ABSTRACT
Neither biographical facts nor Ermolao Barbaro's and Pico della Mirandola's cultural formation prior to 1485 can sustain the theses of either Pico despising classical letters and eloquence, or Barbaro despising Aristotle. The cultural context, especially the discovery and study of Ciceronian texts on oratory, and through Cicero to the re-evaluation of Aristotle as an excellent stylist as well as an excellent philosopher, is another compelling reason. If Pico had wished his Scholastic to defend a philosophical prose without style and clarity of expression as a 'genuine' Scholastic might have done, his creation would have been very different. The Scholastic also shows some acquaintance with Cristoforo Landino's commentary on Virgil, but is ignorant of Sts Augustine and Jerome. In Pico's speech on the appropriate style for the philosopher, neither Scholastic obscurity nor an overly elegant style strewn with poetic tropes is appropriate.
