-Immortales mortales si foret fas fiere,

Flerent divae Camenae Naevium poetam;

Itaque, postquam est Orci traditus thesauro,

Obliti sunt Romae loquier lingua Latina.-

Such proud language on the part of the man and the poet well befitted

one who had witnessed and had personally taken part in the struggles

with Hamilcar and with Hannibal, and who had discovered for the

thoughts and feelings of that age--so deeply agitated and so

elevated by mighty joy--a poetical expression which, if not exactly

the highest, was sound, adroit, and national. We have already

mentioned(31) the troubles into which his licence brought him with

the authorities, and how, driven presumably by these troubles from

Rome, he ended his life at Utica. In his instance likewise the

individual life was sacrificed for the common weal, and the

beautiful for the useful.

Plautus

His younger contemporary, Titus Maccius Plautus (500?-570), appears to

have been far inferior to him both in outward position and in the

conception of his poetic calling. A native of the little town of

Sassina, which was originally Umbrian but was perhaps by this time

Latinized, he earned his livelihood in Rome at first as an actor, and

then--after he had lost in mercantile speculations what he had gained

by his acting--as a theatrical composer reproducing Greek comedies,

without occupying himself with any other department of literature and

probably without laying claim to authorship properly so called. There

seems to have been at that time a considerable number of persons who

made a trade of thus editing comedies in Rome; but their names,

especially as they did not perhaps in general publish their works,(32)

were virtually forgotten, and the pieces belonging to this stock of

plays, which were preserved, passed in after times under the name

of the most popular of them, Plautus. The -litteratores- of the

following century reckoned up as many as 130 such "Plautine pieces";

but of these a large portion at any rate were merely revised by

Plautus or had no connection with him at all; the best of them are

still extant. To form a proper judgment, however, regarding the

poetical character of the editor is very difficult, if not impossible,

since the originals have not been preserved. That the editors

reproduced good and bad pieces without selection; that they were

subject and subordinate both to the police and to the public; that

they were as indifferent to aesthetical requirements as their

audience, and to please the latter, lowered the originals to a

farcical and vulgar tone--are objections which apply rather to the

whole manufacture of translations than to the individual remodeller.

On the other hand we may regard as characteristic of Plautus, the

masterly handling of the language and of the varied rhythms, a rare

skill in adjusting and working the situation for dramatic effect,

the almost always clever and often excellent dialogue, and, above all,

a broad and fresh humour, which produces an irresistible comic effect

with its happy jokes, its rich vocabulary of nicknames, its whimsical

coinage of words, its pungent, often mimic, descriptions and

situations--excellences, in which we seem to recognize the former

actor. Undoubtedly the editor even in these respects retained what

was successful in the originals rather than furnished contributions

of his own. Those portions of the pieces which can with certainty

be traced to the translator are, to say the least, mediocre; but they

enable us to understand why Plautus became and remained the true

popular poet of Rome and the true centre of the Roman stage, and

why even after the passing away of the Roman world the theatre has

repeatedly reverted to his plays.

Caecilius

Still less are we able to form a special opinion as to the third

and last--for though Ennius wrote comedies, he did so altogether

unsuccessfully--comedian of note in this epoch, Statins Caecilius. He

resembled Plautus in his position in life and his profession. Born in

Cisalpine Gaul in the district of Mediolanum, he was brought among the

Insubrian prisoners of war(33) to Rome, and earned a livelihood, first

as a slave, afterwards as a freedman, by remodelling Greek comedies

for the theatre down to his probably early death (586). His language

was not pure, as was to be expected from his origin; on the other

hand, he directed his efforts, as we have already said,(34) to a more

artistic construction of the plot. His pieces experienced but a dull

reception from his contemporaries, and the public of later times laid

aside Caecilius for Plautus and Terence; and, if nevertheless the

critics of the true literary age of Rome--the Varronian and Augustan

epoch--assigned to Caecilius the first place among the Roman editors

of Greek comedies, this verdict appears due to the mediocrity of the

connoisseur gladly preferring a kindred spirit of mediocrity in the

poet to any special features of excellence. These art-critics

probably took Caecilius under their wing, simply because he was more

regular than Plautus and more vigorous than Terence; notwithstanding

which he may very well have been far inferior to both.

Moral Result

If therefore the literary historian, while fully acknowledging the

very respectable talents of the Roman comedians, cannot recognize

in their mere stock of translations a product either artistically

important or artistically pure, the judgment of history respecting its

moral aspects must necessarily be far more severe. The Greek comedy

which formed its basis was morally so far a matter of indifference, as

it was simply on the same level of corruption with its audience; but

the Roman drama was, at this epoch when men were wavering between the

old austerity and the new corruption, the academy at once of Hellenism

and of vice. This Attico-Roman comedy, with its prostitution of body

and soul usurping the name of love--equally immoral in shamelessness

and in sentimentality--with its offensive and unnatural generosity,

with its uniform glorification of a life of debauchery, with its

mixture of rustic coarseness and foreign refinement, was one

continuous lesson of Romano-Hellenic demoralization, and was felt

as such. A proof of this is preserved in the epilogue of the

-Captivi- of Plautus:--

-Spectators, ad pudicos mores facta haec fabulast.

Neque in hoc subigitationes sunt neque ulla amatio

Nec pueri suppositio nec argenti circumductio,

Neque ubi amans adulescens scortum liberet clam suum patrem.

Huius modi paucas poetae reperiunt comoedias,

Ubi boni meliores fiant. Nunc vos, si vobis placet,

Et si placuimus neque odio fuimus, signum hoc mittite;

Qui pudicitiae esse voltis praemium, plausum date!-

We see here the opinion entertained regarding the Greek comedy by

the party of moral reform; and it may be added, that even in those

rarities, moral comedies, the morality was of a character only adapted

to ridicule innocence more surely. Who can doubt that these dramas

gave a practical impulse to corruption? When Alexander the Great

derived no pleasure from a comedy of this sort which its author read

before him, the poet excused himself by saying that the fault lay not

with him, but with the king; that, in order to relish such a piece, a

man must be in the habit of holding revels and of giving and receiving

blows in an intrigue. The man knew his trade: if, therefore, the

Roman burgesses gradually acquired a taste for these Greek comedies,

we see at what a price it was bought. It is a reproach to the Roman

government not that it did so little in behalf of this poetry, but

that it tolerated it at all Vice no doubt is powerful even without a

pulpit; but that is no excuse for erecting a pulpit to proclaim it.

To debar the Hellenic comedy from immediate contact with the persons

and institutions of Rome, was a subterfuge rather than a serious means

of defence. In fact, comedy would probably have been much less

injurious morally, had they allowed it to have a more free course,

so that the calling of the poet might have been ennobled and a Roman

poetry in some measure independent might have been developed; for

poetry is also a moral power, and, if it inflicts deep wounds, it can

do much to heal them. As it was, in this field also the government

did too little and too much; the political neutrality and moral

hypocrisy of its stage-police contributed their part to the fearfully

rapid breaking up of the Roman nation.

National Comedy

Titinius

But, while the government did not allow the Roman comedian to depict

the state of things in his native city or to bring his fellow-citizens

on the stage, a national Latin comedy was not absolutely precluded

from springing up; for the Roman burgesses at this period were not yet

identified with the Latin nation, and the poet was at liberty to lay

the plot of his pieces in the Italian towns of Latin rights just as

in Athens or Massilia. In this way, in fact, the Latin original

comedy arose (-fabula togata- (35)): the earliest known composer

of such pieces, Titinius, flourished probably about the close of

this period.(36)

This comedy was also based on the new Attic intrigue-piece; it was

not translation, however, but imitation; the scene of the piece lay

in Italy, and the actors appeared in the national dress,(37) the

-toga-. Here the Latin life and doings were brought out with peculiar

freshness. The pieces delineate the civil life of the middle-sized

towns of Latium; the very titles, such as -Psaltria- or -Ferentinatis-

, -Tibicina-, -Iurisperita-, -Fullones-, indicate this; and many

particular incidents, such as that of the townsman who has his shoes

made after the model of the sandals of the Alban kings, tend to

confirm it. The female characters preponderate in a remarkable manner

over the male.(38) With genuine national pride the poet recalls

the great times of the Pyrrhic war, and looks down on his new

Latin neighbours,--

-Qui Obsce et Volsce fabulantur; nam Latine nesciunt.-

This comedy belongs to the stage of the capital quite as much as did

the Greek; but it was probably animated by something of that rustic

antagonism to the ways and the evils of a great town, which appeared

contemporaneously in Cato and afterwards in Varro. As in the German

comedy, which proceeded from the French in much the same way as the

Roman comedy from the Attic, the French Lisette was very soon

superseded by the -Frauenzimmerchen- Franziska, so the Latin national

comedy sprang up, if not with equal poetical power, at any rate with

the same tendency and perhaps with similar success, by the side of

the Hellenizing comedy of the capital.

Tragedies

Euripides

Greek tragedy as well as Greek comedy came in the course of this epoch

to Rome. It was a more valuable, and in a certain respect also an

easier, acquisition than comedy. The Greek and particularly the

Homeric epos, which was the basis of tragedy, was not unfamiliar

to the Romans, and was already interwoven with their own national

legends; and the susceptible foreigner found himself far more at home

in the ideal world of the heroic myths than in the fish-market of

Athens. Nevertheless tragedy also promoted, only with less abruptness

and less vulgarity, the anti-national and Hellenizing spirit; and in

this point of view it was a circumstance of the most decisive

importance, that the Greek tragic stage of this period was chiefly

under the sway of Euripides (274-348). This is not the place for a

thorough delineation of that remarkable man and of his still more

remarkable influence on his contemporaries and posterity; but the

intellectual movements of the later Greek and the Graeco-Roman epoch

were to so great an extent affected by him, that it is indispensable

to sketch at least the leading outlines of his character. Euripides

was one of those poets who raise poetry doubtless to a higher level,

but in this advance manifest far more the true sense of what ought to

be than the power of poetically creating it. The profound saying which

morally as well as poetically sums up all tragic art--that action is

passion--holds true no doubt also of ancient tragedy; it exhibits

man in action, but it makes no real attempt to individualize him.

The unsurpassed grandeur with which the struggle between man and

destiny fulfils its course in Aeschylus depends substantially on

the circumstance, that each of the contending powers is only conceived

broadly and generally; the essential humanity in Prometheus and

Agamemnon is but slightly tinged by poetic individualizing. Sophocles

seizes human nature under its general conditions, the king, the old

man, the sister; but not one of his figures displays the microcosm of

man in all his aspects--the features of individual character. A high

stage was here reached, but not the highest; the delineation of man

in his entireness and the entwining of these individual--in themselves

finished--figures into a higher poetical whole form a greater

achievement, and therefore, as compared with Shakespeare, Aeschylus

and Sophocles represent imperfect stages of development. But, when

Euripides undertook to present man as he is, the advance was logical

and in a certain sense historical rather than poetical. He was

able to destroy the ancient tragedy, but not to create the modern.

Everywhere he halted half-way. Masks, through which the expression

of the life of the soul is, as it were, translated from the particular

into the general, were as necessary for the typical tragedy of

antiquity as they are incompatible with the tragedy of character;

but Euripides retained them. With remarkably delicate tact the older

tragedy had never presented the dramatic element, to which it was

unable to allow free scope, unmixed, but had constantly fettered it

in some measure by epic subjects from the superhuman world of gods and

heroes and by the lyrical choruses. One feels that Euripides was

impatient under these fetters: with his subjects he came down at least

to semi-historic times, and his choral chants were of so subordinate

importance, that they were frequently omitted in subsequent

performance and hardly to the injury of the pieces; but yet he has

neither placed his figures wholly on the ground of reality, nor

entirely thrown aside the chorus. Throughout and on all sides he is

the full exponent of an age in which, on the one hand, the grandest

historical and philosophical movement was going forward, but in which,

on the other hand, the primitive fountain of all poetry--a pure and

homely national life--had become turbid. While the reverential piety

of the older tragedians sheds over their pieces as it were a reflected

radiance of heaven; while the limitation of the narrow horizon of the

older Hellenes exercises its satisfying power even over the hearer;

the world of Euripides appears in the pale glimmer of speculation as

much denuded of gods as it is spiritualised, and gloomy passions shoot

like lightnings athwart the gray clouds. The old deeply-rooted faith

in destiny has disappeared; fate governs as an outwardly despotic

power, and the slaves gnash their teeth as they wear its fetters.

That unbelief, which is despairing faith, speaks in this poet with

superhuman power. Of necessity therefore the poet never attains a

plastic conception overpowering himself, and never reaches a truly

poetic effect on the whole; for which reason he was in some measure

careless as to the construction of his tragedies, and indeed not

unfrequently altogether spoiled them in this respect by providing no

central interest either of plot or person--the slovenly fashion of

weaving the plot in the prologue, and of unravelling it by a -Deus ex

machina- or a similar platitude, was in reality brought into vogue by

Euripides. All the effect in his case lies in the details; and with

great art certainly every effort has in this respect been made to

conceal the irreparable want of poetic wholeness. Euripides is

a master in what are called effects; these, as a rule, have a

sensuously-sentimental colouring, and often moreover stimulate

the sensuous impression by a special high seasoning, such as the

interweaving of subjects relating to love with murder or incest.

The delineations of Polyxena willing to die and of Phaedra pining

away under the grief of secret love, above all the splendid picture

of the mystic ecstasies of the Bacchae, are of the greatest beauty

in their kind; but they are neither artistically nor morally pure,

and the reproach of Aristophanes, that the poet was unable to paint a

Penelope, was thoroughly well founded. Of a kindred character is the

introduction of common compassion into the tragedy of Euripides.

While his stunted heroes or heroines, such as Menelaus in the -Helena-,

Andromache, Electra as a poor peasant's wife, the sick and ruined

merchant Telephus, are repulsive or ridiculous and ordinarily both,

the pieces, on the other hand, which keep more to the atmosphere of

common reality and exchange the character of tragedy for that of the

touching family-piece or that almost of sentimental comedy, such as

the -Iphigenia in Aulis-, the -Ion-, the -Alcestis-, produce perhaps

the most pleasing effect of all his numerous works. With equal

frequency, but with less success, the poet attempts to bring into play

an intellectual interest. Hence springs the complicated plot, which

is calculated not like the older tragedy to move the feelings, but

rather to keep curiosity on the rack; hence the dialectically pointed

dialogue, to us non-Athenians often absolutely intolerable; hence the

apophthegms, which are scattered throughout the pieces of Euripides

like flowers in a pleasure-garden; hence above all the psychology of

Euripides, which rests by no means on direct reproduction of human

experience, but on rational reflection. His Medea is certainly in so

far painted from life, that she is before departure properly provided

with money for her voyage; but of the struggle in the soul between

maternal love and jealousy the unbiassed reader will not find much in

Euripides. But, above all, poetic effect is replaced in the tragedies

of Euripides by moral or political purpose. Without strictly or

directly entering on the questions of the day, and having in view

throughout social rather than political questions, Euripides in the

legitimate issues of his principles coincided with the contemporary

political and philosophical radicalism, and was the first and chief

apostle of that new cosmopolitan humanity which broke up the old Attic

national life. This was the ground at once of that opposition which

the ungodly and un-Attic poet encountered among his contemporaries,

and of that marvellous enthusiasm, with which the younger generation

and foreigners devoted themselves to the poet of emotion and of love,

of apophthegm and of tendency, of philosophy and of humanity. Greek

tragedy in the hands of Euripides stepped beyond its proper sphere and

consequently broke down; but the success of the cosmopolitan poet was

only promoted by this, since at the same time the nation also stepped

beyond its sphere and broke down likewise. The criticism of

Aristophanes probably hit the truth exactly both in a moral and in a

poetical point of view; but poetry influences the course of history

not in proportion to its absolute value, but in proportion as it is

able to forecast the spirit of the age, and in this respect Euripides

was unsurpassed. And thus it happened, that Alexander read him

diligently; that Aristotle developed the idea of the tragic poet with

special reference to him; that the latest poetic and plastic art in

Attica as it were originated from him (for the new Attic comedy did

nothing but transfer Euripides into a comic form, and the school of

painters which we meet with in the designs of the later vases derived

its subjects no longer from the old epics, but from the Euripidean

tragedy); and lastly that, the more the old Hellas gave place to the

new Hellenism, the more the fame and influence of the poet increased,

and Greek life abroad, in Egypt as well as in Rome, was directly or

indirectly moulded in the main by Euripides.

Roman Tragedy

The Hellenism of Euripides flowed to Rome through very various

channels, and probably produced a speedier and deeper effect there

by indirect means than in the form of direct translation. The tragic

drama in Rome was not exactly later in its rise than the comic;(39)

but the far greater expense of putting a tragedy on the stage--which

was undoubtedly felt as a consideration of moment, at least during the

Hannibalic war--as well as the nature of the audience(40) retarded the

development of tragedy. In the comedies of Plautus the allusions to

tragedies are not very frequent, and most references of this kind may

have been taken from the originals. The first and only influential

tragedian of this epoch was the younger contemporary of Naevius

and Plautus, Quintus Ennius (515-585), whose pieces were already

travestied by contemporary comic writers, and were exhibited and

declaimed by posterity down to the days of the empire.

The tragic drama of the Romans is far less known to us than the comic:

on the whole the same features, which have been noticed in the case of

comedy, are presented by tragedy also. The dramatic stock, in like

manner, was mainly formed by translations of Greek pieces. The

preference was given to subjects derived from the siege of Troy and

the legends immediately connected with it, evidently because this

cycle of myths alone was familiar to the Roman public through

instruction at school; by their side incidents of striking horror

predominate, such as matricide or infanticide in the -Eumenides-,

the -Alcmaeon-, the -Cresphontes-, the -Melanippe-, the -Medea-, and

the immolation of virgins in the -Polyxena-, the -Erechthides-, the

-Andromeda-, the -Iphigenia- --we cannot avoid recalling the fact,

that the public for which these tragedies were prepared was in the

habit of witnessing gladiatorial games. The female characters and

ghosts appear to have made the deepest impression. In addition to the

rejection of masks, the most remarkable deviation of the Roman edition

from the original related to the chorus. The Roman theatre, fitted up

doubtless in the first instance for comic plays without chorus, had

not the special dancing-stage (-orchestra-) with the altar in the

middle, on which the Greek chorus performed its part, or, to speak

more correctly, the space thus appropriated among the Greeks served

with the Romans as a sort of pit; accordingly the choral dance at

least, with its artistic alternations and intermixture of music and

declamation, must have been omitted in Rome, and, even if the chorus

was retained, it had but little importance. Of course there were

various alterations of detail, changes in the metres, curtailments,

and disfigurements; in the Latin edition of the -Iphigenia- of

Euripides, for instance, the chorus of women was--either after the

model of another tragedy, or by the editor's own device--converted

into a chorus of soldiers. The Latin tragedies of the sixth century

cannot be pronounced good translations in our sense of the word;(41)

yet it is probable that a tragedy of Ennius gave a far less imperfect

image of the original of Euripides than a comedy of Plautus gave of

the original of Menander.

Moral Effect of Tragedy

The historical position and influence of Greek tragedy in Rome

were entirely analogous to those of Greek comedy; and while, as

the difference in the two kinds of composition necessarily implied,

the Hellenistic tendency appeared in tragedy under a purer and more

spiritual form, the tragic drama of this period and its principal

representative Ennius displayed far more decidedly an anti-national

and consciously propagandist aim. Ennius, hardly the most important

but certainly the most influential poet of the sixth century, was not

a Latin by birth, but on the contrary by virtue of his origin half a

Greek. Of Messapian descent and Hellenic training, he settled in his

thirty-fifth year at Rome, and lived there--at first as a resident

alien, but after 570 as a burgess(42)--in straitened circumstances,

supported partly by giving instruction in Latin and Greek, partly by

the proceeds of his pieces, partly by the donations of those Roman

grandees, who, like Publius Scipio, Titus Flamininus, and Marcus

Fulvius Nobilior, were inclined to promote the modern Hellenism and

to reward the poet who sang their own and their ancestors' praises and

even accompanied some of them to the field in the character, as it

were, of a poet laureate nominated beforehand to celebrate the great

deeds which they were to perform. He has himself elegantly described

the client-like qualities requisite for such a calling.(43) From the

outset and by virtue of the whole tenor of his life a cosmopolite, he

had the skill to appropriate the distinctive features of the nations

among which he lived--Greek, Latin, and even Oscan--without devoting

himself absolutely to any cne of them; and while the Hellenism of the

earlier Roman poets was the result rather than the conscious aim of

their poetic activity, and accordingly they at least attempted more or

less to take their stand on national ground, Ennius on the contrary is

very distinctly conscious of his revolutionary tendency, and evidently

labours with zeal to bring into vogue neologico-Hellenic ideas among

the Italians. His most serviceable instrument was tragedy. The

remains of his tragedies show that he was well acquainted with the

whole range of the Greek tragic drama and with Aeschylus and Sophocles

in particular; it is the less therefore the result of accident, that

he has modelled the great majority of his pieces, and all those that

attained celebrity, on Euripides. In the selection and treatment he

was doubtless influenced partly by external considerations. But these

alone cannot account for his bringing forward so decidedly the

Euripidean element in Euripides; for his neglecting the choruses still

more than did his original; for his laying still stronger emphasis on

sensuous effect than the Greek; nor for his taking up pieces like the

-Thyestes- and the -Telephus- so well known from the immortal ridicule

of Aristophanes, with their princes' woes and woful princes, and even

such a piece as Menalippa the Female Philosopher, in which the whole

plot turns on the absurdity of the national religion, and the tendency

to make war on it from the physicist point of view is at once

apparent. The sharpest arrows are everywhere--and that partly in

passages which can be proved to have been inserted(44)--directed

against faith in the miraculous, and we almost wonder that the

censorship of the Roman stage allowed such tirades to pass as

the following:--

-Ego deum genus esse semper dixi et dicam caelitum,

Sed eos non curare opinor, quid agat humanum genus;

Nam si curent, bene bonis sit, male malis, quod nunc abest.-

We have already remarked(45) that Ennius scientifically inculcated the

same irreligion in a didactic poem of his own; and it is evident that

he was in earnest with this freethinking. With this trait other

features are quite accordant--his political opposition tinged with

radicalism, that here and there appears;(46) his singing the praises

of the Greek pleasures of the table;(47) above all his setting aside

the last national element in Latin poetry, the Saturnian measure, and

substituting for it the Greek hexameter. That the "multiform" poet

executed all these tasks with equal neatness, that he elaborated

hexameters out of a language of by no means dactylic structure, and

that without checking the natural flow of his style he moved with

confidence and freedom amidst unwonted measures and forms--are so many

evidences of his extraordinary plastic talent, which was in fact more

Greek than Roman;(48) where he offends us, the offence is owing much

more frequently to Greek alliteration(49) than to Roman ruggedness.

He was not a great poet, but a man of graceful and sprightly talent,

throughout possessing the vivid sensibilities of a poetic nature, but

needing the tragic buskin to feel himself a poet and wholly destitute

of the comic vein. We can understand the pride with which the

Hellenizing poet looked down on those rude strains --

-quos olim Faunei vatesque canebant,-

and the enthusiasm with which he celebrates his own artistic poetry:

-Enni foeta, salve,

Versus propinas flammeos medullitus.-

The clever man had an instinctive assurance that he had spread his

sails to a prosperous breeze; Greek tragedy became, and thenceforth

remained, a possession of the Latin nation.

National Dramas

Through less frequented paths, and with a less favourable wind, a

bolder mariner pursued a higher aim. Naevius not only like Ennius

--although with far less success--adapted Greek tragedies for the

Roman stage, but also attempted to create, independently of the

Greeks, a grave national drama (-fabula praetextata-). No outward

obstacles here stood in the way; he brought forward subjects both

from Roman legend and from the contemporary history of the country on

the stage of his native land. Such were his Nursing of Romulus and

Remus or the Wolf, in which Amulius king of Alba appeared, and his

-Clastidium-, which celebrated the victory of Marcellus over the

Celts in 532.(49) After his example, Ennius in his -Ambracia-

described from personal observation the siege of that city by his

patron Nobilior in 565.(50) But the number of these national dramas

remained small, and that species of composition soon disappeared from

the stage; the scanty legend and the colourless history of Rome were

unable permanently to compete with the rich cycle of Hellenic legends.

Respecting the poetic value of the pieces we have no longer the means

of judging; but, if we may take account of the general poetical

intention, there were in Roman literature few such strokes of genius

as the creation of a Roman national drama. Only the Greek tragedians

of that earliest period which still felt itself nearer to the gods

--only poets like Phrynichus and Aeschylus--had the courage to bring

the great deeds which they had witnessed, and in which they had borne

a part, on the stage by the side of those of legendary times; and

here, if anywhere, we are enabled vividly to realize what the Punic

wars were and how powerful was their effect, when we find a poet,

who like Aeschylus had himself fought in the battles which he sang,

introducing the kings and consuls of Rome upon that stage on which

men had hitherto been accustomed to see none but gods and heroes.

Recitative Poetry

Recitative poetry also took its rise during this epoch at Rome.

Livius naturalized the custom which among the ancients held the

place of our modern publication--the public reading of new works by

the author--in Rome, at least to the extent of reciting them in his

school. As poetry was not in this instance practised with a view to

a livelihood, or at any rate not directly so, this branch of it was

not regarded by public opinion with such disfavour as writing for the

stage: towards the end of this epoch one or two Romans of quality had

publicly come forward in this manner as poets.(51) Recitative poetry

however was chiefly cultivated by those poets who occupied themselves

with writing for the stage, and the former held a subordinate place as

compared with the latter; in fact, a public to which read poetry might

address itself can have existed only to a very limited extent at this

period in Rome.

Satura

Above all, lyrical, didactic, and epigrammatic poetry found but feeble

representation. The religious festival chants--as to which the annals

of this period certainly have already thought it worth while to

mention the author--as well as the monumental inscriptions on temples

and tombs, for which the Saturnian remained the regular measure,

hardly belong to literature proper. So far as the minor poetry makes

its appearance at all, it presents itself ordinarily, and that as

early as the time of Naevius, under the name of -satura-. This term

was originally applied to the old stage-poem without action, which

from the time of Livius was driven off the stage by the Greek drama;

but in its application to recitative poetry it corresponds in some

measure to our "miscellaneous poems," and like the latter denotes not

any positive species or style of art, but simply poems not of an epic

or dramatic kind, treating of any matters (mostly subjective), and

written in any form, at the pleasure of the author. In addition to

Cato's "poem on Morals" to be noticed afterwards, which was presumably

written in Saturnian verses after the precedent of the older first

attempts at a national didactic poetry,(52) there came under this

category especially the minor poems of Ennius, which that writer,

who was very fertile in this department, published partly in his

collection of -saturae-, partly separately. Among these were brief

narrative poems relating to the legendary or contemporary history of

his country; editions of the religious romance of Euhemerus,(53) of

the poems dealing with natural philosophy circulating in the name

of Epicharmus,(54) and of the gastronomies of Archestratus of Gela,

a poet who treated of the higher cookery; as also a dialogue between

Life and Death, fables of Aesop, a collection of moral maxims,

parodies and epigrammatic trifles--small matters, but indicative

of the versatile powers as well as the neological didactic tendencies

of the poet, who evidently allowed himself the freest range in this

field, which the censorship did not reach.

Metrical Annals

Naevius

The attempts at a metrical treatment of the national annals lay

claim to greater poetical and historical importance. Here too it was

Naevius who gave poetic form to so much of the legendary as well as

of the contemporary history as admitted of connected narrative; and

who, more especially, recorded in the half-prosaic Saturnian national

metre the story of the first Punic war simply and distinctly, with

a straightforward adherence to fact, without disdaining anything at

all as unpoetical, and without at all, especially in the description

of historical times, going in pursuit of poetical flights or

embellishments--maintaining throughout his narrative the present

tense.(55) What we have already said of the national drama of the

same poet, applies substantially to the work of which we are now

speaking. The epic, like the tragic, poetry of the Greeks lived and

moved essentially in the heroic period; it was an altogether new and,

at least in design, an enviably grand idea--to light up the present

with the lustre of poetry. Although in point of execution the

chronicle of Naevius may not have been much better than the rhyming

chronicles of the middle ages, which are in various respects of

kindred character, yet the poet was certainly justified in regarding

this work of his with an altogether peculiar complacency. It was no

small achievement, in an age when there was absolutely no historical

literature except official records, to have composed for his

countrymen a connected account of the deeds of their own and the

earlier time, and in addition to have placed before their eyes

the noblest incidents of that history in a dramatic form.

Ennius

Ennius proposed to himself the very same task as Naevius; but the

similarity of the subject only brings out into stronger relief the

political and poetical contrast between the national and the anti-

national poet. Naevius sought out for the new subject a new form;

Ennius fitted or forced it into the forms of the Hellenic epos. The

hexameter took the place of the Saturnian verse; the ornate style of

the Homeridae, striving after plastic vividness of delineation,

took the place of the homely historic narrative. Wherever the

circumstances admit, Homer is directly translated; e. g. the burial of

those that fell at Heraclea is described after the model of the burial

of Patroclus, and under the helmet of Marcus Livius Stolo, the

military tribune who fights with the Istrians, lurks none other than

the Homeric Ajax; the reader is not even spared the Homeric invocation

of the Muse. The epic machinery is fully set agoing; after the battle

of Cannae, for instance, Juno in a full council of the gods pardons

the Romans, and Jupiter after obtaining the consent of his wife

promises them a final victory over the Carthaginians. Nor do the

"Annals" fail to betray the neological and Hellenistic tendencies of

the author. The very employment of the gods for mere decoration bears

this stamp. The remarkable vision, with which the poem opens, tells

in good Pythagorean style how the soul now inhabiting Quintus Ennius

had previously been domiciled in Homer and still earlier in a peacock,

and then in good physicist style explains the nature of things and

the relation of the body to the mind. Even the choice of the subject

serves the same purpose--at any rate the Hellenic literati of all ages

have found an especially suitable handle for their Graeco-cosmopolite

tendencies in this very manipulation of Roman history. Ennius lays

stress on the circumstance that the Romans were reckoned Greeks:

-Contendunt Graecos, Graios memorare solent sos.-

The poetical value of the greatly celebrated Annals may easily be

estimated after the remarks which we have already made regarding the

excellences and defects of the poet in general. It was natural that

as a poet of lively sympathies, he should feel himself elevated by the

enthusiastic impulse which the great age of the Punic wars gave to the

national sensibilities of Italy, and that he should not only often

happily imitate Homeric simplicity, but should also and still more

frequently make his lines strikingly echo the solemnity and decorum of

the Roman character. But the construction of his epic was defective;

indeed it must have been very lax and indifferent, when it was

possible for the poet to insert a special book by way of supplement

to please an otherwise forgotten hero and patron. On the whole the

Annals were beyond question the work in which Ennius fell farthest

short of his aim. The plan of making an Iliad pronounces its own

condemnation. It was Ennius, who in this poem for the first time

introduced into literature that changeling compound of epos and of

history, which from that time up to the present day haunts it like a

ghost, unable either to live or to die. But the poem certainly had

its success. Ennius claimed to be the Roman Homer with still greater

ingenuousness than Klopstock claimed to be the German, and was

received as such by his contemporaries and still more so by posterity.

The veneration for the father of Roman poetry was transmitted from

generation to generation; even the polished Quintilian says, "Let us

revere Ennius as we revere an ancient sacred grove, whose mighty oaks

of a thousand years are more venerable than beautiful;" and, if any

one is disposed to wonder at this, he may recall analogous phenomena

in the successes of the Aeneid, the Henriad, and the Messiad. A

mighty poetical development of the nation would indeed have set

aside that almost comic official parallel between the Homeric

Iliad and the Ennian

Annals as easily as we have set aside the comparison of Karschin

with Sappho and of Willamov with Pindar; but no such development took

place in Rome. Owing to the interest of the subject especially for

aristocratic circles, and the great plastic talent of the poet, the

Annals remained the oldest Roman original poem which appeared to the

culture of later generations readable or worth reading; and thus,

singularly enough, posterity came to honour this thoroughly anti-

national epos of a half-Greek -litterateur- as the true model

poem of Rome.

Prose Literature

A prose literature arose in Rome not much later than Roman poetry,

but in a very different way. It experienced neither the artificial

furtherance, by which the school and the stage prematurely forced the

growth of Roman poetry, nor the artificial restraint, to which Roman

comedy in particular was subjected by the stern and narrow-minded

censorship of the stage. Nor was this form of literary activity

placed from the outset under the ban of good society by the stigma

which attached to the "ballad-singer." Accordingly the prose

literature, while far less extensive and less active than the

contemporary poetical authorship, had a far more natural growth.

While poetry was almost wholly in the hands of men of humble rank and

not a single Roman of quality appears among the celebrated poets of

this age, there is, on the contrary, among the prose writers of this

period hardly a name that is not senatorial; and it is from the

circles of the highest aristocracy, from men who had been consuls and

censors--the Fabii, the Gracchi, the Scipios--that this literature

throughout proceeds. The conservative and national tendency, in the

nature of the case, accorded better with this prose authorship than

with poetry; but here too--and particularly in the most important

branch of this literature, historical composition--the Hellenistic

bent had a powerful, in fact too powerful, influence both on matter

and form.

Writing of History

Down to the period of the Hannibalic war there was no historical

composition in Rome; for the entries in the book of Annals were of the

nature of records and not of literature, and never made any attempt to

develop the connection of events. It is a significant illustration of

the peculiarity of Roman character, that notwithstanding the extension

of the power of the Roman community far beyond the bounds of Italy,

and notwithstanding the constant contact of the noble society of Rome

with the Greeks who were so fruitful in literary activity, it was not

till the middle of the sixth century that there was felt the need and

desire of imparting a knowledge of the deeds and fortunes of the Roman

people, by means of authorship, to the contemporary world and to

posterity. When at length this desire was felt, there were neither

literary forms ready at hand for the use of Roman history, nor was

there a public prepared to read it, and great talent and considerable

time were required to create both. In the first instance,

accordingly, these difficulties were in some measure evaded by writing

the national history either in the mother-tongue but in that case in

verse, or in prose but in that case in Greek. We have already spoken

of the metrical chronicles of Naevius (written about 550?) and of

Ennius (written about 581); both belong to the earliest historical

literature of the Romans, and the work of Naevius may be regarded as

the oldest of all Roman historical works. At nearly the same period

were composed the Greek "Histories" of Quintus Fabius Pictor(56)

(after 553), a man of noble family who took an active part in state

affairs during the Hannibalic war, and of Publius Scipio, the son of

Scipio Africanus (about 590). In the former case they availed

themselves of the poetical art which was already to a certain extent

developed, and addressed themselves to a public with a taste for

poetry, which was not altogether wanting; in the latter case they

found the Greek forms ready to their hand, and addressed themselves

--as the interest of their subject stretching far beyond the bounds

of Latium naturally suggested--primarily to the cultivated foreigner.

The former plan was adopted by the plebeian authors, the latter by

those of quality; just as in the time of Frederick the Great an

aristocratic literature in the French language subsisted side by side

with the native German authorship of pastors and professors, and,

while men like Gleim and Ramler wrote war-songs in German, kings and

generals wrote military histories in French. Neither the metrical

chronicles nor the Greek annals by Roman authors constituted Latin

historical composition in the proper sense; this only began with Cato,

whose "Origines," not published before the close of this epoch, formed

at once the oldest historical work written in Latin and the first

important prose work in Roman literature.(57)

All these works, while not coming up to the Greek conception of

history,(58) were, as contrasted with the mere detached notices of

the book of Annals, systematic histories with a connected narrative

and a more or less regular structure. They all, so far as we can see,

embraced the national history from the building of Rome down to the

time of the writer, although in point of title the work of Naevius

related only to the first war with Carthage, and that of Cato only

to the very early history. They were thus naturally divided into

the three sections of the legendary period, of earlier, and of

contemporary, history.

History of the Origin of Rome

In the legendary period the history of the origin of the city of Rome

was set forth with great minuteness; and in its case the peculiar

difficulty had to be surmounted, that there were, as we have already

shown,(59) two wholly irreconcileable versions of it in circulation:

the national version, which, in its leading outlines at least, was

probably already embodied in the book of Annals, and the Greek

version of Timaeus, which cannot have remained unknown to these Roman

chroniclers. The object of the former was to connect Rome with

Alba, that of the latter to connect Rome with Troy; in the former

accordingly the city was built by Romulus son of the Alban king,

in the latter by the Trojan prince Aeneas. To the present epoch,

probably either to Naevius or to Pictor, belongs the amalgamation of

the two stories. The Alban prince Romulus remains the founder of

Rome, but becomes at the same time the grandson of Aeneas; Aeneas does

not found Rome, but is represented as bringing the Roman Penates to

Italy and building Lavinium as their shrine, while his son Ascanius

founds Alba Longa, the mother-city of Rome and the ancient metropolis

of Latium. All this was a sorry and unskilful patchwork. The view

that the original Penates of Rome were preserved not, as had hitherto

been believed, in their temple in the Roman Forum, but in the shrine

at Lavinium, could not but be offensive to the Romans; and the Greek

fiction was a still worse expedient, inasmuch as under it the gods

only bestowed on the grandson what they had adjudged to the grandsire.

But the redaction served its object: without exactly denying the

national origin of Rome, it yet deferred to the Hellenizing tendency,

and legalized in some degree that desire to claim kindred with Aeneas

and his descendants which was already at this epoch greatly in

vogue;(60) and thus it became the stereotyped, and was soon accepted

as the official, account of the origin of the mighty community.

Apart from the fable of the origin of the city, the Greek

historiographers had otherwise given themselves little or no concern

as to the Roman commonwealth; so that the presentation of the further

course of the national history must have been chiefly derived from

native sources. But the scanty information that has reached us does

not enable us to discern distinctly what sort of traditions, in

addition to the book of Annals, were at the command of the earliest

chroniclers, and what they may possibly have added of their own.

The anecdotes inserted from Herodotus(61) were probably still foreign

to these earliest annalists, and a direct borrowing of Greek materials

in this section cannot be proved. The more remarkable, therefore, is

the tendency, which is everywhere, even in the case of Cato the enemy

of the Greeks, very distinctly apparent, not only to connect Rome with

Hellas, but to represent the Italian and Greek nations as having been

originally identical. To this tendency we owe the primitive-Italians

or Aborigines who were immigrants from Greece, and the primitive-

Greeks or Pelasgians whose wanderings brought them to Italy.

The Earlier History

The current story led with some measure of connection, though the

connecting thread was but weak and loose through the regal period down

to the institution of the republic; but at that point legend dried up;

and it was not merely difficult but altogether impossible to form a

narrative, in any degree connected and readable, out of the lists of

magistrates and the scanty notices appended to them. The poets felt

this most. Naevius appears for that reason to have passed at once

from the regal period to the war regarding Sicily: Ennius, who in the

third of his eighteen books was still describing the regal period and

in the sixth had already reached the war with Pyrrhus, must have

treated the first two centuries of the republic merely in the most

general outline. How the annalists who wrote in Greek managed the

matter, we do not know. Cato adopted a peculiar course. He felt no

pleasure, as he himself says, "in relating what was set forth on the

tablet in the house of the Pontifex Maximus, how often wheat had been

dear, and when the sun or moon had been eclipsed;" and so he devoted

the second and third books of his historical work to accounts of the

origin of the other Italian communities and of their admission to the

Roman confederacy. He thus got rid of the fetters of chronicle, which

reports events year by year under the heading of the magistrates for

the time being; the statement in particular, that Cato's historical

work narrated events "sectionally," must refer to this feature of his

method. This attention bestowed on the other Italian communities,

which surprises us in a Roman work, had a bearing on the political

position of the author, who leaned throughout on the support of the

municipal Italy in his opposition to the doings of the capital; while

it furnished a sort of substitute for the missing history of Rome

from the expulsion of king Tarquinius down to the Pyrrhic war, by

presenting in its own way the main result of that history--the union

of Italy under the hegemony of Rome.

Contemporary History

Contemporary history, again, was treated in a connected and detailed

manner. Naevius described the first, and Fabius the second, war with

Carthage from their own knowledge; Ennius devoted at least thirteen

out of the eighteen books of his Annals to the epoch from Pyrrhus down

to the Istrian war;(62) Cato narrated in the fourth and fifth books

of his historical work the wars from the first Punic war down to that

with Perseus, and in the two last books, which probably were planned

on a different and ampler scale, he related the events of the last

twenty years of his life. For the Pyrrhic war Ennius may have

employed Timaeus or other Greek authorities; but on the whole

the accounts given were based, partly on personal observation

or communications of eye-witnesses, partly on each other.

Speeches and Letters

Contemporaneously with historical literature, and in some sense as an

appendage to it, arose the literature of speeches and letters. This

in like manner was commenced by Cato; for the Romans possessed nothing

of an earlier age except some funeral orations, most of which probably

were only brought to light at a later period from family archives,

such as that which the veteran Quintus Fabius, the opponent of

Hannibal, delivered when an old man over his son who had died in his

prime. Cato on the other hand committed to writing in his old age

such of the numerous orations which he had delivered during his long

and active public career as were historically important, as a sort of

political memoirs, and published them partly in his historical work,

partly, it would seem, as independent supplements to it. There also

existed a collection of his letters.

History of Other Nations

With non-Roman history the Romans concerned themselves so far, that

a certain knowledge of it was deemed indispensable for the cultivated

Roman; even old Fabius is said to have been familiar not merely with

the Roman, but also with foreign, wars, and it is distinctly testified

that Cato diligently read Thucydides and the Greek historians in

general. But, if we leave out of view the collection of anecdotes and

maxims which Cato compiled for himself as the fruits of this reading,

no trace is discernible of any literary activity in this field.

Uncritical Treatment of History

These first essays in historical literature were all of them, as

a matter of course, pervaded by an easy, uncritical spirit; neither

authors nor readers readily took offence at inward or outward

inconsistencies. King Tarquinius the Second, although he was already

grown up at the time of his father's death and did not begin to reign

till thirty-nine years afterwards, is nevertheless still a young man

when he ascends the throne. Pythagoras, who came to Italy about a

generation before the expulsion of the kings, is nevertheless set

down by the Roman historians as a friend of the wise Numa. The state-

envoys sent to Syracuse in the year 262 transact business with

Dionysius the elder, who ascended the throne eighty-six years

afterwards (348). This naive uncritical spirit is especially apparent

in the treatment of Roman chronology. Since according to the Roman

reckoning--the outlines of which were probably fixed in the previous

epoch--the foundation of Rome took place 240 years before the

consecration of the Capitoline temple(63) and 360 years before the

burning of the city by the Gauls,(64) and the latter event, which

is mentioned also in Greek historical works, fell according to these

in the year of the Athenian archon Pyrgion 388 B. C. Ol. 98, i, the

building of Rome accordingly fell on Ol. 8, i. This was, according

to the chronology of Eratosthenes which was already recognized as

canonical, the year 436 after the fall of Troy; nevertheless the

common story retained as the founder of Rome the grandson of the

Trojan Aeneas. Cato, who like a good financier checked the

calculation, no doubt drew attention in this instance to the

incongruity; but he does not appear to have proposed any mode of

getting over the difficulty--the list of the Alban kings, which

was afterwards inserted with this view, certainly did not proceed

from him.

The same uncritical spirit, which prevailed in the early history,

prevailed also to a certain extent in the representation of historical

times. The accounts certainly without exception bore that strong

party colouring, for which the Fabian narrative of the commencement

of the second war with Carthage is censured by Polybius with the

calm severity characteristic of him. Mistrust, however, is more

appropriate in such circumstances than reproach. It is somewhat

ridiculous to expect from the Roman contemporaries of Hannibal a

just judgment on their opponents; but no conscious misrepresentation

of the facts, except such as a simple-minded patriotism of itself

involves, has been proved against the fathers of Roman history.

Science

The beginnings of scientific culture, and even of authorship relating

to it, also fall within this epoch. The instruction hitherto given

had been substantially confined to reading and writing and a knowledge

of the law of the land.(65) But a closer contact with the Greeks

gradually suggested to the Romans the idea of a more general culture;

and stimulated the endeavour, if not directly to transplant this

Greek culture to Rome, at any rate to modify the Roman culture to

some extent after its model.

Grammar

First of all, the knowledge of the mother-tongue began to shape itself

into Latin grammar; Greek philology transferred its methods to the

kindred idiom of Italy. The active study of grammar began nearly at

the same time with Roman authorship. About 520 Spurius Carvilius, a

teacher of writing, appears to have regulated the Latin alphabet, and

to have given to the letter -g, which was not previously included in

it,(66) the place of the -z which could be dispensed with--the place

which it still holds in the modern Occidental alphabets. The Roman

school-masters must have been constantly working at the settlement

of orthography; the Latin Muses too never disowned their scholastic

Hippocrene, and at all times applied themselves to orthography side

by side with poetry. Ennius especially--resembling Klopstock in this

respect also--not only practised an etymological play on assonance

quite after the Alexandrian style,(67) but also introduced, in place

of the simple signs for the double consonants that had hitherto been

usual, the more accurate Greek double writing. Of Naevius and

Plautus, it is true, nothing of the kind is known; the popular

poets in Rome must have treated orthography and etymology with

the indifference which is usual with poets.

Rhetoric and Philosophy

The Romans of this epoch still remained strangers to rhetoric and

philosophy. The speech in their case lay too decidedly at the very

heart of public life to be accessible to the handling of the foreign

schoolmaster; the genuine orator Cato poured forth all the vials of

his indignant ridicule over the silly Isocratean fashion of ever

learning, and yet never being able, to speak. The Greek philosophy,

although it acquired a certain influence over the Romans through the

medium of didactic and especially of tragic poetry, was nevertheless

viewed with an apprehension compounded of boorish ignorance and of

instinctive misgiving. Cato bluntly called Socrates a talker and a

revolutionist, who was justly put to death as an offender against the

faith and the laws of his country; and the opinion, which even Romans

addicted to philosophy entertained regarding it, may well be expressed

in the words of Ennius:

-Philosophari est mihi necesse, at paucis, nam omnino haut placet.

Degustandum ex ea, non in eam ingurgitandum censeo.-

Nevertheless the poem on Morals and the instructions in Oratory, which

were found among the writings of Cato, may be regarded as the Roman

quintessence or, if the expression be preferred, the Roman -caput

mortuum- of Greek philosophy and rhetoric. The immediate sources

whence Cato drew were, in the case of the poem on Morals, presumably

the Pythagorean writings on morals (along with, as a matter of course,

due commendation of the simple ancestral habits), and, in the case of

the book on Oratory, the speeches in Thucydides and more especially

the orations of Demosthenes, all of which Cato zealously studied.

Of the spirit of these manuals we may form some idea from the golden

oratorical rule, oftener quoted than followed by posterity, "to think

of the matter and leave the words to follow from it."(68)

Medicine

Similar manuals of a general elementary character were composed by

Cato on the Art of Healing, the Science of War, Agriculture, and

Jurisprudence--all of which studies were likewise more or less under

Greek influence. Physics and mathematics were not much studied in

Rome; but the applied sciences connected with them received a certain

measure of attention. This was most of all true of medicine. In 535

the first Greek physician, the Peloponnesian Archagathus, settled in

Rome and there acquired such repute by his surgical operations, that a

residence was assigned to him on the part of the state and he received

the freedom of the city; and thereafter his colleagues flocked in

crowds to Italy. Cato no doubt not only reviled the foreign medical

practitioners with a zeal worthy of a better cause, but attempted,

by means of his medical manual compiled from his own experience and

probably in part also from the medical literature of the Greeks, to

revive the good old fashion under which the father of the family was

at the same time the family physician. The physicians and the public

gave themselves, as was reasonable, but little concern about his

obstinate invectives: at any rate the profession, one of the most

lucrative which existed in Rome, continued a monopoly in the hands

of the foreigners, and for centuries there were none but Greek

physicians in Rome.

Mathematics

Hitherto the measurement of time had been treated in Rome with

barbarous indifference, but matters were now at least in some degree

improved. With the erection of the first sundial in the Roman Forum

in 491 the Greek hour (--ora--, -hora-) began to come into use at

Rome: it happened, however, that the Romans erected a sundial which

had been prepared for Catana situated four degrees farther to the

south, and were guided by this for a whole century. Towards the end

of this epoch we find several persons of quality taking an interest

in mathematical studies. Manius Acilius Glabrio (consul in 563)

attempted to check the confusion of the calendar by a law, which

allowed the pontifical college to insert or omit intercalary months at

discretion: if the measure failed in its object and in fact aggravated

the evil, the failure was probably owing more to the unscrupulousness

than to the want of intelligence of the Roman theologians. Marcus

Fulvius Nobilior (consul in 565), a man of Greek culture, endeavoured

at least to make the Roman calendar more generally known. Gaius

Sulpicius Gallus (consul in 588), who not only predicted the eclipse

of the moon in 586 but also calculated the distance of the moon

from the earth, and who appears to have come forward even as an

astronomical writer, was regarded on this account by his

contemporaries as a prodigy of diligence and acuteness.

Agriculture and the Art of War

Agriculture and the art of war were, of course, primarily regulated

by the standard of traditional and personal experience, as is very

distinctly apparent in that one of the two treatises of Cato on

Agriculture which has reached our time. But the results of Graeco-

Latin, and even of Phoenician, culture were brought to bear on these

subordinate fields just as on the higher provinces of intellectual

activity, and for that reason the foreign literature relating to

them cannot but have attracted some measure of attention.

Jurisprudence

Jurisprudence, on the other hand, was only in a subordinate degree

affected by foreign elements. The activity of the jurists of this

period was still mainly devoted to the answering of parties consulting

them and to the instruction of younger listeners; but this oral

instruction contributed to form a traditional groundwork of rules,

and literary activity was not wholly wanting. A work of greater

importance for jurisprudence than the short sketch of Cato was the

treatise published by Sextus Aelius Paetus, surnamed the "subtle"

(-catus-), who was the first practical jurist of his time, and, in

consequence of his exertions for the public benefit in this respect,

rose to the consulship (556) and to the censorship (560). His

treatise --the "-Tripartita-" as it was called--was a work on the

Twelve Tables, which appended to each sentence of the text an

explanation--chiefly, doubtless, of the antiquated and unintelligible

expressions--and the corresponding formula of action. While this

process of glossing undeniably indicated the influence of Greek

grammatical studies, the portion treating of the formulae of action,

on the contrary, was based on the older collection of Appius(69)

and on the whole system of procedure developed by national usage

and precedent.

Cato's Encyclopaedia

The state of science generally at this epoch is very distinctly

exhibited in the collection of those manuals composed by Cato for his

son which, as a sort of encyclopaedia, were designed to set forth in

short maxims what a "fit man" (-vir bonus-) ought to be as orator,

physician, husbandman, warrior, and jurist. A distinction was not yet

drawn between the propaedeutic and the professional study of science;

but so much of science generally as seemed necessary or useful was

required of every true Roman. The work did not include Latin grammar,

which consequently cannot as yet have attained that formal development

which is implied in a properly scientific instruction in language; and

it excluded music and the whole cycle of the mathematical and physical

sciences. Throughout it was the directly practical element in science

which alone was to be handled, and that with as much brevity and

simplicity as possible. The Greek literature was doubtless made use

of, but only to furnish some serviceable maxims of experience culled

from the mass of chaff and rubbish: it was one of Cato's commonplaces,

that "Greek books must be looked into, but not thoroughly studied."

Thus arose those household manuals of necessary information, which,

while rejecting Greek subtlety and obscurity, banished also Greek

acuteness and depth, but through that very peculiarity moulded the

attitude of the Romans towards the Greek sciences for all ages.

Character and Historical Position of Roman Literature

Thus poetry and literature made their entrance into Rome along with

the sovereignty of the world, or, to use the language of a poet of

the age of Cicero:

-Poenico bello secundo Musa pennato gradu

Intulit se bellicosam Romuli in gentem feram.-

In the districts using the Sabellian and Etruscan dialects also there

must have been at the same period no want of intellectual movement

Tragedies in the Etruscan language are mentioned, and vases with

Oscan inscriptions show that the makers of them were acquainted with

Greek comedy. The question accordingly presents itself, whether,

contemporarily with Naevius and Cato, a Hellenizing literature like

the Roman may not have been in course of formation on the Arnus and

Volturnus. But all information on the point is lost, and history

can in such circumstances only indicate the blank.

Hellenizing Literature

The Roman literature is the only one as to which we can still form an

opinion; and, however problematical its absolute worth may appear to

the aesthetic judge, for those who wish to apprehend the history of

Rome it remains of unique value as the mirror of the inner mental

life of Italy in that sixth century--full of the din of arms and

pregnant for the future--during which its distinctively Italian phase

closed, and the land began to enter into the broader career of ancient

civilization. In it too there prevailed that antagonism, which

everywhere during this epoch pervaded the life of the nation and

characterized the age of transition. No one of unprejudiced mind,

and who is not misled by the venerable rust of two thousand years,

can be deceived as to the defectiveness of the Hellenistico-Roman

literature. Roman literature by the side of that of Greece resembles

a German orangery by the side of a grove of Sicilian orange-trees;

both may give us pleasure, but it is impossible even to conceive them

as parallel. This holds true of the literature in the mother-tongue

of the Latins still more decidedly, if possible, than of the Roman

literature in a foreign tongue; to a very great extent the former was

not the work of Romans at all, but of foreigners, of half-Greeks,

Celts, and ere long even Africans, whose knowledge of Latin was only

acquired by study. Among those who in this age came before the public

as poets, none, as we have already said, can be shown to have been

persons of rank; and not only so, but none can be shown to have

been natives of Latium proper. The very name given to the poet was

foreign; even Ennius emphatically calls himself a -poeta-(70). But

not only was this poetry foreign; it was also liable to all those

defects which are found to occur where schoolmasters become authors

and the great multitude forms the public. We have shown how comedy

was artistically debased by a regard to the multitude, and in fact

sank into vulgar coarseness; we have further shown that two of the

most influential Roman authors were schoolmasters in the first

instance and only became poets in the sequel, and that, while the

Greek philology which only sprang up after the decline of the national

literature experimented merely on the dead body, in Latium grammar and

literature had their foundations laid simultaneously and went hand

in hand, almost as in the case of modern missions to the heathen. In

fact, if we view with an unprejudiced eye this Hellenistic literature

of the sixth century--that poetry followed out professionally and

destitute of all productiveness of its own, that uniform imitation

of the very shallowest forms of foreign art, that repertoire of

translations, that changeling of epos--we are tempted to reckon

it simply one of the diseased symptoms of the epoch before us.

But such a judgment, if not unjust, would yet be just only in a very

partial sense. We must first of all consider that this artificial

literature sprang up in a nation which not only did not possess any

national poetic art, but could never attain any such art. In

antiquity, which knew nothing of the modern poetry of individual life,

creative poetical activity fell mainly within the mysterious period

when a nation was experiencing the fears and pleasures of growth:

without prejudice to the greatness of the Greek epic and tragic poets

we may assert that their poetry mainly consisted in reproducing the

primitive stories of human gods and divine men. This basis of ancient

poetry was totally wanting in Latium: where the world of gods remained

shapeless and legend remained barren, the golden apples of poetry

could not voluntarily ripen. To this falls to be added a second

and more important consideration.

The inward mental development and the outward political evolution of

Italy had equally reached a point at which it was no longer possible

to retain the Roman nationality based on the exclusion of all higher

and individual mental culture, and to repel the encroachments of

Hellenism. The propagation of Hellenism in Italy had certainly a

revolutionary and a denationalizing tendency, but it was indispensable

for the necessary intellectual equalization of the nations; and this

primarily forms the historical and even the poetical justification of

the Romano-Hellenistic literature. Not a single new and genuine work

of art issued from its workshop, but it extended the intellectual

horizon of Hellas over Italy. Viewed even in its mere outward aspect,

Greek poetry presumes in the hearer a certain amount of positive

acquired knowledge. That self-contained completeness, which is one

of the most essential peculiarities of the dramas of Shakespeare for

instance, was foreign to ancient poetry; a person unacquainted with

the cycle of Greek legend would fail to discover the background and

often even the ordinary meaning of every rhapsody and every tragedy.

If the Roman public of this period was in some degree familiar, as the

comedies of Plautus show, with the Homeric poems and the legends of

Herakles, and was acquainted with at least the more generally current

of the other myths,(71) this knowledge must have found its way to the

public primarily through the stage alongside of the school, and thus

have formed at least a first step towards the understanding of the

Hellenic poetry. But still deeper was the effect--on which the most

ingenious literary critics of antiquity justly laid emphasis--produced

by the naturalization of the Greek poetic language and the Greek

metres in Latium. If "conquered Greece vanquished her rude conqueror

by art," the victory was primarily accomplished by elaborating from

the unpliant Latin idiom a cultivated and elevated poetical language,

so that instead of the monotonous and hackneyed Saturnian the senarius

flowed and the hexameter rushed, and the mighty tetrameters, the

jubilant anapaests, and the artfully intermingled lyrical rhythms

fell on the Latin ear in the mother-tongue. Poetical language is the

key to the ideal world of poetry, poetic measure the key to poetical

feeling; for the man, to whom the eloquent epithet is dumb and the

living image is dead, and in whom the times of dactyls and iambuses

awaken no inward echo, Homer and Sophocles have composed in vain.

Let it not be said that poetical and rhythmical feeling comes

spontaneously. The ideal feelings are no doubt implanted by nature

in the human breast, but they need favourable sunshine in order to

germinate; and especially in the Latin nation, which was but little

susceptible of poetic impulses, they needed external nurture. Nor let

it be said, that, by virtue of the widely diffused acquaintance with

the Greek language, its literature would have sufficed for the

susceptible Roman public. The mysterious charm which language

exercises over man, and which poetical language and rhythm only

enhance, attaches not to any tongue learned accidentally, but only

to the mother-tongue. From this point of view, we shall form a juster

judgment of the Hellenistic literature, and particularly of the

poetry, of the Romans of this period. If it tended to transplant

the radicalism of Euripides to Rome, to resolve the gods either into

deceased men or into mental conceptions, to place a denationalized

Latium by the side of a denationalized Hellas, and to reduce all

purely and distinctly developed national peculiarities to the

problematic notion of general civilization, every one is at liberty to

find this tendency pleasing or disagreeable, but none can doubt its

historical necessity. From this point of view the very defectiveness

of the Roman poetry, which cannot be denied, may be explained and

so may in some degree be justified. It is no doubt pervaded by a

disproportion between the trivial and often bungled contents and the

comparatively finished form; but the real significance of this poetry

lay precisely in its formal features, especially those of language and

metre. It was not seemly that poetry in Rome was principally in the

hands of schoolmasters and foreigners and was chiefly translation or

imitation; but, if the primary object of poetry was simply to form

a bridge from Latium to Hellas, Livius and Ennius had certainly a

vocation to the poetical pontificate in Rome, and a translated

literature was the simplest means to the end. It was still less

seemly that Roman poetry preferred to lay its hands on the most worn-

out and trivial originals; but in this view it was appropriate. No

one will desire to place the poetry of Euripides on a level with that

of Homer; but, historically viewed, Euripides and Menander were quite

as much the oracles of cosmopolitan Hellenism as the Iliad and

Odyssey were the oracles of national Hellenism, and in so far

the representatives of the new school had good reason for

introducing their audience especially to this cycle of literature.

The instinctive consciousness also of their limited poetical powers

may partly have induced the Roman composers to keep mainly by

Euripides and Menander and to leave Sophocles and even Aristophanes

untouched; for, while poetry is essentially national and difficult to

transplant, intellect and wit, on which the poetry of Euripides as

well as of Menander is based, are in their very nature cosmopolitan.

Moreover the fact always deserves to be honourably acknowledged, that

the Roman poets of the sixth century did not attach themselves to the

Hellenic literature of the day or what is called Alexandrinism, but

sought their models solely in the older classical literature, although

not exactly in its richest or purest fields. On the whole, however

innumerable may be the false accommodations and sins against the rules

of art which we can point out in them, these were just the offences

which were by stringent necessity attendant on the far from scrupulous

efforts of the missionaries of Hellenism; and they are, in a

historical and even aesthetic point of view, outweighed in some

measure by the zeal of faith equally inseparable from propagandism.

We may form a different opinion from Ennius as to the value of his new

gospel; but, if in the case of faith it does not matter so much what,

as how, men believe, we cannot refuse recognition and admiration to

the Roman poets of the sixth century. A fresh and strong sense of the

power of the Hellenic world-literature, a sacred longing to transplant

the marvellous tree to the foreign land, pervaded the whole poetry of

the sixth century, and coincided in a peculiar manner with the

thoroughly elevated spirit of that great age. The later refined

Hellenism looked down on the poetical performances of this period

with some degree of contempt; it should rather perhaps have looked

up to the poets, who with all their imperfection yet stood in a more

intimate relation to Greek poetry, and approached nearer to genuine

poetical art, than their more cultivated successors. In the bold

emulation, in the sounding rhythms, even in the mighty professional

pride of the poets of this age there is, more than in any other epoch

of Roman literature, an imposing grandeur; and even those who are

under no illusion as to the weak points of this poetry may apply to

it the proud language, already quoted, in which Ennius celebrates

its praise:

-Enni poeta, salve, qui mortalibus

Versus propinas flammeos medullitus.-

National Opposition

As the Hellenico-Roman literature of this period was essentially

marked by a dominant tendency, so was also its antithesis, the

contemporary national authorship. While the former aimed at neither

more nor less than the annihilation of Latin nationality by the

creation of a poetry Latin in language but Hellenic in form and

spirit, the best and purest part of the Latin nation was driven to

reject and place under the ban of outlawry the literature of Hellenism

along with Hellenism itself. The Romans in the time of Cato stood

opposed to Greek literature, very much as in the time of the Caesars

they stood opposed to Christianity; freedmen and foreigners formed the

main body of the poetical, as they afterwards formed the main body of

the Christian, community; the nobility of the nation and above all

the government saw in poetry as in Christianity an absolutely hostile

power; Plautus and Ennius were ranked with the rabble by the Roman

aristocracy for reasons nearly the same as those for which the

apostles and bishops were put to death by the Roman government.

In this field too it was Cato, of course, who took the lead as the

vigorous champion of his native country against the foreigners. The

Greek literati and physicians were in his view the most dangerous scum

of the radically corrupt Greek people,(72) and the Roman "ballad-

singers" are treated by him with ineffable contempt.(73) He and

those who shared his sentiments have been often and harshly censured

on this account, and certainly the expressions of his displeasure

are not unfrequently characterized by the bluntness and narrowness

peculiar to him; on a closer consideration, however, we must not only

confess him to have been in individual instances substantially right,

but we must also acknowledge that the national opposition in this

field, more than anywhere else, went beyond the manifestly inadequate

line of mere negative defence. When his younger contemporary, Aulus

Postumius Albinus, who was an object of ridicule to the Hellenes

themselves by his offensive Hellenizing, and who, for example, even

manufactured Greek verses--when this Albinus in the preface to his

historical treatise pleaded in excuse for his defective Greek that he

was by birth a Roman--was not the question quite in place, whether he

had been doomed by authority of law to meddle with matters which he

did not understand? Were the trades of the professional translator of

comedies and of the poet celebrating heroes for bread and protection

more honourable, perhaps, two thousand years ago than they are now?

Had Cato not reason to make it a reproach against Nobilior, that he

took Ennius--who, we may add, glorified in his verses the Roman

potentates without respect of persons, and overloaded Cato himself

with praise--along with him to Ambracia as the celebrator of his

future achievements? Had he not reason to revile the Greeks, with

whom he had become acquainted in Rome and Athens, as an incorrigibly

wretched pack? This opposition to the culture of the age and the

Hellenism of the day was well warranted; but Cato was by no means

chargeable with an opposition to culture and to Hellenism in general.

On the contrary it is the highest merit of the national party, that

they comprehended very clearly the necessity of creating a Latin

literature and of bringing the stimulating influences of Hellenism

to bear on it; only their intention was, that Latin literature should

not be a mere copy taken from the Greek and intruded on the national

feelings of Rome, but should, while fertilized by Greek influences,

be developed in accordance with Italian nationality. With a genial

instinct, which attests not so much the sagacity of individuals as

the elevation of the epoch, they perceived that in the case of Rome,

owing to the total want of earlier poetical productiveness, history

furnished the only subject-matter for the development of an

intellectual life of their own. Rome was, what Greece was not, a

state; and the mighty consciousness of this truth lay at the root both

of the bold attempt which Naevius made to attain by means of history a

Roman epos and a Roman drama, and of the creation of Latin prose by

Cato. It is true that the endeavour to replace the gods and heroes of

legend by the kings and consuls of Rome resembles the attempt of the

giants to storm heaven by means of mountains piled one above another:

without a world of gods there is no ancient epos and no ancient drama,

and poetry knows no substitutes. With greater moderation and good

sense Cato left poetry proper, as a thing irremediably lost, to the

party opposed to him; although his attempt to create a didactic poetry

in national measure after the model of the earlier Roman productions

--the Appian poem on Morals and the poem on Agriculture--remains

significant and deserving of respect, in point if not of success, at

least of intention. Prose afforded him a more favourable field, and

accordingly he applied the whole varied power and energy peculiar to

him to the creation of a prose literature in his native tongue. This

effort was all the more Roman and all the more deserving of respect,

that the public which he primarily addressed was the family circle,

and that in such an effort he stood almost alone in his time. Thus

arose his "Origines," his remarkable state-speeches, his treatises

on special branches of science. They are certainly pervaded by a

national spirit, and turn on national subjects; but they are far

from anti-Hellenic: in fact they originated essentially under Greek

influence, although in a different sense from that in which the

writings of the opposite party so originated. The idea and even the

title of his chief work were borrowed from the Greek "foundation-

histories" (--ktoeis--). The same is true of his oratorical

authorship; he ridiculed Isocrates, but he tried to learn from

Thucydides and Demosthenes. His encyclopaedia is essentially the

result of his study of Greek literature. Of all the undertakings

of that active and patriotic man none was more fruitful of results

and none more useful to his country than this literary activity,

little esteemed in comparison as it probably was by himself.

He found numerous and worthy successors in oratorical and scientific

authorship; and though his original historical treatise, which of its

kind may be compared with the Greek logography, was not followed by

any Herodotus or Thucydides, yet by and through him the principle

was established that literary occupation in connection with the

useful sciences as well as with history was not merely becoming

but honourable in a Roman.

Architecture

Let us glance, in conclusion, at the state of the arts of

architecture, sculpture, and painting. So far as concerns the former,

the traces of incipient luxury were less observable in public than in

private buildings. It was not till towards the close of this period,

and especially from the time of the censorship of Cato (570), that

the Romans began in the case of the former to have respect to the

convenience as well as to the bare wants of the public; to line with

stone the basins (-lacus-) supplied from the aqueducts, (570); to

erect colonnades (575, 580); and above all to transfer to Rome the

Attic halls for courts and business--the -basilicae- as they were

called. The first of these buildings, somewhat corresponding to our

modern bazaars--the Porcian or silversmiths' hall--was erected by Cato

in 570 alongside of the senate-house; others were soon associated with

it, till gradually along the sides of the Forum the private shops were

replaced by these splendid columnar halls. Everyday life, however,

was more deeply influenced by the revolution in domestic architecture

which must, at latest, be placed in this period. The hall of the

house (-atrium-), court (-cavum aedium-), garden and garden colonnade

(-peristylium-), the record-chamber (-tablinum-), chapel, kitchen,

and bedrooms were by degrees severally provided for; and, as to the

internal fittings, the column began to be applied both in the court

and in the hall for the support of the open roof and also for the

garden colonnades: throughout these arrangements it is probable

that Greek models were copied or at any rate made use of. Yet the

materials used in building remained simple; "our ancestors," says

Varro, "dwelt in houses of brick, and laid merely a moderate

foundation of stone to keep away damp."

Plastic Art and Painting

Of Roman plastic art we scarcely encounter any other trace than,

perhaps, the embossing in wax of the images of ancestors. Painters

and painting are mentioned somewhat more frequently. Manius Valerius

caused the victory which he obtained over the Carthaginians and Hiero

in 491 off Messana(74) to be depicted on the side wall of the senate-

house--the first historical frescoes in Rome, which were followed by

many of similar character, and which were in the domain of the arts of

design what the national epos and the national drama became not much

later in the domain of poetry. We find named as painters, one

Theodotus who, as Naevius scoffingly said,

-Sedens in cella circumtectus tegetibus

Lares ludentis peni pinxit bubulo;-

Marcus Pacuvius of Brundisium, who painted in the temple of Hercules

in the Forum Boarium--the same who, when more advanced in life, made

himself a name as an editor of Greek tragedies; and Marcus Plautius

Lyco, a native of Asia Minor, whose beautiful paintings in the temple

of Juno at Ardea procured for him the freedom of that city.(75) But

these very facts clearly indicate, not only that the exercise of art

in Rome was altogether of subordinate importance and more of a manual

occupation than an art, but also that it fell, probably still more

exclusively than poetry, into the hands of Greeks and half Greeks.

On the other hand there appeared in genteel circles the first

traces of the tastes subsequently displayed by the dilettante and

the collector. They admired the magnificence of the Corinthian and

Athenian temples, and regarded with contempt the old-fashioned terra-

cotta figures on the roofs of those of Rome: even a man like Lucius

Paullus, who shared the feelings of Cato rather than of Scipio, viewed

and judged the Zeus of Phidias with the eye of a connoisseur. The

custom of carrying off the treasures of art from the conquered Greek

cities was first introduced on a large scale by Marcus Marcellus

after the capture of Syracuse (542). The practice met with severe

reprobation from men of the old school of training, and the stern

veteran Quintus Fabius Maximus, for instance, on the capture of

Tarentum (545) gave orders that the statues in the temples should not

be touched, but that the Tarentines should be allowed to retain their

indignant gods. Yet the plundering of temples in this way became of

more and more frequent occurrence. Titus Flamininus in particular

(560) and Marcus Fulvius Nobilior (567), two leading champions of

Roman Hellenism, as well as Lucius Paullus (587), were the means of

filling the public buildings of Rome with the masterpieces of the

Greek chisel. Here too the Romans had a dawning consciousness of the

truth that an interest in art as well as an interest in poetry formed

an essential part of Hellenic culture or, in other words, of modern

civilization; but, while the appropriation of Greek poetry was

impossible without some sort of poetical activity, in the case of art

the mere beholding and procuring of its productions seemed to suffice,

and therefore, while a native literature was formed in an artificial

way in Rome, no attempt even was made to develop a native art.

Notes for Chapter XIV

1. A distinct set of Greek expressions, such as -stratioticus-,

-machaera-, -nauclerus-, -trapezita-, -danista-, -drapeta-, -

oenopolium-, -bolus-, -malacus-, -morus-, -graphicus-, -logus-,

- apologus-, -techna-, -schema-, forms quite a special feature in

the language of Plautus. Translations are seldom attached, and that

only in the case of words not embraced in the circle of ideas to which

those which we have cited belong; for instance, in the -Truculentus-

--in a verse, however, that is perhaps a later addition (i. 1, 60)

--we find the explanation: --phronesis-- -est sapientia-. Fragments

of Greek also are common, as in the -Casina-, (iii. 6, 9):

--Pragmata moi parecheis-- -- -Dabo- --mega kakon--, -ut opinor-.

Greek puns likewise occur, as in the -Bacchides- (240):

-opus est chryso Chrysalo-.

Ennius in the same way takes for granted that the etymological meaning

of Alexandros and Andromache is known to the spectators (Varro, de L.

L. vii. 82). Most characteristic of all are the half-Greek

formations, such as -ferritribax-, -plagipatida-, -pugilice-,

or in the -Miles Gloriosus- (213):

-Fuge! euscheme hercle astitit sic dulice et comoedice!-

2. III. VIII. Greece Free

3. One of these epigrams composed in the name of Flamininus runs thus:

--Zenos io kraipnaisi gegathotes ipposunaisi

Kouroi, io Spartas Tundaridai basileis,

Aineadas Titos ummin upertatos opase doron

Ellenon teuxas paisin eleutherian.--

4. Such, e. g, was Chilo, the slave of Cato the Elder, who earned

money en bis master's behalf as a teacher of children (Plutarch,

Cato Mai. 20).

5. II. IX. Ballad-Singers

6. The later rule, by which the freedman necessarily bore the

-praenomen- of his patron, was not yet applied in republican Rome.

7. II. VII. Capture of Tarentum

8. III. VI. Battle of Sena

9. One of the tragedies of Livius presented the line--

-Quem ego nefrendem alui Iacteam immulgens opem.-

The verses of Homer (Odyssey, xii. 16):

--oud ara Kirken

ex Aideo elthontes elethomen, alla mal oka

elth entunamene ama d amphipoloi pheron aute

siton kai krea polla kai aithopa oinon eruthron.--

are thus interpreted:

-Topper citi ad aedis--venimus Circae

Simul duona coram(?)--portant ad navis,

Milia dlia in isdem--inserinuntur.-

The most remarkable feature is not so much the barbarism as the

thoughtlessness of the translator, who, instead of sending Circe to

Ulysses, sends Ulysses to Circe. Another still more ridiculous

mistake is the translation of --aidoioisin edoka-- (Odyss. xv. 373)

by -lusi- (Festus, Ep. v. affatim, p. ii, Muller). Such traits are

not in a historical point of view matters of difference; we recognize

in them the stage of intellectual culture which irked these earliest

Roman verse-making schoolmasters, and we at the same time perceive

that, although Andronicus was born in Tarentum, Greek cannot have

been properly his mother-tongue.

10. Such a building was, no doubt, constructed for the Apollinarian

games in the Flaminian circus in 575 (Liv. xl. 51; Becker, Top. p.

605); but it was probably soon afterwards pulled down again (Tertull.

de Spect. 10).

11. In 599 there were still no seats in the theatre (Ritschl, Parerg.

i. p. xviii. xx. 214; comp. Ribbeck, Trag. p. 285); but, as not only

the authors of the Plautine prologues, but Plautus himself on

various occasions, make allusions to a sitting audience (Mil. Glor.

82, 83; Aulul. iv. 9, 6; Triicul. ap. fin.; Epid. ap. fin.), most

of the spectators must have brought stools with them or have seated

themselves on the ground.

12. III. XI. Separation of Orders in the Theatre

13. Women and children appear to have been at all times admitted to

the Roman theatre (Val. Max. vi. 3, 12; Plutarch., Quaest. Rom. 14;

Cicero, de Har. Resp. 12, 24; Vitruv. v. 3, i; Suetonius, Aug.

44,&c.); but slaves were -de jure- excluded (Cicero, de Har. Resp. 12,

26; Ritschl. Parerg. i. p. xix. 223), and the same must doubtless have

been the case with foreigners, excepting of course the guests of the

community, who took their places among or by the side of the senators

(Varro, v. 155; Justin, xliii. 5. 10; Sueton. Aug. 44).

14. III. XII. Moneyed Aristocracy

15. II. IX. Censure of Art

16. It is not necessary to infer from the prologues of Plautus (Cas.

17; Amph. 65) that there was a distribution of prizes (Ritschl,

Parerg. i. 229); even the passage Trin. 706, may very well belong to

the Greek original, not to the translator; and the total silence of

the -didascaliae- and prologues, as well as of all tradition, on

the point of prize tribunals and prizes is decisive.

17. The scanty use made of what is called the middle Attic comedy does

not require notice in a historical point of view, since it was nothing

but the Menandrian comedy in a less developed form. There is no trace

of any employment of the older comedy. The Roman tragi-comedy--after

the type of the -Amphitruo- of Plautus--was no doubt styled by the

Roman literary historians -fabula Rhinthonica-; but the newer Attic

comedians also composed such parodies, and it is difficult to see why

the Ionians should have resorted for their translations to Rhinthon

and the older writers rather than to those who were nearer to their

own times.

18. III. VI In Italy

19. Bacch. 24; Trin. 609; True. iii. 2, 23. Naevius also, who in

fact was generally less scrupulous, ridicules the Praenestines and

Lanuvini (Com. 21, Ribb.). There are indications more than once of a

certain variance between the Praenestines and Romans (Liv. xxiii. 20,

xlii. i); and the executions in the time of Pyrrhus (ii. 18) as well

as the catastrophe in that of Sulla, were certainly connected with

this variance. --Innocent jokes, such as Capt. 160, 881, of course

passed uncensured. --The compliment paid to Massilia in Cas. v. 4., i,

deserves notice.

20. Thus the prologue of the -Cistellaria- concludes with the

following words, which may have a place here as the only contemporary

mention of the Hannibalic war in the literature that has come down

to us:--

-Haec res sic gesta est. Bene valete, et vincite

Virtute vera, quod fecistis antidhac;

Servate vostros socios, veteres et novos;

Augete auxilia vostris iustis legibus;

Perdite perduelles: parite laudem et lauream

Ut vobis victi Poeni poenas sufferant.-

The fourth line (-augete auxilia vostris iustis Iegibus-) has

reference to the supplementary payments imposed on the negligent

Latin colonies in 550 (Liv. xxix. 15; see ii. 350).

21. III. XIII. Increase of Amusements

22. For this reason we can hardly be too cautious in assuming

allusions on the part of Plautus to the events of the times. Recent

investigation has set aside many instances of mistaken acuteness of

this sort; but might not even the reference to the Bacchanalia,

which is found in Cas. v. 4, 11 (Ritschl, Parerg. 1. 192), have been

expected to incur censure? We might even reverse the case and infer

from the notices of the festival of Bacchus in the -Casina-, and some

other pieces (Amph. 703; Aul. iii. i, 3; Bacch. 53, 371; Mil. Glor.

1016; and especially Men. 836), that these were written at a time

when it was not yet dangerous to speak of the Bacchanalia.

23. The remarkable passage in the -Tarentilla- can have no

other meaning:--

-Quae ego in theatro hic meis probavi plausibus,

Ea non audere quemquam regem rumpere:

Quanto libertatem hanc hic superat servitus!-

24. The ideas of the modern Hellas on the point of slavery are

illustrated by the passage in Euripides (Ion, 854; comp. Helena,

728):--

--En gar ti tois douloisin alochunen pherei,

Tounoma ta d' alla panta ton eleutheron

Oudeis kakion doulos, ostis esthlos e.--

25. For instance, in the otherwise very graceful examination which in

the -Stichus- of Plautus the father and his daughters institute into

the qualities of a good wife, the irrelevant question--whether it is

better to marry a virgin or a widow--is inserted, merely in order that

it may be answered by a no less irrelevant and, in the mouth of the

interlocutrix, altogether absurd commonplace against women. But that

is a trifle compared with the following specimen. In Menander's

-Plocium- a husband bewails his troubles to his friend:--

--Echo d' epikleron Lamian ouk eireka soi

Tout'; eit' ap' ouchi; kurian tes oikias

Kai ton agron kai panton ant' ekeines

Echoumen, Apollon, os chalepon chalepotaton

Apasi d' argalea 'stin, ouk emoi mono,

Tio polu mallon thugatri.--pragm' amachon legeis'

Eu oida--

In the Latin edition of Caecilius, this conversation, so elegant in

its simplicity, is converted into the following uncouth dialogue:--

-Sed tua morosane uxor quaeso est?--Ua! rogas?--

Qui tandem?--Taedet rientionis, quae mihi

Ubi domum adveni ac sedi, extemplo savium

Dat jejuna anima.--Nil peccat de savio:

Ut devomas volt, quod foris polaveris.-

26. Even when the Romans built stone theatres, these had not the

sounding-apparatus by which the Greek architects supported the efforts

of the actors (Vitruv. v. 5, 8).

27. III. XIII. Increase of Amusements

28. The personal notices of Naevius are sadly confused. Seeing that

he fought in the first Punic war, he cannot have been born later than

495. Dramas, probably the first, were exhibited by him in 519 (Gell.

xii. 21. 45). That he had died as early as 550, as is usually

stated, was doubted by Varro (ap. Cic. Brut. 15, 60), and certainly

with reason; if it were true, he must have made his escape during the

Hannibalic war to the soil of the enemy. The sarcastic verses on

Scipio (p. 150) cannot have been written before the battle of

Zama. We may place his life between 490 and 560, so that he was a

contemporary of the two Scipios who fell in 543 (Cic. de Rep. iv. 10),

ten years younger than Andronicus, and perhaps ten years older than

Plautus. His Campanian origin is indicated by Gellius, and his Latin

nationality, if proof of it were needed, by himself in his epitaph.

The hypothesis that he was not a Roman citizen, but possibly a burgess

of Cales or of some other Latin town in Campania, renders the fact

that the Roman police treated him so unscrupulously the more easy

of explanation. At any rate he was not an actor, for he served in

the army.

29. Compare, e. g., with the verse of Livius the fragment from

Naevius' tragedy of -Lycurgus- :--

-Vos, qui regalis cordons custodias

Agitatis, ite actutum in frundiferos locos,

Ingenio arbusta ubi nata sunt, non obsita-;

Or the famous words, which in the -Hector Profisciscens- Hector

addresses to Priam:

-Laetus sum laudari me abs te, pater, a laudato viro;-

and the charming verse from the -Tarentilla-; --

-Alii adnutat, alii adnictat; alium amat, alium tenet.-

30. III. XIV. Political Neutrality

31. III. XIV. Political Neutrality

32. This hypothesis appears necessary, because otherwise the ancients

could not have hesitated in the way they did as to the genuineness or

spuriousness of the pieces of Plautus: in the case of no author,

properly so called, of Roman antiquity, do we find anything like a

similar uncertainty as to his literary property. In this respect,

as in so many other external points, there exists the most remarkable

analogy between Plautus and Shakespeare.

33. III. III. The Celts Conquered by Rome, III. VII. Measures Adopted

to Check the Immigration of the Trans-Alpine Gauls

34. III. XIV. Roman Barbarism

35 -Togatus- denotes, in juristic and generally in technical language,

the Italian in contradistinction not merely to the foreigner, but also

to the Roman burgess. Thus especially -formula togatorum- (Corp.

Inscr. Lat., I. n. 200, v. 21, 50) is the list of those Italians bound

to render military serviee, who do not serve in the legions. The

designation also of Cisalpine Gaul as -Gallia togata-, which first

occurs in Hirtius and not long after disappears again from the

ordinary -usus loquendi-, describes this region presumably according

to its legal position, in so far as in the epoch from 665 to 705 the

great majority of its communities possessed Latin rights. Virgil

appears likewise in the -gens togata-, which he mentions along with

the Romans (Aen. i. 282), to have thought of the Latin nation.

According to this view we shall have to recognize in the -fabula

togata-the comedy which laid its plot in Latium, as the -fabula

palliata- had its plot in Greece; the transference of the scene of

action to a foreign land is common to both, and the comic writer is

wholly forbidden to bring on the stage the city or the burgesses of

Rome. That in reality the -togata- could only have its plot laid in

the towns of Latin rights, is shown by the fact that all the towns

in which, to our knowledge, pieces of Titinius and Afranius had their

scene--Setia, Ferentinum, Velitrae, Brundisium,--demonstrably had

Latin or, at any rate, allied rights down to the Social war. By the

extension of the franchise to all Italy the writers of comedy lost

this Latin localisation for their pieces, for Cisalpine Gaul, which

-de jure- took the place of the Latin communities, lay too far off

for the dramatists of the capital, and so the -fabula togata- seems in

fact to have disappeared. But the -de jure- suppressed communities of

Italy, such as Capua and Atella, stepped into this gap (ii. 366, iii.

148), and so far the -fabula Atellana- was in some measure the

continuation of the -togata-.

36. Respecting Titinius there is an utter want of literary

information; except that, to judge from a fragment of Varro, he seems

to have been older than Terence (558-595, Ritschl, Parerg. i. 194) for

more indeed, cannot he inferred from that passage, and though, of the

two groups there compared the second (Trabea, Atilius, Caecilius) is

on the whole older than the first (Titinius, Terentius, Atta), it does

not exactly follow that the oldest of the junior group is to be deemed

younger than the youngest of the elder.

37. II. VII. First Steps toward the Latinizing of Italy

38. Of the fifteen comedies of Titinius, with which we are acquainted,

six are named after male characters (-baratus-? -coecus-, -fullones-,

-Hortensius-, -Quintus-, -varus-), and nine after female (-Gemina-,

-iurisperita-, -prilia-? -privigna-, -psaltria- or -Ferentinatis-,

-Setina-, -tibicina-, -Veliterna-, -Ulubrana?), two of which, the

-iurisperita- and the -tibicina-, are evidently parodies of men's

occupations. The feminine world preponderates also in the fragments.

39. III. XIV. Livius Andronicus

40. III. XIV. Audience

41. We subjoin, for comparison, the opening lines of the -Medea- in

the original of Euripides and in the version of Ennius:--

--Eith' ophel' 'Apgous me diaptasthai skaphos

Kolchon es aian kuaneas sumplegadas

Med' en napaisi Pelion pesein pote

Tmetheisa peuke, med' epetmosai cheras

Andron arioton, oi to pagchruson deros

Pelia metelthon ou gar an despoin

Medeia purgous ges epleus Iolkias

'Eroti thumon ekplageis' 'Iasonos.--

-Utinam ne in nemore Pelio securibus

Caesa accidisset abiegna ad terram trabes,

Neve inde navis inchoandae exordium

Coepisset, quae nunc nominatur nomine

Argo, quia Argivi in ea dilecti viri

Vecti petebant pellem inauratam arietis

Colchis, imperio regis Peliae, per dolum.

Nam nunquam era errans mea domo efferret pedem

Medea, animo aegra, amort saevo saucia.-

The variations of the translation from the original are instructive

--not only its tautologies and periphrases, but also the omission

or explanation of the less familiar mythological names, e. g. the

Symplegades, the Iolcian land, the Argo. But the instances in which

Ennius has really misunderstood the original are rare.

42. III. XI. Roman Franchise More Difficult of Acquisition

43. Beyond doubt the ancients were right in recognizing a sketch of

the poet's own character in the passage in the seventh book of the

Annals, where the consul calls to his side the confidant,

-quocum bene saepe libenter

Mensam sermonesque suos rerumque suarum

Congeriem partit, magnam cum lassus diei

Partem fuisset de summis rebus regundis

Consilio indu foro lato sanctoque senatu:

Cui res audacter magnas parvasque iocumque

Eloqueretur, cuncta simul malaque et bona dictu

Evomeret, si qui vellet, tutoque locaret.

Quocum multa volup ac gaudia clamque palamque,

Ingenium cui nulla malum sententia suadet

Ut faceret facinus lenis aut malus, doctus fidelis

Suavis homo facundus suo contentus beatus

Scitus secunda loquens in tempore commodus verbum

Paucum, multa tenens antiqua sepulta, vetustas

Quem fecit mores veteresque novosque tenentem,

Multorum veterum leges divumque hominumque,

Prudenter qui dicta loquive tacereve possit.-

In the line before the last we should probably read -multarum leges

divumque hominumque.-

44. Euripides (Iph. in Aul. 956) defines the soothsayer as a man,

--Os olig' alethe, polla de pseuon legei

Tuchon, otan de me, tuche oioichetai--

This is turned by the Latin translator into the following diatribe

against the casters of horoscopes:--

-Astrologorum signa in caelo quaesit, observat,

Iovis

Cum capra aut nepa aut exoritur lumen aliquod beluae.

Quod est ante pedes, nemo spectat: caeli scrutantur plagas.-

45. III. XII. Irreligious Spirit

46. In the -Telephus- we find him saying--

-Palam mutire plebeio piaculum est.-

47. III. XIII. Luxury

48. The following verses, excellent in matter and form, belong to the

adaptation of the -Phoenix- of Euripides:--

-Sed virum virtute vera vivere animatum addecet,

Fortiterque innoxium vocare adversum adversarios.

Ea libertas est, qui pectus purum et firmum gestitat:

Aliae res obnoxiosae nocte in obscura latent.-

In the -Scipio-, which was probably incorporated in the collection of

miscellaneous poems, the graphic lines occurred:--

-- -- -mundus caeli vastus constitit silentio,

Et Neptunus saevus undis asperis pausam dedit.

Sol equis iter repressit ungulis volantibus;

Constitere amnes perennes, arbores vento vacant.-

This last passage affords us a glimpse of the way in which the poet

worked up his original poems. It is simply an expansion of the words

which occur in the tragedy -Hectoris Lustra- (the original of which

was probably by Sophocles) as spoken by a spectator of the combat

between Hephaestus and the Scamander:--

-Constitit credo Scamander, arbores vento vacant,-

and the incident is derived from the Iliad (xxi. 381).

49. Thus in the Phoenix we find the line:--

-- -- -stultust, qui cupita cupiens cupienter cupit,-

and this is not the most absurd specimen of such recurring assonances.

He also indulged in acrostic verses (Cic. de Div. ii. 54, iii).

50. III. III. The Celts Conquered by Rome

51. III. IX. Conflicts and Peace with the Aetolians

52. Besides Cato, we find the names of two "consulars and poets"

belonging to this period (Sueton. Vita Terent. 4)--Quintus Labeo,

consul in 571, and Marcus Popillius, consul in 581. But it remains

uncertain whether they published their poems. Even in the case of

Cato this may be doubted.

53. II. IX. Roman Historical Composition

54. III. XII. Irreligious Spirit

55. III. XII. Irreligious Spirit

56. The following fragments will give some idea of its tone. Of Dido

he says:

-Blande et docte percontat--Aeneas quo pacto

Troiam urbem liquerit.-

Again of Amulius:

-Manusque susum ad caelum--sustulit suas rex

Amulius; gratulatur--divis-.

Part of a speech where the indirect construction is remarkable:

-Sin illos deserant for--tissumos virorum

Magnum stuprum populo--fieri per gentis-.

With reference to the landing at Malta in 498:

-Transit Melitam Romanus--insuiam integram

Urit populatur vastat--rem hostium concinnat.-

Lastly, as to the peace which terminated the war concerning Sicily:

-Id quoque paciscunt moenia--sint Lutatium quae

Reconcilient; captivos--plurimos idem

Sicilienses paciscit--obsides ut reddant.-

57. That this oldest prose work on the history of Rome was composed in

Greek, is established beyond a doubt by Dionys. i. 6, and Cicero, de

Div. i. 21, 43. The Latin Annals quoted under the same name by

Quintilian and later grammarians remain involved in mystery, and the

difficulty is increased by the circumstance, that there is also quoted

under the same name a very detailed exposition of the pontifical law

in the Latin language. But the latter treatise will not be attributed

by any one, who has traced the development of Roman literature in its

connection, to an author of the age of the Hannibalic war; and even

Latin annals from that age appear problematical, although it must

remain a moot question whether there has been a confusion of the

earlier with a later annalist, Quintus Fabius Maximus Servilianus

(consul in 612), or whether there existed an old Latin edition of the

Greek Annals of Fabius as well as of those of Acilius and Albinus, or

whether there were two annalists of the name of Fabius Pictor.

The historical work likewise written in Greek, ascribed to Lucius

Cincius Alimentus a contemporary of Fabius, seems spurious and a

compilation of the Augustan age.

58. Cato's whole literary activity belonged to the period of his old

age (Cicero, Cat. ii, 38; Nepos, Cato, 3); the composition even of the

earlier books of the "Origines" falls not before, and yet probably not

long subsequent to, 586 (Plin. H. N. iii. 14, 114).

59. It is evidently by way of contrast with Fabius that Polybius

(xl. 6, 4) calls attention to the fact, that Albinus, madly fond of

everything Greek, had given himself the trouble of writing history

systematically [--pragmatiken iotorian--].

60. II. IX. Roman Early History of Rome

61. III. XIV. Knowledge of Languages

62. For instance the history of the siege of Gabii is compiled from

the anecdotes in Herodotus as to Zopyrus and the tyrant Thrasybulus,

and one version of the story of the exposure of Romulus is framed

on the model of the history of the youth of Cyrus as Herodotus

relates it.

63. III. VII. Measures Adopted to Check the Immigration of the

Transalpine Gauls

64. II. IX. Roman Early History of Rome

65. II. IX. Registers of Magistrates

66. Plautus (Mostell. 126) says of parents, that they teach their

children -litteras-, -iura-, -leges-; and Plutarch (Cato Mai. 20)

testifies to the same effect.

67. II. IX. Philology

68. Thus in his Epicharmian poems Jupiter is so called, -quod iuvat-;

and Ceres, -quod gerit fruges.-

The History of Rome (Volumes 1-5) · 第 30 / 54 章