The Impracticability of Latin ‘Kunstprosa’
The Impracticability of Latin ‘Kunstprosa’
This chapter provides a discussion that aims to offer some account of the impracticability of Latin ‘Kunstprosa’. It begins by presenting the quandary of Vitruvius. Vitruvius showed a thorough competence; his intellectual predecessors in the later Republic had provided a lesson in the logical grouping of topics, a lesson he learnt. Vitruvius’ quandary can be explained by the failure of Latin prose to provide the educated writer with workable models of sound prose style. The chapter then inspects the masters themselves, Cicero and Caesar. The period in Cicero’s oratorical prose is deemed to be generally above reproach, once allowance is made for his increasing assurance. The issue of anacoluthon in Cicero’s philosophical writings was considerably discussed at the time this essay was delivered, and in subsequent e-mail exchanges with Jaap Wisse. The chapter then turns to Cicero’s only real successor, Livy. Moreover, the origin and use of the period in formal Latin style are described.
Keywords: Kunstprosa, Vitruvius, Cicero, Caesar, Livy, philosophical writings, Jaap Wisse, Latin style
British Academy Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.
