Cambridge Ancient Hi.. - Index of

860 29. education in the roman empire
read as many as fifty. 23 These figures are likely to be as true of late antiquity
as they were of the Middle Ages.
The teaching of rhetoric in antiquity comprised three distinct stages,
which might of course overlap in practice. The pupil began by studying and
probably learning by heart a series of short model texts, each illustrating a
particular rhetorical genre. These would be explained and commented on
by the teacher. Several collections of such preliminary exercises or progymnasmata
were made in the Greek world, of which the earliest still surviving
is that of Aelius Theon of Alexandria (first/second century a.d.). No such
collection survives in Latin, but the resemblances in content and arrangement
between Quintilian’s precepts and Theon’s practice bear witness to a
common pedagogical tradition, doubtless of Greek origin. The next stage
was the study of a theoretical handbook of rhetoric, often structured on
the model of a Hellenistic technē. Finally the student was required to
compose and deliver speeches, both on general moral or political topics
and in imaginary legal disputes. Side by side with these three stages went
the reading of a selection of speeches by classical writers – Demosthenes,
above all, in Greek, Cicero in Latin.
Unlike the grammarian, however, the rhetorician had another role
besides teaching. He was expected to give displays of his art in theatres and
other public places. These might be merely exhibitions of a virtuosity
which was much appreciated by those who had enjoyed a rhetorical education
and often admired by those who had not. But he might also be called
upon to be the spokesman of his city, delivering epithalamia or funeral orations
for local notables, addresses of welcome to high officials, panegyrics
on emperors, requests for subventions or privileges, or pleas for clemency.
As Choricius observed in his funeral oration for Procopius of Gaza, delivered
some time between 530 and 540: ‘There are two tests of the excellence
of a rhetorician, astounding his audience in the theatre by the wisdom and
beauty of his words, and initiating the young in the mysteries of the
ancients . . . In his lectures to the young he never let pass a word that was
not Attic, nor a thought that was not relevant to his purpose, nor a syllable
which spoilt the rhythm of his speech, nor a sentence whose construction
failed to please the ear . . . When he came to deliver his own compositions
in the theatre – something which he often did in order to kindle in the
young a love of eloquence – he astonished every learned ear and charmed
all the bystanders.’ 24 This public role explains both the close relations which
often prevailed between the rhetorician and the governing élite of his city,
and the self-complacent aggrandizement of themselves and their craft so
characteristic of rhetoricians. A good example of this is to be found in the
opening paragraph of John Doxapatres’ introductory lecture on the
23 Michael of Ephesus, CAG 20.613 lines 4–7. 24 Choricius, Oratio Funebris in Procopium 7–9.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008