Cicero's De Oratore Research Articles

The War of Words

The War of Words

‘A FADED REFLECTION OF THE GRACCHI’: ETHICS, ELOQUENCE AND THE PROBLEM OF SULPICIUS IN CICERO'S DE ORATORE

This paper is as much about a particular depiction of the tribune P. Sulpicius Rufus as it is about Cicero's De Oratore, a dialogue regularly called upon by historians to give evidence on the 90s b.c. and the characters who take part in the conversation it depicts. My main focus is literary: I will argue that, given what we know about the historical Sulpicius, Cicero's choice of Sulpicius for a prominent minor role in De Oratore drives the tragic historical framework that undercuts the optimism expressed within the dialogue by the main protagonist L. Licinius Crassus for the civic value of oratory. The Rhetorica ad Herennium illustrates a certain type of allegory with the statement ‘as if one should call Drusus a “faded reflection of the Gracchi”’. In De Oratore, Drusus’ friend and successor Sulpicius functions as a reflection of the Gracchi and his eloquence reinforces the problem posed by such orators as the notoriously eloquent Gaius Gracchus for any such grand claims about the civic value of oratory. By examining Cicero's use of relatively recent history, we therefore discover that De Oratore is significantly more pessimistic than it may at first seem. This pessimism, however, has important implications for historians, since expanding our understanding of De Oratore as a literary construct should encourage historians to be significantly more cautious about using the text as a historical source. As Görler points out with regard to Crassus’ swansong at De or. 3.4–5, although ‘a naive reader of Oratorum Romanorum Fragmenta could be left with the impression that some sentences are quite well attested’, most of the fragments of Crassus’ speech can actually be traced back to De Oratore. Likewise, a significant proportion of the standard elements in Sulpicius’ backstory go back to De Oratore and become a great deal less convincing once we accept De Oratore as a sustained fictional account featuring people who were neither as politically ‘safe’ nor as intellectually united as Cicero would have them be. My secondary focus in this paper is therefore on the broader lessons to be drawn from Sulpicius’ role in De Oratore. I will begin by outlining the historical context of the dialogue, which was written in the mid 50s but is set in 91, a few weeks before the natural death of Crassus, one of its two protagonists. Next, I will discuss the dialogue's literary context, specifically the Platonic allusions Cicero embeds within the text. These allusions encourage us to treat De Oratore’s historical framework carefully, if not sceptically, and I will outline the ‘off notes’ struck by references to the Gracchi and by the presentation of Crassus and Antonius before examining the problem Sulpicius poses for a straightforwardly optimistic reading of De Oratore. I will conclude by considering first the literary implications for De Oratore of accepting that Sulpicius is a deliberately problematic character and then the historical implications of taking a sceptical approach towards De Oratore as an historical source for our picture of Sulpicius.

The State of Speech

The State of Speech

Introduction

Introduction

Castiglione vs. Cicero: Political Engagement, or Effeminate Chatter?

The political message of Castiglione's Cortegiano, first published in 1528, seems to bear little resemblance to that of its formal model, Cicero's De Oratore. While Cicero's ideal republican orator is actively engaged in political debate, Castiglione's courtier is in many respects an entertainer: removed from the possibility of civic engagement, the courtier's most obvious attributes are aesthetic. Despite these differences, Castiglione opens the final book of his dialogue with two strong Ciceronian echoes: he first laments the deaths of three key speakers, and then compares all of the dialogue's interlocutors with the Greek leaders who emerged from the Trojan horse. The result of the double reprise is that Cicero's focus — the silencing and displacement of the ideal orator in the context of political crisis, and his ambivalence toward a new cultural model — forms the backdrop for Castiglione's Book Four. This essay focuses on the political significance of these motifs to show that the Cortegiano both critiques the wistful idealism of Cicero's De Oratore and offers a solution to the paradoxes inherent in the Ciceronian dialogue. While Cicero's best speakers adhere to their principles, they are ineffectual in a political crisis. In addition, although Cicero's text is heavily indebted to Greek culture, it offers at best an ambiguous view of Greek oratory, stigmatizing it as "effeminate" and divorced from political reality. Castiglione's reconsideration of these contradictions seeks not only to justify the new profession of courtiership but also to establish its superiority to the Ciceronian model. Implicitly critiquing Cicero's nostalgic republican idealism, the Cortegiano validates both side-switching as necessary for political survival, and the "effeminate" arts of courtiership as a tool for empire-building.

Rhetoric: an historical introduction

Acknowledgments. List of Abbreviations. Introducting Rhetoric. Part I: Classical Rhetorical Traditions. Introduction. 1 The Rhetorician: Demagogue or Statesman? Plato's Gorgias and Aristotle's Rhetoric. 2 Eloquence, Persuasion, and Invention: Cicero's De oratore. 3 Rhetoric and the Search for God: Augustine's On Christian Doctrine and Confessions. 4 Practical Reason or Interested Calculation? Cicero's On Duties and Machiavelli's The Prince. Part II: Classical Rhetoric and Literary Interpretation. Introduction. 5 Tradition and Invention: Bacon's Aphorisms and the Essays. 6 Deception, Strong Speech, and Mild Discourse in Milton's Early Prose and Paradise Lost. 7 Prudence and Eloquence in Jane Austen's Persuasion. Part III: Rhetoric and Contemporary Disciplines. Introduction. 8 Literary Criticism and Rhetorical Invention: Wayne C. Booth's The Rhetoric of Fiction and Stephen Greenblatt's Marvelous Possessions. 9 Faction Politics and Rhetorical Invention: Eugene Garver's For the Sake of Argument and Danielle S. Allen's Talking to Strangers. 10 Legal Reasoning, Historical Contingency, and Change: Edward H. Levi's An Introduction to Legal Reasoning. Index.

A Ciceronian sunburn: a Tudor dialogue on humanistic rhetoric and civic poetics

The poetry of Spenser, Sidney, and their contemporaries viewed as rhetorical discourse. A Ciceronian Sunburn reconsiders complexion of Tudor poetics by demonstrating ways in which poets and pedagogues appropriated rhetorical brilliance of Cicero to inform their approaches to learning. By recasting poetic texts of Edmund Spenser and Sir Philip Sidney as works that participated in sixteenth-century debates on learning, E. Armstrong challenges conventional views of Tudor poetics. He argues that poetry of Spenser, Sidney, and others of period reflects a more fully developed understanding of Ciceronian rhetoric than is found in lectures, pedagogical handbooks, and treatises of early modern scholars to which historians of humanistic rhetoric most frequently turn. Reclaiming poetics as a substantive force for rhetorical tradition, Armstrong finds that poetry of period confirms Cicero's dictum that the poet is nearest kinsman to orator. By showing how poets' work contributed to and was appropriated by those immersed in Tudor controversies on learning, Armstrong brings to fore an argument that prizes practical, ethically directed, and civic-minded over moral and philosophical detachment for which poets traditionally are revered. Armstrong offers a study that operates on three interrelated levels. He analyzes writings of a circle of Tudor poets and scholars, all known to one other and in a sense conversing - Lodowick Bryskett, Spenser (and his glossarist E.K.), Abraham Fraunce, William Temple, and Sidney. On another level Armstrong broadens context for conversation by locating it within divergent visions of learning and rhetoric advanced by Erasmus and Peter Ramus. On a third level Armstrong grounds these early modern disputes, both historically and intellectually, in topics discovered in Cicero's De oratore and De officiis.

Book Review: The Roman World of Cicero's De Oratore, by Elaine Fantham

Book Review| November 01 2006 Book Review: The Roman World of Cicero's De Oratore, by Elaine Fantham The Roman World of Cicero's De Oratore by Elaine Fantham. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. 364 pp. Rhetorica (2006) 24 (4): 427–432. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2006.24.4.427 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Book Review: The Roman World of Cicero's De Oratore, by Elaine Fantham. Rhetorica 1 November 2006; 24 (4): 427–432. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2006.24.4.427 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © The International Society for the History of Rhetoric2006 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

The Roman World of Cicero's De Oratore (review)

The Roman World of Cicero's De Oratore (review)

Cicero the Advocate, and: The Roman World of Cicero's De Oratore (review)

Reviewed by: Cicero the Advocate, and: The Roman World of Cicero's De Oratore Anthony Corbeill Jonathan Powell and Jeremy Paterson, eds. Cicero the Advocate. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. xii + 448 pp. Cloth, $150. Elaine Fantham . The Roman World of Cicero's De Oratore. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. x + 354 pp. Cloth, $120. Emphasis falls emphatically on "advocate" in the fine Powell and Paterson collection. Each essay concentrates on the forensic speeches and the various strategies that Cicero employs "to ensure that the person he represents is acquitted or that the person he is prosecuting is found guilty" (from the dust jacket, the only place advocacy is defined). Well-organized and unusually coherent (given the genre), all of Cicero the Advocate can be read with profit. The book has three parts: an "editorial introduction," "themes," and "case studies." The concise and accurate introduction (1–57) provides a context for understanding Roman forensic oratory. Topics include a helpful comparison between Greek, Roman, and modern expectations; the mechanics of the Roman courts; the role of rhetorical theory in the construction of Cicero's orations; and, [End Page 144] finally, a review of the possible relationship between Cicero's published and original speeches. Indeed, the coverage is so comprehensive that it occasionally overlaps unnecessarily with the treatment of individual contributors (e.g., Lintott, Burnand, Laws). Needless polemics, however, tend to mar the introduction's tone. In advocating advocacy, the editors adopt a Ciceronian rhetoric of deniability, attacking a position that a subsequent statement grudgingly acknowledges. For example, the editors note early on: "Reading the work of some recent scholars [one relevant eighteen-page essay is cited], one might think that a Roman law court was a place in which all kinds of considerations, personal, social, or political, mattered more than the legal and factual points that the court was supposed to be deciding" (3). Before one can ponder this assessment of recent scholarship on Cicero (characteristic of "the individualistic 1980s" [3, n. 11]), the next paragraph begins, "Nobody, of course [my emphasis], denies that the outcome of a trial—in any legal system—can sometimes be affected by extraneous (especially political) issues." So perhaps these "recent scholars" are worth reading after all; indeed, the study of the cultural background that contributes to persuasion certainly warrants consideration in a book on advocacy. Fortunately, the individual contributions that follow adopt a more conciliatory tone. The range and number of essays preclude active engagement, so in what follows I will summarize key issues. After a survey of "Legal Procedure in Cicero's Time" (61–78) by Andrew Lintott, Jeremy Paterson's "Self-Reference in Cicero's Forensic Speeches" (79–95) assesses the oratorical function of self-praise. Attributing this practice to the original role of the patronus (80), Paterson identifies the advertisement of wealth and status as an important element of Roman advocacy, necessarily changing in tone for Cicero as his own status increases. Paterson's fine analysis, however, would need to change if applied to non-forensic speeches, in which Ciceronian self-praise is particularly pronounced. This surely would affect his conclusion that "Cicero never forgot what he was about, which was to win the case for his client" (95). In the dramatically titled "A Volscian Mafia? Cicero and his Italian Clients in the Forensic Speeches" (97–116; "mafia" refers simply to "local networks of obligations and contacts," 114), Kathryn Lomas surveys the role of Italian communities in five of Cicero's works (Pro Roscio Amerino, Pro Cluentio, Pro Caecina, Pro Caelio, Pro Plancio) to try to discover why there is a "relatively low level of visibility" of Italians even in those cases in which such connections are vital (98). The Italians defended by Cicero fall into two categories: municipals who, like Cicero, seek prominence in Rome (Caelius, Plancius), and the wealthy who have key connections within the capital but do not seek political office in Rome (Roscius, Cluentius, Oppianicus). Lomas convincingly demonstrates that Cicero defends clients from regions where he could hope for political support (especially in southern Latium). In "Reading Cicero's Narratives" (117–46), D. S. Levene employs a reader-response approach to the narrationes of three speeches (Pro Roscio...

The Frauds of Humanism: Cicero, Machiavelli, and the Rhetoric of Imposture

Abstract Machiavelli's advocacy of force and fraud in the conduct of politics is the key teaching that has secured his reputation as “Machiavellian” and that has led to the conception of The Prince as the first document in the Western tradition to lay bare the dark, demonic underside of civic humanism. But this interpretation overlooks the degree to which a politics of intense competition and personal rivalry inhabits the humanist vision from antiquity, producing an ethics of expediency and a rhetoric of imposture that seeks to mask its alertness to advantage behind the guise of integrity and service. This vision is nowhere more apparent than in Cicero's De Oratore, which exerted a powerful influence on the Italian humanists of the quattrocentro in whose direct descent Machiavelli stands. Deception, to put it simply, is an acknowledged and vital element in civic humanism long before The Prince. The difference is that Cicero typically couches it in a sacrificial rhetoric that is euphemistically inflected while Machiavelli opts for a hard-edged rhetoric of administrative efficiency to make his case. But the stylistic differences, important as they are, should not mask the essential affinity between the Machiavellian doctrine of princely fraud and the Ciceronian ethics of gentlemanly dissimulation

Restraint and Emotion in Cicero's De Oratore

In De Oratore Cicero has the revered orator Crassus ask, Who then is the man who gives people a thrill? whom do they stare at in amazement when he speaks? who is interrupted by applause? who is thought to be so to say a god among men? (1942a, III.53). Crassus, who is asking his companions to think about emotional energy in speech, goes on, It is those whose speeches are clear, explicit, and full, perspicuous in matter and language, and who in actual delivery achieve a sort of rhythm and cadence that is, whose style I call 'ornate'. Several things are striking about the passage. First, it resolves its inquiry by invoking the concept of ornatus, a word widely used to translate the Greek idea of kosmos (DiLorenzo 1978). Cicero thus refers to a quality that joins the ideas of cosmic order, physical beauty, and earthly power. Second, the passage is delivered in the midst of Crassus's discussion of the fourth rhetorical canon, that referring to the elaboration of ideas in language, of selecting levels of style and modes of verbal embellishment. Third, the passage ranges across the entire field of rhetorical art, at least as indexed by the scope of the canons. The performative quality directly under discussion, that which gives people a thrill initially associated with the Theophrastian virtues of style that Crassus has been enumerating, that is, clarity and explicitness quickly is expanded to include copiousness of invention, perspicuity of language, and energetic beauty in delivery. Cicero's Crassus thus discusses a performative dynamic that appears to govern rhetoric as a whole. As the other characters in the dialogue discuss this quality of speech, which engages listeners emotionally and transforms their experience of the present, they bound beyond the preliminary categories of their analysis and describe a power of speech that is aesthetic and philosophical. As the

The rhetoric of embodiment

T his paper deals with the embodiment in Cicero's De Oratore of a particular rhetorical method. The method is referred to by the Romans as controversia and by the Sophists before them as antilogic and involves the conduct of argument by placing two or more opposing claims in juxtaposition. I will argue that instead of discussing controversia in a formal manner, by abstracting its general nature and detailing its logical parts (diaeresis), Cicero chooses to dramatize controversia in order to transcend abstract principles and allow his students direct access to argument in action. In a word, Cicero chooses to perform the subject, and in so doing to give substance or body to theory and pedagogy. In the process, he also pursues his own most cherished philosophical objective, which is to bring res and verba, the thing and the word into synthesis. I will further suggest that the rhetoric of embodiment which Cicero develops in De Oratore is replete with interesting pedagogical implications. Like much of Cicero's published work, De Oratore was intended to serve as a model for imitation by others (see Axer 59). In this case, the text models both a particular set of rhetorical principles and a distinctive pedagogical stance for teaching them. I am particularly interested in what the pedagogy of De Oratore has to say to us today about an appropriate approach to the teaching of argumentation.' But before I begin with Cicero, De Oratore, antilogic, controversia, and the rhetoric of embodiment, I would go back even further in history, from Rome to the eastern Mediterranean, from the eloquence of Cicero to the arguments of Odysseus, that other man famous for dealing with contention (Odyssey 1.2). You will recall that when Odysseus leaves Calypso after seven years as a captive on her paradisal island, he sails away on a log raft which breaks up in a large storm sent by Poseidon. When it looks as though he is doomed to drown, he laments that all he has accomplished on his way home will perish with him. Would that I had died on the fields of Troy, he cries, where all my deeds would have been noted, praised, and preserved (5.306-12). What Odysseus is concerned with here is his kleos: his fame, honor, stature, renown, that standard heroic obsession that one's reputation will ring out under heaven (8.74f; cf. Thalmann 60-69). Instead of a life of adventure marked by kleos, however, Odysseus in Book V is faced with death at sea, a death unmarked and lonely (5.312). What is notable for us in this episode is that kleos appears only to exist in the reports on one's life; i.e. it requires discourse to give it substance, enough substance to transcend the event itself. Consequently, when Odysseus arrives on land and is taken by Nausikaa to the Phaiakian court, he acts the part of a poet as well as a hero (11.68-69) by recounting his adventures and in the process giving form to his kleos. Discursive enactment, therefore, becomes the only way in which the unforgettable experi-

Everything Must be Argued: Rhetorical Theory and Pedagogical Practice in Cicero's De Oratore

The method of Cicero's practice and pedagogy in De Oratore is explicitly designed to allow for the comparative estimate of competing positions and represents a salutary effort to discover in any controversy the possible basis for cooperative action.

The manuscripts of Cicero's De oratore: E is a descendant of A

The manuscripts of Cicero's De oratore divide into two families: mutili and integri. The oldest representatives of the mutilated family are Avranches 238 (A; c. 830–50), Erlangen 380 (olim 848; E; c. 985), and London, Harley 2736 (H; written by Lupus of Ferrierès, c. 830–40). A and H are independent of each other, and the best witnesses to the text of the lost archetype (M). E too is considered to be an independent witness. Since the work of E. Ströbel, dating from the early eighties of the last century, the view has been generally held that E, though closely related to A, is not a descendant of it but a copy of a ‘gemellus’ of A. The stemma devised by Ströbel has remained essentially the same to the present day.

Social Evasion and Aristocratic Manners in Cicero's De Oratore

Social Evasion and Aristocratic Manners in Cicero's De Oratore

Baldesar Castiglione, Thomas Wilson, and the Courtly Body of Renaissance Rhetoric

Abstract: Historically, the Renaissance marks a transformation in wfiich the elite classes come to define themselves by their aesthetic refinement, taste, and good manners. Accompanying this change is a special vision of the human body which is distinguished from that of artisans and peasants. This opposition has been described by Bakhtin as one between the classical body and the grotesque one, and it appears in the most unportant book for the Renaissance redefinition of the upper classes, Castiglione's II libro del cortegiano. Castiglione's view of the body actually derives from the rhetorical tradition of antiquity, in particular from Quintilian and Cicero's De oratore. A similar view appears in the works of Renaissance rhetoricians and can usefully be illustrated by analysis of Thomas Wilson's The Arte of Rhetorique (1553), although the latter also retains a vision of the grotesque body as a result of the ambiguous social position of its author.

From Athens to Tusculum: Gleaning the Background of Cicero's De oratore.

'WUhelm Kiaulehn, Se scaenico dialogorum apparatu, Diss. Halle, 1913 (Dissertationes Philologicae Halenses 23, 2, pp. I-VII, 147-244), pp. 175-76; Ernst Becker, 'TechnLk und Szenerie des ciceronischen Dialogs, Diss. Munster, 1938, p. 26; Michel Ruch, Le preambule dans les oeuvres philosophiques de Ciceron, Paris, 1958 (Publications de la Faculte des Lettres de I'Universite de Strasbourg, 136), pp. 197-202; Anton Daniel Leeman/Harm Pinkster, M. TuUius Cicero. De oratore libri III. Kommentar, vol. 1, Heidelberg, 1981, pp. 76-77; vol. 2, Heidelberg, 1985, pp. 202203, 213. ^Particular attention has been paid to a number of Platonic features, ranging from outright imitation to hidden allusions: Rudolf Hirzel, Der Dialog, vol. 1, (Leipzig, 1895), pp. 486-488; Max Pohlenz, Cicero De re publica als Kunstwerk, in: Festschrift Richard Reitzenstein, (Leipzig and Berlin 1931), p. 71; Callus Zoll, Cicero Platonis aemulus, (Diss. Zurich, 1962), pp. 98-105; Leeman/Pinkster, vol. 1, pp. 6567. These are the principal findings: a. In De or. 1 the scenery of Plato's Phaedrus is explicitly evoked, but Cicero's talk is set in a carefully chosen contrast: see our section I. There are some verbatim quotations: Phdr. 229b vSdrtoi^ = De or. 1.28 acuta; 229c dv rj Tpia (rraSia = 1.28 duobus spatiis tribusve (first noticed by Leeman/Pinkster 1, pp. 99-100). b. As in Phaedrus, in De or. a main character recants what he had said before (palinodia): see our section 1, towards the end. c. Catulus' and Crassus' praise of Hortensius (De or. 3.228f.) is modelled after Socrates' prophetical praise of Isocrates (Phdr. 279a). d. As Plato's Phaedo, De or. immediately precedes the main

Rhetoric in the earliest years of printing, 1465–1500

This essay surveys the three types of rhetorical treatises printed in the incunabular period (i.e., to 1500): that is, ancient, medieval, and original works. Cicero's De oratore and Saint Augustine's De doctrina Christiana Book IV are identified as the earliest rhetorical works printed. First editions of medieval works and of other ancient works are listed. A sampling shows that Germany and France produced the greatest number of original works; they also produced the earliest vernacular rhetorical works while England and Italy had none. The article concludes with suggestions for further research.

Pronuntiatio and its Effect on Chaucer’s Audience

Prontmtiatio and its Effect on Chaucer's Audience Beryl Rowland York University, Toronto CHAUCER has fom audiencesc his comemponay fatenm; a hypothetical group addressed as 'ye' in the poems; fictive characters who were auditors within the poem itself; and lastly, all readers ofhis poetry either then or since. The audience with which I am concerned is the first, composed of those men and women living elegantly and precariously at the royal court in the last decades of the fourteenth century. I shall suggest that the reaction of this audience was unique and essentially different from our own because of the way Chaucer presented his poetry. The subject of oral delivery, which in the opinion of Bronson more than forty years ago required further exploration, is still being assayed. 1 The contention that the famous Troilus frontispiece is simply icono­ graphic, rep;-esenting "as a reality the myth of delivery that Chaucer cultivates so assiduously in the poem,"2 using the vocabulary of arr to reflect upon the poem itself, 3 may remind us of our ignorance of the nature and extent of poetic recitals, but no one denies that Chaucer once 1 B. H. Bronson, "Chaucer's Art in Relation to his Audience,"in Five Studies in Literature(Berkeley: U of California P, 1940), pp. 1-14. 2 Derek Pearsall, "The Troilus Frontispiece and Chaucer's Audience," YES, 7 (1977), 68-74; see also, D.S. Brewer," 'Troilus and Criseyde,' "in theSphereHistory of Literature in the English Language, ed. W. F. Bolton(London: Barrie &Jenkins, 1970), I, 196; James H. McGregor, "The Iconography of Chaucer in Hoccleve's De Regimine Principum and in the Troi/us Frontispiece,"ChauR, 11(1977), 338-50. The traditional view is expressed, among others, by Nevill Coghill, "Chaucer's narrative art in The Canterbury Tales," inChaucer andChaucerians, ed. D.S. Brewer(London: Nelson, 1966), pp. 135-36. 3 M. B. Parkes and ElizabethSalter, introd., Troilus andCriseyde: A Facsimile of Corpus Christi College Cambridge MS. 61 (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1978), pp. xv-xvii. To ElizabethSalter the international cultural traditions reflected in the frontispiece preclude 33 PRONUNTIATIO facial expression he used, would have profoundly affected his listeners' understanding of the poem. Most of the writings on rhetoric in the Middle Ages, whether they are preaching manuals or handbooks on style, make some reference to oral delivery, and the practices which they cite, though modified and some­ times much abbreviated, reflect the advice given by the early rhetori­ cians. In particular they go back, as Geoffrey of Vinsauf did, to Ad Herennium or to Cicero's De Oratore. In Ad Herennium the speaker is told how to use voice, expression, and gesture in various situations. Dialogue is defined as consisting of assigning language to some person that conforms to his character, and it should be accompanied by tremendous flexibility in tone and manner ofdelivery. Emotions such as joy, sorrow, and anger are to be conveyed largely through facial expression, and bodily movements are to suit the tone of the address. While the writer advised a use of restraint and decorum, the gestures that a speaker might use to convey various emotions included facial expressions, walking up and down, stamping the right foot, slapping one's thigh, beating one's head, as well as using the hands.7 Cicero stressed the artistic and psychological importance: "Imitation of manners and behavior, either given in character or not, is a considerable ornament of style, and extremely effective in calming down an audience and often also in exciting it. "8 He advised free use of the voice and even uncontrolled vociferation to amplify the effects required, and emphasized that deliv­ ery was the dominant factor in oratory. Delivery was controlled by "bodily carriage, gesture, play of features and changing intonation of voice . . . to this there should be added a certain humor, flashes of wit, the culture befitting a gentleman, and readiness and terseness alike in repelling and in delivering attack, the whole being combined with a delicate charm and urbanity. "9 Although he was concerned with judicial 7 Ad C. Herennium, tr. Harry Caplan (1954; rpt. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UP, 1964), lll, x - IV, lvi. See especially III, xv, 27: "Sin...