pr.1. I now come to what is by far the most arduous portion of the task which I have set myself to perform. Indeed had I fully realised the difficulties when I first designed this work, I should have considered betimes whether my strength was sufficient to support the load that now weighs upon me so heavily. But to begin with, I felt how shameful it would be to fail to perform what I had promised, and later, despite the fact that my labour became more and more arduous at almost every stage, the fear of stultifying what I had already written sustained my courage through every difficulty.
pr.1. ventum est ad partem operis destinati longe gravissimam. equidem onus si tantum opinione prima concipere potuissem, quanto me premi ferens sentio, maturius consuluissem vires meas. initio pudor omittendi, quae promiseram, tenuit; mox, quanquam per singulas prope partes labor cresceret, ne perderem, quae iam effecta erant, per omnes difficultates animo me sustentavi.
pr.2. Consequently even now, though the burden that oppresses me is greater than ever, the end is in sight and I am resolved to faint by the wayside rather than despair. But the fact that I began with comparatively trivial details deceived me. Subsequently I was lured still further on my voyage by the temptations of the favouring breeze that filled my sails; but the rules which I was then concerned to give were still of a familiar kind and had been already treated by most writers of rhetorical textbooks: thus far I seemed to myself to be still in sight of shore and I had the company of many who had ventured to entrust themselves to the self-same winds.
pr.2. nunc quoque, licet maior quam unquam moles premat, tamen prospicienti finem mihi constitutum est vel deficere potius quam desperare. autem quod initium a parvis ceperamus. velut aura sollicitante provecti longius, dum tamen nota illa et plerisque artium scriptoribus tractata praecipimus, nec adhuc a litore procul videbamur et multos circa velut iisdem se ventis credere ausos habebamus.
pr.3. But presently when I entered on the task of setting forth a theory of eloquence which had been but newly discovered and rarely essayed, I found but few that had ventured so far from harbour. And finally now that the ideal orator, whom it was my design to mould, has been dismissed by his masters and is either proceeding on his way borne onward by his own impetus, or seeking still mightier assistance from the innermost shrine of wisdom, I begin to feel how far I have been swept into the great deep.
pr.3. cum eloquendi rationem novissime repertam paucissimisque temptatam ingressi sumus, rarus, qui tam procul a portu recessisset, reperiebatur. vero nobis ille, quem instituebamus, orator a dicendi magistris dimissus aut suo iam impetu fertur aut maiora sibi auxilia ex ipsis sapientiae penetralibus petit, quam in altum simus ablati sentire coepimus.
pr.4. Now there isNothing before and nothing behind but the sky and the Ocean.One only can I discern in all the boundless waste of waters, Marcus Tullius Cicero, and even he, though the ship in which he entered these seas is of such size and so well found, begins to lessen sail and to row a slower stroke, and is content to speak merely of the kind of speech to be employed by the perfect orator. But my temerity is such that I shall essay to form my orator's character and to teach him his duties. Thus I have no predecessor to guide my steps and must press far, far on, as my theme may demand. Still an honourable ambition is always deserving of approval, and it is all the less hazardous to dare greatly, when forgiveness is assured us if we fail.
pr.4. caelum undique et undique pontus. modo in illa immensa vastitate cernere videmur M. Tullium, qui tamen ipse, quamvis tanta atque ita instructa nave hoc mare ingressus, contrahit vela inhibetque remos et de ipso demum genere dicendi, quo sit usurus perfectus orator, satis habet dicere. nostra temeritas etiam mores ei conabitur dare et adsignabit officia. nec antecedentem consequi possumus, et longius eundum est, ut res feret. tamen cupiditas honestorum et velut tutioris audentiae est temptare, quibus paratior venia est.
1.1. The orator then, whom I am concerned to form, shall be the orator as defined by Marcus Cato, “a good man, skilled in speaking.” But above all he must possess the quality which Cato places first and which is in the very nature of things the greatest and most important, that is, he must be a good man. This is essential not merely on account of the fact that, if the powers of eloquence serve only to lend arms to crime, there can be nothing more pernicious than eloquence to public and private welfare alike, while I myself, who have laboured to the best of my ability to contribute something of value to oratory, shall have rendered the worst of services to mankind, if I forge these weapons not for a soldier, but for a robber. But why speak of myself?
1.1. ergo nobis orator, quem constituimus, is, qui a M. Catone finitur, vir bonus dicendi peritus; verum, id quod et ille posuit prius et ipsa natura potius ac maius est, utique vir bonus. non eo tantum, quod, si vis illa dicendi malitiam instruxerit, nihil sit publicis privatisque rebus perniciosius eloquentia, nosque ipsi, qui pro virili parte conferre aliquid ad facultatem dicendi conati sumus, pessime mercamur de rebus humanis, si latroni comparamus haec arma, non militi.
1.2. Nature herself will have proved not a mother, but a stepmother with regard to what we deem her greatest gift to man, the gift that distinguishes us from other living things, if she devised the power of speech to be the accomplice of crime, the foe to innocency and the enemy of truth. For it had been better for men to be born dumb and devoid of reason than to turn the gifts of providence to their mutual destruction.
1.2. de nobis loquor? ipsa natura in eo, quod praecipue indulsisse homini videtur quoque nos a ceteris animalibus separasse, non parens, sed noverca fuerit, si facultatem dicendi, sociam scelerum, adversam innocentiae, hostem veritatis invenit. enim nasci et egere omni ratione satius fuisset quam prouidentiae munera in mutuam perniciem convertere.
1.3. But this conviction of mine goes further. For I do not merely assert that the ideal orator should be a good man, but I affirm that no man can be an orator unless he is a good man. For it is impossible to regard those men as gifted with intelligence who on being offered the choice between the two paths of virtue and of vice choose the latter, nor can we allow them prudence, when by the unforeseen issue of their own actions they render themselves liable not merely to the heaviest penalties of the laws, but to the inevitable torment of an evil conscience.
1.3. tendit hoc iudicium meum. enim tantum id dico, eum, qui sit orator, virum bonum esse oportere, sed ne futurum quidem oratorem nisi virum bonum. certe neque intelligentiam concesseris iis qui, proposita honestorum ac turpium via, peiorem sequi malent, neque prudentiam, cum in gravissimas frequenter legum, semper vero malae conscientiae poenas a semet ipsis improviso rerum exitu induantur.
1.4. But if the view that a bad man is necessarily a fool is not merely held by philosolphers, but is the universal belief of ordinary men, the fool will most assuredly never become an orator. To this must be added the fact that the mind will not find leisure even for the study of the noblest of tasks, unless it first be free from vice. The reasons for this are, first, that vileness and virtue cannot jointly inhabit in the selfsame heart and that it is as impossible for one and the same mind to harbour good and evil thoughts as it is for one man to be at once both good and evil:
1.4. neminem malum esse nisi stultum eundem non modo a sapientibus dicitur, sed vulgo quoque semper est creditum, certe non fiet unquam stultus orator. quod ne studio quidem operis pulcherrimi vacare mens nisi omnibus vitiis libera potest: primum quod in eodem pectore nullum est honestorum turpiumque consortium, et cogitare optima simul ac deterrima non magis est unius animi quam eiusdem hominis bonum esse ac malum;
1.5. and secondly, that if the intelligence is to be concentrated on such a vast subject as eloquence it must be free from all other distractions, among which must be included even those preoccupations which are free from blame. For it is only when it is free and self-possessed, with nothing to divert it or lure it elsewhere, that it will fix its attention solely on that goal, the attainment of which is the object of its preparations.
1.5. tum illa quoque ex causa, quod mentem tantae rei intentam vacare omnibus aliis etiam culpa carentibus curis oportet. demum enim libera ac tota, nulla distringente atque alio ducente causa, spectabit id solum ad quod accingitur.
1.6. If on the other hand inordinate care for the development of our estates, excess of anxiety over household affairs, passionate devotion to hunting or the sacrifice of whole days to the shows of the theatre, rob our studies of much of the time that is their due (for every moment that is given to other things involves a loss of time for study), what, think you, will be the results of desire, avarice, and envy, which waken such violent thoughts within our souls that they disturb our very slumbers and our dreams?
1.6. agrorum nimia cura et sollicitior rei familiaris diligentia et venandi voluptas et dati spectaculis dies multum studiis auferunt (huic enim rei perit tempus, quodcumque alteri datur), quid putamus facturas cupiditatem, avaritiam, invidiam, quarum impotentissimae cogitationes somnos etiam ipsos et illa per quietem visa perturbent?
1.7. There is nothing so preoccupied, so distracted, so rent and torn by so many and such varied passions as an evil mind. For when it cherishes some dark design, it is tormented with hope, care and anguish of spirit, and even when it has accomplished its criminal purpose, it is racked by anxiety, remorse and the fear of all manner of punishments. Amid such passions as these what room is there for literature or any virtuous pursuit? You might as well look for fruit in land that is choked with thorns and brambles.
1.7. est enim tam occupatum, tam multiforme, tot ac tam variis adfectibus concisum atque laceratum quam mala mens. et cum insidiatur, spe, curis, labore distringitur; et etiam cum sceleris compos fuit, sollicitudine, paenitentia, poenarum omnium exspectatione torquetur. inter haec litteris aut ulli bonae arti locus? hercule magis quam frugibus in terra sentibus ac rubis occupata.
1.8. Well then, I ask you, is not simplicity of life essential if we are to be able to endure the toil entailed by study? What can we hope to get from lust or luxury? Is not the desire to win praise one of the strongest stimulants to a passion for literature? But does that mean that we are to suppose that praise is an object of concern to bad men? Surely every one of my readers must by now have realised that oratory is in the main concerned with the treatment of what is just and honourable? Can a bad and unjust man speak on such themes as the dignity of the subject demands?
1.8. , non ad perferendos studiorum labores necessaria frugalitas? ergo ex libidine ac luxuria spei? praecipue acuit ad cupiditatem litterarum amor laudis? igitur malis esse laudem curae putamus? hoc quis non videt, maximam partem orationis in tractatu aequi bonique consistere? de his secundum debitam rerum dignitatem malus atque iniquus?
1.9. Nay, even if we exclude the most important aspects of the question now before us, and make the impossible concession that the best and worst of men may have the same talent, industry and learning, we are still confronted by the question as to which of the two is entitled to be called the better orator. The answer is surely clear enough: it will be he who is the better man. Consequently, the bad man and the perfect orator can never be identical.
1.9. , ut maximam partem quaestionis eximam, demus, id quod nullo modo fieri potest, idem ingenii, studii, doctrinae, pessimo atque optimo viro: uter melior dicetur orator? qui homo quoque melior. igitur unquam malus idem homo et perfectus orator.
1.10. For nothing is perfect, if there exists something else that is better. However, as I do not wish to appear to adopt the practice dear to the Socratics of framing answers to my own questions, let me assume the existence of a man so obstinately blind to the truth as to venture to maintain that a bad man equipped with the same talents, industry and learning will be not a whit inferior to the good man as an orator; and let me show that he too is mad.
1.10. enim perfectum est quidquam, quo melius est aliud., ne more Socraticorum nobismet ipsi responsum finxisse videamur, sit aliquis adeo contra veritatem obstinatus, ut audeat dicere, eodem ingenio, studio, doctrina praeditum nihilo deteriorem futurum oratorem malum virum quam bonum: convincamus huius quoque amentiam.
1.11. There is one point at any rate which no one will question, namely, that the aim of every speech is to convince the judge that the case which it puts forward is true and honourable. Well then, which will do this best, the good man or the bad? The good man will without doubt more often say what is true and honourable.
1.11. hoc certe nemo dubitabit, omnem orationem id agere, ut iudici, quae proposita fuerint, vera et honesta videantur. igitur hoc facilius bonus vir persuadebit an malus? quidem et dicet saepius vera atque honesta.
1.12. But even supposing that his duty should, as I shall show may sometimes happen, lead him to make statements which are false, his words are still certain to carry greater weight with his audience. On the other hand bad men, in their contempt for public opinion and their ignorance of what is right, sometimes drop their mask unawares, and are impudent in the statement of their case and shameless in their assertions.
1.12. etiam si quando aliquo ductus officio (quod accidere, ut mox docebimus, potest) falso haec adfirmare conabitur, maiore cum fide necesse est audiatur. malis hominibus ex contemptu opinionis et ignorantia recti nonnunquam excidit ipsa simulatio. immodeste proponunt, sine pudore adfirmant.
1.13. Further, in their attempt to achieve the impossible they display an unseemly persistency and unavailing energy. For in lawsuits no less than in the ordinary paths of life, they cherish depraved expectations. But it often happens that even when they tell the truth they fail to win belief, and the mere fact that such a man is its advocate is regarded as an indication of the badness of the case.
1.13. in iis, quae certum est effici non posse, deformis pertinacia et irritus labor. sicut in vita, ita in causis quoque spes improbas habent. autem accidit, ut iis etiam vera dicentibus fides desit, videaturque talis advocatus malae causae argumentum.
1.14. I must now proceed to deal with the objections which common opinion is practically unanimous in bringing against this view. Was not Demosthenes an orator? And yet we are told that he was a bad man. Was not Cicero an orator? And yet there are many who have found fault with his character as well. What am I to answer? My reply will be highly unpopular and I must first attempt to conciliate my audience.
1.14. de iis dicendum est, quae mihi quasi conspiratione quadam vulgi reclamari videntur. Orator ergo Demosthenes non fuit? atqui malum virum accepimus. Cicero? atqui huius quoque mores multi reprehenderunt. agam? magna responsi invidia subeunda est, mitigandae sunt prius cures.
1.15. I do not consider that Demosthenes deserves the serious reflexions that have been made upon his character to such an extent that I am bound to believe all the charges amassed against him by his enemies; for my reading tells me that his public policy was of the noblest and his end most glorious.
1.15. enim nec Demosthenes tam gravi morum dignus videtur invidia, ut omnia, quae in eum ab inimicis congesta sunt, credam, cum et pulcherrima eius in re publica consilia et finem vitae clarum legam, nec Marco Tullio defuisse video in ulla parte civis optimi voluntatem.
1.16. Again, I cannot see that the aims of Cicero were in any portion of his career other than such as may become an excellent citizen. As evidence I would cite the fact that his behaviour as consul was magnificent and his administration of his province a model of integrity, while he refused to become one of the twenty commissioners, and in the grievous civil wars which afflicted his generation beyond all others, neither hope nor fear ever deterred him from giving his support to the better party, that is to say, to the interests of the common weal. Some, it is true, regard him as lacking in courage.
1.16. est actus nobilissime consulatus, integerrime provincia administrata et repudiatus vigintiviratus, et civilibus bellis, quae in aetatem eius gravissima inciderunt, neque spe neque metu declinatus animus, quo minus optimis se partibus, id est rei publicae, iungeret.
1.17. The best answer to these critics is to be found in his own words, to the effect that he was timid not in confronting peril, but in anticipating it. And this he proved also by the manner of his death, in meeting which he displayed a singular fortitude.
1.17. fortis videtur quibusdam, quibus optime respondit ipse, non se timidum in suscipiendis, sed in providendis periculis; quod probavit morte quoque ipsa, quam praestantissimo suscepit animo.
1.18. But even if these two men lacked the perfection of virtue, I will reply to those who ask if they were orators, in the manner in which the Stoics would reply, if asked whether Zeno, Cleanthes or Chrysippus himself were wise men. I shall say that they were great men deserving our veneration, but that they did not attain to that which is the highest perfection of man's nature.
1.18. defuit his viris summa virtus, sic quaerentibus, an oratores fuerint, respondebo, quomodo Stoici, si interrogentur an sapiens Zeno, an Cleanthes, an Chrysippus ipse, respondeant, magnos quidem illos ac venerabiles, non tamen id, quod natura hominis summum habet, consecutos.
1.19. For did not Pythagoras desire that he should not be called a wise man, like the sages who preceded him, but rather a student of wisdom? But for my own part, conforming to the language of every day, I have said time and again, and shall continue to say, that Cicero was a perfect orator, just as in ordinary speech we call our friends good and sensible men, although neither of these titles can really be given to any save to him that has attained to perfect wisdom. But if I am called upon to speak strictly and in accordance with the most rigid laws of truth, I shall proclaim that I seek to find that same perfect orator whom Cicero also sought to discover.
1.19. et Pythagoras non sapientem se, ut qui ante eum fuerunt, sed studiosum sapientiae vocari voluit. tamen secundum communem loquendi consuetudinem saepe dixi dicamque, perfectum oratorem esse Ciceronem; ut amicos et bonos viros et prudentissimos dicimus vulgo, quorum nihil nisi perfecte sapienti datur. cum proprie et ad legem ipsam veritatis loquendum erit, cum quaeram oratorem, quem et ille quaerebat.
1.20. For while I admit that he stood on the loftiest pinnacle of eloquence, and can discover scarcely a single deficiency in him, although I might perhaps discover certain superfluities which I think he would have pruned away (for the general view of the learned is that he possessed many virtues and a few faults, and he himself states that he has succeeded in suppressing much of his youthful exuberance), none the less, in view of the fact that, although he had by no means a low opinion of himself, he never claimed to be the perfect sage, and, had he been granted longer life and less troubled conditions for the composition of his works, would doubtless have spoken better still, I shall not lay myself open to the charge of ungenerous criticism, if I say that I believe that he failed actually to achieve that perfection to the attainment of which none have approached more nearly, and indeed had I felt otherwise in this connexion, I might have defended my point with greater boldness and freedom.
1.20. enim stetisse ipsum in fastigio eloquentiae fateor, ac vix, quid adiici potuerit, inuenio, fortasse inventurus, quod adhuc abscisurum putem fuisse (nam fere sic docti iudicaverunt, plurimum in eo virtutum, nonnihil fuisse vitiorum, et se ipse multa ex illa iuvenili abundantia coercuisse testatur), tamen, quando nec sapientis sibi nomen, minime sui contemptor, asseruit et melius dicere, certe data longiore vita et tempore ad componendum securiore, potuisset, non maligne crediderim defuisse ei summam illam, ad quam nemo propius accessit.
1.21. Marcus Antonius declared that he had seen no man who was genuinely eloquent (and to be eloquent is a far less achievement than to be an orator), while Cicero himself has failed to find his orator in actual life and merely imagines and strives to depict the ideal. Shall I then be afraid to say that in the eternity of time that is yet to be, something more perfect may be found than has yet existed?
1.21. licebat, si aliter sentirem, fortius id liberiusque defendere. vero M. Antonius neminem a se visum eloquentem, quod tanto minus erat, professus est; ipse etiam M. Tullius quaerit adhuc eum et tantum imaginatur ac fingit, ego non audeam dicere, aliquid in hac, quae superest, aeternitate inveniri posse eo, quod fuerit, perfectius?
1.22. I say nothing of those critics who will not allow sufficient credit even for eloquence to Cicero and Demosthenes, although Cicero himself does not regard Demosthenes as flawless, but asserts that he sometimes nods, while even Cicero fails to satisfy Brutus and Calvus (at any rate they criticised his style to his face), or to win the complete approval of either of the Asinii, who in various passages attack the faults of his oratory in language which is positively hosthe.
1.22. illos, qui Ciceroni ac Demostheni ne in eloquentia quidem satis tribuunt; quanquam neque ipsi Ciceroni Demosthenes videatur satis esse perfectus, quem dormitare interim dicit, nec Cicero Bruto Calvoque, qui certe compositionem illius etiam apud ipsum reprehendunt, nec Asinio utrique, qui vitia orationis eius etiam inimice pluribus locis insequuntur.
1.23. However, let us fly in the face of nature and assume that a bad man has been discovered who is endowed with the highest eloquence. I shall none the less deny that he is an orator. For I should not allow that every man who has shown himself ready with his hands was necessarily a brave man, because true courage cannot be conceived of without the accompaniment of virtue.
1.23. sane, quod minime natura patitur, repertum esse aliquem malum virum summe disertum: nihilo tamen minus oratorem eum negabo. nec omnibus, qui fuerint manu prompti, viri fortis nomen concesserim, quia sine virtute intelligi non potest fortitudo.
1.24. Surely the advocate who is called to defend the accused requires to be a man of honour, honour which greed cannot corrupt, influence seduce, or fear dismay. Shall we then dignify the traitor, the deserter, the turncoat with the sacred name of orator? But if the quality which is usually termed goodness is to be found even in quite ordinary advocates, why should not the orator, who has not yet existed, but may still be born, be no less perfect in character than in excellence of speech?
1.24. ei, qui ad defendendas causas advocatur, non est opus fide, quam nec cupiditas corrumpat nec gratia avertat nec metus frangat; sed proditorem, transfugam, praevaricatorem donabimus oratoris illo sacro nomine? mediocribus etiam patronis convenit haec, quae vulgo dicitur, bonitas, cur non orator ille, qui nondum fuit, sed potest esse, tam sit moribus quam dicendi virtute perfectus?
1.25. It is no hack-advocate, no hireling pleader, nor yet, to use no harser term, a serviceable attorney of the class generally known as causidici, that I am seeking to form, but rather a man who to extraordinary natural gifts has added a thorough mastery of all the fairest branches of knowledge, a man sent by heaven to be the blessing of mankind, one to whom all history can find no parallel, uniquely perfect in every detail and utterly noble alike in thought and speech.
1.25. enim forensem quandam instituimus operam nec mercennariam vocem nec, ut asperioribus verbis parcamus, non inutilem sane litium advocatum, quem denique causidicum vulgo vocant, sed virum cum ingenii natura praestantem tum vero tot pulcherrimas artes penitus mente complexum, datum tandem rebus humanis, qualem nulla antea vetustas cognoverit, singularem perfectumque undique, optima sentientem optimeque dicentem.
1.26. How small a portion of all these abilities will be required for the defence of the innocent, the repression of crime or the support of truth against falsehood in suits involving questions of money? It is true that our supreme orator will bear his part in such tasks, but his powers will be displayed with brighter splendour in greater matters than these, when he is called upon to direct the counsels of the senate and guide the people from the paths of error to better things.
1.26. hoc quota pars erit, quod aut innocentes tuebitur aut improborum scelera compescet, aut in pecuniariis quaestionibus veritati contra calumniam aderit? ille quidem in his quoque operibus fuerit, sed maioribus clarius elucebit, cum regenda senatus consilia et popularis error ad meliora ducendus.
1.27. Was not this the man conceived by Virgil and described as quelling a riot when torches and stones have begun to fly:Then, if before their eyes some statesman graveStand forth, with virtue and high service crowned,Straight are they dumb and stand intent to hear.Here then we have one who is before all else a good man, and it is only after this that the poet adds that he is skilled in speaking:“His words their minds control, their passions soothe.”Again, will not this same man, whom we are striving to form, if in time of war he be called upon to inspire his soldiers with courage for the fray, draw for his eloquence on the innermost precepts of philosophy?
1.27. non talem quendam videtur finxisse Vergilius, quem in seditione vulgi iam faces et saxa iaculantis moderatorem dedit:pietate gravem ac meritis si forte virum quem, silent arrectisque auribus adstant?Habemus igitur ante omnia virum bonum, post haec adiiciet dicendi peritum:regit dictis animos et pectora mulcet.Quid?
1.28. For how can men who stand upon the verge of battle banish all the crowding fears of hardship, pain and death from their minds, unless those fears be replaced by the sense of the duty that they owe their country, by courage and the lively image of a soldier's honour?
1.28. non in bellis quoque idem ille vir, quem instituimus, si sit ad proelium miles cohortandus, ex mediis sapientiae praeceptis orationem trahet? quomodo pugnam ineuntibus tot simul metus laboris, dolorum, postremo mortis ipsius exciderint, nisi in eorum locum pietas et fortitudo et honesti praesens imago successerit?
1.29. And assuredly the man who will best inspire such feelings in others is he who has first inspired them in himself. For however we strive to conceal it, insincerity will always betray itself, and there was never in any man so great eloquence as would not begin to stumble and hesitate so soon as his words ran counter to his inmost thoughts.
1.29. certe melius persuadebit aliis qui prius persuaserit sibi. enim se, quamlibet custodiatur, simulatio, nec unquam tanta fuerit loquendi facultas, ut non titubet atque haereat, quotiens ab animo verba dissentiunt. autem malus aliud dicat necesse est quam sentit.
1.30. Now: a bad man cannot help speaking things other than he feels. On the other land, the good will never be at a loss for honourable words or fail to find matter full of virtue for utterance, since among his virtues practical wisdom will be one. And even though his imagination lacks artifice to lend it charm, its own nature will be ornament enough, for if honour dictate the words, we shall find eloquence there as well.
1.30. nunquam honestus sermo deficiet, nunquam rerum optimarum (nam iidem etiam prudentes erunt) inventio; quae etiamsi lenociniis destituta sit, satis tamen natura sua ornatur nec quidquam non diserte, quod honeste, dicitur.
1.31. Therefore, let those that are young, or rather let all of us, whatever our age, since it is never too late to resolve to follow what is right, strive with all our hearts and devote all our efforts to the pursuit of virtue and eloquence; and perchance it may be granted to us to attain to the perfection that we seek. For since nature does not forbid the attainment of either, why should not someone succeed in attaining both together? And why should not each of us hope to be that happy man?
1.31. , iuventus, immo omnes aetates, (neque enim rectae voluntati serum est tempus ullum) totis mentibus huc tendamus, in hoc elaboremus; forsan et consummare contingat. si natura non prohibet et esse virum bonum et esse dicendi peritum, cur non aliquis etiam unus utrumque consequi possit? cur autem non se quisque speret fore illum aliquem?
1.32. But if our powers are inadequate to such achievement, we shall still be the better for the double effort in proportion to the distance which we have advanced toward either goal. At any rate let us banish from our hearts the delusion that eloquence, the fairest of all things, can be combined with vice. The power of speaking is even to be accounted an evil when it is found in evil men; for it makes its possessors yet worse than they were before.
1.32. quod si vires ingenii non suffecerint, tamen ad quem usque modum processerimus, meliores erimus ex utroque. certe procul eximatur animo, rerum pulcherrimam eloquentiam cum vitiis mentis posse misceri. dicendi, si in malos incidit, et ipsa iudicanda est malum; peiores enim illos facit, quibus contigit.
1.33. I think I hear certain persons (for there will always be some who had rather be eloquent than good) asking, “Why then is there so much art in connexion with eloquence? Why have you talked so much of 'glosses,' the methods of defence to be employed in difficult cases, and sometimes even of actual confession of guilt, unless it is the case that the power and force of speech at times triumphs over truth itself? For a good man will only plead good cases, and those might safely be left to truth to support without the aid of learning.”
1.33. mihi audire quosdam (neque enim deerunt unquam, qui diserti esse quam boni malint) illa dicentes: Quid ergo tantum est artis in eloquentia? cur tu de coloribus et difficilium causarum defensione, nonnihil etiam de confessione locutus es, nisi aliquando vis ac facultas dicendi expugnat ipsam veritatem? enim vir non agit nisi bonas causas, eas porro etiam sine doctrina satis per se tuetur veritas ipsa.
1.34. Now, though my reply to these critics will in the first place be a defence of my own work, it will also explain what I consider to be the duty of a good man on occasions when circumstances have caused him to undertake the defence of the guilty. For it is by no means useless to consider how at times we should speak in defence of falsehood or even of injustice, if only for this reason, that such an investigation will enable us to detect and defeat them with the greater ease, just as the physician who has a thorough knowledge of all that can injure the health will be all the more skilful in the prescription of remedies.
1.34. ego, cum de meo primum opere respondero, etiam pro boni viri officio, si quando eum ad defensionem nocentium ratio duxerit, satisfaciam. enim, quomodo aut pro falsis aut etiam pro iniustis aliquando dicatur, non est inutile, vel propter hoc solum, ut ea facilius et deprehendamus et refellamus; quemadmodum remedia melius adhibebit, cui nota quae nocent fuerint.
1.35. For the Academicians, although they will argue on either side of a question, do not thereby commit themselves to taking one of these two views as their guide in life to the exclusion of the other, while the famous Carneades, who is said to have spoken at Rome in the presence of Cato the Censor, and to have argued against justice with no less vigour than he had argued for justice on the preceding day, was not himself an unjust man. But the nature of virtue is revealed by vice, its opposite, justice becomes yet more manifest from the contemplation of injustice, and there are many other things that are proved by their contraries. Consequently the schemes of his adversaries should be no less well known to the orator than those of the enemy to a commander in the field.
1.35. enim Academici, cum in utramque disserunt partem, non secundum alteram vivunt, nec Carneades ille, qui Romae audiente Censorio Catone non minoribus viribus contra iustitiam dicitur disseruisse quam pridie pro iustitia dixerat, iniustus ipse vir fuit. et virtus quid sit, adversa ei malitia detegit, et aequitas fit ex iniqui contemplatione manifestior, et plurima contrariis probantur. ergo oratori sic esse adversariorum nota consilia ut hostium imperatori.
1.36. But it is even true, although at first sight it seems hard to believe, that there may be sound reason why at times a good man who is appearing for the defence should attempt to conceal the truth from the judge. If any of my readers is surprised at my making such a statement (although this opinion is not of my own invention, but is derived from those whom antiquity regarded as the greatest teachers of wisdom), I would have him reflect that there are many things which are made honourable or the reverse not by the nature of the facts, but by the causes from which they spring.
1.36. et illud, quod prima proposition durum videtur, potest adferre ratio, ut vir bonus in defensione causae velit auferre aliquando iudici veritatem. si quis a me proponi mirabitur, (quanquam non est haec mea proprie sententia, sed eorum, quos grauissimos sapientiae magistros aetas vetus credidit) sic iudicet, pleraque esse, quae non tam factis quam causis eorum vel honesta fiant vel turpia.
1.37. For if to slay a man is often a virtue and to put one's own children to death is at times the noblest of deeds, and if it is permissible in the public interest to do deeds yet more horrible to relate than these, we should assuredly take into consideration not solely and simply what is the nature of the case which the good man undertakes to defend, but what is his reason and what his purpose in so doing.
1.37. si hominem occidere saepe virtus, liberos necare nonnunquam pulcherrimum est, asperiora quaedam adhuc dictu, si communis utilitas exegerit, facere conceditur, ne hoc quidem nudum est intuendum, qualem causam vir bonus, sed etiam quare et qua mente defendat.
1.38. And first of all everyone must allow, what even the sternest of the Stoics admit, that the good man will sometimes tell a lie, and further that he will sometimes do so for comparatively trivial reasons; for example we tell countless lies to sick children for their good and make many promises to them which we do not intend to perform.
1.38. primum concedant mihi omnes oportet, quod Stoicorum quoque asperrimi confitentur, facturum aliquando virum bonum ut mendacium dicat, et quidem nonnunquam levioribus causis, ut in pueris aegrotantibus utilitatis eorum gratia multa fingimus, multa non facturi promittimus;
1.39. And there is clearly far more justification for lying when it is a question of diverting an assassin from his victim or deceiving an enemy to save our country. Consequently a practice which is at times reprehensible even in slaves, may on other occasions be praiseworthy even in a wise man. If this be granted, I can see that there will be many possible emergencies such as to justify an orator in undertaking cases of a kind which, in the absence of any honourable reason, he would have refused to touch.
1.39. nedum si ab homine occidendo grassator avertendus sit aut hostis pro salute patriae fallendus; ut hoc, quod alias in servis quoque reprehendendum est, sit alias in ipso sapiente laudandum. si constiterit, multa iam video posse evenire, propter quae orator bene suscipiat tale causae genus, quale remota ratione honesta non recepisset.
1.40. In saying this I do not mean that we should be ready under any circumstances to defend our father, brother or friend when in peril (since I hold that we should be guided by stricter rules in such matters), although such contingencies may well cause us no little perplexity, when we have to decide between the rival claims of justice and natural affection. But let us put the problem beyond all question of doubt. Suppose a man to have plotted against a tyrant and to be accused of having done so. Which of the two will the orator, as defined by us, desire to save? And if he undertakes the defence of the accused, will he not employ falsehood with no less readiness than the advocate who is defending a bad case before a jury?
1.40. hoc dico (quia severiores sequi placet leges) pro patre, fratre, amico periclitantibus, tametsi non mediocris haesitatio est, hinc iustitiae proposita imagine, inde pietatis. dubii relinquamus. aliquis insidiatus tyranno atque ob id reus: utrumne salvum eum nolet is, qui a nobis finitur, orator? an, si tuendum susceperit, non tam falsis defendet, quam qui apud iudices malam causam tuetur?
1.41. Again, suppose that the judge is likely to condemn acts which were rightly done, unless we can convince him that they were never done. Is not this another case where the orator will not shrink even from lies, if so he may save one who is not merely innocent, but a praiseworthy citizen? Again, suppose that we realise that certain acts are just in themselves, though prejudicial to the state under existing circumstances. Shall we not then employ methods of speaking which, despite the excellence of their intention, bear a close resemblance to fraud.
1.41. si quaedam bene facta damnaturus est iudex, nisi ea non esse facta convicerimus, non vel hoc modo servabit orator non innocentem modo, sed etiam laudabilem civem? si quaedam iusta natura, sed condicione temporum inutilia civitati sciemus, nonne utemur arte dicendi bona quidem, sed malis artibus simili?
1.42. Further, no one will hesitate for a moment to hold the view that it is in the interests of the commonwealth that guilty persons should be acquitted rather than punished, if it be possible thereby to convert them to a better state of mind, a possibility which is generally conceded. If then it is clear to an orator that a man who is guilty of the offences laid to his charge will become a good man, will he not strive to secure his acquittal?
1.42. hoc nemo dubitabit, quin, si nocentes mutari in bonam mentem aliquo modo possint, sicut posse conceditur, salvos esse eos magis e re publica sit quam puniri. liqueat igitur oratori futurum bonum virum, cui vera obicientur, non id aget, ut salvus sit?
1.43. Imagine for example that a skilful commander, without whose aid the state cannot hope to crush its enemies, is labouring under a charge which is obviously true: will not the common interest irresistibly summon our orator to defend him? We know at any rate that Fabricius publicly voted for and secured the election to the consulate of Cornelius Rufinus, despite the tact that he was a bad citizen and his personal enemy, merely because he knew that he was a capable general and the state was threatened with war. And when certain persons expressed their surprise at his conduct, he replied that he had rather be robbed by a fellow-citizen than be sold as a slave by the enemy. Well then, had Fabricius been an orator, would he not have defended Rufinus against a charge of peculation, even though his guilt were as clear as day?
1.43. nunc, ut crimine manifesto prematur dux bonus et sine quo vincere hostem civitas non possit: nonne ei communis utilitas oratorem advocabit? Fabricius Cornelium Rufinum, et alioqui malum civem et sibi inimicum, tamen, quia utilem sciebat ducem, imminente bello, palam consulem suffragio suo fecit atque id mirantibus quibusdam respondit, a cive se spoliari malle quam ab hoste venire., si fuisset orator, non defendisset eundem Rufinum vel manifesti peculatus reum?
1.44. I might produce many other similar examples, but one of them taken at random is enough. For my purpose is not to assert that such tasks will often be incumbent on the orator whom I desire to form, but merely to show that, in the event of his being compelled to take such action, it will not invalidate our definition of an orator as a “good man, skilled in speaking.”
1.44. dici possunt similia, sed vel unum ex iis quodlibet sufficit. enim hoc agimus, ut istud illi, quem formamus, viro saepe sit faciendum; sed ut, si talis coegerit ratio, sit tamen vera finitio, oratorem esse virum bonum dicendi peritum.
1.45. And it is necessary also both to teach and learn how to establish difficult cases by proof. For often even the best cases have a resemblance to bad and, the charges which tell heavily against an innocent person frequently have a strong resemblance to the truth. Consequently, the same methods of defence have to be employed that would be used if he were guilty. Further, there are countless elements which are common to both good cases and bad, such as oral and documentary evidence, suspicions and opinions, all of which have to be established or disposed of in the same way, whether they be true or merely resemble the truth. Therefore, while maintaining his integrity of purpose, the orator will modify his pleading to suit the circumstances.
1.45. vero ac discere, quomodo etiam probatione difficilia tractentur, necessarium est. frequenter etiam optimae causae similes sunt malis, et innocens reus multis veri similibus premitur; quo fit, ut eadem actionis ratione defendendus sit, qua si nocens esset. innumerabilia sunt bonis causis malisque communia, testes, litterae, suspiciones, opiniones. aliter autem verisimilia quam vera et confirmantur et refelluntur., ut res feret, flectetur oratio manente honesta voluntate.
2.1. Since then the orator is a good man, and such goodness cannot be conceived as existing apart from virtue, virtue, despite the fact that it is in part derived from certain natural impulses, will require to be perfected by instruction. The orator must above all things devote his attention to the formation of moral character and must acquire a complete knowledge of all that is just and honourable. For without this knowledge no one can be either a good man or skilled in speaking, unless indeed we agree with those who regard morality as intuitive and as owing nothing to instruction: indeed they go so far as to acknowledge that handicrafts, not excluding even those which are most despised among them, can only be acquired by the result of teaching, whereas virtue, which of all gifts to man is that which makes him most near akin to the immortal gods, comes to him without search or effort, as a natural concomitant of birth.
2.1. igitur orator est vir bonus, is autem citra virtutem intelligi non potest, virtus, etiamsi quosdam impetus ex natura sumit, tamen perficienda doctrina est: mores ante omnia oratori studiis erunt excolendi atque omnis honesti iustique disciplina pertractanda, sine qua nemo nec vir bonus esse nec dicendi peritus potest.
2.2. But can the man who does not know what abstinence is, claim to be truly abstinent? or brave, if he has never purged his soul of the fears of pain, death and superstition? or just, it he has never, in language approaching that of philosophy, discussed the nature of virtue and justice, or of the laws that have been given to mankind by nature or established among individual peoples and nations? What a contempt it argues for such themes to regard them as being so easy of comprehension! However, I pass this by; for I am sure that no one with the least smattering of literary culture will have the slightest hesitation in agreeing with me. I will proceed to my next point, that no one will achieve sufficient skill even in speaking, unless he makes a thorough study of all the workings of nature and forms his character on the precepts of philosophy and the dictates of reason.
2.2. forte accedemus iis, qui natura constare mores et nihil adiuvari disciplina putant; scilicet ut ea quidem, quae manu fiunt, atque eorum etiam contemptissima confiteantur egere doctoribus, virtutem vero, qua nihil homini, quo ad deos immortales propius accederet, datum est, obviam et illaboratam, tantum quia nati simus, habeamus. erit qui id ipsum, quid sit abstinentia, ignoret? fortis qui metus doloris, mortis, superstitionis nulla ratione purgaverit? iustus qui aequi bonique tractatum, qui leges, quaeque natura sunt omnibus datae quaeque propriae populis et gentibus constitutae, nunquam eruditiore aliquo sermone tractarit? O quam istud parvum putant, quibus tam facile videtur! hoc transeo, de quo neminem, qui litteras vel primis, ut aiunt, labris degustarit, dubitaturum puto. illud sequens praevertar, ne dicendi quidem satis peritum fore, qui non et naturae vim omnem penitus perspexerit et mores praeceptis ac ratione formarit.
2.5. For it is with good cause that Lucius Crassus, in the third book of the de Oratore, affirms that all that is said concerning equity, justice, truth and the good, and their opposites, forms part of the studies of an orator, and that the philosophers, when they exert their powers of speaking to defend these virtues, are using the weapons of rhetoric, not their own. But he also confesses that the knowledge of these subjects must be sought from the philosophers for the reason that, in his opinion, philosophy has more effective possession of them.
2.5. enim frustra in tertio de Oratore libro L. Crassus cuncta, quae de aequo, iusto, vero, bono deque iis, quae sunt contra posita, dicantur, propria esse oratoris adfirmat, ac philosophos, cum ea dicendi viribus tuentur, uti rhetorum armis, non suis. tamen confitetur, ea iam esse a philosophia petenda, videlicet quia magis haec illi videtur in possessione earum rerum fuisse.
2.6. And it is for the same reason that Cicero in several of his books and letters proclaims that eloquence has its fountain-head in the most secret springs of wisdom, and that consequently for a considerable time the instructors of morals and of eloquence were identical. Accordingly this exhortation of mine must not be taken to mean that I wish the orator to be a philosopher, since there is no other way of life that is further removed from the duties of a statesman and the tasks of an orator.
2.6. etiam illud est, quod Cicero pluribus libris et epistolis testatur dicendi facultatem ex intimis sapientiae fontibus fluere, ideoque aliquamdiu praeceptores eosdem fuisse morum atque dicendi. haec exhortatio mea non eo pertinet ut esse oratorem philosophum velim, quando non alia vitae secta longius a civilibus officiis atque ab omni munere oratoris recessit.
2.7. For what philosopher has ever been a frequent speaker in the courts or won renown in public assemblies? Nay, what philosopher has ever taken a prominent part in the government of the state, which forms the most frequent theme of their instructions? None the less I desire that he, whose character I am seeking to mould, should be a “wise man” in the Roman sense, that is, one who reveals himself as a true statesman, not in the discussions of the study, but in the actual practice and experience of life.
2.7. quis philosophorum aut in iudiciis frequens aut clarus in contionibus fuit? denique in ipsa, quam maxime plerique praecipiunt, rei publicae administratione versatus est? ego illum, quem instituo, Romanum quendam velim esse sapientem, qui non secretis disputationibus, sed rerum experimentis atque operibus vere civilem virum exhibeat.
2.8. But inasmuch as the study of philosophy has been deserted by those who have turned to the pursuit of eloquence, and since philosophy no longer moves in its true sphere of action and in the broad daylight of the forum, but has retired first to porches and gymnasia and finally to the gatherings of the schools, all that is essential for an orator, and yet is not taught by the professors of eloquence, must undoubtedly be sought from those persons in whose possession it has remained. The authors who have discoursed on the nature of virtue must be read through and through, that the life of the orator may be wedded to the knowledge of things human and divine.
2.8. quia deserta ab his, qui se ad eloquentiam contulerunt, studia sapientiae non iam in actu suo atque in hac fori luce versantur, sed in porticus et in gymnasia primum, mox in conventus scholarum recesserunt: id, quod est oratori necessarium nec a dicendi praeceptoribus traditur, ab iis petere nimirum necesse est, apud quos remansit, evolvendi penitus auctores, qui de virtute praecipiunt, ut oratoris vita cum scientia diuinarum rerum sit humanarumque coniuncta.
2.9. But how much greater and fairer would such subjects appear if those who taught them were also those who could give them most eloquent expression! O that the day may dawn when the perfect orator of our heart's desire shall claim for his own possession that science that has lost the affection of mankind through the arrogance of its claims and the vices of some that have brought disgrace upon its virtues, and shall restore it to its place in the domain of eloquence, as though he had been victorious in a trial for the restoration of stolen goods!
2.9. ipsae quanto maiores ac pulchriores viderentur, si illas ii docerent, qui etiam eloqui praestantissime possent? sit tempus unquam, quo perfectus aliquis, qualem optamus, orator hanc artem superbo nomine et vitiis quorundam bona eius corrumpentium invisam vindicet sibi ac, velut rebus repetitis, in corpus eloquentiae adducat.
2.10. And since philosophy falls into three divisions, physics, ethics and dialectic, which, I ask you, of these departments is not closely connected with the task of the orator? Let us reverse the order just given and deal first with the third department which is entirely concerned with words. If it be true that to know the properties of each word, to clear away ambiguities, to unravel perplexities, to distinguish between truth and falsehood, to prove or to refute as may be desired, all form part of the functions of an orator, who is there that can doubt the truth of my contention?
2.10. quidem cum sit in tris divisa partes, naturalem, moralem, rationalem, qua tandem non est cum oratoris opere coniuncta? ut ordinem retro agamus, de ultima illa, quae tota versatur in verbis, nemo dubitaverit, si et proprietates vocis cuiusque nosse et ambigua aperire et perplexa discernere et de falsis iudicare et colligere ac resoluere quae velis oratorum est.
2.11. I grant that we shall not have to employ dialectic with such minute attention to detail when we are pleading in the courts as when we are engaged in philosophical debate, since the orator's duty is not merely to instruct, but also to move and delight his audience; and to succeed in doing this he needs a strength, impetuosity and grace as well. For oratory is like a river: the current is stronger when it flows within deep banks and with a mighty flood, than when the waters are shallow and broken by the pebbles that bar their way.
2.11. ea non tam est minute atque concise in actionibus utendum quam in disputationibus, quia non docere modo, sed movere etiam ac delectare audientes debet orator, ad quod impetu quoque ac viribus et decore est opus; ut vis amnium maior est altis ripis multoque gurgitis tractu fluentium quam tenuis aquae et obiectu lapillorum resultantis.
2.12. And just as the trainers of the wrestling school do not impart the various throws to their pupils that those who have learnt them may make use of all of them in actual wrestling matches (for weight and strength and wind count for more than these), but that they may have a store from which to draw one or two of such tricks, as occasion may offer; even so the science of dialectic, or if you prefer it of disputation, while it is often useful in definition, inference, differentiation, resolution of ambiguity, distinction and classification, as also in luring on or entangling our opponents, yet if it claim to assume the entire direction of the struggles of the forum, will merely stand in the way of arts superior to itself and by its very subtlety will exhaust the strength that has been pared down to suit its limitations.
2.12. ut palaestrici doctores illos, quos numeros vocant, non idcirco discentibus tradunt, ut iis omnibus ii, qui didicerint, in ipso luctandi certamine utantur (plus enim pondere et firmitate et spiritu agitur), sed ut subsit copia illa, ex qua unum aut alterum, cuius se occasio dederit, efficiant, ita haec pars dialectica, sive illam dicere malumus disputatricem, ut est utilis saepe et finitionibus et comprehensionibus et separandis quae sunt differentia, et resolvenda ambiguitate, distinguendo, dividendo, illiciendo, implicando, ita, si totum sibi vindicaverit in foro certamen, obstabit melioribus et sectas ad tenuitatem suam vires ipsa subtilitate consumet.
2.14. As a result you will find that certain persons who show astonishing skill in philosophical debate, as soon as they quit the sphere of their quibbles, are as helpless in any case that demands more serious pleading as those small animals which, though nimble enough in a confined space, are easily captured in an open field.
2.14. reperias quosdam in disputando mire callidos, cum ab ilia cavillatione discesserint, non magis sufficere in aliquo graviore actu quam parva quaedam animalia, quae in angustiis mobilia campo deprehenduntur.
2.15. Proceeding to moral philosophy or ethics, we may note that it at any rate is entirely suited to the orator. For vast as is the variety of cases (since in them, as I have pointed out in previous books, we seek to discover certain points by conjecture, reach our conclusions in others by means of definition, dispose of others on legal grounds' or by raising the question of competence, while other points are established by syllogism and others involve contradictions or are diversely interpreted owing to some ambiguity of language ), there is scarcely a single one which does not at some point or another involve the discussion of equity and virtue, while there are also, as everyone knows, not a few which turn entirely on questions of quality.
2.15. quidem pars illa moralis, quae dicitur Ethice, certe tota oratori est accommodata. in tanta causarum, sicut superioribus libris diximus, varietate, cum alia coniectura quaerantur, alia finitionibus concludantur, alia iure summoveantur vel transferantur, alia colligantur vel ipsa inter se concurrant vel in diversum ambiguitate ducantur, nulla fere dici potest, cuius non parte in aliqua tractatus aequi ac boni reperiatur, plerasque vero esse quis nescit, quae totae in sola qualitate consistant?
2.16. Again in deliberative assemblies how can we advise a policy without raising the question of what is honourable? Nay, even the third department of oratory, which is concerned with the tasks of praise and denunciation, must without a doubt deal with questions of right and wrong.
2.16. consiliis vero quae ratio suadendi est ab honesti quaestione seposita? ilia etiam pars tertia, quae laudandi ac vituperandi officiis continetur, nempe in tractatu recti pravique versatur.
2.17. For the orator will assuredly have much to say on such topics as justice, fortitude, abstinence, self-control and piety. But the good man, who has come to the knowledge of these things not by mere hearsay, as though they were just words and names for his tongue to employ, but has grasped the meaning of virtue and acquired a true feeling for it, will never be perplexed when he has to think out a problem, but will speak out truly what he knows.
2.17. de iustitia, fortitudine, abstinentia, temperantia, pietate non plurima dicet orator? ille vir bonus, qui haec non vocibus tantum sibi nota atque nominibus aurium tenus in usum linguae perceperit, sed qui virtutes ipsas mente complexus ita sentiat, nec in cogitando ita laborabit sed, quod sciet, vere dicet.