Quintiliano - Quintiliani Declamationes - 1665

Declamationes cum Variorum Notis (M. Fab. Quintiliani Declamationes Undeviginti. M. Fabii Avi et Calpurnii Flacci Declamationes. Auctoris Incerti Dialogus De causis Corruptae Eloquentiae. Cum Variorum Notis) (and below is reported Tome II - perhaps a printing error).
Subtitle [with:] Institutiones Oratoriae (M. Fabii Quintiliani Institutionum Oratoriarum. Libri Duodecim. Summa diligentia ad fidem vetustissimorum codicum regogniti ac restituti. Accesserunt huic renovatae editioni. Declamationes, quae tam ex P. Pithoei, J. C. Clarissimi, quam aliorum Bibliothecis & editionibus colligi potuerunt. Cum Turnebi, Camerarii, Parei, Gronovii, & Aliorum Notis. Cum Indice locupletissimo, tam in Textum, quam Notas).

Two volumes in two large 8vo volumes (cm 12.5 x 20.5). Leiden and Rotterdam, Ex Officina Hackiana, 1665. First volume, the “Declamationes”: antip. finely engraved by p. p. (“R. a Perlyn fe”.), frontispiece with typographic mark featuring an eagle and motto “Movendo”, pp. 784 + 7 (Index) + 1 c. b.; Second volume, the “Institutiones Oratoriae”: antip. finely engraved by p. p., frontispiece with typographic mark of an eagle and motto “Movendo”, pp. (28) with Preface by Angelo Poliziano and Dedication Epistle to D. Petro Castellano, 916 + 30 (Index) + 2 c. b. Both volumes have antique bindings in full stiff parchment with title and volume number ms. on the spine. An ordinary and physiological yellowing to the pages but copies in solid binding, printed on good paper and with a good impression. It should be noted that tradition attributes to Quintilian two collections of “Declamationes” (the 19 Maiores, of certain authorship to the Author, well developed, whose themes are elaborated in full, and here contained in volume I together with the uncertain dialogue “De Causis Corruptae Eloquentiae”; and the 338 Minores, of which only 145 survive to us, often in draft form, and here contained in the second volume together with the “Institutio Oratoria”); of these only some could go back to Quintilian, while the others, especially the numerous “Minors,” were certainly the work of a school, probably Quintilian’s own school (there is talk of “Declamationes pseudo-quintilianee”). Here we therefore present two sixteenths related to the greatest treatise on rhetoric of ancient Rome, the “Institutio Oratoria,” to what could be reconstructed, the “De causis corruptae Eloquentiae,” and to what remains of Quintilian’s other works, the “Declamationes.” Marcus Fabio Quintiliano (30–40 AD) was a master of rhetoric and had among his pupils Pliny the Younger. The exact date of Quintilian’s death is unknown, but it is presumed not long after the end of the Flavian era. After twenty years of teaching he decided to abandon the post and devoted himself to composing a dialogue in which he expounded his position on the growing corruption of the art of eloquence. Quintilian wrote first the treatise “De causis corruptae eloquentiae” and then the “Institutio oratoria.” The “De causis corruptae eloquentiae” remains lost, and we could not attempt to reconstruct its content except for the line of thought that the author expresses in his greater work, the “Institutio oratoria.” In the course of the 1st century AD, the problem of the “great oratory,” which had made the Roman Senate’s Hall famous in Cicero’s time, had become only a memory of the past. The positions of Latin writers on the reasons for the decline of eloquence pointed to two basic motivations: on one hand the schools, which had lost their ability to teach due to a lack of suitable teachers; consequently the qualitative level they had guaranteed had become so low that the young were no longer prepared as in the past and thus could no longer compete with the models of the great masters of the past. On the other hand, the political context had changed: in Cicero’s time important decisions were taken by the Senate after an assembly discussion, where everyone had to argue their position against opponents. Instead, in the present, republican freedoms had disappeared and all major decisions were taken by the emperor and his court; consequently the very need for good orators had vanished. The first line of thought can be traced precisely to Quintilian, who was chosen by the Flavians to undertake what today one might define as a radical reform of the state school (school system, curricula, teaching, pedagogical lines), and this is precisely evidenced by the “Institutio oratoria.” The second line, however, is associated with Tacitus and is evidenced by his “Dialogus de Oratoribus.” The “Institutio oratoria” was composed between about 90 and 96 AD and is a treatise divided into twelve books dedicated to Vitellius Marcus, a famous figure at the court of Domitian. The treatise brings together the fruits of Quintilian’s teaching experience but also his doctrine, in line with Cicero’s thought regarding rhetoric as a science that must educate the citizen and the morally exemplary man. Cicero represents for Quintilian the culmination and model of Roman oratory, and Quintilian expounds the “great oratory” of the Roman Senate’s Hall, now forgotten. In it, the author cites Greek and Latin sources, discusses predecessors’ positions with calm and balanced judgment, clarifies the problems, and develops the discussion in a discursive tone. In this sense the “Institutio oratoria” can be regarded as a summa of ancient rhetoric, precisely because it can be read as a collection of materials that preserved the acquisitions of the science and technique of communication and persuasion, carrying with it clear implications regarding the historical-cultural conditions in which it is situated, in particular with respect to two problems: the changed function of the orator in civil society and new stylistic trends. And here both problems can be traced back to the corruption of eloquence and thus to its decline, with causes in technical and moral factors. Christian Matthias Theodor Mommsen (Garding, 1817 - Charlottenburg, 1903), German historian, numismatist, jurist, epigraphist and philologist, generally considered the greatest classicist of the 19th century, wrote about the work: “It is one of the most excellent works we possess of ancient Roman literature, inspired by good taste and sound judgment, simple in its sense and composition, instructive without pedantry, engaging without the need for personal effort, in contrast deliberately with the empty and mannered literature of the time.”