into English by Sir Alexander Barclay, Preest, at commandment of the
right hye and mighty Prince, Thomas Duke of Northfolke.”</span> The volume is without
date, but is supposed to have been printed about 1540. It was twice reprinted in
1557, and in one of these editions was accompanied with Catiline’s Conspiracy,
translated by Thomas Paynel. The version of Barclay, though a good one for the
time, having become obsolete, not less than three translations appeared in the
middle and end of the seventeenth century—one by William Crosse, and the other
two by anonymous authors. These early translations are all <span class="tei tei-q">“Faithfully done in
Englysh,”</span> according to the taste of the time, which, if the sense were tolerably
rendered, was little solicitous for accuracy, and still less for elegance of diction<a id="noteref_644" name="noteref_644" href="#note_644"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">644</span></span></a>.
In Rowe’s translation, 1709, the sense of the author is given with correctness, but
the style is feeble and colloquial. Gordon, better known as the translator of Tacitus,
also translated Sallust in 1744. His version is accompanied with a series of discourses
on topics connected with Roman history, as on faction and parties, public
corruption, and civil wars. The Epistles of Sallust to Cæsar on Government, are
also translated by him, and their authenticity vindicated. In 1751, Dr Rose published
a new translation of the Catilinarian and Jugurthine Wars. <span class="tei tei-q">“This translation,”</span>
says Steuart, <span class="tei tei-q">“is justly entitled to the esteem in which it has been held, and the
author himself to considerable praise, for his endeavours to combine the advantages
of a free and literal version. His chief defect proceeds from what constitutes the
great difficulty in all classical translation—the uniting a clear transfusion of the sense
with the ease and freedom of original composition. To the critical reader, this will
be abundantly obvious, if he compare the version of Sallust with the original pieces
of Dr Rose himself. In the speeches, too, where the ancient writers laid out all
their energy, and in which they should be followed by a like effort of the translator,
the author is cold and languid, and he rises on no occasion above the level of ordinary
narrative.”</span> The most recent English translation is that by the author above
quoted—1806, two volumes quarto. Two long Essays, with notes, are prefixed to it—the
one on the Life, and the other on the Literary Character and Writings of Sallust.
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-49">[pg A-49]</span><a name="PgA49" id="PgA49" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>The Spanish translation of Sallust, executed under the auspices of the Infant Don
Gabriel, has been much celebrated on account of its plates and incomparable typography.
It was printed in 1772.
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em">
    <a name="toc41" id="toc41"></a><a name="pdf42" id="pdf42"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">CÆSAR.</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Lupus, Abbot of Ferriers, says, in one of his letters, that no historic work of
Cæsar was extant, except his Commentaries on the Gallic War, of which he promises
to send his correspondent, the Bishop Heribold, a copy, as soon as he can
procure one<a id="noteref_645" name="noteref_645" href="#note_645"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">645</span></span></a>. The other Commentaries, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Bello Civili</span></span>, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Bello Alexandrino</span></span>,
of which he speaks as being also extant, were written, he affirms, by Hirtius.
It thus appears, that though Lupus was mistaken as to the author of the work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
Bello Civili</span></span>, the whole series of memoirs now known by the name of Cæsar’s Commentaries,
was extant in the ninth century. About a century afterwards, Pope
Gerbert, or Sylvester II., writes to the Archbishop of Rheims to procure the loan of
a copy of Cæsar from the Abbot of Terdon, who was possessed of one, and to have
it transcribed for him<a id="noteref_646" name="noteref_646" href="#note_646"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">646</span></span></a>. Cæsar’s Commentaries are repeatedly quoted in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Speculum
Historiale</span></span> of Vincent de Beauvais, a work of the thirteenth century, and in
various other productions of the same period. It is probable, therefore, that copies
of them were not very scarce in that age; but they had become so rare by the
middle of the fifteenth century, that Candidi, in a letter to Niccolo Niccoli, announces
the discovery of a MS. of Cæsar as a great event.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Andrea, Bishop of Aleria, took charge of the first edition of Cæsar, and an erudite
epistle by him is prefixed to it. It came forth at Rome, from the printing-press of
<a name="corra49" id="corra49" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Sweynheim</span> and Pannartz, as early as the year 1469. Of this <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Editio Princeps</span></span> of Cæsar,
only 275 copies were thrown off; but it was reprinted at the same place in 1472.
There were a good many editions published towards the end of the fifteenth century,
most of which have now become rare. The first of the ensuing century was
that of Philippus Beroaldus, (Bologna 1504). It was followed by the Aldine editions,
(Venice 1513–19,) which are not so remarkable either for accuracy or beauty as
the other early editions of the Classics which issued from the celebrated press of the
Manutii. The first had seven pages of errata—<span class="tei tei-q">“Mendis scatet,”</span> say the Bipontine
editors. In the edition, 1566, there were inserted plates of warlike instruments,
encampments, and the most celebrated places mentioned in Cæsar’s campaigns,
which became a common ornament and appendage in subsequent impressions.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Fulvius Ursinus published an edition of considerable note in 1570. Ursinus had
discovered a MS. written in the middle of the tenth century, which he chiefly employed
in the correction of the text. He is accused of having committed a literary
theft in the publication of this work, it being alleged that he had received many
annotations from Petrus Ciacconius, which he mixed up with his own, and inserted
as such, suppressing altogether the name of the real author.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The next edition of any eminence, was that of Strada (Frankfort, 1574). This
impression is remarkable for containing forty plates of battles, and other things relating
to the campaigns of Cæsar; as also inscriptions, found in various cities of
Spain. It is also distinguished as having been the prototype of Clarke’s splendid
edition of Cæsar, which Mr Dibdin pronounces to be <span class="tei tei-q">“the most sumptuous classical
volume which this country ever produced. It contains,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“eighty-seven
copperplates, which were engraved at the expense of the different noblemen to
whom they are dedicated. Of these plates, I am not disposed to think so highly
as some fond admirers: The head of Marlborough, to whom this courtly work is
dedicated, by Kneller and Vertue, does not convey any exalted idea of that renowned
hero; and the bust of Julius Cæsar, which follows it, will appear meagre
and inelegant to those who have contemplated a similar print in the quarto publication
of Lavater’s Physiognomy. The plates are in general rather curious than
ably executed; and compared with what Flaxman has done for Homer and Æschylus,
are tasteless and unspirited. The type of this magnificent volume is truly
beautiful and splendid, and for its fine lustre and perfect execution, reflects immortality
on the publisher. The text is accompanied with various readings in the
mar<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-50">[pg A-50]</span><a name="PgA50" id="PgA50" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>gin; and at the end of the volume, after the fragments of Cæsar, are the critical
notes of the editor, compiled with great labour from the collation of ancient MSS.
and former editions. A MS. in the Queen’s library, and one belonging to the Bishop
of Ely, were particularly consulted by Dr Clarke. The work closes with a large
and correct index of names and places. It is upon the whole a most splendid edition,
and will be a lasting monument of the taste, as well as erudition of the editor.”</span>
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The best edition since the time of Dr Clarke’s, is that by Oudendorp, printed at
Leyden in 1737. This editor had the use of many ancient MSS., particularly two
of the beginning of the ninth century, one of which had belonged to Julius Bongarsius,
and the other to Petrus Bellovacensis. <span class="tei tei-q">“The preceding commentators on
Cæsar,”</span> says Harles, <span class="tei tei-q">“have all been eclipsed by the skill and researches of Oudendorp,
who, by a careful examination of numerous MSS. and editions, has often successfully
restored the true ancient reading of his author.”</span> He has inserted in his
publication Dodwell’s disquisition concerning the author of the books <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Bello
Alexandrino</span></span>, and Scaliger’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Topographical Description of Gaul</span></span>. Morus reprinted
this edition, but with many critical improvements, at Leipsic, 1780. He
has illustrated the military tactics of Cæsar, from Ritter’s History of the Gauls, and
from the books of Guischardus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Re Militari Veterum</span></span>. The best modern German
edition is that of Oberlin, (Leipsic, 1805). It is founded on the basis of those of
Oudendorp and Morus, with additional observations, and a careful revision of the
text. In the preface, those writings in which the faith due to Cæsar’s Commentaries
is attempted to be shaken, are reviewed and refuted; and there are added several
fragments of Cæsar, as also those notices of ancient authors concerning him,
which had been neglected or omitted by Morus.
</p>
<div class="tei tei-tb"> </div>
<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cæsar was first rendered into <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Italian</span></span> by Agost. Ortica, the translator of Sallust.
He says, in the preface, that his version was executed in a very hurried manner, as
it was transcribed and printed all in the course of six months. Argelati could not
ascertain the date of the most ancient edition, which was printed at Milan, but he
thinks that it was as old as the fifteenth century<a id="noteref_647" name="noteref_647" href="#note_647"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">647</span></span></a>. This impression was followed
by not fewer than twelve others, before the middle of the sixteenth century. A
subsequent translation, by F. Baldelli, appeared at Venice, 1554. This edition was,
succeeded by many others, particularly one at Venice in 1595, quarto, of which
Palladio, the great architect, took charge. He inserted in it various engravings of
battles, encampments, sieges, and other military operations, from plates which had
been executed by his two sons, Leonida and Orazio, and had come into his hands
soon after their premature decease. He prepared the edition chiefly for the sake of
introducing these designs, and thereby honouring the memory of his children. To
this edition there is a preface by Palladio on the military affairs of the Romans, their
legions, arms, and encampments. A splendid impression of Baldelli’s version, accompanied
with Palladio’s designs, was thrown off at Venice in 1619. In 1737, a
translation appeared at Venice, bearing to be printed from an ancient MS. of Cæsar,
in Italian, which the editor says he had discovered, (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">where</span></span> he does not specify,)
and had in some few places corrected and modernized. Paitoni has exposed this
literary fraud, and has shown, that it is just the translation of Baldelli, with a few
words altered at the beginning of paragraphs. In some respects, however, it is a
good edition, containing various tables and notices conducive to the proper understanding
of the author.
</p>
<div class="tei tei-tb"> </div>
<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
We have seen that several translations of the Latin classics were executed by
order of the French king, John. Charles V., who succeeded him in 1364, was a
still warmer patron of learning, and was himself tolerably versed in Latin literature.
<span class="tei tei-q">“Tant que compettement,”</span> says Christine de Pise, in her Memoirs of him, <span class="tei tei-q">“entendoit
son Latin.”</span> By his order and directions the first <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">French</span></span> translation of
Cæsar was undertaken<a id="noteref_648" name="noteref_648" href="#note_648"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">648</span></span></a>. But the earliest French translation of Cæsar’s Commentaries
which was printed, was that of Robert Gaguin, dedicated to Charles VIII. and
published in 1488. Of the recent French versions the most esteemed is that by
Turpin de Crissi, accompanied by historical and critical notes, and printed at Montargis,
1785.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-51">[pg A-51]</span><a name="PgA51" id="PgA51" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The part of Cæsar’s Commentaries which relates to the Gallic wars was translated
into <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">English</span></span> as early as 1565, by Arthur Golding, who dedicated his work to Sir William
Cecil, afterwards Lord Burleigh. In 1695, a translation of the whole Commentaries
was printed with the following title: <span class="tei tei-q">“The Commentaries of Cæsar, of his
Wars in Gallia, and of the Civil Wars betwixt him and Pompey, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">with many excellent
and judicious Observations</span></span> thereupon; as also, the Art of our Modern Training;
by Clement Edmonds, Esq.”</span> The best translation is that by <span class="tei tei-q">“William Duncan,
Professor of Philosophy in the University of Aberdeen, printed at London,
1755,”</span> with a long preliminary Discourse concerning the Roman Art of War.
</p>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em">
    <a name="toc43" id="toc43"></a><a name="pdf44" id="pdf44"></a>
<h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">CICERO.</span></h2>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Some of Cicero’s orations were studied harangues, which he had prepared and
written over previous to their delivery. This, however, was not the case with the
greater proportion of his speeches, most of which were pronounced without much
premeditation, but were afterwards copied out, with such corrections and embellishments
as bestowed on them a greater polish and lustre than when they had originally
fallen from his lips. Before the invention of printing had increased the means of
satisfying public curiosity, as no oration was given to the world but by the author
himself, he had always the power of altering and improving by his experience of the
effect it produced at delivery. Pliny informs us, that many things on which Cicero
had enlarged at the time when he actually spoke in the Senate and the Forum,
were retrenched when he ultimately gave his orations to the public in writing<a id="noteref_649" name="noteref_649" href="#note_649"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">649</span></span></a>.
Cicero himself had somewhere declared, that the defence of Cornelius had occupied
four days, whence Pliny concludes, that those orations which, when delivered at
full length, took up so much time at the bar, were greatly altered and abridged,
when he afterwards comprised them in a single volume. The orations, in particular,
for Muræna and Varenus, he says, seem now to contain merely the general heads
of a discourse. Sometimes, however, they were extended and not curtailed, by the
orator in the closet, as was confessedly the case in the defence of Milo. A few of
the orations which Cicero had delivered, he did not consider as at all worthy of preservation.
Thus, of the oration for Dejotarus, he says, in one of his letters to Dolabella,
<span class="tei tei-q">“I did not imagine that I had preserved among my papers the trifling speech
which I made in behalf of Dejotarus; however, I have found it, and sent it to you,
agreeably to your request<a id="noteref_650" name="noteref_650" href="#note_650"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">650</span></span></a>.”</span> This accounts for many speeches of Cicero, the delivery
of which is recorded in history, being now lost. It appears, however, that
those which he considered deserving of his care, though they may be widely different
from the state in which they were originally pronounced, came pure from the
hand of the author, either in the shape in which he would have wished to have delivered
them, or in that which he considered best adapted for publication and perusal.
They were probably transcribed by himself, and copies of them multiplied by
his freedmen, such as Tyro and Tyrannio, whom he had accustomed to accurate
transcription. His orations had also the good fortune to meet, at a very early period,
with a judicious and learned commentator in the person of Asconius Pedianus,
a grammarian in the reign of Nero, part of whose Commentary was discovered by
Poggio, along with other classical works, in the monastery of St Gall, near Constance.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
All the orations of Cicero were not lost during the middle ages. Pope Gerbert,
in one of his letters, asks from the Abbot Gesilbert a copy of the concluding part of
the speech for Dejotarus; and he writes to another of his correspondents, to bring
him Cicero’s treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span>, and the Orations against Verres, <span class="tei tei-q">“Comitentur
iter tuum Tulliana opuscula, et de Republicâ et in Verrem<a id="noteref_651" name="noteref_651" href="#note_651"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">651</span></span></a>:”</span> Brunetto Latini,
who died in 1294, translated into Italian the orations for Dejotarus, Marcellus, and
Ligarius, which were afterwards printed at Lyons in 1568<a id="noteref_652" name="noteref_652" href="#note_652"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">652</span></span></a>. These three harangues
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-52">[pg A-52]</span><a name="PgA52" id="PgA52" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>being in a great measure complimentary addresses to Cæsar, and containing no
sentiment but what might be safely expressed in presence of an unlimited sovereign,
more transcripts had been made of them in Rome’s tyrannical ages, than of
those orations which breathed forth the expiring spirit of liberty.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cicero was the idol of Petrarch, the great restorer of classical literature. He
never could speak of him but in terms of deep and enthusiastic admiration. The
sweetness and sonorousness of Tully’s periods charmed his ear; and though unable
to penetrate the depths of his philosophy, yet his vigorous fancy often soared with
the Roman orator into the highest regions of imagination. Hence, while eager for
the discovery of all the classics, his chief diligence was exercised in endeavouring
to preserve such works of Cicero as were then known, and to recover such as were
lost<a id="noteref_653" name="noteref_653" href="#note_653"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">653</span></span></a>. Petrarch received in loan from Lapo of Castiglionchio a copy of several of
Cicero’s orations, among which were the Philippics, and the oration for Milo.
These he kept by him for four years, that he might transcribe them with his own
hand, on account of the blunders of the copyists in that age. This we learn from
the letters of Lapo, published by the Abbé Mehus. Coming to Liege when about
twenty-five years of age, that is, in 1329, Petrarch remained there till two orations
of Cicero, which he had discovered in that city, were transcribed, one by his own
hand, and another by a friend, both of which were immediately transmitted by him
to Italy. He was detained at Liege for some time by the difficulty of procuring
even the worst sort of ink. Several other orations of Cicero were discovered by
Petrarch in different parts of Italy.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Dominico Arretino, who was nearly contemporary with Petrarch, declares, in one
of his works, entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Fons</span></span>, that he had seen eleven of Cicero’s orations, and that
a person had told him that he actually possessed and had read twenty of them<a id="noteref_654" name="noteref_654" href="#note_654"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">654</span></span></a>.
It appears, however, that in the time of Cosmo de Medici those works of Cicero
which were extant were very much corrupted. <span class="tei tei-q">“Illorum librorum,”</span> says Niccolo
Niccoli, speaking of some of the works of Cicero, <span class="tei tei-q">“magna pars interierit, hi vero
qui supersunt adeo mendosi sunt, ut paulo ab interitu distent;”</span> hence, in the middle
of the fifteenth century, the discovery of a new MS. of Cicero was hailed as a
new acquisition. At Langres, in a library of the monks of Clugni, in Burgundy,
Poggio found the oration for Cæcina, which he immediately transcribed, and sent
various copies of it to his friends in Italy. In the monasteries around Constance he
discovered the two orations against Rullus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Lege Agrariâ</span></span>, and that to the people
on the same subject; also the orations <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Rabirio</span></span>, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Roscio</span></span>. A note
on the MS. copy of the oration <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Pisonem</span></span>, preserved in the abbey of Santa Maria,
in Florence, records the fact of this harangue having been likewise discovered by
Poggio<a id="noteref_655" name="noteref_655" href="#note_655"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">655</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
A compendium of Cicero’s treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Inventione</span></span> was well known in the dark
ages, having been translated into Italian, in an abridged form, in the thirteenth century,
by a professor of Bologna. This was almost the first prose work which had
appeared in the language, and was printed at Lyons with the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ethica d’Aristotile</span></span>,
by Brunetto Latini, who also translated the first book <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Inventione</span></span><a id="noteref_656" name="noteref_656" href="#note_656"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">656</span></span></a>. Lupus of
Ferrieres possessed a copy of Cicero’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetorica</span></span>, as he himself informs us<a id="noteref_657" name="noteref_657" href="#note_657"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">657</span></span></a>, but it
was incomplete; and he accordingly asks Einhart, who had been his preceptor, for
the loan of his MS. of this work, in order that his own might be perfected. Ingulphus,
who flourished in England towards the close of the eleventh century, declares,
that he was sent from Westminster to the school at Oxford, where he learned Aristotle,
and the first two books of Tully’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetorica</span></span><a id="noteref_658" name="noteref_658" href="#note_658"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">658</span></span></a>. Now, if the first two books
of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetorica</span></span>, which are all that have hitherto been discovered, were used as an
elementary work in the public school at Oxford, they can hardly be supposed to
have been very scarce in Italy. From the jurisconsult, Raymond Superantius, or
Sorranza, to whom he had been indebted for the books <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Gloriâ</span></span>, Petrarch
received an imperfect copy of the tract <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, of which the MSS., though
generally incomplete, were by no means uncommon at that period. <span class="tei tei-q">“Ab hoc
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-53">[pg A-53]</span><a name="PgA53" id="PgA53" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>habui,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“et Varronis et Ciceronis aliqua: Cujus unum volumen de communibus
fuit; sed inter ipsa communia libri de Oratore ac de Legibus imperfecti, ut
fere semper inveniuntur.”</span> Nearly half a century from the death of Petrarch had
elapsed, before the discovery of a complete copy of Cicero’s rhetorical works. It
was about the year 1418, during the Popedom of Martin V., and while Poggio
was in England, that Gerard Landriani, Bishop of Lodi, found in that city, among
the ruins of an ancient monastery, a MS., containing Cicero’s treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>,
his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span> and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Orator</span></span>. He carried the MS. with him to Milan, and there gave it
to Gaspar Bazizza. The character, however, in which it was written, was such,
that few scholars or antiquaries in that city could read it. At length Cosmus, a
young Veronese scholar, deciphered and transcribed the dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>.
Blondus Flavius, the author of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Italia Illustrata</span></span>, who had come in early youth
from his native place, Forli, to Milan, transcribed the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, and sent copies of it
to Guarinus of Verona, and Leonard Justiniani, at Venice. By these means the
rhetorical works of Cicero were soon diffused all over Italy. The discovery was
hailed as a triumph, and subject of public congratulation. Poggio was informed of
it while in England, and there awaited the arrival of a copy with the most lively
impatience<a id="noteref_659" name="noteref_659" href="#note_659"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">659</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The philosophic writings of Cicero have descended to us in a more imperfect
state than his oratorical dialogues or orations. In consequence of the noble spirit
of freedom and patriotism which they breathe, their proscription would no doubt
speedily follow that of their author. There is a common story of a grandson of
Augustus concealing one of Cicero’s philosophic works, on being detected while
perusing it by his grandfather, and though he received his gracious permission to
finish it, the anecdote shews that it was among the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">libri prohibiti</span></span>. The chief
reading, indeed, of Alexander Severus, was the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Republic</span></span> and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Offices</span></span><a id="noteref_660" name="noteref_660" href="#note_660"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">660</span></span></a>: But Alexander
was an imperial phœnix, which never revived in the Roman empire; and we
hear little of Cicero during the reigns of the barbarian sovereigns of Italy in the
middle ages.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Petrarch procured an imperfect copy of Cicero’s treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>, from the
Lawyer Raymond Sorranza<a id="noteref_661" name="noteref_661" href="#note_661"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">661</span></span></a>, who had a most extensive library, and to whom, as
we have just seen, he had been indebted for a MS. of the dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
No further discovery was subsequently made of the remaining parts of the work
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>. The other philosophical writings of Cicero were found by Petrarch
among the books in his father’s library, or were recovered for him by the persons
whom he employed for this purpose in almost every quarter of Italy: <span class="tei tei-q">“Abeuntibus
amicis,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“et, ut fit, petentibus numquid e patriâ suâ vellem, respondebam,—nihil
præter libros Ciceronis.”</span> Petrarch frequently quotes the treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
Finibus</span></span>, as a work with which he was familiar. Leonard Aretine, however, has
been generally considered as the discoverer of that dialogue, as also of the treatise
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Naturâ Deorum</span></span><a id="noteref_662" name="noteref_662" href="#note_662"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">662</span></span></a>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-q">“There is no collection of my letters,”</span> says Cicero, in one of his epistles to Atticus;
<span class="tei tei-q">“but Tiro has about seventy of them, and you can furnish some more. I
must look over and correct them, and then they may be published.”</span> This, however,
never was accomplished by himself. After the revolution of the Roman state, the
publication of his letters must have been dangerous, on account of the freedom with
which he expresses himself concerning Octavius, and the ministers of his power.
Cornelius Nepos mentions, that some of Cicero’s letters were published, but that
sixteen books of Epistles to Atticus, from his consulship to his death, though extant,
were by no means in common circulation<a id="noteref_663" name="noteref_663" href="#note_663"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">663</span></span></a>. The reigns of the princes who succeeded
Augustus, were not more favourable to freedom than his own; and hence the
Familiar Letters, as well as those to Atticus, probably remained long in the cabinets
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-54">[pg A-54]</span><a name="PgA54" id="PgA54" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>of the curious, before they received any critical inspection. The Letters of Cicero,
however, were well known in the middle ages, and even in those times pains were
taken to have accurate copies of them. Lupus Ferrariensis procured duplicates of
Cicero’s Epistles, in order to collate them with his own MSS., and thus to make
up a correct and complete collection<a id="noteref_664" name="noteref_664" href="#note_664"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">664</span></span></a>. John of Salisbury cites two of Cicero’s letters
to Caius Cassius; one of which is now contained in the twelfth, and the other
in the fifteenth book of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Familiar Epistles</span></span>. In the Life of Julius Cæsar, which
passes under the name of Julius Celsus, and which was written during the middle
ages, extracts are occasionally made from the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Familiar Epistles</span></span>. They had become
scarce, however, at the time when Petrarch found a copy of them at Verona, a
place where he little expected to make such a discovery<a id="noteref_665" name="noteref_665" href="#note_665"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">665</span></span></a>. This old MS., which
Victorius thinks of the age of the Florentine Pandects, ultimately came into the
Medicean library; and a copy which Petrarch had transcribed from it, was brought
from Padua to Florence by Niccolo Niccoli, at whose death it was placed in the
library of St Marc in that city<a id="noteref_666" name="noteref_666" href="#note_666"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">666</span></span></a>. Several scholars who inspected both have observed,
that the transcript by Petrarch differed in some respects from the original<a id="noteref_667" name="noteref_667" href="#note_667"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">667</span></span></a>.
It was also marked with various corrections and glosses, in the hand-writing of Niccolo
Niccoli himself<a id="noteref_668" name="noteref_668" href="#note_668"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">668</span></span></a>. All the other MSS. of the Familiar Epistles flowed from this
discovered by Petrarch, as we learn from a passage of Lagomarsinus, who speaks
thus of the different <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">codices</span></span> of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epistolæ Familiares</span></span>: <span class="tei tei-q">“Quibus tamen ego codicibus
non tantum tribuo, quantum uni illi omnium quotquot ubique terrarum, idem
epistolarum corpus continentes, extant, vetustissimo, (et ex quo cæteros omnes qui
usquam sunt tanquam e fonte ac capite manâsse, et Angelus Politianus, et Petrus
Victorius memoriæ prodiderunt,) qui Florentiæ in Mediceo-Laurentianæ Bibliothecæ
XLIX. adservatur numero IX. extra notatus<a id="noteref_669" name="noteref_669" href="#note_669"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">669</span></span></a>.”</span> There has been a good deal of
doubt and discussion how these Letters first came to obtain the title of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Familiares</span></span>.
They are not so called in any original MS. of Cicero, nor are they cited by this name
in any ancient author, as Aulus Gellius, or Priscian. These writers generally quote
each book of the Epistles by the name of the person to whom the first letter in
that book is addressed. Thus Gellius cites the first book by the name of the Letters
to Lentulus, because it commences with a letter to him. Nor are the MSS.
in which the appellation of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epistolæ Familiares</span></span> is employed uniform in the
title. In some MSS. they are called <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epistolæ Familiares</span></span>, in others, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epistolæ
ad Familiares</span></span>, and in a Palatine MS. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Libri Epistolarum Familiarum</span></span>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Previous to the year 1340, Petrarch also discovered the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epistles to Atticus</span></span><a id="noteref_670" name="noteref_670" href="#note_670"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">670</span></span></a>
which had been missing for many centuries; and on perusing them, declared that
he now recognized Cicero as an inconsiderate and unfortunate old man. He copied
them over with his own hand, and arranged them in their proper order. The
MS. in his hand-writing passed, after his death, into the possession of Coluccio Salutati,
and subsequently became the property of Coluccio’s disciple Leonard Aretine.
Donatus, the son of Leonard, succeeded to it, and by him it was transferred to Donatus
Acciaiolus. After his decease, it fell into the hands of an obscure grammarian,
who gave it to Bartollomeo Cavalcanti, in whose library it was consulted by
P. Victorius, and was afterwards bestowed on him by the owner. Victorius, highly
valuing this MS., which he first recognised to be in the hand-writing of Petrarch,
conceived that it would be preserved with greatest security in some public collection;
and he accordingly presented it to Cosmo, the first Duke of Tuscany, to be
deposited in the Medicean library<a id="noteref_671" name="noteref_671" href="#note_671"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">671</span></span></a>. With regard to the most ancient MS. from
which Petrarch made the copy, it unfortunately was lost, as Petrus Victorius laments
in one of his Epistles<a id="noteref_672" name="noteref_672" href="#note_672"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">672</span></span></a>. <span class="tei tei-q">“Utinam inveniretur exemplum, unde has ad Atticum
descripsit Petrarca, ut exstat illud, quo usus est in describendis alteris illis, quæ
Familiares appellantur, de cujus libri antiquitate, omni veneratione digna, magnifice
multa vereque alio loco prædicavi.”</span> It thus appears, that the Epistles to Atticus
were well known to Petrarch. Still, however, as they were scarce in the fifteenth
century, Poggio, who found a copy, while attending the Council of Constance,
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-55">[pg A-55]</span><a name="PgA55" id="PgA55" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>was considered in his own age as the discoverer of the entire collection of the
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epistles to Atticus</span></span>, and has been regarded in the same light by modern writers.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The three books of the Letters of Cicero to his brother Quintus, were found by
an Italian grammarian, Casparinus of Bergamo, who died in the year 1431; and who
some time before his death had taken great pains to amend their corrupted text<a id="noteref_673" name="noteref_673" href="#note_673"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">673</span></span></a>.
That they were much corrupted, may be conjectured from what we know of the
manner in which they were originally written, for it appears, from one of the Letters
of Cicero<a id="noteref_674" name="noteref_674" href="#note_674"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">674</span></span></a>, that Quintus had complained that he could scarcely read some of
his former letters. Now, when Quintus could scarcely read his brother’s hand-writing,
what must have been the difficulties and mistakes of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Librarius</span></span> by
whom they were first collected and copied?
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Cicero’s translation of Aratus appears to have been extant in the ninth century.
Lupus of Ferrieres had an imperfect copy of it, and begs a complete copy from his
correspondent Ansbald. <span class="tei tei-q">“Tu autem,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“huic nostro cursori Tullium in
Arato trade; ut ex eo, quem me impetraturum credo, quæ deesse illi Egil noster
aperuit, suppleantur.<a id="noteref_675" name="noteref_675" href="#note_675"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">675</span></span></a>”</span>
</p>
<div class="tei tei-tb"> </div>
<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Various editions of separate portions of the writings of Cicero were printed before
the publication of a complete collection of his works. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">The Orations</span></span>—the treatise
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>—the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Opera Philosophica</span></span>—the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epistolæ Familiares</span></span>—and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ad Atticum</span></span>,
were all edited in Italy between the years 1466 and 1471—most of them being
printed at Rome by Sweynheim and Pannartz. The most ancient printing-press in
Italy was that established at the Monastery of Subiaco, in the Campagna di Roma, by
these printers. Sweynheim and Pannartz were two German scholars, who had been
induced to settle at that convent by the circumstance that it was chiefly inhabited
by German monks. In 1467, they went from Subiaco, to Rome<a id="noteref_676" name="noteref_676" href="#note_676"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">676</span></span></a>; after this removal,
they received in correcting their editions, the assistance of a poor but eminent
scholar, Giandrea de Bussi; and were aided by the patronage of Andrea, Bishop of
Aleria, who furnished prefaces to many of their classical editions. Notwithstanding
the rage for classical MSS. which had so recently existed, and the novelty,
usefulness, and importance of the art which they first introduced into Italy, as also
the support which they received from men of rank and learning, they laboured under
the greatest difficulties, and prosecuted their undertaking with very inadequate
compensation, as we learn from a petition presented, 1472, in their names, to Pope
Sextus, by the chief patron, the Bishop of Aleria. Their necessities were probably
produced by the number of copies of each impression which they threw off, and
which exceeding the demand, they were so encumbered by those left on their
hands, as to be reduced to the greatest poverty and distress<a id="noteref_677" name="noteref_677" href="#note_677"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">677</span></span></a>. The first book
which they printed at Rome, was the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epistolæ Familiares</span></span> of Cicero.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Alexander Minutianus, who published an edition of the whole works at Milan,
1498, in four volumes folio, was the first person who comprised the scattered publications
of Cicero in one uniform book. Harles informs us, in one passage, that
Minutianus did not consult any MSS. in the preparation of this edition, but merely
collated the editions of the separate parts of Cicero’s writings previously published,
so that his work is only a continued reimpression of preceding editions<a id="noteref_678" name="noteref_678" href="#note_678"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">678</span></span></a>; but he
elsewhere mentions, that he had inspected the MSS. of the Orations which Poggio
had brought from Germany to Italy<a id="noteref_679" name="noteref_679" href="#note_679"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">679</span></span></a>. In the Orations, Minutianus chiefly followed
the Brescian edition, 1483, which was itself founded on that of Rome. The work
was printed off, not according to the best arrangement, but as the copies of the preceding
editions successively reached him, which he himself acknowledges in the
preface. <span class="tei tei-q">“Sed quam necessitas præscripsit dum vetustiora exemplaria ex diversis
et longinquis locis exspectamus.”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“If we peruse Saxius,”</span> says Mr Dibdin, <span class="tei tei-q">“we
shall see with what toil, and at what a heavy expense, this celebrated work of
Minutianus was compiled.”</span> De Bure and Ernesti are lavish in their praises of its
typographical beauty. The latter says it is printed <span class="tei tei-q">“grandi modulo, chartis et
lite<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-56">[pg A-56]</span><a name="PgA56" id="PgA56" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>ris pulchris et splendidis.”</span> The Aldine edition, which was published in parts from
1512 to 1523, is not accounted a very critical or correct one, though the latter portion
of it was printed under the care of Naugerius. It would be endless to enumerate
the subsequent editions of Cicero. That of Petrus Victorius, however,
whom Harles calls <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ciceronis Æsculapius</span></span>, printed at Venice in 1534–37, in four
volumes folio, should not be forgotten, as there is no commentator to whom Cicero
has been more indebted than to Victorius, particularly in the correction and
emendation of the Epistles. The edition of Lambinus, Paris, 1566, also deserves
notice. Lambinus was an acute and daring commentator, who made many corrections
on the text, but adopted some alterations too rashly. From his time
downwards, Harles thinks that the editors of Cicero may be divided into two classes;
some following the bold changes introduced by Lambinus, and others preferring
the more scrupulous text of Victorius. Of the latter class was Gruterus, who,
in his edition published at Hamburgh, 1618, appears to have obstinately rejected
even the most obvious emendations which had been recently made on the text of
his author. The three editions of Ernesti’s Cicero, (Lips. 1737, Hal. Sax. 1758–74,)
and the three of Olivet’s, (Paris, 1740, Geneva, 1758, Oxon. 1783,) are too
well known to be particularized or described. Olivet did not collate MSS.; but he
compared with each other what he considered as the four most important editions
of Cicero; those of P. Victorius, Paullus Manutius, Lambinus, and Gruterus. In
1795, the first volume of a new edition of Cicero, by Beck, was printed at Leipsic,
and since that period, three more volumes, at long intervals, have fallen from the
press. The last volume which appeared, was in 1807; and along with the three by
which it was preceded, comprehends the Orations of Cicero. The preface contains
a very full account of preceding editions, and the most authoritative MSS. of Cicero.
Ernesti’s editions were adopted as the basis of the text; but the editor departs from
them where he sees occasion. He does not propose many new emendations of his
own; but he seems a very acute judge of the merit of various readings, and a judicious
selector from the corrections of others. While this edition of Beck was proceeding
in Germany, Schütz brought forth another, which is now completed, except
part of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Index Latinitatis</span></span>. There are few notes subjoined to the text;
but long summaries are prefixed to each oration and work of Cicero; and the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetorica
ad Herennium</span></span> is introduced by an ample dissertation concerning the real author
of that treatise. A new arrangement of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epistolæ Familiares</span></span> has also been
adopted. They are no longer printed, as in most other editions, in a chronological
series, but are classed according to the individuals to whom they are addressed.
The whole publication is dedicated to Great Britain and the Allied Sovereigns, in
a long columnar panegyric.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
There have also been lately published in Germany, several learned and critical editions
of separate portions of the works of Cicero, particularly his Philosophical
Writings. The edition of all his Philosophic Treatises, by Goerenz, which is now
proceeding and already comprehends the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span>, the dialogues <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span> and
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Finibus</span></span>, is distinguished by intelligent Prefaces and Excursuses on the periods
of the composition of the respective Dialogues; as also on the design of the author
in their composition.
</p>
<div class="tei tei-tb"> </div>
<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The translations of Cicero are so numerous, that for the Italian translations I
must refer the reader to Paitoni, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Biblioteca degli autori antichi Greci e Latini
Volgarizzati</span></span>, Tom. I. p. 219; and Argelati, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Biblioteca degli Volgarizzatori</span></span>, Tom.
I. p. 214. For French versions, to Goujet, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bibliotheque Françoise</span></span>, Tom. II. p.
221; and, for English, to Brüggemann, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">View of the Editions and Translations of
the Ancient Greek and Latin authors</span></span>, p. 481.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-57">[pg A-57]</span><a name="PgA57" id="PgA57" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<div class="tei tei-tb"><hr style="width: 60%" /></div>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
For the benefit of those who wish to prosecute their inquiries into the subject
of Roman Literature, I have subjoined a note of some of the most important Books
which treat of the subject. An asterisk is prefixed to the titles of those works
which have been consulted by me in the compilation of the preceding pages.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Aimerichius.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Specimen veteris Romanæ Literaturæ deperditæ vel adhuc
latentis, seu Syllabus Historicus et Criticus veterum olim notæ  eruditionis
Romanorum, ab urbe conditâ ad Honorii Augusti excessum, eorum imprimis
quorum Latina opera vel omnino vel ex parte desiderantur</span></span>. Ferrara, 1784. 8vo.
</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
<span class="tei tei-q">“This work is intended to give an idea of Roman literature, from the foundation
of the city to the death of the Emperor Honorius. The preface, written by a friend
of the author, gives an account of the manner in which the Romans lived, both in
the capital and in the provinces, during this long period. The historical and literary
Syllabus contains, under nine articles, a variety of literary matters. In the
first, the Abbé Aimerichius gives us brief notices, and a critical review of the ancient
Roman writers, both Pagan and Christian, whose works were extant in public
or private libraries, before the death of the Emperor Honorius. In the second,
we have the titles and subjects of several works which have been lost, but which
have been cited or indicated by contemporary writers, or writers nearly such, whose
testimonies are related by our author. The third contains an account of the most
celebrated public or private libraries, that were known at Rome before the death of
Honorius: and, in the fourth, we have the author’s inquiries concerning the pronunciation
of the Romans, their manner of writing, and the changes which took place
in their orthography. In the fifth, the Abbé treats of the magistracies that could not
be obtained, either at Rome or in the provinces, but by men of letters, as also of
rites and sacrifices, of luxury, riches, public shows, &amp;c. In the sixth, he gives his
particular opinion concerning the ancient literature of the Romans, and the mixture
of the Latin and Greek languages which they employed, both in their conversation
and in their writings. The seventh contains an indication of the principal heresies
that disturbed the church, from the time of the Apostles to that of Honorius; and the
eighth several memorable facts and maxims, not generally known, which belong to
the literary, civil, military, and ecclesiastical history of this period. In the concluding
article, the Abbé takes notice of the Latin works which had been lost for a
considerable time, and shows how, and by whom, they were first discovered.”</span>—From
this account, <a name="corr343" id="corr343" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">which</span> I have extracted from Horne’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Introduction to the
Study of Bibliography</span></span>, I regret extremely that I have had no opportunity of
consulting the work of Aimerichius.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Blessig.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Origine Philosophiæ apud Romanos</span></span>. Strasburgh, 1770. 4to.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Becmannus.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Manductio ad linguam Latinam cum Tractatu de Originibus
Linguæ Latinæ</span></span>. 1608. 8vo.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Casaubon.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Satyrica Græcorum Poësi et Romanorum Satira libri duo,
in quibus etiam Poëtæ recensentur, qui in utrâque poësi floruerunt</span></span>. Halæ, 1774.
8vo.
</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This treatise, which is one of the most learned and agreeable productions of
Casaubon, is the source of almost everything that has been written by modern
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-58">[pg A-58]</span><a name="PgA58" id="PgA58" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>authors, on the subject of the satiric poetry of the Romans. Casaubon traces its
early history in the Fescennine verses, the Atellane fables, and the satires of Ennius
and Lucilius, and vindicates to the Romans the invention of this species of
composition, for which, he contends, they had no model in the poetry of the Greeks.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Cellarius.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dissertatio de Studiis Romanorum Literariis</span></span>. Halle, 1698. 4to.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Corradus.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Quæstura—Partes duæ, quarum altera de Ciceronis Vitâ et Libris—Altera
Ciceronis Libros permultis locis emendat.</span></span> Lips. 1754. 8vo.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Crusius.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lives of the Roman Poets</span></span>. London, 1733. 2 Vols.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Eberhardt.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Uber den Zustand der Schönen Wissenschaften bei den Römern</span></span>.
Altona, 1801. 8vo.
</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This work was written by a Swede, and in the Swedish language. It contains,
in its original form, a very superficial and inaccurate sketch of the subject; but
some valuable notes and corrections accompany the German translation.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Fabricius.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bibliotheca Latina, digesta et aucta diligentiâ Jo. Aug. Ernesti</span></span>.
Lips. 1773. 3 Tom. 8vo.
</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The well-known and justly-esteemed <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bibliotheca</span></span> of Fabricius gives an account
of all the Latin writers from Plautus to Marcian Capella. In most of the articles
we have a biographical sketch of the author—a list of his writings—an account of
the most authoritative MSS. of his works—of the best editions, and of the most
celebrated translations in the modern languages of Europe.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Fuhrmann.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Handbuch der Classischen Literatur, oder Anleitung zur Kentniss
der Griechischen und Römischen Classischen Schriftsteller, ihren Schriften,
und der besten Ausgaben, und Uebersetzungen derselben</span></span>. Rudolstadt,
1809–10.
</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
Two of the volumes of this work relate to Roman literature. It is chiefly bibliographical,
containing very full accounts of the editions and translations of the
Classics which have appeared, particularly in Germany; but there are also some
critical accounts of the works of the Roman authors: these are chiefly extracted
from Journals and Reviews, and, in consequence, the author frequently repeats the
same thing in different words, and still more frequently contradicts himself.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Fuhrmann.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Anleitung zur Geschichte der Classischen Literatur der
Griechen und Römer</span></span>. Rudolstadt, 1816.
</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
An abridgment of the preceding work.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Funccius.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Origine et Pueritiâ, De Adolescentiâ, Virili Ætate, et Senectute
Linguæ Latinæ</span></span>. Frankfort, 1720.
</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This is one of the most learned and valuable works extant on the subject of Latin
literature. In the first tract, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Pueritiâ</span></span>, the author chiefly treats of the origin
and progress of the Roman language.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Gaudentius Paganinus.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Philosophiæ ap. Romanos Ortu et Progressu</span></span>.
Pisa, 1643, 4.
</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
A very dull and imperfect account of the state of philosophy among the Romans,
from the earliest periods to the time of Boethius.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Hankius.</span></span> (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Mart.</span></span>)—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Romanarum Rerum Scriptoribus</span></span>. Lips. 1687. 4to.
</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
The first part of this work contains a succinct account of the ancient Roman Annalists
and Historians. The latter part relates to modern writers who treated of
Roman affairs.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Harles.</span></span> (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Th. Christ</span></span>.)—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Introductio in Notitiam Literaturæ Romanæ,
imprimis Scriptorum Latinorum</span></span>. Noriberg. 1781. 2 Tom. 8vo.
</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This work of Harles, as far as it extends, is written on the same plan, and is much
of the same description, as the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bibliotheca</span></span> of Fabricius. It is not continued farther,
however, than the Augustan age inclusive.
</p>

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-59">[pg A-59]</span><a name="PgA59" id="PgA59" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Harles.</span></span> (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Th. Christ.</span></span>)—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brevior Notitia Literaturæ Romanæ, imprimis
Scriptorum Latinorum</span></span>. Lips. 1788. 1 Tom. 8vo.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Harles.</span></span> (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Th. Christ.</span></span>)—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Supplementa ad Breviorem Notitiam Literaturæ
Romanæ</span></span>. Lips. 1788. 2 Tom. 8vo.
</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This work, and the preceding, are on the same plan as the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Introductio</span></span>; but bring
down the history of Roman writers, and the editions of their works, to the latest
periods. It is much to be regretted, that these works of Harles had not been incorporated
into one; since, taken separately, each is incomplete, and collectively, they
abound in repetitions.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Klügling.</span></span> (C. F.)—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Supplementa ad Breviorem Notitiam Literaturæ Romanæ</span></span>.
Lips. 1817.
</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This Supplement to Harles, contains an account of the editions of the Classics
which had appeared chiefly in Germany, subsequent to the publication of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brevior
Notitia</span></span>.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">König.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Satirâ Romanorum</span></span>. Oldenburgh, 1796.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Kriegk.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Diatribe de Veterum Romanorum Peregrinationibus Academicis</span></span>.
    <a name="corr345" id="corr345" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Jenæ</span>, 1704. 4to.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Leo</span></span> (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Annibal di</span></span>).—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memorie di Pacuvio</span></span>. Neapol. 1763.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Meierotto.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Præcipuis rerum Romanarum Scriptoribus</span></span>. Berlin, 1792.
folio.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Müller.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Einleitung zu nöthiger Kentniss und Gebrauche der alten Lateinischen
Schriftsteller</span></span>. Dresden, 1747. 5 Tom. 8vo.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Moine d’Orgeval.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Considerations sur le Progrés des Belles Lettres chez
les Romains</span></span>. Paris, 1749.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Osannus.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Analecta Critica, Poësis Romanorum scænicæ reliquias illustrantia</span></span>.
Berlin, 1717.
</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This is a work of considerable ingenuity and research. It contains some discussion
concerning the date at which regular comedies and tragedies were first exhibited
at Rome; but it is chiefly occupied with comparisons between the Fragments
of the ancient Latin Dramatists, and the corresponding passages in the Greek originals.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Sagittarius</span></span> (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Casp.</span></span>)—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Commentatio de Vitâ et Scriptis Liv. Andronici,
Nævii, Ennii, Cæcilii, Pacuvii, Attii, Attilii, Lucilii, Afranii, Catonis</span></span>. Altenburg,
1672.
</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
This is a small volume of 110 pages, which has now become extremely scarce.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Sagittarius</span></span> (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Casp.</span></span>)—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Vitâ, scriptis, editionibus, interpretibus, lectione,
atque imitatione Plauti, Terentii, Ciceronis</span></span>. Altenburg, 1671.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Schoell.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Histoire Abregée de la Litterature Romaine</span></span>. Paris, 1815. 4
Tom. 8vo.
</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
See above. Preface, p. xiii.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Tiraboschi.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Storia della Litteratura Italiana</span></span>. Modena, 1787. Tom. I.
and II.
</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
See above. Preface, p. xiii.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Vossius</span></span> (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Gerard</span></span>).—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Historicis Latinis Libri tres</span></span>. Lugd. Bat. 1651.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Walchius.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Historia Critica Latinæ Linguæ</span></span>. Lips. 1761.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Ziegler.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Mimis Romanorum</span></span>. Gotting. 1789.
</p>
</div>
    </div>
    <div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-60">[pg A-60]</span><a name="PgA60" id="PgA60" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
<a name="toc45" id="toc45"></a><a name="pdf46" id="pdf46"></a>
<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE.</span></h1>
    
        
        
 <table summary="This is a table" cellspacing="0" class="rules tei tei-table" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em"><colgroup span="3"></colgroup><tbody><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell"></td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-size: 90%">Born.</span></span></td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-size: 90%">Dies.</span></span></td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell"></td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-size: 90%">A.U.C.</span></span></td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-size: 90%">A.U.C.</span></span></td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">L. Andronicus</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell"></td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">534</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Nævius</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell"></td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">550</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Ennius </td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">515</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">585</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Plautus</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">525</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">570</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Cæcilius</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell"></td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">586</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Terence</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">560</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">594</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Pacuvius</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">534</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">624</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Attius</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">584</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">664</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Lucilius</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">605</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">659?</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Lucretius</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">658</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">702</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Catullus</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">667</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">708?</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Laberius</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell"></td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">710</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Cato</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">519</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">605</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Varro</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">637</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">727</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Sallust</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">668</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">718</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Cæsar</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">656</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">709</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Hortensius</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">640</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">703</td>
        </tr><tr class="tei tei-row">
            <td class="tei tei-cell">Cicero</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">647</td>
            <td class="tei tei-cell">710</td>
        </tr></tbody></table>           
        
    

<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageA-61">[pg A-61]</span><a name="PgA61" id="PgA61" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
</div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
    <a name="toc47" id="toc47"></a><a name="pdf48" id="pdf48"></a>
<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">INDEX</span></h1>

<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Afranius, his Comedies, vol. i. p. 170.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Agriculture, advantages of Italy for, ii. <a href="#Pg006" class="tei tei-ref">6</a>–<a href="#Pg011" class="tei tei-ref">11</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Antias, Q. Valerius, Latin Annalist, ii. <a href="#Pg074" class="tei tei-ref">74</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Antipater, Cælius, Latin Annalist, ii. <a href="#Pg072" class="tei tei-ref">72</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Antonius, Marcus, character of his eloquence, ii. <a href="#Pg117" class="tei tei-ref">117</a>.
<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His death, <a href="#Pg119" class="tei tei-ref">119</a>.</td></tr></tbody></table>
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Arcesilaus founds the New Academy, ii. <a href="#Pg208" class="tei tei-ref">208</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Asellio, Sempronius, Latin Annalist, ii. <a href="#Pg073" class="tei tei-ref">73</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Atellane Fables, i. 229.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Attius, his Tragedies, i. 214.
</td></tr></tbody></table><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Brutus, his Historical Epitomes, ii. <a href="#Pg107" class="tei tei-ref">107</a>.
</td></tr></tbody></table><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Cæcilius, his Comedies, i. 168.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Cæcina, his history, ii. <a href="#Pg108" class="tei tei-ref">108</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Cæsar compared with Xenophon, ii. <a href="#Pg094" class="tei tei-ref">94</a>.
<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His Commentaries, <a href="#Pg095" class="tei tei-ref">95</a>–<a href="#Pg101" class="tei tei-ref">101</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His Ephemeris, whether the same work with his Commentaries, <a href="#Pg101" class="tei tei-ref">101</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His Anticatones, <a href="#Pg102" class="tei tei-ref">102</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His Analogia, <a href="#Pg103" class="tei tei-ref">103</a>.</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Calvus, Licinius, his Epigrams, i. 322.
<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His orations, ii. <a href="#Pg131" class="tei tei-ref">131</a>.</td></tr></tbody></table>
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Carmen Saliare, i. 43.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Carneades teaches the Greek philosophy at Rome, ii. <a href="#Pg211" class="tei tei-ref">211</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Cato, the Censor, his work on Agriculture, ii. <a href="#Pg012" class="tei tei-ref">12</a>–<a href="#Pg016" class="tei tei-ref">16</a>.
<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His Orations, <a href="#Pg016" class="tei tei-ref">16</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His work De Originibus, <a href="#Pg018" class="tei tei-ref">18</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">On Medicine, <a href="#Pg020" class="tei tei-ref">20</a>–<a href="#Pg021" class="tei tei-ref">21</a>.</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Catullus, i. 271–320.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Cethegus, Marcus, an orator, ii. <a href="#Pg110" class="tei tei-ref">110</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Cicero, his Orations, ii. <a href="#Pg152" class="tei tei-ref">152</a>.
<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Compared with Demosthenes, <a href="#Pg192" class="tei tei-ref">192</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His works on Rhetoric, <a href="#Pg193" class="tei tei-ref">193</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">De Oratore, <a href="#Pg195" class="tei tei-ref">195</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Brutus, <a href="#Pg198" class="tei tei-ref">198</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">The Orator, <a href="#Pg199" class="tei tei-ref">199</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Topica, <a href="#Pg200" class="tei tei-ref">200</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Rhetorica ad Herennium, inquiry concerning the author of, <a href="#Pg202" class="tei tei-ref">202</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His philosophical works—De Legibus, <a href="#Pg223" class="tei tei-ref">223</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">De Finibus, <a href="#Pg229" class="tei tei-ref">229</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Academica, <a href="#Pg232" class="tei tei-ref">232</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Tusculanæ Disputationes, <a href="#Pg236" class="tei tei-ref">236</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">De <a name="corra61" id="corra61" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Naturâ</span> Deorum, <a href="#Pg243" class="tei tei-ref">243</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">De Officiis, <a href="#Pg257" class="tei tei-ref">257</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">De Senectute, <a href="#Pg259" class="tei tei-ref">259</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">De Republica, <a href="#Pg263" class="tei tei-ref">263</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His Epistles, <a href="#Pg278" class="tei tei-ref">278</a>.</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Columna Rostrata, inscription on the, i. 46.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Cotta, his style of oratory, ii. <a href="#Pg122" class="tei tei-ref">122</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Crassus, Lucius, character of his eloquence, ii. <a href="#Pg120" class="tei tei-ref">120</a>.
<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His death, <a href="#Pg120" class="tei tei-ref">ibid.</a></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Compared with Antony, <a href="#Pg121" class="tei tei-ref">121</a>.</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Decemviral Laws, ii. <a href="#Pg134" class="tei tei-ref">134</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Dialogue, remarks on this species of composition, ii. <a href="#Pg194" class="tei tei-ref">194</a>.
</td></tr></tbody></table><a name="PgA62" id="PgA62" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Eloquence, Roman, commencement of, ii. <a href="#Pg109" class="tei tei-ref">109</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Ennius, his tragedies, i. 67.
<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Annals, 78.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Translation of Euhemerus, 94.</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Etruscans, their origin, i. 20.
<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Their conquests, 26.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Religion, 29.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Arts, 35.</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Eugubian Tables, i. 47.
</td></tr></tbody></table><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Fabius Pictor, Latin Annalist, ii. <a href="#Pg067" class="tei tei-ref">67</a>–<a href="#Pg071" class="tei tei-ref">71</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Fratres Arvales, hymn of the, i. 43.
</td></tr></tbody></table><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Galba, Sergius, an orator, ii. <a href="#Pg110" class="tei tei-ref">110</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Gracchi, oratory of the, ii. <a href="#Pg113" class="tei tei-ref">113</a>.
</td></tr></tbody></table><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Hirtius, his continuation of Cæsar’s Commentaries, ii. <a href="#Pg105" class="tei tei-ref">105</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
History, Roman, uncertainty of, ii. <a href="#Pg057" class="tei tei-ref">57</a>–<a href="#Pg067" class="tei tei-ref">67</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Hortensius, his luxury and magnificence, ii. <a href="#Pg124" class="tei tei-ref">124</a>.
<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His villas at Tusculum, Bauli, and Laurentum, <a href="#Pg124" class="tei tei-ref">124</a>,
<a href="#Pg125" class="tei tei-ref">125</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Character of his eloquence, <a href="#Pg127" class="tei tei-ref">127</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His descendants, <a href="#notep130" class="tei tei-ref">130, Note</a>.</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Jurisconsults, Roman, account of, ii. <a href="#Pg138" class="tei tei-ref">138</a>.
</td></tr></tbody></table><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Laberius, i. 328.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Lælius, his oratory compared with that of Scipio, ii. <a href="#Pg111" class="tei tei-ref">111</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Latin Language, its origin, i. 32.
<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Its changes, 48.</td></tr></tbody></table>
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Laws, Roman, ii. <a href="#Pg133" class="tei tei-ref">133</a>–<a href="#Pg138" class="tei tei-ref">138</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Leges Regiæ, ii. <a href="#Pg133" class="tei tei-ref">133</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Livius Andronicus, i. 54–58.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Lucceius, his History of the Social War, ii. <a href="#Pg107" class="tei tei-ref">107</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Lucilius, i. 238–248.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Lucretius, i. 250–271.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Lucullus, his patronage of learning, ii. <a href="#Pg051" class="tei tei-ref">51</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Luscius Lavinius, i. 171.
</td></tr></tbody></table><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Magna Græcia, its settlements, i. 50.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Mimes, their origin and subjects, i. 324.
</td></tr></tbody></table><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Nævius, i. 58–62.
</td></tr></tbody></table><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Pacuvius, i. 209.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Plautus, i. 96–168.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Philosophy, Greek, introduction of, at Rome, ii. <a href="#Pg209" class="tei tei-ref">209</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Plebiscita, account of the, ii. <a href="#Pg136" class="tei tei-ref">136</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Prætor, account of the office of, ii. <a href="#Pg141" class="tei tei-ref">141</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Publius Syrus, i. 332.
</td></tr></tbody></table><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Quadrigarius, Claudius, Latin Annalist, ii. <a href="#Pg073" class="tei tei-ref">73</a>.
</td></tr></tbody></table><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Sallust, his character, ii. <a href="#Pg082" class="tei tei-ref">82</a>.
<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His Gardens, <a href="#Pg082" class="tei tei-ref">ibid.</a></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His conspiracy of Catiline, and Jugurthine war, <a href="#Pg084" class="tei tei-ref">84</a>–<a href="#Pg088" class="tei tei-ref">88</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His Roman History, <a href="#Pg092" class="tei tei-ref">92</a>.</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Satire, Roman, origin of, i. 232.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Senatusconsultum, what, ii. <a href="#Pg137" class="tei tei-ref">137</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Sisenna, Roman Annalist, ii. <a href="#Pg075" class="tei tei-ref">75</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Sulpicius, his worthless character, ii. <a href="#Pg121" class="tei tei-ref">121</a>.
<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His style of oratory, <a href="#Pg122" class="tei tei-ref">122</a>.</td></tr></tbody></table>
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Sylla, his library, ii. <a href="#Pg050" class="tei tei-ref">50</a>.
<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His Memoirs of his Life, <a href="#Pg077" class="tei tei-ref">77</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His character, <a href="#Pg078" class="tei tei-ref">78</a>.</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Terence, i. 175–206.
<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Compared with Plautus, 206.</td></tr></tbody></table>
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Theatre, Roman, its construction, i. 337–353.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
<a name="corr348" id="corr348" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Tyrannio</span>, his library, ii. <a href="#Pg052" class="tei tei-ref">52</a>.
</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Trabea, i. 173.
</td></tr></tbody></table><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">
Varro, his farms and villas, ii. <a href="#Pg025" class="tei tei-ref">25</a>.
<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">His work on Agriculture, <a href="#Pg028" class="tei tei-ref">28</a>–<a href="#Pg034" class="tei tei-ref">34</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">De Lingua Latina, <a href="#Pg034" class="tei tei-ref">34</a>.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Other works of Varro, <a href="#Pg040" class="tei tei-ref">40</a>.</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table>
<p class="tei tei-p" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
FINIS.
</p>

<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 0.90em; margin-top: 1.80em"><span style="font-size: 90%">
JAMES KAY, JUN. PRINTER.
</span></p>
    </div>
   
            <div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
            
                
                
                    <hr class="doublepage" /><div id="footnotes" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em">
                        <h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Footnotes</span></h1>
                        <dl class="tei tei-list-footnotes"><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_1" name="note_1" href="#noteref_1">1.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Voyage du Jeune Anacharsis</span></span>, T. II. c. 20.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_2" name="note_2" href="#noteref_2">2.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Antiquitat. Rom.</span></span> Lib. I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_3" name="note_3" href="#noteref_3">3.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Geograph.</span></span> Lib. VI.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_4" name="note_4" href="#noteref_4">4.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XVIII. c. 11.; XXXVII. c. 12.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_5" name="note_5" href="#noteref_5">5.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Virgil, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Georg.</span></span> Lib. II.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_6" name="note_6" href="#noteref_6">6.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Numa</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_7" name="note_7" href="#noteref_7">7.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Livy, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epitome</span></span>,
    <a name="corr008" id="corr008" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Lib.</span> XVIII. Valer. Maxim. Lib. IV. c. 4. § 6.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_8" name="note_8" href="#noteref_8">8.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Senectute</span></span>, c. 16.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_9" name="note_9" href="#noteref_9">9.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Rapin, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hortorum</span></span>, Lib. IV.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_10" name="note_10" href="#noteref_10">10.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Bonstetten, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Voyage dans le Latium</span></span>, p. 274.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_11" name="note_11" href="#noteref_11">11.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">J. C. L. Sismondi, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Tableau de l’Agriculture Toscane</span></span>, and Chasteauvieux,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lettres Ecrites d’Italie</span></span>. Paris, 1816. 2 Tom.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_12" name="note_12" href="#noteref_12">12.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Cato.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_13" name="note_13" href="#noteref_13">13.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Cato.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_14" name="note_14" href="#noteref_14">14.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plin. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XIV. c. 4; Lib. XVI. c. 39.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_15" name="note_15" href="#noteref_15">15.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Cato.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_16" name="note_16" href="#noteref_16">16.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_17" name="note_17" href="#noteref_17">17.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Cato.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_18" name="note_18" href="#noteref_18">18.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">C. 160.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_19" name="note_19" href="#noteref_19">19.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 17.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_20" name="note_20" href="#noteref_20">20.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Vegetius, Lib. I. c. 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_21" name="note_21" href="#noteref_21">21.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Cato.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_22" name="note_22" href="#noteref_22">22.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Valerius Maximus, Lib. VIII. c. 7. Valerius says, he was in his 86th year;
but Cato did not survive beyond his 85th. Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Bruto</span></span>, c. 20. Pliny, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist.
Nat.</span></span> Lib. XIX. c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_23" name="note_23" href="#noteref_23">23.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Livy, Lib. XXXIX. c. 40.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_24" name="note_24" href="#noteref_24">24.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. XXXIV. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_25" name="note_25" href="#noteref_25">25.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. VII. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_26" name="note_26" href="#noteref_26">26.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 17.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_27" name="note_27" href="#noteref_27">27.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. XXXIX. c. 40.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_28" name="note_28" href="#noteref_28">28.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. X. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_29" name="note_29" href="#noteref_29">29.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. VIII. c. 5.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_30" name="note_30" href="#noteref_30">30.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 17.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_31" name="note_31" href="#noteref_31">31.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 87.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_32" name="note_32" href="#noteref_32">32.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Quintil. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Inst. Orat.</span></span> Lib. III. c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_33" name="note_33" href="#noteref_33">33.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Pliny, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XXV. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_34" name="note_34" href="#noteref_34">34.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Pliny, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XXV. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_35" name="note_35" href="#noteref_35">35.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Livy, Lib. IV. c. 25.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_36" name="note_36" href="#noteref_36">36.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plin. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XXIX. c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_37" name="note_37" href="#noteref_37">37.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Cato.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_38" name="note_38" href="#noteref_38">38.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plin. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XX. c. 9.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_39" name="note_39" href="#noteref_39">39.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. Lib. XXIX. c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_40" name="note_40" href="#noteref_40">40.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Pliny, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XXIX. c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_41" name="note_41" href="#noteref_41">41.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Stor. del. Let. Ital.</span></span> Part. III. Lib. III. c. 5. § 5.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_42" name="note_42" href="#noteref_42">42.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">See Spon, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Recherches Curieuses d’Antiquité</span></span>. Diss. 27. Bayle, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dict. Hist.</span></span>
art. Porcius, Rem. H.
<br /><br />
In what degree of estimation medicine was held at Rome, and by what class of
people it was practised, were among the <span class="tei tei-hi"><a name="corr022a" id="corr022a" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr"><span style="font-style: italic">quæstiones vexatæ</span></span></span> of classical literature in
our own country in the beginning and middle of last century. Dr Mead, in his
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Oratio Herveiana</span></span>, and Spon, in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Recherches d’Antiquité</span></span>, followed out an idea
first suggested by Casaubon, in his animadversions on Suetonius, that physicians in
Rome were held in high estimation, and were frequently free citizens; that it was
the surgeons who were the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">servile pecus</span></span>; and that the erroneous idea of physicians
being slaves, arose from confounding the two orders. These authors chiefly rested
their argument on classical passages, from which it appears that physicians were
called the friends of Cicero, Cæsar, and Pompey. Middleton, in a well known Latin
dissertation, maintains that there was no distinction at Rome between the physician,
surgeon, and apothecary, and that, till the time of Julius Cæsar at least, the
art of medicine was exercised only by foreigners and slaves, or by freedmen, who,
having obtained liberty for their proficiency in its various branches, opened a shop
for its practice.—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Medicorum apud veteres Romanos degentium Conditione
Dissertatio</span></span>. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Miscellaneous Works</span></span>, Vol. IV. See on this topic, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Schlæger, Histor.
litis, De Medicorum apud veteres Romanos degentium Conditione. Helmst.</span></span>
1740.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_43" name="note_43" href="#noteref_43">43.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. VII. c. 10.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_44" name="note_44" href="#noteref_44">44.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Officiis</span></span>, Lib. I. c. 29. Multa sunt multorum facete dicta: ut ea, quæ a
sene Catone collecta sunt, quæ vocant apophthegmata.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_45" name="note_45" href="#noteref_45">45.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Sat.</span></span> Lib. I. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_46" name="note_46" href="#noteref_46">46.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">For Cato’s family, see Aulus Gellius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. XIII. c. 19.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_47" name="note_47" href="#noteref_47">47.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">We have many minute descriptions of the villas of luxurious Romans, from the
time of Hortensius to Pliny, but there are so few accounts of those in the simpler age
of Scipio, that I have subjoined the description of Seneca, who saw this mansion
precisely in the same state it was when possessed and inhabited by the illustrious
conqueror of Hannibal. <span class="tei tei-q">“Vidi villam structam lapide quadrato, murum circumdatum
    <span class="tei tei-corr">sylvæ</span>, turres quoque in propugnaculum <span class="tei tei-corr">villæ</span> utrimque subrectas.
Cisternam ædificiis et viridibus subditam, quæ sufficere in usum exercitûs posset.
Balneolum angustum, tenebricosum ex consuetudine antiquâ. Magna ergo me
voluptas subit contemplantem mores Scipionis et nostros. In hoc angulo, ille Carthaginis
horror, cui Roma debet quod tantum semel capta est, abluebat corpus laboribus
rusticis fessum; exercebat enim operâ se, terramque, ut mos fuit priscis, ipse
subigebat. Sub hoc ille tecto tam sordido stetit—hoc illum pavimentum tam vile
sustinuit.”</span> Senec. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> 86.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_48" name="note_48" href="#noteref_48">48.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. II.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_49" name="note_49" href="#noteref_49">49.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Trionfo della Fama</span></span>, c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_50" name="note_50" href="#noteref_50">50.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Varro, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Re Rusticâ</span></span>, Lib. II. proœm.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_51" name="note_51" href="#noteref_51">51.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cæsar, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Comment. de Bello Civili</span></span>, Lib. II. c. 17, &amp;c.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_52" name="note_52" href="#noteref_52">52.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Suetonius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Jul. Cæs.</span></span> c. 44.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_53" name="note_53" href="#noteref_53">53.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Fam.</span></span> Lib. IX. Ep. 6. Ed. Schütz.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_54" name="note_54" href="#noteref_54">54.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Re Rusticâ</span></span>, Lib. II.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_55" name="note_55" href="#noteref_55">55.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Philip.</span></span> II. c. 40.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_56" name="note_56" href="#noteref_56">56.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">See Castell’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Villas of the Ancients</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_57" name="note_57" href="#noteref_57">57.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Re Rusticâ</span></span>, Lib. III. c. 5.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_58" name="note_58" href="#noteref_58">58.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Classical Tour in Italy</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_59" name="note_59" href="#noteref_59">59.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Appian, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Bello Civili</span></span>, Lib. IV. 47.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_60" name="note_60" href="#noteref_60">60.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Berwick’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lives of Asin. Pollio, M. Varro, &amp;c.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_61" name="note_61" href="#noteref_61">61.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Scaligerana prima</span></span>, p. 144.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_62" name="note_62" href="#noteref_62">62.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">Πολυγραφωτατος</span></span>. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Attic.</span></span> Lib. III. Ep. 18.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_63" name="note_63" href="#noteref_63">63.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Divinat.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 18. Seneca, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> 98.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_64" name="note_64" href="#noteref_64">64.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Suetonius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Illust. Grammat.</span></span> c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_65" name="note_65" href="#noteref_65">65.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Suetonius (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Illust. Gram.</span></span>) says, that he was sent by Attalus, at the moment
of the death of Ennius. Now, Ennius died in 585, at which time Eumenes reigned
at Pergamus, and was not succeeded by Attalus till the year 595; so that Suetonius
was mistaken, either as to the year in which Crates came to Rome, or the king by
whom he was sent—I rather think he was wrong in the latter point; for, if Crates
was the first Greek rhetorician who taught at Rome, which seems universally admitted,
he must have been there before 593, in which year the rhetoricians were expressly
banished from Rome, along with the philosophers.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_66" name="note_66" href="#noteref_66">66.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Suetonius, c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_67" name="note_67" href="#noteref_67">67.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Court de Gebelin, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Monde Primitif</span></span>, T. VI. Disc. Prelim. p. 12.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_68" name="note_68" href="#noteref_68">68.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Attic.</span></span> Lib. XIII. Ep. 12.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_69" name="note_69" href="#noteref_69">69.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. Lib. XIII. Ep. 18.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_70" name="note_70" href="#noteref_70">70.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Famil.</span></span> Lib. IX. Ep. 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_71" name="note_71" href="#noteref_71">71.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Aulus Gellius, Lib. I. c. 18</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_72" name="note_72" href="#noteref_72">72.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">See also as to the Celtic derivations, Court de Gebelin, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Monde Primitif</span></span>. Disc.
Prelim. T. VI. p. 23.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_73" name="note_73" href="#noteref_73">73.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Jupiter, Juno, Saturnus, Vulcanus, Vesta, et alii plurimi quos Varro conatur ad
mundi partes sive elementa transferre. (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">St August. Civit. Dei</span></span>, Lib. VIII. c. 5.)</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_74" name="note_74" href="#noteref_74">74.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lactantius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Div. Inst.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 6.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_75" name="note_75" href="#noteref_75">75.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Bolingbroke, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Use and Study of History</span></span>, Lett. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_76" name="note_76" href="#noteref_76">76.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Au. Gellius, Lib. XIV. c. 7.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_77" name="note_77" href="#noteref_77">77.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">St Augustine, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Civitat. Dei</span></span>, Lib. XIX. c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_78" name="note_78" href="#noteref_78">78.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Antiochus of Ascalon, a teacher of the old Academy.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_79" name="note_79" href="#noteref_79">79.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Fabricius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Biblioth. Latin.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 7.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_80" name="note_80" href="#noteref_80">80.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Au. Gellius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. XIII. c. 11.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_81" name="note_81" href="#noteref_81">81.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ibid.</span></span> Lib. VII. c. 16.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_82" name="note_82" href="#noteref_82">82.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Tom. I. p. 241.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_83" name="note_83" href="#noteref_83">83.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">It was long believed, that Pope Gregory the First had destroyed the works of
Varro, in order to conceal the plagiarisms of St Augustine, who had borrowed largely
from the theological and philosophic writings of the Roman scholar. This, however,
is not likely. That illustrious Father of the Christian Church is constantly
referring to the learned heathen, without any apparent purpose of concealment; and
he extols him in terms calculated to attract notice to the subject of his eulogy.
Nor did St Augustine possess such meagre powers of genius, as to require him to
build up the city of the true God from the crumbling fragments of Pagan temples.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_84" name="note_84" href="#noteref_84">84.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academ. Poster.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_85" name="note_85" href="#noteref_85">85.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Morhof, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Polyhistor</span></span>. Tom. I. Lib. I. Falsterus,
    <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Rei Liter. ap. Roman.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_86" name="note_86" href="#noteref_86">86.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Middendorp, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Academ.</span></span> Lib. III.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_87" name="note_87" href="#noteref_87">87.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Tiraboschi, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Stor. dell Lett. Ital.</span></span> Part III. Lib. III. c. 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_88" name="note_88" href="#noteref_88">88.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plin. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XVIII. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_89" name="note_89" href="#noteref_89">89.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Paul. Æmil.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_90" name="note_90" href="#noteref_90">90.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Id. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Sylla</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_91" name="note_91" href="#noteref_91">91.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Lucullo</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_92" name="note_92" href="#noteref_92">92.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ibid.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_93" name="note_93" href="#noteref_93">93.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Attic.</span></span> Lib. IV. Ep. 4 and 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_94" name="note_94" href="#noteref_94">94.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Quint. Frat.</span></span> Lib. II. Ep. 4. According to some writers, it was a
younger Tyrannio, the disciple of the elder, who arranged Cicero’s library, and
taught his nephew.—Mater, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ecole d’Alexandrie</span></span>, Tom. I. p. 179.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_95" name="note_95" href="#noteref_95">95.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Suidas, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lexic.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_96" name="note_96" href="#noteref_96">96.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plin. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. VII. c. 30.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_97" name="note_97" href="#noteref_97">97.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plin. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XXXV. c. 14.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_98" name="note_98" href="#noteref_98">98.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Au. Gellius, Lib. IV. c. 9.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_99" name="note_99" href="#noteref_99">99.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Cicero.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_100" name="note_100" href="#noteref_100">100.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Chron. Euseb.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_101" name="note_101" href="#noteref_101">101.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Suetonius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in August.</span></span> c. 94.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_102" name="note_102" href="#noteref_102">102.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Au. Gellius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. XIX. c. 14.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_103" name="note_103" href="#noteref_103">103.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ibid.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_104" name="note_104" href="#noteref_104">104.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Au. Gellius, Lib. X. c. 4.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_105" name="note_105" href="#noteref_105">105.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">See farther, with regard to Nigidius Figulus, Bayle, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dict. Histor.</span></span> Art. Nigidius,
and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mem. de l’Acad. des Inscriptions</span></span>, Tom. XXIX. p. 190.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_106" name="note_106" href="#noteref_106">106.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Au. Gellius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. XIII. c. 9.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_107" name="note_107" href="#noteref_107">107.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Griffet, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Arte Regnandi</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_108" name="note_108" href="#noteref_108">108.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, Lib. II. c. 13.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_109" name="note_109" href="#noteref_109">109.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Vopiscus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><a name="corr057" id="corr057" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr"><span style="font-style: italic">Vit. Taciti Imp.</span></span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_110" name="note_110" href="#noteref_110">110.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Römische Geschichte</span></span>, Tom. I. p. 367.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_111" name="note_111" href="#noteref_111">111.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, Lib. II. c. 13.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_112" name="note_112" href="#noteref_112">112.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. I. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_113" name="note_113" href="#noteref_113">113.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Quæ in Commentariis Pontificum aliisque publicis privatisque erant monumentis,
incensâ urbe, pleræque interîere. Livy, Lib. VI. c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_114" name="note_114" href="#noteref_114">114.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Livy, Lib. VI. c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_115" name="note_115" href="#noteref_115">115.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Polybius, Lib. III. c. 22, 25, 26.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_116" name="note_116" href="#noteref_116">116.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> Lib. II. Ep. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_117" name="note_117" href="#noteref_117">117.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. IV. p. 257. ed. Sylburg, 1586.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_118" name="note_118" href="#noteref_118">118.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. II. p. 111.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_119" name="note_119" href="#noteref_119">119.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. III. p. 174.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_120" name="note_120" href="#noteref_120">120.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. IV. c. 7.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_121" name="note_121" href="#noteref_121">121.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. III. c. 22.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_122" name="note_122" href="#noteref_122">122.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XXXIV. c. 14.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_123" name="note_123" href="#noteref_123">123.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XXXIV. c. 14.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_124" name="note_124" href="#noteref_124">124.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Livy, Lib. IV. c. 23.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_125" name="note_125" href="#noteref_125">125.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Dionys. Halic. Lib. I. p. 60.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_126" name="note_126" href="#noteref_126">126.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Pliny, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XXXV. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_127" name="note_127" href="#noteref_127">127.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Numa</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_128" name="note_128" href="#noteref_128">128.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. VIII. c. 40.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_129" name="note_129" href="#noteref_129">129.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">His laudationibus historia rerum nostrarum est facta mendosior. Multa enim
scripta sunt in iis, quæ facta non sunt—falsi triumphi, plures consulatus, genera
etiam falsa. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 16.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_130" name="note_130" href="#noteref_130">130.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. III. c. 20.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_131" name="note_131" href="#noteref_131">131.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">L’Evesque, Hist. Critique de la Republique Romaine</span></span>, T. I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_132" name="note_132" href="#noteref_132">132.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Livy, Lib. V. c. 21.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_133" name="note_133" href="#noteref_133">133.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Bankes, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Civil History of Rome</span></span>, Vol. I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_134" name="note_134" href="#noteref_134">134.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 11.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_135" name="note_135" href="#noteref_135">135.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Livy, Lib. II. c. 40.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_136" name="note_136" href="#noteref_136">136.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">The question concerning the authenticity or uncertainty of the Roman history,
was long, and still continues to be, a subject of much discussion in France.—<span class="tei tei-q">“At
Paris,”</span> said Lord Bolingbroke, <span class="tei tei-q">“they have a set of stated paradoxical orations.
The business of one of these was to show that the history of Rome, for the four first
centuries was a mere fiction. The person engaged in it proved that point so strongly,
and so well, that several of the audience, as they were coming out, said, the person
who had set that question had played booty, and that it was so far from being a paradox,
that it was a plain and evident truth.”</span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Spence’s</span></span> <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Anecdotes</span></span>, p. 197. It was
chiefly in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memoires de l’Academie des Inscriptions</span></span>, &amp;c. that this literary controversy
was plied. M. de Pouilly, in the Memoirs for the year 1722, produced his
proofs and arguments against the authenticity. He was weakly opposed, in the
following year, by M. Sallier, and defended by M. Beaufort, in the Memoirs of the
Academy, and at greater length in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dissert. sur l’Incertitude des cinq premiers
siècles de l’Hist. Romaine</span></span>, (1738,) which contains a clear and conclusive exposition
of the state of the question. The dispute has been lately renewed in the
Memoirs of the Institute, in the proceedings of which, for 1815, there is a long paper,
by M. Levesque, maintaining the total uncertainty of the Roman history previous
to the invasion of the Gauls; while the opposite side of the question has been
strenuously espoused by M. Larcher. This controversy, though it commenced in
France, has not been confined to that country. Hooke and Gibbon have argued
for the certainty, (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Miscell. Works</span></span>, Vol. IV. p. 40,) and Cluverius for the uncertainty,
of the Roman history, (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ital. Antiq.</span></span> Lib. III. c. 2.) Niebuhr, the late German
historian of Rome, considers all before Tullus Hostilius as utterly fabulous.
The time that elapsed from his accession to the war with Pyrrhus, he regards as a
period to be found in almost every history, between mere fable and authentic
record. Beck, in the introduction to his German translation of Ferguson’s Roman
Republic, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ueber die Quellen der altesten Römischen Geschichte und ihren Werth</span></span>,
has attempted to vindicate the authenticity of the Roman history to a certain extent;
but his reasonings and citations go little farther than to prove, what never can be
disputed, that there is much truth in the general outline of events—that the kings
were expelled—that the Etruscans were finally subdued; and that consuls were created.
He admits, that much rested on tradition; but tradition, he maintains, is so
much interwoven with every history, that it cannot be safely thrown away. The
remainder of the treatise is occupied with a feeble attempt to show, that more monuments
existed at Rome after its capture by the Gauls, than is generally supposed,
and that Fabius Pictor made a good use of them.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_137" name="note_137" href="#noteref_137">137.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Pliny, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XXXV. c. 4.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_138" name="note_138" href="#noteref_138">138.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Hankius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Romanar. Rerum Scriptor.</span></span> Pars I. c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_139" name="note_139" href="#noteref_139">139.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. VII.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_140" name="note_140" href="#noteref_140">140.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. IV. p. 234.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_141" name="note_141" href="#noteref_141">141.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Romulo</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_142" name="note_142" href="#noteref_142">142.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. III. c. 9.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_143" name="note_143" href="#noteref_143">143.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_144" name="note_144" href="#noteref_144">144.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. III. c. 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_145" name="note_145" href="#noteref_145">145.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ernesti has attempted, but I think unsuccessfully, to support the authenticity of
the Annals of Fabius against the censures of Polybius, in his dissertation, entitled,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Fabii Fide adversus Polybium</span></span>, inserted in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Opuscula Philologica</span></span>, Leipsic,
1746—Lugd. Bat. 1764. He attempts to show, from other passages, that Polybius
was a great detractor of preceding historians, and that he judged of events more
from what was probable and likely to have occurred, than from what actually happened,
and that no historian could have better information than Fabius. To the interrogatories
which Polybius puts to Fabius, with regard to the causes assigned by
him as the origin of the second Punic war, Ernesti replies for him, that the Senate
of Carthage could no more have taken the command from Hannibal in Spain, or delivered
him up, than the Roman Senate could have deprived Cæsar of his army,
when on the banks of the Rubicon; and as to the support which Hannibal received
while in Italy, it is answered, that it was quite consistent with political wisdom, and
the practice of other nations, for a government involuntarily forced into a struggle,
by the disobedience or evil counsels of its subjects, to use every exertion to obtain
ultimate success, or extricate itself with honour, from the difficulties in which it had
been reluctantly involved.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_146" name="note_146" href="#noteref_146">146.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. I. p. 64.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_147" name="note_147" href="#noteref_147">147.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Fabium æqualem temporibus hujusce belli potissimum auctorem habui. Lib. XXII. c. 7.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_148" name="note_148" href="#noteref_148">148.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 27.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_149" name="note_149" href="#noteref_149">149.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XI. 
    <a name="corr071a" id="corr071a" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">c. 53</span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_150" name="note_150" href="#noteref_150">150.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. XI. c. 14.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_151" name="note_151" href="#noteref_151">151.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">He also probably suggested to Sallust a phrase which has given much scandal
in so grave a historian. Cicero says, in one of his letters, (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Famil.</span></span> Lib. IX.
Ep. 22,) <span class="tei tei-q">“At vero Piso, in annalibus suis, queritur, adolescentes peni deditos esse.”</span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_152" name="note_152" href="#noteref_152">152.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Römische Geschichte</span></span>, Tom. I. p. 245.
<br />
As his account of Roman affairs was written in Greek, I omit in the list of Latin
annalists Lucius Cincius Alimentus, who was contemporary with Fabius, having
been taken prisoner by Hannibal during the second Punic war. But though his
history was in Greek, he wrote in Latin a biographical sketch of the Sicilian Rhetorician
Gorgias Leontinus, and also a book, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Re Militari</span></span>, which has been cited
by Au. Gellius, and acknowledged by Vegetius as the foundation of his more elaborate
Commentaries on the same subject.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_153" name="note_153" href="#noteref_153">153.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic"> Brutus</span></span>, c. 26.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_154" name="note_154" href="#noteref_154">154.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">The passage is a fragment from the first book of Sallust’s lost history. Mar.
Victorinus <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in prim. Ciceronis de Inventione</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_155" name="note_155" href="#noteref_155">155.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Fontibus et Auctoritate Vitarum Parallel. Plutarchi</span></span>, p. 134. Gotteng. 1820.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_156" name="note_156" href="#noteref_156">156.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. I. c. 7.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_157" name="note_157" href="#noteref_157">157.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 26.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_158" name="note_158" href="#noteref_158">158.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. I. c. 7.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_159" name="note_159" href="#noteref_159">159.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Æl. Spartianus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Hadriano</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_160" name="note_160" href="#noteref_160">160.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Au. Gellius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 13.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_161" name="note_161" href="#noteref_161">161.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>, Lib. I. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_162" name="note_162" href="#noteref_162">162.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. V. c. 18.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_163" name="note_163" href="#noteref_163">163.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 35.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_164" name="note_164" href="#noteref_164">164.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. IX. c. 13.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_165" name="note_165" href="#noteref_165">165.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. XIII. c. 28.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_166" name="note_166" href="#noteref_166">166.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. Lib. VII. c. 19.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_167" name="note_167" href="#noteref_167">167.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. VI. c. 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_168" name="note_168" href="#noteref_168">168.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">See above, Vol. I. p. 322.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_169" name="note_169" href="#noteref_169">169.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 63.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_170" name="note_170" href="#noteref_170">170.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. II. c. 9.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_171" name="note_171" href="#noteref_171">171.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Jugurtha</span></span>, c. 95.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_172" name="note_172" href="#noteref_172">172.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 63.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_173" name="note_173" href="#noteref_173">173.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>, Lib. I. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_174" name="note_174" href="#noteref_174">174.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 29. Some persons have supposed that Cicero did not here mean
Xenophon’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Cyropædia</span></span>, but a life of Cyrus, written by Scaurus. This, indeed,
seems at first a more probable meaning than that he should have bestowed a compliment
apparently so extravagant on the Memoirs of Scaurus; but his words do not
admit of this interpretation.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Præclaram illam quidem, sed neque tam rebus nostris
aptam, nec tamen Scauri laudibus anteponendam.”</span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_175" name="note_175" href="#noteref_175">175.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. VII.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_176" name="note_176" href="#noteref_176">176.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Mario</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_177" name="note_177" href="#noteref_177">177.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. II. c. 13.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_178" name="note_178" href="#noteref_178">178.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. II. c. 5. Lib. VI. c. 4.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_179" name="note_179" href="#noteref_179">179.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Lucullo</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_180" name="note_180" href="#noteref_180">180.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Sylla</span></span>.—Appian.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_181" name="note_181" href="#noteref_181">181.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Mario</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_182" name="note_182" href="#noteref_182">182.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memoirs of the Court of Augustus</span></span>, Vol. I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_183" name="note_183" href="#noteref_183">183.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Vespasiano</span></span>, c. 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_184" name="note_184" href="#noteref_184">184.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Malheureux sort de l’histoire! Les spectateurs sont trop peu instruits, et les acteurs
trop interessés pour que nous puissions compter sur les recits des uns ou des
autres.—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Gibbon’s</span></span> <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Miscell. Works</span></span>, Vol. IV.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_185" name="note_185" href="#noteref_185">185.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Att.</span></span> Lib. XVII. c. 18.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_186" name="note_186" href="#noteref_186">186.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Nardini, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Roma Antica</span></span>. Lib. IV. c. 7.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_187" name="note_187" href="#noteref_187">187.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Steuart’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Sallust</span></span>, Essay I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_188" name="note_188" href="#noteref_188">188.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Classical Tour</span></span>, Vol. II. c. 6.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_189" name="note_189" href="#noteref_189">189.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Sat.</span></span> Lib. I. <a name="corr083" id="corr083" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Sat.</span> 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_190" name="note_190" href="#noteref_190">190.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Suetonius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Grammaticis</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_191" name="note_191" href="#noteref_191">191.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Leben des Sallust</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_192" name="note_192" href="#noteref_192">192.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Bankes, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Civil Hist. of Rome</span></span>, Vol. II.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_193" name="note_193" href="#noteref_193">193.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">The 
    authors of the Universal History suppose that these books were Phœnician
and Punic volumes, carried off from Carthage by Scipio, after its destruction, and
presented by him to Micipsa; and they give a curious account of these books, of
which some memory still subsists, and which they conjecture to have formed part
of the royal collection of Numidia.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_194" name="note_194" href="#noteref_194">194.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Senec. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> 114.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_195" name="note_195" href="#noteref_195">195.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">It is curious into what gross blunders the most learned and accurate writers occasionally
fall. Fabricius, speaking of these letters, says, <span class="tei tei-q">“Duæ orationes (sive
epistolæ potius) de Rep. ordinandâ ad Cæsarem missæ, cum in Hispanias proficisceretur
contra Petreium et Afranium, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">victo Cn. Pompeio</span></span>.”</span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bibliothec. Latin.</span></span> Lib.
I. c. 9.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_196" name="note_196" href="#noteref_196">196.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lectiones Subsecivæ</span></span>, Lib. I. c. 3. Lib. II. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_197" name="note_197" href="#noteref_197">197.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Asinius Pollio, however, as we learn from Suetonius, thought that the Commentaries
were drawn up with little care or accuracy, that the author was very credulous
as to the actions of others, and that he had very hastily written down what
regarded himself, with the intention, which he never accomplished, of afterwards
revising and correcting.—Sueton. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Cæsar.</span></span> c. 56.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_198" name="note_198" href="#noteref_198">198.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Bankes, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Civil Hist. of Rome</span></span>, Vol. II.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_199" name="note_199" href="#noteref_199">199.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Neque Druides habent, qui rebus divinis præsint; neque sacrificiis student.
Deorum numero eos solos ducunt, quos cernunt, et quorum opibus aperte juvantur—Solem,
et Vulcanum, et Lunam: reliquos ne famâ quidem acceperunt. Lib. VI.
c. 21.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_200" name="note_200" href="#noteref_200">200.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Deorum maximè Mercurium colunt, cui, certis diebus, humanis quoque hostiis,
litare fas habent. Herculem ac Martem concessis animalibus placant ... Lucos ac
nemora consecrant, deorumque nominibus appellant Secretum illud, quod solâ reverentia
vident. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Mor. Germ.</span></span> c. 9.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_201" name="note_201" href="#noteref_201">201.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Germ. Antiqua</span></span>, Lib. I. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_202" name="note_202" href="#noteref_202">202.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 72.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_203" name="note_203" href="#noteref_203">203.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">See Plutarch <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Cæsare</span></span>, where it is related that Cæsar wrote verses and
speeches, and read them to the pirates by whom he was taken prisoner, on his
return to Rome from Bithynia, where he had sought refuge from the power of Sylla.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_204" name="note_204" href="#noteref_204">204.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Critic. Ling. Lat.</span></span> p. 537.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_205" name="note_205" href="#noteref_205">205.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Attic.</span></span> Lib. XII. ep. 40.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_206" name="note_206" href="#noteref_206">206.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Middleton’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Life of Cicero</span></span>, Vol. II, p. 347, 2d ed.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_207" name="note_207" href="#noteref_207">207.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XVIII. c. 26.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_208" name="note_208" href="#noteref_208">208.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Sueton. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Cæsar.</span></span> c. 56.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_209" name="note_209" href="#noteref_209">209.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span> c. 72.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_210" name="note_210" href="#noteref_210">210.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Au. Gellius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 10.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_211" name="note_211" href="#noteref_211">211.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Charisius, Lib. I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_212" name="note_212" href="#noteref_212">212.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Au. Gellius, Lib VII, c. 9.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_213" name="note_213" href="#noteref_213">213.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Sueton. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Cæsar.</span></span> c. 56.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_214" name="note_214" href="#noteref_214">214.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_215" name="note_215" href="#noteref_215">215.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">See above, Vol. I. p. 204.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_216" name="note_216" href="#noteref_216">216.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">See also Blondellus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. du Calendrier Romain</span></span>. Paris, 1682, 4to; Bianchinus,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dissert. de Calendario et Cyclo Cæsaris</span></span>, Rom. 1703, folio; and Court de
Gebelin, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Monde Primit.</span></span> T. IV.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_217" name="note_217" href="#noteref_217">217.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Mihi non illud quidem accidit, ut Alexandrino atque Africano bello interessem;
quæ bella tamen ex parte nobis Cæsaris sermone sunt nota. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Bell. Gall.</span></span> Lib.
VIII.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_218" name="note_218" href="#noteref_218">218.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Imperfecta ab rebus gestis Alexandriæ confeci, usque ad exitum, non quidem
civilis dissensionis, cujus finem nullum videmus, sed vitæ Cæsaris. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Bell. Gall.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_219" name="note_219" href="#noteref_219">219.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Hist. Lat.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 13.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_220" name="note_220" href="#noteref_220">220.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Sueton. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Cæsar.</span></span> c. 72.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_221" name="note_221" href="#noteref_221">221.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Famil.</span></span> Lib. V. Ep. 12.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_222" name="note_222" href="#noteref_222">222.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. IV. Ep. 6.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_223" name="note_223" href="#noteref_223">223.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Ling. Lat.</span></span> Lib. IV.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_224" name="note_224" href="#noteref_224">224.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. VIII. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_225" name="note_225" href="#noteref_225">225.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Famil.</span></span> Lib. VI. Ep. 7.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_226" name="note_226" href="#noteref_226">226.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-q">“Duæ sunt artes,”</span> says Cicero, <span class="tei tei-q">“quæ possunt locare homines in amplissimo
gradu dignitatis: una imperatoris, altera oratoris boni: Ab hoc enim pacis ornamenta
retinentur; ab illo belli pericula repelluntur.”</span> <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Orat. pro Muræna</span></span>, c. 14.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_227" name="note_227" href="#noteref_227">227.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ratio ipsa in hanc sententiam ducit, ut existimem sapientiam sine eloquentia
parum prodesse civitatibus. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetoricorum</span></span>, Lib. I. c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_228" name="note_228" href="#noteref_228">228.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. II.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_229" name="note_229" href="#noteref_229">229.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 22.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_230" name="note_230" href="#noteref_230">230.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Orat.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 60.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_231" name="note_231" href="#noteref_231">231.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rhetoric. seu De Inventione</span></span>, Lib. I. c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_232" name="note_232" href="#noteref_232">232.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Tiber. Graccho</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_233" name="note_233" href="#noteref_233">233.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Tiber. Graccho</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_234" name="note_234" href="#noteref_234">234.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. X. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_235" name="note_235" href="#noteref_235">235.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Tib. Graccho</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_236" name="note_236" href="#noteref_236">236.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Orator.</span></span> Lib. III. c. 60. Plutarch and Cicero’s accounts of the eloquence
of C. Gracchus, seem not quite consistent with what is delivered on the subject by
Gellius.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_237" name="note_237" href="#noteref_237">237.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Funccius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Virili Ætate Lat. Ling.</span></span> c. 1. § 24.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_238" name="note_238" href="#noteref_238">238.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. IV. Od. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_239" name="note_239" href="#noteref_239">239.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, Lib. II. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_240" name="note_240" href="#noteref_240">240.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Valer. Maxim. Lib. VII. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_241" name="note_241" href="#noteref_241">241.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Valer. Maxim. Lib. III. c. 7; and Lib. VI. c. 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_242" name="note_242" href="#noteref_242">242.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, Lib. II. c. 28, 29, 48, 49.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_243" name="note_243" href="#noteref_243">243.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Id.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 47.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_244" name="note_244" href="#noteref_244">244.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Mario</span></span>. Valerius Maximus, Lib. VIII. c. 9.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_245" name="note_245" href="#noteref_245">245.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, Lib. III. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_246" name="note_246" href="#noteref_246">246.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Id.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 33.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_247" name="note_247" href="#noteref_247">247.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Orat.</span></span>. Lib. I. c. 26, 27.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_248" name="note_248" href="#noteref_248">248.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Orat.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_249" name="note_249" href="#noteref_249">249.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Sylla</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_250" name="note_250" href="#noteref_250">250.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, Lib. III. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_251" name="note_251" href="#noteref_251">251.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Sylla</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_252" name="note_252" href="#noteref_252">252.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, Lib. III. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_253" name="note_253" href="#noteref_253">253.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 89.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_254" name="note_254" href="#noteref_254">254.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 63.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_255" name="note_255" href="#noteref_255">255.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_256" name="note_256" href="#noteref_256">256.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, Lib. III. c. 61.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_257" name="note_257" href="#noteref_257">257.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 89.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_258" name="note_258" href="#noteref_258">258.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_259" name="note_259" href="#noteref_259">259.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_260" name="note_260" href="#noteref_260">260.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plin. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XVII. c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_261" name="note_261" href="#noteref_261">261.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. Lib. XXXIII. c. 11.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_262" name="note_262" href="#noteref_262">262.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Nardini, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Roma Antica</span></span>, Lib. VI. c. 15.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_263" name="note_263" href="#noteref_263">263.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Sueton. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Augusto</span></span>, c. 72.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_264" name="note_264" href="#noteref_264">264.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Varro, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Re Rustica</span></span>, Lib. III. c. 6.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_265" name="note_265" href="#noteref_265">265.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Macrobius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Saturnalia</span></span>, Lib. III. c. 13.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_266" name="note_266" href="#noteref_266">266.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plin. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XIV. c. 14.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_267" name="note_267" href="#noteref_267">267.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. Lib. XXV. c. 11.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_268" name="note_268" href="#noteref_268">268.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Varro, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Re Rustica</span></span>, Lib. III. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_269" name="note_269" href="#noteref_269">269.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. Lib. III. c. 17.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_270" name="note_270" href="#noteref_270">270.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_271" name="note_271" href="#noteref_271">271.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plin. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. IX. c. 55.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_272" name="note_272" href="#noteref_272">272.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicer. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academica</span></span>, Lib. II. c. 25, 31, 33.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_273" name="note_273" href="#noteref_273">273.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Bonstetten, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Voyage dans le Latium</span></span>, p. 152–160. Nibby, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Viaggio Antiquario
ne contorni di Roma</span></span>, T. II.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_274" name="note_274" href="#noteref_274">274.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Varro, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Re Rustica</span></span>, Lib. III. c. 13.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_275" name="note_275" href="#noteref_275">275.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 95.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_276" name="note_276" href="#noteref_276">276.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Varro, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Re Rustica</span></span>. Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Attic.</span></span> Lib. V. Ep. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_277" name="note_277" href="#noteref_277">277.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Seren. Samonicus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Medicina</span></span>, c. 15.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_278" name="note_278" href="#noteref_278">278.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Familiares</span></span>, Lib. VIII. Ep. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_279" name="note_279" href="#noteref_279">279.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><a name="corr128a" id="corr128a" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-hi"><span class="tei tei-corr"><span style="font-style: italic">Dio</span></span><span style="font-style: italic"> Cassius</span></span>, Lib. XXXIX.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_280" name="note_280" href="#noteref_280">280.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Quint. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Inst. Orat.</span></span> Lib. XI. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_281" name="note_281" href="#noteref_281">281.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Atticum</span></span>, Lib. III. Ep. 9, &amp;c.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_282" name="note_282" href="#noteref_282">282.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">As a proof of his astonishing memory, it is recorded by Seneca, that, for a trial
of his powers of recollection, he remained a whole day at a public auction, and
when it was concluded, he repeated in order what had been sold, to whom, and at
what price. His recital was compared with the clerk’s account, and his memory
was found to have served him faithfully in every particular. Senec. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Præf.</span></span> Lib. I.
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Controv.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_283" name="note_283" href="#noteref_283">283.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Aulus Gellius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 5.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_284" name="note_284" href="#noteref_284">284.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Valerius Maximus, Lib. VIII. c. 10.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_285" name="note_285" href="#noteref_285">285.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_286" name="note_286" href="#noteref_286">286.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Macrobius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Saturnalia</span></span>, Lib. III. c. 13.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_287" name="note_287" href="#noteref_287">287.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_288" name="note_288" href="#noteref_288">288.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Meiners, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Decadence des Mœurs chez les Romains</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_289" name="note_289" href="#noteref_289">289.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><a name="notep130" id="notep130" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>Hortensius was first married to a daughter of Q. Catulus, the orator, who is one
of the speakers in the Dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>. (Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, Lib. III. c.
61.) He afterwards asked, and obtained from Cato, his wife Marcia; who, having
succeeded to a great part of the wealth of Hortensius on his death, was then taken
back by her former husband. (Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Catone</span></span>.) By his first wife, Hortensius
had a son and daughter. In his son Quintus, he was not more fortunate than his
rival, Cicero, in his son Marcus. Cicero, while Proconsul of Cilicia, mentions, in
one of his letters, the ruffian and scandalous appearance made by the younger Hortensius
at Laodicea, during the shows of gladiators.—<span class="tei tei-q">“I invited him once to supper,”</span>
says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“on his father’s account; and, on the same account, only once.”</span>
(<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Ad Attic.</span></span> Lib. VI. Ep. 3.) Such, indeed, was his unworthy conduct, that
his father at this time entertained thoughts of disinheriting him, and making his
nephew, Messala, his heir; but in this intention he did not persevere. (Valer.
Maxim. Lib. V. c. 9.) After his father’s death, he joined the party of Cæsar, (Cicero,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Ad Att.</span></span> Lib. X. Ep. 16, 17, 18,) by whom he was appointed Proconsul of
Macedonia; in which situation he espoused the side of the conspirators, subsequently
to the assassination of Cæsar. (Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Philip.</span></span> X. c. 5 and 6.) By order
of Brutus, he slew Caius Antonius, brother to the Triumvir, who had fallen into his
hands; and, being afterwards taken prisoner at the battle of Philippi, he was slain
by Marc Antony, by way of reprisal, on the tomb of his brother. (Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In M.
Bruto</span></span>.)
<br />
Hortensia, the daughter, inherited something of the spirit and eloquence of her
father. A severe tribute having been imposed on the Roman matrons by the Triumvirs,
Antony, Octavius, and Lepidus, she boldly pleaded their cause before these
noted extortioners, and obtained some alleviation of the impost. (Valer. Maxim.
Lib. VIII. c. 3.)
<br />
Quintus, the son of the orator, left two children, Q. Hortensius Corbio, and M.
Hortensius Hortalus. The former of these was a monster of debauchery; and is
mentioned by his contemporary, Valerius Maximus, among the most striking examples
of those descendants who have degenerated from the honour of their ancestors. (Lib. III. c. 5.) This wretch, not being likely to become a father, and the
wealth of the family having been partly settled on the wife of Cato, partly dissipated
by extravagance, and partly confiscated in the civil wars, Augustus Cæsar, who was
a great promoter of matrimony, gave Hortensius Hortalus a pecuniary allowance to
enable him to marry, in order that so illustrious a family might not become extinct.
He and his children, however, fell into want during the reign of his benefactor’s
successor. Tacitus has painted, with his usual power of striking delineation, that
humiliating scene, in which he appeared, with his four children, to beg relief from
the Senate; and the historian has also recorded the hard answer which he received
from the unrelenting Tiberius. Perceiving, however, that his severity was disliked
by the Senate, the Emperor said, that, if they desired it, he would give a certain
sum to each of Hortalus’s male children. They returned thanks; but Hortalus, either
from terror or dignity of mind, said not a word; and, from this time, Tiberius
showing him no favour, his family sunk into the most abject poverty: (Tacit. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Annal.</span></span>
Lib. II. c. 37 and 38.) And such were the descendants of the orator with the
park, the plantations, the ponds, and the pictures!</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_290" name="note_290" href="#noteref_290">290.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Catull. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Carm.</span></span> 53.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_291" name="note_291" href="#noteref_291">291.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Pliny, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> Lib. I. ep. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_292" name="note_292" href="#noteref_292">292.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 80.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_293" name="note_293" href="#noteref_293">293.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_294" name="note_294" href="#noteref_294">294.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">According to some authorities it was a short while before, and according to
others a short while after, the expulsion of Tarquin.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_295" name="note_295" href="#noteref_295">295.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-q">“Exactis deinde regibus leges hæ exoleverunt; iterumque cœpit populus Romanus
incerto magis jure et consuetudine ali, quam per latam legem.”</span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Pompon. Lætus</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Leg.</span></span> II. § 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_296" name="note_296" href="#noteref_296">296.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Gibbon, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire</span></span>, c. 44.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_297" name="note_297" href="#noteref_297">297.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>, Lib. II. c. 23. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, Lib. I, c. 42.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_298" name="note_298" href="#noteref_298">298.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-q">“Decem tabularum leges,”</span> says Livy, <span class="tei tei-q">“nunc quoque, in hoc immenso aliarum
super aliis acervatarum legum cumulo, fons omnis publici privatique est
juris.”</span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_299" name="note_299" href="#noteref_299">299.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, Lib. II. c. 33.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_300" name="note_300" href="#noteref_300">300.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Saint Prix, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. du Droit Romain</span></span>, p. 23. Ed. Paris, 1821.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_301" name="note_301" href="#noteref_301">301.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire</span></span>, c. 44.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_302" name="note_302" href="#noteref_302">302.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Orat.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 57.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_303" name="note_303" href="#noteref_303">303.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. Lib. I. c. 58.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_304" name="note_304" href="#noteref_304">304.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">It must be admitted, however, that Cicero, in other passages of his works, has
given the study of civil law high encomiums, particularly in the following beautiful
passage delivered in the person of Crassus: <span class="tei tei-q">“Senectuti vero celebrandæ et ornandæ
quid honestius potest esse perfugium, quàm juris interpretatio? Equidem mihi hoc
subsidium jam inde ab adolescentiâ comparavi, non solum ad causarum usum forensem,
sed etiam ad decus atque ornamentum senectutis; ut cùm me vires (quod
fere jam tempus adventat) deficere <a name="corr139" id="corr139" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">cœpissent</span>, ab solitudine domum meam vindicarem.”</span>
(<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, Lib. I. c. 45.) Schultingius, the celebrated civilian, in his
dissertation <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Jurisprudentia Ciceronis</span></span>, tries to prove, from various passages in his
orations and rhetorical writings, that Cicero was well versed in the most profound
and nice questions of Roman jurisprudence, and that he was well skilled in international
law, as Grotius has borrowed from him many of his principles and illustrations,
in his treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Jure Belli et Pacis</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_305" name="note_305" href="#noteref_305">305.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, Lib. I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_306" name="note_306" href="#noteref_306">306.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ibid.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 49.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_307" name="note_307" href="#noteref_307">307.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-q">“An non pudeat, certam creditam pecuniam periodis postulare, aut circa stillicidia
affici?”</span>—Quint. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Inst. Orat.</span></span> Lib. VIII. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_308" name="note_308" href="#noteref_308">308.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Polletus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Historia Fori Romani, ap. Supplement. ad Graevii et Gronov. antiquitat.</span></span>
T. I. p. 351.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_309" name="note_309" href="#noteref_309">309.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Verrem</span></span>, Act. I. c. 14.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_310" name="note_310" href="#noteref_310">310.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Nardini, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Roma Antica</span></span>, Lib. V. c. 2, &amp;c.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_311" name="note_311" href="#noteref_311">311.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Virg. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Æneid.</span></span> Lib. VII.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_312" name="note_312" href="#noteref_312">312.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-q">“Parvis de rebus,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“sed fortasse necessariis consulimur, Patres conscripti. De Appiâ viâ et de monetâ Consul—De Lupercis tribunus plebis refert.
Quarum rerum etsi facilis explicatio videtur, tamen animus aberrat a sententiâ, suspensus
curis majoribus.”</span>—C. I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_313" name="note_313" href="#noteref_313">313.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Orator</span></span>, c. 30.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_314" name="note_314" href="#noteref_314">314.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Orator</span></span>, c. 30. spe et expectatione laudati.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_315" name="note_315" href="#noteref_315">315.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Officiis</span></span>, Lib. II. c. 14.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_316" name="note_316" href="#noteref_316">316.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 91.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_317" name="note_317" href="#noteref_317">317.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cæcilius was <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a Jew</span></span>, who had been domiciled in Sicily; whence Cicero, playing
on the name of Verres, asks, <span class="tei tei-q">“Quid Judæo cum <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Verre</span></span>?”</span> (a boar.)</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_318" name="note_318" href="#noteref_318">318.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">He ultimately, however, met with a well-merited and appropriate fate. Having
refused to give up his Corinthian vases to Marc Antony, he was proscribed for their
sake, and put to death by the rapacious Triumvir.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_319" name="note_319" href="#noteref_319">319.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Livy, Lib. XXV. c. 40.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_320" name="note_320" href="#noteref_320">320.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Gillies, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">History of Greece</span></span>, Part II. T. IV. c. 27.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_321" name="note_321" href="#noteref_321">321.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lectures on Rhetoric</span></span>, &amp;c. Vol. II. Lect. XXVIII.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_322" name="note_322" href="#noteref_322">322.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. II. Ep. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_323" name="note_323" href="#noteref_323">323.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Wolf, in the preface to his edition of the Oration for Marcellus, mentions having
seen a scholastic declamation, entitled, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Oratio Catilinæ, in M. Ciceronem</span></span>. It
concludes thus,—<span class="tei tei-q">“Me consularem patricium, civem et amicum reipublicæ a faucibus
inimici consulis eripite; supplicem atque insontem pristinæ claritudini, omnium
civium gratiæ, et benevolentiæ vestræ restitute. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Amen.</span></span>”</span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_324" name="note_324" href="#noteref_324">324.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Funccius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Viril. Ætat. Ling. Lat.</span></span> Pars II. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_325" name="note_325" href="#noteref_325">325.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Aonius Palearius wrote a declamation in answer to this speech, entitled, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Contra
Murænam</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_326" name="note_326" href="#noteref_326">326.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Origin and Progress of Language</span></span>, Book IV.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_327" name="note_327" href="#noteref_327">327.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Correspondence</span></span>, p. 85.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_328" name="note_328" href="#noteref_328">328.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Jenisch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Parallel der beiden grösten Redner des Althertum</span></span>, p. 124, ed. Berlin,
1821.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_329" name="note_329" href="#noteref_329">329.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Cicero.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_330" name="note_330" href="#noteref_330">330.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Philip.</span></span> VI. c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_331" name="note_331" href="#noteref_331">331.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Juvenal, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Satir.</span></span> X. v. 118.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_332" name="note_332" href="#noteref_332">332.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Quintil. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Inst. Orat.</span></span> Lib. V.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_333" name="note_333" href="#noteref_333">333.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Orator</span></span>, c. 67, 70.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_334" name="note_334" href="#noteref_334">334.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. VII. c. 30.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_335" name="note_335" href="#noteref_335">335.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Cicer.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_336" name="note_336" href="#noteref_336">336.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Macrobius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Saturnal.</span></span> Lib. III. c. 14.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_337" name="note_337" href="#noteref_337">337.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 7.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_338" name="note_338" href="#noteref_338">338.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dio Cassius</span></span>, XXXIX. c. 9.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_339" name="note_339" href="#noteref_339">339.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Attic.</span></span> Lib. IV. Ep. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_340" name="note_340" href="#noteref_340">340.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Attic.</span></span> Lib. IV. Ep. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_341" name="note_341" href="#noteref_341">341.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">See Nichol’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Literary Anecdotes</span></span>. Harles, also, seems to suppose that Bishop
Ross was in earnest:—<span class="tei tei-q">“Orationem pro Sulla spuriam esse audacter pronunciavit
vir quidam doctus in—A Dissertation, in which the defence of P. Sulla, &amp;c. is proved
to be spurious.”</span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Harles</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Introduct. in Notitiam Literat. Rom.</span></span> Tom. II. p. 153.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_342" name="note_342" href="#noteref_342">342.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bib. Lat.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_343" name="note_343" href="#noteref_343">343.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. IV. Ep. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_344" name="note_344" href="#noteref_344">344.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-q">“Cum Appendice De Oratione, quæ vulgo fertur, M. T. Ciceronis pro Q. Ligario,”</span>
in which the author attempts to abjudicate from Cicero the beautiful oration for
Ligarius, which shook even the soul of Cæsar, while he has translated into his own
language the two wretched orations, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Post Reditum</span></span>, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ad Quirites</span></span>, insisting on
the legitimacy of both, and enlarging on their truly classical beauties! In his Preface,
he has pleasantly enough parodied the arguments of Wolf against the oration
for Marcellus, ironically showing that they came not from that great scholar, but
from a <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">pseudo</span></span> Wolf, who had assumed his name.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_345" name="note_345" href="#noteref_345">345.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Paral. der Beyden Grösten Redner des Altherthums</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_346" name="note_346" href="#noteref_346">346.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 12, &amp;c.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_347" name="note_347" href="#noteref_347">347.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Famil.</span></span> Lib. I. Ep. 9.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_348" name="note_348" href="#noteref_348">348.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Attic.</span></span> Lib. XII. Ep. 5, &amp;c.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_349" name="note_349" href="#noteref_349">349.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Famil.</span></span> Lib. VI. Ep. 18.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_350" name="note_350" href="#noteref_350">350.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ibid.</span></span> Lib. VII. Ep. 19.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_351" name="note_351" href="#noteref_351">351.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Inst. Orat.</span></span> Lib. XII. c. 10.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_352" name="note_352" href="#noteref_352">352.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Brutus</span></span>, c. 91. Is dedit operam (si modo id consequi potuit) ut nimis redundantes
nos juvenili quâdam dicendi impunitate et licentiâ reprimeret; et quasi extra
ripas diffluentes coerceret.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_353" name="note_353" href="#noteref_353">353.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Observat. Critic. in Sophoc. et Ciceron.</span></span> Lips. 1802.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_354" name="note_354" href="#noteref_354">354.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Fuhrmann, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Handbuch der Classisch. Literat.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_355" name="note_355" href="#noteref_355">355.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Nat. et Const. Rhetor.</span></span> c. 13.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_356" name="note_356" href="#noteref_356">356.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dissert. Utrum ars Rhetorica ad Herennium Ciceroni falsò inscribitur</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_357" name="note_357" href="#noteref_357">357.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Re Poet.</span></span> Lib. III. c. 31. and 34.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_358" name="note_358" href="#noteref_358">358.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">See P. Burmanni Secund. 
        <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In </span><a name="corr204" id="corr204" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr"><span style="font-style: italic">Præf.</span></span><span style="font-style: italic"> ad Rhetoric. ad Herennium.</span></span> Also Fabricius,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bib. Lat.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_359" name="note_359" href="#noteref_359">359.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Paradise Regained</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_360" name="note_360" href="#noteref_360">360.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Orat.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 10. Ab illo fonte et capite Socrate.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_361" name="note_361" href="#noteref_361">361.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academ.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 5.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_362" name="note_362" href="#noteref_362">362.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Natur. Deor.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 43.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_363" name="note_363" href="#noteref_363">363.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Pliny, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XXXV. c. 11.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_364" name="note_364" href="#noteref_364">364.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mem. de l’Instit. Royale</span></span>, Tom. XXX.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_365" name="note_365" href="#noteref_365">365.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero styles him Princeps Stoicorum, (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Divin.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 47,) and eruditissimum
hominem, et pæne divinum (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pro Muræna</span></span>, c. 31.)</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_366" name="note_366" href="#noteref_366">366.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Censuerunt ut M. Pomponius Prætor animadverteret <span class="tei tei-sic">uti e</span> republicâ fideque
suâ videretur Romæ ne essent. (Au. Gellius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. XV. c. 11.)</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_367" name="note_367" href="#noteref_367">367.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ælian, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Histor. Var.</span></span> Lib. III. c. 17.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_368" name="note_368" href="#noteref_368">368.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Catone</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_369" name="note_369" href="#noteref_369">369.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Au. Gellius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. VII. c. 14.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_370" name="note_370" href="#noteref_370">370.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Oratore</span></span>, Lib. III. c. 18.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_371" name="note_371" href="#noteref_371">371.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ibid.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 38.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_372" name="note_372" href="#noteref_372">372.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Hæc in philosophiâ ratio contra omnia disserendi, nullamque rem aperte judicandi,
profecta a Socrate, repetita ab Arcesilao, confirmata a Carneade, usque ad
nostram viguit ætatem. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Nat. Deor.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 5.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_373" name="note_373" href="#noteref_373">373.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academ. Prior.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 48.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_374" name="note_374" href="#noteref_374">374.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Valer. Max. Lib. VIII. c. 7.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_375" name="note_375" href="#noteref_375">375.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academ. Prior.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 31.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_376" name="note_376" href="#noteref_376">376.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Quintil. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Inst. Orat.</span></span> Lib. XII. c. 1. Lactant. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Instit.</span></span> Lib. V. c. 14.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_377" name="note_377" href="#noteref_377">377.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Catone</span></span>. Plin. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. VII. c. 30.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_378" name="note_378" href="#noteref_378">378.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Divin. Institut.</span></span> Lib. V. c. 16.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_379" name="note_379" href="#noteref_379">379.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Fortitud. Alexandri</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_380" name="note_380" href="#noteref_380">380.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Diog. Laert. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Clitomacho</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_381" name="note_381" href="#noteref_381">381.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academic. Prior.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 32.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_382" name="note_382" href="#noteref_382">382.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academic. Prior.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 32.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_383" name="note_383" href="#noteref_383">383.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Mater, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ecole d’Alexandrie</span></span>, Tom. II. p. 131.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_384" name="note_384" href="#noteref_384">384.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Dans la Grèce, aprés ces épreuves, commençoit enfin la vie champêtre dans les
jardins du Lycée ou de l’Academie, où l’on entreprenoit un cours de philosophie,
que les véritables amateurs avoient l’art singulier de ne jamais finir. Ils restoient
toute leur vie attachés à quelque chef de secte comme Metrodore à Epicure, moudroient
dans les écoles, et étoient ensuite enterrés à l’ombre de ces mêmes arbustes,
sous lesquels ils avoient tant médité. (De Pauw, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Recherches Philosophiques sur
les Grecs</span></span>, T. II.)</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_385" name="note_385" href="#noteref_385">385.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academ. Prior.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 4.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_386" name="note_386" href="#noteref_386">386.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Familiares</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_387" name="note_387" href="#noteref_387">387.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Garve, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Anmerk. zu Büchern von den Pflichten</span></span>. Breslau, 1819. Schoell, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist.
Abregée de la Litterat. Romaine</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_388" name="note_388" href="#noteref_388">388.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">P. XII.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_389" name="note_389" href="#noteref_389">389.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ciceron. Opera</span></span>, Tom. XIII. p. 15.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_390" name="note_390" href="#noteref_390">390.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Attic.</span></span> Lib. XII. 
    Ep. 52.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_391" name="note_391" href="#noteref_391">391.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> Lib. XIII. Ep. 21.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_392" name="note_392" href="#noteref_392">392.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dialog. Hipparchus</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_393" name="note_393" href="#noteref_393">393.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Black’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Life of Tasso</span></span>, Vol. II.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_394" name="note_394" href="#noteref_394">394.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Hulsemann, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Uber die Principien und den Geist der Gesetze</span></span>. Leipsic, 1802.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_395" name="note_395" href="#noteref_395">395.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Quæque de optimâ republicâ sentiremus, in sex libris ante diximus; accommodabimus
hoc tempore leges ad illum, quem probamus civitatûs statum. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legib.</span></span>
Lib. III. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_396" name="note_396" href="#noteref_396">396.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Quint. Frat.</span></span> Lib. II. Ep. 14. Lib. III. Ep. 5 and 6.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_397" name="note_397" href="#noteref_397">397.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legib.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 17.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_398" name="note_398" href="#noteref_398">398.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ibid.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 20.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_399" name="note_399" href="#noteref_399">399.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Hominis Amicissimi, Cn. Pompeii, laudes illustrabit. Lib. I. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_400" name="note_400" href="#noteref_400">400.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>, Lib. II. c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_401" name="note_401" href="#noteref_401">401.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ibid.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 5.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_402" name="note_402" href="#noteref_402">402.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Excursion from Rome to Arpino</span></span>, p. 89. Ed. Geneva, 1820.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_403" name="note_403" href="#noteref_403">403.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plin. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XXXI. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_404" name="note_404" href="#noteref_404">404.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-q">“Cæruleus nos Liris amat.”</span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Martial</span></span>, Lib. XIII. Ep. 83. See also Lucan,
Lib. II.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_405" name="note_405" href="#noteref_405">405.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>, Lib. II. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_406" name="note_406" href="#noteref_406">406.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Kelsall, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Excursion</span></span>, p. 116.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_407" name="note_407" href="#noteref_407">407.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Legibus</span></span>, Lib. II. c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_408" name="note_408" href="#noteref_408">408.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Attic.</span></span> Lib. XII. Ep. 12.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_409" name="note_409" href="#noteref_409">409.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Classic Tour through Italy</span></span>, by Sir R. C. Hoare, Vol. I. p. 293.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_410" name="note_410" href="#noteref_410">410.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Classical Tour</span></span>, Vol. II. c. 9.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_411" name="note_411" href="#noteref_411">411.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Classical Excursion from Rome to Arpino</span></span>, p. 99. Cicero always considered
the citizens of Arpinum as under his particular protection and patronage; and it is
pleasant to find, that its modern inhabitants still testify, in various ways, due veneration
for their illustrious townsman. Their theatre is called the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Teatro Tulliano</span></span>,
of which the drop-scene is painted with a bust of the orator; and even now, workmen
are employed in building a new town-hall, with niches, destined to receive
statues of Marius and Cicero.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_412" name="note_412" href="#noteref_412">412.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Macrob. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Saturnal.</span></span> Lib. VI. c. 4.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_413" name="note_413" href="#noteref_413">413.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Saturnal.</span></span> Lib. VI. c. 4.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_414" name="note_414" href="#noteref_414">414.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Diogenes Laertius</span></span>, Lib. VII.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_415" name="note_415" href="#noteref_415">415.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Diog. Laert.</span></span> Lib. VII.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_416" name="note_416" href="#noteref_416">416.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plin. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XXXI. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_417" name="note_417" href="#noteref_417">417.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Academ. Prior.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 33.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_418" name="note_418" href="#noteref_418">418.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Famil.</span></span> Lib. IX. Ep. 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_419" name="note_419" href="#noteref_419">419.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Et ut nos nunc sedemus ad Lucrinum, pisciculosque exsultantes videmus. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
propriet. Serm.</span></span> c. 1. 335. voc. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">exsultare</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_420" name="note_420" href="#noteref_420">420.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Dedicat. ad Prælect. in Cic. Acad.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_421" name="note_421" href="#noteref_421">421.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Introduct. in Academic.</span></span> Ed. Lips. 1810.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_422" name="note_422" href="#noteref_422">422.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Nec esse, nec dici posse novum opus, ac penitus mutatum; sed tantummodo
correctum, magis politum, et quoad formam et dictionem, hîc et illic, splendidius
mutatum. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Lib. Cic. Academ. Comment.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_423" name="note_423" href="#noteref_423">423.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Classical Tour</span></span>, Vol. II. c. 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_424" name="note_424" href="#noteref_424">424.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rome in the Nineteenth Century</span></span>, Vol. III. Let. 93.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_425" name="note_425" href="#noteref_425">425.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Finibus</span></span>, Lib. III. and IV. Kelsall, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Excursion from Rome to Arpino</span></span>, p.
193.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_426" name="note_426" href="#noteref_426">426.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Attic.</span></span> Lib. I. Ep. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_427" name="note_427" href="#noteref_427">427.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Middleton’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Life of Cicero</span></span>, Vol. I. p. 142.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_428" name="note_428" href="#noteref_428">428.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Blainville’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Travels</span></span>, Vol. II.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_429" name="note_429" href="#noteref_429">429.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Eustace, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Classical Tour</span></span>, Vol. II. c. 8. Grotta Ferrata was long considered both
by travellers (Addison, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Letters on Italy</span></span>, Blainville, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Travels</span></span>, &amp;c.) and antiquarians
(Calmet, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Univers.</span></span> Cluverius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Italic. Antiq.</span></span>) as the site of Cicero’s Tusculan
villa. The opinion thus generally received, was first deliberately called in question
by Zuzzeri, in a dissertation published in 1746, entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Sopra un’ antica Villa
scoperta sopra Frescati nell appartenenze della nuova villa dell collegio Romano</span></span>.
This writer places the site close to the villa and convent of Ruffinella, which is
higher up the hill than Grotta Ferrata, lying between Frescati and the town of Tusculum.
He was answered by Cardoni, a monk of the Basilian order of Grotta Ferrata,
in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Disceptatio Apologetica de Tusculano Ciceronis</span></span>, Romæ, 1757. Cardoni
chiefly rests his argument on a passage of Strabo, where that geographer says,
that the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Tusculan hill</span></span> is fertile, well watered, and surrounded with beautiful villas.
Now Cardoni, referring this passage (which applies to the Tusculan hill in general)
solely to the Tusculan villa, argues somewhat unfairly, that Strabo’s description answers
to Grotta Ferrata, but not to Ruffinella. (p. 8, &amp;c.) Nibby in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Viaggio
Antiquario</span></span>, supports the claims of Ruffinella, on the authority of a passage in Frontinus,
which he interprets with no greater candour or success. (T. II. p. 41.) With
exception of Eustace, however, all modern travellers, whose works I have consulted,
declare in favour of Ruffinella. <span class="tei tei-q">“At the convent of Ruffinella, says Forsyth, farther
up the hill than Grotta Ferrata, his (Cicero’s) name was found stamped on some
ancient tiles, which should ascertain the situation of a villa in preference to any
moveable.”</span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Remarks on Italy</span></span>, p. 281. See also <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rome in the Nineteenth Century</span></span>,
Vol. III. Letter 92, and Kelsall’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Classical Excursion</span></span>, p. 192.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_430" name="note_430" href="#noteref_430">430.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Alex. ab Alexandro, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dies Geniales</span></span>, Lib. I. c. 23. Rossmini, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vita di Filelfo</span></span>,
T. III. p. 59. Ed. Milan, 1808, 3 Tom. 8vo.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_431" name="note_431" href="#noteref_431">431.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Tusc. Disp.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 3. Lib. III. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_432" name="note_432" href="#noteref_432">432.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Juvenal, I think, had probably this passage of the Tusculan Disputations in
view, in the noble and pathetic lines of his tenth Satire—
<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“Provida Pompeio dederat Campania febres,”</span> &amp;c.</div>
</div></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_433" name="note_433" href="#noteref_433">433.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Some of the advantages and disadvantages of the method of writing in dialogue,
are stated by Mr. Hume, in the introduction to his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dialogues concerning
Natural Religion</span></span>, (London, 1779, 8vo,) a work apparently modelled on Cicero’s
Nature of the Gods.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_434" name="note_434" href="#noteref_434">434.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">In the English extracts from Cicero <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Nat. Deor.</span></span> I have availed myself of
a very good but anonymous translation, printed Lond. 1741, 8vo.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_435" name="note_435" href="#noteref_435">435.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">In the Herculanensia, (p. 22,) Sir William Drummond contends, at considerable
length, that a work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">On Piety according to Epicurus</span></span>, (<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">Περι Ευσεβεῖας κατ’ Επικουρον</span></span>,) of which a fragment has been discovered at Herculaneum, was the prototype
of a considerable part of the discourse of Velleius. The reader will find a
version of the passages in which a resemblance appears, in the Quarterly Review,
(No. V.) where it is also remarked, <span class="tei tei-q">“that Sir William seems to us to have failed
altogether in rendering it probable that Cicero had ever seen this important fragment,
the passages in which there is any resemblance, relating, without exception,
to what each author is reporting of the doctrines of certain older philosophers, as
expressed in their works; and the reports are not by any means so precisely similar
as to induce us to suppose that Cicero had even taken the very justifiable liberty of
saving himself some little trouble, by making use of another author’s abstract, from
Chrysippus, and from Diogenes the Babylonian.”</span> Schütz, the German editor of
Cicero, enumerates some works, which he thinks Cicero had read, and others,
which he seems to have known merely from summaries and abridgments. The
following is his conjecture with regard to the writings of Epicurus:—<span class="tei tei-q">“Epicuri
denique <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">κυριας δοξας</span></span>,
    ejus <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">κανονα</span></span> seu libros, de Judicio, item
    <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">περι φυσεως</span></span> et 
    <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">περι ὁσιοτητος</span></span>, non ex aliorum tantum testimoniis, sed ex suâ ipsius lectione ei notos
fuisse, facile, tot locis ubi de eo agitur inter se collatis, intelligitur.”</span> (Cicer. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Opera</span></span>,
Tom. XV. p. 27.) Perhaps the treatise, <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">περι Ὁσιοτητος</span></span>, was a similar work to
that, <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-family: Gentium, 'New Athena Unicode', 'DejaVu Serif', 'Lucida Grande', 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Palatino Linotype', serif">Περι Ευσεβεῖας</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_436" name="note_436" href="#noteref_436">436.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">In his Dialogues on Natural Religion, Mr. Hume puts two very good remarks
into the mouth of one of his characters. Speaking of Cicero’s argument for a Deity,
deduced from the grandeur and magnificence of nature, he observes, <span class="tei tei-q">“If this argument,
I say, had any force in former ages, how much greater must it have at present,
when the bounds of nature are so infinitely enlarged, and such a magnificent scene is
opened to us!”</span> P. 103.—Again, in mentioning that the infidelity of Galen was
cured by the study of anatomy, (which was much more extended by him than it had
been in the days of Cicero,) he says, <span class="tei tei-q">“And if the infidelity of Galen, even when
these natural sciences were still imperfect, could not withstand such striking appearances,
to what pitch of pertinacious obstinacy must a <a name="corr246" id="corr246" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">philosopher</span> in this age have
attained, who can now doubt of a Supreme Intelligence!”</span> P. 23.—See also Lactantius,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Opificio Dei</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_437" name="note_437" href="#noteref_437">437.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">There was published, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bononiæ</span></span>, 1811, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">M. T. Ciceronis de Naturâ Deorum
Liber Quartus: e pervetusto Codice MS. Membranaceo nunc primum edidit P.
Seraphinus Ord. Fr. Min.</span></span>—This tract was republished, (Oxonii, 1813,) by Mr.
Lunn, who says in a prefatory note, that <span class="tei tei-q">“he entertains no doubt, from the opinion
of several of his friends, of this production being a literary forgery.”</span> Of this, indeed,
there can be no doubt, as appears among various other proofs, from the minute
account of the Jews.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Sed etiam plures adhibere deos vel divos, a quibus ipsi
regantur, quos nomine Elohim designare soleant, secundi ordinis,”</span> &amp;c. (p. 12.)—There
is some humour in the manner in which the Italian editor, in a preface written
in the rude style of a simple friar, obtests that the work is not a forgery.—<span class="tei tei-q">“Sed ne
quis existimet, me ipsum fecisse hunc librum, testor, detestor, obtestor, et contestor,
per S. Franciscum Assissium, me talem facere non posse, qui sacris incumbere
cogor, nec profanis possum,”</span> &amp;c.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_438" name="note_438" href="#noteref_438">438.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">C. 29.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_439" name="note_439" href="#noteref_439">439.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">C. 7.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_440" name="note_440" href="#noteref_440">440.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Multis etiam sensi mirabile videri, eam nobis potissimum probatam esse philosophiam,
quæ lucem eriperet, et quasi noctem quandam rebus offunderet, desertæque
disciplinæ et jampridem relictæ patrocinium nec opinatum a nobis esse susceptum.—(<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
Nat. Deor.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 3.)</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_441" name="note_441" href="#noteref_441">441.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Warburton, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Divine Legation</span></span>, Vol. II. p. 168. Ed. 1755. Warburton here
alludes to Bentley—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Remarks on a late Discourse of Free-thinking</span></span>, Part II.
Rem. 53.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_442" name="note_442" href="#noteref_442">442.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bolingbroke’s Works</span></span>, Vol. VIII. p. 81. ed. 8vo.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_443" name="note_443" href="#noteref_443">443.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. p. 266, 278.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_444" name="note_444" href="#noteref_444">444.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Fuerint qui judicarent oportere statui per Senatum ut aboleantur hæc scripta,
quibus religio Christiana comprobetur, et vetustatis opprimatur auctoritas.—Arnobius,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Adversus Gentes</span></span>, Lib. III.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_445" name="note_445" href="#noteref_445">445.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">In the preface to the second book of this treatise, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Divinatione</span></span>, Cicero,
enumerating his late philosophical compositions, says, <span class="tei tei-q">“Quibus libris editis, tres
libri perfecti sunt <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Naturâ Deorum</span></span> * * quæ ut plene essent cumulateque perfecta,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Divinatione</span></span> ingressi sumus his libris <a name="corr253a" id="corr253a" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">scribere.</span>”</span>—(<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Div.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 1.)</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_446" name="note_446" href="#noteref_446">446.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Hoc sum contentus; quod, etiamsi, quomodo quidque fiat, ignorem, quid fiat,
intelligo.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_447" name="note_447" href="#noteref_447">447.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">C. 38.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_448" name="note_448" href="#noteref_448">448.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">C. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_449" name="note_449" href="#noteref_449">449.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cowley.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_450" name="note_450" href="#noteref_450">450.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plin. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. XXXI. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_451" name="note_451" href="#noteref_451">451.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">At least so says Middleton, (Vol. III. p. 297,) and he quotes as his authority
Spartian’s Life of Hadrian, (c. 25.) Spartian, however, only tells, that he was <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">buried</span></span>
at Cicero’s villa of Puteoli—<span class="tei tei-q">“Apud ipsas Bajas periit, invisusque omnibus sepultus
est in villâ Ciceronianâ Puteolis.”</span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_452" name="note_452" href="#noteref_452">452.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Classical Tour</span></span>, Vol. II. c. 11.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_453" name="note_453" href="#noteref_453">453.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Philosophische Anmerkungen zu Cicero’s Büchern von den Pflichten</span></span>,
Breslau, 1819.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_454" name="note_454" href="#noteref_454">454.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. I. c. 39.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_455" name="note_455" href="#noteref_455">455.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Rogers, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Human Life</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_456" name="note_456" href="#noteref_456">456.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-q">“Fuit enim hoc in amicitiâ quasi quoddam jus inter illos, ut militiæ, propter
eximiam belli gloriam, Africanum ut deum coleret Lælius; domi vicissim Lælium,
quòd ætate antecedebat, observaret in parentis loco Scipio.”</span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_457" name="note_457" href="#noteref_457">457.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Famil.</span></span> Lib. VII. ep. 18. In palimpsesto, laudo equidem parsimoniam,
sed miror, quid in illâ chartulâ fuerit, quod delere malueris quam hæc non scribere;
nisi forte tuas formulas: non enim puto te meas epistolas delere, ut reponas tuas.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_458" name="note_458" href="#noteref_458">458.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mem. de l’Academ. des Inscriptions, &amp;c.</span></span> Tom. VI.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_459" name="note_459" href="#noteref_459">459.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Mai published the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span> at Rome, with a preface, giving a history of
his discovery, notes, and an index of emendations. It was reprinted from this edition
at London, without change, 1823; also at Paris, 1823, with the notes of Mai,
and excerpts from his preface; and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">cura</span></span> Steinacker at Leipsic, 1823. To this German
edition there is a prefatory epistle by Hermann, which I was disappointed to
find contained only some observations on a single passage of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span>,
with regard to the division of the citizens into classes by Servius Tullius. In the
same year an excellent French translation was published by M. Villemain, accompanied
with an introductory review of the work he translates; as also notes and dissertations
on those topics of Education, Manners, and Religion, which he supposes
to have formed the subjects of the last three books which have not yet been recovered.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_460" name="note_460" href="#noteref_460">460.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Quint. Frat.</span></span> Lib. II. ep. 14.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_461" name="note_461" href="#noteref_461">461.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Quint. Frat.</span></span> Lib. III. ep. 5 and 6.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_462" name="note_462" href="#noteref_462">462.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cælius ad Ciceronem, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Famil.</span></span> Lib. VIII. Ep. 1. Tui libri politici omnibus
vigent.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_463" name="note_463" href="#noteref_463">463.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Attic.</span></span> Lib. VI.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_464" name="note_464" href="#noteref_464">464.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Quint. Frat.</span></span> Lib. III. ep. 6.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_465" name="note_465" href="#noteref_465">465.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">The above quotation is from the XL. Number of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">North American Review</span></span>,
July 1823. It is highly creditable to the scholarship of our Transatlantic brethren,
that the work <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Republicâ</span></span>, should on its first publication, have been the subject
of an article in one of their principal literary journals, while, as far as I know, the
reviews of this ancient land of colleges and universities, have passed over, in absolute
silence, the most important classical discovery since the age of the Medici.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_466" name="note_466" href="#noteref_466">466.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">I do not know that this distinguishing feature of the character of Cicero has
been anywhere so well described as in the following passage of M. Villemain, in
which he has introduced in this respect a beautiful comparison between Cicero and
the most illustrious writer of his own nation. Talking of the digression concerning
the Parhelion and Orrery, he admits it was little to the purpose, but he adds, <span class="tei tei-q">“Peut
on se défendre d’un mouvement de respect, quand on songe à ce beau caractère de
curiosité philosophique, à ce goût universel de la science dont fut animé Cicéron,
et qui au milieu d’une vie agitée par tant de travaux, et dans un état de civilisation
encore dénué de secours, lui fit rechercher avec un insatiable ardeur tous les moyens
de connoissances nouvelles et de lumières?</span>
<br />
<span class="tei tei-q">“Cet homme qui avait si laborieusement médité l’art de l’éloquence, et le pratiquait
chaque jour dans le Forum, dans le sénat, dans les tribunaux; ce grand orateur,
qui même pendant son consulat plaidait encore des causes privées, au milieu d’une
vie toute de gloire, d’agitations, et de périls, dans ce mouvement d’inquiétudes et
d’affaires attesté par cette foule de lettres si admirables et si rapidement écrites, étudiait
encore tout ce que dans son siécle il était possible de savoir. Il avait cultivé
la poésie: il avait approfondi et transporté chez les Romains toutes les philosophies
de la Grèce; il cherchait à récueillir les notions encore imparfaites des sciences
physiques. Nous voyons même par une de ses lettres qu’il s’occupa de faire un
traité technique de géographie, à peu près comme <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Voltaire</span></span> compilait laborieusement
un abrégé chronologique de l’histoire d’Allemagne. Ces deux génies ont eu
en effet ce caractère distinctif de méler aux plus brillans trésors de l’imagination et
de goût, l’ardeur de toutes les connoissances, et cette activité intellectuelle qui ne
s’arrête, ni ne se lasse jamais.</span>
<br />
<span class="tei tei-q">“Sans doute il y avait entre eux de grands dissemblances, surtout dans cette
vocation prédominante qui entrainait l’un vers l’éloquence et l’autre vers la poésie;
sans doute aussi la diversité des temps et des situations mettait plus de difference
encore entre l’auteur Français de dix huitième siécle, et le Consul de la republique
Romaine: mais cette ardeur de tout savoir, ce mouvement de la pensée qui s’appliquait
également à tout, forme un trait éminent qui les rapproche; et peutêtre le
sentiment confus de cette vérité agissait il sur Voltaire dans l’admiration si vivement
sentie, si sérieuse, que cet esprit contempteur de tant de renommées antiques
exprima toujours pour le génie de Cicéron.”</span>—P. LXII.
</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_467" name="note_467" href="#noteref_467">467.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">This first book occupied in the palimpsest 211 pages. Of these, 72 are wanting;
but two short fragments belonging to this book are to be found in Lactantius
and Nonius, so that about a third of the book is still lost.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_468" name="note_468" href="#noteref_468">468.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Mai cannot exactly state how much of the second book is wanting in the
palimpsest, but he thinks probably a third part; enough remains of it to console the
reader for the loss.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_469" name="note_469" href="#noteref_469">469.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Somnium Scipionis</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_470" name="note_470" href="#noteref_470">470.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Attic.</span></span> Lib. XII. Ep. 14.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_471" name="note_471" href="#noteref_471">471.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lactantius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Divin. Inst.</span></span> Lib. III. c. 18. Luendorum scelerum causâ nasci homines.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_472" name="note_472" href="#noteref_472">472.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plin. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span> Lib. I. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pref.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_473" name="note_473" href="#noteref_473">473.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Divin.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 9.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_474" name="note_474" href="#noteref_474">474.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Tusc. Disput.</span></span> Lib. III. c. 28.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_475" name="note_475" href="#noteref_475">475.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Scharfii, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dissert. de vero auctore Consolationis. Miscell. Lips. Observ.</span></span> 130.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_476" name="note_476" href="#noteref_476">476.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Rogers’ <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lines, written at Pæstum</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_477" name="note_477" href="#noteref_477">477.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Petrarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Rer. Senil.</span></span> Lib. XV. Ep. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_478" name="note_478" href="#noteref_478">478.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Varillas, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vie de Louis XI. Menagiana</span></span>, Tom. II.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_479" name="note_479" href="#noteref_479">479.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">In Comment. Epist. Ad Attic.</span></span> XV. 27.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_480" name="note_480" href="#noteref_480">480.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Eulogia</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_481" name="note_481" href="#noteref_481">481.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Mencken, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Præf. P. Alcyonî de Exilio</span></span>, Lips. 1707.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_482" name="note_482" href="#noteref_482">482.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Tiraboschi, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Stor. dell. Letter. Ital.</span></span> Part. III. Lib. III. c. 4. § 14.—Ginguené
thinks that Tiraboschi has completely succeeded in justifying Alcyonius. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist.
Litter. d’Ital.</span></span> T. VII. p. 254.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_483" name="note_483" href="#noteref_483">483.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Confess.</span></span> III. 4, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Vit. Beata</span></span>. proœm.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_484" name="note_484" href="#noteref_484">484.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Tunstall, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Observations on the Epistles between Cicero and Brutus</span></span>, p. 20.
Ed. London, 1744.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_485" name="note_485" href="#noteref_485">485.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vit. Attici</span></span>, c. 16.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_486" name="note_486" href="#noteref_486">486.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> Lib. VII. Ep. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_487" name="note_487" href="#noteref_487">487.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. Ep. 26.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_488" name="note_488" href="#noteref_488">488.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">A few unimportant letters which had passed between these two great men,
during Cicero’s proconsulship in Cilicia, were included among the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epistolæ Familiares</span></span>,
and are of undisputed authenticity. It does not seem clear, whether they ever
formed part of the great collection of eight books, which contained the subsequent
correspondence between Cicero and Brutus.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_489" name="note_489" href="#noteref_489">489.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Middleton’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pref. to the Epistles of Cicero and Brutus</span></span>, p. 4. London, 1743.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_490" name="note_490" href="#noteref_490">490.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Tunstall, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Observations</span></span>, &amp;c. p. 27.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_491" name="note_491" href="#noteref_491">491.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Pliny, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Nat.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_492" name="note_492" href="#noteref_492">492.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Quint. Frat.</span></span> Lib. II. 
    <a name="corr289" id="corr289" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Ep.</span> 15.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_493" name="note_493" href="#noteref_493">493.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. 
    </span><a name="corr289a" id="corr289a" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr"><span style="font-style: italic">Ad</span></span><span style="font-style: italic"> Attic.</span></span> Lib. XIII. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">passim</span></span>, ed. <span class="tei tei-corr">Schütz</span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_494" name="note_494" href="#noteref_494">494.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> 25.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_495" name="note_495" href="#noteref_495">495.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Pueritia Ling. Lat.</span></span> c. 1. § 10. Adamum scribendi atque <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">signandi</span></span>
modum præmonstrasse primitus ratio ipsa persuadet.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_496" name="note_496" href="#noteref_496">496.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lennep, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Tirone</span></span>, p. 77. Ed. Amsteld. 1804.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_497" name="note_497" href="#noteref_497">497.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Kopp, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Palæographia Critica</span></span>. Ed. Manheim, 1817. 2 Tom. 4to.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_498" name="note_498" href="#noteref_498">498.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Isidorus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Originum</span></span>, Lib. I. c. 21.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_499" name="note_499" href="#noteref_499">499.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Manilius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Astronom.</span></span> Lib. IV. v. 197.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_500" name="note_500" href="#noteref_500">500.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. XIV. Epig. 202.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_501" name="note_501" href="#noteref_501">501.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Epigr. 138.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_502" name="note_502" href="#noteref_502">502.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Kopp, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Palæographia Critica</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_503" name="note_503" href="#noteref_503">503.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Quintil. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Inst. Orator.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_504" name="note_504" href="#noteref_504">504.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_505" name="note_505" href="#noteref_505">505.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Funccius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Virili Ætat. Ling. Lat.</span></span> Pars II. c. 8. § 9.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_506" name="note_506" href="#noteref_506">506.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><a name="corr291" id="corr291" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span><span style="font-style: italic">
    ad Quint. </span><span class="tei tei-corr"><span style="font-style: italic">Frat.</span></span></span> Lib. III. Ep. 5.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_507" name="note_507" href="#noteref_507">507.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Geograph.</span></span> Lib. XIII.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_508" name="note_508" href="#noteref_508">508.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. II. Ep. 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_509" name="note_509" href="#noteref_509">509.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 14. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">et passim</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_510" name="note_510" href="#noteref_510">510.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ibid.</span></span> Lib. XX. c. 6.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_511" name="note_511" href="#noteref_511">511.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. III. c. 10.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_512" name="note_512" href="#noteref_512">512.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Tacit. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Annal.</span></span> Lib. XV. c. 38–41.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_513" name="note_513" href="#noteref_513">513.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Joann. Sarisberiensis, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Nug. Curial.</span></span> Lib. VIII. c. 19. Lursenius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dissert.
De Bibliothecis Veterum</span></span>, p. 297.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_514" name="note_514" href="#noteref_514">514.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Sulp. Severus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Martini Vita</span></span>, c. 16.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_515" name="note_515" href="#noteref_515">515.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> XVIII. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Opera</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_516" name="note_516" href="#noteref_516">516.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Cassiodor. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Opera</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_517" name="note_517" href="#noteref_517">517.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Petit-Radel, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Recherches sur les Biblioth. Anciennes</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_518" name="note_518" href="#noteref_518">518.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Stor. dell Letter. Ital.</span></span> Part I. Lib. I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_519" name="note_519" href="#noteref_519">519.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bibliotheca Latin.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_520" name="note_520" href="#noteref_520">520.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Nug. Cur.</span></span> Lib. VIII. c. 19.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_521" name="note_521" href="#noteref_521">521.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ibid.</span></span> Lib. II. c. 26.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_522" name="note_522" href="#noteref_522">522.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Tom. I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_523" name="note_523" href="#noteref_523">523.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Historicis Latinis</span></span>, Lib. I, c. 19.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_524" name="note_524" href="#noteref_524">524.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Critic. Philosoph.</span></span> Tom. III.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_525" name="note_525" href="#noteref_525">525.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Stor. dell Letterat. Ital.</span></span> Tom. III. Lib. II. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_526" name="note_526" href="#noteref_526">526.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dict. Histor.</span></span> Art. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Gregoire</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_527" name="note_527" href="#noteref_527">527.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vicende della Letteratura</span></span>, Lib. I. c. 3.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_528" name="note_528" href="#noteref_528">528.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Litter. d’Italie</span></span>, Tom. I. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_529" name="note_529" href="#noteref_529">529.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Bayle, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Diction. Histor.</span></span> Art. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Gregoire</span></span>. Rem. M. Gibbon’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Decline and
Fall of the Rom. Emp.</span></span> c. 45.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_530" name="note_530" href="#noteref_530">530.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Muratori, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Antiquitates Italiæ Med. Ævi</span></span>. Tom. III. p. 853. ed. Milan, 1741.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_531" name="note_531" href="#noteref_531">531.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Tiraboschi, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Stor. dell. Letterat. Ital.</span></span> Tom. III. Lib. II.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_532" name="note_532" href="#noteref_532">532.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ibid.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_533" name="note_533" href="#noteref_533">533.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Petit-Radel, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Recherches sur les Biblioth. Anciennes</span></span>, p. 53.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_534" name="note_534" href="#noteref_534">534.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Eichhorn, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Litterargeschichte</span></span>, ed. Gotting. 1812.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_535" name="note_535" href="#noteref_535">535.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lupi, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> 103. dated 855.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_536" name="note_536" href="#noteref_536">536.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. Ep. 91.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_537" name="note_537" href="#noteref_537">537.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Epist. 69.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_538" name="note_538" href="#noteref_538">538.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ginguené, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Litt. d’Italie</span></span>, Tom. I. p. 63.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_539" name="note_539" href="#noteref_539">539.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ziegel, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Rei Liter.</span></span> Tom. I. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Liter. de la France</span></span>, Tom. IV.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_540" name="note_540" href="#noteref_540">540.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Hallam’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">State of Europe during the Middle Ages</span></span>, Vol. III. p. 332, 2d ed.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_541" name="note_541" href="#noteref_541">541.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Annali d’Italia</span></span>, Ad. Ann. 899, &amp;c.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_542" name="note_542" href="#noteref_542">542.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> 130.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_543" name="note_543" href="#noteref_543">543.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> 44.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_544" name="note_544" href="#noteref_544">544.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Antiquitates Italiæ Med. Ævi</span></span>, Tom. III. p. 818. The most valuable books
of the Bobbian collection were transferred, in the seventeenth century, by the Cardinal
Borromeo, to the Ambrosian library at Milan; and it is from the Bobbian Palimpsesti
there discovered, that Mai has recently edited his fragments of orations of
Cicero, and plays of Plautus.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_545" name="note_545" href="#noteref_545">545.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Mehus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vita Ambrosii Camaldulensis</span></span>, p. 157. ed. Florent. 1759.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_546" name="note_546" href="#noteref_546">546.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ibid.</span></span> p. 183.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_547" name="note_547" href="#noteref_547">547.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Petrarc. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad M. Varronem</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_548" name="note_548" href="#noteref_548">548.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Mill’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Travels of Theodore Ducas</span></span>, Vol. I. p. 28.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_549" name="note_549" href="#noteref_549">549.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vita Ambrosii Camaldulensis</span></span>, p. 290.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_550" name="note_550" href="#noteref_550">550.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ibid.</span></span> p. 291.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_551" name="note_551" href="#noteref_551">551.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ibid.</span></span> p. 335.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_552" name="note_552" href="#noteref_552">552.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Roscoe’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Life of Lorenzo de Medici</span></span>, c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_553" name="note_553" href="#noteref_553">553.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> Lib. V.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_554" name="note_554" href="#noteref_554">554.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Morhoff, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Polyhistor</span></span>. Lib. I. c. 7. Lomeierus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Bibliothecis</span></span>, c. 9. § 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_555" name="note_555" href="#noteref_555">555.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ap. Mehus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pref. ad Epist. Ambros. Camaldulensis</span></span>, p. 33. ed. Florent. 1759.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_556" name="note_556" href="#noteref_556">556.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. p. 31.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_557" name="note_557" href="#noteref_557">557.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. p. 50.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_558" name="note_558" href="#noteref_558">558.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. p. 44.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_559" name="note_559" href="#noteref_559">559.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. p. 31.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_560" name="note_560" href="#noteref_560">560.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Roscoe’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Life of Lorenzo de Medici</span></span>, c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_561" name="note_561" href="#noteref_561">561.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Mehus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pref.</span></span> p. 67.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_562" name="note_562" href="#noteref_562">562.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Avogradi, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Magnificentiâ Cosmi Medices</span></span>, Lib. II.

<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-left: 2.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">“O mira in tectis bibliotheca tuis!</span></div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Nunc legis altisoni sparsim pia scripta Maronis,</div>
<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: left">Nunc ea quæ Cicero ——”</span> &amp;c.</div>
</div></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_563" name="note_563" href="#noteref_563">563.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Roscoe, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Life of Lorenzo</span></span>, c. 7.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_564" name="note_564" href="#noteref_564">564.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Polit. Epist.</span></span> Lib. IV. Ep. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_565" name="note_565" href="#noteref_565">565.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Travels of Theod. Ducas</span></span>, c. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_566" name="note_566" href="#noteref_566">566.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Berrington, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Literary Hist. of the Middle Ages</span></span>, Book VI.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_567" name="note_567" href="#noteref_567">567.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Polyhistor</span></span>. Lib. IV. c. 10.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_568" name="note_568" href="#noteref_568">568.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Luxurie Veterum Poet. Lat.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_569" name="note_569" href="#noteref_569">569.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Eichhorn, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Litterargeschichte</span></span>, Tom. III. p. 569.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_570" name="note_570" href="#noteref_570">570.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Evelyn’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memoirs and Corresp.</span></span> Vol. II. p. 173. Second ed.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_571" name="note_571" href="#noteref_571">571.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Morhoff, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Polyhistor</span></span>. Lib. IV. c. 11.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_572" name="note_572" href="#noteref_572">572.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Thuanus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist.</span></span> Lib. LXXXIV.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_573" name="note_573" href="#noteref_573">573.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><a name="corr307" id="corr307" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr"><span style="font-style: italic">Handbuch</span></span><span style="font-style: italic"> der Classisch. Litteratur.</span></span> T. III. p. 31.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_574" name="note_574" href="#noteref_574">574.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Osannus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Analecta Critica</span></span>, c. 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_575" name="note_575" href="#noteref_575">575.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Præf. ad Plautum</span></span>, ed. Lambini.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_576" name="note_576" href="#noteref_576">576.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Famil.</span></span> Lib. V.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_577" name="note_577" href="#noteref_577">577.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Bandini, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Catalog. Cod. Lat. Bibliothecæ Mediceæ-Laurentianæ</span></span>, Tom. II.
p. 243, &amp;c.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_578" name="note_578" href="#noteref_578">578.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Mehus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pref. ad Epist. Ambros. Camaldul.</span></span> p. 41.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_579" name="note_579" href="#noteref_579">579.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_580" name="note_580" href="#noteref_580">580.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ambros. Camaldul. Epist.</span></span> Lib. VIII. Ep. 31.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_581" name="note_581" href="#noteref_581">581.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Harles, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Supplement. ad Not. Literat. Rom.</span></span> Tom. II. p. 483.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_582" name="note_582" href="#noteref_582">582.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Renouard, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. de l’Imprim. des Aldes</span></span>. Tom. I. p. 162.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_583" name="note_583" href="#noteref_583">583.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Muretus, in a letter dated about this time, (1581,) and addressed to his friend
Paullus Sacratus, mentions, in the strongest terms of regret and resentment, that a
Plautus, on the correction and emendation of which he had bestowed the labour
and study of twenty-five years of his life, had been stolen from him by some person
whom he admitted to his library. (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> Lib. III. Ep. 28.)</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_584" name="note_584" href="#noteref_584">584.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Don Juan</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_585" name="note_585" href="#noteref_585">585.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Maffei, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Traduttori Italiani</span></span>, p. 8. Ed. Venez. 1720.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_586" name="note_586" href="#noteref_586">586.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. 70.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_587" name="note_587" href="#noteref_587">587.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Paitoni, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Biblioteca degli autor. Lat. Volgarizzati</span></span>, Tom. III. p. 118.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_588" name="note_588" href="#noteref_588">588.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Curiosities of Literature</span></span>, Vol, I. New series.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_589" name="note_589" href="#noteref_589">589.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Journal Historique</span></span>. Amsterdam, 1719.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_590" name="note_590" href="#noteref_590">590.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bib. Lat.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 1. § 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_591" name="note_591" href="#noteref_591">591.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pref.</span></span> to Johnson and Steevens’ <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Shakspeare</span></span>, p. 96. 3d Ed.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_592" name="note_592" href="#noteref_592">592.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Vol. I. p. 370.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_593" name="note_593" href="#noteref_593">593.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Boswell’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Tour to the Hebrides</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_594" name="note_594" href="#noteref_594">594.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><a name="corr314" id="corr314" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Ginguené,</span> <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Lit. d’Italie</span></span>, Tom. II. p. 290.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_595" name="note_595" href="#noteref_595">595.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bib. Lat.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 3. § 4.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_596" name="note_596" href="#noteref_596">596.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Polit. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_597" name="note_597" href="#noteref_597">597.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Bandini, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Catalog. Bib. Med. Laurent.</span></span> p. 264. Hawkin’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Inquiry into Lat.
Poet.</span></span> p. 200.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_598" name="note_598" href="#noteref_598">598.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Dibdin, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bibliotheca Spenceriana</span></span>, Tom. II.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_599" name="note_599" href="#noteref_599">599.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Minerva, o Giornal. de Letter. d’Ital.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_600" name="note_600" href="#noteref_600">600.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Argelati, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Biblioteca de Volgarizzatori</span></span>, Tom. IV. p. 44.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_601" name="note_601" href="#noteref_601">601.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Renouard, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. de l’Imprim. des Aldes</span></span>, Tom. I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_602" name="note_602" href="#noteref_602">602.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De la louange des bons facteurs en Rime</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_603" name="note_603" href="#noteref_603">603.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Sulzer, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Theorie der Schönen Wissensch. Terenz</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_604" name="note_604" href="#noteref_604">604.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Baillet, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Jugemens des Sçavans</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_605" name="note_605" href="#noteref_605">605.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mem. de Trevoux</span></span>, 1721.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_606" name="note_606" href="#noteref_606">606.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><a name="corr317" id="corr317" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span class="tei tei-corr">Goujet,</span> <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bib. Fran.</span></span> Tom. IV. p. 436.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_607" name="note_607" href="#noteref_607">607.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Vit. et Carm. Lucret. Præf.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_608" name="note_608" href="#noteref_608">608.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">See Good’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lucretius, Pref.</span></span> p. 99. Eichstädt, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Vit. &amp;c. Lucret.</span></span> p. 65.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_609" name="note_609" href="#noteref_609">609.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. XV. c. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_610" name="note_610" href="#noteref_610">610.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Barbari, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. I. ad Poggium</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_611" name="note_611" href="#noteref_611">611.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Mehus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Præf. ad Epist. Ambros. Camaldul.</span></span> p. 38.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_612" name="note_612" href="#noteref_612">612.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Renouard, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Annales de l’Imprimerie des Aldes</span></span>, Tom. I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_613" name="note_613" href="#noteref_613">613.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Biblioth. Franc.</span></span> Tom. V.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_614" name="note_614" href="#noteref_614">614.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Good’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lucretius</span></span>, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Preface</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_615" name="note_615" href="#noteref_615">615.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">See Goujet, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bibliotheque Françoise</span></span>, Tom. V. p. 18. Fabricius, however,
says, that he does not know who was the author of this verse translation, and Mr
Good, in the preface to his Lucretius, attributes it to one James Langlois, who, he
says, translated not from the original Latin, but from Marolles’ prose version.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_616" name="note_616" href="#noteref_616">616.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Evelyn’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memoirs</span></span>, Tom. I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_617" name="note_617" href="#noteref_617">617.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Evelyn’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memoirs and Correspondence</span></span>, Vol. II. p. 102, 2d edit.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_618" name="note_618" href="#noteref_618">618.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Spence’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Anecdotes</span></span>, p. 106.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_619" name="note_619" href="#noteref_619">619.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Literary Hours</span></span>, No. II.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_620" name="note_620" href="#noteref_620">620.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Noct. Attic.</span></span> Lib. VII. c. 20.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_621" name="note_621" href="#noteref_621">621.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Maffei, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Verona Illustrata</span></span>, Part II. p. 4.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_622" name="note_622" href="#noteref_622">622.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. Part II. p. 6.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_623" name="note_623" href="#noteref_623">623.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Sammtliche Schriften</span></span>, Tom. I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_624" name="note_624" href="#noteref_624">624.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Symbol. Epist.</span></span> XVI.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_625" name="note_625" href="#noteref_625">625.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Part. II. p. 5.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_626" name="note_626" href="#noteref_626">626.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">P. 477.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_627" name="note_627" href="#noteref_627">627.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Brüggemann, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">View of the English Editions, Translations, &amp;c. of the Ancient
Latin Authors</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_628" name="note_628" href="#noteref_628">628.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Mehus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Præf.</span></span> p. 50.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_629" name="note_629" href="#noteref_629">629.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Ad Ambrosium Camald.</span></span> Ep. 39.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_630" name="note_630" href="#noteref_630">630.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Gesner, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Præf.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_631" name="note_631" href="#noteref_631">631.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">See Maffei, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Verona Illustrata</span></span>, Part II. Lib. III.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_632" name="note_632" href="#noteref_632">632.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Præf. Pet. Victor. in explicationes, suar. Castig. in Cat. &amp;c.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_633" name="note_633" href="#noteref_633">633.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Præf.</span></span> p. 20.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_634" name="note_634" href="#noteref_634">634.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Ad Marcel. Cervinum</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_635" name="note_635" href="#noteref_635">635.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Introduct. in Notit. Litt. Rom.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_636" name="note_636" href="#noteref_636">636.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> 104.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_637" name="note_637" href="#noteref_637">637.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Warton, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. of English Poetry</span></span>, Vol. I. Dissert. II.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_638" name="note_638" href="#noteref_638">638.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Fuhrmann, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Handbuch der Classisch. Lit.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_639" name="note_639" href="#noteref_639">639.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Dibdin, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Introduction to the Classics</span></span>, Vol. II. p. 197.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_640" name="note_640" href="#noteref_640">640.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Fabricius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bib. Lat.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 9.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_641" name="note_641" href="#noteref_641">641.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ibid.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_642" name="note_642" href="#noteref_642">642.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ibid.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_643" name="note_643" href="#noteref_643">643.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Villaret, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. de France</span></span>, T. XI. p. 121.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_644" name="note_644" href="#noteref_644">644.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Stuart’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Sallust</span></span>, Essay II.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_645" name="note_645" href="#noteref_645">645.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> 37.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_646" name="note_646" href="#noteref_646">646.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_647" name="note_647" href="#noteref_647">647.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Biblioteca degli Volgarizzatori</span></span>, Tom. I. p. 206.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_648" name="note_648" href="#noteref_648">648.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Villaret, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. de France</span></span>, T. XI. p. 121.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_649" name="note_649" href="#noteref_649">649.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Plin. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> Lib. I. Ep. 20.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_650" name="note_650" href="#noteref_650">650.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Famil.</span></span> Lib. IX. Ep. 12.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_651" name="note_651" href="#noteref_651">651.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> 87.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_652" name="note_652" href="#noteref_652">652.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Tiraboschi, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Stor. dell Lett. Ital.</span></span> Tom. IV. Lib. III. c. 5. § 21. Maffei, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Traduttori
Ital.</span></span> p. 41.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_653" name="note_653" href="#noteref_653">653.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Ad Vir. Illust.</span></span> ep. 2.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_654" name="note_654" href="#noteref_654">654.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Mehus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vit. Ambros. Camald.</span></span> p. 213.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_655" name="note_655" href="#noteref_655">655.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ginguené, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Lit. d’Italie</span></span>, Tom. II. Shepherd’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Life of Poggio</span></span>. Bandini,
<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Catal. Codic. Biblioth. Medic. Laurent.</span></span> Tom. II. p. 432.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_656" name="note_656" href="#noteref_656">656.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Paitoni, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bibliotec. degli Autor. Volgarizzati</span></span>.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_657" name="note_657" href="#noteref_657">657.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Epist. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_658" name="note_658" href="#noteref_658">658.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Hallam’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Europe during the Middle Ages</span></span>, Vol. III. p. 524. 3d ed.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_659" name="note_659" href="#noteref_659">659.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">B. Flavii, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ital. Illust.</span></span> p. 346. ap. Meiners, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lebenschreibung Beruhmter manner</span></span>,
Tom. I. p. 39. Ginguené, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. Lit.</span></span> Tom. II. Pet. Victor, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Castigat. ad
Cicer. post castig. in Paradox.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_660" name="note_660" href="#noteref_660">660.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lemprid. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">in Alex. Sev.</span></span> c. 29. <span class="tei tei-q">“Latina cùm legeret, non alia magis legebat
quàm de Officiis Ciceronis et De Republicâ.”</span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_661" name="note_661" href="#noteref_661">661.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. Senil.</span></span> Lib. XV. Ep. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_662" name="note_662" href="#noteref_662">662.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Clayton’s <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">History of the House of Medici</span></span>, c. 3</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_663" name="note_663" href="#noteref_663">663.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vit. Attic.</span></span> c. 16.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_664" name="note_664" href="#noteref_664">664.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> 69.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_665" name="note_665" href="#noteref_665">665.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Petrarc. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Viros Illust.</span></span> Ep. 1.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_666" name="note_666" href="#noteref_666">666.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Mehus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vit. Ambros. Camald.</span></span> p. 214.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_667" name="note_667" href="#noteref_667">667.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Fabricius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bib. Lat.</span></span> Lib. I. c. 8.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_668" name="note_668" href="#noteref_668">668.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Pet. Vict. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span></dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_669" name="note_669" href="#noteref_669">669.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lagomarsini, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ad Poggii Epist.</span></span> I. 189.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_670" name="note_670" href="#noteref_670">670.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist. ad Vir. Illust.</span></span> Ep. I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_671" name="note_671" href="#noteref_671">671.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Bandini, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Catalog. Bib. Laurent.</span></span> p. 474.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_672" name="note_672" href="#noteref_672">672.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Lib. VII.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_673" name="note_673" href="#noteref_673">673.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Fuhrmann, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Handbuch der Classisch. Lit.</span></span> T. IV. p. 208.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_674" name="note_674" href="#noteref_674">674.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> Lib. II. Ep. 15.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_675" name="note_675" href="#noteref_675">675.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epist.</span></span> 69.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_676" name="note_676" href="#noteref_676">676.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Tiraboschi, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Stor. dell’ Letterat. Ital.</span></span> T. VI. Part I. Lib. I.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_677" name="note_677" href="#noteref_677">677.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Beloe, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Anecdotes of Literature and Scarce Books</span></span>, Vol. VI. p. 140.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_678" name="note_678" href="#noteref_678">678.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Introduct. in Notit. Literat. Roman.</span></span> p. 47.</dd><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_679" name="note_679" href="#noteref_679">679.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">Ibid. p. 84.</dd></dl>
                    </div>
                
            
            </div>
            <hr class="doublepage" /><div class="boxed tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
                <a name="toc49" id="toc49"></a><a name="pdf50" id="pdf50"></a>
                <h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Transcriber’s Note</span></h1>
                <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The table of contents has been added in the electronic version.</p>
                <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The appendix is paginated separately. The page numbers of the appendix have been 
                  prefixed with <span class="tei tei-q">“A-”</span>.</p>
                <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class="tei tei-q">“Ibid.”</span> is sometimes printed in italics, sometimes not.</p>
                <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In the original, the Appendix was printed in a smaller font.</p>
                <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The book has many inconsistencies in spelling, capitalization or punctuation,
                    especially in the quotations from foreign languages,
                    where sometimes diacritical signs are missing or wrong. 
                    They were not corrected or modernized, except in the following places which can be regarded as printing errors.</p>
                <table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr008" class="tei tei-ref">page 8</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Liv.”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Lib.”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr016" class="tei tei-ref">page 16</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Appian”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Oppian”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr022" class="tei tei-ref">page 22</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“from”</span> added before <span class="tei tei-q">“the city”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr022a" class="tei tei-ref">page 22</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“questiones”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“quæstiones”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr023" class="tei tei-ref">page 23</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Cumae”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Cumæ”</span>, <span class="tei tei-q">“sylvae”</span> to <span class="tei tei-q">“sylvæ”</span>,
                        <span class="tei tei-q">“villae”</span> to <span class="tei tei-q">“villæ”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr028" class="tei tei-ref">page 28</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“edile”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“ædile”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr032" class="tei tei-ref">page 32</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Edile”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Ædile”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr040" class="tei tei-ref">page 40</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Theatreales”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Theatrales”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr042" class="tei tei-ref">page 42</a>, quote added following <span class="tei tei-q">“vitâ.”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr057" class="tei tei-ref">page 57</a>, period removed following <span class="tei tei-q">“Taciti”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr068" class="tei tei-ref">page 68</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“vented”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“invented”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr068a" class="tei tei-ref">page 68</a>, comma changed to period following <span class="tei tei-q">“fables”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr071" class="tei tei-ref">page 71</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“givi g”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“giving”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr071a" class="tei tei-ref">page 71</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“c.”</span> added before <span class="tei tei-q">“53”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr083" class="tei tei-ref">page 83</a>, italics removed from second <span class="tei tei-q">“Sat.”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr087" class="tei tei-ref">page 87</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Sullust’s”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Sallust’s”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr091" class="tei tei-ref">page 91</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“a”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“à”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr093" class="tei tei-ref">page 93</a>, period added following <span class="tei tei-q">“unsuccessfully”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr117" class="tei tei-ref">page 117</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“appropiate”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“appropriate”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr128" class="tei tei-ref">page 128</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“restain”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“restrain”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr128a" class="tei tei-ref">page 128</a>, period removed following <span class="tei tei-q">“Dio”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr129" class="tei tei-ref">page 129</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“alnost”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“almost”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr133" class="tei tei-ref">page 133</a>, period added following <span class="tei tei-q">“patrician”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr139" class="tei tei-ref">page 139</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“coepissent”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“cœpissent”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr177" class="tei tei-ref">page 177</a>, period added following <span class="tei tei-q">“court”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr178" class="tei tei-ref">page 178</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Phillippic”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Philippic”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr188" class="tei tei-ref">page 188</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“á”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“à”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr191" class="tei tei-ref">page 191</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Bnt”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“But”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr195" class="tei tei-ref">page 195</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“occured”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“occurred”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr204" class="tei tei-ref">page 204</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Praef.”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Præf.”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr210" class="tei tei-ref">page 210</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“whe”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“who”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr211" class="tei tei-ref">page 211</a>, comma added following <span class="tei tei-q">“Scipio”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr218" class="tei tei-ref">page 218</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“a”</span> added before <span class="tei tei-q">“philosopher”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr220" class="tei tei-ref">page 220</a>, quote added following <span class="tei tei-q">“abundo”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr233" class="tei tei-ref">page 233</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“fron”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“from”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr237" class="tei tei-ref">page 237</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“rerepresenting”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“representing”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr241" class="tei tei-ref">page 241</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Metullus”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Metellus”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr246" class="tei tei-ref">page 246</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“phiosopher”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“philosopher”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr253" class="tei tei-ref">page 253</a> and <a href="#corra61" class="tei tei-ref">A-61</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Natura”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Naturâ”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr253a" class="tei tei-ref">page 253</a>, quote added following <span class="tei tei-q">“scribere.”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr262" class="tei tei-ref">page 262</a>, quote added following <span class="tei tei-q">“father.”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr268a" class="tei tei-ref">page 268</a>, double <span class="tei tei-q">“their”</span> removed before <span class="tei tei-q">“known characters”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr268" class="tei tei-ref">page 268</a>, quote added following <span class="tei tei-q">“wisdom.”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr272" class="tei tei-ref">page 272</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“praebituram”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“præbituram”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr279" class="tei tei-ref">page 279</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Cœlius”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Cælius”</span> (twice)</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr284" class="tei tei-ref">page 284</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“betwen”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“between”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr285a" class="tei tei-ref">page 285</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“latinity”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Latinity”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr285" class="tei tei-ref">page 285</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“appellatæ”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“appellate”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr289" class="tei tei-ref">page A-3</a>, italics removed from <span class="tei tei-q">“Ep.”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr289a" class="tei tei-ref">page A-3</a>, period removed following <span class="tei tei-q">“Ad”</span>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Schutz”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Schütz”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr291" class="tei tei-ref">page A-5</a>, period added following <span class="tei tei-q">“Epist”</span> and <span class="tei tei-q">“Frat”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr298" class="tei tei-ref">page A-12</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Abbe”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Abbé”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corra17" class="tei tei-ref">page A-17</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Causaubon”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Casaubon”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr303" class="tei tei-ref">page A-17</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“seventh”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“seventeenth”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr305" class="tei tei-ref">page A-19</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Georenz”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Goerenz”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr305a" class="tei tei-ref">page A-19</a>, period added following <span class="tei tei-q">“MSS”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corra20" class="tei tei-ref">page A-20</a>, apostroph added following <span class="tei tei-q">“Scriverius”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr307" class="tei tei-ref">page A-21</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Hundbuch”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Handbuch”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr314" class="tei tei-ref">page A-28</a>, comma added following <span class="tei tei-q">“Ginguené”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corra29" class="tei tei-ref">page A-29</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Schmeider”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Schmieder”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corra30" class="tei tei-ref">page A-30</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Varard”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Verard”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr317" class="tei tei-ref">page A-31</a>, comma added following <span class="tei tei-q">“Goujet”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr320" class="tei tei-ref">page A-34</a>, period added following <span class="tei tei-q">“MSS”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corra44" class="tei tei-ref">page A-44</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“edite”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“edit”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corra49" class="tei tei-ref">page A-49</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Sweyn”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Sweynheim”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr343" class="tei tei-ref">page A-57</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“whch”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“which”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr345" class="tei tei-ref">page A-59</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Jenae”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Jenæ”</span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><a href="#corr348" class="tei tei-ref">page A-62</a>, <span class="tei tei-q">“Tirannio”</span> changed to <span class="tei tei-q">“Tyrannio”</span></td></tr></tbody></table>
              
              <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Some variant spellings were not changed (e. g. <span class="tei tei-q">“Ferierres”</span> and <span class="tei tei-q">“Ferriers”</span>, <span class="tei tei-q">“truly”</span> and <span class="tei tei-q">“truely”</span>).</p>
            </div>
            <hr class="doublepage" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
                <div id="pgfooter" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em"><pre class="pre tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em">***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HISTORY OF ROMAN LITERATURE FROM ITS EARLIEST PERIOD TO THE AUGUSTAN AGE. VOLUME II***
</pre><hr class="doublepage" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"><a name="rightpageheader51" id="rightpageheader51"></a><a name="pgtoc52" id="pgtoc52"></a><a name="pdf53" id="pdf53"></a><h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Credits</span></h1><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr><th class="tei tei-label tei-label-gloss">April 1, 2011  </th></tr><tr><td class="tei tei-item tei-item-gloss"><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Project Gutenberg TEI edition 1</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><span class="tei tei-respStmt">
                    <span class="tei tei-resp">
                        Produced by <span class="tei tei-name">Ted Garvin</span>, <span class="tei tei-name">Stefan Cramme</span> and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
                    </span>
                </span></td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table></div><hr class="doublepage" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"><a name="rightpageheader54" id="rightpageheader54"></a><a name="pgtoc55" id="pgtoc55"></a><a name="pdf56" id="pdf56"></a><h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">A Word from Project Gutenberg</span></h1><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This file should be named 
          35751-h.html or 
          35751-h.zip.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This and all associated files of various formats will be found
          in: 

            <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/3/5/7/5/35751/" class="block tei tei-xref" style="margin-bottom: 1.80em; margin-left: 3.60em; margin-top: 1.80em; margin-right: 3.60em"><span style="font-size: 90%">http://www.gutenberg.org</span><span style="font-size: 90%">/dirs/3/5/7/5/35751/</span></a></p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Updated editions will replace the previous one — the old
          editions will be renamed.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Creating the works from public domain print editions means that
          no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the
          Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
          States without permission and without paying copyright royalties.
          Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this
          license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
          to protect the Project Gutenberg™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered
          trademark, and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks,
          unless you receive specific permission. If you do not charge
          anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the rules is
          very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as
          creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research.
          They may be modified and printed and given away — you may do
          practically <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">anything</span></em> with public domain eBooks.
          Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially
          commercial redistribution.</p></div><hr class="page" /><div id="pglicense" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"><a name="rightpageheader57" id="rightpageheader57"></a><a name="pgtoc58" id="pgtoc58"></a><a name="pdf59" id="pdf59"></a><h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">The Full Project Gutenberg License</span></h1><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">Please read this before you distribute or use this
          work.</span></em></p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
          distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing
          this work (or any other work associated in any way with the
          phrase <span class="tei tei-q">“Project Gutenberg”</span>), you agree to comply with all the terms
          of the Full Project Gutenberg™ License (<a href="#pglicense" class="tei tei-ref">available with this file</a> or online
          at <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/license" class="tei tei-xref">http://www.gutenberg.org/license</a>).</p><div id="pglicense1" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">Section 1.</span></h2><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">General Terms of Use &amp; Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
            electronic works</span></h2><div id="pglicense1A" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h3 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">1.A.</span></h3><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ electronic
              work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
              and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual
              property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree
              to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease
              using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic
              works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a
              copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not
              agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may
              obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the
              fee as set forth in paragraph <a href="#pglicense1E8" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.8.</a></p></div><div id="pglicense1B" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h3 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">1.B.</span></h3><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class="tei tei-q">“Project Gutenberg”</span> is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or
              associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be
              bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you
              can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the
              full terms of this agreement. See paragraph <a href="#pglicense1C" class="tei tei-ref">1.C</a> below. There are a lot of things you can
              do with Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
              agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ electronic
              works. See paragraph <a href="#pglicense1E" class="tei tei-ref">1.E</a> below.</p></div><div id="pglicense1C" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h3 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">1.C.</span></h3><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (<span class="tei tei-q">“the Foundation”</span> or PGLAF), owns a compilation
              copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
              individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
              United States. If an individual work is in the public domain in the
              United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim
              a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
              displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all
              references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support
              the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
              freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this
              agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can
              easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in
              the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it
              without charge with others.</p></div><div id="pglicense1D" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h3 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">1.D.</span></h3><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
              what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in
              a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check
              the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
              before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
              creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work.
              The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status
              of any work in any country outside the United States.</p></div><div id="pglicense1E" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h3 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">1.E.</span></h3><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:</p><div id="pglicense1E1" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.1.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
                access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever any
                copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase <span class="tei tei-q">“Project Gutenberg”</span>
                appears, or with which the phrase <span class="tei tei-q">“Project Gutenberg”</span> is associated) is
                accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

                    </p><div class="block tei tei-q" style="margin-bottom: 1.80em; margin-left: 3.60em; margin-top: 1.80em; margin-right: 3.60em"><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 0.90em"><span style="font-size: 90%">This eBook is for the use of
                    anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no
                    restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it
                    away or re-use it under the terms of the Project
                    Gutenberg License included with this eBook or
                    online at </span><a href="http://www.gutenberg.org" class="tei tei-xref"><span style="font-size: 90%">http://www.gutenberg.org</span></a></p></div></div><div id="pglicense1E2" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.2.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from the public
                domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with
                permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and
                distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or
                charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with
                the phrase <span class="tei tei-q">“Project Gutenberg”</span> associated with or appearing on the work, you
                must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs <a href="#pglicense1E1" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.1</a> through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for
                the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs
                <a href="#pglicense1E8" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.8</a> or 1.E.9.</p></div><div id="pglicense1E3" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.3.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the permission
                of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both
                paragraphs <a href="#pglicense1E1" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.1</a> through 1.E.7 and any
                additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will
                be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission
                of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.</p></div><div id="pglicense1E4" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.4.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License terms from
                this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work
                associated with Project Gutenberg™.</p></div><div id="pglicense1E5" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.5.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
                electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
                prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph <a href="#pglicense1E1" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.1</a> with active links or immediate access
                to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License.</p></div><div id="pglicense1E6" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.6.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
                compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
                any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
                to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than
                <span class="tei tei-q">“Plain Vanilla ASCII”</span> or other format used in the official
                version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ web site (http://www.gutenberg.org), you must, at
                no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a
                means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
                request, of the work in its original <span class="tei tei-q">“Plain Vanilla ASCII”</span> or
                other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License
                as specified in paragraph <a href="#pglicense1E1" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.1.</a></p></div><div id="pglicense1E7" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.7.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing,
                copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply with
                paragraph <a href="#pglicense1E8" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.8</a> or 1.E.9.</p></div><div id="pglicense1E8" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.8.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to
                or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that</p><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label">•  </th><td class="tei tei-item"><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
                  the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you already use to
                  calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the
                  Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this
                  paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days
                  following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to
                  prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly
                  marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in <a href="#pglicense4" class="tei tei-ref">Section 4, <span class="tei tei-q">“Information about donations to the
                  Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”</span></a></p></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label">•  </th><td class="tei tei-item"><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
                  you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does
                  not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such
                  a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a
                  physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other
                  copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.</p></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label">•  </th><td class="tei tei-item"><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">You provide, in accordance with paragraph <a href="#pglicense1F3" class="tei tei-ref">1.F.3</a>, a full refund of any money paid for a
                  work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is
                  discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the
                  work.</p></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label">•  </th><td class="tei tei-item"><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
                  distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><div id="pglicense1E9" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.9.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or
                group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement,
                you must obtain permission in writing from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
                Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
                forth in <a href="#pglicense3" class="tei tei-ref">Section 3</a> below.</p></div></div><div id="pglicense1F" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h3 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">1.F.</span></h3><div id="pglicense1F1" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.F.1.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify,
                do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread public domain works
                in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
                electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
                contain <span class="tei tei-q">“Defects,”</span> such as, but not limited to, incomplete,
                inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
                intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other
                medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be
                read by your equipment.</p></div><div id="pglicense1F2" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.F.2.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES — Except for the <span class="tei tei-q">“Right of
                Replacement or Refund”</span> described in <a href="#pglicense1F3" class="tei tei-ref">paragraph
                1.F.3</a>, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any
                other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement,
                disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including
                legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
                LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
                PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK
                OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO
                YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL
                DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.</p></div><div id="pglicense1F3" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.F.3.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND — If you discover a defect in
                this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a
                refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written
                explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received
                the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your
                written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
                defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
                refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
                providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
                receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy
                is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
                opportunities to fix the problem.</p></div><div id="pglicense1F4" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.F.4.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
                <a href="#pglicense1F3" class="tei tei-ref">paragraph 1.F.3</a>, this work is provided
                to you 'AS-IS,' WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
                IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR
                FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.</p></div><div id="pglicense1F5" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.F.5.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or
                the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any
                disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of
                the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
                interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
                the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
                provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.</p></div><div id="pglicense1F6" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.F.6.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">INDEMNITY — You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
                trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
                providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this
                agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion
                and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all
                liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly
                or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur:
                (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration,
                modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
                Defect you cause.</p></div></div></div><div id="pglicense2" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">Section  2.</span></h2><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™</span></h2><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works
            in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including
            obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the
            efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks
            of life.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
            assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™'s goals and
            ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain freely available for
            generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
            secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn
            more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
            Sections <a href="#pglicense3" class="tei tei-ref">3</a> and <a href="#pglicense4" class="tei tei-ref">4</a> and the Foundation web page at <a href="http://www.pglaf.org" class="tei tei-xref">http://www.pglaf.org</a>.</p></div><div id="pglicense3" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">Section 3.</span></h2><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation</span></h2><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation
            organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax
            exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or
            federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter
            is posted at <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf" class="tei tei-xref">http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf</a>. Contributions
            to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S.
            federal laws and your state's laws.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr.
            S. Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are
            scattered throughout numerous locations. Its business office is
            located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801)
            596-1887, email business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date
            contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and
            official page at <a href="http://www.pglaf.org" class="tei tei-xref">http://www.pglaf.org</a></p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">For additional contact information:

              </p><div class="block tei tei-address" style="margin-bottom: 1.80em; margin-left: 3.60em; margin-top: 1.80em; margin-right: 3.60em"><span class="tei tei-addrLine"><span style="font-size: 90%">Dr. Gregory B. Newby</span></span><br /><span class="tei tei-addrLine"><span style="font-size: 90%">Chief Executive and Director</span></span><br /><span class="tei tei-addrLine"><span style="font-size: 90%">gbnewby@pglaf.org</span></span><br /></div></div><div id="pglicense4" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">Section 4.</span></h2><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation</span></h2><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without wide spread public
            support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number
            of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in
            machine readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment
            including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are
            particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the
            IRS.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
            charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
            States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
            considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
            with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where
            we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
            DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
            visit <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate" class="tei tei-xref">http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate</a></p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
            have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
            against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
            approach us with offers to donate.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
            any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
            outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation methods and
            addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including
            checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please
            visit: <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate" class="tei tei-xref">http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate</a></p></div><div id="pglicense5" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">Section 5.</span></h2><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic
            works.</span></h2><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class="tei tei-name">Professor Michael S. Hart</span> is the
            originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that
            could be freely shared with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and
            distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer
            support.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of
            which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. unless a copyright
            notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in
            compliance with any particular paper edition.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Each eBook is in a subdirectory of the same number as the eBook's
            eBook number, often in several formats including plain vanilla ASCII,
            compressed (zipped), HTML and others.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Corrected <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">editions</span></em> of our eBooks replace the old file
            and take over the old filename and etext number. The replaced older file
            is renamed. <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">Versions</span></em> based on separate sources are treated
            as new eBooks receiving new filenames and etext numbers.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search
            facility: 
            
              <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org" class="block tei tei-xref" style="margin-bottom: 1.80em; margin-left: 3.60em; margin-top: 1.80em; margin-right: 3.60em"><span style="font-size: 90%">http://www.gutenberg.org</span></a></p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to
            make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and
            how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.</p></div></div></div>
            </div>
        </div>
    </div>
</body></html>
generated by cgit v1.2.3 (git 2.25.1) at 2026-05-20 22:12:52 +0000