[14] Vixdum finierat Maternus, concitatus et velut instinctus, cum Vipstanus Messalla cubiculum eius ingressus est, suspicatusque ex ipsa intentione singulorum altiorem inter eos esse sermonem, “num parum tempestivus” inquit “interveni secretum consilium et causae alicuius meditationem tractantibus?” “Minime, minime” inquit Secundus, “atque adeo vellem maturius intervenisses; delectasset enim te et Apri nostri accuratissimus sermo, cum Maternum ut omne ingenium ac studium suum ad causas agendas converteret exhortatus est, et Materni pro carminibus suis laeta, utque poetas defendi decebat, audentior et poetarum quam oratorum similior oratio.” “Me vero” inquit “[et] sermo iste infinita voluptate adfecisset, atque id ipsum delectat, quod vos, viri optimi et temporum nostrorum oratores, non forensibus tantum negotiis et declamatorio studio ingenia vestra exercetis, sed eius modi etiam disputationes adsumitis, quae et ingenium alunt et eruditionis ac litterarum iucundissimum oblectamentum cum vobis, qui ista disputatis, adferunt, tum etiam iis, ad quorum auris pervenerint. Itaque hercule non minus probari video in te, Secunde, quod Iuli Africani vitam componendo spem hominibus fecisti plurium eius modi librorum, quam in Apro, quod nondum ab scholasticis controversiis recessit et otium suum mavult novorum rhetorum more quam veterum oratorum consumere.”
XIV. Maternus finished with an air of enthusiasm, that seemed to lift him above himself. In that moment , Vipstanius Messala entered the room. From the attention that appeared in every countenance, he concluded that some important business was the subject of debate. I am afraid, said he, that I break in upon you at an unseasonable time. You have some secret to discuss, or, perhaps, a consultation upon your hands. Far from it, replied Secundus; I wish you had come sooner. You would have had the pleasure of hearing an eloquent discourse from our friend Aper, who has been endeavouring to persuade Maternus to dedicate all his time to the business of the bar, and to give the whole man to his profession. The answer of Maternus would have entertained you: he has been defending his art, and but this moment closed an animated speech, that held more of the poetical than the oratorical character. I should have been happy, replied Messala, to have heard both my friends. It is, however, some compensation for the loss, that I find men of their talents, instead of giving all their time to the little subtleties and knotty points of the forum, extending their views to liberal science, and those questions of taste, which enlarge the mind, and furnish it with ideas drawn from the treasures of polite erudition. Enquiries of this kind afford improvement not only to those who enter into the discussion, but to all who have the happiness of being present at the debate. It is in consequence of this refined and elegant way of thinking, that you, Secundus, have gained so much applause, by the life of Julius Asiaticus , with which you have lately obliged the world. From that specimen, we are taught to expect other productions of equal beauty from the same hand. In like manner, I see with pleasure, that our friend Aper loves to enliven his imagination with topics of controversy, and still lays out his leisure in questions of the schools , not, indeed, in imitation of the ancient orators, but in the true taste of our modern rhetoricians.
[15] Tum Aper: “non desinis, Messalla, vetera tantum et antiqua mirari, nostrorum autem temporum studia inridere atque contemnere. Nam hunc tuum sermonem saepe excepi, cum oblitus et tuae et fratris tui eloquentiae neminem hoc tempore oratorem esse contenderes [antiquis], eo, credo, audacius, quod malignitatis opinionem non verebaris, cum eam gloriam, quam tibi alii concedunt, ipse tibi denegares.” “Neque illius” inquit “sermonis mei paenitentiam ago, neque aut Secundum aut Maternum aut te ipsum, Aper, quamquam interdum in contrarium disputes, aliter sentire credo. Ac velim impetratum ab aliquo vestrum ut causas huius infinitae differentiae scrutetur ac reddat, quas mecum ipse plerumque conquiro. Et quod quibusdam solacio est, mihi auget quaestionem, quia video etiam Graecis accidisse ut longius absit [ab] Aeschine et Demosthene Sacerdos ille Nicetes, et si quis alius Ephesum vel Mytilenas concentu scholasticorum et clamoribus quatit, quam Afer aut Africanus aut vos ipsi a Cicerone aut Asinio recessistis.”
XV. I am not surprised, returned Aper, at that stroke of raillery. It is not enough for Messala, that the oratory of ancient times engrosses all his admiration; he must have his fling at the moderns. Our talents and our studies are sure to feel the sallies of his pleasantry . I have often heard you, my friend Messala, in the same humour. According to you, the present age has not a single orator to boast of, though your own eloquence, and that of your brother, are sufficient to refute the charge. But you assert roundly, and maintain your proposition with an air of confidence. You know how high you stand, and while in your general censure of the age you include yourself, the smallest tincture of malignity cannot be supposed to mingle in a decision, which denies to your own genius, what by common consent is allowed to be your undoubted right. I have as yet, replied Messala, seen no reason to make me retract my opinion; nor do I believe, that my two friends here, or even you yourself (though you sometimes affect a different tone), can seriously maintain the opposite doctrine. The decline of eloquence is too apparent. The causes which have contributed to it, merit a serious enquiry. I shall be obliged to you, my friends, for a fair solution of the question. I have often reflected upon the subject; but what seems to others a full answer, with me serves only to increase the difficulty. What has happened at Rome, I perceive to have been the case in Greece. The modern orators of that country, such as the priest Nicetes, and others who, like him, stun the schools of Mytelene and Ephesus , are fallen to a greater distance from Æschines and Demosthenes, than Afer and Africanus , or you, my friends, from Tully or Asinius Pollio.
[16] “Magnam” inquit Secundus “et dignam tractatu quaestionem movisti. Sed quis eam iustius explicabit quam tu, ad cuius summam eruditionem et praestantissimum ingenium cura quoque et meditatio accessit?” Et Messalla “aperiam” inquit “cogitationes meas, si illud a vobis ante impetravero, ut vos quoque sermonem hunc nostrum adiuvetis.” “Pro duobus” inquit Maternus “promitto: nam et ego et Secundus exsequemur eas partis, quas intellexerimus te non tam omisisse quam nobis reliquisse. Aprum enim solere dissentire et tu paulo ante dixisti et ipse satis manifestus est iam dudum in contrarium accingi nec aequo animo perferre hanc nostram pro antiquorum laude concordiam.” “Non enim” inquit Aper “inauditum et indefensum sae- culum nostrum patiar hac vestra conspiratione damnari: sed hoc primum interrogabo, quos vocetis antiquos, quam oratorum aetatem significatione ista determinetis. Ego enim cum audio antiquos, quosdam veteres et olim natos intellego, ac mihi versantur ante oculos Ulixes ac Nestor, quorum aetas mille fere et trecentis annis saeculum nostrum antecedit: vos autem Demosthenem et Hyperidem profertis, quos satis constat Philippi et Alexandri temporibus floruisse, ita tamen ut utrique superstites essent. Ex quo apparet non multo pluris quam trecentos annos interesse inter nostram et Demosthenis aetatem. Quod spatium temporis si ad infirmitatem corporum nostrorum referas, fortasse longum videatur; si ad naturam saeculorum ac respectum inmensi huius aevi, perquam breve et in proximo est. Nam si, ut Cicero in Hortensio scribit, is est magnus et verus annus, par quo eadem positio caeli siderumque, quae cum maxime est, rursum existet, isque annus horum quos nos vocamus annorum duodecim milia nongentos quinquaginta quattuor complectitur, incipit Demosthenes vester, quem vos veterem et antiquum fingitis, non solum eodem anno quo nos, sed etiam eodem mense extitisse.
XVI. You have started an important question, said Secundus, and who so able to discuss it as yourself? Your talents are equal to the difficulty; your acquisitions in literature are known to be extensive, and you have considered the subject. I have no objection, replied Messala: my ideas are at your service, upon condition that, as I go on, you will assist me with the lights of your understanding. For two of us I can venture to answer, said Maternus: whatever you omit, or rather, what you leave for us to glean after you, we shall be ready to add to your observations. As to our friend Aper, you have told us, that he is apt to differ from you upon this point, and even now I see him preparing to give battle. He will not tamely bear to s
ee us joined in a league in favour of antiquity. Certainly not, replied Aper, nor shall the present age, unheard and undefended, be degraded by a conspiracy. But before you sound to arms, I wish to know, who are to be reckoned among the ancients? At what point of time do you fix your favourite æra? When you talk to me of antiquity, I carry my view to the first ages of the world, and see before me Ulysses and Nestor, who flourished little less than thirteen hundred years ago. Your retrospect, it seems, goes no farther back than to Demosthenes and Hyperides; men who lived in the times of Philip and Alexander, and indeed survived them both. The interval, between Demosthenes and the present age, is little more than four hundred years; a space of time, which, with a view to the duration of human life, may be called long; but, as a portion of that immense tract of time which includes the different ages of the world, it shrinks into nothing, and seems to be but yesterday. For if it be true, as Cicero says in his treatise called Hortensius, that the great and genuine year is that period in which the heavenly bodies revolve to the station from which their source began; and if this grand rotation of the whole planetary system requires no less than twelve thousand nine hundred and fifty-four years of our computation, it follows that Demosthenes, your boasted ancient, becomes a modern, and even our contemporary; nay, that he lived in the same year with ourselves; I had almost said, in the same month .
17 [17] Sed transeo ad Latinos oratores, in quibus non Menenium, ut puto, Agrippam, qui potest videri antiquus, nostrorum temporum disertis anteponere soletis, sed Ciceronem et Caesarem et Caelium et Calvum et Brutum et Asinium et Messallam: quos quid antiquis potius temporibus adscribatis quam nostris, non video. Nam ut de Cicerone ipso loquar, Hirtio nempe et Pansa consulibus, ut Tiro libertus eius scribit, septimo idus [Decembris] occisus est, quo anno divus Augustus in locum Pansae et Hirtii se et Q. Pedium consules suffecit. Statue sex et quinquaginta annos, quibus mox divus Augustus rem publicam rexit; adice Tiberii tris et viginti, et prope quadriennium Gai, ac bis quaternos denos Claudii et Neronis annos, atque illum Galbae et Othonis et Vitellii longum et unum annum, ac sextam iam felicis huius principatus stationem, qua Vespasianus rem publicam fovet: centum et viginti anni ab interitu Ciceronis in hunc diem colliguntur, unius hominis aetas. Nam ipse ego in Britannia vidi senem, qui se fateretur ei pugnae interfuisse, qua Caesarem inferentem arma Britanniae arcere litoribus et pellere adgressi sunt. Ita si eum, qui armatus C. Caesari restitit, vel captivitas vel voluntas vel fatum aliquod in urbem pertraxisset, aeque idem et Caesarem ipsum et Ciceronem audire potuit et nostris quoque actionibus interesse. Proximo quidem congiario ipsi vidistis plerosque senes, qui se a divo quoque Augusto semel atque iterum accepisse congiarium narrabant. Ex quo colligi potest et Corvinum ab illis et Asinium audiri potuisse; nam Corvinus in medium usque Augusti principatum, Asinius paene ad extremum duravit, ne dividatis saeculum, et antiquos ac veteres vocitetis oratores, quos eorundem hominum aures adgnoscere ac velut coniungere et copulare potuerunt.
XVII. But I am in haste to pass to our Roman orators. Menenius Agrippa may fairly be deemed an ancient. I take it, however, that he is not the person, whom you mean to oppose to the professors of modern eloquence. The æra, which you have in view, is that of Cicero and Cæsar; of Cælius and Calvus; of Brutus , Asinius, and Messala. Those are the men, whom you place in the front of hour line; but for what reason they are to be classed with the ancients, and not, as I think they ought to be, with the moderns, I am still to learn. To begin with Cicero; he, according to the account of Tiro, his freedman, was put to death on the seventh of the ides of December, during the consulship of Hirtius and Pansa , who, we know, were both cut off in the course of the year, and left their office vacant for Augustus and Quintus Pedius. Count from that time six and fifty years to complete the reign of Augustus; three and twenty for that of Tiberius, four for Caligula, eight and twenty for Claudius and Nero, one for Galba, Otho, and Vitellius, and finally six from the accession of Vespasian to the present year of our felicity, we shall have from the death of Cicero a period of about one hundred and twenty years, which may be considered as the term allotted to the life of man. I myself remember to have seen in Britain a soldier far advanced in years, who averred that he carried arms in that very battle in which his countrymen sought to drive Julius Cæsar back from their coast. If this veteran, who served in the defence of his country against Cæsar’s invasion, had been brought a prisoner to Rome; or, if his own inclination, or any other accident in the course of things, had conducted him thither, he might have heard, not only Cæsar and Cicero, but even ourselves in some of our public speeches. In the late public largess you will acknowledge that you saw several old men, who assured us that they had received more than once, the like distribution from Augustus himself. If that be so, might not those persons have heard Corvinus and Asinius? Corvinus, we all know, lived through half the reign of Augustus, and Asinius almost to the end. How then are we to ascertain the just boundaries of a century? They are not to be varied at pleasure, so as to place some orators in a remote, and others in a recent period, while people are still living, who heard them all, and may, therefore, with good reason rank them as contemporaries.
[18] Haec ideo praedixi, ut si qua ex horum oratorum fama gloriaque laus temporibus adquiritur, eam docerem in medio sitam et propiorem nobis quam Servio Galbae aut C. Carboni quosque alios merito antiquos vocaverimus; sunt enim horridi et inpoliti et rudes et informes et quos utinam nulla parte imitatus esset Calvus vester aut Caelius aut ipse Cicero. Agere enim fortius iam et audentius volo, si illud ante praedixero, mutari cum temporibus formas quoque et genera dicendi. Sic Catoni seni comparatus C. Gracchus plenior et uberior, sic Graccho politior et ornatior Crassus, sic utroque distinctior et urbanior et altior Cicero, Cicerone mitior Corvinus et dulcior et in verbis magis elaboratus. Nec quaero quis disertissimus: hoc interim probasse contentus sum, non esse unum eloquentiae vultum, sed in illis quoque quos vocatis antiquos pluris species deprehendi, nec statim deterius esse quod diversum est, vitio autem malignitatis humanae vetera semper in laude, praesentia in fastidio esse. Num dubitamus inventos qui prae Catone Appium Caecum magis mirarentur? satis constat ne Ciceroni quidem obtrectatores defuisse, quibus inflatus et tumens nec satis pressus, sed supra modum exsultans et superfluens et parum Atticus videretur. legistis utique et Calvi et Bruti ad Ciceronem missas epistulas, ex quibus facile est deprehendere Calvum quidem Ciceroni visum exsanguem et aridum, Brutum autem otiosum atque diiunctum; rursusque Ciceronem a Calvo quidem male audisse tamquam solutum et enervem, a Bruto autem, ut ipsius verbis utar, tamquam “fractum atque elumbem.” si me interroges, omnes mihi videntur verum dixisse: sed mox ad singulos veniam, nunc mihi cum universis negotium est.
XVIII. From what I have said, I assume it as a clear position, that the glory, whatever it be, that accrued to the age in which those orators lived, is not confined to that particular period, but reaches down to the present time, and may more properly be said to belong to us, than to Servius Galba , or to Carbo , and others of the same or more ancient date. Of that whole race of orators, I may freely say, that their manner cannot now be relished. Their language is coarse, and their composition rough, uncouth, and harsh; and yet your Calvus , your Cælius, and even your favourite Cicero, condescend to follow that inelegant style. It were to be wished that they had not thought such models worthy of imitation. I mean to speak my mind with freedom; but before I proceed, it will be necessary to make a preliminary observation, and it is this: Eloquence has no settled form: at different times it puts on a new garb, and changes with the manners and the taste of the age. Thus we find, that Gracchus , compared with the elder Cato , is full and copious; but, in his turn, yields to Crassus , an orator more polished, more correct, and florid. Cicero rises superior to both; more animated, more harmonious and sublime. He is followed by Corvinus , who has all the softer graces; a sweet flexibility in his style, and a curious felicity in the choice of his words. Which was the greatest orator, is not the question. The use I make of these examples, is to prove that eloquence does
not always wear the same dress, but, even among your celebrated ancients, has its different modes of persuasion. And be it remembered, that what differs is not always the worst. Yet such is the malignity of the human mind, that what has the sanction of antiquity is always admired; what is present, is sure to be condemned. Can we doubt that there have been critics, who were better pleased with Appius Cæcus than with Cato? Cicero had his adversaries : it was objected to him, that his style was redundant, turgid, never compressed, void of precision, and destitute of Attic elegance. We all have read the letters of Calvus and Brutus to your famous orator. In the course of that correspondence, we plainly see what was Cicero’s opinion of those eminent men. The former appeared to him cold and languid; the latter , disjointed, loose, and negligent. On the other hand, we know what they thought in return: Calvus did not hesitate to say, that Cicero was diffuse luxuriant to a fault, and florid without vigour. Brutus, in express terms, says, he was weakened into length, and wanted sinew. If you ask my opinion, each of them had reason on his side. I shall hereafter examine them separately. My business at present, is not in the detail: I speak of them in general terms.
[19] Nam quatenus antiquorum admiratores hunc velut terminum antiquitatis constituere solent, qui usque ad Cassium * * * * * , quem reum faciunt, quem primum adfirmant flexisse ab illa vetere atqueirecta dicendi via, non infirmitate ingenii nec inscitia litterarum transtulisse se ad aliud dicendi genus contendo, sed iudicio et intellectu. Vidit namque, ut paulo ante dicebam, cum condicione temporum et diversitate aurium formam quoque ac speciem orationis esse mutandam. facile perferebat prior ille populus, ut imperitus et rudis, impeditissimarum orationum spatia, atque id ipsum laudabat, si dicendo quis diem eximeret. Iam vero longa principiorum praeparatio et narrationis alte repetita series et multarum divisionum ostentatio et mille argumentorum gradus, et quidquid aliud aridissimis Hermagorae et Apollodori libris praecipitur, in honore erat; quod si quis odoratus philosophiam videretur et ex ea locum aliquem orationi suae insereret, in caelum laudibus ferebatur. Nec mirum; erant enim haec nova et incognita, et ipsorum quoque oratorum paucissimi praecepta rhetorum aut philosophorum placita cognoverant. At hercule pervulgatis iam omnibus, cum vix in cortina quisquam adsistat, quin elementis studiorum, etsi non instructus, at certe imbutus sit, novis et exquisitis eloquentiae itineribus opus est, per quae orator fastidium aurium effugiat, utique apud eos iudices, qui vi et potestate, non iure et legibus cognoscunt, nec accipiunt tempora, sed constituunt, nec exspectandum habent oratorem, dum illi libeat de ipso negotio dicere, sed saepe ultro admonent atque alio transgredientem revocant et festinare se testantur.
Complete Works of Tacitus (Delphi Classics) (Delphi Ancient Classics Book 24) Page 169