Page:Correspondence of Marcus Cornelius Fronto volume 2 Haines 1920.djvu/287

 When that book and those words were read to Fronto, while I and many more were sitting with him, it was the opinion of a person present, and one by no means unlearned, that it was absurd and frigid in a historical work to say "with many mortals" instead of "with many men," and savoured too much of poetry: then said Fronto to him who had expressed this view:

"Do you, a man of the correctest taste in other things, affirm that you think 'many mortals' an absurd and frigid expression? And do you suppose that a man so discreet and master of so pure and current a style had no motive for preferring 'mortals' to 'men'? And do you believe that it would have given the same convincing picture of a multitude of men if he had substituted multis hominibus for multis mortalibus? For my part, unless my love and reverence for that writer and for all the language of our old authors blinds my judgment, I hold that, in so describing the concourse of nearly a whole city, 'mortals' is an expression far and away more ample, more comprehensive, and more copious than simply 'men.' For the phrase multi homines can be contracted and compressed to mean quite a moderate number, while multi mortales in some mysterious way and by some subtle nuance includes almost the whole body of citizens of every class and age and sex. And surely Quadrigarius, wishing to describe what was actually the fact, the presence of a huge and mixed multitude, said that Metellus went into the Capitol 'with many mortals' more emphatically than if he had said 'with many men.'"  271