No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Extract
In assessing the characteristics of Cicero's oratory we are in the unfortunate position of being unable to compare him with his contemporaries and predecessors. The speeches of Hortensius and of the other famous orators of Cicero's day are lost, as are those of Crassus and Antonius, the much admired figures of his boyhood, with whom, according to the Brutus, Roman oratory first equalled Greek. Yet though we know little of the other orators of the Roman Republic, it is possible by a study of Cicero's speeches and of his oratorical writings to get a fairly good idea of his special characteristics.
A passage in the Brutus will serve as a useful introduction to a brief study of Ciceronian oratory.
[‘Before the time of Hortensius] there was no orator’, says Cicero, ‘who appeared to have studied literature more deeply than the common run of men—literature which is the fountain-head of perfect eloquence; no one who had embraced philosophy—the mother of all good deeds and good words; no one who had learnt civil law—a thing most necessary for private cases, and essential to the orator's good judgement; no one who had at his command the traditions of Rome, from which if occasion demanded he could call up most trustworthy witnesses from the dead; no one who by rapid and neat mockery of his opponent could unbend the minds of the jurymen and turn them for a while from solemnity to smiling and laughter; no one who could widen an issue and bring his speech from a limited dispute referring to a particular person or time to a general question of universal application; no one who could delight by a temporary digression from the issue, or could move the judge to anger or to tears, or in fact—which is the special quality of the orator—could turn his feelings whithersoever the occasion demanded.’
Information
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Classical Association 1945
References
page 72 note 1 Brutus, 322.
page 72 note 2 Divinatio in Caecilium, 39.
page 73 note 1 In Pisonem, 71.
page 73 note 2 Pro Sestio, 119. Cf. Verr. 11. iv. 109; Rosc. Am. 47.
page 73 note 3 In Pisonem, 68. Cf. Mur. 61.
page 73 note 4 Pro Archia, 3.
page 73 note 5 Quintilian 1. viii. 11.
page 73 note 6 Zillinger, , Cicero und die altrömischen Dichtern, p. 66 f.Google Scholar
page 73 note 7 Pro Roscio Amerino, 90, 46.
page 74 note 1 Pro Caelio, 18.
page 74 note 2 Pro Caelio, 36 f.
page 74 note 3 Pro Scauro, 4.
page 74 note 4 Pro Lege Manilia, 22.
page 74 note 5 De Natura Deorum, i. 6.
page 75 note 1 Pro Caelio, 40, 41. Other philosophical or semi-philosophical passages: Sest. 47; Har. Resp. 19, 57; Rosc. Am. 67.
page 75 note 2 Pro Murena, 60 f. Cf. Balb. 3, Deiot. 37. Cicero's knowledge of Epicureanism is shown in Post Red. in Sen. 14, Sest. 23, and in particular Pis. 42, 49, 65. A reference in Pis. 63—‘sis licet Themista sapientior’—presupposes a knowledge of anti-Epicurean polemic.
page 75 note 3 Pro Sestio, 91.
page 75 note 4 Gasquy, (Cicéron jurisconsulte, p. 285)Google Scholar concludes that Cicero was ‘nonseulement un orateur sans égal et un avocat habile, mais encore un jurisconsulte consommé’.
page 75 note 5 The others are Pro Quinctio, Pro Roscio Comoedo, and the fragmentary Pro Tullio. There were no doubt others which were not published.
page 76 note 1 Orator, 102.
page 76 note 2 De Legibus, i. 12.
page 76 note 3 Ad Atticum, i. 5, 6.
page 76 note 4 Ad Familiares, vii. 22.
page 76 note 5 Pro Caecina, 65.
page 76 note 6 Ibid. 70, 73.
page 76 note 7 Pro Murena, 25 f.
page 76 note 8 In Verrem, 11. iii. 209.
page 77 note 1 Memorials and Correspondence of Charles James Fox, iv, p. 349.
page 77 note 2 e.g. Verr. 11. v. 180, 181; Dom. 86, 101; Sull. 23; Cat. iii. 24; Clu. 119; Prov. Cons. 20.
page 77 note 3 Orator, 120.
page 77 note 4 e.g. Verr. 11. i. 48; Balb. 12, Scaur. 3.
page 77 note 5 De Oratore, iii. 205.
page 77 note 6 Quintilian XII. x. 61.
page 77 note 7 Pro Caelio, 34.
page 77 note 8 Cf. Quintilian VI. iii. 2.
page 77 note 9 Ibid. 5.
page 78 note 1 In Verrem, II. i. 121; iv. 53, 57, 95. Quintilian defends these on the ground that Cicero attributes them to others (vi. iii. 4).
page 78 note 2 Quintilian vi. iii. 35.
page 78 note 3 Plutarch, Cato, xxi. 5.
page 78 note 4 Pro Murena, 21 f.
page 78 note 5 Quintilian 11. iv. 24.
page 78 note 6 In Pisonem, 43.
page 78 note 7 Pro Caecina, 50 f.
page 79 note 1 Pro Caecina, 42 f.
page 79 note 2 Ibid. 53.
page 79 note 3 Ibid. 43.
page 79 note 4 In Verrem, 11. ii. 2 f., iv. 106 f.
page 79 note 5 Quintilian iv. iii. 13.
page 79 note 6 Pro Sestio, 3.
page 80 note 1 Plutarch, Cicero, xxxix. 6.
page 80 note 2 Pro Caelio, 60.
page 80 note 3 Pro Flacco, 106.
page 80 note 4 Orator, 131.
page 80 note 5 Ibid.
page 81 note 1 Orator, 132.
page 81 note 2 Brutus, 290.