and forced the publication of his professor's lectures. Aristotle's
philosophy of rhetoric, Cicero's charming dialog on his profession,
Quintilian's treatise on the teaching of rhetoric--none of these is a
text-book. The rhetoric _Ad Herennium_ is. It is clear and orderly in its
organization. It defines all the technical terms which it uses, and
illustrates its principles. As one might expect, it delights in
over-analysis, in categories and sub-categories, the four kinds of causes,
the three virtues of the _narratio_. In the hands of a skilled teacher of
composition, however, and with much class-room practice, it undoubtedly
would get rhetoric taught more effectively than would more philosophical
or literary treatises. Thus in Guarino's school at Ferrara (1429-1460) the
_Ad Herennium_ was regarded as the quintessence of pure Ciceronian
doctrine of oratory, and was made the starting point and standing
authority in teaching rhetoric. In more advanced classes it was
supplemented by the _De oratore, Orator_, and what was known of
Quintilian.[157] The _Ciceronianus_ of Erasmus testifies that by the next
century the scholarship of the renaissance had discovered that the _Ad
Herennium_ was not from the pen of Cicero, and that the _De inventione_
was considered apologetically by its famous author, who wrote his _De
oratore_ to supersede the more youthful treatise.[158] But six years after
the publication of the _Ciceronianus_ of Erasmus, the edition of Cicero's
_Opera_ published in Basel in 1534 still incorporates the _Ad Herennium_,
and Thomas Wilson in England owes most of his first book and part of the
second of his _Arte of Rhetorique_ to its anonymous author, whom he
believed to be Cicero. For instance in his section on _Devision_ as a part
of a speech, Wilson says, "Tullie would not have a devision to be made,
of, or above three partes at the moste, nor lesse then three neither, if
neede so required."[159]

"Tullie" says no such thing. Indeed, Cicero never considers _divisio_ as