them in the Brutus (325) as flourishing in the years of his own boyhood. Apollonius, however, who is described by Strabo' as being with Molon a pupil of Menecles, was heard by the augur Scaevola at Rhodes, on his way to Asia, where he was praetor in B. C. 120 (de Or. i 75). Hence the brothers of Alabanda must have begun to 'flourish' at a still earlier time. The 'exaggerated unnaturalness" which was the general characteristic of all Asiatic orators, displayed itself in two different ways, which are distinguished in the Brutus (325). The earlier of the two is there described as a pointed and epigrammatic style, marked by neatness and gracefulness, rather than dignity, of expression. This is the style of the brothers of Alabanda. In composition, again, their rhythms. were monotonous, and (like Hegesias) they were too fond of finishing their sentences with the double trochee. The other style is represented by Aeschylus of Cnidus, whom Cicero heard in Asia in B.C. 783, and by Aeschines of Miletus, whom he describes as his own contemporary'. The dramatic date of the Brutus is later than B.C. 50, in fact just before the departure of Brutus for the province of Gallia Cisalpina in B.C. 46 (see Brut. 171, cf. Jahn on § 11). At this time, the Asiatic orators in question were no longer alive, but their style was adopted 'over all Asia'. In contrast to that already described, it was marked 'not so much by a close sententiousness as by a rapid volubility of expression, and not only by a flowing fulness of speech, but also by an embellished and artificial" kind of diction', which attracted the admiration of many, including Cicero himself; but which, in the hands of its later imitators, and possibly even in those of its original inventors, had little, if anything, to distinguish it from turgid and empty bombast. It may fairly be identified with what he elsewhere calls the 'rich and fatty' style, encouraged by the unpolished and uncultivated audiences of regions such as Caria, Phrygia and Mysia (Or. 25). In its bondage to beauty of sound, it condescended to eke out its rhythms by resorting to 'padding' (§ 230). In delivery, the Asiatic school was marked by an enunciation midway between speaking and singing, the latter being more especially exaggerated in the peroration (§§ 27, 57). The excellences of both varieties of the Asiatic style were apparently combined in the person of Menippus, who, according to the perhaps unduly indulgent verdict of Cicero, was in B.C. 78, tota Asia disertissimus, and worthy of being counted an 'Attic orator' (Brut. 315). 1 p. 655. Wilkins, Introd. to de Or. p. 43. 8 Brut. 316. 4 ib. 325. 5 Brut. 325 ad finem, fuit (Eberhard floruit) and erat. 6 facto (Ruhnken for faceto). 7 Cf. Jebb ii 443 and 440, where it is well remarked that Asianism oscillates between bombast and importunate epigram'. In the second century, the way was prepared for a reaction against the growing degradation of Greek oratory, by Hermagoras of Temnos, who drew up an elaborate system of rhetoric, founded on the rhetorical treatises of his predecessors, with some additions of his own'. It concerned itself almost exclusively with inventio, with the discovery of arguments as opposed to the style, and it dissected with ingenious subtlety the different kinds of issues raised, more particularly in the forensic branch of oratory. The very fact that it was confined to the consideration of subject matter, which is independent of questions of language, while it neglected the department of style, in which it would have naturally limited itself to Greek alone, made the teaching of Hermagoras readily available for use by Roman students of rhetoric; and, in fact, the rhetoric taught at Rome during the latter part of the second and the earlier part of the first century was almost exclusively founded on his system. In the last quarter of the second century, two rhetoricians of Alabanda, pupils of Menecles, settled at Rhodes, and founded a school of rhetoric. The first to arrive was Apollonius, whom Scaevola (as we have already seen) found at Rhodes about 120 B.C. The second was Molon, who was afterwards sent by the Rhodians as an envoy to Rome in 81, and was still alive in 78, when Cicero was travelling in Asia and elsewhere, to recruit his health, and to complete his rhetorical studies. The Roman orator's debt of gratitude to his Rhodian instructor, led him probably to exaggerate the importance of the rhetoricians of Rhodes, whom he describes as a separate and distinctive group; and in this he is naturally followed by Quintilian, who makes them intermediate between the Attic and Asiatic schools. We learn, however, on the thoroughly competent authority of Dionysius, that the Rhodian rhetoricians, and Molon among them, selected as their model the Attic orator, Hyperides. It is true that they do not appear to have succeeded in reproducing his many points of excellence; but their attempt to do so is sufficient to warrant their being regarded, not as an independent school, but as part of the Atticizing reaction against the degenerate Asiatic style of their day. Hyperides being, though not to the same degree as Lysias, a leading representative of the plain style, it is clear that his imitators must have, theoretically at least, approved a plainer style than that of Demosthenes and other Attic orators of a 1 de Inv. i 8, 'satis in ea (arte) videtur ex antiquis artibus ingeniose et diligenter electas res collocasse et nonnihil ipse quoque novi protulisse. 2 On the rhetoric of Hermagoras, cf. Piderit's dissertation; also Volkmann's Rhetorik, p. 5, 20 ff.; Blass G. B. 84-88; 3 de Or. i 75. See note on § 25 and cf. Jebb ii 445. de Dinarcho 8. similarly elevated type; and further, that they had no sympathy with the bombastic variety of Asianism. The Asianism to which they were akin was the epigrammatic variety represented by Menecles, who, it will be remembered, counted Molon himself among his pupils'. During the same time, Athens also was a seat of rhetorical teaching. Some of the teachers were genuine Atticists and devoted admirers of Demosthenes; but most of them could hardly be distinguished from the degenerate Asiatic orators of the day. They did not even belong by right of birth to the city which was the scene of their teaching, but were drawn to the ancient home of eloquence by the spell of its old associations. Among these may be mentioned Menedemus, who knew many passages of Demosthenes by heart, and whom the orator Antonius, when on his way to Cilicia in 98, heard disputing at Athens on the relations of rhetoric to philosophy; Demetrius the Syrian, who was an old man when Cicero studied with him for a while in Athens in 785; Pammenes, who as we shall see in the Orator (§ 105) read through, with Brutus, the whole of Demosthenes; and lastly, at a somewhat later time, the younger Gorgias, the unprincipled tutor of the younger Cicero, and, like him, the unworthy bearer of a famous name,- -a rhetorican whose work on the figures of speech, with illustrative passages from Demosthenes, Lysias, Hyperides, Lycurgus, and Deinarchus, as well as later orators (including representatives of Asianism), has come down to us in the form of an abridgment from a Latin translation by Rutilius Lupus. The Atticizing reaction, however, at Rhodes and elsewhere, was not at present strong enough to win the victory over the predominant Asianism. The scene of the struggle was transferred to Rome itself, and was continued, as we shall see hereafter, during the life of Cicero. But it was not until the time of Augustus that the devoted and enthusiastic Atticist Dionysius, who describes the old Attic style as having well nigh disappeared in his own generation, was enabled to welcome the triumphant restoration of a purer taste, and in writing to a Roman friend, gracefully to ascribe this happy transformation to the powerful influence and the commanding example of the mistress of the world". IV. ROMAN ORATORY. HORTENSIUS, CICERO, AND THE ROMAN ATTICISTS. The history of Roman oratory down to the death of Cicero falls into four periods: (1) extending from prehistoric times to the end. 1 Blass, G. B. 93. 2 Dionys. orat. ant. init. 3 de Or. iii 43. de Or. i 83-93. 5 Brut. 315. Dionys. orat. ant. 3. of the second Punic war; (2) from Cato the Censor to the Gracchi and their contemporaries; (3) the age of the orators L. Crassus and M. Antonius; and (4) the times of Hortensius and Cicero. The first shews no traces of Greek influence; the second is partially affected by Greek literature only, to the exclusion of Greek oratory and rhetoric; in the third, Greek oratory and rhetoric slowly work their way into recognition, though even those who are most indebted to them are very far from publicly acknowledging their indebtedness; while, in the fourth, Greek models assume a position of supreme and avowed importance'. A general view of Cicero's own retrospect of the oratory of Rome may be obtained from the following very brief outline of part of the Brutus: After a rapid enumeration of the men of mark in the earlier times of Rome who were presumably good speakers (52—60), Cicero adds that the first who deserved not merely to be mentioned as an orator but also to be diligently read and studied was CATO the Censor; and he laments that Cato is neglected even by those who take as their model among Greek orators one who (he ventures to say) is most closely allied to Cato, namely Lysias (61-69). He then enumerates the best speakers among the elder and the younger contemporaries of Cato (77-80, 81–90), mentioning among the latter Gaius Laelius (consul in B. C. 140), the younger Africanus (consul in 147 and 134), and Servius Sulpicius Galba (in 144). In the next age, out of the inany orators whose names are recounted, the foremost are the Gracchi, and in particular GAIUS GRACCHUS (tribune in B. C. 123), and next to them Gaius Papirius Carbo (consul in 120). In these may be traced the first beginning of a true art of oratory, such as is brought to a higher perfection in M. ANTONIUS (consul in 99, the grandfather of the triumvir) and L. Licinius CRASSUS (consul in 95). After an elaborate criticism on these (138-146), their contemporary Q. Mucius Scaevola, the pontifex (who was consul in 95 and died in 82), is compared with Cicero's friend Servius Sulpicius Rufus (§§ 147-158, praetor in 65). After further details on the oratory of Crassus (158-164) and some of his minor contemporaries (165–172), L. Marcius Philippus (consul in 91) is described as longo intervallo proximus to the two great orators Crassus and Antonius (173); while (not to dwell on others) C. Julius Caesar Strabo (aedile in 90), is praised for his wit (177). Among the younger contemporaries of the last, honourable mention is made of C. Aurelius Cotta (consul in 75) and P. Sulpicius Rufus (tribune in 88), who selected Antonius and Crassus, respectively, as their models in oratory (202-3); and next to these in merit comes C. Scribonius Curio (tribune in 90, consul in 76, who died in 53, §§ 210-221). As Cicero does not desire to say anything, in his own person, of orators that were still alive (231, 251), he accordingly leaves to Brutus the mention of his uncle Cato (118), and of M. Claudius Marcellus (consul 51, §§ 248-251), and to Atticus the eulogy of Julius CAESAR (252-261), reserving for himself little more than a concluding remark in praise of his commentarii (262). He then turns to the consideration of some younger orators, recently deceased, the most notable of whom 1 Ellendt, eloquent. Rom. hist. § 3. are M. Caelius Rufus (praetor in 48, § 273) and M. Calidius (praetor in 57, who died in 47, 274-278); and C. Scribonius Curio (tribune in 50, who in 49 died as legatus Caesaris in Africa, son of the Curio already mentioned; §§ 280-2); and Gaius Licinius CALVUS (born 84, died 48). Calvus having been the first to introduce into Roman oratory the attempt to imitate certain particular models among the Attic orators, to the exclusion of all others, Cicero takes occasion to denounce this as resting on a narrow and mistaken view of the full meaning of Attic oratory (284—291). Before returning to Hortensius, Cicero allows himself to be interrupted for a while by Atticus with a gentle protest against the excessive praise he had, it was to be presumed, ironically, bestowed on the old Roman orators; for example on the elder Cato, whom he had, with some reservations, actually compared to Lysias. He meets this protest by disclaiming all intention of irony and by promising at some future time to discuss the old Roman orators more fully. He next gives an account of the career of HORTENSIUS (301-7); and, pressed by Brutus, adds an outline of his own oratorical training and of the varied studies which had contributed towards it (esp. 307-16), besides touching in graceful terms on his own relations to his former rival (317-24). After this we have a more detailed criticism of the style of Hortensius (325-8). In his closing words he dwells on the gloomy prospects of oratory at the time, and especially on the state of public affairs which prevented the high promise of the past career of Brutus from winning an open field for its complete fulfilment (329-333). Much of the above incomplete outline is necessarily little more than a dry catalogue of names. In the original, a far larger number of orators is enumerated, but many of them are comparatively obscure, and even in the case of the more distinguished, their speeches are now represented by the merest fragments. Accordingly, the tasteful criticisms of Cicero on the various shades of difference in the style of his predecessors, are necessarily thrown away on the modern student, to whom the perusal of the Brutus conveys an impression similar to that produced by a gallery of historical portraits of persons of whom little is known but their names, or by a collection of smart and epigrammatic notices of books that are themselves irretrievably lost'. Some of the digressions, where the style expands into an ampler fulness, have, however, a permanent interest. To the student of the Orator, the portions of the dialogue which are of special importance are those that supply us with evidence on the three styles of oratory which successively presented themselves at Rome in the earlier half of the first century B.C., the first in order of time being Asianism as represented by Hortensius; the second, the Rhodian eclecticism of Cicero himself; and the third, the pure Atticism of men like Gaius Licinius Calvus. 1 The scattered criticisms of Cicero have, however, been successfully woven into a fairly consecutive history of Roman eloquence by Ellendt; and the impulse thereby given to the study of this subject has since led to the publication of Meyer's complete collection of the fragments of all the Roman orators, with the exception of Cicero. 2e.g. that on the judgment of experts, |