to their home worldnWith pleasant report: LeavenEarth alone, it is at peace.nBut he goes on immediately to say:nAlways the Poet knew it wasn’tnthat way.nTotalnWar throughout the globe,njustice and injusticenConfounded, every sort ofnknavery, the plownDisused unhonored, the farmernconscripted and his scythenStraitly misshapen to makena cruel sword.nAnd later, he makes his point with morenanimus:nSuch slaughter, they say,nmanures the fields of Utopia.nSo that the plowman in ansleepier centurynTurns up the bones of anlegendary DiomedesnAnd marvels that the land usednto nourish those giantsnWho have now become thensubsoil in which the CapitolnIs footed: where the softhandednsenators daylongnArgue the townsman’s ancientncase against the farmer:nHe is behind the times, he willnnever understand.nThe decisions there broughtnback to the homestead innthe form of taxesnAnd soldiers, who look withnenvious eyes upon this lifenThey fleer at, guzzling thenmurky raw-edgedncountry wine.nBut nothing changes. The warngrinds over the world and allnIts politics, the soldiers marrynthe farmers’ daughtersnAnd tell their plowman sonsnabout the fight at thenScaean Cate,nAnd the other sanguinenbraveries the dust has eaten.nSundown still draws thenchickens to their purringnroost.nThe cow to the milking stall,nthe farmer to his porchnto watchnWhether the soaringnconstellations promise rain.n30/CHRONICLESnThere is an abundance here, of extraordinarynwork, but beyond the individuallynexcellent poems, there is that modelnin Fred Chappell’s mind and on thesenpages, of what kind of life to aspire to,nwhat it means to be “A Man of Lettersnin the Modern World.” The phrase isnone Tate used as a title for a collectionnof essays, and is appropriate becausenChappell’s model may be somewhatnmodernized and improved from Tate’snversion, but is akin to it. (One of thesennew poems is “Afternoons with Allen,”na prologue to Tate’s The Fathers.)nRilke and Roethke have both told usnthat for poetry we must change ournlives. Chappell, in his quiet way, makesna more profound suggestion—that poetrynmay also be a way of saving ournlives. If there could be justice, charm,ngenerosity, wisdom, decency, pity, andntaste all working together—as they arenhere, in miraculous abundance — wenwould have every reason to hope.nDavid R. Slavitt is a poet and novelistnwho lives in Philadelphia.nThe Ethos ofnFreedomnby E. Christian KopffnTrials of Character: The Eloquencenof Ciceronian Ethosnby James M. MaynChapel Hill: The University ofnNorth Carolina Pressn^ ^’ I ‘ hat’s just rhetoric!” So we dis-nJL miss statements we have littlenrespect for. Readers of Tacitus’ Dialoguenon Orators will remember thatnthe Roman historians thought that eloquencenis a sign of a free state. Therenwas a time when the speeches of Burkenand Canning, of Daniel Webster andnAbraham Lincoln were studied innschool and sat in stately volumes on thenbookshelves of educated readers. Whatnwould Tacitus think of the state ofnpublic speaking today?nAs William Butler Yeats made hisnown persona a key element in hisnpoetry, so the great Roman oratornCicero (103-43 B.C.) molded an ethosnthat developed over time and yetnprovided a basis for persuasion andnnngreat literature. As with Yeats, thenpersona was based on reality. In Trialsnof Character, Professor James M. Maynprovides students with the first thoroughninvestigation into the interactionnof fact and fancy in Cicero’s life andnworks that produced some of the mostnbrilliant speeches ever delivered. SincenCicero’s carefully wrought persona wasnrooted in his changing status as henclimbed the Roman ladder of successnto the top, May’s book often amountsnto a biography of Cicero from thenperspective of his literary art. May’snpainstaking analyses of important orationsnmake it clear that a literary techniquenoften associated with literarynmodernism was used by a masterncraftsman in the ancient world to creatennot “rhetoric,” but passion andnpersuasion.nCicero lived in a society where enormousnprestige belonged to the powerful,nwho were not afraid to flaunt it. Innhis early speeches Cicero developednrhetorical strategies premised on hisnreal position as an underdog standingnup to powerful and dangerous leaders.nMay blames Cicero because in thenglory days after he became consul henemphasized ethos to the exclusion ofnclear narrative and proper presentationnof evidence. May seems to forget thatnby that time, Cicero no longer spokenalone for a client, but as one of annumber of distinguished advocates.nEach speech concentrated on the specialnskill of the orator, and while narrativenand proof were allotted to othernspeakers, Cicero was typically asked tonspeak last and concentrate on characternand emotion. That he was given thisnposition so often indicates that Cicero’snuse of ethos was recognized in his ownnday as brilliant and original. It wouldnhave made no sense for him to repeatnthe work of earlier speakers.nThe passages from Cicero’s speechesnare given in the translation found innthe Loeb Classical Library, with thenLatin reserved for the notes in thenback, to help make the book accessiblento more readers. When May deals withnLatin that is not Cicero’s, problemsnarise. In quoting the famous first similenof Vergil’s Aeneid, May translates Furornarma ministrat (1.149) as “furynministers to arms,” but the phrasenmeans “Fury supplies the arms.” (SeenOxford Latin Dictionary, ministro, 3.)nA few. similar slips make one wish thatn