2. Cassiodorus

2. Cassiodorus

The survey included by the monk Cassiodorus[59] in his _Institutiones_ is hardly more than an enumeration. The seven arts are not considered in their larger aspects; and the Trivium is merely sketched. _Rhetorica_, after being summarily distinguished from _dialectica_ and divided into its typical considerations and objects, is hastened through the parts of a speech into the emotions. Then defining it anew and dividing it into its traditional five parts, Cassiodorus enumerates _status_, reverts to the parts of a speech, cites Quintilian and Fortunatianus, and classifies arguments. The meager summary is not even clear. Nevertheless the influence of Cassiodorus in carrying forward the idea of the seven arts is attested by frequent reference.[60]

3. Isidore

In the seventh century, and for centuries afterward, a chief purveyor of the lore of the seven arts was the _Etymologiæ_, or _Origines_, of the Spanish bishop Isidore of Seville.[61] The work is an aggregation of summaries, not only of the seven arts, which occupy only three books of the twenty, but of medicine, law, holy writ, history, the hierarchy celestial and terrestrial, zoölogy, geography, metallurgy, agriculture, and crafts. Though it has no single guiding scheme, its brief chapters are grouped under headings fairly convenient for reference. It is a guide-book, rendering its first service when books were few and hard to get, and long continuing in vogue. In the thirteenth century Vincent of Beauvais,[62] undertaking more systematically a compend hardly less comprehensive, his vast _Speculum_, transferred to it whole passages from Isidore.

Isidore appealed to the earlier middle age as a mediator not only of manifold lore, but especially of ancient tradition.

The disciplines of the liberal arts are seven: first _grammatica_, i.e., skill in speaking; second, _rhetorica_, for the splendor and abundance of its eloquence deemed necessary especially in political questions;[63] third, _dialectica_, surnamed _logica_, which by subtlest arguments distinguishes the true from the false. I. ii.

Isidore’s _grammatica_ has the usual contents, including _schemata_, _tropi_, and metric.[64] _Fabula_ and _historia_ reflect the ancient elementary exercises.[65] His second book contains both _rhetorica_ and _dialectica_.

“_Rhetorica_ is the lore of speaking well on political questions to persuade [men of what is] just and good. It is called by a Greek name ἀπὸ τοῦ ῥητορίζειν, i.e., from wealth of speech. For in Greek speech is called ῥῆσις, and an orator ῥήτωρ. _Rhetorica_, moreover, is connected with _grammatica_. In the one we learn the lore of speaking correctly; in the other we perceive how to utter what we have learned. II. i.

“This discipline was invented by the Greeks—Gorgias, Aristotle, Hermagoras, and transferred to Latin by Cicero and Quintilian.... The perfect knowledge of this discipline makes the orator. ii.

“The orator, then, is a good man skilled in speaking: good, i.e., in nature, breeding, education; skilled in speaking, i.e., in expert eloquence. This consists of five parts (_inventio_, _dispositio_, _elocutio_, _memoria_, _pronuntiatio_) and in the function of persuading.”... iii.

In the same summary fashion Isidore treats the three fields, _status_, simple or compound proposition, the four parts of a speech, the five sorts of cases, syllogisms, law, apothegm, proof and disproof, the school exercises _prosopopœia_ and _ethopœia_, questions abstract and concrete. The remainder of the section, somewhat more than one third, is devoted to _elocutio_: the three styles, the division into phrase, clause, and period, the typical faults of phrasing, and the figures. As to the last he makes a distinction lost on his later medieval readers. “Of these most have been noted above under _grammatica_ as the _schemata_ of Donatus. Therefore only those should find place here which hardly occur in a poem, but freely in a speech.” II. xxi.

“_Dialectica_ is the discipline designed for the discussion of cases (ad disserendas causas). It is that species of philosophy which is called _logica_, i.e., the theory controlling definition, investigation and discussion. For it teaches in many forms of questions how by discussion the true may be distinguished from the false.... Therefore _dialectica_ follows the discipline of _rhetorica_ because they have many things in common.” II. xxii.

To distinguish the two, Isidore quotes from Varro a metaphor often quoted from Zeno; _dialectica_ is the closed fist, _rhetorica_ the open hand. The one is the more acute in discussing, the other the more fluent in imparting; the one is of the schools, the other of the forum; the one for scholars, the other for the people. xxiii.

A chapter (xxiv) inserted here groups all the seven arts under _philosophia_, which is threefold:[66] (1) _naturalis_ (_physica_), (2) _moralis_ (_ethica_), (3) _rationalis_ (_logica_), “in which is discussed how in the causes of things or in the conduct of life truth itself may be sought.” Isidore does not, however, pursue this larger scope of _logica_. Though he cites additionally Plato’s use of the term to include both _dialectica_ and _rhetorica_, he goes on to enumerate other divisions of philosophy, and then (xxv) to the usual items of _dialectica_ as presented by Boethius: Porphyry’s Introduction, Aristotle’s Categories, interpretation, syllogisms, division and definition, topics.

The program for the Trivium keeps in the main the ancient proportions. Some usurpation of composition by _dialectica_, some leaning of _rhetorica_ toward dilation and decoration, may be read into it; but each of the two studies clearly has its own function, and work enough for serious occupation. As in other parts of his aggregation, Isidore makes his summary of the Trivium a list of studies, not a group. He attempts no unified plan. Therefore his putting of _rhetorica_ before instead of after _dialectica_ should hardly be pressed for significance.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] ARP 90, 94, 96, 101.

[2] About 310-393; _grammaticus_ and _rhetor_ at Bordeaux, which was the greatest, perhaps, of the schools of Gaul.

Editions: Schenkl, Berlin (MGH, Auctores antiquissimi, V. ii), 1883; Peiper, Leipzig (Teubner), 1886; H. G. E. White, London & New York (Loeb series, 2 vols.), 1919-1921, with translation (used in this section), introduction, notes, and select bibliography; full bibliography in Marie José Byrne, _Prolegomena to an edition of the works of Ausonius_, New York, 1916.

[3] III. xxvii, last sentence of footnote 1.

[4] Chapter I. B. 1.

[5] See Chapter I. B. 2, especially a. (1); and for the earlier _declamatio_, ARP 87-101.

[6]

Palmæ forensis et camenarum decus.

V. ii. 7.

Facundum doctumque virum, seu lege metrorum Condita seu prosis solveret orsa modis.

_Ibid._ iii. 3.

[7]

Grammatice ad Scaurum atque Probum, promptissime rhetor.

_Ibid._ xx. 7.

Grammatici in studio vel rhetoris aut in utroque.

_Ibid._ xxv. 3.

Nos [i.e. Ausonius] ad grammaticen studium convertimus et mox Rhetorices etiam, quod satis, attigimus.

I. i. 15.

[8]

Possem absolute dicere, Sed dulcius circumloquar Diuque fando perfruar.

Lines 7-9 of the poem in _Epist._ XII.

[9]

Ego volvo libros uberes, Instarque densæ grandinis Torrente lingua perstrepo. ... Cum maxime nunc proloquor Circumloquentis ambitu.

II. vii. 7.

[10]

Incessu gravis et verbis ingentibus.

V. xvii. 2.

[11] Quis ita Æsopi venustatem, quis sophisticas Isocratis conclusiones, quis ad enthymemata Demosthenis aut opulentiam Tullianam aut proprietatem nostri Maronis accedat? _Epist._ ii.

[12] His most considerable prose piece is the _Gratiarum actio ad Gratianum_.

[13]

Mox schola et auditor multus prætextaque pubes Grammatici nomen divitiasque dedit.

V. xviii. 7.

[14] About 430-484; Bishop of Auvergne, 471; educated at Lyon.

Editions: Mohr, Leipzig (Teubner), 1895, and MGH.

Biography by Chaix (l’Abbé L.-A.), _St. Sidoine Apollinaire et son siècle_, 2 vols., Paris, 1867; translation, with introduction and notes, by Dalton (O. M.), Oxford, 1915.

For his influence see Manitius, Boissier, Roger. It was doubtless enhanced, if not revived, by _dictamen_, for which see below, Chapter VIII. Alain de Lille puts him beside Quintilian and Symmachus among “rhetoricæ auctores alii” (_Anticlaudianus_, III. iii). John of Salisbury refers to him in _Metalogicus_ (PL. 199: 831 A, 865 D) and _Policraticus_ (see the index to Webb’s ed.).

[15] See above, Chapter I, B. 2. a. and ARP, IV. ii. A.

[16] Cui non rhetorica partitio, non oratoriæ minæ, non grammaticales figuræ congruentem decorem disciplinamque suppeditaverunt. Neque enim illic, ut exacte perorantibus mos est, aut pondera historica aut poetica schemata scintillasve controversialium clausularum libuit aptari. VII. ix. 1-2. The words _disciplina_ and _controversialis_ allude to the schools; _clausula_, to the study of closing cadences. Cf. VIII. iii. 3.

[17] Hic iam quam volupe auribus insonare cicadas meridie concrepantes, ranas crepusculo incumbente blaterantes, cygnos atque anseres concubia nocte clangentes, intempesta gallos gallinacios concinentes, oscines corvos voce triplicata puniceam surgentis Auroræ facem consalutantes, diluculo autem Philomelam inter frutices sibilantem, Prognen inter asseres minurientem! Cui concentui licebit adiungas fistulæ septiforis armentalem Camenam, quam sæpe nocturnis carminum certaminibus insomnes nostrorum montium Tityri exercent inter greges tinnibulatos per depasta buceta reboantes. Quæ tamen varia vocum cantuumque modulamina profundius confovendo sopori tuo lenocinabuntur. II. ii. 14.

[18] Si quid heroicus arduum comicus lepidum, lyricus cantilenosum orator declamatorium, historicus verum satiricus figuratum, grammaticus regulare panegyrista plausibile, sophista serium epigrammatista lascivum, commentator lucidum iurisconsultus obscurum. IV. i. 2.

[19] Obversatur etenim per dies mentibus singulorum quod persona ætate gravis infirmitate fragilis, nobilitate sublimis religione venerabilis, solius dilectionis obtentu abrupisti tot repagula, tot obiectas veniendi difficultates, itinerum videlicet longitudinem brevitatem dierum, nivium copiam penuriam pabulorum, latitudines solitudinum angustias mansionum, viarum voragines aut umore imbrium putres aut frigorum siccitate tribulosas; ad hoc aut aggeres saxis asperos aut fluvios gelu lubricos aut colles ascensu salebrosos aut valles lapsuum assiduitate derasas; per quæ omnia incommoda, quia non privatum commodum requirebas, amorem publicum rettulisti. III. ii. 3.

[20] Sentit ut Pythagoras dividit ut Socrates, explicat ut Platon implicat ut Aristoteles, ut Æschines blanditur ut Demosthenes irascitur, vernat ut Hortensius æstuat ut Cethegus, incitat ut Curio moratur ut Fabius, simulat ut Crassus dissimulat ut Cæsar, suadet ut Cato dissuadet ut Appius persuadet ut Tullius. IV. iii. 6. This is immediately followed by another series balancing the Fathers. Similar is the invective in the letter to Thaumastus: iudicanda dictant, dictata convellunt; adtrahunt litigaturos, protrahunt audiendos; trahunt addictos, retrahunt transigentes. V. vii. 2. So 3 and 5 in the same letter, and 14 in the letter to Faustus, IX. ix.

[21] Sermonis pompa Romani. IV. xvii. 2.

[22] Sermonis Celtici squamam depositura nobilitas nunc oratorio stilo, nunc etiam Camenalibus modis imbuebatur. III. iii. 2.

[23] Cui tamen sermonicari Latialiter cordi est. IV. iii. 1.

[24] For sophistic, see Chapter I. B.; for _declamatio_, ARP 87-101.

[25] VIII. xi.

[26] IV. iii.

[27] Atqui pueritiam tuam competenter scholis liberalibus memini imbutam et sæpenumero acriter eloquenterque declamasse coram oratore satis habeo compertum. V. v. 2.

[28]

Et nunc inflat epos tragœdiarum, Nunc comœdia temperat iocosa, Nunc flammant satiræ et tyrannicarum Declamatio controversiarum.

VIII. xi. 3 (lines 26-29 of the enclosed poem).

Note that _declamatio_ is here recognized as a literary form.

[29] Ethicam dictionem pro personæ temporis loci qualitate variabat, idque non verbis qualibuscumque, sed grandibus pulchris elucubratis. In materia controversiali fortis et lacertosus. VIII. xi. 6. For prosopopœia see ARP, index, and Emporius in Halm, 561. For the use of χαρακτήρ by Sidonius himself see the stock parasite in III. 13.

[30] Quidam ab Arvernis Belgicam petens ... postquam Remos advenerat, scribam tuum sive bybliopolam pretio fors fuat officione demeritum copiosissimo velis nolis declamationum tuarum schedio emunxit. Qui redux nobis ... curæ mihi ... cuncta transcribere. Omnium assensu pronuntiatum pauca nunc posse similia dictari. Etenim rarus aut nullus est cui meditaturo par affatim assistat dispositio per causas, positio per litteras, compositio per syllabas; ad hoc oportunitas in exemplis fides in testimoniis, proprietas in epithetis urbanitas in figuris, virtus in argumentis pondus in sensibus, flumen in verbis fulmen in clausulis. Structura vero fortis et firma coniunctionumque perfacetarum nexa cæsuris insolubilibus, sed nec hinc minus lubrica et levis ac modis omnibus erotundata quæque lectoris linguam inoffensam decenter expediat, ne salebrosas passa iuncturas per cameram palati volutata balbutiat; tota denique liquida prorsus et ductilis, veluti cum crystallinas crustas aut onychitinas non impacto digitus ungue perlabitur ... non extat ad præsens vivi hominis oratio quam peritia tua non sine labore transgredi queat ac supervadere. IX. vii. 1-4.

[31] 474-521; works in MGH and in CSE. The subjects of the _controversiæ_ are from the usual stock; e.g.: In abdicatum qui patrem necavit. In novercam quæ, cum marito privigni odia suadere non posset, utrique venenum porrexit. In eum qui patri suo cibum subtraxit. His panegyric of Theodoric was delivered about 507.

A collection of _declamationes_ was current under the name of Quintilian.

[32] Dixit disposite graviter ardenter, magna acrimonia maiore facundia maxima disciplina. VIII. vi. 6.

[33] Sic adulescentum declamatiunculas pannis textilibus comparantes intellegebant eloquia iuvenum laboriosius brevia produci quam porrecta succidi. I. iv. 3.

[34] Sic et magnus orator, si negotium aggrediatur angustum, tunc amplum plausibilius manifestat ingenium. VIII. x. 3.

[35] Si quis autem carmen prolixius eatenus duxerit esse culpandum quod epigrammatis excesserit paucitatem, istum liquido patet neque balneas Etrusci neque Herculem Surrentinum neque comas Flavii Earini neque Tibur Vopisci neque omnino quicquam de Papinii nostri silvulis lectitasse quas omnes descriptiones vir ille præiudicatissimus non distichorum aut tetrastichorum stringit angustiis, sed potius, ut lyricus Flaccus in artis poeticæ volumine præcipit, multis isdemque purpureis locorum communium pannis semel inchoatas materias decenter extendit. Carmen XXII. 6 (prose epilogue). The allusions are to Statius. For the rhetorical cast of the _Ars poetica_ itself, which is constantly quoted throughout the middle age, see ARP 245.

[36] ARP 100.

[37] Above, page 80.

[38] Nam debetur ab eo percopiosus litteris honor. Hunc olim perorantem et rhetorica sedilia plausibili oratione frangentem. V. x. 2.

[39] See Chapter I. B. 2. a (3) and d (5).

[40] Both are in Keil, with two other grammarians of this period who seem to have had considerable currency, Fortunatianus and Victorinus. The names have occasioned some confusion. Keil calls the grammarian Atilius Fortunatianus, and distinguishes Maximus from Marius Victorinus. The latter has been regarded as the author of the widespread commentary on Cicero’s _De inventione_; but Halm assigns this to Q. Fabius Laurentius Victorinus. The _Ars rhetorica_ is generally assigned to Q. Chirius (or Curius) Fortunatianus. But the determination of persons is of little moment here. The works are all of this period and all current in the middle age.

Keil includes also the compends of Cassiodorus and Bede. His notes are valuable especially for locating correspondences and medieval use.

W. J. Chase’s translation of the _Ars Minor_ of Donatus reprints Keil’s text and has an historical introduction (Univ. of Wisconsin Studies No. 36, Madison, 1926).

[41] E.g., in 1445 Panicali da Cingoli gave his _Flores grammaticæ_ the sub-title _Donatellus_; and by then the English name for an elementary grammar was _donet_. Pecock uses the word, in the sense of primer, as a title for his handbook of morals.

[42] Priscian includes a translation of the elementary exercises of Hermogenes (see above, Chapter I. B. 2. c).

[43] For _prælectio_ see the index to ARP.

[44] Scientia interpretandi poetas atque historicos et recte scribendi loquendique ratio. Marius Victorinus, Keil VI. 188. The same words are found in Audax, Keil VII. 321; and substantially equivalent definitions in Servius on Donatus, Keil IV. 486; Asper, Keil V. 547; Dositheus, Keil VII. 376. Priscian’s examples are mainly from poetry.

[45] Nulla imbutus poetica disciplina Terentianum Maurum sine magistro adtingere non auderes. Asper, Cornutus, Donatus et alii innumerabiles requiruntur, ut quilibet poeta possit intellegi cuius carmina et theatri plausus uiderentur captare. _De utilitate credendi_, 17 (CSE, S. August, vol. 6, 21. 25).

For later use of prælectio see the index to the present volume.

[46] E. K. Rand’s introduction to the Loeb _Boethius_, page ix.

For the commented translation of the Analytics see Manitius I. 30; for the resumption of the Analytics at Chartres, the section on John of Salisbury’s _Metalogicus_ below, Chapter VI. C.

[47] The history of the use of Quintilian is set forth in Fierville’s edition of Book I (Paris, 1890). This has been reviewed and extended by F. H. Colson in the introduction to his edition of Book I (Cambridge University Press, 1924).

[48] The assignment to Cicero is as early as Jerome. See Cornificius in Pauly-Wissowa.

Halm shows very little use of the _Rhetorica ad Herennium_ during this period. There is a full synopsis of this work in Wilkins’s introduction to his edition of Cicero’s _De oratore_ (Oxford, 1893), page 56. Faral shows in comparative tables that it is the source of the lists of figures in the medieval _artes poeticæ_ (_Les arts poétiques du xiie et du xiiie siècle_, Paris, 1924), pages 52-54.

[49] _Ars rhetorica._ It is praised by Cassiodorus.

[50] Julius Victor makes far the largest use of Quintilian.

[51] See Quintilian I. ix, and compare this and his II. iv with the exercises of Hermogenes above in Chapter I. B. 2. c.

[52] The best edition of the _De nuptiis Philologiæ et Mercurii_ is Dick’s, Leipzig (Teubner), 1925.

[53] “Officium uero meum tunc fuerat docte scribere legereque; nunc etiam illud accessit ut meum sit erudite intellegere probareque.” III. 230.

Many of the usual topics are merely mentioned. Marked agreement with this book is shown by Priscian, Diomedes, and Charisius; considerable agreement, by Marius Victorinus and Maximus Victorinus. See Dick’s references _ad loc._ It is used by Cassiodorus especially, and also by Isidore. Bede’s use may be through Maximus Victorinus.

[54] Meique prorsum iuris esse quicquid Artes ceteræ proloquuntur. Nam neque ipsam quam aures uestræ probauere, Grammaticam, neque alteram opimi oris præcluem facultate, uel illam formarum diuersa radio ac puluere lineantem sine meis posse rationibus explicari quis dubitat? Quippe in dicione mea iureque consistunt sex normæ, quis constant ceteræ disciplinæ. Nam prima est de loquendo, secunda de eloquendo, tertia de proloquendo, quarta de proloquiorum summa, quinta de iudicando, quæ pertinet ad iudicationem poetarum et carminum, sexta de dictione, quæ dicenda rhetoribus commodata est. IV. 336-338.

[55] See below, Chapter VI.

[56] The compend uses Cicero and Quintilian, Aristotle’s _Topics_, but above all Aristotle’s _Categories_. See Dick _ad loc._

[57] Sed dum talibus perturbatur multa terrestrium plebs deorum, ecce quædam sublimissimi corporis ac fiduciæ grandioris, uultus etiam decore luculenta femina insignis ingreditur, cui galeatus uertex ac regali caput maiestate sertatum, arma in manibus, quibus se uel communire solita uel aduersarios uulnerare, fulminea quadam coruscatione renidebant. Subarmalis autem uestis illi peplo quodam circa humeros inuoluto Latiariter tegebatur, quod omnium figurarum lumine uariatum cunctorum schemata præferebat, pectus autem exquisitissimis gemmarum coloribus subbalteatum. Hæc cum in progressu arma concusserat, uelut fulgoreæ nubis fragore colliso bombis dissultantibus fracta diceres crepitare tonitrua; denique creditum quod instar Iouis eadem posset etiam fulmina iaculari. Nam ueluti potens rerum omnium regina et impellere quo uellet et unde uellet deducere, et in lacrimas flectere et in rabiem concitare, et in alios etiam uultus sensusque conuertere tam urbes quam exercitus prœliantes, quæcumque poterat agmina populorum. V. 426-27.

[58] The sections on figures (523-555) are taken almost verbatim from Aquila Romanus. The preceding sections on _clausula_ are based on Cicero. _Color_ is used also (e.g. 471) as by Seneca Rhetor (ARP 98). The frequent agreement of Fortunatianus with this book is shown by Dick _ad loc._ In comparison with the medieval vogue of the whole work, the influence of this book seems small. John of Salisbury’s _Metalogicus_, for instance, citing Martianus a dozen times, never refers to it.

[59] About 490-575.

[60] He is used, for instance, by Remi of Auxerre, and appears in the tenth-century library of Chartres (Clerval, 21). For other references see Manitius and Manacorda. The _Institutiones_ are in MGH.

[61] About 570-636; Bishop of Seville about 600. _Etymologiæ_ edited by Lindsay, Oxford, 1910.

To the usual general books of reference add Labriolle.

[62] See below, Chapter VI. D. 2.

[63] If Isidore’s concision seems to involve him here in a non-sequitur, he is not the first, nor the last, to force the rhetoric that he heard under the rhetoric that he read.

[64] _Rhythmus_ is defined vaguely as follows: “Huic adhæret rythmus, qui non est certo fine moderatus, sed tamen rationabiliter ordinatis pedibus currit; qui Latine nihil aliud quam numerus dicitur.” I. xxxix.

[65] See the indexes to ARP and to this volume.

[66] For divisions of _philosophia_, see below, Chapter VI.