Can we suppose that Juvenal is using a rhetorical theme to write serious political comment in the satire on the vanity of human wishes?
             The way I've interpreted this question is that Juvenal was using Roman rhetorical language and themes that were currently popular, in his works. And that this was strategic in winning over the cases he was making in his satire, just as an orator did in his public speeches. And so I intend to show that Juvenal was writing serious political comment using this rhetorical theme. Firstly, I intend to discuss briefly the nature of Roman rhetorical theme, taking as examples both Quintilian ( first century AD) and Cicero ( first century BC). Then attempt to apply these themes to Juvenal Satire 10, working along the basic structure of the satire, but focusing mainly on the overtly political elements such as specifically the lust for military glory, but also the less obvious examples within themes that would appear non-political. Then reach a conclusion about the seriousness of the satire in this context.
             Both Cicero and Quintilian have defined the structure in which Roman rhetoric was set out. A rhetorical passage always starts with a prooimion (or exordium in Latin). This is intended to make the listeners more favourably inclined towards one particular argument, by posing questions that are impossible for the audience to disagree with, before launching into the actual attack. This stirs up pity and links the authors needs with that of the general audience , making it appear a moral issue that has only one answer, the one suggested in the rest of the work. After the exordium comes the narrative, which can be either wholly for or against a case . This is the section that traditionally was used to incriminate the people involved , by giving accounts of the facts . Using the moral element to expose hidden motives, which is also a main theme of a lot of Juvenals work. The rest of rhetoric is conce...