תמונות בעמוד
PDF
ePub

the five most ancient rhetoricians are all that have come down to us: the continuation, which, according to the index, should contain the lives of eleven rhetoricians, particularly No. 6, that of L. Caestius Pius, No. 7, that of M. Porcius Latro, No. 8, that of Q. Curtius Rufus, &c. &c., is lost, and no other notice of this rhetorician exists. A second person of this name is the consular Curtius Rufus mentioned in Pliny, Epist. vii. 27, and especially in Tacitus, Ann. xi. 20. It is related of him that he rose from the humblest station, through the support of his patrons and his own energetic eloquence, to the dignity of a senator; and Tiberius himself (who reigned from the year A.D. 14 to 37) promoted him to the praetorship, and afterwards even made him consul (namely, suffectus); and in the year A. D. 47 he received the insignia triumphalia as commander of the Roman army on the Upper Rhine; and at last was made proconsul of Africa the highest honour a Roman statesman could attain under the emperors; in which office he died at an advanced age, probably in the year A. D. 52. It is unknown whether these two men named Curtius Rufus were related or not: we might have known had Tacitus, in the above-mentioned passage, expressed himself with less reserve respecting the origin of the consular, as he says the common opinion that he was the son of a gladiator was wrong, but that he himself was ashamed to state the truth. The question now is, whether either of them was the author of the life of Alexander. It has been even asserted by some that they were one and the same person, and that the rhetorician Q. Curtius Rufus, after spending a life devoted to literature, engaged in the service of the state; but we cannot possibly admit this, as the transition from the one to the other is so rare an occurrence, that Tacitus and Pliny, who give a tolerably detailed account of the consular, would necessarily have mentioned this circumstance. We, moreover, have little doubt that if a Roman consular had written such a work, either in the earlier years of his literary life, or in the leisure of a more advanced age, frequent mention would have been made of it by contemporary authors. We therefore believe that the first-mentioned Q. Curtius Rufus is the author of the following work: and if we have proved above that the Roman princeps, who is praised in the work as the preserver of the Roman Empire, is Augustus, and that Curtius wrote at a time when the house of Augustus still contained some promising young men, we may add that the best period of the rhetorician coincides with the time of the firmly-established sovereignty of Augustus; that is, about the year of the birth of Christ. M. Porcius Latro is the immediate predecessor of Curtius in the list of rhetoricians, whose lives Suetonius wrote, and he died, according to Hieronymus in

[ocr errors]

his 'Chronicon,' Olymp. 194, 1; that is, about 4 or 3 B. c.; so that we are justified in connecting the best period of our author with the year in which his predecessor in the list died. It is possible, indeed, that the consular, whose real origin Tacitus conceals from a feeling of modesty, was an illegitimate son of the rhetorician. Those scholars who suppose the author of the life of Alexander to be either the rhetorician mentioned by Suetonius, or the consular described by Tacitus. -as well as those who consider the eulogy on the Roman princeps, x. 28, to refer to Augustus, or Claudius, or Vespasian, or even, which is still less possible, to Trajan-agree with us in the opinion that the Latin language in the work of Curtius is worthy of all praise. We ourselves recognise in it the perfection of Roman literature, on account of the perfect accuracy in the appropriate use of separate words, and in the syntactical combination of words into clauses and sentences. There is only one point in which a slight deviation from the classical prose of Cicero and Cæsar may be observed; namely, that sometimes the expressions which were formerly used only in poetry are here introduced into prosesuch as aevum for vita or aetas, juventa for juventus, saevus for crudelis, immanis; the frequent and thereby weakened use of ingens, and of linquere for relinquere; also the joining passive verbs with the dative instead of using the preposition ab. The frequent use of ceterum for sed, in which, however, Sallust had preceded Curtius, is likewise a slight deviation from the earlier language. Other deviations, such as the absolute use of the participle perfect passive for, instance, audito for quum auditum esset, with a sentence following; the use of the participle future active in connection with a hypothetical sentence-for instance, viii. 11, acinacem strinxit percussurus uxorem, nisi prohibitus esset, should be considered rather as examples of a judicious development of the language than as defects, since brevity and precision of expression are thereby promoted. The speeches, in particular, which Curtius, agreeably to the custom of the ancients and the example of other historians, interweaves into his history, are distinguished for their energetic eloquence, and for the appropriateness in the characters of the speakers; from which circumstance we may infer the rhetorical activity of the author, and his intention to produce a work with specimens of his skill. He had in this respect, and indeed in the whole composition of his history, a model in the Greek work of Clitarchus, a celebrated historian, who lived soon after the death of Alexander, and was much praised by the ancients for his rhetorical powers, though he was suspected of credulity, especially in his description of the wonders of far distant countries. The same defects, accordingly, are found in our Latin author; but it must be

observed, that it is easier to find fault with the uncertainty in the description of distant countries, than to correct them; and that subsequent experience has as often tended to confirm as to refute the wonders which the earlier observers described. We have, in our notes, fully discussed and traced to their proper sources the false conceptions which the companions of Alexander themselves formed concerning the situation of the countries on the Jaxartes, in the east of the Caspian Sea. Curtius, who wrote in Rome, and followed the Greek original of Clitarchus, might perhaps, by dint of serious research, have corrected the errors of his predecessors; but such researches about countries which were far beyond the boundaries of the Roman Empire, were not to the taste of those ancient authors, who wrote for the entertainment and moral instruction of their readers. Sallust, Livy, and Tacitus, have made similar blunders; and considering that the countries described by them were not so far distant, their mistakes are even more surprising.

With respect to the judgment of the moral character of Alexander the Great, we find our author quite in accordance with truth, and with the most faithful accounts of that noble character: he is a sincere admirer of his greatness and the wonderful energy of his mind, without passing over the faults which youth and passion fostered in him, and which were ripened by flattery on the one hand, and obstinate resistance on the other. We have no doubt that the study of this work will afford much useful nutriment to the young mind. To the scholar who wishes to form a distinct idea of that memorable period it is indispensable, as are also the military history of Arrian, the interesting biography of Plutarch, and the dry historical skeleton in Diodorus, who indeed follows the same Greek author as Curtius, but in a different spirit.

[graphic]

Q. CURTII RUFI

DE GESTIS

ALEXANDRI MAGNI,

REGIS MACEDONUM.

LIBER III.

ALEXANDER, the great hero of this work, succeeded to the crown of his father Philip, king of Macedonia, in the twenty-first year of his age. After securing his supremacy in Greece, he commenced, in the spring of 334 B. C., a war, the object of which was the conquest of Asia. He crossed the Hellespont, routed on the river Granicus an army which was brought against him by the Persian satraps of Asia Minor, took the cities of Sardis, Ephesus, Miletus, and Halicarnassus, and compelled the whole of the western and southern coast, as far as Sida (Side), to submit to his arms. In the beginning of the spring of 333 B. C. he marched into Phrygia Major, a territory in the interior of Asia Minor, and ordered the whole Macedonian army to be concentrated at Gordium, the capital of that district. This is the point at which the narrative of Curtius begins, in the Third Book of his history, the first two books being lost.

(1) Alexander comes to Celaenae, and makes arrangements for occupying the citadel. (2) He assembles his army in Gordium, the capital of Phrygia. He cuts the celebrated Gordian knot with his sword. (3) After making arrangements for the security of the seacoast of Asia Minor, he advances to Ancyra, proceeds to Paphlagonia, and enters Cappadocia. (4) The great king Darius musters his troops near Babylon. (5) Charidemus, an exiled Athenian, frankly shows to him the superiority of the Macedonian army, and pays for his candour with his life. (6) Darius, however, is troubled by dreams, which are variously interpreted by the soothsayers. (7 and 8) The pomp of the royal army when on its march is described. (9) Alexander marches through Cappadocia, and arrives

`at the pass of Cilicia, which, neglected by the Persian leaders, is given up by the weak and deserted garrison to whose care it has been committed. (10) Description of Cilicia. (11) Alexander, while proceeding through the undefended passes, praises his good fortune, though he himself displayed the greatest prudence and foresight during the march. He enters Tarsus. (12) Alexander, whilst heated, bathes in the river Cydnus: his body becomes benumbed, and to the great grief of his army, he is carried away for dead. (13) On returning to his senses, he asks for a powerful medicine to hasten his recovery, saying that he would rather die than remain inactive at that decisive moment. (14) His own physician, Philip, promises to prepare such a medicine for him. In the meantime, Alexander receives a letter from Parmenio, warning him to beware of the treachery of his physician. Alexander, after an inward conflict, resolves to keep the letter secret. (15) When Philip brings him the potion, he drinks it without any signs of alarm, and then hands him the letter. The indignation of the physician shows his consciousness of innocence. (16) The result justifies the king's confidence. In three days he is able to appear again at the head of his troops. The Macedonians, from their great veneration for their kings in general, and their affection and admiration for Alexander in particular, publicly thank Philip. (17) Alexander takes Soli, and there celebrates games in gratitude for his recovery. He then goes to Mallos, and afterwards, having sent Parmenio on before, to Issus. In accordance with the opinion of his council of war, he resolves to give battle in this neighbourhood. (18) Sisenes, a Persian in the Macedonian army, is suspected of treachery, and, though innocent, is put to death. (19) Darius rejects the advice of the Greeks in his service, to offer battle in Mesopotamia, or at least to divide his forces. (20) Leaving the heavy baggage at Damascus, he leads his army towards Cilicia, goes through the pass of Mons Amanus (Pylae Amanicae), and arrives at Issus, which, however, the Macedonians have already left, having gone through the Cilician gates into Syria. (21) After the receipt of this intelligence, Alexander retraces his steps, and arrives in the neighbourhood of Darius's camp at Issus. (22) Darius is surprised : having ordered a division of his army to cross the river Pinarus, and oppose the Macedonians, he settles his plan of operation. (23) His order of battle is described. (24) Alexander's order of battle. (25) Alexander encourages the various divisions of his army. (26) The armies meet-the battle commences. (27) Alexander presses hard upon Darius; the Persians fall around their sovereign; Darius leaves his chariot, mounts a horse which is kept ready for him, and flees. (28) General flight of the Persian army. Their camp is plundered, the royal tent alone being spared (29), in which are the family of Darius, plunged in grief. The total loss on both sides is stated. (30) Alexander returns from the pursuit, and sends Leonnatus to the royal ladies, who are mistakenly bewailing the death of Darius. (31) He visits them himself, accompanied by Hephaes

« הקודםהמשך »