IV.

THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF

CLASSICAL LATIN PROSE.

(JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY,' VOL. XV (1886.)

WERE any one asked who in his opinion were the main representatives of Latin Prose style, there can I suppose be little doubt that he would mention Cicero, Livy, and Tacitus. These three names, in fact, mark three definite stages in the development of classical Latin Prose. To speak more accurately, there are two stages, each of which marks the extreme point of a line of tendency. These stages are represented respectively by the styles of Cicero and of Tacitus, between whom Livy, who has a manner peculiar to himself, occupies the middle place.

The elements of a good style are two, luminousness and beauty. By luminousness I mean its power of representing thought and passion. To express thought it must be lucid, to represent thought and passion it must be simple and strong. By beauty I mean such a choice of words, and such an arrangement of them, as satisfies the requirements of the ear.

In a masterly style these two elements are combined in a manner which is felt to defy dissection, and to require none. The impression produced is one and indivisible, and we do not care to analyze it. Such a passage as the conclusion of Cicero's second Philippic speaks home to us with a living

impression of unity and directness which we acknowledge without question. We admire and ask for nothing more1.

But Rome was not built, nor the Latin prose of Cicero formed, in a day. It is possible to trace with tolerable clearness the course of literary development of which it is the climax, and to observe the laborious process by which, from writer to writer, the combination of luminousness with beauty was gradually perfected.

Isidore 1. 38. 2 preserves a tradition, which probably comes from Varro, that the first Latin prose was written by Appius Claudius Caecus. Tam apud Graecos quam apud Latinos longe antiquiorem curam fuisse carminum (supply probably Varro ait) quam prosae. Omnia enim prius versibus condebantur, prosae autem studium sero viguit. Primus apud Graecos Pherecydes Syrus soluta oratione scripsit. Apud Romanos autem Appius Caecus adversus Pyrrhum solutam orationem primus exercuit. Iam ex hinc et ceteri pro se eloquentiam condiderunt.

1

This notice probably represents the accepted literary tradition of Rome; and whatever truth there may be in it, it is quite clear that for the purposes of oratory Latin prose composition must have been in existence before the Punic wars. We have Cicero's express testimony to the existence of mortuorum laudationes in rude prose2. In an ancient city community like that of Rome—a community in which the people § 118. Resipisce, quaeso, aliquando rem publicam, M. Antoni; quibus ortus sis, non quibuscum vivas, considera. Mecum, ut voles; redi cum re publica in gratiam. Sed de te tu ipso videris; ego de me ipse profitebor. Defendi rem publicam adulescens, non deseram senex; contempsi Catilinae gladios, non pertimescam tuos. Quin etiam corpus libenter obtulerim, si repraesentari morte mea libertas civitatis potest, ut aliquando dolor populi Romani pariat quod iam diu parturit. Etenim si abhinc annos prope viginti hoc ipso in templo negavi posse mortem immaturam esse consulari, quanto verius nunc negabo seni? Mihi vero, patres conscripti, etiam optanda mors est, perfuncto rebus iis quas adeptus sum quasque gessi. Duo modo haec opto, unum ut moriens populum Romanum liberum relinquam, alterum ut ita cuique eveniat, ut de re publica quisque mereatur.

2 Brutus, § 61: Nec vero habeo quemquam antiquiorem (Catone) cuius quidem scripta proferenda putem, nisi quem Appii Caeci oratio haec ipsa de Tyrrho et nonnullae mortuorum laudationes forte delectant.

had to be persuaded—some kind of oratory must have arisen at a very early period. We may however almost say of Latin prose as we may of Latin poetry, that in order to study it we must begin at the end. The earliest specimens of Latin prose style which now survive are the fragments of the speeches and histories of the elder Cato (for the Res Rustica as we have it is written in no style at all), and Cato, whose life extended from 234-149 B.C., or eighty-five years, comes at the end of what we may call the Italian period proper, and at the moment when the study of Greek literature was beginning to change the form of Latin composition. Anti-Hellenist as he was, it is difficult to suppose that Cato altogether escaped the influence of the new fashion, and in his old age it is known that he took to the study of Demosthenes and (to a certain extent) to that of Thucydides. Let us take some specimens of Cato's oratory from the few fragments which survive.

Meyer, Fragmenta Oratorum Romanorum, p. 411. Tuum nefarium facinus peiore facinore operiri postulas, succidias humanas facis, tantas trucidationes facis, decem capita libera interficis, decem hominibus vitam eripis, indicta causa, iniudicatis, incondemnatis.

esse.

Ib. p. 43. Dixit a decemviris parum sibi bene cibaria curata Iussit vestimenta detrahi, atque flagro caedi. Decemviros Bruttiani verberavere: videre multi mortales. Quis hanc contumeliam, quis hoc imperium, quis hanc servitutem ferre potest? Nemo hoc rex ausus est facere: eane fieri bonis, bono genere gnatis, boni consulitis? Ubi societas, ubi fides maiorum? Insignitas iniurias, plagas, verbera, vibices, eos dolores atque carnificinas per dedecus atque maximam contumeliam, inspectantibus popularibus suis atque multis mortalibus, te facere ausum esse? Sed quantum luctum quantumque gemitum, quid lacrimarum quantumque fletum factum audivi! Servi iniurias nimis aegre ferunt. Quid illos, bono genere gnatos, magna virtute praeditos, opinamini animi habuisse atque habituros, dum vivent?

1 [Editio auctior, Turici 1842: Mr. Nettleship does not follow Meyer's text absolutely.]

The following fragment is from the Oratio pro Rhodiensibus (Meyer, p. 104).

Scio solere plerisque hominibus rebus secundis atque prolixis atque prosperis animum excellere, superbiam atque ferociam augescere atque crescere. Quod mihi nunc magnae curae est, quod haec res tam secunde processit, ne quid in consulendo adversi eveniat, quod nostras secundas res confutet, neve haec laetitia nimis luxuriose eveniat. Adversae res edomant, et docent quid opus sit facto. Secundae res laetitia transversum trudere solent a recte consulendo atque intellegendo. Quo maiore opere dico suadeoque, uti haec res aliquot dies proferatur, dum ex tanto gaudio in potestatem nostram redeamus.

Atque ego quidem arbitror, Rhodienses noluisse nos ita depugnare, uti depugnatum est, neque regem Persen vicisse. Non Rhodienses modo id noluere, sed multos populos atque multas nationes idem noluisse arbitror. Atque haud scio an partim eorum fuerint, qui non nostrae contumeliae causa id noluerint evenire: sed enim id metuere, si nemo esset homo, quem vereremur, quodque luberet faceremus, ne sub solo imperio nostro in servitute nostra essent: libertatis suae causa in ea sententia fuisse arbitror. Atque Rhodienses tamen Persen publice numquam adiuvere. Cogitate, quanto nos inter nos privatim cautius facimus. Nam unus quisque nostrum, si quis advorsus rem suam quid fieri arbitratur, summa vi contra nititur ne advorsus eam fiat: quod illi tamen perpessi.

Ea nunc derepente tanta nos beneficia ultro citroque tantamque amicitiam relinquemus? Quod illos dicimus voluisse facere, id nos priores facere occupabimus?

Qui acerrime advorsus eos dicit, ita dicit, hostes voluisse fieri. Ecquis est tandem vostrum qui, quod ad sese attineat, aequom censeat poenas dare ob eam rem quod arguatur male facere voluisse? Nemo, opinor: nam ego, quod ad me attinet, nolim.

The next is from the Origines, book 4 p. 19, Jordan):

Di immortales tribuno militum fortunam ex virtute eius dedere. Nam ita evenit, cum saucius multifariam ibi factus esset, tamen vulnus capiti nullum evenit, eumque inter mortuos

defatigatum vulneribus atque quod sanguen eis defluxerat cognovere, eum sustulere, isque convaluit, saepeque postilla operam rei publicae fortem atque strenuam praehibuit, illoque facto, quod illos milites subduxit, exercitum servavit. Sed idem benefactum quo in loco ponas nimium interest. Leonides Laco, qui simile apud Thermopylas fecit, propter eius virtutes omnis Graecia gloriam atque gratiam praecipuam claritudinis inclutissumae decoravere monumentis, signis statuis elogiis historiis aliisque rebus: gratissimum id eius factum habuere. At tribuno militum parva laus pro factis relicta, qui idem fecerat atque rem serva

verat.

Ea omnia, as Gellius' says of the speech pro Rhodiensibus, distinctius numerosiusque fortassean dici potuerunt, fortius atque vividius potuisse dici non videntur. The style is clear and forcible, it is therefore luminous: but harmony, and therefore beauty, it has none. The sentences follow the thoughts, without any idea of rhythm to modify them; succidias humanas facis, tantas trucidationes facis, decem funera facis, decem capita libera interficis. There are but few connecting particles, those employed being of the simplest kind, such as relatives, conditionals, or adversatives. Verbs are constantly placed in the same position at the end of the sentence, without any attempt to vary the sound: excellere, augescere, crescere: processerit,— eveniat,—confutet,-eveniat: proferatur,—redeamus. The order of the words is sometimes entirely without art; secundae res trudere solent a recte consulendo atque intellegendo. The same idea is reiterated by the use of words almost synonymous; rebus secundis atque prosperis atque prolixis: superbiam atque ferociam: multos populos atque multas nationes. Words are repeated for emphasis and distinctness, to the destruction of true rhetorical effect; adversae res, secundae res: depugnare uti depugnatum est: adversus rem suam,-adversus eam: dicit, ita dicit. In the same careless spirit Cato (in the pro Rhodiensibus) begins three consecutive sentences with atque.

Very much the same characteristics meet us in the fragments 1 6 (7). 3. 52.