Laura Kladky

Rhetorical Education

March 18, 2015

Paper Proposal

Working Title: The Lion Plays Fox: Quintilian’s Vir Bonus and Machiavellian’s Principe nuovo

My intention with this paper is to explore the links between Quintilian and Machiavelli in

their participation in the educational tradition, viewing The Prince as ‘rhetorical education for

princes.’ Some particular points of connection that I intend to investigate include the motif of

‘the lion and the fox’ from Cicero, which Machiavelli explicitly references, in addition to a

number of other explicit references to rhetorical education texts. This highlights the contrast

made between rightness, or truth, the latter of which is first if not foremost in the list of the

components of virtue in Cicero’s De Officiis, and expediency, or deception. The question of

whether the two are separable, and if so, what the balance between them is to be, is one of if not

the central question for princely education.

Other topics I intend to investigate are the differences in perspective on dissimulation and

‘being vs. seeming’ between Cicero and his discipline Quintilian, particularly in the question of

inconsistencies in Cicero’s own exposition of this distinction. These inconsistencies can be

viewed as gaps Quintilian addresses and answers in his own Institutio Oratoria, points of

weakness that Quintilian enlarges rather than fixes. Can seeming to be something train you to

actually be it? This is a question consciously or unconsciously raised in all texts aimed at training

Elizabeth Britt� 3/25/15 9:02 AMComment [1]: Given  the  title  and  your  first  sentence  (and  what  I  know  of  your  project),  I  expected  you  to  discuss  Quintilian  rather  than  Cicero  here.    

Elizabeth Britt� 3/25/15 9:07 AMComment [2]: Cicero  looms  large  in  this  sentence,  too.  I  need  more  explanation  about  how  you’ll  be  using  Cicero  vs.  Quintilian.  Machiavelli  seems  to  get  short  shrift  in  this  triangle.    

leaders or those intended for the public eye, and most poignantly in sections that treat self-

presentation and self-representation.

My primary texts will be Machiavelli and Quintilian, with Cicero as the major secondary

counterpoint. I will also treat other ‘mirror of princes’ texts, but only to the extent that their

passages are addressed or imitated in The Prince, or they explicitly address the right vs.

expedient issue. In order to undertake this sweeping a project, I will consult and review criticism

on Quintilian and Machiavelli as understood today, a discussion which picked up in the field of

rhetorical education in the 90’s and continued today.

My approach and methodology will begin with an overview of these critical

understandings of Machiavelli’s connections with both Quintilian and Cicero to date,

connections which have included the common concerns of consilium, decorum, kairos,

hyperbole, definitions and genera, to which I add deception/lying, ‘seeming’ vs. being, and

hypocrisy. Outlining the specific role of deception as a feature of expediency will be undertaken

through an exploration of the role of truthfulness in virtue. I will largely make this point by close

reading the relevant passages in Cicero, Quintilian, and Machiavelli.

My methodology will continue with a series of exploratory and comparative close

readings of similar and imitative passages in the works of the latter two. I will draw upon these

close readings in order to reach a final verdict upon the extent to which Quintilian diverges from

Cicero and anticipates Machiavelli. I believe this will highlight contradictions in the vir bonus

figure, as well as inherent, inevitable differences in the virtue that must be taught to the

commoner as opposed to the elite man or princely figure.

So far, I have completed reading these sources, as well as gathered citations. Specific

points I have focused on include the question of promises made and exceptions to them, one of

Elizabeth Britt� 3/25/15 9:08 AMComment [3]: Which  texts?  The  Prince  and  Institutio  Oratoria?  

Elizabeth Britt� 3/25/15 9:09 AMComment [4]: This  strategy  seems  like  a  good  way  to  limit  your  engagement  with  this  genre.  

Elizabeth Britt� 3/25/15 9:11 AMComment [5]: My  fault  for  neglecting  to  ask  for  a  list  of  sources,  but  I’d  like  to  see  who  you  mean  here.  Do  you  intend  to  use  other  sources  besides  the  ones  listed  on  your  workshop  handout?  Those  seemed  like  a  good  starting  point.  

Elizabeth Britt� 3/25/15 9:12 AMComment [6]: Does  this  mean  that  none  of  the  other  sources  have  discussed  these  concepts?  If  not,  this  is  your  opportunity  to  contribute  to  the  conversation.  

Elizabeth Britt� 3/25/15 9:11 AMComment [7]: Interesting  that  Cicero  comes  first  here!  

Elizabeth Britt� 3/25/15 9:13 AMComment [8]: Do  you  imagine  these  readings  constituting  the  bulk  of  the  essay?  

Elizabeth Britt� 3/25/15 9:14 AMComment [9]: This  statement  seems  to  bring  Cicero  fully  into  the  picture  in  a  way  that  the  title  of  your  proposal  (and  its  first  sentence)  do  not.    

Elizabeth Britt� 3/25/15 9:15 AMComment [10]: A  very  interesting  point.  Elizabeth Britt� 3/25/15 9:16 AMComment [11]: The  ones  listed  on  the  workshop  handout?  Or  the  primary  sources?  

the major points of weakness in Cicero’s moral prescriptions, alongside the question of those it is

permissible to wrong and deceive. Also of interest is the gray area of questions of adaptation to

the person and occasion, in which Machiavelli takes recourse to Quintilian himself. I have also

done a full literature review of contemporary rhetorical education criticism that concerns itself

with Machiavelli. I have identified referential passages in The Prince and worked upon forming

a more conceptually informed understanding of right vs. expedient as well as virtue in the

classical ‘moment.’

Ultimately, my question will be how much Quintilian anticipates Machiavelli, as well as

how much the rhetorical education of any prince or leader must consist in teaching them how to

seem, as opposed to how to simply be. Is princely rhetorical education the training of a lion, or a

fox?

Laurie,    I’m  very  happy  to  hear  about  the  amount  of  reading  that  you’ve  already  done  for  this  project.  I’m  also  glad  that  you’ve  narrowed  the  scope  from  what  you  originally  imagined.  As  described  in  this  proposal,  however,  the  project  is  a  bit  unclear  to  me.  At  the  beginning  and  end,  the  project  seems  to  focus  on  Quintilian,  but  in  the  middle,  it  seems  to  focus  on  Cicero.  Throughout,  Machiavelli  seems  shunted  a  bit  to  the  side.  So  one  of  the  things  you’ll  need  to  determine  is  which  theorists  you’re  focusing  on  and  for  what  purpose.  If  it’s  Machiavelli  and  Quintilian,  think  about  the  role  that  Cicero  needs  to  play  in  that  exploration  and  limit  yourself  to  that  (much  as  you’re  doing  with  the  “mirror  of  princes”  genre).  If  you’re  more  interested  in  the  three  as  a  triangle,  then  you’ll  probably  want  to  limit  the  concepts  that  you  work  with  (so  that  you  don’t  end  up  with  a  dissertation!).    I  look  forward  to  seeing  where  you  go  next.  It’s  a  great  project.    Beth    Grade:  B+  

Elizabeth Britt� 3/25/15 9:18 AMComment [12]: Does  this  include  sources  not  on  the  workshop  handout?  

Elizabeth Britt� 3/25/15 9:22 AMComment [13]: This  statement  returns  you  to  the  original  title  and  opening  statement  (by  omitting  Cicero).      

Elizabeth Britt� 3/25/15 9:27 AMComment [14]: This  question  seems  to  imply  more  of  a  focus  on  Machiavelli  than  the  rest  of  the  proposal  indicates.