For this
purpose he coined so strange a word, that the prosecutor implored the
protection of the judges.
purpose he coined so strange a word, that the prosecutor implored the
protection of the judges.
Tacitus
He wrote on several subjects with profound erudition.
Quintilian says, he was completely master of the Latin language, and
thoroughly conversant in the antiquities of Greece and Rome. His works
will enlarge our sphere of knowledge, but can add nothing to
eloquence. _Peritissimus linguæ Latinæ, et omnis antiquitatis, et
rerum Græcarum, nostrarumque; plus tamen scientiæ collaturus, quam
eloquentiæ. _ Lib. x. cap. 1.
Sisenna, we are told by Cicero, was a man of learning, well skilled in
the Roman language, acquainted with the laws and constitution of his
country, and possessed of no small share of wit; but eloquence was not
his element, and his practice in the forum was inconsiderable. See _De
Claris Oratoribus_, s. 228. In a subsequent part of the same work,
Cicero says, that Sisenna was of opinion, that to use uncommon words
was the perfection of style. To prove this he relates a pleasant
anecdote. One Caius Rufus carried on a prosecution. Sisenna appeared
for the defendant; and, to express his contempt of his adversary, said
that many parts of the charge deserved to be spit upon.
For this
purpose he coined so strange a word, that the prosecutor implored the
protection of the judges. I do not, said he, understand Sisenna; I am
circumvented; I fear that some snare is laid for me. What does he mean
by _sputatilica? _ I know that _sputa_ is spittle: but what is
_tilica? _ The court laughed at the oddity of a word so strangely
compounded. _Rufio accusante Chritilium, Sisenna defendens dixit
quædam ejus SPUTATILICA esse crimina. Tum Caius Rufius, Circumvenior,
inquit, judices, nisi subvenitis. Sisenna quid dicat nescio; metuo
insidias. SPUTATILICA! quid est hoc? _ Sputa _quid sit, scio_; tilica
_nescio. Maximi risus, De Claris Oratoribus_, s. 260. Whether this
was the same Sisenna, who is said in the former quotation to have been
a correct speaker, does not appear with any degree of certainty.
[h] For the character of Secundus, see s. ii.
Quintilian says, he was completely master of the Latin language, and
thoroughly conversant in the antiquities of Greece and Rome. His works
will enlarge our sphere of knowledge, but can add nothing to
eloquence. _Peritissimus linguæ Latinæ, et omnis antiquitatis, et
rerum Græcarum, nostrarumque; plus tamen scientiæ collaturus, quam
eloquentiæ. _ Lib. x. cap. 1.
Sisenna, we are told by Cicero, was a man of learning, well skilled in
the Roman language, acquainted with the laws and constitution of his
country, and possessed of no small share of wit; but eloquence was not
his element, and his practice in the forum was inconsiderable. See _De
Claris Oratoribus_, s. 228. In a subsequent part of the same work,
Cicero says, that Sisenna was of opinion, that to use uncommon words
was the perfection of style. To prove this he relates a pleasant
anecdote. One Caius Rufus carried on a prosecution. Sisenna appeared
for the defendant; and, to express his contempt of his adversary, said
that many parts of the charge deserved to be spit upon.
For this
purpose he coined so strange a word, that the prosecutor implored the
protection of the judges. I do not, said he, understand Sisenna; I am
circumvented; I fear that some snare is laid for me. What does he mean
by _sputatilica? _ I know that _sputa_ is spittle: but what is
_tilica? _ The court laughed at the oddity of a word so strangely
compounded. _Rufio accusante Chritilium, Sisenna defendens dixit
quædam ejus SPUTATILICA esse crimina. Tum Caius Rufius, Circumvenior,
inquit, judices, nisi subvenitis. Sisenna quid dicat nescio; metuo
insidias. SPUTATILICA! quid est hoc? _ Sputa _quid sit, scio_; tilica
_nescio. Maximi risus, De Claris Oratoribus_, s. 260. Whether this
was the same Sisenna, who is said in the former quotation to have been
a correct speaker, does not appear with any degree of certainty.
[h] For the character of Secundus, see s. ii.
