238 



ROMAX PHILOSOPHY. 



Character of 

 his style. 



Difference 



Latin 

 languages. 



proposito deflectatque sententiam : ut proponat quid dictnras sit : ut, 

 cum transegerit jam aliquid, definiat : ut se ipse revocet : ut, quod 

 dixit, iteret : ut argumentum ratione concludat : . . . . ut dividat in 

 partes : ut aliquid relinquat ac negligat : ut ante praemuniat : ut in eo 

 ipso, in quo reprehendatur, culpam in adversarium conferat : . . . . 

 ut hominum sermones moresque describat : ut muta quaedam loquentia 

 inducat : ut ab eo, quod agitur, avertat animos ; ut ssepe in hilaritatem 

 risumve convertat : ut ante occupet quod videat opponi : ut comparet 

 Similitudines : ut utatur exemplis : . . . . ut liberius quod^audeat : ut 

 irascatur etiam: ut objurget aliquando: ut deprecetur, ut supplicet; 

 ut medeatur ; ut "a proposito declinet aliquantulum : ut optet, ut exe- 

 cretur ; ut fiat iis, apud quos dicet, familiaris." l 



But by the invention of a style, which adapts itself with singular 

 felicity to every class of subjects, whether lofty or familiar, philo- 

 sophical or forensic, Cicero answers even more exactly to his own 

 definition of a perfect orator, 2 than by his plausibility, pathos, and 

 brilliancy. It is not, however, here intended to enter upon the 

 consideration of a subject so ample and so familiar to all scholars as 

 Cicero's oratorical diction, much less to take an extended view of it 

 through the range of his philosophical writings, and familiar corre- 

 spondence. Among many excellences, the greatest is its suitableness 

 to the genius of the Latin language ; though the dimiseness thence 

 necessarily resulting has exposed it, both in his own days and since 

 his time, to the criticisms of those who have affected to condemn its 

 Asiatic character, in comparison with the simplicity of Attic writers, 

 and the strength of Demosthenes. 3 Greek, however, is celebrated for 

 copiousness i n its vocabulary and perspicuity in its phrases ; and the 

 consequent facility of expressing the most novel or abstruse ideas with 

 p rec j s i on an d elegance. Hence the Attic style of eloquence was plain 

 and simple, because simplicity and plainness were not incompatible 

 with clearness, energy, and harmony. But it was a singular want of 

 judgment, an ignorance of the very principles of composition, which 

 induced Brutus, Calvus, Sallust, and others to imitate this terse and 

 severe beauty in their own defective language, and even to pronounce 



1 Orat. 40. [" Our model orator then will often turn one and the same subject 

 about in many ways ; dwell and linger on the same thought ; frequently extenuate 

 circumstances, frequently deride them ; sometimes depart from his object, and di- 

 rect his view another way : propound what he means to speak ; define what he has 

 effected; recollect himself; repeat what he has said ; conclude his address with an 

 argument ; distribute into parts ; leave and neglect something occasionally ; guard 

 his case beforehand ; cast back upon his adversary the very charges brought against 

 him ; describe the language and characters of men ; introduce inanimate objects 

 speaking ; avert attention from the main point ; turn a matter into jest and amuse- 

 ment ; anticipate an objection ; introduce similes ; employ examples ; speak with 

 boldness and freedom, even with indignation ; sometimes with invective ; implore 

 and entreat ; heal an offence ; occasionally decline a little from his object ; implore 

 blessings ; denounce execrations ; in a word, put himself on terms of familiarity 

 with the people whom he addresses." Editor.'] 



2 Orat. 29. 3 Tusc. Qusest, i. 1 ; de clar. Orat. 82, &c.; de opt. gen. Die. 



