PERIOD FIRST.--1. Early Literature of the Romans; the Fescennine Songs; the Fabulae Atellanae.--2. Early Latin Poets; Livius Andronicus, Naevius, and Ennius.--3. Roman Comedy.--4. Comic Poets; Plautus, Terence, and Statius.--5. Roman Tragedy.--6. Tragic Poets; Pacuvius and Attius.--7. Satire; Lucilius.--8. History and Oratory; Fabius Pictor; Cencius Alimentus; Cato; Varro; M. Antonius; Crassus; Hortensius.--9. Roman Jurisprudence.--10. Grammarians.
PERIOD SECOND.--1. Development of the Roman Literature.--2. Mimes, Mimographers, Pantomime; Laberius and P. Lyrus.--3. Epic Poetry; Virgil; The Aeneid.--4. Didactic Poetry; the Bucolics; the Georgics; Lucretius.-- 5. Lyric Poetry; Catullus; Horace.--6. Elegy; Tibullus; Propertius; Ovid. --7. Oratory and Philosophy; Cicero.--8. History; J. Caesar; Sallust; Livy.--9. Other Prose Writers.
PERIOD THIRD.--1. Decline of Roman Literature.--2. Fable; Phaedrus.--3. Satire and Epigram; Persius, Juvenal, Martial.--4. Dramatic Literature; the Tragedies of Seneca.--5. Epic Poetry; Lucan; Silius Italicus; Valerius Flaccus; P. Statius.--6. History; Paterculus; Tacitus; Suetonius; Q. Curtius; Valerius Maximus.--7. Rhetoric and Eloquence; Quintilian; Pliny the Younger.--8. Philosophy and Science; Seneca; Pliny the Elder; Celsus; P. Mela; Columella; Frontinus.--9. Roman Literature from Hadrian to Theodoric; Claudian; Eutropius; A. Marcellinus; S. Sulpicius; Gellius; Macrobius; L. Apuleius; Boethius; the Latin Fathers.--10. Roman Jurisprudence.
1. ROMAN LITERATURE AND ITS DIVISIONS.--Inferior to Greece in the genius of its inhabitants, and, perhaps, in the intrinsic greatness of the events of which it was the theatre, unquestionably inferior in the fruits of intellectual activity, Italy holds the second place in the classic literature of antiquity. Etruria could boast of arts, legislation, scientific knowledge, a fanciful mythology, and a form of dramatic spectacle, before the foundations of Rome were laid. But, like the ancient Egyptians, the Etrurians made no progress in composition. Verses of an irregular structure and rude in sense and harmony appear to have formed the highest limit of their literary achievements. Nor did even the opulent and luxurious Greeks of Southern Italy, while they retained their independence, contribute much to the glory of letters in the West. It was only in their fall that they did good service to the cause, when they redeemed the disgrace of their political humiliation by the honor of communicating the first impulse towards intellectual refinement to the bosoms of their conquerors. When, in the process of time, Sicily, Macedonia, and Achaia had become Roman provinces, some acquaintance with the language of their new subjects proved to be a matter almost of necessity to the victorious people; but the first impression made at Rome by the productions of the Grecian Muse, and the first efforts to create a similar literature, must be traced to the conquest of Tarentum (272 B.C.). From that memorable period, the versatile talents which distinguished the Greeks in every stage of national decline began to exercise a powerful influence on the Roman mind, which was particularly felt in the departments of education and amusement. The instruction of the Roman youth was committed to the skill and learning of Greek slaves; the spirit of the Greek drama was transferred into the Latin tongue, and, somewhat later, Roman genius and ambition devoted their united energies to the study of Greek rhetoric, which long continued to be the guide and model of those schools, in whose exercises the abilities of Cicero himself were trained. Prejudice and patriotism were powerless to resist this flood of foreign innovation; and for more than a century after the Tarentine war, legislative influence strove in vain to counteract the predominance of Greek philosophy and eloquence. But this imitative tendency was tempered by the pride of Roman citizenship. That sentiment breaks out, not merely in the works of great statesmen and warriors, but quite as strikingly in the productions of those in whom the literary character was all in all. It is as prominent in Virgil and Horace as in Cicero and Caesar; and if the language of Rome, in other respects so inferior to that of Greece, has any advantage over the sister tongue, it lies in that accent of dignity and command which seems inherent in its tones. The austerity of power is not shaded down by those graceful softenings so agreeable to the disposition of the most polished Grecian communities. In the Latin forms and syntax we are everywhere conscious of a certain energetic majesty and forcible compression. We hear, as it were, the voice of one who claims to be respected, and resolves to be obeyed.