This article discusses the critical comparison (σύγκρισις) of the styles of Demosthenes and Cicero in Longinus, On the Sublime 12.4-5. Many readers have claimed that Longinus here presents Demosthenes and Cicero as two different models of the sublime. A detailed analysis of the passage, however, reveals that while the two are both credited with grandeur (µέγεθος), they are in fact not treated on a par with respect to sublimity (ὕψος). While the style of Demosthenes is described with keywords of Longinus’ conception of the sublime (ὕψος), Cicero’s style is consistently associated with the quality of diffusion (χύσις), which is closely associated with amplification (αὔξησις). Longinus’ discussion of Cicero may have pleased the Roman readers in his audience, as he is presented as a canonical author of ‘great’ literature. We argue, however, that in the end, Longinus reserves the status of sublimity for his heroes of classical Greece.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
Arieti, J.A., and Crossett, J.M. (1985). Longinus. On the Sublime. New York.
Augello, I. (2006). Cecilio di Calatte. Frammenti di critica letteraria, retorica e storiografia. Rome.
Bowersock, G.W. (1979). Historical Problems in Late Republican and Augustan Classicism. In: H. Flashar, ed., Le classicisme à Rome aux 1ers siècles avant et après J.-C. Vandœuvres/Geneva, pp. 57-78.
Canevaro, M., and Gray, B., eds. (2018). The Hellenistic Reception of Classical Athenian Democracy and Political Thought. Oxford.
Chalkomatas, D. (2007). Ciceros Dichtungstheorie. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der antiken Literaturästhetik. Berlin.
Dugan, J. (2005). Making a New Man. Ciceronian Self-Fashioning in the Rhetorical Works. Oxford.
Dugan, J. (2007). Modern Critical Approaches to Roman Rhetoric. In: W. Dominik and J. Hall, eds, A Companion to Roman Rhetoric. Malden, MA, pp. 9-22.
Fyfe, W.H. (rev. D.A. Russell) (1995). Longinus. On the Sublime. In: S. Halliwell, W.H. Fyfe (rev. D.A. Russell), and D. Innes, Aristotle, Poetics. Longinus, On the Sublime. Demetrius, On Style. Cambridge, MA, pp. 143-307.
Heath, M. (1999). Longinus, On Sublimity. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 45, pp. 43-74.
Heath, M. (2012). Longinus and the Ancient Sublime. In: T.M. Costelloe, ed., The Sublime from Antiquity to the Present. Cambridge, pp. 11-23.
Hubbell, H.M. (1952). Cicero. Orator. London.
Innes, D.C. (1995). Longinus, Sublimity and the Low Emotions. In: D.C. Innes, H. Hine, and C. Pelling, eds., Ethics and Rhetoric. Classical Essays for Donald Russell. Oxford, pp. 323-333.
Innes, D.C. (2002). Longinus and Caecilius. Models of the Sublime. Mnemosyne 55, pp. 259-284.
de Jonge, C.C. (2014). The Attic Muse and the Asian Harlot. Classicizing Allegories in Dionysius and Longinus. In: J. Ker and C. Pieper, eds., Valuing the Past in the Greco-Roman World. Leiden/Boston, pp. 388-409.
de Jonge, C.C. (2018). Demosthenes versus Cicero. Intercultural Competition in Ancient Literary Criticism. In: C. Damon and C. Pieper, eds., Eris vs. Aemulatio. Valuing Competition in Classical Antiquity. Leiden/Boston, pp. 300-323.
Kennedy, G.A. (1972). The Art of Rhetoric in the Roman World, 300 BC-300 AD. Princeton, NJ.
Kennedy, G.A. (1999). Classical Rhetoric and its Christian and Secular Tradition from Ancient to Modern Times. 2nd ed. Chapel Hill, NC.
Lombardo, G. (2003). Il sublime di Demetrio. Aevum Antiquum 3, pp. 135-154.
May, J.M., and Wisse, J. (2001). Cicero, On the Ideal Orator. New York.
Mazzucchi, C.M. (2010). Dionisio Longino, Del sublime. Introduzione, testo critico, traduzione e commentario. 2nd ed. Milan.
Neuberger-Donath, R. (1987). Longini De sublimitate lexicon. Hildesheim.
Ofenloch, E. (1907). Caecilii Calactini fragmenta. Leipzig.
Porter, J.I. (2001). Des sons qu’on ne peut entendre. Cicéron, les ‘kritikoi’ et la tradition du sublime dans la critique littéraire. In: C. Auvray-Assayas and D. Delattre, eds., Cicéron et Philodème. La polémique en philosophie. Paris, pp. 315-341.
Porter, J.I. (2016). The Sublime in Antiquity. Cambridge.
Race, W.H. (1997). Pindar, Olympian Odes, Pythian Odes. Cambridge MA.
Rhys Roberts, W. (1899). Longinus, On the Sublime. Cambridge.
Russell, D.A. (1964). Longinus, On the Sublime. Oxford.
Russell, D.A. (1989). Longinus on Sublimity. In: G.A. Kennedy, ed., The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism, Vol. 1: Classical Criticism. Cambridge, pp. 306-311.
Russell, D.A. (2001). Quintilian, The Orator’s Education. (5 vols). Cambridge, MA.
Russell, D.A., and Winterbottom, M. (1972). Ancient Literary Criticism. The Principal Texts in New Translations. Oxford.
Usener, H., and Radermacher, L. (1904-1929). Dionysii Halicarnasei quae exstant, Vol. 6: Opusculorum volumen secundum. Stuttgart/Leipzig.
Voigt, E.-M. (1971). Sappho et Alcaeus, Fragmenta. Amsterdam.
Whitmarsh, T. (2001). Greek Literature and the Roman Empire. The Politics of Imitation. Oxford.
Woerther, F. (2015). Caecilius de Calè-Acte, Fragments et témoignages. Paris.
Wooten, C.W. (1989). Dionysius of Halicarnassus and Hermogenes on the Style of Demosthenes. American Journal of Philology 110, pp. 576-588.
Zabulis, H. (1998). Cicerone nel trattato del Sublime. In: Ciceroniana. Atti del X Colloquium Tullianum, Monte Sant’Angelo, 24-27 aprile 1997. Rome, pp. 133-157.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 1005 | 67 | 3 |
Full Text Views | 95 | 11 | 1 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 154 | 27 | 3 |
This article discusses the critical comparison (σύγκρισις) of the styles of Demosthenes and Cicero in Longinus, On the Sublime 12.4-5. Many readers have claimed that Longinus here presents Demosthenes and Cicero as two different models of the sublime. A detailed analysis of the passage, however, reveals that while the two are both credited with grandeur (µέγεθος), they are in fact not treated on a par with respect to sublimity (ὕψος). While the style of Demosthenes is described with keywords of Longinus’ conception of the sublime (ὕψος), Cicero’s style is consistently associated with the quality of diffusion (χύσις), which is closely associated with amplification (αὔξησις). Longinus’ discussion of Cicero may have pleased the Roman readers in his audience, as he is presented as a canonical author of ‘great’ literature. We argue, however, that in the end, Longinus reserves the status of sublimity for his heroes of classical Greece.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 1005 | 67 | 3 |
Full Text Views | 95 | 11 | 1 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 154 | 27 | 3 |