Billeder på siden

we again find a very pronounced family likeness, it being also a peculiar characteristic of both authors that their prejudices against the moral conduct of a man do not prevent them from doing full justice to his intellectual abilities.87



The same association of ideas, finally, is noticeable in certain miscellaneous items, particularly in utterances on the materialistic character of forensic oratory as compared with that of the past, on the influence formerly enjoyed by orators," the pursuit of philosophy" and the like. Everywhere "apparent liniamenta eiusdem viri et vultus," but what is still more significant perhaps, the entire treatise contains not a single thought that can be said to have been repudiated or contradicted in the historical works of Tacitus. 92

(d) The Stylistic Character of the Dialogus.

We have reached the last stage in our journey and are now prepared to consider the argument derived from the style of the Dialogus, which constituted, as has been repeatedly remarked, the one great obstacle in the way of a general acceptance of the treatise as a genuine work of Tacitus.

habebatur, promptus adversus insontes, XIII 3 oratio a Seneca composita multum cultus praeferret ut fuit illi viro ingenium amoenum et temporis eius auribus adcommodatum (see also XIII 11 XIV 52 and note c. 21 12)... Augusto prompta et profluens . . . eloquentia fuit (see note 2 11. 14). Tiberius artem quoque callebat, qua verba expenderet, tum validus sensibus aut consulto ambiguus, etiam Gai Caesaris turbata mens vim dicendi non corrupit. nec in Claudio, quotiens meditata dissereret, elegantiam requireres.

87 Cp. his remarks on CAESAR, note c. 21 21; on EPRIUS MARCELLUS, c. 5 30 adcinctus et minax H. IV 43 minacibus oculis Ann. XVI 29 cum per haec atque talia Marcellus, ut erat torvus ac minax, voce vultu oculis ardesceret and note 1. c.; on HELVIDIUS PRISCUS, c. 5 32 sapientiam and H. IV 5 doctores sapientiae secutus est; on VIPSTANUS MESSALLA, H. IV 42 magnam . . . eloquentiae famam V. M. adeptus est and c. 15 6 ff.; on VIBIUS CRISPUS, c. 8. 12 H. II 10 pecunia potentia ingenio inter claros magis quam inter bonos IV 42 quomodo senes nostri Marcellum, Crispum . . . imitentur; on POMPONIUS SECUNDUS, note c. 13 10; DOMITIUS AFER, ibid.

88 Cf. notes c. 5 12. 19 10 22 12 19 13 2. 25 17 12 19 9 32 34 37 32.
89 c. 8 and note c. 12 9 H. IV 42 and esp.
90 c. 36 init. Ann. XV 21.

Ann. XI 5 ff.

91 Cf. note c. 19 19 32 ext.

92 Ann. IV 61, cited c. 6 25, is hardly a genuine exception, for although Tacitus may in his later years, as has been pointed out ad loc., have esteemed extemporary effusions less highly, it must be remembered that in the earlier passage he speaks more particularly of the pleasure afforded by improvisations, whereas the passage from the Annals deals rather with the ephemeral character of impromptu speeches.

To begin with, it cannot be too strongly or too often emphasised that the refusal to accept the Dialogus as Tacitean is ultimately and primarily based upon a methodological aberration. For, let us consider for a moment the status quo. Here was a treatise ascribed to Tacitus in our MSS. which was found to exhibit remarkable stylistic discrepancies, when compared with the admittedly genuine writings of the historian, especially the Annals. This being so, one might have supposed that the only legitimate method of criticism would have been to ascertain, if possible, some plausible reasons for the phenomenon in question. But instead of adopting this course, scholars from the time of Lipsius precipitately abandoned the unimpeachable testimony of the MSS., boldly declaring the stylistic character of the Dialogus to be incompatible with Tacitean authorship. This wholly unwarranted inference being regarded almost in the light of an axiom, a perverse ingenuity subsequently succeeded in discovering other confirmatory evidence of the spuriousness of the treatise. These objections have been. dealt with in the foregoing pages and it has been shown that they not only possess no validity whatever, but that weighty internal reasons, which the sceptics studiously ignore or strangely overlook, confirm the MS. tradition. We shall now prove that the observable stylistic differences, though habitually exaggerated on the one hand, can be satisfactorily accounted for, while on the other they are offset by equally striking coincidences which, quite apart from the abundant evidence already furnished, cannot but dispel any doubt still remaining as to identity of authorship."

93 Schanz, Röm. Lit. II p. 363, well says 'Das Problem besteht nicht darin die Stilverschiedenheit des Dialogs zu erklären, sondern die der historischen Schriften,' but how the same writer can contend in the same breath that this difference is not 'das Product einer Entwickelung' but eine mit Bewusstsein vollzogene künstlerische That' is incomprehensible to me. See also note 29.

94 Cp. the remarks of Teuffel, Introd. to his German translation p. 18 f.: “In der That kennen wir kaum eine schwerere Verirrung des Urtheils als die Bezweifelung oder Bestreitung des taciteischen Ursprungs unserer Schrift und wir erblicken darin einen abschreckenden Beweis, auf welche Abwege es führt, wenn man bei einem schriftstellerischen Producte statt in dessen Tiefe einzudringen, vielmehr an der Oberfläche und dem Aeusserlichen kleben bleibt. Dass ein Unterschied ist zwischen der Darstellungsweise unserer Schrift und den übrigen taciteischen zumal wenn man vorzugsweise die Annalen der Vergleichung zu Grunde legt-kann ein Blinder sehen; aber nur ein Solcher kann auch die ganz wesentlichen und characteristischen Punkte der Gleichheit und Aehnlichkeit verkennen, und nur plumpes Zutappen kann aus jenen

Relegating the reader for detailed comment to my Notes and to the chapter on 'Style and Language,' I here content myself with an enumeration of some of the more striking stylistic coincidences between the Dialogus and the historical works of Tacitus.


a. The 'happy audacity' with which Tacitus enriched the vocabulary of the language is already noticeable in the Dialogus, the following expressions being also found in the later works, but not elsewhere histrionalis (c. 26 9 29 11 Ann. I 16), clientulus (c. 37 2 Ann. XII 36), educationibus in the plural (c. 28 23 Ann. III 25) and perhaps et et after a negative (c. 5 5 34 11 Ag. 35).

b. Expressions invested with a new meaning and apparently not elsewhere in prose: cura = 'liber' (c. 3 13 6 22 Ann. III 24 IV 11), lenocinari (c. 6 24 G. 43), sacra ='sacra loca' (c. 13 19 H. III 33 Ann. I 54. 79), inpexa in a figurative sense (c. 20 10 and perhaps Ann. XVI 10), cogitatio='consilium' (c. 3 13 21 21 Ag. 39 H. I 27 II 74 Ann. XV 54), incitamentum, an extremely rare word, except in Tacitus (14 times), and not elsewhere used of persons (c. 40 11 H. II 23 Ann. VI 29), obviam ire used in a non-hostile signification (c. 41 19 H. IV 46 Ann. IV 6 XIII 5), inauditus in a legal sense first found in Tacitus and, with two exceptions, always joined with 'indefensus' (c. 16 14 H. I 6 II 10 Ann. II 77 — Ann. IV 11 XII 22).

[ocr errors]


c. Expressions of very rare or not common occurrence in good Latin prose met with both in the Dial. and the historical writings of Tacitus quisque with plural predicate (c. 1 17), utrique='uterque' (c. 2 6), modo . . . nunc (c. 3 16), gloria 'literary fame' (c. 5 10), mediocritas (c. 7 4), ingero 'din into the ears' (c. 7 14), notabilior, honorificentius, audentius (c. 8 12 9 9 18 7), ȧò кооû construction of relative pronoun (c. 8 24), dare='dedere' (c. 8 30), concessive ut (c. 9 18), vanescere (c. 10 24), ullus as a noun (c. 12 14), adj. with inf. (c. 16 11), sita for posita' (c. 18 2), use of quodsi (c. 19 15), etsi non at certe (c. 19 21), adfluens (c. 20 8), nisi quis - nisi qui

(c. 21 24), epexegetic que (c. 22 9), concessu = consensu' (c. 25 12),


[ocr errors]

-post superior -inferior to' (c. 26 31), numerare 'esteem' (c. 26 32), delegari = committere' (c. 29 1), habere continere'




[ocr errors]

Differenzen auf Verschiedenheit des Verfassers schliessen, statt sich des Glückes zu freuen, dass uns von einem denkwürdigen, schriftstellerischen Entwickelungsgange die beiden Endglieder wie die Mittelstufen erhalten sind."

95 See the lists in Boetticher, Lex. Tac. LI-LV Dr. Stil p. 115 ff. 96 See below, Vogel pp. 279 ff. Jansen p. 65 ff.


(c. 30 13) 'opus esse, sufficere, expedire' with ut to avoid the dependence of one infinitive upon another (c. 31 1 32 2 Ann. III 69), pudendus as an adjective (c. 32 14), ingenuitas (c. 32 21), dum with ind. pres. in orat. obl. (c. 32 33), adversus 'as compared with ' (c. 33 5), ut ='ita ut' (c. 33 19), facile dixerim and similar phrases (c. 35 6), fidelius (c. 34 25), robustiores opp. to 'pueri' (c. 35 15), compositus (c. 36 5), hine 'out of such conditions arose' (c. 36 8 Ann. III 27), reus in a less restricted, non-legal sense (c. 36 10 Ann. II 24), distrahere (c. 36 13), quo modo in comparative clauses (c. 36 32), rubor ='pudor' (c. 37 1), nec ='nec ideo' (c. 37 24), proeliator (c. 37 33 Ann. II 73), ius 'privilege' (c. 40 1 Ann. II 30), saluber = 'validus' (c. 41 11 H. V 6 Ann. II 33), conferre 'discuss' (c. 42 5 and perhaps Ag. 15).


d. Words and constructions in the Dialogus, especially frequent in Tac. or characteristic of his style: ipse (c. 14 3 12), tamquam used objectively (c. 2 2), nec-et (c. 2 10), in quantum and like prepositional phrases (see below), quo minus = 'quin' (c. 3 5), vertere as a middle (c. 4 3), adj. = adv. (c. 4 3), dativus subjectivus (c. 4 8), praevalere ='plus valere' (c. 5 4), indefinite relative pronoun followed by alius (c. 59), fovere (c. 5 10), adj. = subordinate clause (c. 5 23), officium office' (c. 6 6), subnixus (c. 6 12), et quoque (c. 6 18), ellipsis of sed (ibid.), diu ='iam diu' (c. 6 27), ellipsis of verb (c. 7 4), auditus = 'auditu cognitus' (c. 7 18), oblitteratus (c. 8 3), habere with gerundive and gerund (c.811), donec='quamdiu' (c.817), principes in amicitia (ibid.), mansurum, and the use of a fut. act. part. adj. clause (c. 9 22), ellipsis of verb governing acc. with inf. (c. 10 33), ellipsis of verb after hinc (ibid.), increpare (c. 12 1), praecipuus in a superlative sense (c. 12 2), et before negative (c. 12 8), crimen 'scelus' (c. 12 12), adjective with genitive (c. 13 22), an as a disjunctive conjunction (c. 13 13), ablative of rest (c. 13 25), compound verbs with acc. (c. 14 4 25 14), satis constat (c. 16 21), cum maxime (c. 16 29), mox subsequently' (c. 17 10), abandonment of the oratio obliqua (c. 17 19 25 4 30 17 32 32), ita='itaque' (c. 17 19), rursus = av (c. 18 24), iter'ratio' (c. 19 22), quasi-instrumental ablative (c. 19 23), postquam with pluperfect ind. (c. 22 8), asyndetic collocations (c. 23 10), affirmative et (c. 25 24), nunc (c. 26 27), primum mox (c. 28 7), haurire, in a figurative sense. 287), (c. 28 28), perfect passive participle for abstract noun (c. 29 11), et ipsis 'likewise' (c. 30 1), an in indirect questions with 'utrumʼ



omitted (c. 32 4), ellipsis of demonstrative pronoun (c. 32 8), plural predicate after two singular subjects in adversative clauses (c. 42 6).


e. Peculiar collocations and figurative expressions common to the historical works and the Dialogus: Repetition of the same word within short intervals (c. 1 8 13 8), non modo, non ... modo, non solum, non tantum (c. 2 6 7 13 14 16), paupertas et angustia rerum circumsteterunt (c. 8 12 H. I 17 IV 79), a general term more closely defined by a specific word or phrase (c. 91 2 12 13 3 16 29 19 7.24 20 8 22 18 24 10), in herba vel flore (c. 9 20 H. V 7), natura -denegavit (c. 10 10 Ann. XV 42), oblectare otium (c. 10 12 Ann. XII 49), nomen inserere famae (ibid. H. II 61 Ann. VI 2), variation and repetition of preposition (c. 10 25 critical note), aut probata... aut excusata (c. 10 38 Ag. 3), ingredi auspicatus — pleonasm (c. 11 8 187 35 12), in Neronem improbam. . . potentiam (c. 11 9), sacra studiorum (ibid.), nullis contacta vitiis pectora (c. 12 8 10 18 31 25 Ann. I 10 III 30), position of adverb (c. 12 19), quos vocetis quam determinetis and analogous amplifications (c. 16 16), sing. predicate with two subjects (c. 22 20 26 18 40 14), non ... neque ...sed (c. 29 7), position of unus (c. 34 31), hanc illi famam circumdederunt (c. 37 26 Ag. 20 H. IV 11. 45 Ann. XIV 15. 53), verbsubject-verb or object-verb-object (c. 37 35).98

f. One of the most noticeable features of the style of Tacitus, when compared with that of post-Augustan prose-writers, is his peculiar predilection for alliterative combinations. It is, therefore, of the highest significance in the present discussion to observe the same fondness for alliteration in the Dialogus. See 'Style and Language.'

The failure of so many scholars from Lipsius to Andresen to recognise any resemblance between the style of the historian Tacitus and that met with in our treatise was primarily due to the deplorable fact that the Histories and more particularly the Annals were taken as the sole criterion and standard of comparison. In the later works, Tacitus, like Thucydides, seemed, if we may appropriate the language of Quintilian, densus et brevis et semper instans,'

97 Cp. also the remarks of Kaibel, Stil und Text der IIoλ. 'Anv. des Aristoteles p. 50 with the passage from Soph. Elect. 580 ff. there cited.

98 Half a dozen instances excepted, all of the illustrations of Tacitean usage given under a. b. c. d. e. are omitted in Weinkauff's collection pp. cxxxviii-clxiv! 99 This peculiarity did not escape his later imitator, Ammianus Marcellinus.

« ForrigeFortsæt »