As in most other states, corruption of manners was the consequence of

prosperity and the cause of decay. Towards the close of the third century

of Rome, Pythagoras had in some measure succeeded in reforming the morals

of Crotona, while the rival state of Sybaris, like the Moorish Grenada,

hastened to destruction, amid carousals and civil dissensions; and though

once capable, as is said, (but probably with some exaggeration,) of

bringing three hundred thousand soldiers into the field(102), it sunk,

after a short struggle, under the power of Crotona. The other independent

states were successively agitated by the violence of popular revolution,

and crushed by the severity of despotism. As in the mother country, they

had constant dissensions among themselves. This rivalship induced them to

call in the assistance of the Sicilians—a measure which prepared the way

for their subjection to the vigorous but detestable sway of the elder

Dionysius, and of Agathocles. Tarentum, founded about the same time with

Sybaris and Crotona, was the most powerful city of the Grecian colonies

toward the conclusion of their political existence, and the last

formidable rival to the Romans in Italy. Like the neighbouring states, it

was chiefly ruined by the succour of foreign allies. Unsuccessfully

defended by Alexander Molossus, oppressed by the Syracusan tyrants, and

despoiled by Cleomenes of Sparta, neither the genius of Pyrrhus, nor the

power of Carthage, could preserve it from the necessity of final

submission to the Romans.

In all their varieties of fortune, the Grecian colonies had maintained the

manners and institutions of the mother country, which no people ever

entirely relinquish with the soil they have left. A close political

connection also subsisted between them; and, about the year 300 of Rome,

the Athenians sent to the assistance of Sybaris a powerful expedition,

which, on the decay of that city, founded the town of Thurium in the

immediate vicinity. This constant intercourse cherished and preserved the

literary spirit of the colonies of Magna Græcia. Herodotus, the father of

history, and Lysias, whose orations are the purest models of the simple

Attic eloquence, were, in early youth, among the original founders of the

colony of Thurium(103), and the latter held a share in its government till

an advanced period of life. The Eleatic school of philosophy was founded

in Magna Græcia; and the impulse which the wisdom of Pythagoras had given

to the mind, promoted also the studies of literature. Plato visited

Tarentum during the consulship of Lucius Camillus and Appius

Claudius(104), which was in the 406th year of Rome, and Zeuxis was invited

from Greece to paint at Crotona the magnificent temple of Juno, which had

been erected in that city(105). History and poetry were cultivated with a

success which did not dishonour the Grecian name. Lycus of Rhegium was the

civil, and Glaucus of the same city was the literary historian of Magna

Græcia. Orpheus of Crotona was the author of a poem on the expedition of

the Argonauts, attributed to an elder Orpheus. The lyric productions of

Ibicus of Rhegium rivalled those of Anacreon and Alcæus. Two hundred and

fifty-five comedies, written by Alexis of Thurium, the titles of which

have been collected by Meursius, and a few fragments of them by Stephens,

are said to have been composed in the happiest vein of the middle comedy

of the Greeks, which possessed much of the comic force of Aristophanes and

Cratinus, without their malignity. In his Meropis and Ancylio, this

dramatist is supposed to have carped at Plato; and his comedy founded on

the life of Pythagoras, was probably in a similar vein of satire.

Stephano, the son of Alexis, and who, according to Suidas, was the uncle

of Menander, became chiefly celebrated for his tragedies; but his comedies

were also distinguished by happy pictures of life, and uncommon harmony of

versification.

War, which had so long retarded the progress of literature at Rome, at

length became the cause of its culture. The Romans were now involved in a

contest with the civilized colonies of Magna Græcia. Accordingly, when

they garrisoned Thurium, in order to defend it against the Samnites, and

when in 482 they obtained complete possession of Magna Græcia, by the

capture of Tarentum, which presented the last resistance to their arms,

they could not fail to catch a portion of Grecian taste and spirit, or at

least to admire the beautiful creations of Grecian fancy. Many of the

conquerors remained in Magna Græcia, while, on the other hand, all the

inhabitants of its cities, who were most distinguished for literary

attainments, fixed their residence at Rome.

The first Carthaginian war, which broke out in 489, so far from retarding

the literary influence of these strangers, accelerated the steps of

improvement. Unlike the former contests of the Romans, which were either

with neighbouring states, or with barbarous nations who came to attack

them in their own territories, it was not attended with that immediate

danger which is utterly inconsistent with literary leisure. In its

prosecution, too, the Romans for the first time carried their arms beyond

Italy. Literature, indeed, was not one of those novelties in which the

western part of Africa was fruitful, but, with the exception of Greece

itself, there was no country where it flourished more luxuriantly than in

Sicily; and that island, as is well known, was the principal scene of the

first great struggle between Rome and Carthage. None of the Grecian

colonies shone with such splendour as Syracuse, a city founded by the

Dorians of Corinth, in the 19th year of Rome. This capital had attained

the summit both of political and literary renown long before the first

Carthaginian war. Æschylus passed the concluding years of his life in

Sicily, and wrote, it is said, his tragedy of _The Persians_, to gratify

the curiosity of Hiero I. King of Syracuse, who was desirous to see a

representation of the celebrated war which the Greeks had waged against

Xerxes. Epicharmus, retained in the same elegant court, was the first who

rejected, on the stage, the ancient mummeries of the satires, and composed

dramas on that regular elaborate plan, which was reckoned worthy of

imitation by Plautus—

“Dicitur ————————————

Plautus ad exemplar Siculi properare Epicharmi(106).”

Dionysius, the tyrant, was also a patron of learning, and was himself a

competitor in the fields of literature. Philistus, the historian, was the

friend of the elder, and Plato of the younger Dionysius. Aristippus and

Æschines passed some time in the court of these tyrants. Theocritus, and

other poets of the Alexandrian constellation, resided in Sicily before

they partook in Egypt of the splendid patronage of the Ptolemies. The

Syracusans, who put to death so many of their Athenian prisoners in cold

blood, and with frightful tortures, spared those of them who could recite

the verses of Euripides. Scenic representations were peculiarly popular in

Sicily: Its towns were crowded with theatres, and its dramatists were

loaded with honours. The theatrical exhibitions which the Roman invaders

of Sicily must have witnessed, and the respect there paid to distinguished

poets, would naturally awaken literary emulation. During a contest of

nearly twenty-four years between Rome and Carthage, Hiero II., King of

Syracuse, was the zealous and strenuous ally of the Romans. At the

conclusion of peace between these rival nations, in the year 512, part of

Sicily was ceded to the Romans, and the intercourse which consequently

arose with the inhabitants of this newly-acquired territory, laid the

foundation of those studies, which were afterwards brought to perfection

by the progress of time, and by direct communication with Greece

itself(107).

Accordingly, it is in the end of the fifth, and beginning of the sixth

century, from the building of Rome, that we find among its inhabitants the

earliest vestiges of literature. Poetry, as with most other nations, was

the first of the liberal arts which was cultivated among the Romans; and

dramatic poetry, founded on the school of Greece, appears to have been

that which was earliest preferred. We have seen, indeed, that previous to

this period, and in the year 392, when the city was afflicted with a

plague, the Senate decreed that players should be summoned from Etruria to

appease the wrath of the gods by scenic representations, and that the

Roman youth imitated these expiatory performances, by rallying each other

in extemporary verses. This by some has been considered as a dawning of

the drama, since the characters probably bore a resemblance to the

Arlequin and Scaramouch of the Italian farces. But

LIVIUS ANDRONICUS,

A native of Magna Græcia, was the first who attempted to establish at Rome

a regular theatre, or to connect a dramatic fable, free from the

mummeries, the _ballet_, and the melodrama of the ancient satires(108).

Tiraboschi asserts, that when his country was finally subdued by the

Romans, in 482, Livius was made captive and brought to Rome(109). It is

generally believed that he there became the slave, and afterwards the

freedman of Livius Salinator, from whom he derived one of his names: these

facts, however, do not seem to rest on any authority more ancient than the

Eusebian Chronicle(110). The precise period of his death is uncertain; but

in Cicero’s Dialogue _De Senectute_, Cato is introduced saying, that he

had seen old Livius while he was himself a youth(111). Now Cato was born

in 519, and since the period of youth among the Romans was considered as

commencing at fifteen, it may be presumed that the existence of Livius was

at least protracted till the year 534 of the city. It has been frequently

said, that he lived till the year 546(112), because Livy(113) mentions

that a hymn composed by this ancient poet was publicly sung in that year,

to avert the disasters threatened by an alarming prodigy; but the

historian does not declare that it was written for the occasion, or even

recently before.

The earliest play of Livius was represented in 513 or 514, about a year

after the termination of the first Punic war. Osannus, a modern German

author, has written a learned and chronological dissertation on the

question, in which of these years the first Roman play was performed(114);

but it is extremely difficult for us to come to any satisfactory

conclusion on a subject which, even in the time of Cicero, was one of

doubt and controversy(115). Like Thespis, and other dramatists in the

commencement of the theatrical art, Livius was an actor, and for a

considerable time the sole performer in his own pieces. Afterwards,

however, his voice failing, in consequence of the audience insisting on a

repetition of favourite passages, he introduced a boy who relieved him, by

declaiming in concert with the flute, while he himself executed the

corresponding gesticulations in the monologues, and in the parts where

high exertion was required, employing his own voice only in the

conversational and less elevated scenes(116). It was observed that his

action grew more lively and animated, because he exerted his whole

strength in gesticulating, while another had the care and trouble of

pronouncing. “Hence,” continues Livy, “the practice arose of reciting

those passages which required much modulation of the voice, to the gesture

and action of the comedian. Thenceforth the custom so far prevailed, that

the comedians never pronounced anything except the verses of the

dialogues(117):” And this system, which one should think must have

completely destroyed the theatric illusion, continued, under certain

modifications, to subsist on the Roman stage during the most refined

periods of taste and literature.

The popularity of Livius increasing from these performances, as well as

from a propitiatory hymn he had composed, and which had been followed by

great public success, a building was assigned to him on the Aventine hill.

This edifice was partly converted into a theatre, and was also inhabited

by a troop of players, for whom Livius wrote his pieces, and frequently

acted along with them(118).

It has been disputed whether the first drama represented by Livius

Andronicus at Rome was a tragedy or comedy(119). However this may be, it

appears from the names which have been preserved of his plays, that he

wrote both tragedies and comedies. These titles, which have been collected

by Fabricius and other writers, are, _Achilles_, _Adonis_, _Ægisthus_,

_Ajax_, _Andromeda_, _Antiopa_, _Centauri_, _Equus Trojanus_, _Helena_,

_Hermione_, _Ino_, _Lydius_, _Protesilaodamia_, _Serenus_, _Tereus_,

_Teucer_, _Virgo_(120). Such names also evince that most of his dramas

were translated or imitated from the works of his countrymen of Magna

Græcia, or from the great tragedians of Greece. Thus, Æschylus wrote a

tragedy on the subject of Ægisthus: There is still an Ajax of Sophocles

extant, and he is known to have written an Andromeda: Stobæus mentions the

Antiopa of Euripides: Four Greek dramatists, Sophocles, Euripides,

Anaxandrides, and Philæterus, composed tragedies on the subject of Tereus;

and Epicharmus, as well as others, chose for their comedies the story of

the Syrens.

Little, however, except the titles, remains to us, from the dramas of

Livius. The longest passage we possess in connection, extends only to four

lines. It forms part of a hymn to Diana, recited by the chorus, in the

tragedy of _Ino_, and contains an animated exhortation to a person about

to proceed to the chase:—

“Et jam purpureo suras include cothurno,

Baltheus et revocet volucres in pectore sinus;

Pressaque jam gravida crepitent tibi terga pharetra:

Dirige odorisequos ad cæca cubilia canes(121).”

This passage testifies the vast improvement effected by Livius on the

Latin Tongue; and indeed the polish of the language and metrical

correctness of these hexameter lines, have of late led to a suspicion that

they are not the production of a period so ancient as the age of

Livius(122), or at least that they have been modernised by some later

hand. With this earliest offspring of the Latin muse, it may be curious to

compare a production from her last age of decrepitude. Nemesianus, in his

_Cynegeticon_, has closely imitated this passage while exhorting Diana to

prepare for the chase:

“Sume habitus, arcumque manu; pictamque pharetram

Suspende ex humeris; sint aurea tela, sagittæ;

Candida puniceis aptentur crura cothurnis:

Sit chlamys aurato multum subtemine lusa,

Corrugesque sinus gemmatis baltheus artet

Nexibus ——”

As the above-quoted verses in the chorus of the _Ino_ are the only passage

among the fragments of Livius, from which a connected meaning can be

elicited, we must take our opinion of his poetical merits from those who

judged of them while his writings were yet wholly extant. Cicero has

pronounced an unfavourable decision, declaring that they scarcely deserved

a second perusal(123). They long, however, continued popular in Rome, and

were read by the youths in schools even during the Augustan age of poetry.

It is evident, indeed, that during that golden period of Roman literature,

there prevailed a taste corresponding to our black-letter rage, which led

to an inordinate admiration of the works of Livius, and to the bitter

complaints of Horace, that they should be extolled as perfect, or held up

by old pedants to the imitation of youth in an age when so much better

models existed:

“Non equidem insector, delendaque carmina Livi

Esse reor, memini quæ plagosum mihi parvo

Orbilium dictare; sed emendata videri,

Pulchraque, et exactis minimum distantia, miror:

Inter quæ verbum emicuit si forte decorum, et

Si versus paulo concinnior unus et alter;

Injuste totum ducit venditque poema(124).”

But although Livius may have been too much read in the schools, and too

much admired in an age, which could boast of models so greatly superior to

his writings, he is at least entitled to praise, as the inventor among the

Romans of a species of poetry which was afterwards carried by them to much

higher perfection. By translating the Odyssey, too, into Latin verse, he

adopted the means which, of all others, was most likely to foster and

improve the infant literature of his country—as he thus presented it with

an image of the most pure and perfect taste, and at the same time with

those wild and romantic adventures, which are best suited to attract the

sympathy and interest of a half-civilized nation. This happy influence

could not be prevented even by the use of the rugged Saturnian verse,

which led Cicero to compare the translation of Livius to the ancient

statues, which might be attributed to Dædalus(125).

The Latin Odyssey commenced—

“Virum mihi, Camena, insece versutum.”

There have also been three lines preserved by Festus, which are translated

from the 8th Book, expressing the effects produced on the mind by a

sea-storm—

—— “Namque nilum pejus

Macerat hemonem quamde mare sævom: vires quoi

Sunt magnæ, topper confringent importunæ undæ(126).”

From the æra in which the dramatic productions of Livius appeared,

theatrical representations formed the object of a peculiar art. The more

regular drama, founded on that of Magna Græcia, or Sicily, being divided

into tragedy and comedy, became, in a great measure, the province of

professional players or authors, while the Roman youths of distinction

continued to amuse themselves with the _Fabulæ Atellanæ_, and _Exodia_, a

species of satirical medley, derived from the ancient Etruscans, or from

the Osci, the nature and progress of which I shall hereafter have occasion

more particularly to examine.

CNEIUS NÆVIUS,

A native of Campania, was the first imitator of the regular dramatic works

which had been produced by Livius Andronicus. He served in the first Punic

war, and his earliest plays were represented at Rome in the year 519(127).

The names of his tragedies, from which as few fragments remain as from

those of Livius, are still preserved:—_Alcestis_, (from which there is yet

extant a description of old age in rugged and barbarous verse)—_Danae_,

_Dulorestes_, _Hesiona_, _Hector_, _Iphigenia_, _Lycurgus_, _Phœnissæ_,

_Protesilaus_, and _Telephus_. All these were translated, or closely

imitated from the works of Euripides, Anaxandrides, and other Greek

dramatists. Cicero commends a passage in the _Hector_, one of the

above-mentioned tragedies(128), where the hero of the piece, delighted

with the praises which he had received from his father Priam, exclaims—

“—— Lætus sum

Laudari me abs te, pater, laudato viro(129).”

Nævius, however, was accounted a better comic than tragic poet. Cicero has

given us some specimens of his jests, with which that celebrated wit and

orator appears to have been greatly amused; but they consist rather in

unexpected turns of expression, or a play of words, than in genuine

humour. One of these, recorded in the second Book _De Oratore_, has found

its way into our jest-books; and though one of the best in Cicero, it is

one of the worst of Joe Miller. It is the saying of a knavish servant,

“that nothing was shut up from him in his master’s house”.—“Solum esse,

cui domi nihil sit nec obsignatum, nec occlusum: Quod idem,” adds Cicero,

“in bono servo dici solet, sed hoc iisdem etiam verbis.”

Unfortunately for Nævius, he did not always confine himself in his

comedies to such inoffensive jests. The dramas of Magna Græcia and Sicily,

especially those of Epicharmus, were the prototypes of the older Greek

comedy; and accordingly the most ancient Latin plays, particularly those

of Nævius, which were formed on the same school, though there be no

evidence that they ridiculed political events, partook of the personal

satire and invective which pervaded the productions of Aristophanes. If,

as is related, the comedies of Nævius were directed against the vices and

corporal defects of the Consuls and Senators of Rome, he must have been

the most original of the Latin comic poets, and infinitely more so than

Plautus or Terence; since although he may have parodied or copied the

dramatic fables of the ancient Greek or Sicilian comedies, the spirit and

colouring of the particular scenes must have been his own. The elder

Scipio was one of the chief objects of his satiric representations, and

the poetic severity with which Aristophanes persecuted Socrates or

Euripides, was hardly more indecent and misdirected than the sarcasms of

Nævius against the greatest captain, the most accomplished scholar, and

the most virtuous citizen of his age. Some lines are still extant, in

which he lampooned Scipio on account of a youthful amour, in which he had

been detected by his father—

“Etiam qui res magnas manu sæpe gessit gloriose,

Cujus facta viva nunc vigent, qui apud gentes solus

Præstat, eum suus pater, cum pallio uno, ab amicâ abduxit.”

The conqueror of Hannibal treated these libels with the same indifference

with which Cæsar afterwards regarded the lines of Catullus. Nævius,

however, did not long escape with impunity. Rome was a very different sort

of republic from Athens: It was rather an aristocracy than a democracy,

and its patricians were not always disposed to tolerate the taunts and

insults which the chiefs of the Greek democracy were obliged to endure.

Nævius had said in one of his verses, that the patrician family of the

Metelli had frequently obtained the Consulship before the age permitted by

law, and he insinuated that they had been promoted to this dignity, not in

consequence of their virtues, but the cruelty of the Roman fate:

“Fato Metelli Romæ fiunt Consules.”

With the assistance of the other patricians, the Metelli retorted his

sarcasms in a Saturnian stanza, not unlike the measure of some of our old

ballads, in which they threatened to play the devil with their witty

persecutor—

“Et Nævio Poetæ,

Cum sæpe læderentur,

Dabunt malum Metelli,

Dabunt malum Metelli,

Dabunt malum Metelli.”

The Metelli, however, did not confine their vengeance to this ingenious

and spirited satire, in the composition of which, it may be presumed that

the whole Roman Senate was engaged. On account of the unceasing abuse and

reproaches which he had uttered against them, and other chief men of the

city, he was thrown into prison, where he wrote his comedies, the

_Hariolus_ and _Leontes_. These plays being in some measure intended as a

recantation of his former invectives, he was liberated by the tribunes of

the people.(130) He soon, however, relapsed into his former courses, and

continued to persecute the nobility in his dramas and satires with such

implacable dislike, that he was at length driven from Rome by their

influence, and having retired to Utica(131), he died there, in the year

550, according to Cicero(132); but Varro fixes his death somewhat later.

Before leaving Rome, he had composed the following epitaph on himself,

which Gellius remarks is full of Campanian arrogance; though the import of

it, he adds, might be allowed to be true, had it been written by

another(133);

“Mortales immortales flere si foret fas,

Flerent divæ Camœnæ Nævium poetam;

Itaque postquam est Orcino traditus thesauro,

Oblitei sunt Romæ loquier Latina lingua(134).”

Besides his comedies and the above epitaph, Nævius was also author of the

Cyprian Iliad, a translation from a Greek poem, called the _Cyprian Epic_.

Aristotle, in the 23d chapter of his Poetics, mentions the original work,

(τα κυπρια,) which, he says, had furnished many subjects for the drama.

Some writers, particularly Pindar, have attributed this Greek poem to

Homer; and there was long an idle story current, that he had given it as a

portion to his daughter Arsephone. Herodotus, in his second Book,

concludes, after some critical discussion, that it was not written by

Homer, but that it was doubtless the work of a contemporary poet, or one

who lived shortly after him. Heyne thinks it most probable, that it was by

a poet called Stasinus, a native of the island of Cyprus, and that it

received its name from the country of its author(135). Whoever may have

written this Cyprian Epic, it contained twelve books, and was probably a

work of amorous and romantic fiction. It commenced with the nuptials of

Thetis and Peleus—it related the contention of the three goddesses on

Mount Ida—the fables concerning Palamedes—the story of the daughters of

Anius—and the love adventures of the Phrygian fair during the early period

of the siege of Troy—and it terminated with the council of the gods, at

which it was resolved that Achilles should be withdrawn from the war, by

sowing dissension between him and Atrides(136).

History of Roman Literature from its Earliest Period to the Augustan Age. Vol. I · 第 4 / 36 段