Institutio Oratoria

Quintilian

Quintilian. Institutio Oratoria, Volume 1-4. Butler, Harold Edgeworth, translator. Cambridge, Mass; London: Harvard University Press, William Heinemann Ltd., 1920-1922.

The following forms of reflexion are even more modern. There is the type which depends on surprise for its effect, as, for example, when Vibius Crispus, in denouncing the man who wore a breastplate when strolling in the forum and alleged that he did so because he feared for his life, cried,

Who
v7-9 p.291
gave you leave to be such a coward?
Another instance is the striking remark made by Africanus to Nero with reference to the death of Agrippina:
Caesar, your provinces of Gaul entreat you to bear your good fortune with courage.

Others are of an allusive type: for example, Domitius Afer, in his defence of Cloatilla, whom Claudius had pardoned when she was accused of having buried her husband, who had been one of the rebels, addressed her sons in his peroration with the words:

Nonetheless, it is your duty, boys, to give your mother burial.
[*]( The point is uncertain. Possibly, as Gesner suggests, the sons were accusing their mother. ) Some, again,

depend on the fact that they are transferred from one context to another Crispus, in his defence of Spatale, whose lover had made her his heir and then proceeded to die at the age of eighteen, remarked:

What a marvellous fellow to gratify his passion thus!
[*](sibi indulsit would seen to mean his appointing S. his heir and then being kind enough to die so soon! But the point is uncertain. )

Another type of reflexion may be produced by the doubling of a phrase, as in the letter written by Seneca for Nero to be sent to the senate on the occasion of his mother's death, with a view to creating the impression that he had been in serious danger:—

As yet I cannot believe or rejoice that I am safe.
Better, however, is the type which relies for its effect on contrast of opposites, as
I know from whom to fly, but whom to follow I know not;
[*]( Cic. ad Att. VIII. vii. 2. ) or,
What of the fact that the poor wretch, though he could not speak, could not keep silence?
[*]( Probably from the lost in Pisonem, since St. Jerome in a letter to Oceanus says postea vero Pisoniano vitio, cum loqui non post, tacere non poterat. But here again the point is obscure. ) But to produce the most striking effect this type should be given point by the introduction of a comparison, such as is made by Trachalus in his speech against Spatale, where he says:
Is it your pleasure, then, ye laws, the faithful guardians of chastity, that wives should receive a title [*]( By the lex Julia et Papia Poppaea childless wives were only entitled to a tenth of their husband's estate. ) and harlots a quarter?
v7-9 p.293
In these instances, however, the reflexion may equally well be good or bad.

On the other hand, there are some which will always be bad, such as those which turn on play upon words, as in the following case:

Conscript fathers, for I must address you thus that you may remember the duty owed to fathers.
Worse still, as being more unreal and far-fetched, is the remark made by the gladiator mentioned above in his prosecution of his sister:
I have fought to the last finger.
[*]( The exact meaning is uncertain. The allusion may be to the turning up of the thumb as a sign of defeat. See sect. 12. )

There is another similar type, which is perhaps the worst of all, where the play upon words is combined with a false comparison. When I was a young man I heard a distinguished pleader, after handing a mother some splinters of bone taken from the head of her son (which he did merely to provide an occasion for his epigram), cry:

Unhappiest of women, your son is not yet dead and yet you have gathered up his bones!

Moreover, most of our orators delight in devices of the pettiest kind, which seriously considered are merely ludicrous, but at the moment of their production flatter their authors by a superficial semblance of wit. Take, for instance, the exclamation from the scholastic theme, where a man, after being ruined by the barrenness of his land, is shipwrecked and hangs himself:

Let him whom neither earth nor sea receives, hang in mid air.

A similar absurdity is to be found in the declamation, to which I have already referred, in which a father poisons his son who insists on tearing his flesh with his teeth:

The man who eats such flesh, deserves such drink.
Or again, take this passage from the theme of the luxurious man who is alleged to have pretended to starve himself to death:
Tie a noose
v7-9 p.295
for yourself: you have good reason to be angry with your throat. 'rake poison: it is fit that a luxurious man should die of drink!

Others are merely fatuous, such as the remark of the declaimer who urges the courtiers of Alexander to provide him with a tomb by burning down Babylon.

I am burying Alexander. Shall any man watch such a burial from his housetop?
As if this were the climax of indignities! Others fail from sheer extravagance. For example, I once heard a rhetorician who was declaiming about the Germans, say:
I know not where they carry their heads,
[*]( Is this a suggestion that the Germans are monsters whose heads do grow beneath their shoulders or that they are so tall that their heads are lost in the clouds? ) and again when belauding a hero,
He beats back whole wars with the boss of his shield.

However, I shall never come to an end if I try to describe every possible form of this kind of absurdity. I will therefore turn to discuss a point of more importance. Rhetoricians are divided in opinion on this subject: some devote practically all their efforts to the elaboration of reflexions, while others condemn their employment altogether. I cannot agree entirely with either view.

If they are crowded too thick together, such reflexions merely stand in each other's way, just as in the case of crops and the fruits of trees lack of room to grow results in a stunted development. Again in pictures a definite outline is required to throw objects into relief, and consequently artists who include a number of objects in the same design separate them by intervals sufficient to prevent one casting a shadow on the other. Further,

this form of display breaks up our speeches into a number of detached sentences; every reflexion is isolated, and consequently a fresh start is necessary after each. This produces a discontinuous style, since

v7-9 p.297
our language is composed not of a system of limbs, but of a series of fragments: for your nicely rounded and polished phrases are incapable of cohesion. Further, the colour,

though bright enough, has no unity, but consists of a number of variegated splashes. A purple stripe appropriately applied lends brilliance to a dress, but a dress decorated with a quantity of patches can never be becoming to anybody.

Wherefore, although these ornaments may seem to stand out with a certain glitter of their own, they are rather to be compared to sparks flashing through the smoke than to the actual brilliance of flame: they are, in fact, invisible when the language is of uniform splendour, just as the stars are invisible in the light of day. And where eloquence seeks to secure elevation by frequent small efforts, it merely produces an uneven and broken surface which fails to win the admiration due to outstanding objects and lacks the charm that may be found in a smooth surface.

To this must be added the fact that those who devote themselves solely to the production of reflexions cannot avoid giving utterance to many that are trivial, flat or foolish. For their mere number will so embarrass their author that selection will be impossible. Consequently you will often find that such persons will produce a division or an argument as if it were an epigram, the only qualification necessary being that it should come toward the close of the period and be impressively delivered.

You killed your wife, though you were an adulterer yourself. I should loathe you even if you had only divorced her.
Here we have a division.
Do you wish me to prove that a love-philtre is a poison? The man would still be living, if he had not drunk it.
This is an
v7-9 p.299
argument. There are, moreover, a number of speakers who not merely deliver many such epigrams, but utter everything as if it were an epigram.

Against these persons, on the other hand, must be set those who shun and dread all ornament of this kind, approving nothing that is not plain, humble and effortless, with the result that by their reluctance to climb for fear of falling they succeed merely in maintaining a perpetual flatness. What sin is there in a good epigram? Does it not help our case, or move the judge, or commend the speaker to his audience? It may be urged, perhaps,

that it is a form of ornament eschewed by the ancients. What do you mean by antiquity? If you go back to the earliest periods you will find that Demosthenes frequently employed methods that were known to none before him. How can we give our approval to Cicero, if we think that no change should be made from the methods of Cato and the Gracchi? And yet before the Gracchi and Cato the style of oratory was simpler still.

For my own part I regard these particular ornaments of oratory to be, as it were, the eyes of eloquence. On the other hand, I should not like to see the whole body full of eyes, for fear that it might cripple the functions of the other members, and, if I had no alternative, I should prefer the rudeness of ancient eloquence to the license of the moderns. But a middle course is open to us here no less than in the refinements of dress and mode of life, where there is a certain tasteful elegance that offends no one. Therefore let us as far as possible seek to increase the number of our virtues, although our first care must always be to keep ourselves free from vices, lest in seeking to make ourselves better than

v7-9 p.301
the ancients we succeed merely in making ourselves unlike them.

I will now proceed to the next subject for discussion, which is, as I have said, that of tropes, or modes, as the most distinguished Roman rhetoricians call them. Rules for their use are given by the teachers of literature as well. But I postponed the discussion of the subject when I was dealing with literary education, because it seemed to me that the theme would have greater importance if handled in connexion with the ornaments of oratory, and that it ought to be reserved for treatment on a larger scale.