diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/files/QuintIntro.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/files/QuintIntro.html | 6397 |
1 files changed, 6397 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/old/files/QuintIntro.html b/old/files/QuintIntro.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..b0bb3fd --- /dev/null +++ b/old/files/QuintIntro.html @@ -0,0 +1,6397 @@ +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> +<html> +<head> +<title>Quintilian X: Introduction</title> +<meta http-equiv = "Content-Type" content = "text/html; charset=UTF-8"> + +<link rel = "stylesheet" type = "text/css" href = "quintstyles.css"> + +</head> + +<body> + +<div class = "contents"> + +<p><a href = "../main.html#preface">Preface</a></p> + +<p class = "space"> +Introduction:</p> +<p><a href = "#intro_chapI"> I. Life of Quintilian</a></p> +<p><a href = "#intro_chapII"> II. The Institutio Oratoria</a></p> +<p><a href = "#intro_chapIII">III. Quintilian’s Literary +Criticism</a></p> +<p><a href = "#intro_chapIV">IV. Style and Language</a></p> +<p><a href = "#intro_chapV"> V. Manuscripts</a></p> + +<p class = "space"> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html">Chapter I</a></p> +<p> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html">Chapters II-VII</a></p> +<p> +<a href = "QuintCrit.html">Critical Notes</a></p> + +</div> + + +<div class = "intro"> + +<!-- page numbering starts over --> +<span class = "pagenum">i</span> +<a name = "intro_pagei" id = "intro_pagei"> </a> + +<h4><a name = "intro" id = "intro"> +INTRODUCTION.</a></h4> + +<p class = "line"> </p> + +<h5><a name = "intro_chapI" id = "intro_chapI">I.</a><br> +Life of Quintilian.</h5> + +<p><span class = "smallcaps">It</span> would be possible to state in a +very few lines all that is certainly known about Quintilian’s personal +history; but much would remain to be said in order to convey an adequate +idea of the large place he must have filled in the era of which he is so +typical a representative. The period of his activity at Rome is nearly +co-extensive with the reign of the Flavian emperors,—Vespasian, +Titus, and Domitian. For twenty years he was the recognised head of the +teaching profession in the capital, and a large proportion of those who +came to maturity in the days of Trajan and Hadrian must have received +their intellectual training in his school. It is in itself a sign of the +tendencies of the age that Quintilian should have enjoyed the immediate +patronage of the reigning emperor in the conduct of work which would +formerly have attracted little notice. In earlier days the profession of +teaching had been held in low repute at Rome<a class = "tag" name = +"tag1" id = "tag1" href = "#note1">1</a>. The first attempt to open a +school of rhetoric, in <span class = "smallroman">B.C.</span> 94, was +looked on with the greatest suspicion and disfavour. Even Cicero adopts +a tone of apology in the rhetorical text-books which he wrote for the +instruction of others. But now all was changed, and education had come +to be, as it was in a still greater degree under Nerva, Trajan, and the +Antonines, a department of the government itself. Vespasian was the +founder of a new dynasty; and, though he had little culture to boast of +himself, he was shrewd enough to appreciate the advantages to be derived +from systematising the education of the Roman youth, and maintaining +friendly relations +<span class = "pagenum">ii</span> +<a name = "intro_pageii" id = "intro_pageii"> </a> +with those to whom it was entrusted. Quintilian, for his part, seems to +have diligently seconded, in the scholastic sphere, his patron’s efforts +to efface the memory of the time of trouble and unrest which had +followed the extinction of the Julian line in the person of Nero. After +his retirement from the active duties of his profession, he received the +consular insignia from Domitian,—the promotion of a teacher of +rhetoric to the highest dignity in the State being regarded as a most +unexampled phenomenon by the conservative opinion of the day, which had +failed to recognise the significance of the alliance between prince and +pedagogue. The interest with which the publication of the <i>Institutio +Oratorio</i> was looked forward to, at the close of his laborious +professional career, is sufficient evidence of the authoritative +position Quintilian had gained for himself at Rome. It was a tribute not +only to the successful teacher, but also to the man of letters who, +conscious that his was an age of literary decadence, sought to probe the +causes of the national decline and to counteract its evil +influences.</p> + +<p>Like so many of the distinguished men of his time, Quintilian was a +Spaniard by birth. There must have been something in the Spanish +national character that rendered the inhabitants of that country +peculiarly susceptible to the influences of Roman culture: certainly no +province assimilated more rapidly than Spain the civilisation of its +conquerors. The expansion of Rome may be clearly traced in the history +of her literature. Just as Italy, rather than the imperial city itself, +had supplied the court of Augustus with its chiefest literary ornaments, +so now Spain sends up to the centre of attraction for all things Roman a +band of authors united, if by nothing else, at least by the ties of a +common origin. Pomponius Mela is said to have come from a place called +Cingentera, on the bay of Algesiras; Columella was a native of Gades, +Martial of Bilbilis; the two Senecas and Lucan were born in Corduba. The +emperor Trajan came from Italica, near Seville; while Hadrian belonged +to a family which had long been settled there. Quintilian’s birthplace +was the town of Calagurris (Calahorra) on the Ebro, memorable in +previous history only for the resistance which it enabled Sertorius to +offer to Metellus and Pompeius: it was the last place that submitted +after the murder of the insurgent general in <span class = +"smallroman">B.C.</span> 72.</p> + +<p>In most of the older editions of Quintilian an anonymous Life +appears, the author of which (probably either Omnibonus Leonicenus or +Laurentius Valla) prefers a conjecture of his own to the ‘books of the +time,’ and makes out that Quintilian was born in Rome. His main argument +is that Martial does not include his name among those of the +distinguished authors to whom he refers as being of Spanish origin (e.g. +Epigr. i. +<span class = "pagenum">iii</span> +<a name = "intro_pageiii" id = "intro_pageiii"> </a> +61 and 49), though he addresses him separately in complimentary terms +(Epigr. ii. 90). Against this we may set, however, the line in which +Ausonius embodies what was evidently a well-known and accepted tradition +(Prof. i. 7):—</p> + +<p class = "poem ital">Adserat usque licet Fabium Calagurris +alumnum;</p> + +<p>and the statement of Hieronymus in the <i>Eusebian +Chronicle:—<ins class = "correction" title = +"text reads ‘Quinti/tilianus’ at line break">Quintilianus</ins>, ex Hispania +Calagurritanus, primus Romae publicam scholam</i> [<i>aperuit</i>]. The +latter extract carries additional weight if we accept the conjecture of +Reifferscheid<a class = "tag" name = "tag2" id = "tag2" href = +"#note2">2</a> that Jerome here follows the authority of Suetonius +(Roth, p. 272) in his work on the grammarians and rhetoricians.</p> + +<p>The fact of Quintilian’s Spanish origin may therefore be regarded as +fully established, though we cannot cite the authority of Quintilian +himself on the subject. His removal to Rome, at a very early period of +his life, would naturally make him more of a Roman than a Spaniard; and +this is probably the reason why he nowhere refers to the accident of his +birth-place. Indeed his work does not lend itself to autobiographical +revelations. Most of his reminiscences, some of which occur in the Tenth +Book (<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec23">1 §§23</a> and +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec86">86</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec12">3 §12</a>: cp. v. 7, 7: vi. 1, +14: xii. 11, 3) are suggested by some detail connected with his +subject. Apart from the famous introduction to Book VI, where his grief +for the loss of his wife and two sons is allowed to interrupt the +continuity of his argument, he speaks of his father only once (ix. +3, 73), and then simply to quote, not without some diffidence, +a <i>bon mot</i> of his in illustration of a figure of speech. The +father was himself a rhetorician, and seems to have taught the subject +both at Calagurris and also after the family removed to Rome: whether he +is identical with the Quintilianus mentioned as a declaimer of moderate +reputation by the elder Seneca (Controv. x. praef. 2: cp. ib. +33, 19) cannot now be ascertained.</p> + +<p>The date of Quintilian’s birth has been variously given as <span +class = "smallroman">A.D.</span> 42, <span class = +"smallroman">A.D.</span> 38, and <span class = "smallroman">A.D.</span> +35, the last being now most commonly adopted. It cannot be determined +with certainty, though a few considerations may here be adduced to show +why it seems necessary to discard any theory that would put it after +<span class = "smallroman">A.D.</span> 38. Dodwell, in his ‘Annales +Quintilianei’ (see Burmann’s edition, vol. ii. p. 1117), arrived at +the year <span class = "smallroman">A.D.</span> 42, after a careful +examination of all the passages on which he thought it allowable to base +an inference. But Quintilian tells us himself that he was a young man +(<i>nobis adulescentibus</i> vi. 1, 14) at the trial of Cossutianus +Capito, +<span class = "pagenum">iv</span> +<a name = "intro_pageiv" id = "intro_pageiv"> </a> +which we know from Tacitus (Ann. xiii. 33) took place in <span class = +"smallroman">A.D.</span> 57: a fact which is in itself enough to show +that Dodwell is at least two years too late. Another indication is +derived from the references which Quintilian makes to his teacher +Domitius Afer, who is known to have died at a ripe old age in <span +class = "smallroman">A.D.</span> 59: cp. xii. 11, 3 <i>vidi ego ... +Domitium Afrum valde senem</i>: v. 7, 7 <i>quem adulescentulus senem +colui</i>: x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec86">1, 86</a> <i>quae ex Afro +Domitio iuvenis excepi</i>. Unfortunately we do not know the date of the +trial of Volusenus Catulus referred to in x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec23">1, 23</a>: Quintilian was a +boy at the time (<i>nobis pueris</i>). In the preface to Book VI he +writes like an old man: this appears especially in the reference he +makes to the wife whom he had lost and who was only +nineteen,—<i>aetate tam puellari praesertim meae comparata</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec5">§5</a>. If we may infer that +Quintilian was nearer sixty than fifty when he wrote these words, in +<span class = "smallroman">A.D.</span> 93 or 94, we may be certain that +he was born not later than <span class = "smallroman">A.D.</span> 38, +and probably two or three years earlier.</p> + +<p>Quintilian received his early education at Rome, and his father’s +position as a teacher of rhetoric, as well as the whole tendency of the +education of the day, no doubt gave it a rhetorical turn from the very +first. Even boys at school practised declamation, as may be seen from +the following passage of the <i>Institutio</i>:—</p> + +<p>‘<i>Non inutilem scio servatum esse a praeceptoribus meis morem, qui +cum pueros in classes distribuerant, ordinem dicendi secundum vires +ingenii dabant; et ita superiore loco quisque declamabat ut praecedere +profectu videbatur. Huius rei iudicia praebebantur: ea nobis ingens +palma, ducere vero classem multo pulcherrimum. Nec de hoc semel decretum +erat: tricesimus dies reddebat victo certaminis potestatem. Ita nec +superior successu curam remittebat, et dolor victum ad depellendam +ignominiam concitabat. Id nobis acriores ad studia dicendi faces +subdidisse quam exhortationem docentium, paedagogorum custodiam, vota +parentium, quantum animi mei coniectura colligere possum, +contenderim.</i>’—i. 2, 23-25.</p> + +<p>The same style of exercise was kept up at a later stage, when the boy +passed into the hands of a professed teacher of rhetoric, such as the +notorious Remmius Palaemon, who is said by the scholiast on Juvenal (vi. +451) to have been Quintilian’s master:—</p> + +<p>‘<i>Solebant praeceptores mei neque inutili et nobis etiam iucundo +genere exercitationis praeparare nos coniecturalibus causis, cum +quaerere atque exsequi iuberent “cur armata apud Lacedaemonios Venus” et +“quid ita crederetur Cupido puer atque volucer et sagittis ac face +armatus” et similia, in quibus scrutabamur voluntatem.</i>’—ii. +4, 26.</p> + +<p>He now came into contact with, and listened to the eloquence of, the +most celebrated orators of the day. In his relations with the greatest +of +<span class = "pagenum">v</span> +<a name = "intro_pagev" id = "intro_pagev"> </a> +these, Domitius Afer, Quintilian seems to have acted on the maxim which +he himself lays down for the budding advocate: <i>oratorem sibi aliquem, +quod apud maiores fieri solebat, deligat, quem sequatur, quem +imitetur</i> x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec19">5, 19</a>. To Afer he +attached himself (<i>adsectabar Domitium Afrum</i> Plin. Ep. ii. +14, 10), and was in all probability by him initiated in the +business of the law-courts and public life generally: cp. v. 7, 7 +<i>adulescentulus senem colui</i> (<i>Domitium</i>). In this passage +Afer is said to have written two books on the examination of witnesses; +and from vi. 3, 42 it would appear that his ‘dicta’ or witticisms were +sufficiently distinguished to merit the honour of publication. He had +held high office under Tiberius, Caligula, and Nero, and his +pre-eminence at the bar was undisputed: xii. 11, 3 <i>principem fuisse +quondam fori non erat dubium</i>. In his review of Latin oratory, +Quintilian gives him high praise: <i>arte et toto genere dicendi +praeferendus, et quem in numero veterum habere non timeas</i> x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec118">1, 118</a>. The pupil was +fortunate therefore in his master, and he drew upon his reminiscences of +Afer’s teaching when he himself came to instruct others (Plin. l.c.). +Among other notable orators of the day were Servilius Nonianus (x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec102">1, 102</a>), Iulius +Africanus (x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec118">1, 118</a>: xii. +10, 11), Iulius Secundus (x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec120">1, 120</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec12">3, 12</a>: xii. 10, 11), +Galerius Trachalus (x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec119">1, 119</a>: xii. +10, 11), and Vibius Crispus (ibid.).</p> + +<p>When he was about twenty-five years of age some motive induced +Quintilian to return to Calagurris, his native town; and there he spent +several years in the practice of his profession as teacher and +barrister. We know that he came back to Rome with Galba in <span class = +"smallroman">A.D.</span> 68: the evidence for this is again the +statement made by Hieronymus in the Eusebian Chronicle, +<i>M. Fabius Quintilianus Romam a Galba perducitur</i>. Galba had +been governor of Hispania Tarraconensis under Nero (<span class = +"smallroman">A.D.</span> 61-68), and it is not improbable that +Quintilian, when he returned to his native country, was in some way +attached to his official retinue; the numerous <i>bons mots</i> which he +records in the third chapter of the Sixth Book (§§62, 64, 66, +80, 90) seem to point to a certain amount of personal intercourse +between himself and the future emperor<a class = "tag" name = "tag3" id += "tag3" href = "#note3">3</a>.</p> + +<p>At Rome Quintilian must soon have proved himself thoroughly qualified +for the work of teaching and training the young. The imperial +countenance afterwards shown him by Vespasian was in all probability +only an official expression of the esteem felt in the Roman community +for one who was serving with such distinction in a sphere of which the +importance was coming now to be more adequately recognised. Quintilian +was not only a learned man and a great teacher: he was a great +<span class = "pagenum">vi</span> +<a name = "intro_pagevi" id = "intro_pagevi"> </a> +moral power in the midst of a people which had long been demoralised by +the vices of its rulers. The fundamental principle of his teaching, +<i>non posse oratorem esse nisi virum bonum</i> (i. pr. §9 and +xii. 1), shows the high ideal he cherished and the wide view he +took of the opportunities of his position. He felt himself strong enough +to make a protest against the literary influence of Seneca, then the +popular favourite, and to endeavour to recall a vitiated taste to more +rigorous standards: <i>corruptum et omnibus vitiis fractum dicendi genus +revocare ad severiora iudicia contendo</i> (x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec125">1, 125</a>). And when, in +the evening of his days, he wrote his great treatise on the ‘technical +training’ of the orator, it was from himself and his own successful +practice that he drew many of his most cogent illustrations, e.g. vi. 2, +36, and (in regard to his powers of memory) xi. 2, 39 and iv. +2, 86.</p> + +<p>In the earlier years of his career at Rome, before he became absorbed +in the work of teaching, Quintilian must have had a considerable amount +of practice at the bar. He tells us himself of a speech which he +published, <i>ductus iuvenali cupiditate gloriae</i> viii. 2, 24. It was +of a common type. A certain Naevius Arpinianus was accused of +having killed his wife, who had fallen from a window; and we may infer +with certainty from the tone of Quintilian’s reference to the +circumstances of the case that he succeeded in securing the acquittal of +Naevius—more fortunate than the wife-killer of whom we read in +Tacitus (Ann. iv. 22). A more distinguished cause was that of +Berenice, the Jewish Queen before whom St. Paul appeared (Acts xxv. +13), and whose subsequent visit to Rome was connected with the +ascendency she had established over the heart of the youthful Titus +(Tac. Hist. ii. 2: Suet. Tit. 7). We can only speculate on the +nature of the issue involved, as Quintilian confines himself to a bare +statement of fact—<i>ego pro regina Berenice apud ipsam causam +dixi</i> iv. 1, 19. It was in all probability a civil suit brought or +defended by Berenice against some Jewish countryman; and the phenomenon +of the queen herself presiding over a trial in which she was an +interested party is accounted for by the hypothesis that, at least in +civil suits, Roman tolerance allowed the Jews to settle their own +disputes according to their national law. On such occasions the person +of highest rank in the community to which the disputants belonged might +naturally be designated to preside over the tribunal<a class = "tag" +name = "tag4" id = "tag4" href = "#note4">4</a>.</p> + +<span class = "pagenum">vii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagevii" id = "intro_pagevii"> </a> +<p>In another case, Quintilian seems to have shown some of the dexterity +attributed to him in the oft-quoted line of Juvenal (vi. 280) <i>Dic +aliquem, sodes, dic, Quintiliane, colorem</i>. He was counsel for a +woman who had been party to an arrangement by which the provisions of +the Voconian law (passed <span class = "smallroman">B.C.</span> 169 to +prevent the accumulation of property in the hands of females) had been +evaded by the not uncommon method of a fraudulent disposition to a third +person<a class = "tag" name = "tag5" id = "tag5" href = "#note5">5</a>. +Quintilian’s client was accused of having produced a forged will. This +charge it was easy to rebut, though it rendered necessary the +explanation that the heirs named in the will had really undertaken to +hand the property over to the woman; and if this explanation were openly +given it would involve the loss of the estate. There is an evident tone +of satisfaction in Quintiiian’s description of what happened: <i>ita +ergo fuit nobis agendum ut iudices illud intellegerent factum, delatores +non possent adprehendere ut dictum, et contigit utrumque</i> (ix. +2, 74).</p> + +<p>Unlike his great model Cicero, who was considered most effective in +the <i>peroratio</i> of a great case, where the work was divided among +several pleaders, Quintilian was generally relied on to state a case +(<i>ponere causam</i>) in its main lines for subsequent elaboration: +<i>me certe, quantacunque nostris experimentis habenda est fides, +fecisse hoc in foro, quotiens ita desiderabat utilitas, probantibus et +eruditis et iis qui iudicabant, scio: et (quod non adroganter dixerim, +quia sunt plurimi quibuscum egi qui me refellere possint si mentiar) +fere a me ponendae causae officium exigebatur</i> iv. 2, 86. His +methodical habit of mind would render him specially effective for this +department of work. Other orators may have been more brilliant, more +full of fire, and more able to work upon the feelings of an audience: if +Quintilian had not the ‘grand style’—if he represents the type of +an orator that is ‘made’ rather than ‘born’—we may at least +believe that he was unsurpassed for judicious, moderate, and effective +statement. His model in this as in other matters was probably Domitius +Afer, of whom Pliny says (Ep. ii. 14, 10) <i>apud decemviros +dicebat graviter et lente, hoc enim illi actionis genus erat</i>. His +character and training would secure him a place apart from the common +herd. ‘Among the orators of the day, some ignorant and coarse, having +left mean occupations, without any preliminary study, for the bar, where +they made up in audacity for lack of talent, and in noisy conceit for a +defective knowledge +<span class = "pagenum">viii</span> +<a name = "intro_pageviii" id = "intro_pageviii"> </a> +of law—others trained in the practice of delation to every form of +trickery and violence—Quintilian, honest, able, and moderate stood +by himself<a class = "tag" name = "tag6" id = "tag6" href = +"#note6">6</a><ins class = "correction" title = "text has double quote">.’</ins></p> + +<p>It was after Quintilian had attained some distinction in the practice +of his profession, probably in the year 72, that his activity became +invested with an official and public character. We learn the facts from +Suetonius’s Life of Vespasian (ch. 18): <i>primus e fisco latinis +graecisque rhetoribus annua centena constituit</i>: and the Eusebian +chronicle (see Roth’s Suetonius, p. 272), <i>Quintilianus, ex +Hispania Calagurritanus, qui primus Romae publicam</i> +(‘state-supported’) <i>scholam</i> [<i>aperuit</i>] <i>et salarium e +fisco accepit, claruit</i>—the zenith of his fame being placed +between the years 85 and 89 <span class = "smallroman">A.D.</span> +Vespasian, in fact, created and endowed a professorial Chair of +Rhetoric, and Quintilian was its first occupant. He thus became the +official head of the foremost school of oratory at Rome, and the +‘supreme controller of its restless youth’:</p> + +<div class = "poem ital"> +<p>Quintiliane, vagae moderator summe iuventae,</p> +<p>Gloria Romanae, Quintiliane, togae. +<span class = "plaintext">—Mart. ii. 90, 1-2.</span></p> +</div> + +<p>In this capacity he must have exercised the greatest possible +influence on the rising youth of Rome. The younger Pliny was his pupil, +and evidently retained a grateful memory of the instruction which he +received from him: Ep. ii. 14, 9 and vi. 6, 3. The same is true, in +all probability, of Pliny’s friend Tacitus, who has much in common with +Quintilian: possibly also of Suetonius. If Juvenal was not actually his +pupil,—he is believed to have practised declamation till well on +in life,—we may infer from the complimentary references which +occur in his Satires that he at least appreciated Quintilian’s work and +recognised its healthy influence<a class = "tag" name = "tag7" id = +"tag7" href = "#note7">7</a><ins class = "correction" title = "period missing">. </ins></p> + +<p>After a public career at Rome, extending over a period of twenty +years<a class = "tag" name = "tag8" id = "tag8" href = "#note8">8</a>, +Quintilian definitely retired from both teaching and pleading at +<span class = "pagenum">ix</span> +<a name = "intro_pageix" id = "intro_pageix"> </a> +the bar. He seems to have profited by the example of his model, Domitius +Afer, who would have done better if he had retired earlier (xii. +11, 3): Quintilian thought it was well to go while he would still +be missed,—<i>et praecipiendi munus iam pridem deprecati sumus et +in foro quoque dicendi, quid honestissimum finem putabamus desinere dum +desideraremur</i>, ii. 12, 12. The wealth which he had acquired by the +practice of his profession (Juv. vii. 186-189) enabled him to go into +retirement with a light heart. The first-fruits of his leisure was a +treatise in which he sought to account for that decline in eloquence for +which the <i>Institutio Oratoria</i> was afterwards to provide a remedy. +It was entitled <i>De causis corruptae eloquentiae</i>, and was long +confounded with the Dialogue on Oratory, now ascribed to Tacitus: he +refers to this work in vi. pr. §3: viii. 6, 76: possibly also in ii. 4, +42: v. 12, 23: vi. pr. §3: viii. 3, 58, and 6, 76<a class = "tag" name = +"tag9" id = "tag9" href = "#note9">9</a>. This treatise is no longer +extant, and we have lost also the two books <i>Artis Rhetoricae</i>, +which were published under Quintilian’s name (1 pr. §7), <i>neque +editi a me neque in hoc comparati: namque alterum sermonem per biduum +habitum pueri quibus id praestabatur exceperant, alterum pluribus sane +diebus, quantum notando consequi potuerant, interceptum boni iuvenes sed +nimium amantes mei temerario editionis honore vulgaverant</i><a class = +"tag" name = "tag10" id = "tag10" href = "#note10">10</a>. In a recent +edition of the ‘Minor Declamations’ (M. Fabii Quintiliani +declamationes quae supersunt cxlv Lipsiae, 1884), Const. Ritter +endeavours to show that this is the work referred to in the passage +quoted above, from the preface to the <i>Institutio</i>: cp. Die +Quintilianischen Declamationen, Freiburg i.B., und +<span class = "pagenum">x</span> +<a name = "intro_pagex" id = "intro_pagex"> </a> +Tübingen, 1881, p. 246 sqq.<a class = "tag" name = "tag11" id = "tag11" +href = "#note11">11</a> Meister’s view, however, is that, like the +‘Greater Declamations,’ which are generally admitted to have been +composed at a later date, the ‘Minor Declamations’ also were written +subsequently either by Quintilian himself or (more probably) by +imitators who had caught his style and were glad to commend their +compositions by the aid of his great name. Even in his busy professional +days Quintilian had suffered from the zeal of pirate publishers: he +tells us (vii. 2, 24) that several pleadings were in circulation +under his name which he could by no means claim as entirely his own: +<i>nam ceterae, quae sub nomine meo feruntur, neglegentia excipientium +in quaestum notariorum corruptae minimam partem mei habent</i>.</p> + +<p>While living in retirement, and engaged on the composition of his +work, Quintilian received a fresh mark of Imperial favour, this time +from Domitian. This prince had adopted two grand-nephews, whom he +destined to succeed him on the throne,—the children of his niece +Flavia Domitilla, and of Flavius Clemens, a cousin whom he associated +with himself about this time in the duties of the consulship. They were +rechristened Vespasian and Domitian (Suet. Dom. 15), and the care of +their education was entrusted to Quintilian (<span class = +"smallroman">A.D.</span> 93). He accepted it with fulsome expressions of +gratitude and appreciation<a class = "tag" name = "tag12" id = "tag12" +href = "#note12">12</a>; but did not exercise it for long<a class = +"tag" name = "tag13" id = "tag13" href = "#note13">13</a>, as the +children, with their parents, became the victims of the tyrant’s +capriciousness shortly before his murder, and were ruined as rapidly as +they had risen. Flavius Clemens was put to death, and his wife +Domitilla, probably accompanied by her two sons, was sent into exile. +They seem to have embraced the Jewish faith; and it is interesting to +speculate on the possibility that through intercourse with them, and +with their children, Quintilian may have come into contact with a +religion which was the forerunner of that which was destined soon +afterwards to achieve so universal a triumph.</p> + +<p>It was while he was acting as tutor to the two princes that +Quintilian received, through the influence of their father Flavius +Clemens, the compliment of the consular insignia. This we learn from +Ausonius, himself the recipient of a similar favour from his pupil +Gratian: <i>Quintilianus per Clementem ornamenta consularia sortitus, +honestamenta nominis potius videtur quam insignia potestatis +habuisse</i>. It was probably in allusion to +<span class = "pagenum">xi</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexi" id = "intro_pagexi"> </a> +this promotion, unexampled at that time in the case of a teacher of +rhetoric, that Juvenal wrote (vii. 197-8)—</p> + +<div class = "poem ital"> +<p>Si Fortuna volet, fies de rhetore consul;</p> +<p>Si volet haec eadem, fies de consule rhetor:</p> +</div> + +<p>while another parallel is chronicled by Pliny, Ep. iv. 11, 1 +<i>praetorius hic modo ... nunc eo decidit ut exsul de senatore, rhetor +de oratore fieret. Itaque ipse in praefatione dixit dolenter el +graviter: ‘quos tibi Fortuna, ludos facis?’ facis enim ex professoribus +senatores, ex senatoribus professores.</i></p> + +<p>The flattery with which Quintilian loads the emperor for these and +similar favours is the only stain on a character otherwise invariably +manly, honourable, and straightforward. It is startling for us to hear +that monster of iniquity, the last of the Flavian line, invoked as an +‘upright guardian of morals’ (<i>sanctissimus censor</i> iv. pr. §3), +even when he was ‘tearing in pieces the almost lifeless world.’ There +may have been a grain of sincerity in the compliments which Quintilian, +like Pliny, pays to his literary ability. Domitian’s poetical +productions are said not to have been altogether wanting in merit; and +his attachment to literary pursuits is shown by the festivals he +instituted in honour of Minerva and Jupiter Capitolinus, in which +rhetorical, musical, and artistic contests were a prominent feature (see +on x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec91">1, 91</a>). But this is no +justification for the fulsome language employed by Quintilian in the +introduction to the Fourth Book, where the emperor is spoken of as the +protecting deity of literary men: <i>ut in omnibus ita in eloquentia +eminentissimum ... quo neque praesentius aliud nec studiis magis +propitium numen est</i>; nor for his profession of belief that nothing +but the cares of government prevented Domitian from becoming the +greatest poet of Rome: <i>Germanicum Augustum ab institutis studiis +deflexit cura terrarum, parumque dis visum est esse eum maximum +poetarum</i> x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec91">1, 91</a> sq. Few would +recognise Domitian in the following reference: <i>laudandum in quibusdam +quod geniti immortales, quibusdam quod immortalitatem virtute sint +consecuti: quod pietas principis nostri praesentium quoque temporum +decus fecit</i> iii. 7, 9. Such servility can only be partially +explained by Quintilian’s official relations to the Court and by the +circumstances of the time at which he wrote. It was a vice of the age: +Quintilian shares it with Martial, Statius, Silius Italicus, and +Valerius Flaccus. The indignant silence which Tacitus and Juvenal +maintained during the horrors of this reign is a better expression of +the virtue of old Rome, which seems to have burned with steadier flame +in the hearts of her genuine sons than in those of the ‘new men’ +<span class = "pagenum">xii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexii" id = "intro_pagexii"> </a> +from the provinces, with neither pride of family nor pride of +nationality to save them from the corrupting influences of their +surroundings<a class = "tag" name = "tag14" id = "tag14" href = +"#note14">14</a>.</p> + +<p>That Quintilian acquired considerable wealth, partly as a teacher and +partly by work at the bar, is evident from the pointed references made +by Juvenal in the seventh Satire. After showing how insignificant are +the fees paid by Roman parents for their children’s education, when +compared with their other expenses, the satirist suddenly breaks +off,—<i>unde igitur tot Quintilianus habet saltus?</i> How does it +come about (if his profession is so unremunerative) that Quintilian owns +so many estates? The only answer which Juvenal can give to this +conundrum is that the great teacher was one of the fortunate: ‘he is a +lucky man, and your lucky man, like Horace’s Stoic, unites every good +quality in himself, and can expect everything<a class = "tag" name = +"tag15" id = "tag15" href = "#note15">15</a>.’ We must remember however, +that, while Quintilian acquired wealth in the practice of his +profession, no charge is made against him as having placed his abilities +at the disposal of an unscrupulous ruler for his own advancement. Under +Nero, Marcellus Eprius assisted in procuring the condemnation of +Thrasea, and received over £42,000 for the service (Tac. Ann. xvi. 33): +if Quintilian’s name had ever been associated with such a trial, Juvenal +would have been more direct in his reference. But with Quintilian, as +with so many others, the advantages of position and fortune were +counterbalanced by grave domestic losses. In a less rhetorical age the +memorable introduction to the Sixth Book of the <i>Institutio</i> would +perhaps have taken a rather more simple form; but it is none the less a +testimony to the warm human heart of the writer, now a childless +widower. He had married, when already well on in life, a young girl +whose death at the early age of nineteen made him feel as if in her he +had lost a daughter rather than a wife: <i>cum omni virtute quae in +feminas cadit functa insanabilem attulit marito dolorem, tum aetate tam +puellari, praesertim meae comparata, potest et ipsa numerari inter +vulnera orbitatis</i> vi. pr. 5. She left him two sons, the younger +of whom did not long survive her; he had just completed his fifth year +when he died. The father now concentrated all his affection +<span class = "pagenum">xiii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexiii" id = "intro_pagexiii"> </a> +on the elder, and it was with his education in view that he made all +haste to complete his great work, which he considered would be the best +inheritance he could leave to him,—<i>hanc optimum partem +relicturus hereditatis videbar, ut si me, quod aequum et optabile fuit, +fata intercepissent, praeceptore tamen patre uteretur</i> ib. §1. But +the blow again descended, and his house was desolate: <i>at me fortuna +id agentem diebus ac noctibus festinantemque metu meae mortalitatis ita +subito prostravit ut laboris mei fructus ad neminem minus quam ad me +pertineret. Illum enim, de quo summa conceperam et in quo spem unicam +senectutis reponebam, repetito vulnere orbitatis amisi</i> ib. §2.</p> + +<p>This would be about the year 94 <span class = +"smallroman">A.D.</span>, and the <i>Institutio Oratoria</i> is said to +have seen the light in 95. After that we hear no more of Quintilian. +Domitian was assassinated in 96, and under the new <i>régime</i> it is +possible that the favourite of the Flavian emperors may have been under +a cloud. But his work was done; even if he lived on for a few years +longer in retirement, his career had virtually closed with the +publication of his great treatise. It used to be believed that he lived +into the reign of Hadrian, and died about 118 <span class = +"smallroman">A.D.</span>, but this idea is founded on a misconception<a +class = "tag" name = "tag16" id = "tag16" href = "#note16">16</a>. +Probably he did not even see the accession of Nerva in 96: if he did, he +must have died soon afterwards, for there are two letters of Pliny’s +(one written between 97 and 100, and the other about 105) in which Pliny +does not speak of his old teacher as of one still alive.</p> + + +<hr class = "mid"> + +<h5><a name = "intro_chapII" id = "intro_chapII">II.</a><br> +The Institutio Oratoria.</h5> + +<p>Though Quintilian spent little more than two years on the composition +of the <i>Institutio Oratorio</i>, his work really embodies the +experience of a +<span class = "pagenum">xiv</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexiv" id = "intro_pagexiv"> </a> +lifetime. No doubt much of it lay ready to his hand, even before he +began to write, and he would willingly have kept it longer; but the +solicitations of Trypho, the publisher, were too much for him. His +letter to Trypho shows that he fully appreciated the magnitude of his +task; and there is even the suggestion that (like many a busy teacher +since his time) he only realised when called upon to publish that he had +not covered the whole ground of his subject<a class = "tag" name = +"tag17" id = "tag17" href = "#note17">17</a>. The opening words of the +introduction (<i>post impetratam studiis meis quietem, quae per viginti +annos erudiendis iuvenibus impenderam</i>, &c.) show that the +<i>Institutio</i> was the work of his retirement: and various +indications lead us to fix the date of its composition as falling +between <span class = "smallroman">A.D.</span> 93 and 95. The +introduction to the Fourth Book was evidently written when (probably in +93) Domitian had appointed Quintilian tutor to his grand-nephews; the +Sixth Book, where he refers to his family losses, must have followed +shortly afterwards; while the harshness of his references to the +philosophers in the concluding portions of the work (cp. xi. 1, 30, xii. +3, 11, with 1, pr. 15, which may have been written, or at least revised, +after the rest was finished) seems to suggest that their expulsion by +Domitian (in 94) was already an accomplished fact<a class = "tag" name = +"tag18" id = "tag18" href = "#note18">18</a>. The book is dedicated to +Victorius Marcellus, to whom Statius also addresses the Fourth Book of +his <i>Silvae</i>, evidently as to a person of some consideration and an +orator of repute (cp. Stat. Silv. iv. 4, 8, and 41 sq.). Marcellus had a +son called Geta (Inst. Or. i. pr. 6: Stat. Silv. iv. 4, 71), and it +was originally with a view to the education of this youth (<i>erudiendo +Getae tuo</i>) that Quintilian associated the father’s name with his +work. Geta is again referred to, along with Quintilian’s elder son, and +also the grand-nephews of Domitian, in the introduction to the Fourth +Book; but the opening words of the Sixth Book show that they are all +gone, and the epilogue, at the conclusion of Book xii, is addressed to +Marcellus on behoof of ‘studiosi iuvenes’ in general.</p> + +<p>The plan of the <i>Institutio Oratorio</i> cannot be better given +than in its author’s own words (i. pr. 21 sq.): <i>Liber primus ea quae +sunt ante officium rhetoris continebit. Secundo prima apud rhetorem +elementa et quae de ipsa rhetorices substantia quaeruntur tractabimus, +quinque deinceps inventioni (nam huic et dispositio subiungitur) +quattuor elocutioni, in cuius partem memoria ac pronuntiatio veniunt, +dabuntur. Unus accedet in quo nobis orator ipse informandus est, et qui +mores eius, quae in +<span class = "pagenum">xv</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexv" id = "intro_pagexv"> </a> +suscipiendis, discendis, agendis causis ratio, quod eloquentiae genus, +quis agendi debeat esse finis, quae post finem studia, quantum nostra +valebit infirmitas, disseremus.</i> The first book deals with what the +pupil must learn before he goes to the rhetorician; it gives an account +of home-training and school discipline, and contains also a statement of +Quintilian’s views of grammar. The second book treats of rhetoric in +general: the choice of a proper instructor, as well as his character and +function, and the nature, principles, aims, and use of oratory. It is in +these early books especially that Quintilian reveals the high tone which +has made him an authority on educational morals, as well as rhetorical +training: see especially i. 2, 8, where he enlarges on Juvenal’s dictum, +<i>maxima debetur puero reverentia</i>; ii. 4, 10, where he advocates +gentle and conciliatory methods in teaching; and ii. 2, 5,—a +picture of the ideal teacher in language which might be applied to +Quintilian himself<a class = "tag" name = "tag19" id = "tag19" href = +"#note19">19</a>. The remaining books, except the twelfth, are devoted +to the five ‘parts of rhetoric,’—invention, arrangement, style, +memory, and delivery (Cic. de Inv. i. 7, 9). In the third book we +have a classification of the different kinds of oratory. Next he treats +of the ‘different divisions of a speech, the purpose of the exordium, +the proper form of a statement of facts, what constitutes the force of +proofs, either in confirming our own assertions or refuting those of our +adversary, and of the different powers of the peroration, whether it be +regarded as a summary of the arguments previously used, or as a means of +exciting the feelings of the judge rather than of refreshing his +memory<ins class = "correction" title = "close quote misprinted after next footnote tag">.’</ins> This brings us to the end of the sixth book, +which closes with remarks on the uses of humour and of altercation<a +class = "tag" name = "tag20" id = "tag20" href = "#note20">20</a>. The +discussion of arrangement finishes with the seventh book, which is +extremely technical: style (<i>elocutio</i>) is the main subject of the +four books which follow. Of these the eighth and ninth treat of the +elements of a good style,—such as perspicuity, ornament, &c.; +the tenth of the practical studies and exercises (including a course of +reading) by which the actual command of these elements may be obtained; +while the eleventh deals with appropriateness (i.e. the different kinds +of oratory which suit different audiences), memory, and delivery. The +twelfth book—which Quintilian calls the most grave and important +part of the whole work—treats of the high moral qualifications +requisite in the perfect orator: +<span class = "pagenum">xvi</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexvi" id = "intro_pagexvi"> </a> +just as the first book, introductory to the whole, describes the early +training which should precede the technical studies of the orator, so +the last book sets forth that ‘discipline of the whole man’ which is +their crown and conclusion<a class = "tag" name = "tag21" id = "tag21" +href = "#note21">21</a>. “Lastly, the experienced teacher gives advice +when the public life of an orator should begin, and when it should end. +Even then his activity will not come to an end. He will write the +history of his times, will explain the law to those who consult him, +will write, like Quintilian himself, a treatise on eloquence, or set +forth the highest principles of morality. The young men will throng +round and consult him as an oracle, and he will guide them as a pilot. +What can be more honourable to a man than to teach that of which he has +a thorough knowledge? ‘I know not,’ he concludes, ‘whether an orator +ought not to be thought happiest at that period of his life when, +sequestered from the world, devoted to retired study, unmolested by +envy, and remote from strife, he has placed his reputation in a harbour +of safety, experiencing while yet alive that respect which is more +commonly offered after death, and observing how his character will be +regarded by posterity<a class = "tag" name = "tag22" id = "tag22" href = +"#note22">22</a>.’”</p> + + +<p class = "space"> +The <i>Institutio Oratoria</i> differs from all other previous +rhetorical treatises in the comprehensiveness of its aim and method. It +is a complete manual for the training of the orator, from his cradle to +the public platform. Founding on old Cato’s maxim, that the orator is +the <i>vir bonus dicendi peritus</i>, Quintilian considers it necessary +to take him at birth in order to secure the best results, as regards +both goodness of character and skill in speaking. His work has therefore +for us a double value and a twofold interest: it is a treatise on +education in general, and on rhetorical education in particular. +Throughout the whole, oratory is the end for the sake of which +everything is undertaken,—the goal to which the entire moral and +intellectual training of the student is to be directed. Quintilian’s +high conception of his subject is reflected in the language of the +‘Dialogue on Oratory’: <i>Studium quo non aliud in civitate nostra vel +ad utilitatem fructuosius vel ad voluptatem dulcius vel ad dignitatem +amplius vel ad urbis famam pulchrius vel ad totius imperii atque omnium +gentium notitiam inlustrius excogitari potest</i> (ch. 5). Though +the field for the practical display of eloquence had been greatly +limited by +<span class = "pagenum">xvii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexvii" id = "intro_pagexvii"> </a> +the extinction of the old freedom of political life, rhetoric +represented, in Quintilian’s day, the whole of education. It was to the +Romans what <span class = "greek" title = "mousikê">μουσική</span> was +to the Greeks, and was valued all the more by them because of its +eminently practical purpose. The student of rhetoric must therefore be +fully equipped. “Quintilian postulates the widest culture: there is no +form of knowledge from which something may not be extracted for his +purpose; and he is fully alive to the importance of method in education. +He ridicules the fashion of the day, which hurried over preliminary +cultivation, and allowed men to grow grey while declaiming in the +schools, where nature and reality were forgotten. Yet he develops all +the technicalities of rhetoric with a fulness to which we find no +parallel in ancient literature. Even in this portion of the work the +illustrations are so apposite and the style so dignified and yet sweet, +that the modern reader, whose initial interest in rhetoric is of +necessity faint, is carried along with much less fatigue than is +necessary to master most parts of the rhetorical writings of Aristotle +and Cicero. At all times the student feels that he is in the company of +a high-toned Roman gentleman who, so far as he could do without ceasing +to be a Roman, has taken up into his nature the best results of ancient +culture in all its forms<a class = "tag" name = "tag23" id = "tag23" +href = "#note23">23</a>.”</p> + +<p>It is in connection with the general rather than with the technical +training of his pupils that Quintilian establishes a claim to rank with +the highest educational authorities,—as for example in his +insistence on the necessity of good example both at home<a class = "tag" +name = "tag24" id = "tag24" href = "#note24">24</a> and in school, and +on the respect due to the young<a class = "tag" name = "tag25" id = +"tag25" href = "#note25">25</a>, as well as his catalogue of the +qualifications required in the trainer of youth (ii. 2, 5: 4, 10), +his protest against corporal punishment (i. 3, 14), and his +consistent advocacy of the moral as well as the intellectual aspects of +education. His system was conceived as a remedy for the existing state +of things at Rome, where eloquence and the arts in general had, as +Messalla puts it in the ‘Dialogue on Oratory,’ “declined from their +ancient glory, not from the dearth of men, but from the indolence of the +young, the carelessness of parents, the ignorance of teachers, and +neglect of the old discipline<a class = "tag" name = "tag26" id = +"tag26" href = "#note26">26</a>.” Under it parents and teachers were to +be united in the effort to develop the moral and intellectual qualities +of the Roman youth: and through education the state was to recover +something of her old vigour and virtue.</p> + +<p>The work was expected with the greatest interest before its +publication, and we may infer, from the high authority assigned to +Quintilian in the +<span class = "pagenum">xviii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexviii" id = "intro_pagexviii"> </a> +literature of the period, that it long held an honoured place in Roman +schools. But it is curious that the earliest known references are not to +the <i>Institutio</i> but to the <i>Declamationes</i>. In an interesting +chapter of the Introduction to a recent volume<a class = "tag" name = +"tag27" id = "tag27" href = "#note27">27</a>, M. Fierville has +gathered together all the references that occur in the literature of the +early centuries of our era. Trebellius Pollio and Lactantius (both of +the 3rd century) speak of the Declamations, and Ausonius (4th century) +refers to Quintilian without naming his writings: the first definite +mention of the <i>Institutio</i> is made by Hilary of Poitiers (died +367) and afterwards by St. Jerome (died 420). Later Cassiodorus +(468-562) pronounced a eulogy which may stand as proof of his high +appreciation: <i>Quintilianus tamen doctor egregius, qui post fluvios +Tullianos singulariter valuit implere quae docuit, virum bonum dicendi +peritum a prima aetate suscipiens, per cunctas artes ac disciplinas +nobilium litterarum erudiendum esse monstravit, quem merito ad +defendendum totius civitatis vota requirerent</i> (de Arte +Rhetor.—Rhet. Lat. Min., ed. Halm, p. 498). The Ars Rhetorica +of Julius Victor (6th century) is largely borrowed from Quintilian: see +Halm, praef. p. ix. Isidore, Bishop of Seville (570-630), studied +Quintilian in conjunction with Aristotle and Cicero. After the Dark Age, +Poggio’s discovery, at St. Gall in 1416, of a complete manuscript +of Quintilian was ranked as one of the most important literary events in +what we know now as the era of the Renaissance<a class = "tag" name = +"tag28" id = "tag28" href = "#note28">28</a>. The great scholars of the +fifteenth century worked hard at the emendation of the text. The +<i>editio princeps</i> was given to the world by G. A. Campani in +1470; and in the concluding words of his preface the editor reflects +something of the enthusiasm for his author which had already been +expressed by Petrarch, Poggio, and others,—<i>proinde de +Quintiliano sic habe, post unam beatissimam et unicam felicitatem +M. Tullii, quae fastigii loco suspicienda est omnibus et tamquam +adoranda, hunc unum esse quem praecipuum habere possis in eloquentia +ducem: quem si assequeris, quidquid tibi deerit ad cumulum +consummationis id a natura desiderabis non ab arte deposces</i>. This +edition was followed in rapid succession by various others, so that by +the end of the 16th century Quintilian had been edited a hundred times +over<a class = "tag" name = "tag29" id = "tag29" href = +"#note29">29</a>. The 17th century is not so rich in editions, but +Quintilian still reigned in the schools as the great master of rhetoric: +students of English literature +<span class = "pagenum">xix</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexix" id = "intro_pagexix"> </a> +will remember how Milton (Sonnet xi) uses the authority of his name when +referring to the roughness of northern nomenclature:—</p> + +<div class = "poem"> +<p>Those rugged names to our like mouths grow sleek</p> +<p>That would have made Quintilian stare and gasp.</p> +</div> + +<p>In his ‘Tractate on Education’ too Milton strongly recommends the +first two or three books of the <i>Institutio</i>. The 18th century +provided the notable editions of Burmann (1720), Capperonier (1725), +Gesner (1738), and witnessed also the commencement of Spalding’s +(1798-1816), whose text, as revised by Zumpt and Bonnell, practically +held the field till the publication of Halm’s critical edition (1868). +Towards the close of last century it would appear that Quintilian was as +much studied as he had ever been,—probably by many who believed +in, as well as by some who would have rejected the application of the +maxim ‘<i>orator</i> nascitur non fit.’ William Pitt, for example, +shortly after his arrival at Cambridge (1773), and while ‘still bent on +his main object of oratorical excellence,’ attended a course of lectures +on Quintilian, which caused him on one occasion to interrupt his +correspondence with his father<a class = "tag" name = "tag30" id = +"tag30" href = "#note30">30</a>. His lasting popularity must have been +due, not only to his own intrinsic merits, but to the fact that his +writings harmonised well with the studies of those days: it was promoted +also by the serviceable abridgments of the <i>Institutio</i>, either in +whole or in part, that were from time to time published,—notably +that of Ch. Rollin in 1715. In our own day men whose education was +moulded on the old lines—such as J. S. Mill—considered +Quintilian an indispensable part of a scholar’s equipment. Macaulay read +him in India, along with the rest of classical literature. Lord +Beaconsfield professed that he was ‘very fond of Quintilian<a class = +"tag" name = "tag31" id = "tag31" href = "#note31">31</a>.’ But by our +classical scholars he has been almost entirely neglected, no complete +edition having appeared in this country since a revised text was issued +in London in 1822. German criticism, on the other hand, has of late paid +Quintilian special attention, with conspicuous results for the +emendation and illustration of his text: to the great names of Spalding, +Zumpt, and Bonnell, must be added those of Halm, Meister, Becher, +Wölfflin, and Kiderlin.</p> + + +<p class = "space"> +Besides the literary criticism for which it has always attracted +attention, and which will form the subject of the next section, the +Tenth Book of the <i>Institutio</i> contains valuable precepts in regard +to various practical matters which are still of as great importance as +they were in Quintilian’s day. Among these are the practice of writing, +the use of an amanuensis, +<span class = "pagenum">xx</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexx" id = "intro_pagexx"> </a> +the art of revision, the limits of imitation, the best exercises in +style, the advantages of preparation, and the faculty of +improvisation.</p> + +<p>The following list of <span class = "smallcaps">Loci +Memoriales</span> (mainly taken from Krüger’s third edition, pp. +108-110) will give some idea of the various points on which, especially +in the later chapters of the Tenth Book, Quintilian states his opinion +weightily and often with epigrammatic terseness:</p> + +<div class = "inset"> +<p><a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec112">1 §112</a> +(p. 110) Ille se profecisse sciat cui Cicero valde placebit.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec4">2 §4</a> +(p. 124) Pigri est ingenii contentum esse iis quae sint ab aliis +inventa.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec7">2 §7</a> +(p. 125) Turpe etiam illud est, contentum esse id consequi quod +imiteris.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec8">2 §8</a> +(p. 126) Nulla mansit ars qualis inventa est, nec intra initium +stetit.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec10">2 §10</a> +(pp. 126-7) Eum vero nemo potest aequare cuius vestigiis sibi utique +insistendum putat; necesse est enim semper sit posterior qui +sequitur.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec10">2 §10</a> +(p. 127) Plerumque facilius est plus facere quam idem.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec12">2 §12</a> +(ibid.) Ea quae in oratore maxima sunt imitabilia non sunt, ingenium, +inventio, vis, facilitas, et quidquid arte non traditur.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec18">2 §18</a> +(p. 131) Noveram quosdam qui se pulchre expressisse genus illud +caelestis huius in dicendo viri sibi viderentur, si in clausula +posuissent ‘esse videatur.’</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec20">2 §20</a> +(p. 132) (Praeceptor) rector est alienorum ingeniorum atque formator. +Difficilius est naturam suam fingere.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec22">2 §22</a> +(ibid.) Sua cuique proposito lex, suus decor est.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec24">2 §24</a> +(p. 134) Non qui maxime imitandus, et solus imitandus est.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec2">3 §2</a> +(p. 136) Scribendum ergo quam diligentissime et quam plurimum. Nam ut +terra alte refossa generandis alendisque seminibus fecundior fit, sic +profectus non a summo petitus studiorum fructus effundit uberius et +fidelius continet.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec2">3 §2</a> +(p. 137) Verba in labris nascentia.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec3">3 §3</a> +(ibid.) Vires faciamus ante omnia, quae sufficiant labori certaminum et +usu non exhauriantur. Nihil enim rerum ipsa natura voluit magnum effici +cito, praeposuitque pulcherrimo cuique operi difficultatem.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec7">3 §7</a> +(p. 139) Omnia nostra dum nascuntur placent, alioqui nec +scriberentur.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec9">3 §9</a> +(ibid.) Primum hoc constituendum, hoc obtinendum est, ut quam optime +scribamus: celeritatem dabit consuetudo.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec10">3 §10</a> +(ibid.) Summa haec est rei: cito scribendo non fit ut bene scribatur, +bene scribendo fit ut cito.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec15">3 §15</a> +(p. 142) Curandum est ut quam optime dicamus, dicendum tamen pro +facultate.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec22">3 §22</a> +(p. 146) Secretum in dictando perit.</p> + +<span class = "pagenum">xxi</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxi" id = "intro_pagexxi"> </a> +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec26">3 §26</a> +(p. 148) Cui (acerrimo labori) non plus inrogandum est quam quod somno +supererit, haud deerit.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec27">3 §27</a> +(ibid.) Abunde, si vacet, lucis spatia sufficiunt: occupatos in noctem +necessitas agit. Est tamen lucubratio, quotiens ad eam integri ac +refecti venimus, optimum secreti genus.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec29">3 §29</a> +(ibid.) Non est indulgendum causis desidiae. Nam si non nisi refecti, +non nisi hilares, non nisi omnibus aliis curis vacantes studendum +existimarimus, semper erit propter quod nobis ignoscamus.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec31">3 §31</a> +(p. 149) Nihil in studiis parvum est.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIV_sec1">4 §1</a> +(p. 151) Emendatio, pars studiorum longe utilissima; neque enim sine +causa creditum est stilum non minus agere, cum delet. Huius autem operis +est adicere, detrahere, mutare.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIV_sec4">4 §4</a> +(p. 152) Sit ergo aliquando quod placeat aut certe quod sufficiat, ut +opus poliat lima, non exterat.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec23">5 §23</a> +(p. 166) Diligenter effecta (sc. materia) plus proderit quam plures +inchoatae et quasi degustatae.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec1">6 §1</a> +(p. 167) Haec (sc. cogitatio) inter medios rerum actus aliquid invenit +vacui nec otium patitur.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec2">6 §2</a> +(p. 168) Memoriae quoque plerumque inhaeret fidelius quod nulla +scribendi securitate laxatur.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec5">6 §5</a> +(ibid.) Sed si forte aliqui inter dicendum effulserit extemporalis +color, non superstitiose cogitatis demum est inhaerendum.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec6">6 §6</a> +(p. 169) Refutare temporis munera longe stultissimum est.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec6">6 §6</a> +(ibid.) Extemporalem temeritatem malo quam male cohaerentem +cogitationem.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec1">7 §1</a> +(p. 170) Maximus vero studiorum fructus est et velut praemium quoddam +amplissimum longi laboris ex tempore dicendi facultas.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec4">7 §4</a> +(p. 171) Perisse profecto confitendum est praeteritum laborem, cui +semper idem laborandum est. Neque ego hoc ago ut ex tempore dicere +malit, sed ut possit.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec12">7 §12</a> +(p. 175) Mihi ne dicere quidem videtur nisi qui disposite, ornate, +copiose dicit, sed tumultuari.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec15">7 §15</a> +(p. 176) Pectus est enim, quod disertos facit, et vis mentis.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec16">7 §§16-17</a> +(p. 177) Extemporalis actio auditorum frequentia, ut miles congestu +signorum, excitatur. Namque et difficiliorem cogitationem exprimit et +expellit dicendi necessitas, et secundos impetus auget placendi +cupido.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec18">7 §18</a> +(ibid.) Facilitatem quoque extemporalem a parvis initiis paulatim +perducemus ad summam, quae neque perfici neque contineri nisi usu +potest.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec20">7 §20</a> +(p. 178) Neque vero tanta esse umquam fiducia facilitatis +<span class = "pagenum">xxii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxii" id = "intro_pagexxii"> </a> +debet ut non breve saltem tempus, quod nusquam fere deerit, ad ea quae +dicturi sumus dispicienda sumamus.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec21">7 §21</a> +(p. 178) Qui stultis videri eruditi volunt, stulti eruditis +videntur.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec24">7 §24</a> +(p. 179) Rarum est ut satis se quisque vereatur.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec26">7 §26</a> +(p. 180) Studendum vero semper et ubique.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec27">7 §27</a> +(p. 180-1) Neque enim fere tan est ullus dies occupatus ut nihil +lucrativae ... operae ad scribendum aut legendum aut dicendum rapi +aliquo momento temporis possit.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec28">7 §28</a> +(p. 181) Quidquid loquemur ubicumque sit pro sua scilicet portione +perfectum.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec28">7 §28</a> +(ibid.) Scribendum certe numquam est magis, quam cum multa dicemus ex +tempore.</p> + +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec29">7 §29</a> +(p. 181-2) Ac nescio an si utrumque cum cura et studio fecerimus, +invicem prosit, ut scribendo dicamus diligentius, dicendo scribamus +facilius. Scribendum ergo quotiens licebit, si id non dabitur, +cogitandum; ab utroque exclusi debent tamen sic dicere ut neque +deprehensus orator neque litigator destitutus esse videatur.</p> +</div> + +<hr class = "mid"> + +<h5><a name = "intro_chapIII" id = "intro_chapIII">III.</a> +Quintilians’s Litary Criticism.</h5> + +<p>It was the conviction that a cultured orator is better than an orator +with no culture that induced Quintilian to devote so considerable a part +of the Tenth Book to a review of Greek and Roman literature. He was +aware that in order to speak with effect it is necessary for a man to +know a good deal that lies outside the scope of the particular case +which he may undertake to plead; and while the ‘firm facility’ <span +class = "greek" title = "hexis">ἕξις</span> at which he taught the +orator to aim could only be attained by a variety of exercises and +qualifications, a course of wide and careful reading must always, he +considered, form one of the factors in the combination.</p> + +<p>In judging of the merits of Quintilian’s literary criticism we must +not forget the point of view from which he wrote. He is not dealing with +literature in and for itself. His was not the cast of mind in which the +faculty of literary appreciation finds artistic expression in the form +in which criticism becomes a part of literature itself. We cannot think +of the author of the Tenth Book of the <i>Institutio</i> as one whom a +divinely implanted instinct for literature impelled, towards the evening +of his days, to leave a record of the personal impressions he had +derived from contact with those whom we now recognise as the +master-minds of classical antiquity. Quintilian writes, not as the +literary man for a sympathetic brotherhood, but as the professor of +rhetoric for students in his school. If, in the +<span class = "pagenum">xxiii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxiii" id = "intro_pagexxiii"> </a> +course of his just and sober, but often trite and obvious criticisms, he +characterises a writer in language which has stood the test of time, it +is always when that writer touches his main interest most nearly, as one +from whom the student of style may learn much. In short, his work in the +department of literary criticism is done much in the same spirit as that +which, in these later days, has moved many sober and sensible, but on +the whole average persons, conversant with the general current of +contemporary thought, and not without the faculty of appreciative +discrimination, to draw up a list of the ‘Best Hundred Books.’ Their +aim, however, has been to guide and direct the work of that peculiar +product of modern times, the ‘general reader’: Quintilian’s victim was +the professed student of rhetoric.</p> + +<p>But this limitation, arising partly out of the special aim which he +had imposed upon himself, partly, also, in all probability, from the +constitution of his own mind, ought not to blind us to the value of the +comprehensive review of ancient literature which Quintilian has left us +in this Tenth Book. “His literary sympathies are extraordinarily wide. +When obliged to condemn, as in the case of Seneca, he bestows generous +and even extravagant praise on such merit as he can find. He can +cordially admire even Sallust, the true fountain-head of the style which +he combats, while he will not suffer Lucilius to lie under the +aspersions of Horace.... The judgments which he passes may be in many +instances traditional, but, looking to all the circumstances of the +time, it seems remarkable that there should then have lived at Rome a +single man who could make them his own and give them expression. The +form in which these judgments are rendered is admirable. The gentle +justness of the sentiments is accompanied by a curious felicity of +phrase. Who can forget the ‘immortal swiftness of Sallust,’ or the +‘milky richness of Livy,’ or how ‘Horace soars now and then, and is full +of sweetness and grace, and in his varied forms and phrases is most +fortunately bold’? Ancient literary criticism perhaps touched its +highest points in the hands of Quintilian.”<a class = "tag" name = +"tag32" id = "tag32" href = "#note32">32</a></p> + +<p>The course of reading which Quintilian recommends is selected with +express reference to the aim which he had in view, and which is put +prominently forward in connection with nearly every individual +criticism. The young man who aspires to success in speaking must have +his taste formed: when he reads Homer, let him note that, great poet as +Homer is, and admirable in every respect, he is also <i>oratoria virtute +eminentissimus</i> (<a href = +"QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec46">1 §46</a>). Alcaeus is <i>plerumque +oratori similis</i> (<a href = +"QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec63">1 §63</a>): Euripides is, on that +ground, to be preferred to Sophocles (<a href = +"QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec67">1 §67</a>): Lucan is <i>magis +oratoribus quam poetis imitandus</i> (<a href = +"QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec70">1 §70</a>): and the old Greek comedy +is +<span class = "pagenum">xxiv</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxiv" id = "intro_pagexxiv"> </a> +specially recommended as a form of poetry ‘than which probably none is +better suited to form the orator’ (<a href = +"QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec65">1 §65</a>). With the prose writers +Quintilian is thoroughly at home, and he nowhere lets in so much light +on his own sympathies as in the estimates he gives us of Cicero (<a href += "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec105">1 §§105-112</a>) and Seneca (<a +href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec125">1 §§125-131</a>). His +criticism of Cicero is precisely what might have been expected from the +general tone of the references throughout the <i>Institutio</i>. Cicero +is Quintilian’s model, to whom he looks up with reverential admiration: +he will not hear of his faults. In his own day the great orator had been +attacked by Atticists of the severer type for the richness of his style +and the excessive attention which they alleged that he paid to rhythm. +The ‘plainness’ of Lysias was their ideal, and they failed to recognise +the fact that, with the more limited resources of the Latin language, +such simplicity and condensation would be perilously near to baldness +(cp. note on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec105">1 §105</a>). Cicero they +regarded as an Asianist in disguise; in the words of his devoted +follower, they “dared to censure him as unduly turgid and Asiatic and +redundant; as too much given to repetition, and sometimes insipid in his +witticisms; and as spiritless, diffuse, and (save the mark!) even +effeminate in his arrangement” (<i>Inst. Or.</i> xii. 10, 12, quoted on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec105">1 §105</a>). That this +criticism had not been forgotten in Quintilian’s own day is obvious not +only from the <i>Institutio</i> but also from the discussion in the +<i>Dialogus de Oratoribus</i>, where Aper is represented as saying “We +know that even Cicero was not without his disparagers, who thought him +inflated, turgid, not sufficiently concise, but unduly diffuse and +luxuriant, and far from Attic” (ch. 18). To such detractors of his great +model Quintilian will have nothing to say, and in his criticism of +Cicero he gives full expression to his enthusiastic admiration for the +genius of one who had brought eloquence to the highest pinnacle of +perfection (vi. 31 <i>Latinae eloquentiae princeps</i>: cp. x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec105">1 §§105-112</a>: xii. 1, +20 <i>stetisse ipsum in fastigio eloquentiae fateor</i>: 10, 12 sqq. +<i>in omnibus quae in quoque laudantur eminentissimum</i>).</p> + +<p>With such an absorbing enthusiasm for Cicero, it was hardly to be +expected that Quintilian would show an adequate appreciation of Seneca. +Seneca’s influence was the great obstacle in the way of a general return +to the classical tradition of the Golden Age, and this was the literary +reform which Quintilian had at heart—<i>corruptum et omnibus +vitiis fractum dicendi genus revocare ad severiora iudicia contendo</i> +x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec125">1, 125</a>. It is probable +that, in spite of the appearance of candour which he assumes in dealing +with him, Quintilian approached Seneca with a certain degree of +prejudice<a class = "tag" name = "tag33" id = "tag33" href = +"#note33">33</a>. Quintilian represents the literature of erudition, and +his +<span class = "pagenum">xxv</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxv" id = "intro_pagexxv"> </a> +standard is the best of what had been done in the past: Seneca was, like +Lucan, the child of a new era, to whom it seemed perfectly natural that +new thoughts should find utterance in new forms of expression. Seneca’s +motto was ‘nullius nomen fero,’—he gave free rein to the play of +his fancy, and rejected all method<a class = "tag" name = "tag34" id = +"tag34" href = "#note34">34</a>: Quintilian looked with horror (in the +interest of his pupils) on a liberty that was so near to licence, and +set himself to check it by recalling men’s minds to the ‘good old ways,’ +and extolling Cicero as the synonym for eloquence itself. In such a +conflict of tastes as regards things literary, and apart from the +ambiguous character of Seneca’s personal career, it is not surprising +that Quintilian should have been unfavourably disposed towards him. He +had a grudge, moreover, against philosophers in general, especially the +Stoics. They had encroached on what his comprehensive scheme of +education impelled him to believe was the province of the teacher of +rhetoric,—the moral training of the future orator<a class = "tag" +name = "tag35" id = "tag35" href = "#note35">35</a>.</p> + +<p>He was morbidly anxious to show that rhetoric stood in need of no +extraneous assistance: even the ‘grammatici’ he teaches to know their +proper place (see esp. i. 9, 6). But it was mainly, no doubt, as +representing certain literary tendencies of which he disapproved that +Seneca must have incurred Quintilian’s censure. It is probable that in +many passages of the <i>Institutio</i>, where he is not specially named, +it is Seneca that is in the writer’s mind: the tone of the references +corresponds in several points with the famous passage of the Tenth +Book<a class = "tag" name = "tag36" id = "tag36" href = +"#note36">36</a>. In this passage +<span class = "pagenum">xxvi</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxvi" id = "intro_pagexxvi"> </a> +Quintilian is evidently putting forward the whole force of his authority +in order to counteract Seneca’s influence. He has kept him waiting in a +marked manner, to the very end of his literary review: and when he comes +to deal with him he does not confine his criticism to a few words or +phrases, but devotes nearly as much space to him as he did to Cicero +himself. In his estimate of Seneca nothing is more remarkable than the +careful manner in which Quintilian mingles praise and blame. But the +praise is reluctant and half-hearted: it is Seneca’s faults that his +critic wishes to make prominent. He admits his ability (<i>ingenium +facile et copiosum</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec128">§128</a>), and even goes the +length of saying that it would be well if his imitators could rise to +his level (<i>foret enim optandum pares ac saltem proximos illi viro +fieri</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec127">§127</a>). But praise is no +sooner given than it is immediately recalled. It was his faults that +secured imitators for Seneca (<i>placebat propter sola vitia</i> ib.); +if he was distinguished for wide knowledge (<i>plurimum studii, multa +rerum cognitio</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec128">§128</a>), he was often misled +by those who assisted him in his researches; if there is much that is +good in him, ‘much even to admire’ (<i>multa ... probanda in eo, multa +etiam admiranda sunt</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec131">§131</a>), still it requires +picking out. In short, so dangerous a model is he, that he should be +read only by those who have come to maturity, and then not so much, +evidently, for improvement, as for the reason that it is good to ‘see +both sides,’—<i>quod exercere potest utrimque iudicium</i>, +ib.</p> + +<p>It has already been suggested that the secret of a great part of +Quintilian’s antipathy to Seneca may have been his dislike of the +philosophers, whom his imperial patrons found it necessary from time to +time to suppress. He was anxious to exalt rhetoric at the expense of +philosophy. But he was no doubt also honestly of opinion—and his +position as an instructor of youth would make him feel bound to express +his view distinctly—that Seneca was a dangerous model for the +budding orator to imitate. His merits were many and great: but his +peculiarities lent themselves readily to degradation. Quintilian wished +to put forward a counterblast to the fashionable tendency of the day, +and to recall—in their own interests—to severer models +Seneca’s youthful imitators,—those of whom he writes <i>ad ea</i> +(i.e. <i>eius vitia</i>) <i>se quisque dirigebat effingenda, quae +poterat; deinde quum se iactaret eodem modo dicere, Senecam +infamabat</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec127">§127</a>. Seneca was of course +not responsible for the exaggerations of his imitators, and Quintilian +would never have encouraged in his pupils exclusive devotion to any +particular model, especially if that model were characterised by such +peculiar features of style as distinguished Sallust or Tacitus. But he +could not forgive +<span class = "pagenum">xxvii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxvii" id = "intro_pagexxvii"> </a> +Seneca for his share in the reaction against Cicero<a class = "tag" name += "tag37" id = "tag37" href = "#note37">37</a>. Admirers of Seneca think +that he failed to make allowance for the influences at work on the +philosopher’s style, and that he judged him too much from the standpoint +of a rhetorician. They admit Seneca’s faults—his tendency to +declamation, the want of balance in his style, his excessive subtlety, +his affectation, his want of method: but they contend that these faults +are compensated by still greater virtues<a class = "tag" name = "tag38" +id = "tag38" href = "#note38">38</a>. M. Rocheblave, who possesses +the appreciation of Seneca traditional among Frenchmen, follows Diderot +in inclining to believe that the philosopher was the victim of envy and +dislike<a class = "tag" name = "tag39" id = "tag39" href = +"#note39">39</a>. For himself he protests in the following terms against +what he considers the inadequacy of Quintilian’s estimate: ‘Da mihi +quemvis Annaei librorum ignarum, et dicito num ex istis Quintiliani +laudibus non modo perspicere, sed suspicari etiam possit quanto +sapientiae doctrinaeque gradu steterit scriptor qui in tota latina +facundia optima senserit, humanissima docuerit, maxima et multo plurima +excogitaverit, ita ut, multis ex antiqua morali philosophia seu graeca +seu latina depromptis, adiectis pluribus, potuerit in unum propriumque +saporem omnia illa quasi sapientiae humanae libamenta confundere? +Credisne a tali lectore scriptorem vivo gurgite exundantem, sensibus +scatentem, legentes in perpetuas rapientem cogitationes, eum denique +quem ob vim animi ingeniique acumen iure anteponat Tullio Montanius +noster<a class = "tag" name = "tag40" id = "tag40" href = +"#note40">40</a>, protinus agnitum iri? ...facile credo pusillas Fabii +laudes multum infra viri meritum stetisse (quod detrectationis sit +tutissimum genus) omnes mecum confessuros’ (pp. 44-5).</p> + +<p>Whether they were altogether deserved or not, there can be no doubt +<span class = "pagenum">xxviii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxviii" id = "intro_pagexxviii"> </a> +that the strictures made by so great a literary leader as Quintilian was +in his own day must have greatly contributed to the overthrow of +Seneca’s influence. There is more than one indication, in the literature +of the next generation, that he is no longer regarded as a safe model +for imitation. Tacitus, in reporting the panegyric which Nero delivered +on Claudius after his death, and which was the work of Seneca, says that +it displayed much grace of style (<i>multum cultus</i>), as was to be +expected from one who possessed <i>ingenium amoenum et temporis</i> eius +<i>auribus accommodatum</i> (Ann. xiii. 3). Suetonius tell us how +Caligula disparaged the <i>lenius comtiusque scribendi genus</i> which +Seneca represented; and here (Calig. 53) occurs a similar reference to a +fame that had passed away,—<i>Senecam <b>tum</b> maxime +placentem</i>, just as the elder Pliny, writing about the time of +Seneca’s death, speaks of him as <i>princeps <b>tum</b> eruditorum</i> +(Nat. Hist. xiv. 51). Later writers, such as Fronto and Aulus Gellius<a +class = "tag" name = "tag41" id = "tag41" href = "#note41">41</a> were +much more unreserved and even immoderate in their censure. And it is a +remarkable fact (noted by M. Rocheblave) that the name of the great +Stoic nowhere occurs in the writings of his successors, Epictetus and +Marcus Aurelius. He who had been the greatest literary ornament of +Nero’s reign disappears almost from notice in the second century.</p> + +<p>In regard to the general body of Quintilian’s literary criticism, the +question of greatest interest for modern readers is the degree of its +originality. How far is Quintilian giving us his own independent +judgments on the writings of authors whom he had read at first hand? How +far is he merely registering current criticism, which must already have +found more or less definite expression in the writings and teaching of +previous rhetoricians and grammarians? The circumstances of the case +make it impossible for us to approach the special questions which it +involves with any great prejudice in favour of Quintilian’s originality +in general. The extent of his indebtedness to previous writers, as +regards the main body of his work, may be inferred from a glance at the +‘Index scriptorum et artificum’ in Halm’s edition. In many places he is +merely simplifying the rules of the Greek rhetoricians whom he followed. +Probably he was not equally well up in all the departments of the +subject of which he treats, and he naturally relied, to some extent, on +the works of those who had preceded him. But did he take his literary +criticism from others? Was Quintilian one of those reprehensible persons +who do not scruple to borrow, and to give forth as their own, the +estimate formed and expressed +<span class = "pagenum">xxix</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxix" id = "intro_pagexxix"> </a> +by some one else of authors whose works they may never themselves have +read?</p> + +<p>In endeavouring to find an answer to this question, it will be +convenient to consider Quintilian’s criticism of the Greek writers apart +from that which he applies to his own countrymen, with whose works he +might <i>a priori</i> be expected to be more familiar. The notes to +that part of the Tenth Book in which he deals with Greek literature (<a +href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec46">1 §§46-84</a>) will show too +many instances of parallelism for us to believe that, in addressing +himself to this portion of his subject, Quintilian scrupulously avoided +incurring any obligations to others<a class = "tag" name = "tag42" id = +"tag42" href = "#note42">42</a>. No doubt in his long career as a +teacher he had come into contact with traditional opinion as to the +merits and characteristics not only of the Greek but also of the Latin +writers; and in the two years which he tells us he devoted to the +composition of the <i>Institutio</i><a class = "tag" name = "tag43" id = +"tag43" href = "#note43">43</a> he may still further have increased his +debt to extraneous sources. It was in fact impossible that Quintilian +should have been unaware of the nature of the criticism current in his +own day, and of what had previously been said and written by others. But +he is not to be thought of as one who, before indicating his opinion of +a particular writer, carefully refers, not to that writer’s works, but +to the opinion of others concerning them. The cases in which he +reproduces, in very similar language, the verdict of others are not +always to be explained on the hypothesis of conscious borrowing<a class += "tag" name = "tag44" id = "tag44" href = "#note44">44</a>. The +coincidences which can be traced certainly do detract from the +originality of his work. +<span class = "pagenum">xxx</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxx" id = "intro_pagexxx"> </a> +But we do not need to believe that, in writing his individual +criticisms, Quintilian always had recourse to the works of others: he no +doubt had them at hand, and his career as a teacher had probably +impressed on his memory many <i>dicta</i> which he could hardly fail to +reproduce, in one form or another, when he came to gather together the +results of his teaching.</p> + +<p>Literary criticism at Rome before Quintilian’s time is associated +mainly with the names of Varro, Cicero, and Horace<a class = "tag" name += "tag45" id = "tag45" href = "#note45">45</a>. Varro was the author of +numerous works bearing on the history and criticism of literature: such +were his <i>de Poetis</i>, <i>de Poematis</i>, <span class = "greek" +title = "peri charaktêrôn">περὶ χαρακτήρων</span>, <i>de Actionibus +Scaenicis</i>, <i>Quaestiones Plautinae</i>. Our knowledge of their +scope and character is however derived only by inference from a few +scattered fragments, and in regard to these it is impossible to say +definitely to which of his treatises they severally belong. Quintilian’s +references to his literary activity as well as his great learning +(<i>vir Romanorum eruditissimus</i> x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec95">1, 95</a>), and the +quotation of his estimate of Plautus (ib. §99), are sufficient evidence +that he was not unacquainted with Varro’s writings. Cicero he knew +probably better than he knew any other author: the extent of his +indebtedness to such works as the <i>Brutus</i> may be inferred from the +parallelisms which occur in his treatment of the Attic orators (x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec76">1, 76-80</a>). He dissents +expressly from Horace’s estimate of Lucilius (ib. §94): and the +frequency of his references to other literary judgments of Horace (cp. +§§24, 56, 61, 63) shows that he must have been in the habit of +illustrating his teaching by quotations from the works of that cultured +critic of literature and life.</p> + +<p>But the author with whom Quintilian’s literary criticism has most in +common is undoubtedly Dionysius of Halicarnassus. It is true that in the +Tenth Book he nowhere expressly mentions him; but references to him by +name as an authority on rhetorical matters are common enough in other +parts of the <i>Institutio</i><a class = "tag" name = "tag46" id = +"tag46" href = "#note46">46</a>. Quintilian no doubt knew his works +well, especially that which originally consisted of three books <span +class = "greek" title = "peri mimêseôs">περὶ μιμήσεως</span><a class = +"tag" name = "tag47" id = "tag47" href = "#note47">47</a>. The second +book of this treatise has long been known to scholars +<span class = "pagenum">xxxi</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxxi" id = "intro_pagexxxi"> </a> +in the shape of a fragmentary epitome, which presents so many striking +resemblances to the literary judgments contained in the first chapter of +Quintilian’s Tenth Book, that early commentators, such as, for instance, +H. Stephanus, concluded that Quintilian had borrowed freely from +the earlier writer: <i>multa hinc etiam mutuatum constat; quibus modo +nomine suppresso pro suis utitur, modo addito verbo <b>putant</b> sua +non esse declarat</i>. The parallelisms in question were fully drawn out +by Claussen in the work mentioned above, though Usener justly remarks +that he wrongly includes a good deal that was the common property not +only of Dionysius and Quintilian, but of the whole learned world of the +day: they will all be found duly recorded in the notes to this edition, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec46">1 §§46-84</a>.</p> + +<p>The general resemblances between Quintilian and Dionysius are +apparent in their order of treatment. In his introduction to the +<i>Iudicium de Thucydide</i>, the latter sets forth the plan of his +second book in terms which present many points of analogy with the +scheme of the Tenth Book of the <i>Institutio</i>: <span class = "greek" +title = "en tois proekdotheisi Peri tês mimêseôs hupomnêatismois epelêluthôs ous hupelambanon epiphanestatous einai poiêtas te kai sungrapheis ... kai dedêlêkôs en oligois tinas hekastos autôn eispheretai pragmatikas te kai lektikas aretas kai pê malista cheirôn heautou ginetai ... hina tois proairoumenois graphein te kai legein eu kaloi kai dedokimasmenoi kanones ôsin eph’ hôn poiêsontai tas kata meros gumnasias, mê panta mimoumenoi ta par’ ekeinois keimena tois andrasin, alla tas men aretas autôn lambanontes, tas d’ apotuchias phulattomenoi; hapsamenos te tôn sungrapheôn edêlôsa kai peri Thoukoudidou ta dokounta moi suntomô te kai kephalaiôdei graphê perilabôn, ... hôs kai peri tôn allôn epoiêsa; ou gar ên akribê kai diexodikên dêlôsin huper hekastou tôn andrôn poieisthai proelomenon eis elachiston onkon sunagagein tên pragmateian.">ἐν τοῖς προεκδοθεῖσι Περὶ τῆς μιμήσεως ὑπομνηατισμοῖς +ἐπεληλυθὼς οὓς ὑπελάμβανον ἐπιφανεστάτους εἶναι ποιητάς τε καὶ +συγγραφεῖς ... καὶ δεδηληκὼς ἐν ὀλίγοις τίνας ἕκαστος αὐτῶν εἰσφέρεται +πραγματικάς τε καὶ λεκτικὰς ἀρετὰς καὶ πῇ μάλιστα χείρων ἑαυτοῦ γίνεται +... ἵνα τοῖς προαιρουμένοις γράφειν τε καὶ λέγειν εὖ καλοὶ καὶ +δεδοκιμασμένοι κανόνες ὦσιν ἐφ᾽ ὧν ποιήσονται τὰς κατὰ μέρος γυμνασίας, +μὴ πάντα μιμούμενοι τὰ παρ᾽ ἐκείνοις κείμενα τοῖς ἀνδράσιν, ἀλλὰ τὰς μὲν +ἀρετὰς αὐτῶν λαμβάνοντες, τὰς δ᾽ ἀποτυχίας φυλαττόμενοι‧ ἁψάμενός τε τῶν +συγγραφέων ἐδήλωσα καὶ περὶ Θουκουδίδου τὰ δοκοῦντά μοι συντόμῳ τε καὶ +κεφαλαιώδει γραφῇ περιλαβών, ... ὡς καὶ περὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἐποίησα‧ οὐ γὰρ +ἦν ἀκριβῆ καὶ διεξοδικὴν δήλωσιν ὑπὲρ ἑκάστου τῶν ἀνδρῶν ποιεῖσθαι +προελόμενον εἰς ἐλάχιστον ὄγκον συναγαγεῖν τὴν πραγματείαν.</span> In +like manner Quintilian, addressing himself throughout to young men +aspiring to success as public speakers, enumerates the various authors +who seem to be fit subjects for reading and imitation. While admitting +that some benefit may be derived from almost every writer (<a href = +"QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec57">1 §57</a>), he confines himself to +the most distinguished in the various departments of literature (<ins +class = "correction" title = "text reads ‘45’"><a href = +"QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec44">§44</a></ins> <i>paucos enim, qui sunt +eminentissimi, excerpere in animo est</i>); and even with regard to +these he warns his readers, as Dionysius does, that they are not to +imitate all their characteristics, but only what is good (<a href = +"QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec24">1 §24</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec14">2 §§14-15</a>).</p> + +<p>The order of treatment is almost identical in the two writers. First +come the poets, with the writers of epic poetry at their head: these are +not only named in the same order (Homer, Hesiod, Antimachus, Panyasis), +but they are commended in very similar terms. But if Quintilian had been +translating directly from Dionysius, it is very probable that he would +have mentioned him by name, instead of concealing his obligations +<span class = "pagenum">xxxii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxxii" id = "intro_pagexxxii"> </a> +by the use of such a phrase as <i>putant</i> (in speaking of +Panyasis—see note on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec54">§54</a>). If he goes on to add +some criticisms which are not in Dionysius, viz. on Apollonius Rhodius, +Aratus, Theocritus, and to mention also Pisander, Nicander, and +Euphorion, it is with the express intimation that they do not rank in +the canon fixed by the <i>grammatici</i>,—the very reason for +which these writers had been omitted by Dionysius. The Greek rhetorician +says nothing of the elegiac and iambic poets mentioned by +Quintilian,—the former in general terms (<i>princeps +<b>habetur</b> Callimachus</i>, <i>secundas <b>confessione +plurimorum</b> Philetas occupavit</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec58">§58</a>), the latter with +express reference to the judgment of Aristarchus on the great +Archilochus (<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec59">§59</a>)<a class = +"tag" name = "tag48" id = "tag48" href = "#note48">48</a>. In treating +of the lyric poets, Quintilian mentions the number nine (<a href = +"QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec61">§61</a>), which Dionysius does not; but as +regards the substance of his criticisms, he is again almost in exact +agreement with his predecessor. Both refer to Pindar, Stesichorus, +Alcman, and Simonides, with the trifling difference that in Dionysius +Simonides comes second instead of fourth on the list. In +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec65">§65</a> Quintilian proceeds to +deal with the Old Comedy, which finds no place in the treatise of +Dionysius, as we now have it. And there is very little that corresponds +with Dionysius in the sections on Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides. +But it is noticeable that in both Euripides is made to form the +transition to Menander and the New Comedy.</p> + +<p>In regard to the poets, then, it seems probable that, while +Quintilian was no doubt familiar with the work of Dionysius, he is +rather incorporating in his criticism the traditions of the literary +schools than borrowing directly from a single predecessor. Claussen was +of opinion that the latter is the true state of the case, and he even +goes so far (p. 348) as to suppose that the original work of +Dionysius (of which the treatise long known as the <span class = "greek" +title = "Archaiôn krisis">Ἀρχαίων κρίσις</span> or the <i>De Veterum +Censura</i> is only a fragmentary epitome) must have contained notices +of the elegiac and iambic poets corresponding with those in Quintilian, +as well as of the old comic dramatists and of additional representatives +of the New Comedy. But a comparison of the various passages on which a +judgment may be based seems to make it certain that, while taking +advantage of his knowledge of previous literary criticism (scraps of +which he may have accumulated for teaching purposes during his long +career), he is not slavishly following any single authority<a class = +"tag" name = "tag49" id = "tag49" href = "#note49">49</a>: cp. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec52">§52</a> <i>datur palma</i> +(<i>Hesiodo</i>,) +<span class = "pagenum">xxxiii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxxiii" id = "intro_pagexxxiii"> </a> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec53">§53</a> <i>grammaticorum +consensus</i>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec54">§54</a> <i>ordinem a grammaticis +datum</i>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec58">§58</a> <i>princeps habetur</i> +and <i>confessione plurimorum</i>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec59">§59</a> <i>ex tribus receptis +Aristarchi iudicio scriptoribus iamborum</i>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec64">§64</a> <i>quidam</i> (probably +including Dionysius), +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec67">§67</a> <i>inter plurimos +quaeritur</i>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec72">§72</a> <i>consensu ... +omnium</i>. And the tone and substance of his estimate of Homer, of +Euripides, and of Menander<a class = "tag" name = "tag50" id = "tag50" +href = "#note50">50</a>, seem to show that he was prepared to rely, when +necessary, on his own independent judgment (cp. <i>meo quidem +iudicio</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec69">§69</a>), especially in dealing +with the poets who would be of greatest service for his professed +purpose.</p> + +<p>In both Dionysius and Quintilian the poets are followed by the +historians. The order in Dionysius is Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon, +Philistus, and Theopompus; in Quintilian, Thucydides, Herodotus, +Theopompus, Philistus,—with short notices of Ephorus, Clitarchus +and Timagenes. The insertion of the three additional names, and the +precedence given to Theopompus, are not the only points in which +Quintilian differs here from Dionysius, who is known in this case to +have limited himself to the five names in question (Epist. ad Pomp. +767 R: Usener, p. 50, 10): Xenophon is by Quintilian expressly +postponed for treatment among the philosophers. In this he probably +followed an older tradition, which survived also elsewhere. Cicero +speaks of Xenophon as a philosopher (de Orat. ii. §58): in Diogenes +Laertius (ii. 48) it is said of him <span class = "greek" title = "alla kai historian philosophôn prôtos egrapse">ἀλλὰ καὶ ἱστορίαν φιλοσόφων +πρῶτος ἔγραψε</span>—a remark which Usener (p. 113) thinks was +probably derived from some library list in which Xenophon was ranked +among the writers of philosophy; and Dio Chrysostom (Or. xviii.) omits +him from his list of the historians, and includes him in that of the +Socratics.</p> + +<p>These discrepancies may be relied on to disprove Claussen’s +allegation that Dionysius’s treatise is Quintilian’s <i>primus et +praecipuus fons</i>. It is quite as probable that, in dealing with the +historians, he had before him the passage in the second book of Cicero’s +<i>Orator</i>, to which reference has already been made (<a href = +"QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec55">§55</a> sq.). There Cicero mentions +Herodotus, Thucydides, Philistus, Theopompus, and Ephorus, with the +addition of Xenophon, Callisthenes and Timaeus. He may also have had at +hand the great orator’s lost treatise <i>Hortensius</i>, two fragments +of which contain short characterisations of Herodotus, Thucydides, +Philistus, Theopompus, and Ephorus<a class = "tag" name = "tag51" id = +"tag51" href = "#note51">51</a>: in writing it Cicero probably followed +some list similar +<span class = "pagenum">xxxiv</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxxiv" id = "intro_pagexxxiv"> </a> +to those which were accessible both to Dionysius and Quintilian<a class += "tag" name = "tag52" id = "tag52" href = "#note52">52</a>. Again there +is sufficient resemblance here between Quintilian and Dio Chrysostom (as +also in regard to Euripides and Menander: Dio Chr. 6, p. 477 sq.) +to justify the supposition that they followed the same tradition. Dio +expressly elevates Theopompus to the second rank (10, p. 479), +<span class = "greek" title = "tôn de akrôn Thoukudidês emoi dokei kai tôn deuterôn Theopompos; kai gar rhêtorikon ti peri tên apangelian tôn logôn echei">τῶν δὲ ἄκρων Θουκυδίδης ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ καὶ τῶν δευτέρων +Θεόπομπος‧ καὶ γὰρ ῥητορικόν τι περὶ τὴν ἀπαγγελίαν τῶν λόγων +ἔχει.</span>. With this compare Quintilian’s words: <i>Theopompus his +proximus ut in historia praedictis minor, ita oratori magis similis</i> +(<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec74">§74</a>). Ephorus, on the other +hand, is expressly eliminated by Dio.</p> + +<p>It is perhaps in dealing with the orators that Quintilian gives the +surest proofs that he is not following any individual guide. The +parallel passages cited in the notes to +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec76">§§76-80</a> are by no means +confined to the writings of Dionysius, though here again words and +phrases occur (see esp. the note on <i>honesti studiosus, in +compositione adeo diligens</i>, &c., +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec79">§79</a>) which seem to suggest +that Quintilian must have kept a common-place book into which he +‘conveyed’ points which struck him as just or appropriate in the +literary criticism of others<a class = "tag" name = "tag53" id = "tag53" +href = "#note53">53</a>. Unlike Dionysius, however, he refers to the +canon of the ten orators (<a href = +"QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec76">§76</a>) which the recent work of Brzoska, +following A. Reifferscheid, has shown to have originated not with +the critics of Alexandria, but with those of Pergamum<a class = "tag" +name = "tag54" id = "tag54" href = "#note54">54</a>. It is noticeable +that the five orators whom Quintilian selects for notice out of this +canon are identical with those enumerated, in reverse order, by Cicero, +de Orat. iii. 28.</p> + +<p>In their treatment of the philosophers, the chief point in common +between Dionysius and Quintilian is that both put Plato and Xenophon +before Aristotle. And, though they agree generally in the terms in which +they speak of Aristotle, there is no other noteworthy coincidence. The +section on Theophrastus and the Stoics has nothing corresponding to it +in Dionysius: here, as elsewhere in the account of philosophy, Cicero +was laid under contribution.</p> + +<p>We may infer, then, on the whole, that in regard to his judgments of +the Greek writers Quintilian followed the established order of the +literary schools, and incorporated with the expression of his own +opinion much that was traditional in their thought and phraseology. He +cannot be supposed to have followed any single authority: he must rather +be considered to have gleaned in the whole field of the literature of +criticism from +<span class = "pagenum">xxxv</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxxv" id = "intro_pagexxxv"> </a> +Theophrastus (x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec27">1, 27</a>) down to his own +day. He accepted from others, with probably few modifications, the +approved lists of poets, historians, orators, and philosophers, and +adopted the conventional practice of writing careful and well-considered +criticisms upon them—“somewhat cut and dried criticisms,” as Prof. +Nettleship says of Dionysius, “which seldom lack sanity, care, and +insight, but which are rather dangerously suited for learning by heart +and handing on to future generations of pupils.” These lists of +‘classical’ writers may probably be traced back, in the main, to the +literary activity of the critics of Alexandria. They would no doubt be +well known to the Greek rhetoricians who were at work on the education +of the Roman youth as early as the beginning of the first century <span +class = "smallroman">B.C.</span>, and may have served as the basis of +their prelections to their pupils. Criticism (<span class = "greek" +title = "krisis poiêmatôn, kritikê">κρίσις ποιημάτων, κριτικὴ</span>) +was an essential part of the office of the ‘grammaticus<a class = "tag" +name = "tag55" id = "tag55" href = "#note55">55</a>.’</p> + +<p>In speaking of his duties, which fall under the two main heads of +<i>recte loquendi scientia</i> and <i>poetarum enarratio</i>, Quintilian +adds (i. 4, 3): <i>et mixtum his omnibus <b>iudicium</b> est; quo +quidem ita severe sunt usi veteres grammatici ut non versus modo +censoria quadam virgula notare et libros, qui falso viderentur +inscripti, tamquam subditos submovere familia permiserint sibi, sed +auctores alios in ordinem redegerint, alios omnino exemerint numero</i>. +Beginning with a critical examination of individual texts, the +‘grammatici’ gathered up the results of their work, on the literary +side, in short characterisations of the various writers whom they made +the subject of their study, and finally drew up lists of the best +authors in each department of literature, with a careful indication of +their good points as well as of the features in which they were not to +be used as models. This process received a more or less final form at +the hands of Aristophanes of Byzantium and his follower Aristarchus (see +on x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec54">1, 54</a>), the latter of +whom probably introduced such modifications in the list of his +predecessor as approved themselves to his own judgment (cp. x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec59">1, 59</a> <i>tres receptos +<b>Aristarchi iudicio</b> scriptores iamborum</i>). The influence of +this method in Roman literature may be seen, early in the first century, +in the so-called ‘canon’ of Volcatius Sedigitus, preserved by Gellius +(15, 24)<a class = "tag" name = "tag56" id = "tag56" href = +"#note56">56</a>: he makes a list of ten Latin comedians, on the analogy +of the canon of the ten Attic orators. The list of the Alexandrine +critics was probably in the hands of Cicero, as Usener has shown (pp. +114-126), when he wrote his ‘Hortensius,’—a treatise which seems +to have originally contained an introductory sketch of the great +contributors to the various departments +<span class = "pagenum">xxxvi</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxxvi" id = "intro_pagexxxvi"> </a> +of literature, by way of preparation for the main purpose of the +dialogue,—the praise of philosophy<a class = "tag" name = "tag57" +id = "tag57" href = "#note57">57</a>. Then there is Dio Chrysostom, a +writer who flourished not long after Quintilian himself, and whose +reproduction of similar judgments has already been noted. Such +divergences as occur may probably be accounted for, at least in part, by +the different points of view from which the various critics wrote. In +the preliminary sketch in the <i>Hortensius</i> the object seems to have +been not the education of youth but the recreation of maturity: Dio +draws a careful distinction between the branches which serve for the +student of rhetoric, and those which may be expected to benefit and +delight men who have finished their studies: Quintilian’s aim, again and +again reiterated, is to lay down a course of reading suited to form the +taste of a young man aspiring to success as a speaker.</p> + +<p>The probability that there existed such traditional lists as those +referred to (which would also be of service in the arrangement of the +great public libraries), is strikingly illustrated in Usener’s +<i>Epilogus</i> (p. 128 sq.) by the publication of one which may here be +transcribed as of great interest to readers of Quintilian. It will be +noticed that though the philosophers are omitted, it contains many +points of analogy with that followed by Quintilian, particularly the +addition of the later elegiac poets, Philetas and Callimachus. Names +only are given, without any criticism attached<a class = "tag" name = +"tag58" id = "tag58" href = "#note58">58</a>.</p> + +<p class = "mynote"> +Greek numerals were printed with overlines ¯. They are shown here +in ´ form to reduce text-display problems.</p> + +<p class = "hanging"> +<span class = "greek" title = "Poiêtai pente: Homêros Hêsiodos Peisandros Panuasis Antimachos.">Ποιηταὶ πέντε‧ Ὅμηρος Ἡσίοδος +Πείσανδρος Πανύασις Ἀντίμαχος.</span></p> + +<p class = "hanging"> +<span class = "greek" title = "iambopoioi treis: Sêmonidês Archilochos Hippônax.">ἰαμβοποιοὶ τρεῖς‧ Σημονίδης Ἀρχίλοχος Ἱππῶναξ.</span></p> + +<p class = "hanging"> +<span class = "greek" title = "tragôdopoioi e´: Aischulos Sophoklês Euripidês Iôn Achaios.">τραγῳδοποιοὶ ε´‧ Ἀισχύλος Σοφοκλῆς Εὐριπίδης Ἴων +Ἀχαιός.</span></p> + +<p class = "hanging"> +<span class = "greek" title = "kômôdopoioi archaias z´: Epicharmos Kratinos Eupolis Aristophanês Pherekratês Kratês Platôn.">κωμῳδοποιοὶ +ἀρχαίας ζ´‧ Ἐπίχαρμος Κρατῖνος Εὔπολις Ἀριστοφάνης Φερεκράτης Κράτης +Πλάτων.</span></p> + +<p class = "hanging"> +<span class = "greek" title = "mesês kômôdias b´: Antiphanes Alexis Thourios.">μέσης κωμῳδίας β´‧ Ἀντιφάνες Ἄλεξις Θούριος.</span></p> + +<p class = "hanging"> +<span class = "greek" title = "neas kômôdias e´: Menandros Philippidês Diphilos Philêmôn Apollodôros.">νέας κωμῳδίας ε´‧ Μένανδρος Φιλιππίδης +Δίφιλος Φιλήμων Ἀπολλόδωρος.</span></p> + +<p class = "hanging"> +<span class = "greek" title = "elegeiôn poiêtai d´: Kallinos Mimnermos Philêtas Kallimachos.">ἐλεγείων ποιηταὶ δ´‧ Καλλῖνος Μιμνέρμος Φιλητᾶς +Καλλίμαχος.</span></p> + +<p class = "hanging"> +<span class = "greek" title = "lurikoi th´: Alkman Alkaios Sapphô Stêsichoros Pindaros Bakchulidês Ibukos Anakreôn Simônidês....">λυρικοι +θ´‧ Ἀλκμάν Ἀλκαῖος Σαπφώ Στησίχορος Πίνδαρος Βακχυλίδης Ἴβυκος Ἀνακρέων +Σιμωνίδης....</span></p> + +<p class = "hanging"> +<span class = "pagenum">xxxvii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxxvii" id = "intro_pagexxxvii"> </a> +<span class = "greek" title = "rhêtores th´: Dêmosthenês Lysias Hypereidês Isokratês Aischinês Lykourgos Isaios Antiphôn Andokidês.">ῥητορες θ´‧ Δημοσθένης Λυσίας Ὑπερείδης Ἰσοκράτης Ἀισχίνης +Λυκοῦργος Ἰσαῖος Ἀντιφῶν Ἀνδοκίδης.</span></p> + +<p class = "hanging"> +<span class = "greek" title = "historikoi i´: Thoukydidês Hêrodotos Xenophôn Philistos Theopompos Ephoros Anaximenês Kallisthenês Hellanikos Polybios.">ἱστορικοὶ ι´‧ Θουκυδίδης Ἡρόδοτος Ξενοφῶν Φίλιστος Θεόπομπος +Ἔφορος Ἀναξιμένης Καλλισθένης Ἑλλάνικος Πολύβιος.</span></p> + +<p>In regard to the historians, Usener notes that this list seems to +indicate the principle on which they were selected and arranged. They +are enumerated in pairs, Herodotus and Thucydides coming first, with +their imitators Xenophon and Philistus immediately following them. Then +come Theopompus and Ephorus, as representing the second rank; and next +the historians of Alexander’s victories, Anaximenes and Callisthenes +(cp. Cic. de Orat. ii. §58), in place of whom Clitarchus is mentioned by +Quintilian. Peculiar features about the list given above are that +Thucydides comes first of all (just as Demosthenes does among the +orators), and that, perhaps to make up the number ten, a fifth pair of +historians is added,—Hellanicus from those of older date, and +Polybius to represent more recent writers.</p> + +<p>Usener states the conclusion at which he arrives in the following +words, which may be accepted with the proviso that they are not to be +taken as meaning that Quintilian was altogether ignorant of what +Dionysius wrote: <i>Iudicia de poetis scriptoribusque Graecis non a +Dionysio Quintilianus mutuatus est. Igitur ne Dionysius quidem sua +profert, sed diversum uterque exemplum iudiciorum ut plerumque +consonantium expressit. Fontis utrique communis antiquitatem Hortensius +Tullianus cum Dione comparatus demonstravit. Posteriore tempore cum +eruditionis copia in angustae memoriae paupertatem sensim contraheretur, +iudiciis neglectis sola electorum auctorum nomina relicta sunt et +laterculi formam induerunt.</i> Quintilian did not transcribe his +criticisms of Greek literature from Dionysius. He had no need to do so: +the materials from which Dionysius had drawn were available also to him. +This is sufficient to account for the resemblances in their critical +judgments. But on the other hand it is improbable that Quintilian, in +the course of his reading and teaching, had not studied the writings of +Dionysius; and some at least of the coincidences to which prominence is +given in the notes in this edition must have been the result of his +acquaintance with the work of his predecessor.</p> + +<p>In his review of Latin literature, Quintilian is no doubt giving us +the fruit of his own study and independent judgment, though here again +the notes will indicate that he was familiar with what other writers, +such as Cicero and Horace, had said before in the way of literary +criticism. The examination of his estimate of Seneca has already proved +that he did not hesitate to formulate his own opinions, and to press +them, when +<span class = "pagenum">xxxviii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxxviii" id = "intro_pagexxxviii"> </a> +necessary, upon his pupils. A reference to the <i>Analysis</i> +(pp. 3-5) will show that in this part of his work Quintilian +follows the method which had been traditionally applied to the criticism +of the Greek writers. The same order is preserved (<a href = +"QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec85">§85</a>); the various departments of +literature are each compared with the corresponding departments in Greek +(<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec93">§§93</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec99">99</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec101">101</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec105">105</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec123">123</a>); and individual +writers are pitted against each other, and are sometimes characterised +in similar terms. In all this Quintilian is consistent with the scheme +according to which he had evidently determined to arrange his work: he +is consistent also with the general tradition of literary criticism +among his countrymen. “As Latin literature since Naevius had adopted +Greek models and Greek metres, every Latin writer of any pretensions +took some Greek author as his ideal of excellence in the particular +style which he was adopting. Criticism accordingly drifted into the +vicious course of comparison; of pitting every Latin writer against a +Greek writer, as though borrowing from a man would constitute you his +rival. Thus Ennius was a Homer, Afranius a Menander, Plautus an +Epicharmus, before the days of Horace: in Horace’s time there were three +Homers, Varius, Valgius, and Vergil. Cicero and Demosthenes were +compared by the Greek critics in the Augustan age, and by the time of +Quintilian Sallust has become the Latin Thucydides, Livy the Latin +Herodotus<a class = "tag" name = "tag59" id = "tag59" href = +"#note59">59</a>.” It is this idea of making ‘canons’ of Latin writers, +to correspond as nearly as possible with those which he had accepted +from former critics for the classical writers of Greece, that gives an +air of artificiality to Quintilian’s criticism of Latin literature, and +interferes somewhat with the general effect which his sane and sober +appreciations would otherwise produce. The individual estimates are in +the main all that could be wished for, notably the enthusiastic eulogy +of Cicero (<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec105">§§105-112</a>), +which it is interesting to compare with a similar passage in the +treatise ‘On the Sublime.’ “The same difference,” says the writer, “may +be discerned in the grandeur of Cicero as compared with that of his +Grecian rival. The sublimity of Demosthenes is generally sudden and +abrupt: that of Cicero is equally diffused. Demosthenes is vehement, +rapid, vigorous, terrible; he burns and sweeps away all before him; and +hence we may liken him to a whirlwind or a thunderbolt: Cicero is like a +widespread conflagration, which rolls over and feeds on all around it, +whose fire is extensive and burns long, breaking out successively in +different places, and finding its fuel now here, now there<a class = +"tag" name = "tag60" id = "tag60" href = "#note60">60</a>.” Excellent +also are the shorter characterisations of such writers as Sallust +(<i>immortalem Sallusti velocitatem</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec102">1 §102</a>), of Livy +(<i>Livi lactea ubertas</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec32">1 §32</a>: <i>mirae +iucunditatis clarissimique +<span class = "pagenum">xxxix</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexxxix" id = "intro_pagexxxix"> </a> +candoris</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec101">§101</a>), of Ovid (<i>nimium +amator ingenii sui</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec88">§88</a>), and of Horace (<i>et +insurgit aliquando et plenus est iucunditatis et gratiae et varius +figuris et verbis felicissime audax</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec96">§96</a>). But the general +impression we derive is that Quintilian is producing many of his +criticisms to order, as it were: so much is he tied down to the plan he +has adopted. It is to this same method of mechanical +comparison—born of the artificial traditions of the literary +schools—that we owe Plutarch’s ‘Parallel Lives’; and it has not +been without imitators in more recent times<a class = "tag" name = +"tag61" id = "tag61" href = "#note61">61</a>.</p> + +<hr class = "mid"> + +<h5><a name = "intro_chapIV" id = "intro_chapIV">IV.</a> +Style and Language.</h5> + +<p>Quintilian’s own style is pretty much what might be expected from the +tone of his judgments on others. Cicero was his model, Seneca +represented to him everything that was to be avoided: but the interval +of a hundred years which separated him from the former was a sufficient +barrier to anything more than an approximation to his style, while on +the other hand he does not succeed in emancipating himself entirely from +the literary tendencies of his own time, which found so complete +expression in the writings of Seneca. All the writers of what is known +as the Silver Age possess certain marked characteristics, which +differentiate them from the best models of the republican period; and of +these Quintilian has his share. But he did not fall in with the +fashionable depreciation of those models. He knew that it was impossible +to bring back the Latinity of the Golden Age in all its characteristic +features; but he could at least lift up his voice against the +affectation and artificiality of his contemporaries, who looked upon +that Latinity as tame, insipid, and commonplace. The point of view from +which, as we have already seen, he regarded Seneca may be stated with a +wider application: <i>corruptum et omnibus vitiis fractum dicendi genus +revocare ad severiora iudicia contendo</i>, x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec125">1, 125</a>.</p> + +<p>The depravation of taste which had gone hand in hand with the moral +and social degeneration of the Roman people, in the era of transition +from republic to empire, has already been touched upon in the discussion +<span class = "pagenum">xl</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexl" id = "intro_pagexl"> </a> +of Quintilian’s criticism of Seneca. The literary public had lost all +appetite for the natural straightforwardness of the Ciceronian style: it +craved for something akin to the highly seasoned dishes by which the +epicures of the day sought to stimulate a jaded palate<a class = "tag" +name = "tag62" id = "tag62" href = "#note62">62</a>. It was not enough +now to clothe the thought in pure, clear, and elegant language, even +when adorned by a wealth of expression that bordered on exuberance, and +made musical by the exquisite modulation of the period. No one could win +a hearing who did not countenance the fashionable craze for affectation, +abruptness, and extravagance. Directness, ease, and intelligibility were +no recommendations<a class = "tag" name = "tag63" id = "tag63" href = +"#note63">63</a>. In order to strike and stimulate, everything must be +full of point. Feebleness of thought was considered to be redeemed by +epigram and formal antithesis. The amplitude and artistic symmetry of +the Ciceronian period gave place to a broken and abrupt style, the main +object of which was to arrest attention and to challenge admiration. +Showy passages were looked for, expressed in new and striking +phraseology, such as could be reproduced and even handed on to others<a +class = "tag" name = "tag64" id = "tag64" href = "#note64">64</a>. The +charm of style and the test of its excellence consisted in its being +artificial, inflated, meretricious, involved, obscure—in a word, +depraved<a class = "tag" name = "tag65" id = "tag65" href = +"#note65">65</a>.</p> + +<p>Quintilian’s distaste for the prevailing fashion inclined him to +return to the models of the best republican period. Exclusive devotion +to one particular type was forbidden him, if by nothing else, by his own +declared principles,—<i>non qui maxime imitandus et solus +imitandus est</i> (<a href = +"QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec24">2 §24</a>); and accordingly, in +spite of his great admiration for Cicero, we find several well-marked +features of difference between him and his master, not only in the use +of words, but also in the structure and composition of sentences<a class += "tag" name = "tag66" id = "tag66" href = "#note66">66</a>. Indeed, it +could not have been otherwise. Quintilian’s mission was to restore to +Latin composition the direct and natural character of the earlier style; +but he could not extirpate that tendency to poetical expression which +had taken root at Rome as far back as the +<span class = "pagenum">xli</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexli" id = "intro_pagexli"> </a> +days of Sallust, and was fostered and encouraged in his own time by the +wider study of Greek. He was conscious also of the need of making some +concessions to the popular demand for ornament. The power of the +‘sententious’ style proved itself even on its critic and antagonist. +That he was aware of the compromise he was making is clear from such a +passage as the following, in which he indicates how Cicero may be +adapted to contemporary requirements: <i>ad cuius (Ciceronis) voluptates +nihil equidem quod addi possit invenio, <b>nisi ut sensus nos quidem +dicamus plures</b>: nempe enim fieri potest salva tractatione causae et +dicendi auctoritate, si non crebra haec lumina et continua fuerint et +invicem offecerint. Sed me <b>hactenus cedentem</b> nemo insequatur +ultra</i>, &c. (xii. 10, 46-7). There was a point beyond which he +refused to go: clearness and simplicity must never be sacrificed to +effect. These qualities may be claimed for Quintilian’s style; it is +also sufficiently varied for his subject. When it is obscure, we must +remember the defective state in which his text has come down to us<a +class = "tag" name = "tag67" id = "tag67" href = "#note67">67</a>.</p> + + +<p class = "space"> +It is quite possible to exemplify from the Tenth Book alone the main +features in which Quintilian’s language and style differ from those of +Cicero. And first, in regard to his vocabulary, a list may be appended +of words which, though not peculiar to Quintilian, are yet not to be +found in the republican period<a class = "tag" name = "tag68" id = +"tag68" href = "#note68">68</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Amaritudo</b>, figuratively (Plin. S., Sen., Val. Max.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec117">1, 117</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Auditorium</b> (Tac. Dial., Plin. S., Suet.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec79">1, 79</a>: cp. v. 12, 20 +<i>licet hanc (eloquentiam) auditoria probent</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Classis</b>, of a class in a school (Suet., Col., Petr.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec21">5, 21</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Confinis</b>, figuratively (Ovid, Sen.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec12">5, 12</a>.</p> + +<span class = "pagenum">xlii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexlii" id = "intro_pagexlii"> </a> +<p><b>Consummatus</b> (Sen., Mart., Plin. S.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec14">5, 14</a>: cp. <ins class = +"correction" title = "text reads ‘1’">i.</ins> 9, 3; ii. 19, 1, and +often. The Ciceronian equivalent is <i>perfectus</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Decretorius</b> (Sen., Plin., Suet.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec20">5, 20</a>: cp. vi. +4, 6.</p> + +<p><b>Diversitas</b> (Tac., Plin., Suet.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec106">1, 106</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Evalesco</b> (Verg., Hor., Plin., Tac.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec10">2, 10</a>: cp. ii. 8, 5; +viii. 6, 33.</p> + +<p><b>Expavesco</b> (Hor., Liv., Sen., Plin., Suet.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec30">3, 30</a>: cp. ix. 4, 35; +vi. 2, 31.</p> + +<p><b>Extemporalis</b> (Petr., Tac., Plin. S.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec1">6, 1</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec5">5</a> and +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec6"><ins class = "correction" title = "text reads (6.)8">6</ins></a>; +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec13">7, 13</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec16">16</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec18">18</a>: cp. iv. 1, 54 +<i>extemporalis oratio</i>, for which Cicero would have written +<i>subita et fortuita oratio</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Exundo</b> (Sen., Plin., Tac.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec109">1, 109</a> <b>Cicero vivo +gurgite exundat</b>.</p> + +<p><b>Favorabilis</b> (Vell., Sen., Plin., Tac., Suet.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec21">5, 21</a>: cp. iv. 1, 21 +and often.</p> + +<p><b>Formator</b> (Col., Sen., Plin. S.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec20">2, 20</a> <i>alienorum +ingeniorum formator</i> (sc. <i>praeceptor</i>).</p> + +<p><b>Immutesco</b> (Statius), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec16">3, 16</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Inadfectatus</b> (Plin. S.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec82">1, 82</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Inconcessus</b> (Verg., Ov.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec26">2, 26</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Incredulus</b> (Hor.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec11">3, 11</a>: cp. xii. +8, 11.</p> + +<p><b>Indecens</b> (Petr., Sen., Mart.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec19">2, 19</a>. The Ciceronian +equivalent is <i>indecorus</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Inlaboratus</b> (Sen.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec111">1, 111</a>, and often.</p> + +<p><b>Insenesco</b> (Hor., Ov., Tac.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec11">3, 11</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Inspiro</b> (Verg., Ov., Sen.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec24">3, 24</a>: cp. xii. 10, +62.</p> + +<p><b>Praesumo</b> (Verg., Sen., Plin., Tac.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec4">5, 4</a>: cp. xi. +1, 27.</p> + +<p><b>Profectus</b> (Ov., Sen., Plin. S., Suet), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec2">3, 2</a> and +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec15">15</a>: cp. i. 2, 26, and +often. Cicero uses <i>progressus</i>, <i>processus</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Professor</b> (Col., Tac., Suet.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec18">5, 18</a>: cp. ii. 11, 1, +and often.</p> + +<p><b>Prosa</b> (Vell., Col., Sen., Plin.), x. +<a href = +"QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec19">7, 19</a>,—adjective: cp. xi. +2, 39. As a noun, ix. 4, 52, and often.</p> + +<p><b>Secessus</b> (Verg., Ov., Plin., Tac.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec23">3, 23</a> and +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec28">28</a>; +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec16">5, 16</a>. Cicero uses +<i>recessus</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Substringo</b> (Sen., Tac., Suet.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec4">5, 4</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Versificator</b> (Just., Col.), x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec89">1, 89</a>.</p> + +<p>There is a touch of ‘nationalism’ about Quintilian’s use of the word +<i>Romanus</i> for <i>Latinus</i>. <i>Litterae latinae</i>, +<i>scriptores latini</i>, <i>poetae latini</i>, are the usual forms with +Cicero and the writers of the best period: Quintilian has <i>Romanes +auctores</i> (x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec85">1, 85</a>), <i>sermo +Romanus</i> (ib. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec100">§100</a>), <i>litterae +Romanae</i> (ib. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec123">§123</a>), and often +elsewhere.</p> + + +<p class = "space"> +The following words appear in Quintilian (Book X) for the first +time, though of course it does not follow that they are his own +coinage:—</p> + +<span class = "pagenum">xliii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexliii" id = "intro_pagexliii"> </a> +<p><b>Adnotatio</b>, x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec7">2, 7</a> <i>brevis +adnotatio</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Circulatorius</b>, x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec8">1, 8</a> <i>circulatoria +volubilitas</i>: cp. ii. 4, 15. The noun <i>circulator</i> seems to +have been used first by Asinius Pollio: afterwards it is found in +Seneca, Petronius, Plin. S., Apuleius, &c.</p> + +<p><b>Destructio</b>, x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec12">5, 12</a> <i>destructio et +confirmatio sententiarum</i>. Suetonius (Galba 12) uses this word in its +proper sense of ‘pulling down’ walls.</p> + +<p><b>Offensator</b> (<span class = "greek" title = "hapax legom.">ἅπαξ +λεγόμ.</span>), x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec20">3, 20</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Significantia</b>, x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec121">1, 121</a>.</p> + + +<p class = "space"> +Several words occur which, either in point of form or meaning, indicate +the influence of Greek analogies:—</p> + +<p><b>Recipere</b>, x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec31">7, 31</a>, and often +elsewhere, in the sense of <i>probare</i>. So the Greek <span class = +"greek" title = "apodechesthai">ἀποδέχεσθαι</span>, <span class = +"greek" title = "endechesthai">ἐνδέχεσθαι</span>. Cp. Plin. H. N. +7. 8, 29.</p> + +<p><b>Supinus</b>, x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec17">2, 17</a> used, like <span +class = "greek" title = "huptios">ὕπτιος</span> in Dion. Hal., for +‘languid,’ ‘spiritless.’ Cp. esp. (of Isocr.) <span class = "greek" +title = "huptia">ὑπτία</span> (sc. <span class = "greek" title = +"lexis">λέξις</span>) ... <span class = "greek" title = "kai kechumenê plousiôs">καὶ κεχυμένη πλουσίως</span>, p. 538, 6, R: also +p. 1006, 14, R.</p> + +<p><b>Densus</b> (<span class = "greek" title = "puknos">πυκνός</span>), +for <i>pressus</i>: x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec76">1, 76</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Pedestris</b> (sc. <i>oratio</i>), <span class = "greek" title = +"pezos logos">πεζὸς λόγος</span>: x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec81">1, 81</a>.</p> + +<p>To these may be added the use of <i>subripere</i> (for <i>clam +facere</i>), on the analogy of <span class = "greek" title = "kleptein ti">κλέπτειν τι</span>, iv. 1, 78: <i>transire</i> (for +<i>effugere</i>), on the analogy of <span class = "greek" title = +"parerchesthai">παρέρχεσθαι</span>, ix. 2, 49 (cp. Stat. Theb. ii. 335 +<i>nil transit amantes</i>): <i>finis</i> for <span class = "greek" +title = "horos">ὅρος</span>: <i>maxime</i>, with numerals, for <span +class = "greek" title = "malista">μάλιστα</span>, &c.</p> + +<p>To the same source must be attributed the frequent use in Quintilian +of <i>propter quod</i>, <i>per quod</i>, <i>quae</i>, &c. on the +analogy of <span class = "greek" title = "di’ ho">δι᾽ ὅ</span>, <span +class = "greek" title = "di’ ha">δι᾽ ἅ</span> (see on x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec10">1, 10</a>): <i>circa</i> +(used like <span class = "greek" title = "peri">περί</span>), see on x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec52">1, 52</a>: <i>multum</i> +(with compar.) like <span class = "greek" title = "polu meizon">πολὺ +μεῖζον</span> (x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec94">1, 94</a>): <i>sunt ... +differentes</i>, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec16">2 §16</a>.</p> + + +<p class = "space"> +The influence of poetical usage may be seen in the frequent employment +of simple verbs in the sense of compounds, of abstract nouns in a +concrete sense (e.g. <i>facilitatem</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec7">3 §7</a>), and also in +certain changes in the meaning of words, each of which will be noticed +in its proper place: e.g. <i>componere</i> for <i>sedare</i>; +<i>vacare</i> used impersonally; <i>venus</i> for <i>venustas</i>; +<i>beatus</i> for <i>uber</i>, <i>fecundus</i>; <i>secretum</i>; +<i>olim</i> of future time; <i>utrimque</i> of opposite sides, &c. +Such changes in meaning as will be noted in connection with words like +<i>valetudo</i>, <i>ambitio</i>, <i>advocatus</i>, <i>auctor</i>, +<i>cultus</i>, <i>quicumque</i>, <i>ubicumque</i>, <i>demum</i>, and all +the phenomena connected with the substantivation of the adjective (e.g. +<i>studiosus</i>), are common to Quintilian with other writers of the +Silver Age.</p> + + +<p class = "space"> +Taking now the Parts of Speech in their order, we may illustrate the +peculiarities of Quintilian’s vocabulary by reference to the Tenth +Book.</p> + + +<span class = "pagenum">xliv</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexliv" id = "intro_pagexliv"> </a> +<h5>I. Nouns.</h5> + +<p><b>Advocatus</b> for <i>causidicus</i>, <i>patronus</i>: x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec111">1, 111</a> (where see +note): cp. iii. 8, 51; xi. 1, 59: Plin. S. 7, 22: Suet. Claud. 15. For +examples of the use of this word in its earlier sense cp. v. 6, 6; xi. +3, 132; xii. 3, 2.</p> + +<p><b>Ambitio</b> carries with it in Quintilian, as generally in the +Silver Age, a sinister meaning, so that Quintilian can call it a +<i>vitium</i>: i. 2, 22 <i>licet ipsa vitium sit ambitio frequenter +tamen causa virtutum est</i>. So <i>perversa ambitio</i> x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec21">7, 21</a>: cp. Tac. Ann. +vi. 46: Iuv. 8, 135. For the Ciceronian use of the word (<i>popularis +gratiae captatio ad adipiscendos honores</i>), see pro Sulla §11: pro +Planc. §45: de Orat. i. §1.</p> + +<p><b>Auctor</b>, almost identical with <i>scriptor</i>: see on x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec24">1, 24</a>. Cp. Ep. ad +Tryph. §1 <i>legendis auctoribus qui sunt innumerabiles</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Cultus</b> = <i>ornatus</i>: x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec124">1, 124</a>; +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec17">2, 17</a>. Cp. iii. 8, 58 +<i>in verbis cultum adfectaverunt</i>: xi. 1, 58 <i>nitor et cultus</i>. +Cicero uses <i>ornatus</i> and <i>nitor</i> as applied to language: +Orat. §80 <i>ornatus verborum</i>, §13 4 <i>orationis</i>. Cp. Tac. +Dial. 20, 23.</p> + +<p><b>Opinio</b> is used for ‘reputation’ (<i>existimatio</i>), whether +good or bad. So x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec18">5, 18</a> (where see note): +7, 17: cp. xii. 1, 12 <i>contemptu opinionis</i>: ii. 12, 5 <i>adfert et +ista res opinionem</i>: ix. 2, 74 <i>veritus opinionem iactantiae</i>: +iv. 1, 33 <i>opinione adrogantiae laborare</i>: Tac. Dial. 10 <i>ne +opinio quidem et fama ... aeque poetas quam oratores sequitur</i>: Sen. +Ep. 79, 16. In Cicero it is found only with a genitive (ad Att. 7, 2 +<i>opinio integritatis</i>: cp. Liv. xlv. 38, 6: Caes. B.G. vii. 59, 5: +Tac. Dial. 15), or with an adjective (Verr. ii. 3, 24 <i>falsam ... +malam opinionem</i>).</p> + +<p><b>Opus</b> frequently means ‘branch,’ ‘department’ in Quintilian: x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec9">1, 9</a> (where see note). +It is often identical with ‘genus’: e.g. x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec123">1, 123</a> where they are +used together, <i>quo in genere—in hoc opere</i>. Cp. iii. 7, 28 +<i>quamquam tres status omnes cadere in hoc opus (laudativum genus) +possint</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Valetudo</b>, always in the sense of ‘bad health’ in Quintilian +and contemporary writers. If ‘good health’ is meant, an adjective is +used: e.g. x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec26">3, 26</a> <i>bona +valetudo</i>: vi. 3, 77 <i>commodior valetudo</i>. With Cicero it may +mean either: de Fin. v. §84 <i>bonum valetudo, miser morbus</i>: de Am. +§8 <i>quod in collegio nostro non adfuisses, valetudinem respondeo +causam</i>: ad Fam. iv. 1, 1: in Tusc. iv. §80 he has <i>mala +valetudo</i>. With Quintilian’s usage cp. Tac. Hist. iii. 2; Ann. vi. +50: Suet. Claud. 26: Plin. S. 2, 20.</p> + +<p><b>Venus</b> for <i>venustas</i>, x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec79">1, 79</a> (where see note); +ib. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec100">§100</a>. This use of the word +is poetical: Hor. A. P. 320; Car. iv. 13, 17. For <i>venustas</i>, +<i>lepor</i> occurs in Cicero with the same meaning, see de Orat. i. +§243: Or. §96.</p> + +<p>Other points in connection with the use of substantives are referred +to +<span class = "pagenum">xlv</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexlv" id = "intro_pagexlv"> </a> +in the notes: e.g. the periphrastic construction with <i>vis</i> or +<i>ratio</i> and the gerund (see on <i>vim dicendi</i> x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec1">1, 1</a>): the concrete use +of certain nouns in the plural (see on <i>historias</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec75">§75</a>: cp. <i>lectiones</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec45">§45</a>): the concrete use of +abstract nouns (e.g. <i>facilitatem</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec7">3 §7</a>: <i>profectus</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec14">5 §14</a>: cp. <i>silvarum +amoenitas</i> for <i>silvae amoenae</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec24">3 §24</a>). The frequent +occurrence of verbal nouns in <i>-tor</i> must also be noted: in Quint. +they have come to be used almost like adjectives or participles +(<i>hortator</i> x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec23">3, 23</a>: +<i>offensator</i> ib. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec20">§20</a>), and may, like +adjectives, be compared by the aid of an adverb (<i>nimium amator</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec88">1 §88</a>, where see +note)<a class = "tag" name = "tag69" id = "tag69" href = +"#note69">69</a>.</p> + + +<h5>II. Adjectives.</h5> + +<p><b>Beatus</b> (<i>abundans</i>, <i>fecundus</i>): x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec61">1, 61</a> <i>beatissima +rerum verborumque copia</i>, where see note: cp. v. 14, 31 <i>beatissimi +amnes</i>. Cicero does not use <i>beatus</i> of things: cp. de Rep. ii. +19, 34 <i>abundantissimus amnis</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Densus</b> (like <i>pressus</i> in Cicero): +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec68">§§68</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec73">73</a> (with notes), <i>densus +et brevis et semper instans sibi Thucydides</i>: cp. Cic. de Orat. ii. +§59 <i>Thucydides ita verbis aptus et pressus</i>. So x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec76">1, 76</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec106">106</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Exactus</b>: x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec14">2, 14</a> <i>exactissimo +iudicio</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec30">7 §30</a> <i>exacti +commentarii</i>. <i>Exactus</i> bears the same relation to +<i>exigere</i> as <i>perfectus</i> does to <i>perficere</i>, with which +<i>exigere</i> is, in Quintilian, synonymous: <i>e.g.</i> i. 5, 2; +9, 2. So Hor. Ep. ii. 1, 72: Suet. Tib. 18: Plin. Ep. 8, 23; also +M. Seneca, and Val. Max. For <i>exactus</i> Cicero used +<i>diligenter elaboratus</i> (Brut. §312) or <i>accuratus</i> (ad Att. +xiii. 45, 3): or <i>perfectus</i> (de Orat. i. §§34, 35).</p> + +<p><b>Expositus</b> = <i>tritus</i>, <i>communis</i>: x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec11">5, 11</a> <i>voluptatem +expositis dare</i>: Iuv. 7, 54 <i>vatem—qui nihil expositum soleat +deducere, hoc qui communi feriat carmen triviale moneta</i>: Sen. E. 55. +Cicero has (de Orat. i. 31, 137) <i>omnium communia et contrita +praecepta</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Incompositus</b>: x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec66">1, 66</a> <i>rudis in +plerisque et incompositus</i> (Aeschylus): cp. iv. 5, 10; ix. 4, 32: +Verg. Georg. i. 350 <i>motus incompositos</i>: Hor. Sat. i. 10, 1: Tac. +Dial. 26: Sen. Ep. 40, 4: Liv. xxiii. 27; v. 28.</p> + +<p><b>Otiosus</b> = <i>inutilis</i>, <i>inanis</i>. See on x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec76">1, 76</a> <i>tam nihil +otiosum</i>: cp. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec17">2 §17</a>. So Tac. Dial. +40: Plin. S. 10, 62. In Cicero we have <i>vacuus</i>, <i>otio +abundans</i>, Brut. §3: N.D. iii. §39.</p> + +<span class = "pagenum">xlvi</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexlvi" id = "intro_pagexlvi"> </a> +<p><b>Praecipuus</b>, used by itself, see on x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec94">1, 94</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Summus</b>, in sense of <i>extremus</i>: x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec21">1, 21</a>, where see note. +The usage is poetical: cp. Plaut. Pers. 33; Asin. 534: Verg. Aen. ii. +324 <i>venit summa dies</i>: Hor. Ep. i. 1, 1: Ovid ex Pont. iv. 9, 59, +Am. iii. 9, 27: Iuv. i. 5. Schmalz (<i>Ueber den Sprachgebrauch des +Asinius Pollio—München</i>, 1890, p. 36) contends that this +use is not Ciceronian, for while Pollio writes <i>summo ludorum die</i> +(ad Fam. x. 32, 3) and Caelius <i>summis Circensibus ludis</i> (ad +Fam. viii. 12, 3—<i>Manutius: <b>extremis</b> diebus Circensium +ludorum meorum</i>), Cicero himself says (ad Fam. vii. 1, 3) +<i>extremus elephantorum dies fuit</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Supinus</b> = <i>ignavus</i> (as <span class = "greek" title = +"huptios">ὕπτιος</span>, p. xliii. above): x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec17">2, 17</a> <i>otiosi et +supini</i>: cp. ix. 4, 137 <i>tarda et supina compositio</i>: Iuv. i. +66: Mart. vi. 42 <i>Non attendis et aure supina Iamdudum negligenter +audis</i>. This word may have been used first by Quintilian in this +sense: in Cicero it is used of the body, e.g. de Div. i. 53, 120.</p> + +<p>Noticeable also, and characteristic of his time, is Quintilian’s use +of <i>plerique</i> and <i>plurimi</i>, the former having often the force +of <i>nonnulli</i>, <i>plures</i>, <i>multi</i> (x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec26">1 §§26</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec31">31</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec34">34</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec37">37</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec66">66</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec106">106</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec13">2 §13</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec16">3 §16</a>), the latter +losing its force as a superlative, and standing generally for +<i>permulti</i> (x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec12">1 §§12</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec22">22</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec27">27</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec40">40</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec49">49</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec58">58</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec60">60</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec65">65</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec81">81</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec95">95</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec107">107</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec109">109</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec117">117</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec128">128</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec6">2 §§6</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec14">14</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec24">24</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec1">6 §1</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec17">7 §17</a>).</p> + +<p>Nothing is more common in Quintilian than the use of adjectives (and +participles) in the place of nouns.<a class = "tag" name = "tag70" id = +"tag70" href = "#note70">70</a> In some cases this arises from the +actual omission of a noun, which can readily be supplied to define the +meaning of the adjective: for example x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec20">5, 20</a> +<i>decretoriis</i> (sc. <i>armis</i>) <i>exerceatur</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec100">1 §100</a> <i>togatis</i> +(sc. <i>fabulis</i>) <i>excellit Afranius</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec88">1 §88</a> <i>lascivus +quidem in herois</i> (sc. <i>versibus</i>) <i>quoque Ovidius</i>. But in +most cases there is no perceptible ellipse; the general idea intended is +contained in the adjective itself. In the Masculine and Feminine only +those adjectives can be used as nouns which express personal qualities, +as of character, position, reputation, &c.: the Neuter denotes +generally the properties of things, mostly abstractions. Following the +arrangement of Dr. Hirt’s paper, we may cite examples from the Tenth +Book as follows:—</p> + + +<h5 class = "boldf">The Neuter Adjective.</h5> + +<p>(1) <i>The Neuter singular used by itself</i>:—</p> + +<p>Nom. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec22">3 §22</a> <i>secretum in +dictando perit</i>.</p> + +<span class = "pagenum">xlvii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexlvii" id = "intro_pagexlvii"> </a> +<p>Acc. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec30">3 §30</a> <i>faciat sibi +cogitatio secretum</i>.</p> + +<p>Gen. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec27">3 §27</a> <i>optimum +secreti genus</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec30">§30</a> <i>amator secreti</i>. +Partitive genitives: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec1">6 §1</a> <i>aliquid +vacui</i>: dependent on adj. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec79">1 §79</a> <i>honesti +studiosus</i>.</p> + +<p>Dat.: occurs in other books: e.g. i. pr. 4 <i>proximum vero</i>: vi. +3, 21 <i>contrarium serio</i>.</p> + +<p>Abl. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec16">7 §16</a> <i>cum stilus +secreto gaudeat</i>.</p> + +<p>Frequent instances occur in prepositional phrases, with accusative +and ablative: these are mostly local, and the great extension of the +usage in post-Augustan times points to the influence of Greek analogy +(<span class = "greek" title = "ex isou, ek tou phanerou k.t.l.">ἐξ +ἴσου, ἐκ τοῦ φανεροῦ κ.τ.λ.</span>). Examples are: <i>in altum</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec28">7 §28</a> (= <i>in +profundum</i>): <i>e contrario</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec19">1 §19</a>: <i>in +deposito</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec33">3 §33</a>: <i>in +expedito</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec24">7 §24</a>: +(<i>vertere</i>) <i>in Latinum</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec2">5 §2</a> (containing the +idea of locality: cp. <i>ex Graeco</i>): <i>ex integro</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec20">1 §20</a> (where see note): +<i>in posterum</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec14">3 §14</a>: <i>in +publicum</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec1">7 §1</a>: <i>in +universum</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec42">1 §42</a>: <i>in peius</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec16">2 §16</a>: <i>ex +proximo</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec13">1 §13</a>: <i>a summo</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec2">3 §2</a>: <i>ad +ultimum</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec7">7 §7</a>; ib. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec16">16</a>: <i>ex ultimo</i> ib. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec10">10</a>.</p> + +<p>Sometimes the adjective, in addition to being used substantivally, +governs like a noun, the genitive depending on it being always +partitive: e.g. <i>multum</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec80">1 §§80</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec94">94</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec115">115</a>: <i>plus</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec77">1 §§77</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec86">86</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec97">97</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec99">99</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec106">106</a>: <i>plurimum</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec60">1 §§60</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec65">65</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec81">81</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec117">117</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec128">128</a>; +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec1">3 §1</a>; +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec3">5 §§3</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec10">10</a>; +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec1">6 §1</a>; +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec17">7 §17</a>: <i>minus</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec12">2 §12</a>: <i>quantum</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec8">5 §8</a>. And with a +pronoun: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec24">7 §24</a> <i>promptum hoc +et in expedito positum</i>.</p> + +<p>(2) <i>The Neuter Plural.</i></p> + +<p>Instances need not be cited where adjectives are used substantivally +in cases which can be recognised as neuter: e.g. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec6">3 §6</a> <i>scriptorum +proxima</i>. Quintilian gave a wide extension to the usage even where +the case could not be recognised. It can be detected most easily, of +course, when the adjective is used alongside of nouns, e.g. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec8">5 §8</a> <i>sua brevitati +gratia</i>, <i>sua copiae</i>, <i>alia translatis virtus</i>, <i>alia +propriis</i>; or when another adjective or pronoun is used in the nom. +or acc., e.g. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec35">1 §35</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec32">3 §32</a> <i>novorum +interpositione priora confundant</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec11">5 §11</a>. Other instances +(of 2nd and 3rd decl.) are +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec30">7 §30</a> <i>subitis ex +tempore occurrant</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec1">5 §1</a> <i>ex latinis</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec6">7 §6</a> <i>ex +diversis</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec66">1 §66</a> <i>in +plerisque</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec11">5 §11</a> <i>varietatem +similibus dare</i>. So with comparatives and superlatives: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec63">1 §63</a> <i>maioribus +aptior</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec58">1 §58</a> <i>cum optimis +satiati sumus</i>, <i>varietas tamen nobis ex vilioribus grata sit</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec6">5 §6</a> <i>certe proximis +locus</i>.</p> + + +<h5 class = "boldf">The Masculine Adjective.</h5> + +<p>(1) <i>The Masculine Plural.</i></p> + +<p>In the following places masculine adjectives are found together, in +the plural, or else along with nouns: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec71">1 §§71</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec124">124</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec130">130</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec17">2 §17</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec16">3 §16</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec1">5 §1</a>.</p> + +<span class = "pagenum">xlviii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexlviii" id = "intro_pagexlviii"> </a> +<p>Single instances are (Genitive) <i>veterum</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec97">1 §§97</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec118">118</a>: <i>magnorum</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec25">1 §25</a>: (Dative) +<i>imperitis</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec15">7 §15</a>: +<i>antiquis</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec17">2 §17</a>: +<i>studiosis</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec45">1 §45</a> (where see note: +Cicero would have had <i>dicendi</i>, or <i>eloquentiae studiosis</i>): +<i>bonis</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec3">2 §3</a>: (Accusative) +<i>veteres</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec42">1 §42</a>: <i>posteros</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec112">1 §§112</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec120">120</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec6">2 §6</a>: <i>obvios</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec29">3 §29</a>: +<i>intentos</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec33">3 §33</a>: (Ablative) +<i>ex nostris</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec114">1 §114</a>: <i>ab +antiquis</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec126">1 §126</a>: <i>de +novis</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec40">1 §40</a>. With the +comparative +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec19">5 §19</a> <i>apud +maiores</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec7">5 §7</a> <i>priores</i>: +superlative +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec58">1 §58</a> <i>confessione +plurimorum</i>. In +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec123">1 §123</a> we have one of +the few instances of the addition of another adjective to an adjective +doing duty for a noun—<i>paucissimos adhuc eloquentes litterae +Romanae tulerunt</i>.</p> + +<p>(2) <i>The Masculine Singular.</i></p> + +<p>When the adjective can denote a class collectively, it may be used as +a noun: this is quite frequent in Quintilian, as in most writers, +especially when the adjective stands near a substantive, e.g. +<i>perorare in adulterum</i>, <i>aleatorem</i>, <i>petulantem</i> ii. +4, 22.</p> + +<p>The following are cases of the isolated use of the masculine +singular: (Genitive) x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec26">2, 26</a> <i>prudentis +est</i>: (Accusative) +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec3">2 §3</a> <i>similem raro +natura praestat</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec19">3 §19</a> <i>quasi +conscium infirmitatis nostrae timentes</i>.</p> + + +<h5 class = "boldf">The Participle used as a Noun.</h5> + +<p>(1) <i>The Neuter Singular.</i></p> + +<p>Participles follow the analogy of the adjective. In addition to those +which have actually become nouns (e.g. <i>responsum</i>, +<i>praeceptum</i>, <i>promissum</i>, &c.), Quintilian uses several +participles as nouns in a manner that is again an extension of classical +usage. So even with a pronoun, or another adjective: e.g. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec2">2 §2</a> <i>ad propositum +praescriptum</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec11">§11</a> <i>ad alienum +propositum</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec12"><ins class = "correction" title = "text reads ‘5 §72’">5 §12</ins></a> <i>decretum +quoddam atque praeceptum</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec24">7 §24</a> <i>promptum hoc +et in expedito positum</i>.</p> + +<p>(2) <i>The Neuter Plural.</i></p> + +<p>Instances of the usual kind are too numerous to mention: the +participle in <i>-us</i>, <i>-a</i>, <i>-um</i> is found frequently in +abl., gen., and dat. Not so common is the plural of the 3rd decl.: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec86">1 §86</a> <i>eminentibus +vincimur</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec5">3 §5</a> <i>nec protinus +offerentibus se gaudeamus</i>, <i>adhibeatur indicium inventis</i>, +<i>dispositio probatis</i>.</p> + +<p>(3) <i>The Perfect Participle.</i></p> + +<p>In regard to the masculine plural Quintilian here follows the +Ciceronian usage, according to which the participle is employed when a +definite class of individuals is indicated, and a <i>qui</i> clause when +the description is more unrestricted. Instances of the participle are +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec131">1 §131</a> <i>robustis et +<span class = "pagenum">xlix</span> +<a name = "intro_pagexlix" id = "intro_pagexlix"> </a> +satis firmatis legendus</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec2">3 §2</a> 7 <i>occupatos in +noctem necessitas agit</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec17">5 §17</a> +<i>exercitatos</i>; rather more general is <i>a conrogatis +laudantur</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec18">1 §18</a>. The Masculine +Singular is, in classical Latin, generally found along with a +substantive, it being incorrect to use any such expression as, for +example, <i>manes occisi placare</i>. Quintilian makes a very free use +of this participle: e.g. i. 2, 24 <i>reddebat victo certaminis +polestatem</i>: v. 12, 2 <i>spiculum in corpore occisi inventum +est</i>, &c.</p> + +<p>(4) <i>The Future Participle.</i></p> + +<p>The use of this participle received a great extension in +post-Augustan times. The following are instances of its employment as a +substantive: i. 4, 17 <i>non doceo, sed admoneo docturos</i>: 21 +<i>liberum opinaturis relinquo</i>: and in the singular iv. 1, 52 <i>hoc +adicio ut dicturus intueatur quid, apud quem dicendum sit</i>.</p> + +<p>(5) <i>The Present Participle.</i></p> + +<p>Frequent as is the substantival use of this participle in all Latin +authors, in none is it more frequent than in Quintilian—generally +in the Gen. and Dat. Sing. and Plur., not so common in the Nom. and Acc. +Pl., and seldom in the Abl. and Nom. Sing. In some instances it is found +alongside of a noun: e.g. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec2">2 §2</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec3">7 §3</a>. The most common +example of the Gen. Sing., standing alone, is (as might be expected from +the subject-matter of the <i>Institutio</i>) <i>discentis</i>, +<i>dicentis</i>, &c., e.g. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec6">1 §6</a>: for the Dative see +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec17">1 §§17</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec24">24</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec30">30</a>: Accusative +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec20">1 §20</a>: Ablative +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec15">1 §15</a> (<i>intellegere +sine demonstrante</i>): <i>eminentibus</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec86">1 §86</a>: cp. <i>illis ... +recipientibus</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec12">5 §12</a>. In the plural, +the Genitive and Dative are equally common: for the Nominative may be +quoted +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec15">2 §15</a> +<i>imitantes</i>: for the Accusative +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec16">1 §16</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec26">2 §26</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec25">3 §25</a>.</p> + + +<h5>III. Pronouns.</h5> + +<p><b>Ipse</b> follows the usual rules. For an interesting point in +connection with its use, see on +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec15">2 §15</a>. It is often +used as = <i>per se</i>, e.g. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec117">1 §117</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec21">3 §21</a>: often with +pronouns, e.g. <i>vel hoc ipso</i> (<span class = "greek" title = "di’ auto touto">δι᾽ αὐτὸ τοῦτο</span>) +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec75">1 §75</a>, cp. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec8">5 §8</a>. For <i>et ipse</i> +see note on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec31">1 §31</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Hic</b> seems frequently to be used with reference to the +circumstances of the writer’s own times: e.g. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec43">1 §43</a> <i>recens haec +lascivia</i>: and probably also +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec31">7 §31</a> <i>hanc brevem +adnotationem</i>. (This is certainly the case with <i>ille</i>: e.g. +<i>illis dictandi deliciis</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec18">3 §18</a>: <i>ille +laudantium clamor</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec17">1 §17</a>.) It has been +suggested that in some cases the manuscripts may be wrong: e.g. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec6">1 §6</a> <i>ex his</i> (for +<i>ex iis</i>?): but cp. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec25">1 §§25</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec33">33</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec40">40</a>, &c. Such instances +of a preference for <i>hic</i> over <i>is</i> come under Priscian’s rule +(xvi. 58), <i><b>Hic</b> +<span class = "pagenum">l</span> +<a name = "intro_pagel" id = "intro_pagel"> </a> +non solum de <b>praesente</b> verum etiam de <b>absente</b> possumus +dicere, ad <b>intellectum</b> referentes demonstrativum</i>.</p> + +<p>The conjunction of <i>nullus</i> and <i>non</i> +(= <i>quisque</i>, <i>omnis</i>) is common in Quintilian and +Suetonius: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec25">7 §25</a> <i>nullo non +tempore et loco</i>: cp. iii. 6, 7: ix. 4, 83: Suet. Aug. 32; Tib. 66; +Nero 16, &c.: Mart. 8, 20.</p> + +<p><b>Quicunque</b> has in Quintilian completely acquired the force of +an indefinite pronoun: see on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec12">1 §12</a>; <a href = +"QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec105">105</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Quilibet unus</b> (<a href = +"QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec1">1 §1</a>) does not occur in Cicero: +cp. i. 12, 7: v. 10, 117.</p> + +<p><b>Ut qui</b> is frequently found in place of the Ciceronian +<i>quippe qui</i>, <i>utpote qui</i>: see on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec55">1 §55</a>.</p> + + +<h5>IV. Verbs.</h5> + +<p>An instance of the use of simple for compound verbs (frequent in +Quintilian and the Silver Age generally, and a mark of the ‘poetization’ +of Latin prose) occurs +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec99">1 §99</a> <i>licet +Caecilium veteres laudibus ferant</i>: see note <i>ad loc.</i>, and cp. +Plin. Ep. viii. 18, 3: Suet. Oth. 12, Vesp. 6. In Cicero we have +<i>efferre laudibus</i>, de Am. §24: de Off. ii. §36: de Orat. iii. §52. +So elsewhere in Quintilian <i>finire</i> for <i>definire</i>, +<i>solari</i> for <i>consolari</i>, <i>spargere</i> for +<i>dispergere</i>, &c.</p> + +<p>Examples of a change in the meaning of verbs common to Cicero and +Quintilian are the following:—</p> + +<p><b>Componere</b> occurs now in the sense of <i>sedare</i>, +<i>placare</i>: e.g. ix. 4, 12 <i>ut, si quid fuisset turbidiorum +cogitationum, componerent</i>: iii. 4, 15 <i>concitando componendisve +adfectibus</i> (Cicero, de Orat. i. §202 <i>motum dicendo vel +<b>excitare</b> vel <b>sedare</b></i>): cp. x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec119">1, 119</a> <i>Vibius +Crispus compositus et iucundus</i>, whereas Cicero has (Or. §176) +<i>Isocrates est in ipsis numeris <b>sedatior</b></i>. So Pollio, ad +Fam. x. 33, 3 has the phrase <i>bellum componere</i>: cp. Hor. Ep. ii. +1, 8 <i>componere litem</i>: Verg. Aen. iv. 341 <i>componere +curas</i>—both at the end of a hexameter: Tac. Hist. iv. 50: Suet. +Caes. 4.</p> + +<p><b>Digerere</b> = <i>concoquere</i>: see +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec19">1 §19</a>. For +<i>concoquere</i> in Cicero, see de Fin. ii. §64: de N. D. ii. +§§24, 124, 136.</p> + +<p><b>Praedicere</b> = <i>antea</i>, <i>supra dicere</i>: see on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec74">1 §74</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Recipere</b> = <i>probare</i> (<span class = "greek" title = +"apodechomai">ἀποδέχομαι</span>): +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec31">7 §31</a>, and often.</p> + +<p><b>Vacat</b>: used impersonally +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec58">1 §§58</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec90">90</a>: cp. i. 12, 12. This +usage is not found in Cicero.</p> + + +<h5>V. Adverbs.</h5> + +<p><b>Abunde</b> is often found along with adjectives and adverbs, to +increase their force: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec25">1 §25</a> <i>abunde +similes</i> (where see note): +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec104">§104</a> <i>elatum abunde +spiritum</i>. It has something of the emphasis of Cicero’s <i>satis +superque</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Adhuc</b> occurs very frequently with a comparative: see on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec71">1 §71</a> (<i>plus +adhuc</i>) and +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec99">§99</a>. It is often used also +(as in Livy and others) of +<span class = "pagenum">li</span> +<a name = "intro_pageli" id = "intro_pageli"> </a> +past time, when it = <i>eo etiam tempore</i>, or <i>etiam tum</i>: e.g. +<i>scholae adhuc operatum</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec13">3 §13</a>: cp. i. 8, 2: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec27">2 §27</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Alioqui</b> has different uses in Quintilian, as in Tacitus. (1) +It occurs pretty much as <span class = "greek" title = "ta men alla">τὰ +μὲν ἄλλα</span> in Greek, with very little of an antithesis: e.g. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec64">1 §64</a> <i>Simonides, +tenuis alioqui, sermone proprio et iucunditate commendari potest</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec32">3 §32</a> <i>expertus +iuvenem, studiosum alioqui, praelongos habuisse sermones</i>, &c. +(There is a definite antithesis in what seems to be the corresponding +usage in Tacitus, when <i>alioqui</i> is opposed to an adverb of time: +e.g, Ann. iii. 8 <i>cum incallidus alioqui et facilis iuventa senilibus +</i>tum<i> artibus uteretur</i>: xiii. 20 <i>ingreditur Paris, solitus +alioquin id temporis luxus principis intendere, sed </i>tunc<i> +compositus ad maestitiam.</i>) (2) It is equivalent to <i>praeterea</i>, +‘besides’: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec13">3 §13</a> <i>in +eloquentia Galliarum ... princeps, alioqui inter paucos disertus</i>. +Cp. Tac. Ann. iv. 11 <i>ordo alioqui sceleris ... patefactus est</i>. +This sense is an easy transition from ‘for the rest.’ The instance in +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec128">1 §128</a> (<i>cuius et +multae alioqui et magnae virtutes fuerunt</i>) seems to fall also under +this head, unless it means ‘apart from’ the doubtful compliments they +paid him (Seneca) by imitating him: cp. Tac. Ann. iv. 37 <i>validus +alioqui spernendis honoribus</i>. (3) <i>Alioqui</i> stands for +‘otherwise,’ ‘in the opposite case,’ either with a <i>si</i> clause, as +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec16">3 §16</a> <i>immutescamus +alioqui si nihil dicendum videatur</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec30">§30</a> <i>quid alioqui fiet +... si particulas</i>, &c.: or without, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec6">6 §6</a> <i>alioqui vel +extemporalem temeritatem malo quam male cohaerentem cogitationem</i>. +Cp. Tac. Ann. ii. 38: xi. 6.</p> + +<p><b>Certe</b> stands for <i>quidem</i> when the point of the sentence +is reinforced by an illustration: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec4">6 §4</a> <i>Cicero certe +... tradidit</i>: cp. xii. 1, 43: vi. 2, 3.</p> + +<p><i>Demum</i>, which in classical Latin is an adverb of time +(‘lastly’), stands in Quintilian, and other writers of the Silver Age, +for <i>tantum</i>, <i>dumtaxat</i>, the idea of time having disappeared: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec44">1 §44</a> <i>pressa demum +et tenuia</i>, where see note: cp. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec13">3 §13</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec5">6 §5</a>. With pronouns it +is frequently used, for emphasis, like <i>adeo</i>: e.g. Cic. de Orat. +ii. §131 <i>sed hi loci ei demum oratori prodesse possunt, qui est +versatus in rebus vel usu</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Interim</b> often stands for <i>interdum</i>, as +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec9">1 §9</a>, where see note. At +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec33">3 §33</a> we have +<i>interim ... interim</i> for <i>modo ... modo</i>, as also i. 7, 11: +<i>interim ... interdum</i> vi. 2, 12: <i>interim ... non numquam ... +saepe</i> iv. 5, 20: <i>semper ... interim</i> ii. 1, 1.</p> + +<p><b>Longe</b> and <b>multum</b> are both used with comparatives, +instead of <i>multo</i>: e.g. <i>longe clarius</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec67">1 §67</a> (where see note): +<i>multum tersior</i> (<span class = "greek" title = "polu">πολύ</span>) +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec94">1 §94</a> (note).</p> + +<p><b>Mox</b> is used in enumerations in place of <i>deinde</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec3">6 §3</a> +<i>primum—tum—mox</i>: cp. i. 2, 29 <i>primum—mox</i>: +ib. 9, 2 <i>primum—mox—tum</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Nec</b> = <i>ne quidem</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec7">3 §7</a> <i>alioqui nec +scriberentur</i>. Cp. ix. 2, 67 <i>quod in foro non expedit, illic nec +liceat</i> iv. 2, 93: v. 10, 86.</p> + +<span class = "pagenum">lii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelii" id = "intro_pagelii"> </a> +<p><b>Non</b> occurs with the 1st pers. plur. (<a href = +"QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec16">3 §16</a>, cp. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec5">3 §5</a>) and 3rd pers. +sing. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec27">2 §27</a> where see note, +(also after <i>dum</i> xii. 10, 48 and <i>modo</i> iii. 11, 24) where +Cicero would have had <i>ne</i>: cp. i. 1, 19 <i>non ergo perdamus</i>: +ib. §5 <i>non adsuescat ergo</i>. Cp. <i>utinam non</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec100">§100</a>: and see note on +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec27">2 §27</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Non nisi</b>. These particles (<i>non</i>, <i>nisi</i>) are used +together with the force of an adverb, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec24">1 §24</a> (where see note): +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec29">3 §29</a>. Cp. Ov. Tr. +iii. 12, 36.</p> + +<p><b>Olim</b> is never used by Cicero of future time, as +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec94">1 §94</a> and +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec104">104</a> (where see note). Cp. +Plin. Panegyr. 15.</p> + +<p><b>Plane</b>, though common enough in classical Latin, as in +Quintilian, with verbs and adjectives, is not found so often in +conjunction with other adverbs. There may be a touch of colloquialism +about such a phrase as <i>ut plane manifesto appareat</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec53">1 §53</a>: cp. Pollio, in +Cic. ad Fam. x. 32, 1 <i>plane bene</i>: ad Att. xiii. 6, 2: <i>plane +belle</i> ib. xii. 37, 1.</p> + +<p><b>Protinus</b> has its usual meaning (<i>statim</i>) in +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec5">3 §5</a> (where it is best +taken with <i>gaudeamus</i>, not with <i>offerentibus</i>): cp. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec21">7 §21</a>. Its employment +to denote logical consequence is noted at +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec3">1 §3</a>: cp. <i>ib.</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec42">§42</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Saltem</b> is often used for <i>quidem</i> and <i>neque saltem</i> +for <i>ne quidem</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec15">2 §15</a> <i>nec vero +saltem iis</i>, &c., where see note: cp. i. 1, 24 <i>neque enim mihi +illud saltem placet</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Sicut (ut) ... ita</b>. This formula is especially common in +Quintilian, either with or without a negative: see on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec1">1 §1</a>, and cp. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec3">§§3</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec14">14</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec72">72</a>: ix. 2, 88, &c.</p> + +<p><b>Ubicumque</b>, like <i>quicumque</i>, has become an indefinite: +e.g. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec28">7 §28</a> <i>quidquid +loquemur ubicumque</i>. The more classical use is found at +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec5">1 §§5</a> and +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec10">10</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Utique</b>: see note on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec20">1 §20</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Utrimque</b> is used not of place, but of the ‘opposite sides’ of +a question: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec20">5 §20</a> <i>causas +utrimque tractet</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec131">1 §131</a>: cp. v. 10, 81: +Hor. Ep. i. 18, 9: Tac. Hist. i. 14.</p> + +<p><b>Velut</b> occurs more commonly than either <i>quasi</i> or +<i>tamquam</i> in comparisons: see on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec5">1 §5</a> <i>velut opes +quaedam</i>, and cp. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec18">§§18</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec61">61</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec3">3 §3</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec17">5 §17</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec1">7 §1</a>. So also +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec6">7 §6</a> <i>ducetur ante +omnia rerum ipsa serie velut duce</i>.</p> + + +<h5>VI. Prepositions.</h5> + +<p><b>Ab</b> for ‘on leaving,’ as in the poets and Livy: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec17">5 §17</a> <i>ne ab illa, in +qua consenuerunt, umbra discrimina velut quendam solem reformident</i>: +cp. xi. 3, 22: i. 6, 25: Ov. Met. iv. 329: Plin. N. H. xiv. +7, 9. So <span class = "greek" title = "apo">ἀπὸ</span> in Homer, +Il. viii. 53 <span class = "greek" title = "Hoi d’ ara deipnon helonto karêkomoôntes Achaioi Rhimpha kata klisias, apo d’ autou thôrêssonto">Οἱ +δ᾽ ἄρα δεῖπνον ἕλοντο καρηκομόωντες Ἀχαιοὶ Ῥίμφα κατὰ κλισίας, ἀπὸ δ᾽ +αὐτοῦ θωρήσσοντο</span>.</p> + +<p><b>Circa</b> does duty in Quintilian for <i>in</i>, <i>de</i>, +<i>ad</i>, <i>erga</i>, &c.: cp. the use of <span class = "greek" +title = "peri">περί</span>, <span class = "greek" title = +"amphi">ἀμφί</span> with the acc. in Greek<ins class = "correction" +title = "period missing">. </ins>So +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec52">1 §52</a> <i>utiles circa +praecepta sententiae</i>: see note <i>ad loc</i>.</p> + +<span class = "pagenum">liii</span> +<a name = "intro_pageliii" id = "intro_pageliii"> </a> +<p><b>Citra</b> very often stands for <i>sine</i> or <i>praeter</i>: +e.g. <i>citra lectionis exemplum</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec2">1 §2</a>, where see note: +cp. i. 4, 4 <i>neque citra musicen grammatice potest esse perfecta</i>. +In Cicero <i>citra</i> is used only of place.</p> + +<p>The following prepositional expressions should also be +noted:—</p> + +<p><b>Ante omnia</b> = <i>primum</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec3">1 §3</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec4">2 §4</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec6">7 §6</a>. In +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec3">1 §3</a> we have <i>ante +omnia</i>, <i>proximum</i>, <i>novissimum</i>: cp. iv. 2, 52 <i>ante +omnia</i>, <i>deinde</i>: iii. 9, 6 <i>ante omnia</i>, <i>deinde</i>, +<i>tum</i>, <i>postremo</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Cum eo quod</b> is used as a transition formula for the Ciceronian +<i>accedit quod</i>. A certain case of this usage occurs xii. 10, +47: the instance at x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec13">7, 13</a> has been +challenged, but see the note.</p> + +<p><b>Ex integro</b>. Quintilian prefers the use of <i>ex</i> in such +phrases to <i>de</i>: e.g. x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec20">1 §20</a> (where see note): +<i>ex industria</i> ib.: and so <i>ex abundanti</i>, <i>ex professo</i>, +<i>ex pari</i>, &c., elsewhere.</p> + +<p><b>Inter paucos</b>, ‘as few have ever been’: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec13">3 §13</a> <i>inter paucos +disertus</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Per quae</b> (<i>quod</i>) of agency or instrument: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec87">1 §87</a> <i>in iis per +quae nomen est adsecutus</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Propter quae</b> (<i>quod</i>) for <i>quam ob rem</i>, especially +in transitions: see on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec10">1 §10</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Praeter id quod</b> for <i>praeterquam quod</i>: see on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec28">1 §28</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Sine dubio</b>. The use of this phrase at +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec51">1 §51</a> may possibly be +an instance of the peculiarity noted by Spalding on i. 6, 12, where he +points out that Quintilian frequently makes it stand for <i>quidem</i>, +in clauses where the idea is by <i>sine dubio</i> made of less account +than some other statement immediately following, and introduced by +<i>tamen</i> or <i>sed</i> (as i. 6, 12 and 14). Examples are v. 7, 28 +<i>sine dubio ... tamen</i>: v. 10, 53 and viii. 3, 67 <i>sine dubio ... +sed</i>. Applying this to x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec51">1, 51</a> <i>Verum hic +omnes sine dubio et in omni genere eloquentiae procul a se reliquit, +epicos tamen praecipue</i>, we might bring out the construction by +rendering, ‘But while of course (or ‘to be sure’) Homer has +out-distanced all rivals, in every kind of eloquence, it is the epic +poets whom he leaves furthest behind.’ Cp. on +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec15">3 §15</a>.</p> + + +<h5>VII. Conjunctions.</h5> + +<p>Under this head may come <b>Adde quod</b>, a phrase which occurs +seven times in Quintilian, five times in the Tenth Book: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec3">1 §§3</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec16">16</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec10">2 §§10</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec11">11</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec12">12</a>: xii. 1, 4 and 11, 29. +Schmalz (<i>Ueber den Sprachgebrauch des Asinius Pollio</i>) remarks +that it must be ranked rather with Pollio ad Fam. x. 31, 4 (<i>adde huc +quod</i>), where <i>quod</i> is to be taken as a conjunction, than with +Cic. ad Att. vi. 1, 7, ad Fam. xiii. 41, 1 (<i>addo etiam illud +quod</i>), and ad Fam. xvi. 16, 1 (<i>adde hoc quod</i>), where +<i>quod</i> is a relative referring to the foregoing demonstrative. The +phrase is originally +<span class = "pagenum">liv</span> +<a name = "intro_pageliv" id = "intro_pageliv"> </a> +poetical: it is found in Attius, frequently in Lucretius (i. 847: iii. +827: iv. 1113), in the <i>Satires</i> and <i>Epistles</i> of Horace, and +over and over again in Ovid: Vergil seems to avoid it. Pollio probably +introduced it into prose, and from him it passed to others: Schmalz +refers to Plin. Ep. viii. 14, 3: iii. 14, 6: Sen. 40, 4: Symmach. 2, 7: +4, 71: Fronto, p. 92 N.</p> + +<p><b>Cum interim</b> = ‘though all the time.’ See note on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec18">1 §18</a>: cp. § III.</p> + +<p><b>Dum ... non</b> stands for <i>dummodo ... non</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec7">3 §7</a>: cp. xii. 10, 48. +The usage is poetical. <i>Dummodo</i> does not occur in Quintilian.</p> + +<p><b>Enim</b> occurs, conformably to classical usage, in the third +place after a word preceded by a preposition: e.g. <i>ad profectum +enim</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec15">3 §15</a>: and so +frequently after <i>sum</i>,—<a href = +"QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec10">2 §10</a> <i>necesse est enim</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec14">1 §14</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec15">7 §§15</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec24">24</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec19">2 §19</a>. But <i>nihil +enim est</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec78">1 §78</a>, where Krüger +suggests <i>nihil enim inest</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Etsi</b>. As it is generally stated that <i>etsi</i> does not +occur in Quintilian it may be well to include it here. Instances are i. +pr. 19: i. 5, 28: v. 13, 3: ix. i, 19.</p> + +<p><b>Ideoque</b> is constantly used for <i>itaque</i>. See note on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec21">1 §21</a>.</p> + +<p><b>Licet</b> = <i>etsi</i>, as sometimes in Cicero: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec99">1 §99</a>: ii. 2, 8 and +passim.</p> + +<p><b>Quamlibet</b> and <b>quamquam</b>. Quintilian uses these words (in +clauses which contain no verb) along with adjectives, participles, and +adverbs: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec19">3 §19</a> <i>nam in stilo +quidem quamlibet properato</i>: cp. viii. 6, 4 <i>oratione quamlibet +clara</i>: xii. 8, 7 <i>quamlibet verbose</i>: xi. 1, 34 <i>quamquam +plena sanguinis</i>. A similar use of <i>quamvis</i> is less +uncommon in other writers: cp. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec74">1 §74</a> <i>quamvis +bonorum</i>: ib. §94 <i>quamvis uno libra</i> (where see note). See +Madvig on Cic. de Fin. v. §68.</p> + +<p><b>Quia</b> is sometimes used where <i>quod</i> (<i>eo quod</i>) +might have been expected: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec15">1 §15</a> <i>hoc sunt +exempla potentiora ... quia</i>: cp. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec14">5 §14</a> <i>Declamationes +vero ... sunt utilissimae quia</i> (Halm) <i>inventionem et +dispositionem pariter exercent</i>. So i. 6, 39 <i>nam et auctoritatem +antiquitatis habent</i> (sc. <i>verba a vetustate repetita</i>) <i>et, +quia intermissa sunt, gratiam novitati similem parant</i>. Cp. <i>non +quia non</i> (with the subjunctive) x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec19">7, 19</a> and +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec31">31</a>: so ii. 2, 2: iv. 1, 5, +65: viii. 3, 42: ix. 1, 23; 4, 20.</p> + +<p><b>Quoque</b> often occurs alongside of an adjective, to increase its +force, where older writers would have had <i>vel</i> or <i>etiam</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec20">1 §20</a> <i>ex industria +quoque</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec14">2 §14</a> <i>in magnis +quoque auctoribus</i>: cp. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec121">1 §121</a> <i>ceterum +interceptus quoque magnum sibi vindicat locum</i>: ii. II, I <i>exemplo +magni quoque nominis professorum</i>.</p> + +<p><b>Quotiens</b> = <i>cum</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIV_sec3">4 §3</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec29">7 §29</a>. Cp. iv. 1, 76: +viii. 3, 55.</p> + + +<p class = "space"> +For the rest, Quintilian’s style cannot be called artistic. It is indeed +generally clear and simple: instances of obscurity are very often +traceable to the ‘insanabilis error’ in the old text, of which Leonardo +wrote +<span class = "pagenum">lv</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelv" id = "intro_pagelv"> </a> +to Poggio, and which the progress of criticism has done so much to +remedy. It is also free from all bombast and excessive embellishment. +But there is little of the graceful and ample movement of the Ciceronian +period: the sentence often halts, as it were, there are frequent +instances of harsh expression, and the periods are awkwardly +constructed. Quintilian was not an artist in style. Probably the +technicalities of his subject kept him from thinking too much of such +matters as rhythm, cadence, and harmony. His main object was to say +clearly and directly what he wanted to say, without laying too great +stress on the form in which it was cast. The leading thought is +generally stated at once, and everything subordinate to it is left to +take care of itself. Hence it is that causal clauses are allowed to come +dragging in at the end of a sentence (x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec13">2 §§13</a> and +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec23">23</a>), and adjectival or +attributive clauses stand by themselves in a position of remarkable +isolation (<i>vel ob hoc memoria dignum</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec80">1 §80</a>: <i>rebus tamen +acuti magis quam</i>, &c. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec84">1 §84</a>: cp. §§85, 95, +103). Relative sentences also are introduced in a detached sort of +fashion (<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec80">1 §80</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec28">2 §28</a>). The thought is +sometimes hard to follow (as notably in the opening sections of the +Tenth Book: cp. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec13">2 §§13</a> and +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec20">§§20</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec21">21</a>; +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec7">7 §7</a>), because the +composition is not framed as a harmonious whole: the transition +particles are loosely used (see on <i>nam</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec12">1 §12</a>: cp. §50, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec31">7 §31</a>: <i>quidem</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec88">1 §88</a>), and are +sometimes wanting altogether, especially in the case of figures suddenly +and abruptly introduced (see on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec4">1 §4</a>: cp. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec1">7 §1</a>). Instances of a +more or less artificial striving after variety of expression are often +met with: e.g. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec36">1 §§36</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec41">41</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec83">83</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec102">102</a>. In the order of words +there is sometimes the same departure from customary usage (<a href = +"QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec109">1 §109</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec17">2 §17</a>), especially in +the case of proper names (<a href = +"QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec86">1 §86</a> <i>Afro Domitio</i> for +<i>Domitio Afro</i>: cp. <i>Atacinus Varro</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec87">§87</a>: <i>Bassus Aufidius</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec103">§103</a>)<a class = "tag" name += "tag71" id = "tag71" href = "#note71">71</a>. Constructions <span +class = "greek" title = "kata sunesin">κατὰ σύνεσιν</span> frequently +occur: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec65">1 §65</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec105">§105</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec25">7 §25</a>. Under this +head may be included the omission of the subject: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec7">1 §7</a> <i>congregat</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec66">§66</a> <i>permiserunt</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec4">7 §4</a> <i>malit ... +possit</i>: and of words to be supplied from the context, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec56">1 §56</a> +<i>congerentes</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec7">1 §7</a> <i>solitos</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec107">1 §107</a> <i>quibus nihil +ille</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec123">1 §123</a> <i>qui +ubique</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec24">2 §24</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec25">3 §25</a>. In the same +way <i>esse</i> is frequently omitted for the sake of brevity: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec17">1 §17</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec66">§66</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec90">§90</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIV_sec1">4 §1</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec6">5 §6</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec7">7 §7</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec23">§23</a>. Lastly there are +frequent instances of inadvertent and negligent repetition: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec8">1 §§8</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec9">9</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec23">23</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec94">94</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec131">131</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec11">2 §§11-12</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec6">5 §§6-7</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec23">7 §23</a>: cp. on +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec23">2 §23</a>.</p> + +<p>Among minor peculiarities of idiom are (1) An almost excessive +fondness for the use of the perfect subjunctive: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec14">1 §14</a> <i>dixerim</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec26">§26</a> +<span class = "pagenum">lvi</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelvi" id = "intro_pagelvi"> </a> +<i>maluerim</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec37">§37</a> <i>fuerit</i>, where see +note: so even <i>ut non dixerim</i> (<i>ne dicam</i>) +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec77">1 §77</a> and <i>ut sic +dixerim</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec15">2 §15</a>. (2) The +use of the future indicative in dependent clauses: see on <i>sciet</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec4">1 §4</a>, and cp. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec26">2 §§26</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec28">28</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec28">3 §28</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec28">7 §28</a>: also as a mild +imperative, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec58">1 §58</a> +<i>revertemur</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec18">3 §18</a> +<i>sequemur</i>; +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec1">2 §1</a> +<i>renuntiabit</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec23">§23</a> <i>aptabimus</i>. +(3) The frequent use of the infinitive in constructions which are +characteristic of the Silver Age: (<i>a</i>) with <i>verbs</i>, as +<i>meruit credi</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec72">1 §72</a>: <i>qui esse +docti adfectant</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec97">§97</a>: <i>optandum ... +fieri</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec127">§127</a>: <i>si consequi +utrumque non dabitur</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec22">7 §22</a>: <i>opponere +verear</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec101">1 §101</a>: +<i>intermittere veremur</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec26">7 §26</a>: cp. +<i>expertus iuvenem ... habuisse</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec32">3 §32</a>: for +<i>dubitare</i> see on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec73">1 §73</a>: +(<i>b</i>) with <i>adjectives</i>, <i>legi dignus</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec96">1 §96</a>: <i>contentum id +consequi</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec7">2 §7</a>. (4) The +substantival use of the gerund, <i>ceteraque genera probandi ac +refutandi</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec49">1 §49</a>: <i>lex +orandi</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec76">1 §76</a>: +<i>inveniendi</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec69">§69</a>: <i>sive acumine +disserendi sive eloquendi facultate</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec81">1 §81</a>: cp. +<i>loquendi</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec83">§83</a>: <i>eloquendo</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec106">§106</a>: <i>nascendi</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec4">3 §4</a>: <i>saliendi</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec6">3 §6</a>: ib. +<i>iaculando</i>: <i>adiciendo</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec32">3 §32</a>: +<i>emendandi</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIV_sec2">4 §2</a>: <i>cogitandi</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec25">7 §25</a>. +(5) <i>Quamquam</i> with subjunctive +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec33">1 §33</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec21">2 §21</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec17">7 §17</a>: +<i>forsitan</i> with indic. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec10">2 §10</a>: &c.</p> + +<p>Among the figures of syntax may be mentioned (1) <i>Anaphora</i>, or +the repetition of the same word at the beginning of several clauses: +e.g. nulla <i>varietas</i>, nullus <i>adfectus</i>, nulla +<i>persona</i>, nulla <i>cuiusquam sit oratio</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec55">1 §55</a>: cp. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec99">1 §§99</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec115">115</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec130">130</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec2">2 §2</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec3">3 §3</a> (illic +<i>radices</i>, illic <i>fundamenta sunt</i>, illic <i>opes</i>, +&c.): +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec9">§9</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec29">§29</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec2">5 §§2</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec8">8</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec1">6 §1</a>; +(2) <i>Asyndeton</i>: e.g. <i>facere</i> quam optime, quam +facillime <i>possit</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec4">1 §4</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec16">2 §16</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVI_sec6">6 §6</a>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec7">7 §§7</a>, +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec26">26</a>; +(3) <i>Chiasmus</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec14">5 §14</a> +(<i>alitur—renovatur</i>) and +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec15">§15</a> (<i>ne +carmine—reficiuntur</i>): +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec15">7 §15</a>.</p> + + +<p class = "space"> +The frequent occurrence of figures taken from the gladiatorial arena or +the field of battle may be made the subject of a concluding paragraph<a +class = "tag" name = "tag72" id = "tag72" href = "#note72">72</a>. It is +in keeping with the martial character of the Romans that there is no +more fertile source of metaphor in their literature than the art of war, +which was indeed their favourite pursuit; just as the Greeks drew their +images from nothing more readily than from the sea and those maritime +occupations in which they were so much at home. It is generally to what +is most familiar both to himself and to those whom he is addressing that +a speaker or writer has recourse in order to enforce his meaning. Both +Cicero and Quintilian had lived through troublous times, and it is +little wonder that even in the quiet repose of their rhetorical +treatises we should frequently meet with phrases and illustrations in +which we seem to hear the noise of battle. And under the Flavian +emperors the less serious combats in the Coliseum had come to be looked +upon as great national +<span class = "pagenum">lvii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelvii" id = "intro_pagelvii"> </a> +entertainments. Hence it was natural to picture the orator, whose main +object is to win persuasion, as one striving for the mastery with +weapons appropriate to the warfare he is waging. No greater compliment +can be found to pay to Julius Caesar than to say that ‘he spoke as he +fought’: <i>tanta in eo vis est, id acumen, ea concitatio, ut illum +eodem animo dixisse quo bellavit appareat</i>, x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec114">1, 114</a>. The orator +must always be on the alert,—ever ‘ready for battle,’ <i>in +procinctu</i> +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec2">1 §2</a> (where see note): +if he cannot take prompt action, he might as well remain in +camp,—<i>nullum erit, si tam tardum fuerit, auxilium</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIV_sec4">4 §4</a>. His style must be +appropriate to the matter in hand: <i>id quoque vitandum ne in oratione +poetas nobis et historicos ... imitandos putemus. Sua cuique proposito +lex, suus cuique decor est</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec21">2 §§21-2</a>. Victory must +ever be the end in view,—victory in what is a real combat, not a +sham fight: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec29">1 §§29-30</a> <i>nos vero +armatos stare in acie et summis de rebus decernere et ad victoriam +niti</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec27">2 §27</a> <i>quam omnia, +etiam quae delectationi videantur data, ad victoriam spectent</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec79">1 §79</a> <i>Isocrates ... +palaestrae quam pugnae magis accommodatus</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec31">1 §31</a> <i>totum opus +(historia) non ad actum rei pugnamque praesentem, sed ad memoriam +posteritatis et ingenii famam componitur</i>. The orator must have all +the wiry vigour of an experienced campaigner, and his weapons ought not +to be made for show: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec33">1 §33</a> <i>dum ... +meminerimus non athletarum toris sed militum lacertis opus esse, nec +versicolorem illam, qua Demetrius Phalereus dicebatur uti, vestem bene +ad forensem pulverem facere</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec30">1 §30</a> <i>Neque ego arma +squalere situ ac rubigine velim, sed fulgorem in iis esse qui terreat, +qualis est ferri, quo mens simul visusque praestringitur, non qualis +auri argentique, imbellis et potius habenti periculosus</i>: cp. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec60">1 §60</a> <i>cum validae +tum breves vibrantesque sententiae, plurimum sanguinis atque +nervorum</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec77">1 §77</a> <i>carnis tamen +plus habet (Aeschines) minus lacertorum</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec12">2 §12</a> <i>quo fit ut +minus sanguinis ac virium declamationes habeant quam orationes</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec115">1 §115</a> <i>verum +sanguinem perdidisse</i>. As soon as possible he must add practice to +theory: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec4">1 §4</a>, cp. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec19">5 §§19-20</a> +(<i>iuvenis</i>) <i>iudiciis intersit quam plurimis et sit certaminis +cui destinatur frequens spectator ... et, quod in gladiatoribus fieri +videmus, decretoriis exerceatur</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec3">3 §3</a> <i>vires faciamus +ante omnia, quae sufficiant labori certaminum et usu non +exhauriantur</i>. His whole activity is that of the battle-field: +whether he is for the prosecution or the defence, he must either +overcome his adversary or succumb to him: cp. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec106">1 §106</a> <i>pugnat ille +(Demosthenes) acumine semper, hic (Cicero) frequenter et pondere</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec120">§120</a> <i>ut esset multo +magis pugnans</i>. And he must not linger too long over preparatory +exercises, otherwise his armour will rust and his joints lose their +suppleness: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec16">5 §16</a> <i>nam si nobis +sola materia fuerit ex litibus, necesse est deteratur fulgor et durescat +articulus et ipse ille mucro ingenii cotidiana pugna retundatur</i>.</p> + +<hr class = "mid"> + +<span class = "pagenum">lviii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelviii" id = "intro_pagelviii"> </a> + +<h5><a name = "intro_chapV" id = "intro_chapV">V.</a> +Manuscripts.</h5> + +<p class = "mynote"> +In this final section of the Introduction, links have been omitted +because they would have been more distracting than useful. +</p> + +<p>Considerable interest attaches to the study of the manuscripts of +Quintilian, the oldest of which may be grouped in three main divisions: +(1) the complete manuscripts, (2) the incomplete, and +(3) the mixed.</p> + +<p>The most important representative of the first class is the <i>Codex +Ambrosianus</i>, a manuscript of the 10th or 11th century, now at Milan. +As we have it now, it is unfortunately in a mutilated condition, nearly +a fourth part of the folios having been lost (from ix. 4, 135 +<i>argumenta acria et cit</i>. to xii. 11, 22 <i>antiquitas ut +possit</i>). Halm secured a new and trustworthy collation of this MS., +distinguishing carefully between the original text and the readings of +the second hand.</p> + +<p>Although now in the defective condition above indicated, the +<i>Ambrosianus</i> must have been originally complete. In this it +differs from the representatives of the second family of MSS., the most +valuable member of which—the <i>Bernensis</i>—is of even +greater importance for the constitution of the text than the +<i>Ambrosianus</i>, at least in those parts which it contains. It is the +oldest of all the known manuscripts of Quintilian, belonging to the 10th +century. The peculiarity which it shares with the other members of its +family is that it contains certain great <i>lacunae</i>, which must have +existed also in the manuscript from which it was copied, as they are +indicated in the <i>Bernensis</i> by blank spaces. The size of the first +<i>lacuna</i> varies with the fortunes of the particular codex: in the +<i>Bernensis</i> it extends from the beginning to 2 §5 (<i>licet, +et nihilo minus</i>). The others are identical in all cases: v. 14, +12—viii. 3, 64: viii. 6, 17—viii. 6, 67: ix. 3, 2—x. +1, 107 (<i>nulla contentio</i>): xi. 1, 71—xi. 2, 33: and +xii. 10, 43 to the end.</p> + +<p>To the same family as the <i>Bernensis</i> belongs the +<i>Bambergensis</i> A, which was directly copied from the +<i>Bernensis</i> not long after the latter had been written: it also is +of the 10th century. But inasmuch as in the <i>Bambergensis</i> the +great <i>lacunae</i> were, at a very early date, filled in by another +hand (<i>Bambergensis</i> G<a class = "tag" name = "tag73" id = +"tag73" href = "#note73">73</a>), this manuscript may now rank in the +third group, where it became the parent, as I hope to show below, of the +<span class = "pagenum">lix</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelix" id = "intro_pagelix"> </a> +<i>Harleianus</i> (2664), and through the <i>Harleianus</i> of the +<i>Florentinus</i>, <i>Turicensis</i>, and an innumerable company of +others. Besides reproducing <i>Bambergensis</i> G, these MSS. +follow for the most part the readings introduced by a later hand (called +by Halm <b>b</b>) into the original <i>Bambergensis</i> A. +A recent examination of the <i>Bambergensis</i> has suggested a +doubt whether the readings known as <b>b</b>, which are often of a very +faulty character, can have been derived from the same codex +as G.</p> + +<p>Halm’s critical edition of Quintilian is founded, in the main, on the +manuscripts above mentioned, with a few examples of the 15th century for +the parts where he had only the <i>Ambrosianus</i> and the +<i>Bambergensis</i> G, or the latter exclusively, to rely on. Since +the date of the publication of his text (1868) great progress has been +made with the critical study of Quintilian. In 1875 MM. Chatelain +and le Coultre published a collation of the <i>Nostradamensis</i> +(see below), the main results of which have been incorporated in +Meister’s edition (1886-87). And in a critical edition of the First Book +of the <i>Institutio</i> (1890) M. Ch. Fierville has given a most +complete account of all the continental manuscripts, drawing for the +purpose on a previous work in which he had already shown proof of his +interest in the subject (<i>De Quintilianeis Codicibus</i>, 1874).</p> + +<p>There can be little doubt that Halm’s critical instinct guided him +aright in attaching supreme importance to the <i>Bernensis</i> (with +<i>Bambergensis</i> A), the <i>Ambrosianus</i>, and +<i>Bambergensis</i> G. But much has been derived from some +manuscripts of which he took no account, and there is one in particular, +which has hitherto been strangely overlooked, and to which prominence is +accordingly given in this edition. Before proceeding to deal with it, +I shall annex here a brief notice of the various MSS. which figure +in the Critical Notes, grouped in one or other of the three divisions +given above. An editor of the Tenth Book of the <i>Institutio</i> is +especially bound to travel outside the rather narrow range of Halm’s +critical edition, as so much of the existing text (down to 1 §107) +has been based mainly on <i>Bambergensis</i> G alone. In addition +to collating, for the purposes of this edition, such MSS. as the +<i>Ioannensis</i> at Cambridge, the <i>Bodleianus</i> and +<i>Balliolensis</i> at Oxford, and the very important Harleian codex, +referred to above, I have also carefully compared eight 15th +century manuscripts in the hope (which the Critical Appendix will show +to have been not entirely disappointed) of gleaning something new. This +part of the present work may be regarded as supplementing, for this +country, what M. Ch. Fierville has already so laboriously +accomplished for the manuscripts of the Continent.</p> + +<p>Of the first family, the outstanding example is the +<i>Ambrosianus</i>. The resemblances between it and +<i>Bambergensis</i> G are sufficient to show that +<span class = "pagenum">lx</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelx" id = "intro_pagelx"> </a> +the manuscript from which the latter was copied probably belonged to the +same class. But this manuscript, which must have been complete (like the +<i>Ambrosianus</i> originally), has altogether disappeared: one of the +great objects for extending the study of the MSS. of Quintilian beyond +the limits observed by Halm is the hope of being able to distinguish +between such examples as may seem (like the <i>Dorvilianus</i> at +Oxford) to preserve some of the traditions of the family, and those +whose origin may be clearly traced back to <i>Bambergensis</i> A +and G. For all the complete MSS. of Quintilian in existence must be +derived either from this family or from the mixed group of which the +<i>Bambergensis</i>, in its present form, seems to be the undoubted +original.</p> + +<p>In the second group we must include, not much inferior to the +<i>Bernensis</i>, the <i>Parisinus Nostradamensis</i> (N) Bibl. Nat. +fonds latin 18527. It is an independent transcript in all probability of +the incomplete MS. from which the <i>Bernensis</i> was copied, and as +such has a distinct value of its own. It is ascribed to the 10th +century. For the readings of this codex I have been able to compare a +collation made by M. Fierville in 1872, with that published by +MM. Chatelain and le Coultre in 1875.</p> + +<p>Then there is the <i>Codex Ioannensis</i> (in the library of +St. John’s College, Cambridge), a recent examination of which has +shown me that the account given of it by Spalding (vol. ii. pr. +p. 4) must be amended in some particulars. In its present condition +it begins with <i>constaret</i> (i. 2, 3), but a portion of the +first page has been cut away for the sake of the ornamental letter: +originally the MS. must have begun at the beginning of the second +chapter, like the <i>Nostradamensis</i>, the <i>Vossiani</i> 1 +and 2, the <i>Codex Puteanus</i>, and <i>Parisinus</i> 7721 (see +Fierville, p. 165). Again, the reading at xi. 2, 33 is clearly +<i>multiplici</i>, not <i>ut duplici</i>, and in this it agrees with the +Montpellier MS. (<i>Pithoeanus</i>), which is known to be a copy (11th +century) of the <i>Bernensis</i> (see M. Bonnet in Revue de Phil. +1887). A remarkable feature about this MS. is the number of +inversions which the writer sets himself to make in the text. These I +have not included in the Critical Notes, but some of them may be +subjoined here, as they may help to establish the derivation of this +manuscript. The codex from which it was copied must have been illegible +in parts: this is probably the explanation of such omissions (the space +being left blank) as <i>tum in ipsis</i> in x. 2, 14, and +<i>virtutis</i> ib. §15. It is written in a very small and neat hand, +with no contemporary indication of the great <i>lacunae</i>, and may be +ascribed to the 13th century. It agrees generally with the +<i>Bernensis</i>, though there are striking resemblances also to the +<i>Pratensis</i> (see p. lxiii and note). Among the inversions +referred to are the following:—x. 3, 1 <i>sic etiam +utilitatis</i>, for <i>sic utilitatis etiam</i>: ib. §30 <i>oratione +continua</i>, for <i>continua oratione</i>: 5 §8 <i>alia propriis +alia translatis virtus</i>, for <i>alia +<span class = "pagenum">lxi</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxi" id = "intro_pagelxi"> </a> +translatis virtus alia propriis</i>: 7 §21 <i>stultis eruditi</i>, +for <i>stulti eruditis</i>: ib. §28 <i>solum summum</i>, for <i>summum +solum</i>. Some of these peculiarities (e.g. the inversion at 5 §8) +it shares with the Leyden MSS.—the <i>Vossiani</i> i. and iii., a +collation of which is given in Burmann’s edition: these codices +M. Fierville assigns to that division of his first group in which +the <i>Nostradamensis</i> heads the list (see below, p. lxiv). +I may note also the readings <i>viderit bona et invenit</i> ( +2 §20), which <i>Ioan.</i> shares with <i>Voss.</i> iii.: <i>potius +libertas ista</i> ( 3 §24) <i>Ioan.</i> and <i>Voss.</i> i.; +<i>ubertate</i>—for <i>libertate</i>—( 5 §15) <i>Ioan. +Voss.</i> i. and iii.</p> + +<p>To the same family belongs the <i>Codex Salmantinus</i>, a 12th or +13th century manuscript in the library of the University of Salamanca. +M. Fierville, who kindly placed at my disposal his collation of the +Tenth Book, thinks it must have been indirectly derived from the +<i>Bernensis</i>. He notes some hundred variants in which it differs +from the <i>Nostradamensis</i> (most of them being the errors of a +copyist), and some thirty-seven places in which, while differing from +the <i>Nostradamensis</i>, it agrees with the <i>Bernensis</i> and the +<i>Bambergensis</i>. This MS. also gives <i>ubertate</i> in 5 §15 : +it agrees in showing the important reading <i>alte refossa</i> in +3 §2 : and resembles the <i>Ioannensis</i> in certain minor +omissions, e.g. <i>certa</i> before <i>necessitate</i> in 5 §15 : +<i>idem</i> before <i>laborandum</i> in 7 §4 : <i>et</i> before +<i>consuetudo</i> in 7 §8 : cp. <i>subiunctura sunt</i> for +<i>subiuncturus est</i> 7 §9 . For other coincidences see the +Critical Appendix.</p> + +<p>In the same group must be included two MSS. of first-class importance +for the text of Quintilian, for a collation of which (as of the <i>Codex +Salmantinus</i>) I am indebted to the kindness of +M. Fierville. They are the <i>Codex Pralensis</i> (No. 14146 fonds +latin de la Bibliothèque nationale), of the 12th century, and the +<i>Codex Puteanus</i> (No. 7719) of the 13th. The former is the work of +Étienne de Rouen, a monk of the Abbey of Bec, and it consists of +extracts from the <i>Institutio</i> amounting to nearly a third of the +whole. There are eighty sections, of which §76 (<i>de figuris +verborum</i>) includes x. 1 §§108-131; §77 (<i>de imitatione</i>) +consists of x. 2, 1-28; §78 (<i>quomodo dictandum sit</i>) of x. +3, 1-32; and §79 (<i>de laude scriptorum tam Graecorum quam +Latinorum</i>) of x. 1, 46-107. The importance of this codex arises +from the fact that it is an undoubted transcript of the +<i>Beccensis</i>, now lost. The <i>Beccensis</i> is supposed by +M. Fierville (Introd. p. lxxvii. sq.) to have belonged to the +9th or 10th century, in which case it would take, if extant, at least +equal rank with the <i>Bernensis</i>. That it was an independent copy of +some older MS. seems to be proved, not only by the variants in the +<i>Pratensis</i>, but also by the fact that both the <i>Pratensis</i> +and the <i>Puteanus</i> (which is also a transcript of the +<i>Beccensis</i>) show a <i>lacuna</i> after the word <i>mutatis</i> in +<span class = "pagenum">lxii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxii" id = "intro_pagelxii"> </a> +x. 3, 32. This <i>lacuna</i> must have existed in the <i>Beccensis</i>, +though there is no trace of it elsewhere. Guided by the sense, Étienne +de Rouen added the words <i>correctum fuisse tabellis</i> in his copy +(the <i>Pratensis</i>): the text runs <i>codicibus esse +sublatum</i>.</p> + +<p>The general character of the readings of the <i>Pratensis</i> may be +gathered from a comparison of passages in the Critical Appendix to this +volume. Among other variants, the following may be mentioned,—and +it will be seen that certain peculiar features in some of the MSS. used +by Halm (notably S) probably arose either from the <i>Pratensis</i> +or from its prototype, the <i>Beccensis</i>. At x. 1. 50 Prat, gives +(like S) <i>rogantis Achillen Priami precibus</i>, while most codd. +have <i>Priami</i> before <i>rogantis</i>: ib. §53 <i>eloquentie</i> (so +Put. S 7231, 7696) for <i>eloquendi</i>: ib. <i>superatum</i> (so Put.) +for <i>superari</i>: §55 <i>aequalem credidit parem</i> (as Put. S Harl. +2662, 11671): §67 <i>idque ego</i> (as Put. S) for <i>idque ego +sane</i>: §68 <i>qui fuerunt</i> and also <i>vero</i>, omitted (as in +Put. S): so also <i>tenebras</i> §72, <i>valuerunt</i> §84 (as +7231, 7696), and <i>veterum</i> §97: at §95 Prat, gives et +<i>eruditissimos</i> for <i>et doctissimos</i>, and hence the omission +of <i>erudit.</i> in S. On the whole, the study of the text of the +<i>Pratensis</i> seems to give additional confidence in the readings +of G: for example §98 <i>imperare</i> (as Put.): §101 +<i>cesserit</i> (Put. 7231, 7696): ib. <i>nec indignetur</i>. Étienne de +Rouen carefully omitted all the Greek words which he found in his +original, and this strengthens the contention that <span class = "greek" +title = "phrasin">φράσιν</span> in 1 §87 (see Crit. Notes, and cp. +§42) was originally written in Greek. At 2 §20 <i>quem superius +institui</i> for <i>quem institueram in libra secundo</i> is an +indication of the fact that Étienne de Rouen was making a compendium of +the <i>Institutio</i>, and not transcribing the whole treatise. This +probably detracts from the significance of those readings which seem to +be peculiar to the <i>Pratensis</i>, among which may be noted 1 §48 +<i>putat</i> for <i>creditum est</i> (where Put. has +<i>certissimum</i>): §59 <i>ad exemplum maxime permanebit</i> (<i>ad +exitum</i> Put. and S): §78 <i>propinquior</i> for <i>propior</i>: +§80 <i>mediocri</i> for <i>medio</i>: §81 <i>assurgit</i> for +<i>surgit</i>: §109 <i>in utroque</i> for <i>in quoque</i>. Peculiar +readings which Prat. shares with the <i>Puteanus</i> (and which were +therefore probably in the <i>Beccensis</i>) are §46 <i>in magnis</i> for +<i>in magnis rebus</i>: §49 <i>innuit</i> for <i>nuntiat</i>: §50 +<i>excessit</i> for <i>excedit</i>: §54 <i>ne virtus</i> for <i>ne +utrius</i> (<i>neutrius</i>): §57 <i>ignoro ergo</i> (S) for <i>ignoro +igitur</i>: §63 <i>plurimumque oratio</i>: §68 <i>in affectibus +communibus mirus</i>: §79 <i>discernendi</i> for <i>dicendi</i>: §107 +<i>nominis latini</i> for <i>latini sermonis</i>. At 1 §72 Prat. +has <i>qui ut a pravis sui temporis Menandro</i> (Put. <i>ut +pravis</i>), and this became in S Harl. 2662 and 11671 <i>qui quamvis +sui temp</i>. <i>Men.</i> There are frequent inversions, e.g. <i>dicendi +genere</i> §52 (Put.): <i>Attici sermonis</i> (Put.) §65: <i>plus +Attio</i> (Put.) §97: <i>cuicumque eorum Ciceronem</i> (as Put. 7231, +7696) §105: <i>sit nobis</i> §112: +<span class = "pagenum">lxiii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxiii" id = "intro_pagelxiii"> </a> +<i>est autem</i> (as Ioan.) §115: <i>forum illustrator</i> (as Ioan.) +§122: <i>creditus sum</i> §125: <i>dignis lectione</i> 2 §1: +<i>possumus sperare</i> §9: <i>nemo vero eum</i> §10: <i>aliquo tamen in +loco aliquid</i> §24: <i>scientia movendi</i> §27: <i>ipso opere</i> +3 §8: <i>se res facilius</i> §9: <i>desperatio etiam</i> §14: +<i>vox exaudiri</i> §25: <i>praecipue in hoc</i> §26: <i>possunt +semper</i> §28<a class = "tag" name = "tag74" id = "tag74" href = +"#note74">74</a>.</p> + +<p>From the list of readings given above, it will be seen that the +<i>Codex Puteanus</i> is in general agreement with the <i>Pratensis</i>, +each being an independent copy of the same original. The variants given +by this MS. will be found in the Critical Appendix for the part of the +Tenth Book collated by M. Fierville, 1 §§46-107. At times it +is even more in agreement than the <i>Pratensis</i> with the later +family, of which Halm took S as the typical example: e.g. 1 §61 +<i>spiritu</i>: ib. <i>merito</i> omitted: §72 <i>possunt decernere</i> +(for <i>possis decerpere</i>—<i>possis decernere</i> Prat.).</p> + +<p>In the arrangement introduced by Étienne de Rouen in the +<i>Pratensis</i>, the last two sections (§§79 and 80) consist +respectively of x. 1 §§46-107, and xii. 10 §§10-15. These portions +of the <i>Institutio</i> must have formed part of the mutilated original +from which the <i>Beccensis</i> was copied, and they have been +reproduced separately along with 1 §§108-131 in two Paris MSS. +(7231 and 7696), a collation of which has been put at my disposal by +M. Fierville. The first is a mixed codex of the 12th century, +containing nine separate works, of which the extracts from Quintilian +form one. The second, also of the 12th century, belonged to the Abbey of +Fleury-sur-Loire, and comprises five treatises besides the Quintilian. +In both the title runs Quintilianus, <i>libro Xº Inst. Orator. Qui +auctores Graecorum maxime legendi</i>. M. Fierville states (Introd. +p. lxxxv.) that of forty-five variants which he compared (x. +1 §§46-68) in the <i>Pratensis</i>, <i>Puteanus</i>, 7231, and +7696, twenty-eight occur in the two former only, eight in the two +latter, and nine in all four. He adds that the <i>Vossiani</i> i. and +iii. resemble the two former more nearly than the two latter. Both 7231 +and 7696 agree in giving the usual collocation at §50 <i>illis Priami +rogantis Achillen</i>: at §59 the former has <i>ad exim</i>, the latter +<i>ad exi</i>: at §61 both give <i>eum nemini credit</i>, omitting +<i>merito</i> (as Put. and S): at §68 <i>namque is et sermone</i> +(as Prat.: <i>namque sermone</i> Put.): ib. <i>in dicendo ac +respondendo</i> (Prat. Put. <i>in dicendo et in resp.</i>): §72 +(apparently) <i>ut pravis sui temporis iudiciis</i>: §82 <i>finxisse +sermonem</i> (as Prat. Put. and most codd.): §83 <i>ac varietate</i>: +§88 <i>laudandus partibus</i> (<i>laudandis part.</i> Prat. Put. Harl. +2662, 11671): §91 <i>visum</i> (<i>visum est</i> Prat. Put.): §98 +<i>senes +<span class = "pagenum">lxiv</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxiv" id = "intro_pagelxiv"> </a> +non parum tragicum</i> (Prat. Put. Harl. 2662, 11671): §107 <i>Latini +nominis</i>: §121 <i>leve</i> (Prat. N). In §98 <i>Thyestes</i> is +omitted in both (also in Prat. Put.): is this a sign that the name was +written in Greek in the original? In 7231 I have noted two inversions +which do not seem to appear in 7696: <i>dedit exemplum et ortum</i> +1 §46: <i>proximus aemulari</i> §62.</p> + +<p>M. Fierville classifies the various members of the whole family of +MSS. which has just been reviewed in five sub-divisions. The first +includes the <i>Bernensis</i>, <i>Bambergensis</i> A, +<i>Ambrosianus</i> ii., <i>Pithoeanus</i> (these two are direct +copies of the <i>Bernensis</i>), <i>Salmantinus</i>, three Paris codices +(7720, 7722 and <i>Didot</i>), and probably the <i>Ioannensis</i>. In +the second he ranks the <i>Nostradamensis</i>, <i>Vossiani</i> i. and +iii., and a Paris MS. (7721): in the third the <i>Beccensis</i>, +<i>Pratensis</i>, and <i>Puteanus</i>: in the fourth a <i>codex +Vaticanus</i>, referred to by Spalding: and in the fifth the fragments +just dealt with (7231, 7696). Of these he rightly considers the +<i>Bernensis</i>, <i>Bambergensis</i>, <i>Nostradamensis</i>, +<i>Pratensis</i>, and <i>Puteanus</i> to be of greatest importance for +the constitution of the text.</p> + + +<p class = "space"> +At the head of the third group of the manuscripts of Quintilian must now +be placed the <i>Codex Harleianus</i> (2664), in the library of the +British Museum<a class = "tag" name = "tag75" id = "tag75" href = +"#note75">75</a>. This manuscript was first described by Mr. L. C. +Purser in <i>Hermathena</i> (No. xii., 1886); and to his notice of it I +am now able to add a statement of its history and a pretty certain +indication of the relation it bears to other known codices. As to date, +it cannot be placed later than the beginning of the 11th century. There +are in the margin marks which show clearly that at an early date it was +used to supply the great <i>lacunae</i> in some MS. of the first or +incomplete class; one of these should have appeared in the margin of the +annexed facsimile, <i>a</i> being used at the beginning and <i>b</i> (as +here x. 1, 107) at the end of the parts to be extracted. The manuscript +contains 188 folios and 24 quaternions, and is written in one column. At +the beginning the writing is larger than subsequently, just as the first +part of the <i>Bambergensis</i> is larger than G, which the +<i>Harleianus</i> (H) closely resembles. On fols. 90-91 the hand is more +recent, and the writing is in darker ink: fols. 61-68 seem to have been +supplied later. There is a blank of eight lines at the end of 161v., +where Book xi. ch. 1 concludes; ch. 2 begins at the top of the next +page. There is also a blank line (as in Bn and Bg) at iii. 8, 30, though +nothing is wanting in the text.</p> + +<p>The result of my investigations has been to identify this important +manuscript with the <i>Codex Dusseldorpianus</i>, which we know +disappeared from the library at Düsseldorf before Gesner’s time. In the +preface to +<span class = "pagenum">lxv</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxv" id = "intro_pagelxv"> </a> +his edition of 1738, §20, he describes it, on the evidence of one who +had seen it, as ‘Poggianis temporibus certe priorem, necdum, quod +sciatur, recentiori aetate a quoquam collatum’: its remarkable freedom +from variants and emendations suggests that it must have lain long +unnoticed. When Gesner wanted to refer to it, he found it was gone: +‘tandem compertum est mala fraude nescio quorum hominum et hunc et alios +rarissimos codices esse subductos.’ It had, in fact, been sold by the +Düsseldorf librarian, possibly acting under orders. The diary of +Humphrey Wanley, Harley’s librarian, shows that he bought it (along with +several other manuscripts) on the 6th August, 1724, from Sig. John James +Zamboni, Resident <i>Chargé d’Affaires</i> in England for the Elector of +Hesse Darmstadt. Zamboni’s correspondence is in the Bodleian at Oxford; +and I have ascertained, by examining it, that he received the Harleian +manuscript of Quintilian from M. Büchels, who was librarian of the +Court library at Düsseldorf in the beginning of last century, and with +whom Zamboni drove a regular trade in manuscripts.</p> + +<p>‘The correspondence’ (to quote from what has already been written +elsewhere) ‘is of a very interesting character, and throws light on the +provenance of several of the Harleian MSS. The transactions of the pair +begin in 1721, when Büchels receives 1200 florins (not without much +dunning) for a consignment of printed books. Zamboni, who was something +of a humourist, is constantly endeavouring to beat down the librarian’s +prices: “j’aime les beaux livres,” he says on one occasion, when +pretending that he will not entertain a certain offer, “j’aime les beaux +livres, mais je ne hais pas l’argent.” The trade in MSS. began in 1724, +when Büchels sent a list from which Zamboni selected eleven codices, +assuring his correspondent that if he would only be reasonable they +would soon come to terms. Early in the year he offers 500 florins for +the lot, protesting that he had no intention of selling again: “sachez, +Monsieur, que je ne vous achète pas les livres pour les revendre.” Three +weeks after it came to hand, he made over the whole consignment to +Harley’s librarian. It included our Quintilian and the great +Vitruvius—the entries in Zamboni’s letters corresponding exactly +with those in Wanley’s diary. In the end of the same month Zamboni is +writing to Büchels for more, protesting that his great ambition is to +make a “très jolie collection” of MSS. (Bodl. MSS. Add. +D, 66).’</p> + +<p>What the history of the <i>Harleianus</i> may have been before it +came to Düsseldorf, I have been unable to ascertain. The only clue +is a scrawl on the first page: <i>Iste liber est maioris ecclesiae</i>. +This Mr. Purser has ascribed, with great probability, to Strasburg. The +<i>Codex Florentinus</i> has an inscription showing that it was given by +Bishop Werinharius (the +<span class = "pagenum">lxvi</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxvi" id = "intro_pagelxvi"> </a> +first of that name, 1000-1029?) to the Cathedral of St. Mary at +Strasburg; and Wypheling, who made a catalogue of the library there +(circ. 1508), says of this bishop: ‘multa dedit ecclesiae suae +praesertim multos praestantissimos libros antiquissimis characteribus +scriptos; quorum adhuc aliqui in bibliotheca maioris ecclesiae repositi +videntur.’ This shows that there was a greater and a less church at +Strasburg, to the latter of which the MS. may formerly have belonged. +And if, as is now generally believed, neither the <i>Florentinus</i> nor +the <i>Turicensis</i> can be considered identical with the manuscript +which roused the enthusiasm of the literary world when Poggio discovered +it in 1416, it is not impossible that we may have recovered that +manuscript in the <i>Harleianus</i>, if we can conceive of its having +migrated from Strasburg to St. Gall.</p> + +<p class = "mynote"> +The following paragraph appeared in the book as a single-sheet +Addendum labeled “Place opposite p. lxvi.” Its original location +was therefore at the point “...the insertion at a wrong place in +the // text...” in the second paragraph after the Addendum. +</p> + +<p>Writing in the ‘Neue Heidelberger Jahrbücher’ (1891, p. 238 +sqq.), Mr. A. C. Clark, of Queen’s College, Oxford, supplies some +very interesting information in regard to Zamboni’s purchases. It seems +that Zamboni was able to tell Lord Oxford’s librarian that the MSS. +which he was selling to him had originally belonged to Graevius; and by +comparing the Zamboni correspondence in the Bodleian Library with the +posthumous catalogue of Graevius’s library, Mr. Clark has now discovered +that Büchels was offering to Zamboni the entire MSS. collection of that +great scholar, which in this way ultimately found a home in the library +of the British Museum. Graevius died in 1703, and the Elector Johann +Wilhelm bought both his books and his manuscripts. The former he +presented to the library of the University of Heidelberg: the latter he +retained in his own library at Düsseldorf. In regard to the Harleian +codex of Quintilian, Mr. Clark’s theory is that it belonged formerly not +to Strasburg, but to the cathedral at Cologne, which is more than once +referred to as ‘maior ecclesia.’ Gesner must have been in error when he +said that this codex had not been recently collated (cp. Introd. +p. lxv); for Gulielmus had seen it at Cologne, and in his +‘Verisimilia,’ iii. xiv, quotes some variants and ‘proprii errores’ from +the preface to Book vi, all of which appear in the <i>Harleianus</i> as +we have it now. And as Graevius is known to have borrowed from the +library of Cologne Cathedral, in 1688, an important codex of Cicero ad +Fam. (Harl. 2682), Mr. Clark infers that he got the Quintilian at the +same time. He evidently omitted to return them; and after his death they +passed, with many other MSS., first to Düsseldorf, and then to +London.</p> + +<p>It was only after the <i>Bambergensis</i> arrived in the British +Museum (where it was sent by the authorities of the Bamberg Library, in +courteous compliance with a request from me) that it was possible to +form a definite opinion as to the place occupied by the +<i>Harleianus</i> in regard to it. At first it appeared, even to the +experts, that the latter MS. was distinctly of older date than the +former: it is written in a neater hand, and on palaeographical grounds +alone there might have been room for doubt. But a fuller examination +convinced me that the <i>Harleianus</i> was copied directly from the +<i>Bambergensis</i>, possibly at the very time when the latter was being +completed by the addition of the parts known as +<i>Bambergensis</i> G, and of some at least of the readings now +generally designated <b>b</b>. These latter, indeed, the +<i>Harleianus</i> slavishly follows, in preference to the first hand in +the original <i>Bambergensis</i>: probably the copyist of the +<i>Harleianus</i> was aware of the importance attached to the codex +(uncial?) from which the <b>b</b> readings were taken. In view, however, +of the defective state in which the <i>Bambergensis</i> has come down to +us, as regards the opening part, and considering also the mutilation of +the <i>Ambrosianus</i>, we may still claim for the MS. in the British +Museum the distinction of being the oldest complete manuscript of +Quintilian in existence.</p> + +<p>The proof that the <i>Harleianus</i> stands at the head of the great +family of the <i>mixed</i> manuscripts of Quintilian (represented till +now mainly by the <i>Florentinus</i>, <i>Turicensis</i>, +<i>Almeloveenianus</i>, and <i>Guelferbytanus</i>) is derived from a +consideration of its relationship to both parts of the +<i>Bambergensis</i> on the one hand, and to those later MSS. on the +other. I begin with a point which involves a testimony to the +critical acumen of that great scholar C. Halm. In the +<i>Sitzungsberichte der königl. bayer. Akademie der Wissenschaften zu +München</i>, 1866, i. pp. 505-6, Halm established the dependence of +the <i>Turicensis</i> and the <i>Florentinus</i> on the +<i>Bambergensis</i> by pointing out, among other proofs, the insertion +at a wrong place in the +<span class = "pagenum">lxvii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxvii" id = "intro_pagelxvii"> </a> +text of both these codices of certain words which, having been +inadvertently omitted by the copyist of the <i>Bambergensis</i> from +their proper context, were written in by him in a blank space at the +foot of the page in which the passage in question occurs. The passage is +ix. 2, 52: <i>circa crimen Apollonii Drepani[tani: gaudeo etiam si quid +ab eo abstulisti et abs te] nihil rectius factum esse dico</i>. When the +copyist of the <i>Bambergensis</i> noticed his mistake, he completed +<i>Drepanitani</i> in the text, and wrote in the words <i>gaudeo etiam +... abs te</i> at the foot of the page, with a pretty clear indication +of the place where they were to be taken in. In the <i>Bambergensis</i> +the page ends with the words (§54) <i>an huius ille legis quam</i>, and +the next page continues <i>C̣ḷọẹlius a se inventam gloriatur</i>. +Noticing that in both the <i>Florentinus</i> and the <i>Turicensis</i> +the marginal addition (<i>gaudeo etiam ... abs te</i>) is inserted not +after <i>legis quam</i> but after <i>Clodius</i>, Halm drew the +inference that these codices were copied from the <i>Bambergensis</i> +not directly, but through some intervening manuscript. The +<i>Harleianus</i> is this manuscript. In it the words referred to do +come in between <i>legis quam</i> and (<i>Cloe</i>)<i>lius</i>: indeed, +so slavishly does the writer follow the second hand in the +<i>Bambergensis</i>, in which the letters C l o e are +subpunctuated, that the <i>Harleianus</i> actually shows <i>et abs te +lius a se inventa</i><a class = "tag" name = "tag76" id = "tag76" href = +"#note76">76</a>, exactly as the writer of <b>b</b> wished the +<i>Bambergensis</i> to stand. It must be feared that the copyist of the +<i>Harleianus</i> did not know enough Latin to save him from making very +considerable mistakes. If I am right in believing that this manuscript +must take rank above the <i>Turicensis</i> and the <i>Florentinus</i> +(and all other MSS. of this family), it is he who must be credited with +a great deal of the confusion that has crept into Quintilian’s text. It +may be well to mention one or two obvious examples. In ix. 3, 1 the text +stands <i>utinamque non peiora vincant. Verum schemata</i>, &c. In +the <i>Bambergensis</i>, <i>utrum nam</i> is supplied by <b>b</b> above +the line, and in the margin <i>que peiora vincant verum</i>, the words +affected by the change being +<span class = "pagenum">lxviii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxviii" id = "intro_pagelxviii"> </a> +subpunctuated in the text. The copyist of the <i>Harleianus</i> takes +the <i>utrum nam</i> and leaves the rest, showing <i>utrum nam +schemata</i>: this appears as <i>utrim nam schemata</i> in the +<i>Turicensis</i>, and as <i>utinam schemata</i> in the +<i>Florentinus</i> and <i>Almeloveenianus</i>. Take again ix. 3, 68-9 in +the <i>Bambergensis</i> (G) <i>quem suppli[catione dignum indicaris. +Aliter quoque voces aut] eadem aut diversa</i>, &c. The words +enclosed in brackets are the last line of a particular column (142 v.); +they were inadvertently omitted by the copyist of the <i>Harleianus</i>, +and as a consequence we have <i>supplici</i> in <i>Turic.</i> and +<i>Flor.</i>, <i>supplitia</i> in <i>Guelf.</i>, &c. Again at x. 7, +20 a certain sleepiness on the part of the scribe of the +<i>Harleianus</i>, which caused him to write <i>Neque vero tantas eum +breve saltem qui foro tempus quod nusquam fere deerit ad ea quae</i>, +&c., has given rise to the greatest confusion in <i>Turic.</i>, +<i>Flor.</i>, <i>Alm.</i>, <i>Bodleianus</i>, <i>Burn.</i> 243, &c. +In this H follows exactly the second hand in Bg., except for the +remarkable insertion of the words <i>qui foro</i> between <i>breve +saltem</i> and <i>tempus</i>: at this point the copyist of H must have +allowed his eyes to stray to the beginning of the previous line in Bg, +where the words <i>qui foro</i> hold a conspicuous position. +<i>Flor.</i> and <i>Tur.</i> repeat the mistake, except that the latter +gives <i>eum brevem</i> for <i>eum breve</i>. Again at the end of Book +ix, <i>Bambergensis</i> G gives <i>ut numerum spondet flexisse non +arcessisse non arcessiti et coacti esse videantur</i>: this reading is +identical with that of the <i>Harleianus</i>, except that the latter for +<i>arcessiti</i> gives <i>arcessisti</i>, a deviation promptly +reproduced by the <i>Florentinus</i>, while the <i>Turicensis</i> shows +<i>accersisti</i>. Perhaps the most conclusive instance of all is the +following: at iv. 2, 128 the <i>Bambergensis</i> gives (for <span class += "greek" title = "epidiêgêsis">ἐπιδιήγησις</span>) <span class = +"greek" title = "EPIDIÊTÊSEI">ΕΠΙΔΙΗΤΗϹΕΙ</span>: this appears in H as +<span class = "greek" title = "EPIDIÊSEI">ΕΠΙΔΙΗϹΕΙ</span> the seventh +and eighth letters having been inadvertently omitted by the copyist. +F makes this <span class = "greek" title = +"EPITHESIE">ΕΠΙΘΕϹΙΕ</span> and T shows <span class = "greek" title = +"EPITHSIS">ΕΠΙΘϹΙϹ</span> (<span class = "greek" title = +"epiliêsei">επιλιησει</span>—Spalding).</p> + +<div class = "mynote"> + +<p>The four forms of the Greek word appear in the printed text as:</p> + +<p> +<img src = "../images/epidiegesis1.gif" width = "137" height = "16" +alt = "text image"></p> + +<p><img src = "../images/epidiegesis2.gif" width = "108" height = "17" +alt = "text image"></p> + +<p><img src = "../images/epidiegesis3.gif" width = "104" height = "15" +alt = "text image"></p> + +<p><img src = "../images/epidiegesis4.gif" width = "88" height = "15" +alt = "text image"></p> +</div> + +<p>As the <i>Bambergensis</i> (Bg), in its present state, only commences +at i. 1. 6. (<i>nec de patribus tantum</i>), the readings of the +<i>Harleianus</i> (H) are for the Prooemium and part of chapter 1 of +first-class importance. In the pr. §1 we have <i>pertinerent</i> H, +<i>pertinent</i> T: §2 <i>diversas</i> H, <i>divisas</i> T: §5 <i>fieri +oratorem non posse</i> HF, <i>fieri non posse oratorem</i> T +(as A): §6 <i>amore</i> H, <i>studio</i> F: <i>iτ ingenii</i> H, +<i>iter ingenii</i> T, <i>ingenii</i> F: §13 <i>officio quoque</i> H, +<i>quoque officio</i> F: §19 <i>summa</i> H (also Bg), <i>summam</i> T: +§25 <i>demonstraturi</i> HF, <i>demonstrari</i> T: §27 <i>adiumenta</i> +H (a correction by same hand on <i>adiuvante</i>): so Bg F: +<i>adiuvante</i> T. In chap. 1 §3 <i>sed plus</i> HT: <i>sed et +plus</i> F: <i>hoc quippe viderit</i> H Bg F: <i>hoc +quippe</i> (om. <i>viderit</i>) T.</p> + +<p>These instances are taken from the introductory part of the First +Book, where Bg almost entirely fails us, only a few words being here and +there decipherable. Wherever I have compared, in other places, the +readings of +<span class = "pagenum">lxix</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxix" id = "intro_pagelxix"> </a> +Bg (and G), H, T, and F, I have found H, if not always in +exact agreement with the Bamberg MS. (often owing to the copyist’s +ignorance of Latin) invariably nearer the parent source than either T +or F. Here are a few instances from the First Book: I §8 <i>nihil +est peius</i> Bg H T, <i>nihil enim est peius</i> F: ib. §11 +<i>defuerit</i> Bg H T, <i>defuerint</i> F: ib. §12 <i>perbibet</i> Bg H +F, <i>perhibet</i> T: ib. §16 <i>formandam</i> Bg H, <i>formandum</i> F +T: 2 §18 <i>in media rei p. vivendum</i> Bg (b) H, <i>in med. +rei praevivendum</i> T, <i>reip. videndum</i> F: ib. §24 +<i>depellendam</i> Bg H, <i>repellendam</i> T: ib. §31 <i>concipiat quis +mente</i> Bg H, <i>quis mente concipiat</i> F: 4 §27 +<i>tereuntur</i> Bg H T, <i>intereuntur</i> F: 6 §9 <i>dicet</i> +Bg, <i>dicit</i> H F, <i>dicitur</i> T: ib. §14 <i>dici ceris</i> Bg +(dici ceris),<a class = "tag" name = "tagA" id = "tagA" href = +"#noteA">A</a> <i>diceres</i> H, <i>dici</i> F T: ib. §30 <i>aliaque +quae consuetudini serviunt</i> Bg H,—in margin of H <i>aliquando +consuetudini servit</i> (b): F and T adopt the latter, and give the +alternative reading in the margin: 10 §28 <i>haec ei et cura</i> H F, +<i>haec et cura ei</i> T: 11 §4 <i>pinguitudine</i> Bg H, +<i>pinguedine</i> F T. Among scattered instances elsewhere are the +following: ii. 5, 13 <i>dicentur</i> Bg H, <i>docentur</i> T: 5 §26 +<i>hanc</i> Bg H, om. T: 15 §8 <i>testatum est</i> Bg H, +<i>testatum</i> T. In ix. 363 G has <i>parem</i> (for +<i>marem</i> A): H gives <i>patrem</i> and F T follow suit: +cp. ix. 4, 8 <i>hoc est</i> G H, <i>id est</i> F: ib. §16 <i>quoque</i> +G H, om. T: ib. §32 <i>nesciat</i> G H, <i>dubitet</i> F: +<i>dignatur</i> G H, <i>digne dicatur</i> F: viii. pr. §3 <i>dicendi</i> +G H, <i>discendi</i> T: ix. 4, 119 <i>ignorabo</i> G, <i>ignoraba</i> H, +<i>ignorabam</i> T: ib. §129 <i>et hac fluit</i> G H, <i>et hac et hac +fluit</i> T: xii. 11, 8 <i>scierit</i> G, <i>scieret</i> H, +<i>sciret</i> T: ib. 2 §18 <i>autem</i> Bg H, om. T: x. 1, §4 +<i>numuro quae</i> G H, <i>num muro quae</i> T, <i>numeroque</i> F: ib. +§50 <i>et philogus</i> G, <i>et philochus</i> H T, <i>et epiloghus</i> +F: ib. §73 <i>porem</i> G H, <i>priorem</i> F T: ib. §75 <i>vel hoc +est</i> G H, <i>hoc est vel</i> T: x. 2, 7 <i>posteriis</i> (for +<i>historiis</i>) H, <i>posteris</i> F (<i>posterius</i> ed. Camp.): x. +2, 10 <i>discernamus</i> Bg, <i>discernantur</i> b, +<i>disnantur</i> H T, <i>desinantur</i> F. Noteworthy cases of the +close adherence of T to H are the following: <i>Empedoclena</i> i. 4, 4: +<i>vespueruginem</i> i. 7, 12: <i>tereuntur</i> i. 4, 27: <i>flex +his</i> x. 1, 2: <i>gravissimus</i> x. 1, 97: <i>ipsae +illae quae extorque eum credas</i> x. 1, 110, where both also +give <i>trans usum</i> for <i>transversum</i>, and <i>non repe</i> for +non rapi: <i>morare refinxit finxit recipit</i> x. 3, 6: <i>nam +quod cum isocratis</i> x. 4, 4. In other instances the writer +of T has evidently tried to improve on the reading of H: e.g. in the +title of Book x, H gives an abbreviation which T mistakes for +<i><b>quo</b> enim <b>dandum</b></i>: also <i>extemporal facilitas</i> +which appears in T as <i>extempora vel facilitas</i>: x. 1, 79 +<i>ven iudicis</i> H (in mistake for <i>se non iud.</i>), which is made +by T into <i>venit iudicis</i>. Many similar instances could be cited in +regard to both T and F; the reading <i>tantum</i>, for instance, in x. +1, 92, which occurs in both, has evidently arisen from H, which +here shows something that looks more like <i>tantum</i> than +<i>tacitum</i> (the reading of G). Again, in every +<span class = "pagenum">lxx</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxx" id = "intro_pagelxx"> </a> +place where Halm uses the formula ‘F T soli ex notis,’ H will +be found to correspond<a class = "tag" name = "tag77" id = "tag77" href += "#note77">77</a>.</p> + +<div class = "mynote"> +<p><a name = "noteA" id = "noteA" href = "#tagA">A.</a> +(<i>dici ceris</i>) text image showing inserted letters:</p> +<p> +<img src = "../images/diciceris.gif" width = "171" height = "53" +alt = "text images"> +</p> +</div> + +<p>With such evidence as has been given above, it is impossible to doubt +that the <i>Harleianus</i> must now take rank above both the manuscripts +which, before the appearance of Halm’s edition, held so prominent a +place in the criticism of Quintilian, the <i>Codex Florentinus</i> and +the <i>Codex Turicenis</i>. The former is an eleventh century MS., now +in the Laurentian library at Florence. On the first page is this +inscription: <i>Werinharius episcopus dedit Sanctae Mariae</i>: on the +last <i>Liber Petri de Medicis, Cos. fil.</i>: and below <i>Liber +sanctae Mariae ecclesiae Argñ.</i> (= Argentoratensis) <i>in +dormitorio</i>. There were two bishops of Strasburg bearing the name of +Werner: the first 1001-1029, and the second 1065-1079. M. Fierville +(Introd. p. xciv) tells us that the first Werner (of Altemburg or +Hapsburg) laid the foundations of the cathedral at Strasburg in 1015, +and presented to the Chapter a number of valuable books; and we also +know that in 1006 he had attended the Council at Frankfort to promote +the erection of a cathedral church at Bamberg. Here then we have the +elements of a solution of the problem. Bishop Werner was a patron of +letters; and learning that by the addition of what is now known as +<i>Bambergensis</i> G a complete text of Quintilian had been +secured, he had it copied. The <i>Codex Harleianus</i> was in all +probability the first copy, and from it the <i>Codex Florentinus</i> was +reproduced. The latter was still at Strasburg in 1372, a fact which +(though hitherto it seems to have been unnoticed) is enough to dispose +of its claim to be considered the manuscript of Poggio, which he +describes as ‘plenum situ’ and ‘pulvere squalentem’ lying ‘in teterrimo +quodam et obscuro carcere, fundo scilicet unius turris, quo ne capitales +quidem rei damnati retruderentur.’ If so important a MS. had passed from +Strasburg to St. Gall within forty years of Poggio’s visit, it is +hard to believe that it would have been allowed to lie neglected and +unknown. After 1372 we know nothing certain of its history till it +reappears in the library of the Medicis at Florence in the latter part +of the fifteenth century. It is generally supposed that some time +between 1372 and 1417 it must have been transported from Strasburg to +the monastery of St. Gall, and that it passed from there to +Florence after Poggio’s departure. A similar theory may quite as +legitimately be maintained in reference to the <i>Harleianus</i>, which, +as I have +<span class = "pagenum">lxxi</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxxi" id = "intro_pagelxxi"> </a> +already indicated, may be the very manuscript which Poggio discovered at +St. Gall in 1416<a class = "tag" name = "tag78" id = "tag78" href = +"#note78">78</a>.</p> + +<p>The <i>Codex Turicensis</i> was long considered to be of older date +than the <i>Florentinus</i>, but recent investigations seem to have +proved the contrary. Halm attributes it to the second part of the +eleventh century, and E. Wölfflin takes a similar view. In the +beginning of the eighteenth century it passed into the library at +Zürich. Spalding believed it to be the manuscript discovered by Poggio, +and M. Fierville is of the same opinion: Halm rejects this theory. +The great point in favour of the claim of the <i>Turicensis</i> is that +it is known to have come from St. Gall, while we can only +conjecture the history of the <i>Harleianus</i>. But the +<i>Turicensis</i> cannot have been the MS. which Poggio carried with him +into Italy, according to a statement made by Bandini, Regius, and +others. It is true that this statement is hard to reconcile with what +Poggio himself says in his letter to Guarini, whom he informs that he +has made hasty transcripts of his various ‘finds’ (presumably including +the Quintilian) for his friends Leonardo of Arezzo and Nicolai of +Florence. But Poggio may have had his own reasons for a certain degree +of mystery about his good fortune. In the preface to his edition, +Burmann speaks of the manuscript of St. Gall, on the authority of +the librarian Kesler, as having been ‘honesto furto sublatum’: if it was +the <i>Harleianus</i> there is perhaps little need to wonder that +nothing has been known till now of its later fortunes<a class = "tag" +name = "tag79" id = "tag79" href = "#note79">79</a>.</p> + +<p class = "space"> +The affiliation of other MSS. of this class (which includes also the +<i>Almeloveenianus</i>) to the codices which have just been described, +may be determined by the application of certain tests. Prominent among +such MSS. is the <i>Codex Bodleianus</i>, which has received more +attention from editors of Quintilian than its merits seem to me to +warrant. It repeats word for word the remarkable error attributable to +the <i>Harleianus</i> at x. 7, 20 (see above, p. lxviii): in +other places it embodies attempted emendations, e.g. x. 1, 90 +<i>nec ipsum senectus maturavit</i>: 2 §7 <i>de metris</i> for +<span class = "pagenum">lxxii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxxii" id = "intro_pagelxxii"> </a> +<i>dimiteris</i> (see above, p. lxvii, note). It belonged to Archbishop +Laud, and must have been written in the fifteenth century.</p> + +<p>Of the same age and family are two manuscripts often cited by Halm, +the <i>Lassbergensis</i> and the <i>Monacensis</i>. The former was +formerly at Landsberg in Bavaria: it is now at Freiburg. The reading +<i>atque interrogationibus atque interrogantibus</i>, which Halm gives +from it alone at x. 1, 35, I have found also in G +and H; this seems quite enough to identify its parentage. The +<i>Monacensis</i> was collated by Halm for his critical edition in the +parts where he had to rely on A G or on G alone: with no conspicuous +results,—‘nihil fere aliud effectum est quam ut docere possemus, +ubi aliquot locorum, qui in libris melioribus leviter corrupti sunt, +emendatio primum tentata sit’ (praef. viii, ix).</p> + +<p>Alongside of these I would place a rather interesting MS. in the +British Museum, which has been collated specially for the purpose of +this edition, with no result worth speaking of, except to establish its +class. It repeats the mistake of H at x. 7, 20: and the fact that the +copyist began his work in a hand that was meant to imitate writing of +the eleventh century seems, along with the internal evidence, to prove +that it is one of the copies of Poggio’s MS. In x. 2, 7 it has +<i>posterius</i> for <i>historiis</i> (a mistake in H—see +p. lxix): and in the same place it shows (like the Bodleian codex) +<i>de metris</i> for <i>dimiteris</i>. This is also the reading of the +second hand in the <i>Turicensis</i>. Such differences as exist between +it and H F T may be ascribed to attempted emendation: e.g. +<i>vertere latus</i> x. 3, 21. Poggio’s letter to Guarini is copied at +the end of the volume.</p> + +<p>The other MSS. of the fifteenth century, so far as they are known to +him, M. Fierville divides carefully into two classes (his third and +fourth). The principal features of difference which distinguish them +among themselves, and from those already mentioned, are that they +incorporate, in varying degrees, the results of the progress of +scholarship, and that they are seldom copied from any single manuscript. +A detailed examination would no doubt establish what is really the +point of greatest moment in regard to them: how far are they derived, +through Poggio’s manuscript, from the <i>Bambergensis</i>, and how far +from such complete manuscripts as the <i>Ambrosianus</i> and the +original of <i>Bambergensis</i> G? Some of them (as well as other +fifteenth century MSS., with a description of which I desire to +supplement M. Fierville’s Introduction, pp. cii sq.), are of +at least as great importance as those referred to above as having been +collated in part by Halm.</p> + +<p>The <i>Argentoratensis</i> (S), also used by Halm, may be mentioned +first: it was collated by Obrecht for his edition of 1698<a class = +"tag" name = "tag80" id = "tag80" href = "#note80">80</a>. This +manuscript was +<span class = "pagenum">lxxiii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxxiii" id = "intro_pagelxxiii"> </a> +destroyed in the bombardment of Strasburg, August 24, 1870. Then there +are the MS. of Wolfenbuttel (<i>Codex Guelferbytanus</i>), collated for +the first time by Spalding: the <i>Codex Gothanus</i>, used by Gesner +for his edition of 1738: the <i>Codex Vallensis</i> (Parisinus 7723), +which purports to bear the signature of Laurentius Valla +(9 December, 1444), whose corrections and marginal notes it +contains<a class = "tag" name = "tag81" id = "tag81" href = +"#note81">81</a>. The list of these and several others, all carefully +described by M. Fierville, may now be extended by a short reference +to various MSS. in this country, hitherto uncollated. The results of my +examination of them (as well as of the <i>Bodleianus</i>, and +<i>Burneianus</i> 243, referred to above) appear in the Critical +Appendix: if few of them are of first-class importance, it may at least +be claimed that right readings, with which Spalding, Halm, and Meister +have successively credited the early printed editions,—e.g. the +Cologne edition of 1527,—have now been attributed to earlier +sources. And when M. Fierville had so carefully examined the MSS. +of France, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, and Spain, it seemed of some +importance that his laborious work should be supplemented by a +description of the MSS. belonging to the libraries of this country.</p> + +<p>In the British Museum there are eight manuscripts in all of +Quintilian’s <i>Institutio</i>: of the most important of these, the +<i>Harleianus</i> (H), I have already given an account, and one of +two MSS. in Burney’s collection (Burn. 243) has also been mentioned. Of +the remaining MSS. two may be taken together, as they are in complete +agreement with each other, and show conclusive proofs (as will appear in +the notes) of relationship to such codices as the <i>Argentoratensis</i> +and the <i>Guelferbytanus</i>. The first of these two MSS. (<i>Codex +Harleianus</i> 2662) has an inscription bearing that it was written by +Gaspar Cyrrus ‘nationis Lutatiae,’ and was finished on the 25th of +January, 1434,—only eighteen years after Poggio made his great +discovery. So great an advance is evident in the text, as compared with +the readings of H F T, that it seems probable that this MS. owes +little to that family. The same may be said of the <i>Codex +Harleianus</i> 11,671, a beautiful little quarto, dated 1467: it has the +Epitome of Fr. Patrizi attached (see Classical Review, 1891, +p. 34). The following cases of remarkable errors will suffice to +connect both these MSS. with the <i>Guelferbytanus</i>: x. 3, 12 +<i>a patrono suo</i> for <i>a patruo suo</i>: 1 §97 <i>verum</i> +for <i>veterum</i>: 1 §55 <i>equalem credidit parem</i> (as also +Prat., Guelf., S, and Voss. i. +<span class = "pagenum">lxxiv</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxxiv" id = "intro_pagelxxiv"> </a> +and iii.): 1 §72 <i>quamvis sui temporis Menandro</i> for <i>ut +pravis sui temporis iudiciis Menandro</i>: 7 §6 <i>adducet +ducetur</i>. Another very interesting MS. in the British Museum is +<i>Harleianus</i> 4995, dated July 5, 1470: it contains the notes of +Laurentius Valla, which were frequently reproduced at the time, and +might be classed along with the <i>Vallensis</i> were it not that a +marginal note at x. 6, 2 (where a false lacuna appears in most +codices, as Bn. and Bg.), ‘<i>hic deficit antiquus codex</i>,’ makes it +probable that the copyist had more than one MS. at his side<a class = +"tag" name = "tag82" id = "tag82" href = "#note82">82</a>. This MS. +agrees with the <i>Vallensis</i> and <i>Gothanus</i> in reading +<i>cognitioni</i> for <i>cogitationi</i> x. 1, 1: +<i>ubertate</i> for <i>ubertas</i> 1 §109: <i>et vis summa</i> +§117: <i>eruendas</i> for <i>erudiendas</i> 2 §6: <i>nobis +efficiendum</i> ib. §14: <i>decretoriis</i> 5 §20. The other two +Harleian MSS. (4950 and 4829) present no features of special interest: +I have, however, included them in the critical notes for the sake +of completeness. The former was written by ‘Franciscus de Mediolano’: it +is often in agreement with the <i>Lassbergensis</i>. The latter finishes +with the words <span class = "greek" title = "hê biblos tou sôzomenou">ἡ +βίβλος τοῦ σωζομένου</span> and the motto <span class = "greek" title = +"agathê tuchê">ἀγαθῇ τύχῃ</span>. The readings of the <i>Burneianus</i> +244 are also occasionally recorded in the notes. All three are in +general agreement with L, and also with the <i>Codex +Carcassonensis</i>, a fifteenth century MS. of which M. Fierville +published a collation in 1874.</p> + +<p>A greater degree of interest attaches to two Oxford manuscripts, one +of which (the <i>Codex Balliolensis</i>) is unclassed by Fierville, +while the other (the <i>D’Orville</i> MS.) has never been examined at +all. The former was used by Gibson for his edition of 1693. It begins at +<i>bis vitiosa sunt</i> i. 5, 14, but there are various lacunae, which +do not correspond with those of the incomplete family. The MS. is in +fact in a mutilated condition. +<span class = "pagenum">lxxv</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxxv" id = "intro_pagelxxv"> </a> +In the Tenth Book we miss its help after the end of the first chapter +till we reach iii. §26, where it begins again with the words <i>quam +quod somno supererit</i>: it stops abruptly at <i>nostrorumque +Hort(ensium)</i> x. 6, 4. It is in general agreement with +Harleianus 2662. I may note that in i. 5, 36 it has +<i>interrogatione</i>, a reading which Halm says appears for the first +time in the edition of Sichardus, 1529: ib. §69 it has <i>e rep</i> with +A and 7727, with the latter of which it is in close correspondence (e.g. +<i>forte</i> at i. 5, 15, all other codices <i>forsan</i> or +<i>forsitan</i>).</p> + +<p>There remains the <i>D’Orville</i> MS. in the Bodleian at Oxford +(<i>Codex Dorvilianus</i>),—a manuscript which has been entirely +overlooked, except for a single reference in Ingram’s abridged edition +of the <i>Institutio</i> (1809). Yet it seems well deserving of +attention. In some places it shows a remarkable resemblance to the +<i>Ambrosianus</i> (e.g. <i>Getae</i> 1 pr. §6: <i>et quantum</i> +ib. §8): at 1 pr. §4 it has <i>summam inde eloquentiae</i> +(Spalding’s reading, found in no other MS.): <i>destinabamus al. +festinabimus</i> ib. §6 (the alternative being a reading peculiar +to A). Its most important contribution to the Tenth Book is +7 §20, where it gives the reading which Herzog conjectured and +which I have received into the text: <i>neque vero tanta esse unquam +debet fiducia facilitatis</i>: in 2 §14 (see Critical Notes) it has +<i>quos eligamus ad imitandum</i>, a reading peculiar to itself. For the +rest it is in general agreement with the Balliol codex. It is Italian +work, of the early part of the fifteenth century,—earlier, Mr. +Madan thinks, than the <i>Codex Bodleianus</i>. A marginal note at +ix. 3, 2 shows that the copyist must have had more than one MS. before +him. In some cases it would appear as if he carefully balanced rival +readings: at 1 pr. §12. all codices have <i>quaestio ex his incidat</i> +except A, which gives <i>ex his incidat quaestio</i>: the reading +in the <i>Dorvilianus</i> is <i>quaestio incidat ex his</i>: again at i. +2, 6 <i>ante palatum eorum quam os instituimus</i>, many codices give +<i>mores</i> for <i>os</i>: Dorv. shows <i>quam vel mores vel +os</i>.</p> + + +<p class = "space"> +List of editions, tractates, and books of reference.</p> + +<p class = "reference space"> +Besides the complete editions of <span class = +"smallcaps">Spalding</span>, <span class = "smallcaps">Zumpt</span>, +<span class = "smallcaps">Bonnell</span>, <span class = +"smallcaps">Halm</span> (1868-9) <span class = +"smallcaps">Meister</span> (1886-87), use has been made of the following +editions of Book x.:— +</p> + +<table class = "reference" summary = "editions of book X"> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps"> +<p>M. Stephanus Riccius.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Venice, 1570.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps"> +<p>C. H. Frotscher.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Leipzig, 1826.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps"> +<p>M. C. G. Herzog.</p></td> +<td class = "number">2nd ed. Leipzig, 1833.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps"> +<p>G. A. Herbst.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Halle, 1834.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class = "smallcaps">John E. B. Mayor</span> +(incomplete).</p></td> +<td class = "number">Cambridge, 1872.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps"> +<p>Bonnell-Meister.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Berlin, 1882.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps"> +<p>G. T. A. Krüger.</p></td> +<td class = "number">2nd ed. Leipzig, 1872.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><span class = "gap"> „ „</span>(Gustav Krüger)</td> +<td class = "number">3rd ed.<span class = "gap"> „</span>1888.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps"> +<p>Fr. Zambaldi.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Firenze, 1883.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps"> +<p>S. Dosson.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Paris, 1884.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps"> +<p>D. Bassi.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Torino, 1884.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps"> +<span class = "pagenum">lxxvi</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxxvi" id = "intro_pagelxxvi"> </a> +<p>J. A. Hild.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Paris, 1885.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class = "smallcaps">F. Meister</span> (text only).</p></td> +<td class = "number">Leipzig and Prague, 1887.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class = "smallcaps">Frieze</span> (Books x. and<ins class = +"correction" title = "text has . after ‘and’"> </ins>xii.)</p></td> +<td class = "number">New York, 1889.</td> +</tr> +</table> + +<p class = "reference"> +Among the Translations, reference has been made to <span class = +"smallcaps">Lindner’s</span> (<i>Philologische Klassiker</i>, Wien, +1881), <span class = "smallcaps">Alberti’s</span> (Leipzig, 1858), and +<span class = "smallcaps">Herzog’s</span> (Leipzig, 1829); also to <span +class = "smallcaps">Guthrie’s</span> (London, 1805), and <span class = +"smallcaps">Watson’s</span> (in <span class = "smallcaps">Bohn’s</span> +series). +</p> + +<p class = "reference space"> +The following have been used as books of reference:—</p> + +<table class = "reference" summary = "reference works"> +<tr> +<td><p><span class = "smallcaps">Wilkins</span>: Cicero, <i>De +Oratore</i>, Books i. and ii. (2nd ed.)</p></td> +<td class = "number" width = "33%">Oxford, 1888 and 1890.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class = "smallcaps">Sandys</span>: Cicero, +<i>Orator</i>.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Cambridge, 1889.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class = "smallcaps">Kellogg</span>: Cicero, +<i>Brutus</i>.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Boston, 1889.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class = "smallcaps">Wolff</span>: Tacitus, <i>Dialogus de +Oratoribus</i>.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Gotha, 1890.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class = "smallcaps">Andresen</span>:<span class = +"gap"> „ „</span></p></td> +<td class = "number">Leipzig, 1879.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class = "smallcaps">Reiske</span>: Dionysius +Halicarnassensis.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Vols. v-vi.<br> +Leipzig, 1775-7.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class = "smallcaps">Usener</span>: Dionysius +Halicarnassensis <i>Librorum de Imitatione Reliquiae, Epistulaeque +Criticae Duae</i>.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Bonn, 1889.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class = "smallcaps">Ammon:</span> +<i>De Dionysii Halicarnassensis Librorum Rhetoricorum Fontibus: +Dissertatio Inauguralis</i>.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Munich, 1889.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class = "smallcaps">Volkmann:</span> +<i>Die Rhetorik der Griechen und Römer</i>.</p></td> +<td class = "number">2nd ed. Leipzig, 1885.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class = "smallcaps">Causeret:</span> +<i>Étude sur la langue de la Rhétorique et de la Critique Littéraire +dans Cicéron</i>.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Paris, 1886.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p>and <span class = "smallcaps">Fierville</span>: +<i>Quintilian</i>, Book i.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Paris, 1890.</td> +</tr> +</table> + +<p class = "reference"> +The references to Nägelsbach’s <i>Lateinische Stylistik</i> are to the +eighth edition (Nägelsbach-Müller).</p> + + +<p class = "reference space"> +The periodical literature bearing specially on the Tenth Book of +Quintilian has grown to very considerable dimensions within recent +years. The following articles and tractates have been +consulted:—</p> + +<table class = "reference" summary = "list of articles"> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Claussen:</td> +<td><p><i>Quaestiones Quintilianeae</i>.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Leipzig, 1883.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Nettleship:</td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Journal of Philology</i>, Vol. xviii, No. 36, p. 225 +sqq.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Becher</td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Bursian’s Jahresbericht</i>, 1887, xv. 2, pp. 1-61.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><span class = "gap"> „</span></td> +<td><p><i>Quaestiones grammaticae ad librum X. Quintiliani de Instit. +Or.</i><br> +(<i>Jahresbericht über die königliche Klosterschule zu +Ilfeld</i>).</p></td> +<td class = "number">Nordhausen, 1879.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><span class = "gap"> „</span></td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Philologus XLV</i>.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><span class = "gap"> „</span></td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Philologische Rundschau</i>, iii. 14: 427 sqq. and 457 sqq.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><span class = "gap"> „</span></td> +<td> +<p><i>Programm des königlicken Gymnasiums zu Aurich</i>.</p> +</td> +<td class = "number">Ostern, 1891.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Kiderlin</td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Blätter für das bayer</i>. <i>Gymn.-Wesen</i>, 1887, p. 454; +1188, pp. 83-91.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><span class = "gap"> „ </span></td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Jahrbücher f. Philologie u. Pädagogik</i>, vol. 135, +pp. 829-832.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><span class = "gap"> „ </span></td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Zeitschrift f. d. Gymn.-Wesen</i>, vol. 32, pp. 62-73.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><span class = "gap"> „ </span></td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Fleckeisen’s Jahrb. f. Philologie</i>, 1888, p. 829 sqq.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><span class = "gap"> „ </span></td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Jahresb. des philol. Vereins zu, Berlin</i>, xiv. (1888), +p. 62 sqq.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><span class = "gap"> „ </span></td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Hermes</i>, vol. xxiii. p. 163 sqq.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><span class = "gap"> „ </span></td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Rheinisches Museum</i>, xlvi. (1891) pp. 9-24.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Hirt</td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Jahresb. des philol. Vereins zu Berlin</i>, viii. (1882), +p. 67 sqq.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><span class = "gap"> „ </span></td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><span class = "gap"> „ „ „ </span>ix. (1883), +p. 312 sqq.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><span class = "gap"> „ </span></td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><span class = "gap"> „ „ „ </span>xiv. (1888), +p. 51 sqq.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><span class = "gap"> „ </span></td> +<td> +<p><i>Ueber die Substantivierung des Adjectivums bei +Quintilian</i>.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Berlin, 1890.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Meister</td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Philologus</i>, xviii. (1863), p. 487 sqq.: xxxiv. (1876), +p. 740 sqq.: xxxv. (1877), p. 534 sqq., and p. 685 sqq.: +xxxviii. (1879), p. 160 sqq.: xlii. (1884) p. 141 sqq.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps"> +<span class = "pagenum">lxxvii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxxvii" id = "intro_pagelxxvii"> </a> +Schöll:</td> +<td><p><i>Rheinisches Museum</i>, xxxiv. (1879), p. 84 sqq.: xxxv. +(1880), p. 639.</p></td> +<td class = "number"></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Wölfflin</td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Rheinisches Museum</i>, xlii. (1887), p. 144 and p. 310 +sqq.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><span class = "gap"> „ </span></td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Hermes</i>, xxv. (1890), pp. 326, 7.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Andresen</td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Rheinisches Museum</i>, xxx. (1875), p. 506 sqq.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Eussner</td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Blätter für das bayer. Gymn.-Wesen</i>, 1881, p. 391 sqq.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Fleckeisen’s</td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Jahrb. f. Philologie</i>, 1885, p. 615 sqq. <i>Literar. +Centralblatt</i>, 1885, n. 22, p. 754.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Gertz</td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p>‘<i>Opuscula philologica ad Madvigium a discipulis missa</i>’ (1876), +p. 92 sqq.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">H. J. Müller:</td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Zeitschrift für das Gymn.-Wesen</i>, xxxi. 12, p. 733 +sqq.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Iwan Müller:</td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Bursian’s Jahresbericht</i>, iv. (1876), 2, p. 262 sqq.; vii. +(1879), 2, p. 157 sqq.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Wrobel</td> +<td colspan = "2"> +<p><i>Zeitschrift für die österreich. Gymnasien</i>, xxvii. (1876), +p. 353 sqq.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Törnebladh:</td> +<td><p><i>De usu Particularum apud Quintilianum +Quaestiones</i>.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Holmiae, 1861.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Reuter:</td> +<td><p><i>De Quintiliani libro qui fuit de causis corruptae +eloquentiae</i>.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Vratislaviae, 1887.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Günther:</td> +<td><p><i>De coniunctionum causalium apud Quintilianum usu</i>.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Halis Saxonum, 1881.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Morawski:</td> +<td><p><i>Quaestiones Quintilianeae</i>.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Posnaniae, 1874.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Marty:</td> +<td><p><i>De Quintilianeo usu et copia verborum cum Ciceronianis +potissimum comparatis</i>.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Glaronae, 1885.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "smallcaps">Peters, Dr. Heinrich:</td> +<td><p><i>Beiträge zur Heilung der Ueberlieferung in Quintilians +Institutio Oratoria</i>.</p></td> +<td class = "number">Cassel, 1889.</td> +</tr> +</table> + +<p class = "space"> +Table of places where the text of this edition differs from those of +Halm (1869) and Meister (1887).</p> + +<table class = "comp" summary = "different readings"> +<tr> +<td></td> +<th>Halm.</th> +<th>Meister.</th> +<th>This Edition.</th> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan = "4"> +<span class = "smallcaps">Chap. I.</span> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 1</td> +<td><p>cogitationi</p></td> +<td><p>cognitioni</p></td> +<td><p>cognitioni.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 2</td> +<td><p>quae quoque sint modo</p></td> +<td><p>quo quaeque sint modo</p></td> +<td><p>quae quoque sint modo.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>nisi tamquam</p></td> +<td><p>nisi tamquam</p></td> +<td><p>nisi tamen.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 3</td> +<td><p>ante omnia est</p></td> +<td><p>ante omnia necesse est</p></td> +<td><p>ante omnia est.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>imitatio est</p></td> +<td><p>imitatio est</p></td> +<td><p>imitati.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 4</td> +<td><p>procedente opere iam minima</p></td> +<td><p>procedente iam opere etiam minima</p></td> +<td><p>procedente iam opere minima.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 5</td> +<td><p>Num ergo</p></td> +<td><p>Non ergo</p></td> +<td><p>Non ergo.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 7</td> +<td><p>[et] ... scio solitos</p></td> +<td><p>et ... solitos scio</p></td> +<td><p>et ... solitos scio.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>aliud quod</p></td> +<td><p>aliud quo</p></td> +<td><p>aliud quo.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 8</td> +<td><p>consequimur</p></td> +<td><p>consequemur</p></td> +<td><p>consequemur.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 11</td> +<td><p><span class = "greek" title = "tropikôs">τροπικῶς</span> [quare +tamen]</p></td> +<td><p><span class = "greek" title = "tropikôs">τροπικῶς</span> quasi +tamen</p></td> +<td><p>as Meister.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 16</td> +<td><p>imagine [ambitu]</p></td> +<td><p>[imagine] ambitu</p></td> +<td><p>imagine et ambitu.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 17</td> +<td><p>commodata</p></td> +<td><p>accommodata</p></td> +<td><p>accommodata.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 18</td> +<td><p>placent ... laudantur ... placent</p></td> +<td><p>placeant ... laudentur ... placent</p></td> +<td><p>as Halm.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 19</td> +<td><p>contrarium</p></td> +<td><p>e contrario</p></td> +<td><p>e contrario.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>ut actionis impetus</p></td> +<td><p>as Halm</p></td> +<td><p>actionis impetu.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>retractemus</p></td> +<td><p>retractemus</p></td> +<td><p>tractemus.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 23</td> +<td><p>quin etiam si</p></td> +<td><p>[quin] etiam si</p></td> +<td><p>as Halm.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number"> +<span class = "pagenum">lxxviii</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxxviii" id = "intro_pagelxxviii"> </a> +§ 28</td> +<td>genus * * ostentationi</td> +<td>poeticam ostentationi</td> +<td>as Meister.</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 31</td> +<td><p>etenim ... solutum est</p></td> +<td><p>est enim ... solutum</p></td> +<td><p>as Meister.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 33</td> +<td><p>ideoque</p></td> +<td><p>adde quod</p></td> +<td><p>adde quod.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 35</td> +<td><p>acriter et</p></td> +<td><p>acriter <i>Stoici</i> et</p></td> +<td><p>as Meister.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 37</td> +<td><p>qui sint <i>legendi</i>, quaeque</p></td> +<td><p>qui sint <i>legendi</i>, et quae</p></td> +<td><p>qui sint <i>legendi</i>, quae.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 38</td> +<td><p>quibuscum vivebat</p></td> +<td><p>as Halm</p></td> +<td><p>[quibuscum vivebat].</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>Graecos omnis [et philosophos]</p></td> +<td><p>Graecos omnes <i>persequamur</i> [et philosophos]</p></td> +<td><p>as Meister.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 42</td> +<td><p>ad phrasin</p></td> +<td><p>ad faciendam etiam phrasin</p></td> +<td><p>ad faciendam <span class = "greek" title = +"phrasin">φράσιν</span>.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>de singulis</p></td> +<td><p>de singulis loquar</p></td> +<td><p>de singulis loquar.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 44</td> +<td><p>tenuia et quae</p></td> +<td><p>tenuia et quae</p></td> +<td><p>tenuia atque quae.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>summatim, a qua</p></td> +<td><p>summatim, quid et a qua</p></td> +<td><p>as Meister.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>paucos enim (sunt autem em.)</p></td> +<td><p>paucos (sunt enim em.)</p></td> +<td><p>paucos enim, qui sunt em.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 45</td> +<td><p>his simillimi</p></td> +<td><p>his similes</p></td> +<td><p>his simillimi.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 46</td> +<td><p><i>omnium</i> amnium fontiumque</p></td> +<td><p>amnium fontiumque</p></td> +<td><p>omnium <i>fluminum</i> fontiumque.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 48</td> +<td><p>non <i>in</i> utriusque</p></td> +<td><p>non utriusque</p></td> +<td><p>non utriusque.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>creditur</p></td> +<td><p>creditum est</p></td> +<td><p>creditum est.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 53</td> +<td><p>aliud <i>parem</i></p></td> +<td><p>aliud secundum</p></td> +<td><p>aliud secundum.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 54</td> +<td><p>Aristophanes neminem</p></td> +<td><p>Arist. poetarum iudices neminem</p></td> +<td><p>as Meister.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 59</td> +<td><p>dum adsequamur</p></td> +<td><p>dum adsequamur</p></td> +<td><p>dum adsequimur.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 61</td> +<td><p>spiritus magnificentia</p></td> +<td><p>spiritus magnificentia</p></td> +<td><p>spiritu magnificentia.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 63</td> +<td><p>magnificus et dicendi vi</p></td> +<td><p>magnificus et diligens</p></td> +<td><p>magnificus et diligens.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 68</td> +<td><p>quem ipsum quoque reprehendunt</p></td> +<td><p>quod ipsum reprehendunt</p></td> +<td><p>as Meister.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 69</td> +<td><p>praecipuus est. Admiratus</p></td> +<td><p>praecipuus. eum admiratus</p></td> +<td><p>praecipuus. Hunc admiratus.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 70</td> +<td><p>illa mala iudicia</p></td> +<td><p>as Halm</p></td> +<td><p>illa iudicia.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 72</td> +<td><p>pravis</p></td> +<td><p>pravis</p></td> +<td><p>prave.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 79</td> +<td><p>honesti studiosus, in compositione</p></td> +<td><p>honesti studiosus in compositione</p></td> +<td><p>as Halm.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 80</td> +<td><p>is primus</p></td> +<td><p>is primum</p></td> +<td><p>is primum.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 81</td> +<td><p>orationem quam</p></td> +<td><p>orationem quam</p></td> +<td><p>orationem et quam.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>sed tamquam Delphico videatur oraculo instinctus</p></td> +<td><p>sed quodam [Delphici] videatur oraculo dei instinctus</p></td> +<td><p>sed quodam Delphici videatur oraculo dei instinctus.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 83</td> +<td><p>eloquendi vi ac suavitate</p></td> +<td><p>eloquendi suavitate</p></td> +<td><p>eloquendi suavitate.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 85</td> +<td><p>haud dubie ei proximus</p></td> +<td><p>as Halm</p></td> +<td><p>haud dubie proximus.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 87</td> +<td><p>phrasin</p></td> +<td><p>phrasin</p></td> +<td><p><span class = "greek" title = "phrasin">φράσιν</span>.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 88</td> +<td><p>propiores</p></td> +<td><p>propriores (?)</p></td> +<td><p>propiores.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 89</td> +<td><p>tamen [ut est dictum]</p></td> +<td><p>tamen ut est dictum</p></td> +<td><p>as Meister.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 90</td> +<td><p>sed ut dicam</p></td> +<td><p>et ut dicam</p></td> +<td><p>et ut dicam.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 91</td> +<td><p>promptius</p></td> +<td><p>propius</p></td> +<td><p>propius.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 92</td> +<td><p>feres</p></td> +<td><p>feras</p></td> +<td><p>feres.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 93</td> +<td><p>elegia</p></td> +<td><p>elegia</p></td> +<td><p>elegea.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 94</td> +<td><p>nisi labor</p></td> +<td><p>non labor</p></td> +<td><p>non labor.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>multum eo est tersior</p></td> +<td><p>as Halm</p></td> +<td><p>multum est tersior.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number"> +<span class = "pagenum">lxxix</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxxix" id = "intro_pagelxxix"> </a> +§ 96</td> +<td><p>opus * * quibusdam interpositus</p></td> +<td><p>opus sed aliis quibuidam interpositus</p></td> +<td><p>as Meister.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 97</td> +<td><p>grandissimi</p></td> +<td><p>clarissimi</p></td> +<td><p>clarissimi.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 100</td> +<td><p>linguae</p></td> +<td><p>linguae</p></td> +<td><p>linguae <i>suae</i>.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 101</td> +<td><p>commodavit</p></td> +<td><p>commodavit</p></td> +<td><p>commendavit.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>T. Livium</p></td> +<td><p>T. Livium</p></td> +<td><p>Titum Livium.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 102</td> +<td><p>ideoque illam immortalem</p></td> +<td><p>ideoque immortalem</p></td> +<td><p>ideoque immortalem.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>clari vir ingenii</p></td> +<td><p>clari vir ingenii</p></td> +<td><p>clarus vi ingenii.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 103</td> +<td><p>praestitit, genere ipso probabilis, in operibus quibusdam suis +ipse viribus minor</p></td> +<td><p>praestitit, genere ipso probabilis, in partibus quibusdam suis +ipse viribus minor</p></td> +<td><p>praestitit genere ipso, probablis in omnibus sed in quibusdam +suis ipse viribus minor.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 104</td> +<td><p>et ornat</p></td> +<td><p>et ornat</p></td> +<td><p>et exornat.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 106</td> +<td><p>omnia denique</p></td> +<td><p>omnia denique</p></td> +<td><p>[omnia] denique.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>illic—hic</p></td> +<td><p>illi—huic</p></td> +<td><p>illi—huic.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 107</td> +<td><p>vicimus</p></td> +<td><p>vincimus</p></td> +<td><p>vincimus.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>in quibus nihil</p></td> +<td><p>quibus nibil</p></td> +<td><p>quibus nihil.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 111</td> +<td><p>nihil umquam pulchrius</p></td> +<td><p>nihil pulchrius</p></td> +<td><p>nihil pulchrius.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 115</td> +<td><p>si quid adiecturus fuit</p></td> +<td><p>as Halm</p></td> +<td><p>si quid adiecturus sibi non si quid detracturus fuit.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 117</td> +<td><p>et fervor, sed</p></td> +<td><p>et sermo purus, sed</p></td> +<td><p>et fervor, sed.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 123</td> +<td><p>scripserunt</p></td> +<td><p>scripserunt</p></td> +<td><p>scripserint.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 126</td> +<td><p>ab eo</p></td> +<td><p>ab eo</p></td> +<td><p>ab illo.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 127</td> +<td><p>ac saltem</p></td> +<td><p>aut saltem</p></td> +<td><p>ac saltem.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 130</td> +<td><p>si ille quaedam contempsisset</p></td> +<td><p>si aliqua contempsisset</p></td> +<td><p>si obliqua contempsisset.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>si parum * *</p></td> +<td><p>si parum <i>sana</i></p></td> +<td><p>si parum <i>recta</i>.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 131</td> +<td><p>potest utcumque</p></td> +<td><p>potest utrimque</p></td> +<td><p>potest utrimque.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan = "4"> +<span class = "smallcaps">Ch. II.</span> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 6</td> +<td><p>tradiderint</p></td> +<td><p>tradiderint</p></td> +<td><p>tradiderunt.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 8</td> +<td><p>nulla est ars</p></td> +<td><p>nulla mansit ars</p></td> +<td><p>nulla <i>man</i>sit ars.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 13</td> +<td><p>[et] cum</p></td> +<td><p>cum et</p></td> +<td><p>cum et.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>accommodata est</p></td> +<td><p>accommodata sit</p></td> +<td><p>accommodata sit.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 15</td> +<td><p>et a doctis inter ipsos etiam</p></td> +<td><p>as Halm.</p></td> +<td><p>et a doctis, inter ipsos etiam.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>ut ita dixerim</p></td> +<td><p>ut ita dixerim</p></td> +<td><p>ut sic dixerim.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 17</td> +<td><p>Attici scilicet</p></td> +<td><p>Atticis scilicet</p></td> +<td><p>Attici sunt scilicet.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>obscuri</p></td> +<td><p>obscuri sunt</p></td> +<td><p>obscuri.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 22</td> +<td><p>cuique proposita</p></td> +<td><p>as Halm</p></td> +<td><p>cuique proposito.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 28</td> +<td><p>deerant</p></td> +<td><p>deerunt</p></td> +<td><p>deerunt.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>oportebat</p></td> +<td><p>oporteat</p></td> +<td><p>oporteat.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan = "4"> +<span class = "smallcaps">Ch. III.</span> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 2</td> +<td><p>alte effossa</p></td> +<td><p>alte refossa</p></td> +<td><p>alte refossa.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>et fundit</p></td> +<td><p>et fundit</p></td> +<td><p>effundit</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 10</td> +<td><p>[ut provideamus] et efferentis.</p></td> +<td><p>ut provideamus et eff.</p></td> +<td><p>ut provideamus, effer.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 15</td> +<td><p>plura celerius</p></td> +<td><p>plura celerius</p></td> +<td><p>plura et celerius.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 20</td> +<td><p>in legendo</p></td> +<td><p>in intellegendo</p></td> +<td><p>in intellegendo.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 21</td> +<td><p>femur et latus</p></td> +<td><p>as Halm.</p></td> +<td><p>frontem et latus.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number"> +<span class = "pagenum">lxxx</span> +<a name = "intro_pagelxxx" id = "intro_pagelxxx"> </a> +§ 22</td> +<td><p>secretum quod dictando</p></td> +<td><p>as Halm</p></td> +<td><p>secretum in dictando.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 25</td> +<td><p>velut * rectos</p></td> +<td><p>velut tectos</p></td> +<td><p>velut tectos.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 32</td> +<td><p>adiciendo</p></td> +<td><p>adicienti</p></td> +<td><p>adiciendo.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan = "4"> +<span class = "smallcaps">Ch. IV.</span> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 3</td> +<td><p>finem habeat</p></td> +<td><p>finem habet</p></td> +<td><p>finem habet.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan = "4"> +<span class = "smallcaps">Ch. V.</span> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 4</td> +<td><p>praesumunt eandem</p></td> +<td><p>praes. eandem</p></td> +<td><p>praes. eadem.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 17</td> +<td><p>inanibus <i>se</i> simulacris ... adsuefacere</p></td> +<td><p>inanibus simulacris ... adsuescere</p></td> +<td><p>as Meister.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 18</td> +<td><p>etiam M. Porcio</p></td> +<td><p>etiam Porcio</p></td> +<td><p>etiam M. Porcio.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 21</td> +<td><p>autem is idoneus</p></td> +<td><p>autem idoneus.</p></td> +<td><p>autem idoneus.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan = "4"> +<span class = "smallcaps">Ch. VI.</span> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 2</td> +<td><p>inhaerent ... quae ... laxantur</p></td> +<td><p>inhaeret.... quod ... laxatur</p></td> +<td><p>as Meister.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 5</td> +<td><p>regredi</p></td> +<td><p>regredi</p></td> +<td><p>redire.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 7</td> +<td><p>retrorsus</p></td> +<td><p>retrorsum</p></td> +<td><p>retrorsus.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>si utcumque</p></td> +<td><p>si utrimque</p></td> +<td><p>si utrimque.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan = "4"> +<span class = "smallcaps">Ch. VII.</span> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 1</td> +<td><p>instar portus</p></td> +<td><p>intrare portum</p></td> +<td><p>intrare portum.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 2</td> +<td><p>statimque, si non succurratur</p></td> +<td><p>statimque, si non succurratur</p></td> +<td><p>statimque si non succuratur.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 5</td> +<td><p>quid quoque loco primum sit ac secundum et deinceps</p></td> +<td><p>as Halm</p></td> +<td><p>quid quoque loco primum sit quid secundum ac deinceps.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 6</td> +<td><p>via dicet, ducetur</p></td> +<td><p>via ducetur, dicet</p></td> +<td><p>via dicet, ducetur.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 9</td> +<td><p>observatione simul</p></td> +<td><p>observatione una</p></td> +<td><p>observatione una.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 13</td> +<td><p>superfluere video: quodsi</p></td> +<td><p>videmus superfluere: cum eo quod si</p></td> +<td><p>superfluere video, cum eo quod si.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 14</td> +<td><p>ut Cicero dictitabant</p></td> +<td><p>ut Cicero ait, dictitabant</p></td> +<td><p>ut Cicero dictitabant.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 17</td> +<td><p>adeo praemium</p></td> +<td><p>adeo pretium</p></td> +<td><p>adeo pretium.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 20</td> +<td><p>tanta sit ... fiducia facilitatus ut</p></td> +<td><p>tantam esse ... fiduciam facilitatis velim ut</p></td> +<td><p>tanta esse umquam debet fiducia facilitatis ut.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>non capitur</p></td> +<td><p>non capitur</p></td> +<td><p>non labitur.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 24</td> +<td><p>quam omnino non</p></td> +<td><p>quam non omnino</p></td> +<td><p>quam non omnino.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 26</td> +<td><p>est et illa</p></td> +<td><p>est et illa</p></td> +<td><p>est alia.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 26</td> +<td><p>quam illa</p></td> +<td><p>quam in illa</p></td> +<td><p>quam illa.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 29</td> +<td><p>nescio an utrumque</p></td> +<td><p>nescio an si utrumque</p></td> +<td><p>as Meister.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>id efficere</p></td> +<td><p>id efficere</p></td> +<td><p>sic dicere.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">„ </td> +<td><p>in his</p></td> +<td><p>in his</p></td> +<td><p>et in his.</p></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td class = "number">§ 32</td> +<td><p>quod simus</p></td> +<td><p>quod non simus</p></td> +<td><p>quod non simus.</p></td> +</tr> +</table> + +</div> <!-- end div intro --> + +<div class = "footnote"> + +<h4>FOOTNOTES</h4> + +<p><a name = "note1" id = "note1" href = "#tag1">1.</a> +(Rhetores) quorum professio quam nullam apud maiores auctoritatem +habuerit, Tac. Dial. 30.</p> + +<p><a name = "note2" id = "note2" href = "#tag2">2.</a> +C. Suetoni Tranquilli praeter Caesarum libros reliquiae. Leipzig 1860, +p. 365 sq. and 469 sq.</p> + +<p><a name = "note3" id = "note3" href = "#tag3">3.</a> +There is however some doubt about the name, most editors reading +L. Galba.</p> + +<p><a name = "note4" id = "note4" href = "#tag4">4.</a> +So Hild, Introd. p. xii, where reference is made to the following +authorities as establishing this custom for the Jews of Asia: Joseph, +xiv. 10. 17 <span class = "greek" title = "Ioudaioi ... epedeixan heautous sunodon echein idian kata tous patrious nomous ap’ archês kai topon idion, en hôi ta te pragmata kai tas pros allêlous antilogias krinousi">Ἰουδαῖοι ... ἐπέδειξαν ἑαυτοὺς σύνοδον ἔχειν ἰδίαν δατὰ τοὺς +πατρίους νόμους ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς καὶ τόπον ἴδιον, ἐν ᾧ τά τε πράγματα καὶ τὰς +πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἀντιλογίας κρίνουσι</span>—the words of +L. Antonius, governor of the province of Asia, A.D. 50. Cp. id. +xiv. 7, 2: Act Apost. ix. 2: xxii. 19: xxvi. 11: Cor. ii. 11, 24. The +privilege was maintained under the Christian emperors: see inter alia +Cod. Theod. ii. 1, 10 <i>sane si qui per compromissum, ad similitudinem +arbitrorum, apud Iudaeos vel patriarchas ex consensu partium in civili +duntaxat negotio putaverint litigandum, sortiri eorum iudicium iure +publico non vetentur</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note5" id = "note5" href = "#tag5">5.</a> +Gaius ii §274 <i>mulier quae ab eo qui centum milia aeris census est, +per legem Voconiam heres institui non potest, tamen fideicommisso +relictam sibi hereditatem capere potest</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note6" id = "note6" href = "#tag6">6.</a> +Hild, Introd. pp. xiii.-xiv, where passages are cited from contemporary +literature describing both types. For the first cp. Martial viii. 16 +<i>Pistor qui fueras diu, Cipere, Nunc causas agis</i>, and +<i>passim</i>: Petronius, Sat. 46 <i>destinavi illum artificii docere, +aut tonstrinum aut praeconem aut certe causidicum</i> ... Philero was +lately a street porter: <i>nunc etiam adversus Norbanum se extendit; +litterae thesaurum est, et artificium numquam moritur</i>: Juv. vii. 106 +sqq.: Plin. v. 13, 6 sq.: vi. 29. Of the second class the best +representative is Aquilius Regulus, informer and legacy-hunter, on whose +account Herennius Senecio parodied Cato’s famous utterance, <i>vir malus +dicendi imperitus</i> Plin. iv. 7, 5 and ii. 20.</p> + +<p><a name = "note7" id = "note7" href = "#tag7">7.</a> +Hild (p. xv. note) compares Juv. Sat. xiv. 44 sqq. with Quint, i. 2, 8 +and Tac. Dial. 29: and especially Sat. vii. 207 with Quint, ii. 2, 4: +<i>Di, maiorum umbris tenuem et sine pondere terram Spirantesque crocos +et in urna perpetuum ver, Qui praeceptorem sancti valuere parentis Esse +loco!</i> and <i>Sumat ante omnia parentis erga discipulos suos +animum</i> (sc. <i>praeceptor</i>) <i>ac succedere se in eorum locum a +quibus sibi liberi tradantur existimet</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note8" id = "note8" href = "#tag8">8.</a> +i. pr. §1 <i>post impetratam studiis meis quietem quae per viginti annos +erudiendis iuvenibus impenderam</i>. The chronology is rather uncertain. +It is supposed that Quintilian began his <i>Institutio</i> in 92 or 93 +and finished it in 94 or 95. If the period of twenty years is to be +interpreted rigorously, we may suppose that he is referring to his +official career, as it may have been in 72 that Vespasian took the step +referred to above, p. viii. Or we may understand him to be dating +the period of his educational activity as extending from <span class = +"smallroman">A.D.</span> 70 to <span class = "smallroman"><ins class = +"correction" title = "period invisible">A.</ins>D.</span> 90, though he +did not begin to write the <i>Institutio</i> till 92. The latter is the +more probable alternative.</p> + +<p><a name = "note9" id = "note9" href = "#tag9">9.</a> +See De Quintiliani libro qui fuit De Causis Corruptae Eloquentiae: +Dissertatio Inauguralis: Augustus Reuter, Vratislaviae 1887.</p> + +<p><a name = "note10" id = "note10" href = "#tag10">10.</a> +The <i>Declamationes</i> may also be mentioned here, as having long been +credited to Quintilian: they consist of 19 longer and 145 shorter +pieces. That Quintilian practised this form of rhetorical exercise, and +with success,—at least in the earlier part of his career,—is +clear from such passages as xi. 2, 39: but it seems probable, from the +nature of the contents of the existing collection, if not from the +style, that tradition has erred in attributing to the master what must +have been, in the main, the work of pupils and imitators. The popular +habit of tacking on to a great name whatever seems not unworthy of it, +may account for the fact that these rhetorical efforts are credited to +Quintilian as early as the time of Ausonius, who says (Prof. 1, 15) +<i>Seu libeat fictas ludorum evolvere lites Ancipitem palmam +Quintilianus habet</i>. St. Jerome, on Isaiah viii. praef., speaks +of his <i>concinnas declamationes</i>: Lactantius i. 24 quotes one which +has disappeared from the collection; and lastly, Trebellius Pollio, a +historian of the age of Diocletian, speaking of a certain Postumus, of +Gaulish origin, adds: <i>fuit autem ... ita in declamationibus disertus +ut eius controversiae Quintiliano dicantur insertae</i> (Trig. tyr. +4, 2): cp. ib. <i>Quintiliano, quem declamatorem Romani generis +acutissimum vel unius capitis lectio prima statim fronte demonstrat</i> +(Hild, Introd. p. xxi. note).</p> + +<p><a name = "note11" id = "note11" href = "#tag11">11.</a> +See also the Dissertatio of Albertus Trabandt, Gryphiswaldiae 1883, +<i>De Minoribus quae sub nomine Quintiliani feruntur +Declamationibus</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note12" id = "note12" href = "#tag12">12.</a> +iv. pr. 2 <i>Cum vero mihi Domitianus Augustus sororis suae nepotum +delegaverit curam, non satis honorem iudiciorum caelestium intellegam, +nisi ex hoc oneris quoque magnitudinem metiar</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note13" id = "note13" href = "#tag13">13.</a> +If they had still been under Quintilian’s care when he wrote the +Introduction to the Sixth Book (where referring to his domestic losses +he says that he will live henceforth not to himself but to the youth of +Rome), he would almost certainly have made some reference to them.</p> + +<p><a name = "note14" id = "note14" href = "#tag14">14.</a> +In judging Quintilian we must not forget that similar extravagances have +not been unknown in our own literature. His translator, Guthrie—an +Aberdonian Scot, who is full of enthusiasm for his author—cries +out in a note on this passage: “I will engage to point out from the +works of some of the greatest and most learned men, as well as of the +best poets, of England, compliments to the abilities not only of +princes, but of noblemen, statesmen, nay, private gentlemen, who in this +respect deserved them as little as Domitian did.”</p> + +<p><a name = "note15" id = "note15" href = "#tag15">15.</a> +The expression used in vi. pr. §4, <i>meo casu cui tamen nihil obici +nisi quod vivam potest</i>, shows that Quintilian was quite conscious of +his comfortable circumstances.—Halm (followed by Meister) reads +<i>quam</i> quod vivam: but I find <i>nisi</i> in both the Bamberg (G) +and the Harleian codices.</p> + +<p><a name = "note16" id = "note16" href = "#tag16">16.</a> +Some have supposed that Quintilian made a second marriage (sometime +between 93 and 95), after losing his wife and two children. This theory, +which is rejected now by Mommsen, Teuffel, and most authorities, was +invented to account for the existence of a grown-up daughter, to whom, +on the occasion of her marriage (about the year 105), Pliny gives a +present of 50,000 sesterces: Ep. vi. 32. But this young lady must have +been the daughter of another Quintilianus altogether. What we know of +our Quintilian’s affluent circumstances is inconsistent with such +liberality on Pliny’s part: the gift is offered as to a man who is +comparatively poor. Moreover, the letter intimating the gift contains no +such reference to the services of a former teacher as might have been +expected on so interesting an occasion. And lastly it is almost +inconceivable that Quintilian, after bewailing in the Introduction to +Book vi. (about 93 <span class = "smallroman">A.D.</span>) the +bereavements that left him desolate (<i>superstes omnium meorum</i>), +should have had twelve years afterwards a daughter of marriageable +age.</p> + +<p><a name = "note17" id = "note17" href = "#tag17">17.</a> +<i>Quibus (libris) componendis, ut scis, paulo plus quam biennium tot +alioqui negotiis districtus impendi; quod tempus non tam stilo quam +inquisitioni instituti operis prope infiniti et legendis auctoribus, qui +sunt innumerabiles, datum est.</i></p> + +<p><a name = "note18" id = "note18" href = "#tag18">18.</a> +Milder references, such as those at i. 4, 5 and x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec35">1, 35</a> and +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec123">123</a>, may have been written +before the event mentioned above (the date of which is fixed by Suet. +Dom. 10 and Tac. Agric. 2), and may have been allowed to stand.</p> + +<p><a name = "note19" id = "note19" href = "#tag19">19.</a> +<i>Ipse nec habeat vitia nec ferat. Non austeritas eius tristis, non +dissoluta sit comitas, ne inde odium, hinc contemptus oriatur. Plurimus +ei de honesto ac bono sermo sit: nam quo saepius monuerit, hoc rarius +castigabit. Minime iracundus, nec tamem eorum quae emendanda erunt +dissimulator: simplex in docendo, patiens laboris, adsiduus potius quam +immodicus</i> ii. 2, 5.</p> + +<p><a name = "note20" id = "note20" href = "#tag20">20.</a> +See Oscar Browning’s ‘Educational Theories’ p. 26 sqq., for a good +account of Quintilian’s system.</p> + +<p><a name = "note21" id = "note21" href = "#tag21">21.</a> +xii. 1, 3 and 4 <i>ne futurum quidem oratorem nisi virum bonum: ... ne +studio quidem operis pulcherrimi vacare mens nisi omnibus vitiis libera +potest</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note22" id = "note22" href = "#tag22">22.</a> +Inst. Or. xii. 11, 4-7, cited by Browning pp. 33-4: <i>ac nescio an +eum tum beatissimum credi oporteat fore, cum iam secretus et +consecratus, liber invidia, procul contentionibus, famam in tuto +collocarit et sentiet vivus eam, quae post fata praestari magis solet, +venerationem, et quid apud posteros futurus sit videbit</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note23" id = "note23" href = "#tag23">23.</a> +Dr. Reid in <i>Encyclopaedia Britannica</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note24" id = "note24" href = "#tag24">24.</a> +i. 2. §§4-8: cp. Tac. Dial. 29.</p> + +<p><a name = "note25" id = "note25" href = "#tag25">25.</a> +i. 2. §8: cp. Iuv. xiv. 44 sqq.</p> + +<p><a name = "note26" id = "note26" href = "#tag26">26.</a> +<i>Quis enim ignorat et eloquentiam et ceteras artes descivisse ab illa +vetere gloria non inopia praemiorum, sed desidia iuventutis et +neglegentia parentum et inscientia praecipientium et oblivione moris +antiqui?</i>—ch. 28.</p> + +<p><a name = "note27" id = "note27" href = "#tag27">27.</a> +M. F. Quintiliani de Institutione Oratoria, Liber Primus: Paris, +Firmin-Didot et Cie. 1890, pp. xiv. sqq.</p> + +<p><a name = "note28" id = "note28" href = "#tag28">28.</a> +For the identification of this manuscript see below p. lxx.</p> + +<p><a name = "note29" id = "note29" href = "#tag29">29.</a> +Admiration for him was carried to such a pitch that at Leipzig the +professor of eloquence was designated <i>Quintiliani professor</i>. +Luther was one of his greatest admirers, preferring him to almost every +other writer; and Erasmus was a diligent student of his works, +especially Books i and x of the <i>Institutio</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note30" id = "note30" href = "#tag30">30.</a> +Stanhope’s Life of Pitt, vol. i. p. 11.</p> + +<p><a name = "note31" id = "note31" href = "#tag31">31.</a> +To Sir Stafford Northcote: “He was very fond of Quintilian, and said it +was strange that in the decadence of Roman literature, as it was called, +we had three such authors as Tacitus, Juvenal, and Quintilian,” Lang’s +‘Life of Lord Iddesleigh,’ vol. ii. p. 178.</p> + +<p><a name = "note32" id = "note32" href = "#tag32">32.</a> +Dr. Reid in the <i>Encyclopaedia Britannica</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note33" id = "note33" href = "#tag33">33.</a> +See M. Samuel Rocheblave: De M. Quintiliano L. Annaei Senecae +Judice, Paris (Hachette), 1890.</p> + +<p><a name = "note34" id = "note34" href = "#tag34">34.</a> +Ep. xvi. 5, 6 <i>de compositione non constat</i>: Ep. xix. 5, 13 +<i>oratio certam regulam non habet</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note35" id = "note35" href = "#tag35">35.</a> +i Prooem. §10 sqq., especially <i>neque enim hoc concesserim rationem +rectae honestaeque vitae, ut quidam putaverunt, ad philosophos +relegandam</i>. Cp. x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec35">1, 35</a>: and xii. 2, 9 +<i>Utinam ... orator hanc artem superbo nomine et vitiis quorundam bona +eius corrumpentium invisam vindicet.</i> M. Rocheblave sees in +these and other passages evidence of a bias against the representatives +of philosophy on the part of Quintilian, which must have worked as +powerfully in the case of a teacher of youth as the more open +denunciations of Juvenal and Martial. He even finds traces of +Quintilian’s influence with Domitian in the banishment of the +philosophers from Rome in <span class = "smallroman">A.D.</span> 94. It +is certainly noticeable that the tone of his references to them becomes +more bitter in the later books: e.g. xi. 1, 33-35: and xii. 3, 11-12. +The Prooemium to Book i. may have been written last of all: and +apart from it there is nothing in Books i to x (see i. 4, 5; x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec35">1, 35</a> and +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec123">123</a>) so acrimonious as the +extracts refered to. Cp. p. xiv.</p> + +<p><a name = "note36" id = "note36" href = "#tag36">36.</a> +See ii. 5, 10-12 <i>Ne id quidem inutile, etiam corruptas aliquando et +vitiosas orationes, quas tamen plerique iudiciorum pravitate mirantar, +legi palam ostendique in his quam multa impropria, obscura, tumida, +humilia, sordida, lasciva, effeminata sint: quae non laudantur modo a +plerisque sed, quod est peius, propter hoc ipsum quod sunt prava +laudantur.</i> With this last cp. x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec127">1, 127</a> (of Seneca) +<i>placebat propter sola vitia</i>. So i. 8, 9 <i>quando nos in omnia +deliciarum vitia dicendi quoque ratione defluximus</i>: ii. 5, 22 +(<i>cavendum est</i>) <i>ne recentis huius lasciviae flosculis capti +voluptate prava deleniantur ut praedulce illud genus et puerilibus +ingeniis hoc gratius quo propius est adament</i>: with which compare x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec129">1, 129</a> <i>corrupta +pleraque atque eo perniciosissima, quod abundant dulcibus vitiis</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec130">§130</a> <i>consensu potius +eruditorum quam puerorum amore comprobaretur</i>. Rocheblave cites also +viii. 5, 27, 28, 30.</p> + +<p><a name = "note37" id = "note37" href = "#tag37">37.</a> +It is doubtful if the allusion in +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec126">§126</a> (<i>potioribus +praeferri non sinebam quos ille non destiterat incessere</i>, &c.) +is exclusively to Cicero. Seneca’s extant works contain many references +to Cicero which are the reverse of disparaging: Rocheblave (p. 43) cites +Ep. vi. 6, 6 where he speaks of him as ‘locuples’ in the choice of +words: xvi. 5, 9 where he is ‘maximus’ in philosophy: xviii. 4, 10 where +he is ‘disertissimus’: see also xix. 5, 16, and xvi. 5, 7.</p> + +<p><a name = "note38" id = "note38" href = "#tag38">38.</a> +Cp. Rocheblave, p. 46 <i>De Annaeo vero Seneca, velut olim de Catone +defendebat lepidissimus consul, merito nobis dici videtur posse, quae +deficiant, si minus omnia, pleraque saltem tempori esse attribuenda; +quae vero emineant, ipsius scriptoris esse propria, et in primis oculos +capere</i>: p. 36 <i>Eloquentiam non verbis, sed rebus valere, nec +per se, sed propter quae docere animum possit, esse excolendam Annaeus +semper professus est. Eloquentiam contra delectu verborum praecipue +constare, et per se amandam et requirendam esse, nulla aut minima rerum +adhibita ratione, docebant rhetores, et in primis Quintilianus</i>: +p. 38 <i>Ergo quum in eloquentia duo sint praesertim consideranda, +scilicet res verbaque, haud dubium est Annaeam pro rebus Fabium pro +verbis, utrumque asperrime, egisse</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note39" id = "note39" href = "#tag39">39.</a> +See note on p. 58, where an extract is given which is quoted by Diderot +in his Essai sur Claude et Néron. Instead of Seneca being the ‘corruptor +eloquentiae’ the truth <ins class = "correction" title = "text reads ‘it’">is</ins> that ‘il ne corrompit rien. Il suivit son génie, il +s’accommoda au goût de ses contemporains, il eut l’avantage de leur +plaire et de s’en faire admirer; et <i>l’envie lui fit un crime de ce +qui passerait pour vrai talent dans un homme moins célèbre</i>.’</p> + +<p><a name = "note40" id = "note40" href = "#tag40">40.</a> +Montaigne, Essais ii. ch. x.</p> + +<p><a name = "note41" id = "note41" href = "#tag41">41.</a> +Fronto, De Oration. p. 157 <i>At enim quaedam in libris eius scite +dicta, graviter quoque nonnulla. Etiam laminae interdum argentiolae +cloacis inveniuntur; eane re cloacas purgandas redimemus?</i> For +Gellius see Noct Att. xii. 2.</p> + +<p><a name = "note42" id = "note42" href = "#tag42">42.</a> +“In the case of the first list, or list of Greek authors, he gives his +readers fair warning that he is only repeating other people’s +criticisms, not pronouncing his own. In +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec27">§27</a> he mentions Theophrastus +by name; in +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec52">§52</a>, speaking of Hesiod, he +says <i>datur ei palma</i>, &c.; in +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec53">§53</a> the second place is +given to Antimachus by the consent of the <i>grammatici</i>; Panyasis is +thought (<i>putant</i>) <i>in eloquendo neutrius aequare virtutes</i>, +Callimachus (58) <i>princeps habetur (elegiae), secundas confessione +plurimorum Philetas occupavit</i>. In 59 only three <i>iambographi</i> +are mentioned, those, namely, who were allowed by Aristarchus. The +<i>novem lyrici</i> were probably a selection of Aristarchus: in any +case they are the <i>Pindarus novemque lyrici</i> (for this need not be +taken to mean strictly ten) of Petronius’s first chapter.”—Prof. +Nettleship in Journ. of Philol. xviii. p. 258.</p> + +<p><a name = "note43" id = "note43" href = "#tag43">43.</a> +<i>Quod tempus</i> (i.e. <i>paulo plus quam biennium</i>) <i>non tam +stilo quam inquisitioni instituti operis prope infiniti et</i> legendis +auctoribus, qui sunt innumerabiles <i>datum est</i>: Epist. ad +Tryphonem.</p> + +<p><a name = "note44" id = "note44" href = "#tag44">44.</a> +Claussen, Quaestiones Quintilianeae, Leipzig 1873, p. 343 note: +<i>sententia mea, ut semel dicam, Quintilianus non omnia quae contuli +opera in singulis iudiciis evolvit sed nonnullos locos memoria tenuit, +adeo ut inscius interdum auctorum verba referret</i>. This (though +somewhat inconsistent with the opinion quoted p. xxxii) is a milder +verdict than that of Professor Nettleship, who, after speaking of +Quintilian’s ‘somewhat pretentious moral overture’ (<i>vir bonus dicendi +peritus</i>, &c.), adds: “one would be glad to know whether he would +have thought it a necessary virtue in a <i>bonus grammaticus</i> to read +and conscientiously study the Greek authors on whom he passes formal +critical judgments. For it is, alas! too plain that, whether Quintilian +had or had not read them, he contents himself in many cases with merely +repeating the traditional criticisms of the Greek schools upon some of +the principal Greek authors.” (Journ. of Philol. xviii. +p. 257.)</p> + +<p><a name = "note45" id = "note45" href = "#tag45">45.</a> +See Prof. Nettleship’s paper on ‘Literary Criticism in Latin Antiquity’ +in Journ. of Philol. vol. xviii. p. 225 sqq.</p> + +<p><a name = "note46" id = "note46" href = "#tag46">46.</a> +Cp. iii. 1, 16, where he is eulogised among the Greek rhetoricians; ix. +3, 89: 4, 88 (‘similia dicit Halicarnasseus Dionysius’). Cp. the +parallelism in regard to the Panegyricus of Isocrates, x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIV_sec4">4, 4</a>: and for other +instances see Claussen, op. cit. pp. 339-340.</p> + +<p><a name = "note47" id = "note47" href = "#tag47">47.</a> +The extant remains of this treatise have recently been edited by Usener +(Bonn. 1889), with a valuable <i>Epilogus</i>. The scope of the work is +indicated by Dionysius himself in the Epist. ad Pompeium iii. +p. 776 R, Usener p. 50: <span class = "greek" title = +"toutôn ho men prôtos autên perieilêphe tên peri tês mimêseôs zêtêsin, ho de deuteros peri tou tinas andras mimeisthai dei poiêtas te kai philosophous, historiographous (te) kai rhêtoras, ho de tritos peri tou pôs dei mimeisthai.">τούτων ὁ μὲν πρῶτος αὐτὴν περιείληφε τὴν περὶ τῆς +μιμήσεως ζήτησιν, ὁ δὲ δεύτερος περὶ τοῦ τίνας ἄνδρας μιμεῖσθαι δεῖ +ποιητάς τε καὶ φιλοσόφους, ἱστοριογράφους (τε) καὶ ῥήτορας, ὁ δὲ τρίτος +περὶ τοῦ πῶς δεῖ μιμεῖσθαι.</span></p> + +<p><a name = "note48" id = "note48" href = "#tag48">48.</a> +The standpoint from which both critics regarded this class of poetry was +probably much the same as that which Dio Chrysostom applies to lyric +poetry generally: <span class = "greek" title = "melê de kai elegeia kai iamboi kai dithyramboi tô men scholên agonti pollou axia">μέλη δὲ καὶ +ἐλεγεῖα καὶ ἴαμβοι καὶ διθύραμβοι τῷ μὲν σχολὴν ἄγοντι πολλοῦ +ἄξια</span> (cp. tunc et elegiam vacabit, &c., +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec58">§58</a>) <span class = "greek" +title = "tô de prattein te kai hama tas praxeis kai tous logous auxein dianooumenô ouk an eiê pros auta scholê">τῷ δὲ πράττειν τε καὶ ἅμα τὰς +πράξεις καὶ τοὺς λόγους αὔξειν διανοουμένῳ οὐκ ἂν εἴη πρὸς αὐτὰ +σχολή</span> (Or. xviii. 8, p. 478 R.)</p> + +<p><a name = "note49" id = "note49" href = "#tag49">49.</a> +How diverse the tradition of the various authorities came to be in +regard to the epic poets may be seen from Usener’s note p. 137.</p> + +<p><a name = "note50" id = "note50" href = "#tag50">50.</a> +Cp. however Usener’s note p. 138 <i>Aristophanis propria fuit +Menandri illa admiratio quam epigramma prodit Kaibelli</i> p. 1085 +(C.I.Gr. 6083): <i>cuius iudicii Kaibelius</i> p. 490 <i>in +Quintiliano</i> x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec69">1, 69</a> <i>vestigia recte +observavit</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note51" id = "note51" href = "#tag51">51.</a> +See Usener, p. 123: fr. xvii. <i>quid enim aut Herodoto dulcius aut +Thucydide gravius</i>, fr. xviii. <i>aut Philisto brevius aut Theopompo +acrius aut Ephoro mitius inveniri potest?</i> It has been supposed that +between these two fragments the words <i>aut Xenophonte iucundius</i> +may have fallen out: cp. Quint, x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec82">1, 82</a>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note52" id = "note52" href = "#tag52">52.</a> +See especially fr. xi. <i>qua re velim dari mihi, Luculle, indicem +tragicorum, ut sumam qui forte mihi desunt</i>: and cp. note on +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec57">1 §57</a>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note53" id = "note53" href = "#tag53">53.</a> +Cp. the note on <i>qui parcissime</i> x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIV_sec4">4, 4</a>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note54" id = "note54" href = "#tag54">54.</a> +De Canone decem Oratorum Atticorum Quaestiones. Breslau, 1883.</p> + +<p><a name = "note55" id = "note55" href = "#tag55">55.</a> +<i>A iudicandis poetarum carminibus olim ars grammatica initium +sumpserat, fuitque ante <span class = "greek" title = +"kritikê">κριτική</span> quam <span class = "greek" title = +"grammatikê">γραμματική</span></i>—Usener, p. 132.</p> + +<p><a name = "note56" id = "note56" href = "#tag56">56.</a> +See Prof. Nettleship, Journ. of Phil. pp. 230-231.</p> + +<p><a name = "note57" id = "note57" href = "#tag57">57.</a> +Among other traces of the use of such an abridgment by Cicero, Usener +reckons his judgments on the Greek historians (Herodotus and Thucydides, +Philistus, Theopompus and Ephorus, Xenophon, Callisthenes and Timaeus) +in the second book of the <i>de Oratore</i> (§§55-58), a work which was +written ten years before the <i>Hortensius</i>: on Herodotus and +Thucydides, Orat. §39: cp. Ep. ad Quintum fr. ii. 11 (13), 4, <i>ad +Callisthenem et ad Philistum redeo, in quibus te video volutatum. +Callisthenes quidem volgare et notum negotium, quem ad modum aliquot +Graeci locuti sunt: Siculus ille capitalis, creber, acutus, brevis, +paene pusillus Thucydides</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note58" id = "note58" href = "#tag58">58.</a> +<i>Adponam laterculum quam breve tam egregium, quod ex codice +Coisliniano</i> n. 387 <i>olim Athoo saeculi X Montefalconius edidit +bibl. Coislin</i>. p. 597, <i>ex codice Bodleiano olim Meermanni +recentiore Cramerus anecd.</i> Paris t. iv. p 196, 15 sq. Usener, +p. 129.</p> + +<p><a name = "note59" id = "note59" href = "#tag59">59.</a> +Nettleship, in Journ. of Philol. p. 233.</p> + +<p><a name = "note60" id = "note60" href = "#tag60">60.</a> +Havell’s translation, p. 27.</p> + +<p><a name = "note61" id = "note61" href = "#tag61">61.</a> +See the note on x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec85">1, 85</a>, with the +quotation from Professor Nettleship’s article in the Journal of +Philology. In the <i>Rheinisches Museum</i> (xix. 1864, p. 3 sqq.) +Mercklin pushed the parallelism to an excessive extent, endeavouring to +find a correspondence between each individual Greek and Latin writer +mentioned by Quintilian.</p> + +<p><a name = "note62" id = "note62" href = "#tag62">62.</a> +“His (Seneca’s) works are made up of mottoes. There is hardly a sentence +which might not be quoted; but to read him straight forward is like +dining on nothing but anchovy sauce.”—Macaulay, Trevelyan’s Life, +i. p. 448.</p> + +<p><a name = "note63" id = "note63" href = "#tag63">63.</a> +<i>Pervasit iam multos ista persuasio, ut id demum eleganter atque +exquisite dictum patent, quod interpretandum sit</i>: viii. 2. 21.</p> + +<p><a name = "note64" id = "note64" href = "#tag64">64.</a> +Tac. Dial. 20 <i>Iam vero iuvenes ... non solum audire sed etiam referre +domum aliquid inlustre et dignum memoria volunt, traduntque invicem ac +saepe in colonias ac provincias suas scribunt, sive sensus aliquis +arguta et brevi sententia effulsit, sive locus exquisito et poetico +cultu enituit</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note65" id = "note65" href = "#tag65">65.</a> +ii. 5, 10 <i>ostendi in his quam multa impropria, obscura, tumida, +humilia, sordida, lasciva, effeminata sint: guae non laudantur modo a +plerisque, sed, quod est peius, propter hoc ipsum quod sunt prava +laudantur</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note66" id = "note66" href = "#tag66">66.</a> +He resembles other writers of the decadence in the frequent use of rare +or poetical words, in neglecting the nice distinctions formerly made +between synonyms, in the numbers of adjectives used +substantively, &c.</p> + +<p><a name = "note67" id = "note67" href = "#tag67">67.</a> +In discussing Quintilian’s language and style, it must not be forgotten +that he was a Spaniard by birth. In his recent pamphlet, ‘Ueber die +Substantivierung des Adjectivums bei Quintilian’ (Berlin, 1890), Dr. +Paul Hirt quotes an interesting remark of Filelfo (cp. G. Voigt, +‘Wiederbelebung des klass. Alt.’ i. p. 467 note), which has lately +received some corroboration: <i>sapit hispanitatem nescio quam, hoc est +barbariem plane quandam</i>. Filelfo did not like Quintilian: <i>nullam +habet elegantiam, nullum nitorem, nullam suavitatem. Neque movet dicendo +Quintilianus, neque satis docet, nec delectat.</i> But this was only +Filelfo’s opinion, for which he would not have been able to furnish such +scientific grounds as that lately (Archiv. f. Lat. Lex. und Gramm. 1 +p. 356) supplied by Dr. E. Wölfflin, in regard to the +adjective <i>pandus</i>. This word was in use in the days of Ennius, and +occurs often afterwards in poetry, but not in prose. In Spain, however, +it lingered, and is used by Seneca, Martial, Silius, Columella, and +especially by Quintilian. After these writers it disappears again till +the fourth century.—Cp. i. 5, 57 <i>gurdos, quos pro stolidis +accipit vulgus, ex Hispania duxisse originem audivi</i>, which has been +quoted (by Abbé Gédoyn, and by Hermann, following Gesner) strangely +enough in disproof of Quintilian’s Spanish birth.</p> + +<p><a name = "note68" id = "note68" href = "#tag68">68.</a> +For this section I am especially indebted to a <i>Dissertatio</i> by +Adamus Marty: <i>De Quintilianeo Usu et Copia Verborum cum Ciceronianis +potissimum comparatis</i>. Also the <i>Prolegomena</i> in Bonnell’s +Lexicon: and Dosson’s <i>Remarques sur la Langue de Quintilien</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note69" id = "note69" href = "#tag69">69.</a> +Marty (op. cit. p. 47) has an interesting note, in which, referring to +the Zeitschrift f. Gymnasialwesen, xiv. pp. 427-29, he says it has +been found that there are in Cicero 290 (296) substantives in +<i>-tor</i> and 44 (46) in <i>-trix</i>. Of these 73 in <i>-tor</i> and +4 in <i>-trix</i> are also in Quintilian, who has, on the other hand, 28 +in <i>-tor</i> and 8 in <i>-trix</i> which do not occur in Cicero. These +are—<i>adfectator</i>, <i>admirator</i>, <i>adsertor</i>, +<i>agnitor</i>, <i>altercator</i>, <i>auxiliator</i>, +<i>constitutor</i>, <i>consultor</i>, <i>contemptor</i>, +<i>cunctator</i>, <i>delator</i>, <i>derisor</i>, <i>exactor</i>, +<i>formator</i>, <i>iactator</i>, <i>insectator</i>, <i>latrator</i>, +<i>legum lator</i>, <i>luctator</i>, <i>plosor</i>, <i>professor(?)</i>, +<i>raptor</i>, <i>repertor</i>, <i>rixator</i>, <i>signator</i>, +<i>stuprator</i>, <i>ventilator</i>, <i>versificator</i>, +<i>cavillatrix</i>, <i>disputatrix</i>, <i>elocutrix</i>, +<i>enuntiatrix</i>, <i>exercitatrix</i>, <i>hortatrix</i>, +<i>iudicatrix</i>, (<i>litteratrix</i>), <i>sermocinatrix</i>.</p> + +<p><a name = "note70" id = "note70" href = "#tag70">70.</a> +This subject has been most exhaustively treated in a Programm by Dr. +Paul Hirt, ‘Ueber die Substantivierung des Adjectivums bei Quintilian’ +(Berlin, 1890), a monument of German thoroughness. See also Becher’s +Quaestiones Grammaticae (Nordhausen, 1879), pp. 6 sqq.</p> + +<p><a name = "note71" id = "note71" href = "#tag71">71.</a> +Schmalz (Ueber den Sprachgebrauch des Asinius Pollio, p. 52) says +that this usage, which is a favourite one with Pollio ad Fam. x. 32, 5 +<i>Gallum Cornelium</i>), was first introduced by Varro (L. Lat. 5, +83 <i>Scaevola Quintus</i>: de Re Rust. i. 2, 1 <i>Libo Marcius</i>). It +is frequent in Cicero’s correspondence, and became general in Velleius +Paterculus.</p> + +<p><a name = "note72" id = "note72" href = "#tag72">72.</a> +See a Programm by David Wollner, ‘Die von der Beredsamkeit aus der +Krieger- und Fechtersprache entlehnten Bildlichen Wendungen in der +rhetorischen Schriften des Cicero, Quintilian, und Tacitus’ (Landau, +1886).</p> + +<p><a name = "note73" id = "note73" href = "#tag73">73.</a> +Halm’s account of this is more accurate than Meister’s. The former +(Praef. p. viii) says <i>magnae autem lacunae Bernensis pergamenis +insertis ex alio codice suppletae sunt</i>. The <i>alius codex</i> which +the writer of G had at hand is no longer extant: it no doubt belonged to +the same family as the <i>Ambrosianus</i>, and +<i>Bambergensis</i> G is consequently of first-class importance, +especially where the <i>Ambrosianus</i> fails us. It is incorrect to say +(with Meister, Praef. p. vi) <i>lacunae pergamenis ex alieno codice +insertis expletae sunt</i>. The writer of G did not mutilate another +codex in order to complete Bg: in some places he begins his copy on the +blank space left at the end of a folio in Bg.</p> + +<p><a name = "note74" id = "note74" href = "#tag74">74.</a> +The <i>Pratensis</i> is the oldest authority for the reading <i>tam +laesae hercule</i> at i. 2, 4: the <i>Puteanus</i> and <i>Ioannensis</i> +agree. Again all three omit the words <i>de litteris</i> at i. 4, 6, and +show <i>praecoquum</i> for <i>praecox</i> at i. 3, 3 (so Voss. iii. and +7760), and <i>haec igitur ex verbis</i> at i. 5, 2 (so Voss. iii.).</p> + +<p><a name = "note75" id = "note75" href = "#tag75">75.</a> +An account of this important codex has already been given in an article +on M. Fierville’s Quintilian, Classical Review, February, 1891.</p> + +<p><a name = "note76" id = "note76" href = "#tag76">76.</a> +The subpunctuation of these letters by the second hand by the +<i>Bambergensis</i> is a phenomenon which may, I think, be +explained in this way. The codex from which the readings known as +<b>b</b> are taken must have been of considerable antiquity, and +probably abounded in contractions: <i>lius</i> may have seemed to the +copyist the nearest approach to what he had before him, wherefore he +subpunctuated Cloe. Cloelius in the <i>Bambergensis</i> is a very +intelligible mistake for Clodius. Another example of a similar mistake +on the part of the writer of b occurs at x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec7">2, 7</a>, where the +Bambergensis now shows <i>id consequi q̣ụọd imiteris</i>, the writer of +b having subpunctuated <i>quo</i> because he did not understand the +contraction for <i>quod</i> which he had in the text before him. The +copyist of the Harleianus at once follows suit, and hence the remarkable +reading <i>id consequi dimiteris</i>, which in the Bodleianus and other +MSS. becomes <i>de metris</i> (see Crit. Note ad loc.). In fact, it +seems that much of the corruption which has prevailed in the text of +Quintilian is due to the fact that <b>b</b> very often did not +understand what he was doing, and that through such codices as followed +his guidance his errors became perpetuated. Cp. <i>totas at cures</i> +(for <i>vires</i> <b>b</b>) <i>suas</i> in the second last line of +the Facsimile (x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec109">1, 109</a>.)</p> + +<p><a name = "note77" id = "note77" href = "#tag77">77.</a> +The only places in the Tenth Book which form any obstacle to the theory +that H was copied directly from the Bambergensis are the following: x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec33">3, 33</a>, where the +remarkable gloss <i>vindemoni</i> occurs (repeated in F but not +in T): see Crit. Notes ad loc. for an attempted explanation: x. +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec1">2, 1</a> <i>ex his +<u>summa</u></i> H, a mistake evidently recognised by the copyist +himself: and x. +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec27">1, 27</a> <i>blandita +tum</i> H (so L C), <i>libertate</i> G.</p> + +<p><a name = "note78" id = "note78" href = "#tag78">78.</a> +The claim of the Codex Florentinus to be Poggio’s manuscript was +definitely rejected by A. Reifferscheid in the <i>Rheinisches +Museum</i>, xxiii (1868), pp. 143-146. Reifferscheid refers to a +Codex Urbinas (577), an examination of which would probably settle the +question, if it is what it professes to be, a transcript of Poggio’s +manuscript. It bears the following inscription: <i>Scripsit Poggius +Florentinus hunc librum Constantiae diebus LIII sede apostolica vacante. +Reperimus vero eum in bibliotheca monasterii sancti galli quo plures +litterarum studiosi perquirendorum librorum causa accessimus ex quo +plurimum utilitalis eloquentiae studiis comparatum putamus, cum antea +Quintilianum neque integrum neque nisi lacerum et truncum plurimis locis +haberemus. Hec verba ex originali Poggii sumpta.</i></p> + +<p><a name = "note79" id = "note79" href = "#tag79">79.</a> +For the controversy as between the Turicensis and the Florentinus see +Halm, Sitzungsberichte der königl. Akademie der Wissenschaften zu +München, 1866, p. 499 note: and Fierville, Introduction, +p. xcii. sqq.</p> + +<p><a name = "note80" id = "note80" href = "#tag80">80.</a> +Kiderlin (Rhein. Mus. xlvi. p. 12, note) cites the following +passages in Book x, where S has preserved the right reading: I add +those of my MSS. which are in agreement—§19 <i>digerantur</i> +(G H <i>dirigantur</i>, L <i>dirigerantur</i>): +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec27">§27</a> <i>blandicia</i>, so +Burn. 243 (G <i>libertate</i>, H L <i>blandita tum</i>): +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec55">§55</a> <i>sed</i> (G H +<i>et</i>, om. L): +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec65">§65</a> <i>tamen quem</i> +(G H <i>tamen quae</i>: M <i>tamquam</i>): +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec66">§66</a> <i>correctas</i> +(G H <i>rectas</i>, M <i>correptas</i>): +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec67">§67</a> <i>uter</i> (G H M +T <i>uterque</i>): +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec68">§68</a> <i>reprehendunt</i> +(G H M <i>reprehendit,—et</i> H ?): +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec69">§69</a> <i>testatur</i> (as +Harl. 2662, 4995, 4950, 4829, Burn. 244, Ball., Dorv.), G M +<i>praestatur</i> (as Burn. 243, Bodl.): +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec76">§76</a> <i>in eo tam</i> +(G <i>inectam</i>, M <i>in hoc tam</i>).</p> + +<p><a name = "note81" id = "note81" href = "#tag81">81.</a> +See note on the following page.</p> + +<p><a name = "note82" id = "note82" href = "#tag82">82.</a> +Since the above was written the readings of the <i>Vallensis</i> have +been given in detail for the Tenth Book by Becher (<i>Programm des +königlichen Gymnasiums zu Aurich</i>, Easter, 1891). With the exception +of <i>Harl.</i> 4995, no other fifteenth century codex furnishes so +correct a text; and it is interesting to speculate whether the +improvements are due to the progress of scholarship since Poggio’s +discovery, or to the fact that the <i>Vallensis</i> and <i>Harl.</i> +4995 derive, not from the class of MSS. to which Poggio’s belonged, but +from some other and more reliable codex. If the latter was copied from +the former, it will afford a test, such as Becher desiderates, for +discriminating between the corrections made in the <i>Vallensis</i>. +Those not adopted in <i>Harl.</i> 4995 were made, in all probability, +after 1470. For example in 1. §23 <i>utile erit</i> +(<i>Vall.</i><sup>2</sup>) does not appear in the London manuscript, +which also has <i>audatiora</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec4">5 §4</a>: <i>nobis ac</i> +and <i>uno genere</i> ib. §7: <i>virtutum</i> ib. §17: <i>recidere</i> +ib. §22: <i>diligenter effecta</i>, (without <i>una enim</i>) ib. §23: +<i>iniicere</i> +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapVII_sec29">7 §29</a>. In all these +places there are corrections by a later hand in the <i>Vallensis</i>. +But in the following passages, among others, the copyist of <i>Harl.</i> +4995 adopts corrections which had already been made in the +<i>Vallensis</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec9">1 §9</a> <i>quae cultiore in +parte</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec19">§19</a> <i>iteratione</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec31">§31</a> <i>molli</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec38">§38</a> <i>exequar</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec107">§107</a> <i>qui duo plurimum +affectus valent</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec117">§117</a> <i>et vis summa</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec125">§125</a> <i>tum</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapII_sec15">2 §15</a> <i>dicunt</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec17">§17</a> <i>quam libet</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapIII_sec2">3 §2</a> <i>et fundit</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec6">§6</a> <i>scriptorum</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec17">§17</a> <i>contextis quae fudit +levitas</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec21">§21</a> <i>simul vertere +latus</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec31">§31</a> <i>crebra relatione</i>: +<a href = "QuintBody2.html#chapV_sec12">5 §12</a> <i>de <ins class += "correction" title = "second letter unclear: primary text has ‘re’">reo</ins></i>: +<a href = "QuintBody1.html#chapI_sec25">§25</a> <i>utilior</i>. +A comparison of the two codices might possibly reveal the fact that +the writer of <i>Harl.</i> 4995 is himself the author of some of the +emendations in the <i>Vallensis</i>. Was he J. Badius?</p> + +</div> <!-- end div footnote --> + + +<hr class = "spacer"> + +<div class = "contents"> +<p><a href = "../main.html">Preface</a></p> +<p><a href = "QuintBody1.html">Chapter I</a></p> +<p><a href = "QuintBody2.html">Chapters II-VII</a></p> +<p><a href = "QuintCrit.html">Critical Notes</a></p> +</div> + +</body> + +</html> + |