DEC 4 1918 The Classical Weekly Entered as second-class matter November 18, 1907, at the Post Office, New York, N. Y., under the Act of Congress of March 3, 1879 Acceptance for mailing at special rate of postage provided for in Section 1103, Act of October 3. 1917, authorized on June VOL. XII 28. 1918. NEW YORK, DECEMBER 2, 1918 THE LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY An outline of the purpose and scope of The Loeb Classical Library was given in THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY 5.126-127, in an article reprinted from The Nation of November 9, 1911. In 6.82-86, we reprinted an article entitled Machines or Mind?, prepared by Dr. W. H. D. Rouse, one of the General Editors of the Library, as a general introduction to the Library. This paper is a fine plea for classical studies. In 9.49, as part of his article, A Working Library for Students of the Classics, Supplement, Professor Husband gave a list of the volumes in the Library which had been published up to that time (November 20, 1915). It may be noted, in passing, that the American agency for the Library has been taken over by Messrs. G. P. Putnam's Sons, 2 West 45th Street, New York City. In the contributions to THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY, by Messrs. Yeames and Messer, entitled Classical Articles in Non-Classical Periodicals, reference has been made to many reviews of parts of the Library, both in American and in foreign periodicals. Now, dealing with the classical originals rather than with translations of them is the business of THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY, as of every other classical periodical. Hence, there has been no attempt to secure for THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY a detailed review of every volume in The Loeb Classical Library (there would, indeed, not have been space for the realization of such an aim). Yet, since to the avowed classicist, who, by preference, deals with the Classics in the originals, the Library may well be of service, by supplying some texts not otherwise easily accessible, and by enabling him to read more rapidly and more widely than he otherwise might in the classical originals, some volumes of the Library have been noticed in THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY. In 6.198-199 Professor Lodge reviewed Mr. John Sargeaunt's translation of Terence (2 volumes). In 7.142-143 Professor Ullman discussed together two renderings of Propertius-one by H. F. Butler, in The Loeb Classical Library, the other by J. S. Phillimore, in the Oxford Library of Translations. I have myself, in various places, published notices of other volumes in the Library (see e. g. 6.223; 7.192). Circumstances make possible, at this time, a more extended review of recent additions to the Library. Since Professor Husband's list was published, the following volumes in the Library have appeared: No. 7 Achilles Tatius, by S. Gaselee; Caesar, The Gallic War, by H. J. Edwards, on the whole a very excellent translation; Dio Cassius, the fourth, fifth, and sixth of nine volumes, by Ernest Cary; Galen, On the Natural Faculties, by A. J. Brock; Greek Anthology, five volumes, by W. R. Paton; Hesiod, the Homeric Hymns, and Homerica, combined in one volume, by H. G. Evelyn-White; Lucian, the second of seven volumes, by A. M. Harmon; Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, Meditations and Speeches, by C. R. Haines; Plutarch, five out of ten volumes, by Bernadotte Perrin; Procopius, two out of six volumes, by H. B. Dewing; Theophrastus, Enquiry into Plants, and Minor Works on Odours and Weather Signs, two volumes, by Sir A. Hort; in one volume, Longus's Romance, Daphnis and Chloe, translated by S. Gaselee, and Parthenius's Love Romances, G. Thornley's translation, revised by J. M. Edmonds, well known for his translation of Sappho, and of the Greek Bucolic Poets (the latter in The Loeb Classical Library); Apuleius, The Golden Ass, W. Adlington's rendering, revised by S. Gaselee; Ovid, Heroides and Amores, by Grant Showerman; Ovid, Metamorphoses, two volumes, by Frank Justus Miller; Pliny's Letters, the translation of W. Melmoth, revised by W. М. Hutchinson: Plautus, two volumes out of four, by Paul Nixon; Seneca, Tragedies; two volumes, by Frank Justus Miller; Seneca, Epistulae Morales, one volume out of three, by R. M. Gummere; Strabo, The Geography, one volume out of eight, by Horace Leonard Jones; Vergil, one volume out of two, by Henry Rushton Fairclough: Juvenal and Persius, in one volume, by G. G. Ramsay; Xenophon, Hellenica, by C. L. Brownson. It will be of interest to indicate here the extent to which American classical scholars have thus far participated in the Library: Appian's Roman History, 4 volumes, Horace White; Dio Cassius, 6 volumes, Ernest Cary; Julian, Emperor, The Works of, two volumes, by Professor Wilmer Cave Wright (Mrs. Wright), of Bryn Mawr College; Lucian, 2 volumes, A. M. Harmon, formerly of Princeton, then of Yale University, now Lieutenant in the Naval Service of the United States; Plato, I volume (including Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Phaedrus), Harold North Fowler, of Western Reserve University; Plutarch, 5 volumes, Bernadotte Perrin, Professor Emeritus of Yale University; Procopius, 2 volumes, H. B. Dewing, of Princeton University; Xenophon, Cycropaedia, 2 volumes, Walter Miller, University of Missouri; Xenophon, Hellenica, C. L. Brownson, College of the City of New York; Cicero, De Officiis, Walter Miller; Horace, The Odes and Epodes, Charles E. Bennett, Cornell University; Ovid, Heroides and Amores, Grant Showerman, University of Wisconsin; Ovid, Metamorphoses, 2 volumes, Frank Justus Miller, University of Chicago; Plautus, 2 volumes, Paul Nixon, of Bowdoin College, now Lieutenant in the United States Army; Seneca, Tragoediae, 2 volumes, Frank Justus Miller; Seneca, Epistulae Morales, I volume, R. M. Gummere, formerly of Haverford College, now of the William Penn Charter School, Philadelphia; Strabo, the Geography, I volume, H. L. Jones, of Cornell University; nicography, Sueton 2 volumes, John C. Rolfe, of the University of Pennsylvania. Professor Harmon's two volumes on Lucian include the following pieces: Volume I, Phalaris I; Phalaris II; Hippias, or the Bath; Dionysos; Heracles; Amber, or The Swans (De Electro); The Fly; Nigrinus; Demonax; The Hall (De Domo); My Native Land; Octogenarians (Longaevi); A True Story (Vera Historia); Slander (Calumniae Non Temere Credendum); The Consonants at Law (Iudicium Vocalium: Sigma vs. Tau in the Court of the Seven Vowels); The Carousal, or The Lapiths (Convivium); Volume 2, The Downward Journey, or The Tyrant; Zeus Catechized; Zeus Rants; The Dream, or The Cock; Prometheus; Icaromenippus, or the Sky-man; Timon, or the Misanthrope; Charon, or the Inspectors; Philosophies for Sale. On the great merits of this translation see THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY 6.223, and, more especially, Professor Shorey in Classical Philology 8.234-235. Professor Perrin's five volumes of Plutarch include the following: (1) Theseus and Romulus; Lycurgus and Numa; (2) Solon and Publicola; Themistocles and Camillus; Aristides and Cato Maior; Cimon and Lucullus; (3) Pericles and Fabius Maximus; Nicias and Crassus; (4) Alcibiades and Coriolanus; Lysander and Sulla; (5) Agesilaus and Pompey; Pelopidas and Marcellus. These volumes and their successors ought to be of service to many students and teachers. It would be interesting and instructive for the teacher of Latin seriously to consider how much of his teaching these volumes can be made to illuminate. On the merits of the translation see THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY 7.192, and Professor Roger Miller Jones in Classical Philology 11.479-482, 12.312-314, 13.415-416. The translation has found favor in England, too; see H. G. Evelyn-White, in The Classical Review 30.89-90, and G. W. Butterworth, in The Classical Review 31.55-56. Mr. Dewing's translation of Procopius includes four of the eight books of Procopius's History of the Wars. Books I and 2 deal with The Persian Wars, fought by Justin and Justinian against the Persian Kings Kavadh and Chosroes Anushirvan, down to 550 A.D. Books 3 and 4 deal with the Vandalic War in Africa, down to 546. For a review of the two volumes, by G. W. Butterworth, see The Classical Review 31.53-54; see also J. W. Beardslee, Jr., in Classical Philology 13.317319. The translator of Galen's On the Natural Faculties explains (page 2) that the work has to do with the powers of the Physis or Nature. By that Galen practically means what we should call the physiological or biological powers, the characteristic faculties of the living organism; this Physis is the subconscious vital principle of the animal or plant. In considering Pliny's knowledge of Greek literature it will be convenient to notice in approximately chronological order the authors whom he quotes or to whom he alludes. This order also permits the following classification of the forms of Greek literature which Pliny knew: (I) epic poetry; (2) didactic, elegiac, and lyric poetry; (3) drama; (4) history; (5) philosophy; (6) oratory; (7) academic poetry of the Alexandrian period. (1) We are thus enabled to begin with Homer, as Pliny himself no doubt began. He quotes his witty friend Atilius (2.14.3) as saying that young lawyers are now beginning their careers by pleading in the highest courts, just as boys are first introduced to Homer, the greatest of poets, in the Schools. Only a casual review of the Greek quotations in Pliny is needed to show that he was more familiar with Homer than with any other Greek poet. He quotes from all parts of the Iliad, and, though the lines taken from the Odyssey are comparatively few, they are so scattered as to indicate ready recollection of all parts of the poem. The following lines of the Iliad are found: 1.63 (1.18.1), 1.88 (6.8.3), 1.528 (1.7.4), 2.212 (1.20.22), 3.214 and 3.222 (1.20.22), 5.356 (9.26.6), 8.102 (9.13.20), 9.319 (8.2.8), 12.243 (1.18.4), 16.250 (1.7.1), 18.20 (4.11.12), 21.388 (9.26.6); and the following from the Odyssey: 1.351-352 (5.20.8), 2.47 (5.19.2), 22.412 (9.1.3). The fact that five of the twelve quotations from the Iliad are from the first three books may be held to indicate that these books, the earliest read, were best remembered, as would be the case with most modern readers. The variety of the occasions which suggest Homeric lines to Pliny is an evidence of his real familiarity with the poems. Quite unliterary subjects prompt more of these quotations than are called forth by literary themes. Thus his ability to grant only a part of the request of Octavius Rufus in the matter of the Baetici reminds him of Zeus fulfilling one of Achilles's prayers and denying the other (1.7.1; 11. 16.250). Suetonius's uneasiness over a bad dream brings out the sympathetic quotation, καὶ γάρ τ ̓ ὄναρ ἐκ Διός ἐστιν (11. 1.63; 1.18.1). Senecio's report of the voluntary exile of Licinianus, accused by Domitian, is like Antilochus's report to Achilles, κεῖται Πατροκλός (4.11.12; 11. 18.20). In his relations with his household Pliny tries to keep in mind Odysseus's mildness (5.19.2; Od. 2.47). Hearing that a friend is in danger from a man who is about to become tribune, he promises his support in the words of Achilles to Calchas, 'No one shall harm you while I live' (6.8.3; 11. 1.88). His discrimination between the more and the less thrifty of his tenants teaches them that he does not hold both brave and coward in like esteem (8.2.8; 11. 9.319). Quotations from Homer in the literary letters, then, are not to be wondered at. Writing to Tacitus in defence of long orations he refers, in quotations, to Thersites (1.20.22; Il. 2.212), Odysseus (Il. 3.222), and Menelaus (Il. 3.214). In urging Maximus to publish at once his oration against Planta, who has just died, so that he may not seem to have composed it deliberately for publication after Planta's death, Pliny is reminded of Odysseus's rebuke of Eurycleia, οὐχ ὁσίη κταμένοισιν ἐπ ̓ ἄνδρασιν εὐχετάασθαι (Od. 22.412); but, as Planta has died a natural death, he substitutes φθιμένοισιν for κταμένοισιν (9.1.3). He quotes two lines from Homer to illustrate the bold and almost violent metaphors which the poet sometimes employs (9.26.6; 11. 21.388, 5.356). on There are also references to Homer without quotation. Pliny compliments Arrius his oratory, comparing it to the honeyed speech of Nestor (4.3.3). Encouraging Caninius in his ambition to write an epic on the Dacian Wars, he suggests that the poet shall imitate the license of Homer in the metrical treatment of names ill adapted to his verse (8.4.4). He excuses the detailed account of his Tuscan villa on the ground that he has written neither more nor less than the occasion required (5.6.43): 'You see in how many verses Homer describes the armor of Achilles and Vergil that of Aeneas; still each is concise because he accomplishes just what he intends'. Though it is very likely that Pliny's first reading of Homer was dictated by the conventional requirements of Roman education, the number and the aptness of his quotations justify the supposition that he continued to read the epic poems throughout his life. Perhaps, indeed, it was fashionable to cultivate this facility of quotation. Pliny himself tells us of a senator, who, interrupted in an attempted speech by the dismission of the Senate, complained in the words of a Homeric verse (9.13.20; 11. 8.102). But another more influential motive may be conjectured, one which would have had weight even if Pliny's early training and natural taste had not led him to Homer. The value of the epic poems for the orator was strongly emphasized by Quintilian, more strongly, perhaps, than one would expect, were it not for the unique and supreme position that Homer held among the ancients, who were not content to praise him as a poet, but insisted on drawing every kind of lesson from his work. In a review of the Greek and the Latin authors who deserve the special attention of students of oratory, Quintilian says (10.1.46), 'As Aratus holds "one must begin with Jove", so it is evident that we shall rightly begin with Homer. For, as he himself says the courses of all streams and fountains have their origin in Ocean, so he has provided a pattern and an origin for all the parts of eloquence'. And he goes on to mention the varied excellences of Homer's style with more enthusiasm and at greater length than those of all the Greek orators together. It seems not improbable that Pliny, already well grounded in Homer, found a stimulus to further reading of epic in the manifest admiration which his teacher in oratory had for the Homeric poems. (2) Among the didactic poets Hesiod is the only one whom Pliny quotes. Writing to Caninius Rufus of the death of Silius Italicus, he is reminded of the brevity of human life and the necessity of strenuous endeavor to achieve in this short period something of enduring fame (3.7.15): You have no need of goads, but my affection for you induces me to urge you on, though already running, as you are wont to urge me. ̓Αγαθὴ δ' ἔρις, and it is a noble rivalry when two friends by mutual admonitions excite each other to the passion for immortality'. This phrase is from the Works and Days (20), and is applied by the farmer poet, more humbly and materially than by Pliny, to the zealous accumulation of wealth. It would be unsafe to infer from Pliny's silence that he knew nothing of the lyric poets. But, considering what we know of his temperament and interests, we hardly expect to find quotations from Sappho or Alcaeus in the Letters. The vividly emotional expression of an age so fresh and so sincere in its inspiration as the sixth century B. C. could not meet with any genuine response in the mind of so conventional a gentleman. Pindar is not mentioned or quoted. The matter and the form of his verse perhaps made it almost as difficult of access to the Romans as to the modern reader. There is no allusion to Simonides or to the other poets of the choral lyric. (3) The references to Greek tragedy are few. In sending some of his hendecasyllabics to a friend Pliny writes rather complacently (7.4.2), 'I have never been a stranger to poetry-indeed I wrote a Greek tragedy when I was only fourteen years old. What sort of tragedy? I don't know; but they called it a tragedy'. Pliny does not mention or quote either Aeschylus or Sophocles. He quotes Euripides twice: once in describing the dignified bearing of a Vestal who was condemned to death by Domitian, when he borrows a line from the pathetic narration of the death of Polyxena (4.11.9; Hec. 569); and again in praising the young Serius Augurinus (4.27.6), who is, he says, such a man as you would expect the friend of Spurinna and of Arrius to be, 'for that famous utterance is most true, "knowing that he is such a man as they with whom he delights to be"". The Greek words are from the Phoenix of Euripides, and are quoted by more than one ancient author. The passage is given at greatest length by Aeschines (c. Timarch. 152), but the words which Pliny quotes are also found in Demosthenes's Oration on the False Legation (245), where they are requoted from Aeschines. Considering Pliny's great interest in the orators, we may conjecture that this passage was strongly impressed upon his mind by its occurrence in controversial speeches by these great exemplars of the art of public oratory (compare Nauck, Fragmenta Tragicorum Graecorum 809, for a list of authors who repeat this commonplace). These two quotations would not justify the inference that Pliny knew more of Euripides than of the earlier tragedians. Yet this is probably true. It is certain that Euripides was more read and quoted by the Romans than were Aeschylus and Sophocles. In Cicero's Letters Euripides is quoted sixteen times, Sophocles three times, and Aeschylus not at all. The fact is explained in part by the peculiarly quotable character of Euripides's work, his many sententious expressions, his many declamatory didactic passages. His frequently obvious moralizing was more easily understood and appreciated than the austerity of Aeschylus or the perfect art of Sophocles. It must be remembered, of course, that the Euripidean drama was a far more important element in that Hellenistic culture which the Romans first assimilated than the more severe examples of Attic tragedy; and Roman taste in literature, as in art, never wholly outgrew this Hellenistic influence. But the forensic oratory of Euripides must have attracted Pliny. It is the judgment of Quintilian (10.1.67) that as poets Sophocles and Euripides are very superior to Aeschylus, while for the special purpose of the orator Euripides is much more useful than Sophocles. He commends especially the style of Euripides, his sententiousness and philosophy, his argumentative skill, and his pathos. Pliny has two quotations from Old Comedy, both descriptive of the oratory of Pericles, and, in the absence of his actual speeches, valuable as contemporary testimony to his singular power. One (1.20.19) is from the Acharnians of Aristophanes (531), 'he lightened, he thundered, he stirred up Hellas'. The other (1.20.17) is from Eupolis (four verses): 'And not only was he swift of speech, but a certain persuasiveness dwelt upon his lips. So he charmed; and alone among the orators he left the sting with his hearers'. Pliny writes to Caninius of hearing a literary friend, Vergilius Romanus, read an original work in imitation of the Old Comedy (6.21). Quintilian (10.1.65) praises the poets of this School for their pure Attic diction, their free spirit, their general vigor; he finds that their style has grandeur, elegance, and charm. In the letter just quoted Pliny also says that Vergilius has written admirable imitations of Menander, worthy of comparison with Plautus and Terence. He has no other allusion to the New Comedy. Quintilian expresses the greatest admiration for Menander, saying (10.1.69). 'careful reading of Menander is sufficient for effecting all the purposes of instruction in oratory, such is his wealth of invention, his facility in expression, so well is his talent adapted to all conditions, characters, and emotions'. (4) There is little evidence to show that the historians were read by Pliny. He does not mention Herodotus. In his reflections on the death of Silius Italicus (3.7.13) he repeats the story that Xerxes, beholding his vast army, wept at the thought that in a few years not one man of this great host would be alive (Herodotus 7.46). This anecdote was very possibly a commonplace of the Schools, and does not prove that Pliny was familiar with Herodotus. There are two quotations from Thucydides. Writing to Titinius Capito of his reasons for not undertaking to be a historian, Pliny contrasts the qualities desirable in history and in oratory, and remarks (5.8.11), 'It makes a great difference, as Thucydides says, whether what one is writing is to be a κτῆμα or an ἀγώνισμα', a permanent possession or a competitive exhibition of rhetorical skill. The reference is, of course, to the Athenian historian's famous justification of the philosophical method in history (Thucydides 1.22.4). Discussing Regulus's public speaking, Pliny admits its vigor, but qualifies his praise by saying, 'although there is less force in good men than in bad, ὡς ἀμαθία μὲν θράσος, λογισμὸς δὲ ὅκνον φέρει ("ignorance gives rise to boldness, reason to hesitation"), so upright talent is weakened by modesty, perverse is strengthened by audacity'. The quotation is from the funeral oration of Pericles (Thucydides 2.40.3) and in its context is depreciative of Spartan courage. (5) Indications of interest in Greek philosophy are very faint-a hope that a dinner may be enlivened with Socratic talk (3.12.1); the generous opinion that the rhetorician Euphrates frequenter etiam Platonicam illam sublimitatem et latitudinem effingit (1.10.5); one quotation from the Memorabilia of Xenophon (7.32.3; Mem. 2.31.1), 'praise is a most agreeable thing to hear'; and a ghost story in which a philosopher named Athenodorus, possibly Athenodorus of Tarsus, who lived in the Augustan age, plays an important part (7.27.7). (6) So many of Pliny's Letters are taken up with accounts of his actual public speeches, in the Senate and in the courts, with discussion of his written and embellished orations, which he apparently considered his most important work, and with observations on the theory of oratory, that it is quite obvious that the Greek and Latin orators interested him more than any other authors. Unless we go back to the Homeric heroes whose eloquence is mentioned by Pliny in a letter to Tacitus (1.20.22), we must note Pericles as the earliest orator to whom he refers. As to actual knowledge of Pericles's oratory, Pliny was in the same position as the modern reader: he knew it only by hearsay, by the descriptions which the comic poets gave of the vigor and persuasive power of the Athenian statesman (1.20.17,19), and by those reconstructed speeches in the text of Thucydides, which, however faithfully they may reflect the ideas and the public policy of Pericles, are entirely Thucydidean in style. It may be noted that the quotation from the historian in connection with Regulus's powers in public speech is taken from one of these Periclean orations (see above). Not having the actual speeches, Pliny makes a futile attempt to prove to Tacitus (1.20) that their effectiveness had nothing to do with brevity. The letter contains reference to five Attic orators who left written works and whose works are, at least in part, extant: Lysias, Isocrates, Demosthenes, Aeschines, and Hyperides. Pliny quotes only from Demosthenes and Aeschines. In the letter to Tacitus on the advantages of elaborate oratory over a concise and direct style (1.20) he says that the friend who favors the latter type points to Lysias among the Greeks, while Pliny arrays on the opposing side Demosthenes, Aeschines, and Hyperides. It may be inferred that the simple and unpretentious style and the severely practical method of Lysias had little attraction for Pliny. Quintilian's comment (10.1.78) on this orator is, 'You could not find a more perfect orator, if it suffices an orator to teach', that is, to set forth his case clearly. 'He has nothing useless, nothing superfluous; but he is to be compared to a pure fountain rather than to a great river'. Indeed no author illustrates more clearly the difference between Hellenic and Latin genius in the economy of means and end. The art of Lysias was probably no less conscious than that of Sophocles, and it was under a no less strict control. The Latin could admire such reserve at a distance, but it would be difficult for him, in any literary undertaking, to dispense with ornament and amplification. Pliny's attitude is of a piece with the Roman preference for Euripides. Hyperides is mentioned by Pliny on the side opposed to Lysias, although Quintilian remarks of him, while praising his charm of style and his acumen, that his abilities are best adapted to cases of the smaller sort. The author of the essay Περί Ύψους (34) says that, if number of excellences and not degrees were to be considered, Hyperides would be thought to surpass Demosthenes. He is like a victor in the pentathlon, who in any other contest would miss the first prize, but is a far-better all-round athlete than the layman. So versatile a writer no doubt had speeches in the 'great river' style which was admired by Pliny. But Demosthenes is, of course, Pliny's chief model among the Greeks-ille norma oratoris et regula, he calls him (9.26.8), as Quintilian says that he was paene lex orandi (10.1.76). Pliny writes to Arrianus (1.2.2), 'I have striven to imitate Demosthenes and Calvus, at least in their forms of speech; for the vigor of such great men can be attained by only a few whom a favoring deity has loved'. mad, but that I might imitate and follow it, so far as the diversity of talents greatest and least and the dissimilarity of the cases would allow'. Pliny tells Maximus, with evident pleasure, of an incident that illustrated his own literary reputation (9.23.5), and adds by way of excuse, 'If Demosthenes was rightly pleased when an old woman of Athens recognized him with the words "Οὐτός ἐστι Δημοσθένης", ought not I to rejoice in the celebrity of my name?' Except for two insignificant quotations (2.3.10, from Demosthenes 18.313; and 4.7.6, from Demosthenes 18.291, applied ironically to the public reading of Regulus's eulogy of his son), both from the Oration on the Crown, all the words of Demosthenes actually quoted are found in the letter to Lupercus (9.26). In this letter, addressed to a friend who was especially interested, it is to be presumed, in such questions of taste, Pliny attempts to defend certain passages in his own speeches which Lupercus had scored as defects, apparently thinking them turgid or extravagant. Pliny excuses them on the ground that oratory is admirable in proportion to its daring and freedom from constraint; and this theory he seeks to substantiate by examples, first of hyperbole, from Homer (9.26.6), and then of invective and bold metaphor, from Demosthenes. Four of these quotations are from the Oration on the Crown (18.216,299,301, in 9.26.8; 18.136, in 9.26.9), one is from the Second Olynthiac (2.9, in 9.26.9), one from the First Philippic (4.49, in 9.26.8), one from the Oration on the False Legation (19.259, in 9.26.9), and six are from the first Oration against Aristogeiton (25.28, 46, 48, 76, 84, in 9.26.9). Some of these are good examples of the directness and force of Demosthenes; one or two perhaps better illustrate his range of abusive epithets. Pliny groups them all together as expressions of the sort which Aeschines called θαύματα, not ῥήματα. In spite of Aeschines, Pliny (9.26.10) believes that the superiority of Demosthenes to his rival consists in his bold employment of just such figures: 'In other things his vigor is apparent, in these his grandeur'. And he finds that Aeschines himself has on occasion a similar violence. He gives several examples: four from Aeschines on the Crown (Ctes. 101, 206, in 9.26.11; Ctes. 208, 253, in 9.26.12), and one from the speech against Timarchus (Tim. 176, in 9.26.12). Aeschines is mentioned by Pliny only in connection with Demosthenes, as here. He refers twice to the story that Aeschines read aloud to a Rhodian audience, both his own Oration on the Crown and Demosthenes's, and commented on the Later he writes to Julius Genitor, the rhetorician, of inevitable applause given to the greater speech with more specific study and imitation (7.30.4-6): 'I do some writing and reading, but, when I read, I feel by comparison how badly I write; although you encourage me, you who compare my poor attempts to avenge Helvidius with Demosthenes's speech against Meidias. To be sure I had this speech in hand when I was composing my own, not with the idea of rivaling it, for that would be impudent and all but the grim but appreciative 'What if you had heard the beast himself!' (2.3.10; 4.5.1). We may doubt whether Lupercus found his friend's learned argument convincing. He may have felt that Pliny's hyperboles and metaphors were simply marks of bad taste, without the originality and fire which excused the violence of Demosthenes. He may |