character was much more marked than its acerbity. In many places he
shows Greek reflections, for he had received a liberal education, duly
completed at Athens. But his philosophy did not consist of dreamy
theories and arbitrary rules--it was directed to practical ends, to the
harmonizing of the feelings, and the elevation of society. As a man of
the world, he was not carried away by fancies, nor given to exaggerated
views; and as a companion of the great, he was not inclined to inveigh
bitterly against the degeneracy of the times. On the contrary, so kindly
were his feelings, that he tells us that we should overlook the vices of
our friends. His teaching, both in spirit and range, was broader than
that of his predecessors; his shafts were directed against classes
rather than individuals, and wherever he is more pointed, his object is
not to gratify personal spite, but to make his warning more forcible by
illustration. Moreover, his names are generally unreal. In this way he
attacks Nasidienus on the excessive luxury of the table, and his advice
was applicable not only to the rich and great, but to more ordinary men.
Thus, he shows the bad tendencies of avarice and love-intrigues, and the
meanness of sycophantism and legacy-hunting. Many of the faults he
condemns are rather errors in taste than serious moral delinquencies.
Sometimes he criticises merely trivial matters, such as a costume or a
scent. "Rufillus smells all perfumes, Gorgonius like a goat," and the
most humorous of his pieces is that in which he ridicules the ignorance
and impudence of a manoeuvring chatterer. But in this line he is not
very successful, and his contests of rival jesters are as much beneath
the notice of any good writer of the present day, as his account is of
Porcius, the jack-pudding "swallowing cakes whole."

Horace says that men are more impervious to slashing reproach than to
fine ridicule, and he was unusually adroit in hitting foibles without
inflicting pain. He was not a man who held strong opinions on subjects.