Rhetorical Study in Ancient Rome
Rhetorical Study in Ancient Rome
Prior to becoming an empire, Roman government was best described as a democratic oligarchy in which rhetoric was a powerful political tool. Upper class young men (and even some women) were required to study the art of persuasive speech as part of their regular education. This education was firmly based in the Greek Tradition and many of the first public speaking instructor and tutors in Rome were actually from Greece! In early Roman times, knowledge of rhetoric and the ability to craft a persuasive public speech were most important in legislative assemblies and judicial courts.
The early Roman government was comprised of popular assemblies, high offices, and the Roman senate. The Roman senate, which consisted of several hundred men that previously held public office, had the ultimate authority to pass or veto popular legislation. As you can see, Rome was not as radically democratic as Athens, however free male Roman citizens could address public officials and the larger citizenry at legislative assemblies. In these assemblies, ordinary men could propose legislation as well as show support or voice concern over current policy. Positions of high offices were also voted on by all free Roman men in assembly. Due to the oligarchic character of Rome, aristocratic men spoke in assembly and were elected to high office more often than any other class of citizens. Unfortunately as this Roman city-state became an empire, the assembly’s importance waned and eventually the Senate had full governmental control.
In Roman courts, individuals worked with patrons, similar to present day lawyers, who would determine the most effective ways to argue each client’s case. Depending on the magnitude of the case, several patrons could represent a single client and patrons were chosen for their speaking skills as well as their political status. These early lawyers would give long speeches about their client’s guilt or innocence. Since cases were argued in front of juries made up of at least fifty Roman citizens whom determined the verdict and, when necessary, sentence in both criminal and civic cases, patrons had to be both logically and, more importantly, emotionally persuasive. As the popular assembly became increasingly defunct, the courts turned into Rome’s premier space of public speaking. Having knowledge of the law was increasingly important for Roman citizens as Rome’s democratic climate was eclipsed by a senatorial oligarchy and ultimately befell into tyranny. Consequently, rhetorical education in the Roman Empire focused on teaching students how to eloquently and successfully plead a case.
Cicero, a well known lawyer and politician, believed that attaining true eloquence required a strong liberal education. In other words, eloquence was more than simply pleasing speech; a speaker had to obtain vast knowledge on all relevant subjects in order to be truly eloquent. The first step in learning how to be eloquent was learning the proper way to compose a speech. In De Oratore, Cicero summarizes the five cannons of rhetoric which comprise the speech writing process. They are: invention (the modes of discovering arguments); arrangement (the ordering of arguments in a speech); style (the use of figures and tropes); memory (the ability to recall a speech’s arguments); and delivery (diction and gesture). For Cicero, teaching people how to be eloquent public speakers was an important step in making them informed citizens. You see, to Cicero, an eloquent speaker understood that issues of justice, tolerance and fairness were at the heart of public speech and thus, public life.
[pg] As the political climate of Rome changed becoming more honorable, Quintilian, a famed lawyer and teacher, developed a course of rhetorical education that was explicitly moral in an attempt to return Rome to its previously democratic state. In Institutio Oratoria, Quintilian set out to create a system of lifelong rhetorical study that would perfect the natural talents of a speaker. Quintilian, in other words, wanted to mold a good speaker into the perfect speaker. Public speech, Quintilian believed, should never ignore the moral issues involved in civic life; it should deal with questions of justice and honor. This belief is most salient in Quintilian’s description of the perfect speaker as the “good man speaking well”. Not only was the perfect orator a “good man,” Quintilian believed that “bad” or immoral individuals were not effective or successful speakers. The “good man speaking well” would be both morally virtuous, active in public life and committed to the public good rather than private gain. Essentially, the perfect speaker was a morally conscious, informed and active citizen who would put the good of the state before him or herself. This perfect speaker would be an ideal leader, well equipped to guide Roman government back to its glorious past. After learning about some of the history of public speaking education, it is easy to see the influence these ancient thinkers have had on some of the most notable speakers in US history.
