Institutio Oratoria

Indeed, such is his supremacy that he has scarce left a name to other writers of the new comedy, and has cast them into darkness by the splendour of his own renown. Still, you will find something of value in the other comic poets as well, if you read them in not too critical a spirit; above all, profit may be derived from the study of Philemon, [*]( Philemon of Soli (360–262); Menader of Athens (342– 290). ) who, although it was

If we turn to history, we shall find a number of distinguished writers; but there are two who must undoubtedly be set far above all their rivals: their excellences are different in kind, but have won almost equal praise. Thucydides is compact in texture, terse and ever eager to press forward: Herodotus is pleasant, lucid and diffuse: the former excels in vigour, speeches and the expression of the stronger passions; the latter in charm, conversations and the delineation of the gentler emotions.

Theopompus [*]( Theopompus of Chios, born about 378 B.C., wrote a history of Greece ( Hellenica ) from close of Peloponnesian war to 394 B.C., and a history of Greece in relation to Philip of Macedon ( Philippica ). His master, Isocrates, urged him to write history. ) comes next, and though as a historian he is inferior to the authors just mentioned, his style has a greater resemblance to oratory, which is not surprising, as he was an orator before he was urged to turn to history. Philistus [*]( Philistus of Syracuse, born about 430 B.C., wrote a history of Sicily. ) also deserves special distinction among the crowd of later historians, good though they may have been: he was an imitator of Thucydides, and though far his inferior, was somewhat more lucid. Ephorus, [*]( Ephorus of Cumae, flor. circ. 340 B.C., wrote a universal history. He was a pupil of Isocrates. Cp. II. viii. 11. ) according to Isocrates, needed the spur.

Clitarchus [*]( Clitarchus of Megara wrote a history of Persia and of Alexander, whose contemporary he was. ) has won approval by his talent, but his accuracy has been impugned. Timagenes [*]( Timagenes, a Syrian of the Augustan age, wrote a history of Alexander and his successors. ) was born long after these authors, but deserves our praise for the very fact that he revived the credit of history, the writing of which had fallen into neglect. I have not forgotten Xenophon, but he will find his place among the philosophers.

There follows a vast army of orators, Athens alone having produced ten remarkable orators [*]( Antiphon, Andocides, Lysias (flor. 403–380), Isocrates (435–338), Isacus, Demosthenes, Aeschines, Lycargus, Hyperides and Dinarchus. ) in the same generation. Of these Dermosthenes is far the greatest: indeed he came to be regarded almost as the sole pattern of oratory. Such is the force and compactness of his language, so muscular his style, so free from tameness and so self-controlled, that you will find nothing in him that is either too much or too little.

The style of Aesehines is fuller and more diffuse, while his lack of restraint gives an appearance of grandeur. But he has more flesh and less muscle. Hyperides has extraordinary charm and point, but is better qualified, not to say more useful, for cases of minor importance.

Lysias belongs to an earlier generation than those whom I have just mentioned. He has subtlety and elegance and, if the orator's sole duty were merely to instruct, it would be impossible to conceive greater perfection. For there is nothing irrelevant or far-fetched in his speeches. None the less I would compare him to a clear spring rather than to a mighty river.

Isocrates was an exponent of a different style of oratory: he is neat and polished and better suited to the fencingschool than to the battlefield. He elaborated all the graces of style, nor was he without justification. For lie had trained himself for the lecture-room and not the law-courts. He is ready in invention, his moral ideals are high and the care which he bestows upon his rhythm is such as to be a positive fault.

I do not regard these as the sole merits of the orators of whom I have spoken, but have selected what seemed to me their chief excellences, while those whom I have passed over in silence were far from being indifferent. In fact, I will readily admit that the

Proceeding to the philosophers, from whom Cicero acknowledges that he derived such a large portion of his eloquence, we shall all admit that Plato is supreme whether in acuteness or perception or in virtue of his divine gift of style, which is worthy of Homer. For he soars high above the levels of ordinary prose or, as the Greeks call it, pedestrian language, and seems to me to be inspired not by mere human genius, but, as it were, by the oracles of the god of Delphi.

Why should I speak of the unaffected charm of Xenophon, so far beyond the power of affectation to attain? The Graces themselves seem to have moulded his style, and we may with the utmost justice say of him, what the writer of the old comedy [*]( Eupolis, πειθώ τις ἐπεκάθιζεν ἐπὶ τοῖς χείλεσιν. ) said of Pericles, that the goddess of persuasion sat enthroned upon his lips.

Why should I dwell on the elegance of the rest of the Socratics? or on Aristotle, [*](Sweet is the last epithet to be applied to the surviving works of Aristotle. But Dionysius of Halicarnassus and Cicero praise him no less warmly, referring, no doubt, to works that are lost. ) with regard to whom I hesitate whether to praise him more for his knowledge, for the multitude of his writings, the sweetness of his style, the penetration revealed by his discoveries or the variety of the tasks which he

The ancient Stoics indulged their eloquence comparatively little. Still, they pleaded the cause of virtue, and the rules which they laid down for argument and proof have been of the utmost value. But they showed themselves shrewd thinkers rather than striking orators, which indeed they never aimed at being.

I now come to Roman authors, and shall follow the same order in dealing with them. As among Greek authors Homer provided us with the most auspicious opening, so will Virgil among our own. For of all epic poets, Greek or Roman, he, without doubt, most nearly approaches to Homer.

I will repeat the words which I heard Domitius Afer use in my young days. I asked what poet in his opinion came nearest to Homer, and he replied,

Virgil comes second, but is nearer first than third.

All our other poets follow a long way in the rear. Macer and Lucretius are, it is true, worth reading, but not for the purpose of forming style, that is to say, the body of eloquence: both deal elegantly with their themes, but the former is tame and the latter difficult. The poems by which Varro of Atax [*]( Varro of Atax in Gaul (82–37 B.C. ) was specially famous for his translation of the Argontautica of Apollonius Rhodius. he also wrote didactic poetry and historical epic. ) gained his reputation were translations, but he is by no means to be despised, although his diction is not sufficiently rich to be of much

Ennius deserves our reverence, but only as those groves whose age has made them sacred, but whose huge and ancient trunks inspire us with religious awe rather than with admiration for their beauty. There are other poets who are nearer in point of time and more useful for our present purpose. Ovid has a lack of seriousness even when he writes epic and is unduly enamoured of his own gifts, but portions of his work merit our praise.

On the other hand, although Cornelius Severus [*]( Friend and contemporary of Ovid. A considerable fragment is preserved by Sen. Suas. vi. 26. The Sicilian War was the war with Sextus Pompeius (38–36) and perhaps formed a portion of a larger work on the Civil War. The surviving fragment deals with the death of Cicero. The priunus liber may therefore perhaps be the first book of this larger work. ) is a better versifier than poet, yet if, as has been said, he had written his poem on the Sicilian war in the same style throughout as his first book, he would have had a just claim to the second place. A premature death prevented the powers of Serranus [*](Nothing is known of this poet except the name.) from ripening to perfection, but his youthful works reveal the highest talent and a devotion to the true ideal of poetry, which is remarkable in one so young.

We have suffered serious loss in the recent death of Valerius Flaccus. Saleius Bassus [*]( Nothing is known of this poet save that he is highly praised by Tacitus in his Diblogues, and was patronized by Vespasian. The unfinished Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus survives. ) showed an ardent and genuinely poetic genius, but, like that of Serranus, it was not mellowed by years. Rabirius [*]( A contemporary of Ovid, believed to be the author of a fragment on the battle of Actium, found at Hereulaneum. ) and Pedo [*]( C. Albinovanns Pedo wrote a poem on the voyage of Germanicus to the north of Germany. A fragment is preserved by Sen. Suas. i. 14. ) deserve to be studied by those who have the time. Lucan is fiery and passionate and remarkable for the grandeur of his general reflexions, but, to be frank, I consider that he is more suitable for imitation by the orator than by the poet.

I have restricted my list of poets to these names, because Germanicus