arisen which called itself Attic, and attempted to return to the simplicity of Xenophon and Lysias. But in avoiding the Eastern exaggeration, it had fallen into a meagreness and baldness very different from the direct force of Demosthenes. Probably this tendency was really no more sincere than the other, for both styles alike aimed to excite the admiration of the hearer rather than to influence his mind or feelings by the effective presentation of ideas.

Hortensius, the great contemporary and rival of Cicero, was a special example of the Asiatic school. He was a somewhat effeminate person, with a dandified air both in composition and delivery. His voice," we read, " was resonant and sweet, his motions and gestures had even more art than is suitable for an orator." 1

ee

The extreme Attic school was represented by C. Licinius Calvus.2 "Though he handled his style with knowledge and good taste," writes Cicero, "yet being too critical of himself, and fearing to acquire unhealthy force, he lost even real vitality. Accordingly, his speaking, repressed by too great scrupulousness, was brilliant to the learned and those who listened to him attentively, but by the crowd and the Forum it was swallowed like a pill."

It is important to settle Cicero's own position in this contest. He himself fancied that he followed the true and best form of Atticism. We see by his oratorical works that his ideas were formed on the best models; that he was familiar with all the rhetorical systems of the Greeks of the best period, and fully appreciated all the excellencies of the earlier Roman orators, as well as the simplicity and directness of Demosthenes. But taste had declined, and everything had to be overdone to satisfy the public. Cicero seems to have taken a

1 Brutus, xcv, 326.

2 Born May 28, B.C. 82; died before B.C. 47.

8 Brutus, lxxxii, 284.

middle course, following the style of the Rhodian school, a branch or outgrowth of the Asiatic, with strong Attic tendencies. It professed to abhor the luxuriance and affectation of Asianism and to aim at the old directness and true feeling; but Cicero was assailed in his own time for exaggeration, false pathos, and artificial rhetoric, such as were characteristic of Asianism. Nor could we expect anything else. He could not restore a style which the age could not appreciate, nor rise to a height for which his native genius was insufficient. With him, however, Latin oratory reached the acme of its development.

Many literary men The younger Pliny

Immediately after Cicero, came the Empire with its suppression of free thought, and in this the extreme style of Asiatic exaggeration and posing became the rage. endeavored to stem this tide, but in vain. attempted to take Cicero as his model, but the only oration of his that we possess is merely a fulsome rhetorical exercise. Quintilian wrote a treatise on the education of the orator, full of sound learning and good sense. Oratory was the favorite study of all literary men, and even emperors entered the lists to contend for pre-eminence. But "art for art's sake" had become the aim in literature generally; and oratory, now divorced from real feeling, could not but end in affected brilliancy and false emotion, such as mark all we know of later Roman work.

Before the Romans came into contact with Greek oratory, that art had been reduced to a very elaborate and even pedantic science. All the principles by which a public speaker could proceed had been formulated into rules which even to this day, with or without the speaker's knowledge, guide all discusWithout going into the minute details of the system, one may well notice the scientific principles which had been carefully mastered by Cicero, and which formed the basis of his skill as an orator.

sion.

Naturally the first matter to be attended to was the settlement of the question at issue (constitutio causae). As the ancient science of rhetoric had to do with discourse of every kind, all questions that might arise were divided into two classes: those whose discussion was directed to acquiring knowledge merely (quaestiones cognitionis), and those directed to determining what action should be taken as the result of the enquiry (quaestiones actionis). With the former we have nothing to do here. They are confined to philosophical discussion only, and the orations of Cicero are all on practical subjects.

The practical questions included under the quaestiones actionis were of several different kinds: they might be judicial questions coming before some form of court (genus iudiciale); they might be deliberative and come before an assembly or senate (genus deliberativum); or they might be questions of praise or blame in reference to some particular person or act not under judicial investigation (genus demonstrativum). The last class would include eulogies and the like.

The oration itself had also its divisions, which were established particularly in regard to the genus judiciale as the most important of the three kinds. The exordium contained necessary preliminary remarks and the approach to the subject. The narratio gave the facts on which the argument was founded. The propositio was the statement of the theme or view to be maintained, and often contained a partitio or division of the proposition. The argumentatio embraced the confirmatio or arguments for the main thesis, and the confutatio (refutatio) or refutation of real or supposed arguments of the opponent. The address ended with the peroratio, the place for such application of the argument, or appeal to the hearers, or general remarks, as were suitable to the occasion. Naturally, as the art of speaking came before the science, and was at all times more or less free from scientific trammels, these divisions

could not well cover the whole ground, and each of them was accordingly subdivided into several smaller parts, which varied according to the character of the oration. Thus the exordium contained a principium and an insinuatio (the suggestions to be made in order to gain the favorable attention of the hearer), and all the various forms of proof had their place as well as their names in the confirmatio. Even the main divisions are not all clearly marked, but generally they can be made out in Cicero's speeches. For examples, see the summary and the running analysis of each oration in the notes.

With the same particularity were the necessary duties of the orator divided, and furnished each with its technical name : inventio, the gathering of material; dispositio, the arrangement; elocutio, the suitable expression in language; memoria, the committing to memory; actio, the delivery. Under each of these, again, was a body of lore with its technical phrases. Elocutio embraced the whole doctrine of what we should call style, and the use of all rhetorical devices, ornaments (lumina), and forms of speech. So that no science was ever more completely digested and labelled than this of oratory.

Of the orations in the present edition, Roscius, Verres, and Archias belong purely to the genus iudiciale; the Manilian Law and the four Orations against Catiline belong to the genus deliberativum.

III. CICERO AS AN ORATOR.

CICERO'S success as an orator was due more than anything else to his skill in effectively presenting the strong points of a case and cleverly covering the weak ones. For this he had extraordinary natural talents, increased by very diligent study and practice, and never, even in his greatest success, did he relax the most careful study of his cases to this end. Attention is called throughout the notes to his felicities in this branch of his art, which, because it is not strictly literary, is likely to be overlooked, and all the more because such art must always be carefully concealed. It is sufficient, however, to call attention to it here generally, referring the student to the notes for details.

On the literary side of oratory, Cicero's only rival is Demosthenes, to whom he is superior in everything except moral earnestness and the power that comes from it, a quality which belongs to the man rather than the orator. Teuffel (Gesch. der Röm. Lit.) ascribes to him an extraordinary activity of intellect, a lively imagination, quickness and warmth of feeling, a marvellous sense of form, an inexhaustible fertility of expression, an incisive and diverting wit, with the best physical advantages. As to his "form," he speaks of it as "clear, choice, clean, copious, appropriate, attractive, tasteful, and harmonious." The whole range of tones from light jest even to tragic vehemence was at his command, and especially did he excel in an appearance of conviction and emotion, which he increased by an impassioned delivery. Of course he is not always at his best, but it is never safe to criticise his compositions without a careful study of the practical necessities of the occasion.

Thus Cicero's style is often criticised as redundant and tautological, a criticism which must proceed either from igno