Ixiv
livy’s Patavinitas.
Latins, and Turnus Herdonius opposed him, which was no more
than his duty, Livy10 calls him seditiosus facinorosusque homo,
Jiisque artibus opes domi nactus, and this merely because the
man had courage enough to oppose a tyrant more powerful
than himself. For such sentiments, Livy must have become
proverbial, as one of that class of men whom the French call
Ultra: he idolised the olden times. In this sense, Augustus
called him a Pompeianll, and it is a well-known anecdote that
he forbade one of his grandsons to read Livy. The youth,
however, secretly continued reading, and being surprised on
one occasion tried to hide the book. But Augustus, who
knew that his power was too well established to suffer any in-
jury from a work written by a dreamy partizan of Pompey,
allowed his grandson to go on reading Livy as much as he
pleased.
One cannot speak of Livy without mentioning the Patavini-
tas which Asinius Pollio is said to have censured in him.13 It
is impossible to decide whether the reproach was meant against
his history, or against the speeches which he had delivered as
a rhetorician. Cicero distinguished between urbanitas as pecu-
liar to men born and brought up at Rome, and the eloquence
of men coming from the municipia, and it may be that
Asinius Pollio on some occasion when he heard Livy speak,
made some such remark, as: “One discovers in his dialect
that he has not been brought up at Rome;” just as at Paris
one often hears the remark, that it is easy to discover from a
person’s dialect that he is not a Parsian.13 The charge cannot
well have been applied to Livy’s work, for his language is as
perfect and as classical as any in Roman literature; and much
as he differs from Cicero, yet he is not inferior to him in the
grammatical correctness and purity of his language ; but there
may nevertheless have been certain nice shades in style, which
we are no longer able to recognise. If we further consider
that Asinius Pollio had been consul thirty-one years before
Livy began writing his history, and that consequently he was
some seventy years old when Livy wrote, I must own that
it is almost inconceivable to me that Asinius Pollio should
10 i. 50. " Tacitus, Annal, iv. 34. 12 Quinctil. viii. 1, 3.
13 In reading a French work, ɪ can always distinguish whether the author is,
for example, a native of Paris or of Geneva; and a Frenchman can do this, of
com sc, with still greater certainty. Every Frenchman must be able to recognise
that Sismo∏di,s works have something foreign about them.—N.
REPUTATION OP LIVY. lχv
have known tlιe work of Livy. I therefore consider this
story as one of those numberless false anecdotes which we find
in the works of Macrobius. There is indeed a statement that
Asinius Pollio was still alive after the death of Caius Caesar14:
but this is hardly credible ; for if it had been the case, Pliny
would undoubtedly have mentioned him among the Iongaevi.
I need not point out to you the beauties of Livy’s style ;
you know them well enough. What is most fascinating in him,
is his amiable character and his kindliness. The more one
reads him, the more one forgives him his defects, and had we
his last books in which he described the events of his own
time, his frankness and candour would still more win our
admiration and love. Few authors have exercised an influence
like that of Livy. He forms an era in Roman literature ; and
after him, no attempt was made to write Roman annals.
Quinctilian compares him with Herodotus ; but this can apply
only to the mildness of their narratives ; since Livy is wanting
in the very things which distinguish Herodotus : for no other
author was so rich in recollections and ancient lore, so great an
investigator, and such a master in observing and inquiring, as
the latter. Livy’s splendid talent shews itself in his conceptions
of detail, and in narration. He had no idea of the early
Roman constitution : even that which was established in his
youth was not very well known to him. That which in the
early institutions, bore the same name as in his own days, is
always confounded by him with what actually existed. There
are, on the other hand, statements which are inappropriate to
his own time, but are quite correct, if applied to the earlier
ages. His reputation was extraordinary ; it is well known that
one man came from Cadiz to Rome merely to see Livy13; and
this reputation was not ephemeral; it lasted and became firmly
established. Livy was regarded as the historian, and Roman
history was learned and studied from him alone. He threw
all his predecessors into the shade, and nearly all subse-
quent historians confined themselves to abridging his work, as
1' This statement, which is found in M. Seneca, Excerpt. Controv. iv. does not
refer to the emperor Caius (Caligula), but to Caius the son of Agrippa, whom
Augustus had adopted. Seneca says, mortuo in Syria Caio Caesare, which cau
apply only to the latter. Asiuius Pollio died in a.d. 5. (Hieron. in Euvt>.
Chron. ad. am. mmxx), and cannot possibly have known LioCs work after its
completion. ” Pliny, Epιst. ii. 3.
VOL.I. f