in literary activity, it was not till the middle of
the sixth century that there was felt the need and
desire of imparting a knowledge of the deeds and fortunes
of the Roman people, by means of authorship, to the
contemporary world and to posterity. When at
length this desire was felt, there were neither literary
forms ready at hand for the use of Roman history, nor
was there a public prepared to read it, and great
talent and considerable time were required to create
both. In the first instance, accordingly, these
difficulties were in some measure evaded by writing
the national history either in the mother-tongue but
in that case in verse, or in prose but in that case
in Greek. We have already spoken of the metrical
chronicles of Naevius (written about 550?) and of
Ennius (written about 581); both belong to the earliest
historical literature of the Romans, and the work
of Naevius may be regarded as the oldest of all Roman
historical works. At nearly the same period
were composed the Greek “Histories” of
Quintus Fabius Pictor(56) (after 553), a man of noble
family who took an active part in state affairs during
the Hannibalic war, and of Publius Scipio, the son
of Scipio Africanus (about 590). In the former
case they availed themselves of the poetical art which
was already to a certain extent developed, and addressed
themselves to a public with a taste for poetry, which
was not altogether wanting; in the latter case they
found the Greek forms ready to their hand, and addressed
themselves —as the interest of their subject
stretching far beyond the bounds of Latium naturally
suggested—primarily to the cultivated foreigner.
The former plan was adopted by the plebeian authors,
the latter by those of quality; just as in the time
of Frederick the Great an aristocratic literature
in the French language subsisted side by side with
the native German authorship of pastors and professors,
and, while men like Gleim and Ramler wrote war-songs
in German, kings and generals wrote military histories
in French. Neither the metrical chronicles nor
the Greek annals by Roman authors constituted Latin
historical composition in the proper sense; this only
began with Cato, whose “Origines,” not
published before the close of this epoch, formed at
once the oldest historical work written in Latin and
the first important prose work in Roman literature.(57)
All these works, while not coming up to the Greek conception of history,(58) were, as contrasted with the mere detached notices of the book of Annals, systematic histories with a connected narrative and a more or less regular structure. They all, so far as we can see, embraced the national history from the building of Rome down to the time of the writer, although in point of title the work of Naevius related only to the first war with Carthage, and that of Cato only to the very early history. They were thus naturally divided into the three sections of the legendary period, of earlier, and of contemporary, history.