Podcasts about de oratore

A Memory Palace is an imaginary location in your mind where you can store mnemonic images. It has been used since ancient Rome, and is responsible for some quite incredible memory feats. Many studies have been conducted to analyze the effectiveness of the Memory Palace technique. It's all based on the scientific fact that your brain and spatial memory perceive space as a kind of image. The method of loci is also known as the memory journey, memory palace, or mind palace technique. This method is a mnemonic device adopted in ancient Roman and Greek rhetorical treatises (in the anonymous Rhetorica ad Herennium, Cicero's De Oratore, and Quintilian's Institutio Oratoria). Memory Palace “Ars Memoriae” Great Expectation Mnemosyne: Lightweight Persistent Memory Memory Takes Hold Carl Jung Semantic Web ManMachine - Semantic Memory Intel | Architect of the Future Memory of Loci Mega-mix

Gaius Julius Caesar (100–44 BCE) is regarded as one of the most effective military generals in human history. His conquest of Gaul propelled him into the national spotlight, providing him the platform he needed to establish himself as a supreme leader. Despite what we learn about him and school (and how we learn about him), his biography should be a cautionary tale about power and betrayal. While the Gorgias and De Oratore address the necessity of speaking well and telling the truth, Caesar’s Commentaries are pure propaganda, an early version of the “campaign memoir,” in which he uses his story of conquest to implicitly make his case for becoming the ruler of Rome. This text provides an important counterpoint to the work of Cicero in particular. Caesar embodied precisely what Cicero was trying to warn his generation against.

Marcus Tullius Cicero (106–43 BCE) was arguably the greatest intellectual and statesman of the Roman era. He was a key opponent of Julius Caesar, and his work on the art of oration, and his orations themselves, continue to instruct anyone who wishes to speak against propaganda and authoritarian rule. De Oratore is Cicero’s textbook on oratory, in which he outlines the relationships between what we say in public and the kind of wisdom and goodness that we cultivate in private. Ultimately that relationship should be one-to-one, resulting in the highest form of persuasion: the conversion of one’s soul.

A complete Latin recording of the first book of Cicero's De Oratore.

Ciceronis De Oratore - Liber Primus - Capitula 250-265 Brevis descriptio earum rerum quae geruntur in his capitulis: Capitula 250-255: Antonius confitetur scientiam iuris civilis posse aliquantum oratori prodesse; admonet autem multa et magna et difficilia esse ea quae vere sunt oratori necessaria, qua de causa non vult industriam oratoris in plura studia (minus necessaria, ut ius civile) distrahere. Capitula 256-261: Reliqua vero studia quae Crassus oratori imposuerat (h.e. historia, prudentia iuris publici, e.q.s.) etiam si adiuvant oratorem, non sunt necessario comprehendenda multumque temporis requirunt. Ergo secundum Antonii senentiam orator est is qui accommodate ad persuadendum potest dicere; qui non debet in omnibus studiis versari sed potius in hoc uno opere (sc. dicendi in foro ac iudiciis) tempus omne suum conferre. Capitula 262-265: Crassus petit ab Antonio ut, quoniam totum munus oratoris angustiis finibus circumdederit, exponat tandem praecepta atque propria officia oratoris; sed hunc sermonem in posterum diem differt. Scaevola invitus domum discedens salse ac comiter Antonium vellicat. Quaedam de toto opere deque libro primo generatim Liber cui index est De Oratore scriptus est a Marco Tullio Cicerone anno quinquagesimo quinto a.C.n. (h.e. 55). Materies quae agitur est ars bene dicendi sive ars oratoris; ut hanc materiem (de qua antea iuvenis in libro qui inscribitur De Inventione disseruerat) elegantius atque magis philosophice tractaret, Cicero non aride praecepta atque exercitationes artis proposuit sed potius colloqium effinxit in quo Romani eloquentissimi (in primis Marcus Licinius Crassus et Marcus Antonius ille orator) inter se de omni ratione dicendi disputant atque colloquuntur. Hic liber iam diu numeratur in optimis quos hic optimus scriptor et orator Romanus umquam in lucem edidit. Erat etiam inter primos libros tempore renatarum artium typis excussos.  Totum opus divisum est in tres libros sive volumina. In hoc primo libro, Cicero primum fratri suo Quinto librum mittit sive dedicat, deinde argumentum libri atque res agendas adumbrat; dicit se repetiturum (h.e. quasi ex memoria narraturum) sermonem quem ipse non auribus suis audiverit sed quem amicus suus Gauius Aurelius Cotta (qui erat unus ex participibus eius sermonis) sibi narraverit. Sermo habetur anno nonagesimo primo a.C.n (h.e. 91); inter varias rei publicae controversias Lucius Licinius Crassus villam suam Tusculi sitam animi causa petit atque aliquot amicos ibi hospitio excipit, inter quos Quintus Mucius Scaevola ille augur, Marcus Antonius orator, Publius Sulpicius Rufus. Dum omnes otio fruuntur, Crassus sermonem de studio dicendi infert. Infra in hac pagina invenientur nexus ad paucas editiones utiles. Editiones Utiles 1) Editio Loebensis: LOEBENSIS 2) Editio Totius Operis in Usum Delphini (primus liber De Oratore incipit circa paginam 800am): IN USUM DELPHINI

Ciceronis De Oratore - Liber Primus - Capitula 234-250 Brevis descriptio earum rerum quae geruntur in his capitulis: Capitula 234-245: Antonius negat ius civile oratori perutile esse. In iis enim ipsis causis in quibus ius civile tractatur, solet esse summa dissensio de ipso iure inter peritissimos eius rei; orator igitur is in tali causa superior discessurus est qui est eloquentissimus, non iuris peritissimus. Cum autem absit magna dissensio de iure, causae quoque non solent exstare. Capitula 246-250: Dubium etiam est utrum ius civile multum delectationis adferat. Antonius negat se umquam scientiam eius desiderasse dum causas dicit. Orator potest secundum eius sententiam sine damno esse communi ac vulgari scientia iuris civilis contentus; si quando causa ad oratorem delata erit in qua opus erit tali scientia, orator facile poterit auxilium ab peritioribus petere. Quaedam de toto opere deque libro primo generatim Liber cui index est De Oratore scriptus est a Marco Tullio Cicerone anno quinquagesimo quinto a.C.n. (h.e. 55). Materies quae agitur est ars bene dicendi sive ars oratoris; ut hanc materiem (de qua antea iuvenis in libro qui inscribitur De Inventione disseruerat) elegantius atque magis philosophice tractaret, Cicero non aride praecepta atque exercitationes artis proposuit sed potius colloqium effinxit in quo Romani eloquentissimi (in primis Marcus Licinius Crassus et Marcus Antonius ille orator) inter se de omni ratione dicendi disputant atque colloquuntur. Hic liber iam diu numeratur in optimis quos hic optimus scriptor et orator Romanus umquam in lucem edidit. Erat etiam inter primos libros tempore renatarum artium typis excussos.  Totum opus divisum est in tres libros sive volumina. In hoc primo libro, Cicero primum fratri suo Quinto librum mittit sive dedicat, deinde argumentum libri atque res agendas adumbrat; dicit se repetiturum (h.e. quasi ex memoria narraturum) sermonem quem ipse non auribus suis audiverit sed quem amicus suus Gauius Aurelius Cotta (qui erat unus ex participibus eius sermonis) sibi narraverit. Sermo habetur anno nonagesimo primo a.C.n (h.e. 91); inter varias rei publicae controversias Lucius Licinius Crassus villam suam Tusculi sitam animi causa petit atque aliquot amicos ibi hospitio excipit, inter quos Quintus Mucius Scaevola ille augur, Marcus Antonius orator, Publius Sulpicius Rufus. Dum omnes otio fruuntur, Crassus sermonem de studio dicendi infert. Infra in hac pagina invenientur nexus ad paucas editiones utiles. Editiones Utiles 1) Editio Loebensis: LOEBENSIS 2) Editio Totius Operis in Usum Delphini (primus liber De Oratore incipit circa paginam 800am): IN USUM DELPHINI

Ciceronis De Oratore - Liber Primus - Capitula 219-233 Brevis descriptio earum rerum quae geruntur in his capitulis: Capitula 219-226: Antonius negat philosophiam esse oratori necessario percipienda ostenditque ipsum Crassum non multum philosophia uti dum causas dicit. Capitula 227-233: Antonius etiam probat aliquot bonos viros et philosophiae deditos propter eam philosophiam minus bene se in causis defendere potuisse, inter quos Publius Rutilius Romanus et ille Socrates Graecus. Quaedam de toto opere deque libro primo generatim Liber cui index est De Oratore scriptus est a Marco Tullio Cicerone anno quinquagesimo quinto a.C.n. (h.e. 55). Materies quae agitur est ars bene dicendi sive ars oratoris; ut hanc materiem (de qua antea iuvenis in libro qui inscribitur De Inventione disseruerat) elegantius atque magis philosophice tractaret, Cicero non aride praecepta atque exercitationes artis proposuit sed potius colloqium effinxit in quo Romani eloquentissimi (in primis Marcus Licinius Crassus et Marcus Antonius ille orator) inter se de omni ratione dicendi disputant atque colloquuntur. Hic liber iam diu numeratur in optimis quos hic optimus scriptor et orator Romanus umquam in lucem edidit. Erat etiam inter primos libros tempore renatarum artium typis excussos.  Totum opus divisum est in tres libros sive volumina. In hoc primo libro, Cicero primum fratri suo Quinto librum mittit sive dedicat, deinde argumentum libri atque res agendas adumbrat; dicit se repetiturum (h.e. quasi ex memoria narraturum) sermonem quem ipse non auribus suis audiverit sed quem amicus suus Gauius Aurelius Cotta (qui erat unus ex participibus eius sermonis) sibi narraverit. Sermo habetur anno nonagesimo primo a.C.n (h.e. 91); inter varias rei publicae controversias Lucius Licinius Crassus villam suam Tusculi sitam animi causa petit atque aliquot amicos ibi hospitio excipit, inter quos Quintus Mucius Scaevola ille augur, Marcus Antonius orator, Publius Sulpicius Rufus. Dum omnes otio fruuntur, Crassus sermonem de studio dicendi infert. Infra in hac pagina invenientur nexus ad paucas editiones utiles. Editiones Utiles 1) Editio Loebensis: LOEBENSIS 2) Editio Totius Operis in Usum Delphini (primus liber De Oratore incipit circa paginam 800am): IN USUM DELPHINI

Ciceronis De Oratore - Liber Primus - Capitula 204-218 Brevis descriptio earum rerum quae geruntur in his capitulis: Capitula 204-208: Mucius oratiunculam Crassi laudat; Sulpicius autem rogat ut Crassus paulo latius de ipsa arte disserat. Crassus hunc laborem Antonio imponendum censet; Antonius quamvis invitus morem Crasso gerit, sed imperat ne ornata oratio de arte et doctrina exspectetur; nam negat se umquam artem didicisse, polliciturque se dicturum tantum de iis rebus quae ipse in usu atque in causis invenerit. Capitula 209-218: Antonius dicit se oratorem terminis angustioribus definire quam Crassus; sibi enim oratorem videri eum non qui omnem omnium rerum scientiam comprehenderit sed tantum qui et verbis et sententiis uti possit in causis forensibus atque communibus, quique praeterea sit instructus voce et actione et lepore quodam. Negat Antonius scientiam omnium rerum oratori necessariam esse; concedit tamen oratorem debere multa non ut sua possedisse sed ut aliena libasse ne oratio sua sit rudis careatque iucunda multarum rerum varietate. Quaedam de toto opere deque libro primo generatim Liber cui index est De Oratore scriptus est a Marco Tullio Cicerone anno quinquagesimo quinto a.C.n. (h.e. 55). Materies quae agitur est ars bene dicendi sive ars oratoris; ut hanc materiem (de qua antea iuvenis in libro qui inscribitur De Inventione disseruerat) elegantius atque magis philosophice tractaret, Cicero non aride praecepta atque exercitationes artis proposuit sed potius colloqium effinxit in quo Romani eloquentissimi (in primis Marcus Licinius Crassus et Marcus Antonius ille orator) inter se de omni ratione dicendi disputant atque colloquuntur. Hic liber iam diu numeratur in optimis quos hic optimus scriptor et orator Romanus umquam in lucem edidit. Erat etiam inter primos libros tempore renatarum artium typis excussos.  Totum opus divisum est in tres libros sive volumina. In hoc primo libro, Cicero primum fratri suo Quinto librum mittit sive dedicat, deinde argumentum libri atque res agendas adumbrat; dicit se repetiturum (h.e. quasi ex memoria narraturum) sermonem quem ipse non auribus suis audiverit sed quem amicus suus Gauius Aurelius Cotta (qui erat unus ex participibus eius sermonis) sibi narraverit. Sermo habetur anno nonagesimo primo a.C.n (h.e. 91); inter varias rei publicae controversias Lucius Licinius Crassus villam suam Tusculi sitam animi causa petit atque aliquot amicos ibi hospitio excipit, inter quos Quintus Mucius Scaevola ille augur, Marcus Antonius orator, Publius Sulpicius Rufus. Dum omnes otio fruuntur, Crassus sermonem de studio dicendi infert. Infra in hac pagina invenientur nexus ad paucas editiones utiles. Editiones Utiles 1) Editio Loebensis: LOEBENSIS 2) Editio Totius Operis in Usum Delphini (primus liber De Oratore incipit circa paginam 800am): IN USUM DELPHINI

Ciceronis De Oratore - Liber Primus - Capitula 185-203 Brevis descriptio earum rerum quae geruntur in his capitulis: Capitula 185-192: Crassus dicit scientiam iuris civilis non modo necessariam esse sed etiam satis facilem ad consequendum ac percipiendum. Capitula 193-203: Pergit Crassus laudare ius civile etiam propter delectationem et honorem quas adferre potest. Finem facit dicens se non omnia de dicendi ratione exponere posse sed tantum digitum ad fontes unde hauriantur intendere. Quaedam de toto opere deque libro primo generatim Liber cui index est De Oratore scriptus est a Marco Tullio Cicerone anno quinquagesimo quinto a.C.n. (h.e. 55). Materies quae agitur est ars bene dicendi sive ars oratoris; ut hanc materiem (de qua antea iuvenis in libro qui inscribitur De Inventione disseruerat) elegantius atque magis philosophice tractaret, Cicero non aride praecepta atque exercitationes artis proposuit sed potius colloqium effinxit in quo Romani eloquentissimi (in primis Marcus Licinius Crassus et Marcus Antonius ille orator) inter se de omni ratione dicendi disputant atque colloquuntur. Hic liber iam diu numeratur in optimis quos hic optimus scriptor et orator Romanus umquam in lucem edidit. Erat etiam inter primos libros tempore renatarum artium typis excussos.  Totum opus divisum est in tres libros sive volumina. In hoc primo libro, Cicero primum fratri suo Quinto librum mittit sive dedicat, deinde argumentum libri atque res agendas adumbrat; dicit se repetiturum (h.e. quasi ex memoria narraturum) sermonem quem ipse non auribus suis audiverit sed quem amicus suus Gauius Aurelius Cotta (qui erat unus ex participibus eius sermonis) sibi narraverit. Sermo habetur anno nonagesimo primo a.C.n (h.e. 91); inter varias rei publicae controversias Lucius Licinius Crassus villam suam Tusculi sitam animi causa petit atque aliquot amicos ibi hospitio excipit, inter quos Quintus Mucius Scaevola ille augur, Marcus Antonius orator, Publius Sulpicius Rufus. Dum omnes otio fruuntur, Crassus sermonem de studio dicendi infert. Infra in hac pagina invenientur nexus ad paucas editiones utiles. Editiones Utiles 1) Editio Loebensis: LOEBENSIS 2) Editio Totius Operis in Usum Delphini (primus liber De Oratore incipit circa paginam 800am): IN USUM DELPHINI

Ciceronis De Oratore - Liber Primus - Capitula 160-184 Brevis descriptio earum rerum quae geruntur in his capitulis: Capitula 160-166: Omnes rogant Crassum ut ea quae dixit brevissime de praeceptis dicendi ac exercitationibus dilatet. Crassus autem incipit de iure civili disserere. Capitula 167-184: Crassus permultis exemplis atque argumentis fretus dicit scientiam iuris civilis esse oratori perfecto necessariam. Quaedam de toto opere deque libro primo generatim Liber cui index est De Oratore scriptus est a Marco Tullio Cicerone anno quinquagesimo quinto a.C.n. (h.e. 55). Materies quae agitur est ars bene dicendi sive ars oratoris; ut hanc materiem (de qua antea iuvenis in libro qui inscribitur De Inventione disseruerat) elegantius atque magis philosophice tractaret, Cicero non aride praecepta atque exercitationes artis proposuit sed potius colloqium effinxit in quo Romani eloquentissimi (in primis Marcus Licinius Crassus et Marcus Antonius ille orator) inter se de omni ratione dicendi disputant atque colloquuntur. Hic liber iam diu numeratur in optimis quos hic optimus scriptor et orator Romanus umquam in lucem edidit. Erat etiam inter primos libros tempore renatarum artium typis excussos.  Totum opus divisum est in tres libros sive volumina. In hoc primo libro, Cicero primum fratri suo Quinto librum mittit sive dedicat, deinde argumentum libri atque res agendas adumbrat; dicit se repetiturum (h.e. quasi ex memoria narraturum) sermonem quem ipse non auribus suis audiverit sed quem amicus suus Gauius Aurelius Cotta (qui erat unus ex participibus eius sermonis) sibi narraverit. Sermo habetur anno nonagesimo primo a.C.n (h.e. 91); inter varias rei publicae controversias Lucius Licinius Crassus villam suam Tusculi sitam animi causa petit atque aliquot amicos ibi hospitio excipit, inter quos Quintus Mucius Scaevola ille augur, Marcus Antonius orator, Publius Sulpicius Rufus. Dum omnes otio fruuntur, Crassus sermonem de studio dicendi infert. Infra in hac pagina invenientur nexus ad paucas editiones utiles. Editiones Utiles 1) Editio Loebensis: LOEBENSIS 2) Editio Totius Operis in Usum Delphini (primus liber De Oratore incipit circa paginam 800am): IN USUM DELPHINI

Ciceronis De Oratore - Liber Primus - Capitula 137-159 Brevis descriptio earum rerum quae geruntur in his capitulis: Capitula 137-147: Crassus brevissime proponit ea communia et contrita praecepta dicendi quae ipse didicit adulescens. Dicit autem ea praecepta non tam necessaria esse ad bene dicendum quam ipsa exercitatio. Capitula 148-159: Rogatus ab Sulpicio Crassus (iterum brevissime) profert et exercitationes oratori utiles et res eidem perdiscendas. Quaedam de toto opere deque libro primo generatim Liber cui index est De Oratore scriptus est a Marco Tullio Cicerone anno quinquagesimo quinto a.C.n. (h.e. 55). Materies quae agitur est ars bene dicendi sive ars oratoris; ut hanc materiem (de qua antea iuvenis in libro qui inscribitur De Inventione disseruerat) elegantius atque magis philosophice tractaret, Cicero non aride praecepta atque exercitationes artis proposuit sed potius colloqium effinxit in quo Romani eloquentissimi (in primis Marcus Licinius Crassus et Marcus Antonius ille orator) inter se de omni ratione dicendi disputant atque colloquuntur. Hic liber iam diu numeratur in optimis quos hic optimus scriptor et orator Romanus umquam in lucem edidit. Erat etiam inter primos libros tempore renatarum artium typis excussos.  Totum opus divisum est in tres libros sive volumina. In hoc primo libro, Cicero primum fratri suo Quinto librum mittit sive dedicat, deinde argumentum libri atque res agendas adumbrat; dicit se repetiturum (h.e. quasi ex memoria narraturum) sermonem quem ipse non auribus suis audiverit sed quem amicus suus Gauius Aurelius Cotta (qui erat unus ex participibus eius sermonis) sibi narraverit. Sermo habetur anno nonagesimo primo a.C.n (h.e. 91); inter varias rei publicae controversias Lucius Licinius Crassus villam suam Tusculi sitam animi causa petit atque aliquot amicos ibi hospitio excipit, inter quos Quintus Mucius Scaevola ille augur, Marcus Antonius orator, Publius Sulpicius Rufus. Dum omnes otio fruuntur, Crassus sermonem de studio dicendi infert. Infra in hac pagina invenientur nexus ad paucas editiones utiles. Editiones Utiles 1) Editio Loebensis: LOEBENSIS 2) Editio Totius Operis in Usum Delphini (primus liber De Oratore incipit circa paginam 800am): IN USUM DELPHINI

Ciceronis De Oratore - Liber Primus - Capitula 96-136 Brevis descriptio earum rerum quae geruntur in his capitulis: Capitula 96-101: Sulpicius gaudet se et Cottam tali sermoni forte fortuna interesse et rogat Crassum ac Antonium ut uterque quid sentiat de omni genere dicendi aperiat. Crassus primo recusat; tum Cottae urgenti promittit se responsurum. Capitula 102-109: Crassus rogatur ab Sulpicio utrum existimet artem aliquam esse dicendi. Post brevem moram atque recusationem, respondet ea quae rhetores doceant non proprie ‘artem’ esse appellanda sed fortasse vulgari sensu posse vocari ‘artem’; adfirmat tamen alia exstare maiora quae ad consequendam eloquentiam conducant. Capitula 110-121: Antonius Crassum hortatur ut exponat quas res putet ad dicendum plus prodesse quam eam ‘artem’ quam rhetores profiteantur. Crassus respondet primum naturam ipsam atque ingenium vim maximam ad dicendum adferre. Perfectus igitur ac integer orator debet omnibus vitiis carere; etiam decet eum ob magnitudinem gravitatemque muneris pertimescere aliquantum dum orationem habet. Capitula 122-136: Omnes Crasso adsentiuntur Antoniusque duas causas cur oratores summi saepe ita in dicendi exordio timeant proponit. Tum repetit eam sententiam Crassi qua dixit aliquas res a natura datas esse oratori omnino necessarias. Sulpicius dicit se timere ne tales res sibi et Cottae desint; Crassus respondet se facile perspicere eorum summum ingenium esse ac studium neque quidquam ex talibus rebus eis deesse. Cotta autem a Crasso poscit ut dicit igitur quid praeter eas res a natura datas oratori sumendum esse putet. Quaedam de toto opere deque libro primo generatim Liber cui index est De Oratore scriptus est a Marco Tullio Cicerone anno quinquagesimo quinto a.C.n. (h.e. 55). Materies quae agitur est ars bene dicendi sive ars oratoris; ut hanc materiem (de qua antea iuvenis in libro qui inscribitur De Inventione disseruerat) elegantius atque magis philosophice tractaret, Cicero non aride praecepta atque exercitationes artis proposuit sed potius colloqium effinxit in quo Romani eloquentissimi (in primis Marcus Licinius Crassus et Marcus Antonius ille orator) inter se de omni ratione dicendi disputant atque colloquuntur. Hic liber iam diu numeratur in optimis quos hic optimus scriptor et orator Romanus umquam in lucem edidit. Erat etiam inter primos libros tempore renatarum artium typis excussos.  Totum opus divisum est in tres libros sive volumina. In hoc primo libro, Cicero primum fratri suo Quinto librum mittit sive dedicat, deinde argumentum libri atque res agendas adumbrat; dicit se repetiturum (h.e. quasi ex memoria narraturum) sermonem quem ipse non auribus suis audiverit sed quem amicus suus Gauius Aurelius Cotta (qui erat unus ex participibus eius sermonis) sibi narraverit. Sermo habetur anno nonagesimo primo a.C.n (h.e. 91); inter varias rei publicae controversias Lucius Licinius Crassus villam suam Tusculi sitam animi causa petit atque aliquot amicos ibi hospitio excipit, inter quos Quintus Mucius Scaevola ille augur, Marcus Antonius orator, Publius Sulpicius Rufus. Dum omnes otio fruuntur, Crassus sermonem de studio dicendi infert. Infra in hac pagina invenientur nexus ad paucas editiones utiles. Editiones Utiles 1) Editio Loebensis: LOEBENSIS 2) Editio Totius Operis in Usum Delphini (primus liber De Oratore incipit circa paginam 800am): IN USUM DELPHINI

Ciceronis De Oratore - Liber Primus - Capitula 74-95 Brevis descriptio earum rerum quae geruntur in his capitulis: Capitula 74 - 79: Scaevola dubitat num quis existere possit qui facultatem ornatissime dicendi adeptus etiam ceteras omnes artes et doctrinas complectatur; praesertim cum Crassus ipse (qui omnium opinione sit optimus orator) neget se id consecutum esse. Crassus respondet se numquam vacavisse aliis rebus discendis propter sua negotia in foro et iudiciis; hominem autem existere posse in futurum qui non modo tam bene dicat quam ipse, sed etiam illa alia discere et cognoscere possit quibus sibi non contigerit operam dare propter nimias occupationes. Capitula 80-95: Antonius sententiam Crassi laudans nihilominus dicit id perdifficile esse ut orator omnium rerum atque artium rationem comprehendat.  Antonius porro describit disputationem quam audiverat Athenis inter philosophos de officio et de ratione oratoris: Menedemus proposuit quandam prudentiam esse constituendarum et regendarum rerum publicarum, quam orator possit sine philosopia adipisci. Charmadas negavit quemquam posse facultatem dicendi adsequi nisi qui philosophorum inventa didicisset; Menedemus contra dixit Demosthenem optime et callide dixisse, quamquam orator fuisset non philosophus. Charmadas respondit Demosthenem aut id ingenio potuisse aut propterea quod discipulus fuisset Platonis. Antonio Charmadas etiam visus est probare nullam esse artem neque artificium dicendi: nullos rhetores qui artem dicendi profiterentur umquam ipsos disertos fuisse et contra multos bonos oratores exstitisse qui tamen numquam operam studiis rhetoricis dedissent. Antonius tum hac opinione adductus scripsit libellum in quo statuit disertos homines multos esse, nullos tamen vere eloquentes; nam secundum eius opinionem diserti sunt qui possunt satis acute et dilucide dicere, eloquentes vero qui, omnia quae ad dicendum pertinent memoria continentes, magnificius et mirabilius dicant de qualibet re. Antonius dicit talem oratorem vere eloquentem nondum exstitisse sed fortasse aliquando futurum esse. Quaedam de toto opere deque libro primo generatim Liber cui index est De Oratore scriptus est a Marco Tullio Cicerone anno quinquagesimo quinto a.C.n. (h.e. 55). Materies quae agitur est ars bene dicendi sive ars oratoris; ut hanc materiem (de qua antea iuvenis in libro qui inscribitur De Inventione disseruerat) elegantius atque magis philosophice tractaret, Cicero non aride praecepta atque exercitationes artis proposuit sed potius colloqium effinxit in quo Romani eloquentissimi (in primis Marcus Licinius Crassus et Marcus Antonius ille orator) inter se de omni ratione dicendi disputant atque colloquuntur. Hic liber iam diu numeratur in optimis quos hic optimus scriptor et orator Romanus umquam in lucem edidit. Erat etiam inter primos libros tempore renatarum artium typis excussos.  Totum opus divisum est in tres libros sive volumina. In hoc primo libro, Cicero primum fratri suo Quinto librum mittit sive dedicat, deinde argumentum libri atque res agendas adumbrat; dicit se repetiturum (h.e. quasi ex memoria narraturum) sermonem quem ipse non auribus suis audiverit sed quem amicus suus Gauius Aurelius Cotta (qui erat unus ex participibus eius sermonis) sibi narraverit. Sermo habetur anno nonagesimo primo a.C.n (h.e. 91); inter varias rei publicae controversias Lucius Licinius Crassus villam suam Tusculi sitam animi causa petit atque aliquot amicos ibi hospitio excipit, inter quos Quintus Mucius Scaevola ille augur, Marcus Antonius orator, Publius Sulpicius Rufus. Dum omnes otio fruuntur, Crassus sermonem de studio dicendi infert. Infra in hac pagina invenientur nexus ad paucas editiones utiles. Editiones Utiles 1) Editio Loebensis: LOEBENSIS 2) Editio Totius Operis in Usum Delphini (primus liber De Oratore incipit circa paginam 800am): IN USUM DELPHINI

Ciceronis De Oratore - Liber Primus - Capitula 45-73 Brevis descriptio earum rerum quae geruntur in his capitulis: Capitula 45-60: Crassus Scaevolae respondet: Etsi philosophi volunt id tantum oratori concedere, ut possit bene et copiose dicere in iudiciis et contionibus, multa tamen etiam in hac una re ei tribuunt; quia tum opus erit dicere de moribus humanis, de lege, de iure, de statu rei publicae; nullus autem orator poterit bene et perite de his rebus loqui nisi ea omnia bene intellexerit.  Ergo licet sane dicere quasdam esse partes proprias philosophorum; philosophi enim possunt melius et penitius scire de legibus, de pace, de bello, de iure. Orator autem perfectus debet et poterit satis bene intellegere eas res ut possit ornate et copiose dicere. Capitula 61-73: Crassus: Hoc autem fortasse minus probari potest, sed nihilominus dicendum videtur: etiamsi scientia rerum obscuriorum (ut mathematicae, physicae) est propria philosophorum, si quis tamen velit ornate et bene dicere de talibus rebus, oratoris facultate opus erit; necesse igitur est ut orator perfectus de quacumque re dicere possit. Crassus confitetur hoc nimis magnum fortasse videri (ut possit semper orator "quacumque de re" loqui); asseverat autem oratorem posse saltem ab peritioribus doceri de qualibet arte, ita ut etiam melius de hac arte dicat quam ii qui eam docuerint.  Ergo, omnes oratores debent de vita et moribus omnino perdiscere quia haec sunt necessaria in iudiciis et contionibus; ceteras partes philosophiae et humanitatis poterunt cum opus fuerit discere; optimus autem quisque orator etiam in iis ceteris rebus satis bene instructus erit, licet non sit tam peritus quam philosophus. Quaedam de toto opere deque libro primo generatim Liber cui index est De Oratore scriptus est a Marco Tullio Cicerone anno quinquagesimo quinto a.C.n. (h.e. 55). Materies quae agitur est ars bene dicendi sive ars oratoris; ut hanc materiem (de qua antea iuvenis in libro qui inscribitur De Inventione disseruerat) elegantius atque magis philosophice tractaret, Cicero non aride praecepta atque exercitationes artis proposuit sed potius colloqium effinxit in quo Romani eloquentissimi (in primis Marcus Licinius Crassus et Marcus Antonius ille orator) inter se de omni ratione dicendi disputant atque colloquuntur. Hic liber iam diu numeratur in optimis quos hic optimus scriptor et orator Romanus umquam in lucem edidit. Erat etiam inter primos libros tempore renatarum artium typis excussos.  Totum opus divisum est in tres libros sive volumina. In hoc primo libro, Cicero primum fratri suo Quinto librum mittit sive dedicat, deinde argumentum libri atque res agendas adumbrat; dicit se repetiturum (h.e. quasi ex memoria narraturum) sermonem quem ipse non auribus suis audiverit sed quem amicus suus Gauius Aurelius Cotta (qui erat unus ex participibus eius sermonis) sibi narraverit. Sermo habetur anno nonagesimo primo a.C.n (h.e. 91); inter varias rei publicae controversias Lucius Licinius Crassus villam suam Tusculi sitam animi causa petit atque aliquot amicos ibi hospitio excipit, inter quos Quintus Mucius Scaevola ille augur, Marcus Antonius orator, Publius Sulpicius Rufus. Dum omnes otio fruuntur, Crassus sermonem de studio dicendi infert. Infra in hac pagina invenientur nexus ad paucas editiones utiles. Editiones Utiles 1) Editio Loebensis: LOEBENSIS 2) Editio Totius Operis in Usum Delphini (primus liber De Oratore incipit circa paginam 800am): IN USUM DELPHINI

Ciceronis De Oratore - Liber Primus - Capitula 24-44 Brevis descriptio earum rerum quae geruntur in his capitulis: Capitula 24-29: Cicero dicit se olim audisse haec omnia quae narraturus sit ab Gaio Aurelio Cotta, qui sermoni interfuit. Anno nonagesimo primo a.C.n., tribunus plebis et consul Romanus inter se rixabantur de iudiciis Romanis exercendis. Diebus ludorum Latinorum (cum iudicia non haberentur) Lucius Licinius Crassus, orator praeclarissimus et fautor tribuni plebis, se in Tusculanum suum contulit cum socero suo Quinto Mucio Scaevola et amico Marco Antonio. Etiam Gaius Aurelius Cotta et Publicius Sulpicius Rufus, minores natu et studiosi illorum gravissimorum hominum, aderant. Primo die de temporibus atque difficultatibus rei publicae omnes collocuti sunt; postero die, consederunt sub arbore et Crassus sermonem de studio dicendi intulit ut eorum animi relaxarentur ex priore sermone de turbulento rei publicae statu. Capitula 30-34: Crassus primum laudat Sulpicium et Cottam quia adhuc adulescentes iam bene audiant propter facultatem dicendi. Pergit etiam laudare artem oratoris ac oratores multis de causis asseveratque tales homines esse omnibus civitatibus necessarios. Capitula 35-44: Scaevola respondet se assentire cetera neque posse concedere haec: unum, quod civitates ab oratoribus constitutas et conservatas dixerit Crassus; alterum, quod extra forum et iudicia statuerit oratorem in omni genere humanitatis perfectum. Hoc Sulpicio videtur esse nimiae arrogantiae; Crassum igitur hortatur ut tantum profiteatur oratores posse haec tria consequi: facere causam quamque probababiliorem; facilius aliis persuadere in contionibus sententiisque dicendis; prudentibus hominibus videri bene dicere, stultis etiam vera.   Quaedam de toto opere deque libro primo generatim Liber cui index est De Oratore scriptus est a Marco Tullio Cicerone anno quinquagesimo quinto a.C.n. (h.e. 55). Materies quae agitur est ars bene dicendi sive ars oratoris; ut hanc materiem (de qua antea iuvenis in libro qui inscribitur De Inventione disseruerat) elegantius atque magis philosophice tractaret, Cicero non aride praecepta atque exercitationes artis proposuit sed potius colloqium effinxit in quo Romani eloquentissimi (in primis Marcus Licinius Crassus et Marcus Antonius ille orator) inter se de omni ratione dicendi disputant atque colloquuntur. Hic liber iam diu numeratur in optimis quos hic optimus scriptor et orator Romanus umquam in lucem edidit. Erat etiam inter primos libros tempore renatarum artium typis excussos.  Totum opus divisum est in tres libros sive volumina. In hoc primo libro, Cicero primum fratri suo Quinto librum mittit sive dedicat, deinde argumentum libri atque res agendas adumbrat; dicit se repetiturum (h.e. quasi ex memoria narraturum) sermonem quem ipse non auribus suis audiverit sed quem amicus suus Gauius Aurelius Cotta (qui erat unus ex participibus eius sermonis) sibi narraverit. Sermo habetur anno nonagesimo primo a.C.n (h.e. 91); inter varias rei publicae controversias Lucius Licinius Crassus villam suam Tusculi sitam animi causa petit atque aliquot amicos ibi hospitio excipit, inter quos Quintus Mucius Scaevola ille augur, Marcus Antonius orator, Publius Sulpicius Rufus. Dum omnes otio fruuntur, Crassus sermonem de studio dicendi infert. Infra in hac pagina invenientur nexus ad paucas editiones utiles. Editiones Utiles 1) Editio Loebensis: LOEBENSIS 2) Editio Totius Operis in Usum Delphini (primus liber De Oratore incipit circa paginam 800am): IN USUM DELPHINI

Ciceronis De Oratore - Liber Primus - Capitula 1-23 Brevis descriptio earum rerum quae geruntur in his capitulis: Capitula 1-5: Cicero hunc librum mittit sive dedicat Quinto fratri, qui solet in disputationibus de arte oratoris dissentire, quod Cicero dicit eloquentiam artibus contineri, Quintus autem elegantiam in quodam genere ingenii atque exercitationis positam esse putat. Capitula 6-15: Miratur Cicero tam paucos et esse et fuisse bonos oratores cum sint tot homines in alio quovis genere excellentes (ut philosophos, imperatores, eos qui rem publicam gubernant). Capitula 16-23: Cicero hanc paucitatem bonorum oratorum ponit in varietate rerum ex quibus ars bene dicendi constat. Nam adeo difficile est haec omnia consequi ut admodum rari proveniant oratores qui officium illius muneris implere possint.    Quaedam de toto opere deque libro primo generatim Liber cui index est De Oratore scriptus est a Marco Tullio Cicerone anno quinquagesimo quinto a.C.n. (h.e. 55). Materies quae agitur est ars bene dicendi sive ars oratoris; ut hanc materiem (de qua antea iuvenis in libro qui inscribitur De Inventione disseruerat) elegantius atque magis philosophice tractaret, Cicero non aride praecepta atque exercitationes artis proposuit sed potius colloqium effinxit in quo Romani eloquentissimi (in primis Marcus Licinius Crassus et Marcus Antonius ille orator) inter se de omni ratione dicendi disputant atque colloquuntur. Hic liber iam diu numeratur in optimis quos hic optimus scriptor et orator Romanus umquam in lucem edidit. Erat etiam inter primos libros tempore renatarum artium typis excussos.  Totum opus divisum est in tres libros sive volumina. In hoc primo libro, Cicero primum fratri suo Quinto librum mittit sive dedicat, deinde argumentum libri atque res agendas adumbrat; dicit se repetiturum (h.e. quasi ex memoria narraturum) sermonem quem ipse non auribus suis audiverit sed quem amicus suus Gauius Aurelius Cotta (qui erat unus ex participibus eius sermonis) sibi narraverit. Sermo habetur anno nonagesimo primo a.C.n (h.e. 91); inter varias rei publicae controversias Lucius Licinius Crassus villam suam Tusculi sitam animi causa petit atque aliquot amicos ibi hospitio excipit, inter quos Quintus Mucius Scaevola ille augur, Marcus Antonius orator, Publius Sulpicius Rufus. Dum omnes otio fruuntur, Crassus sermonem de studio dicendi infert. Infra in hac pagina invenientur nexus ad paucas editiones utiles. Editiones Utiles 1) Editio Loebensis: LOEBENSIS 2) Editio Totius Operis in Usum Delphini (primus liber De Oratore incipit circa paginam 800am): IN USUM DELPHINI

Crisis looms in ancient Rome: the uneasy triumvirate between Caesar, Pompey and Crassus rests on thin bonds that seem inevitable to break. The Senate supports Pompey, but Caesar has successfully (and illegally) conquered Gaul, winning wide-spread military support. Everything seems primed for disaster. In fact, in less than a decade, the Great Civil War, the death gasp of the Republic, will spread across the whole breadth of the empire, changing forever the political and social life of Romans. This, of course, is the best time to write a treatise on rhetoric. Or it is if you happen to be Cicero. Cicero, a political player as well as rhetorician, saw in the dis-ease of Rome a need for leaders who could be well-informed about the issues, but also know how to effectively persuade those around them to order and peace. The risks are high and the need is pressing, both for the empire in general and for Cicero in general—he’s been exiled, his home has been destroyed by political thugs and his life is in danger for criticizing high-ranking leaders, including Ceasar. But he also knows that this isn’t the first time that the Roman world has been rocked by political instability and needed strong leaders versed in rhetoric. So when he sits down to write his rhetorical treatise, he sets it not in the current period (far, far too risky!) but back fifty years ago, just before another civil war would destroy the peace of the Roman Republic. The dialogue is written almost dramatically as three historical figures gather together in the peace of a patrician home “during the days of the Roman Games”: Lucius Crasses, Marcus Antonius, and Scaevola. They are joined by the young men Sullpicius and Gaius Cotta. Cotta suggests that in this peace “Crassus, why do we not imitate Socrates as he appears in the Phaedrus of Plate? For your plane tree has suggested this comparison to my mind, casting as it does, with its spreading branches, as deep a shade over this pot, as that one cast whose shelter Socrates sought “ (I. vii.28). You might remember from our Pheadrus podcast that Socrates normally engages in dialogues in the city, in the market or gymnasium or private people’s houses, but in the Phaedrus, Socrates gets a little topsy-turvey by going out in nature, giving long speeches instead of dialectic and—most shockingly of all—defending rhetoric. Well, looks like Crassus and Antoius are going to be similarly inspired by the setting to break with tradition—these are powerful Roman men who take action in politics and war and the business of running an empire. They are manly men, not like the Greek philosophers—the unmanly ninny GReekling-- who unambitiously ponder the meaning of things like philosophy and rhetoric instead of taking over the known world. In fact, Crassus seems to even have to describe rhetoric in terms of what it can do in terms of political power. And he starts by telling the most important creation story of the history of rhetoric. This story, as the legand goes and Crassus relates, starts with “brute creation” and the point that while human beings are slower, and weaker and less deadly than other animals they do have one advantage—they can discourse. So the orator created “our present condition of civilization as men and as citizens, or after the establishment of social communities, to give shape to laws, tribuals and civic rights?” (I.viii.33). Even today, Crassus says, the orator upholds his own dignity and the safety of “countless individuals and of the entire state.” Scaevola the cynical points out that orators also have caused great disaster to the state. So the discussion quickly turns to how to educate the orator to be the best kind of person, morally and intellectually, to lead the state towards greatness. Crassus (Cicero stand-in) and Antonio (C’s brother’s stand-in) debate requirements for the good rhetor—is it art or natural ability? It’s less of a clear-cut debate than you’d think, and Antonius sort of switches positions between the first and second book. Generally, both of the agree that “Good speakers bring, as their peculiar possession, a stule that is harmonious, graceful, and marked by a certain artistry and polish. Yet this style, if the underlying subject matter be not comprehended and mastered by the speaker, must inevilably be of no account or even become the sport of universal derision” (I.xi.50). That sport, incidentally, being the fruitless apolitical sophistry of the Greeklings that these political Romans despise.That’s what Crassus calls “Greeklings who are fonder of argument than of truth” But if there’s good content to oratory, then that’s worth while—that’s something that can actually DO something. But this education, to know everything you speak on, is hard to come by. Should orators be generalists or specialists? All of this takes a lot of “zeal and industry and study” (475), to be “he who on any matter whatever can speak with fullness and variety” (I. xiii.59) because “it is nearer the truth to say that neither can anyone be eloquent upon a subject that is unknowen to him. “ That means lots and lots of study—of Roman laws, above all else, but also on physiology, trade, astronomy grammar, all of it. Antonius, again the fly in the ointment, points out that it would be impossible to develop the kind of breadth that Crassus describes: “I cannont deny that he would be a remarkable kind of man and worth of admiration; but if such a one there should be or indeed ever has been or really ever could be, assuredly you would be that one man.” (I.vxi.) Wow. Ancient Romans had really mastered the art of the compli-insult. Okay, so what is rhetoric, then? Is it a specialized skill that only a few experts master or is it something added on to these other skills? Besides, Antonius observes “not a single writer on rhetoric has been even moderately eloquent” (I.xx.91). that’s a good burn, too, and one that you still here in rhetoric: we study this stuff all the time, so why aren’t we giving the speeches that inspire the world? How can we be so dull when we’re supposed to be experts in this stuff? Crassus points out that he’s talking about an ideal and that ideal is hard to achieve, maybe even impossibly, but it is important to have the idea “picture to ourselves in our discourse an orator from whom every blemish has been taken away and one who moreover is rich in every merit”—what would that look like? First there would be some physical characteristics—the orator who can’t speak, and speak loudly and clearly, won’t got far. And there whould be a “natural state of looks, expression and voice” for oratory (I.xxvvii.126) and good memory.There should be natural talent, but also passion and willingness to work to improve. This passion for betterment is critical, Crassus muses “What else do you suppose young Cotta, but enthusiasm and something like the passion of love? Without which no man will ever attain anything in life that is out of the common” (I. xxix.134). And even if someone doesn’t have all of these natural abilities, their training can help them to do a little better. “those on whome these gifts have been bestowed by nature in smaller measure, can none the less acquire the power to use what they have with propriety and discernment and so as to show now lack of taste.” (I.xxvii.132). Even if you aren’t the ideal orator, you can get much better with practice. The next day, the group is joined by Quintus Catulus and Gaius Julius Ceasar. Catulus for his part, argues that Oratorys “derives from ability, but owes little to art” in other words, it’s just a knack after all. This time Antonius fights back, kind of reversing his previous position. Antonius points out that “there are some very clever rules” that can make an audience friendly to a speaker and establish goodwill. But soon the whole conversation focuses back on the importance of being widely educated, especially in law and civil right. So what are the takeaways from The Orator? Over all it’s a long description of the importance of eloquence. “Eloquence is dependent upon the trained skill of highly educated men” (7) and “no one should be numbered with the orators who is not accomplished in all those arts” of the well-educated (53), because “excellence in speaking cannot be made manifest unless the speaker fully comprehends the matter” (37). Good will and delivery also emphasized. To educate, imitation comes first (265), then gradually more serious argumentation, although there are rhetorical geniuses. Performance should have genuine emotion behind it (335). There are a variety of acceptable styles (II. 23). (which we’ll talk about in a later episode) and different parts to speech and preparing a speak—and I know it sounds like we’re deferring, but we’ll talk about those in the future too. We have an entire episode prepared for talk about these parts of preparing a speech. Generally, thought, this treatise argues that over all Eloquence “is one of the supreme virtues” (II.43) But the fact that this treatise talks so seriously about rhetoric and its philosophy is in some way worth remarking on in itself. There’s some jingoistic feelings that manly Roman empire-building is much cooler than sissy Greekling philosophizing going around the culture and De Oratore is no exception that. I always think it’s funny how the speakers in this dialogue go out of their way to insist that they aren’t really sitting around philosophizing, and if they are, it’s only because it’s a state vacation and they kind of have to. The comparison with Plato’s Phaedrus are apt: here are Roman politicians who are acting out of character because of the circumstances and talking like philosophers. But while Cicero has his characters insist that the via activa is paramount, the circumstances suggest otherwise. These politicians are all doomed—the crisis in the Republic is about to reach full swing and soon many of the participants will be dead or exiled. Their political influence will be only fleeting, but Cicero’s dialogue invoking them keeps them relevant. The same could be said for Cicero himself in his own time: a brilliant politician, he was unable to stem the tide of violence as the republic descended into autocracy. Cicero was eventually exiled and then murdered.   He wasn’t just murdered but he was also posthumously beheaded, his hands chopped off and his tongue repeated stabbed with a hairpin. Sort of an ignomous end to a great politician. But Cicero the rhetorician seemingly had no end—the impact of his treatises, including de Oratore, dominated medieval and renaissance rhetoric. So for all of the insistence that sitting around theorize isn’t as important as the work of government, it turns out that theory has the longest-lasting influence. Situating de Oretore in the real violence of the Roman republic demonstrates not only the sometimes futile work of rhetoric, but also how high the stakes are in developing rhetors who are well-educated, balanced, virtuous and eloquent.  

Courtly political rhetoric   Welcome to Mere Rhetoric, the podcast for beginners and insiders about the ideas, people and movements that have shaped rhetorical history. Today we continue our month-long celebration of deliberative rhetoric by looking back half a millennium to the European Renaissance.   Back in the European Renaissance, politics looked different. There were no brightly colored billboards along the side of the freeway on-ramp, no official newspaper endorsements of candidates, no candidate debates. There were, in fact, no candidates. That is not to say that there was no politics. Instead of working to get the vote of the average Joe, those who aspired to political power had to work another angle—they had to work the court.   Royal courts were the nexis of political life in the Renaissance. There were smaller courts for smaller authorities, but the courts of say, the king of France or the Queen of England might include thousands of people. Courtiers, these court members, could have their fortunes made because of the favorable impressions they made at court. There were offices of the court, including such fantastic positions as Gentleman of the Bedchamber, Doorward, and Groom of the Stool, which did, in fact, mean “stool” in two senses of the word. These were important positions that could secure your family’s influence for generations. Everyone was competing for these positions, so it became brutally important to make the right impression. You didn’t want to lose your chance to be Groom of the Stool. On the other hand, say or do the wrong thing and you could be exiled from court or from the country or worse. Many of the monarchs who were insecure had reasons to distrust the insubordinate at court and could punish absolutely anyone who undermined their authority at court. You don’t want to make a major social gaffe when you could literally lose your head for it.   In the context of the high stakes of court living, handbooks of behavior began to appear so that social climbers could politic their way to the top without doing anything stupid. These handbooks could be subtitled “How to Win Friends and Ingratiate People.” Giovanni Della Casa’s courtusie book, for example, gives the gentle reader the advice that it’s an “unmannerly part, for a man to lay his nose upon the cup where another must drink, or upon the meate another must eate, to the end to smell unto it” because, in a horrifying gaffe, “it may chance there might fall some droppe from his nose, that would make a man loath to it.” (qtd Richards 479). Ew. That would be so embarrassing.   But the master of masters of the hunt, the main man of gentle men was Baldassare Castiglione. Besides having an embarrassing first name, Castiglione was a courtier at the court of the Duke of Urbino, in Italy, where he was a poet, religious leader, soldier and all-around man around court. He wrote the most famous handbook of the Renaissance “The Courtier.” The Courtier is a dialogue, like the other text that it most resembles, Cicero’s De Oratore. It addresses the question of what makes the ideal Renaissance gentleman and the dialogues in it take place over several days, with multiple figures putting in their two cents, changing their minds and coining new terms to describe how to best do polite politics at court.   One of the most important of these terms was Sprezzatura. Sprezztura refers to making something difficult seem easy. As Castiglione’s character puts it, “I have found quite a universal rule which in this matter seems to me valid above all other, and in all human affairs whether in word or deed: and that is to avoid affectation in every way possible as though it were some rough and dangerous reef; and (to pronounce a new word perhaps) to practice in all things a certain sprezzatura [nonchalance], so as to conceal all art and make whatever is done or said appear to be without effort and almost without any thought about it.”   This idea, to make whatever is done or said to appear as if it took no effort and no thought is one that has been valued in rhetoric for years. Cicero, in De Oratore, points out the values of “orations [that] were composed very simply” as if they sprang up from “nature and truth [rather] than from study and art.” (1.26).   For Castiglione and his fellow courtiers, sprezzatura, or nonchalance, was able to conceal the art, the work that went into appearing witty, or poetic. One translation describes it as “an art without art, a negligent diligence, an inattentive attention” (Saccone 57). It’s the rhetorical equivalent of “oh this old thing?” Daniel Javitch, a 20th century scholar, defines Sprezzatura as “at once artifice made to seem natural and a seemingly effortless resolution of difficult. (56). If your excellent speech looks like it took a lot of time and effort, then you look like someone who takes a lot of time and effort, but if your excellent speech looks like you took no time at all, then you look like a genius.   One figure in the Courtier, Canossa, describes how this nonchalance can improve the practice of rhetoric: “I remember having read of some excellent orators … who endeavored to make everyone believe that they were ignorant of letters and, dissembling their knowledge, gave the impression that their speeches were made very simply, as if they had been prompted by nature and truth rather than study or artifice” (53).   Junior high kids get this. Remember the archetype of the slacker genius? We all knew one, or aspired to be one. The kid who sits in the back of class, playing tetris on her phone, until the most difficult math problem stumps the whole class and she’s the only one who solves it, or the guy who cuts class every day, but then turns in a final paper that wows the teacher into giving him an A. There’s something mystical about the idea that some people can skip all the work and still succeed.   This idea was all the more important in rhetoric, because if you labored over your work, not only did it look like you were not just naturally brilliant, but it might look like you weren’t sincere. We still kind of dislike the idea of the speechwriter in politics, who is crafting just the right words to make the voters feel outrage or sympathy on behalf of the politician. But if the politician appears to be speaking words that flow out naturally from the power of the moment filtered through a great and sensitive mind, we feel inspired rather than manipulated.   There is, perhaps, something dishonest in the idea of sprezzatura, but the figure of Canossa insists that it’s something that can’t be taught. Much like in De Oratore, there is a question in the courtier about how much any of this can be taught and how much is just something that you’re born with, a natural grace that accompanies everything you do.   The book of the courtier itself seemed to be charmed with natural grace. It was translated widely, most notably for English speakers, by Thomas Hoby, where it came to define manners and ideals in the age of Elizabeth and Shakespeare.   In fact, you can find traces of Castiglione in several of Shakespeare’s plays, especially those that take place in court, like Pericles who was, himself, a remarkable example of a courtier who sings, jousts, writes love poetry, and negotiates treacherous courts. Pericles’ daughter, Marina, is even more so the naturally talented courtier: she almost can’t help it how artistic, beautiful and smart she is, and though it gets her into trouble, it gets her out again. The talent that saves Marina, actually, is her rhetorical prowess. When she is sold to a brothel, She financially ruins the pimps when time and time again, she persuades the men who would take advantage of her to choose virtue over vice. This includes, as it would for a true courtier, when she must gently persuade those in positions of power. “Let not authority, which teaches you to govern others, be the means to make you misgovern much yourself,” she says to a lusty governor named Lysimachus, “If you were born to honor, show it now; If put upon you, make the judgment good that thought you worthy of it.”   Whether skill of the courtier comes from training or from inborn ability, it is crucial for courtiers like Pericles and Marina. This is the politics of the royal court, which seeks to cajole and charm those in power, so that they will say as Lysimachus did to Marina, “Thou art a piece of virtue, the best wrought up that ever nature made and I doubt not thy training hath been noble […] Hold, here’s more gold. If thou dost hear from me, it shall be for thy good.”   If you hear from me, in the future, I hope that it’s for your good as well. I’d love to hear from you. Contact us through our email mererhetoricpodcast, or check out on Twitter at mererhetoricked to make comments or suggestions for future podcasts. As a matter of fact, today’s podcast was the suggestion of an old friend Vincent Robert-Nicoud, who is not only a heck of a great Renaissance scholar, but he also always opened the door for me, which is an awful gentlemanly thing to do. He can have any office at my court that he wants—Grand Squire, Master of the Hunt. Only not the Gentleman of the Stool.