Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

PROFESSOR OF THE LATIN LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE IN LAFAYETTE COLLEGE

[graphic][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small]

COPYRIGHT, 1895,

By W. B. OWEN.

Norwood Press :

J. S. Cushing & Co. - Berwick & Smith.
Norwood, Mass., U.S.A.

plea.1 Two years later he was killed by the order of Marius, a task which the cruel messengers found a difficult one, so much were they affected by the charms of his eloquence.2

Antony's ideal in oratory was quite unlike that of Crassus, inasmuch as the latter was a master in the more formal and theoretical phases of his art, while the former was more practical, and aimed rather to give direct and cogent utterance to his exact thought than to dress it in any special graces of style. Besides the manual (libellus de ratione dicendi) composed in his youth, he committed nothing to writing, assigning as his reason, so far as his speeches were concerned, that he did not wish to be confronted with his written words when he cared to deny anything that he had said.4

The traits most essential for the orator, according to Antony, were sagacity, readiness, decision, and experience, qualities which he himself possessed in the highest degree. He attached great importance to the invention, the careful selection, and marshaling of his material. He aimed to be able to note the criti

cal points in a trial, to place favorable considerations in the best light, and keep the unfavorable out of view, and in case of error to be able to withdraw in such a way as to seem to be still on the offensive. His language was correct, but chosen rather with a view to its force than its beauty. Although laborious in preparation, a ready and tenacious memory enabled him to speak with freedom and without the appearance of elaborate forethought or study. His voice, naturally harsh, was yet strong and well suited to passionate or pathetic utterance; and to this he added the force of appropriate and energetic action,10 so that in animated speech his eloquence was well-nigh irresistible. 1 Tusc. Disp. II. 24, 57.

2 de Or. III. 3, 10; Tusc. Disp. V. 19, 55; Vell. II. 22, 3; Val. Max. VIII. 9, 2; IX. 2, 2.

3 de Or. I. 21, 94; 47, 206; III. 49, 189; Or. 5, 18; Brut. 44, 163.

4 pro Cluent. 50, 140.

6 Brut. 37, 139; de Or. II. 42, 179; 77, 314.

7 de Or. III. 9, 32; II. 72, 294; 73, 296.

5 de Or. II. 20, 84; 28, 125.

9 Brut. 59, 215; de Or. II. 28, 122; Brut. 37, 139.

8 Brut. 37, 140.

10 Brut. 38, 141.

(c) Sulpicius.

Cicero has brought into close connection with these masters two young men of great promise, - Sulpicius and Cotta.

2

P. Sulpicius Rufus, born 124 B.C., was of patrician family, and in the earlier part of his career roused great hopes in the party of the optimates that they would have in him an eminent champion of their principles,1 a hope that was disappointed only by the evident unscrupulousness and incapacity of that party. Sulpicius, from an ardent partisan of the aristocracy, became its adversary. The beginnings of the change may perhaps be traced to Antony's defense of Norbanus. He was, however, in harmony with the best men of the Senate in 91 B.C., and on terms of intimacy with the tribune M. Livius Drusus, whose design for the complete enfranchisement of the Italians he approved, as also with Q. Pompeius Rufus, who was his opponent when consul in 88.

In the first year of the Social war he served as legate in the field, and in 88 was made tribune of the people, in which office his first measures were directed against the Marian party, and were moderately conservative. He vetoed on constitutional grounds the proposition, made in the interest of the equites, to recall all those who had been exiled under the law of Varius; but he resolutely opposed on the same ground of illegality C. Julius Caesar Vopiscus in his candidature for the consulship, as he had not yet been praetor.6

It seems most likely that the change in his political attitude grew out of his purpose to carry through the reform of Drusus, and secure the complete enfranchisement of the Italians. To this end he must conciliate prejudices, and Plutarch tells us that he went about attended by his anti-senate made up of 600

1 de Or. I. 7, 25.

3 de Or. II. 21, 89; 25, 107; 47, 197 ff.; 75, 305.

4 de Or. I. 7, 25; Lael. 1, 2.

6 Brut. 63, 226; de Har. Resp. 20, 43.

2 de Or. III. 3, 11.

5 Brut. 89, 304; Liv. Perioch. 76.

PREFACE.

THE text of this edition of De Oratore is that of Sorof, with some changes in orthography and punctuation, and a few slight differences of reading which will be found duly discussed in the notes and the appendix. I have made free use of the introduction, following it somewhat more closely in the strictly historical parts; but have added section 9 entire. In that discussion I have felt justified in giving some emphasis to libration, a trait of Cicero's style which has not been adequately treated. In the commentary I have made such omissions, additions, and adaptations as seemed called for by the needs of those students for whom this work is especially designed.

I take pleasure in gratefully acknowledging the courtesy of Dr. Sorof in permitting me to use his edition as the basis for this one, and also his kindness in offering other valuable assistance. The De Oratore has been a favorite field for scholarly work, and the modern editor has an ample fund of materials, both critical and explanatory, upon which to draw. Next to Dr. Sorof, however, credit is here due to Professor A. S. Wilkins, of the Owens College, Manchester, whose excellent edition has been constantly before me.

I am greatly indebted to Professor Edmund Morris Hyde,

« PreviousContinue »