eratque verborum et dilectus elegans et apta et quasi rotunda constructio; cumque argumenta excogitabantur ab eo multa et firma ad probandum tum concinnae acutaeque sententiae; gestusque natura ita venustus ut ars etiam, quae non erat, et e disciplina motus quidam videretur accedere. vereor ne amore videar plura quam fuerint in illo dicere; quod non ita est; alia enim de illo maiora dici possunt. nam nec continentia nec pietate nec ullo genere virtutis quemquam eiusdem aetatis cum illo conferendum puto.

143 + 144 P. ET L. COMINII

About the brothers P. and L. Cominius (RE Cominius 4, 8, 11) and their style of speaking nothing more is known than what emerges from the references to their oratorical appearances (F 1, 3); an extant speech is mentioned by Asconius (F 2). Cicero names the brothers P. and L. Co-

Against C. Aelius Paetus Staienus (F1)

F 1 Cic. Clu. 99–102

quid quod Staienus est condemnatus? non dico hoc tempore, iudices, id quod nescio an dici oporteat, illum maiestatis esse condemnatum; non recito testimonia hominum


143 + 144 P. ET L. COMINII

chosen, his sentences compact and periodic; and the arguments devised by him were varied and strong in order to convince; above all, his ideas shrewd and neatly put; and the movement of his body was so graceful by nature that art and some movement based on training seemed to be there, as well, which was not the case. I am afraid lest out of affection I seem to mention more than there was in him. This is not the case; for other and greater qualities could be mentioned for him. For to be sure, for self-control, for devotion, or indeed for any other kind of virtue I do not think that anyone of the same period could be compared with him.

143 + 144 P. ET L. COMINII

minius (F 1), while Asconius talks of Publius and Gaius Cominius (F 2): one of these references must be a mistake. Unless there is an error in the manuscripts, it is more likely that the contemporary Cicero is correct (Badian 1955, 220).

Against C. Aelius Paetus Staienus (F 1)

Soon after 74 BC, the brothers prosecuted C. Aelius Paetus Staienus (107A) for treason because of his behavior as quaestor in 77 BC (TLRR 159).

F 1 Cicero, Pro Cluentio

What of the fact that Staienus was condemned? I do not mention at this point, judges, what should perhaps be mentioned, that he was condemned for treason. I do not read out the evidence of very trustworthy people that was

DOI: 10.4159/DLCL.fragmentary_republican_latin-oratory.2019