Institutio Oratoria

The cretic is excellent, both at the beginning (e.g. quod precatus a diis immortalibus sum [*](pro Muren. i. 1. ) ) and at the close (e.g. in conspeclu populi Romani vomere postridie ). [*](Phil. II. xxv. 63. ) The last example makes it clear what a good effect is produced when it is preceded by an anapaest or by that form of paean which is regarded as best suited to the end of a sentence. But the cretic may be preceded by a cretic, as in servare quam plurinos. [*](pro Lig. xii. 38. ) It is better thus than when it is preceded by a chores, as in quis non turpe duceret? [*](Phil. II. xxv. 63. ) assuming that we treat the final short syllable as long. However, for the sake of argument, let us substitute duceres for duceret.

Here, however,

In specifying the feet above-mentioned, I do not mean to lay it down as an absolute law that no others can be used, but merely wish to indicate the usual practice and the principles that are best suited for present needs. I may add that two consecutive anapaests should be avoided, since they form the conclusion of a pentameter or reproduce the rhythm of the anapaestic metre, as in the passage, nam ubi libido dominatur, innocentiae leve praesidinun est, [*]( Crassus in Cic. Or. lxv. 219. For where lust holds sway, there is but small protection for innocence. ) where elision makes the last two syllables sound as one.

The anapaest should preferably be preceded by a spondee or a bacchius, as, for instance, if you alter the order of words in the passage just quoted to leve innocentiae praesidium est. Personally, although I know that in this I am in disagreement with great writers, I am not attracted by the paean consisting of three shorts followed by a long: for it is no more than an anapaest with the addition of another short syllable (e.g. facilitas, agilitas ). Why it should have been so popular, I cannot see, unless it be that those who gave it their approval were students of the language of common life rather than of oratory. It is preferably preceded by short syllables,

such as are provided by the pyrrhic or the choreus (e.g.

My purpose in discussing this topic at length is not to lead the orator to enfeeble his style by pedantic measurement of feet and weighing of syllables: for oratory should possess a vigorous flow, and such solicitude is worthy only of a wretched pedant, absorbed in trivial detail:

since the man who exhausts himself by such painful diligence will have no time for more important considerations; for he will disregard the weight of his subject matter, despise true beauty of style and, as Lucilius says, will construct a tesselated pavement of phrases nicely dovetailed together in intricate patterns. [*]( In Or. xliv. 149, the lines are actually quoted quam lepide lexeis compostae Ut tesserulae oinnes arte pavimnento atque emblemate verniculato. How neatly his phrases are put together, like a cunningly tesselated pavement with intricate inlay. ) The inevitable result will be that his passions will cool and his energy be wasted, just as our dandies destroy their horses' capacity for speed by training them to shorten their paces.

Prose-structure, of course, existed before rhythms were discovered in it, just as poetry was originally the outcome of a natural impulse and was created by the instinctive feeling of the ear for quantity and the observation of time and rhythm, while the discovery of feet came later. Consequently assiduous practice in writing will be sufficient to enable us to produce similar rhythmical effects when speaking extempore.