Cicero: PHILOSOPHIA

[1] Cum e Cilicia decedens Rhodum venissem et eo mihi de Q. Hortensi morte esset adlatum, opinione omnium maiorem animo cepi dolorem. nam et amico amisso cum consuetudine iucunda tum multorum officiorum coniunctione me privatum videbam et interitu talis auguris dignitatem nostri conlegi deminutam dolebam; qua in cogitatione et cooptatum me ab eo in conlegium recordabar, in quo iuratus iudicium dignitatis meae fecerat, et inauguratum ab eodem; ex quo augurum institutis in parentis eum loco colere debebam.

[1] When, departing from Cilicia, I had come to Rhodes and there news was brought to me of the death of Q. Hortensius, I conceived a grief in spirit greater than the expectation of all. For, with a friend lost, I saw myself deprived both of pleasant companionship and of the conjunction of many offices, and I was grieving that by the death of such an augur the dignity of our college had been diminished; and in that thought I also recalled that I had been coopted by him into the college, in which, under oath, he had made a judgment of my dignity, and inaugurated by that same man; whence, by the institutions of the augurs, I ought to honor him in the place of a parent.

[2] Augebat etiam molestiam, quod magna sapientium civium bonorumque penuria vir egregius coniunctissimusque mecum consiliorum omnium societate alienissimo rei publicae tempore exstinctus et auctoritatis et prudentiae suae triste nobis desiderium reliquerat; dolebamque quod non, ut plerique putabant, adversarium aut obtrectatorem laudum mearum sed socium potius et consortem gloriosi laboris amiseram.

[2] It further augmented my vexation that, amid a great penury of wise and good citizens, an outstanding man, most closely conjoined with me by a fellowship of all counsels, had been extinguished at a time most alien to the republic, and had left to us a sad lack both of his authority and of his prudence; and I grieved that I had lost, not, as most thought, an adversary or a detractor of my praises, but rather a partner and co-sharer of glorious labor.

[3] Etenim si in leviorum artium studio memoriae proditum est poetas nobilis poetarum aequalium morte doluisse, quo tandem animo eius interitum ferre debui, cum quo certare erat gloriosius quam omnino adversarium non habere? cum praesertim non modo numquam sit aut illius a me cursus impeditus aut ab illo meus, sed contra semper alter ab altero adiutus et communicando et monendo et favendo.

[3] For indeed, if in the pursuit of the lighter arts it has been handed down to memory that famous poets grieved at the death of poets their equals, with what spirit ought I to have borne his demise, with whom it was more glorious to contend than not to have an adversary at all? especially since not only was neither his course ever hindered by me nor mine by him, but on the contrary each was always aided by the other by communicating and by admonishing and by favoring.

[4] Sed quoniam perpetua quadam felicitate usus ille cessit e vita suo magis quam suorum civium tempore et tum occidit, cum lugere facilius rem publicam posset, si viveret, quam iuvare, vixitque tam diu quam licuit in civitate bene beateque vivere, nostro incommodo detrimentoque, si est ita necesse, doleamus, illius vero mortis opportunitatem benevolentia potius quam misericordia prosequamur, ut, quotienscumque de clarissumo et beatissumo viro cogitemus, illum potius quam nosmet ipsos diligere videamur.

[4] But since, having enjoyed a certain perpetual felicity, he withdrew from life at a time more his own than that of his fellow-citizens, and died at a time when, if he were to live, he could more easily mourn the republic than help it, and since he lived only so long as it was permitted to live well and happily in the commonwealth, let us grieve, if it must be so, for our inconvenience and detriment, but let us accompany the opportuneness of his death with benevolence rather than with pity, so that, whenever we think about that most illustrious and most blessed man, we may seem to love him rather than our own selves.

[5] Nam si id dolemus, quod eo iam frui nobis non licet, nostrum est id malum; quod modice feramus, ne id non ad amicitiam sed ad domesticam utilitatem referre videamur: sin tamquam illi ipsi acerbitatis aliquid acciderit angimur, summam eius felicitatem non satis grato animo interpretamur.

[5] For if we lament this, that it is now not permitted us to enjoy him, that misfortune is ours; which we should bear moderately, lest we seem to refer it not to friendship but to domestic utility: but if we are distressed as though some acerbity had befallen him himself, we do not interpret his supreme felicity with a sufficiently grateful mind.

[6] Etenim si viveret Q. Hortensius, cetera fortasse desideraret una cum reliquis bonis et fortibus civibus, hunc autem aut praeter ceteros aut cum paucis sustineret dolorem, cum forum populi Romani, quod fuisset quasi theatrum illius ingeni, voce erudita et Romanis Graecisque auribus digna spoliatum atque orbatum videret.

[6] Indeed, if Q. Hortensius were living, he would perhaps miss the other things along with the remaining good and brave citizens, but this grief he would sustain either beyond the rest or with a few, when he saw the forum of the Roman people, which had been as it were the theater of that genius, stripped and bereft of a cultivated voice worthy of Roman and Greek ears.

[7] Equidem angor animo non consili, non ingeni, non auctoritatis armis egere rem publicam, quae didiceram tractare quibusque me adsuefeceram quaeque erant propria cum praestantis in re publica viri tum bene moratae et bene constitutae civitatis. quod si fuit in re publica tempus ullum, cum extorquere arma posset e manibus iratorum civium boni civis auctoritas et oratio, tum profecto fuit, cum patrocinium pacis exclusum est aut errore hominum aut timore.

[7] Indeed I am anguished in mind that the commonwealth needed arms not of counsel, not of ingenuity, not of authority—arms which I had learned to handle and to which I had accustomed myself, and which were proper both to a preeminent man in public affairs and to a state of good morals and well constituted. But if there was in the commonwealth any time when the authority and oration of a good citizen could extort arms from the hands of enraged citizens, then assuredly it was when the patronage of peace was excluded either by the error of men or by fear.

[8] Ita nobismet ipsis accidit ut, quamquam essent multo magis alia lugenda, tamen hoc doleremus quod, quo tempore aetas nostra perfuncta rebus amplissimis tamquam in portum confugere deberet non inertiae neque desidiae, sed oti moderati atque honesti, cumque ipsa oratio iam nostra canesceret haberetque suam quandam maturitatem et quasi senectutem, tum arma sunt ea sumpta, quibus illi ipsi, qui didicerant eis uti gloriose, quem ad modum salutariter uterentur non reperiebant.

[8] Thus it befell us ourselves that, although there were much more other things to be lamented, nevertheless we were pained at this: that at the time when our age, discharged from most ample affairs, ought, as it were, to take refuge into a harbor not of inertia nor of desidia, but of moderated and honest otium, and when our very oration was now growing gray and had its own certain maturitas and as it were senescence, then those arms were taken up, with which those very men who had learned to use them gloriously could not find in what manner they might use them salutarily.

[9] Itaque ei mihi videntur fortunate beateque vixisse cum in ceteris civitatibus tum maxume in nostra, quibus cum auctoritate rerumque gestarum gloria tum etiam sapientiae laude perfrui licuit. quorum memoria et recordatio in maxumis nostris gravissimisque curis iucunda sane fuit, cum in eam nuper ex sermone quodam incidissemus.

[9] Therefore, they seem to me to have lived fortunately and blessedly, both in other states and most especially in our own, for whom it was permitted to enjoy, along with authority and the glory of deeds accomplished, the praise of wisdom as well. The memory and the recordation of these men, amid our greatest and most weighty cares, was indeed pleasant, when we had lately fallen upon that topic from a certain conversation.

[10] Nam cum inambularem in xysto et essem otiosus domi, M. ad me Brutus, ut consueverat, cum T. Pomponio venerat, homines cum inter se coniuncti tum mihi ita cari itaque iucundi, ut eorum aspectu omnis quae me angebat de re publica cura consederit. quos postquam salutavi: Quid vos, inquam, Brute et Attice? numquid tandem novi?

[10] For when I was walking up and down in the xystus and was at leisure at home, Marcus Brutus, as he was accustomed, had come to me with Titus Pomponius, men both conjoined with each other and so dear and so pleasant to me that at the sight of them every care about the commonwealth that was vexing me settled down. After I greeted them: “What say you, Brutus and Atticus? Is there at length anything new?”

Nihil sane, inquit Brutus, quod quidem aut tu audire velis aut ego pro certo dicere audeam.

“Nothing indeed,” said Brutus, “which either you would wish to hear or I would dare to say for certain.”

[11] Tum Atticus: eo, inquit, ad te animo venimus, ut de re publica esset silentium et aliquid audiremus potius ex te, quam te adficeremus ulla molestia. Vos vero, inquam, Attice, et praesentem me cura levatis et absenti magna solacia dedistis. nam vestris primum litteris recreatus me ad pristina studia revocavi.

[11] Then Atticus: “We have come to you with this disposition,” he says, “that there be silence about the commonwealth, and that we might rather hear something from you than afflict you with any molestation.” “Indeed, Atticus,” I say, “you both lighten my present care, and to me when absent you have given great consolations. For by your letters first, being re-created, I called myself back to my pristine studies.”

Tum ille: legi, inquit, perlubenter epistulam, quam ad te Brutus misit ex Asia, qua mihi visus est et monere te prudenter et consolari amicissume.

Then he: "I read," he said, "most gladly the epistle which Brutus sent to you from Asia, in which he seemed to me both to advise you prudently and to console you most affectionately."

[12] Recte, inquam, est visus: nam me istis scito litteris ex diuturna perturbatione totius valetudinis tamquam ad aspiciendam lucem esse revocatum. atque ut post Cannensem illam calamitatem primum Marcelli ad Nolam proelio populus se Romanus erexit posteaque prosperae res deinceps multae consecutae sunt, sic post rerum nostrarum et communium gravissumos casus nihil ante epistulam Bruti mihi accidit, quod vellem aut quod aliqua ex parte sollicitudines adlevaret meas.

[12] Rightly, said I, he seemed so: for know that by that letter I was, as it were, recalled from a long-continued perturbation of my entire health to behold the light. And as after that calamity of Cannae the Roman people first raised itself by Marcellus’s battle at Nola, and afterwards many prosperous events followed in succession, so after the most grave disasters of our affairs, both mine and the commonwealth’s, nothing before Brutus’s letter befell me that I would wish, or that in any part alleviated my anxieties.

[13] Tum Brutus: volui id quidem efficere certe et capio magnum fructum, si quidem quod volui tanta in re consecutus sum. sed scire cupio, quae te Attici litterae delectaverint. Istae vero, inquam, Brute, non modo delectationem mihi, sed etiam, ut spero, salutem adtulerunt.

[13] Then Brutus: I certainly wished to effect that, and I take great fruit, if indeed in so great a matter I have achieved what I wished. But I desire to know what of Atticus’s letters has delighted you. Those indeed, I said, Brutus, have brought me not only delight, but also, as I hope, salvation.

Salutem? inquit ille. quodnam tandem genus istuc tam praeclarum litterarum fuit?

“Salvation?” said he. “What, pray, was that kind of letter so illustrious?”

An mihi potuit, inquam, esse aut gratior ulla salutatio aut ad hoc tempus aptior quam illius libri, quo me hic adfatus quasi iacentem excitavit?

Or could there have been for me, I say, any salutation more gratifying or more apt to this time than that book of his, with which he here addressed me and roused me as if lying prostrate?

[14] Tum ille: nempe eum dicis, inquit, quo iste omnem rerum memoriam breviter et, ut mihi quidem visum est, perdiligenter complexus est? Istum ipsum, inquam, Brute, dico librum mihi saluti fuisse. Tum Atticus: optatissimum mihi quidem est quod dicis; sed quid tandem habuit liber iste, quod tibi aut novum aut tanto usui posset esse?

[14] Then he: “You mean, do you say, the one in which that man comprehended the whole memory of things briefly and, as it seemed to me at least, very diligently?” “That very one,” said I, “Brutus, I say that book was salvation to me.” Then Atticus: “What you say is most welcome to me indeed; but what, pray, did that book have, that could be to you either new or of such great use?”

[15] Ille vero et nova, inquam, mihi quidem multa et eam utilitatem quam requirebam, ut explicatis ordinibus temporum uno in conspectu omnia viderem. quae cum studiose tractare coepissem, ipsa mihi tractatio litterarum salutaris fuit admonuitque, Pomponi, ut a te ipso sumerem aliquid ad me reficiendum teque remunerandum si non pari, at grato tamen munere: quamquam illud Hesiodium laudatur a doctis, quod eadem mensura reddere iubet qua acceperis aut etiam cumulatiore, si possis.

[15] That one indeed, I said, furnished for me both many new things and that utility which I was seeking, namely that, the orders of time having been set out, I might see everything in a single view. And when I had begun to handle these matters studiously, the very tractation of letters was salutary to me, and it admonished me, Pomponius, to take from you yourself something for refreshing myself and for remunerating you, if not with an equal, yet with a grateful gift: although that Hesiodian maxim is praised by the learned, which bids one to render back in the same measure as you have received, or even in a more cumulated one, if you can.

[16] Ego autem voluntatem tibi profecto emetiar, sed rem ipsam nondum posse videor; idque ut ignoscas, a te peto. nec enim ex novis, ut agricolae solent, fructibus est unde tibi reddam quod accepi—sic omnis fetus repressus exustusque flos siti veteris ubertatis exaruit —, nec ex conditis, qui iacent in tenebris et ad quos omnis nobis aditus, qui paene solis patuit, obstructus est. seremus igitur aliquid tamquam in inculto et derelicto solo; quod ita diligenter colemus, ut impendiis etiam augere possimus largitatem tui muneris: modo idem noster animus efficere possit quod ager, qui quom multos annos quievit, uberiores efferre fruges solet.

[16] I, however, will assuredly measure out my goodwill to you, but I do not yet seem able as to the thing itself; and I ask you to pardon that. For neither is there from new fruits, as farmers are wont, whence I might render back to you what I received — thus all the fruiting has been repressed, and the flower burned up; with drought the former fecundity has withered —, nor from stored [supplies], which lie in darkness and to which every access for us, which had been open almost to us alone, has been obstructed. We shall therefore sow something, as though on uncultivated and derelict soil; which we shall cultivate so diligently that by expenditures we may even be able to augment the largess of your gift: provided only that our spirit can effect the same as a field which, when it has rested many years, is wont to bear forth more abundant crops.

[17] Tum ille: ego vero et exspectabo ea quae polliceris, nec exigam nisi tuo commodo et erunt mihi pergrata, si solveris. Mihi quoque, inquit Brutus, [et] exspectanda sunt ea quae Attico polliceris, etsi fortasse ego a te huius voluntarius procurator petam, quod ipse, cui debes, incommodo exacturum negat.

[17] Then he: for my part I will indeed await the things you promise, nor will I exact them except at your convenience, and they will be very welcome to me, if you discharge them. “To me also,” says Brutus, “[and] the things which you promise to Atticus are to be awaited, although perhaps I, as this man’s voluntary procurator, will seek from you that which he himself, to whom you owe it, says he will not exact to your inconvenience.”

[18] At vero, inquam, tibi ego, Brute, non solvam, nisi prius a te cavero amplius eo nomine neminem, cuius petitio sit, petiturum. Non mehercule, inquit, tibi repromittere istuc quidem ausim. nam hunc, qui negat, video flagitatorem non illum quidem tibi molestum, sed adsiduum tamen et acrem fore.

[18] But indeed, I say, I will not pay you, Brutus, unless I shall first have taken security from you that no one else, on that account, whose claim it is, will demand it. “Not, by Hercules,” says he, “would I dare to promise that to you. For I see that this fellow, who says no, will be a dunner—not indeed troublesome to you, but nevertheless assiduous and sharp.”

Tum Pomponius: ego vero, inquit, Brutum nihil mentiri puto. videor enim iam te ausurus esse appellare, quoniam longo intervallo modo primum animadverti paulo te hilariorem.

Then Pomponius: I indeed, said he, think Brutus to be telling nothing untrue. For I seem now about to dare to address you, since after a long interval I have only just now for the first time noticed you somewhat more cheerful.

[19] Itaque quoniam hic quod mihi deberetur se exacturum professus est, quod huic debes, ego a te peto. Quidnam id? inquam. Ut scribas, inquit, aliquid; iam pridem enim conticuerunt tuae litterae.

[19] And so, since this man has professed that he will exact what would be owed to me, what you owe to this man I ask from you. What, pray, is that? I said. That you write, he said, something; for your letters have long since fallen silent.

nam ut illos de re publica libros edidisti, nihil a te sane postea accepimus: eisque nosmet ipsi ad rerum nostrarum memoriam comprehendendam impulsi atque incensi sumus. sed illa, cum poteris; atque ut possis, rogo.

for when you published those books on the Republic, we truly have received nothing from you afterwards: and by them we ourselves have been impelled and inflamed to comprehend a memorial of our affairs. but as for that, when you can; and that you may be able, I ask.

[20] Nunc vero, inquit, si es animo vacuo, expone nobis quod quaerimus. Quidnam est id? inquam. Quod mihi nuper in Tusculano inchoavisti de oratoribus: quando esse coepissent, qui etiam et quales fuissent.

[20] Now indeed, he said, if you are free in mind, expound to us what we are seeking. What is that? I said. What you recently began for me at Tusculum about the orators: when they had begun to exist, who also and what sort they had been.

quem ego sermonem cum ad Brutum tuum vel nostrum potius detulissem, magnopere hic audire se velle dixit. itaque hunc elegimus diem, cum te sciremus esse vacuum. quare, si tibi est commodum, ede illa quae coeperas et Bruto et mihi.

When I had reported that discourse to your Brutus—or rather to our Brutus—he said that he greatly wished to hear it. And so we chose this day, since we knew you to be free. Wherefore, if it is convenient for you, set forth those things which you had begun, both for Brutus and for me.

[21] Ego vero, inquam, si potuero, faciam vobis satis. Poteris, inquit: relaxa modo paulum animum aut sane, si potes, libera. Nempe igitur hinc tum, Pomponi, ductus est sermo, quod erat a me mentio facta causam Deiotari fidelissimi atque optumi regis ornatissume et copiosissume a Bruto me audisse defensam.

[21] Indeed I, said I, if I shall be able, will satisfy you. You will be able, he said: only relax your mind a little, or indeed, if you can, liberate it. So then from this point, Pomponius, the discourse was led, because mention had been made by me that I had heard from Brutus the cause of Deiotarus, a most faithful and best king, defended most ornate and most copious.

Scio, inquit, ab isto initio tractum esse sermonem teque Bruti dolentem vicem quasi deflevisse iudiciorum vastitatem et fori.

I know, he says, that from that beginning the conversation was drawn, and that you, grieving for Brutus, had, as it were, bewailed the devastation of the courts of judgment and of the forum.

[22] Feci, inquam, istuc quidem et saepe facio. nam mihi, Brute, in te intuenti crebro in mentem venit vereri, ecquodnam curriculum aliquando sit habitura tua et natura admirabilis et exquisita doctrina et singularis industria. cum enim in maxumis causis versatus esses et cum tibi aetas nostra iam cederet fascisque submitteret, subito in civitate cum alia ceciderunt tum etiam ea ipsa, de qua disputare ordimur, eloquentia obmutuit.

[22] I did that, said I, and I often do. For to me, Brutus, as I look upon you, it very often comes to mind to fear what course your admirable nature, your exquisite doctrine, and your singular industry will someday have. For when you had been engaged in the greatest cases, and when our age was now yielding to you and lowering its fasces, suddenly in the commonwealth, when other things fell, then even that very eloquence, about which we begin to dispute, was struck dumb.

[23] Tum ille: ceterarum rerum causa, inquit, istuc et doleo et dolendum puto; dicendi autem me non tam fructus et gloria quam studium ipsum exercitatioque delectat: quod mihi nulla res eripiet te praesertim tam studiosum et * * * . dicere enim bene nemo potest nisi qui prudenter intellegit; quare qui eloquentiae verae dat operam, dat prudentiae, qua ne maxumis quidem in bellis aequo animo carere quisquam potest.

[23] Then he: As for the rest of matters, said he, at that I both grieve and think one ought to grieve; but as for speaking, it is not so much the fruit and the glory as the very study and the exercise that delights me: which nothing will snatch from me, especially you being so studious and * * * . For no one can speak well unless he understands prudently; wherefore he who devotes his effort to true eloquence devotes it to prudence, which no one can bear to lack with equanimity even in the greatest wars.

[24] Praeclare, inquam, Brute, dicis eoque magis ista dicendi laude delector, quod cetera, quae sunt quondam habita in civitate pulcherrima, nemo est tam humilis qui se non aut posse adipisci aut adeptum putet; eloquentem neminem video factum esse victoria. sed quo facilius sermo explicetur, sedentes, si videtur, agamus. Cum idem placuisset illis, tum in pratulo propter Platonis statuam consedimus.

[24] Excellently, I say, Brutus, you speak, and for that reason I am all the more delighted by that praise of speaking, because as for the other things which have at some time been held most beautiful in the state, there is no one so humble who does not think that he either can attain them or has attained them; I see that no one has been made eloquent by victory. But, in order that the discourse may be unfolded more easily, let us conduct it sitting, if it seems good. When the same pleased them as well, then we sat down in a little meadow near Plato’s statue.

[25] Hic ego: laudare igitur eloquentiam et quanta vis sit eius expromere quantamque eis, qui sint eam consecuti, dignitatem afferat, neque propositum nobis est hoc loco neque necessarium. hoc vero sine ulla dubitatione confirmaverim, sive illa arte pariatur aliqua sive exercitatione quadam sive natura, rem unam esse omnium difficillumam. quibus enim ex quinque rebus constare dicitur, earum una quaeque est ars ipsa magna per sese.

[25] Here I said: therefore to praise eloquence and to set forth how great its force is, and how great a dignity it brings to those who have attained it, is neither our purpose in this place nor necessary. This, however, I would confirm without any hesitation: whether it be procured by some art, or by a certain exercitation, or by nature, it is the one thing most difficult of all. For since it is said to consist of five things, each one of them is itself a great art in its own right.

quare quinque artium concursus maxumarum quantam vim quantamque difficultatem habeat existimari potest.

Therefore the concurrence of the five greatest arts can be estimated to have how great a force and how great a difficulty.

[26] Testis est Graecia, quae cum eloquentiae studio sit incensa iamdiuque excellat in ea praestetque ceteris, tamen omnis artes vetustiores habet et multo ante non inventas solum, sed etiam perfectas, quam haec est a Graecis elaborata dicendi vis atque copia. in quam cum intueor, maxime mihi occurrunt, Attice, et quasi lucent Athenae tuae, qua in urbe primum se orator extulit primumque etiam monumentis et litteris oratio est coepta mandari.

[26] Greece is witness, which, although it is inflamed with zeal for eloquence and has long excelled in it and surpasses the rest, nevertheless has all the arts more ancient and long before not only discovered but even perfected than this force and copiousness of speaking was wrought out by the Greeks. When I look upon this, Atticus, your Athens most of all occurs to me and, as it were, shines—where, in that city, the orator first put himself forward, and first also oratory began to be committed to monuments and to letters.

[27] Tamen ante Periclem, cuius scripta quaedam feruntur, et Thucydidem, qui non nascentibus Athenis sed iam adultis fuerunt, littera nulla est, quae quidem ornatum aliquem habeat et oratoris esse videatur. quamquam opinio est et eum, qui multis annis ante hos fuerit, Pisistratum et paulo seniorem etiam Solonem posteaque Clisthenem multum, ut temporibus illis, valuisse dicendo.

[27] Nevertheless, before Pericles, of whom certain writings are reported, and Thucydides, who belonged not to Athens in its birth but when already grown, there is no writing that has any ornament and seems to be that of an orator. Although there is the opinion that even him who had been many years before these—Pisistratus—and also Solon, somewhat older, and afterwards Cleisthenes, prevailed much, for those times, by speaking.

[28] Post hanc aetatem aliquot annis, ut ex Attici monumentis potest perspici, Themistocles fuit, quem constat cum prudentia tum etiam eloquentia praestitisse; post Pericles, qui cum floreret omni genere virtutis, hac tamen fuit laude clarissumus. Cleonem etiam temporibus illis turbulentum illum quidem civem, sed tamen eloquentem constat fuisse.

[28] After this age by several years, as can be perceived from the records of Atticus, there was Themistocles, whom it is agreed excelled both in prudence and also in eloquence; after that, Pericles, who, although he flourished in every kind of virtue, was nevertheless most renowned for this praise. It is agreed that Cleon too, in those times, though admittedly a turbulent citizen, was nevertheless eloquent.

[29] Huic aetati suppares Alcibiades Critias Theramenes; quibus temporibus quod dicendi genus viguerit ex Thucydidi scriptis, qui ipse tum fuit, intellegi maxume potest. grandes erant verbis, crebri sententiis, compressione rerum breves et ob eam ipsam causam interdum subobscuri.

[29] To this age were contemporaries Alcibiades, Critias, Theramenes; in which times what genus of speaking had vigor can be understood most clearly from the writings of Thucydides, who himself was then. They were grand in words, frequent in sentiments, brief by the compression of matters, and for that very cause sometimes somewhat obscure.

[30] Sed ut intellectum est quantam vim haberet accurata et facta quodam modo oratio, tum etiam magistri dicendi multi subito exstiterunt. tum Leontinus Gorgias, Thrasymachus Calchedonius, Protagoras Abderites, Prodicus Ceius, Hippias Eleius in honore magno fuit; aliique multi temporibus eisdem docere se profitebantur adrogantibus sane verbis, quemadmodum causa inferior—ita enim loquebantur—dicendo fieri superior posset.

[30] But when it was understood how great a force an accurate and in a certain manner fashioned oration had, then also many masters of speaking suddenly arose. Then Gorgias of Leontini, Thrasymachus the Chalcedonian, Protagoras the Abderite, Prodicus the Cean, Hippias the Eleian were in great honor; and many others in those same times professed to teach, with truly arrogant words, how the inferior cause—so indeed they spoke—could by speaking be made superior.

[31] His opposuit sese Socrates, qui subtilitate quadam disputandi refellere eorum instituta solebat * verbis. huius ex uberrumis sermonibus exstiterunt doctissumi viri; primumque tum philosophia non illa de natura, quae fuerat antiquior, sed haec, in quad e bonis rebus et malis deque hominum vita et moribus disputatur, inventa dicitur. quod quoniam genus ab hoc quod proposuimus abhorret, philosophos aliud in tempus reiciamus; ad oratores, a quibus digressi sumus, revertamur.

[31] To these Socrates set himself in opposition, who by a certain subtlety of disputation was accustomed to refute their institutes * by words. From this man’s most copious discourses there arose most learned men; and then first philosophy—not that about nature, which had been earlier, but this, in which there is disputation about good things and bad and about the life and morals of men—is said to have been invented. Since this kind abhors from that which we have proposed, let us defer the philosophers to another time; let us return to the orators, from whom we have digressed.

[32] Exstitit igitur iam senibus illis quos paulo ante diximus Isocrates, cuius domus cunctae Graeciae quasi ludus quidam patuit atque officina dicendi; magnus orator et perfectus magister, quamquam forensi luce caruit intraque parietes aluit eam gloriam, quam nemo meo quidem iudicio est postea consecutus. is et ipse scripsit multa praeclare et docuit alios; et cum cetera melius quam superiores, tum primus intellexit etiam in soluta oratione, dum versum effugeres, modum tamen et numerum quendam oportere servari.

[32] Therefore, when those old men whom we mentioned a little before were already aged, there arose Isocrates, whose house stood open to all Greece as if a certain school and workshop of speaking; a great orator and a consummate master, although he lacked the forensic light and, within walls, nourished that glory which, in my judgment at least, no one afterwards attained. He himself both wrote many things excellently and taught others; and while he did other things better than his predecessors, he was the first to understand that even in loose oration (prose), while you avoided verse, nevertheless a measure and a certain number ought to be kept.

[33] Ante hunc enim verborum quasi structura et quaedam ad numerum conclusio nulla erat; aut, si quando erat, non apparebat eam dedita opera esse quaesitam—quae forsitan laus sit —; verum tamen natura magis tum casuque nonnunquam, quam aut ratione aliqua aut ulla observatione fiebat.

[33] For before this man there was, as it were, no structure of words and no kind of closing to the measure; or, if ever there was, it did not appear that it had been sought with deliberate effort—which perhaps is a merit—; but nonetheless it came about then more by nature and sometimes by chance than by any method or any observance.

[34] Ipsa enim natura circumscriptione quadam verborum comprehendit concluditque sententiam, quae cum aptis constricta verbis est, cadit etiam plerumque numerose. nam et aures ipsae quid plenum, quid inane sit iudicant et spiritu quasi necessitate aliqua verborum comprensio terminatur; in quo non modo defici, sed etiam laborare turpe est.

[34] For nature herself, by a certain circumscription of words, comprehends and concludes the sentence (thought), which, when it is constricted with apt words, also for the most part falls rhythmically. For our very ears judge what is full and what is void, and by the breath, as by a certain necessity, the comprehension of words is brought to an end; in which matter it is disgraceful not only to fail, but even to labor.

[35] Tum fuit Lysias ipse quidem in causis forensibus non versatus, sed egregie subtilis scriptor atque elegans, quem iam prope audeas oratorem perfectum dicere. nam plane quidem perfectum et quoi nihil admodum desit Demosthenem facile dixeris. nihil acute inveniri potuit in eis causis quas scripsit, nihil, ut ita dicam, subdole, nihil versute, quod ille non viderit; nihil subtiliter dici, nihil presse, nihil enucleate, quo fieri possit aliquid limatius; nihil contra grande, nihil incitatum, nihil ornatum vel verborum gravitate vel sententiarum, quo quicquam esset elatius.

[35] Then there was Lysias—himself indeed not practiced in forensic cases, but a remarkably subtle and elegant writer—whom you would now almost dare to call a perfect orator. For as plainly perfect, and one to whom almost nothing is lacking, you would easily name Demosthenes. Nothing acute could be devised in those cases which he wrote, nothing, so to speak, crafty, nothing wily, which he did not perceive; nothing could be said more subtly, more closely, more enucleately, whereby anything might be made more polished; on the contrary, nothing grand, nothing impassioned, nothing ornate either with the gravity of words or of thoughts, by which anything would be loftier.

[36] Huic Hyperides proxumus et Aeschines fuit et Lycurgus et Dinarchus et is, cuius nulla exstant scripta, Demades aliique plures. haec enim aetas effudit hanc copiam; et, ut opinio mea fert, sucus ille et sanguis incorruptus usque ad hanc aetatem oratorum fuit, in qua naturalis inesset, non fucatus nitor.

[36] Next to him were Hyperides and Aeschines and Lycurgus and Dinarchus and Demades, of whom no writings are extant, and many others besides. For this age effused this abundance; and, as my opinion holds, that uncorrupted sap and blood lasted down to this generation of orators, in which a natural, not cosmetically painted, polish was inherent.

[37] Phalereus enim successit eis senibus adulescens eruditissimus ille quidem horum omnium, sed non tam armis institutus quam palaestra. itaque delectabat magis Atheniensis quam inflammabat. processerat enim in solem et pulverem non ut e militari tabernaculo, sed ut e Theophrasti doctissumi hominis umbraculis.

[37] For Phalereus succeeded those elders, a most erudite youth indeed of all these, but trained not so much in arms as in the palaestra. And so he delighted the Athenians rather than inflamed them. For he had stepped forth into the sun and dust not as from a military tabernacle (tent), but from the shaded colonnades of Theophrastus, a most learned man.

[38] Hic primus inflexit orationem et eam mollem teneramque reddidit et suavis, sicut fuit, videri maluit quam gravis, sed suavitate ea, qua perfunderet animos, non qua perfringeret; [et] tantum ut memoriam concinnitatis suae, non, quemadmodum de Pericle scripsit Eupolis, cum delectatione aculeos etiam relinqueret in animis eorum, a quibus esset auditus.

[38] He first inflected oration and made it soft and tender, and he preferred to seem sweet, as he was, rather than grave, but with a suavity by which he would suffuse souls, not by which he would shatter them; [and] only so far as to leave a memory of his concinnity, not, as Eupolis wrote about Pericles, that along with delectation he also left stings in the minds of those by whom he had been heard.

[39] Videsne igitur vel in ea ipsa urbe, in qua et nata et alta sit eloquentia, quam ea sero prodierit in lucem? si quidem ante Solonis aetatem et Pisistrati de nullo ut diserto memoriae proditum est. at hi quidem, ut populi Romani aetas est, senes, ut Atheniensium saecla numerantur, adulescentes debent videri.

[39] Do you see then even in that very city in which eloquence was both born and reared, how late it came forth into the light? Since indeed before the age of Solon and Pisistratus it has been handed down to memory of no one as eloquent. But these men, as the age of the Roman people goes, ought to seem old; as the generations of the Athenians are counted, young men.

nam etsi Servio Tullio regnante viguerunt, tamen multo diutius Athenae iam erant, quam est Roma ad hodiernum diem. nec tamen dubito quin habuerit vim magnam semper oratio.

for although they flourished while Servius Tullius was reigning, nevertheless Athens had already existed for much longer than Rome has up to the present day. Yet I do not doubt that oration has always had great force.

[40] Neque enim iam Troicis temporibus tantum laudis in dicendo Ulixi tribuisset Homerus et Nestori, quorum alterum vim habere voluit, alterum suavitatem, nisi iam tum esset honos eloquentiae; neque ipse poeta hic tam [idem] orna tus in dicendo ac plane orator fuisset. cuius etsi incerta sunt tempora, tamen annis multis fuit ante Romulum; si quidem non infra superiorem Lycurgum fuit, a quo est disciplina Lacedaemoniorum astricta legibus.

[40] For neither, in the Trojan times, would Homer have attributed so much praise in speaking to Ulysses and to Nestor—of whom he wished the one to possess force, the other suavity—unless even then there were honor for eloquence; nor would this poet himself have been so [likewise] adorned in speaking and plainly an orator. And although his times are uncertain, yet he was many years before Romulus; indeed he was not later than the earlier Lycurgus, by whom the discipline of the Lacedaemonians was bound by laws.

[41] Sed studium eius generis maiorque vis agnoscitur in Pisistrato. denique hunc proximo saeculo Themistocles insecutus est, ut apud nos, perantiquus, ut apud Athenienses, non ita sane vetus. fuit enim regnante iam Graecia, nostra autem civitate non ita pridem dominatu regio liberata. nam bellum Volscorum illud gravissimum, cui Coriolanus exsul interfuit, eodem fere tempore quo Persarum bellum fuit, similisque fortuna clarorum virorum;

[41] But the zeal of that kind and a greater force are recognized in Pisistratus. Finally, Themistocles followed him in the next age—very ancient as among us, but, as among the Athenians, not really so old. For he lived when Greece was already ruling, while our city had not so long before been freed from royal dominion. For that most grievous war of the Volsci, in which Coriolanus, an exile, took part, was at nearly the same time as the war of the Persians, and the fortune of illustrious men was similar;

[42] Si quidem uterque, cum civis egregius fuisset, populi ingrati pulsus iniuria se ad hostes contulit conatumque iracundiae suae morte sedavit. nam etsi aliter apud te est, Attice, de Coriolano, concede tamen ut huic generi mortis potius adsentiar. At ille ridens: tuo vero, inquit, arbitratu; quoniam quidem concessum est rhetoribus ementiri in historiis, ut aliquid dicere possint argutius.

[42] If indeed each, although he had been an outstanding citizen, having been driven out by the injustice of an ungrateful people, betook himself to the enemies and by his death assuaged the impulse of his irascibility. For although it is otherwise with you, Atticus, concerning Coriolanus, grant nevertheless that I rather assent to this kind of death. But he, laughing: “Truly, at your discretion,” he said; “since indeed it has been conceded to rhetoricians to fabricate in histories, so that they may be able to say something more acute.”

ut enim tu nunc de Coriolano, sic Clitarchus, sic Stratocles de Themistocle finxit.

for just as you now about Coriolanus, so Clitarchus, so Stratocles, fashioned fictions about Themistocles.

[43] Nam quem Thucydides, qui et Atheniensis erat et summo loco natus summusque vir et paulo aetate posterior, tantum <morbo> mortuum scripsit et in Attica clam humatum, addidit fuisse suspicionem veneno sibi conscivisse mortem: hunc isti aiunt, cum taurum immolavisset, excepisse sanguinem patera et eo poto mortuum concidisse. hanc enim mortem rhetorice et tragice ornare potuerunt; illa mors volgaris nullam praebebat materiem ad ornatum. quare quoniam tibi ita quadrat, omnia fuisse Themistocli paria et Coriolano, pateram quoque a me sumas licet, praebebo etiam hostiam, ut Coriolanus sit plane alter Themistocles.

[43] For the man whom Thucydides—who was both an Athenian and born of the highest rank, an outstanding man, and a little later in age—wrote to have died only of illness and to have been buried secretly in Attica, and added that there was a suspicion that he had procured death for himself by poison: these fellows say that, after he had immolated a bull, he caught the blood in a patera and, having drunk it, fell down dead. For this kind of death they were able to adorn rhetorically and tragically; that commonplace death furnished no material for ornament. Therefore, since it so fits your scheme that everything was equal for Themistocles and Coriolanus, you may also take the patera from me; I will even supply the victim, so that Coriolanus may be plainly a second Themistocles.

[44] Sit sane, inquam, ut lubet, de isto; et ego cautius posthac historiam attingam te audiente, quem rerum Romanarum auctorem laudare possum religiosissumum. sed tum fere Pericles Xanthippi filius, de quo ante dixi, primus adhibuit doctrinam; quae quamquam tum nulla erat dicendi, tamen ab Anaxagora physico eruditus exercitationem mentis a reconditis abstrusisque rebus ad causas forensis popularisque facile traduxerat. huius suavitate maxume hilaratae Athenae sunt, huius ubertatem et copiam admiratae eiusdem vim dicendi terroremque timuerunt.

[44] Let it be so, say I, as it pleases you, about that man; and I will hereafter touch upon history more cautiously with you listening— you, whom I can praise as a most scrupulous author of Roman affairs. But about that time Pericles, son of Xanthippus, of whom I spoke before, was the first to apply doctrine; which, although at that time there was none of speaking, yet, instructed by Anaxagoras the physicist, he had easily transferred the exercise of his mind from recondite and abstruse matters to forensic and popular causes. By his suavity Athens was most gladdened; admiring his richness and copiousness, they feared this same man’s force of speaking and the terror it inspired.

[45] Haec igitur aetas prima Athenis oratorem prope perfectum tulit. nec enim in constituentibus rem publicam nec in bella gerentibus nec in impeditis ac regum dominatione devinctis nasci cupiditas dicendi solet. pacis est comes otique socia et iam bene constitutae civitatis quasi alumna quaedam eloquentia.

[45] Therefore this first age at Athens brought forth an orator nearly perfect. For neither among those establishing the Republic, nor among those waging wars, nor among those impeded and bound by the domination of kings, is the desire of speaking wont to be born. Eloquence is the companion of peace and the associate of leisure, and the, as it were, foster-child of a now well-established state.

[46] Itaque, ait Aristoteles, cum sublatis in Sicilia tyrannis res privatae longo intervallo iudiciis repeterentur, tum primum, quod esset acuta illa gens et controversiae nata, artem et praecepta Siculos Coracem et Tisiam conscripsisse—nam antea neminem solitum via nec arte, sed accurate tamen et descripte plerosque dicere —; scriptasque fuisse et paratas a Protagora rerum illustrium disputationes, quae nunc communes appellantur loci.

[46] And so, says Aristotle, when, the tyrannies having been removed in Sicily, private claims after a long interval were being recovered by judgments, then for the first time—because that nation was keen and born for controversy—the Sicilians Corax and Tisias composed an art and precepts— for before that no one was accustomed to speak by method nor by art, though nevertheless most spoke accurately and in an outlined fashion —; and disputations on illustrious matters were written out and prepared by Protagoras, which are now called commonplaces.

[47] Quod idem fecisse Gor giam, cum singularum rerum laudes vituperationesque conscripsisset, quod iudicaret hoc oratoris esse maxume proprium, rem augere posse laudando vituperandoque rursus adfligere; huic Antiphontem Rhamnusium similia quaedam habuisse conscripta; quo neminem umquam melius ullam oravisse capitis causam, cum se ipse defenderet se audiente, locuples auctor scripsit Thucydides.

[47] The same Gorgias did, when he had composed praises and vituperations of individual things, because he judged this to be most properly the orator’s own: to be able to augment a matter by lauding and, by vituperating, to strike it down in turn; and Antiphon of Rhamnus had certain similar pieces composed; about whom Thucydides, a weighty authority, wrote that no one ever pleaded any capital case better, when he was defending himself, Thucydides being an auditor.

[48] Nam Lysiam primo profiteri solitum artem esse dicendi; deinde, quod Theodorus esset in arte subtilior, in orationibus autem ieiunior, orationes eum scribere aliis coepisse, artem removisse. similiter Isocraten primo artem dicendi esse negavisse, scribere autem aliis solitum orationes, quibus in iudiciis uterentur; sed cum ex eo, quia quasi committeret contra legem 'quo quis iudicio circumveniretur', saepe ipse in iudicium vocaretur, orationes aliis destitisse scribere totumque se ad artes componendas transtulisse.

[48] For that Lysias at first was accustomed to profess that there is an art of speaking; then, because Theodorus was subtler in the art but more jejune in orations, he began to write orations for others, and set the art aside. similarly that Isocrates at first had denied that there is an art of speaking, but was accustomed to write orations for others, which they might use in judgments; but since on that account, because he was, as it were, committing an offense against the law 'whereby someone might be circumvented in a trial', he himself was often called into court, he ceased to write orations for others and transferred himself wholly to composing arts.

[49] Et Graeciae quidem oratorum partus atque fontis vides, ad nostrorum annalium rationem veteres, ad ipsorum sane recentes. nam ante quam delectata est Atheniensium civitas hac laude dicendi, multa iam memorabilia et in domesticis et in bellicis rebus effecerat. hoc autem studium non erat commune Graeciae, sed proprium Athenarum.

[49] And indeed you see the births and the fountainhead of Greece’s orators—ancient by the reckoning of our annals, by their own, to be sure, recent. For before the state of the Athenians was delighted with this renown of speaking, it had already accomplished many memorable things both in domestic and in military affairs. But this pursuit was not common to Greece, but proper to Athens.

[50] Quis enim aut Argivum oratorem aut Corinthium aut Thebanum scit fuisse temporibus illis? nisi quid de Epaminonda docto homine suspicari lubet. Lacedaemonium vero usque ad hoc tempus audivi fuisse neminem.

[50] For who knows that there was in those times an Argive orator or a Corinthian or a Theban? unless it pleases one to suspect something about Epaminondas, a learned man. A Lacedaemonian, indeed, down to this time I have heard there was none.

Menelaum ipsum dulcem illum quidem tradit Homerus, sed pauca dicentem. brevitas autem laus est interdum in aliqua parte dicendi, in universa eloquentia laudem non habet.

Homer hands down Menelaus himself as sweet indeed, yet saying few things. Brevity, however, is sometimes a praise in some part of speaking; in the whole of eloquence it does not have praise.

[51] At vero extra Graeciam magna dicendi studia fuerunt maxumique huic laudi habiti honores illustre oratorum nomen reddiderunt. nam ut semel e Piraeo eloquentia evecta est, omnis peragravit insulas atque ita peregrinata tota Asia est, ut se externis oblineret moribus omnemque illam salubritatem Atticae dictionis et quasi sanitatem perderet ac loqui paene dedisceret. hinc Asiatici oratores non contemnendi quidem nec celeritate nec copia, sed parum pressi et nimis redundantes; Rhodii saniores et Atticorum similiores.

[51] But indeed outside Greece there were great pursuits of speaking, and the very great honors held for this praise rendered illustrious the name of orators. For once eloquence was carried forth from the Piraeus, she traversed all the islands and then sojourned through all Asia in such a way that she smeared herself over with foreign customs and lost all that salubrity of Attic diction and, as it were, its sanity, and almost unlearned how to speak. Hence the Asiatic orators, not to be despised indeed either for celerity or for copiousness, but insufficiently compressed and too redundant; the Rhodians more sound and more similar to the Attics.

[52] Sed de Graecis hactenus; et enim haec ipsa forsitan fuerint non necessaria. Tum Brutus: ista vero, inquit, quam necessaria fuerint non facile dixerim; iucunda certe mihi fuerunt neque solum non longa, sed etiam breviora quam vellem. Optime, inquam, sed veniamus ad nostros, de quibus difficile est plus intellegere quam quantum ex monumentis suspicari licet.

[52] But about the Greeks thus far; for indeed these very things perhaps were not necessary. Then Brutus: 'As for how necessary they were,' he says, 'I would not easily say; certainly they were pleasant to me and not only not long, but even briefer than I would have wished.' 'Very good,' I said, 'but let us come to our own, about whom it is difficult to understand more than as much as it is permitted to suspect from monuments.'

[53] Quis enim putet aut celeritatem ingeni L. Bruto illi nobilitatis vestrae principi defuisse? qui de matre savianda ex oraculo Apollinis tam acute arguteque coniecerit; qui summam prudentiam simulatione stultitiae texerit; qui potentissimum regem clarissumi regis filium expulerit civitatemque perpetuo dominatu liberatam magistratibus annuis legibus iudiciisque devinxerit; qui collegae suo imperium abrogaverit, ut e civitate regalis nominis memoriam tolleret: quod certe effici non potuisset, nisi esset oratione persuasum.

[53] Who, indeed, would think that quickness of genius had been lacking to that L. Brutus, the chief of your nobility?—he who, about kissing his mother from the oracle of Apollo, conjectured so acutely and wittily; who veiled the highest prudence under a simulation of stupidity; who expelled the most potent king, the son of a most illustrious king, and, the commonwealth freed from perpetual dominion, bound it to annual magistracies, to laws and to judgments; who abrogated his colleague’s imperium, in order to remove from the state the memory of the royal name: which certainly could not have been effected unless it had been persuaded by oration.

[54] Videmus item paucis annis post reges exactos, cum plebes prope ripam Anionis ad tertium miliarium consedisset eumque montem, qui Sacer appellatus est, occupavisset, M. Valerium dictatorem dicendo sedavisse discordias, eique ob eam rem honores amplissumos habitos et eum primum ob eam ipsam causam Maxumum esse appellatum. ne L. Valerium quidem Potitum arbitror non aliquid potuisse dicendo, qui post decemviralem invidiam plebem in patres incitatam legibus et contionibus suis mitigaverit.

[54] We likewise see that, a few years after the kings were driven out, when the plebs had sat down near the bank of the Anio at the third milestone and had occupied that hill which is called the Sacred, M. Valerius, the dictator, by speaking soothed the discords; and for that reason the most ample honors were paid to him, and he was the first for that very cause to be called Maximus. Nor do I suppose that L. Valerius Potitus lacked some power in speaking either, who, after the decemviral odium, when the plebs had been incited against the patres, mitigated them by his laws and by his addresses to the assembly.

[55] Possumus Appium Claudium suspicari disertum, quia senatum iamiam inclinatum a Pyrrhi pace revocaverit; possumus C. Fabricium, quia sit ad Pyrrhum de captivis recuperandis missus orator; Ti. Coruncanium, quod ex pontificum commentariis longe plurumum ingenio valuisse videatur; M'. Curium, quod is tribunus plebis interrege Appio Caeco diserto homine comitia contra leges habente, cum de plebe consulem non accipiebat, patres ante auctores fieri coegerit; quod fuit permagnum nondum lege Maenia lata.

[55] We can suspect Appius Claudius to have been eloquent, because he called back the senate, just now inclined, from a peace with Pyrrhus; we can (suspect) Gaius Fabricius, because he was sent to Pyrrhus as an orator about recovering the captives; Tiberius Coruncanius, because from the commentaries of the pontifices he seems to have prevailed far the most by native ingenium; Manius Curius, because he, as tribune of the plebs, when the interrex Appius the Blind, an eloquent man, was holding the comitia contrary to the laws, since he was not accepting a consul from the plebs, compelled the patres to become auctores beforehand—which was a very great thing, the Maenian law not yet having been passed.

[56] Licet aliquid etiam de M. Popilli ingenio suspicari, qui cum consul esset eodemque tempore sacrificium publicum cum laena faceret, quod erat flamen Carmentalis, plebei contra patres concitatione et seditione nuntiata, ut erat laena amictus ita venit in contionem seditionemque cum auctoritate tum oratione sedavit. sed eos oratores habitos esse aut omnino tum ullum eloquentiae praemium fuisse nihil sane mihi legisse videor: tantummodo coniectura ducor ad suspicandum.

[56] It is permissible to suspect something also about the talent of M. Popillius, who, when he was consul and at the same time was performing a public sacrifice with the laena (since he was the flamen of Carmentis), when a stirring-up and sedition of the plebs against the patres was announced, came into the assembly just as he was, wrapped in the laena, and quelled the sedition both by authority and by oration. But that those men were held as orators, or that there was then at all any reward for eloquence, I seem to myself to have read nothing: I am only led by conjecture to surmise.

[57] Dicitur etiam C. Flaminius, is qui tribunus plebis legem de agro Gallico et Piceno viritim divi dundo tulerit, qui consul apud Tarsumennum sit interfectus, ad populum valuisse dicendo. Q. etiam Maxumus Verrucosus orator habitus est temporibus illis et Q. Metellus, is qui bello Punico secundo cum L. Veturio Philone consul fuit. quem vero exstet et de quo sit memoriae proditum eloquentem fuisse et ita esse habitum, primus est M. Cornelius Cethegus, cuius eloquentiae est auctor et idoneus quidem mea sententia Q. Ennius, praesertim cum et ipse eum audiverit et scribat de mortuo; ex quo nulla suspicio est amicitiae causa esse mentitum.

[57] It is also said that Gaius Flaminius—the one who, as tribune of the plebs, carried a law for dividing, man-by-man, the Gallic and Picenian land, and who, as consul, was slain at Lake Trasimene—prevailed with the people by speaking. Quintus Maximus Verrucosus too was held an orator in those times, and Quintus Metellus, the one who in the Second Punic War was consul with Lucius Veturius Philo. But the first of whom there exists, and about whom it has been handed down to memory, that he was eloquent and so regarded, is Marcus Cornelius Cethegus, whose eloquence has as its author—and, in my judgment, a fit one—Quintus Ennius, especially since he both himself heard him and writes of him as deceased; whence there is no suspicion that he lied for the sake of friendship.

[58] Est igitur sic apud illum in nono, ut opinor, annali:

[58] Therefore it is thus with him in the ninth, as I think, annal:

additur orator Cornelius suaviloquenti
ore Cethegus Marcus Tuditano conlega
Marci filius—

there is added the orator Cornelius Cethegus, suave-eloquent
of mouth, Marcus, colleague to Tuditanus,
son of Marcus—

et oratorem appellat et suaviloquentiam tribuit, quae nunc quidem non tam est in plerisque: latrant enim iam quidam oratores, non loquuntur; sed est ea laus eloquentiae certe maxuma:

and he both calls him an orator and attributes to him suave-eloquence, which nowadays indeed is not so much in most: for by now certain orators bark, they do not speak; but that praise of eloquence is certainly very great:

is dictust ollis popularibus olim,
qui tum vivebant homines atque aevum agitabant,
flos delibatus populi—

he was called by those fellow citizens of old,
who then were living men and were passing their age,
the culled flower of the people—

[59] probe vero; ut enim hominis decus ingenium, sic ingeni ipsius lumen est eloquentia, qua virum excellentem praeclare tum illi homines florem populi esse dixerunt:

[59] well indeed; for as the ornament of a man is genius, so the light of that very genius is eloquence, by which those men then most clearly said that an excellent man is the flower of the people:

Suadai . . . medulla.

The marrow of Suasion.

Peitho quam vocant Graeci, cuius effector est orator, hanc Suadam appellavit Ennius; eius autem Cethegum medullam fuisse vult, ut, quam deam in Pericli labris scripsit Eupolis sessitavisse, huius hic medullam nostrum oratorem fuisse dixerit.

Peitho, as the Greeks call her, whose producer is the orator, this Ennius called Suada; and he means that Cethegus was the marrow of her, just as Eupolis wrote that the goddess sat upon the lips of Pericles, so this man said that our orator was the marrow of her.

[60] At hic Cethegus consul cum P. Tuditano fuit bello Punico secundo quaestorque his consulibus M. Cato modo plane annis cxl ante me consulem; et id ipsum nisi unius esset Enni testimonio cognitum, hunc vetustas, ut alios fortasse multos, oblivione obruisset. illius autem aetatis qui sermo fuerit ex Naevianis scriptis intellegi potest. his enim consulibus, ut in veteribus commentariis scriptum est, Naevius est mortuus; quamquam Varro noster diligentissumus investigator antiquitatis putat in hoc erratum vitamque Naevi producit longius.

[60] But this Cethegus was consul with P. Tuditanus, and in the Second Punic War Marcus Cato was quaestor to these consuls, indeed plainly 140 years before my consulship; and this very fact, unless it were known by the testimony of Ennius alone, antiquity would have overwhelmed him, as perhaps many others, with oblivion. What the speech of that age was can be understood from the writings of Naevius; for in the consulship of these men, as it is written in the ancient commentaries, Naevius died; although our Varro, a most diligent investigator of antiquity, thinks there is an error in this and extends Naevius’s life farther.

nam Plautus P. Claudio L. Porcio viginti annis post illos quos ante dixi consulibus mortuus est Catone censore.

for Plautus died, when P. Claudius and L. Porcius were consuls, twenty years after those whom I mentioned before, with Cato as censor.

[61] Hunc igitur Cethegum consecutus est aetate Cato, qui annis ix post eum fuit consul. eum nos ut perveterem habemus, qui L. Marcio M'. Manilio consulibus mortuus est, annis lxxxvi ipsis ante me consulem. nec vero habeo quemquam antiquiorem, cuius quidem scripta proferenda putem, nisi quem Appi Caeci oratio haec ipsa de Pyrrho et nonnullae mortuorum laudationes forte delectant.

[61] Therefore Cato followed this Cethegus in age, who was consul 9 years after him. We regard him as a very old-fashioned figure, who died when L. Marcius and M'. Manilius were consuls, 86 years before my own consulship. Nor indeed do I have anyone more ancient whose writings I would think ought to be proffered, unless it be someone whom this very oration of Appius the Blind about Pyrrhus and some laudations of the dead perhaps delight.

[62] Et hercules eae quidem exstant: ipsae enim familiae sua quasi ornamenta ac monumenta servabant et ad usum, si quis eiusdem generis occidisset, et ad memoriam laudum domesticarum et ad illustrandam nobilitatem suam. quamquam his laudationibus historia rerum nostrarum est facta mendosior. multa enim scripta sunt in eis quae facta non sunt: falsi triumphi, plures consulatus, genera etiam falsa et ad plebem transitiones, cum homines humiliores in alienum eiusdem nominis infunderentur genus; ut si ego me a M'. Tullio esse dicerem, qui patricius cum Ser.

[62] And by Hercules, those indeed exist: for the families themselves used to preserve them as if their own ornaments and monuments, both for use, if someone of the same lineage had died, and for the memory of domestic praises and for the illustrating of their own nobility. And yet by these laudations the history of our affairs has been made more erroneous. For many things were written in them which were not done: fictitious triumphs, more numerous consulships, even false genera and transfers to the plebs, when humbler men were infused into another family of the same name; as if I were to say that I am from M'. Tullius, who, a patrician with Ser.

Sulpicio consul anno x post exactos reges fuit.

Sulpicius was consul in year 10 after the expulsion of the kings.

[63] Catonis autem orationes non minus multae fere sunt quam Attici Lysiae, cuius arbitror plurumas esse—est enim Atticus, quoniam certe Athenis est et natus et mortuus et functus omni civium munere, quamquam Timaeus eum quasi Licinia et Mucia lege repetit Syracusas —, et quodam modo est nonnulla in iis etiam inter ipsos similitudo: acuti sunt, elegantes faceti breves; sed ille Graecus ab omni laude felicior.

[63] But Cato’s orations are generally no less many than those of the Attic Lysias, whose I judge to be the very most—for he is Attic, since certainly at Athens he was both born and died and fulfilled every civic office, although Timaeus, as if by the Licinian and Mucian law, reclaims him to Syracuse —, and in a certain way there is also some likeness in these even between the men themselves: they are sharp, elegant, facetious, brief; but that Greek is more fortunate in every sort of praise.

[64] Habet enim certos sui studiosos, qui non tam habitus corporis opimos quam gracilitates consectentur; quos, valetudo modo bona sit, tenuitas ipsa delectat—quamquam in Lysia sunt saepe etiam lacerti, sic ut [et] fieri nihil possit valentius; verum est certe genere toto strigosior —, sed habet tamen suos laudatores, qui hac ipsa eius subtilitate admodum gaudeant.

[64] For he has certain devotees of his, who pursue not so much opulent bodily habits as gracilities; to whom, provided only that health be good, the very tenuity itself is delightful—although in Lysias there are often even muscles, such that nothing could be made more powerful; yet he is certainly, in the whole kind, more stringy—, but nevertheless he has his own lauders, who take exceedingly great pleasure in this very subtlety of his.

[65] Catonem vero quis nostrorum oratorum, qui quidem nunc sunt, legit? aut quis novit omnino? at quem virum, di boni!

[65] But Cato, in truth—who among our orators, who indeed are now, reads him? Or who knows him at all? Yet what a man, good gods!

mitto civem aut senatorem aut imperatorem: oratorem enim hoc loco quaerimus: quis illo gravior in laudando, acerbior in vituperando, in sententiis argutior, in docendo edisserendoque subtilior? refertae sunt orationes amplius centum quinquaginta, quas quidem adhuc invenerim et legerim, et verbis et rebus inlustribus. licet ex his eligant ea quae notatione et laude digna sint: omnes oratoriae virtutes in eis reperientur.

I pass over the citizen or the senator or the general: for an orator we are seeking in this place; who was more grave in praising, more acerbic in blaming, more acute in maxims, more subtle in teaching and in fully expounding? There are more than 150 speeches—so many as I have thus far found and read—crammed with illustrious words and matters. Let them choose from these the things worthy of notation and praise: all the oratorical virtues will be found in them.

[66] Iam vero Origines eius quem florem aut quod lumen eloquentiae non habent? amatores huic desunt, sicuti multis iam ante saeclis et Philisto Syracusio et ipsi Thucydidi. nam ut horum concisis sententiis, interdum etiam non satis apertis [autem] cum brevitate tum nimio acumine, officit Theopompus elatione atque altitudine orationis suae—quod idem Lysiae Demosthenes —, sic Catonis luminibus obstruxit haec posteriorum quasi exaggerata altius oratio.

[66] Now in truth, what bloom or what light of eloquence do his Origines not have? Admirers are lacking to this, just as, many ages before, to Philistus the Syracusan and to Thucydides himself. For, just as Theopompus, with the elation and altitude of his oration—the same thing Demosthenes to Lysias —, works against their concise sentences, at times even not sufficiently open, [autem] both by brevity and by excessive acumen, so this, the as‑it‑were exaggerated‑higher oration of the later men, has blocked out Cato’s lights.

[67] Sed ea in nostris inscitia est, quod hi ipsi, qui in Graecis antiquitate delectantur eaque subtilitate, quam Atticam appellant, hanc in Catone ne noverunt quidem. Hyperidae volunt esse et Lysiae. laudo: sed cur nolunt Catones?

[67] But such is the ignorance among our own, that these very men who take delight in antiquity among the Greeks and in that subtlety which they call Attic do not even recognize this in Cato. They want to be Hyperides and Lysias. I praise them: but why do they not wish to be Catos?

[68] Attico genere dicendi se gaudere dicunt. sapienter id quidem; atque utinam imitarentur nec ossa solum, sed etiam sanguinem! gratum est tamen, quod volunt.

[68] They say that they take delight in the Attic kind of speaking. Wisely indeed; and would that they imitated not only the bones, but also the blood! Still, it is welcome that they wish it.

cur igitur Lysias et Hyperides amatur, cum penitus ignoretur Cato? antiquior est huius sermo et quaedam horridiora verba. ita enim tum loquebantur.

Why then are Lysias and Hyperides loved, while Cato is utterly ignored? The discourse of this man is more antique, and certain words are somewhat rougher; for thus indeed at that time they spoke.

id muta, quod tum ille non potuit, et adde numeros et, <ut> aptior sit oratio, ipsa verba compone et quasi coagmenta, quod ne Graeci quidem veteres factitaverunt: iam neminem antepones Catoni.

Change that which at that time he could not, and add numbers and, so that the oration be more apt, compose the very words and, as it were, coagment them—something which not even the ancient Greeks made a practice of: now you will put no one before Cato.

[69] Ornari orationem Graeci putant, si verborum immutationibus utantur, quos appellant tropous, et sententiarum orationisque formis, quae vocant schemata: non veri simile est quam sit in utroque genere et creber et distinctus Cato. nec vero ignoro nondum esse satis politum hunc oratorem et quaerendum esse aliquid perfectius; quippe cum ita sit ad nostrorum temporum rationem vetus, ut nullius scriptum exstet dignum quidem lectione, quod sit antiquius. sed maiore honore in omnibus artibus quam in hac una arte dicendi versatur antiquitas.

[69] The Greeks think an oration is ornamented if they use changes of words, which they call tropous, and the forms of thoughts and of discourse, which they call schemata: it is not readily credible how in each kind Cato is both copious and distinct. Nor indeed am I unaware that this orator is not yet sufficiently polished and that something more perfected is to be sought; since he is so old in proportion to the standard of our times that no writing exists—indeed worthy of reading—which is earlier. But antiquity is treated with greater honor in all the arts than in this one art of speaking.

[70] Quis enim eorum qui haec minora animadvertunt non intellegit Canachi signa rigidiora esse quam ut imitentur veritatem? Calamidis dura illa quidem, sed tamen molliora quam Canachi; nondum Myronis satis ad veritatem adducta, iam tamen quae non dubites pulchra dicere; pulchriora Polycliti et iam plane perfecta, ut mihi quidem videri solent. similis in pictura ratio est: in qua Zeuxim et Polygnotum et Timanthem et eorum, qui non sunt usi plus quam quattuor coloribus, formas et liniamenta laudamus; at in Aetione Nicomacho Protogene Apelle iam perfecta sunt omnia.

[70] For who among those who notice these finer points does not understand that the statues of Canachus are too rigid to imitate truth? Those of Calamis are indeed hard, yet softer than Canachus’s; those of Myron not yet sufficiently brought to truth, yet already such as you would not hesitate to call beautiful; those of Polyclitus more beautiful and now plainly perfect, as at least they are wont to seem to me. A similar ratio holds in painting: in which we praise in Zeuxis and Polygnotus and Timanthes, and in those who did not use more than four colors, the forms and lineaments; but in Aetion, Nicomachus, Protogenes, Apelles everything is already perfect.

[71] Et nescio an reliquis in rebus omnibus idem eveniat: nihil est enim simul et inventum et perfectum; nec dubitari debet quin fuerint ante Homerum poetae, quod ex eis carminibus intellegi potest, quae apud illum et in Phaeacum et in procorum epulis canuntur. quid, nostri veteres versus ubi sunt?

[71] And I do not know whether in all other matters as well the same happens: for nothing is at once both invented and perfected; nor ought it to be doubted that there were poets before Homer, as can be understood from those songs which in Homer are sung both at the banquets of the Phaeacians and of the suitors. Well then, where are our ancient verses?

quos olim Fauni vatesque canebant,
cum neque Musarum scopulos
nec dicti studiosus quisquam erat ante hunc

which once the Fauns and the seer-poets sang,
when neither the crags of the Muses
nor was there anyone studious of diction before him

ait ipse de se nec mentitur in gloriando: sic enim sese res habet. nam et Odyssia Latina est sic [in] tamquam opus aliquod Daedali et Livianae fabulae non satis dignae quae iterum legantur.

he himself says of himself and does not lie in glorying: for thus the matter stands. For both the Latin Odyssey is thus [in] as if some work of Daedalus, and the Livian plays are not sufficiently worthy to be read a second time.

[72] Atqui hic Livius [qui] primus fabulam C. Claudio Caeci filio et M. Tuditano consulibus docuit anno ipso ante quam natus est Ennius, post Romam conditam autem quarto decumo et quingentesimo, ut hic ait, quem nos sequimur. est enim inter scriptores de numero annorum controversia. Accius autem a Q. Maxumo quintum consule captum Tarento scripsit Livium annis xxx post quam eum fabulam docuisse et Atticus scribit et nos in antiquis commentariis invenimus;

[72] But this Livius [who] first staged a play, in the consulship of Gaius Claudius, son of Caecus, and Marcus Tuditanus, in the very year before Ennius was born, but after Rome was founded in the 514th year, as this man says, whom we follow. For there is among writers a controversy about the number of years. Accius, moreover, wrote that, with Quintus Maximus consul for the 5th time, Tarentum having been captured, Livius was taken; 30 years after that he staged a play; and Atticus writes this too, and we have found it in ancient commentaries;

[73] Docuisse autem fabulam annis post xi, C. Cornelio Q. Minucio consulibus ludis Iuventatis, quos Salinator Senensi proelio voverat. in quo tantus error Acci fuit, ut his consulibus xl annos natus Ennius fuerit: quoi aequalis fuerit Livius, minor fuit aliquanto is, qui primus fabulam dedit, quam ii, qui multas docuerant ante hos consules, et Plautus et Naevius.

[73] And that he taught a play 11 years afterward, in the consulship of Gaius Cornelius and Quintus Minucius, at the Games of Youth, which Salinator had vowed at the Senan battle. In this Accius’s error was so great, that in the consulate of these men Ennius was 40 years old: to whom Livius was equal in age; the man who first gave a play was somewhat younger than those who had taught many before these consuls, both Plautus and Naevius.

[74] Haec si minus apta videntur huic sermoni, Brute, Attico adsigna, qui me inflammavit studio inlustrium hominum aetates et tempora persequendi. Ego vero, inquit Brutus, et delector ista quasi notatione temporum et ad id quod instituisti, oratorum genera distinguere aetatibus, istam diligentiam esse accommodatam puto.

[74] If these things seem less apt to this discourse, Brutus, assign them to Atticus, who has inflamed me with zeal for pursuing the ages and times of illustrious men. “For my part,” says Brutus, “I both take delight in that, as it were, notation of times, and for that which you have instituted, to distinguish the genera of orators by ages, I think that diligence to be well accommodated.”

[75] Recte, inquam, Brute, intellegis. atque utinam exstarent illa carmina, quae multis saeclis ante suam aetatem in epulis esse cantitata a singulis convivis de clarorum virorum laudibus in Originibus scriptum reliquit Cato. tamen illius, quem in vatibus et Faunis adnumerat Ennius, bellum Punicum quasi Myronis opus delectat.

[75] Rightly, I say, Brutus, you understand. And would that those songs were still extant, which Cato left written in the Origines—that many ages before his own time at banquets they used to be chanted by individual guests about the lauds of famous men. Yet the Punic War of that man, whom Ennius numbers among the bards and the Fauns, delights, as if it were a work of Myron.

[76] Sit Ennius sane, ut est certe, perfectior: qui si illum, ut simulat, contemneret, non omnia bella persequens primum illud Punicum acerrimum bellum reliquisset. sed ipse dicit cur id faciat. 'scripsere' inquit 'alii rem vorsibus'; et luculente quidem scripserunt, etiam si minus quam tu polite.

[76] Let Ennius indeed be, as certainly he is, more perfect: who, if he despised that man, as he makes show, would not, while pursuing all wars, have left that first, most fierce Punic war. But he himself says why he does that. ‘Others,’ says he, ‘have written the matter in verses’; and indeed they have written splendidly, even if less polished than you.

nec vero tibi aliter videri debet, qui a Naevio vel sumpsisti multa, si fateris, vel, si negas, surripuisti.

nor indeed ought it to seem otherwise to you, who have either taken many things from Naevius, if you confess it, or, if you deny it, have surreptitiously stolen them.

[77] Cum hoc Catone grandiores natu fuerunt C. Flaminius C. Varro Q. Maximus Q. Metellus P. Lentulus P. Crassus, qui cum superiore Africano consul fuit. ipsum Scipionem accepimus non infantem fuisse. filius quidem eius, is qui hunc minorem Scipionem a Paulo adoptavit, si corpore valuisset, in primis habitus esset disertus; indicant cum oratiunculae tum historia quaedam Graeca scripta dulcissime.

[77] Along with this Cato there were, older in years, C. Flaminius, C. Varro, Q. Maximus, Q. Metellus, P. Lentulus, P. Crassus, who was consul with the earlier Africanus. We have received that Scipio himself was not inarticulate. His son indeed—the one who adopted this younger Scipio from Paulus—if he had been strong in body, would have been held among the foremost as eloquent; both some little orations and a certain history written most sweetly in Greek attest it.

[78] Numeroque eodem fuit Sex. Aelius, iuris quidem civilis omnium peritissumus, sed etiam ad dicendum paratus. de minoribus autem C. Sulpicius Galus, qui maxume omnium nobilium Graecis litteris studuit; isque et oratorum in numero est habitus et fuit reliquis rebus ornatus atque elegans.

[78] And in the same number was Sextus Aelius, of civil law indeed the most expert of all, but also prepared for speaking. But among the juniors, Gaius Sulpicius Gallus, who most of all the nobles cultivated Greek letters; and he both was held in the number of orators and was in the remaining matters adorned and elegant.

iam enim erat unctior quaedam splendidiorque consuetudo loquendi. nam hoc praetore ludos Apollini faciente cum Thyesten fabulam docuisset, Q. Marcio Cn. Servilio consulibus mortem obiit Ennius.

For already there was a certain more unctuous and more splendid custom of speaking. For, with this praetor celebrating the games to Apollo, when he had produced the play Thyestes, with Q. Marcius and Cn. Servilius as consuls, Ennius met his death.

[79] Erat isdem temporibus Ti. Gracchus P. f., qui bis consul et censor fuit, cuius est oratio Graeca apud Rhodios; quem civem cum gravem tum etiam eloquentem constat fuisse. P. etiam Scipionem Nasicam, qui est Corculum appellatus, qui item bis consul et censor fuit, habitum eloquentem aiunt, illius qui sacra acceperit filium; dicunt etiam L. Lentulum, qui cum C. Figulo consul fuit. Q. Nobiliorem M. f. iam patrio instituto deditum studio litterarum—qui etiam Q. Ennium, qui cum patre eius in Aetolia militaverat, civitate donavit, cum triumvir coloniam deduxisset—et T. Annium Luscum huius Q. Fulvi conlegam non indisertum dicunt fuisse;

[79] In the same times there was Tiberius Gracchus, son of Publius, who was twice consul and censor, whose Greek oration before the Rhodians exists; it is agreed that he was, as a citizen, both weighty and also eloquent. They say that Publius Scipio Nasica, who was called Corculum, who likewise was twice consul and censor, was held eloquent, the son of him who had received the sacred objects; they also say Lucius Lentulus, who was consul with Gaius Figulus. Quintus Nobilior, son of Marcus, already by ancestral institution devoted to the study of letters—who even granted citizenship to Quintus Ennius, who had campaigned with his father in Aetolia, when, as triumvir, he had led out a colony—and Titus Annius Luscus, colleague of this Quintus Fulvius, they say, was not ineloquent;

[80] Atque etiam L. Paullus Africani pater personam principis civis facile dicendo tuebatur. et vero etiam tum Catone vivo, qui annos quinque et octoginta natus excessit e vita, cum quidem eo ipso anno contra Ser. Galbam ad populum summa contentione dixisset, quam etiam orationem scriptam reliquit—sed vivo Catone minores natu multi uno tempore oratores floruerunt.

[80] And also L. Paullus, the father of Africanus, by speaking was easily defending the persona of the leading citizen. And indeed even then, with Cato alive—who departed from life at the age of 85, after in that very year he had spoken to the people against Ser. Galba with the highest contention, and he even left that oration written—yet with Cato alive many younger men flourished as orators at one and the same time.

[81] Nam et A. Albinus, is qui Graece scripsit historiam, qui consul cum L. Lucullo fuit, et litteratus et disertus fuit; et tenuit cum hoc locum quendam etiam Ser. Fulvius et Numerius Fabius Pictor et iuris et litterarum et antiquitatis bene peritus; Quinctusque Fabius Labeo fuit ornatus isdem fere laudibus. nam Q. Metellus, is cuius quattuor filii consulares fuerunt, in primis est habitus eloquens, qui pro L. Cotta dixit accusante Africano; cuius et aliae sunt orationes et contra Ti. Gracchum exposita est in C. Fanni annalibus.

[81] For both A. Albinus, the one who wrote a history in Greek, who was consul with L. Lucullus, was both literate and eloquent; and along with him a certain place was held also by Ser. Fulvius and Numerius Fabius Pictor, well skilled in law, in letters, and in antiquity; and Quintus Fabius Labeo was adorned with nearly the same commendations. For Q. Metellus, he whose four sons were consular, was accounted especially eloquent, who spoke on behalf of L. Cotta when Africanus was the accuser; and of him there are other speeches too, and one against Ti. Gracchus is set forth in the Annals of C. Fannius.

[82] Tum ipse L. Cotta est veterator habitus; sed C. Laelius et P. Africanus in primis eloquentes, quorum exstant orationes, ex quibus existumari de ingeniis oratorum potest. sed inter hos aetate paulum his antecedens sine controversia Ser. Galba eloquentia praestitit; et nimirum is princeps ex Latinis illa oratorum propria et quasi legituma opera tractavit, ut egrederetur a proposito ornandi causa, ut delectaret animos aut permoveret, ut augeret rem, ut miserationibus, ut communibus locis uteretur.

[82] Then L. Cotta himself was accounted a veteran operator; but C. Laelius and P. Africanus were among the foremost eloquent men, whose orations exist, from which the talents of the orators can be estimated. But among these, slightly preceding them in age, Ser. Galba, without controversy, excelled in eloquence; and assuredly he, as the first among the Latins, treated those works proper and as it were legitimate to orators: to digress from the proposition for the sake of ornament, to delight minds or to move them, to augment the matter, to use miserations, to employ commonplaces.

sed nescio quomodo huius, quem constat eloquentia praestitisse, exiliores orationes sunt et redolentes magis antiquitatem quam aut Laeli <aut> Scipionis aut etiam ipsius Catonis; itaque exaruerunt, vix iam ut appareant.

but somehow this man’s orations—whom it is agreed excelled in eloquence—are thinner and more redolent of antiquity than either those of Laelius <or> of Scipio, or even of Cato himself; and so they have dried up, so that they scarcely now appear.

[83] De ipsius Laeli et Scipionis ingenio quamquam ea est fama, ut plurimum tribuatur ambobus, dicendi tamen laus est in Laelio inlustrior. at oratio Laeli de collegiis non melior quam de multis quam voles Scipionis; non quo illa Laeli quicquam sit dulcius aut quo de religione dici possit augustius, sed multo tamen vetustior et horridior ille quam Scipio; et, cum sint in dicendo variae voluntates, delectari mihi magis antiquitate videtur et lubenter verbis etiam uti paulo magis priscis Laelius.

[83] Concerning the native talent of Laelius himself and of Scipio, although such is their fame that very much is attributed to both, yet the praise of speaking is more illustrious in Laelius. But Laelius’s oration on the collegia is not better than many, whichever you please, of Scipio’s; not as though that one of Laelius were in any respect sweeter, or as though anything could be said more augustly concerning religion, but nevertheless he is much more ancient and rougher than Scipio; and, since there are various tastes in speaking, it seems to me that Laelius is more delighted by antiquity and gladly uses words even a little more old-fashioned.

[84] Sed est mos hominum, ut nolint eundem pluribus rebus excellere. nam ut ex bellica laude aspirare ad Africanum nemo potest, in qua ipsa egregium Viriathi bello reperimus fuisse Laelium: sic ingeni litterarum eloquentiae sapientiae denique etsi utrique primas, priores tamen libenter deferunt Laelio. nec mihi ceterorum iudicio solum videtur, sed etiam ipsorum inter ipsos concessu ita tributum fuisse.

[84] But it is the custom of men not to wish the same person to excel in several things. For just as, in military laud, no one can aspire to Africanus—though in that very sphere we have found Laelius to have been outstanding in the war with Viriathus—so in the genius of letters, in eloquence, and, finally, in sapience, although to both they assign first places, they nevertheless gladly defer the prior rank to Laelius. Nor does it seem to me to have been thus attributed only by the judgment of others, but also by the concession of the men themselves among themselves.

[85] Erat omnino tum mos, ut in reliquis rebus melior, sic in hoc ipso humanior, ut faciles essent in suum cuique tribuendo. memoria teneo Smyrnae me ex P. Rutilio Rufo audisse, cum diceret adulescentulo se accidisse, ut ex senatus consulto P. Scipio et D. Brutus, ut opinor, consules de re atroci magnaque quaererent. nam cum in silva Sila facta caedes esset notique homines interfecti insimulareturque familia, partim etiam liberi societatis eius, quae picarias de P. Cornelio L. Mummio censoribus redemisset, decrevisse senatum, ut de ea re cognoscerent et statuerent consules.

[85] Altogether at that time there was a custom—just as it was better in other matters, so in this very one more humane—that they were easy in assigning to each his own. I keep in memory that at Smyrna I heard from P. Rutilius Rufus, when he said that, while he was a rather young man, it had happened that, by a decree of the Senate, P. Scipio and, as I think, D. Brutus, consuls, were to inquire into an atrocious and great matter. For when in the Sila forest a slaughter had been committed and well-known men killed, and the household—partly even free men—of that partnership which had farmed (leased) the pitch-works from P. Cornelius and L. Mummius as censors was being accused, the Senate had decreed that the consuls should investigate and determine that matter.

[86] Causam pro publicanis accurate, ut semper solitus esset, eleganterque dixisse Laelium. cum consules re audita 'amplius' de consili sententia pronuntiavissent, paucis interpositis diebus iterum Laelium multo diligentius meliusque dixisse iterumque eodem modo a consulibus rem esse prolatam. tum Laelium, cum eum socii domum reduxissent egissentque gratias et ne defatigaretur oravissent, locutum esse ita: se, quae fecisset, honoris eorum causa studiose accurateque fecisse, sed se arbitrari causam illam a Ser.

[86] Laelius, as he was always accustomed, had spoken the case for the publicans carefully and elegantly. When, after the matter had been heard, the consuls, on the opinion of their council, had pronounced "amplius," and, a few days having intervened, Laelius again, much more diligently and better, had spoken, and again in the same way the matter had been put off by the consuls. Then Laelius, when the associates had brought him home, had given thanks, and had begged that he not be wearied out, spoke thus: that what he had done he had done zealously and carefully for the sake of their honor, but that he thought that that case was by Ser.

Galba, quod is in dicendo ardentior acriorque esset, gravius et vehementius posse defendi. itaque auctoritate C. Laeli publicanos causam detulisse ad Galbam;

by Galba—because in speaking he was more ardent and keener—it could be defended more gravely and more vehemently. and so, by the authority of Gaius Laelius, the publicans referred the case to Galba;

[87] Illum autem, quod ei viro succedendum esset, verecunde et dubitanter recepisse. unum quasi comperendinatus medium diem fuisse, quem totum Galbam in consideranda causa componendaque posuisse; et cum cognitionis dies esset et ipse Rutilius rogatu sociorum domum ad Galbam mane venisset, ut eum admoneret et ad dicendi tempus adduceret, usque illum, quoad ei nuntiatum esset consules descendisse, omnibus exclusis commentatum in quadam testudine cum servis litteratis fuisse, quorum alii aliud dictare eodem [a] tempore solitus esset. interim cum esset ei nuntiatum tempus esse, exisse in aedes eo colore et iis oculis, ut egisse causam, non commentatum putares.

[87] But that he, because he had to succeed that man, accepted it modestly and hesitantly. There was one, as it were comperendinated, intervening day, which Galba devoted wholly to considering and composing the case; and when it was the day of the hearing and Rutilius himself, at the request of the allies, had come in the morning to Galba’s house to remind him and to bring him to the time for speaking, right up until it was announced to him that the consuls had come down, with everyone excluded he had been rehearsing in a certain vaulted chamber with lettered slaves, to whom he was accustomed to dictate different things at the same [a] time. Meanwhile, when it was announced to him that it was time, he came out into the apartments with such a complexion and such eyes that you would think he had pleaded the case, not rehearsed.

[88] Addebat etiam, idque ad rem pertinere putabat, scriptores illos male mulcatos exisse cum Galba; ex quo significabat illum non in agendo solum, sed etiam in meditando vehementem atque incensum fuisse. quid multa? magna exspectatione, plurumis audientibus, coram ipso Laelio sic illam causam tanta vi tantaque gravitate dixisse Galbam, ut nulla fere pars orationis silentio praeteriretur.

[88] He also added—and he thought this pertained to the matter—that those writers had come out badly maltreated with Galba; from this he indicated that that man had been vehement and incensed not only in acting but even in meditating. Why say more? With great expectation, with very many listening, in the presence of Laelius himself, Galba pleaded that case with such force and such gravity that scarcely any part of the oration was passed over in silence.

itaque multis querelis multaque miseratione adhibita socios omnibus adprobantibus illa die quaestione liberatos esse.

and so, with many querelas and much commiseration brought to bear, with everyone approving, the allies were on that day freed from the inquest.

[89] Ex hac Rutili narratione suspicari licet, cum duae summae sint in oratore laudes, una subtiliter disputandi ad docendum, altera graviter agendi ad animos audientium permovendos, multoque plus proficiat is qui inflammet iudicem quam ille qui doceat, elegantiam in Laelio, vim in Galba fuisse. quae quidem vis tum maxume cognitast, cum Lusitanis a Ser. Galba praetore contra interpositam, ut existumabatur, fidem interfectis L. Libone tribuno plebis populum incitante et rogationem in Galbam privilegi similem ferente, summa senectute, ut ante dixi, M. Cato legem suadens in Galbam multa dixit; quam orationem in Origines suas rettulit, paucis ante quam mortuus est [an] diebus an mensibus.

[89] From this narration of Rutilius one may suspect that, since there are two chief praises in an orator—one, of disputing subtly for teaching, the other, of acting gravely for moving the minds of the hearers—and that he profits much more who inflames the judge than he who teaches, elegance was in Laelius, force in Galba. And indeed that force was then especially recognized, when, the Lusitanians having been slain by the praetor Servius Galba contrary to a pledged faith, as it was thought, with Lucius Libo, tribune of the plebs, inciting the people and proposing a bill against Galba similar to a privilegium, in extreme old age, as I said before, Marcus Cato, recommending a law against Galba, spoke much; which speech he inserted into his Origins a few [an] days or months before he died.

[90] Tum igitur nihil recusans Galba pro sese et populi Romani fidem implorans cum suos pueros tum C. Gali etiam filium flens commendabat, cuius orbitas et fletus mire miserabilis fuit propter recentem memoriam clarissimi patris; isque se tum eripuit flamma, propter pueros misericordia populi commota, sicut idem scriptum reliquit Cato. atque etiam ipsum Libonem non infantem video fuisse, ut ex orationibus eius intellegi potest.

[90] Then therefore, refusing nothing, Galba, imploring the good faith of the Roman People on his own behalf, weeping, was commending both his own boys and even the son of Gaius Gallus, whose orphanhood and tears were wondrously pitiable because of the recent memory of his most illustrious father; and he then rescued himself from the flame, the pity of the people being stirred on account of the boys, as the same Cato has left written. And I also see that Libo himself was no infant, as can be understood from his orations.

[91] Cum haec dixissem et paulum interquievissem: quid igitur, inquit, est causae, Brutus, si tanta virtus in oratore Galba fuit, cur ea nulla in orationibus eius appareat? quod mirari non possum in eis, qui nihil omnino scripti reliquerunt. Nec enim est eadem inquam, Brute, causa non scribendi et non tam bene scribendi quam dixerint. nam videmus alios oratores inertia nihil scripsisse, ne domesticus etiam labor accederet ad forensem—pleraeque enim scribuntur orationes habitae iam, non ut habeantur —;

[91] When I had said these things and paused a little: “What then,” says he, “is the cause, Brutus, if so great a virtue in the orator Galba existed, why does it not appear at all in his orations?” which I cannot wonder at in those who have left absolutely nothing written. For, I say, Brutus, the cause of not writing is not the same as the cause of not writing as well as they spoke. for we see that some other orators, out of inertia, wrote nothing, lest domestic labor also be added to the forensic—for most orations are written after they have already been delivered, not in order that they may be delivered —;

[92] Alios non laborare ut meliores fiant—nulla enim res tantum ad dicendum proficit quantum scriptio: memoriam autem in posterum ingeni sui non desiderant, cum se putant satis magnam adeptos esse dicendi gloriam eamque etiam maiorem visum iri, si in existimantium arbitrium sua scripta non venerint —; alios, quod melius putent dicere se posse quam scribere, quod peringeniosis hominibus neque satis doctis plerumque contingit, ut ipsi Galbae.

[92] Others do not labor to become better—for no thing so much profits for speaking as writing: moreover, they do not desire a memory in time to come of their own genius, since they think that they have acquired glory of speaking great enough, and that it will seem even greater, if their writings shall not have come into the judgment of those who estimate—; others, because they think that they are able to speak better than to write, which very often befalls men very ingenious and not sufficiently learned, as in Galba himself.

[93] Quem fortasse vis non ingeni solum sed etiam animi et naturalis quidam dolor dicentem incendebat efficiebatque ut et incitata et gravis et vehemens esset oratio; dein cum otiosus stilum prehenderat motusque omnis animi tamquam ventus hominem defecerat, flaccescebat oratio. quod iis qui limatius dicendi consectantur genus accidere non solet, propterea quod prudentia numquam deficit oratorem, qua ille utens eodem modo possit et dicere et scribere; ardor animi non semper adest, isque cum consedit, omnis illa vis et quasi flamma oratoris exstinguitur.

[93] Him, perhaps, the force not of genius only but also of spirit, and a certain natural dolor, used to inflame when speaking and made the speech both impelled, weighty, and vehement; then, when at leisure he had taken up the stylus and every motion of feeling, like a wind, had failed the man, the speech went slack. This does not usually befall those who pursue a more file-polished kind of speaking, for prudence never fails the orator, and by using it he is able in the same manner both to speak and to write; the ardor of spirit is not always present, and when it has subsided, all that force and as it were the flame of the orator is extinguished.

[94] Hanc igitur ob causam videtur Laeli mens spirare etiam in scriptis, Galbae autem vis occidisse. Fuerunt etiam in oratorum numero mediocrium L. et Sp. Mummii fratres, quorum exstant amborum orationes; simplex quidem Lucius et antiquus, Spurius autem nihilo ille quidem ornatior, sed tamen astrictior; fuit enim doctus e disciplina Stoicorum. multae sunt Sp. Albini orationes.

[94] For this reason, therefore, Laelius’s mind seems to breathe even in his writings, but Galba’s force to have died out. There were also, among the number of middling orators, the brothers Lucius and Spurius Mummius, of whom the orations of both are extant; Lucius indeed simple and antique, but Spurius, by no means more ornate, yet more tightly constrained; for he was learned from the discipline of the Stoics. There are many orations of Spurius Albinus.

sunt etiam L. et C. Aureliorum Orestarum, quos aliquo video in numero oratorum fuisse.

There are also L. and C. of the Aurelii Orestae, whom I see to have been counted to some degree among the orators.

[95] P. etiam Popillius cum civis egregius tum non indisertus fuit; Gaius vero filius eius disertus, Gaiusque Tuditanus cum omni vita atque victu excultus atque expolitus, tum eius elegans est habitum etiam orationis genus. eodemque in genere est habitus is, qui iniuria accepta fregit Ti. Gracchum patientia, civis in rebus optimis constantissimus M. Octavius. at vero M. Aemilius Lepidus, qui est Porcina dictus, isdem temporibus fere quibus Galba, sed paulo minor natu et summus orator est habitus et fuit, apparet ex orationibus, scriptor sane bonus.

[95] P. Popillius, both an egregious (outstanding) citizen and not ineloquent, was also; indeed his son Gaius was eloquent, and Gaius Tuditanus, cultivated and polished in his whole life and way of living, was then regarded as having an elegant kind of oratory as well. And in the same class was held the man who, having received an injury, broke Ti. Gracchus by patience, M. Octavius, a citizen most constant in the best affairs. But indeed M. Aemilius Lepidus, who was called Porcina, at nearly the same time as Galba, but a little younger in years, was held—and truly was—a consummate orator, as appears from his speeches, a writer decidedly good.

[96] Ut hoc in oratore Latino primum mihi videtur et levitas apparuisse illa Graecorum et verborum comprensio et iam artifex, ut ita dicam, stilus. hunc studiose duo adulescentes ingeniosissimi et prope aequales C. Carbo et Ti. Gracchus audire soliti sunt; de quibus iam dicendi locus erit, cum de senioribus pauca dixero. Q. enim Pompeius non contemptus orator temporibus illis fuit, qui summos honores homo per se cognitus sine ulla commendatione maiorum est adeptus.

[96] Now in this Latin orator it seems to me that for the first time both that Greek levity and a compression of words and a style already, so to speak, artful appeared. Him two exceedingly ingenious and nearly coeval youths, C. Carbo and Ti. Gracchus, were wont to hear attentively; about whom there will now be an occasion to speak, when I shall have said a few things about the elders. For Q. Pompeius was in those times a not-contemptible orator, who, a man known on his own merits without any commendation of ancestors, attained the highest honors.

[97] Tum L. Cassius multum potuit non eloquentia, sed dicendo tamen; homo non liberalitate, ut alii, sed ipsa tristitia et severitate popularis, cuius quidem legi tabellariae M. Antius Briso tribunus plebis diu restitit M. Lepido consule adiuvante; eaque res P. Africano vituperationi fuit, quod eius auctoritate de sententia deductus Briso putabatur. tum duo Caepiones multum clientes consilio et lingua, plus auctoritate tamen et gratia sublevabant. Sex.

[97] Then L. Cassius had much influence not by eloquence, yet by speaking nevertheless; a man popular not by liberality, as others, but by his very gloominess and severity, to whose ballot-law indeed M. Antius Briso, tribune of the plebs, long resisted, with M. Lepidus the consul aiding; and this matter was a source of reproach to P. Africanus, because Briso was thought to have been drawn off from his opinion by his authority. Then the two Caepiones greatly supported their clients by counsel and by tongue, yet more by authority and favor. Sex.

Pompei sunt scripta nec nimis extenuata, quamquam veterum est similis, et plena prudentiae.

Pompey’s writings are not overly attenuated, although akin to those of the ancients, and are full of prudence.

[98] P. Crassum valde probatum oratorem isdem fere temporibus accepimus, qui et ingenio valuit et studio et habuit quasdam etiam domesticas disciplinas. nam et cum summo illo oratore Ser. Galba, cuius Gaio filio filiam suam conlocaverat, adfinitate sese devinxerat et cum esset P. Muci filius fratremque haberet P. Scaevolam, domi ius civile cognoverat.

[98] We have received that P. Crassus was a highly approved orator at nearly the same times, who was strong both in native ingenium and in study, and he also had certain domestic disciplines. For he had bound himself by affinity with that supreme orator Ser. Galba, to whose son Gaius he had settled his own daughter in marriage; and since he was the son of P. Mucius and had as a brother P. Scaevola, he had learned the civil law at home.

in eo industriam constat summam fuisse maxumamque gratiam, cum et consuleretur plurimum et diceret.

in him it is established that there was the highest industry and the very greatest influence, since he both was consulted most and spoke.

[99] Horum aetatibus adiuncti duo C. Fannii C. M. filii fuerunt; quorum Gai filius, qui consul cum Domitio fuit, unam orationem de sociis et nomine Latino contra Gracchum reliquit sane et bonam et nobilem. Tum Atticus: quid ergo? estne ista Fanni?

[99] Joined to the generations of these were two Gaius Fannius, sons respectively of Gaius and of Marcus; of whom the one who was the son of Gaius, who was consul with Domitius, left a single oration On the Allies and the Latin Name against Gracchus, truly both good and notable. Then Atticus: “What then? Is that Fannius’s?”

nam varia opinio pueris nobis erat. alii a C. Persio litterato homine scriptam esse aiebant, illo quem significat valde doctum esse Lucilius; alii multos nobilis, quod quisque potuisset, in illam orationem contulisse.

for when we were boys, opinion was varied. some said it had been written by C. Persius, a literate man—that one whom Lucilius signifies to be very learned; others that many nobles, each what he could, had contributed to that oration.

[100] Tum ego: audivi equidem ista, inquam, de maioribus natu, sed nunquam sum adductus ut crederem; eamque suspicionem propter hanc causam credo fuisse, quod Fannius in mediocribus oratoribus habitus esset, oratio autem vel optuma esset illo quidem tempore orationum omnium. sed nec eiusmodi est, ut a pluribus confusa videatur—unus enim sonus est totius orationis et idem stilus —, nec de Persio reticuisset Gracchus, cum ei Fannius de Menelao Maratheno et de ceteris obiecisset; praesertim cum Fannius numquam sit habitus elinguis. nam et causas defensitavit et tribunatus eius arbitrio et auctoritate P. Africani gestus non obscurus fuit.

[100] Then I: I have indeed heard those things, I said, from my elders, but I have never been induced to believe; and I think that suspicion arose for this reason, because Fannius was held among mediocre orators, whereas the oration was the very best at that time of all orations. But neither is it of such a sort that it seems confused by several— for there is one tone of the whole oration and the same style —, nor would Gracchus have kept silent about Persius, when Fannius had thrown Menelaus of Marathon and the rest in his teeth; especially since Fannius was never considered tongueless. For he both defended causes, and his tribunate, conducted by the discretion and authority of P. Africanus, was not obscure.

[101] Alter autem C. Fannius M. filius, C. Laeli gener, et moribus et ipso genere dicendi durior. is soceri instituto, quem, quia cooptatus in augurum conlegium non erat, non admodum diligebat, praesertim cum ille Q. Scaevolam sibi minorem natu generum praetulisset—cui tamen Laelius se excusans non genero minori dixit se illud, sed maiori filiae detulisse —, is tamen instituto Laeli Panaetium audiverat. eius omnis in dicendo facultas historia ipsius non ineleganter scripta perspici potest, quae neque nimis est infans neque perfecte diserta.

[101] The other, however, Gaius Fannius, son of Marcus, son‑in‑law of Gaius Laelius, was harsher both in morals and in the very genus of speaking. He, following his father‑in‑law’s institute—whom, because he had not been co‑opted into the college of augurs, he did not particularly esteem, especially since that man had preferred Quintus Scaevola the younger to himself as a son‑in‑law—yet Laelius, excusing himself to him, said that he had conferred that not upon the younger son‑in‑law, but upon his elder daughter—he nevertheless, in Laelius’s institute, had listened to Panaetius. All his faculty in speaking can be discerned from his history written by himself not inelegantly, which is neither excessively infantile nor perfectly disert.

[102] Mucius autem augur quod pro se opus erat ipse dicebat, ut de pecuniis repetundis contra T. Albucium. is oratorum in numero non fuit, iuris civilis intellegentia atque omni prudentiae genere praestitit. L. Coelius Antipater scriptor, quemadmodum videtis, fuit ut temporibus illis luculentus, iuris valde peritus, multorum etiam, ut L. Crassi, magister.

[102] Mucius, however, the Augur, used to plead himself what was needful on his own behalf, as in the case on extorted monies against Titus Albucius. He was not in the number of orators; he excelled in intelligence of civil law and in every kind of prudence. Lucius Coelius Antipater, a writer, as you see, was, for those times, luculent, very skilled in law, and even the teacher of many, as of Lucius Crassus.

[103] Utinam in Ti. Graccho Gaioque Carbone talis mens ad rem publicam bene gerendam fuisset quale ingenium ad bene dicendum fuit: profecto nemo his viris gloria praestitisset. sed eorum alter propter turbulentissumum tribunatum, ad quem ex invidia foederis Numantini bonis iratus accesserat, ab ipsa re publica est interfectus; alter propter perpetuam in populari ratione levitatem morte voluntaria se a severitate iudicum vindicavit. sed fuit uterque summus orator.

[103] Would that in Tiberius Gracchus and Gaius Carbo there had been such a mind for the republic to be well managed as there was a talent for speaking well: surely no one would have surpassed these men in glory. But one of them, on account of a most turbulent tribunate—to which he had come angry with the “good men,” because of the ill-will over the Numantine treaty—was slain by the republic itself; the other, on account of perpetual levity in the popular cause, by voluntary death vindicated himself from the severity of the judges. But each was a consummate orator.

[104] Atque hoc memoria patrum teste dicimus. nam et Carbonis et Gracchi habemus orationes nondum satis splendidas verbis, sed acutas prudentiaeque plenissumas. fuit Gracchus diligentia Corneliae matris a puero doctus et Graecis litteris eruditus.

[104] And we say this, the memory of our fathers as witness. For we have the orations of both Carbo and Gracchus, not yet sufficiently splendid in words, but sharp and most full of prudence. Gracchus, by the diligence of his mother Cornelia, was taught from boyhood and was educated in Greek letters.

nam semper habuit exquisitos e Graecia magistros, in eis iam adulescens Diophanem Mytilenaeum Graeciae temporibus illis disertissumum. sed ei breve tempus ingeni augendi et declarandi fuit.

for he always had carefully chosen masters from Greece, among them, already as a youth, Diophanes of Mytilene, in those times the most eloquent of Greece. But the time was brief for the augmenting and declaring of his ingenuity.

[105] Carbo, quoi vita suppeditavit, est in multis iudiciis causisque cognitus. hunc qui audierant prudentes homines, in quibus familiaris noster L. Gellius qui se illi contubernalem in consulatu fuisse narrabat, canorum oratorem et volubilem et satis acrem atque eundem et vehementem et valde dulcem et perfacetum fuisse dicebat; addebat industrium etiam et diligentem et in exercitationibus commentationibusque multum operae solitum esse ponere.

[105] Carbo, while life afforded him the opportunity, was known in many trials and causes. Those prudent men who had heard him—among whom our acquaintance L. Gellius, who said that he had been his tentmate in his consulship—said that he was a canorous orator, voluble, and sufficiently sharp, and at the same time vehement and very sweet and very witty; he added that he was industrious as well and diligent, and that he was accustomed to put much effort into exercises and commentations.

[106] Hic optimus illis temporibus est patronus habitus eoque forum tenente plura fieri iudicia coeperunt. nam et quaestiones perpetuae hoc adulescente constitutae sunt, quae antea nullae fuerunt; L. enim Piso tribunus plebis legem primus de pecuniis repetundis Censorino et Manilio consulibus tulit—ipse etiam Piso et causas egit et multarum legum aut auctor aut dissuasor fuit, isque et orationes reliquit, quae iam evanuerunt, et annales sane exiliter scriptos —; et iudicia populi, quibus aderat Carbo, iam magis patronum desiderabant tabella data; quam legem L. Cassius Lepido et Mancino consulibus tulit.

[106] This man was held the best patron in those times, and while he was holding the forum, more trials began to be conducted. For both the standing courts (quaestiones perpetuae) were constituted when he was a young man, which previously had been none; for Lucius Piso, tribune of the plebs, first carried a law concerning the recovery of monies (de pecuniis repetundis) in the consulship of Censorinus and Manilius—Piso himself also both pled causes and was either the author or the dissuader of many laws, and he likewise left speeches, which have now vanished, and annals written rather meagerly—; and the people’s trials, at which Carbo was present, now more required a patron with the ballot given; which law Lucius Cassius carried in the consulship of Lepidus and Mancinus.

[107] Vester etiam D. Brutus M. filius, ut ex familiari eius L. Accio poeta sum audire solitus, et dicere non inculte solebat et erat cum litteris Latinis tum etiam Graecis, ut temporibus illis, eruditus. quae tribuebat idem Accius etiam Q. Maxumo L. Pauli nepoti; et vero ante Maxumum illum Scipionem, quo duce privato Ti. Gracchus occisus esset, cum omnibus in rebus vementem tum acrem aiebat in dicendo fuisse.

[107] Your own D. Brutus, son of M., as I was accustomed to hear from his intimate L. Accius the poet, was also wont to speak not without culture, and was, both in Latin letters and also in Greek, erudite for those times. The same Accius attributed these qualities also to Q. Maxumus, grandson of L. Paulus; and indeed, before that Maxumus, he said that Scipio—the leader, though a private citizen, under whom Ti. Gracchus was slain—had been both vehement in all matters and keen in speaking.

[108] Tum etiam P. Lentulus ille princeps ad rem publicam dumtaxat quod opus esset satis habuisse eloquentiae dicitur; isdemque temporibus L. Furius Philus perbene Latine loqui putabatur litteratiusque quam ceteri; P. Scaevola valde prudenter et acute; paulo etiam copiosius nec multo minus prudenter M'. Manilius. Appi Claudi volubilis sed paulo fervidior oratio. erat in aliquo numero etiam M. Fulvius Flaccus et C. Cato Africani sororis filius, mediocres oratores; etsi Flacci scripta sunt, sed ut studiosi litterarum.

[108] Then also that P. Lentulus, a leading man, is said to have had eloquence for the republic only so far as there was need; and in the same times L. Furius Philus was thought to speak Latin very well and more literately than the rest; P. Scaevola very prudently and acutely; and somewhat more copiously and not much less prudently, M'. Manilius. The oration of Appius Claudius was voluble but a little more fervid. There were of some account also M. Fulvius Flaccus and C. Cato, the son of Africanus’s sister, mediocre orators; although writings of Flaccus exist, yet as of a devotee of letters.

Flacci autem aemulus P. Decius fuit, non infans ille quidem sed ut vita sic oratione etiam turbulentus.

But the rival of Flaccus was P. Decius, not indeed inarticulate, but, as in life, so also in speech, turbulent.

[109]M. Drusus C. f., qui in tribunatu C. Gracchum conlegam iterum tribunum fregit, vir et oratione gravis et auctoritate, eique proxime adiunctus C. Drusus frater fuit. tuus etiam gentilis, Brute, M. Pennus facete agitavit in tribunatu C. Gracchum paulum aetate antecedens. fuit enim M. Lepido et L. Oreste consulibus quaestor Gracchus, tribunus Pennus illius Marci filius, qui cum Q. Aelio consul fuit; sed is omnia summa sperans aedilicius est mortuus.

[109]M. Drusus, son of C., who in his tribunate broke G. Gracchus, his colleague, when he was tribune again, a man weighty both in speech and in authority; and to him there was closely adjoined his brother C. Drusus. Your clansman too, Brute, M. Pennus wittily harried G. Gracchus in his tribunate, being a little his senior in age. For when M. Lepidus and L. Orestes were consuls, Gracchus was quaestor; Pennus, the son of that Marcus who was consul with Q. Aelius, was tribune; but he, hoping for the highest honors, died in his aedileship.

nam de T. Flaminino, quem ipse vidi, nihil accepi nisi Latine diligenter locutum.

for about T. Flamininus, whom I myself saw, I have received nothing except that he spoke Latin carefully.

[110] His adiuncti sunt C. Curio M. Scaurus P. Rutilius C. Gracchus. de Scauro et Rutilio breviter licet dicere, quorum neuter summi oratoris habuit laudem et est uterque in multis causis versatus. erat in quibusdam laudandis viris, etiam si maximi ingeni non essent, probabilis tamen industria; quamquam his quidem non omnino ingenium, sed oratorium ingenium defuit.

[110] To these are joined C. Curio, M. Scaurus, P. Rutilius, C. Gracchus. About Scaurus and Rutilius one may speak briefly: neither of them had the repute of a supreme orator, and yet each was versed in many cases. There was in certain men to be praised, even if they were not of the greatest talent, nevertheless a commendable industry; although in their case it was not talent altogether that was lacking, but oratorical talent.

neque enim refert videre quid dicendum sit, nisi id queas solute et suaviter dicere; ne id quidem satis est, nisi id quod dicitur fit voce voltu motuque conditius.

for it does not matter to see what must be said, unless you can say it fluently and suavely; not even that is sufficient, unless what is said is made more seasoned by voice, visage, and movement.

[111] Quid dicam opus esse doctrina? sine qua etiam si quid bene dicitur adiuvante natura, tamen id, quia fortuito fit, semper paratum esse non potest. in Scauri oratione, sapientis hominis et recti, gravitas summa et naturalis quaedam inerat auctoritas, non ut causam sed ut testimonium dicere putares, cum pro reo diceret.

[111] What shall I say of the need for doctrine? without which, even if something is said well with nature aiding, nevertheless, because it comes about fortuitously, it cannot be always prepared. in the oration of Scaurus, a wise and upright man, there was the highest gravity and a certain natural authority, so that you would think he was speaking not to plead a cause but to give testimony, when he was speaking on behalf of the defendant.

[112] Hoc dicendi genus ad patrocinia mediocriter aptum videbatur, ad senatoriam vero sententiam, cuius erat ille princeps, vel maxume; significabat enim non prudentiam solum, sed, quod maxume rem continebat, fidem. habebat hoc a natura ipsa, quod a doctrina non facile posset; quamquam huius quoque ipsius rei, quemadmodum scis, praecepta sunt. huius et orationes sunt et tres ad L. Fufidium libri scripti de vita ipsius acta sane utiles, quos nemo legit; at Cyri vitam et disciplinam legunt, praeclaram illam quidem, sed neque tam nostris rebus aptam nec tamen Scauri laudibus anteponendam.

[112] This kind of speaking seemed moderately apt for defenses, but for a senatorial opinion, of which he was the chief, most of all; for it signified not prudence only, but, what most of all held the matter together, good faith. He had this from nature itself, which could not easily be had from doctrine; although for this very thing too, as you know, there are precepts. Of this man there exist both orations and three books written to L. Fufidius, on the conduct of his own life—truly useful—which no one reads; but they read the Life and Discipline of Cyrus, illustrious indeed, yet neither so apt to our affairs nor to be set before the praises of Scaurus.

[113] Ipse etiam Fufidius in aliquo patronorum numero fuit. Rutilius autem in quodam tristi et severo genere dicendi versatus est. erat uterque natura vehemens et acer; itaque cum una consulatum petivissent, non ille solum, qui repulsam tulerat, accusavit ambitus designatum competitorem, sed Scaurus etiam absolutus Rutilium in iudicium vocavit.

[113] Fufidius himself too was counted in some rank among the patrons. Rutilius, however, was practiced in a certain sad and severe genre of speaking. Each was by nature vehement and sharp; and so, when they had sought the consulship together, not only did the one who had suffered a repulse accuse his designated competitor of electoral bribery (ambitus), but Scaurus also, after being acquitted, called Rutilius into court.

multaque opera multaque industria Rutilius fuit, quae erat propterea gratior, quod idem magnum munus de iure respondendi sustinebat.

and Rutilius was of many works and much industry, which for that reason was the more pleasing, because he likewise sustained the great office of responding on law.

[114] Sunt eius orationes ieiunae; multa praeclara de iure; doctus vir et Graecis litteris eruditus, Panaeti auditor, prope perfectus in Stoicis; quorum peracutum et artis plenum orationis genus scis tamen esse exile nec satis populari adsensioni adcommodatum. itaque illa, quae propria est huius disciplinae, philosophorum de se ipsorum opinio firma in hoc viro et stabilis inventa est.

[114] His orations are jejune; many preeminent things on law; a learned man and erudite in Greek letters, a hearer of Panaetius, nearly perfect among the Stoics; whose style of speaking you know, however, to be very acute and full of art, yet slender and not sufficiently accommodated to popular assent. And so that which is proper to this discipline, the philosophers’ opinion about themselves, was found in this man to be firm and stable.

[115] Qui quom innocentissumus in iudicium vocatus esset, quo iudicio convolsam penitus scimus esse rem publicam, cum essent eo tempore eloquentissimi viri L. Crassus et M. Antonius consulares, eorum adhibere neutrum voluit. dixit ipse pro sese et pauca C. Cotta, quod sororis erat filius—et is quidem tamen ut orator, quamquam erat admodum adulescens —, et Q. Mucius enucleate ille quidem et polite, ut solebat, nequaquam autem ea vi atque copia, quam genus illud iudici et magnitudo causae postulabat.

[115] When, being a most innocent man, he had been called into judgment—by which judgment we know the Republic to have been convulsed utterly—, since at that time there were the most eloquent men, L. Crassus and M. Antonius, consular men, he was willing to employ neither of them. He spoke himself on his own behalf, and Gaius Cotta said a few things, because he was the son of his sister — and he indeed, nevertheless, as an orator, although he was very much a young man —, and Quintus Mucius, indeed neatly and politely, as he was accustomed, yet by no means with that force and copiousness which that genus of trial and the magnitude of the cause demanded.

[116] Habemus igitur in Stoicis oratoribus Rutilium, Scaurum in antiquis; utrumque tamen laudemus, quoniam per illos ne haec quidem in civitate genera hac oratoria laude caruerunt. volo enim ut in scaena sic etiam in foro non eos modo laudari, qui celeri motu et difficili utantur, sed eos etiam, quos statarios appellant, quorum sit illa simplex in agendo veritas, non molesta.

[116] We have therefore among Stoic orators Rutilius, and Scaurus among the ancients; yet let us praise both, since through them not even these kinds in the state were lacking in this oratorical praise. For I wish that, as on the stage, so also in the forum, not only those be praised who employ a swift and difficult movement, but also those whom they call “statary,” whose simplicity of truth in performance is not troublesome.

[117] Et quoniam Stoicorum est facta mentio, Q. Aelius Tubero fuit illo tempore, L. Pauli nepos; nullo in oratorum numero sed vita severus et congruens cum ea disciplina quam colebat, paulo etiam durior; qui quidem in triumviratu iudicaverit contra P. Africani avunculi sui testimonium vacationem augures quo minus iudiciis operam darent non habere; sed ut vita sic oratione durus incultus horridus; itaque honoribus maiorum respondere non potuit. fuit autem constans civis et fortis et in primis Graccho molestus, quod indicat Gracchi in eum oratio; sunt etiam in Gracchum Tuberonis. is fuit mediocris in dicendo, doctissumus in disputando.

[117] And since mention has been made of the Stoics, there was at that time Q. Aelius Tubero, grandson of L. Paulus; in no tally of orators, but in life severe and congruent with that discipline which he cultivated, even a little harsher; who indeed, when serving in a triumvirate, judged—contrary to the testimony of P. Africanus, his maternal uncle—that the augurs did not have an exemption to prevent them from giving service to the courts; but, as in life, so in oration, he was harsh, uncultivated, rough; and thus he could not answer to the honors of his ancestors. He was, however, a steadfast and brave citizen, and particularly troublesome to Gracchus, as Gracchus’s speech against him indicates; there are also speeches of Tubero against Gracchus. He was middling in speaking, most learned in disputation.

[118] Tum Brutus: quam hoc idem in nostris contingere intellego quod in Graecis, ut omnes fere Stoici prudentissumi in disserendo sint et id arte faciant sintque architecti paene verborum, idem traducti a disputando ad dicendum inopes reperiantur. unum excipio Catonem, in quo perfectissumo Stoico summam eloquentiam non desiderem, quam exiguam in Fannio, ne in Rutilio quidem magnam, in Tuberone nullam video fuisse.

[118] Then Brutus: how I understand that this same thing happens among our own as among the Greeks—that almost all the Stoics are most prudent in disputing and do it by art, and are almost architects of words; yet the same men, when transferred from disputation to speaking, are found poor. I except one, Cato, in whom, a most perfect Stoic, I do not miss the highest eloquence, which I see to have been scant in Fannius, not great even in Rutilius, and in Tubero I see there was none.

[119] Et ego: non, inquam, Brute, sine causa, propterea quod istorum in dialecticis omnis cura consumitur, vagum illud orationis et fusum et multiplex non adhibetur genus. tuus autem avunculus, quemadmodum scis, habet a Stoicis id, quod ab illis petendum fuit; sed dicere didicit a dicendi magistris eorumque more se exercuit. quod si omnia a philosophis essent petenda, Peripateticorum institutis commodius fingeretur oratio.

[119] And I: not, I say, Brutus, without cause, for the reason that, since all their care is consumed in dialectic, that wandering kind of oration, both diffuse and manifold, is not employed. Your uncle, however, as you know, has from the Stoics that which ought to have been sought from them; but he learned to speak from masters of speaking and exercised himself after their manner. But if everything had to be sought from philosophers, oration would be more suitably fashioned by the institutes of the Peripatetics.

[120] Quo magis tuum, Brute, iudicium probo, qui eorum [id est ex vetere Academia] philosophorum sectam secutus es, quorum in doctrina atque praeceptis disserendi ratio coniungitur cum suavitate dicendi et copia; quamquam ea ipsa Peripateticorum Academicorumque consuetudo in ratione dicendi talis est, ut nec perficere oratorem possit ipsa per sese nec sine ea orator esse perfectus. nam ut Stoicorum astrictior est oratio aliquantoque contractior quam aures populi requirunt, sic illorum liberior et latior quam patitur consuetudo iudiciorum et fori.

[120] Wherefore I approve your judgment, Brutus, the more, you who have followed the sect of those philosophers [that is, from the old Academy], in whose doctrine and precepts the method of disputation is conjoined with the suavity and copiousness of speaking; although that very practice of the Peripatetics and Academics in the rationale of speaking is such that it can neither by itself perfect an orator nor can an orator be perfect without it. For as the oration of the Stoics is more constrained and somewhat more contracted than the ears of the people require, so theirs is freer and broader than the custom of the courts and of the forum permits.

[121] Quis enim uberior in dicendo Platone? Iovem sic [ut] aiunt philosophi, si Graece loquatur, loqui. quis Aristotele nervosior, Theophrasto dulcior?

[121] For who is more copious in speaking than Plato? Jupiter would speak thus, [as] the philosophers say, if he were to speak in Greek. Who more sinewy than Aristotle, more dulcet than Theophrastus?

lectitavisse Platonem studiose, audivisse etiam Demosthenes dicitur—idque apparet ex genere et granditate verborum; dicit etiam in quadam epistula hoc ipse de sese —, sed et huius oratio in philosophiam translata pugnacior, ut ita dicam, videtur et illorum in iudicia pacatior.

Demosthenes is said to have read Plato studiously and even to have listened to him—and this appears from the style and grandeur of his words; he also says this himself about himself in a certain letter—, but both his oration, when translated into philosophy, seems, so to speak, more pugnacious, and theirs, when translated into the courts, more pacific.

[122] Nunc reliquorum oratorum aetates, si placet, et gradus persequamur. Nobis vero, inquit Atticus, et vehementer quidem, ut pro Bruto etiam respondeam. Curio fuit igitur eiusdem aetatis fere sane illustris orator, cuius de ingenio ex orationibus eius existumari potest: sunt enim et aliae et pro Ser.

[122] Now let us, if it pleases, pursue the ages and the grades of the remaining orators. For us indeed, says Atticus, and very much so, so that I may even reply on behalf of Brutus. Curio was therefore of nearly the same age, a truly illustrious orator, whose inborn talent can be judged from his speeches: for there are both others and the one on behalf of Ser.

Fulvio de incestu nobilis oratio. nobis quidem pueris haec omnium optima putabatur, quae vix iam comparet in hac turba novorum voluminum.

A noble oration by Fulvius on incest. To us indeed, as boys, this was considered the best of all, which now scarcely appears in this crowd of new volumes.

[123] Praeclare, inquit Brutus, teneo qui istam turbam voluminum effecerit. Et ego, inquam, intellego, Brute, quem dicas; certe enim et boni aliquid adtulimus iuventuti, magnificentius quam fuerat genus dicendi et ornatius; et nocuimus fortasse, quod veteres orationes post nostras non a me quidem—meis enim illas antepono—sed a plerisque legi sunt desitae. Me numera, inquit, in plerisque; quamquam video mihi multa legenda iam te auctore quae antea contemnebam.

[123] “Excellently,” says Brutus, “I grasp who has produced that crowd of volumes.” “And I too,” I say, “understand, Brutus, whom you mean; for certainly we have also brought something good to the youth—a kind of speaking more magnificent than it had been and more ornate; and perhaps we have done harm, because the speeches of the ancients, after ours, have ceased to be read, not indeed by me—for I set those before my own—but by most people.” “Count me,” he says, “among the many; although I see that many things must now be read by me, at your authority, which formerly I was despising.”

[124] Atqui haec, inquam, de incestu laudata oratio puerilis est locis multis: de amore de tormentis de rumore loci sane inanes, verum tamen nondum tritis nostrorum hominum auribus nec erudita civitate tolerabiles. scripsit etiam alia nonnulla et multa dixit et inlustria et in numero patronorum fuit, ut eum mirer, cum et vita suppeditavisset et splendor ei non defuisset, consulem non fuisse.

[124] And yet, I say, the praised speech about incest is boyish in many passages: on love, on tortures, on rumor, the passages truly empty, but nevertheless not tolerable either to the not‑yet‑worn ears of our people nor to an educated commonwealth. he also wrote some other things and delivered many, and illustrious ones, and was in the number of advocates, so that I marvel that, although both life had supplied and splendor had not been lacking to him, he was not consul.

[125] Sed ecce in manibus vir et praestantissimo ingenio et flagranti studio et doctus a puero C. Gracchus: noli enim putare quemquam, Brute, pleniorem aut uberiorem ad dicendum fuisse. Et ille: sic prorsus, inquit, existumo atque istum de superioribus paene solum lego. Immo plane, inquam, Brute, legas censeo.

[125] But look—now in our hands is a man of most preeminent genius and burning zeal, and taught from boyhood, Gaius Gracchus: for do not suppose, Brutus, that anyone was more full or more copious for speaking. And he: just so, I altogether think, and of those above I read him almost alone. Nay rather, plainly, I say, Brutus, I advise that you read him.

damnum enim illius immaturo interitu res Romanae Latinaeque litterae fecerunt.

for by his untimely death the Roman commonwealth and Latin letters suffered a loss.

[126] Utinam non tam fratri pietatem quam patriae praestare voluisset. quam ille facile tali ingenio, diutius si vixisset, vel paternam esset vel avitam gloriam consecutus! eloquentia quidem nescio an habuisset parem neminem.

[126] Would that he had been willing to show not so much piety to his brother as to his fatherland. How easily, with such an ingenium, if he had lived longer, would he have attained either his father’s or his grandfather’s glory! In eloquence, indeed, I do not know whether he would have had any equal.

grandis est verbis, sapiens sententiis, genere toto gravis. manus extrema non accessit operibus eius: praeclare inchoata multa, perfecta non plane. legendus, inquam, est hic orator, Brute, si quisquam alius, iuventuti; non enim solum acuere, sed etiam alere ingenium potest.

He is grand in words, wise in maxims, in his whole manner grave. The finishing hand did not come to his works: many things splendidly begun, not completely perfected. He must be read, I say, this orator, Brutus, by the youth, if anyone else, for he can not only whet but also nourish the genius.

[127] Huic successit aetati C. Galba, Servi illius eloquentissimi viri filius, P. Crassi eloquentis et iuris periti gener. laudabant hunc patres nostri, favebant etiam propter patris memoriam, sed cecidit in cursu. nam rogatione Mamilia Iugurthinae coniurationis invidia, cum pro sese ipse dixisset, oppressus est.

[127] To this age there succeeded C. Galba, the son of that most eloquent man Servius, the son-in-law of P. Crassus, eloquent and skilled in law. Our fathers praised this man; they also favored him on account of his father’s memory, but he fell in the running. For by the Mamilian rogation, through the odium of the Jugurthine conspiracy, although he had spoken on his own behalf, he was crushed.

exstat eius peroratio, qui epilogus dicitur; qui tanto in honore pueris nobis erat ut eum etiam edisceremus. hic, qui in conlegio sacerdotum esset, primus post Romam conditam iudicio publico est condemnatus.

His peroration survives, which is called the epilogue; it was in such honor among us boys that we even learned it by heart. This man, who was in the college of priests, was the first, after Rome was founded, to be condemned by a public trial.

[128] P. Scipio, qui est in consulatu mortuus, non multum ille quidem nec saepe dicebat, sed et Latine loquendo cuivis erat par et omnis sale facetiisque superabat. eius conlega L. Bestia bonis initiis orsus tribunatus—nam P. Popillium vi C. Gracchi expulsum sua rogatione restituit —, vir et acer et non indisertus, tristis exitus habuit consulatus. nam invidiosa lege [Mamilia quaestio] C. Galbam sacerdotem et quattuor consularis, L. Bestiam C. Catonem Sp. Albinum civemque praestantissimum L. Opimium, Gracchi interfectorem, a populo absolutum, cum is contra populi studium stetisset, Gracchani iudices sustulerunt.

[128] P. Scipio, who died in his consulship, indeed did not speak much nor often, but in speaking Latin he was equal to anyone and he surpassed all in wit and witticisms. His colleague L. Bestia, having begun his tribunate with good beginnings—for he restored P. Popillius, expelled by the force of C. Gracchus, by his own rogation—, a man keen and not ineloquent, had a sad outcome of his consulship. For by an invidious law [the Mamilian inquiry] the Gracchan judges condemned C. Galba, a priest, and four men of consular rank, L. Bestia, C. Cato, Sp. Albinus, and a most outstanding citizen, L. Opimius, the slayer of Gracchus, who had been acquitted by the people, although he had stood against the people’s zeal.

[129] Huius dissimilis in tribunatu reliquaque omni vita civis improbus C. Licinius Nerva non indisertus fuit. C. Fimbria temporibus isdem fere sed longius aetate provectus habitus est sane, ut ita dicam, luculentus patronus: asper maledicus, genere toto paulo fervidior atque commotior, diligentia tamen et virtute animi atque vita bonus auctor in senatu; idem tolerabilis patronus nec rudis in iure civili et cum virtute tum etiam ipso orationis genere liber; cuius orationes pueri legebamus, quas iam reperire vix possumus.

[129] Unlike him, in his tribunate and in all the rest of his life, the unscrupulous citizen Gaius Licinius Nerva was not ineloquent. Gaius Fimbria, in nearly the same times but carried further in age, was held to be, so to speak, a truly luculent advocate: harsh, a maledicator, in his whole style somewhat more fervid and more agitated, yet by diligence and by virtue of spirit and in life a good authority in the Senate; likewise a tolerable advocate and not untrained in civil law, and both by virtue and also by the very genus of his oration free-spoken; whose orations we as boys used to read, which now we can scarcely find.

[130] Atque etiam ingenio et sermone eleganti, valetudine incommoda C. Sextius Calvinus fuit; qui etsi, cum remiserant dolores pedum, non deerat in causis, tamen id non saepe faciebat. itaque consilio eius, cum volebant, homines utebantur, patrocinio, cum licebat. isdem temporibus M. Brutus, in quo magnum fuit, Brute, dedecus generi vestro, qui, cum tanto nomine esset patremque optimum virum habuisset et iuris peritissimum, accusationem factitaverit, ut Athenis Lycurgus.

[130] And moreover C. Sextius Calvinus was of elegant genius and speech, with incommodious health; who, although, when the pains of his feet abated, he did not fail in cases, nevertheless he did not do that often. And so men made use of his counsel when they wished, of his patronage when it was permitted. In the same times M. Brutus—than whom there was, Brutus, a great disgrace to your lineage—who, though he was of so great a name and had had a father an excellent man and most skilled in law, made a practice of accusation, as Lycurgus at Athens.

is magistratus non petivit sed fuit accusator vehemens et molestus, ut facile cerneres naturale quoddam stirpis bonum degeneravisse vitio depravatae voluntatis.

he did not seek magistracies but was a vehement and vexatious accuser, so that you might easily discern that a certain natural good of the lineage had degenerated through the vice of a depraved will.

[131] Atque eodem tempore accusator de plebe L. Caesulenus fuit, quem ego audivi iam senem, cum ab L. Sabellio multam lege Aquilia de iustitia petivisset. non fecissem hominis paene infimi mentionem, nisi iudicarem qui suspiciosius aut criminosius diceret audivisse me neminem. doctus etiam Graecis T. Albucius vel potius paene Graecus.

[131] And at the same time there was an accuser from the plebs, L. Caesulenus, whom I heard when already an old man, when he had sought a fine from L. Sabellius under the Aquilian law on a question of justice. I would not have made mention of a man almost of the lowest sort, unless I judged that I had heard no one who spoke more suspiciously or more criminously. T. Albucius too was learned in Greek—or rather, almost a Greek.

loquor, ut opinor; sed licet ex orationibus iudicare. fuit autem Athenis adulescens, perfectus Epicureus evaserat, minime aptum ad dicendum genus.

I speak, as I opine; but it is permitted to judge from the orations. Moreover, at Athens he was an adolescent, he had emerged a perfect Epicurean, a genus least apt for speaking.

[132] Iam Q. Catulus non antiquo illo more sed hoc nostro, nisi quid fieri potest perfectius, eruditus. multae litterae, summa non vitae solum atque naturae sed orationis etiam comitas, incorrupta quaedam Latini sermonis integritas; quae perspici cum ex orationibus eius potest tum facillume ex eo libro, quem de consulatu et de rebus gestis suis conscriptum molli et Xenophonteo genere sermonis misit ad A. Furium poetam familiarem suum; qui liber nihilo notior est quam illi tres, de quibus ante dixi, Scauri libri.

[132] Now Q. Catulus was erudite not in that ancient manner but in this our own—unless anything can be made more perfect. Much in letters; the highest affability not only of life and character but even of oration; a certain uncorrupted integrity of the Latin speech; which can be perceived both from his orations and most easily from that book which, written about his consulship and his achievements, in a soft and Xenophontic kind of diction, he sent to A. Furius, a poet, his intimate friend; which book is by no means more notorious than those three of which I spoke before, the books of Scaurus.

[133] Tum Brutus: mihi quidem, inquit, nec iste notus est nec illi; sed haec mea culpa est, numquam enim in manus inciderunt. nunc autem et a te sumam et conquiram ista posthac curiosius.

[133] Then Brutus: "For my part," he says, "neither this man is known to me nor that one; but this is my fault, for they have never fallen into my hands. Now, however, I will both take them from you and hunt those up more carefully hereafter."

Fuit igitur in Catulo sermo Latinus; quae laus dicendi non mediocris ab oratoribus plerisque neglecta est. nam de sono vocis et suavitate appellandarum litterarum, quoniam filium cognovisti, noli exspectare quid dicam. quamquam filius quidem non fuit in oratorum numero; sed non deerat ei tamen in sententia dicenda cum prudentia tum elegans quoddam et eruditum orationis genus.

There was, then, in Catulus a Latin speech; and this commendation of speaking, no mean one, has been neglected by most orators. For about the sound of the voice and the sweetness of pronouncing letters, since you have come to know his son, do not expect me to say anything. Although the son indeed was not in the number of orators; yet in the delivering of a judgment there was not lacking to him both prudence and a certain elegant and erudite genus of oration.

[134] Nec habitus est tamen pater ipse Catulus princeps in numero patronorum; sed erat talis ut, cum quosdam audires qui tum erant praestantes, videretur esse inferior, cum autem ipsum audires sine comparatione, non modo contentus esses, sed melius non quaereres.

[134] Nor, however, was Catulus the father himself held as chief in the number of patrons; but he was such that, when you heard certain men who were then preeminent, he seemed to be inferior, whereas when you heard him himself without comparison, not only would you be content, but you would not seek anything better.

[135] Q. Metellus Numidicus et eius conlega M. Silanus dicebant de re publica quod esset illis viris et consulari dignitati satis. M. Aurelius Scaurus non saepe dicebat, sed polite; Latine vero in primis est eleganter locutus. quae laus eadem in A. Albino bene loquendi fuit; nam flamen Albinus etiam in numero est habitus disertorum; Q. etiam Caepio, vir acer et fortis, cui fortuna belli crimini, invidia populi calamitati fuit.

[135] Q. Metellus Numidicus and his colleague M. Silanus used to speak about the Republic as was sufficient for those men and for consular dignity. M. Aurelius Scaurus did not often speak, but with polish; in Latin, indeed, he spoke most elegantly. The same praise of speaking well belonged to A. Albinus; for the flamen Albinus also was held in the number of eloquent men; Q. Caepio too, a keen and brave man, for whom the fortune of war was accounted a crime, and the people’s envy a calamity.

[136] Tum etiam C. L. Memmii fuerunt oratores mediocres, accusatores acres atque acerbi; itaque in iudicium capitis multos vocaverunt, pro reis non saepe dixerunt. Sp. Thorius satis valuit in populari genere dicendi, is qui agrum publicum vitiosa et inutili lege vectigali levavit. M. Marcellus Aesernini pater non ille quidem in patronis, sed et in promptis tamen et non inexercitatis ad dicendum fuit, ut filius eius P. Lentulus.

[136] Then too C. and L. Memmius were mediocre orators, keen and bitter accusers; and so they summoned many into a capital trial, they did not often speak for the defendants. Sp. Thorius had sufficient strength in the popular genus of speaking, he who relieved the public land of the tax by a vicious and useless law. M. Marcellus, the father of Aeserninus, was not indeed among the patrons, but was nevertheless among the ready and not unexercised for speaking, as was his son P. Lentulus.

[137] L. etiam Cotta praetorius in mediocrium oratorum numero, dicendi non ita multum laude processerat, sed de industria cum verbis tum etiam ipso sono quasi subrustico persequebatur atque imitabatur antiquitatem.

[137] L. Cotta also, a praetorian, was in the number of mediocre orators; he had not advanced very far in praise for speaking, but deliberately he both pursued and imitated antiquity, with his words and even with the very sound itself, as it were somewhat sub-rustic.

Atque ego et in hoc ipso Cotta et in aliis pluribus intellego me non ita disertos homines et rettulisse in oratorum numerum et relaturum. est enim propositum conligere eos, qui hoc munere in civitate functi sint, ut tenerent oratorum locum; quorum quidem quae fuerit ascensio et quam in omnibus rebus difficilis optimi perfectio atque absolutio ex eo quod dicam existimari potest.

And I, both in this very Cotta and in many others, understand that I have included, and will include, men not so eloquent in the number of orators. For my purpose is to collect those who have discharged this office in the commonwealth, so that they might hold the place of orators; and of them, what their ascent has been, and how in all matters the perfection and completion of the best is difficult, can be estimated from what I shall say.

[138] Quam multi enim iam oratores commemorati sunt et quam diu in eorum enumeratione versamur, cum tamen spisse atque vix, ut dudum ad Demosthenen et Hyperiden, sic nunc ad Antonium Crassumque pervenimus. nam ego sic existimo, hos oratores fuisse maximos et in his primum cum Graecorum gloria Latine dicendi copiam aequatam.

[138] For how many orators have already been commemorated, and how long we are engaged in their enumeration, although yet slowly and with difficulty, just as a little while ago we reached Demosthenes and Hyperides, so now we have come to Antonius and Crassus. For I so judge: that these orators were the greatest, and that in them for the first time the copiousness of speaking in Latin was made equal to the glory of the Greeks.

[139] Omnia veniebant Antonio in mentem; eaque suo quaeque loco, ubi plurimum proficere et valere possent, ut ab imperatore equites, pedites, levis armatura, sic ab illo in maxume opportunis orationis partibus conlocabantur. erat memoria summa, nulla meditationis suspicio; imparatus semper adgredi ad dicendum videbatur, sed ita erat paratus, ut iudices illo dicente non numquam viderentur non satis parati ad cavendum fuisse.

[139] Everything came into Antonius’s mind; and each of these, in its own proper place, where they could most make progress and prevail, were stationed by him, as by a commander cavalry, infantry, and the light-armed, so in the most opportune parts of the oration. He had a supreme memory, with no suspicion of meditation; he seemed always to approach speaking unprepared, but he was so prepared that the judges, while he was speaking, sometimes seemed not to have been sufficiently prepared to guard against him.

[140] Verba ipsa non illa quidem elegantissimo sermone; itaque diligenter loquendi laude caruit—neque tamen est admodum inquinate locutus —, sed illa, quae proprie laus oratoris est in verbis. nam ipsum Latine loqui est illud quidem [est], ut paulo ante dixi, in magna laude ponendum, sed non tam sua sponte quam quod est a pleris que neglectum: non enim tam praeclarum est scire Latine quam turpe nescire, neque tam id mihi oratoris boni quam civis Romani proprium videtur. sed tamen Antonius in verbis et eligendis, neque id ipsum tam leporis causa quam ponderis, et conlocandis et comprensione devinciendis nihil non ad rationem et tamquam ad artem dirigebat; verum multo magis hoc idem in sententiarum ornamentis et conformationibus.

[140] The words themselves were not, to be sure, in the most elegant diction; and so he lacked the praise of careful speaking—nor, however, did he speak very uncleanly—, but he had those things which are properly the praise of an orator in respect to words. For to speak Latin itself is, as I said a little before, to be placed in great praise, yet not so much by its own intrinsic worth as because it has been neglected by the majority: for it is not so glorious to know Latin as it is shameful not to know it, nor does that seem to me so much the mark of a good orator as of a Roman citizen. Yet nevertheless Antonius, both in choosing words—not for the sake of charm so much as of weight—and in placing them and in binding them by compression, directed everything according to reason and, as it were, according to art; but much more did he do this same thing in the ornaments and conformations of thoughts.

[141] Quo in genere quia praestat omnibus Demosthenes, idcirco a doctis oratorum est princeps iudicatus. schemata enim quae vocant Graeci, ea maxume ornant oratorem eaque non tam in verbis pingendis habent pondus quam in inluminandis sententiis. sed cum haec magna in Antonio tum actio singularis; quae si partienda est in gestum atque vocem, gestus erat non verba exprimens, sed cum sententiis congruens: manus humeri latera supplosio pedis status incessus omnisque motus cum verbis sententiisque consentiens; vox permanens, verum subrauca natura.

[141] In which kind, because Demosthenes excels all, therefore by the learned he has been judged the prince of orators. For the schemata which the Greeks so call most of all adorn the orator, and they have weight not so much in painting words as in illuminating thoughts. But while these things were great in Antonius, his delivery was singular; which, if it is to be divided into gesture and voice, his gesture did not express the words, but was congruent with the thoughts: the hands, the shoulders, the sides, the stamping of the foot, the stance, the gait, and every motion agreeing with the words and thoughts; a voice enduring, though somewhat hoarse by nature.

sed hoc vitium huic uni in bonum convertebat.

but he converted this defect, for this one alone, into a good.

[142] Habebat enim flebile quiddam in questionibus aptumque cum ad fidem faciendam tum ad misericordiam commovendam: ut verum videretur in hoc illud, quod Demosthenem ferunt ei, qui quaesivisset quid primum esset in dicendo, actionem, quid secundum, idem et idem tertium respondisse. nulla res magis penetrat in animos eosque fingit format flectit, talesque oratores videri facit, quales ipsi se videri volunt.

[142] For he had something plaintive in his questionings, apt both to engender credence and to move compassion: so that that saying would seem true in his case, which they report of Demosthenes—that, to one who had asked what was first in speaking, he answered “delivery,” what second, the same, and the same for the third. Nothing penetrates more into minds and shapes, forms, and bends them, and it makes orators seem such as they themselves wish to seem.

[143] Huic alii parem esse dicebant, alii anteponebant L. Crassum. illud quidem certe omnes ita iudicabant, neminem esse, qui horum altero utro patrono cuiusquam ingenium requireret. equidem quamquam Antonio tantum tribuo quantum supra dixi, tamen Crasso nihil statuo fieri potuisse perfectius.

[143] Some said that this man had an equal; others put L. Crassus before him. This at least, indeed, all judged thus: that there was no one who, with either of these as his patron, would require the genius of anyone else. For my part, although I attribute to Antonius as much as I said above, yet I determine that nothing could have been made more perfect than Crassus.

erat summa gravitas, erat cum gravitate iunctus facetiarum et urbanitatis oratorius, non scurrilis lepos, Latine loquendi accurata et sine molestia diligens elegantia, in disserendo mira explicatio; cum de iure civili, cum de aequo et bono disputaretur, argumentorum et similitudinum copia.

there was the highest gravitas; joined with gravitas, an oratorical charm of facetiae and urbanity, not scurrilous; an accurate and, without annoyance, diligent elegance of speaking Latin; in disserting, a wondrous explication; whenever civil law, whenever equity and the good were under dispute, a copiousness of arguments and of similitudes.

[144] Nam ut Antonius coniectura movenda aut sedanda suspicione aut excitanda incredibilem vim habebat: sic in interpretando in definiendo in explicanda aequitate nihil erat Crasso copiosius; idque cum saepe alias tum apud centumviros in M.'. Curi causa cognitum est.

[144] For just as Antonius had incredible power in moving by conjecture, or in soothing suspicion, or in arousing it: so in interpreting, in defining, in explaining equity, nothing was more copious than Crassus; and this was recognized both often on other occasions and before the centumviri in the case of M'. Curius.

[145] Ita enim multa tum contra scriptum pro aequo et bono dixit, ut hominem acutissimum Q. Scaevolam et in iure, in quo illa causa vertebatur, paratissimum obrueret argumentorum exemplorumque copia; atque ita tum ab his patronis aequalibus et iam consularibus causa illa dicta est, cum uterque ex contraria parte ius civile defenderet, ut eloquentium iuris peritissimus Crassus, iuris peritorum eloquentissimus Scaevola putaretur. qui quidem cum peracutus esset ad excogitandum quid in iure aut in aequo verum aut esset aut non esset, tum verbis erat ad rem cum summa brevitate mirabiliter aptus.

[145] For he then said so many things against the written law on behalf of equity and the good, that he overwhelmed Quintus Scaevola—a most sharp man and most prepared in the law, on which that case turned—with an abundance of arguments and examples; and thus at that time that case was pleaded by these patrons, peers and now consular men, when each from the opposing side defended the civil law, that Crassus was thought the most skilled in law among the eloquent, and Scaevola the most eloquent among the jurists. He indeed, since he was very acute in devising what in law or in equity was or was not true, was then, in words, marvelously fitted to the matter with the utmost brevity.

[146] Quare sit nobis orator in hoc interpretandi explanandi edisserendi genere mirabilis sic ut simile nihil viderim; in augendo in ornando in refellendo magis existumator metuendus quam admirandus orator. verum ad Crassum revertamur.

[146] Therefore, let the orator be for us in this kind of interpreting, explaining, and expounding marvelous, such that I have seen nothing similar; in augmenting, in adorning, in refuting, more to be feared as an evaluator than to be admired as an orator. But let us return to Crassus.

[147] Tum Brutus: etsi satis, inquit, mihi videbar habere cognitum Scaevolam ex iis rebus, quas audiebam saepe ex C. Rutilio, quo utebar propter familiaritatem Scaevolae nostri, tamen ista mihi eius dicendi tanta laus nota non erat; itaque cepi voluptatem tam ornatum virum tamque excellens ingenium fuisse in nostra re publica.

[147] Then Brutus: “Although,” he said, “I seemed to myself to have Scaevola sufficiently known from those things which I often heard from C. Rutilius, with whom I associated on account of his familiarity with our Scaevola, nevertheless so great a praise of his speaking was not known to me; and so I took delight that so ornate a man and so excellent a genius had been in our commonwealth.”

[148] Hic ego: noli, inquam, Brute, existimare his duobus quicquam fuisse in nostra civitate praestantius. nam ut paulo ante dixi consultorum alterum disertissimum, disertorum alterum consultissimum fuisse, sic in reliquis rebus ita dissimiles erant inter sese, statuere ut tamen non posses utrius te malles similiorem. Crassus erat elegantium parcissimus, Scaevola parcorum elegantissimus; Crassus in summa comitate habebat etiam severitatis satis, Scaevolae multa in severitate non deerat tamen comitas.

[148] Here I: do not, say I, Brutus, estimate that in our commonwealth there was anything more preeminent than these two. For, as I said a little before, of the jurisconsults the one was most eloquent, of the eloquent the other most consultative; so in the remaining matters they were so dissimilar between themselves that yet you could not determine which of the two you would prefer to be more similar to. Crassus was the most sparing of the elegant, Scaevola the most elegant of the sparing; Crassus, amid the highest comity, had also enough of severity, to Scaevola, amid much severity, comity was nevertheless not lacking.

[149] Licet omnia hoc modo; sed vereor ne fingi videantur haec, ut dicantur a me quodam modo; res se tamen sic habet. cum omnis virtus sit, ut vestra, Brute, vetus Academia dixit, mediocritas, uterque horum medium quiddam volebat sequi; sed ita cadebat, ut alter ex alterius laude partem, uterque autem suam totam haberet.

[149] Granted all this in this way; but I fear lest these things seem to be feigned, so as to be said by me in a certain fashion; nevertheless the matter stands thus. Since all virtue is, as your Old Academy, Brutus, said, a mediocrity, each of these men wished to follow a kind of middle; but it so fell out that the one had a part from the other’s praise, while each had the whole of his own.

[150] Tum Brutus: cum ex tua oratione mihi videor, inquit, bene Crassum et Scaevolam cognovisse, tum de te et de Ser. Sulpicio cogitans esse quandam vobis cum illis similitudinem iudico. Quonam, inquam, istuc modo?

[150] Then Brutus: since from your oration I seem to myself, he said, to have well come to know Crassus and Scaevola, then, thinking about you and about Ser. Sulpicius, I judge there to be a certain similitude of you with them. By what mode, said I, is that so?

Quia mihi et tu videris, inquit, tantum iuris civilis scire voluisse quantum satis esset oratori et Servius eloquentiae tantum adsumpsisse, ut ius civile facile possit tueri; aetatesque vostrae ut illorum nihil aut non fere multum differunt.

“Because you too seem to me,” he said, “to have wished to know only so much of civil law as would be sufficient for an orator, and that Servius has assumed so much eloquence that he can easily defend civil law; and your ages, as theirs, differ not at all or scarcely very much.”

[151] Et ego: de me, inquam, dicere nihil est necesse; de Servio autem et tu probe dicis et ego dicam quod sentio. non enim facile quem dixerim plus studi quam illum et ad dicendum et ad omnes bonarum rerum disciplinas adhibuisse. nam et in isdem exercitationibus ineunte aetate fuimus et postea una Rhodum ille etiam profectus est, quo melior esset et doctior; et inde ut rediit, videtur mihi in secunda arte primus esse maluisse quam in prima secundus.

[151] And I: as for me, I said, there is no need to speak; but about Servius both you speak properly, and I too will say what I think. For I would not easily say that anyone applied more zeal than he both to speaking and to all the disciplines of good pursuits. For we were in the same exercises in our early youth, and afterward, together, he even set out to Rhodes, to the end that he might be better and more learned; and when he returned from there, he seems to me to have preferred to be first in a second art rather than second in a first.

atque haud scio an par principibus esse potuisset; sed fortasse maluit, id quod est adeptus, longe omnium non eiusdem modo aetatis sed eorum etiam qui fuissent in iure civili esse princeps.

and I scarcely know but that he could have been equal to the leading men; but perhaps he preferred—what he has attained—to be by far the chief of all, not only of the same age but even of those who had been, in civil law.

[152] Hic Brutus: ain tu? inquit: etiamne Q. Scaevolae Servium nostrum anteponis? Sic enim, inquam, Brute, existumo, iuris civilis magnum usum et apud Scaevolam et apud multos fuisse, artem in hoc uno; quod numquam effecisset ipsius iuris scientia, nisi eam praeterea didicisset artem, quae doceret rem universam tribuere in partes, latentem explicare definiendo, obscuram explanare interpretando, ambigua primum videre, deinde distinguere, postremo habere regulam, qua vera et falsa iudicarentur et quae quibus propositis essent quaeque non essent consequentia.

[152] Here Brutus: “Do you say so?” says he: “do you even set our Servius before Q. Scaevola?” “Yes indeed, Brutus,” said I, “I so reckon: that the great use/practice of civil law was both in Scaevola and in many others, but the art in this one alone; which the science of the law itself would never have effected, unless besides that he had learned the art which teaches to allot the whole matter into parts, to unfold what is latent by defining, to make clear what is obscure by interpreting, to see ambiguities first, then to distinguish them, and finally to have a rule by which true and false might be judged, and what things, given certain propositions, were consequent and what were not.”

[153] Hic enim adtulit hanc artem omnium artium maxumam quasi lucem ad ea, quae confuse ab aliis aut respondebantur aut agebantur. Dialecticam mihi videris dicere, inquit. Recte, inquam, intellegis; sed adiunxit etiam et litterarum scientiam et loquendi elegantiam, quae ex scriptis eius, quorum similia nulla sunt, facillime perspici potest.

[153] For he brought this art, the greatest of all arts, as a kind of light to those things which were being confusedly either answered or handled by others. “You seem to me to be saying Dialectic,” said he. “Rightly,” said I, “you understand; but he also added both a knowledge of letters and an elegance of speaking, which can most easily be perceived from his writings, the like of which there are none.”

[154] Cumque discendi causa duobus peritissumis operam dedisset, L. Lucilio Balbo C. Aquilio Gallo, Galli hominis acuti et exercitati promptam et paratam in agendo et in respondendo celeritatem subtilitate diligentiaque superavit; Balbi docti et eruditi hominis in utraque re consideratam tarditatem vicit expediendis conficiendisque rebus. sic et habet quod uterque eorum habuit, et explevit quod utrique defuit.

[154] And when, for the sake of learning, he had given his effort to two most expert men, L. Lucilius Balbus and C. Aquilius Gallus, he surpassed the ready and prepared celerity in doing and in responding of Gallus, a sharp and well-practiced man, by subtlety and diligence; he conquered the deliberate slowness, in both respects, of Balbus, a learned and erudite man, in the expediting and completing of matters. Thus he both has what each of them had, and he filled up what was lacking to each.

[155] Itaque ut Crassus mihi videtur sapientius fecisse quam Scaevola—hic enim causas studiose recipiebat, in quibus a Crasso superabatur; ille se consuli nolebat, ne qua in re inferior esset quam Scaevola —, sic Servius sapientissume, cum duae civiles artes ac forenses plurimum et laudis haberent et gratiae, perfecit ut altera praestaret omnibus, ex altera tantum adsumeret, quantum esset et ad tuendum ius civile et ad obtinendam consularem dignitatem satis.

[155] And so, just as Crassus seems to me to have acted more wisely than Scaevola—for the latter indeed would zealously take on cases, in which he was surpassed by Crassus; the former did not wish to be consulted, lest he be in any respect inferior to Scaevola —, so Servius, most wisely, since the two civil and forensic arts had very much both of praise and of favor, brought it about that in the one he excelled all, and from the other he assumed only as much as was sufficient both for safeguarding the civil law and for obtaining the consular dignity.

[156] Tum Brutus: ita prorsus, inquit, et antea putabam—audivi enim nuper eum studiose et frequenter Sami, cum ex eo ius nostrum pontificium, qua ex parte cum iure civili coniunctum esset, vellem cognoscere—et nunc meum iudicium multo magis confirmo testimonio et iudicio tuo; simul illud gaudeo, quod et aequalitas vestra et pares honorum gradus et artium studiorumque quasi finitima vicinitas tantum abest ab obtrectatione et invidia, quae solet lacerare plerosque, uti ea non modo non exulcerare vestram gratiam, sed etiam conciliare videatur. quali enim te erga illum perspicio, tali illum in te voluntate iudicioque cognovi.

[156] Then Brutus: “Exactly so, he says, and I thought so before as well—for I lately heard him, diligently and often, at Samos, when I wished to learn from him our pontifical law, in what part it was conjoined with the civil law—and now I confirm my judgment much more by your testimony and judgment; at the same time I rejoice at this, that both your equality and your equal grades of honors and the almost contiguous neighborhood of your arts and studies are so far from detraction and envy, which are wont to lacerate very many, that they seem not only not to ulcerate your mutual goodwill, but even to conciliate it. For of such a sort as I perceive you to be toward him, of such goodwill and judgment have I recognized him toward you.”

[157] Itaque doleo et illius consilio et tua voce populum Romanum carere tam diu; quod cum per se dolendum est tum multo magis consideranti ad quos ista non translata sint, sed nescio quo pacto devenerint. Hic Atticus: dixeram, inquit, a principio, de re publica ut sileremus; itaque faciamus. nam si isto modo volumus singulas res desiderare, non modo querendi sed ne lugendi quidem finem reperiemus.

[157] And so I grieve that the Roman people have gone so long bereft both of his counsel and of your voice; which, while it is to be lamented in itself, is much more so to one considering to whom these things have not been transferred, but by I know not what way have devolved. Here Atticus: I said, says he, from the beginning, that we should keep silence about the commonwealth; so let us do. For if in that way we wish to miss each particular thing, we shall find no end not only of complaining but not even of mourning.

[158] Pergamus ergo, inquam, ad reliqua et institutum ordinem persequamur. paratus igitur veniebat Crassus, exspectabatur audiebatur; a principio statim, quod erat apud eum semper accuratum, exspectatione dignus videbatur. non multa iactatio corporis, non inclinatio vocis, nulla inambulatio, non crebra supplosio pedis; vehemens et interdum irata et plena iusti doloris oratio, multae et cum gravitate facetiae; quodque difficile est, idem et perornatus et perbrevis; iam in altercando invenit parem neminem.

[158] Let us proceed then, I said, to the rest and pursue the established order. Accordingly Crassus used to come prepared; he was awaited, he was listened to; from the very beginning, since there was with him always something meticulously accurate, he seemed worthy of the expectation. No excessive tossing of the body, no inclination of the voice, no walking about, no frequent stamping of the foot; a vehement speech, and at times angry and full of righteous indignation; many witticisms too, and with gravity; and—what is difficult—the same man both ornate and very brief; indeed, in disputation he found no peer.

[159] Versatus est in omni fere genere causarum; mature in locum principum oratorum venit. accusavit C. Carbonem eloquentissimum hominem admodum adulescens; summam ingeni non laudem modo sed etiam admirationem est consecutus.

[159] He was versed in almost every kind of cases; early he came into the place of the leading orators. he prosecuted C. Carbo, a most eloquent man, while quite a young man; he attained for the summit of his talent not only praise but even admiration.

[160] defendit postea Liciniam virginem, cum annos xxvii natus esset. in ea ipsa causa fuit eloquentissimus orationisque eius scriptas quasdam partes reliquit. voluit adulescens in colonia Narbonensi causae popularis aliquid adtingere eamque coloniam, ut fecit, ipse deducere; exstat in eam legem senior, ut ita dicam, quam aetas illa ferebat oratio.

[160] afterward he defended the virgin Licinia, when he was 27 years old. in that very case he was most eloquent, and he left behind certain written parts of his oration. as a young man he wished, in the Narbonensian colony, to touch upon something of the popular cause, and to lead out that colony himself—as he did; there exists on that law an oration “older,” so to speak, than that age of his would warrant.

multae deinde causae; sed ita tacitus tribunatus ut, nisi in eo magistratu cenavisset apud praeconem Granium idque nobis bis narravisset Lucilius, tribunum plebis nesciremus fuisse.

many causes thereafter; but so silent a tribunate that, unless he had dined in that magistracy at the crier Granius’s, and unless Lucilius had told us this twice, we would not know that he had been tribune of the plebs.

[161] Ita prorsus, inquit Brutus; sed ne de Scaevolae quidem tribunatu quicquam audivisse videor et eum collegam Crassi credo fuisse.

[161] Quite so indeed, said Brutus; but I seem not even to have heard anything about Scaevola’s tribunate, and I believe he was the colleague of Crassus.

Omnibus quidem aliis, inquam, in magistratibus, sed tribunus anno post fuit eoque in rostris sedente suasit Serviliam legem Crassus; nam censuram sine Scaevola gessit: eum enim magistratum nemo umquam Scaevolarum petivit. sed haec Crassi cum edita oratio est, quam te saepe legisse certo scio, quattuor et triginta tum habebat annos totidemque annis mihi aetate praestabat. his enim consulibus eam legem suasit quibus nati sumus, cum ipse esset Q. Caepione consule natus et C. Laelio, triennio ipso minor quam Antonius.

In all the other magistracies indeed, I say, but he was tribune a year later, and with him sitting on the rostra Crassus urged the Servilian law; for he held the censorship without Scaevola: for that magistracy none of the Scaevolae ever sought. But when this oration of Crassus was published, which I am certain you have often read, he then had 34 years and by just as many years surpassed me in age. For he recommended that law under the consuls under whom we were born, since he himself was born with Quintus Caepio and Gaius Laelius as consuls, being by three years younger than Antonius himself.

quod idcirco posui, ut dicendi Latine prima maturitas in qua aetate exstitisset posset notari et intellegeretur iam ad summum paene esse perductam, ut eo nihil ferme quisquam addere posset, nisi qui a philosophia a iure civili ab historia fuiss et instructior.

which I for that reason set down, in order that the first maturity of speaking Latin—at what age it had appeared—might be marked, and it might be understood that it had already been brought almost to the summit, so that scarcely anyone could add anything to it, except one who had been more instructed by philosophy, by civil law, and by history.

[162] Erit, inquit [M.] Brutus, aut iam est iste quem exspectas?

[162] Will he be, said [M.] Brutus, or is he already the one whom you expect?

Nescio, inquam. sed est etiam L. Crassi in consulatu pro Q. Caepione defensiuncula non brevis ut laudatio, ut oratio autem brevis; postrema censoris oratio, qua anno duodequinquagesimo usus est. in his omnibus inest quidam sine ullo fuco veritatis color; quin etiam comprensio et ambitus ille verborum, si sic periodon appellari placet, erat apud illum contractus et brevis et in membra quaedam, quae kola Graeci vocant, dispertiebat orationem libentius.

I do not know, I say. but there is also, in the consulship of L. Crassus, on behalf of Q. Caepio, a little defense, not long as a laudatio, yet, as an oratio, brief; the final censor’s speech, which he employed in his forty-eighth year. in all these there is a certain color of truth without any rouge; nay rather, the comprehension and that ambit of words, if it pleases that it be thus called a periodon, was with him contracted and brief, and he more willingly divided the speech into certain members, which the Greeks call kola.

[163] Hoc loco Brutus: quando quidem tu istos oratores, inquit, tanto opere laudas, vellem aliquid Antonio praeter illum de ratione dicendi sane exilem libellum, plura Crasso libuisset scribere: cum enim omnibus memoriam sui tum etiam disciplinam dicendi no bis reliquissent. nam Scaevolae dicendi elegantiam satis ex iis orationibus, quas reliquit, habemus cognitam.

[163] At this point Brutus: “Since indeed you so greatly praise those orators,” he said, “I would that Antonius, besides that quite meager booklet on the method of speaking, had written something, and that it had pleased Crassus to write more; for then they would have left behind both to everyone a memory of themselves and to us as well a discipline of speaking. For we have the elegance of Scaevola’s speaking sufficiently known from those orations which he left.”

[164] Et ego: mihi quidem a pueritia quasi magistra fuit, inquam, illa in legem Caepionis oratio; in qua et auctoritas ornatur senatus, quo pro ordine illa dicuntur, et invidia concitatur in iudicum et in accusatorum factionem, contra quorum potentiam popul ariter tum dicendum fuit. multa in illa oratione graviter, multa leniter, multa aspere, multa facete dicta sunt; plura etiam dicta quam scripta, quod ex quibusdam capitibus eitis nec explicatis intellegi potest. ipsa illa censoria contra Cn. Domitium conlegam non est oratio, sed quasi capita rerum et orationis commentarium paulo plenius.

[164] And I: to me indeed from boyhood that oration against the law of Caepio was, as it were, a schoolmistress, I say; in which both the authority of the Senate—on whose behalf those things are said—is embellished, and ill-will is stirred up against the faction of the judges and of the accusers, against whose power it had then to be spoken popularly. Many things in that oration were said gravely, many gently, many harshly, many wittily; more were spoken than written, which can be understood from certain heads having been set out and not explained. That censorial piece itself against Gnaeus Domitius colleague is not an oration, but as it were the heads of matters and a somewhat fuller commentary of a speech.

nulla est enim altercatio clamoribus umquam habita maioribus.

for no altercation has ever been held with greater clamor.

[165] et vero fuit in hoc etiam popularis dictio excellens; Antoni genus dicendi multo aptius iudiciis quam contionibus.

[165] and indeed there was in this, too, an excellent popular diction; Antonius’s style of speaking was much more apt to judicial trials than to assemblies.

Hoc loco ipsum Domitium non relinquo. nam etsi non fuit in oratorum numero, tamen pone satis in eo fuisse orationis atque ingeni, quo et magistratus personam et consularem dignitatem tueretur; quod idem de C. Coelio dixerim, industriam in eo summam fuiss e summasque virtutes, eloquentiae tantum, quod esset in rebus privatis amicis eius, in re publica ipsius dignitati satis.

At this point I do not leave out Domitius himself. For although he was not in the number of orators, nevertheless I reckon there was enough of oratory and genius in him to maintain both the persona of a magistracy and consular dignity; the same I would say of C. Coelius—that there was in him the highest industry and the highest virtues, only so much of eloquence as was, in private affairs, enough for his friends, and in the republic, enough for his own dignity.

[166] eodem tempore M. Herennius in mediocribus oratoribus Latine et diligenter loquentibus numeratus est; qui tamen summa nobilitate hominem, cognatione sodalitate conlegio, summa etiam eloquentia, L. Philippum in consulatus petitione superavit. eodem temp ore C. Claudius etsi propter summam nobilitatem et singularem potentiam magnus erat, tamen etiam eloquentiae quandam mediocritatem adferebat.

[166] at the same time M. Herennius was counted among the moderate orators speaking in Latin and diligently; who nevertheless, being a man of the highest nobility—by cognation, sodality, collegium—and even by the highest eloquence, surpassed L. Philippus in the petition for the consulship. at the same time C. Claudius, although on account of the highest nobility and singular power he was great, nevertheless also brought a certain mediocrity of eloquence.

[167] eiusdem fere temporis fuit eques Romanus C. Titius, qui meo iudicio eo pervenisse videtur quo potuit fere Latinus orator sine Graecis litteris et sine multo usu pervenire. huius orationes tantum argutiarum tantum exemplorum tantum urbanitatis habent, ut paene Attico stilo scriptae esse videantur. easdem argutias in tragoedias satis ille quidem acute sed parum tragice transtulit.

[167] Of nearly the same time was the Roman eques Gaius Titius, who in my judgment seems to have come to that point to which a Latin orator could for the most part arrive without Greek letters and without much practice. His orations have so much in the way of witticisms, so many examples, so much urbanity, that they seem to have been written in an almost Attic style. The same witticisms he indeed transferred into tragedies quite cleverly, but too little tragically.

quem studebat imitari L. Afranius poeta, homo perargutus, in fabulis quidem etiam, ut scitis, disertus.

whom the poet L. Afranius strove to imitate, a very sharp-witted man, and in plays indeed also, as you know, eloquent.

[168] fuit etiam Q. Rubrius Varro, qui a senatu hostis cum C. Mario iudicatus est, acer et vehemens accusator, in eo genere sane probabilis. doctus autem Graecis litteris propinquus noster, factus ad dicendum, M. Gratidius M. Antoni perfamiliaris, cuius pra efectus cum esset in Cilicia est interfectus, qui accusavit C. Fimbriam, M. Mari Gratidiani pater.

[168] there was also Q. Rubrius Varro, who was judged an enemy by the senate along with C. Marius, a sharp and vehement accuser, in that genre indeed quite credible. Learned, moreover, in Greek letters, our kinsman, made for speaking, M. Gratidius, a most intimate familiar of M. Antonius—whose prefect, when he was in Cilicia, he was—was slain; he accused C. Fimbria, the father of M. Marius Gratidianus.

[169] Atque etiam apud socios et Latinos oratores habiti sunt Q. Vettius Vettianus e Marsis, quem ipse cognovi, prudens vir et in dicendo brevis; Q. D. Valerii Sorani, vicini et familiares mei, non tam in dicendo admirabiles quam docti et Graecis litteris et Latinis; C. Rusticelius Bononiensis, is quidem et exercitatus et natura volubilis; omnium autem eloquentissumus extra hanc urbem T. Betutius Barrus Asculanus, cuius sunt aliquot orationes Asculi habitae; illa Romae contra Caepionem nobilis sane, quoi or ationi Caepionis ore respondit Aelius, qui scriptitavit orationes multis, orator ipse numquam fuit.

[169] And also among the allies and the Latins there were held as orators Q. Vettius Vettianus from among the Marsi, whom I myself knew, a prudent man and brief in speaking; Q. and D. Valerii of Sora, my neighbors and familiars, admirable not so much in speaking as learned in Greek and Latin letters; Gaius Rusticelius of Bononia—he indeed both exercised and by nature voluble; but the most eloquent of all outside this city, T. Betutius Barrus of Asculum, of whom there are several orations delivered at Asculum; that one at Rome against Caepio was truly notable, to which oration Aelius replied as Caepio’s mouthpiece, who wrote speeches for many, himself was never an orator.

[170] apud maiores autem nostros video disertissimum habitum ex Latio L. Papirium Fregellanum Ti. Gracchi P. f. fere aetate; eius etiam oratio est pro Fregellanis colonisque Latinis habita in senatu.

[170] among our ancestors, however, I see that the most eloquent man from Latium was considered to be Lucius Papirius of Fregellae, nearly of the age of Tiberius Gracchus, son of Publius; there is also a speech of his delivered in the senate on behalf of the Fregellans and the Latin colonists.

Tum Brutus: quid tu igitur, inquit, tribuis istis externis quasi oratoribus?

Then Brutus: 'What then,' said he, 'do you ascribe to those external, so‑called orators?'

Quid censes, inquam, nisi idem quod urbanis? praeter unum, quod non est eorum urbanitate quadam quasi colorata oratio.

What do you suppose, said I, unless the same as for the urbane? except for one thing: that their oration is not, as it were, colored by a certain urbanity of theirs.

[171] Et Brutus: qui est, inquit, iste tandem urbanitatis color? Nescio, inquam; tantum esse quendam scio. id tu, Brute, iam intelleges, cum in Galliam veneris; audies tu quidem etiam verba quaedam non trita Romae, sed haec mutari dediscique possunt; illud est maius, quod in vocibus nostrorum oratorum retinnit quiddam et resonat urbanius.

[171] And Brutus: “What is, he says, that color of urbanity, then?” “I do not know,” I say; “I only know that there is a certain one. This you, Brutus, will understand when you come into Gaul; you will indeed hear certain words not in circulation at Rome, but these can be altered and unlearned; the greater thing is this: that in the voices of our orators something echoes back and resonates more urbanely.”

nec hoc in oratoribus modo apparet, sed etiam in ceteris.

Nor does this appear only in orators, but also in the rest.

[172] ego memini T. Tincam Placentinum hominem facetissimum cum familiari nostro Q. Granio praecone dicacitate certare.

[172] I remember T. Tinca, a Piacentine man, a most facetious fellow, vying in dicacity with our friend Q. Granius the crier.

Eon', inquit Brutus, de quo multa Lucilius?

"Is it he," says Brutus, "about whom Lucilius wrote much?"

Isto ipso; sed Tincam non minus multa ridicule dicentem Granius obruebat nescio quo sapore vernaculo; ut ego iam non mirer illud Theophrasto accidisse, quod dicitur, cum percontaretur ex anicula quadam quanti aliquid venderet et respondisset illa atque a ddidisset 'hospes, non pote minoris', tulisse eum moleste se non effugere hospitis speciem, quom aetatem ageret Athenis optumeque loqueretur omnium. sic, ut opinor, in nostris est quidam urbanorum sicut illic Atticorum sonus. sed domum redeamus, id est ad nostros revortamur.

That very one; but although Tinca was saying no fewer many things wittily, Granius was overwhelming him with I know not what vernacular savor; so that I now do not wonder that that thing befell Theophrastus, as it is told: when he was inquiring from a certain little old woman for how much she would sell something, and she had answered and had added, “stranger, it can’t be for less,” he took it ill that he did not escape the appearance of a stranger, although he spent his age at Athens and spoke most excellently of all. Thus, as I suppose, among our people there is a certain sound of the urbanites, just as there of the Attic. But let us return home, that is, let us turn back to our own.

[173] Duobus igitur summis Crasso et Antonio L. Philippus proxumus accedebat, sed longo intervallo tamen proxumus. itaque eum, etsi nemo intercedebat qui se illi anteferret, neque secundum tamen neque tertium dixerim. nec enim in quadrigis eum secundum nume raverim aut tertium qui vix e carceribus exierit, cum palmam iam primus acceperit, nec in oratoribus qui tantum absit a primo, vix ut in eodem curriculo esse videatur.

[173] Therefore, next to the two supreme men, Crassus and Antonius, Lucius Philippus was nearest, yet nearest after a long interval. And so him, although no one intervened who would set himself before him, I would call neither second nor third. For I would not reckon as second or third in the four-horse chariot-race one who has scarcely come out of the starting-stalls, when the first has already received the palm; nor among orators one who is so far distant from the first that he scarcely seems to be in the same course.

sed tamen erant ea in Philippo quae, qui sine comparatione illorum spectaret, satis mag na diceret: summa libertas in oratione, multae facetiae; satis creber in reperiendis, solutus in explicandis sententiis; erat etiam in primis, ut temporibus illis, Graecis doctrinis institutus, in altercando cum aliquo aculeo et maledicto facetus.

Yet nevertheless, there were in Philippus those qualities which, if one looked without comparison with those men, he would call sufficiently great: the highest liberty in oration, many witticisms; quite frequent in finding points, unbound in unfolding his thoughts; he was also, in the first rank—as for those times—instituted in Greek doctrines, and in disputation with someone he was witty, with a sting and with malediction.

[174] horum aetati prope coniunctus L. Gellius non tam vendibilis orator, quam ut nescires quid ei deesset; nec enim erat indoctus nec tardus ad excogitandum nec Romanarum rerum immemor et verbis solutus satis; sed in magnos oratores inciderat eius aetas; m ultam tamen operam amicis et utilem praebuit atque ita diu vixit ut multarum aetatum oratoribus implicaretur.

[174] Nearly joined in age to these, L. Gellius was not so marketable an orator that you would not know what he lacked; for he was not unlearned, nor slow to excogitate, nor unmindful of Roman affairs, and sufficiently unbound in words; but his age had fallen among great orators; nevertheless he furnished much and useful service to his friends, and he lived so long that he was entangled with orators of many ages.

[175] multum etiam in causis versabatur isdem fere temporibus D. Brutus, is qui consul cum Mamerco fuit, homo et Graecis doctus litteris et Latinis. dicebat etiam L. Scipio non imperite Gnaeusque Pompeius Sex. f. aliquem numerum obtinebat.

[175] much also in causes was engaged at nearly the same times D. Brutus, the one who was consul with Mamercus, a man learned in Greek and Latin letters. L. Scipio also spoke not unskillfully, and Gnaeus Pompeius, son of Sextus, held some standing.

nam Sex. frater e ius praestantissimum ingenium contulerat ad summam iuris civilis et ad perfectam geometriae rerumque Stoicarum scientiam. itam in iure et ante hos M. Brutus et paulo post eum C. Billienus homo per se magnus prope simili ratione summus evaserat; qui consu l factus esset, nisi in Marianos consulatus et in eas petitionis angustias incidisset.

for Sextus, his brother, had directed his most preeminent ingenuity to the highest point of civil law and to a perfected knowledge of geometry and of Stoic matters. thus in law, both before these men M. Brutus and a little after him C. Billienus, a man great in himself, by a nearly similar method had emerged as supreme; he would have been made consul, had he not fallen into the Marian consulships and into those straits of candidature.

[176] Cn. autem Octavi eloquentia, quae fuerat ante consulatum ignorata, in consulatu multis contionibus est vehementer probata. sed ab eis, qui tantum in dicentium numero, non in oratorum fuerunt, iam ad oratores revortamur.

[176] But the eloquence of Cn. Octavius, which had been unknown before his consulship, was vehemently approved in his consulship by many assemblies. But from those who were only in the number of speakers, not of orators, let us now return to the orators.

Censeo, inquit Atticus; eloquentis enim videbare, non sedulos velle conquirere.

I think so, said Atticus; for you seemed to wish to seek out the eloquent, not the sedulous.

[177] Festivitate igitur et facetiis, inquam, C. Iulius L. f. et superioribus et aequalibus suis omnibus praestitit oratorque fuit minime ille quidem vehemens, sed nemo unquam urbanitate, nemo lepore, nemo suavitate conditior. sunt eius aliquot orationes, e x quibus sicut ex eiusdem tragoediis lenitas eius sine nervis perspici potest.

[177] Accordingly, in festivity and witticisms, said I, Gaius Julius, son of Lucius, surpassed both his elders and all his equals; and as an orator he was indeed by no means vehement, but no one ever was more seasoned with urbanity, no one with charm, no one with suavity. There are several speeches of his, e x which, just as from his tragedies likewise, his lenity without sinews can be perceived.

[178] eius aequalis P. Cethegus, cui de re publica satis suppeditabat oratio—totam enim tenebat eam penitusque cognoverat; itaque in senatu consularium auctoritatem adsequebatur —; sed in causis publicis nihil, privatis satis veterator videbatur. erat in privatis causis Q. Lucretius Vispillo et acutus et iuris peritus; nam Afella contionibus aptior quam iudiciis. prudens etiam T. Annius Velina et in eius generis causis orator sane tolerabilis.

[178] a contemporary of his, P. Cethegus, whose speech on the Republic was sufficiently in supply—for he held it altogether and had thoroughly come to know it; and so in the senate he was attaining the authority of the consulars —; but in public causes he seemed nothing, in private ones a sufficiently shrewd old hand. there was in private causes Q. Lucretius Vispillo, both sharp and skilled in law; for Afella was more apt for assemblies than for trials. prudent also was T. Annius Velina, and in causes of that kind an orator quite tolerable.

in eodem genere causarum multum erat T. Iuventius nimis ille q uidem lentus in dicendo et paene frigidus, sed et callidus et in capiendo adversario versutus et praeterea nec indoctus et magna cum iuris civilis intellegentia.

In the same kind of cases T. Iuventius was of much weight—too slow indeed in speaking and almost frigid, yet both crafty and, in catching the adversary, adroit, and moreover not unlearned and with great intelligence in civil law.

[179] cuius auditor P. Orbius meus fere aequalis in dicendo non nimis exercitatus, in iure autem civili non inferior quam magister fuit. nam T. Aufidius, qui vixit ad summam senectutem, volebat esse similis horum eratque et bonus vir et innocens, sed dicebat parum; nec sane plus frater eius M. Vergilius, qui tribunus plebis L. Sullae imperatori diem dixit. eius collega P. Magius in dicendo paulo tamen copiosior.

[179] whose auditor was P. Orbius, my almost equal in age, not overly exercised in speaking, but in civil law not inferior to his master. For T. Aufidius, who lived to the highest old age, wished to be like these men and was both a good man and innocent, but he spoke too little; nor indeed did his brother M. Vergilius speak more, who, as tribune of the plebs, named a day for trial for the general L. Sulla. His colleague P. Magius was, in speaking, however, somewhat more copious.

[180] sed omnium oratorum sive rabularum, qui et plane indocti et inurbani aut rustici etiam fuerunt, quos quidem ego cognoverim, solutissimum in dicendo et acutissimum iudico nostri ordinis Q. Sertorium, equestris C. Gargonium. fuit etiam facilis et expedi tus ad dicendum et vitae splendore multo et ingenio sane probabili T. Iunius L. f. tribunicius, quo accusante P. Sextius praetor designatus damnatus est ambitus; is processisset honoribus longius, nisi semper infirma atque etiam aegra valetudine fuisset.

[180] But of all the orators—or rather the pettifoggers—who were plainly unlearned and unurbane, or even rustic, at least among those whom I have known, I judge the most unshackled in speaking and the sharpest to be, of our order, Q. Sertorius; of the equestrian order, C. Gargonius. There was also an easy and ready speaker, and with much splendor of life and indeed a quite commendable talent, T. Junius, L.’s son, tribunician, at whose prosecution P. Sextius, praetor-designate, was condemned for bribery (ambitus); he would have advanced farther in honors, had he not always had a weak and even sickly health.

[181] Atque ego praeclare intellego me in eorum commemoratione versari qui nec habiti sint oratores neque fuerint, praeteririque a me aliquot ex veteribus commemoratione aut laude dignos. sed hoc quidem ignoratione; quid enim est superioris aetatis quod scr ibi possit de iis, de quibus nulla monumenta loquuntur nec aliorum nec ipsorum? de his autem quos ipsi vidimus neminem fere praetermittimus eorum quos aliquando dicentis audivimus.

[181] And I understand quite clearly that I am engaged in the commemoration of those who have neither been held to be orators nor actually were such, and that several among the ancients, worthy of commemoration or of praise, are being passed over by me. But this, indeed, is from ignorance; for what is there from an earlier age that can be written about those of whom no monuments speak—neither those of others nor their own? Of those, however, whom we ourselves have seen, we scarcely omit anyone among those whom we have at some time heard speaking.

[182] volo enim sciri in tanta et tam vetere re publica maxumis praemiis eloquentiae propositis omnes cupisse dicere, non plurumos ausos esse, potuisse paucos. ego tamen ita de uno quoque dicam, ut intellegi possit quem existimem clamatorem, quem oratorem f uisse. isdem fere temporibus aetate inferiores paulo quam Iulius sed aequales propemodum fuerunt C. Cotta P. Sulpicius Q. Varius Cn. Pomponius C. Curio L. Fufius M. Drusus P. Antistius; nec ulla aetate uberior oratorum fetus fuit.

[182] for I wish it to be known that in so great and so ancient a republic, with the very greatest prizes of eloquence set forth, all desired to speak, not very many dared, few were able. Yet I will speak about each one in such a way that it can be understood whom I judge to have been a shouter, whom an orator. In nearly the same times, a little younger in age than Julius but almost contemporaries, were C. Cotta, P. Sulpicius, Q. Varius, Cn. Pomponius, C. Curio, L. Fufius, M. Drusus, P. Antistius; nor in any age was there a more abundant crop of orators.

[183] ex his Cotta et Sulpicius cum meo iudicio tum omnium facile primas tulerunt.

[183] among these, Cotta and Sulpicius, both in my judgment and in everyone’s, easily carried off the first place.

Hic Atticus: quo modo istuc dicis, inquit, cum tuo iudicio tum omnium? semperne in oratore probando aut improbando volgi iudicium cum intellegentium iudicio congruit? an alii probantur multitudine, alii autem ab iis qui intellegunt?

Here Atticus: “How do you say that,” he said, “both by your judgment and by that of everyone? Does the judgment of the crowd, in approving or disapproving an orator, always congrue with the judgment of the intelligent? Or are some approved by the multitude, and others by those who understand?”

Recte requiris, inquam, Attice; sed audies ex me fortasse quod non omnes probent.

You inquire rightly, said I, Atticus; but you will perhaps hear from me something that not everyone may approve.

[184] An tu, inquit, id laboras, si huic modo Bruto probaturus es?

[184] Or do you, he said, labor over that, if you are only going to win approval from this Brutus?

Plane, inquam, Attice, disputationem hanc de oratore probando aut improbando multo malim tibi et Bruto placere, eloquentiam autem meam populo probari velim. et enim necesse est, qui ita dicat ut a multitudine probetur, eundem doctis probari. nam quid in dicendo rectum sit aut pravum ego iudicabo, si modo is sum qui id possim aut sciam iudicare; qualis vero sit orator ex eo, quod is dicendo efficiet, poterit intellegi.

Plainly, said I, Atticus, I would much prefer that this disputation about approving or disapproving the orator should please you and Brutus, but that my eloquence be approved by the people. For indeed it is necessary that he who speaks in such a way as to be approved by the multitude be approved by the learned as well. For I will judge what in speaking is right or wrong, if only I am the sort of man who can or knows how to judge that; and what sort of orator he is can be understood from what he will accomplish by speaking.

[185] tria sunt enim, ut quidem ego sentio, quae sint efficienda dicendo: ut doceatur is apud quem dicetur, ut delectetur, ut moveatur vehementius. quibus virtutibus oratoris horum quidque efficiatur aut quibus vitiis orator aut non adsequatur haec aut etia m in his labatur et cadat, artifex aliquis iudicabit. efficiatur autem ab oratore necne, ut ii qui audiunt ita afficiantur ut orator velit, volgi adsensu et populari adprobatione iudicari solet.

[185] for there are three things, as indeed I think, that must be brought to effect by speaking: that the one before whom it is spoken be taught, that he be delighted, that he be moved more vehemently. By which virtues of the orator each of these is achieved, or by which vices the orator either does not attain these or even in these stumbles and falls, some expert will judge. But whether it is brought about by the orator or not, that those who hear are affected as the orator wills, is usually judged by the assent of the crowd and popular approbation.

itaque numquam de bono oratore aut non bono doctis hominibus cum populo dissensio fuit.

Therefore there has never been dissension between learned men and the people about whether an orator is good or not good.

[186] an censes, dum illi viguerunt quos ante dixi, non eosdem gradus oratorum volgi iudicio et doctorum fuisse? de populo si quem ita rogavisses: quis est in hac civitate eloquentissimus? in Antonio et Crasso aut dubitaret aut hunc alius, illum alius dicer et. nemone Philippum, tam suavem oratorem tam gravem tam facetum his anteferret, quem nosmet ipsi, qui haec arte aliqua volumus expendere, proximum illis fuisse diximus?

[186] Or do you think, while those whom I mentioned before were flourishing, that the same gradations of orators, in the judgment of the crowd and of the learned, did not obtain? If you had asked someone from the people in this way: who is the most eloquent in this city? between Antonius and Crassus he would either hesitate, or one person would name this man, another that. Would no one prefer Philippus—so suave an orator, so grave, so facetious—to these, whom we ourselves, we who wish to weigh these things by some art, have said was next to them?

nemo profecto; id enim ipsum est summi oratoris summum oratorem populo videri.

No one, assuredly; for this very thing is the mark of a supreme orator: to seem to the people a supreme orator.

[187] quare tibicen Antigenidas dixerit discipulo sane frigenti ad populum: 'mihi cane et Musis'; ego huic Bruto dicenti, ut solet, apud multitudinem: 'mihi cane et populo, mi Brute', dixerim, ut qui audient quid efficiatur, ego etiam cur id efficiatur inte llegam. credit eis quae dicuntur qui audit oratorem, vera putat, adsentitur probat, fidem facit oratio:

[187] wherefore the flute-player Antigenidas said to a pupil decidedly cold before the people: 'play for me and for the Muses'; I would say to this Brutus, speaking, as he is wont, before the multitude: 'play for me and for the people, my Brutus,' so that those who will hear may perceive what is being effected, I too may understand why that is being effected. He who hears an orator believes the things that are said, deems them true, assents, approves; the oration creates credence:

[188] tu artifex quid quaeris amplius? delectatur audiens multitudo et ducitur oratione et quasi voluptate quadam perfunditur: quid habes quod disputes? gaudet dolet, ridet plorat, favet odit, contemnit invidet, ad misericordiam inducitur ad pudendum ad pig endum; irascitur miratur sperat timet; haec perinde accidunt ut eorum qui adsunt mentes verbis et sententiis et actione tractantur; quid est quod exspectetur docti alicuius sententia?

[188] you, artificer, what more do you seek? the listening multitude is delighted and is led by the oration and is, as it were, suffused with a certain voluptuous pleasure: what have you to dispute? it rejoices, it grieves, it laughs, it weeps, it favors, it hates, it despises, it envies, it is led to mercy, to shame, to regretting; it grows angry, it marvels, it hopes, it fears; these things befall in like manner as the minds of those present are handled by words and sentences and by action (delivery); what is there for which the opinion of some learned person should be awaited?

quod enim probat multitudo, hoc idem doctis probandum est. denique hoc specimen est popularis iudici, in quo numquam fuit populo cum doctis intellegentibusque dissensio.

For what the multitude approves, this same thing must be approved by the learned. Finally, this is the criterion of a popular judgment, in which there has never been dissension between the people and the learned and the intelligent.

[189] cum multi essent oratores in vario genere dicendi, quis umquam ex his excellere iudicatus est volgi iudicio, qui non idem a doctis probaretur? quando autem dubium fuisset apud patres nostros eligendi cui patroni daretur optio, quin aut Antonium optaret aut Crassum? aderant multi alii; tamen utrum de his potius dubitasset aliquis, quin alterum nemo.

[189] when there were many orators in various genres of speaking, who of these was ever judged to excel by the judgment of the crowd who was not likewise approved by the learned? and whenever among our forefathers it was in doubt, in choosing, to whom the option of a patron should be given, did they not opt for either Antonius or Crassus? many others were present; yet, if anyone hesitated, it was between these; about any other, no one.

quid? adulescentibus nobis cum esset Cotta et Hortensius, num quis, quoi quidem eligendi potestas esset, quemquam his anteponebat?

What then? When we were young men, with Cotta and Hortensius present, did anyone, to whom indeed the power of choosing belonged, set anyone ahead of these?

[190] Tum Brutus: quid tu, inquit, quaeris alios? de te ipso nonne quid optarent rei, quid ipse Hortensius iudicaret videbamus? qui cum partiretur tecum causas—saepe enim interfui—perorandi locum, ubi plurimum pollet oratio, semper tibi relinquebat.

[190] Then Brutus: why, says he, do you seek others? As to yourself, did we not see what the defendants would choose, what Hortensius himself would judge? He, when he was dividing the cases with you—for I was often present—always left to you the place for the peroration, where oratory is most potent.

Faciebat ille quidem, inquam, et mihi benevolentia, credo, ductus tribuebat omnia. sed ego quae de me populi sit opinio nescio; de reliquis hoc adfirmo, qui volgi opinione disertissimi habiti sint, eosdem intellegentium quoque iudicio fuisse probatissimo s.

He indeed did so, I said, and, led by benevolence toward me, I believe, he ascribed everything to me. But as for myself, what the people’s opinion of me is I do not know; about the rest I affirm this: those who were held by the opinion of the vulgus as most eloquent, these same men were also most approved by the judgment of the intelligent.

[191] nec enim posset idem Demosthenes dicere, quod dixisse Antimachum clarum poetam ferunt: qui cum convocatis auditoribus legeret eis magnum illud, quod novistis, volumen suum et eum legentem omnes praeter Platonem reliquissent, 'legam' inquit 'nihilo min us: Plato enim mihi unus instar est centum milium'. et recte: poema enim reconditum paucorum adprobationem, oratio popularis adsensum volgi debet movere. at si eundem hunc Platonem unum auditorem haberet Demosthenes, cum esset relictus a ceteris, verbum f acere non posset.

[191] Nor indeed could Demosthenes say the same thing which they report that Antimachus, a famous poet, said: who, when, having convoked his auditors, he was reading to them that great volume of his, which you know, and when all, except Plato, had left him as he was reading, said, 'I will read nonetheless: for Plato alone is to me the equivalent of a hundred thousand.' And rightly: for a recondite poem ought to move the approbation of the few, whereas a popular oration should stir the assent of the crowd. But if Demosthenes had this same Plato as his single auditor, when he had been abandoned by the rest, he would not be able to say a word.

[192] quid tu, Brute? possesne, si te ut Curionem quondam contio reliquisset?

[192] What about you, Brutus? Would you be able, if the assembly had deserted you, as once it deserted Curio?

Ego vero, inquit ille, ut me tibi indicem, in eis etiam causis, in quibus omnis res nobis cum iudicibus est, non cum populo, tamen si a corona relictus sim, non queam dicere.

“But I indeed,” said he, “to declare myself to you, even in those causes in which our whole business is with the judges, not with the people, nevertheless, if I were left by the circle of bystanders, I would not be able to speak.”

Ita se, inquam, res habet. ut, si tibiae inflatae non referant sonum, abiciendas eas sibi tibicen putet, sic oratori populi aures tamquam tibiae sunt; eae si inflatum non recipiunt aut si auditor omnino tamquam equus non facit, agitandi finis faciendus e st.

So, I say, the matter stands. as, if inflated flutes do not give back a sound, the piper thinks he should throw them away, so to the orator the people’s ears are as flutes; if they do not receive what is blown in, or if the auditor altogether does not act like a horse, an end must be made to the agitating.

[193] hoc tamen interest, quod volgus interdum non probandum oratorem probat, sed probat sine comparatione; cum a mediocri aut etiam malo delectatur, eo est contentus; esse melius non sentit, illud quod est qualecumque est probat. tenet enim aures vel medio cris orator, sit modo aliquid in eo; nec res ulla plus apud animos hominum quam ordo et ornatus valet.

[193] this, however, makes a difference: that the crowd sometimes approves an orator not to be approved, but approves without comparison; when it is delighted by a mediocre or even a bad one, it is content with that; it does not perceive that there is something better; it approves that which is, whatever it is. for even a mediocre orator holds the ears, provided only that there is something in him; and nothing prevails more with the minds of men than order and ornament.

[194] Quare quis ex populo, cum Q. Scaevolam pro M. Coponio dicentem audiret in ea causa de qua ante dixi, quicquam politius aut elegantius aut omnino melius aut exspectaret aut posse fieri putaret?

[194] Wherefore would anyone from the populace, when he heard Q. Scaevola speaking on behalf of M. Coponius in that case about which I spoke before, either expect anything more polished or more elegant or altogether better, or think that it could be done?

[195] cum is hoc probare vellet, M.'. Curium, cum ita heres institutus esset, 'si pupillus ante mortuus esset quam in suam tutelam venisset', pupillo non nato heredem esse non posse: quid ille non dixit de testamentorum iure, de antiquis formulis? quem ad m odum scribi oportuisset, si etiam filio non nato heres institueretur?

[195] when he wanted to prove this—that Manius Curius, since he had been instituted heir on these terms, “if the pupil had died before he had come into his own tutelage,” could not be heir with the pupil not born—what did he not say about the law of testaments, about the ancient formulae? how it ought to have been written, if even with the son not yet born an heir were to be instituted?

[196] quam captiosum esse populo quod scriptum esset neglegi et opinione quaeri voluntates et interpretatione disertorum scripta simplicium hominum pervertere?

[196] how deceptive for the people it is that what is written be neglected and that intentions be sought by opinion and that by the interpretation of the eloquent the writings of simple men be perverted?

[197] quam ille multa de auctoritate patris sui, qui semper ius illud esse defenderat? quam omnino multa de conservando iure civili? quae quidem omnia cum perite et scienter, item breviter et presse et satis ornate et pereleganter diceret, quis esset in pop ulo, qui aut exspectaret aut fieri posse quicquam melius putaret?

[197] How many things did he say about the authority of his father, who had always defended that law to be such? How very many things about preserving the civil law? And since he said all these things both expertly and knowingly, likewise briefly and concisely and sufficiently ornately and most elegantly, who would there be among the people who either would wait for more or would think that anything better could be done?

at vero, ut contra Crassus ab adulescente delicato, qui in litore ambulans scalmum repperisset ob eamque rem aedificare navem concupivisset, exorsus est, similiter Scaevolam ex uno scalmo c aptionis centumvirale iudicium hereditatis effecisse: hoc in illo initio consecutus, multis eiusdem generis sententiis delectavit animosque omnium qui aderant in hilaritatem a severitate traduxit; quod est unum ex tribus quae dixi ab oratore effici debere. deinde hoc voluisse eum qui testamentum fecisset, hoc sensisse, quoquo modo filius non esset qui in suam tutelam veniret, sive non natus sive ante mortuus, Curius heres ut esset; ita scribere plerosque et id valere et valuisse semper. haec et multa eius modi dicens fidem faciebat; quod est ex tribus oratoris officiis alterum.

But in truth, by way of counter, Crassus began from the story of a pampered youth who, walking on the shore, had found a thole and for that reason had conceived a longing to build a ship; similarly, that Scaevola, from a single thole, had manufactured a centumviral judgment concerning an inheritance: having achieved this in that opening, with many sentences of the same sort he delighted and translated the minds of all who were present from severity into hilarity; which is one of the three things I said ought to be effected by the orator. Then he argued that this was what the man who had made the testament had willed, this he had meant: that in whatever way there should not be a son who would come under his own guardianship, whether not born or dead beforehand, Curius should be heir; that most men write thus and that this is valid and has always been valid. Saying these and many things of that kind, he was creating credibility; which is the second of the orator’s three offices.

[198] deinde aequum bonum, testamentorum sententias voluntatesque tutatus est: quanta esset in verbis captio cum in ceteris rebus tum in testamentis, si neglegerentur voluntates; quantam sibi potentiam Scaevola adsumeret, si nemo auderet testamentum facere postea nisi de illius sententia. haec cum graviter tum ab exemplis copiose, tum varie, tum etiam ridicule et facete explicans eam admirationem adsensionemque commovit, dixisse ut contra nemo videreur. hoc erat oratoris officium partitione tertium, genere maxumum.

[198] then he defended equity and the good, the purports and intentions of testaments: how great a captiousness there would be in words, both in other matters and in testaments in particular, if intentions were neglected; how great a power Scaevola would assume to himself, if no one would dare to make thereafter except by his judgment. Explaining these points now gravely, now copiously from examples, now variously, and even ridiculously and facetiously, he stirred such admiration and assent that no one seemed to have spoken in opposition. This was the orator’s duty, the third by partition, in kind the greatest.

hic ille de populo iudex, qui separatim alterum admiratus esset, idem audito altero iudicium suum contemneret; at vero intellegens et doctus audiens Scaevolam sentiret esse quoddam uberius dicendi genus et ornatius. ab utroque autem causa perorat a si quaerere tur uter praestaret orator, numquam profecto sapientis iudicium a iudicio volgi discreparet.

This judge from the populace, who, if he had heard one separately, would have admired that one, the same man, once the other had been heard, would hold his own judgment in contempt; but truly an intelligent and learned hearer, on listening to Scaevola, would feel that there is a certain more copious and more ornate genus of speaking. And once the case had been fully perorated by both, if it were asked which orator excelled, surely the judgment of the wise would never differ from the judgment of the crowd.

[199] Qui praestat igitur intellegens imperito? magna re et difficili; si quidem magnum est scire quibus rebus efficiatur amittaturve dicendo illud quicquid est, quod aut effici dicendo oportet aut amitti non oportet. praestat etiam illo doctus auditor indo cto, quod saepe, cum oratores duo aut plures populi iudicio probantur, quod dicendi genus optumum sit intellegit.

[199] In what, then, does the intelligent excel the unskilled? In a great and difficult matter; namely, if indeed it is a great thing to know by what means, by speaking, that thing—whatever it is—which ought to be effected by speaking or ought not to be lost, is effected or is lost. The learned auditor also excels the unlearned in this: that often, when two or more orators are approved by the people’s judgment, he understands which genus of speaking is optimal.

nam illud quod populo non probatur, ne intellegenti quidem auditori probari potest. ut enim ex nervorum sono in fidibus quam scienter ei puls i sint intellegi solet, sic ex animorum motu cernitur quid tractandis his perficiat orator.

for that which is not approved by the people cannot be approved even by an intelligent auditor. For just as from the sound of the strings on a lyre it is usually understood how skillfully they have been struck by him, so from the movement of minds it is discerned what the orator accomplishes in the treatment of these matters.

[200] itaque intellegens dicendi existumator non adsidens et adtente audiens sed uno aspectu et praeteriens de oratore saepe iudicat. videt oscitantem iudicem, loquentem cum altero, non numquam etiam circulantem, mittentem ad horas, quaesitorem ut dimittat rogantem: intellegit oratorem in ea causa non adesse qui possit animis iudicum admovere orationem tamquam fidibus manum. idem si praeteriens aspexerit erectos intuentis iudices, ut aut doceri de re idque etiam voltu probare videantur, aut ut avem cantu al iquo sic illos viderit oratione quasi suspensos teneri aut, id quod maxume opus est, misericordia odio motu animi aliquo perturbatos esse vehementius: ea si praeteriens, ut dixi, aspexerit, si nihil audiverit, tamen oratorem versari in illo iudicio et opus oratorium fieri aut perfectum iam esse profecto intelleget.

[200] therefore an intelligent evaluator of speaking, not sitting by and listening attentively, but with one glance and while passing by, often judges about the orator. He sees the judge yawning, talking with another, sometimes even strolling about, sending to check the time, begging the quaesitor to dismiss the court: he understands that in that case the orator is not present who can apply his oration to the minds of the judges as a hand to the strings. Likewise, if while passing he has caught sight of the judges upright and intent, so that they seem either to be being taught about the matter and to approve it also in their countenance, or—as a bird by some song—he has seen them held as if suspended by the oration, or, that which is most needful, to be more vehemently perturbed by pity, by hatred, by some movement of mind: if he has seen these things in passing, as I said, even if he has heard nothing, nevertheless he will assuredly understand that an orator is engaged in that trial and that an oratorical work is being wrought or is now already completed.

[201] Cum haec disseruissem, uterque adsensus est; et ego tamquam de integro ordiens: quando igitur, inquam, a Cotta et Sulpicio haec omnis fluxit oratio, cum hos maxume iudicio illorum hominum et illius aetatis dixissem probatos, revortar ad eos ipsos; tum reliquos, ut institui, deinceps persequar. quoniam ergo oratorum bonorum—hos enim quaerimus—duo genera sunt, unum attenuate presseque, alterum sublate ampleque dicentium, etsi id melius est quod splendidius et magnificentius, tamen in bonis omnia quae summa sunt iure laudantur.

[201] When I had discussed these things, each gave assent; and I, as if initiating afresh: since therefore, I said, from Cotta and Sulpicius all this discourse has flowed, since I had said that these were especially approved by the judgment of those men and of that age, I will turn back to those very men; then the rest, as I have established, I will pursue in sequence. Since therefore of good orators—for these we seek—there are two kinds, one of those speaking in an attenuated and pressed style, the other in an elevated and ample style, although that is better which is more splendid and magnificent, nevertheless among good things all things which are of the highest rank are rightly praised.

[202] sed cavenda est presso illi oratori inopia et ieiunitas, amplo autem inflatum et corruptum orationis genus. inveniebat igitur acute Cotta, dicebat pure ac solute; et ut ad infirmitatem laterum perscienter contentionem omnem remiserat, sic ad virium im becillitatem dicendi accommodabat genus. nihil erat in eius oratione nisi sincerum, nihil nisi siccum atque sanum; illudque maxumum quod, cum contentione orationis flectere animos iudicum vix posset nec omnino eo genere diceret, tractando tamen impellebat , ut idem facerent a se commoti quod a Sulpicio concitati.

[202] but for that compressed orator indigence and jejunity are to be guarded against, while for the ample one an inflated and corrupt genus of oration. Cotta, accordingly, would find acutely, he spoke purely and unbound; and just as, in very knowing fashion, in view of the weakness of his flanks he had relaxed all strain, so he accommodated his manner of speaking to the feebleness of his powers. There was nothing in his speech except what was sincere, nothing except dry and sound; and this was the chief point: that, since by the strenuousness of oration he could scarcely bend the minds of the judges, nor did he at all speak in that mode, nevertheless by handling the case he impelled them, so that, moved by himself, they did the same thing as when incited by Sulpicius.

[203] fuit enim Sulpicius omnium vel maxume, quos quidem ego audiverim, grandis et, ut ita dicam, tragicus orator. vox cum magna tum suavis et splendida; gestus et motus corporis ita venustus, ut tamen ad forum, non ad scaenam institutus videretur; incitata et volubilis nec ea redundans tamen nec circumfluens oratio. Crassum hic volebat imitari; Cotta malebat Antonium; sed ab hoc vis aberat Antoni, Crassi ab illo lepos.

[203] For Sulpicius was, of all—indeed most especially among those whom I have heard—a grand and, so to speak, tragic orator. His voice was both great and sweet and splendid; his gesture and movement of body so charming that nevertheless he seemed trained for the forum, not for the stage; a speech incited and voluble, yet not redundant nor circumfluent. This man wished to imitate Crassus; Cotta preferred Antonius; but from this one the force of Antonius was lacking, from that one the charm of Crassus.

[204] O magnam, inquit, artem, Brutus: si quidem istis, cum summi essent oratores, duae res maxumae altera alteri defuit.

[204] “O what a great art,” says Brutus: if indeed, in the case of those men, though they were the greatest orators, of the two greatest qualities, the one was lacking to the one, the other to the other.

Atque in his oratoribus illud animadvertendum est, posse esse summos qui inter se sint dissimiles. nihil enim tam dissimile quam Cotta Sulpicio, et uterque aequalibus suis plurimum praestitit. quare hoc doctoris intellegentis est videre, quo ferat natura sua quemque, et ea duce utentem sic instituere, ut Isocratem in acerrimo ingenio Theopompi et lenissimo Ephori dixisse traditum est, alteri se calcaria adhibere alteri frenos.

And in the case of these orators this must be observed: that there can be men of the highest rank who are dissimilar among themselves. For nothing was so dissimilar as Cotta to Sulpicius, and each very greatly excelled his equals. Wherefore this is the mark of an intelligent teacher: to see whither each one’s own nature bears him, and, using her as guide, to train him thus—as it is handed down that Isocrates said, in the case of the most sharp in genius Theopompus and the most gentle Ephorus—that he applied spurs to the one and a bridle to the other.

[205] Sulpici orationes quae feruntur, eas post mortem eius scripsisse P. Cannutius putatur aequalis meus, homo extra nostrum ordinem meo iudicio disertissimus. ipsius Sulpici nulla oratio est, saepeque ex eo audivi, cum se scribere neque consuesse neque po sse diceret. Cottae pro se lege Varia quae inscribitur, eam L. Aelius scripsit Cottae rogatu.

[205] The orations of Sulpicius which are in circulation are thought to have been written after his death by P. Cannutius, my contemporary, a man outside our order, in my judgment most eloquent. Of Sulpicius himself there is no oration, and I have often heard from him, since he would say that he neither was accustomed to write nor was able to. The speech of Cotta, “On His Own Behalf under the Lex Varia,” so entitled, was written by L. Aelius at Cotta’s request.

fuit is omnino vir egregius et eques Romanus cum primis honestus idemque eruditissimus et Graecis litteris et Latinis, antiquitatisque nostrae et in inventis reb us et in actis scriptorumque veterum litterate peritus. quam scientiam Varro noster acceptam ab illo auctamque per sese, vir ingenio praestans omnique doctrina, pluribus et inlustrioribus litteris explicavit.

he was, in sum, an outstanding man and a Roman knight, among the foremost honorable, and likewise most erudite in both Greek and Latin letters, and, as to our antiquity, learnedly skilled both in institutions and in deeds and in the writings of the ancients. Which knowledge our Varro, having received from him and having increased it by himself—a man excelling in native talent and in every doctrine—has explicated in more and more illustrious writings.

[206] sed idem Aelius Stoicus <esse> voluit, orator autem nec studuit unquam nec fuit. scribebat tamen orationes, quas alii dicerent; ut Q. Metello f., ut Q. Caepioni, ut Q. Pompeio Rufo; quamquam is etiam ipse scripsit eas quibus pro se est usus, sed non sine Aelio.

[206] but that same Aelius wished to be a Stoic <to be>, whereas as an orator he neither ever studied nor was one. nevertheless he used to write orations, which others would deliver; for Q. Metellus f., for Q. Caepio, for Q. Pompeius Rufus; although he too himself wrote those which he used on his own behalf, but not without Aelius.

[207] his enim scriptis etiam ipse interfui, cum essem apud Aelium adulescens eumque audire perstudiose solerem. Cottam autem miror summum ipsum oratorem minimeque ineptum Aelianas leves oratiunculas voluisse existimari suas. his duobus eiusdem aetatis adnu merabatur nemo tertius, sed mihi placebat Pomponius maxime vel dicam minime displicebat.

[207] for I myself was even present at the drafting of these writings, when I was with Aelius as a youth and used to hear him most studiously. But I marvel that Cotta, himself a highest, consummate orator and by no means inept, wished his own to be thought Aelian light little orations. Alongside these two of the same age no third was numbered; but Pomponius pleased me most—or shall I say, displeased me least.

locus erat omnino in maxumis causis praeter eos de quibus supra dixi nemini; propterea quod Antonius, qui maxume expetebatur, facilis in causis recipiendis erat; fast idiosior Crassus, sed tamen recipiebat. horum qui neutrum habebat, confugiebat ad Philippum fere aut ad Caesarem; Cotta <tum et> Sulpicius expetebantur. ita ab his sex patronis causae inlustres agebantur; neque tam multa quam nostra aetate iudicia fiebant , neque hoc quod nunc fit, ut causae singulae defenderentur a pluribus, quo nihil est vitiosius.

There was altogether no place in the very greatest cases for anyone except those about whom I said above; because Antonius, who was most sought after, was easy in taking on cases; Crassus more fastidious, yet still took them on. One who had neither of these fled for refuge generally to Philippus or to Caesar; Cotta then also Sulpicius were sought after. Thus by these six patrons illustrious causes were prosecuted; nor were there as many trials as in our age, nor this which now happens, that single cases are defended by several, than which nothing is more vicious.

[208] respondemus iis quos non audivimus: in quo primum saepe aliter est dictum aliter ad nos relatum; deinde magni interest coram videre me quem ad modum adversarius de quaque re adseveret, maxime autem quem ad modum quaeque res audiatur. sed nihil vitiosi us quam, cum unum corpus debeat esse defensionis, nasci de integro causam, cum sit ab altero perorata.

[208] we reply to those whom we have not heard: in which, first, one thing is often said, another is reported to us; next, it greatly matters to see in person how the adversary asserts each matter, and most of all how each matter is heard. But nothing is more faulty than this: when there ought to be one single body of defense, for the case to be born anew, when it has been fully argued by the other.

[209] omnium enim causarum unum est naturale principium, una peroratio; reliquae partes quasi membra suo quaeque loco locata suam et vim et dignitatem tenent. cum autem difficile sit in longa oratione non aliquando aliquid ita dicere, ut sibi ipse non conve niat, quanto difficilius cavere, ne quid dicas, quod non conveniat eius orationi qui ante te dixerit. sed quia et labor multo maior est totam causam quam partem dicere et quia plures ineuntur gratiae, si uno tempore dicas pro pluribus, idcirco hanc consue tudinem lubenter adscivimus.

[209] for all cases have one natural beginning, one peroration; the remaining parts, as limbs, each placed in its own proper place, hold their own force and dignity. Now, since it is difficult in a long speech not at some time to say something in such a way that it does not agree with oneself, how much more difficult is it to beware lest you say anything that does not agree with the oration of the one who has spoken before you. But because both the labor is much greater to speak the whole case than a part, and because more favors are won if you speak at one time on behalf of several, for that reason we have gladly adopted this custom.

[210] Erant tamen, quibus videretur illius aetatis tertius Curio, quia splendidioribus fortasse verbis utebatur et quia Latine non pessume loquebatur usu credo aliquo domestico. nam litterarum admodum nihil sciebat; sed magni interest quos quisque audiat co tidie domi, quibuscum loquatur a puero, quem ad modum patres paedagogi matres etiam loquantur.

[210] There were, however, those to whom Curio seemed the third of that age, because perhaps he used more splendid words and because he spoke Latin not very badly, through, I believe, some domestic usage. For he knew almost nothing of letters; but it makes a great difference whom each person hears every day at home, with whom he speaks from boyhood, in what manner fathers, pedagogues, even mothers speak.

[211] legimus epistulas Corneliae matris Gracchorum: apparet filios non tam in gremio educatos quam in sermone matris. auditus est nobis Laeliae C. f. saepe sermo: ergo illam patris elegantia tinctam vidimus et filias eius Mucias ambas. quarum sermo mihi fu it notus, et neptes Licinias, quas nos quidem ambas, hanc vero Scipionis etiam tu, Brute, credo, aliquando audisti loquentem.

[211] we have read the epistles of Cornelia, the mother of the Gracchi: it appears that her sons were reared not so much in the lap as in their mother’s discourse. The speech of Laelia, daughter of Gaius, was often heard by us: therefore we saw her tinged with her father’s elegance, and both her daughters, the Muciae. Their discourse was known to me, and the granddaughters, the Liciniae, both of whom we indeed have heard; and this one, the wife of Scipio, even you, Brutus, I believe, have at some time heard speaking.

Ego vero ac lubenter quidem, inquit Brutus; et eo lubentius, quod L. Crassi erat filia.

“I indeed, and quite gladly,” said Brutus; “and the more gladly, because she was the daughter of L. Crassus.”

[212] Quid Crassum, inquam, illum censes istius Liciniae filium, Crassi testamento qui fuit adoptatus?

[212] What do you think of Crassus, I say, that man, the son of that Licinia, who was adopted by Crassus’s testament?

Summo iste quidem dicitur ingenio fuisse, inquit; et vero hic Scipio conlega meus mihi sane bene et loqui videtur et dicere.

That man indeed is said to have been of the highest genius, he said; and in truth this Scipio, my colleague, seems to me certainly both to speak well and to say well.

Recte, inquam, iudicas, Brute. etenim istius genus est ex ipsius sapientiae stirpe generatum. nam et de duobus avis iam diximus, Scipione et Crasso, et de tribus proavis, Q. Metello, cuius quattuor filii, P. Scipione, qui ex dominatu Ti. Gracchi privatus in libertatem rem publicam vindicavit, Q. Scaevola augure, qui peritissimus iuris idemque percomis est habitus.

Rightly, I say, you judge, Brutus. For indeed that man’s lineage is generated from the very stock of wisdom itself. For we have already spoken of his two grandfathers, Scipio and Crassus, and of his three great‑grandfathers: Quintus Metellus, who had four sons, Publius Scipio, who, as a private citizen, vindicated the republic into liberty from the domination of Tiberius Gracchus, and Quintus Scaevola the augur, who was held as most skilled in law and likewise very courteous.

[213] iam duorum abavorum quam est inlustre nomen, P. Scipionis qui bis consul fuit, qui est Corculum dictus, alterius omnium sapientissimi, C. Laeli!.

[213] now how illustrious is the name of the two great-great-grandfathers, of P. Scipio, who was consul twice, who was called Corculum, and of the other, the wisest of all, C. Laelius!.

O generosam, inquit, stirpem et tamquam in unam arborem plura genera sic in istam domum multorum insitam atque <inluminatam> sapientiam!.

O noble stock, said he, and, as into one tree several kinds, so into that house the wisdom of many grafted and <illuminated>!.

Similiter igitur suspicor, ut conferamus parva magnis, Curionis, etsi pupillus relictus est, patrio fuisse instituto puro sermone adsuefactam domum; et eo magis hoc iudico, quod neminem ex his quidem, qui aliquo in numero fuerunt, cognovi in omni genere honestarum artium tam indoctum tam rudem.

Similarly therefore I suspect—so that we may compare small things with great—that Curio’s household, although he was left a ward, had by a paternal institution been accustomed to pure speech; and I all the more judge this, because I have known no one, at least among those who were of some account, in every kind of the honorable arts so unlearned and so uncultivated.

[214] nullum ille poetam noverat, nullum legerat oratorem, nullam memoriam antiquitatis conlegerat; non publicum ius, non privatum et civile cognoverat. quamquam id quidem fuit etiam in aliis et magnis quidem oratoribus, quos parum his instructos artibus vi dimus, ut Sulpicium, ut Antonium. sed ei tamen unum illud habebant dicendi opus elaboratum; idque cum constaret ex quinque notissimis partibus, nemo in aliqua parte earum omnino nihil poterat: in quacumque enim una plane clauderet, orator esse non posset; sed tamen alius in alia excellebat magis.

[214] he knew no poet, he had read no orator, he had gathered no memory of antiquity; he had become acquainted with neither public law nor private and civil law. Although this indeed was the case even in others—and in great orators too—whom we have seen too little furnished with these arts, such as Sulpicius, such as Antonius. Yet they had that one work of speaking elaborated; and since it consisted of five most well-known parts, no one could be altogether nothing in any one of those parts: for if in any single one he were plainly deficient, he could not be an orator; but nevertheless one excelled more in one, another in another.

[215] reperiebat quid dici opus esset et quo modo praeparari et quo loco locari, memoriaque ea comprendebat Antonius, excellebat autem actione; erantque ei quaedam ex his paria cum Crasso, quaedam etiam superiora; at Crassi magis nitebat oratio. nec vero Su lpicio neque Cottae dicere possumus neque cuiquam bono oratori rem ullam ex illis quinque partibus plane atque omnino defuisse.

[215] he discovered what needed to be said, and how it ought to be prepared, and in what place it should be located, and Antony would comprehend these by memory, but he excelled in delivery; and he had in some of these things equals with Crassus, in some even superior; but Crassus’s oration shone more. Nor indeed can we say that Sulpicius or Cotta or any good orator was plainly and altogether lacking in any matter from those five parts.

[216] itaque in Curione hoc verissime iudicari potest, nulla re una magis oratorem commendari quam verborum splendore et copia. nam cum tardus in cogitando tum in struendo dissipatus fuit. reliqua duo sunt, agere et meminisse: in utroque cacinnos inridentiu m commovebat.

[216] and so in Curio this can be most truly judged: that by no single thing is an orator more commended than by the splendor and copiousness of words. For he was both slow in thinking and scattered in constructing. The remaining two are, to deliver and to remember: in both he stirred the cachinnations of the deriders.

motus erat is, quem et C. Iulius in perpetuum notavit, cum ex eo in utramque partem toto corpore vacillante quaesivit, quis loqueretur e luntre; et Cn. Sicinius homo impurus sed admodum ridiculus—neque aliud in eo oratoris simile quicquam.

There was that motion—one which even Gaius Julius marked for perpetuity, when he asked of him, as he was vacillating with his whole body to either side, who was speaking from the skiff; and Gnaeus Sicinius, an impure man but very ridiculous—nor was there anything else in him in any way like an orator.

[217] is cum tribunus plebis Curionem et Octavium consules produxisset Curioque multa dixisset sedente Cn. Octavio conlega, qui devinctus erat fasciis et multis medicamentis propter dolorem artuum delibutus, 'numquam, inquit, Octavi, conlegae tuo gratiam re feres; qui nisi se suo more iactavisset, hodie te istic muscae comedissent.' memoria autem ita fuit nulla, ut aliquotiens, tria cum proposuisset, aut quartum adderet aut tertium quaereret; qui in iudicio privato vel maxumo, cum ego pro Titinia Cottae pero ravissem, ille contra me pro Ser. Naevio diceret, subito totam causam oblitus est idque veneficiis et cantionibus Titiniae factum esse dicebat.

[217] when he, as tribune of the plebs, had brought forward Curio and Octavius, the consuls, and had said many things to Curio, with his colleague Cn. Octavius sitting, who was bound up with bandages and smeared with many medicaments on account of pain in his limbs, he said, 'you will never repay your colleague, Octavius; for if he had not tossed himself about in his usual manner, today the flies would have eaten you right there.' His memory, moreover, was so utterly none that often, when he had proposed three points, he either added a fourth or looked for the third; and this man, in a private trial of the very greatest importance, when I had delivered the peroration before Cotta on behalf of Titinia, and he was speaking against me for Ser. Naevius, suddenly forgot the whole case, and said that this had been brought about by Titinia’s poisonings and incantations.

[218] Magna haec immemoris ingeni signa; sed nihil turpius quam quod etiam in scriptis obliviscebatur quid paulo ante posuisset: ut in eo libro, ubi se exeuntem e senatu et cum Pansa nostro et cum Curione filio conloquentem facit, cum senatum Caesar consul habuisset, omnisque ille sermo ductus <est> a percontatione fili quid in senatu esset actum. in quo multis verbis cum inveheretur in Caesarem Curio disputatioque esset inter eos, ut est consuetudo dialogorum, cum sermo esset institutus senatu misso, quem senatum Caesar consul habuisset, reprendit eas res, quas idem Caesar anno post et deinceps reliquis annis administravisset in Gallia.

[218] These are great signs of a forgetful nature; but nothing is more disgraceful than that he even in his writings would forget what he had set down a little before: as in that book where he represents himself as going out from the senate and conversing with our Pansa and with Curio the son, when Caesar, as consul, had held the senate, and that whole conversation was led <est> from the son’s inquiry as to what had been done in the senate. In this, while with many words Curio was inveighing against Caesar and there was a disputation between them, as is the custom of dialogues, since the conversation had been instituted with the senate dismissed, which senate Caesar as consul had held, he censures those matters which that same Caesar a year later and thereafter in the remaining years managed in Gaul.

[219] Tum Brutus admirans: tantamne fuisse oblivionem, inquit, in scripto praesertim, ut ne legens quidem umquam senserit quantum flagiti commisisset?

[219] Then Brutus, admiring, says: was the oblivion so great, especially in writing, that not even when reading did he ever sense how great a flagitious deed he had committed?

Quid autem, inquam, Brute, stultius quam, si ea vituperare volebat quae vituperavit, non eo tempore instituere sermonem, cum illarum rerum iam tempora praeterissent? sed ita totus errat, ut in eodem sermone dicat in senatum se Caesare consule non acceder e, sed id dicat ipso consule exiens e senatu. iam qui hac parte animi, quae custos est ceterarum ingeni partium, tam debilis esset, ut ne in scripto quidem meminisset quid paulo ante posuisset, huic minime mirum est ex tempore dicenti solitam effluere men tem.

But what, I say, Brutus, is more foolish than, if he wanted to vituperate the things which he did vituperate, not to institute the discourse at that time, when the times of those matters had already passed? but he errs so entirely, that in the same dialogue he says that he does not acced e into the senate with Caesar as consul, but says that as he is going out of the senate with the consul himself. now one who, in that part of the mind which is the guardian of the other parts of genius, was so feeble that not even in writing did he remember what he had a little before set down—for such a man it is by no means a wonder that, when speaking ex tempore, his mind, as usual, should flow away.

[220] itaque cum ei nec officium deesset et flagraret studio dicendi, perpaucae ad eum causae deferebantur. orator autem, vivis eius aequalibus, proxumus optumis numerabatur propter verborum bonitatem, ut ante dixi, et expeditam ac profluentem quodam modo c eleritatem. itaque eius orationes aspiciendas tamen censeo.

[220] and so, although duty did not fail him and he burned with zeal for speaking, very few cases were brought to him. The orator, however, while his contemporaries were alive, was counted next to the best on account of the goodness of his words, as I said before, and a certain unencumbered and out‑flowing celerity. And so I judge his orations nonetheless to be looked at.

sunt illae quidem languidiores, verum tamen possunt augere et quasi alere id bonum, quod in illo mediocriter fuisse concedimus: quod habet tantam vim, ut solum sine aliis in Curione speciem orato ris alicuius effecerit. sed ad instituta redeamus.

they indeed are rather languid, yet nevertheless they can augment and, as it were, nourish that good which we concede to have been in him to a moderate degree: which has such force that it alone, without the others, produced in Curio the semblance of some orator. But let us return to our established plan.

[221] In eodem igitur numero eiusdem aetatis C. Carbo fuit, illius eloquentissimi viri filius. non satis acutus orator, sed tamen orator numeratus est. erat in verbis gravitas et facile dicebat et auctoritatem naturalem quandam habebat oratio.

[221] In the same number, therefore, of the same age was C. Carbo, the son of that most eloquent man. Not a sufficiently acute orator, but nevertheless he was numbered as an orator. There was gravity in his words, and he spoke easily, and his speech had a certain natural authority.

acutior Q. Va rius rebus inveniendis nec minus verbis expeditus; fortis vero actor et vemens et verbis nec inops nec abiectus et quem plane oratorem dicere auderes Cn. Pomponius lateribus pugnans, incitans animos, acer acerbus criminosus.

Q. Varius was more acute in devising matters and no less expeditious in words; indeed a stout and vehement pleader, and in his words neither inops nor abject; and one whom you would plainly have dared to call an orator was Cn. Pomponius—elbowing his way, stirring spirits, keen, harsh, accusatory.

[222] Multum ab his aberat L. Fufius, tamen ex accusatione M.'. Aquili diligentiae fructum ceperat. nam M. Drusum tuum magnum avonculum, gravem oratorem ita dumtaxat cum de re publica diceret, L. autem Lucullum etiam acutum, patremque tuum, Brute, iuris quo que et publici et privati sane peritum, M. Lucullum, M. Octavium Cn. f., qui tantum auctoritate dicendoque valuit ut legem Semproniam frumentariam populi frequentis subfragiis abrogaverit, Cn. Octavium M. f., M. Catonem patrem, Q. etiam Catulum filium abducamus ex acie id est ab iudiciis et in praesidiis rei publicae, cui facile satis facere possint, conlocemus.

[222] L. Fufius was far removed from these, yet from the accusation of M'. Aquilius he had reaped the fruit of diligence. For M. Drusus, your great uncle, a weighty orator but only thus when he spoke about the commonwealth, and L. Lucullus, keen as well, and your father, Brutus, also truly skilled in law both public and private, M. Lucullus, M. Octavius, son of Cn., who so prevailed by authority and by speaking that he abrogated the Sempronian grain law by the supporting votes of a thronging people, Cn. Octavius, son of M., M. Cato the father, and Q. Catulus the son—let us draw these away from the battle-line, that is, from the courts, and place them in the defenses of the republic, to which they could easily render adequate service.

[223] Eodem Q. Caepionem referrem, nisi nimis equestri ordini deditus a senatu dissedisset. Cn. Carbonem, M. Marium et ex eodem genere compluris minime dignos elegantis conventus auribus aptissimos cognovi turbulentis contionibus. quo in genere, ut in his perturbem aetatum ordinem, nuper L. Quinctius fuit; aptior etiam Palicanus auribus imperitorum.

[223] To the same class I would refer Q. Caepio, if he had not, being too devoted to the equestrian order, dissented from the Senate. Cn. Carbo, M. Marius, and several of the same kind I have known—by no means worthy of the ears of an elegant gathering, yet most apt for turbulent popular assemblies. In which category, so that among these I may disturb the order of ages, there was lately L. Quinctius; and Palicanus was even more fitted to the ears of the inexpert.

[224] Et quoniam huius generis facta mentio est, seditiosorum omnium post Gracchos L. Appuleius Saturninus eloquentissimus visus est: magis specie tamen et motu atque ipso amictu capiebat homines quam aut dicendi copia aut mediocritate prudentiae. longe aut em post natos homines improbissimus C. Servilius Glaucia, sed peracutus et callidus cum primisque ridiculus. is ex summis et fortunae et vitae sordibus in praetura consul factus esset, si rationem eius haberi licere iudicatum esset.

[224] And since mention of this kind has been made, of all the seditious after the Gracchi, L. Appuleius Saturninus seemed the most eloquent: yet he captivated men more by appearance and motion and by his very cloak than either by a copiousness of speaking or by the moderation of prudence. By far the most wicked since men were born was C. Servilius Glaucia, yet very sharp and crafty, and among the foremost a wag. He, from the utmost sordidness both of fortune and of life, in his praetorship would have been made consul, if it had been adjudged that it was permitted that his candidacy be considered.

nam et plebem tenebat et equestrem ordinem beneficio legis devinxerat. is praetor eodem die, quo Saturninus tribunus plebis, Mario et Flacco consulibus publice est interfectus; homo simillimus Atheniensis Hyperboli, cuius improbitatem veteres Atticorum comoediae notaverunt.

for he both held the plebs and had bound the equestrian order by the benefaction of a law. This man, praetor on the same day on which Saturninus was tribune of the plebs, with Marius and Flaccus as consuls, was slain publicly; a man most similar to the Athenian Hyperbolus, whose depravity the ancient comedies of the Attics have noted.

[225] Quos Sex. Titius consecutus, homo loquax sane et satis acutus sed tam solutus et mollis in gestu, ut saltatio quaedam nasceretur, cui saltationi Titius nomen esset. ita cavendumst, ne quid in agendo dicendove facias, cuius imitatio rideatur.

[225] Whom Sextus Titius followed, a truly loquacious man and sufficiently acute, but so loose and soft in gesture that a certain dance arose, to which dance the name “Titius” was given. Thus one must beware not to do anything in acting or in speaking, the imitation of which may be laughed at.

sed ad pa ulo superiorem aetatem revecti sumus; nunc ad eam de qua aliquantum sumus locuti revertamur.

but we have been carried back to a somewhat earlier age; now let us return to that about which we have spoken somewhat.

[226] Coniunctus igitur Sulpici aetati P. Antistius fuit, rabula sane probabilis, qui multos cum tacuisset annos neque contemni solum sed inrideri etiam solitus esset, in tribunatu primum contra C. Iuli illam consulatus petitionem extraordinariam veram caus am agens est probatus; et eo magis quod eandem causam cum ageret eius conlega ille ipse Sulpicius, hic plura et acutiora dicebat. itaque post tribunatum primo multae ad eum causae, deinde omnes maxumae quaecumque erant deferebantur.

[226] Therefore, joined to Sulpicius’s age was Publius Antistius, a decidedly passable pettifogger, who, after he had kept silent for many years and had been accustomed not only to be despised but even to be mocked, during his tribunate first won approval by pleading the true cause against that extraordinary petition for the consulship of Gaius Julius; and all the more because, when his colleague, that very Sulpicius, was pleading the same cause, this man said more and sharper things. And so, after the tribunate, at first many cases, then all the greatest, whatever there were, were referred to him.

[227] Rem videbat acute, componebat diligenter, memoria valebat; verbis non ille quidem ornatis utebatur, sed tamen non abiectis; expedita autem erat et perfacile currens oratio; et erat eius quidam tamquam habitus non inurbanus; actio paulum cum vitio vocis tum etiam ineptiis claudicabat. hic temporibus floruit iis, quibus inter profectionem reditumque L. Sullae sine iure fuit et sine ulla dignitate res publica; hoc etiam magis probabatur, quod erat ab oratoribus quaedam in foro solitudo. Sulpicius occider at, Cotta aberat et Curio; vivebat e reliquis patronis eius aetatis nemo praeter Carbonem et Pomponium, quorum utrumque facile superabat.

[227] He saw the matter acutely, composed carefully, and his memory was strong; he did not, to be sure, use ornate words, yet not abject ones; moreover, his speech was unencumbered and ran very easily; and there was in him a certain, as it were, habit not inurbane; his delivery limped a little both from a defect of the voice and also from ineptitudes. He flourished in those times in which, between the departure and the return of L. Sulla, the commonwealth was without law and without any dignity; he was approved all the more for this, because there was in the forum a kind of solitude of orators. Sulpicius had been slain, Cotta was absent, and Curio likewise; of the remaining patrons of that age no one lived except Carbo and Pomponius, each of whom he easily surpassed.

[228] Inferioris autem aetatis erat proxumus L. Sisenna, doctus vir et studiis optimis deditus, bene Latine loquens, gnarus rei publicae, non sine facetiis, sed neque laboris multi nec satis versatus in causis; interiectusque inter duas aetates Hortensi et Sulpici nec maiorem consequi poterat et minori necesse erat cedere. huius omnis facultas ex historia ipsius perspici potest, quae cum facile omnis vincat superiores, tum indicat tamen quantum absit a summo quamque genus hoc scriptionis nondum sit satis La tinis litteris inlustratum. nam Q. Hortensi admodum adulescentis ingenium ut Phidiae signum simul aspectum et probatum est.

[228] Of the later generation the nearest was L. Sisenna, a learned man and devoted to the best studies, speaking Latin well, knowledgeable in the republic, not without facetiae, but neither of much labor nor sufficiently practiced in causes; and, cast between the two ages of Hortensius and Sulpicius, he could not attain the greater, and it was necessary to yield to the lesser. All his faculty can be perceived from his own history, which, while it easily surpasses all its predecessors, yet indicates how far it is from the summit, and how this genus of writing has not yet been sufficiently illustrated by Latin letters. For the talent of Q. Hortensius, when quite an adolescent, was, like a statue of Phidias, at once looked upon and approved.

[229] Is L. Crasso Q. Scaevola consulibus primum in foro dixit et apud hos ipsos quidem consules, et cum eorum qui adfuerunt tum ipsorum consulum, qui omnibus intellegentia anteibant, iudicio discessit probatus. undeviginti annos natus erat eo tempore, est autem L. Paullo C. Marcello consulibus mortuus: ex quo videmus eum in patronorum numero annos quattuor et quadraginta fuisse. hoc de oratore paulo post plura dicemus; hoc autem loco voluimus <eius> aetatem in disparem oratorum aetatem includere.

[229] Under the consulship of L. Crassus and Q. Scaevola he spoke in the Forum for the first time, and indeed before those very consuls; and, by the judgment both of those who were present and of the consuls themselves, who surpassed all in intelligence, he departed approved. He was 19 years old at that time, and he died under the consulship of L. Paullus and C. Marcellus: from which we see that he was in the number of patrons for 44 years. About the orator we shall say more a little later; but in this place we wished to include his age within the disparate age of the orators.

quamquam id quidem omnibus usu venire necesse fuit, quibus paulo longior vita contigit, ut et cum multo maioribus natu, quam essent ipsi, et cum aliquanto minoribus compararentur. ut Accius isdem aedilibus ait se et Pacuvium docuisse fabulam, quom ille octoginta, ipse triginta annos natus esset:

although this indeed necessarily came in experience to all to whom a somewhat longer life befell, that they were compared both with those much greater in years than they themselves were, and with some somewhat younger. as Accius says that, under the same aediles, he and Pacuvius produced a play, when that man was 80, he himself 30 years old:

[230] Sic Hortensius non cum suis aequalibus solum, sed et mea cum aetate et cum tua, Brute, et cum aliquanto superiore coniungitur, si quidem et Crasso vivo dicere solebat et magis iam etiam vigebat Antonio; et cum Philippo iam sene pro Cn. Pompei bonis di cens in illa causa, adulescens cum esset, princeps fuit et in eorum, quos in Sulpici aetate posui, numerum facile pervenerat et suos inter aequalis M. Pisonem M. Crassum Cn. Lentulum P. Lentulum Suram longe praestitit et me adulescentem nactus octo annis minorem, quam erat ipse, multos annos in studio eiusdem laudis exercuit et tecum simul, sicut ego pro multis, sic ille pro Appio Claudio dixit paulo ante mortem.

[230] Thus Hortensius is conjoined not only with his own equals, but with my age as well, and with yours, Brutus, and with one somewhat earlier, since indeed he was wont to speak while Crassus was alive and was even more in his vigor with Antonius; and when Philippus was already old, pleading in that case for the goods of Cn. Pompeius, though he was a young man, he was foremost, and he had easily come into the number of those whom I set in the age of Sulpicius; and among his own peers he far excelled M. Piso, M. Crassus, Cn. Lentulus, P. Lentulus Sura; and, finding me a young man eight years younger than he himself was, he exercised for many years in the pursuit of the same praise; and together with you, just as I spoke for many, so he spoke for Appius Claudius a little before his death.

[231] Vides igitur, ut ad te oratorem, Brute, pervenerimus tam multis inter nostrum tuumque initium dicendi interpositis oratoribus; ex quibus, quoniam in hoc sermone nostro statui neminem eorum qui viverent nominare, ne vos curiosius eliceretis ex me quid de quoque iudicarem, eos qui iam sunt mortui nominabo.

[231] You see therefore, how to you, the orator, Brutus, we have come, so many orators having been interposed between our beginning of speaking and yours; of whom, since in this our discourse I have determined to name none of those who are living, lest you draw out from me too inquisitively what I judge about each, I will name those who are now dead.

Tum Brutus: non est, inquit, ista causa quam dicis, quam ob rem de iis qui vivunt nihil velis dicere.

Then Brutus: That is not, says he, the cause which you say, on account of which you wish to say nothing about those who are living.

Quaenam igitur, inquam, est?

What then, I ask, is it?

Vereri te, inquit, arbitror ne per nos hic sermo tuus emanet et ii tibi suscenseant, quos praeterieris.

“I think,” he says, “that you fear lest through us this discourse of yours should emanate, and those whom you will have passed over be incensed at you.”

Quid? vos, inquam, tacere non poteritis?

What? will you, I say, not be able to be silent?

Nos quidem, inquit, facillime; sed tamen te arbitror malle ipsum tacere quam taciturnitatem nostram experiri.

"We indeed," he said, "most easily; but yet I judge you prefer to be silent yourself rather than to experience our taciturnity."

[232] Tum ego: vere tibi, inquam, Brute, dicam. non me existimavi in hoc sermone usque ad hanc aetatem esse venturum; sed ita traxit ordo aetatum orationem, ut iam ad minoris etiam pervenerim.

[232] Then I: I will tell you truly, Brutus, said I. I did not suppose that in this discourse I would come as far as this age; but thus the order of ages drew the oration, so that now I have even come to the younger.

Interpone igitur, inquit, si quos videtur; deinde redeamus ad te et ad Hortensium.

“Interpose, therefore,” he says, “if any seem good; then let us return to you and to Hortensius.”

Immo vero, inquam, ad Hortensium; de me alii dicent, si qui volent. Minime vero, inquit. nam etsi me facile omni tuo sermone tenuisti, tamen is mihi longior videtur, quod propero audire de te; nec vero tam de virtutibus dicendi tuis, quae cum omnibus tum certe mihi notissimae sunt, quam quod gradus tuos et quasi processus dicendi studeo cognoscere.

Nay indeed, I say, to Hortensius; about me others will speak, if any wish. By no means indeed, he says. For although you have easily held me by all your discourse, nevertheless it seems longer to me, because I am in haste to hear about you; and indeed not so much about your virtues of speaking, which both to all and certainly to me are most well known, as because I am eager to learn your steps and, as it were, the processes of speaking.

[233] Geretur, inquam, tibi mos, quoniam me non ingeni praedicatorem esse vis sed laboris mei. verum interponam, ut placet, alios et a M. Crasso, qui fuit aequalis Hortensi, exordiar.

[233] I say, your wish shall be complied with, since you want me to be not a herald of my genius but of my labor. But I will, as it pleases, interpose others, and from M. Crassus, who was a contemporary of Hortensius, I will begin.

Is igitur mediocriter a doctrina instructus, angustius etiam a natura, labore et industria et quod adhibebat ad obtinendas causas curam etiam et gratiam, in principibus patronis aliquot annos fuit. in huius oratione sermo Latinus erat, verba non abiecta, res compositae diligenter, nullus flos tamen neque lumen ullum, animi magna, vocis parva contentio, omnia fere ut similiter atque uno modo dicerentur. nam huius aequalis et inimicus C. Fimbria non ita diu iactare se potuit; qui omnia magna voce dicens ve rborum sane bonorum cursu quodam incitato ita furebat tamen, ut mirarere tam alias res agere populum, ut esset insano inter disertos locus.

Accordingly, this man, moderately equipped by learning, and more narrowly also by nature, by labor and industry and by the care as well as the favor that he brought to obtaining cases, was for several years among the leading patrons. in his oration the speech was Latin, the words not abject, the matters arranged carefully, yet there was no flower nor any light; great exertion of spirit, small exertion of voice; almost everything was said as it were similarly and in one manner. for his contemporary and enemy C. Fimbria could not for very long vaunt himself; who, saying everything with a loud voice, with a certain incited course of words indeed quite good, nevertheless raved in such a way that you were amazed that the people were meanwhile doing other business, so that there was room for a madman among the eloquent.

[234] Cn. autem Lentulus multo maiorem opinionem dicendi actione faciebat quam quanta in eo facultas erat; qui cum esset nec peracutus, quamquam et ex facie et ex voltu videbatur, nec abundans verbis, etsi fallebat in eo ipso, sic intervallis, exclamationib us, voce suavi et canora, admirando inridebat, calebat in agendo, ut ea quae derant non desiderarentur. ita tamquam Curio copia nonnulla verborum, nullo alio bono, tenuit oratorum locum:

[234] But Cn. Lentulus created by delivery a much greater opinion of speaking than the faculty in him amounted to; who, since he was not very acute—although he seemed so both from his face and from his countenance—nor abundant in words, though he deceived in that very point, yet by intervals, by exclamations, with a sweet and canorous voice, by exciting admiration he would provoke laughter, he grew hot in action, so that the things that were lacking were not missed. Thus, just as Curio, by some supply of words, with no other excellence, he held a place among the orators:

[235] Sic Lentulus ceterarum virtutum dicendi mediocritatem actione occultavit, in qua excellens fuit. nec multo secus P. Lentulus, cuius et excogitandi et loquendi tarditatem tegebat formae dignitas, corporis motus plenus et artis et venustatis, vocis et suavitas et magnitudo. sic in hoc nihil praeter actionem fuit, cetera etiam minora quam in superiore.

[235] Thus Lentulus concealed by delivery the mediocrity of the other virtues of speaking, in which he was excellent. Nor much otherwise P. Lentulus, whose slowness both of invention and of speaking was covered by the dignity of his form, the movement of his body full both of art and of grace, and both the sweetness and the magnitude of his voice. Thus in this man there was nothing besides delivery; the rest were even smaller than in the former.

[236]M. Piso quicquid habuit, habuit ex disciplina maxumeque ex omnibus qui ante fuerunt Graecis doctrinis eruditus fuit. habuit a natura genus quoddam acuminis quod etiam arte limaverat, quod erat in reprehendendis verbis versutum et sollers sed saepe sto machosum, nonnumquam frigidum, interdum etiam facetum. is laborem quasi cursum forensem diutius non tulit, quod et corpore erat infirmo et hominum ineptias ac stultitias, quae devorandae nobis sunt, non ferebat iracundiusque respuebat sive morose, ut puta batur, sive ingenuo liberoque fastidio.

[236]M. Piso had whatever he had from discipline, and especially, beyond all who had been before, he was educated by Greek doctrines. He had from nature a certain kind of acumen, which he had also polished by art—a thing adroit and skillful in reprehending words, but often irritable, sometimes frigid, and at times even facetious. He did not for long endure the labor, as it were the forensic race, because he was weak in body, and he did not put up with the ineptitudes and stupidities of men—which must be swallowed by us—but rejected them with more irascibility, whether morosely, as was thought, or with an ingenuous and free fastidious disdain.

is cum satis floruisset adulescens, minor haberi est coeptus postea. deinde ex virginum iudicio magnam laudem est adeptus et ex eo tempore quasi revocatus in cursum tenuit locum tam diu, quam ferre potuit laborem; postea quantum detraxit ex studio tantum amisit ex gloria.

He, when he had sufficiently flourished as an adolescent, afterwards began to be accounted lesser. Then, by the judgment of the virgins, he obtained great laud, and from that time, as if recalled into the course, he held his place as long as he could bear the labor; thereafter, by as much as he detracted from his zeal, by so much he lost from his glory.

[237] P. Murena mediocri ingenio sed magno studio rerum veterum, litterarum et studiosus et non imperitus, multae industriae et magni laboris fuit. C. Censorinus Graecis litteris satis doctus, quod proposuerat explicans expedite, non invenustus actor sed in ers et inimicus fori. L. Turius parvo ingenio sed multo labore, quoquo modo poterat, saepe dicebat; itaque ei paucae centuriae ad consulatum defuerunt.

[237] P. Murena, with moderate natural talent but great zeal for ancient matters, of letters both studious and not unskilled, was of much industry and great labor. C. Censorinus, sufficiently learned in Greek letters, explaining expeditiously what he had proposed, not an uncomely actor but inert and an enemy of the forum. L. Turius, of small talent but much labor, in whatever way he could, often spoke; and thus a few centuries were lacking to him for the consulship.

[238] C. Macer auctoritate semper eguit, sed fuit patronus propemodum diligentissimus. huius si vita, si mores, si voltus denique non omnem commendationem ingeni everteret, maius nomen in patronis fuisset. non erat abundans, non inops tamen; non valde nitens, non plane horrida oratio; vox gestus et omnis actio sine lepore; at in inveniendis componendisque rebus mira accuratio, ut non facile in ullo diligentiorem maioremque cognoverim, sed eam ut citius veteratoriam quam oratoriam diceres.

[238] C. Macer always lacked authority, but he was a well-nigh most diligent patron. If in his case his life, his character, and finally his countenance did not overturn all commendation of his talent, his name would have been greater among patrons. He was not abundant, yet not destitute; his speech not very polished, yet not plainly rough; voice, gesture, and the whole delivery without charm; but in finding and composing matters a wondrous exactness, such that I have not easily known in anyone a man more diligent and greater—only that you would more quickly call it veteran-crafty than oratorical.

hic etsi etiam in publicis causis probabatur, tamen in privatis inlustriorem obtinebat locum.

This man, although he was approved even in public cases, nevertheless held a more illustrious place in private ones.

[239] C. deinde Piso statarius et sermonis plenus orator, minime ille quidem tardus in excogitando, verum tamen voltu et simulatione multo etiam acutior quam erat videbatur. nam eius aequalem M.'. Glabrionem bene institutum avi Scaevolae diligentia socors i psius natura neglegensque tardaverat. etiam L. Torquatus elegans in dicendo, in existimando admodum prudens, toto genere perurbanus.

[239] C. then Piso, a steady-paced and full-in-discourse orator, was by no means slow in excogitating; yet by his countenance and simulation he seemed even much sharper than he was. For his contemporary M'. Glabrio, though well instructed by the diligence of his grandfather Scaevola, had been delayed by his own slothful and negligent nature. Also L. Torquatus, elegant in speaking, very prudent in judging, in his whole manner thoroughly urbane.

meus autem aequalis Cn. Pompeius vir ad omnia summa natus maiorem dicendi gloriam habuisset, nisi eum maioris gloriae cupi ditas ad bellicas laudes abstraxisset. erat oratione satis amplus, rem prudenter videbat; actio vero eius habebat et in voce magnum splendorem et in motu summam dignitatem.

my contemporary Gnaeus Pompeius, a man born for every highest achievement, would have had greater glory in speaking, had not a desire for greater glory drawn him away to warlike accolades. he was in oratory quite ample; he saw the matter with prudence; and his delivery possessed great splendor in his voice and, in gesture, the highest dignity.

[240] Noster item aequalis D. Silanus, vitricus tuus, studi ille quidem habuit non multum, sed acuminis et orationis satis. Q. Pompeius A. f., qui Bithynicus dictus est, biennio quam nos fortasse maior, summo studio dicendi multaque doctrina, incredibili la bore atque industria, quod scire possum: fuit enim mecum et cum M. Pisone cum amicitia tum studiis exercitationibusque coniunctus. huius actio non satis commendabat orationem; in hac enim satis erat copiae, in illa autem leporis parum.

[240] Our contemporary likewise, D. Silanus, your stepfather, indeed had not much of study, but enough of acumen and of oration. Q. Pompeius A. f., who is called Bithynicus, perhaps older than us by two years, had the highest zeal for speaking and much learning, with incredible labor and industry—which I can attest; for he was joined with me and with M. Piso both by friendship and by studies and exercises. His delivery did not sufficiently commend his oration; for in the former there was enough of copia, but in the latter too little of charm.

[241] Erat eius aequalis P. Autronius voce peracuta atque magna nec alia re ulla probabilis, et L. Octavius Reatinus, qui cum multas iam causas diceret, adulescens est mortuus—is tamen ad dicendum veniebat magis audacter quam parate —, et C. Staienus, qui se ipse adoptaverat et de Staieno Aelium fecerat, fervido quodam et petulanti et furioso genere dicendi: quod quia multis gratum erat et probabatur, ascendisset ad honores, nisi in facinore manifesto deprehensus poenas legibus et iudicio dedisset.

[241] There was as his contemporary P. Autronius, with a very sharp and great voice and commendable in no other respect, and L. Octavius the Reatine, who, although he was already pleading many cases, died a young man—he, however, came to speaking more boldly than preparedly—, and C. Staienus, who had adopted himself and had made himself from a Staienus into an Aelius, with a certain hot, petulant, and furious kind of speaking: which, because it was pleasing to many and was approved, he would have ascended to honors, had he not, caught in manifest crime, paid penalties to the laws and to the judgment.

[242] Eodem tempore C. L. Caepasii fratres fuerunt, qui multa opera, ignoti homines et repentini, quaestores celeriter facti sunt, oppidano quodam et incondito genere dicendi. addamus huc etiam, ne quem vocalem praeterisse videamur, C. Cosconium Calidianum, qui nullo acumine eam tamen verborum copiam, si quam habebat, praebebat populo cum multa concursatione magnoque clamore. quod idem faciebat Q. Arrius, qui fuit M. Crassi quasi secundarum.

[242] At the same time there were the brothers C. and L. Caepasius, who, by much effort, unknown and upstart men, were quickly made quaestors, with a certain oppidan and uncomposed kind of speaking. Let us add here also, lest we seem to have passed over anyone vocal, C. Cosconius Calidianus, who with no acumen nevertheless supplied to the people whatever abundance of words he had, with much bustling to and fro and great clamor. The same thing was done by Q. Arrius, who was, as it were, M. Crassus’s man of the “seconds.”

is omnibus exemplo debet esse quantum in hac urbe polleat multorum oboedire tempori multorumque vel honori vel periculo servire.

He ought to be an example to all, of how powerful in this city it is to obey the timing of many, and to serve the honor or the peril of many.

[243] His enim rebus infimo loco natus et honores et pecuniam et gratiam consecutus etiam in patronorum—sine doctrina, sine ingenio—aliquem numerum pervenerat. sed ut pugiles inexercitati, etiam si pugnos et plagas Olympiorum cupidi ferre possunt, solemt amen saepe ferre non possunt, sic ille cum omni iam fortuna prospere functus labores etiam magnos excepisset, illius iudicialis anni severitatem quasi solem non tulit.

[243] For by these things, though born in the lowest station, having obtained both honors and money and favor, he had even come to be counted to some extent among the patrons—without learning, without natural talent. But just as untrained pugilists, even if, eager for the Olympian contests, they can bear fists and blows, yet often cannot endure the sun, so he, though now having fared prosperously with every turn of fortune and having undertaken even great labors, did not bear the severity of that judicial year, as if it were the sun.

[244] Tum Atticus: tu quidem de faece, inquit, hauris idque iam dudum, sed tacebam; hoc vero non putabam, te usque ad Staienos et Autronios esse venturum.

[244] Then Atticus: you indeed are drawing from the dregs, and have been for a long time now, but I was keeping silent; this, however, I did not suppose: that you would come even as far as the Staieni and the Autronii.

Non puto, inquam, existimare te ambitione me labi, quippe de mortuis; sed ordinem sequens in memoriam notam et aequalem necessario incurro. volo autem hoc perspici, omnibus conquisitis, qui in multitudine dicere ausi sint, memoria quidem dignos perpaucos , verum qui omnino nomen habuerint, non ita multos fuisse. sed ad sermonem institutum revertamur.

I do not think, I say, that you suppose me to slip through ambition, since I am dealing with the dead; but following the order, I necessarily run into a memory that is well-known and of the same age. I wish, however, this to be perceived: with everything searched out, of those who dared to speak before the multitude, those worthy of memory were very few , but those who had any name at all were not so many. but let us return to the instituted discourse.

[245] T. Torquatus T. f. et doctus vir ex Rhodia disciplina Molonis et a natura ad dicendum satis solutus atque expeditus, cui si vita suppeditavisset, sublato ambitu consul factus esset, plus facultatis habuit ad dicendum quam voluntatis. itaque studio hui c non satisfecit, officio vero nec in suorum necessariorum causis nec in sententia senatoria defuit.

[245] Titus Torquatus, son of Titus, and a learned man from the Rhodian discipline of Molon, and by nature for speaking sufficiently unbound and expeditious, to whom, if life had sufficed, with canvassing removed he would have been made consul, had more faculty for speaking than willingness. And so he did not satisfy this pursuit, but in duty he was not lacking, neither in the cases of his own intimates nor in delivering a senatorial opinion.

[246] Etiam M. Pontidius municeps noster multas privatas causas actitavit, celeriter sane verba volvens nec hebes in causis vel dicam plus etiam quam non hebes, sed effervescens in dicendo stomacho saepe iracundiaque vehementius; ut non cum adversario solum sed etiam, quod mirabile esset, cum iudice ipso, cuius delinitor esse debet orator, iurgio saepe contenderet. M. Messalla minor natu quam nos, nullo modo inops, sed non nimis ornatus genere verborum; prudens acutus, minime incautus patronus, in causis co gnoscendis componendisque diligens, magni laboris, multae operae multarumque causarum.

[246] Also M. Pontidius, our fellow-townsman, frequently pleaded many private causes, indeed rolling words swiftly and not dull in cases—or I would even say more than merely not dull—but in speaking effervescent in temper and often with too vehement irascibility; so that he would often contend in quarrel not only with the adversary but also, which was remarkable, with the judge himself, whose soother the orator ought to be. M. Messalla, younger by birth than we, in no way lacking, but not overly ornate in his style of words; prudent, acute, by no means incautious as a patron, diligent in getting to know and composing cases, a man of great labor, much work, and many causes.

[247] Duo etiam Metelli, Celer et Nepos nihil in causis versati nec sine ingenio nec indocti hoc erant populare dicendi genus adsecuti. Cn. autem Lentulus Marcellinus nec umquam indisertus et in consulatu pereloquens visus est, non tardus sententiis, non in ops verbis, voce canora, facetus satis. C. Memmius L. f. perfectus litteris sed Graecis, fastidiosus sane Latinarum, argutus orator verbisque dulcis, sed fugiens non modo dicendi verum etiam cogitandi laborem, tantum sibi de facultate detraxit quantum imm inuit industriae.

[247] The two Metelli as well, Celer and Nepos, engaged in no causes, neither without ingenium nor unlearned, had attained this popular genus of speaking. Cn. Lentulus Marcellinus, moreover, was never ineloquent, and in his consulship seemed very eloquent, not slow in sententiae, not poor in words, with a canorous voice, sufficiently facetious. C. Memmius L. f., perfect in letters but Greek ones, decidedly fastidious of Latin letters, a shrewd orator and sweet in words, but fleeing not only the labor of speaking but even of thinking, detracted from his own faculty as much as he diminished from his industry.

[248] Hoc loco Brutus: quam vellem, inquit, de his etiam oratoribus qui hodie sunt tibi dicere luberet; et si de aliis minus, de duobus tamen quos a te scio laudari solere, Caesare et Marcello, audirem non minus lubenter quam audivi de iis qui fuerunt.

[248] At this point Brutus: "How I would wish," he says, "that it might please you to speak about these orators too who are today; and if less about others, yet about the two whom I know are wont to be praised by you, Caesar and Marcellus, I would listen no less gladly than I have listened about those who were."

Cur tandem? inquam; an exspectas quid ego iudicem de istis qui tibi sunt aeque noti ac mihi?

Why, pray? I say; or do you expect what I judge about those who are as well known to you as to me?

Mihi mehercule, inquit, Marcellus satis est notus, Caesar autem parum; illum enim saepe audivi, hic, cum ego iudicare iam aliquid possem, afuit.

By Hercules, says he, Marcellus is sufficiently known to me, but Caesar too little; for I have often heard the former, while the latter, when I already could judge something, was absent.

[249] Quid igitur de illo iudicas quem saepe audisti?

[249] What then do you judge of him whom you have often heard?

Quid censes, inquit, nisi id quod habiturus es similem tui?

What do you suppose, he said, except that you are going to have one similar to yourself?

Ne ego, inquam, si itast, velim tibi eum placere quam maxume.

Indeed I, I say, if that is so, would wish him to please you as much as possible.

Atqui et ita est, inquit, et vementer placet; nec vero sine causa. nam et didicit et omissis ceteris studiis unum id egit seseque cotidianis commentationibus acerrume exercuit.

And indeed so it is, he says, and it pleases exceedingly; nor indeed without cause. For he both learned, and, the other studies set aside, pursued that one thing, and trained himself most keenly by quotidian commentations.

[250] Itaque et lectis utitur verbis et frequentibus <sententis>, splendore vocis, dignitate motus fit speciosum et inlustre quod dicitur, omniaque sic suppetunt, ut ei nullam deesse virtutem oratoris putem; maxumeque laudandus est, qui hoc tempore ipso, cum liceat in hoc communi nostro et quasi fatali malo, consoletur se cum conscientia optumae mentis tum etiam usurpatione et renovatione doctrinae. vidi enim Mytilenis nuper virum atque, ut dixi, vidi plane virum. itaque cum eum antea tui similem in dicendo viderim, tum vero nunc a doctissimo viro tibique, ut intellexi, amicissimo Cratippo instructum omni copia multo videbam similiorem.

[250] Therefore he employs both selected words and frequent maxims; by the splendor of his voice and the dignity of his movement, what is said becomes splendid and illustrious, and all things are so at hand that I think no virtue of the orator is lacking to him; and he is most to be praised who, at this very time—since it is permitted, in this our common and, as it were, fated evil—consoles himself both with the conscience of a most excellent mind and also with the exercise and renewal of doctrine. For I saw at Mytilene recently a man, and, as I said, I plainly saw a man. And so, although I had formerly seen him like you in speaking, yet now, equipped with every resource by the most learned man Cratippus—most friendly to you, as I understood—I saw him much more similar.

[251] Hic ego: etsi, inquam, de optumi viri nobisque amicissimi laudibus lubenter audio, tamen incurro in memoriam communium miseriarum, quarum oblivionem quaerens hunc ipsum sermonem produxi longius. sed de Caesare cupio audire quid tandem Atticus iudicet.

[251] Here I: although, I say, I gladly hear the praises of a most excellent man and our very dearest friend, nevertheless I run into the memory of our common miseries, seeking the oblivion of which I have prolonged this very discourse farther. But about Caesar I desire to hear what, after all, Atticus judges.

Et ille: praeclare, inquit, tibi constas, ut de iis qui nunc sint nihil velis ipse dicere; et hercule si sic ageres, ut de iis egisti qui iam mortui sunt, neminem ut praetermitteres, ne tu in multos Autronios et Staienos incurreres. quare sive hanc turbam effugere voluisti sive veritus <es> ne quis se aut praeteritum aut non satis laudatum queri posset, de Caesare tamen potuisti dicere, praesertim cum et tuum de illius ingenio notissimum iudicium esset nec illius de tuo obscurum.

And he: “Excellently,” he says, “you are consistent with yourself, in that you yourself wish to say nothing about those who are now alive; and, by Hercules, if you were to proceed as you did about those who are already dead, so as to pass over no one, you would run into many an Autronius and a Staienus. Wherefore, whether you wished to escape this crowd or were afraid lest someone could complain that he had been either passed over or not sufficiently praised, you could nevertheless have spoken about Caesar, especially since both your judgment about his ingenium was very well-known and his about yours was not obscure.”

[252] Sed tamen, Brute, inquit Atticus, de Caesare et ipse ita iudico et de hoc huius generis acerrumo existimatore saepissume audio, illum omnium fere oratorum Latine loqui elegantissume; nec id solum domestica consuetudine ut dudum de Laeliorum et Muciorum familiis audiebamus, sed quamquam id quoque credo fuisse, tamen, ut esset perfecta illa bene loquendi laus, multis litteris et iis quidem reconditis et exquisitis summoque studio et diligentia est consecutus:

[252] But still, Brutus, said Atticus, both I myself so judge about Caesar and I very often hear from this most acute estimator of this kind, that he, of almost all orators, speaks Latin most elegantly; and not that alone by domestic custom, as we used to hear formerly about the families of the Laelii and the Mucii—though I believe that too was the case—yet, in order that that praise of speaking well might be perfected, he has attained it by many letters, and those indeed recondite and exquisite, and by the highest zeal and diligence:

[253] Qui[n] etiam in maxumis occupationibus ad te ipsum, inquit in me intuens, de ratione Latine loquendi accuratissume scripserit primoque in libro dixerit verborum dilectum originem esse eloquentiae tribueritque, mi Brute, huic nostro, qui me de illo maluit quam se dicere, laudem singularem; nam scripsit his verbis, cum hunc nomine esset adfatus: ac si, cogitata praeclare eloqui <ut> possent, nonnulli studio et usu elaboraverunt, cuius te paene principem copiae atque inventorem bene de nomine ac dignitate populi Romani meritum esse existumare debemus: hunc facilem et cotidianum novisse sermonem nunc pro relicto est habendum?

[253] Nay even amid the greatest occupations he wrote to you yourself, he said—looking upon me—most accurately on the method of speaking Latin; and in the first book he said that the selection of words is the origin of eloquence, and he ascribed, my Brutus, to this friend of ours—who preferred that I speak about him rather than he himself—a singular commendation. For he wrote in these words, when he had addressed this man by name: “And since some, by study and use, have worked it out that they might be able to utter splendidly the things well thought out, we ought to consider you almost the chief in abundance and the inventor, one who has deserved well of the name and dignity of the Roman people.” Is the knowing of this easy and everyday speech now to be accounted as something abandoned?

[254] Tum Brutus: amice hercule, inquit, et magnifice te laudatum puto, quem non solum principem atque inventorem copiae dixerit, quae erat magna laus, sed etiam bene meritum de populi Romani nomine et dignitate. quo enim uno vincebamur a victa Graecia, id aut ereptum illis est aut certe nobis cum illis communicatum.

[254] Then Brutus: “By Hercules, my friend,” he said, “and I think you have been praised magnificently—you, whom he said not only the chief and inventor of copiousness (which was a great praise), but also as having deserved well of the name and dignity of the Roman people. For in that one thing by which we were outdone by conquered Greece, that either has been snatched from them, or at any rate has been made common to us with them.”

[255] Hanc autem, inquit, gloriam testimoniumque Caesaris tuae quidem supplicationi non, sed triumphis multorum antepono.

[255] “This glory, however,” he said, “and Caesar’s testimony I set not above your supplication, to be sure, but above the triumphs of many.”

Et recte quidem, inquam, Brute; modo sit hoc Caesaris iudici, non benevolentiae testimonium. plus enim certe adtulit huic populo dignitatis quisquis est ille, si modo est aliquis, qui non inlustravit modo sed etiam genuit in hac urbe dicendi copiam, quam illi qui Ligurum castella expugnaverunt: ex quibus multi sunt, ut scitis, triumphi.

And rightly indeed, I say, Brutus; only let this be a testimony of Caesar’s judgment, not of benevolence. For he certainly has brought more dignity to this people—whoever that man is, if indeed there is someone—who not only illustrated but also generated in this city a copiousness of speaking, than those who stormed the strongholds of the Ligurians: of which, as you know, there are many triumphs.

[256] Verum quidem si audire volumus, omissis illis divinis consiliis, quibus saepe constituta est imperatorum sapientia salus civitatis aut belli aut domi, multo magnus orator praestat minutis imperatoribus. 'at prodest plus imperator.' quis negat? sed tam en—non metuo ne mihi adclametis; est autem quod sentias dicendi liber locus—malim mihi L. Crassi unam pro M'. Curio dictionem quam castellanos triumphos duo.

[256] But indeed, if we are willing to hear the truth, leaving aside those divine counsels by which often by the wisdom of imperators the safety of the commonwealth has been established, whether in war or at home, by far a great orator surpasses petty imperators. 'But the imperator profits more.' Who denies it? Yet even so—I do not fear that you will shout your applause to me; and this is a free place for saying what one feels—I would rather have for myself one pleading of L. Crassus on behalf of M'. Curius than two triumphs over little forts.

'at plus interfuit rei publicae castellum capi Ligurum quam bene defendi causam M'.Curi'.

'but it mattered more to the Republic that a stronghold of the Ligurians be taken than that the case of M'. Curius be well defended.'

[257] Credo; sed Atheniensium quoque plus interfuit firma tecta in domiciliis habere quam Minervae signum ex ebore pulcherrimum; tamen ego me Phidiam esse mallem quam vel optumum fabrum tignuarium. quare non quantum quisque prosit, sed quanti quisque sit ponderandum est; praesertim cum pauci pingere egregie possint aut fingere, operarii autem aut baiuli deesse non possint.

[257] I believe; but it also was more to the interest of the Athenians to have firm roofs in their dwellings than a most beautiful statue of Minerva made of ivory; yet I would rather be Phidias than even the best carpenter. Wherefore it must be weighed not how much each person may be of use, but how much each person is; especially since few can paint excellently or model, whereas laborers and porters cannot be lacking.

[258] Sed perge, Pomponi, de Caesare et redde quae restant.

[258] But proceed, Pomponius, about Caesar and render what remains.

Solum quidem, inquit ille, et quasi fundamentum oratoris vides locutionem emendatam et Latinam, cuius penes quos laus adhuc fuit, non fuit rationis aut scientiae sed quasi bonae consuetudinis. mitto C. Laelium P. Scipionem: aetatis illius ista fuit laus tamquam innocentiae sic Latine loquendi—nec omnium tamen; nam illorum aequales Caecilium et Pacuvium male locutos videmus —: sed omnes tum fere, qui nec extra urbem hanc vixerant neque eos aliqua barbaries domestica infuscaverat, recte loquebantur. sed hanc certe rem deteriorem vetustas fecit et Romae et in Graecia.

“Only, indeed,” said he, “and, as it were, the foundation of the orator, you see a corrected and Latin locution, whose praise, among those in whose hands it has been up to now, was not of reason or of science but, as it were, of good custom. I pass over C. Laelius and P. Scipio: of that age this was the praise, just as of innocence, so of speaking Latin — yet not of all; for we see Caecilius and Pacuvius, their equals, to have spoken badly —: but then almost all, who had neither lived outside this city nor had some domestic barbarism darkened them, spoke rightly. But certainly antiquity has made this thing worse both at Rome and in Greece.”

confluxerunt enim et Athenas et in hanc urbem multi inquinate loquentes ex diversis locis. quo magis expurgandus est sermo et adhibenda tamquam obrussa ratio, quae mutari non potest, nec utendum pravissima consuetudinis regula.

For many, speaking in a defiled manner, have confluxed both to Athens and to this city from diverse places. Wherefore all the more must speech be expurgated, and a criterion, as a touchstone, be applied, which cannot be altered, and the most depraved rule of custom must not be used.

[259] T. Flamininum, qui cum Q. Metello consul fuit, pueri vidimus: existumabatur bene Latine, sed litteras nesciebat. Catulus erat ille quidem minime indoctus, ut a te paulo est ante dictum, sed tamen suavitas vocis et lenis appellatio litterarum bene loquendi famam confecerat. Cotta, qui se valde dilatandis litteris a similitudine Graecae locutionis abstraxerat sonabatque contrarium Catulo, subagreste quiddam planeque subrusticum, alia quidem quasi inculta et silvestri via ad eandem laudem pervenerat.

[259] T. Flamininus, who was consul with Q. Metellus, we saw as boys: he was thought to speak good Latin, but he did not know letters. Catulus was indeed by no means unlearned, as was said by you a little before, but nevertheless the sweetness of his voice and the gentle pronunciation of the letters had constructed his reputation for speaking well. Cotta, who by greatly dilating the letters had withdrawn himself from the likeness of Greek locution and sounded the contrary of Catulus—something somewhat countrified and plainly sub-rustic—had by another path, as it were uncultivated and sylvan, arrived at the same praise.

Sisenna autem quasi emendator sermonis usitati cum esse vellet, ne a C. Rusio quidem accusatore deterreri potuit quominus inusitatis verbis uteretur.

Sisenna, however, although he wished to be, as it were, a corrector of the customary speech, could not be deterred, not even by the accuser Gaius Rusius, from using unusual words.

[260] Quidnam istuc est? inquit Brutus, aut quis est iste C. Rusius?

[260] What, pray, is that? said Brutus, or who is this C. Rusius?

Et ille: fuit accusator, inquit, vetus, quo accusante C. Hirtilium Sisenna defendens dixit quaedam eius sputatilica esse crimina. tum C. Rusius: 'circumvenior, inquit, iudices, nisi subvenitis. Sisenna quid dicat nescio; metuo insidias.

And he: he was an accuser, he said, a veteran; when he was prosecuting C. Hirtilius, Sisenna, defending, said that some of his charges were sputatilic. Then C. Rusius: 'I am being circumvented, he said, judges, unless you come to the rescue. I do not know what Sisenna says; I fear insidious plots.

sputatilica, quid est hoc? sputa quid sit scio, tilica nescio.' maxumi risus; sed ille tamen familiaris meus recte loqui putabat esse inusitate loqui.

'sputatilica, what is this? I know what spittle is; I do not know tilica.' the greatest laughter; but that friend of mine nevertheless thought that to speak rightly was to speak in an unusual way.

[261] Caesar autem rationem adhibens consuetudinem vitiosam et corruptam pura et incorrupta consuetudine emendat. itaque cum ad hanc elegantiam verborum Latinorum—quae, etiam si orator non sis et sis ingenuus civis Romanus, tamen necessaria est—adiungit illa oratoria ornamenta dicendi, tum videtur tamquam tabulas bene pictas conlocare in bono lumine. hanc cum habeat praecipuam laudem in communibus, non video cui debeat cedere.

[261] But Caesar, employing reason, emends vicious and corrupt usage by pure and incorrupt usage. And so, when to this elegance of Latin words—which, even if you are not an orator and are a freeborn Roman citizen, is nevertheless necessary—he adds those oratorical ornaments of speaking, then he seems as if to set well‑painted panels in good light. Since he has this as his preeminent praise among common qualities, I do not see to whom he ought to yield.

splendidam quandam minimeque veteratoriam rationem dicendi tenet, voce motu forma etiam magnificam et generosam quodam modo.

he possesses a certain splendid and by no means crafty manner of speaking, magnificent and in some way generous in voice, motion, and even form.

[262] Tum Brutus: orationes quidem eius mihi vehementer probantur. compluris autem legi; atque etiam commentarios quosdam scripsit rerum suarum.

[262] Then Brutus: his orations indeed are vehemently approved by me. Moreover, I have read several; and he even wrote certain commentaries on his own affairs.

Valde quidem, inquam, probandos; nudi enim sunt, recti et venusti, omni ornatu orationis tamquam veste detracta. sed dum voluit alios habere parata, unde sumerent qui vellent scribere historiam, ineptis gratum fortasse fecit, qui volent illa calamistris inurere: sanos quidem homines a scribendo deterruit; nihil est enim in historia pura et inlustri brevitate dulcius. sed ad eos, si placet, qui vita excesserunt, revertamur.

“Indeed,” said I, “much to be approved; for they are naked, straight and charming, with every ornament of speech, as if a garment, stripped off. But while he wished others to have things prepared, from which those who wanted to write history might take, he perhaps did a kindness to the inept, who will want to sear those things with curling-irons; he did, however, deter sane men from writing; for nothing in history is sweeter than pure and illustrious brevity. But let us return, if it please, to those who have departed this life.”

[263] C. Sicinius igitur Q. Pompei illius, qui censor fuit, ex filia nepos quaestorius mortuus est; probabilis orator, iam vero etiam probatus, ex hac inopi ad ornandum, sed ad inveniendum expedita Hermagorae disciplina. ea dat rationes certas et praecepta dicendi; quae si minorem habent apparatum—sunt enim exilia —, tamen habent ordinem et quasdam errare in dicendo non patientes vias. has ille tenens et paratus ad causas veniens, verborum non egens, ipsa illa comparatione disciplinaque dicendi iam in patronorum numerum pervenerat.

[263] Gaius Sicinius, therefore, the grandson through a daughter of that Quintus Pompeius who was censor, died a man of quaestorian rank; a credible orator, indeed by now even a proven one, formed by that Hermagorean discipline which is poor for ornamentation but expeditious for invention. It gives sure methods and precepts of speaking; which, if they have a smaller apparatus—for they are meager—yet they have order and certain ways that do not allow one to err in speaking. Holding these and coming prepared to cases, not being in need of words, by that very arrangement and discipline of speaking he had already come into the number of patroni (advocates).

[264] Erat etiam vir doctus in primis C. Visellius Varro consobrinus meus, qui fuit cum Sicinio aetate coniunctus. is cum post curulem aedilitatem iudex quaestionis esset, est mortuus; in quo fateor volgi iudicium a iudicio meo dissensisse. nam populo non erat satis vendibilis: praeceps quaedam et cum idcirco obscura, quia peracuta, tum rapida et celeritate caecata oratio; sed neque verbis aptiorem cito alium dixerim neque sententiis crebriorem.

[264] There was also a learned man among the foremost, Gaius Visellius Varro, my cousin, who was joined in age with Sicinius. He, when after the curule aedileship he was judge of a quaestio, died; in which matter I confess the judgment of the crowd differed from my own judgment. For he was not sufficiently marketable to the people: a certain headlong, and therefore obscure—because very sharp—then rapid and blinded-by-speed way of speaking; yet I could quickly name no other more apt in words nor more frequent in sentences.

praeterea perfectus in litteris iurisque civilis iam a patre Aculeone traditam tenuit disciplinam.

Moreover, perfect in letters and in civil law, he held to the discipline already transmitted by his father Aculeo.

[265] Reliqui sunt, qui mortui sint, L. Torquatus, quem tu non tam cito rhetorem dixisses, etsi non derat oratio, quam, ut Graeci dicunt, politikon. erant in eo plurumae litterae nec eae volgares, sed interiores quaedam et reconditae, divina memoria, summa verborum et gravitas et elegantia; atque haec omnia vitae decorabat gravitas et integritas. me quidem admodum delectabat etiam Triari in illa aetate plena litteratae senectutis oratio. quanta severitas in voltu, quantum pondus in verbis, quam nihil non consideratum exibat ex ore!.

[265] There remain those who have died: L. Torquatus, whom you would not so quickly have called a rhetor, although oration was not lacking, as rather, as the Greeks say, politikon. There were in him very many letters, and not those vulgar, but certain inner and recondite, a divine memory, the utmost gravity in words and elegance; and all these things his life adorned by gravity and integrity. I, for my part, was greatly delighted also by the oration of Triarius, in that age full of lettered old age. How much severity in his countenance, how much weight in his words, how nothing unconsidered went forth from his mouth!.

[266] Tum Brutus Torquati et Triari mentione commotus—utrumque enim eorum admodum dilexerat —: ne ego, inquit, ut omittam cetera quae sunt innumerabilia, de istis duobus cum cogito, doleo nihil tuam perpetuam auctoritatem de pace valuisse. nam nec istos excellentis viros nec multos alios praestantis civis res publica perdidisset. Sileamus, inquam, Brute, de istis, ne augeamus dolorem.

[266] Then Brutus, moved at the mention of Torquatus and Triarius—for he had exceedingly cherished each of them —: indeed I, he says, so that I may omit the rest which are innumerable, when I think about these two, I grieve that your perpetual authority concerning peace has availed nothing. For neither these outstanding men nor many other excellent citizens would the commonwealth have lost. Let us be silent, I said, Brutus, about those men, lest we increase our grief.

nam et praeteritorum recordatio est acerba et acerbior exspectatio reliquorum. itaque omittamus lugere et tantum quid quisque dicendo potuerit, quoniam id quaerimus, praedicemus.

for both the recollection of past things is bitter, and the expectation of the remaining things is more bitter. therefore let us cease from lamenting, and let us proclaim only how much each person has been able by speaking, since that is what we seek.

[267] Sunt etiam ex iis, qui eodem bello occiderunt, M. Bibulus, qui et scriptitavit accurate, cum praesertim non esset orator, et egit multa constanter; Appius Claudius socer tuus, conlega et familiaris meus: hic iam et satis studiosus et valde cum doctus tum etiam exercitatus orator et cum auguralis tum omnis publici iuris antiquitatisque nostrae bene peritus fuit. L. Domitius nulla ille quidem arte, sed Latine tamen et multa cum libertate dicebat.

[267] There are also among those who fell in the same war M. Bibulus, who both wrote accurately—especially as he was not an orator—and conducted many matters with constancy; Appius Claudius, your father-in-law, my colleague and familiar friend: this man was both sufficiently studious and, not only very learned but also practiced as an orator, and well-versed both in augural and in all public law and in our antiquity. L. Domitius, indeed by no art, yet spoke in Latin and with much freedom.

[268] duo praeterea Lentuli consulares, quorum Pu blius ille nostrarum iniuriarum ultor, auctor salutis, quicquid habuit, quantumcumque fuit, illud totum habuit e disciplina; instrumenta naturae derant; sed tantus animi splendor et tanta magnitudo, ut sibi omnia, quae clarorum virorum essent, non dubitaret asciscere eaque omni dignitate obtineret. L. autem Lentulus satis erat fortis orator, si modo orator, sed cogitandi non ferebat laborem; vox canora, verba non horrida sane, ut plena esset animi et terroris oratio; quaereres in iudiciis fortasse melius, in re publica quod erat esse iudicares satis.

[268] two, moreover, of the Lentuli of consular rank, of whom that Pu blius, the avenger of our injuries, the author of salvation—whatever he had, however much it was, he had all that from discipline; the instruments of nature were lacking; but such greatness and such a splendor of mind, that he did not hesitate to appropriate to himself all things which belong to renowned men, and he held them with every dignity. L. moreover Lentulus was a sufficiently courageous orator, if indeed an orator, but he did not endure the labor of cogitating; a sonorous voice, words assuredly not rough, so that the speech was full of spirit and of terror; you would perhaps seek him rather in the courts; in public affairs you would judge what he was to be sufficient.

[269] Ne T. quidem Postumius contemnendus in dicendo; de re publica vero non minus vemens orator quam bellator fuit, effrenatus et acer nimis, sed bene iuris publici leges atque instituta cognoverat.

[269] Nor indeed was T. Postumius to be contemned in speaking; in the Republic, moreover, he was no less a vehement orator than a man of war, unbridled and too keen, but he had well come to know the laws and institutes of public law.

Hoc loco Atticus: putarem te, inquit, ambitiosum esse, si, ut dixisti, ii quos iam diu conligis viverent. omnis enim commemoras, qui ausi aliquando sunt stantes loqui, ut mihi imprudens M. Servilium praeterisse videare.

At this point Atticus: “I would think you ambitious,” he says, “if, as you said, those whom you have long been collecting were alive. For you commemorate all who have ever dared to speak standing, so that to me you seem unwittingly to have passed over M. Servilius.”

[270] Non, inquam, ego istuc ignoro, Pomponi, multos fuisse, qui verbum numquam in publico fecissent, quom melius aliquanto possent quam isti oratores, quos colligo, dicere; sed his commemorandis etiam illud adsequor, ut intellegatis primum ex omni numero q uam non multi ausi sint dicere, deinde ex iis ipsis quam pauci fuerint laude digni.

[270] No, I say, I am not unaware of that, Pomponius, that there have been many who never uttered a word in public, though they could speak considerably better than those orators whom I am collecting; but by commemorating these I also achieve this: that you may understand, first, from the whole number how not many dared to speak, then from those very men how few were worthy of praise.

[271] Itaque ne hos quidem equites Romanos amicos nostros, qui nuper mortui sunt, <omittam,> P. Cominium Spoletinum, quo accusante defendi C. Cornelium, in quo et compositum dicendi genus et acre et expeditum fuit; T. Accium Pisaurensem, cuius accusationi r espondi pro A. Cluentio, qui et accurate dicebat et satis copiose, eratque praeterea doctus Hermagorae praeceptis, quibus etsi ornamenta non satis opima dicendi, tamen, ut hastae velitibus amentatae, sic apta quaedam et parata singulis causarum generibus argumenta traduntur.

[271] And so not even these Roman knights, our friends, who have lately died, <I will not omit,> P. Cominius of Spoletium, at whose accusation I defended C. Cornelius, in whom there was both a composed manner of speaking and a sharp and unencumbered one; T. Accius of Pisaurum, to whose accusation I responded on behalf of A. Cluentius, who spoke both accurately and sufficiently copiously, and was besides learned in the precepts of Hermagoras, by which, although they furnish not ornaments of speech sufficiently opulent, nevertheless, as spears for the velites furnished with thongs, so certain apt and prepared arguments are handed down for the several kinds of causes.

[272] Studio autem neminem nec industria maiore cognovi, quamquam ne ingenio quidem qui praestiterit facile dixerim C. Pisoni, genero meo. nullum tempus illi umquam vacabat aut a forensi dictione aut a commentatione domestica aut a scribendo aut a cogitando. itaque tantos processus efficiebat ut evolare, non excurrere videretur; eratque verborum et dilectus elegans et apta et quasi rotunda constructio; cumque argumenta excogitabantur ab eo multa et firma ad probandum tum concinnae acutaeque sententiae; gestusque natura ita venustus, ut ars etiam, quae non erat, et e disciplina motus quidam videretur accedere.

[272] In zeal, however, I have known no one, nor in industry greater—although I would not easily say that anyone even in natural talent excelled—than Gaius Piso, my son‑in‑law. No time was ever free to him either from forensic speaking or from domestic commentation, or from writing or from thinking. And so great were the advances he achieved that he seemed to fly forth, not merely to run; and both the selection of words was elegant and the construction apt and, as it were, rounded; and while many arguments were excogitated by him, firm for proving, there were also neat and sharp sentences; and his gesture was by nature so graceful that art too—which was not there—and certain movements from discipline seemed to be added.

vereor ne amore videar plura quam fuerint in illo dicere; quod non ita est: alia enim de illo maiora dici possunt. nam nec continentia nec pietate nec ullo genere virtutis quemquam eiusdem aetatis cum illo conferendum puto.

I fear lest, out of affection, I may seem to say more than there were in him; which is not so: for other, greater things about him can be said. For neither in continence nor in piety nor in any genus of virtue do I think anyone of the same age to be compared with him.

[273] Nec vero M. Caelium praetereundum arbitror, quaecumque eius in exitu vel fortuna vel mens fuit; qui quamdiu auctoritati meae paruit, talis tribunus plebis fuit, ut nemo contra civium perditorum popularem turbulentamque dementiam a senatu et a bonorum causa steterit constantius. quam eius actionem multum tamen et splendida et grandis et eadem in primis faceta et perurbana commendabat oratio. graves eius contiones aliquot fuerunt, acres accusationes tres eaeque omnes ex rei publicae contentione susceptae; defensiones, etsi illa erant in eo meliora quae dixi, non contemnendae tamen saneque tolerabiles.

[273] Nor indeed do I think M. Caelius should be passed over, whatever either his fortune or his mind was at the end; for so long as he obeyed my authority, he was such a tribune of the plebs that no one stood more steadfastly with the senate and the cause of the good men against the popular and turbulent dementia of ruined citizens. And his oration, brilliant and grand, and at the same time exceptionally witty and very urbane, greatly commended that course of action. He had several weighty public addresses, and three keen prosecutions, all of them undertaken from a contention for the commonwealth; his defenses, although those qualities which I have mentioned were better in him, were nevertheless not to be despised and indeed quite tolerable.

hic cum summa voluntate bonorum aedilis curulis factus esset, nescio quomodo discessu meo discessit a sese ceciditque, posteaquam eos imitari coepit quos ipse perverterat.

this man, when he had been made curule aedile with the fullest goodwill of the good, somehow upon my departure departed from himself and fell, after he began to imitate those whom he himself had overthrown.

[274] Sed de M. Calidio dicamus aliquid, qui non fuit orator unus e multis, potius inter multos prope singularis fuit: ita reconditas exquisitasque sententias mollis et pellucens vestiebat oratio. nihil tam tenerum quam illius comprensio verborum, nihil tam flexibile, nihil quod magis ipsius arbitrio fingeretur, ut nullius oratoris aeque in potestate fuerit: quae primum ita pura erat ut nihil liquidius, ita libere fluebat ut nusquam adhaeresceret; nullum nisi loco positum et tamquam in vermiculato emblemate, ut ait Lucilius, structum verbum videres; nec vero ullum aut durum aut insolens aut humile aut [in] longius ductum; ac non propria verba rerum, sed pleraque translata, sic tamen, ut ea non inruisse in alienum locum, sed immigrasse in suum diceres; nec vero haec soluta nec diffluentia, sed astricta numeris, non aperte nec eodem modo semper, sed varie dissimulanterque conclusis.

[274] But let us say something about M. Calidius, who was not one orator among many; rather, among many he was well-nigh singular: so did a soft and pellucid speech clothe his recondite and exquisite thoughts. Nothing was so tender as his handling of words, nothing so flexible, nothing more shaped at his own discretion, so that it was in the power of no orator equally: which in the first place was so pure that nothing was more liquid, and it flowed so freely that it adhered nowhere; you would see no word except set in its place and, as in a vermiculated emblem, as Lucilius says, constructed; nor indeed any word either harsh or unwonted or humble or drawn out to too great a length; and not words proper to the things, but for the most part transferred, yet in such a way that you would say they had not rushed into an alien place, but had migrated into their own; nor indeed were these loose or running off, but bound by numbers, not openly nor always in the same way, but with closes varied and dissembling.

[275] Erant autem et verborum et sententiarum illa lumina, quae vocant Graeci schemata, quibus tamquam insignibus in ornatu distinguebatur omnis oratio. 'qua de re agitur' autem illud, quod multis locis in iuris consultorum includitur formulis, id ubi esset videbat.

[275] Moreover, there were those lights both of words and of sentences, which the Greeks call schemata, by which, as by insignia in ornament, the whole oration was distinguished. 'qua de re agitur,' however—that phrase which in many places is included in the formulas of the jurisconsults—he saw where it lay.

[276] Accedebat ordo rerum plenus artis, actio liberalis totumque dicendi placidum et sanum genus. quod si est optumum suaviter dicere, nihil est quod melius hoc quaerendum putes. sed cum a nobis paulo ante dictum sit tria videri esse quae orator efficere deberet, ut doceret, ut delectaret, ut moveret, duo summe tenuit, ut et rem inlustraret disserendo et animos eorum qui audirent devinciret voluptate; aberat tertia illa laus, qua permoveret atque incitaret animos, quam plurumum pollere diximus; nec erat ulla vis atque contentio: sive consilio, quod eos quorum altior oratio actioque esset ardentior furere et bacchari arbitraretur, sive quod natura non esset ita factus sive quod non consuesset sive quod non posset.

[276] There was added an order of matters full of art, a liberal delivery, and an altogether placid and sound kind of speaking. And if it is the optimum thing to speak suavely, there is nothing that you would think better to be sought than this. But since a little before it was said by us that there seem to be three things which an orator ought to effect—to teach, to delight, to move—he supremely held two: both to illustrate the matter by discoursing and to bind fast the minds of those who heard by pleasure; the third praise was absent, by which he would move and incite souls, which we said to have the most power; nor was there any force or contention: whether by design, because he judged those whose speech was loftier and whose delivery more ardent to rave and to bacchate, or because by nature he was not so made, or because he was not accustomed, or because he was not able.

hoc unum illi, si nihil utilitatis habebat, afuit; si opus erat, defuit.

This one thing in him—if it had no utility, it was absent; if there was need, it was wanting.

[277] Quin etiam memini, cum in accusatione sua Q. Gallio crimini dedisset sibi eum venenum paravisse idque a se esse deprensum seseque chirographa testificationes indicia quaestiones manifestam rem deferre diceret deque eo crimine accurate et exquisite disputavisset, me in respondendo, cum essem argumentatus quantum res ferebat, hoc ipsum etiam posuisse pro argumento, quod ille, cum pestem capitis sui, cum indicia mortis se comperisse manifesto et manu tenere diceret, tam solute egisset, tam leniter, tam oscitanter.

[277] Nay, I even remember that, when in his prosecution Q. Gallius had imputed as a crimen that he had prepared poison for him, and that this had been detected by himself, and said that he was bringing forward a manifest case with chirographs, testimonies, indicia, interrogations, and after he had disputed about that charge accurately and exquisitely, I, in replying, when I had argued as far as the matter bore, also put forth this very point as an argument: that he, when he said he had ascertained the bane of his life, the tokens of death, plainly and had them in his very hand, had conducted himself so loosely, so gently, so drowsily.

[278] 'Tu istuc, M. Calidi, nisi fingeres, sic ageres? praesertim cum ista eloquentia alienorum hominum pericula defendere acerrume soleas, tuum neglegeres? ubi dolor, ubi ardor animi, qui etiam ex infantium ingeniis elicere voces et querelas solet?

[278] 'Would you, M. Calidius, act thus unless you were feigning that? especially when, with that eloquence of yours, you are most keenly accustomed to defend the perils of other men, would you neglect your own? where is the pain, where the ardor of spirit, that is even wont to elicit voices and complaints from the dispositions of infants?

nulla perturbatio animi, nulla corporis, frons non percussa, non femur; pedis, quod minimum est, nulla supplosio. itaque tantum afuit ut inflammares nostros animos, somnum isto loco vix tenebamus.' sic nos summi oratoris vel sanitate vel vitio pro argumento ad diluendum crimen usi sumus.

no perturbation of mind, none of body, the brow not struck, nor the thigh; of the foot, which is the least, no stamping. and so far was it from the case that you inflamed our animus, we were scarcely keeping sleep at bay at that point.' thus we used either the soundness or the fault of a consummate orator as an argument for diluting the charge.

[279] Tum Brutus: atque dubitamus, inquit, utrum ista sanitas fuerit an vitium? quis enim non fateatur, cum ex omnibus oratoris laudibus longe ista sit maxuma, inflammare animos audientium et quocumque res postulet modo flectere, qui hac virtute caruerit, id ei quod maxumum fuerit defuisse?

[279] Then Brutus: and do we hesitate, he says, whether that was soundness or a vice? For who would not acknowledge that, since out of all the praises of an orator this is by far the greatest, to inflame the spirits of the hearers and to bend them in whatever way the matter demands, he who has lacked this virtue has had lacking to him that which was the greatest?

Sit sane ita, inquam; sed redeamus ad eum, qui iam unus restat, Hortensium; tum de nobismet ipsis, quoniam id etiam, Brute, postulas, pauca dicemus. quamquam facienda mentio est, ut quidem mihi videtur, duorum adulescentium, qui si diutius vixissent, magnam essent eloquentiae laudem consecuti.

Let it be so indeed, I say; but let us return to him who now alone remains, Hortensius; then about our very selves, since you also, Brutus, request that, we will say a few things. And yet mention must be made, as indeed it seems to me, of two young men who, if they had lived longer, would have attained great laud of eloquence.

[280] C. Curionem te, inquit Brutus, et C. Licinium Calvum arbitror dicere.

[280] C. Curio, says Brutus, and C. Licinius Calvus I suppose you to be speaking of.

Recte, inquam, arbitraris; quorum quidem alter [quod verisimile dixisset] ita facile soluteque verbis volvebat satis interdum acutas, crebras quidem certe sententias, ut nihil posset ornatius esse, nihil expeditius. atque hic parum a magistris institutus naturam habuit admirabilem ad dicendum; industriam non sum expertus, studium certe fuit. qui si me audire voluisset, ut coeperat, honores quam opes consequi maluisset.

Rightly, I say, you judge; of whom indeed the one [as he would likely have said] was rolling out words so easily and unbound, and at times quite sharp, certainly frequent sentences, that nothing could be more ornate, nothing more expeditious. And this man, too little instructed by teachers, had a marvelous nature for speaking; I have not made trial of his industry, zeal certainly was there. Who, if he had been willing to listen to me, as he had begun, would have preferred to acquire honors rather than wealth.

Quidnam est, inquit, istuc? et quem ad modum distinguis?

What, pray, is that, he said, and in what manner do you distinguish?

[281] Hoc modo, inquam. cum honos sit praemium virtutis iudicio studioque civium delatum ad aliquem, qui eum sententiis, qui suffragiis adeptus est, is mihi et honestus et honoratus videtur. qui autem occasione aliqua etiam invitis suis civibus nactus est imperium, ut ille cupiebat, hunc nomen honoris adeptum, non honorem puto.

[281] In this way, I say. Since honor is the reward of virtue, conferred by the judgment and zeal of the citizens upon someone—who has obtained it by opinions, who by suffrages—he seems to me both honest and honored. But one who by some opportunity, even with his fellow-citizens unwilling, has gotten imperium, as that man desired, I reckon to have obtained the name of honor, not the honor.

quae si ille audire voluisset, maxuma cum gratia et gloria ad summam amplitudinem pervenisset, ascendens gradibus magistratuum, ut pater eius fecerat, ut reliqui clariores viri. quae quidem etiam cum P. Crasso M. f., <cum> initio aetatis ad amicitiam se meam contulisset, saepe egisse me arbitror, cum eum vementer hortarer, ut eam laudis viam rectissimam esse duceret, quam maiores eius ei tritam reliquissent.

If he had been willing to hear these things, he would have come, with very great favor and glory, to the highest amplitude of distinction, ascending by the steps of the magistracies, as his father had done, as the other more illustrious men. And indeed these very things also with P. Crassus, M.’s son, <when> at the beginning of his age he had betaken himself to my friendship, I think that I often discussed, as I vehemently exhorted him to consider that road of praise the straightest, which his ancestors had left to him well-trodden.

[282] Erat enim cum institutus optume tum etiam perfecte planeque eruditus, ineratque et ingenium satis acre et orationis non inelegans copia; praetereaque sine arrogantia gravis esse videbatur et sine segnitia verecundus. sed hunc quoque absorbuit aestus quidam insolitae adulescentibus gloriae; qui quia navarat miles operam imperatori, imperatorem se statim esse cupiebat, cui muneri mos maiorum aetatem certam, sortem incertam reliquit. ita gravissumo suo casu, dum Cyri et Alexandri similis esse voluit, qui suum cursum transcurrerant, et L. Crassi et multorum Crassorum inventus est dissimillimus.

[282] For he was both most excellently instructed and, moreover, perfectly and plainly erudite, and there was in him both a sufficiently keen natural ingenium and a not inelegant copia of oration; besides, he seemed grave without arrogance and modest without sloth. But a certain surge of glory unusual for adolescents swallowed up this man as well; who, because as a soldier he had plied service to a commander, straightway desired to be a commander himself, for which office the custom of the ancestors has left a fixed age, an uncertain lot. Thus, to his most grievous mishap, while he wished to be like Cyrus and Alexander, who had run through their course, he was found most dissimilar to L. Crassus and to many of the Crassi.

[283] Sed ad Calvum—is enim nobis erat propositus—revertamur; qui orator fuit cum litteris eruditior quam Curio tum etiam accuratius quoddam dicendi et exquisitius adferebat genus; quod quamquam scienter eleganterque tractabat, nimium tamen inquirens in se atque ipse sese observans metuensque, ne vitiosum conligeret, etiam verum sanguinem deperdebat. itaque eius oratio nimia religione attenuata doctis et attente audientibus erat inlustris, multitudine autem et a foro, cui nata eloquentia est, devorabatur.

[283] But let us return to Calvus—for he was the one set before us—who, as an orator, was both more erudite in letters than Curio and also brought a certain more accurate and more exquisite kind of speaking; which, although he handled knowingly and elegantly, yet, prying too much into himself and observing himself and fearing lest he gather something faulty, he was even losing the true blood. And so his oration, attenuated by excessive scrupulosity, was illustrious to the learned and to those listening attentively, but by the multitude and by the forum, for which eloquence is born, it was devoured.

[284] Tum Brutus: Atticum se, inquit, Calvus noster dici oratorem volebat: inde erat ista exilitas quam ille de industria consequebatur.

[284] Then Brutus: Our Calvus, says he, wanted to be called an Attic orator: thence was that exility which he was deliberately pursuing.

Dicebat, inquam, ita; sed et ipse errabat et alios etiam errare cogebat. nam si quis eos, qui nec inepte dicunt nec odiose nec putide, Attice putat dicere, is recte nisi Atticum probat neminem. insulsitatem enim et insolentiam tamquam insaniam quandam orationis odit, sanitatem autem et integritatem quasi religionem et verecundiam oratoris probat.

He did speak thus, I say; but he himself was erring and even was compelling others to err. For if someone thinks that those who speak neither ineptly nor odiously nor foully speak Attically, he rightly approves no one as Attic unless he is Attic. For he hates insipidity and insolence as a kind of insanity of speech, but he approves the sanity and integrity—so to speak, the religion and modesty—of the orator.

haec omnium debet oratorum eadem esse sententia.

This ought to be the same sentiment of all orators.

[285] Sin autem ieiunitatem et siccitatem et inopiam, dummodo sit polita, dum urbana, dum elegans, in Attico genere ponit, hoc recte dumtaxat; sed quia sunt in Atticis <aliis> alia meliora, videat ne ignoret et gradus et dissimilitudines et vim et varietatem Atticorum. 'Atticos', inquit, 'volo imitari.' quos? nec enim est unum genus.

[285] But if, however, he places jejuneness and dryness and want—provided it be polished, provided urbane, provided elegant—under the Attic kind, this is right only so far; but since among Attic writers in <others> other things are better, let him see to it that he not ignore both the grades and the dissimilitudes and the force and the variety of the Attics. 'The Attics,' he says, 'I wish to imitate.' Which ones? for it is not a single kind.

nam quid est tam dissimile quam Demosthenes et Lysias, quam idem et Hyperides, quam horum omnium Aeschines? quem igitur imitaris? si aliquem: ceteri ergo Attice non dicebant?

for what is so dissimilar as Demosthenes and Lysias, as that same man and Hyperides, as Aeschines of all these? whom, then, do you imitate? if some one: did the rest therefore not speak Attically?

si omnis: qui potes, cum sint ipsi dissimillumi inter se? in quo illud etiam quaero, Phalereus ille Demetrius Atticene dixerit. mihi quidem ex illius orationibus redolere ipsae Athenae videntur. at est floridior, ut ita dicam, quam Hyperides, quam Lysias: natura quaedam aut voluntas ita dicendi fuit.

if all: how can you, since they themselves are most dissimilar among themselves? And herein I further ask whether that Demetrius of Phalerum spoke Attically. To me indeed, from his orations, Athens herself seems to exhale her fragrance. Yet he is, so to speak, more florid than Hyperides, than Lysias: it was a certain nature or volition of speaking thus.

[286] Et quidem duo fuerunt per idem tempus dissimiles inter se, sed Attici tamen; quorum Charisius multarum orationum, quas scribebat aliis, cum cupere videretur imitari Lysiam; Demochares autem, qui fuit Demostheni sororis filius, et orationes scripsit aliquot et earum rerum historiam, quae erant Athenis ipsius aetate gestae, non tam historico quam oratorio genere perscripsit. at Charisi vult Hegesias esse similis, isque se ita putat Atticum, ut veros illos prae se paene agrestes putet.

[286] And indeed there were two in the same period, dissimilar among themselves, yet Attic nonetheless; of whom Charisius, the author of many orations which he used to write for others, although he seemed to desire to imitate Lysias; but Demochares, who was the son of Demosthenes’ sister, both wrote several orations and fully wrote out the history of those affairs which were done at Athens in his own lifetime, not so much in an historical as in an oratorical kind. But Hegesias wishes to be like Charisius, and he thinks himself so Attic that he considers those true men almost rustic in comparison with himself.

[287] At quid est tam fractum, tam minutum, tam in ipsa, quam tamen consequitur, concinnitate puerile? 'Atticorum similes esse volumus.' optume; suntne igitur hi Attici oratores? 'quis negare potest?

[287] But what is so fractured, so minute, so puerile even in the very concinnity which he nevertheless pursues? 'We wish to be like the Attics.' Excellent; are these then Attic orators? 'Who can deny it?

hos imitamur.' quo modo, qui sunt et inter se dissimiles et aliorum? 'Thucydidem' inquit 'imitamur.' optume, si historiam scribere, non si causas dicere cogitatis. Thucydides enim rerum gestarum pronuntiator sincerus et grandis etiam fuit; hoc forense concertatorium iudiciale non tractavit genus.

'We imitate these.' In what way, seeing that they are both dissimilar among themselves and from others? 'Thucydides,' he says, 'we imitate.' Very good, if you are thinking to write history, not to plead causes. For Thucydides was a sincere and even grand proclaimer of deeds done; he did not handle this forensic, contentious, judicial genre.

orationes autem, quas interposuit—multae enim sunt —, eas ego laudare soleo: imitari neque possim, si velim, nec velim fortasse, si possim. ut si quis Falerno vino delectetur, sed eo nec ita novo ut proximis consulibus natum velit, nec rursus ita vetere ut Opimium aut Anicium consulem quaerat—'atqui hae notae sunt optumae': credo; sed nimia vetustas nec habet eam, quam quaerimus, suavitatem nec est iam sane tolerabilis —:

the orations, however, which he interposed—for they are many—, those I am accustomed to praise: to imitate them I neither could, if I wished, nor perhaps would wish, if I could. as if someone were delighted with Falernian wine, but would want it neither so new as to have been born under the most recent consuls, nor again so old as to seek the consulship of Opimius or Anicius—'and yet these labels are the best': I believe it; but excessive antiquity neither has that sweetness which we seek nor now indeed is tolerable—:

[288] num igitur, qui hoc sentiat, si is potare velit, de dolio sibi hauriendum putet? minime; sed quandam sequatur aetatem. sic ego istis censuerim et novam istam quasi de musto ac lacu fervidam orationem fugiendam nec illam praeclaram Thucydidi nimis veterem tamquam Anicianam notam persequendam.

[288] So then, would a man who holds this view, if he wishes to drink, think he must draw for himself from a cask? By no means; rather let him follow a certain age (vintage). Thus I would advise that both that new kind of speech, as if hot from the must and the vat, is to be avoided, and that illustrious style of Thucydides, too old, is not to be pursued like an Anician mark.

ipse enim Thucydides, si posterius fuisset, multo maturior fuisset et mitior.

for Thucydides himself, if he had been later, would have been much maturer and milder.

[289] 'Demosthenem igitur imitemur.' o di boni! quid, quaeso, nos aliud agimus aut quid aliud optamus? at non adsequimur.

[289] 'Let us imitate Demosthenes, then.' O good gods! what, I ask, are we doing other than this, or what else do we opt for? But we do not attain it.

isti enim videlicet Attici nostri quod volunt adsequuntur. ne illud quidem intellegunt, non modo ita memoriae proditum esse sed ita necesse fuisse, cum Demosthenes dicturus esset, ut concursus audiendi causa ex tota Graecia fierent. at cum isti Attici dicunt, non modo a corona, quod est ipsum miserabile, sed etiam ab advocatis relinquuntur.

for those, to be sure, our Atticists, achieve what they want. they do not understand even this, not only that it has been handed down to memory thus, but that it had to be thus, that when Demosthenes was about to speak, concourses for the sake of hearing would be made from all Greece. but when those Atticists speak, they are abandoned not only by the crowd, which is itself pitiable, but even by their advocates.

quare si anguste et exiliter dicere est Atticorum, sint sane Attici; sed in comitium veniant, ad stantem iudicem dicant: subsellia grandiorem et pleniorem vocem desiderant.

Therefore, if to speak narrowly and thinly is the mark of the Attics, let them by all means be Attic; but let them come into the Comitium, let them speak before a standing judge: the benches desire a grander and fuller voice.

[290] Volo hoc oratori contingat, ut cum auditum sit eum esse dicturum, locus in subselliis occupetur, compleatur tribunal, gratiosi scribae sint in dando et cedendo loco, corona multiplex, iudex erectus; cum surgat is qui dicturus sit, significetur a corona silentium, deinde crebrae adsensiones, multae admirationes; risus, cum velit, cum velit, fletus: ut, qui haec procul videat, etiam si quid agatur nesciat, at placere tamen et in scaena esse Roscium intellegat. haec cui contingant, eum scito Attice dicere, ut de Pericle audimus, ut de Hyperide, ut de Aeschine, de ipso quidem Demosthene maxume.

[290] I wish this to befall an orator: that when it is heard that he is going to speak, a place on the benches be occupied, the tribunal be filled, the scribes be gracious in giving and yielding place, a manifold crown, the judge erect; that, when the one who is going to speak rises, silence be signaled by the crown, then frequent assents, many admirations; laughter when he wishes, when he wishes, weeping: so that one who sees these things from afar, even if he does not know what is being transacted, yet understands that he is pleasing and that Roscius is on the stage. He to whom these things befall—know that he speaks Attically—just as we hear about Pericles, as about Hyperides, as about Aeschines, and most of all about Demosthenes himself.

[291] Sin autem acutum, prudens et idem sincerum et solidum et exsiccatum genus orationis probant nec illo graviore ornatu oratorio utuntur et hoc proprium esse Atticorum volunt, recte laudant. est enim in arte tanta tamque varia etiam huic minutae subtilitati locus. ita fiet, ut non omnes qui Attice idem bene, sed ut omnes qui bene idem etiam Attice dicant.

[291] But if they approve a kind of oration that is acute, prudent, and at the same time sincere and solid and dried-out, and they do not make use of that heavier oratorical ornament, and they wish this to be proper to the Attics, they praise rightly. For in so great and so various an art there is also room for this minute subtlety. Thus it will come about, not that all who speak Attically also speak well, but that all who speak well also speak Attically.

sed redeamus rursus ad Hortensium.

but let us return again to Hortensius.

[292] Sane quidem, inquit Brutus; quamquam ista mihi tua fuit periucunda a proposita oratione digressio.

[292] Quite so indeed, says Brutus; although that digression of yours from the proposed oration was most delightful to me.

Tum Atticus: aliquotiens sum, inquit, conatus, sed interpellare nolui. nunc quoniam iam ad perorandum spectare videtur sermo tuus, dicam, opinor, quod sentio.

Then Atticus: several times, said he, I have tried, but I did not wish to interrupt. Now, since your discourse already seems to look toward a peroration, I will say, I suppose, what I think.

Tu vero, inquam, Tite.

You indeed, said I, Titus.

Tum ille: ego, inquit, ironiam illam quam in Socrate dicunt fuisse, qua ille in Platonis et Xenophontis et Aeschinis libris utitur, facetam et elegantem puto. est enim et minime inepti hominis et eiusdem etiam faceti, cum de sapientia disceptetur, hanc sibi ipsum detrahere, eis tribuere inludentem, qui eam sibi adrogant: ut apud Platonem Socrates in caelum effert laudibus Protagoram Hippiam Prodicum Gorgiam ceteros, se autem omnium rerum inscium fingit et rudem. decet hoc nescio quo modo illum, nec Epicuro, qui id reprehendit, adsentior.

Then he: I, said he, think that irony which they say was in Socrates, which he employs in the books of Plato, Xenophon, and Aeschines, to be witty and elegant. For it is of a man in no way inept, and of that same man also facetious, when wisdom is being disputed, to take this from himself and, mocking, to attribute it to those who arrogate it to themselves: as in Plato Socrates lifts Protagoras, Hippias, Prodicus, Gorgias, and the others to the sky with praises, but feigns himself unknowing and unpolished in all things. This somehow befits him, nor do I assent to Epicurus, who censures it.

sed in historia, qua tu es usus in omni sermone, cum qualis quisque orator fuisset exponeres, vide quaeso, inquit, ne tam reprehendenda sit ironia quam in testimonio.

but in history, which you have employed throughout the whole discourse, when you were setting forth what sort of orator each man had been, “see, please,” he says, “lest irony be as reprehensible as in testimony.”

[293] Quorsus, inquam, istuc? non enim intellego.

[293] To what end, I say, is that? For I do not understand.

Quia primum, inquit, ita laudavisti quosdam oratores ut imperitos posses in errorem inducere. equidem in quibusdam risum vix tenebam, cum Attico Lysiae Catonem nostrum comparabas, magnum mercule hominem vel potius summum et singularem virum—nemo dicet secus—sed oratorem? sed etiam Lysiae similem?

“Because, in the first place,” he said, “you praised certain orators in such a way that you could lead the unskilled into error. Indeed, at certain points I could scarcely hold in my laughter, when with Atticus you were comparing our Cato to Lysias—a great man, by Hercules, or rather a supreme and singular man—no one will say otherwise—but an orator? and even similar to Lysias?”

quo nihil potest esse pictius. bella ironia, si iocaremur; sin adseveramus, vide ne religio nobis tam adhibenda sit quam si testimonium diceremus.

than which nothing can be more painted. pretty irony, if we were joking; but if we are asserting, see that we must apply as much scruple as if we were giving testimony.

[294] Ego enim Catonem tuum ut civem, ut senatorem, ut imperatorem, ut virum denique cum prudentia et diligentia tum omni virtute excellentem probo; orationes autem eius ut illis temporibus valde laudo—significant enim formam quandam ingeni, sed admodum impolitam et plane rudem—, Origines vero cum omnibus oratoris laudibus refertas diceres et Catonem cum Philisto et Thucydide comparares, Brutone te id censebas an mihi probaturum? quos enim ne e Graecis quidem quisquam imitari potest, his tu comparas hominem Tusculanum nondum suspicantem quale esset copiose et ornate dicere.

[294] For as to your Cato, I approve him as a citizen, as a senator, as a commander, as a man, finally, outstanding not only in prudence and diligence but in every virtue; his speeches, moreover, considering those times, I greatly praise—for they signify a certain form of talent, but very unpolished and plainly rude—, but when you would say that the Origines were crammed with all the praises of an orator and would compare Cato with Philistus and Thucydides, did you suppose that would win approval from Brutus or from me? For those whom not even anyone from among the Greeks can imitate, to these you compare a Tusculan man not yet suspecting what it was to speak copiously and ornately.

[295] Galbam laudas. si ut illius aetatis principem, adsentior—sic enim accepimus —; sin ut oratorem, cedo quaeso orationes—sunt enim—et dic hunc, quem tu plus quam te amas, Brutum velle te illo modo dicere. probas Lepidi orationes.

[295] You praise Galba. If as the leading man of that age, I agree—for thus we have received —; but if as an orator, produce, please, the speeches—for they do exist—and say that this Brutus, whom you love more than yourself, wants you to speak in that way. You approve Lepidus’s speeches.

paulum hic tibi adsentior, modo ita laudes ut antiquas; quod item de Africano, de Laelio, cuius tu oratione negas fieri quicquam posse dulcius, addis etiam nescio quid augustius. nomine nos capis summi viri vitaeque elegantissumae verissimis laudibus. remove haec: ne ista dulcis oratio ita sit abiecta ut eam aspicere nemo velit.

Here I assent to you a little, provided you laud them as ancient; likewise as to Africanus and to Laelius—whose oration you say nothing can be sweeter—you even add something, I know not what, more august. You ensnare us with the name of a most great man and with the very true praises of a most elegant life. Remove these, lest that sweet oration be so cast aside that no one may wish to look upon it.

[296] Carbonem in summis oratoribus habitum scio; sed cum in ceteris rebus tum in dicendo semper, quo iam nihil est melius, id laudari qualecumque est solet. dico idem de Gracchis, etsi de eis ea sunt a te dicta, quibus ego adsentior. omitto ceteros; venio ad eos in quibus iam perfectam putas esse eloquentiam, quos ego audivi sine controversia magnos oratores, Crassum et Antonium.

[296] I know that Carbo was held among the highest orators; but, as in other matters, so in speaking—than which now there is nothing better—whatever it is is accustomed to be praised. I say the same of the Gracchi, although about them those things have been said by you, with which I assent. I omit the others; I come to those in whom you think eloquence is already perfected, whom I heard to be, without controversy, great orators, Crassus and Antonius.

de horum laudibus tibi prorsus adsentior, sed tamen non isto modo: ut Polycliti doryphorum sibi Lysippus aiebat, sic tu suasionem legis Serviliae tibi magistram fuisse; haec germana ironia est. cur ita sentiam non dicam, ne me tibi adsentari putes.

I altogether agree with you about the praises of these men, yet not in that manner: just as Lysippus used to say that the Doryphorus of Polyclitus was for himself a model, so you that the suasion of the Servilian law was for you a teacher; this is genuine irony. Why I feel thus I will not say, lest you think that I am assenting to you.

[297] Omitto igitur quae de his ipsis, quae de Cotta, quae de Sulpicio, quae modo de Caelio dixeris. hi enim fuerunt certe oratores; quanti autem et quales tu videris. nam illud minus curo, quod congessisti operarios omnes; ut mihi videantur mori voluisse nonnulli, ut a te in oratorum numerum referrentur.

[297] I omit, therefore, what you have said about these very men, what about Cotta, what about Sulpicius, what just now about Caelius. For these indeed were certainly orators; but how great and of what sort you have judged them. For I care less about this: that you have heaped together all the workmen; so that some seem to me to have wished to die, in order that by you they might be referred into the number of orators.

Haec cum ille dixisset: longi sermonis initium pepulisti, inquam, Attice, remque commovisti nova disputatione dignam, quam in aliud tempus differamus.

When he had said these things: you have struck up the beginning of a long discourse, say I, Atticus, and you have stirred a matter worthy of a new disputation, which let us defer to another time.

[298] Volvendi enim sunt libri cum aliorum tum in primis Catonis. intelleges nihil illius liniamentis nisi eorum pigmentorum, quae inventa nondum erant, florem et colorem defuisse. nam de Crassi oratione sic existumo, ipsum fortasse melius potuisse scribere, alium, ut arbitror, neminem.

[298] For books are to be unrolled, both those of others and, first and foremost, those of Cato. You will understand that nothing was lacking to his lineaments except the bloom and color of those pigments which had not yet been invented. For about the oration of Crassus I judge thus: he himself perhaps could have written it better; another, as I suppose, no one.

nec in hoc eirona me duxeris esse, quod eam orationem mihi magistram fuisse dixerim. nam etsi [ut] tu melius existumare videris de ea, si quam nunc habemus, facultate, tamen adulescentes quid in Latinis potius imitaremur non habebamus.

nor in this should you reckon me an eirona, because I have said that that oration was a teacher to me. For although you seem to judge better about it, with respect to such faculty as we now possess, yet as adolescents we did not have, among the Latins, what we might rather imitate.

[299] Quod autem plures a nobis nominati sunt, eo pertinuit, ut paulo ante dixi, quod intellegi volui, in eo, cuius omnes cupidissimi essent, quam pauci digni nomine evaderent. quare eirona me, ne si Africanus quidem fuit, ut ait in historia sua C. Fannius, existumari velim.

[299] But that several were named by us aimed at this, as I said a little before: I wished it to be understood that, in that of which all were most desirous, how few turned out worthy of the name. Wherefore I would not wish to be thought an eirona, not even if Africanus indeed was one, as C. Fannius says in his history.

Ut voles, inquit Atticus. ego enim non alienum a te putabam quod et in Africano fuisset et in Socrate.

As you wish, said Atticus. For I did not think alien to you that which had been both in Africanus and in Socrates.

[300] Tum Brutus: de isto postea; sed tu, inquit me intuens, orationes nobis veteres explicabis?

[300] Then Brutus: about that later; but you, said he, looking at me, will you explicate for us the ancient orations?

Vero, inquam, Brute; sed in Cumano aut in Tusculano aliquando, si modo licebit, quoniam utroque in loco vicini sumus. sed iam ad id, unde digressi sumus, revertamur.

Indeed, I said, Brutus; but at Cumae or at Tusculum sometime, if only it be permitted, since in both places we are neighbors. But now let us revert to that from which we have digressed.

[301] Hortensius igitur cum admodum adulescens orsus esset in foro dicere, celeriter ad maiores causas adhiberi coeptus est; <et> quamquam inciderat in Cottae et Sulpici aetatem, qui annis decem maiores <erant>, excellente tum Crasso et Antonio, dein Philippo, post Iulio, cum his ipsis dicendi gloria comparabatur. primum memoria tanta, quantam in nullo cognovisse me arbitror, ut quae secum commentatus esset, ea sine scripto verbis eisdem redderet, quibus cogitavisset. hoc adiumento ille tanto sic utebatur, ut sua et commentata et scripta et nullo referente omnia adversariorum dicta meminisset.

[301] Hortensius, therefore, when as a very young man he had begun to speak in the forum, began quickly to be brought in to greater causes; <and> although he had fallen into the age of Cotta and Sulpicius, who <were> ten years older, with Crassus and Antonius then outstanding, then Philippus, afterwards Julius, he was compared in the glory of speaking with these very men. In the first place, with so great a memory as I think I have known in no one, that the things he had rehearsed with himself he would render without writing in the same words in which he had conceived them. He used so great an aid thus, that he remembered his own things both rehearsed and written, and, with no one prompting, all the sayings of his adversaries.

[302] Ardebat autem cupiditate sic, ut in nullo umquam flagrantius studium viderim. nullum enim patiebatur esse diem quin aut in foro diceret aut meditaretur extra forum. saepissume autem eodem die utrumque faciebat.

[302] He burned with desire in such a way that I have never seen in anyone a more blazing zeal. For he allowed there to be no day without either speaking in the forum or practicing outside the forum. Most often, moreover, he did both on the same day.

adtuleratque minime volgare genus dicendi; duas quidem res quas nemo alius: partitiones, quibus de rebus dicturus esset, et conlectiones, memor et quae essent dicta contra quaeque ipse dixisset.

and he had brought a by no means common kind of speaking; two things indeed which no one else [had]: partitions, by which he would set forth the matters he was going to speak about, and collections, being mindful both of the things that had been said against him and of the things which he himself had said.

[303] Erat in verborum splendore elegans, com positione aptus, facultate copiosus; eaque erat cum summo ingenio tum exercitationibus maxumis consecutus. rem complectebatur memoriter, dividebat acute, nec praetermittebat fere quicquam, quod esset in causa aut ad confirmandum aut ad refellendum. vox canora et suavis, motus et gestus etiam plus artis habebat quam erat oratori satis.

[303] He was elegant in the splendor of words, apt in composition, copious in faculty; and he had achieved these both by the highest genius and by very great exercitations. He comprehended the matter from memory, divided it acutely, and he hardly omitted anything that was in the case either for confirming or for refuting. A canorous and suave voice, and his movement and gesture had even more art than was sufficient for an orator.

hoc igitur florescente Crassus est mortuus, Cotta pulsus, iudicia intermissa bello, nos in forum venimus.

accordingly, with this man flourishing, Crassus died, Cotta was expelled, the judicial proceedings were intermitted by war, we came into the forum.

[304] Erat Hortensius in bello primo anno miles, altero tribunus militum, Sulpicius legatus; aberat etiam M. Antonius; exercebatur una lege iudicium Varia, ceteris propter bellum intermissis; quoi frequens aderam, quamquam pro se ipsi dicebant oratores non illi quidem principes, L. Memmius et Q. Pompeius, sed oratores tamen teste diserto uterque Philippo, cuius in testimonio contentio et vim accusatoris habebat et copiam.

[304] Hortensius was in the war: in the first year a soldier, in the second a military tribune; Sulpicius a legate; M. Antonius was also away; the proceeding under the Varian law alone was being conducted, the rest having been suspended on account of the war; at which I was frequently present, although those speaking on their own behalf were the orators themselves—not, indeed, leading men, L. Memmius and Q. Pompeius, yet orators nonetheless—with the eloquent Philippus as witness for each, in whose testimony there was both contentiousness and the force and the abundance of an accuser.

[305] Reliqui qui tum principes numerabantur in magistratibus erant cotidieque fere a nobis in contionibus audiebantur. erat enim tribunus plebis tum C. Curio, quamquam is quidem silebat, ut erat semel a contione universa relictus; Q. Metellus Celer non ille quidem orator sed tamen non infans; diserti autem Q. Varius C. Carbo Cn. Pomponius, et hi quidem habitabant in rostris; C. etiam Iulius aedilis curulis cotidie fere accuratas contiones habebat. sed me cupidissumum audiendi primus dolor percussit, Cotta cum est expulsus.

[305] The rest who at that time were counted among the leading men were in magistracies, and almost daily were heard by us in public assemblies. For C. Curio was then tribune of the plebs, although indeed he was keeping silence, as he had once been abandoned by the assembly as a whole; Q. Metellus Celer—no orator, indeed, yet not inarticulate; but eloquent were Q. Varius, C. Carbo, and Cn. Pomponius—and these, in fact, dwelt on the Rostra; C. also Julius, curule aedile, almost daily was holding carefully polished addresses. But me, most eager to hear, the first pang of grief struck, when Cotta was expelled.

reliquos frequenter audiens acerrumo studio tenebar cotidieque et scribens et legens et commentans oratoriis tantum exercitationibus contentus non eram. iam consequente anno Q. Varius sua lege damnatus excesserat.

listening frequently to the rest, I was held by the keenest zeal, and every day, both writing and reading and commenting, I was not content with oratorical exercises only. Already in the ensuing year Q. Varius, condemned by his own law, had gone into exile.

[306] Ego autem iuris civilis studio multum operae dabam Q. Scaevolae P. f., qui quamquam nemini <se> ad docendum dabat, tamen consulentibus respondendo studiosos audiendi docebat. atque huic anno proxumus Sulla consule et Pompeio fuit. tum P. Sulpici in tribunatu cotidie contionantis totum genus dicendi penitus cognovimus; eodemque tempore, cum princeps Academiae Philo cum Atheniensium optumatibus Mithridatico bello domo profugisset Romamque venisset, totum ei me tradidi admirabili quodam ad philosophiam studio concitatus; in quo hoc etiam commorabar adtentius—etsi rerum ipsarum varietas et magnitudo summa me delectatione retinebat—, sed tamen sublata iam esse in perpetuum ratio iudiciorum videbatur.

[306] But I, in the study of civil law, was giving much effort to Quintus Scaevola, son of Publius, who, although he made himself available to teach no one, nevertheless by answering those who consulted him taught those eager to listen. And the year next after this was with Sulla and Pompey as consuls. Then, during the tribunate of Publius Sulpicius, who was addressing the assemblies daily, we thoroughly came to know the whole kind of speaking; and at the same time, when Philo, the prince of the Academy, had fled from home with the aristocrats of the Athenians in the Mithridatic War and had come to Rome, I handed over myself entirely to him, stirred by a certain admirable zeal for philosophy; in which I lingered the more attentively for this reason—although the variety and greatness of the matters themselves held me with the highest delight—yet the system of the courts seemed already to have been taken away forever.

[307] Occiderat Sulpicius illo anno tresque proxumo trium aetatum oratores erant crudelissume interfecti, Q. Catulus M. Antonius C. Iulius. eodem anno etiam Moloni Rhodio Romae dedimus operam et actori summo causarum et magistro. haec etsi videntur esse a proposita ratione diversa, tamen idcirco a me proferuntur, ut nostrum cursum perspicere, quoniam voluisti, Brute, possis—nam Attico haec nota sunt—et videre quem ad modum simus in spatio Q. Hortensium ipsius vestigiis persecuti.

[307] Sulpicius had fallen in that year, and in the next three orators of three ages were most cruelly slain, Q. Catulus, M. Antonius, C. Iulius. In that same year also we gave our effort at Rome to Molon the Rhodian, both a consummate pleader of causes and a teacher. Although these things seem to be different from the proposed plan, yet they are brought forward by me for this reason: that you may be able, since you wished it, Brutus, to discern our course— for Atticus knows these things— and to see in what way we have on the course followed in the very footprints of Q. Hortensius.

[308] Triennium fere fuit urbs sine armis; sed oratorum aut interitu aut discessu aut fuga—nam aberant etiam adulescentes M. Crassus et Lentuli duo—primas in causis agebat Hortensius, magis magisque cotidie probabatur Antistius, Piso saepe dicebat, minus saepe Pomponius, raro Carbo, semel aut iterum Philippus. at vero ego hoc tempore omni noctes et dies in omnium doctrinarum meditatione versabar.

[308] For almost three years the city was without arms; but, with the orators either by death, or departure, or flight—for the young men M. Crassus and the two Lentuli were also absent—Hortensius held first place in the cases; Antistius was more and more approved daily, Piso spoke often, Pomponius less often, Carbo rarely, Philippus once or twice. But indeed I throughout this whole time was engaged night and day in the meditation of all doctrines.

[309] Eram cum Stoico Diodoto, qui cum habitavisset apud me <se> cumque vixisset, nuper est domi meae mortuus. a quo cum in aliis rebus tum studiosissime in dialectica exercebar, quae quasi contracta et astricta eloquentia putanda est; sine qua etiam tu, Brute, iudicavisti te illam iustam eloquentiam, quam dialecticam esse dilatatam putant, consequi non posse. huic ego doctori et eius artibus variis atque multis ita eram tamen deditus ut ab exercitationibus oratoriis nullus dies vacuus esset.

[309] I was with the Stoic Diodotus, who, after he had resided with me and had lived with me, has lately died at my house. By him I was trained, both in other matters and most zealously in dialectic, which is to be considered a kind of contracted and constricted eloquence; without which even you, Brutus, judged that you could not attain that proper eloquence, which they suppose to be dialectic dilated. To this teacher and to his arts, various and many, I was nevertheless so devoted that no day was free from oratorical exercises.

[310] Commentabar declamitans—sic enim nunc loquuntur—saepe cum M. Pisone et cum Q. Pompeio aut cum aliquo cotidie, idque faciebam multum etiam Latine sed Graece saepius, vel quod Graeca oratio plura ornamenta suppeditans consuetudinem similiter Latine dicendi adferebat, vel quod a Graecis summis doctoribus, nisi Graece dicerem, neque corrigi possem neque doceri.

[310] I was practicing by declaiming—for thus indeed they now speak—often with M. Piso and with Q. Pompeius, or with someone every day; and I would do this much also in Latin, but more often in Greek, either because Greek oration, supplying more ornaments, brought a habit of speaking similarly in Latin, or because by the greatest Greek doctors, unless I spoke in Greek, I could neither be corrected nor be taught.

[311] Tumultus interim recuperanda re publica et crudelis interitus oratorum trium, Scaevolae Carbonis Antisti, reditus Cottae Curionis Crassi Lentulorum Pompei; leges et iudicia constituta, recuperata res publica; ex numero autem oratorum Pomponius Censorinus Murena sublati. tum primum nos ad causas et privatas et publicas adire coepimus, non ut in foro disceremus, quod plerique fecerunt, sed ut, quantum nos efficere potuissemus, docti in forum veniremus.

[311] Meanwhile tumults for the republic to be recovered and the cruel extinction of three orators—Scaevola, Carbo, Antistius; the return of Cotta, Curio, Crassus, the Lentuli, Pompey; laws and courts constituted, the republic recovered; but from the number of orators Pomponius, Censorinus, Murena were removed. Then for the first time we began to approach causes both private and public, not in order to learn in the forum, which the majority did, but so that, as far as we could accomplish, we might come into the forum learned.

[312] Eodem tempore Moloni dedimus operam; dictatore enim Sulla legatus ad senatum de Rhodiorum praemiis venerat. itaque prima causa publica pro Sex. Roscio dicta tantum commendationis habuit, ut non ulla esset quae non digna nostro patrocinio videretur.

[312] At the same time we devoted our efforts to Molon; for, Sulla being dictator, he had come as legate to the senate concerning the rewards of the Rhodians. And so the first public case, pleaded on behalf of Sextus Roscius, had so much commendation that there was none which did not seem worthy of our patronage.

deinceps inde multae, quas nos diligenter elaboratas et tamquam elucubratas adferebamus.

thereafter from that point many in succession, which we were presenting, diligently elaborated and, as it were, elucubrated.

[313] Nunc quoniam totum me non naevo aliquo aut crepundiis sed corpore omni videris velle cognoscere, complectar nonnulla etiam quae fortasse videantur minus necessaria. erat eo tempore in nobis summa gracilitas et infirmitas corporis, procerum et tenue collum: qui habitus et quae figura non procul abesse putatur a vitae periculo, si accedit labor et laterum magna contentio. eoque magis hoc eos quibus eram carus commovebat, quod omnia sine remissione, sine varietate, vi summa vocis et totius corporis conte ntione dicebam.

[313] Now, since you seem to wish to know me not by some mole or by nursery trinkets, but by my whole body, I will include some things also which perhaps may seem less necessary. At that time there was in me the utmost gracility and infirmity of body, and a tall and slender neck: which habit and which figure is thought not far removed from danger to life, if there is added exertion and great strain of the sides. And all the more did this disturb those to whom I was dear, because I was delivering everything without remission, without variety, with the greatest force of voice and with the strain of the whole body.

[314] Itaque cum me et amici et medici hortarentur ut causas agere desisterem, quodvis potius periculum mihi adeundum quam a sperata dicendi gloria discedendum putavi. sed cum censerem remissione et moderatione vocis et commutato genere dicendi me et periculum vitare posse et temperatius dicere, ut consuetudinem dicendi mutarem, ea causa mihi in Asiam proficiscendi fuit. itaque cum essem biennium versatus in causis et iam in foro celebratum meum nomen esset, Roma sum profectus.

[314] Therefore, when both friends and physicians were urging me to desist from pleading cases, I thought that any danger whatsoever ought rather to be undergone by me than that I should depart from the hoped-for glory of speaking. but since I judged that, by relaxation and moderation of the voice and by a changed genus of speaking, I could both avoid the danger and speak more temperately, in order that I might change my habit of speaking, that was my reason for setting out into Asia. and so, when I had been engaged in cases for two years and now my name was celebrated in the forum, I set out from Rome.

[315] Cum venissem Athenas, sex menses cum Antiocho veteris Academiae nobilissumo et prudentissumo philosopho fui studiumque philosophiae numquam intermissum a primaque adulescentia cultum et semper auctum hoc rursus summo auctore et doctore renovavi. eodem tamen tempore Athenis apud Demetrium Syrum veterem et non ignobilem dicendi magistrum studiose exerceri solebam. post a me Asia tota peragrata est cum summis quidem oratoribus, quibuscum exercebar ipsis lubentibus; quorum erat princeps Menippus Stratonicensis meo iudicio tota Asia illis temporibus disertissimus; et, si nihil habere molestiarum nec ineptia rum Atticorum est, hic orator in illis numerari recte potest.

[315] When I had come to Athens, for six months I was with Antiochus, the most noble and most prudent philosopher of the Old Academy, and I renewed my study of philosophy—never interrupted, cultivated from my earliest youth, and ever augmented—now again with this highest author and teacher. At the same time at Athens I used diligently to exercise myself under Demetrius the Syrian, an old and not ignoble master of speaking. Afterwards all Asia was traversed by me with the very greatest orators, with whom I practiced, they themselves being willing; the chief of whom was Menippus of Stratonicea, in my judgment the most eloquent in all Asia at that time; and, if it is no disadvantage to lack the vexations and the ineptitudes of the Atticists, this orator can rightly be numbered among them.

[316] adsiduissime autem mecum fuit Dionysius Magnes; erat etiam Aeschylus Cnidius, Adramyttenus Xenocles. hi tum in Asia rhetorum principes numerabantur. quibus non contentus Rhodum veni meque ad eundem quem Romae audiveram Molonem adplicavi cum actorem in veris causis scriptoremque praestantem tum in notandis animadvertendisque vitiis et instituendo docendoque prudentissimum.

[316] Most assiduously, moreover, with me was Dionysius of Magnesia; there was also Aeschylus the Cnidian, Xenocles of Adramyttium. These then in Asia were numbered among the chiefs of the rhetors. Not content with these, I came to Rhodes and attached myself to the same Molon whom I had heard at Rome, a preeminent pleader in real causes and writer, and, in marking and animadverting upon faults, and in instituting and teaching, most prudent.

is dedit operam, si modo id consequi potuit, ut nimis redundantis nos et supra fluentis iuvenili quadam dicendi impunitate et licentia reprimeret et quasi extra ripas diffluentis coerceret. ita recepi me biennio post non modo exercitatior sed prope mutatus. nam et contentio nimia vocis resederat et quasi deferverat oratio lateribusque vires et corpori mediocris habitus accesserat.

He took pains, if only he could achieve it, to repress us, too overflowing and superfluous with a certain youthful impunity and license of speaking, and to restrain us, as it were, when we were streaming beyond the banks. Thus I returned two years later not only more practiced but almost transformed; for both the excessive strain of the voice had subsided, and my speech had, as it were, simmered down; and strength had come to my flanks, and to my body a moderate habit had been added.

[317] Duo tum excellebant oratores qui me imitandi cupiditate incitarent, Cotta et Hortensius; quorum alter remissus et lenis et propriis verbis comprendens solute et facile sententiam, alter ornatus, acer et non talis qualem tu eum, Brute, iam deflorescentem cognovisti, sed verborum et actionis genere commotior. itaque cum Hortensio mihi magis arbitrabar rem esse, quod et dicendi ardore eram propior et aetate coniunctior. etenim videram in isdem causis, ut pro M. Canuleio, pro Cn. Dolabella consulari, cum Cotta princeps adhibitus esset, priores tamen agere partis Hortensium.

[317] At that time two orators excelled who stirred me with a desire of imitation, Cotta and Hortensius; of whom the one was relaxed and gentle, and, with his own words, comprehending the thought loosely and easily; the other was adorned, keen, and not such as you, Brutus, knew him when already deflorescent, but more impassioned by the kind of his words and his action. And so I judged that I had more to do with Hortensius, because I was both closer in the ardor of speaking and more conjoined in age. For indeed I had seen in the same causes, as for M. Canuleius, for Cn. Dolabella, a consular, when Cotta had been brought in as principal, nevertheless Hortensius to be taking the leading parts.

acrem enim oratorem, incensum et agentem et canorum concursus hominum forique strepitus desiderat.

For the concourse of men and the roar of the forum desire a keen orator, inflamed and acting and canorous.

[318] Unum igitur annum, cum redissemus ex Asia, causas nobilis egimus, cum quaesturam nos, consulatum Cotta, aedilitatem peteret Hortensius. interim me quaestorem Siciliensis excepit annus, Cotta ex consulatu est profectus in Galliam, princeps et erat et habebatur Hortensius. cum autem anno post ex Sicilia me recepissem, iam videbatur illud in me, quicquid esset, esse perfectum et habere maturitatem quandam suam.

[318] Therefore for one year, when we had returned from Asia, we pleaded notable cases, while I was seeking the quaestorship, Cotta the consulship, and Hortensius the aedileship. Meanwhile the Sicilian year received me as quaestor, Cotta set out from his consulship into Gaul, and Hortensius both was and was held to be the leading man. But when a year later I had taken myself back from Sicily, already that thing in me, whatever it was, seemed to be perfected and to have a certain maturity of its own.

nimis multa videor de me, ipse praesertim; sed omni huic sermoni propositum est, non ut ingenium et eloquentiam meam perspicias, unde longe absum, sed ut laborem et industriam.

I seem to be saying too much about myself—especially I myself; but the purpose of all this discourse is not that you perceive my ingenuity and eloquence, from which I am far removed, but rather my labor and industry.

[319] Cum igitur essem in plurumis causis et in principibus patronis quinquennium fere versatus, tum in patrocinio Siciliensi maxume in certamen veni designatus aedilis cum designato consule Hortensio.

[319] Since, therefore, I had been engaged for almost a quinquennium in very many cases and among the leading patrons, then, in the Sicilian patronage, I came especially into contest, as aedile-designate, with Hortensius, the consul-designate.

Sed quoniam omnis hic sermo noster non solum enumerationem oratoriam verum etiam praecepta quaedam desiderat, quid tamquam notandum et animadvertendum sit in Hortensio breviter licet dicere.

But since all this our discourse requires not only an oratorical enumeration but even certain precepts, one may briefly say what is to be noted and animadverted in Hortensius.

[320] Nam is post consulatum—credo quod videret ex consularibus neminem esse secum comparandum, neglegeret autem eos qui consules non fuissent—summum illud suum studium remisit, quo a puero fuerat incensus, atque in omnium rerum abundantia voluit beatius, ut ipse putabat, remissius certe vivere. primus et secundus annus et tertius tantum quasi de picturae veteris colore detraxerat, quantum non quivis unus ex populo, sed existumator doctus et intellegens posset cognoscere. longius autem procedens ut in ceteris eloquentiae partibus, tum maxume in celeritate et continuatione verborum adhaerescens, sui dissimilior videbatur fieri cotidie.

[320] For he, after the consulship—I suppose because he saw that among the ex‑consuls no one was to be compared with himself, and that he might neglect those who had not been consuls—remitted that highest zeal of his, with which from boyhood he had been inflamed, and amid an abundance of all things he wished to live more happily, as he himself thought, certainly more remissly. The first and second year and the third had taken off only so much, as it were, from the color of an old painting as not any random person of the populace, but a learned and intelligent appraiser could recognize. But proceeding further—just as in the other parts of eloquence, then especially, sticking fast in celerity and in the continuation of words—he seemed to be becoming less like himself every day.

[321] Nos autem non desistebamus cum omni genere exercitationis tum maxume stilo nostrum illud quod erat augere, quantumcumque erat. atque ut multa omittam in hoc spatio et in his post aedilitatem annis, et praetor primus et incredibili populari voluntate sum factus. nam cum propter adsiduitatem in causis et industriam tum propter exquisitius et minime volgare orationis genus animos hominum ad me dicendi novitate converteram.

[321] But we did not cease, with every kind of exercise and most of all with the stylus, to augment that endowment of ours, whatever it was, by however much it was. And, to omit many things in this interval and in those years after the aedileship, I was made praetor first, and by incredible popular goodwill. For since, on account of assiduity in cases and industry, then also on account of a more exquisite and least common kind of oration, I had turned the minds of men toward me by the novelty of my speaking.

[322] Nihil de me dicam: dicam de ceteris, quorum nemo erat qui videretur exquisitius quam volgus hominum studuisse litteris, quibus fons perfectae eloquentiae continetur; nemo qui philosophiam complexus esset matrem omnium bene factorum beneque dictorum; nemo qui ius civile didicisset rem ad privatas causas et ad oratoris prudentiam maxume necessariam; nemo qui memoriam rerum Romanarum teneret, ex qua, si quando opus esset, ab inferis locupletissimos testes excitaret; nemo qui breviter arguteque incluso adversario laxaret iudicum animos atque a severitate paulisper ad hilaritatem risumque traduceret; nemo qui dilatare posset atque a propria ac definita disputatione hominis ac temporis ad communem quaestionem universi generis orationem traducere; nemo qui delectandi gratia digredi parumper a causa, nemo qui ad iracundiam magno opere iudicem, nemo qui ad fletum posset adducere, nemo qui animum eius, quod unum est oratoris maxume proprium, quocumque res postularet impellere.

[322] I will say nothing about myself: I will speak about the rest, of whom there was no one who seemed to have pursued letters more exquisitely than the common crowd of men, in which the fountain of perfect eloquence is contained; no one who had embraced philosophy, the mother of all well-done deeds and well-said words; no one who had learned civil law, a matter most necessary for private cases and for an orator’s prudence; no one who kept a memory of Roman affairs, from which, whenever there was need, he would summon from the shades below the most richly furnished witnesses; no one who, the adversary being enclosed, could briefly and wittily relax the minds of the judges and lead them for a little from severity to cheerfulness and laughter; no one who could dilate and transfer the oration from the proper and defined disputation of the man and the time to the common question of the universal genus; no one who for the sake of delight could digress for a little from the case, no one who could bring the judge in great measure to anger, no one who could bring him to tears, no one who could impel his mind—what is the one thing most proper to an orator—whithersoever the matter demanded.

[323] Itaque cum iam paene evanuisset Hortensius et ego anno meo, sexto autem post illum consulem, consul factus essem, revocare se ad industriam coepit, ne, cum pares honore essemus, aliqua re superiores videremur. sic duodecim post meum consulatum annos in maxumis causis, cum ego mihi illum, sibi me ille anteferret, coniunctissime versati sumus, consulatusque meus, qui illum primo leviter perstrinxerat, idem nos rerum mearum gestarum, quas ille admirabatur, laude coniunxerat.

[323] And so, when Hortensius had now almost faded, and I, in my own year—yet six years after he had been consul—had been made consul, he began to call himself back to industry, lest, since we were equals in honor, we should seem in some respect to be superiors. Thus, for twelve years after my consulship, in the greatest cases, since I put him before myself and he put me before himself, we were engaged together in the closest conjunction; and my consulship, which at first had lightly grazed him, that same thing had united us by the praise of my deeds, which he admired.

[324] Maxume vero perspecta est utriusque nostrum exercitatio paulo ante quam perterritum armis hoc studium, Brute, nostrum conticuit subito et obmutuit: cum lege Pompeia ternis horis ad dicendum datis ad causas simillumas inter se vel potius easdem novi veniebamus cotidie. quibus quidem causis tu etiam, Brute, praesto fuisti complurisque et nobiscum et solus egisti, ut qui non satis diu vixerit Hortensius tamen hunc cursum confecerit: annis ante decem causas agere coepit quam tu es natus; idem quarto <et> sexagensumo anno, perpaucis ante mortem diebus, una tecum socerum tuum defendit Appium. dicendi autem genus quod fuerit in utroque, orationes utriusque etiam posteris nostris indicabunt.

[324] Most especially indeed the exercise of each of us was made evident a little before this pursuit of ours, Brutus, terror-struck by arms, suddenly fell silent and was struck dumb: when, by the Pompeian law, with three hours granted for speaking, we were coming daily to cases very similar to one another, or rather the same. In which cases, indeed, you too, Brutus, were on hand, and you pleaded many both with us and alone, so that Hortensius, though he did not live quite long enough, nevertheless completed this course: he began to plead cases ten years before you were born; and the same man, in his 64th year, a very few days before his death, together with you defended Appius, your father-in-law. But what the kind of speaking was in each, the orations of each will indicate even to our posterity.

[325] Sed si quaerimus, cur adulescens magis floruerit dicendo quam senior Hortensius, causas reperiemus verissumas duas. primum, quod genus erat orationis Asiaticum adulescentiae magis concessum quam senectuti. genera autem Asiaticae dictionis duo sunt: unum sententiosum et argutum, sententiis non tam gravibus et severis quam concinnis et venustis, qualis in historia Timaeus, in dicendo autem pueris nobis Hierocles Alabandeus, magis etiam Menecles frater eius fuit, quorum utriusque orationes sunt in primis ut Asiatico in genere laudabiles.

[325] But if we inquire why Hortensius flourished more in speaking as a youth than as an older man, we shall find two most true causes. First, because the kind of oration was Asiatic, more conceded to adolescence than to old age. Now there are two genera of Asiatic diction: one sententious and acute, with sententiae not so much grave and severe as neat and charming—such as Timaeus in history; in speaking, however, when we were boys, Hierocles of Alabanda, and even more his brother Menecles, were of this sort—whose orations both are among the foremost, as laudable in the Asiatic genus.

aliud autem genus est non tam sententiis frequentatum quam verbis volucre atque incitatum, quali est nunc Asia tota, nec flumine solum orationis sed etiam exornato et faceto genere verborum, in quo fuit Aeschylus Cnidius et meus aequalis Milesius Aeschines. in his erat admirabilis orationis cursus, ornata sententiarum concinnitas non erat.

but another kind is not so much thronged with sentences as winged and impelled in words, such as now the whole of Asia is, not only with a river of oratory but also with an adorned and witty kind of words, in which were Aeschylus of Cnidus and my coeval Aeschines of Miletus. in these there was an admirable course of speech; there was not an ornate concinnity of sentences.

[326] Haec autem, ut dixi, genera dicendi aptiora sunt adulescentibus, in senibus gravitatem non habent. itaque Hortensius utroque genere florens clamores faciebat adulescens. habebat enim et Meneclium illud studium crebrarum venustarumque sententiarum, in quibus, ut in illo Graeco, sic in hoc erant quaedam magis venustae dulcesque sententiae quam aut necessariae aut interdum utiles; et erat oratio cum incitata et vibrans tum etiam accurata et polita.

[326] But these kinds of speaking, as I said, are more apt for adolescents; in old men they do not have gravitas. And so Hortensius, flourishing in both kinds, as a young man drew loud shouts. For he had that Menecles-like zeal for frequent and graceful, charming sentences—among which, as in that Greek, so in him there were certain sentences more charming and sweet than either necessary or at times useful; and his speech was not only quickened and vibrating, but also accurate and polished.

non probabantur haec senibus—saepe videbam cum inridentem tum etiam irascentem et stomachantem Philippum—, sed mirabantur adulescentes, multitudo movebatur.

these things were not approved by the old men—often I saw Philip both mocking and even growing angry and chafing—, but the adolescents marveled, the multitude was moved.

[327] Erat excellens iudicio volgi et facile primas tenebat adulescens. etsi enim genus illud dicendi auctoritatis habebat parum, tamen aptum esse aetati videbatur. et certe, quod et ingeni quaedam forma lucebat <usu> et exercitatione perfecta eratque verborum astricta comprensio, summam hominum admirationem excitabat.

[327] He was excellent in the judgment of the crowd and easily held the first place as a young man. although indeed that kind of speaking had too little authority, nevertheless it seemed apt to his age. and certainly, because a certain form of ingenuity was shining forth, perfected by <use> and by exercise, and there was a strict compression of words, he aroused the highest admiration of men.

sed cum iam honores et illa senior auctoritas gravius quiddam requireret, remanebat idem nec decebat idem; quodque exercitationem studiumque dimiserat, quod in eo fuerat acerrimum, concinnitas illa crebritasque sententiarum pristina manebat, sed ea vestitu illo orationis, quo consuerat, ornata non erat. hoc tibi ille, Brute, minus fortasse placuit quam placuisset, si illum flagrantem studio et florentem facultate audire potuisses.

but when honors already and that elder authority were requiring something more weighty, he remained the same, nor did the same become him; and because he had dismissed exercise and study, which in him had been most keen, that concinnity and the former frequency of sentences remained, but they were not adorned with that attire of speech to which he had been accustomed. This, to you, Brutus, perhaps pleased less than it would have pleased, if you had been able to hear him burning with zeal and flourishing in faculty.

[328] Tum Brutus: ego vero, inquit, et ista, quae dicis, video qualia sint et Hortensium magnum oratorem semper putavi maxumeque probavi pro Messalla dicentem, cum tu afuisti.

[328] Then Brutus: I indeed, said he, both see of what sort those things are which you say, and I have always considered Hortensius a great orator, and I very greatly approved him speaking on behalf of Messalla, when you were absent.

Sic ferunt, inquam, idque declarat totidem quot dixit, ut aiunt, scripta verbis oratio. ergo ille a Crasso consule et Scaevola usque ad Paulum et Marcellum consules floruit, nos in eodem cursu fuimus a Sulla dictatore ad eosdem fere consules. sic Q. Hort ensi vox exstincta fato suo est, nostra publico.

Thus they report, I say, and this is indicated by a speech written, as they say, with just as many words as he uttered. Therefore he flourished from the consulship of Crassus and Scaevola down to the consuls Paulus and Marcellus; we have been in the same course from the dictatorship of Sulla to almost those same consuls. Thus the voice of Q. Hortensius was extinguished by his own fate, ours by a public one.

Melius, quaeso, ominare, inquit Brutus.

"Augur better, please," says Brutus.

[329] Sit sane ut vis, inquam, et id non tam mea causa quam tua; sed fortunatus illius exitus, qui ea non vidit cum fierent, quae providit futura. saepe enim inter nos impendentis casus deflevimus, cum belli civilis causas in privatorum cupiditatibus inclusas, pacis spem a publico consilio esse exclusam videremus. sed illum videtur felicitas ipsius, qua semper est usus, ab eis miseriis, quae consecutae sunt, morte vindicavisse.

[329] Let it be so as you wish, I say, and that not so much for my sake as for yours; but fortunate was that man’s exit, who did not see, when they were being done, the things which he had foreseen would be. For often among ourselves we bewailed the impending disasters, when we saw the causes of civil war enclosed within the cupidities of private men, and the hope of peace excluded from public counsel. But his own felicity, which he always enjoyed, seems to have by death vindicated him from those miseries which followed.

[330] Nos autem, Brute, quoniam post Hortensi clarissimi oratoris mortem orbae eloquentiae quasi tutores relicti sumus, domi teneamus eam saeptam liberali custodia, et hos ignotos atque impudentes procos repudiemus tueamurque ut adultam virginem caste et ab amatorum impetu quantum possumus prohibeamus. equidem etsi doleo me in vitam paulo serius tamquam in viam ingressum, priusquam confectum iter sit, in hanc rei publicae noctem incidisse, tamen ea consolatione sustentor quam tu mihi, Brute, adhibuisti tuis suavissimis litteris, quibus me forti animo esse oportere censebas, quod ea gessissem, quae de me etiam me tacente ipsa loquerentur viverentque mortuo; quae, si recte esset, salute rei publicae, sin secus, interitu ipso testimonium meorum de re publica consiliorum darent.

[330] But we, Brutus, since after the death of Hortensius, a most illustrious orator, we have been left as, so to speak, tutors of orphaned eloquence, let us keep it at home, fenced round with liberal custody, and repudiate these unknown and impudent suitors, and guard it as a grown virgin chastely, and, as far as we can, keep it from the onrush of lovers. For my part, although I am pained that I entered upon life, as upon a road, a little too late, and before the journey was completed fell into this night of the Republic, nevertheless I am sustained by that consolation which you, Brutus, applied to me in your most pleasant letters, in which you judged that I ought to be of stout spirit, because I had done those things which, even with me keeping silent, would themselves speak about me and would live on when I was dead; which things, if it should turn out rightly, by the safety of the Republic, but if otherwise, by my very destruction, would bear witness to my counsels concerning the Republic.

[331] Sed in te intuens, Brute, doleo, cuius in adulescentiam per medias laudes quasi quadrigis vehentem transversa incurrit misera fortuna rei publicae. hic me dolor tangit, haec me cura sollicitat et hunc mecum socium eiusdem et amoris et iudici. tibi favemus, te tua frui virtute cupimus, tibi optamus eam rem publicam in qua duorum generum amplissumorum renovare memoriam atque augere possis.

[331] But looking upon you, Brutus, I grieve—upon whose youth, being borne as if by a four-horse chariot through the midst of praises, the miserable fortune of the Republic ran athwart. This pain touches me, this care troubles me, and I have with me as a companion one who shares the same love and the same judgment. We favor you, we desire that you enjoy your own virtue, we wish for you that Republic in which you may be able to renew the memory of two most illustrious houses and to augment it.

tuum enim forum, tuum erat illud curriculum, tu illuc veneras unus, qui non linguam modo acuisses exercitatione dicendi, sed et ipsam eloquentiam locupletavisses graviorum artium instrumento et isdem artibus decus omne virtutis cum summa eloquentiae laude iunxisses.

for the forum was yours, that course was yours; you alone had come thither, who had not only sharpened your tongue by the exercise of speaking, but had also enriched eloquence itself with the instrument of the weightier arts, and by the same arts had joined every ornament of virtue with the highest praise of eloquence.

[332] Ex te duplex nos afficit sollicitudo, quod et ipse re publica careas et illa te. tu tamen, etsi cursum ingeni tui, Brute, premit haec importuna clades civitatis, contine te in tuis perennibus studiis et effice id quod iam propemodum vel plane potius effeceras, ut te eripias ex ea, quam ego congessi in hunc sermonem, turba patronorum. nec enim decet te ornatum uberrumis artibus, quas cum domo haurire non posses, arcessivisti ex urbe ea, quae domus est semper habita doctrinae, numerari in volgo patronorum. nam quid te exercuit Pammenes vir longe eloquentissimus Graeciae, quid illa vetus Academia atque eius heres Aristus hospes et familiaris meus, si quidem similes maioris partis oratorum futuri sumus?

[332] From you a double solicitude affects us, because both you yourself are bereft of the commonwealth and it of you. You, however, although this inopportune disaster of the state presses the course of your talent, Brutus, keep yourself within your perennial studies and bring to effect that which already almost—or rather plainly—you had effected: that you snatch yourself from that throng of patrons which I have heaped together in this discourse. For it does not befit you, adorned with most abundant arts, which, since you could not draw them from home, you summoned from that city which has always been held the home of learning, to be numbered in the common run of patrons. For to what end did Pammenes, a man by far the most eloquent of Greece, exercise you; to what end that old Academy and its heir Aristo, my guest and intimate, if indeed we are to be like the greater part of orators?

[333] Nonne cernimus vix singulis aetatibus binos oratores laudabilis constitisse? Galba fuit inter tot aequalis unus excellens, cui, quem ad modum accepimus, et Cato cedebat senior et qui temporibus illis aetate inferiores fuerunt; Lepidus postea, deinde Carbo; nam Gracchi in contionibus multo faciliore et liberiore genere dicendi, quorum tamen ipsorum ad aetatem laus eloquentiae perfecta nondum fuit; Antonius, Crassus, post Cotta, Sulpicius, Hortensius. nihil dico amplius, tantum dico: si mihi accidisset, ut numerarer in multis * * * si operosa est concursatio magis oportunorum * * *.

[333] Do we not see that scarcely in single generations have two praiseworthy orators stood forth? Galba was, among so many contemporaries, one outstanding man, to whom, as we have received, both Cato the Elder yielded and those who in those times were inferior in age; afterwards Lepidus, then Carbo; for the Gracchi in the public assemblies had a much easier and freer kind of speaking, yet even for them the praise of eloquence had not yet been perfected to their age; Antonius, Crassus, afterwards Cotta, Sulpicius, Hortensius. I say nothing more; I only say this: if it had befallen me to be numbered among many * * * if the concourse of the more opportune is laborious * * *.