Letter CLXXXII: Marcus Cornelius Fronto to Lucius Verus

To many even unworthy sons the father's place has handed down the sovranty: just as chicks have all the marks of their kind present in them even from the egg, namely combs and feathers and crowing and wakeful ways, so for the sons of kings even in their mother's womb is supreme power destined: they receive the sovranty at the midwife's hand . . . .

Between Romulus and Remus, as they took the auguries on separate hills, birds decided the question of sovranty, and one of the Persian kings (is said in old days to have gained) the kingdom not by a race but by priority in the neighing of his horse.¹³ . . . . . . . .

We know that the plots and conspiracies of others have often deprived one man of his sovranty and handed it over to another. But eloquence when once found can neither be taken away, nor when taken away by death be transferred to another. With you your brother approves these deeds of Romulus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Cato was already recovering Spain, Gracchus already farming Asia and parcelling Carthage out among individual settlers¹⁴ . . . . Now, Marcus Tullius was the chiefest and supreme mouthpiece of the Roman tongue . . . . but Cicero more rhythmically:¹⁵ both of you, aspiring to the charm of either, go the way that I guide you.

There are extant letters in both languages, partly written by actual leaders, partly composed by the writers of histories or annals, such as that most memorable letter in Thucydides of the general Nicias¹⁶ sent from Sicily; also in Gaius Sallustius, the letter full of invective from Mithridates to Arsaces¹⁷ the king, entreating his help; and the dignified despatch of Gnaeus Pompeius to the Senate touching his soldiers' pay;¹⁸ and the recriminatory letter of Adherbal while treacherously beleaguered at Cirta;¹⁹ but all, as the occasion required, short and without any description of events. In the style, however, of your letter there is extant a despatch of Catulus, in which he has set forth in the historical manner his own exploits, chequered with losses and failure, as deserving of the laurel crown. But there is a touch of bombast in these high-flown periods, couched in words almost plaintive.²⁰ History, however, should rather be written in the grand style and, if written for the Senate, with restraint as well. If Asinius Pollio had thrown the jubilations of his Counsels into the form of a letter, in a style necessarily terser, readier, and more compact, even if here and there he did make some answer with a want of finish, he would have written better.²¹

Your letter is both eloquent, as being an orator's, strenuous, as being a general's, dignified, as to the Senate, and, as on a matter military, not overloaded. For neither . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . What imperator, when it is his duty to say something to the Senate, would write a letter? You, having no opportunity (of speaking to them) . . . . about which you had to write . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . that he had given the kingdom of Armenia to Sohaemus²² rather than to Vologaesus; or that he had deprived Pacorus²³ of his kingdom; do you not wish this to be set forth in a speech after the manner in which Nepos on the Numantine affair described it in a letter so much less forcibly, thus: in the above-mentioned war men drawn from all the nations of Spain were present . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The supremest eloquence is to speak of sublime things in the grand style, of homely things in simple language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Even Viriathus²⁴ and even Spartacus²⁵ were skilled in war and quick to strike. But indeed, if you wish to count up the full tale of all the orators, as many as have existed since the foundation of Rome, including those whom Cicero in his Brutus endowed wholesale with the franchise of eloquence, you will scarcely make up the number of three hundred all told, while from one family of the Fabii there fell fighting for their country in one day three hundred soldiers, the bravest of the brave. Not of races many thousands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . to the height of eloquence . . . . where the subject calls for it . . . . or to speak on a matter in a lower key . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

It was surely, Imperator, not the circus or the breastplate that instilled these wise ideas into you from your earliest boyhood, but books and training in letters. When you read many instances of this kind, fruitful of wise suggestion, in histories and speeches, you used eloquence as your mistress in the art of war.

The army you took over was demoralized with luxury and immorality²⁶ and prolonged idleness. The soldiers at Antioch²⁷ were wont to spend their time clapping actors, and were more often found in the nearest cafe-garden than in the ranks. Horses shaggy from neglect, but every hair plucked from their riders: a rare sight was a soldier with arm or leg hairy. Withal the men better clothed than armed, so much so that Pontius Laelianus,²⁸ a man of character and a disciplinarian of the old school, in some cases ripped up their cuirasses with his fingertips; he found horses saddled with cushions, and by his orders the little pommels on them were slit open and the down plucked from their pillions as from geese. Few of the soldiers could vault upon their steeds, the rest scrambled clumsily up by dint of heel or knee or ham; not many could make their spears hurtle, most tossed them like toy lances without verve and vigour. Gambling was rife in camp: sleep night-long, or, if a watch was kept, it was over the wine-cups.

I have received, I have received, and I have and hold a full return from you in like measure heaped high: I can now depart this life with a joyous heart, richly recompensed for my labours and leaving behind me a mighty monument to my lasting fame. That I was your master all men either know or suppose or believe from your lips: indeed, I should be shy of claiming this honour for myself did you not yourselves both proclaim it: since you do proclaim it, it is not for me to deny it.

By what disciplinary measures you were to break-in soldiers of this stamp and make them serviceable and strenuous did you not learn from the dourness of Hannibal, the stern discipline of Africanus, the exemplary methods of Metellus,²⁹ of which histories are full? This very precaution of yours, a lesson drawn from long study, not to engage the enemy in a pitched battle until you had seasoned your men with skirmishes and minor successes—did you not learn it from Cato, a man equally consummate as orator and as commander? I subjoin Cato's very words, in which you can detect the express counterpart of your measures: Meanwhile I tested each separate squadron, maniple, cohort, to gauge its capabilities. By little combats I found out the calibre of each man: if a soldier had done gallant service I rewarded him handsomely, that others might have a mind to the same, and in my address to the soldiers I was profuse in his praise. Meanwhile I made a few encampments here and there, but when the season of the year came round, I established winter quarters³⁰ . . . . tradition tells us that Cato's bust used to be carried forth from the Senate: if by reason of his military exploits, why not the bust of Camillus? why not of Capitolinus? why not of Curius and other generals? . . . . . . . .

Fronto to Lucius Verus

163 A.D.

To my Lord Verus Augustus.

In your military glory and success you have many instruments, and many thousands of armed men called up from every nation under heaven spend themselves and lend their aid to win victory for you: but your supremacy in eloquence has been gained, I may make bold to say, under my leadership, O Caesar, and under my auspices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .¹ Your answer to the Parthian king² was prompt and weighty. Of course you learnt this from your centurions or front-rankers, those truly polished disputants! Dausara and Nicephorium and Artaxata³ were taken by storm under your leadership and auspices, but that fortified and unconquered and impregnable citadel, which is planted in your brother's breast, against the assumption of the title Armeniacus,⁴ which he had refused, who other than you assaulted, and you with what other weapons than those of eloquence? You called in as your ally in winning your way an army, but a vocal army fighting with words. In that part of your letter, as befitted a loving brother, your thoughts were more closely packed and took a tenderer cast, and you arranged your words more rhythmically. When I read them—for I was too unwell to be present in the Senate—and perceived your brother to be hard pressed by your eloquence, I thus apostrophized him in my unspoken thoughts: What do you say to this, Antoninus? I see that you will have to take the title which you have declined, and retreat from your resolve. What is the use now of my letters, what of the letters of philosophers? We are outdone by a soldier's letter. Is there anything, think you, less than admirable in the writing? any unusual or unseasonable word? Or do I seem to you to have trained a vainglorious soldier? Nay, you have what you have asked for in ail your prayers, a brave brother, "a good man skilled in speaking."⁵ He says the same things as you, but expresses them more concisely than you.

At the very moment, when I was turning this over in my mind, following yours came the speech of Antoninus—Good heavens, how many admirable things, how many true! Every saying, every word quite fascinating, steeped in loyal affection and trust and love and longing. What then? which of both my two friends, the petitioner or the petitioned, should I praise the more? Antoninus with all his imperial power was complaisant, but you, Lucius, with all your complaisance, were for very love imperious. Carrying those two speeches in my right hand and my left, methought I was more honoured and more richly adorned than the priests of Eleusis carrying their torches, and kings holding sceptres in their hands, and the quindecimvirs opening the Sacred Books; and thus did I make my prayer to my ancestral⁶ Gods: O Jupiter Ammon, I beseech thee, Libya's God . . . . some of the Gods also preferred to be worshipped as speaking rather than as silent . . . . . . . . . . . . the obstinate be inoculated with eloquence. Even the levin-bolt would lose half its terror did it not fall to the accompaniment of thunder. That very power of thundering was not committed to Father Dis or to Neptune or to the other Gods, but to their sovran emperor Jove, that by the crashing of clouds and the roaring of storms, as by some voice from heaven, he might safeguard his supreme sovranty from contempt.

Therefore, if you seek a veritable sovran of the human race, it is your⁷ eloquence that is sovran, eloquence that sways men's minds. It inspires fear, wins love, is a spur to effort, puts shame to silence, exhorts to virtue, exposes vices, urges, soothes, teaches, consoles. In fine, I challenge boldly and on an old condition—give up eloquence and rule; give up making speeches in the Senate and subdue Armenia. Other leaders before you have subdued Armenia; but, by heaven, your single letter, your brother's single speech on you and your merits will be as regards fame more ennobling, and as regards posterity more talked of, than many a triumph of princes. The famous Ventidius,⁸ when he had defeated and dispersed the Parthians, to proclaim his victory borrowed a speech from C. Sallustius; and Nerva commended his acts in the Senate with words requisitioned from others. Moreover, most of the emperors that preceded your progenitors were virtually dumb and inarticulate, and were no more able to speak of their military achievements than could their helmets.

When the Commonwealth had been transferred from yearly magistrates to C. Caesar and anon to Augustus, I perceive, indeed, that Caesar's gift of speech was that of an imperator,⁹ while Augustus was, I think, master of but the dying elegance of his times and such charm as the Latin tongue still retained unimpaired, rather than of opulent diction. After Augustus a few relics only, withered already and decaying, were left over for the notorious Tiberius. But his successors without a break to Vespasian were all of such a kind as to make us no less ashamed of their speaking than disgusted with their characters and sorry for their acts.¹⁰

But should one say yes, for they had not been taught, why, then, did they bear rule? That they might exercise it, I presume, either by gestures, like actors, or with signs like the dumb, or through an interpreter like foreigners. Which of them could address people or Senate in a speech of his own? which draw up an edict or a rescript in his own words? They ruled but as the mouthpiece of others, like men in the phrensy of delirium: they were as pipes that are only vocal with another's breath.

Now sovranty is a word that connotes not only power but also speech, since the exercise of sovranty practically consists in bidding and forbidding. If he did not praise good actions, if he did not blame evil doings, if he did not exhort to virtue, if he did not warn off from vice, a ruler would belie his name and be called sovran to no purpose . . . . to foist in a changeling was accounted abominable, to publish a false bulletin a military crime, to give false witness a capital offence . . . .

9 . . . . Hadrian's speech affects a spurious pretence of ancient eloquence¹¹ . . . . Osiris . . . . of course I pass over the mule of eloquence:¹² he is labelled as no expert at the lyre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .