[c] Marcus Caelius Rufus, in the judgement of Quintilian, was an orator of considerable genius.  In the conduct of a prosecution, he was remarkable for a certain urbanity, that gave a secret charm to his whole speech.  It is to be regretted that he was not a man of better conduct and longer life. Multum ingenii in Caelio, et praecipue in accusando multa urbanitas; dignusque vir, cui et mens melior, et vita longior contigisset. Quint, lib. x. cap. 1.  His letters to Cicero make the eighth book of the Epistolae ad Familiares.  Velleius Paterculus says of him, that his style of eloquence and his cast of mind bore a resemblance to Curio, but raised him above that factious orator.  His genius for mischief and evil deeds was not inferior to Curio, and his motives were strong and urgent, since his fortune was worse than even his frame of mind. Marcus Caelius, vir eloquio animoque Curioni simillimus, sed in utroque perfectior; nec minus ingeniose nequam, cum ne in modica quidem servari posset, quippe pejor illi res familiaris, quam mens. Vell.  Patere. lib. ii. s. 68.

Licinius Macer Calvus, we are told by Seneca, maintained a long but unjust contention with Cicero himself for the palm of eloquence.  He was a warm and vehement accuser, insomuch that Vatinius, though defended by Cicero, interrupted Calvus in the middle of his speech, and said to the judges, “Though this man has a torrent of words, does it follow that I must be condemned?” Calvus diu cum Cicerone iniquissimam litem de principatu eloquentiae habuit; et usque eo violentus accusator et concitatus fuit, ut in media actione ejus surgeret Vatinius reus, et exclamaret, Rogo vos, judices, si iste disertus est, ideo me damnari oportet? Seneca, Controv. lib. iii. cap. 19.  Cicero could not dread him as a rival, and it may therefore be presumed, that he has drawn his character with an impartial hand.  Calvus was an orator more improved by literature than Curio.  He spoke with accuracy, and in his composition shewed great taste and delicacy; but, labouring to refine his language, he was too attentive to little niceties.  He wished to make no bad blood, and he lost the good.  His style was polished with timid caution; but while it pleased the ear of the learned, the spirit evaporated, and of course made no impression in the forum, which is the theatre of eloquence. Ad Calvum revertamur; qui orator fuisset cum literis eruditior quam Curio, tum etiam accuratius quoddam dicendi, et exquisitius afferebat genus; quod quamquam scienter eleganterque tractabat, nimium tamen inquirens in se, atque ipse sese observans, metuensque ne vitiosum colligeret, etiam verum sanguinem deperdebat.  Itaque ejus oratio nimia religione attenuata, doctis et attente audientibus erat illustris, a multitudine autem, et a foro, cui nata eloquentia est, devorabatur. De Claris Orat. s. 288.  Quintilian says, there were, who preferred him to all the orators of his time.  Others were of opinion that, by being too