Quotation in the Dialogus
Types of quoting
As we have seen, the quotation mode is important for the implementation of the Dialogus into its social context: while there are dialogue figures discussing on the internal text layer, its author on the external ‘world’ layer is Étienne Dolet, which means that he has the freedom to let his figure use the quoted Ciceronianus as he, Dolet, wants: He can let Morus skip passages, extend passages, leave out or add examples, without being constraint to show where he did so.
While it is not completely sure which version of the Ciceronianus Dolet used (cf. Telle 1974, 299), it is sure that he did not quote the Ciceronianus as we today would a quotation consider to be, that means, precisely word by word. The Dialogus is thus able – by quotation – to give a completely different image of what the Ciceronianus was or wanted to say; it can transform its meaning by putting it into a new context which is achieved by quotation (and reaction to the quoted passages).
Type I: Selection of passages
The first way of 'quoting' is the targeted choice of passages of the Ciceronianus by the dialogue figure Morus who is whether 'himself' choosing passages he considers to be important (ex. 1) or who is forced by Villanovanus to skip or shorten whole passages (ex. 2 and 3):
Example 1:
(Mor.) Est alius scrupulus, qui magis urget animum, si non grauabe|ris audire.
(Dolet, Dialogus 170,26–171,4)
Example 2:
(Vill.) Sed eodem relabimur, hoc iam satis discussimus. Nunc te audio: capita Ciceroniani dialogi persequere, at praecipua, & ab ineptiis uacua.
(Dolet, Dialogus 53,17–19)
Example 3:
(Vill.) At me diutius ne teneto, quid in summa Erasmus de imitatione sentiat, breuibus explica.
(Dolet, Dialogus 90,14f.)
What is the function of this quotation practice? By this way of introducing the Ciceronianus, Erasmus' text is framed by the rules that Dolet imposes upon it. Quoting or not quoting allows him to emphasize certain passages by skipping others while the readers do not necessarily recognize this choice.
Type II: Modification of passages
Another category of quoting is the modification of passages that readers may – more or less – know from the Ciceronianus or about which they may say easily: "Yes, that is what Erasmus must have written." Sometimes, there are only typographical changes expressing Dolet’s more traditional understanding of Latin (ex. 4). But not rarely, Dolet is skilfully changing some words, a method which sometimes sharpening the rhetorical appearance of the text (ex. 5), sometimes is a parody on passages of the Ciceronianus (ex. 6) or cancelling the dialogical structure completely which makes the Ciceronianus appear as a treatise – which it is (originally) not (ex. 7).
Example 4:
| Erasmus, Ciceronianus | Dolet, Dialogus |
| negocium | negotium |
| discruciet | discrutiet |
| aedidit | edidit |
| quur, quum | cur, cum |
| ... | ... |
Example 5:
| Erasmus, Ciceronianus 626, 19–24 | Dolet, Dialogus 146,10–18 |
| feremus mentum leua demulceri, feremus et collum oblongum atque exilius, feremus perpetuam vocis contentionem, feremus indecoram parumque virilem in initio dicendi repidationem, feremus iocorum intemperantiam: et si qua sunt alia, in quibus M. Tullius vel sibi, vel aliis displicuit, modo simul et illa exprimant, quibus ista vel texit ille, vel pensauit. | Feremusne tamen perpetuam uocis contentionem? feremus iocorum intemperantiam?feremus indecoram parumque uirilem in initio dicendi trepidationem? Feremus mentum laeua demulceri? & si qua sunt alia, in quibus M. Tullius uel sibi, uel aliis displicuit? Feremus quidem forte, modo, qui Ciceronis uitia expriment, simul illa exprimant, quibus ista uel texit, uel pensauit. |
Example 6:
| Erasmus, Ciceronianus 649,25–650,27 | Dolet, Dialogus 62,24–63,14 |
| (Bul.) Si teipsum non exprimis mendax speculum tua fuerit oratio, nihiloque minus absurdum videbitur, quam si coloribus oblita facie te pro Nosopono Petronium esse similes.
(Nosop.) Aenigmata loqueris. (Bul.) Dicam crassius, ineptiunt qui se torquent in hoc vt Ciceronem istis rationibus totum exprimant. […] (Hyp.) Sphinge dignum aenigma, vt hoc ipso dissimilis sit aliquis, quo similis est.[…] (Nosop.) Dic aliquanto dilucidius. […] (Bul.) qui quod his omnibus studiis comparatum est, ad res praesentes accommodabit, is poterit aliquo iure Ciceroniani cognomen ambire. (Nosop.) Isthaec omnia tua non video quorsum pertineant […]. |
(Mor.) Qui fit tamen, ut qui a Ciceronis lineamentis non recedunt, ipsi fere adeo Ciceroniani non sint, ut subinde destituantur grammaticae subsidiis?
(Vill.) Niuem atram loqueris, remque narras in omni memoria inauditam. Nouum est, & | incredibile, ut qui in tam alto & profundo flumine natet, non se, quo uelit, impellat, ferat, rapiat, & aquarum gurgite ex animo non utatur, modo natandi peritus sit, nec subere aut cortice indigeat. (Mor.) Aenigma. (Vill.) Breuibus explicabo. (Mor.) Age. (Vill.) Incredibile, ut cui sit familiaris Cicero, illius opes communes non habeat, modo antea doctrina sit liberaliter institutus, & aliquo scribendi imbutus usu, nec ingenio satis acri careat. (Mor.) Rem nihildum teneo. (Vill.) Aperte dicam. Simile ueri non est, aut ulla ratione probabile, ut qui Ciceroni operam det, & in illius lectione accurate uersetur, uerborum elegantia, sententiarum grauitate, compositionis lenitate, & aequabili fluxu, diues non sit & beatus. |
Example 7:
| Erasmus, Ciceronianus 634,10–24 | Dolet, Dialogus 170,26–171,17 |
| (Mor.) Est alius scrupulous, qui magis urget animum, si non grauabe|ris audire. An censes ullum hominem eloquentis nomen promereri, qui non dicat apte? Nequaquam: quandoquidem haec praecipua uirtus est oratoris, apposite dicere. Verum illud appositum, unde perpenditur, nonne partim a rebus, de quibus uerba fiunt: partim a personis, tum dicentium, tum audientium: partim a loco, tempore, reliquisque circunstantiis. Itaque non erit Ciceronianus, si quis in theatro disserat de Stoicorum paradoxis, deque Chrysippeis argutiis: aut apud Areopagitas in capitis discrimine lasciuiat facetiis: aut de re culinaria, uerbis ac figuris tragicorum loquatur. Iste nihilominus ridiculus erit orator, quam ii quis in tragico cultu saltet Atellanas: aut feli, quod est in prouerbiis, inducat crocoton, simiae purpuram, Bacchum aut Sardanapalum leonis exuuio, & claua exornet Herculis. Nihil enim laudis meretur quamlibet per se magnificum, si sit ineptum. | (Bul.) est alius scrupus, qui magis vrget animum meum, si non grauaberis audire.
(Nosop.) Vtere pactis arbitratu tuo. (Bul.) An censes vllum eloquentis nomen promereri, qui non dicat apte? (Nosop.) Nequaquam, quandoquidem haec praecipua virtus est oratoris, apposite dicere. (Bul.) Verum illud appositum, vnde perpenditur, nonne partim a rebus, de quibus verba fiunt: partim a personis, tum dicentium, tum audientium: partim a loco, tempore, reliquisque circumstantiis? (Nosop.) Maxime. (Bul.) Ciceronianum autem nonne praestantem oratorem esse vis? (Nosop.) Quid ni? (Bul.) Itaque non erit Ciceronianus, si quis in theatro differat de Stoicorum paradoxis, deque Chrysippeis argutiis: aut apud Areopagitas in capitis discrimine lasciuiat faceriis: aut de re culinaria, verbis ac figuris tragicorum loquatur. (Nosop.) Iste nihilo minus ridiculus erit orator, quam si quis in tragico cultu saltet atellanas: aut feli, quod est in prouerbiis, inducat Crocoton, simiae purpuram, Bacchum aut Sardanapalum leonis exuuio, et daua exornet Herculis. Nihil eniro laudis meretur, quamlibet per se magnificum, si sit ineptum. |
As these examples can show, the quotation of the Ciceronianus by Dolet is modifying, sharpening the appearance of Erasmus' text. It is giving the impression that the Ciceronianus was an aggressive treatise, not a dialogical discussion about Ciceronian imitation. The Dialogus is thus making the Ciceronianus a lot more aggressive than it really was – by simply quoting it.