§12.1.20quanquam enim stetisse ipsum in fastigio eloquentiae fateor, ac vix, quid adiici potuerit, inuenio, fortasse inventurus, quod adhuc abscisurum putem fuisse (nam fere sic docti iudicaverunt, plurimum in eo virtutum, nonnihil fuisse vitiorum, et se ipse multa ex illa iuvenili abundantia coercuisse testatur), tamen, quando nec sapientis sibi nomen, minime sui contemptor, asseruit et melius dicere, certe data longiore vita et tempore ad componendum securiore, potuisset, non maligne crediderim defuisse ei summam illam, ad quam nemo propius accessit.
For although I confess that he himself stood at the summit of eloquence, and scarcely find what could have been added, though perhaps destined to find what I might think should have been pruned away (for learned men have generally judged thus, that there was a great deal of virtue in him, and not a little of vice, and he himself testifies that he restrained many things from that youthful abundance), yet, since he, by no means a despiser of himself, did not claim for himself the name of a wise man, and could have spoken better, certainly if a longer life had been granted and a more secure time for composing, I should not be thought malicious in believing that that highest perfection, to which no one came closer, was lacking to him.
§12.1.21et licebat, si aliter sentirem, fortius id liberiusque defendere.
And it was permitted, if I felt otherwise, to defend this more strongly and freely.
an vero M. Antonius neminem a se visum eloquentem, quod tanto minus erat, professus est; ipse etiam M. Tullius quaerit adhuc eum et tantum imaginatur ac fingit, ego non audeam dicere, aliquid in hac, quae superest, aeternitate inveniri posse eo, quod fuerit, perfectius?
Or did Marcus Antonius indeed declare that no eloquent man had been seen by him, which was so much less; and Marcus Tullius himself still seeks that and only imagines and shapes him, and shall I not dare to say that in this eternity which remains, something more perfect than what has been can be found?
§12.1.22transeo illos, qui Ciceroni ac Demostheni ne in eloquentia quidem satis tribuunt; quanquam neque ipsi Ciceroni Demosthenes videatur satis esse perfectus, quem dormitare interim dicit, nec Cicero Bruto Calvoque, qui certe compositionem illius etiam apud ipsum reprehendunt, nec Asinio utrique, qui vitia orationis eius etiam inimice pluribus locis insequuntur.
I pass over those who do not grant enough even in eloquence to Cicero and Demosthenes; although neither does Demosthenes seem sufficiently perfect to Cicero himself, whom he says sometimes nods, nor does Cicero seem so to Brutus and Calvus, who certainly censure his composition even in writing to him, nor to both the Asinii, who attack the faults of his speech even hostilely in many places.
§12.1.23concedamus sane, quod minime natura patitur, repertum esse aliquem malum virum summe disertum: nihilo tamen minus oratorem eum negabo.
Let us indeed grant, what nature by no means allows, that some bad man has been found who is highly eloquent: nevertheless, I will none the less deny that he is an orator.
nam nec omnibus, qui fuerint manu prompti, viri fortis nomen concesserim, quia sine virtute intelligi non potest fortitudo.
For I would not grant the name of a brave man to everyone who has been ready of hand, because courage cannot be understood without virtue.
§12.1.24an ei, qui ad defendendas causas advocatur, non est opus fide, quam nec cupiditas corrumpat nec gratia avertat nec metus frangat; sed proditorem, transfugam, praevaricatorem donabimus oratoris illo sacro nomine? quodsi mediocribus etiam patronis convenit haec, quae vulgo dicitur, bonitas, cur non orator ille, qui nondum fuit, sed potest esse, tam sit moribus quam dicendi virtute perfectus?
Or does he who is called to defend causes not need good faith, which neither greed may corrupt, nor favor turn aside, nor fear break; but shall we gift a traitor, a deserter, a collusive advocate with that sacred name of orator? But if this goodness, as it is commonly called, is fitting even for mediocre patrons, why should not that orator, who has not yet existed but can exist, be as perfect in morals as in the virtue of speaking?
§12.1.25non enim forensem quandam instituimus operam nec mercennariam vocem nec, ut asperioribus verbis parcamus, non inutilem sane litium advocatum, quem denique causidicum vulgo vocant, sed virum cum ingenii natura praestantem tum vero tot pulcherrimas artes penitus mente complexum, datum tandem rebus humanis, qualem nulla antea vetustas cognoverit, singularem perfectumque undique, optima sentientem optimeque dicentem.
For we are not training a sort of forensic trade, nor a mercenary voice, nor, to spare harsher words, a not useless advocate of lawsuits, whom in short they commonly call a pettifogger, but a man outstanding both in the nature of his talent and also one who has thoroughly embraced in his mind so many most beautiful arts, given at last to human affairs, such as no previous antiquity has known, unique and perfect in every way, thinking the best thoughts and speaking in the best way.
§12.1.26in hoc quota pars erit, quod aut innocentes tuebitur aut improborum scelera compescet, aut in pecuniariis quaestionibus veritati contra calumniam aderit? summus ille quidem in his quoque operibus fuerit, sed maioribus clarius elucebit, cum regenda senatus consilia et popularis error ad meliora ducendus.
In such a man, how small a part will it be that he will either defend the innocent, or restrain the crimes of the wicked, or support the truth against calumny in pecuniary questions? He will indeed be supreme in these works also, but he will shine forth more brightly in greater things, when the counsels of the senate must be guided and the error of the people must be led to better things.
§12.1.27an non talem quendam videtur finxisse Vergilius, quem in seditione vulgi iam faces et saxa iaculantis moderatorem dedit:
"
tum pietate gravem ac meritis si forte virum quem
conspexere, silent arrectisque auribus adstant?
"
Habemus igitur ante omnia virum bonum, post haec adiiciet dicendi peritum:
"
ille regit dictis animos et pectora mulcet.
Or does Virgil not seem to have imagined some such man, whom he presented as a moderator in a riot of the common people when they are already throwing torches and stones: "then, if by chance they have espied some man grave in piety and merits, they are silent and stand by with attentive ears? "We have, therefore, first of all, a good man; after this he will add one skilled in speaking: "illegit dictis animos et pectora mulcet.
"
Quid?
"What of it?
§12.1.28non in bellis quoque idem ille vir, quem instituimus, si sit ad proelium miles cohortandus, ex mediis sapientiae praeceptis orationem trahet? nam quomodo pugnam ineuntibus tot simul metus laboris, dolorum, postremo mortis ipsius exciderint, nisi in eorum locum pietas et fortitudo et honesti praesens imago successerit?
Will not that same man whom we are training, also in wars, if the soldiers must be exhorted to battle, draw his speech from the very midst of the precepts of wisdom? For how shall so many fears of labor, of pain, and finally of death itself fall away from those entering battle, unless piety, courage, and the present image of honor succeed in their place?