368 . Harry M. Hnhhell, Ph.D., 



years ago by Olivier in his dissertation De Critolao Peripatetico, 

 and more systematically by Radermacher in the preface to Sud- 

 haus' Supplementum Philodemi. My excuse for a renewal of 

 the discussion must be found in the fact that Radermacher did 

 not take into account the notices in Cicero, and was thus led to 

 assign to Critolavis a share in the debate which is larger than he 

 seems to deserve. It is with the idea, therefore, of supplement- 

 ing the work of Radermacher rather than of joining issue with 

 him on his main thesis that I present the following pages. A 

 comparison of the arguments used by our four authorities will 

 reveal that they drew from common sources, some of which 

 can be identified, but most of which must be classed as part of a 

 store of commonplaces which were familiar to all educated people. 

 So well known was the general form of argument employed that 

 as Radermacher acutely observed, Lucian could base one of his 

 richest parodies — Tltpl irapaacTov — on the old lines of the discus- 

 sion whether rhetoric was an art. 



At first sight the discussion appears more than unusually 

 futile. Of what account was it whether rhetoric was re'^vr; 

 or TpL^y? But the question was evidently felt to be of vital 

 importance, and we may not be far from wrong in assuming that 

 the bread and butter of many a philosopher and rhetorician was 

 at stake. So long as the rhetorician was a mere declaimer. there 

 was little danger that he would attract any considerable portion 

 of the student class. But the rejuvenated rhetoric of the last 

 days of the Roman republic claimed to be a complete education 

 in itself, supplanting philosophy, or at least reducing phi- 

 losophy to the position of a handmaid of rhetoric. To combat 

 the new rival philosophy put forth its utmost strength. The 

 question of "art" was of vital importance, for it was assumed 

 that only "arts" can be taught ; once it was proven that rhetoric 

 was not an art. it followed that the rhetoricians had nothing to 

 offer the prospective student. The situation oft'ers some parallels 

 to certain educational questions much debated a few years ago. 

 and still, I believe, not entirely settled. It was once the fashion 

 to claim that certain studies offered exceptional "mental disci- 

 pline," or general training of the mind. Investigations in 

 psychology have tended to show that there is no "general" 

 discipline, but only special disciplines. Mathematics, for example, 

 does not increase the ability to study law, but only improves the 



