Page images
PDF
EPUB

having determined never to publish any of his pleadings, lest he should be found to have maintained in one cause something which was inconsistent with what he had alleged in another. Cicero gives an account of Antony's defence of Aquilius which shows his power of moving the passions, and is also characteristic of the manner of Roman pleading. In the dialogue De Oratore, Antony, who is one of the characters, is introduced relating it himself. "Seeing his client, who had once been consul and a leader of armies reduced to a state of the utmost dejection and peril, he had no sooner begun to speak, with a view towards melting the compassion of others, than he was melted himself. Perceiving the emotion of the judges when he raised his client from the earth, on which he had thrown himself, he instantly took advantage of this favorable feeling. He tore open the garments of Aquilius, and showed the scars of those wounds which he had received in the service of his country. Even the stern Marius wept. Him the orator then apostrophized, imploring his protection, and invoking with many tears the gods, the citizens, and the allies of Rome. But whatever I could have said,' remarks he in the dialogue, 'had I delivered it without being myself moved, it would have excited the derision, instead of the sympathy, of those who heard me.'"

Marius who was his enemy, in 666, had Antony's head cut off and affixed to the rostrum where he had defended the lives of so many of his fellow-citizens.

The greatest forensic rival of Antony, was Crassus, who had prepared himself diligently in his youth for public speaking by the study of oratory. He translated into Latin some of the best of the Greek orations, and he at the same time. improved his voice, action, and memory by frequent exercises.

Crassus began his oratorical career at nineteen, when he acquired considerable reputation by his accusation of C. Carbo. Not long afterward he heightened his fame by his defence of Licinia.

The best speech which he delivered, however, and the

one that caused his death, which occurred in 662, he made in the senate against the Consul Philippus, who had declared, in one of the assemblies of the people, that some other advice must be resorted to, since he could no longer direct the affairs of the government with such a senate as then existed. Crassus arraigned the conduct of this consul in terms of the most glowing eloquence, alleging that, instead of acting as the guardian of the rights of the Senate, he sought to strip its members of their ancient inheritance of respect and dignity. It is said he was so greatly irritated by an attempt on the part of Philippus to compel him to comply with his demands, that he exerted, on this occasion, the utmost efforts of his genius and strength; unfortunately, however, he returned home with a pleuritic fever, of which he died within seven days.

This oration of Crassus, followed as it was by his untimely death, made a deep and lasting impression on his countrymen, who long afterwards were accustomed to repair to the Senate-house, for the purpose of looking at the spot where he last stood and had fallen, virtually in defence of the privileges of his order.

Crassus left very few orations behind him. Cicero was in his boyhood when he died, and having collected the opinions of those who had heard him, speaks with a minute and perfect intelligence of his style of oratory.

His diction was perhaps more highly ornamented than that of any speaker that had appeared before his time in the Forum.

He was grave, dignified, and forcible, but these qualities were happily blended with the utmost politeness, urbanity, ease, and gaiety. His language was pure and accurate, and he expressed himself with the greatest elegance.

Clearness and copiousness of argument and illustration were the chief excellences for which his orations were distinguished.

He was diffident in manner while speaking, and was so much embarrassed on one occasion, when a young man, that Q. Maximus, seeing that he was disabled by confu

sion and in danger of making an utter failure, adjourned the court. Crassus always remembered his kindness with the highest sense of gratitude. Cicero says that this diffidence never entirely forsook him, and after the practice of a long life at the bar he was frequently so much agitated in the exordium of his discourse that he was observed to grow pale, and tremble in every part of his frame. It is said that "some persons considered Crassus as only equal to Antony; others preferred him as the most perfect and accomplished orator. Antony chiefly trusted to his intimate acquaintance with affairs and ordinary life. He was not, however, so destitute of knowledge as he seemed; but he thought the best way to recommend his eloquence to the people was to appear as if he had never learned anything. Crassus, on the other hand, was well instructed in literature, and showed off his information to the best advantage. Antony possessed the greater power of promoting conjecture, and of allaying or exciting suspicion, by apposite and well-timed insinuations; but no one could have more copiousness or facility than Crassus in defining, interpreting, and discussing the principles of equity. The language of Crassus was indisputably preferable to that of Antony; but the action and gesture of Antony were as incontestably superior to those of Crassus.

Sulpicius and Cotta were born about 630 A.U.C. They were for some time contemporaries of Antony and Crassus, but were younger orators. They had, however, achieved considerable reputation before the death of the latter and assassination of the former. For some years Sulpicius was respected and admired, but about the year 665, being then a tribune, he espoused the cause of Marius, at the first breaking out of the dissensions between Sylla and Marius. At this time, it may be safely said that he became one of the greatest villains in Rome, although that city could boast of a large assortment of villains at this conjuncture. Cruel and avaricious, he committed, without hesitation or reluctance, the most criminal actions. It is said that he sold by public auction the freedom of Rome to foreigners, telling

out the purchase money on counters erected in the Forum for that purpose. He kept three thousand swordsmen about him in constant pay, ready on any occasion to do his bidding, and these he called his anti-senatorian band. While Marius was in power, Sulpicius, as tribune, transacted all public affairs by violence and force of arms. He decreed to Marius the command in the Mithridatic war. With his band he attacked the consuls while they were holding an assembly of the people in the temple of Castor and Pollux, and deposed one of them. Sylla, however, having at length gained the ascendency, Marius was expelled and Sulpicius was seized and put to death in the bloom of his youth and beauty, justly punished for the many crimes which he had committed. Notwithstanding his villainy he was endowed with great oratoric powers. It is said that he was the most lofty, and what Cicero called the most tragic, orator of Rome; that "his attitudes, deportment, and figure were of supreme dignity; his voice was powerful and sonorous; his elocution rapid; his action variable and animated.

Cotta, being constitutionally weak, was not vehement in manner, but soft and relaxed. Everything he said, however, was in good taste, and he often led the judges to the same conclusion to which Sulpicius impelled them. Says Cicero: "No two things were ever more unlike than they are to each other. The one, in a polite, delicate manner, sets forth his subject in well-chosen expressions. He still keeps to the point; and as he sees with the greatest penetration what he has to prove to the court, he directs to that the whole strength of his reasoning and eloquence, without regarding other arguments. But Sulpicius, endowed with irresistible energy, with a full, strong voice, with the greatest vehemence and dignity of action, accompanied with so much weight and variety of expression, seemed, of all mankind, the best fitted by nature for eloquence."

The renown, however, of all preceding orators at Rome. was eclipsed by Hortensius, who "burst forth in eloquence at once calculated to delight and astonish his fellow-citizens." This famous orator was born in the year 640, and was ten

years younger than Cotta and Sulpicius. At the early age of nineteen he made his first appearance in the Forum, and Cicero, his rival, but his just and impartial critic, says: "His excellence was immediately acknowledged, like that of a statue by Phidias, which only requires to be seen in order to be admired."

The case in which he first appeared was one of considerable importance, being an accusation at the instance of the Roman province of Africa against its governors for rapacity. It was heard before Scævola and Crassus, as judges-the former being the ablest lawyer, and the latter the most accomplished speaker, of his age. The young orator had the good fortune to win not only their approbation but that of every one present at the trial. For many years he was the greatest forensic orator at Rome, and was the acknowledged head of the Roman bar. Cicero says: "Nature had given him so happy a memory that he never had need of committing to writing any discourse which he had meditated, while, after his opponent had finished speaking, he could recall, word by word, not only what the other had said, but also the authorities which had been cited against himself." As a proof of his excellent memory, Seneca says that, for a trial of it, he remained a whole day at a public auction, and when it was concluded, he repeated in order what had been sold, to whom, and at what price. His statement was compared with the clerk's account, and his memory was found to have served him faithfully in every particular. Cicero also says of him: "His industry was indefatigable. He never let a day pass without speaking in the forum, or preparing himself to appear on the morrow; oftentimes he did both. He excelled particularly in the art of dividing his subject, and in then reuniting it in a luminous manner, calling in, at the same time, even some of the arguments which had been used against him. His diction was elegant, noble, and rich; his voice was strong and pleasing; his gestures carefully studied."

The elegance and aptitude for public business of Hortensius procured for him not only a fortune, but the highest

« PreviousContinue »