62 ANALYSIS AND CRITICISM 



them. 8 'At first sight, each group of facts has its cause' 9; the essen- 

 tial point of a revolution or war can sometimes be summed up in 

 a single phrase or formula. But the mind is not completely satis- 

 fied with such minor apergus: 'The partial causes suppose the 

 universal causes', until finally there emerges a 'dominant idea' 

 which expresses 'the genius of the people'. lo Livy's notion of 

 Roman history was inadequate, since it was primarily that of an 

 oratorical spirit writing history; he neglected such factors as the 

 climate, the soil, and social institutions, ^i Modern historians have 

 done better in this respect^^: Tn order to teach better, one must 

 choose better.' 13 



The historian-artist, like the historian-scientist, attempts to 

 strike a balance between the particular and the general. The 

 special gift of imagination enables him to penetrate to the very 

 soul of events: 'Let us, therefore, transform the abstractions and 

 arguments into emotions and images.' But this is not accom- 

 plished by addition of external ornamentation; rather, 'perfect 

 science of itself produces faultless art'. This will be true because, 

 essentially, the scientist and the poet are concerned with the same 

 fundamental human reality. 'Thus, the historian creates portraits 

 while seeking for causes, and, because he wishes to teach, he 

 pleases.' 1"^ The artist's truest style will be the product of his 

 profoundest reflections, so that 'description, narration, style, 

 expression, all the elements of art are produced by science'. 

 Because of this correspondence of content and form, Livy's ora- 

 torical bent will be found to have influenced his art as it did his 

 science. 'The same causes applied to similar objects have pro- 

 duced the same effects.' i^ 



Thus, it followed that Livy's method of presenting the charac- 

 ters in his history was through their discourse, rather than their 

 thoughts or actions (Chapter II, Part Two); but 'Eloquence 

 is not imagination, and, if one wishes to be a painter, it is danger- 

 ous to be an orator.' ^^ This fault was least evident in his treatments 

 of the great figures, like Hannibal and Scipio, with whom the 

 oratorical method was most appropriate. The same criticism is 

 applied to Livy's use of narrative, because, as Aristotle pointed 

 out, 'action depends on character'. i^ The oratorical method is 

 not without its virtues, since it focusses on the reasoning and 

 psychology which motivate the action. But it tends to be swept 

 away by its own eloquence and wander from objective truth, 

 especially when it is written in the vein of high tragedy, instead 



