Kenney_and_Clausen B.M.W.(eds.) - Get a Free Blog

QUINTILIAN
In the long technical sections of Books 3—9 Quintilian attempts mainly to
evaluate existing theories rather than to propound new ones: he is flexible
and undogmatic. More originality is seen when he deals with the education of
young children (Book 1), the proper duties of a teacher (Book 2), and the
merits or utility of individual writers (10.1). And several shorter sections
possess both special interest and novelty, for instance 12. 10.27—37, where he
compares the potentialities of Greek and Latin for a stylist. While his technical
disquisitions are largely (and avowedly) derivative, he draws on his own rich
experience in discussing the actual business of teaching. And he is not averse
from polemic, particularly against faulty method and debased standards.
He consistently adopts a high moral tone, both in his conception of the orator
as necessarily also a good man (1 praef. 9), elaborated in Book iz, and in the
absolute rectitude which he enjoins upon the teacher (2.z.4fT.). It is therefore
curious that he retains no little regard for Domitius Afer (Tac. Ann. 4.52.4,
66.1). He is also uncompromising in his demand that even the most eminent
rhetor should undertake routine teaching (2.3.iff.): only the best, in his opinion,
is good enough. He tried to provide it, and also ventured on some modest
reforms, not apparently with much success, since the whole system of rhetorical
training -was firmly entrenched and parents and pupils alike were intransigent
in their desire to retain it unchanged. More than once he appears to be fighting
for lost causes, mildly liberal.
Quintilian compels admiration, for his seriousness and dedication and for
the sanity and perception of the judgements which he passes on methods of
teaching and (sometimes) on literature. And we may warm to his genial
humanity, even though it does not embrace philosophers. But he has grave
deficiencies. One of them is astonishing: he seems to know little directly of the
major Greek writers. Again, his vision is narrow. If it were not, he would
have perceived that more was required to repair the inadequacies of current
education than tinkering with details and occasional lip-service to wider
culture. And he shows scant historical sense: how, we may ask, could the
paragon who satisfied all Quintilian's requirements and emerged a perfect
orator ever fully benefit from his training in (say) A.D. 90? Tacitus and 'Longinus'
grasped the importance of that question.
Quintilian's style exemplifies many of the virtues which he commends.
He diligently pursues perspicuity, and he avoids archaizing or modernistic
affectations (cf. 8.3.24ft"., 12.10.73). Cicero is his principal model, but he is no
thoughtless imitator. He prefers discourse to harangue, and controls his
rhetoric in places which others would have empurpled. For colour, relief,
and variety he resorts above all to metaphor and simile: he was clearly endowed
with sharp powers of observation. His epigrams are usually neat and unlaboured
and arise naturally from their contexts. Altogether this is a mellow
675
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008