Humanitext Reader

Quintilian · Institutes of Oratory §6.1.12-6.1.21

Tactics and Emotional Appeals of the Accuser in Peroration

Passage 166 of 366 · Latin

Summary

This section discusses the role and tactics of the accuser in the peroration. It details the methods for exciting emotions, the elements that amplify the atrocity of a crime, the technique of anticipating the opponent's arguments, and the qualities that recommend an accused person in danger.

§6.1.12et quae concilient quidem accusatorem, ira praeceptis exordii iam diximus.
And as for the things which may win favor for the accuser, we have already spoken of them in the rules for the exordium.
quaedam tamen, quae illic ostendere sat est, ira peroratione implenda sunt magis, si contra impotentem, invisum, perniciosum suscepta causa est, si iudicibus ipsis aut gloriae damnatio rei aut deformitati futura absolutio.
Yet certain things which it is sufficient there merely to point out must be more fully developed in the peroration, if the cause has been undertaken against an unrestrained, hated, or ruinous person, or if the condemnation of the accused will bring glory, or his acquittal will bring disgrace, to the judges themselves.
§6.1.13nam egregie ira Vatinium Calvus, factum, inquit, ambitum scitis omnes et hoc vos scire omnes sciunt. Cicero quidem ira Verrem etiam emendari posse infamiam iudiciorum damnato reo dicit; quod est unum ex supra dictis.
For Calvus excellently said in his speech against Vatinius: “You all know that bribery was committed, and everyone knows that you know this.” Cicero indeed, in his speech against Verres, says that the infamy of the courts can be corrected if the accused is condemned; which is one of the things mentioned above.
metus etiam, si est adhibendus, ut faciat idem, hunc habet locum fortiorem quam ira prooemio.
Fear also, if it is to be employed to produce the same effect, has a stronger place here than in the introduction.
qua de re quid sentirem, alio iam libro exposui.
On which subject I have already explained what I thought in another book.
§6.1.14concitare quoque invidiam, odium, iram, liberius ira peroratione contingit; quorum invidiam gratia, odium turpitudo, iram offensio iudici facit, si contumax, arrogans, securus sit, quae non ex facto modo dictove aliquo sed vultu, habitu, aspectu moveri solet.
It is also permitted to excite envy, hatred, and anger more freely in the peroration; of which, popularity produces envy, baseness produces hatred, and offense to the judge produces anger, if the accused is obstinate, arrogant, or unconcerned—which is accustomed to be moved not only by some deed or word, but also by expression, posture, and appearance.
egregieque nobis adolescentibus dixisse accusator Cossutiani Capitonis videbatur, Graece quidem, sed ira hunc sensum, erubescis Caesarem timere. §6.1.15summa tamen concitandi adfectus accusatori ira hoc est, ut id, quod obiecit, aut quam atrocissimum aut etiam, si fieri potest, quam maxime miserabile esse videatur.
And the accuser of Cossutianus Capito, when we were young men, seemed to have spoken excellently, in Greek indeed, but to this effect: “Are you ashamed to fear Caesar?” However, the main point for the accuser in exciting feelings lies in this: that the crime which he has charged should seem either as atrocious as possible, or even, if it can be done, as pitiable as possible.
atrocitas crescit ex his, quid factum sit, a quo, ira quem, quo animo, quo tempore, quo loco, quo modo; quae omnia infinitos tractatus habent.
Atrocity grows from these considerations: what was done, by whom, against whom, with what mind, at what time, in what place, in what manner; all of which have infinite treatments.
§6.1.16pulsatum querimur: de re primum ipsa dicendum; tum si senex, si puer, si magistratus, si probus, si bene de re publica meritus; etiam si percussus sit a vili aliquo contemptoque vel ex contrario a potente nimium vel ab eo, quo minime oportuit, et si die forte sollemni aut iis temporibus, cum indicia eius rei maxime exercerentur, aut ira sollicito civitatis statu; item ira theatro, ira templo, ira contione, §6.1.17crescit invidia; et si non errore nec ira vel etiam, si forte ira, sed iniqua, quod patri adfuisset, quod respondisset, quod honores contra peteret, et si plus etiam videri potest voluisse quam fecit.
We complain of a battery: we must first speak of the thing itself; then if the victim was an old man, a boy, a magistrate, an upright man, or one who has deserved well of the state; also if he was struck by someone vile and contemptible, or on the contrary, by one who is too powerful, or by one from whom it was least fitting; and if perhaps on a solemn day, or at those times when trials for that crime were being especially carried on, or in an anxious state of the commonwealth; likewise in a theater, in a temple, or in a public assembly, the indignation increases; and if it was not by mistake nor by anger, or even, if by chance by anger, yet an unjust one, because he had assisted his father, because he had answered back, because he was seeking offices against him, and if he can be seen to have wished to do even more than he did.
plurimum tamen adfert atrocitatis modus, si graviter, si contumeliose: ut Demosthenes ex parte percussi corporis, ex vultu ferientis, ex habitu invidiam Midiae quaerit.
Yet the manner brings the greatest atrocity, if it was done severely, if insultingly: as Demosthenes seeks to excite indignation against Midias from the part of the body struck, from the look of the striker, and from his posture.
§6.1.18occisus utrum ferro an igne an veneno, uno vulnere an pluribus, subito an exspectatione tortus, ad hanc partem maxime pertinet.
Whether a man was killed by the sword, by fire, or by poison, by one wound or by many, suddenly or tortured by anticipation, belongs especially to this part.
utitur frequenter accusator et miseratione, cum aut eius casum, quem ulciscitur, aut liberorum ac parentium solitudinem conqueritur.
The accuser also frequently employs pity, when he laments either the misfortune of him whom he is avenging, or the bereavement of his children and parents.
§6.1.19etiam futuri temporis imagine iudices movet, quae maneant eos, qui de vi et iniuria questi sunt, nisi vindicentur; fugiendum de civitate, cedendum bonis aut omnia, quaecunque inimicus fecerit, perterenda.
He also moves the judges with a picture of the future, showing what things await those who have complained of violence and injustice unless they are avenged: that they must flee from the city, surrender their property, or endure all things, whatever their enemy shall do.
§6.1.20sed saepius id est accusatoris, avertere iudicem a miseratione, qua reus sit usurus, atque ad fortiter iudicandum concitare.
But more often it is the part of the accuser to turn the judge away from the pity which the accused is going to employ, and to excite him to judge courageously.
cuius loci est etiam occupare, quae dicturum facturumve adversarium putes.
To which place it also belongs to anticipate what you think your adversary will say or do.
nam et cautiores ad custodiam suae religionis iudices facit et gratiam responsuris aufert, cum ea quae dicta sunt ab accusatore iam, si pro reo repetentur, non sint nova: ut Servium Sulpicium Messala contra Aufidiam, ne signatorum, ne ipsius discrimen obiiciatur sibi, praemonet.
For it both makes the judges more cautious in guarding their oath and deprives those who are about to reply of favor, since the things already said by the accuser, if they are repeated on behalf of the accused, will not be new: as Messala warns Servius Sulpicius, in the speech against Aufidia, lest the danger of the signers or of himself should be objected to him.
nec non ab Aeschine, quali sit usurus Demosthenes actione, praedictum est.
And likewise it was predicted by Aeschines what kind of pleading Demosthenes would use.
docendi quoque interim iudices, quid rogantibus respondere debeant; quod est unum repetitionis genus.
The judges are also sometimes to be taught what they ought to answer to those who ask them; which is one kind of repetition.
§6.1.21periclitantem vero commendat dignitas et studia fortia et susceptae bello cicatrices et nobilitas et merita maiorum.
But the person in danger is recommended by his dignity, his brave pursuits, the scars received in war, his nobility, and the merits of his ancestors.
hoc, quod proxime dixi, Cicero atque Asinius certatim sunt usi, pro Scauro patre hic ille pro filio.
This which I have just said, Cicero and Asinius used in rivalry, the latter on behalf of Scaurus the father, the former on behalf of the son.

Notes

  1. 6.1.12aut gloriae ¦p.v4-6 p.390¦ damnatio rei aut deformitati futura absolutio — Double dative construction. 'gloriae' and 'deformitati' are datives of purpose/effect, while 'iudicibus ipsis' is the dative of reference/possessor. The future participle 'futura' (agreeing with 'absolutio', with ellipsis for 'damnatio') has the copula verb (such as 'sit') omitted.
  2. 6.1.13factum, inquit, ambitum scitis omnes et hoc vos scire omnes sciunt — A double accusative with infinitive (A.C.I.) construction in a direct quotation from Calvus. 'factum [esse] ambitum' is the object of 'scitis', and in the second part, 'vos scire' is the A.C.I. clause serving as the object of 'omnes sciunt', with 'hoc' as the object of 'scire'.
  3. 6.1.14quorum invidiam gratia, odium turpitudo, iram offensio iudici facit — A clause introduced by the genitive relative pronoun 'quorum' (referring back to 'invidiam, odium, iram'). The verb 'facit' agrees with 'offensio' but also functions as the predicate for 'gratia' and 'turpitudo' (zeugma). The word order is a parallel of 'object (genitive + accusative) + subject', which heightens the contrast.
  4. 6.1.17et si non errore nec ira vel etiam, si forte ira, sed iniqua — Parallelism of ablatives of manner/cause ('errore', 'ira'). The word 'ira' here is the ablative of the noun 'ira' (anger), not a corruption of the preposition 'in' as seen elsewhere. In the latter part 'si forte ira, sed iniqua', a verb or participle (such as 'factum sit') is omitted, meaning 'if by chance by anger, yet an unjust one.'
  5. 6.1.20Servium Sulpicium Messala contra Aufidiam, ne signatorum, ne ipsius discrimen obiiciatur sibi, praemonet — The subject is 'Messala' (proper noun in the nominative) and the object is 'Servium Sulpicium' (proper noun in the accusative). 'contra Aufidiam' means 'in the speech against Aufidia,' and the 'ne' clause is a subordinate clause showing the content of the warning ('praemonet'). 'sibi' refers back to the main subject 'Messala'.

Cite this passage

Quintilian, Institutes of Oratory §6.1.12-6.1.21. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi1002.phi001.humanitext-lat2:6.1.12-6.1.21

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.