Institutio Oratoria

In some cases instinct, and not reason, must supply the touchstone, as, for example, in the line: [*](Aen. viii. 641. )

1. A sow was slain to ratify their pacts.

Here the poet, by inventing the word porca, succeeded in producing an elegant impression, whereas if lie had used the masculine porcuis, the very reverse would have been the case. In some cases, however, the incongruity is obvious enough. It was only the other day that we laughed with good reason at the poet who wrote:

1. The youngling mice had gnawed
2. Within its chest the purple-bordered gown.
[*]( Camillus originally means a young boy. )

On the other hand, we admire Virgil [*](Georg. i. 181. ) when he says:

1. Oft hath the tiny mouse,

   etc.

For here the epithet is appropriate and prevents our expecting too much, while the use of the singular instead of the plural, and the unusual monosyllabic conclusion of the line, both add to the pleasing effect. Horace [*](A. P. 139. ) accordingly imitated Virgil in both these points, when he wrote,

1. The fruit shall be a paltry mouse.

Again, our style need not always dwell on the heights: at times it is desirable that it should sink. For there are occasions when the very meanness of the words employed adds force to what we say. When Cicero, in his denunciation of Piso, [*](Fr. 100. ) says,

When your whole family rolls up in a dray,

do you think that his use of the word dray was accidental, and was not designedly used to increase his audience's contempt for the man he wished to bring to ruin? The same is true when he says elsewhere,

You put down your head and butt him.