Painting showing Quintilian teaching rhetoric
Discussions, debates, and arguments are fundamental human interactions that have been scattered throughout our history. Are these confrontations between people a phenomenon that has grew from our original evolutionary roots? Or rather, have they been provoked through another means such as moral character? Marcus Fabium Quintilianus was a Roman rhetorician who writes about what it takes to be a good orator in his book, “Quintilian’s Institutes of Oratory,” a twelve-volume textbook on rhetoric published around 95 AD. The work explains the theory and practice of rhetoric, but also talks about the foundational education and development of the orator himself. Lee Honeycutt developed an online version of this book last modified July 18, 2006.
Quintilian writes his book during an era in which the emperor’s regime is quite harsh. Because of this limiting government, it is difficult for orators to publicize their idea without creating an opposition from the ruling class. Either in response to this time or because of his unshakable opinion, Quintilian attempts to resurrect the old role of orators. This includes returning to a simpler and clearer language rather than embellishing ideas. He uses another famous rhetorician from the previous century, Cicero, as a model for this simplified way of speaking. Although many of his ideas are based off Cicero, Quintilian dictates that he is theorizing beyond the work of others rather than solely using their thoughts.In Book XII of his work, Quintilian addresses many aspects leading to the development of a promising orator. He discusses the orator’s career after completing his or her education, the necessity to be a good man, the methods in influencing character, and the study of philosophy.
In his introduction, he details his fears about the hardships that a career of an orator will entail, but adds that his education would be wasted if he “might not render useless what had been already finished” (12, introduction). In the last paragraph he explains that he is following in the footsteps of a previous orator, Cicero, but adds that he is theorizing beyond the work of other: “Thus, though I cannot overtake the great man that is before men, I must nevertheless go farther than he, as my subject shall lead me” (12, introduction).
Quintilian then continues into chapter one where he first discusses why it is important for an orator to have a good moral character. He evokes the idea that the power of speaking, used by bad men, will be detrimental to public and private concerns. He continues to talk about how nature has distinguished us from all animals by giving us the ability to speak. By using this gift to promote evil, we are in essence slapping Mother Nature in the face.
“For it would have been better for us to have been born dumb and to have been left destitute of reasoning powers than to have received endowments from providence only to turn them to the destruction of one another” (12.1.1)
After describing the importance of a good moral character, Quintilian then begins to talk about the limitations an immoral character creates in orators. He points out that these men will speak with hindered authority and virtue, be deficient in wisdom, and never be able to perfect their eloquence compared to good men. Because a bad man has vicious thoughts that contradict the truth, it is more difficult for him to dictate his point when speaking. The lies he creates are clouded by his actual immoral desires. A good man does not have these limitations that cause his thought to be slowed.
“But a bad man must of necessity utter words at variance with his thoughts, while good men, on the contrary, will never be lacking a virtuous sincerity of language nor (for good men will also be wise) a power of producing the most excellent thoughts, which, though they may be destitute of showy charms, will be sufficiently adorned by their own natural qualities, since whatever is said with honest feeling will also be said with eloquence” (12.1.28)
Chapter two of book twelve discusses what a good orator must do to maintain high moral character. Quintilian gives details describing the impulses of human nature, and that good men must form their moral character based on the insight that these tendencies give. He insists that an orator must study to maintain a high moral character: “the orator must above all things study morality and must obtain a thorough knowledge of all that is just and honorable, without which no one can either be a good man or able speaker” (12.2.1). Lastly, he describes the division of philosophy into three parts, moral and natural philosophy, and how an orator should never attach himself to any particular sect.
The part of these chapters that I enjoyed reading dealt with the studying of human nature in order to better analyze a person’s moral character. The evolution of human beings is an astronomically complicated topic to try to understand and is filled with details, of which, are almost impossible to comprehend. It is interesting to ponder the thought that humans could have developed an innate immoral character based on the natural selection that occurred during our transformation into Homo sapiens. Oppositely, some individuals may believe that the immoral character of humans was actually a result of the different societies that erupted during our early history. This idea brings out the scientist in me and makes me strive to learn about the scientific background that may help answer some of these questions, leading to an examining websites that discuss the science behind human nature.
Despite if either of these cases is the actual truth, I agree with Quintilian’s point that it is necessary to examine human nature in order to better grasp what aspects of it are important to keep, and which are crucial to suppress. The best orators will be individuals who can grasp this concept and apply it to their lives, thoughts, and arguments.