No More Learning

grant to the senators the right of acting in common the continuous flow of his discourse being broken
with the equites as judices on criminal trials. The and relieved by an essay, placed in the mouth of
measure was vehemently opposed by the consul Caesar, upon the nature and use of humour, a di-
Philippus, who was in consequence regarded as a gression, both amusing in itself, and interesting ge-
traitor to his order, and supported by all the in- nerally, as evincing the miserable bad taste of the
fluence and talent of L. Licinius Crassus, the most | Romans in this department. In the third book,
celebrated orator of that epoch, who had filled the Crassus devotes himself to an exposition of the or-
preceding year the office of censor. This venerable naments of rhetoric, comprising all the graces of
statesman is represented as having retired to his diction, to which are added a few remarks upon de-
villa at Tusculum during the celebration of the livery, that is, upon the voicc, pronunciatwn, and
Roman games, in order that he might collect his action of the speaker.
thoughts and brace up his energies for the grand The MSS. of the De Oratore known up to the
struggle which was soon to decide the contest. early part of the 15th century, were all imperfect.
He was accompanied to his retirement by two There were blanks extending in Bk. i. from c. 28.
youths of high promise, C. Amelius Cotia (consul $ 128 to c. 34. $ 157, and from c. 43. $ 193 to Bk.
B. c. 75) and P. Sulpicius Rufus, and there joined ii. c. 59. § 19, although in the Erfurt MS. only
by his father-in-law and former colleague in the as far as Bk. ii. c. 3. § 13; in Bk. ii. from c. 12. S
consulship (B. C. 95), Q. Mucius Scaevola, renown- 50 to c. 14. § 60 ; and in Bk. iij. from c. 5. § 17
cd for his profound knowledge of civil law, and by to c. 28. $110. These gaps were first supplied by
his friend and political ally, M. Antonius (consul | Gasparinus of Barziza, from a MS. found at Lodi,
B. c. 99), whose fame as a public speaker was and hence called Codex Laudensis, 1419, which in
little if at all inferior to that of Crassus himself. addition to the Rhetorica ad Ilerennium, the Dc In-
The three consular sages having spent the first day venlione, the Brutus and the Orator contained the
in reflections upon politics and the aspect of public three books De Oratore entire. This MS. , which is
affairs, unbend themselves on the second by the now lost, was repeatedly copied, and its contents
introduction of literary topics. The whole party soon became known all over Italy ; but it is uncer-
being stretched at ease under the shadow of a tain whether the whole was transcribed, or merely
spreading plane, the elders, at the earnest solicita- those passages which were required to fill up exist-
tion of Cotta and Sulpicius, commence a discourse ing deficiencies.
upon oratory, which is renewed the following The Editio Princeps of the De Oratore was print-
morning and brought to a close in the afternoon. ed at the monastery of Subiaco, by Sweynheym and
At the end of the first dialogue, Scaevola, in order Pannartz, in 4to. between 1465 and 1467. The
that strict dramatic propriety may be observed most useful editions are those by Pearce, Camb.
(see ad Att. iv. 16), retires, and his place, in the 1716, 1732, and Lond. 1746, 1771, 1795, 8vo. ; by
two remaining colloquies, is supplied by Q. Lutatius J. F. Wetzel, Brunswick, 1794, 8vo. ; by Harles,
Catulus, and his half-brother, C. Julius Caesar with the notes of Pearce and others, Leipzig, 1816,
Strabo, both distinguished as public speakers, the 8vo. ; by O. M. Müller, Leipzig, 1819, 8vo. ; by
former celebrated for the extreme purity of his dic- Heinichsen, Copenhagen, 1830, 8vo.
tion, the latter for the pungency of his wit
Literature :-J. A. Ernesti, De Praestantia Li-
An animated debate first arises on the qualifications brorum Cic. de Oratore Prolusio, Lips. 1736, 4to. ;
essential for pre-eminence in oratory. Crassus, C. F. Matthiae, Prolegomenen zu Cic. Gesprächen
who throughout must be regarded as expressing the rom Redner, Worms, 1791, and Frankfort, 1812,
sentiments of Cicero, after enlarging upon the im 870. ; H. A. Schott, Comment. qua Cic. de Fine
portance, the dignity, and the universal utility of Eloquentiae Sententia esaminatur, Lips. 1801; G.
eloquence, proceeds to describe the deep learning, E. Gierig, Von dem ästhetischen Werthe der Bücher
the varied accomplishments, and the theoretical des Cic. vom Redner, Fulda, 1807 ; J. F. Schaar-
skill which must enter into the combination which schmidt, De Proposito Libri Cic. de Oratore, Schnee-
shall form a perfect orator, while Antonius, although berg, 8vo. ; 1804 ; E. L. Trompheller, l'ersuch
he allows that universal knowledge, if attainable, einer Charakteristik der Ciceronischen Bücher von
would mightily increase the power of those who pos- Redner, Coburg, 1830, 4to.
bessed it, is contented to pitch the standard much
lower, and seeks to prove that the orator is more
4. Brutus s. de Claris Oratoribris.
likely to be embarrassed than benefited by aiming This work is in the form of a dialogue, the
at what is beyond his reach, and that, by attempt- speakers being Cicero himself, Atticus, and M.
ing to master the whole circle of the liberal arts, he Brutus; the scene a grass plot, in front of a colon-
will but waste the time that might be more profit- nade, attached to the house of Cicero at Rome,
ably employed, since the natural gifts of quick ta- with a statue of Plato close at hand. It contains
lents, a good voice, and a pleasing delivery, when a complete critical history of Roman eloquence,
improved by practice, self-training, and experience, from the earliest epochs, commencing with L. Ju-
are in themselves ainply sufficient to produce the re- nius Brutus, Appius Claudius, M. Curius, and
sult sought. This preliminary controversy, in which, sundry sages of the olden time, whose fame rested
however, both parties agree in reality, as to what upon obscure tradition alone, passing on to those
is desirable, although they differ as to what is prac- with regard to whose talents more certain informa-
ticable, being terminated, Antonius and Crassus tion could be obtained, such as Cornelius Cethegus
enter jointly upon the texvodovia (ad Att. iv: and Cato, the censor, advancing gradually till it
16) of the subject, and expound the principles and reached such men as Catulus, Licinius Crassus, and
rules upon which success in the rhetorical art de M. Antonius, whose glory was bright in the recol-
pends and by the observance of which it may be lection of many yet alive, and ending with those
achieved. The former discusses at large in the se whom Cicero himself had heard with admiration as
cond book, the invention and arrangement of argu- a youth, and rivalled as a man, the greatest of whom
mients, and winds up with a dissertation on memory, was Hortensius, and with him the list closes, living


## p. 725 (#745) ############################################

CICERO.
725
CICERO.
1
ii. 1. )
orators being excluded. Prefixed, are some short, | a plain, fimiliar, unpretending tone ; by rising at
but graphic sketches, of the most renowned Grecian another into lofty, impassioned, and highly orna-
models ; the whole discourse being interspersed mented declamation ; and by observing in general
with clever observations on the speculative princi- a graceful medium between the two extremes; by
ples of the art, and many important historical de ascending, as the Greeks expressed it, from the
tails connected with the public life and services of lo xvóv to the dôpós, and falling back from the
the individuals enumerated. Great taste and die dopóv to the uédov,-instead of adhering stead-
crimination are displayed in pointing out the cha- fastly, after the fashion of most great orators, to
racteristic merits, and exposing the defects, of the one particular form. He next passes on to combat
various styles of composition reviewed in turn, and an error very prevalent among his countrymen,
the work is most valuable as a contribution to the who, admitting that Athenian eloquence was the
history of literature. But, from the desire to ren- purest model for imitation, imagined that its es-
der it absolutely complete, and, at the same time, sence consisted in avoiding with scrupulous care
to confine it within moderate limits, the author is all copious, flowing, decorated periods, and in ex-
compelled to hurry from one individual to another, pressing every idea in highly polished, terse, epi-
without dwelling upon any for a sufficient period to grammatic sentences—a system which, however
leave a distinct impression on the mind of the read- interesting as an effort of intellect, must necessarily
er; and, while we complain of the space occupied produce results which will fall dull and cold upon
by a mere catalogue of uninteresting names, by the ear of an ordinary listener, and, if carried out
which we are wearied, we regret that our curiosity to its full extent, degenerate into offensive man-
should have been excited, without being gratified, Derism. After dwelling upon these dangers and
in regard to many of the shining lights which shed insisting upon the folly of neglecting the practice
such a lustre over the last century of the common- of Aeschines and Demosthenes and setting up such
wealth.
a standard as Thucydides, Cicero proceeds to shew
The Brutus was composed next in order, although that the orator must direct his chief attention to
at a long interval, after the De Republica, at a pe-three points, which in fact comprehend the soul of
riod when Caesar was already master of the state, the art, the what, the where, and the how; the mat-
it was written before the Cato, the Cuto itself ter of his speech, the arrangement of that matter,
crming immediately before the Orator, a combina- the expression and enunciation of that matter
tion of circumstances which fixes it down to the each of which is in turn examined and discussed.
year B. C. 46. (Brut. 1, 2, 5, 6, Orat. 7, de Divin. The perfect orator being defined to be one who
clearly demonstrates to his hearers the truth of the
The Brutus was unknown until the discovery of position he maintains, delights them by the beauty
the Codex Laudensis described above. Hence all and fitness of his language, and wins them over to
the MSS. being confessedly derived fron, this source his cause (“ is, qui in foro, causisque civilibus, ita
do not admit of being divided into families, although dicet, ut probet, ut delectet, ut fiectat"), we are
the text might probably be improved if the trans- led to consider the means by which these ends are
cripts existing in various European libraries were reached. The groundwork and foundation of the
more carefully examined and compared
whole is true wisdom, but true wisdom can be
The Editio Princeps of the Brutus was that gained only by the union of all the highest natural
printed at Rome, by Sweynheym and Pannartz, endownients with a knowledge of philosophy and
1469, 4to. , in the same volume with the De Oratore all the chief departments of literature and science ;
and the Orator. The best edition is that by Ellendt, and thus Cicero brings us round to the conclusion,
with very copious and useful prolegomena, Königs which is in fact the pervading idea of this and the
berg, 18:26, 8vo. , to which we may add an useful two preceding works, that he who would be a per-
school edition Billerbeck, Hannover, 1828. fect orator must be a perfect man. What follows
(from c. 40 to the end) is devoted to a dissertation
5. Ad M. Brutum Orator.
on the harmonious arrangement of words and the
Cicero having been frequently requested by M. importance of rhythmical cadence in prose compo-
Brutus to explain his views with regard to what sition—a curious topic, which attracted much at-
constituted a faultless orator, this term being un- tention in ancient times, as may be seen from the
derstood to denote a public speaker in the senate elaborately minute dulness of Dionysis of Hali-
or in the forum, but to exclude the eloquence dis- carnassus, but possesses comparatively little inte-
played by philosophers in their discourses, and by rest for the modern reader.
poets and historians in their writings, endeavours The Orator was composed about the beginning
in the present essay to perform the task imposed of B. c. 45, having been undertaken immediately
on him.
We must not, therefore, expect to find after the completion of the Cato. Cicero declares,
here a series of precepts, the result of observation that he was willing to stake his reputation for
and induction, capable of being readily applied in knowledge and taste in his own art upon the merits
practice, or a description of anything actually ex- of this work : “ Mihi quidem sic persuadeo, me
isting in nature, but rather a fancy picture, in quidquid habuerim judicii de dicendo in illum librum
which the artist represents an object of ideal contulisse;" and every one must be charmed by
beauty, such as would spring from the union of all the faultless purity of the diction, the dexterity
the prominent characteristic excellences of the manifested in the choice of appropriate phraseology,
most gifted individuals, fused together and concen- and the sonorous flow with which the periods roll
trated into one harioonious whole.
gracefully onwards. There is now and then per-
He first points out that perfection must consist haps a little difficulty in tracing the connexion of
in absolute propriety of expression, and that this the different divisions; and while some of the most
could be obtained only by occasional judicious weighty themes are touched upon very slightly,
transitions from one style to another, by assuming, disproportionate space is assigned to the remarks
according to the nature of the subject, at one time upon the music of prose ; bui this probably arose


## p. 726 (#746) ############################################

726
CICERO.
CICERO.
from the subject having been entirely passed over up from recollection the work before us, and dis
in the two preceding treatises. For it must be spatched it to his friend from Rhegium on the 27th
borne in mind that the De Oratore, the Brutus, of July, B. C. 44.
and the Orator were intended to constitute a con- We are here presented with an abstract of the ori-
nected and continuous series, forming a complete ginal, expressed in plain, familiar terms, illustrated
system of the rhetorical art. In the first are ex- by examples derived chiefly from Roman law in-
pounded the principles and rules of oratory, and the stead of from Greek philosophy, accompanied by a
qualifications natural and acquired requisite for suc- promise to expound orally, at a future period, any
cess; in the second the importance of these qualifi- | points which might still appear confused or obscure.
cations, and the use and application of the principles We cannot, of course, expect to find in such a
and rules are illustrated by a critical examination of book any originality of matter; but when we con-
the leading merits and defects of the greatest pub- sider the circumstances under which it was com-
lic speakers ; while in the third is delineated that posed, and the nature of the subject itself, we can-
ideal perfection to which the possession of all the not fail to admire the clear head and the wonderful
requisite qualifications and a strict adherence to memory which could produce at once a full and ac-
all the principles and rules would lead.
curate representation of a hard, complicated, and
The Editio Princeps of the Orator is that men- technical disquisition on the theory of rhetoric.
tioned above, under the Brutus, printed at Rome The Editio Princeps is without place, date, or
in 1469. The best is that by Meyer, Lips. 1827, printer's name, but is believed to have been pub-
8vo. ; to which we may add the school edition of lished at Venice about 1472. The commentaries
Billerbeck, Hannover, 1829, 8vo.
upon this work are very numerolis. The most ce
Literature :-P. Ramus, Brutinae Quaestiones in lebrated are those by Boethius, G. Vallo, Melanc-
Oratorem Cic. , Paris. 1547, 4to. , 1549, 8vo. ; thon, J. Visorius, Hegendorphinus, Latomus, Go-
J. Perionius, Oratio pro Cic. Oratore contra P. veanus, Talaeus, Curio, Achilles Statius, &c. , which
Romum, Paris. 1547, 8vo. ; A. Maioragius, In are contained in the editions printed at Paris by
Oratorem Cic. Commentarius, Basil. 1552; M. Tiletanus in 1543, 4to. , by David in 1550, 410. ,
Junius, In Oratorem Cic. Scholia, Argent. 1585, by Vascosanus in 1554, 4to. , and by Richardus
8vo. ; H. A. Burchardus, Animadversiones ad Cic. in 1557 and 1561, 4to.
Oratorem, Berolin. 1815, 8vo.
8. Communes Loci.
6. De Optimo Genere Oratorum.
All that we know regarding this work is com-
We have already noticed in the remarks on the
Orator the opinion advocated by several of the prised in a single sentence of Quintilian (ii. 1.
11): "Communes loci, sive qui sunt in vitia
most distinguished speakers of this epoch, such as
directi, quales legimus a Cicerone compositos; seu
Brutus and Calvus, that the essence of the true
Attic style consisted in employing the smallest quibus quaestiones generaliter tractantur, quales
sunt editi a Quinto quoque Hortensio. " Orelli
possible number of words, and concentrating the
supposes,
that the Paradora are here spoken of;
meaning of the speaker into subtle, terse, pointed but this opinion is scarcely borne out by the ex-
sentences, which, however, from being totally de pression in the preface to which he refers.
void of all ornament and amplitude of expression,
were for the most part stiff, lean, and dry, the very 9. Rhetoricorum ad C. Herennium Libri IV.
reverse of Cicero's style. In order to refute practi-
A general view of the whole art of Rhetoric,
cally this prevalent delusion, Cicero resolved to including a number of precepts and rules for
render into Latin the two most perfect specimens of the guidance of the student. Passages from this
Grecian eloquence, the orations of Aeschines and
treatise are quoted by St. Jerome (adv. Rufin.
Demosthenes in the case of Ciesiphon. The trans-
lib. i. p. 204, ed. Basil. ), by Priscian, by Rufinus
lation itself has been lost; but a short preface, in (de Comp. et Metr. Orat. pp. 315, 327 of the Rhe-
which the origin and object of the undertaking is
tores Antig. ed. Pith. ), and by other ancient gram-
explained, is still extant, and bears the title given marians, who speak of it as the work of Cicero,
above, De Optimo Genere Oratorum.
The Editio Princeps of this tract, in an indepen- distinguished scholars of the fifteenth century,
and as such it was generally received by the most
dent form, is that published with the commentary Leonardus Arretinus, Angelus Politianus, and
of Achilles Statius, Paris, 1551, 4to. , and 1552, Laurentius Valla. At a very early period, how-
8ro. We have also “ De Optimo Genere Oratorum,
ad Trebatium Topica, Oratoriae Partitiones, cum Raphael Rhegius and Angelus Decembrius, and
ever, its authenticity was called in question by
Commentario, ed. G. H. Saalfrank, vol. i. Ratisbon, the controversy has been renewed at intervals
1823, 8vo. "
down to the present day. Almost all the best
7. Topica ad C. Trebatium.
editors agree in pronouncing it spurious, but the
C. Trebatius, the celebrated jurisconsult, having utmost diversity of opinion has existed with
found himself unable to comprehend the Topics of regard to the real author. Regius propounded
Aristotle, wbich treat of the Invention of Argu- no less than three hypotheses, assigning it at
ments, and having failed in procuring any expla- one time to Q. Cornificius, who was quaestor
nation from a celebrated rhetorician, whose aid he B. c. 81, and an unsuccessful candidate for the
sought, had frequently applied to Cicero for infor- consulship in B. C. 64; at another, to Virginius, a
mation and assistance. Cicero's incessant occupa- rhetorician contemporary with Nero; and lastly,
tions prevented him for a long time from attending to Timolaus, son of queen Zenobia, who had an
to these solicitations; but when he was sailing to- elder brother Herennianus. Paulus and Aldus
wards Greece, the summer after Caesar's death, he Manutius, Sigonius, Muretus, Barthius, and
was reminded of Trebatius by the sight of Velia, many of less note, all adopted the first suppo-
a city with which the lawyer was closely connected, sition of Regius. G. J. Vossius began by deciding
and accordingly, while on board of the ship, drew in favour of the younger Q. Cornificius, the colleague


## p. 727 (#747) ############################################

CICERO.
727
CICERO.
of Cicero in the augumte (ad Fam. xii. 17—30), ) ties cannot have derived their matter from a com-
but afterwards changed his mind and fixed upon mon Greek original, for not only is it incredible
Tullius Tiro; Julius Caesar Saliger upon M. Gal that two persons translating independently of each
lio; Nascimbaenius upon Laureas Tullius ; while other should have rendered so many phrases in
more recently Schütz has laboured hard to bring words almost identical, but the illustrations from
home the pnternity to M. Antonius Gnipho, and Roman writers common to both at once destroy
Van Heusde to Aelius Stilo. The arguments such an explanation. Only two solutions of the
which seem to prove that the piece in question is enigma suggest themselves. Either we have in
not the production of Cicero arc briefly as follows: the Ad Ilerennium and the De Inventione the notes
1. It could not have been composed before the De taken down by two pupils from the lectures of the
Oratore, for Cicero there (i. 2) speaks of his juve same Latin rhetorician, which were drawn out at
nile efforts in this department as rough and never full length by the one, and thrown aside in an
brought to a conclusion,-a description which cor- unfinished state by the other after some alterations
responds perfectly with the two books De Inven- and corrections had been introduced ; or we have
tione, whereas the Ad Herenniuin is entire and in the Ad Herennium the original lectures, pub-
complete in all its parts; moreover, the author of lished subsequently by the professor himself
. This
the Ad Herennium complains at the outset that he last idea is certainly at variance with the tone as-
was so oppressed with family affairs and business, sumed in the preliminary remarks, but may receive
that he could scarcely find any leisure for his some support from the claim put forth (i. 9) to
favourite pursuits—a statement totally inapplicable originality in certain divisions of insinuationes,
to the early career of Cicero. 2. It could not have which are adopted without observation in the De
deen written after the De Oratore, for not only Inventione. Whatever conclusion we may adopt
does Cicero never make any allusion to such a per- upon this head, it is clear that we possess no evi-
formance among the numerous labours of his later dence to determine the real author. The case
years, but it would have been quite unworthy of made out in favour of Cornificius (we cannot tell
his mature age, cultivated taste, and extensive ex- which Cornificius) is at first sight plausible. Quin-
perience : it is in reality in every way inferior to tilian (iii. 1. & 21, comp. ix. 3. $ 89) frequently
the De Inventione, that boyish essay which he treats mentions a certain Cornificius as a writer upon
so contemptuously. We shall not lay any stress rhetoric, and in one place especially (ix. 3. S 98)
here upon the names of Terentia and young Tul enumerates his classification of figures, which cor-
lius which occur in bk. i. c. 12, since these words responds exactly with the Ad Herennium (iv. 15,
are manifest interpolations. 3. Quintilian repeat- &c. ); and a second point of agreement has been
edly quotes from the De Inventione and other ac- detected in a citation by Julius Rufinianus. (De
knowledged rhetorical pieces of Cicero, but never Fig. Sent. p. 29. ) But, on the other hand, many
notices the Ad Herennium. 4. Marius Victorinus things are ascribed by Quintilian to Cornificius
in his commentary on the De Inventione, makes no which nowhere occur in the Ad Herennium; and,
allusion to the existence of the Ad Herennium; it still more fatal, we perceive, upon examining the
is little probable that he would have carefully dis- words referred to above (ix. 3. § 93), that the re-
cussed the imperfect manual, and altogether passed marks of Cornificius on figures must have been
over that which was complete. 5. Servius refers taken from a separate and distinct tract confined
three times (ad Viry. Aen. viii. 321, ix. 481, 614) to that subject. We can accord to Schütz the
to the “ Rhetorica” and Cassiodorus ( Rhetor. comp. merit of having demonstrated that M. Antonius
pp. 339, 34), ed. Pitb. ) to the “Ars Rhetorica" of Gnipho may be the compiler, and that there is no
Cicero; but these citations are all from the De In- testimony, external or internal, to render this posi-
ventione and not one from the Ad Herennium. tion untenable; but we cannot go further. There
The most embarrassing circumstance connected are several historical allusions dispersed up and
with these two works is the extraordinary resem down reaching from the consulship of L. Cassius
blance which exists between them-a resemblance Longinus, B. c. 107, to the death of Sulpicius in
so strong that it is impossible to doubt that there B. C. 88; and if Burmann and others are correct in
is some bond of union. For although there are believing that the second consulship of Sulla is
numerous and striking discrepancies, not only is distinctly indicated (iv. 54, 68), the fact will be
the general arrangement the same, but in very established, that these books were not published
many divisions the same precepts are conveyed in before B. C. 80.
nearly if not exactly the same phraseology, and The materials for arriving at a correct judgment
illustrated by the same examples. Any one who with regard to the merits of this controversy, will
will compare Ad Herenn. i. 2, ii. 20, 22, 23, be found in the preface of the younger Burmann,
25, 27, with De Invent. i. 7, 42, 45, 48, 49, 51, to his edition of the Rhetorica ad Herennium and
will at once be convinced that these coincidences De Inventione, printed at Leyden in 1761, 8vo. ,
cannot be accidental; but the single instance to be and republished with additional notes by Linde-
found Ad Herenn. ii. 23, and De Invent. i. 50 would mann, Leipzig, 1828, 8vo. ; in the prooemium of
alone be sufficient, for in both we find the same Schütz to his edition of the rhetorical works of
four lines extracted for the same purpose from Cicero, Leipzig, 1804, 3 vols. 8vo. , enlarged and
the Trinummus, and Plautus censured for a fault corrected in his edition of the whole works of
of which he is not guilty, the force of his expres Cicero, Leipzig, 1814 ; and in the disquisition of J.
sion having been misunderstood by his critics. van Heusde, De Aelio Stilone, Utrecht, 1839; to
We cannot suppose that the author of the Ad He- which we may add, as one of the earliest authori-
rennium copied from the De Inventione, since the ties, Utrum Ars Riutorica ad Herennium Ciceroni
former embraces a much wider compass than the falso inscributur, appended to the Problemata in
latter ; still less can we believe that Cicero would Quintil. Instit. Orut. by Raphael Regius, published
be guilty of a shameless plagiarism, which must at Venice in 1492.
have been open to such easy detection. Both par- The Editio Princeps of the Rhetorica ad Herer


## p. 728 (#748) ############################################

728
CICERO.
CICERO.
1
nium was printed along with the De Inventione, that occasion to have spent some days in recount-
under the title “ Ciceronis Rhetorica Nova et ing the particulars of this memorable conversation,
Vetus,” by Nicol. Jenson, in 4to. , Venice, 1470; / in which he had taken a part, to his young friend
and bibliographers have enumerated fourteen more who afterwards dedicated the De Republica to the
belonging to the fifteenth century. The best edi- person who was his travelling companion on this
tion in a separate form is that of Burmann, or the occasion. It is hard to discover who this may have
reprint of Lindemann, mentioned above.
been, but historical considerations go far to prove
that either Q. Cicero or Atticus was the individual
B. POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.
in question. (De Rep. i. 8, Brut. 22; Mai, Praef.
1. De Republica Libri VI.
§ iv. ) The precise date at which the De Repub-
This work on the best form of government and lica was given to the world is unknown; it could
the duty of the citizen, was one of the earliest of scarcely have been before the end of B. C. 54, for
Cicero's philosophical treatises, drawn up at a the work was still in an unfinished state at the
period when, from his intimacy with Pompey, end of September in that year (ad Alt. iv. 16),
Caesar and Crassus being both at a distance, he and during the month of October scarcely a day
fancied, or at least wished to persuade others, that passed in which the author was not called upon to
he was actually grasping the helm of the Roman plead for some client (ad Q. Fr. iii. 3); on the
commonwealth (de Div. ii. ]). Deeply impressed other hand, it appears from an expression in the
with the arduous nature of his task, he changed correspondence of Caelius with Cicero, while the
again and again not only various minute details latter was in Cilicia (ad Fam. viii. 1), that the
but the whole general plan, and when at length“ politici libri” were in general circulation in the
completed, it was received with the greatest favour early part of B. C. 51, while the language used is
by his contemporaries, and is referred to by him- such as would scarcely have been employed except
self repeatedly with evident satisfaction and pride. with reference to a new publication.
It was commenced in the spring of B. c. 54 (ad The greater number of the above particulars are
Att. iv. 14, comp. 16), and occupied much of his gleaned from incidental notices dispersed over the
attention during the summer months of that year, writings of Cicero. The dialogues themselves, al-
while he was residing at his villas in the vicinity though known to have been in existence during
of Cumae and of Pompeii. (Ad Q. Fr. ii. 14. ) It the tenth century, and perhaps considerably later,
was in the first instance divided into two books had ever since the revival of literature eluded the
(ad Q. Fr. iii. 5), then expanded into nine (ad Q. most earnest search, and were believed to have
Fr. l. c. ), and finally reduced to six (de leg. i. 6, been irrecoverably lost with the exception of the
ii. 10, de Div. ii. 1). The form selected was that episode of the Somnium Scipionis, extracted entire
of Dialogue, in imitation of Plato, whom he kept from the sixth book by Macrobius, and sundry
constantly in view. The epoch at which the fragments quoted by grammarians and ecclesiastics,
several conferences, extending over a space of three especially by Lactantius and St. Augustin. But
days, were supposed to have been held, was the in the year 1822, Angelo Mai detected among the
Latinae feriae, in the consulship of C. Sempronius Palimpsests in the Vatican a portion of the long-
Tuditanus and M.