Quintilian's announcement at the beginning of the Institutio that his work aims to depict an ideal is repeated at the end, and book 12 is devoted to a portrayal of the consummate orator. Quintilian's ideal has sometimes been the target of criticism on the grounds of anachronism. The imagined orator, even if he could come into existence, could not perform. The highest task expected of him in imperial Rome: active leadership in political life (e. g., Kennedy 1969: 130-2). But other scholars challenge this view and argue that political discourse, including that which took place in the senate, continued to form an essential part of oratory in Roman society (see chapters 9, 24). In any case, it should be remembered that Quintilian is concerned with an ideal and ideals always bear programmatic implications. In this case the kind of rhetoric outlined in the Institutio is a conscious compromise between two conceptions in Quintilian’s mind: the best possible rhetoric that could be practiced from a technical point of view (based on sound Ciceronian principles and lacking ‘‘modern’’ decadent elements); and an idealized form of rhetoric designed to assume its deserved hegemony over the educational curriculum and to give rise to a new kind of orator, Romanus sapiens (‘‘a Roman wise Man,’’ 12.2.7), who is suited to political leadership because of his moral superiority and unparalleled persuasive ability.
That Quintilian recognized the untimeliness of his proposal (at least partly) is implied by the very last words of the Institution where he states clearly that the main aim of the Institutio is a moral one: haec erant... quibus praecepta dicendi pro virili parte adiuvari posse per nos videbantur, quorum cognitio studiosis iuvenibus si non magnam utilitatem adferet, at certe, quod magis petimus, bonam voluntatem (‘‘these were the precepts. . . through which it seemed that I might advance, as far as I could, the manly task of speaking; the knowledge of which, even if it does not give the young students much practical help, will at least - which I value more - give him good intentions,’’ 12.11.31). In fact, many of the categories that govern Quintilian’s message, even in the application of technical rhetoric, belong to the world of morals: decorum, iudicium, consuetudo, vir bonus. The content of such concepts, moreover, is never defined, a fact that opens the way for their use in justifying Quintilian’s own more or less whimsical views on matters both great and small (Winterbottom 1998).
It is true, nonetheless, that the more enlightened and ‘‘encyclopedic’’ features of Quintilian’s ideal have universal appeal and are linked both to his illustrious ancestors (e. g., Isocrates, Cicero) and offspring; yet part of this universality also derives from Quintilian’s response to specific problems of his own time (Winterbottom 1967). His proposed innovative curriculum must be seen within the context of a fight against philosophy for cultural and educational hegemony (Cassin 1995), one that probably took advantage of Domitian’s suspicion of the subject.
FURTHER READING
The standard critical text of the Institutio Oratoria is that of Winterbottom (1970), now reproduced with minor improvements in the five-volume set of the Loeb collection (Russell 2001), which provides a translation in modern English. Russell’s short introductions to each book of the Institutio present informative critical summaries of the work’s contents and consistently refer the reader to Quintilian’s sources (on which Cousin 1935, in French, is still irreplaceable) and to relevant bibliography on each issue. The edition of Cousin (197580), in French, is especially helpful for its notes. There are valuable individual commentaries on books 1 (Colson 1924), 10 (Peterson 1891), and 12 (Austin 1948) plus a German edition on book 3 (Adamietz 1966). Rhetorica 13.2 and 13.3 (1995), the volumes of Albaladejo, del Rio, and Caballero (1998), and Tellegen-Couperus (2003) are all devoted to Quintilian and the Institutio and comprise about 150 papers in all. These vary in their length, focus, and interest but together address the Institutio from almost every conceivable point of view and refer to a wealth of bibliography. The chapters by Wuellner and Heath in Porter (1997: 51-119) present an overview of the evolution of arrangement and invention, against which Quintilian’s views can be appropriately contextualized. Lausberg (1998) is a classic but much of his material is based explicitly on Quintilian, who often offers additional explanations that synthesize and clarify the material. The transmission of the text is dealt with in detail by Cousin (1975), in French, who can be complemented by Winterbottom (1967). The most comprehensive study of Quintilian’s style is Zundel (1981), in German.
A Companion to Roman Rhetoric Edited by William Dominik, Jon Hall Copyright © 2007 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd
World History
