-
5. The Roman Way and Romanization
- The Catholic University of America Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
Chapter Five The Roman Way and Romanization “Carthage must be obliterated!” [delendam esse Carthaginem, the advice the Elder Cato is said to have proclaimed constantly in all his speeches, no matter their subject] (cf. Florus, Roman History . [.], –; trans. WEH) “For just how long, Catiline, are you going to abuse our patience? .l.l. What times, what customs!” [Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra? .l.l. O tempora! o mores!] (Cicero, First Oration Against Catiline –; trans. WEH) “I came, I saw, I conquered.” [Veni, vidi, vici, Caesar’s words, summing up his campaign against king Pharnakes] (Suetonius, Caesar .; trans. WEH) These sentences have been famous since antiquity, and they abide in the memory of all who have studied Latin even today. What is the source of their power? First, it derives from the power of those speaking: Cato the censor, Cicero the consul, Caesar the dictator, statesmen holding the highest magistracies. Next, it comes from the circumstances, in which the fates of Rome and its enemies, indeed, the fate of the world, were at stake. And it comes from their very content, where rigor rules. Finally, it comes from the inherent energy of the Latin language, which permits saying a lot with few words. Plutarch, who translated Caesar’s sentence into Greek, observes that the original is superior because “in Latin .l.l. the words have the same inflectional ending, and so a brevity which is most impressive” (Life of Caesar .). Through these examples, an image emerges of politicians who do not waste words and who de83 pend more on their actions, their convictions and their personal authority . Such is the ideal of the old Roman, “beautiful with the patina of age.” This ideal lies beneath all Roman rhetoric—even if it clearly does not sum it up completely—and that is where one must begin. It results from specific circumstances, as much ideological as linguistic, social, political , or institutional. Let us lay out this background, which so profoundly differs from what is observable in the Greek world, and which constitutes in a way “Roman-ness” in rhetoric. This Roman-ness will be enriched later on by a “Romanization” of Greek spoils. The Background of Roman Rhetoric Greece had at its very beginnings a literature which made varied and supple use of the art of speaking, and which set forth as models heroes who were clever orators. This does not exist in Rome: no Homer here, no Odysseus. On the contrary, the ancient Roman model is an orator who speaks with careful consideration and who counts on his status— age, nobility, prestige—to guarantee the worth of his words. The “weightiness” (gravitas) and “personal authority” (auctoritas) of the orator are essential elements of the discourse; he is listened to not so much for his words in themselves but for his position in the city, which necessarily gives his words their value, as numerous anecdotes relate. Thus Appius Claudius, summoned before the Popular Assembly in the year following his consulate ( ..), refused to argue in his own defense and instead blasted his accusers with the firmness of his remarks whose strength derived from his prestige as a former consul: There was the same expression on his countenance, the same arrogance in his glance, the same fire in his speech; so markedly, in fact, that a great part of the plebs feared Appius no less when a defendant than they had feared him as consul . (Livy ..) In the second century, Scipio Nasica, having to confront popular protests, let loose: “Be silent, citizens, if you please! I understand better than you what is for the public good”; similarly, Scipio Aemilianus: 84 Rhetoric in Antiquity [44.200.39.110] Project MUSE (2024-03-29 03:30 GMT) “Let people to whom Italy is a step-mother hold their tongues.” M. Aemilius Scaurus, when accused, defended himself with the following line of reasoning: “Varius Severus, who was born in some dago backwater , says that Aemilius Scaurus, corrupted by royal hire, betrayed the empire of the Roman people. Aemilius Scaurus denies any connection with such guilt. Which of the two are you going to believe?” (Valerius Maximus, Memorable Doings and Sayings, ..; ..; .., Loeb trans. modified). History records that success crowned these words, the audience in each case impressed with the authority of the speaker, and these anecdotes were handed down as illustrations of the Roman tradition. The spoken word at Rome is a serious matter. Originally it is sacred and involves the order of...