Besides this poetical retreat, which his imagination could command at any time, Virgil had a real and delightful villa near Naples, where he composed his Georgics, and wrote great part of the Æneid.

[b] When Augustus, or any eminent citizen, distinguished by his public merit, appeared in the theatre, the people testified their joy by acclamations, and unbounded applause. It is recorded by Horace, that Mæcenas received that public honour.

When Virgil appeared, the audience paid the same compliment to a man whose poetry adorned the Roman story. The letters from Augustus, which are mentioned in this passage, have perished in the ruins of ancient literature.

[c] Pomponius Secundus was of consular rank, and an eminent writer of tragedy. See Annals, b. ii. s. 13. His life was written by Pliny the elder, whose nephew mentions the fact (book iii. epist. 5), and says it was a tribute to friendship. Quintilian pronounces him the best of all the dramatic poets whom he had seen; though the critics whose judgement was matured by years, did not think him sufficiently tragical. They admitted, however, that his erudition was considerable, and the beauty of his composition surpassed all his contemporaries. Eorum, quos viderim, longe princeps Pomponius Secundus, quem senes parum tragicum putabant, eruditione ac nitore præstare confitebantur. Lib. x. cap. 1.

[d] Quintilian makes honourable mention of Domitius Afer. He says, when he was a boy, the speeches of that orator for Volusenus Catulus were held in high estimation. Et nobis pueris insignes pro Voluseno Catulo Domitii Afri orationes ferebantur. Lib. x. cap 1. He adds, in another part of the same chapter, that Domitius Afer and Julius Africanus were, of all the orators who flourished in his time, without comparison the best. But Afer stands distinguished by the splendour of his diction, and the rhetorical art which he has displayed in all his compositions. You would not scruple to rank him among the ancient orators. Eorum quos viderim, Domitius Afer et Julius Secundus longe præstantissimi. Verborum arte ille, et toto genere dicendi præferendus, et quem in numero veterum locare non timeas. Lib. x. cap. 1. Quintilian relates, that in a conversation which he had when a young man, he asked Domitius Afer what poet was, in his opinion, the next to Homer? The answer was, Virgil is undoubtedly the second epic poet, but he is nearer to the first than to the third. Utar enim verbis, quæ ex Afro Domitio juvenis accepi; qui mihi interroganti, quem Homero crederet maximè accedere: Secundus, inquit, est Virgilius, propior tamen primo quam tertio. Lib. x. cap. 1. We may believe that Quintilian thought highly of the man whose judgement he cites as an authority. Quintilian, however, had in view nothing but the talents of this celebrated orator. Tacitus, as a moral historian, looked at the character of the man. He introduces him on the stage of public business in the reign of Tiberius, and there represents him in haste to advance himself by any kind of crime. Quoquo facinore properus clare cere. He tells us, in the same passage (Annals, b. iv. s. 52), that Tiberius pronounced him an orator in his own right, suo jure disertum. Afer died in the reign of Nero, A.U.C. 812, A.D. 59. In relating his death, Tacitus observes, that he raised himself by his eloquence to the first civil honours; but he does not dismiss him without condemning his morals. Annals, b. xiv. s. 19.

[e] We find in the Annals and the History of Tacitus, a number of instances to justify the sentiments of Maternus. The rich found it necessary to bequeath part of their substance to the prince, in order to secure the remainder for their families. For the same reason, Agricola made Domitian joint heir with his wife and daughter. Life of Agricola, section 43.

[f] By a law of the Twelve Tables, a crown, when fairly earned by virtue, was placed on the head of the deceased, and another was ordered to be given to his father. The spirit of the law, Cicero says, plainly intimated, that commendation was a tribute due to departed virtue. A crown was given not only to him who earned it, but also to the father, who gave birth to distinguished merit. Illa jam significatio est, laudis ornamenta ad mortuos pertinere, quod coronam virtute partam, et ei qui peperisset, et ejus parenti, sine fraude lex impositam esse jubet. De Legibus, lib. ii. s. 24. This is the reward to which Maternus aspires; and, that being granted, he desires, as Horace did before him, to waive the pomp of funeral ceremonies.

Section XIV.

[a] Vipstanius Messala commanded a legion, and, at the head of it, went over to Vespasian's party in the contention with Vitellius. He was a man of illustrious birth, and equal merit; the only one, says Tacitus, who entered into that war from motives of virtue. Legioni Vipstanius Messala præerat, claris majoribus, egregius ipse, et qui solus ad id bellum artes bonas attulisset. Hist. lib. iii. s. 9. He was brother to Regulus, the vile informer, who has been mentioned. See Life of Agricola, section 2. note a, and this tract, s. xii. note [b]. Messala, we are told by Tacitus, before he had attained the senatorian age, acquired great fame by pleading the cause of his profligate brother with extraordinary eloquence, and family affection. Magnam eo die pietatis eloquentiæque famam Vipstanius Messala adeptus est; nondum senatoriâ ætate, ausus pro fratre Aquilio Regulo deprecari. Hist. lib. iv. s. 42. Since Messala has now joined the company, the Dialogue takes a new turn, and, by an easy and natural transition, slides into the question concerning the causes of the decline of eloquence.

[b] This is probably the same Asiaticus, who, in the revolt of the provinces of Gaul, fought on the side of VINDEX. See Hist. b. ii. s. 94. Biography was, in that evil period, a tribute paid by the friends of departed merit, and the only kind of writing, in which men could dare faintly to utter a sentiment in favour of virtue and public liberty.

[c] In the declamations of Seneca and Quintilian, we have abundant examples of these scholastic exercises, which Juvenal has placed in a ridiculous light.

Section XV.

[a] The eloquence of Cicero, and the eminent orators of that age, was preferred by all men of sound judgement to the unnatural and affected style that prevailed under the emperors. Quintilian gives a decided opinion. Cicero, he says, was allowed to be the reigning orator of his time, and his name, with posterity, is not so much that of a man, as of eloquence itself. Quare non immerito ab hominibus ætatis suæ, regnare in judiciis dictus est: apud posteros vero id consecutus, ut Cicero jam non hominis, sed eloquentiæ nomen habeatur. Lib. x. cap. 1. Pliny the younger professed that Cicero was the orator with whom he aspired to enter into competition. Not content with the eloquence of his own times, he held it absurd not to follow the best examples of a former age. Est enim mihi cum Cicerone æmulatio, nec sum contentus eloquentiâ sæculi nostri. Nam stultissimum credo, ad imitandum non optima quæque præponere. Lib. i. epist. 5.

[b] Nicetes was a native of Smyrna, and a rhetorician in great celebrity. Seneca says (Controversiarum, lib. iv. cap. 25), that his scholars, content with hearing their master, had no ambition to be heard themselves. Pliny the younger, among the commendations which he bestows on a friend, mentions, as a praise-worthy part of his character, that he attended the lectures of Quintilian and Nicetes Sacerdos, of whom Pliny himself was at that time a constant follower. Erat non studiorum tantum, verum etiam studiosorum amantissimus, ac prope quotidie ad audiendos, quos tunc ego frequentabam, Quintilianum et Niceten Sacerdotem, ventitabat. Lib. vi. epist. 6.

[c] Mitylene was the chief city of the isle of Lesbos, in the Ægean Sea, near the coast of Asia. The place at this day is called Metelin, subject to the Turkish dominion. Ephesus was a city of Ionia, in the Lesser Asia, now called Ajaloue by the Turks, who are masters of the place.

[d] Domitius Afer and Julius Africanus have been already mentioned, section xiii. note [d]. Both are highly praised by Quintilian. For Asinius Pollio, see s. xii. note [e].

Section XVI.

[a] Quintilian puts the same question; and, according to him, Demosthenes is the last of the ancients among the Greeks, as Cicero is among the Romans. See Quintilian, lib. viii. cap. 5.

[b] The siege of Troy is supposed to have been brought to a conclusion eleven hundred and ninety-three years before Christian æra. From that time to the sixth year of Vespasian (A.U.C. 828), when this Dialogue was had, the number of years that intervened was about 1268; a period which, with propriety, may be said to be little less than 1300 years.

[c] Demosthenes died, before Christ 322 years, A.U.C. 432. From that time to the sixth of Vespasian, A.U.C. 828, the intervening space was about 396 years. Aper calls it little more than 400 years; but in a conversation-piece strict accuracy is not to be expected.

[d] In the rude state of astronomy, which prevailed during many ages of the world, it was natural that mankind should differ in their computation of time. The ancient Egyptians, according to Diodorus Siculus, lib. i. and Pliny the elder, lib. vii. s. 48, measured time by the new moons. Some called the summer one year, and the winter another. At first thirty days were a lunar year; three, four, and six months were afterwards added, and hence in the Egyptian chronology the vast number of years from the beginning of the world. Herodotus informs us, that the Egyptians, in process of time, formed the idea of the solar or solstitial year, subdivided into twelve months. The Roman year at first was lunar, consisting, in the time of Romulus, of ten months. Numa Pompilius added two. Men saw a diversity in the seasons, and wishing to know the cause, began at length to perceive that the distance or proximity of the sun occasioned the various operations of nature; but it was long before the space of time, wherein that luminary performs his course through the zodiac, and returns to the point from which he set out, was called a year. The great year (annus magnus), or the PLATONIC YEAR, is the space of time, wherein the seven planets complete their revolutions, and all set out again from the same point of the heavens where their course began before. Mathematicians have been much divided in their calculations. Brotier observes, that Riccioli makes the great year 25,920 solar years; Tycho Brahe, 25,816; and Cassini, 24,800. Cicero expressly calls it a period of 12,954 years. Horum annorum, quos in fastis habemus, MAGNUS annos duodecim millia nonagentos quinquaginta quatuor amplectitur solstitiales scilicet. For a full and accurate dissertation on the ANNUS MAGNUS, see the Memoirs of the Academy of Belles Lettres, tom. xxii. 4to edit. p. 82.

Brotier, in his note on this passage, relates a fact not universally known. He mentions a letter from one of the Jesuits on the mission, dated Peking, 25th October 1725, in which it is stated, that in the month of March preceding, when Jupiter, Mars, Venus, and Mercury were in conjunction, the Chinese mathematicians fancied that an approximation of Saturn was near at hand, and, in that persuasion, congratulated the emperor YONG-TCHING on the renovation of the world, which was shortly to take place. The emperor received the addresses of the nobility, and gave credit to the opinion of the philosophers in all his public edicts. Meanwhile, Father Kegler endeavoured to undeceive the emperor, and to convince him that the whole was a mistake of the Chinese mathematicians: but he tried in vain; flattery succeeded at court, and triumphed over truth.

[e] The argument is this: If the great year is the measure of time; then, as it consists, according to Cicero, of 12,954 solar years, the whole being divided by twelve, every month of the great year would be clearly 1080 years. According to that calculation, Demosthenes not only lived in the same year with the persons engaged in the Dialogue, but, it may be said, in the same month. These are the months to which Virgil alludes in the fourth eclogue:

Section XVII.

[a] Menenius Agrippa was consul A.U.C. 251. In less than ten years afterwards, violent dissensions broke out between the patrician order and the common people, who complained that they were harassed and oppressed by their affluent creditors. One Sicinius was their factious demagogue. He told them, that it was in vain they fought the battles of their country, since they were no better than slaves and prisoners at Rome. He added, that men are born equal; that the fruits of the earth were the common birth-right of all, and an agrarian law was necessary; that they groaned under a load of debts and taxes; and that a lazy and corrupt aristocracy battened at ease on the spoils of their labour and industry. By the advice of this incendiary, the discontented citizens made a secession to the MONS SACER, about three miles out of the city. The fathers, in the meantime, were covered with consternation. In order, however, to appease the fury of the multitude, they dispatched Menenius Agrippa to their camp. In the rude unpolished style of the times (prisco illo dicendi et horrido modo, says Livy), that orator told them:

The analogy, which this fable bore to the sedition of the Roman people, was understood and felt. The discontented multitude saw that the state of man described by Menenius, was like to an insurrection. They returned to Rome, and submitted to legal government. Tempore, quo in homine non, ut nunc, omnia in unum consentiebant, sed singulis membris suum cuique consilium, sum sermo fuerat, indignatas reliquas partes, suâ curâ, suo labore, ac ministerio, ventri omnia quæri; ventrem in medio quietum, nihil aliud, quam datis voluptatibus frui; conspirasse inde, ne manus ad os cibum ferrent, nec os acciperit datum, nec dentes conficerent. Hac irâ dum ventrem fame domare vellent, ipsa unâ membra, totumque corpus ad extremam tabem venisse. Inde apparuisse, ventris quoque haud segne ministerium esse; nec magis ali quam alere eum; reddentem in omnes corporis partes hunc, quo vivimus vigemusque, divisum, pariter in venas, maturum confecto cibo sanguinem. Livy, lib. ii. s. 32. St. Paul has made use of a similar argument;

This reasoning of St. Paul merits the attention of those friends of innovation, who are not content with the station in which God has placed them, and, therefore, object to all subordination, all ranks in society.

[b] Cæsar the dictator was, as the poet expresses it, graced with both Minervas. Quintilian is of opinion, that if he had devoted his whole time to the profession of eloquence, he would have been the great rival of Cicero. The energy of his language, his strength of conception, and his power over the passions, were so striking, that he may be said to have harangued with the same spirit that he fought. Caius vero Cæsar si foro tantum vacasset, non alius ex nostris contra Ciceronem nominaretur. Tanta in eo vis est, id acumen, ea concitatio, ut illum eodem animo dixisse, quo bellavit, appareat. Lib. x. cap. 1. To speak of Cicero in this place, were to hold a candle to the sun. It will be sufficient to refer to Quintilian, who in the chapter above cited has drawn a beautiful parallel between him and Demosthenes. The Roman orator, he admits, improved himself by a diligent study of the best models of Greece. He attained the warmth and the sublime of Demosthenes, the harmony of Plato, and the sweet flexibility of Isocrates. His own native genius supplied the rest. He was not content, as Pindar expresses it, to collect the drops that rained down from heaven, but had in himself the living fountain of that copious flow, and that sublime, that pathetic energy, which were bestowed upon him by the bounty of Providence, that in one man eloquence might exert all her powers. Nam mihi videtur Marcus Tullius, cum se totum ad imitationem Græcorum contulisset, effinxisse vim Demosthenis, copiam Platonis, jucunditatem Isocratis. Nec vero quod in quoque optimum fuit studio consecutus est tantum, sed plurimas vel potius omnes ex se ipso virtutes extulit immortalis ingenii beatissimâ ubertate. Non enim pluvias (ut ait Pindarus) aquas colligit sed vivo gurgite exundat, dono quodam providentiæ genitus, in quo vires suas eloquentia experiretur. Lib. x. cap. 1.

[c] Marcus Cælius Rufus, in the judgement of Quintilian, was an orator of considerable genius. In the conduct of a prosecution, he was remarkable for a certain urbanity, that gave a secret charm to his whole speech. It is to be regretted that he was not a man of better conduct and longer life. Multum ingenii in Cælio, et præcipuè in accusando multa urbanitas; dignusque vir, cui et mens melior, et vita longior contigisset. Quint, lib. x. cap. 1. His letters to Cicero make the eighth book of the Epistolæ ad Familiares. Velleius Paterculus says of him, that his style of eloquence and his cast of mind bore a resemblance to Curio, but raised him above that factious orator. His genius for mischief and evil deeds was not inferior to Curio, and his motives were strong and urgent, since his fortune was worse than even his frame of mind. Marcus Cælius, vir eloquio animoque Curioni simillimus, sed in utroque perfectior; nec minus ingeniosè nequam, cum ne in modicâ quidem servari posset, quippe pejor illi res familiaris, quam mens. Vell. Patere. lib. ii. s. 68.

Licinius Macer Calvus, we are told by Seneca, maintained a long but unjust contention with Cicero himself for the palm of eloquence. He was a warm and vehement accuser, insomuch that Vatinius, though defended by Cicero, interrupted Calvus in the middle of his speech, and said to the judges, "Though this man has a torrent of words, does it follow that I must be condemned?" Calvus diu cum Cicerone iniquissimam litem de principatu eloquentiæ habuit; et usque eò violentus accusator et concitatus fuit, ut in media actione ejus surgeret Vatinius reus, et exclamaret, Rogo vos, judices, si iste disertus est, ideo me damnari oportet? Seneca, Controv. lib. iii. cap. 19. Cicero could not dread him as a rival, and it may therefore be presumed, that he has drawn his character with an impartial hand. Calvus was an orator more improved by literature than Curio. He spoke with accuracy, and in his composition shewed great taste and delicacy; but, labouring to refine his language, he was too attentive to little niceties. He wished to make no bad blood, and he lost the good. His style was polished with timid caution; but while it pleased the ear of the learned, the spirit evaporated, and of course made no impression in the forum, which is the theatre of eloquence. Ad Calvum revertamur; qui orator fuisset cum literis eruditior quam Curio, tum etiam accuratius quoddam dicendi, et exquisitius afferebat genus; quod quamquam scienter eleganterque tractabat, nimium tamen inquirens in se, atque ipse sese observans, metuensque ne vitiosum colligeret, etiam verum sanguinem deperdebat. Itaque ejus oratio nimiâ religione attenuata, doctis et attentè audientibus erat illustris, a multitudine autem, et a foro, cui nata eloquentia est, devorabatur. De Claris Orat. s. 288. Quintilian says, there were, who preferred him to all the orators of his time. Others were of opinion that, by being too severe a critic on himself, he polished too much, and grew weak by refinement. But his manner was grave and solid; his style was chaste, and often animated. To be thought a man of attic eloquence was the height of his ambition. If he had lived to see his error, and to give to his eloquence a true and perfect form, not by retrenching (for there was nothing to be taken away), but by adding certain qualities that were wanted, he would have reached the summit of his art. By a premature death his fame was nipped in the bud. Inveni qui Calvum præferrent omnibus; inveni qui contrà crederent eum, nimiâ contra se calumniâ, verum sanguinem perdidisse. Sed est et sancta et gravis oratio, et castigata, et frequenter vehemens quoque. Imitator est autem Atticorum; fecitque illi properata mors injuriam, si quid adjecturus, non si quid detracturus fuit. Quintil. lib. x. cap. 1.

[d] This was the famous Marcus Junius Brutus, who stood forth in the cause of liberty, and delivered his country from the usurpation of Julius Cæsar. Cicero describes him in that great tragic scene, brandishing his bloody dagger, and calling on Cicero by name, to tell him that his country was free. Cæsare interfecto, statim cruentum altè extollens Marcus Brutus pugionem, Ciceronem nominatim exclamavit, atque ei recuperatam libertatem est gratulatus. Philippic, ii. s. 28. The late Doctor Akenside has retouched this passage with all the colours of a sublime imagination.

According to Quintilian, Brutus was fitter for philosophical speculations, and books of moral theory, than for the career of public oratory. In the former he was equal to the weight and dignity of his subject: you clearly saw that he believed what he said. Egregius vero multoque quam in orationibus præstantior Brutus, suffecit ponderi rerum; scias eum sentire quæ dicit. Quintil. lib. x. cap. 1.

For Asinius Pollio and Messala, see section xii. note [e].

[e] Hirtius and Pansa were consuls A.U.C. 711; before the Christian æra 43. In this year, the famous triple league, called the TRIUMVIRATE, was formed between Augustus, Lepidus, and Antony. The proscription, or the list of those who were doomed to die for the crime of adhering to the cause of liberty, was also settled, and Cicero was one of the number. A band of assassins went in quest of him to his villa, called Astura, near the sea-shore. Their leader was one Popilius Lænas, a military tribune, whom Cicero had formerly defended with success in a capital cause. They overtook Cicero in his litter. He commanded his servants to set him down, and make no resistance; then looking upon his executioners with a presence and firmness which almost daunted them, and thrusting his neck as forward as he could out of the litter, he bade them do their work, and take what they wanted. The murderers cut off his head, and both his hands. Popilius undertook to convey them to Rome, as the most agreeable present to Antony; without reflecting on the infamy of carrying that head, which had saved his own. He found Antony in the forum, and upon shewing the spoils which he brought, was rewarded on the spot with the honour of a crown, and about eight thousand pounds sterling. Antony ordered the head to be fixed upon the rostra, between the two hands; a sad spectacle to the people, who beheld those mangled members, which used to exert themselves, from that place, in defence of the lives, the fortunes, and the liberties of Rome. Cicero was killed on the seventh of December, about ten days from the settlement of the triumvirate, after he had lived sixty-three years, eleven months, and five days. See Middleton's Life of Cicero, 4to edit. vol. ii. p. 495 to 498. Velleius Paterculus, after mentioning Cicero's death, breaks out in a strain of indignation, that almost redeems the character of that time-serving writer. He says to Antony, in a spirited apostrophe, you have no reason to exult: you have gained no point by paying the assassin, who stopped that eloquent mouth, and cut off that illustrious head. You have paid the wages of murder, and you have destroyed a consul who was the conservator of the commonwealth. By that act you delivered Cicero from a distracted world, from the infirmities of old age, and from a life which, under your usurpation, would have been worse than death. His fame was not to be crushed: the glory of his actions and his eloquence still remains, and you have raised it higher than ever. He lives, and will continue to live in every age and nation. Posterity will admire and venerate the torrent of eloquence, which he poured out against yourself, and will for ever execrate the horrible murder which you committed. Nihil tamen egisti, Marce Antoni (cogit enim excedere propositi formam operis erumpens animo ac pectore indignatio): nihil, inquam, egisti; mercedem cælestissimi oris, et clarissimi capitis abscissi numerando; auctoramentoque funebri ad conservatoris quondam reipublicæ tantique consulis irritando necem. Rapuisti tu Marco Ciceroni lucem sollicitam et ætatem senilem, et vitam miseriorem te principe, quam sub te triumviro mortem. Famam vero, gloriamque factorum atque dictorum adeo non abstulisti, ut auxeris. Vivit, vivetque per omnium sæculorum memoriam; omnisque posteritas illius in te scripta mirabitur, tuum in eum factum execrabitur. Vell. Paterc. lib. ii. s. 66.

[f] Between the consulship of Augustus, which began immediately after the destruction of Hirtius and Pansa, A.U.C. 711, and the death of that emperor, which was A.U. 767, fifty-six years intervened, and to the sixth of Vespasian (A.U.C. 828), about 118 years. For the sake of a round number, it is called in the Dialogue a space of 120 years.

[g] Julius Cæsar landed in Britain in the years of Rome 699 and 700. See Life of Agricola, s. 13. note a. It does not appear when Aper was in Britain; it could not be till the year of Rome 796, when Aulus Plautius, by order of the emperor Claudius, undertook the conquest of the island. See Life of Agricola, s. 14. note a. At that time, the Briton who fought against Cæsar, must have been far advanced in years.

[h] A largess was given to the people, in the fourth year of Vespasian, when Domitian entered on his second consulship. This, Brotier says, appears on a medal, with this inscription: CONG. II. COS. II. Congiarium alterum, Domitiano consule secundùm. The custom of giving large distributions to the people was for many ages established at Rome. Brotier traces it from Ancus Martius, the fourth king of Rome, when the poverty of the people called for relief. The like bounty was distributed by the generals, who returned in triumph. Lucullus and Julius Cæsar displayed, on those occasions, great pomp and magnificence. Corn, wine, and oil, were plentifully distributed, and the popularity, acquired by those means, was, perhaps, the ruin of the commonwealth. Cæsar lavished money. Augustus followed the example, and Tiberius did the same; but prodigality was not his practice. His politic genius taught him all the arts of governing. The bounties thus distributed, were called, when given to the people, CONGIARIA, and, to the soldiers, DONATIVA. Whoever desires to form an idea of the number of Roman citizens who, at different times, received largesses, and the prodigious expence attending them, may see an account drawn up with diligent attention by Brotier, in an elaborate note on this passage. He begins with Julius Cæsar; and pursues the enquiry through the several successive emperors, fixing the date and expence at every period, as low down as the consulship of Constantius and Galerius Maximianus; when, the empire being divided into the eastern and western, its former magnificence was, by consequence, much diminished.

[i] The person here called Corvinus was the same as Corvinus Messala, who flourished in the reign of Augustus, at the same time with Asinius Pollio. See s. xii. note [e].