New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-04-20
NEW PUBLICATIONS.
LATIN LITERATURE.

His PceShiu VI By GEORGE AUGUSTUS sIMoox A.
Fellow Of Qgeen's Coiese 0 Hsyper Brofhers
,,, -, 81 N, Simcox IL an excellent specimen
81 loss If nroductions for which English scholar
.h,n - earning an honorable distinction. 1t COM
hines rrecse learning and wide range OF s'uuy
with critical subtlety. poeticai appreciation ana
certap fine literary quality which fuses the results
of patieat research and ingenious speculation INTO
an elegant add consistent structure. The authors
aim i, to make Latin literature "intelligib'e ana
;rteresting as whole to the cultivated laity who
might like TO realize its literary worth whether
they read Latin or no." In this attempt he has
reached striking success and he has also given us
a history to which serious Investigators may turn
with satisfaction Following the accepted Prlnci
pes of modern historical writing, he treats oil inter-
ature in connection with the various political social
and personal forces which have influenced It's de-
veIopment OF course. if this plan were to he
carried out in ITS full est extent survey OF Lauh
literature Ought to embrace almost SYNOPSIS OF
Roman history. Roman philosophy ana Roman CIV
ilization-a scheme far beyond the practicable
scope of any special treatise and the true measure
of the writer's success the tact with which he IN
terweayes with his proper subject just enough OF
the related topics TO illustrate the theme without
confusing It, And here as II seems "
rs. Mr. Smcox shows admirable aI''
Tho materials for a history OF LAIN Ht-
e1ature as an organic whole are not eohpe'e.
There are certain periods respecting when we Slai
be always moro less in the dark but there Is
iioht enough upun the most important eras, ana
sven of the general movement of letters. Mr.. Sim
roy shows that it is possible to present review
with which his particular clients the cultivated
laitv" will be abundantly satisfied. His method
of treatment is a happy mixture OF the historical
the biographical and the critical. The sketch OF
the life of each writer is ACCOMPANIED by an expo
sition of the social. personal aud other influences
surrounding him whenever these can be known. as
we'll as of the condition and tendencies OF the liter
atnre of his time The close connection between
Latin and Greek letters and tie remarkable free
dom with which the Latin writers copied and APP
nrouriated and initiated the work of Greclan ge-
Mus is very clearly traced Upon such generally
known authors as Virgil and Horace, Mr. Simcox's
criticisms though profuse are somewhat general
OF the comparatively unfamiliar literature. such as
the early drama of the republic he furnishes an Luz
terestng tica account. The felicity of many OF
his illustrative comments is remarkable. The
following is good example from his CAREFUL, Ju-
dicious and acute essay on Cicero:
n has become the fashion to praise Cicero rs u
man and a writer and TO disparage hun as a states
man and thinker: and recently his reputation
has been exposed to the attacks OF writers vino take
the side Of accomplished iacts IN what may Dc
called a viudictlve spirit Cicero failed as poll
tcian and 1t is rather dthcult 20 see how he could
have succeeded: and resentment at his iailure
takes the form of contempt tor his blindness Ia not
seeing be fore trial thar his Ingenious ana well IN
teutl1ned pians were lmpTactIcable. Besides, ms
pnlitical career as dishgured 10y faults which sem
atural to adyocaies who play a leading pant in
politics; for all CIcerOs great political aulis have
their parallels in the career oil Broughhn, VINO
was in So many respects unlike Cicero. There was
the same ObtTusve fertility OF suggestion, The
same readiness TO patTonize, tile same want OF hx-
Ity of p0litlcal purpOSe-due in bOth TO the same
disposition 10 follow their changing personal inter
est and their changing personal views of the public
good, rather than prIncll les held III common with
others; the same want ol spontaneous respect LOT
the dignity of those with whom they had to act,
sometimes Disgusting itself in fulsome praise some
times expressing itself in ~antOn epsrams; the
salCe giddy citation at the elimination of the ca
reer the same tendency TO be guided ny petty VIZ
dIctiyeness Nheu high station seemed irrecON Err
ally lost In both too there was the same dspo-
stion to take refuge in intellectual interests and IN
the display of intellectual attanments which were
rather extensive than profound. In TINS, as III
mauy points, Cicero has the advantage, Tor hts IN
teliectual exercises did not intrude upon fields
already occupied by more competent workmen.
The last paragraphs of this chapter NAV be quoted
as further specimen Of Mr.. simcoxs critical
manner:
As compared with Demosthenes it is his great
praise to be All using aud ntarestng hs does not
take our concern iOr granted as DemOsthenes does,
who trusts simply to the contaglon OF his own earn
estness. whereas Cicero has studied all methods of
engaging aud relieving our attention. lie varies
everything that he varied he amplltes almost
,verythInG that can he am oined lie fond of side
issues la the defence of Sex. ROsCius, his first
great speech lie rests his not on the innocence
of his client. VIII eli be is content Tor the most part
to asseverate, but on the nelariouH manGuvres OF
Cbrvsogonus SO, too. in the defence OF Cluentius
we hear quite a. much OF the trial IN winch
Ciuentius was supposed to have Outbrlbed his
mohers husband ia OF tho charge of poisoning that
was actually before tue court and. long after the
affair of Catiina the supposed necessity OF protect
Ing all who had hcpel Cicero to save the State
from his nefariOus enterprise figured largely in hi,
speeches lie is rather apt to frame Improbable de
fences and to take up more ground than could
be really held For instance IL is obvious that
there wes malice on either side IN .he ARRAY be
tween, ClOdlus aud Milo; but as ClOdluss PARTISAN
chose to assert that Milo had Land plot to assas
sinate COdIus. Cicero roundly IetOrted that IL wat
Clodius who had LAID plot TO assasslnate Milo ant
his whole speech ls pervaded by TINS rash ASSUME
ton. Throughout, also. Milo Is represented as
pure and spOtless patriot; although, even beior,
his last outbreak. Cicero had pretty well made NJ
his mind that lie was mailman, aud expressed hi
belief with his usual frankness in his OutspOkeI
correspondence Perhaps Cicero wrote III deionc
of Milo with some oxaggcration oil ent huslasm, lie
cause ia the actual tual bn had spoken WIN les
than his usual cOurage ana laed IN Tue result NOR
completely than he accusi oued 10 fail. Bnt J
does not appear that after hiss consulshlp be e'e
was really supreme as AN adv ocaie: he was Away
The greatest living orator, though lew OF the ora
tlous which he banued down to rs belong 10 hl
later years-except The " PhIlippcS." which, wit
one or two exceptions. are more remarkable 70
fLe skiIful pertInacity with which political OH
ieet pursued under great difficulties than for hcI
worth as oratiOns. fOr instance, 1t was voted tina
under the alarming circumsj ances OF u time mill
fary dress should toe worn IN the streets of Rome
and Cicero harps upon this derisOn IN way tia
WAS probably edtYng and useful TO rIght-thiDkID
possips at the time but is the reverse OF impressive
TO pOstrrlty. In general, the difficulties uude
which Cicero spoke are too apparent, aud the neces
sity of putting AIR of herOism intcTleres wit
our appreciation OF the diplomatic Ingenuity dis
played IN the speeS hes and 10 better advantage Il
the letters TO Plancus and other commanders whor
cicero had hopes OF securing to the Interest
of the Senate. Probably wen the great Stcon
Philippine which has generally been recognized a
Cicero's masterpiece gained in reputation goo
deal 10y tho subsequent history OF AntouIus VII
was completely sacrificed to Augustus by all Roma
writers; whence ii followed that all CicerOs al
tacks upon him entirely Justified. AT the tim
81 is hard to think that the conduct OF Antonio
was really outrage upon the sensibilities OF