Life and literature in the Roman republicFrank, Tenney
History
Life and literature in the Roman republic
Frank, Tenney
Latin literature -- History and criticism; Rome -- Intellectual life
[14] Leo, _Gesch. Lit._, 218, assumes that Caecilius had used the
prologue for personal criticism; Euanthius III. 2 says _deos argumentis
narrandis machinatos ceteri Latini ad instar Graecorum habent, Terentius
non habet_, which of course does not exclude an occasional use of the
personal prologue. After Terence, Afranius sometimes employs superhuman
prologues (Priapus, Sapientia, and Remeligo), but he seems also to have
used the prologue for personal statements in the manner of Terence (lines
25-8).
CHAPTER V
THE PROSE OF THE ROMAN STATESMEN
“Ciceronian prose is practically the prose of the human race,” says
Mackail, a critic who is unusually sensitive to qualities of style. In
saying this, he doubtless had in mind not only the orotund periods of the
_Pro Milone_, the elaborately rhythmical movement of the _Pro Archia_,
the vehement force of the first Catilinarian or the easy colloquialism
of the familiar letters. It was rather the lucid and copious exposition
of essays like the _De Oratore_ in which, without revealed effort, a
versatile mind found appropriate and dignified expression for all its
concepts and moods. How did such prose come to be?
Cicero worked incessantly for years to acquire his command of the tools
of expression. When very young he memorized the standard rules of
rhetoric that emphasized the need for clarity, arrangement, conciseness,
luminosity, and all the rest. Do such rules make great writers? On that
point Cicero did not deceive himself. He knew that adults did not need
them, but he recognized that schoolboys would save time by having their
attention called to what practice would eventually reveal. Such rules
might prove guide posts to intelligent beginners, but one has only to
read the three books of the _De Oratore_[1] to discover that rhetoric was
for Cicero a schoolroom crutch to outgrow and forget. Another device
much recommended by the Roman teachers of his day was imitation, the
study of the masters of diverse styles. It is a method that has recently
been employed to good effect in the classroom for the awakening of taste
and sharpening of critical acumen. Cicero did not scorn its use, but
he knew too well that style is personal[2] to attempt to acquire in
this way a garb that would not fit his own mental processes. When he
sought out Apollonius of Rhodes as a critic it was not in order to adapt
himself to that teacher’s mode of expression. He first decided what his
own taste and capacity needed, and what the Roman Forum and Curia would
require of him; then he sought for the teacher who could best help him
by his criticism. His complete independence is shown by the fact that
he traveled long, trying one after the other of the famous teachers of
the east, abandoning them one by one as soon as he discovered that they
did not suit his purposes.[3] Cicero did not impose the Rhodian style
upon himself. He made his own curriculum to fit his temperament and
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account