Institutio Oratoria

Frontispiece of a 1720 edition of the Institutio Oratoria, showingQuintilan teaching rhetoric

Institutio Oratoria (English: Institutes of Oratory) isa twelve-volume textbook on the theory and practice ofrhetoric by Roman rhetorician Quintilian. It was pub-lished around year 95 CE. The work deals also with thefoundational education and development of the oratorhimself.

1 Introduction

Quintilian wrote his book during the last years of the reignof Emperor Domitian. In the tradition of several Romanemperors, such as Nero and Caligula, Domitian’s regimegrew harsher as time went on. “[An] active secret po-lice preyed on the Roman population, and even senatorswere encouraged in various ways to inform on each other... under Domitian, even the slightest suspicion of disre-spect for the emperor became a capital crime” (xx). So-cial and political corruption were rife. In a move of ut-most irony, the debauched Domitian appointed himself“censor perpetuus, making himself responsible for publicmorals” (xx).

Against this backdrop, it was very difficult to find ora-tors in the tradition of Cicero, part of whose “fame asan orator stems from his public denunciations of ene-mies of the state” (XIX). Such positions were simply toodangerous to take during the reign of the emperors sinceAugustus. Therefore, the role of the orator had changedsince Cicero’s day. Now, they were more concerned withpleading cases than anything else. Into this time, Quin-tilian attempted to interject some of the idealism of anearlier time. “Political oratory was dead, and everyonein Rome knew it was dead; but Quintilian deliberatelychooses the oratory of a past generation as his educationalideal” (Gwynn, 188).

2 Contents overview

2.1 Overview of Books I–II

In the first two books, Quintilian focuses on the early edu-cation of the would-be orator, including various subjectshe should be skilled in, such as reading and composition.“He offers us indeed not so much a theory as a curricu-lum. For instance in ch. iv of Book I he discusses certainletters, the derivation of words, and parts of speech; inch. v, the necessity of correctness in speaking and writ-ing, choice of words, barbarisms, aspiration, accent, sole-cisms, figures of speech, foreign words, and compoundwords; in ch. vi, analogy, and in ch. viii, orthography”(Laing). Regarding the age at which the orator’s trainingshould begin, Quintilian refers to the views of Hesiod andEratosthenes, but accepts Chrysippus’ view that a child’slife should never be without education (Quintilian 1.1.15-19).Quintilian sees these formative years as the most criticalto the education of an orator: “The infancy of the mind isas important as the infancy of the body and needs as muchattention” (Quintilian 1.1.1-24). The role of the orator’snurse is greatly emphasized as “it is she that the boy willhear first, [and] it is her words that he will imitate” (Laing,519). Parents play an equally important role, their edu-cation being a determining factor in the orator’s progress.Thirdly, the paedagogus, (the slave who attends the youngorator) “must be well educated and ready at all times tocorrect errors in grammar” (Laing, 520). Finally, Quin-tilian stresses that the orator should be educated by “themost accomplished teacher” (1.1.22). This ideal teacheris described in detail in at (2.2.5).In Book II, Quintilian defines rhetoric as an art, while

1

2 2 CONTENTS OVERVIEW

classifying the three types of arts: theoretical, practi-cal, and productive (2.17-18). He concludes that rhetoricpartakes of all three categories, but associates it moststrongly with the practical (2.18.1-5). Rhetoric is alsodivided into three categories: (1) art, (2) artist, and (3)work (2.14.5). Quintilian then moves into an explorationof rhetoric’s nature and virtue, following it with a compar-ison of oratory and philosophy (2.19-21). It should alsobe noted that Quintilian uses these two terms, rhetoricand oratory, interchangeably (see Book II).

2.2 Overview of Books III–V

Books III-IX explore and develop the various types of or-atory, focusing on the structure and methods of persua-sion. Thus, these books are “concerned primarily withthe art of rhetoric” (Walzer, 40).In Book III, Quintilian begins with an apology to his read-ers for dry, technical nature of his writing (3.1). The fol-lowing chapters discuss the origins of rhetoric (3.2), aswell as its nature and various divisions (3.3). Quintilianthen asks whether there are more than three types of ora-tory (3.4) before discussing cause (3.5) and the status of acause (3.6). Three overarching forms of oratory are dis-cussed: panegyric (3.7), deliberative (3.8), and forensic(3.9).A significant portion of the text is structured aroundAristotle’s 5 canons of rhetoric: Books III to VI concernthe process of invention, arrangement in Book VII, andstyle in Books VIII and IX. In Book IV, Quintilian dis-cusses Cicero’s parts of an oration (4.1-5). Book V islargely a discussion of proofs, designated as artificial orunartificial (5.1).

2.3 Overview of Book VI

The central theme of Book VI is laughter,[1] and it is dis-cussed extensively in chapter three.[2] Aristotle’s threeartistic appeals, ethos, pathos, and logos, are also dis-cussed in Book VI (6.2).

2.4 Overview of Books VII–IX

Book VII covers arrangement, one of Aristotle’s 5 canonsof rhetoric. Style is discussed in Books VIII and IX.

2.5 Overview of Book X

In Book X, Quintilian surveys the past contributions ofLatin and Greek authors to rhetoric(10.1). Followingthis discussion, Quintilian argues that the orator shouldimitate the best authors if he wishes to be successful(10.1.5), “For there can be no doubt that in art no smallportion of our task lies in imitation, since, although

invention came first and is all-important, it is expedi-ent to imitate whatever has been invented with success”(10.2.1). Writing is then discussed (10.3), followed bycorrection (10.4), varied forms of composition: trans-lation, paraphrase, theses, commonplaces, and decla-mations (10.5), premeditation (10.6), and improvisation(10.7).

2.6 Overview of Book XI

In Book XI, Quintilian emphasizes the orator’s choice ofappropriate subject matter at varying times (11.1). Hefurther stresses the role of the audience within oratory:“Their power and rank will make no small difference;we shall employ different methods according as we arespeaking before the emperor, a magistrate, a senator, aprivate citizen, or merely a free man, while a differenttone is demanded by trials in the public courts, and incases submitted to arbitration” (11.1.43). Also discussedare the orator’s memory (11.2) and delivery (11.3), thefinal canons of Aristotle’s rhetoric.

2.7 Overview of Book XII

BookXII addresses the career of the educated orator afterhe has completed his training. In the preface, Quintilianexpresses, for the first time, that he is theorizing beyondthe work of others:

Now there is “Nothing before and nothingbehind but the sky and the Ocean.” One onlycan I discern in all of the boundless waste ofwaters, Marcus Tullius Cicero, and even he,though the ship in which he entered the seas isof such size and so well found, begins to lessensail and to row a slower stroke, and is contentto speakmerely of the kind of speech to be em-ployed by the perfect orator. But my temerityis such that I shall essay to form my orator’scharacter and to teach him his duties. ThusI have no predecessor to guide my steps andmust press far, far on, as my theme may de-mand (Quintilian 12.Pref.4).

Above all else, Quintilian advocates that a good oratormust be a vir bonus, a good man (12.1.1). To aid the or-ator in becoming a good man, Quintilian discusses meth-ods for influencing his character, coupled with the studyof philosophy (12.2). Quintilian then emphasizes thestudy of civic law as essential to orator’s ability to advisethe state (12.3). Also discussed are the orator’s abilityto draw from past and present examples (12.4), as wellas a certain “loftiness of the soul” that situates the oratorabove fear (12.5.1). Quintilian does not offer a specificage at which the order should begin to plead; he reasonsthat this age “will of course depend on the development

3

of his strength” (12.6.2). The orator’s careful selection ofcases is then discussed, alongside the question of payment(12.7). In (12.8), Quintilian stresses that the orator mustdevote time and effort to his study of cases. But abovehis other duties, Quintilian makes clear that the orator“should never, like so many, be led by a desire to win ap-plause to neglect the interest of the actual case” (12.9.1).Lastly, Quintilian compares various styles of Greek andRoman oratory (especially Atticism and the Asiatic style),also commenting on artistic styles of painting and sculp-ture (12.10). As he concludes, Quintilian discusses whenthe orator should retire and examines the possible advan-tages of such a career. His final words urge the orator todevote himself fully to the task: “Wherefore let us seekwith all our hearts that true majesty of oratory, the fairestgift of god to man, without which all things are strickendumb and robbed alike of present glory and the immortalrecord of posterity; and let us press forward to whatsoeveris best, since, if we do this, we shall either reach the sum-mit or at least see many others far beneath us” (12.11.30).

3 On rhetoric

In Quintilian’s time, rhetoric was primarily composed ofthree aspects: the theoretical, the educational, and thepractical. Institutio Oratoria does not claim originality;Quintilian drew from a number of sources in compilinghis work. This eclecticism also prevented him from ad-hering too rigidly to any particular school of thought onthe matter, although Cicero stands out among the othersources. Quintilian also refused any short, simple lists ofrules; he evidently felt that the study and art of rhetoriccould not be so reduced. This might explain the length ofInstitutio Oratoria, which consists of twelve books.From the middle of the first century BC to Quintilian’stime, there had been a flowering of Roman rhetoric. Butby Quintilian’s time, the current of popular taste in ora-tory was rife with what has been called “silver Latin,” astyle that favored ornate embellishment over clarity andprecision. Quintilian’s Institutio Oratoria can in manyways be read as a reaction against this trend; it advocates areturn to simpler and clearer language. It may also reflectthe influence of the late Emperor Vespasian, who was “[a]man of plebeian stock, ... a down-to-earth realist withthe common touch” (Murray, 431); Vespasian dislikedexcess and extravagance, and his patronage of Quintil-ian may have influenced the latter’s views of language.Cicero is the model Quintilian adopts as the standard-bearer for this form; during the previous century, Cicero’sfar more concise style was the standard. This relates tohis discussion of nature and art. Quintilian evidently pre-ferred the natural, especially in language, and disliked theexcessive ornamentation popular in the style of his con-temporaries. Deviating from natural language and thenatural order of thought in pursuit of an over-elaboratestyle created confusion in both the orator and his audi-

ence. “Even difficult questions can be dealt with by anorator of moderate ability if he is content to follow na-ture as his leader and does not give all his attention to ashowy style” (Gwynn, 78).Institutio Oratoria is effectively a comprehensive textbookof the technical aspects of rhetoric. From the eleventhchapter of Book II to the end of Book XI, Quintilian cov-ers such topics as natural order, the relation of nature andart, invention, proof, emotion, and language. Perhapsmost influential among the ideas discussed is his exami-nation of tropes and figures, found in Books 8 and 9. “[A]trope involves the substitution of one word for another, afigure does not necessarily entail any change either to theorder or the meaning of words” (Leitch, 156). An ex-ample of a trope would be metaphor, the altering of aword’s meaning. A figure, on the other hand, gives thewords a new aspect or greater emotional value. Figuresare divided into figures of thought, whichmaymake proofseem more forceful, intensify emotions, or add eleganceor ornamentation; and figures of diction, which is furthersubdivided into “the grammatical, in which the form ofthe word creates the figure, and the rhetorical, in whichthe position of the word is the primary factor” (Gwynn,88).A good part of this work, of course, deals with the techni-cal aspects of rhetoric and the Institutio Oratoria stands—along with Aristotle's 'Rhetoric' and Cicero’s works — asone of the ancient world’s greatest works on rhetoric. Heorganizes the practice of oratory into five canons: inventio(discovery of arguments), dispositio (arrangement of ar-guments), elocutio (expression or style), memoria (mem-orization), and pronuntiatio (delivery). For each canon,particularly the first three, he provides a thorough exposi-tion of all the elements that must be mastered and consid-ered in developing and presenting arguments. The thor-ough and sensible presentation reflect his long experienceas orator and teacher, and in many ways the work can beseen as the culmination of Greek and Roman rhetoricaltheory.Throughout these and other discussions, Quintilian re-mains concerned with the practical, applicable aspect,rather than the theoretical. Unlike many modern theo-rists, he “does not see figurative language as a threat to thestability of linguistic reference” (Leitch, 156). The ref-erential use of a word was always the primary meaning,and the use of figurative language was merely an additionto it, not a replacement for it.

4 On education

“My aim, then, is the education of the perfect orator”(Quintilianus, 1.Preface.9). Book I of Institutio Orato-ria discusses at length the proper method of training anorator, virtually from birth. This focus on early and com-prehensive education was in many ways a reflection of

4 5 LIMITATIONS

Quintilian’s career; Emperor Vespasian’s influence on theofficial status of education marked the period as one ofconscientious education. Quintilian’s contribution to thisline of thought, aside from his long career as a public ed-ucator, was the opening of his text, and it is regarded asa highlight of the discussion:

“Quintilian’s Institutio Oratoria is a land-mark in the history of Roman education: it isthe culmination of a long development, and ithad no successor … [No] teacher was foundwho could speak with Quintilian’s authority,no orator sufficiently interested in the theoryof his art to produce a second de Oratore”(Gwynn, 242).

His theory of education is one area in which Quintiliandiffers from Cicero. Cicero called for a broad, generaleducation; Quintilian was more focused. He lays out theeducational process step by step, from “hav[ing] a fatherconceive the highest hopes of his son from the moment ofhis birth” (Quintilianus, 1.1.1).[3] Other concerns are thatthe child’s nurse should speak well (“The ideal accordingto Chrysippus, would be that she should be a philosopher”(1.1.4)), and that both the parents and the teachers of thechild should be well-educated.[3] With respect to the par-ents, Quintilian “do[es] not restrict this remark to fathersalone” (1.1.6);[3] a well-educated mother is regarded asan asset to the growing orator. Quintilian also presents awide review of suitable literary examples, and this workis also an important work of literary criticism. While heclearly favors certain writers, his fairness is notable, aseven writers, such as Sallust, an influential practitionerof the sort of style that Quintilian opposed, are affordedsome consideration. Above all, Quintilian holds up Ci-cero as an example of a great writer and orator.Quintilian discusses many issues of education that are stillrelevant today. He believed that education should be be-gun early, as mentioned above, but also that it should bepleasurable for the child. “Above all things we must takecare that the child, who is not yet old enough to love hisstudies, does not come to hate them and dread the bit-terness which he had once tasted, even when the yearsof infancy are left behind. His studies must be made anamusement” (1.1.20).[3] The proliferation of educationaltoys available for pre-school aged children shows that thisview still has power. He also examines the various prosand cons of public schooling versus homeschooling, even-tually coming out in favour of public school, so long as itis a good school. His view is that in public schools stu-dents can learn from what is taught to and praised andcensured in their peers in the group instead of only thosethings directed entirely at themselves. (1.2.21) One mustnote, however, that Quintilian makes a point of declaringthat “a good teacher will not burden himself with a largernumber of pupils than he can manage, and it is further ofthe very first importance that he should be on only friendly

and intimate terms with us and make his teaching not aduty but a labor of love” (1.2.15).Quintilian’s most arresting point about the growing ora-tor, however, is that he should be educated in moralityabove all else. To Quintilian, only a good man could bean orator. This is another aspect where he differs fromCicero, or rather pushes further Cicero’s injunction thatan orator should be a good man. Quintilian quite literallybelieved that an evil man could not be an orator, “[f]orthe orator’s aim is to carry conviction, and we trust thoseonly whom we know to be worthy of our trust” (Gwynn,231). This was quite possibly a reaction to the corrupt anddissolute times in which Quintilian lived; he may have at-tributed the decline in the role of the orator to the declinein public morality. Only a man free from vice could con-centrate on the exacting study of oratory. But “the goodman does not always speak the truth or even defend thebetter cause…what matters is not so much the act as themotive” (Clarke, 117). Therefore, Quintilian’s good ora-tor is personally good, but not necessarily publicly good.

5 Limitations

Several limitations have been pointed out in Quintilian’swork. Among them is the injunction that he was too im-mersed in the culture of rhetoric. Because of his po-sition and his profession, it was impossible for him toview rhetoric from the outside. Therefore, it would havebeen difficult for him to entertain any doubts about itsvalue. This helps explain his ideal orator as a morallygood man—-rhetoric to Quintilian was in itself inher-ently good. It may also shed some light on his view ofphilosophy; he “considered rhetoric to be the basis of alleducation, [and] viewed philosophy as a challenge to itssupremacy” (Dominik, 53). He believed that an oratorshould read philosophy, but only because philosophy hadusurped some of the functions of oratory in the first place.Another limitation of Quintilian is that he is inevitably avictim of his own educational tradition. As mentionedabove, he lived in a time of flowery, ornate language.Therefore, although he obviously prefers natural languageand attempts to interject some simplicity into the way lan-guage is taught, to a certain degree he is forced to acceptthe unnatural language of his time, simply because of theforce of current fashion.Finally, some have called into question the idea of theideal orator. The education so dictated in Institutio Ora-toria was designed to create a person who had never ex-isted, and probably never would. Quintilian seemed will-fully unconscious of the changes since the days of greatCiceronian oratory. To what end would this perfect ora-tor be created, if there was no place for him?

8.2 Other material 5

6 Notes[1] Rodríguez Martín (2003), pp.157, 160

[2] Phillips-Anderson (2007), p.22

[3] Halsall, Paul Ancient History Sourcebook: Quintilian: TheIdeal Education, c. 90 CE, 1998

7 References• Phillips-Anderson, Michael Andrew (2007), A the-ory of rhetorical humor in American political dis-course.

• Rodríguez Martín, José-Domingo (2003), “Mov-ing the judge: a legal commentary on Book VIof Quintilian’s Institutio oratoria” in: Olga EvelineTellegen-Couperus (ed.) (2003), Quintilian and thelaw: the art of persuasion in law and politics.

8 External links

8.1 Editions of Institutio Oratoria

• Institutio Oratoria — English translation, with in-dices, search engine, bibliography, and history ofthe text at EServer.org

• Institutio Oratoria— Latin text and English transla-tion at LacusCurtius

• Institutio Oratoria and the disputed DeclamationesMajores Latin texts at the Latin Library

• Institutio Oratoria — Latin text at the BibliothecaAugustana

8.2 Other material

• Detailed Outline of Institutio Oratoria: Outline

• A timeline history of Institutio Oratoria and its in-fluence: MSU

• Herbert F. Wright (1920). "Institutes of Oratory,The". Encyclopedia Americana.

6 9 TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

9 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

9.1 Text• Institutio Oratoria Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutio_Oratoria?oldid=670092442 Contributors: AllanBz, RussBot, Christhe speller, LKNUTZ, SummerWithMorons, Addbot, Thi, Bob Burkhardt, Omnipaedista, ZéroBot, PBS-AWB, Nmatich, Sweepy andAnonymous: 3

9.2 Images• File:Quintilian,_Institutio_oratoria_ed._Burman_(Leiden_1720),_frontispiece.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/68/Quintilian%2C_Institutio_oratoria_ed._Burman_%28Leiden_1720%29%2C_frontispiece.jpg License: Publicdomain Contributors: Own work Original artist: Scanned by Aristeas (Roman Eisele). Copper engraving by F. Bleyswyk.

9.3 Content license• Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0