The physical contexts of Roman oratory shaped quite significantly the speaker’s style of delivery. Court cases during the late republic, for example, were usually conducted in the Forum, a location that presented the orator with numerous challenges. The often oppressive heat of Rome could be a source of considerable discomfort, while on other occasions the speaker might have to contend with wind and rain (Quint. Inst. 11.3.27). Moreover, since no means of artificial amplification were available, even the best speaker in this kind of space would have been unable to make himself heard clearly more than fifty or sixty meters away (see Aldrete 1999: 73-84). High profile criminal cases could also attract large crowds of onlookers. Cicero at Pro Cluentio 93,
For example, claims that the trial of Gaius lunius in 74 bce had been compromised by a rowdy mob of the accuser’s supporters that had gathered first for a rally ( contio) outside the Forum and then moved to the Aurelian steps near the temple of Castor. The presence of such crowds could both help and hinder the orator. On the one hand, they had the ability to interrupt the orator and make it difficult for him to speak effectively (see, e. g., Cic. QFr. 2.3.2-3; Asc. 40-2, Clark 1907). On the other, they often helped to create an emotionally charged atmosphere that the skillful orator could exploit. Indeed, for Cicero a large crowd of onlookers was an essential element of the performative dynamic: habet enim multitudo vim quandam talem ut, quemad-modum tibicen sine tibiis canere, sic orator sine multitudine audiente eloquens esse non possit (‘‘for a crowd has a certain power, so that, just as a flute player cannot play without a flute, so the orator cannot be eloquent unless he has a crowd as his audience,’’ De Or. 2.338; cf. Tac. Dial. 39; Quint. Inst. 10.7.16; Gotoff 1993b: 289-90).
Senatorial debates, by contrast, usually took place indoors, most often of course in the senate house, but occasionally in nearby temples (see chapter 10). The size of the audience would regularly run to several hundred, thus establishing a performative context similar to that of the modern lecture hall or small theater. While there was a set procedure for debates to follow, speeches were not always heard in respectful silence; interjections and interruptions from the audience were frequent and would have affected the orator’s delivery to some degree (Bonnefond-Coudry 1989: 5068). A rather different dynamic would have prevailed at contiones (‘‘public assemblies’’), which were often organized in order to stir up popular support for a politician and his policies. (For the typical location of contiones and their organization, see Morstein-Marx 2004: 34-67; Cicero at Brut. 223 describes them as turbulenti, ‘‘rowdy.’’) To this extent they offered an opportunity for a kind of rabble-rousing mob oratory. As we shall see below, an especially forceful and vigorous style of delivery often proved highly effective in manipulating these kinds of noisy crowds. Indeed, Cicero notes that some orators were unable to adapt their style of delivery to suit this context (e. g., Brut. 165), while others who excelled at speaking in such assemblies did not have the oratorical finesse required by the law courts (Brut. 178, 223).
The situation changes to a certain degree in the early empire. As Maternus in Tacitus’ Dialogus observes, there were now fewer opportunities to address massed crowds at political rallies (40); the grand public trials of the late republic were also a thing of the past (39; cf. Cic. Deiot. 5). To this extent, few orators of the empire would have acquired the special skills of delivery needed to engage effectively with a restless mob in Rome, although legionary commanders and provincial governors may well have encountered situations where such skills were required. Nevertheless many opportunities still existed for speaking in the senate and law courts (see chapters 9, 24). Moreover, we should hesitate before believing Maternus’ complaint that judicial oratory had become lifeless and debilitated because most cases were now heard in auditoria et tabularia (‘‘recital halls and archival offices,’’ 39). Quite apart from the rhetorical bias in his position, it is clear that orators employed a wide variety of theatrical tricks in these courts to augment their pleas. Perhaps the most important factor influencing the approach to delivery among Tacitus’ contemporaries was the great emphasis given to declamatory performance in the education of the student.
As we shall see, the epideictic context of these performances seems to have encouraged students to cultivate a highly mannered style of delivery, one that did not transfer at all well to the real oratorical contexts in which they would eventually have to speak.
World History
