Skip to content

Chapter XIX: Section XVII

Text size

[a] Menenius Agrippa was consul A.U.C. 251. In less than ten years afterwards, violent dissensions broke out between the patrician order and the common people, who complained that they were harassed and oppressed by their affluent creditors. One Sicinius was their factious demagogue. He told them, that it was in vain they fought the battles of their country, since they were no better than slaves and prisoners at Rome. He added, that men are born equal; that the fruits of the earth were the common birth-right of all, and an agrarian law was necessary; that they groaned under a load of debts and taxes; and that a lazy and corrupt aristocracy battened at ease on the spoils of their labour and industry. By the advice of this incendiary, the discontented citizens made a secession to the MONS SACER, about three miles out of the city. The fathers, in the meantime, were covered with consternation. In order, however, to appease the fury of the multitude, they dispatched Menenius Agrippa to their camp. In the rude unpolished style of the times (_prisco illo dicendi et horrido modo_, says Livy), that orator told them:

"At the time when the powers of man did not, as at present,
co-operate to one useful end, and the members of the human
body had their separate interest, their factions, and
cabals; it was agreed among them, that the belly maintained
itself by their toil and labour, enjoying, in the middle of
all, a state of calm repose, pampered with luxuries, and
gratified with every kind of pleasure. A conspiracy
followed, and the several members of the body took the
covenant. The hand would no longer administer food; the
mouth would not accept it, and the drudgery of mastication
was too much for the teeth. They continued in this
resolution, determined to starve the TREASURY of the body,
till they began to feel the consequences of their
ill-advised revolt. The several members lost their former
vigour, and the whole body was falling into a rapid decline.
It was then seen that the belly was formed for the good of
the whole; that it was by no means lazy, idle, and inactive;
but, while it was properly supported, took care to
distribute nourishment to every part, and having digested
the supplies, filled the veins with pure and wholesome
blood."

The analogy, which this fable bore to the sedition of the Roman people, was understood and felt. The discontented multitude saw that the state of man described by Menenius, was _like to an insurrection_. They returned to Rome, and submitted to legal government. _Tempore, quo in homine non, ut nunc, omnia in unum consentiebant, sed singulis membris suum cuique consilium, sum sermo fuerat, indignatas reliquas partes, suâ curâ, suo labore, ac ministerio, ventri omnia quæri; ventrem in medio quietum, nihil aliud, quam datis voluptatibus frui; conspirasse inde, ne manus ad os cibum ferrent, nec os acciperit datum, nec dentes conficerent. Hac irâ dum ventrem fame domare vellent, ipsa unâ membra, totumque corpus ad extremam tabem venisse. Inde apparuisse, ventris quoque haud segne ministerium esse; nec magis ali quam alere eum; reddentem in omnes corporis partes hunc, quo vivimus vigemusque, divisum, pariter in venas, maturum confecto cibo sanguinem._ Livy, lib. ii. s. 32. St. Paul has made use of a similar argument;

"The body is not one member, but many: if the foot shall
say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it,
therefore, not of the body? and if the ear shall say,
Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it,
therefore, not of the body? If the whole body were an eye,
where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where
were the smelling? But now hath God set the members everyone
of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. And if they
were all one member, where were the body? But now are they
many members, yet but one body: and the eye cannot say unto
the hand, I have no need of thee; nor again, the head to the
feet, I have no need of you. And whether one member suffer,
all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured,
all the members rejoice with it."
_First Epistle to the Corinthians_, chap. xii.

This reasoning of St. Paul merits the attention of those friends of innovation, who are not content with the station in which God has placed them, and, therefore, object to all subordination, all ranks in society.

[b] Cæsar the dictator was, as the poet expresses it, graced with both Minervas. Quintilian is of opinion, that if he had devoted his whole time to the profession of eloquence, he would have been the great rival of Cicero. The energy of his language, his strength of conception, and his power over the passions, were so striking, that he may be said to have harangued with the same spirit that he fought. _Caius vero Cæsar si foro tantum vacasset, non alius ex nostris contra Ciceronem nominaretur. Tanta in eo vis est, id acumen, ea concitatio, ut illum eodem animo dixisse, quo bellavit, appareat._ Lib. x. cap. 1. To speak of Cicero in this place, were to hold a candle to the sun. It will be sufficient to refer to Quintilian, who in the chapter above cited has drawn a beautiful parallel between him and Demosthenes. The Roman orator, he admits, improved himself by a diligent study of the best models of Greece. He attained the warmth and the sublime of Demosthenes, the harmony of Plato, and the sweet flexibility of Isocrates. His own native genius supplied the rest. He was not content, as Pindar expresses it, to collect the drops that rained down from heaven, but had in himself the living fountain of that copious flow, and that sublime, that pathetic energy, which were bestowed upon him by the bounty of Providence, that in one man eloquence might exert all her powers. _Nam mihi videtur Marcus Tullius, cum se totum ad imitationem Græcorum contulisset, effinxisse vim Demosthenis, copiam Platonis, jucunditatem Isocratis. Nec vero quod in quoque optimum fuit studio consecutus est tantum, sed plurimas vel potius omnes ex se ipso virtutes extulit immortalis ingenii beatissimâ ubertate. Non enim pluvias (ut ait Pindarus) aquas colligit sed vivo gurgite exundat, dono quodam providentiæ genitus, in quo vires suas eloquentia experiretur._ Lib. x. cap. 1.

[c] Marcus Cælius Rufus, in the judgement of Quintilian, was an orator of considerable genius. In the conduct of a prosecution, he was remarkable for a certain urbanity, that gave a secret charm to his whole speech. It is to be regretted that he was not a man of better conduct and longer life. _Multum ingenii in Cælio, et præcipuè in accusando multa urbanitas; dignusque vir, cui et mens melior, et vita longior contigisset._ Quint, lib. x. cap. 1. His letters to Cicero make the eighth book of the _Epistolæ ad Familiares_. Velleius Paterculus says of him, that his style of eloquence and his cast of mind bore a resemblance to Curio, but raised him above that factious orator. His genius for mischief and evil deeds was not inferior to Curio, and his motives were strong and urgent, since his fortune was worse than even his frame of mind. _Marcus Cælius, vir eloquio animoque Curioni simillimus, sed in utroque perfectior; nec minus ingeniosè nequam, cum ne in modicâ quidem servari posset, quippe pejor illi res familiaris, quam mens._ Vell. Patere. lib. ii. s. 68.

Licinius Macer Calvus, we are told by Seneca, maintained a long but unjust contention with Cicero himself for the palm of eloquence. He was a warm and vehement accuser, insomuch that Vatinius, though defended by Cicero, interrupted Calvus in the middle of his speech, and said to the judges, "Though this man has a torrent of words, does it follow that I must be condemned?" _Calvus diu cum Cicerone iniquissimam litem de principatu eloquentiæ habuit; et usque eò violentus accusator et concitatus fuit, ut in media actione ejus surgeret Vatinius reus, et exclamaret, Rogo vos, judices, si iste disertus est, ideo me damnari oportet?_ Seneca, _Controv._ lib. iii. cap. 19. Cicero could not dread him as a rival, and it may therefore be presumed, that he has drawn his character with an impartial hand. Calvus was an orator more improved by literature than Curio. He spoke with accuracy, and in his composition shewed great taste and delicacy; but, labouring to refine his language, he was too attentive to little niceties. He wished to make no bad blood, and he lost the good. His style was polished with timid caution; but while it pleased the ear of the learned, the spirit evaporated, and of course made no impression in the forum, which is the theatre of eloquence. _Ad Calvum revertamur; qui orator fuisset cum literis eruditior quam Curio, tum etiam accuratius quoddam dicendi, et exquisitius afferebat genus; quod quamquam scienter eleganterque tractabat, nimium tamen inquirens in se, atque ipse sese observans, metuensque ne vitiosum colligeret, etiam verum sanguinem deperdebat. Itaque ejus oratio nimiâ religione attenuata, doctis et attentè audientibus erat illustris, a multitudine autem, et a foro, cui nata eloquentia est, devorabatur._ _De Claris Orat._ s. 288. Quintilian says, there were, who preferred him to all the orators of his time. Others were of opinion that, by being too severe a critic on himself, he polished too much, and grew weak by refinement. But his manner was grave and solid; his style was chaste, and often animated. To be thought a man of attic eloquence was the height of his ambition. If he had lived to see his error, and to give to his eloquence a true and perfect form, not by retrenching (for there was nothing to be taken away), but by adding certain qualities that were wanted, he would have reached the summit of his art. By a premature death his fame was nipped in the bud. _Inveni qui Calvum præferrent omnibus; inveni qui contrà crederent eum, nimiâ contra se calumniâ, verum sanguinem perdidisse. Sed est et sancta et gravis oratio, et castigata, et frequenter vehemens quoque. Imitator est autem Atticorum; fecitque illi properata mors injuriam, si quid adjecturus, non si quid detracturus fuit._ Quintil. lib. x. cap. 1.

[d] This was the famous Marcus Junius Brutus, who stood forth in the cause of liberty, and delivered his country from the usurpation of Julius Cæsar. Cicero describes him in that great tragic scene, brandishing his bloody dagger, and calling on Cicero by name, to tell him that his country was free. _Cæsare interfecto, statim cruentum altè extollens Marcus Brutus pugionem, Ciceronem nominatim exclamavit, atque ei recuperatam libertatem est gratulatus._ Philippic, ii. s. 28. The late Doctor Akenside has retouched this passage with all the colours of a sublime imagination.

Look then abroad through nature, through the range
Of planets, suns, and adamantine spheres,
Wheeling unshaken through the void immense,
And speak, O man! does this capacious scene
With half that kindling majesty dilate
Thy strong conception, as when Brutus rose
Refulgent from the stroke of Cæsar's fate,
Amid the crowd of patriots, and his arm
Aloft extending, like eternal Jove
When guilt brings down the thunder, call'd aloud
On Tully's name, and shook his crimson steel,
And bade the Father of his Country hail!
For, lo! the tyrant prostrate in the dust,
And Rome again is free.
PLEASURES OF IMAG. b. i. ver. 487.

According to Quintilian, Brutus was fitter for philosophical speculations, and books of moral theory, than for the career of public oratory. In the former he was equal to the weight and dignity of his subject: you clearly saw that he believed what he said. _Egregius vero multoque quam in orationibus præstantior Brutus, suffecit ponderi rerum; scias eum sentire quæ dicit._ Quintil. lib. x. cap. 1.

For Asinius Pollio and Messala, see section xii. note [e].

[e] Hirtius and Pansa were consuls A.U.C. 711; before the Christian æra 43. In this year, the famous _triple league_, called the TRIUMVIRATE, was formed between Augustus, Lepidus, and Antony. The _proscription_, or the list of those who were doomed to die for the crime of adhering to the cause of liberty, was also settled, and Cicero was one of the number. A band of assassins went in quest of him to his villa, called _Astura_, near the sea-shore. Their leader was one Popilius Lænas, a military tribune, whom Cicero had formerly defended with success in a capital cause. They overtook Cicero in his litter. He commanded his servants to set him down, and make no resistance; then looking upon his executioners with a presence and firmness which almost daunted them, and thrusting his neck as forward as he could out of the litter, he bade them _do their work, and take what they wanted_. The murderers cut off his head, and both his hands. Popilius undertook to convey them to Rome, as the most agreeable present to Antony; without reflecting on the _infamy of carrying that head, which had saved his own_. He found Antony in the forum, and upon shewing the spoils which he brought, was rewarded on the spot with the _honour of a crown, and about eight thousand pounds sterling_. Antony ordered the head to be _fixed upon the rostra, between the two hands_; a sad spectacle to the people, who beheld those mangled members, which used to exert themselves, from that place, in defence of the lives, the fortunes, and the liberties of Rome. Cicero was killed on the seventh of December, about ten days from the settlement of the triumvirate, after he had lived _sixty-three years, eleven months, and five days_. See Middleton's _Life of Cicero_, 4to edit. vol. ii. p. 495 to 498. Velleius Paterculus, after mentioning Cicero's death, breaks out in a strain of indignation, that almost redeems the character of that time-serving writer. He says to Antony, in a spirited apostrophe, you have no reason to exult: you have gained no point by paying the assassin, who stopped that eloquent mouth, and cut off that illustrious head. You have paid the wages of murder, and you have destroyed a consul who was the conservator of the commonwealth. By that act you delivered Cicero from a distracted world, from the infirmities of old age, and from a life which, under your usurpation, would have been worse than death. His fame was not to be crushed: the glory of his actions and his eloquence still remains, and you have raised it higher than ever. He lives, and will continue to live in every age and nation. Posterity will admire and venerate the torrent of eloquence, which he poured out against yourself, and will for ever execrate the horrible murder which you committed. _Nihil tamen egisti, Marce Antoni (cogit enim excedere propositi formam operis erumpens animo ac pectore indignatio): nihil, inquam, egisti; mercedem cælestissimi oris, et clarissimi capitis abscissi numerando; auctoramentoque funebri ad conservatoris quondam reipublicæ tantique consulis irritando necem. Rapuisti tu Marco Ciceroni lucem sollicitam et ætatem senilem, et vitam miseriorem te principe, quam sub te triumviro mortem. Famam vero, gloriamque factorum atque dictorum adeo non abstulisti, ut auxeris. Vivit, vivetque per omnium sæculorum memoriam; omnisque posteritas illius in te scripta mirabitur, tuum in eum factum execrabitur._ Vell. Paterc. lib. ii. s. 66.

[f] Between the consulship of Augustus, which began immediately after the destruction of Hirtius and Pansa, A.U.C. 711, and the death of that emperor, which was A.U. 767, fifty-six years intervened, and to the sixth of Vespasian (A.U.C. 828), about 118 years. For the sake of a round number, it is called in the Dialogue a space of 120 years.

[g] Julius Cæsar landed in Britain in the years of Rome 699 and 700. See _Life of Agricola_, s. 13. note a. It does not appear when Aper was in Britain; it could not be till the year of Rome 796, when Aulus Plautius, by order of the emperor Claudius, undertook the conquest of the island. See _Life of Agricola_, s. 14. note a. At that time, the Briton who fought against Cæsar, must have been far advanced in years.

[h] A largess was given to the people, in the fourth year of Vespasian, when Domitian entered on his second consulship. This, Brotier says, appears on a medal, with this inscription: CONG. II. COS. II. _Congiarium alterum, Domitiano consule secundùm._ The custom of giving large distributions to the people was for many ages established at Rome. Brotier traces it from Ancus Martius, the fourth king of Rome, when the poverty of the people called for relief. The like bounty was distributed by the generals, who returned in triumph. Lucullus and Julius Cæsar displayed, on those occasions, great pomp and magnificence. Corn, wine, and oil, were plentifully distributed, and the popularity, acquired by those means, was, perhaps, the ruin of the commonwealth. Cæsar lavished money. Augustus followed the example, and Tiberius did the same; but prodigality was not his practice. His politic genius taught him all the arts of governing. The bounties thus distributed, were called, when given to the people, CONGIARIA, and, to the soldiers, DONATIVA. Whoever desires to form an idea of the number of Roman citizens who, at different times, received largesses, and the prodigious expence attending them, may see an account drawn up with diligent attention by Brotier, in an elaborate note on this passage. He begins with Julius Cæsar; and pursues the enquiry through the several successive emperors, fixing the date and expence at every period, as low down as the consulship of Constantius and Galerius Maximianus; when, the empire being divided into the eastern and western, its former magnificence was, by consequence, much diminished.

[i] The person here called Corvinus was the same as Corvinus Messala, who flourished in the reign of Augustus, at the same time with Asinius Pollio. See s. xii. note [e].

Comments

Log in to leave a comment.

A Dialogue Concerning Oratory, or the Causes of Corrupt EloquenceChapter XIX: Section XVII

0%12 min left in chapter