CICERO AND HIS LETTERS.*
WE notice these two books together because they are both. intended to illustrate the works of the same author, Except in * Men): ,Select Letters, ronMA Enrelish Introdnetions, Notes, and Appendices. fly &Wort Watson, MA. oxford: Printed at the Clarendon Press. t The Do Orators of Cicero. Translated by F. II. Calvert, M.A. Edinburgh: Edmoua ton and Douglas, this one point they have little in common, further than that each in its own way has been carefully executed, and deserves to receive a favourable judgment. Mr. Watson's book is much the larger 'of the two; it is also the more important, has required more labour and scholarship, and presents to the reader a far larger amount of information worthy of notice which is due to the editor himself. But Mr. Calvert's book bears no signs of a want of suffi- cient scholarship ; the very nature of the work gave less opportunity for copious annotation ; and if the translator has perhaps erred in snaking his notes too few and too brief, we are not disposed to find fault with him for a mistake which iu this case is rather in his favour than against him. Mr. Watson seems to have gone to the opposite extreme. He gives the reader more assistance than most readers of the book should require, and his introductions, notes, and appendices, admirable as they are in most respects, are yet rather heavy, and give the work a somewhat formidable appearance.
To use a well-worn but convenient phrase, Mr. Watson's volume may be said to " supply a want" in our editions of the classics. Mr. J. E. Yonge is at present bringing out a carefully-prepared edition of Cicero's Letters, but apart from this there is no English edition, so far as we know, of the whole or any considerable num- ber of them which fairly rises above the level of a school-book. Whatever may be the causes of the fact, it was not at all desirable that it should continue to exist. On this ground, even if its merits were not no great as they are, Mr. Watson's work would deserve a hearty welcome. We still have to wait for a collection of the -whole of the Letters edited in a style worthy of English scholar. *hip. When it does come it will be even more bulky than this selection from the correspondence, and will not necessarily super- sede it in the hands of most readers. In the meantime, though exception may be taken to Mr. Watson's choice in some instances, we must feel glad that so many of the letters which best deserve attention are here presented to us in so pleasant a form. That Cicero's letters are well worthy of attention from the classical student, that they have a peculiar value for the light they throw upon the character of the writer and the history of his times, it is surely unnecessary to say. It is not underrating the merits of his other writings to declare that we could better afford to do without them, were such a sacrifice required, than to do without his collected Epistles. Acknowledging to the utmost extent how clever are his rhe- torical treatises, and his works on the philosophy of morals, of religion, and of politics, we should yet prefer to give them up, contenting ourselves with the more original treatises which we owe to the literature of Greece. Even the orations, splendid as they arc, would have to be treated in the same way. But it is only a careful study of the Letters themselves which can justify such a judgment. To bring forward proofs of its correctness would ,be to give a detailed analysis of all the Epistles, with their various contents. The reader who studies them with a view to such a comparison or to their own intrinsic merit will ho most impressed, probably, in the first instance, by their historical value. There is nothing equal to them in the light which they throw upon the history of the times. " Cicero's correspondence," Mr. Watson well remarks, "furnishes the most detailed and trustworthy com- mentary on a very interesting period of Roman history." And we may add that not a little of the importance and interest of this commentary is due to the epistolary form in which it is presented to us. In some of the political struggles of his time, Cicero was the most prominent combatant ; in more, he was only subordinate to the chief opponents ; in all, he took a deep and anxious interest. He had the best means of knowing the motives and designs of the leading men of the different parties in the State. And in his letters, as they have come down to us,—whether they be the artful, insincere, and elaborately deceitful epistles addressed to those whose good- will it suited his interests at the time to secure, or his letters to his personal friends, with their frank disclosures and far more pleasant tone, —we have the best commentary we could wish for upon the events of that critical period, as they affected his own changing fortunes and those of the contending parties. The political drama which was played out during the last years of the Republic is Isere described for us by one who took a leading part in it, and now lets us in behind the scenes. For few periods of history have we so good contemporary evidence; for this important period we have no evidence so full and of so much weight.
But Cicero's Letters are not merely useful in this respect ; they lave a peculiar value for the light they throw upon the character of the writer. They illustrate his character much more clearly than most similar collections do ; and when there is added to this the lad that the writer is the first of Roman, and only the second of all ancient, orators, and among the writers, as well as the statesmen, of his country well deserves the title that Byron has given him of "Rome's least mortal mind ;" it is evident that on this score alone, if there were no other, the value of these letters must be great. It is no slight advantage also to have such a revelation as they afford of the mind and heart of one removed from us by so many centuries, surrounded by circumstances so different, and imbued with modes of thought and life so alien to our own. In this respect they greatly aid us to secure one of the highest rewards of classical studies. How complete is the information which we thus obtain as to Cicero and his surroundings may be seen by any one who will take the trouble to read the pleasant volume published by M. Gaston Boissier some five years ago, Ciceron at see Ana& But it is in reading the letters themselves that we can best enjoy this use of them. Their variety of isubjeot and of style, their liveliness and grace, their sparkling wit, and the nameless charm which hangs around them all, can only be appreciated at first hand. It is in the attractions of his letters, no doubt, that we may find the source of that kindly liking for the writer which makes us ready to think the best of the too conspicuous faults in his character and conduct. But it must be confessed that his own correspondence can furnish matter enough for accusation against him. We may be far enough from joining in the spirit or the substance of the bitter indictment which Mommsen b rings against him, but the damaging irresolution, the inordinate vanity, and the frequent insincerity which dim the brightness of his genius and his life are too patent to be denied or explained away. He is the strongest witness against himself. As has been well said by one who was at once a friendly and a just critic, the late Professor Ramsay, " It is vain to undertake the defence of his conduct by ingenious and elaborate reasonings. The whole case is placed clearly before our eyes, and all the common sources of fallacy and unjust judgment in regard to public men are re- moved. We are not called upon to weigh and scrutinize the evidence of partial or hostile witnesses, whose testimony may be coloured or perverted by the keenness of party spirit. Cicero is his own accuser, and is convicted by his own depositions." Apart from his political conduct, there is perhaps no fault more con- spicuous than his insincerity in his correspondence. This comes out most, of course, in the letters to those with whom he was not on intimate or really friendly terms. With his familiar friends it is different. With Atticus, for example, he is sincere and frank enough ; indeed his candour to this correspondent leads him to make strange confessions of his double-dealing to others. Thus we find him acknowledging that he had opened letters written by his brother, and even sending them in this state to Atticus, to he closed and sent on if he thought proper. In the matter of letter- writing altogether Cicero was troubled with few scruples. He could dictate to a friend's private secretary a letter in the name of his master,, that it might convey a message of a particular character to the person to whom it was sent. Of the emptiness of his professions of friendship and the hollowness of his flattery only too many examples might be given. It says more than anything else could for the charm of his style, and the many attractive vir- tues of his private and social life, that the correspondence which discloses so many faults should yet be the most powerful advocate on his behalf, making us only too glad to extenuate his errors, and to consider his virtues rather than his weakness.
The correspondence of Cicero deserves attention on another ground, as containing rare specimens of excellence in epistolary composition. As a collection of Latin letters it is specially valu- able. Nowhere else can the student of the language find such examples of its use in this kiud of writing. Even if it had been far less full and diversified it would have had peculiar value, as coming to us from the pen of the greatest master of Latin prose style. That it should be so extensive, and so various alike in expression and in theme, of course enhances its value. On these grounds, not to speak of the difference between the two periods which they represent, this collection has obviously a great advan- tage over the only one with which it can be compared, so far as Latin literature is concerned,—the Letters of Pliny the Younger. To make any serious comparison between them with a view to claiming for the latter even an equal place would be absurd. Yet they are not without points of resemblance. We have remarked how important are the epistles of Cicero for the light they throw on the last years of the Republic. In the same way, the Epistles of Pliny are as valuable as they are interesting, for the informa- tion they give us about Roman society under the reign of the Emperor Trajan. For both periods we should be greatly at a loss without the historic material which these two epistolary collections supply. It would lead us too much into detail to endeavour to bring out many of the points of resemblance as well as contrast between these two collections and their authors. A resemblance like that between the letter of Cicero to his brother Quintus on the duties of a provincial governor and that written by Pliny on the same subject suggests itself to the most casual reader. The same may be said of such points in the
character of the two writers as their love of culture, self-compla- cency, not to say self-conceit, and kindness to their dependents. Cicero's relations to Tiro are well known, and we find Pliny in one of his letters making arrangements with one of his friends residing near Nice for the reception of one of his freedmen who was suffer- ing from illness. As has been said, however, there can be no real comparison instituted between the letters of the two. Even on the ground df amusement, Cicero's letters are at more interesting than those of Pliny. He has not a little also of that charm which has been referred to by one of the brothers flare in the Guesses at Truth, with reference to female letter-writers. " What women write best is what expresses personal, individual feeling, or describes personal occurrences, not objectively, as parts of history, but with reference to themselves and their own affec- tions. This is the charm of female letters; they alone touch the matters of ordinary life with ease and grace. Men's letters may be witty, or elegant, or profound; but when they have any- thing beyond a mere practical purpose, they mostly pass out of the true epistolary element, and become didactic or satirical. Cowper alone, whose mind had much of a feminine complexion, can vie with women in writing such letters as flow lightly and calmly along, mirroring the scenes and occupations or ordinary life." M. Boissier, in the book already referred to, has pointed out that there is much in common between Cicero and Madame de Sevigne, and the remark is a due one. One other point may be noticed in relation to the style of Cicero's letters, and that is the remarkable contrast furnished by the terseness of his epistles to his familiar friends to the lengthy sentences which he employs in writing to those whom he wishes to conciliate by elaborate professions of friendship. Cicero's terseness, indeed, is one of the most noticeable features in many of his letters. Take, for ex- ample, that in which he informs Atticus of the result of the consular elections, the birth of a son to himself, and the state of the mother's health ; and all this in the opening sentence. " L. Julio Caesar°, C. Marcie Figulo consulibus, filiolo me auctum scito salvo, Terentia." It would be hard to compress more sense into as few words.
In Mr. Watson's selection the political letters predominate. ISlany of the most characteristic letters are for this reason ex- cluded. But on his principle of selection Mr. Watson, it must be said, has made a good choice. The letters are arranged in chronological order, and divided into several groups, according to the periods they represent. Prefixed to each division is a historical introduction, narrating the course of events in the history of the State and in Cicero's personal history, a knowledge of which is so much required for the proper understanding of the Epistles, and on which in return the Epistles reflect so much light. These introductions are very carefully written, though the con- densed style which the space at disposal has rendered necessary snakes them rather dry. The explanatory notes at the foot of the pages are very satisfactory, erring, if at all, on the side of too great fullness. But the most valaable part of the editor's work is to be found in the appendices, in which many important and interesting questions relating to Cicero's political and domestic history, and to the meaning and use of certain Latin words, are discussed with great learning and ability. Among the appen- dices dealing with questions of the last-mentioned class may be specially noticed that on the meaning of the words " colonia," " municipium," and " priefectura." Mr. Calvert's book is of quite another stamp from Mr. Wat- son's, but at the same time it is a very good book iu its way. As a translation it is much more readable than many productions of the same class, and it will give the " merely English reader " who carefully goes through it a very good notion of the contents and value of this treatise of Cicero. Among the rhetorical works of the great Roman orator this is one of the most important, if not the most important of all. To prove this it would be necessary to compare it in more or less detail with the other treatises of the same order, and this our space prevents us doing. Nor can we, for the same reason, give any outline of the course of this dialogue, in which Cicero discusses the main questions 'concerning the qualifications and sphere of the orator, putting the arguments from different points of view into the mouths of the principal orators of the generation precluding his own. The skill with which lie has overcome the inherent difficulties of this form of composition has often been admired ; and this merit of the De Oratore is apparent even in Mr. Calvert's translation. While much that is said by the different speakers is restricted in its application to the efforts of the Roman senate and bar, much more may be road with a practical end in view by modern students of the art of oratory. To those who cannot read the original or who prefer to become acquainted with it in an English dress this trans- lation may be recommended as, on the whole, as readable as any they can use. It would have been well, perhaps, if Mr. Calvert had not studied brevity so much in his notes. One of the few which he has given us is worth quoting. " The ancient mode of warfare,and the weapons used by the Roman legionary, necessitated a style of drill very different from the erect and rigid attitude of the modern soldier. The very reverse of our present system, it required the utmost flexibility of figure, and threw the body into every possible variety of action and attitude, as the buckler, spear, or sword were successively brought into play for attack or defence, advance or retreat. The peculiar training of the drill and paleestra, therefore, is here (b. III. c. lix.) recommended in preference to that of the stage, not because less vehement and de- monstrative, but precisely for the opposite reason—because bolder, manlier, and more decided, less finically nice and minutely descrip- tive of the individual word. The " laterum inflectio fortis et virilis "—the manly, flexile, and vigorous swaying of the body— and not, as often translated, "a vigorous effort of the lungs "— here mentioned as characteristic of the orator, so far from being employed by the modern speaker, is rarely hazarded even by our tragedians except in the most impassioned scones of the drama, and from its lofty and defiant grandeur was a favourite action of John Kemble in his Roman characters, and especially in the indig- nant burst of his Coriolauus. Indeed, the magnificent attitude of the ancient orator in the fervour of harangue as here portrayed by
Cicero,—the arm advanced as if brandishing the bolt of eloquence, the emphatic beat of the foot, and the whole person defiantly
thrown back, and then brought forward with a circular sweep of the arm, as if swayed to and fro by the whirlwind of passion, is, to modern taste, much more characteristic of the actor than of the orator."
Previous page
