ABSTRACT
In their recent and authoritative commentary on De oratore, Leeman and Pinkster propose that book 1 is a disputatio in utramque partem which discloses a skeptical suspension of judgment by Cicero regarding the main positions represented in the book.1 Thus, within their view, when Crassus’ position that the orator must know all important matters and arts is challenged by Antonius, who says the orator has no time and no need to acquire such knowledge, this is Cicero’s device for showing that both accounts are probable and neither may be chosen with any certainty.2
