Invention and method: two rhetorical treatises from the Hermogenic corpus 9781589831216

Table of contents :
Frontmatter
Index of Short Titles Used in the Notes (page ix)
Note on the Greek Text (page xii)
On Invention: Introduction (page xiii)
On Invention: Text and Translation (page 3)
Book 1. Prooemia (page 3)
1. On Prooemia from Hypolepsis (Suppositions) (page 5)
2. On Prooemia from Hypodiaeresis (Subordination) (page 17)
3. On Prooemia from Periousia (Superfluity) (page 21)
4. On Prooemia from Kairos (Occasion) (page 23)
5. On All Prooemia, and Of How Many Parts They Are Composed (page 25)
Book 2: Diegesis (Narration or Statement of Facts) (page 31)
1. On Katastasis or Diegesis (page 35)
2. On Emigrations and Invention in Declamation about Them (page 35)
3. On Proposals about Laws (page 39)
4. On War and Peace (page 43)
5. On Impiety or Homicide (page 47)
6. On Wrongs to the State (page 49)
7. On Diegesis (page 51)
Book 3: Kataskeuē (Confirmation or Proof) (page 61)
1. Prooemion (page 63)
2. On Prokataskeuē (page 63)
3. On Headings (page 73)
4. On Enstasis and Antiparastasis (page 79)
5. On Biaion (page 83)
6. On Epikheiremes (page 85)
7. On Ergasia of Epikheiremes (page 99)
8. On Enthymeme (page 101)
9. (page 103)
10. On Ap' Arkēs Akhri Telous (page 107)
11. (page 115)
12. (page 119)
13. On the Arrangement of Epikheiremes (page 121)
14. On Definition (page 123)
15. On Diaskeuē (page 127)
Book 4 (page 137)
[Features of Prose Style]
1. On Figures of Speech (page 139)
2. On Antitheton (page 141)
3. On Period (page 147)
4. On Pneuma (page 155)
5. On Tasis (page 169)
6. On Dilemmaton (page 169)
7. On Parekhesis (page 173)
8. On Kyklos (page 173)
9. On Epiphonema (page 175)
10. On Trope (page 179)
11. On Solemn Language (page 181)
12. On Kakozelon (page 183)
[Declamation Problems]
13. On Figured Problems (page 187)
14. On Comparative Problems (page 197)
On Method of Forceful Speaking: Text and Translation (page 201)
Introduction (page 201)
1. (On different Possible Meanings of a Word) (page 205)
2. On All (Unfamiliar) Diction (page 205)
3. On Mistakes in Word Usage (page 207)
4. When To Use the Same and When To Use Varied Words (page 207)
5. On Abundance (page 211)
6. (page 213)
7. On Paraleipsis and Aposiopesis (page 213)
8. On Circumlocution (page 215)
9. On Epanalepsis (page 219)
10. On the Figure of Interrogation (page 221)
11. On Asyndeton (page 223)
12. On Preliminary Headings and Recapitulation (page 225)
13. On Equal Figures (page 225)
14. On Hyperbaton (page 227)
15. On Antitheton (page 231)
16. On Parison and How it Occurs (page 231)
17. On Pretence (of Extemporaneity) (page 233)
18. On Amplification: When Can It Be Opportunely Used in Trials? (page 235)
19. On a Patent Lie: When Ought One to Use It? (page 237)
20. On Oath: What Is Not Sworn and What Is Sworn (page 237)
21. On Advocates: To Whom Should They Be Given? (page 239)
22. On Successfully Accomplishing Opposites by Saying Opposites (page 239)
23. On Forestalling the Claims of the Opposition (page 241)
24. On Escaping Notice While Repeating What You or Others Have Said (page 243)
25. On Praising Oneself without Offense (page 245)
26. On Tricks Devised by Demosthenes in the Lawcourts (page 247)
27. On Second Speeches: Why a Case Is Divided an How This Is Done (page 249)
28. On Narration (page 251)
29. On Commonplace Thoughts: How We Shall Make Them Our Own When Speaking (page 251)
30. On Use of Verses in Prose (page 253)
31. On Powerful Emotions among the Hearers (page 255)
32. On Admitted Wrongdoing (page 257)
33. On Speaking in Tragic Style (page 257)
34. On Speaking in Comic Style (page 259)
35. On Amphiboly (page 261)
36. On Elaboration of Public Speaking, Dialogue, Comedy, Tragedy, and Socratic Symposia (page 263)
37. On Negation (page 265)
Glossary and Index of Technical Terms (page 269)

Citation preview

Invention and Method

Society of Biblical Literature

Writings from the Greco-Roman World John T. Fitzgerald, General Editor

Editorial Board David Armstrong

Elizabeth Asmis | Brian E. Daley, SJ.

David G. Hunter David Konstan Margaret M. Mitchell Michael J. Roberts Johan C. Thom James C. VanderKam

Number 15 Invention and Method

Volume Editor Cecil W. Wooten

Invention and Method Two Rhetorical Treatises from the Hermogenic Corpus The Greek Text, Edited by Hugo Rabe, Translated with Introductions and Notes by

George A. Kennedy

Society of Biblical Literature Atlanta

INVENTION AND METHOD Copyright © 2005, by the Society of Biblical Literature. All rights reserved.

No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by means of any information storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permitted by the 1976 Copyright Act or in writing from the publisher. Requests for permission should be addressed in writing to the Rights and Permissions Department, Society of Biblical Literature, 825 Houston Mill Road,

Suite 350, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA. |

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Hermogenes, 2nd cent. [Selections. English & Greek. 2005] Invention and method in Greek rhetorical theory : two rhetorical treatises from the Hermogenic corpus / the Greek text, edited by Hugo Rabe, with introductions, English translations, and notes by George A. Kennedy. p. cm. — (Writings from the Greco-Roman world ; v. 15) Contains the Greek texts and English translations of two treatises, On invention, and On the method of forcefulness, once attributed to Hermogenes of ‘Tarsus, but now believed to be by unknown authors. The Greek texts are from Hermogenes, edited by Hugo Rabe, published in 1913 by B.G. Teubneri. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-13: 978-1-58983-121-6 (alk. paper) ISBN-10: 1-58983-121-7 (alk. paper) 1. Hermogenes, 2nd cent. — Translations into English. 2. Rhetoric— Early works to 1800. I. Kennedy, George Alexander, 1928— I]. Rabe, Hugo. III. Title. TV. Series.

808—dc22 2005013283

PA3998.H8Es5 2005b |

05 0607 08 0g IOI! 12—-5 4321 Printed in the United States of America on acid-free, recycled paper conforming to ANSI/NISO Z39.48-19g2 (R1997) and ISO 9706:1994 standards for paper permanence.

Table of Contents Index of Short Titles Used in the Notes iX

Note on the Greek Text Xl

On Invention: Introduction Xi

On Invention: Text and Translation 3

Book 1: Prooemia 3

1. On Prooemia from Hypolepsis (Suppositions) 5

2. On Prooemia from Hypodiaeresis (Subordination) 17

3. On Prooemia from Periousia (Superfluity) 21

4. On Prooemia from Kairos (Occasion) 23.

Are Composed 25 Book 2: Diegesis (Narration or Statement of Facts) 31 5. On All Prooemia, and Of How Many Parts They

1. On Katastasis or Diegesis 35

about Them 35 3. On Proposals about Laws 39 2. On Emigrations and Invention in Declamation

4. On War and Peace 43 5. On Impiety or Homicide 47

6. On Wrongs to the State 49

7. On Diegesis 51 Book 3: Kataskeué (Confirmation or Proof) 61 1. Prooemion 63 | 2. On Prokataskeué 63 4. On Headings 73 6. On Enstasis and Antiparastasis 79

3. On Biaion 83 5. On Epikheiremes 85

7. On Ergasia of Epikheiremes 99

8. On Enthymeme IOI 9. 103

1o. On Ap’ Arkés Akhri Telous 107

11. I15

v1 HERMOGENES: OPERA | 12. 119

13. On the Arrangement of Epikheiremes I21

14. On Definition 123 15. On Diaskeué 127

Book 4 137 | Features of Prose Style]

1. On Figures of Speech 139

2. On Antitheton I4I 3. On Period 147

4. On Pneuma 155 5. On Tasis 169 6. On Dilemmaton 169 7. On Parekhesis 173 8. On Kyklos 173 9. On Epiphonema 175

10. On Trope 179 11. On Solemn Language 181 12. On Kakozelon 183

[Declamation Problems]

13. On Figured Problems 187 14. On Comparative Problems 197

Introduction 201

On Method of Forceful Speaking: Text and Translation 201

1. (On Different Possible Meanings of a Word) 205

2. On All (Unfamiliar) Diction 205 3. On Mistakes in Word Usage 207

Varied Words 207 5. On Abundance 211

4. When To Use the Same and When To Use

Rash ‘Thoughts> 213 7. On Paraleipsis and Aposiopesis 213 6. ld > 4 \ ~ ¢ /

ai 0& GnoddcEtc MaYtOs MEOOLMIOV ai aEiMoEts Eloy. AN0 O€ THY EvOE- 1 cEwY ai moO0TAGELS yivortaL, xal MOOOLMioV OoLUOTNS MOEdCTACLC.

“héfic toentéov et tod xatyydoove xal Tiva ToedMOY a0 TOUTWY evolcxetal TA MOO0iwa’ of yao xatyyogobrtéc tivo bnoAnpes Exovot

/ nN 9 bal f \ A ce f + 2 /

ow ? f ‘ ‘\ 4 ¢ ~ \

tohhanic éyBoas 7 pidvov. tov pév ody g~Odvor, et tic Euqaivolto 5 t@ mo0PAjuatt, dtaxgovodueda’ dEwvov yao Paoxaviay bduodoyely nat éxipbovoy det. éuqaiveta: 0& modddutc, Stay 7 O0En Bacxaivwper 7 rhott@, oiov nocoPpedbwv Aioxyivys naga tov Dihinnoy étoaydoros, vE[96] vixnxev, éotepdvwtat, xal xoivetat maganoeaPEtacs 620 Anpoladévove 6o0G> éoci tO noo0imory «undsic bur, © Grvdoec “ADyvaiot, vouion 10 Bacxaivorvtd we tod oteg~avov nai the vixno Aioyivyn thy xatyyogiay évotynoaciat xat’ abtod». 7} ntAovtw, olov Anoxnovxtos FTHoE TOY natéoa toopac, 6 dé abt@ Eivos édwxer, EutoVopoonoer, Exavijxe mhovotos, 6 Natio dEdmEvos Toomey noooHAVe TH adi, 6 Oé abt tO avto Eipos édwxev, améxtewev Eavtoy 6 MATHO, wal xoivetat 6 Malic aitiag 15

, ¥ 4 > l4 A § id 2 4

> ow 2 nd ‘ / ‘ ¢ fw cs bl 4 > ~ ld

/ / et \ > ow / Le) ] yi / 2 w A 7

Davatov: brett mAobtov tig MOdgacic, xadov ody dtaxoovoacar xat hévew 6tt «ob tho MEQiovaiacs ai’tm Paoxaivwy tov aydva éveotyod-

ny».

1 etotvsuppl.m.2 Vc || 4 edetoxovtar Ac | yaoom. Vc Ba || 6 dStaxpovoaye0a Ve Ac || 7-8 4 mAobtTW OM. Vn || 8 Sd6Ey ante ofov supr. Vg

|| 11 thyom. Ve || 12 rAodtov V(wm. po. Ba) || 13 érédwxev Ac || 14 6 dé matyo Ac | adtd60m. VcAc || 15 éréSmxevAc || 16 xatom. P

ON INVENTION, BOOK 1, CHAPTER I 9 The apodoses of every prooemion are the speaker’s axidseis of the

case.? "he protases derive from inventions, and the protasis of a prooemion should be striking. '° Next, one should turn to the prosecutors and consider how prooemia are invented from them, for those prosecuting someone are often suspected of personal hatred or envy. Now we shall reject envy, if any is implied in the statement of the theme, for it is always

a bad thing to admit to jealousy!’ and envy. It is, however, often implied whenever we are begrudging fame or wealth; for example, when on an embassy Aeschines acted in a tragedy at Philip’s court, won the contest, was crowned, and is indicted for false embassy by Demosthenes. '? | In the prooemion he’3 will rightly say, [96] “Let none of you, men of Athens, think I instigated this accusation of Aeschines out of jealousy at his crown and victory.” Or in the case of wealth; for example, a son who has been disowned sought to be supported by his father; the tather gave him a sword; the son hired out as a mercenary; he returned rich; the father, falling into want, appealed to the son, who gave him the same sword; the father killed himself, and the son is brought to trial as responsible for his death. There is here an implication that the suit is brought because of the son’s wealth; thus it is good to reject that and to say, “T did not initiate this contest out of jealousy of his wealth.” !4 9 "The protases are the circumstances of the case as the speaker has stated

them, the apodosis the resulting conclusion. Axidsis means something like “evaluation,” the decision the speaker has made as a result of the facts he recounts. The term is not used in this sense in any earlier extant rhetorical treatise. In the first example quoted in the previous paragraph, “I have introduced this action” is the apodosis and is an axidsis; in the second quotation the apodosis is left unexpressed. 1° Drimytés, or a striking turn of style, is frequently mentioned by the author; the term is discussed in Hermogenes, On Ideas 2.5, where Wooten (81— 84) translates it as “subtlety.” The word can also mean keenness or bitterness, which seems closer to the meaning here. *t Baskania, which may imply the “evil eye.”

‘2 Demosthenes’ speech On the False Embassy is directed against Aeschines but says nothing about his acting in a tragedy at Philip’s court. In On the Crown Demosthenes refers sarcastically several times to Aeschines as having been a third-rate actor on the Athenian stage. "3 T.e., the declaimer taking the role of Demosthenes in this imaginary hypothesis. ‘4 "The speaker is either a member of the family, who might inherit the wealth, or a nonrelative who might receive a portion of the money, confiscated

IO MEPI EYPEZEQ2 A Tas 6& #yBo0as moté pév 6puodoynoouer, moté O& Govnoducba, 1 tobto moLobytes oby Stay Bovdducda, GAN’ btE Osi Gpdoe yYwosiv Taic dovijoeat xai taic 6uodoyiaic. ota dé odtw>c Gy Eywpuev medc Evdokor nodowsmoy xal dmEepéyor nal Exawodtpevoy oiov otoatnyoy 7 ITeouxdéa 7 vowobétny, TOtE GovnoduEeBa, 7 Wd xoLvoY EvEOyETHY 7} TEdC TVA OL 5

éEovoiay Oudov xal adndvBowsnor. m0dc¢ vouodétny pév AéEouer, Ett aloxyooy aneyOdvecda xow® edbeopétn, © 6 Anpuoodérns « undeic Kuo?, ® dvdoes “APnvaiot, vouion uyte tOiac éyBoac Eué undemldc Evexa GAAns ijuew “Agvotoxedtove xatynyoornoorvta tovtovi». me0¢ O& bmEQexor modowmnoyv, Str dé0¢ toig eddoxtuotot meo0cxoovELv, oiov HvéxyOn OxN- 10

[97] stdc ént tiv | ITeoindéove sixdva, xal ovpPovded)s tic unuéte adtoy ‘Olbruov naheiv, oiov «obx éydoac évexev, @ avdoec “AVnvaiot, tic 7006 ITeouxdéa tiv cvpPovdny tadtny éveotnoduny, add’ ebvoias mAéor, dedotxdc, wy} Tt Ma0a THY Dedy GvPownos Ov nay». &E anovoiac dé @uov du &ovoiay, olov névng nat adovowocg ExyPooi, baéoyeto 6 aAov- 15 otos Boge todv¢ moditac, ei Adfo. tov névynta mQ0¢ avaigeoly, ~Owxev 6 Ofjuoc, obu E9Qewey 6 mAovotoc todvc tod névntos vieic, anéPavoy AiUd, xat xolvetat pdvov’ «obx anexyPavdpuevos idia tH thovoiw thy b1Eo

tov odta@y éveotnoduny yoayry, GAd’ ayavaxtay Ent toic vdmotg xal th m0AEt». xal wvotove tic Gv eboot AgLotEic 7} MAovotovs 7} OTOATHYOdS 20

H dnuaywyods, oic avttdéyortac 7} “atnyogotytac avayxaidy got. tac éyBoas tac idias nagateiobar, xatayedyew O& éni thy addy xal Tods yOuoveg nal tod xowh tH ndAEt ovugéoortoc évexey Léyew Eviotacbat tov ayova. “Ouodoyeiv 6& dei tac ExPoac, Edy noeoadinnBévtes aAuvvo-

eda: dveripiovoy yao tiuwmoiay xata toy Hoimnudtwrv AauPdve, @o 25

1 6uo0dA0yhowmpey Vc | d&evyncmyeOa Ve, (inras.) Pa || 2 8te BovrAducba

Vi | 60 av det VV i|| 3 ay Byeuev, sc. €yOpac; altera pars: p. 10, 24sq. || 4 4 Tleouxrdéx om. Vs; haecet 58 % mpdc¢ xotvdv evepyétyy del. Brinkmann || 5

mpogm.2,[email protected] Ve || 7 Dem. 23,1 || 8 phte wre%>o PV || 8-9 &AAn-

évexaV || 9 xatnyopjoavta Ve | tod|tovtm.po.| Pa | +6 brepéyovPc || 10 cf. II. ot. 51,8 || 11 eixédva PV; ofxtav Vg,m.1 Vin | adtov pyxéte V || 12 SAburcrov xaAetv, B et « supr. (m. 1?) Vc; xaAetv 6AvurLov Ba || 16 év

AG Ooéverw Md Oh | cf. 259,5 Sp. || 18 vy diam. po. Ba || 19-20 éxi ty, mOAEeL xal tots véuors VS, cf. 1.22 || 23 xowodV | elvexevAc | évothoacbar V8, (ye’ éviotacOat) Vk; haec v.l. in textum P irrepsit p.12,8 || 25 xat& om. v.l. Dox; map& Og, m. po. Pa

ON INVENTION, BOOK I, CHAPTER I II As for feelings of hostility, sometimes we shall admit and sometimes deny them, not doing this whenever we want but when it is necessary to confront the denials and admissions head on. This will be as follows: if our hostilities are directed at a person who is well-regarded and distinguished and admired, such as a general or Pericles or a lawgiver, then we shall deny the feelings; also in regard to a common benefactor or someone cruel and inhumane in use of power. In regard to a lawgiver we shall say that it is shameful to be hostile to a common benefactor, as Demosthenes says (23.1), “Let none of you, men of Athens, think that I have come to accuse this man, Aristocrates, out of any private hatred.”'5 In regard to a distinguished person, (we shall say) that we fear giving offense to people who are well-thought-of; for example,

a thunderbolt struck | the statue of Pericles and someone advises [97] to cease calling him “Olympian,” saying something like, “Not out of any hatred of Pericles, men of Athens, have I introduced this proposal, but rather out of goodwill, fearing lest he suffer something from the gods since he 1s but a man.” Against a man cruel in use of power one speaks out of desperation; for example, a poor man and a rich man are enemies; the rich man promised to pay for the support of the citizens if he can take the poor man and get rid of him. The people granted this. The rich man did not support the poor man’s sons; they died of starvation, and the rich man is accused of murder. “Not out of private hatred for this rich man did I introduce this suit on behalf of the citizens but because | am distressed for the laws and the city.” In replying to or prosecuting military heroes or rich men or generals or demagogues one can find many cases in which it is necessary to deny any hatred of a private sort and to take refuge in the claim of having instigated the trial in the interest of the city and the laws and for the sake of what will benefit the city in general. On the other hand, it is necessary to acknowledge hatreds if we are defending ourselves when we have previously been done an injustice, for there is no reproach against taking vengeance from those who have wronged us, as Demosthenes did in the speech Against Androtion (22.1): “I shall try to do, if I can, what Eucteby the state, for bringing the prosecution. ™S Nothing is known about Aristocrates except for what littl Demosthenes says in the speech, and there is no reason to think he was regarded as a “common benefactor” by the Athenians.

12 NWEPI EYPEZEQS A “at 6 Anuootérncs éy tH Kat’ ’Avdootiwvocs énoince Adyw «ébneo Kb- 1 xTHUwWY, @ Avdoes dixactai, nadwr ta” “Avdootiwvos xax@c dua ti te mddet Bondeiv @eto deiy xal dixny bxé0 attod AaBeiv, todto xayo mElodoomuat moveiy, av doa oidc te @»: xal éy tH Kata Nealoac addy

Ouotwe. 5

[98] | Kal xeoi todo dxodoyoupévove née tivo badAnytc eboloxetat soAdduic evvoiac 7 xéodovc. TO wév obv xéodocs Gél mapaitnTéoy nal TOY wLoDdy, MANY ei un TO AVds Aéyotpev pwioBor yew [naga] tHv

BonDovpévwr thy owtnoiar, oiov gay bnéo dorotéwy Aéyouev 7 baéo Tveavvoxtovor 7 xaddnaé dnuooia thy nddAw eb notnodytwyr: oiov éxi 10 TOY Totdxovta tvodryvwy éEetiPecay “APnvaio ta yévyn, Meyagsic dratgovmevot EtoE~or, Mavoapévng thc tvoavvidos Hxovow ao0dLddrtEs Ta yévyn, wal yodmer tic tO xata Meyaoéwy aynofota: aiwwdxiorv dototoy yao évtatda dtouoloynjoacdat miodov éyew thy TOY MiAtatwy owtnotay Aéyorta obtws «modor wév oby, © &vdoes “AOnraio, mapa 15 Meyagpéwy adbtdc te 6uohoy péytotov sihnyévar tHv naodyvtwy Adyor xal dueic O° dy 6uodoyyoate, THY Cwtnoiay THY YiAtadtwvy». THy dé evvoltay pavegds éotiv 6puodoysiy dvev xéQdovc, Stay inéo THY Onpoota thy mddw edvegyetyodytwy Aéywuer, oiov ucdAdyvtwmy wovouayety adelpay dbo “ata tov vOuoy TOY EOL THY GoLoTéwWY EQ! TOD yéow@>S 20

ékéhinev 6 Hhioc, “al yoaper tic AcAbodat tov vduov: oioy «gpiAsiv uésy [99] todo ddedpods odu dy dovnDeiny Eywye nowods owltioas tic mdéAews yEeyernuéevove”. 7) ay b1éo ovyyerGy norBueda todvs Adyous: dvenigiovos yao 6 bmuEO THY Mo0GHxdVTwWY Adyos co xal 6 AnuooBévync &y TH

1 60m. Ac Ba | zerotyxe Ba || 2-3 te tH. Ac || 3 oteta: V Dem. 22,1 || 4-5 Dem.59,1 || 6 xatsuspect. | mpdc(promept)Ac || 7 tO... népdoc Ve, v.l. P; tod ... xépdougP Ac, m.1 Ba || 8 xat Ve, vl. P; évarhjoacbat

P, (xupdoa xai m. po. supr.) Ba;om. Ac | profdv, m. 2 &y@va supr., Pb |

tapzom.Om || 9 yp thy t&yv piAtatwv cwtyplavP || 10 (Syuootx om.) TH TeOAEt, M. 2 Syoota thy mdbAwv, Ve | edepyetynodvtwv Vt || 13 cf. Thuc. 1, 139; Plut. Pericl. 30; cf. p. 24, 9 (ubi xaOaupety; at &varpetv etiam Diod. XII

39,4) || 15 otvom.Pc || 17 6poAoyjonte Ve Ba, (on) P; 6duoaroynoete Ac | mé&vreg ante thy add. Ac, mé&vtws Ve Ba, cixdtws Od || 18 &vev xépdove

suspecta || 19-20 cf. Aps. 12 p. 234,15 Sp.-H. || 20 [email protected] || 20-21 cf. 44,19 || 22 xowlodexd|¢ cwryp|I]a¢g Pa || 23-24 dverei@Qovoc Pa

ON INVENTION, BOOK I, CHAPTER I 13 mon did, men of the jury, when after suffering at the hands of Androtion he thought it right at one and the same time to go to the aid of the city and to get justice for himself.” And similarly again in Against Neaera (59.1).'® | A hypolepsis of acting out of favoritism or for profit is of- [98]

ten invented against those speaking in someone’s defense. Now one should always reject motivation of profit or pay (misthos), unless we can persuasively claim that the safety of those who are being aided constitutes pay; for example, if we are speaking on behalf of military heroes or tyrannicides or those who once benefited the city entirely in a public way; for example, under the Thirty ‘Tyrants Athenians sent their families into exile; the Megarians received and cared for them; when the tyranny was over, they came to restore the families, and someone introduces a motion to rescind the decree against the Megarians.*7 Here it is best for the speaker to acknowledge that there was “pay” in the form of the safety of their dear ones, saying, “I myself, men of Athens, acknowledge that I have received the greatest pay from the Megareans, the safety of our loved ones, in return for the present speech, and you would acknowledge it as well.” It is possible openly to acknowledge favoritism without profit whenever we are speaking about those who have benefited the city publicly; for example, when two brothers were about to engage in single combat for a prize in accordance with the law about military heroes, !® there was an eclipse

of the sun, and someone introduces a motion to rescind the law. Thus, “For my part, I would not deny loving these brothers who have both | been saviors of the city.” Or if we are giving a speech [99] tor family members, for a speech on behalf of relatives is not open to reproach. ‘Thus Demosthenes in Against Leptines said (20.1), “Men of the jury, I agreed to speak with others in this case, to 16 Not a genuine work by Demosthenes. The speaker begins by revealing his hostility to Neaira’s lover, Stephanus. "7 "The Megarean Decree of 432, prohibiting trade by Megara in Aegean

and Black Sea ports; cf. Thucydides 1.139; Plutarch, Pericles 30; Diodorus 12.39.4.

18 'The law is imagined to provide that the greatest hero ina battle is entitled to whatever prize he demands. Here two brothers contend for the prize. Cf. Pseudo-Quintilian, Minor Declamations 258; S. F. Bonner, Roman Declamation in the Late Republic and Early Empire (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1949), 88-89.

14 NEPI EYPEZEQE A IIo0g Aentivny sinev «dvdoes Otxactai, uddiota péyv eivexa tov vo- 1 pilew ovugéoety Acddodat tov vouor, eita xal tod matddc eivexa tod

/ A 4 0 A / z \ lod fe) A ¢ ~

XaBotov wuoldyynoa tovtotc, W> dy oid te W, ovvegeiy». ObtH nEOl TOY HATHYOOOYTMY Hal TOY ATodoyoUMEeVwY.

ITeoi 6& todo ta éyxAjuata eyovtas 7 yonotal bmodAnwetcs ovr- 5

/\ ctA J s \ 2 yy; » / \ o ‘ cr 2 4 lod / +g / #Q> ¢ ~ of

(otavtat 7 movnoat. éayv wév ody xaTHyoOMmEY, TAG Poel ME0GOVOAS

yaviac BeBarwooper, oiov «thy wey Acédyetay, @ AvdoES OlxacTai, xal

thy Bow, 7 m00¢ dnavtac det yornta: Mediac, ovdéva of tudy odte tov GAhwy nohitoy ayvoeiy otouat» tas 6& yonotacs meocovoas

, dmtodyjwpers Otaddicopuer, oiov «obx ayrvod wév, © avdoes “AdPnvatot, 6tt 10 tov Xaoidnudy tivec ebeoyéetyny olovtar éyw O& Edvneo A Bovdomai TE

xat olda tovtwm neroayuéva OvvyP@ med buds Einsiv, olouat Oetgew

~b)¢\?\ >o~ A}¢ \, b) , 3 / 4 A‘4-

08 wdvoy ob% Eeveoyéetyny, AGAAa xal xaxovovotatory nal 2oAv Tavartia 7

nooonnev treidnupévoy». “Kav 6& anohoywpeda, tobvartioy motjoower, taS wév yonotas PEeBatobytec broArwpetc, tac O& paviac OtadbortEs, 15 oiov déxa véow tH ?v Taw Aindytes Epuyor, TH Evt ANavTHOACA H LAtno anéxtEewerv advtoy, oi évvéa otoapértEs HolotEevoay, wal xolvEetat 7

< fe) / / \ d 4 j / Pld w =F Y 9 / ¢ /

[100] yur pdvov: éyvtaida yao pula wer bxdAnwic neol thy | yuraixa yonorn, dtt tho vinyns aitia, Hy yor BeParmoat “ata ta noooima Aéyorta ob-

b / / ¢ at 2 / 2 f / \ , ¢ rd

two «Ott uwév ob% GAdoc Tic Huiv Tho vinns aitioc uGAAov Tic yuvatnocg 20 éyéveto, mavtac buds éAniCouev Eyvwxévar»’ pia O€ yadtdAn, 7 tod do-

neiy madoxtovoy avtry eivat, Hy yon eoanebtoat Aéyvorta obtws «El uév obvv toig xatnydoots mEvPouEevol THY yuovalxa tTavbTHY MaLooxXTOVOY dstodyjwpeode, ob% G9IH>S MoWmoETE’ El OF TA MENMVAYMEVA OXOMNOETE HAL

eA > 4 / 4 2 /

TQ TOO TETEAEVTNHOTOS Oixala &yxAnuata, paveitat 4 yort) obx ayatoy 25 viov AAAa e0d0THY NOvyOOY antoxtEtvaca».

°-E / fe) \ oO ldwoinf Pld j / ud-4 ugaivetar 0& xal\Ewer nodowna, Epaper, nodeuiwy

iota modhdnics, ay’ dv obtw Anyduela ta noooimia CytobytEs ent TH naooton xotce, ti dy Bovdowto téhos oi moléutoe yevéodat, AéyorteEc

1 évexaP || 2 AcAdvoOat tH. méAet tov Ve, v.l. P, Dem. 20,1 | xat

supr. Pa; 38 xat Vb || 6 gbce|I] Pe || 7-8 Dem.21,1 || 8 m&vtacV || 10 pwév odv Ac, Dem. 23,6 | & &vdpe¢ Stxxotal P;om. Dem. || 12-13 avdrtov

m. 2 supr. post detZew Ve || 16 xal t& Ve || 20 SutivP VcAc | pe&Adrov € 4 tH¢ Ba || 24 broanvecbe V, (a supr.) Pc; SxoAnvarce Pa | cxornoete V, &

(xt supr.) Pc; oxomjoatte Pa || 27 xabom.m.1 Vc | p.4,13 || 28 yp’ TodAauis Sé xal cuuuayov P (at coniungendum évopaivetou ... moAAcKLS)

ON INVENTION, BOOK I, CHAPTER I 15 the best of my ability, mostly because of thinking that it is advantageous for the law to be rescinded, and then too for the sake of

Chabrias’s son.” Hypolepses about prosecutors and defendants are treated in this way.

Hypolepses about those under indictment are either favorable or unfavorable. If we are prosecuting, we shall insist on the natural wickednesses of the defendant; tor example (Dem. 21.1), “The wantonness, men of the jury, and the insolence that Meidias always shows toward everybody, I think none of you nor any other citizens fail to recognize.” Hypolepses about the existence of good qualities we shall refute; for example (Dem. 23.6), “I am not unaware, men of Athens, that some people think Charidemus is a benefactor; but as for me, if I can say to you what I want and what I know has been done by him, I think I shall show not only that he is no benefactor but that he 1s very ill-disposed to us and exactly the wrong conclusion has been drawn about his character.” If we are, on the other hand, speaking for the defense, we shall do the opposite, strengthening favorable hypolepses and rebutting unfavorable ones; for example, ten young men deserted their military post; the mother of one encountered him and killed him; the other nine, having been turned back, performed with heroism, and the woman is tried for murder. Here one hypolepsis about the | woman is favorable, that she is the cause of the victory,’9 and itis [100] necessary to emphasize this in the prooemia, speaking as follows: “That no other person was the cause of our victory more than this woman, we hope that all of you know.” But there is one bad hypolepsis, that she seems to be the murderer of her son, which needs to be remedied by saying, “If then you are persuaded by the prosecutors and suppose this woman is the murderer of her son, you will not do rightly; but if you look at what has been done and the just charges against the one who has died, the woman seems to have killed a wicked traitor, not a good son.” Persons from outside the case are also revealed (to have suppositions about the case), as we said, most often in the case of enemies. We shall derive prooemia from them by asking in the present crisis what outcome the enemy would want, speaking as follows in the case mentioned earlier: Some exiles came to the aid 9 The argument would be that the killing served as a warning to the other deserters.

16 MEPI EYPEZEQXS A obtms wc év éxelywm tH noo0PArjmatr’ puyddes noAEemovpévy TH Mateior 1

4 x / > Pr] ver 2 A ‘\ / ¢ ~ doxet totic mohEmiots». 5

éBorOnoay xai vixny sigydoarto, xai yedyet tig adtovs natayEw’ «TOIC usy ody stodemiotc bu” ebyijc gots py uatadéEaodat tovc moditas Huds év0dde, va duev abtoic Anpdivas Oddo Huds dé obx GEvoy noveiv, a

Tatra oot regi tév && bnodnwewms Noootwior nexAnowtat, tob-

TOV EVOLOXOMEVA TOY TOOTOY ATAYTAY)).

XN ~~ 3 e ld A

[101] | ITepi tv &€ bnodiaipécewms Npooipmioy. ‘Léfjc Aextéov neot thy && bnodtaipécews Me00LMioY Navy NayxdaAny nai moixtAny éydvtmy thy téyyny. etoioxetat O& xal TaOTA aNd THY 10 EEfic padnudtwyr, ob éy nao O& mooPAjuaow obdéE NaYtTa év mdoLw: Eb-

Hinta usy ydo éotw ebgetervta xai doiuéa, toAdduic O& yaivetar THY && jrodjwpews 7) Goeth, Ovdtt Navtayy palvetar. “Kote 6& t&y && trodtatpéoews eidn toia, Wy nat TA MagadElyuata

Pyjoouer. xai me@tov éotww Ste vo nenoaypévwy Gdixnudtwr, dy xal 15 to Exeooy GyadéEaotat dvvatat xoiow, trodlatoobytEes MOLHNOOMEY OO-

oiutov obtas: olov xatéoxapdy tives add évy nodéum ual éyewmoyrnoay

adtny, obx avijxev 7 yh xagstovs, xal xoivortat dosPeiac: évtada dvo dvtwmy GOditanudtwrv icootaciwy, tov te xatacxapat THY MOAW nal TOO vEwoyvioal, mommoouey &E br0dtatpgéoews MoO0iMLoY ObtTwWS MEL MEV ODY 20

xal 01a TO xataoxdpar THY ndAw Edooay adbtol Oixny, 6p0G> ay é&yéveto’ vov O& M0AAG mAéov, OTE Hal Yewoyhoat OLEeyYwOaY Hy xaTECXApay

1 cf.6,9 || 2 xadrctvm.1 Ba, (yo xatayetv) Ve || 2-3 ofov totc Ba, W VI 542,15 || 3 xaradéyec0a. Ba || 4 cf. 260,5 Sp. || 10 xe

. ep

aN ,

supr. V3,om. We || 11-12 eBOtxra P Vc; eJOyxxtax praeferunt Dox., schol. P (W VII 710, 8) || 12 pévom. Pc | mAcovadxis Ald.; mActotéxtg m. po. Vc |

| patvetar dé rodAAdurg m. po.| Pe | éucpetverat Ba || 13 otverat P || 14 S7co| Statpécews m. po.]| Pe | t&eom. Vc Ba || 15 ad 8te mg.: ye } yap dbo meToaypevwv Pa, (Frot) Pc || 15-16 8t&v... morjowmyevAc || 15 xatom. Vc

|| 18 tob¢ xapmods Ac; cf. 24,12 | 88 db0Pc || 19 bvtwv tHv VS || 21 dtixac V

ON INVENTION, BOOK 1, CHAPTER 2 17 of their country in time of war and brought about a victory, and someone introduces a motion that they be recalled: “Now it is the prayer of the enemy that we not bring these citizens back home, in order that it may be easier for them to capture us, but it is not right for us to do what seems best to our enemies.” You have here everything there is to say about prooemia from hypolepses, since they are invented in this way everywhere. | CHAPTER 2: ON PROOEMIA FROM HYPODIAERESIS [101] (SUBORDINATION)

Next we must speak of prooemia from hypodiatresis,?° having quite

a fine and varied art. ‘These are found by applying the following procedures (mathémata),*' but each is not applicable in every problem nor all in any one. They are indeed effective (euthitkta) and striking (drimeia) when invented, but often the superiority of prooemia from hypolepsis is evident, because these are seen in every case. There are three species of (proemia) trom hypodiaeresis, of which we shall give examples. The first is when two wrongs have been done and it is equally possible to submit the second to judg-

ment. By subordinating one to the other we make a prooemion in this way; for example, some men destroyed a city during a war and plowed up the ground, the ground failed to produce crops, and the men are tried for impiety.*? Since there are two wrongs of equal weight here, having destroyed the city and having plowed it up, we shall make a prooemion from hypodiaeresis as follows: “Now if they had been punished for destroying the city, it would have been rightly done; but now much more so, since they determined to plow up the city that they had destroyed.” Cutting up one thing into small bits, however, is not a prooemion from 2° Hypodiaireo and hypodtairesis are terms of Stoic logic meaning “subdivide, subdivision”; cf. Diogenes Laertius 7.84. But hypodiairesis does not occur as a rhetorical term in any earlier extant text. 21 ‘The author uses mathéma in this chapter to mean something the student has learned; other rhetoricians spoke of topics, theorems, or starting points for invention. Maximus Planudes (Walz 5:376) defines mathémata in this con-

text as “the methods and hypotheses from which propositions (protasets) are found.” 22 |.e., they had offended the tutelary divinities of the city.

18 NEPI EYPEZEQS A

/ 2 f ¢ ¢ A f 2 A} \ / 4 2

OA». O8 MéYTOL } EvOG TEAYMaToS Etc AETOY Touy MeO0imLOY EoTLY 1

é& jodtaipéoews, GAAa tHY am aoxnc Gyo. téhove & tnodtatpécews xatacxevy olov énevoey év Aiu@ xai modtogxia OntwO THY Ayonotoyr

[102] HAiniay axoxteilyar, yéowv Aaday jolotevoev, aitel sic t6 yéoas tOr

cs > lord 4, 327 v4 4 A f fond >] ¢

6ytoea’ évtatda tO adixnua &, tO ta yévn dtapBaehvat, & bodia- 5 oéoews 0€ et Aéyot «Et yao pdvovc tovs matéoacs émEetoEy AnoxtEivat 7 wovacs tac yuvaixac, dEtoc Hv Bavdtov», ob moooiuoy Aéyer, GAAa HATAOKEVALEL TA aN aoxis Ayo. téAove.

Asdteoor & bnodiaipécews udO nua obtwe etoioxetat, év @ moLodpev moooiutoyv. éviote toils Mp0CWNOLG xal NEO THY moayudtwy tdiat 10 nagaxoloviotow tnodnpets, oiov Aioyivyn, Anuoodéver, dedtepas O& ai émtovupaivovoat ano Téy teayudtwy. étay ody edowper év r00BAj uate tac bro0dnwpets Exatéoac mweol tO Ev nOdOwWNOY, THY TE PSOE MEOCODOAY

nal THY ErctyEevouevyy, dm0dLaLoobrtEs AéyomEr Wc Ev Exeiv@ TH MEOPAN-

2 ¢ > ow ~ f 2 \ oe > A 4

pratt’ Anuddns ageoBpevoas napa tov Dihinnoy, xai éoouévov motanat 15 ctow ai “Adijva: to} Maxeddvos, éni tio toanélyncg abtas xatéyoawe xal éenavehdav bBoews uoivetar’ oiov «xal dia tov GAAoy péy Biov, @ ‘Adyvatiot, toy moooovta Anuddy xai tHy mp0dociay Gov Hv xoAdoat tootov, oby Hxtota O& xal Ora Ta viv abTH yeyervnuéva, & Oy aioybyny Ouod xat Cynuiay mneoiijpe tH mde». yivetar 6& nai éni tHy idtwrixdy 20 tobto mohddnic, dv éywpuev 7} udyor 7H teAdyny 7} s0gvopooxdy: oiov sopvopooxdcs ta téHv Movody é6véuata taic étaigaic tiPetat nai xoive[103] tau doeBelac: Aéyomev | yao o8twc «dEtoy ev Hy tov mogvofooxdr xal 6ta tov dAdoy mioeioBar Biov novyooy Gyta xai 67) xal tiumoiacs GEvor,

aby tutota O& viv, bte xai HaéByoeyv sic tac Beds». 25

1 Aertov: cf. p. 222,24 Sp. || 4 xot atret Ba || 5 evradOa 3|¢] Pa || 6 88 et Ac, (et supr.) Vc; odv et Pc Ba; odv (88 cisupr.) Pa | Aéyloex els Pa

|| 7 obvadd. ante Aéyes Pc Ac, supr. Pa || 9 év @ PV; évom. m.1 Vdk; 6 (om. év) v1. P || 10 éviote 38 V_ || 11 xak post aboytivy add. (m.1 ?) Vc || 11-12 ab émroveBatvovoa Ac Ba, v.l. P; ércvpBatvovoty (om. at) P Vc || 12

TAacnatovm. 1 Ve Ac || 14 émywouévyv V || 15 tovom. Pc | [xat] Spengel || 17-18 & &vSpec &Onvator Ac || 18 Fvom.Pc || 19 ywdpeva Pc

|| 25 atom. Pc

ON INVENTION, BOOK 1, CHAPTER 2 19 hypodiaeresis; it is using hypodiaeresis to construct an argument from-beginning-to-end;?3 for example, during a famine and siege an orator persuaded a city to kill those useless because of their age; | one old man escaped notice and performed a deed of valor; he [102] demands the orator as his prize.”4 Here there is only one crime, destroying families, and if someone should say by hypodiaeresis, “for if he persuaded you to kill only the fathers or only the women, he would be deserving of death,” he is not speaking a prooemion but constructing an argument from-beginning-to-end. A second precept from hypodiaeresis that is used to make a prooemion is as follows. Sometimes specific hypolepses are attributed to persons in advance of their actions—for example, to Aeschines or Demosthenes—and a second set is derived trom the actions. Whenever, then, we find each of these hypolepses about

one person in a problem, one belonging to him by nature and the other acquired, we utilize hypodiaeresis, as in the following problem: Demades went on an embassy to Philip, and when the Macedonian asked what sort of place Athens was, he drew (an 1m-

age of ) it on the table, and after he returned home he is indicted for hybris.25 Thus, “Demades deserved to be punished, Athenians, both for his conduct throughout his life and his treason, but not least for what he has now done, as a result of which he has brought shame and loss on the city.” This occurs often in the case of character types, if we are dealing with a charlatan or tax collector or brothel keeper; for example, a brothel keeper gave the names of the Muses to his girls and is charged with impiety. We can say, | “The brothel keeper deserved to be hated because of his [103] life in general, for he is a wicked man deserving punishment, but not least now when he has also committed an act of impiety toward the goddesses.”

23 On this term, see 3.10 below. It occurs repeatedly in Hermogenes’ On Stasis, where it is translated by Heath as “sequence of events.” 24 'To kill or enslave him; cf. n. 18 above.

25 If it was a question of giving Philip geographical information, the indictment would have been for treason. Since, however, the charge is hybris, aggravated insult, drawing a small picture or map is regarded as belittling Athens.

20 MEPI EYPEXEQY A Toitov & tnod:aipécews udPrua eic no00tuiwy esoeow, 6 xadei- 1 tat Tod aVodov 006 TO méAdoy [binod.iaigeots|: yivetar dé, Btav xaxod tivos todundévtos Aéyns Oeiv tov sioyaopévoy Ootvat tyuwolay xal did TO tETOAUNMEVOY xal va uy MdAw todundy. dei 6& TO TOD GBOdoV 200¢ tO péAdov noveivy tote, Stay 7H TO pwnOEeMmno0TE yEeyovds tobto cvuPay 5

tatsiv addi gvdattmucba 7 Stay t6 abto nodttyta noAAduic. Ta dé magadeiyuata capeotéoay novel thy téxyvny noAAol tTvoavvobow é&x TOO avTo yévovc, xat poder tic EAadbyveww TO yévoc: évtadda xadhiotny ywoay &yet tO meooimor, av Aéywuey obtwm «xual THY yeyernuévor

yey eivexa tvoavviday xala@c dy &you utoobytac tO yévos tho adhews 10 éxBaddew tiumoodrtac attodvs tnéo dy énddouer, oby Txtota O& xal tod péddovtos nedvotay motovpévovs, iva un toig 6uotows neogunintwpev GEi». xal nah: éuixOn tis tTagL.yevomerwm CMmatt, xal yoadwer Tis

un mad yévnta. 15 hehiotat tov tig tagtyeiag véuov’ xal yao éxet Ovvdueda déyew «iva

[104] | epi tv &k nEpiovciac npooimioy. Ta & neguovoiag xahotueva nooo0imia idiav esoeow tye év taic nxatnyoolats nat év taic amodoyiaic, capi O&é atta év Exatéoots MoLjow. éav yao xatnyogobrtés Tivos pdvov Ovvmducda Aéyew bts «Hdvvduny QvtOY nat Onuociwy Adinnuatwr xoivel», Ex MEQLOVOIAG MOLOdUEV TO 20

1 &€& — eSpeotvom. Mr || 1-2 xadretrat to tod Ac Mr || 2 [Urodtatopcots] Spengel || 3 tevdom.2suppl. Vc | det V3 || 4 torAunOFe maa V || 6 uym. po. supr. ante ma0etv Va | qpudattamwcOx maBetv (om. méAuv) Pc; (recA add. m. 2) maBetv | mékAut del. m. 2] puaattmucOa Ve || 7 ofov

morrAot Ac || 8 éxBdAdewy Ac; cf. Aps. I 2 p. 241, 7 Sp.-H. || 9 yer yo-

pavPc || 10 péevom.P | efvexevVc Ac || 11 adrods Ac; adtote P Vc; ? m.1 Ba || 13 pr. xatom. Ba | cf. Herod. 2, 89. Demetr. De eloc. 239 | vetaptyevuévent Ac | xal yoaper tic suppl.m.2Pc || 17 ebpec, m. po. od0eowv, Vc || 18 atte suppl. (m.1 ?) Vc

ON INVENTION, BOOK 1, CHAPTER 3 21

A third precept from hypodiaeresis in the invention of prooemia is what is called tou athroou pros to mellon.2© This oc-

curs whenever some evil deed has been dared and you say that the perpetrator should be punished both for what he dared to do and in order that it not be done again. We should use tou athroou pros to mellon either whenever we are preventing something that has never happened before from ever happening or when the same thing is done often. Some examples will make the technique clearer. Many members of the same family become tyrants and someone introduces a motion to expel the family. Here the prooemion is given the best commonplace?’ if we speak as fol-

lows: “Because of the tyrannies that have occurred, it would be good for us to expel this hated family from the city, punishing them for what we suffered, but not least now because we would be exercising foresight for the future in order that we may never incur anything similar.” And again: someone has intercourse with an embalmed body,?° and someone introduces a motion to rescind the law permitting embalming; for here we can say, “that it may not happen again.” | CHAPTER 3: ON PROOEMIA FROM PERIOUSIA (SUPERFLUITY) [104]

Prooemia called “from periousia”?9 take specific forms of invention in prosecutions and in detenses, and I shall make clear what

this is in each case. If when prosecuting someone for homicide we can say, “I could have brought him to trial also for wrongs to the state,”3° we are creating a prooemion from periousia, and if 26 Literally, “from the collected (or the crowd) to what is going to be,” thus “to prevent the same thing being tried again,” another example of the author’s unusual technical terminology, but note “what is called.” Patillon (L’Art rhétorique, 218) translates the phrase “pour en finir une fois pour toutes,” “to finish with it once and for all.” ?7_ _Khora, used to mean topos; cf. 3.15 below, p. 133.

28 Cf. Herodotus 2.89. 29 Although a common Greek word with a variety of applications, often meaning “abundance,” periousia is not used as a technical rhetorical term in any earlier text. To translate it “abundance” here would invite confusion with peribolé, abundance as a feature of style. Patillon (A NRW, 209 n. 112) translates it as “a fortiore.” 3° Cf. 2.6 below.

22 EPI EYPEZXEQZ A Toooiuloy, xayv Onuoolwy adimnudtwy upivortes dvvdbucta Aéyew Ott 1 «Hdvvduny advtoy xal acePsiac uoivery», x MEQLovoias mo0OLWMalOuE-

Ya: olov dototeds dyewo me00H;AVe oteatny®@ deduevos toopady, 6 dé sinev «axonoTtOUVS 7 méALc 0b ToépEL», xaTa xONnUuvo’ doEev EavTOY 6

dototevs, nal xpivetat 6 oteatn yoo aitiag Pavdtov: Aéyoueyv yao & 5 meotovoelas dt. «HOvvauny abtoy xai Onuociwy Gdixnudtoy cioayayeiv yoapapevos, Ott xowvoy Eeveoyéetny tho mdAEews AndAEoEv». 7H Exetvo TO

rodPAnua’ 4 Din weta thy xatddAvow to ITevorotodtov xoiveta: Onuociwy adinudatwr Aéyouer pao «Hndvvduny wey ody xal doeBEiacs adbtyy

yoapamevos éic buds ayaysiv, dtt tO oxtjua tis “APnvac aoeBdc tn- 10 exolvato». ‘lotéov 0&, tt uixootéoov xoivorvtas det Aéyew 6ti «xa petlovos Hdvvduny», un wévtot peilovoc xoivortac Aéyet Ett «ual Tod putxootéoov HOvrvauny»: Atexvovy yao tO tToLodtov.

[105] "Ey 68 taic dxoloyias ebxatalnatétegoy to éx neotlovotas udOnpa’ mac yao dottooby META THY Eveoyeotay xoLWdmEvOS GOLOTA MOlHOEL 15

To0CimLoy éx MEQLovotacs Aéywr “éya wév xal yéoas taEhduBavoy ent

toic nenoaypévoic AjpeoOa, un th ye On xal xolcEetc Sropeveiy», oiov O OTEATNHYOS O TAS TOLNOELS vindpEvoc xatapAésac nal vinnoas xal xotVOMEVOS OnMoclwMY Adixnudtwr, 7 6 Olpacs ano Tob teiyous THY aonida

nat aroxteivac tov moAgéutov. xat xaddnaé Gadiov tod ualjuatos 6v- 20 toc yoetm@douc O& avbextéov.

Tepi tv ano Kaipod mpooimioy. To 0& ano xaieod xahobuevoy noooipnioy Gpatdy tia THY bE0Bodny tic duvduews exer, édy edged. ~ott O& towodtoy tH duvduet, éay Ovvmpeda thy akiwow, Hv eiopéoouer, todnov tia HOn OeiEar xal 25 yeyervnuéyvny. Eott O€ adbtod tO thc taxdoc totodtoy: oiov épvyadevOn-

3 tG otoatynyS Ba || 4 odsuppl.m. po. Pc || 6 ciooy| oly aly : rool | O08] Ve || 7 we Vicf. 40,19) || 8 pvuAym. 2 mg. Ba, vl. Dox.; H polly Ve || 9 yap obtwso 8t1 Ba | adt|y}]|v Pa, (x m. 2 ex 0) Pc; Stxyy vl. P; dStuyny adthy Ve Ba; adthy xat daeBetac Sixyv Ac || 10-11 Smexplvato Ve

|| 11 xatom. Ve Ac; xat tod Ba || 16 év(proéni) Ac || 22 om. Vc |] 25 xatom. Ve || 26 adtod ex tobtov Vc

ON INVENTION, BOOK 1, CHAPTER 4 23 when bringing someone to trial for wrongs to the state we can say, “I could have brought him to trial also for impiety,” we are making a prooemion from periousia; for example: a military hero who

had lost a hand came to seek support from a general, but the latter said, “The city does not feed the useless.” The hero threw himself down a cliff, and the general is brought to trial as responsible for his death. Using periousia, we say that “I could also have brought an indictment against him for wrongs to the state because he destroyed a common benefactor of the city.” Or the following problem: After the fall of Peisistratus, Phya is brought to court for wrongs to the state.3! We say, “Now I could have brought

her in to you under a charge of impiety, because she impiously acted the figure of Athene.” You should understand that when bringing to court on a lesser charge one ought to say, “and I could have brought a greater charge,” but not to say, “and I could have brought a lesser charge” when bringing a greater one, for such a thing would be lacking in art. In defenses, the precept from periousia is more easily comprehended, | for everyone who is brought to trial after some good [105] deed will best use a prooemion from periousia, saying, “I even supposed I would receive a prize for what I have done, certainly not have to undergo trials”; for example, the general who set fire to some ships when being defeated and after victory was tried for wrongs to the state; or the man who threw his shield from the wall and killed an enemy soldier. And one should cultivate a precept that is quite easy and useful. CHAPTER 4: ON PROOEMIA FROM KAIROS (OCCASION)

What is called prooemion “from katros”3” has an indescribably great power whenever it has been employed. It has power of this sort if we are able to show that the axiosis33 that we propose has in some way already taken place. Its force is of the following sort; for example, some people had been banished and had established 3% She was six feet tall and impersonated Athene restoring Peisistratus to Athens in 559 B.C.E.; cf. Herodotus 1.60. 3? Kazros generally refers to a specific moment of time, an occasion, but here it means something already done in the past. 33 Cf. n. g above.

24 MEPI EYPEZEQS A ody tives xal &xtLoay est totic dolotg tho matetdos Etéoay nod, &v 1 @xovy, nmoAguov évotdytosg éxelvoic, Bev &eBAnOnoayr, énavedddrtec

éBon0noay adbtoic, xal yodmer tig adtovds xatadéyeotau Aéyouev yao «tO ev Ooxsiy &ywm yodg~w TO yiyioua tHhuEgoy TovS MoOAitAac xaTa-

dévyeoVal, tO 0& GAndéc On tovtove dedéyueba, ETE Gvupayous Gytac 5

abtovs xatelbeciy sidoaueyv». GAka ual Meyagsic éni thév tordxorta tvoavyvwy éxtidéyvtmv “Adnvaiwy ta yévn avatoobvuevos étoeyor abtd, [106] xatadvbsions tho tvoavvidos | Fxovoww admo0diddrtEs ta yéyn, nai Goi tig xaVaiosivy tO regi THY Meyaoéwy nivdxcor. xai &te éy toicg thy mdAw

xataoxapac. xal onsioacw abthy Bédoytes yao abtov for when wanting to show that they were impious, we say that they have been shown to be impious by the gods, even before our speeches, ever since the earth refused to bear fruit for them, as being under a very heavy curse. This epikheireme?® is also called an ankhistrophon.37

I do not think it necessary to add a precept for cases of mutual allegation,3® for either what is claimed is good and seems to be derived from hypolepsis, or being a prokatastasis39 it belongs to the invention of narrations, not of prooemia. CHAPTER 5: ON ALL PROOEMIA, AND OF HOW MANY : PARTS THEY ARE COMPOSED

Every prooemion is composed of (1) a protasis, which is invented from the precepts laid down above, from which you can certainly

34 On the Megarean Decree, see n. 17 above. The argument here would be that the decree has already effectively been rescinded since the Megareans received the families. 35 Cf. 1.2 above, p. 17. 36 On epikheiremes, see 3.5 below. 37 A sudden transition; cf. On Sublimity 9.13 and 27.3. 38 Epipeplegmena problemata; Maximus Planudes (Walz 5:380) cites a situation in which Aeschines and Demosthenes are imagined as bringing an accusation for false embassy against each other, each claiming that he himself has shown goodwill toward the city and has a good reputation. In so far as the hypolepses relate to the past, they belong to the prooemion; if to the present, they | belong to the narration. 39 A preliminary statement or demonstration; see 3.2 below.

26 MEPI EYPEZEQX A lodEF2AN00dGEWS, 2 la iy1ttc4Eotliy 2 \atimotc, 2 / Ex2PdoEws, A eaf} Ovvdyer A 1 nATAOHEVHC,

"Eo \ ic La / lend \ / ) 4 2 f \ 2 A / 24 4 ow 4 A >. -

THY WOOTACLY “aL THY amto0do~o"r.

av wey oby DednoOwMEY MOALTLAWMTEQOY OTHOaL TO MEOOiMOY, Eis

thy agiwow wpiAjy abto othoousr. Edy O& NQOCOTLOMMEV xal THY aitiay

[107] tho dEuboews antéue|vor tob nodyuatos adbtod, narvnyvoixwtéoa yl- 5 vetat 1) Badows, xat uddcota, dy un ta am doyhc ayo télove dnhds

e 4 A f A \ \ 3 2 2 lend hla / ¢ ~ eimmpey GAL’ Eripwrnuatixms. movet O& Narvnyvolxny thy Padow xal 7 3 fuia,rviva4TOA \ cs fed BAI 2Ady@ ~ /Oia‘\THY A €b-> evovd narnyvoixor 7 Oindoiv, H &v tH if nN.) 6S ~ ~~ \ A) 2 aw 5 > 3 ld * 4 /

ovtuiay 4} &v tH v@ 61a thy &v toig an’ Goxijc you télovs pidotimiay. Asi d& tO mo00tutoy év wév toig modttixoic Hounvetodat waxootéoots 10 tolg *Mdolg xal oxowotevéow, Ev O€ Toig NaDYTixOIs CVYEOTOAUUEVOLS

xalt evxodoig uaAdov. [TegiPodry) b6é adbtaoxns noootuiwy dinidacidoa

dvoua xat dinhacidoa: x@dov xal nooTdoEws Ano aitiag “atacxEvy.

1 % &iworg Pa Vc Ba || 3 eeAnowyev Pc Ac, (0) Ba || 6 to Vc Ac

| 7 8& moArdutg V,vl.P || 8 d&&PaV;xarePc || 9 év tote P Ve; cic te m. 2 Ve; sig t6 Ac Ba;om. vl. P || 10 éounvetecOar Mr (|| 12 edxdaAoce, @ supra x(m. po. ?), Pa || 13 pr.xatom. Ba | amd tHe Ac; 2&8 Vc Ba | xnatacxeny|I] P; xatacxevhy V; de utraque lect. cf. Dox.

ON INVENTION, BOOK 1, CHAPTER § 27 find one; (2) a Rataskeué,*° (3) an apodosis, which 1s an axiosis; and (4) a basis,+? which joins together the protasis and the apodosis.*#? If we want to make the prooemion more characteristic of political oratory,*3 we shall limit it to a plain axiosis.4* If we add the

reason for the axiosis, | touching upon the action itself, the ba- [107] sis becomes more panegyrical, and especially if we do not state the sequence of events*> in a simple way but speak sententiously (epiphonématikés).+© Another thing that makes the basis panegyrical is harmonious rhythm, so it becomes panegyrical 1n two ways,

verbally by means of the rhythm, and in thought by means of the distinction‘4” given to the sequence of events. The prooemion in political speeches should be expressed in longer, extended (skhoinoteneis)*® cola, but in emotional oratory+?

in more compressed (synestrammena)>° and simpler ones. To secure expansion (peribolé)5! in prooemia it is sufficient to double the words and repeat the colon and offer support for the protasis by 4° Here meaning a supporting statement; elsewhere often “proof” as a part of a speech. 41 T.e., a summation or conclusion; see the example in the last sentence of this chapter. 42 'The examples offered below may make these parts clearer. The au-

thor’s theory and terminology of parts of a prooemion are not found in any earlier text. Although it is not true that “every” prooemion consists of these parts, the author is offering novices a formula for beginning speeches in a way he will approve. Compare the formula for a prooemion offered here with the more complex formula to be followed in invention of a proof in 3.4—10 below. 43 T.e., make the prooemion of the declamation more like what is appropriate to deliberative or judicial oratory. The author regards panegyric as more emotional than political oratory; sometimes it is, sometimes it is not. 44 E.g., “I have come forward to recommend a plan” or to prosecute or defend someone. 45 Ta ap’ arkhés akhri telous, “from beginning to end”; see the discussion in 3.10 below.

4° I e., express or imply a personal opinion, exclamation, or value judgment; cf. 4.9 below; Pseudo-Dionysius, Art of Rhetoric 2.10.1 and 18; Julius Rufianus §29, p. 45 Halm. 47° Philotimia; Patillon (L’Art rhétorique, 221 n. 5) paraphrases it as “un certain intérét.” 48 Cf. 4.4 below, p. 157. 49 J.e., panegyric. 5° Cf. Martin, 73. 5§ In the sense of “abundance” this is one of Hermogenes’ “ideas” of style; cf. On Ideas 1.11; but the meaning here seems somewhat more limited.

28 MNEPI EYPEXEQE A nat Ovoua wey, ay Aéyousvy Knoedtov pév, © Gvdoes “APnvaiot, toig 1 Veoic evyouat ndot xai mdoals, tH te mdAEL nal madoLw buiy» wal «b7EO

Ouoy xal tic buetégac evoeBeiac xai ddEnc». x@doy dé dc &y tH Kata ‘Agtotoxedtous «bnéo tod Xeoodvynooy Exew buds dogalds xal 7 7a0oaxoovotévtac anooteondyjva: nddw abtijc». mootacews Oé && aitiag 5 xataoxevy, dv Aéywpev nodhaysf 6 dvvducba eineiy «ta wév TOKT@ TEtohunpéva AéAnBev tudy obdéva» tooto 7 mOdTAGIC, 7 O& xatacxEevy &&

aitiac «énet undé obtwe Eoti uixod Ta TEetoAunuéva, Wo OdvacPat xai [108] Aadety». Aextéov dé xal éxi nagadelyyatos: | mwAobor ta téxva oi vnolmtat, xal yoawer tic napa “Adnvaiotc énaveitvar tov mdoov’ «ola mév 10 obv, & “Adnvaio, mdoyovow oi vnowMtat “axa MooydoE THY Ydow-?,

hédndev ote tudc obte tév dAdwv “EdAjvwy oddéva» tobto 7 modtaalg’ «ual yao obdE obtwco éoti uétQLOY, 6 ToAudot nEQi Ta yidtata, wote hatsivy éveivar dbvacPat» tobto 1) xataoxEevt} Tio mp0TdOEwWS: Elta % amddootig «buds O& mMEOONHEL MEdVOLAY MOLOvMEVOUS THS buEetTégas 15

evootiac énaveivat toig aPAiotc tov Ydgov xai unxé?’ obtwc 6xAnoods xatiotracdat». gay wéev ody noditixdds &cAnons othoa, obtw otHoetc thy a€iwow: si 0& Botset, nod0Es xai THY TH GEtboEews aitiay, tovtéOTLY AbTO tO NEGyua, adbtO A~yw tO aN’ Goyxijc Gyo. TéhOVS yoYdy xal

éav Pednjowpeyr sinsiy tO an aGoxhc Gyo. tédovc toAudrtec énipwvnua- 20 TL“WTEQOY, EoTaL nal OdtwWS Naryynyvelxy 7 Badots «Ou by Gvaynalduevat

dvotvyobo araiay ai vijcou».

1 xatom. Ve Ac | évéuerog Ac, v.l. Dox. | Dem. 18,1 | &vdpegom. Vc Ba | dxaotat Ac Ba || 2 ait& Ac,m.1 Ve | rkoatg Sony ctvoray gyav éy@ StateAG Dem. || 3 evoeBstac te xat V, Dem. | x@Awv Ac; xwdov v.l.

Dox. || 4 Dem. 23,1 | Syae gevPcoV | dopartics tus gyew Ba || 6 RATAGKEDT] SC; xatacxevdv PV || 6-7 mempnyuéva Pc || 8-9 wo |prydé del.]

SbvacOa. (xater.) Ve || 9 eri [III] mapadelyparosg Ve || 9-10 cf. Pollux Naucrat. apud Philostr. V. S. II 12. Aps. I 2 p. 261, 20 Sp.-H. || 10 adroit ante tov add. Ba, m. 2 suppl. Vc || 11 odvom.V_ || 12 &Aovm. 1, tav hAAwy m. 2, Ve || 15 morovpévoue post g eddo&tag Ve Ac || 17 odvom. V

| yo xat orjverP || 18 tHoom. Ba || 19-20 xat édv dé Ba, (xat om.) Ve || 20 2eAjowyev Ac Ba | ta Ve || 20-21 cf. 26,7 || 21 mavynyveexh xat obtws Ba | bv P; o8¢ V; Dox.: yodkpetan xal ads’ Svtiva», pdpov SHAdV ye Ste

|| 22 d&rlotm. po.|StavPa | subscr. réA0¢ tod a’ tép0v P; tén0¢ «’ Vc; om. Ac Ba

ON INVENTION, BOOK I, CHAPTER 5 29 giving areason. In the case of words, if we say (Dem. 18.1), “First,

men of Athens, I pray to the gods, both gods and goddesses, for our city and all of you,” and “for your sake and your reverence and fame”; in the case of cola, as in Against Aristocrates (Dem. 23.1): “For the sake of your holding the Chersonese securely and not being deprived of it again by being misled.”5? There is kataskeué for the protasis from a reason 1f we say——and we can often say this—

“None of you has forgotten the things this man has dared to do,” that is the protasis, and the kataskeué from a reason is, “since the things he dares are not so negligible as to be able to be forgotten.” We should mention an example: | The islanders are selling [108] their children into slavery, and someone introduces a motion in the Athenian assembly to abolish the tribute.53 The protasis is, “What sort of evils the islanders, for their part, are suffering, O Athenians, because of this tribute, none of you nor any of the other Greeks has failed to notice.” ‘The kataskeué for the protasis is, “for what they dare to do with their loved ones is not so trivial that it can go unnoticed.” ‘Then comes the apodosis: “For your part, it is right for you to take thought for your good name and to remove the tribute from these wretched folk and no longer to be so importunate.” This, then, is how you state your axiosis if you want to do it in the political style. But if you want, add the reason for the axiosis, that is, the action itself, what I am calling the plain form of the sequence of events. If we want to state the sequence of events in a venturous and more sententious style, the basis will be panegyrical if we say, “Because of this the islands have the misfortune of being forced to become childless!”

52 This is the figure kata arsin kat thesin (“by negation and affirmation”), used for abundance as described in On Ideas, pp. 293-94 Rabe. 53 Philostratus (Lives of the Sophists 2.12, p. 593 Kayser) quotes part of a declamation by Pollux on this theme.

BLANK PAGE

ON INVENTION, BOOK 2 31 BOOK 2

Book 2 discusses diégésis, the narration or statement of facts in a speech, giving special attention to what the author calls prokatastasis, the beginning, usually the first sentence, of the narration. Diegesis (literally “a leading through”) 1s the word used for narration by both

Plato (Phaedrus 266e) and Aristotle (Rhetoric 3.16), as well as most later Greek rhetoricians until the third century C.E., when it be-

gan to be replaced by katastasis (a “setting down, or statement”). Although Apsines usually refers to narration as diegesis, he uses katas-

tasis as well (Art of Rhetoric 2.1 and repeatedly in ch. 3); in 3.3 he makes a distinction between aphégésis, a “recounting” of incidents, and katastasis, which “lays the basis for proof from personal intent of the speaker” and also “rebuts objections arising from the assumptions of the hearers.”54 Some writers (e.g., Theon, vol. 2, p. 60 Spengel) use diégéma instead of diegesis, a more general word for narrative

of any kind. Aristotle (Rhetoric 3.13.5) attributed to the school of Theodorus of Byzantium a division into prodiegesis (preliminary narration ), diegesis, and epidiegesis (supplementary narration) , also

mentioned in Anonymous Seguerianus ($57). According to the latter ($112, probably derived from a lost work by Alexander Numeniou, a rhetorician of the mid-second century), “Diegesis differs from katastasis in that in katastasis we set out what the judges know, while in diegesis we describe what they do not know.” This distinction did not prevail but suggests a stage by which katastasts began to refer to narration. A. prokatastasis as understood in On Invention is the opening statement of the narration, providing some background for 1t, such as in looking back to past actions that help to explain present circum-

stances. Heath (“Apsines,” 103-5) explains the initial emphasis on this preparation for the narration and relative neglect of actual narration until the end of the book on the ground that there seemed more scope for artistic invention in introducing a narration than in composing the narration itself. The emphasis 1s, however, consistent with the author’s interest in showing elementary students of declamation how to get started with each part of a speech, and in declamation the narration 1s almost identical to the problem as assigned by the teacher. It 54 See the discussion by Heath, On Issues, 83.

BLANK PAGE

ON INVENTION, BOOK 2 33 is something the student can develop but not, or not usually, something he is expected to invent.

The only other extended discussion of prokatastasts 1s found

in the second chapter of Apsines’ Art of Rhetoric. Early in that discussion Apsines says, “We create a prokatastasis in questions for declamation etther by a scrutiny of intention—and this 1s threefold,

for we scrutinize either our own intention or that of the hearers or that of the opponents—or from a removal of an objection or from a preliminary statement of the question at issue or from a preliminary prejudicial attack or preliminary division or a contrast of circumstances of the past and those now existing, or else the first heading 1s introduced as a statement of the case—and this 1s done in detail and with narrative—or we introduce an epigrammatic thought from the

heading, separating it out as a statement of the case (katastasis )— many such are found in speeches of Aristeides—or we bring in a trope,

or start from a promise” (2.1). Each of these types is then discussed and illustrated in the course of the chapter. Heath argues (“Apsines,” 103-5) that Apsines’ chapter may be a further development of what 1s found in On Invention. More likely it is a development, adding other sources, of a prokatastasis, from what was found in an earlier work (perhaps by Apsines’ teacher Bastlicus?) from which the

discussion in On Invention ts borrowed with little change. Other occurrences of prokatastasis are found in Anonymous Seguerianus (§244), derived from Harpocration (second century), where tt 1s applied to the prooemion, and with the meaning “introductory statement

of the narration” in Rufus (§16); Troilus (PS 52,11 Rabe); Syr1anus (2:64-65 and 127); and Maximus Planudes (Walz 5:384). See also Martin, 54, 78, 219, 223; Lausberg, §$279 and 339.

In chapters 2-6 the author considers the invention of the prokatastasis in five categories of declamation. Patillon (L’ Art rhétorique, 87-89) plausibly suggests that the author regarded all declamation themes as capable of being assigned to one of these five types.

As in the account of the prooemium, the author, or possibly the

editor that created our text, omits traditional teaching about narrations, such as dividing them into types and showing how to secure the

virtues of clarity, brevity, and persuasiveness. Quintilian (4.2.32) says that the doctrine of the virtues of narration originated with the school of Isocrates. Cf. Anonymous Seguerianus §$ §63—104; Lausberg, §§ 293-95; and the introduction to 2.7 below.

B1

34 NMEPI EYPEZEQE B

[spi katactdcews Hyovv Oinyyoems.

Awwynoic got navtos mév mo0BAjuatos abto tO nodyua, && ob

[109] ovréatyxey 4 badBeotg. nal did toto | dupynow péy edoety od Jvoxodov’ paivetat yao tob medyuatocs mAatvvouévov toic todmotc, oi¢ 5 éxPyjooua try O& me0xaTdoTacLy Tho Oinyrjoews THY xai MEOCdWHyNHOW

xahovuerny aévov &etdoa, nddev Anybyjoetat xal Gnd todnwy bndowy, xal Et Guoltws év nadot nooPAnuaoLy 1 adty 7 xad ? Exaotoy Eldoc

Cntnuatos tia tig edoeots Moo“ataoTdoEws yivetaL. Qe é&v xegahaim uév oby sineiy ndons Oinynoews éy Mayti mQ0- 10 BAjuate Cytntéoy ta npeoPdteoa wév, yonowua O& TH bmonetuévyn GELOoe H uoioes, xaxetDerv AauPdve Gé.ov, xal mpoxatactTHoaytas Ws m000nxE THY MeOCdLHyHOWW obtw>S Eic adTIY Yworoa THY éugawwoméerny éy

avt@ tH neoPArjuats Sijynow: Gtexvoy yao xal iduwtixdy TO tHS 6enynosws abtdber doxyeo0ar, Bev xai tO medPAnua Aéyet. GAN’ nei THY 15 stooPpAnudtwr cidn noida nal THY noayudtwr ai $ytHoeic dudqogot, noixidac xai tac ebogoeic nagaddoouery, Hote teBeions tnoPécews adb-

tina eidévar, mp 6 toentéoy éotiy sic eboeow tho mo0xaTacTdoEws TEYVL“OY.

epi metoiki@y Kai tho év tobtoic ebpéoeac. 20 Oi neoi wetoixiag Bovdevdmusvor dvoiv todtow Evexey Batéoov THY

[110] Povdny éyovow: 7 yao nooodrtos | dyabod xai dpaviodévtog Adnn tar anohwhotwy Povievorta uetoixsiv, oiov Avdoi ut 6éovtoc tod Tlaxtowhod tov xovoor 7} Aiydatiot ur beoBaivortos tod Neidov xai dodovtos 1 témocg 8’ rept ehogcemo PV || 1-2 témo0c B’ rept SinyHoews Mr || 2

tpoxatactacems Ac Ba | Hyovuv dixyjoewocom. V || 3 pév gore mavtdc Ba

|| 4 wévom.V || 5 p.50,4 || 6 xatom.m.1Pa || 9 xal ody h adr) add. ante yiveta: Ac; Dox. ; tivé¢ éappaduévov évéutcay eivar td mrapdov ywolov: xal Sef (sic V8) pa&AAOVv elroy Obtag adTS dvayLYVaoxecDat «xal et tig ebpeots TPOKATAGTKGEWS Kal ODX! AdTH yivetat» 7 obtws «xal ct duolwes év TKGL TPOBANLACLW 7 autTy eipeors TPOKaTAOTAGEWS YiveTat } xxl’ Exacrtov cldos CytTHUaTOSs idta tus»

|| 12-13 mpoojxe V || 13 SenyyowPa || 14 yao0m.m.1Ac || 15 Aéyerv Ve Ac; Aéyetar Va || 16 zoeloBAynuém. po.|twv Pc || 17 tH¢ SroOdcews Ve || 19 teyvexhy Vc; schol. P: ep’ 6 teyvixdv toemtéov éott, SyAovét. Oemoyux

“tA. || 20 tovTotc, i.e. Totg mpOBAHUaor || 21 petorxeotac Mr || 23 ofov suppl. m. 2 Vc

ON INVENTION, BOOK 2, CHAPTER 2 35 CHAPTER I: ON KATASTASIS OR DIEGESIS55

The diegesis of every problem is (a statement of) the action itself from which the hypothesis has been constructed. Asa result, | [109] it is not difficult to invent a diegesis, for it becomes evident when the action is developed in the ways I shall set out, but (first) it is worthwhile to examine the prokatastasis of the diegesis, which is also called the prodiegesis, asking from what it will be derived and in how many different ways, and if it is the same in all problems or if there is a specific invention of prokatastasis in each species of question. Now to speak in general of every diegesis in every problem, one should seek out prior events useful for the evaluation or judgment to be made in the case, and they are the right things to start from, and after first setting out an appropriate prodiegesis, then to move on to the actual diegesis itself that appears in the particular problem; for it is inartistic and simplistic for the diegesis to begin directly with what is stated in the problem.5® But since there are various kinds of problems, and investigations of subjects are different, we shall describe varied forms of invention, so that when a hypothesis is proposed it will be immediately57 evident where one should turn for artistic invention of the prokatastasis. CHAPTER 2: ON EMIGRATIONS AND INVENTION IN DECLAMATION ABOUT THEM

People debating about emigrating take council for one or the other

of the two following reasons: either | because of the disappear- [110] ance of some existing good, in distress at what has been lost they debate emigrating—for example, the Lydians because the Pactolus River ceases to carry gold, or the Egyptians because the Nile is not flooding and watering the earth—or some unexpected evil 55 "The chapter heading is not part of the original text and was added by a scribe in late antiquity or the Byzantine period when katastasis was the common term for narration. The author of On Invention does not use katastasis to mean narration. 5© T.e., the problem as set forth by the teacher. 57 J.e., in extempore debate; cf. Patillon, ANRW, 2085.

36 MNEPI EYPEXSEQE B

A ow vA / ~w 32 cA rd /

THY phy 7 woCCENLyEvOUEeVOY xaXx06 Gno0dd0x);TOV, Oiov oEieTaL LuxE- 1

hia ovvey@o xai Bovdedortar petoixeiv, 7 mddw Osi ent thy Kardyny ano tho Aitynco to noo xai Bovdebortat metouxeiv.

ki pév oby ayatod twos éntheinovtos Bovisvoueda petoixeiv, thy mooxatdotacw AéEouev AaPdorvtes évtedDev «oi nodyovol TAG NMO- 5 heuc txtioay H try ndAw évtad0a obdevi tH GAdwy enagdévtec 7) todtT@ TO GYAN. wéxou uév oby naylov Hy xal PéBasov, eixdtwc éusvouer’ xal yao arehavouey TOY ayadaor: eel O& otyetat, mETOLxLODHvat Oinatoy».

A 2 / ~~ 2 ~ . 2 \ A # ow /

el 0& xanov Entyévytal tt, AéEouev THY MeOKaTAdOTAGW &> Wot nOdVo-

vou undeuac éAnidos éuqatvouéerng totodtov xaxo0d éxticay évtavdoit 10 tHyv mod: si yao #OEecay, od ay éxtroay». 6 Oé Gidy pévety Gpmoiws nal abdtos dvaByoetat emt Tas xtioEls THY MOOYOrMY, Oy moEocPdTEQOY obdév, AéEet O& Ayadod pwév tivocg Asinovtos Wo «ob Ota tobtO &xtiIGAY

b ~ \ / ¢ a be] A A tad > 5 \

évtavdoi tiv addw oi nodyorot 0608 tobt@m porm énagiévtec, aAAd

xal GAdots nodhoic, Ov noocdyvtwy ob dei THY Anovoiay tot Evdg Gdv- 15

[111] geoPar». édv dé xaxod éruyevouévor, AéEe bt Coby so dnadh xal | addvatov éxtioay oi modyovot try mOAW, GAN’ Wo bmOxELMEYNY xa adthy 2wavEeow avBowsnivots».

Oduey 6& xat ent nagadetyuatos: Povdevbortat Aiyiatiot metotxeiv too Nethov un énavaBaivortoc &tt: éosic od tw «box Tot xal Tods 20 mooyvovovg ovdEvl THY GAhwy énaotévtac thy Aiyuntoy oixijoat, Emel Lyte 0OOY dogddsea unte Motauay GAlwy xaddogc éy Alyiatm paivetat UATE MOOS MutEtay EnitHdELoc ObtE yao Elo Edaiat nag Huiv odtEe Guneho., Th O& TOO notTapLob yaloortac mood xai TH nagaddéw yewoyia».

¢ ‘ 3 ow f 2 w ¢ 2 § 4 x f ¢ / A

6 0& abidy wévew Eost Wo «od Ola TOY MOTAUOY MdvOY Of NEOVOVOL TOY 25

oixtouoy éromjoarto tig Aiydiatov, GAAa nodha abtijs xai GAha DavUAOaYTES, THY xOdoW THY THY Géowy, TO THY rEdiwy EetHAator, TO ic

ta Ghha tic yijc edqpooor, thy thc Baddoons yettviaow xai tHy Tob 20tapos s00c ta GAha yoeiay, xai ob dtd THY Godeiay Lovor, Hy nal adtHy

> Ud > v > 4

1 mpocertywwouévov Pc Ve | kdoxqtov, ye ampocdoxh, P; ampocdoxy-

cog Ac || 2 cf. Thuc. 3,116 | cf. p. 228, 14 Sp.; Aps. I 2 p. 255, 7 Sp.-H. || 4 oe’ érAureévtog P || 5-6 of modyovor thy mdALw Exticav évratOa? || 9 éreuyiverat Ve Ac || 10 éxpawvonéevyg Ac || 12 ei¢ Ve Ac | téiv mooydéveov

om. V_ || 13 é7atrévtog Ac Ba | od} 0m. Pc || 16 étytvouévou Vc Ac | schol. P: Actre: 76 Snuryooy xat me0certaxovertéov || 19 of aéydrtro: Pa Ac Ba

|| 20 é9et obtwo V | tt Pa; por Sc (cf. p. 38,4) || 21 ete thy altyurctov xtioa Vc, (om. eg) Ba || 22 mg. m. 1 &AAov Pa, ye’ xat &AAO Pc || 23 éxttyderov

Ve, (ut vid.)m.1 Ba || 24 yatpovracg Sc.; yatpovtes Pv || 25 votiopov? cf.

1.17 «|| 26 xat &AAcom. V {| 27 thyvom.V_ || 29 alt. xat— | udvov om. Pc

ON INVENTION, BOOK 2, CHAPTER 2 37 has come upon them; for example, Sicily continually experiences earthquakes and the inhabitants consider emigrating, or fire flows down on Catania from Etna and the inhabitants consider emigrating.58

Now if we are debating about emigrating because of the loss of something good, we shall speak our prokatastasis by starting from the following: “Our ancestors established cities—or this city—here, moved by nothing other than this resource;59 tor as

long as it was steady and secure, we rightly stayed here, for we were enjoying the benefits. But since it is gone, it is right to emigrate.” If, on the other hand, something bad has befallen them, we shall state our prokatastasis thus: “Our ancestors founded the city here at a time when no expectation of any evil such as this was manifested, for if they had known it, they would not have founded

the city.” Someone who, nevertheless, thinks it right to remain will also reach back to the foundation by the ancestors, than which nothing is more venerable, and he will say that if some good thing

is gone, “It was not for this that our ancestors founded the city here, nor were they moved by this alone but by many other reasons. Since these still exist, there is no need to be distressed at the loss of one thing.” If some evil has come upon them, he will say, | “Our ancestors did not found this city to be unaffected by suf- [111] fering and immortal, but knowing that it too would be subject to human sufferings.” Let us provide an example. The Egyptians are debating about emigrating since the Nile is no longer rising. (Jn favor of migrating) you will speak thus: “I really think that our ancestors were moved by no other reason when they settled Egypt (than the benefits of the river), since neither the protection of mountains

, nor the beauty of other rivers is to be found in Egypt nor land suitable tor plantations—there are neither olives nor vines in our country—but they were pleased by the produce of the river and by the incomparable conditions for agriculture here.” He who thinks they should remain will say, “Our ancestors did not make the settlement of Egypt solely because of the river but because they admired many other things about the country: the temperate climate, the open plains, the easy access to other parts of the earth, 58 Cf, Apsines 3.15. The theme was drawn from Thucydides 3.116. 59 J.e., the benefit that has now been lost.

38 MEPI EYPEXEQES B éyew got avdowmols ye odor xal 2a0a tod Heo’: ob yao éw nov tov 1 dowy oveavod tac m0dec baetideoay». Kai addw: 6st to noo éni thy

iW 3 lod A ld ¢ ‘4 \ ld Cow 4 ow 2 \ ‘

Katayny ano tijg Aityng xai Boviedvdortat uetoixeiv: 6 wév G€LOv wetotnelly E0El TOY TOONOY TODTOY (OBOE YAE TOS MOOyOVOUSG OL OOxd xTioaL

tiv Katavny 620 thy Aityny péoortac, ei toradbtac éoeodat cvuqgooas 5 tooceddxnoar, GAAa vouilovtas év doiotg otHjosoBat TO noo. wéxoL Mév

la A 4 4 ¢ 4 93 ~ / v4 2 \ A A f \ 7 \ 4 2 ow Pld

(1123 ody | épddatte todc 6oovs, xai riucic éuévoper’ énel O€ bneoPaiver nal

xatatoéeyet try mAw, mEetoinilCdpmcda». 6 O& abtdy weve obtwso «ob0E yao Tavs moe0yovous TOvS xTioartac THY Katayyny évtabtda &ade ndnyciov otoa 7 Aityy, xal d>o mvedc &yer Obaxac, xal Wo pbotc abty mvQdS 10 omeoPaivew te tovs 6oovs, év oi¢ dv EotHun, xal Osiv’ GAN’ oby Wo aDAvatov 060° ws anadty xaxdv éoopévyny xai aneigatoy mvgdc ExtiCov THY

¢ f A cf > € 4) ¢ Va , ¢ mw 2 2 2 ¢ > 4

Katdyyny: nodhoic ydotot xati uy Katdvny oixotow nroylynoe ndo tots

\ 5 ‘4 wd \ 93 b ld ro A \ 3 > aw

pév advtouatoy, toic 0& && éntBovdtjc, toig d& xat && ovoavod».

[Tepi vouwy eiogopac. 15 Ai 6€ TOY vOUwWY Eio~ogal META MEQLOTAOEWS xal ai AvoEtS THY VOUWY META MEQLOTAOEWS NOOdINYH GELS EEovot totabtac xal AauPavo-

pévacs obtwc: éav pév Adwpmev tov vowor, Aéyortes dtt «tooTOY éyory

noe yeyodgdat tov vduov thy adoxyy»: ob0€ yao Zot todtov Tt mQE0Bdtegov 060 ti akimoet uGAAov Goudd.oy tod pdoxew Achbodat tov 20 youov Tod unde THY aoyny adbtoy yeyod~Bal. xatacxevacbyoetat dé

1 év avorg Pc || 2 brelI—II]|t|t0ecav Ve || 3 ard tH altvyg om.

6@

VceAc || 6 8p01¢Pc || 7 o}vom.Pc || 8 wetorxt@ducOa Ac, (w) Ve, (6) Pc

| 9 alt. robg¢om. Ve | thyvom.V || 10 cf. Thuc. 3,116 | dare muedc éotty abty (mg. org abry mvedc,m.2°) Vc || 11 éorhxer P Ac, (evinras.) Vc | ovx,om. @>o,V || 13 té mip Vc || 14 xatom. Vc Ba || 15 add. xat Oécews H Stabésews Pa, (er.) Po; add. xat Oécews 4 Stadrdcewes Va; add. (sic) rept vduev

OEcews 7 Stalécews Ac || 16-17 af ante wet&em. po. supr. Ac || 17-18 & AxuBavouev obtws? || 19 tov véuov post 16 éypyHv Ac | +t tobtov Pc || 20 76 (00 m. po.) Pa; t|& m. 2] Pe | detv ante AcAboOar add. Pe, cic tb add. mg. cy

m.po. Pa || 21 tod, sed wer., Pa; 76 Vc Ac; #76 Ba | Setv yeyprqpas Pe

ON INVENTION, BOOK 2, CHAPTER 3 39 the proximity of the sea, and the utility of the river for other things and not only for irrigation, which is one of the things human be-

ings can have from God; for surely they did not establish their cities beyond the limits of heaven.” And again: Fire is flowing on Catania from Mount Etna and the inhabitants debate emigrating. One who tavors emigration will speak in this way: “I do not think

our ancestors would have established Catania, putting it under Etna, if they had expected there would be such disasters, but they thought the fire would be stopped within its boundaries. Now so

long | as it kept to the mountains we were remaining here. But [112] since it overflows and runs down on the city, let us emigrate.” One thinking it best to remain will say, “Our ancestors who established Catania here did not fail to see that Etna was nearby and that it has fiery eruptions and that it is natural for fire to overflow the boundaries in which it has been held and to flow downward. But they did not found Catania to be immortal and free from suffering and untouched by fire, for fire has troubled many even though they do not inhabit Catania, some of its own accord, some by intrigue, some from heaven.” ® CHAPTER 3: ON PROPOSALS ABOUT LAWS

Proposals for (mew) laws, with an account of the circumstance (prompting need for them), and proposals to repeal (old) laws, with an account of the circumstance, will have prodiegeses of the following sort and be treated as follows.®! If we are arguing to repeal the law, we say that “this law should never have been written in the first place”—for there is nothing more fundamental than this nor more in harmony with our recommendation to repeal the law than (to say) that it not have been written 6° T.e., from spontaneous or unknown combustion, from foreign or do-

mestic attack, or from lightning strikes. |

6! Cf. the progymnasmatic exercise on proposals for laws as described in the handbooks of Theon, Pseudo-Hermogenes, Aphthonius, and Nicolaus; these exercises do not provide for identification of specific circumstances as do declamation problems. The word here translated “repeal” is in Greek lysis (noun) or lysein (verb), the regular terms used by rhetoricians for “refutation” or “refute.” Refutation was regarded as an easier exercise than proof and thus taught first. Similarly, the author here treats repeal of an old law before introduction of a new one as perhaps easier to argue.

40 WEP] EYPEZEQ2 B [113] meoxywodyr 6 Adlyoc é tHy ovpbdytwy «ob yao dy tordvde xal towdy- 1 de éExetoddnucy xaxdy: ene O& EtéOn nal endPouer ta nal ta, Adoat dixatoy». dfjAov yao, do Avoet tic vdmor év nOOPAruaTt xax0d TLVOG

anavtnoartos & abtod tod véuov, xal Wo dy unxéte tobto yiyvotto oxomovvtwy tiv@y: oioy Aaxedatudvios weta ta Ev Magad drt Bovistvor- 5 tat Avew Tor Tho navoedyjvov vdporv, oiov «eet uNndée xeioPat tobtoOY

thy aoxyny év Aaxedaiuon tov vouoyv ob yao ay dd€y¢ aneoteorueta TOLAUTNHS HAL ToOTAiwy xat xaTOOVMWUAaTMY nal THY CvuBpEeBnxdTHY ».

dei yao, dco éyny, negiotaow e#yew tac Advoets THY YOuwWY 7H TAC Eio-

poedcs’ ai yao dvev aitiacg xal mEegiotdoEews eioqooal vouwy 7 AdoEtc 10 yvuuvaopata éott udva, Fev ob6€ dinynoets &yEt. "Lay 6& yedgumsy véuoy xai eioméowmper, 1) MeOxaTdoTAcIC THs

dinynoews yerhostar 4 abth, oioy «tobtov éyohy adda ueioBat tov vouor, & aoyic. ob yao dy tovtov xEtwévov tabta Huds ovvépy nadeiy, & nendv0apev uy xeiévov tod vduov» olov "AAniPiddnsg peta TA HATA 15 Kidlixov ciopéoes vouov undéva otgatnyoy ano otoatonédov avaxahei-

obat' phos: yag «toy vduory todtoy éyony mdda yeyodgia: xal yeyeviotat xdo.oy’ ob yao dv EBhaype un avaxadovpévove buds "AduBiddny éu Linehiac». } ws éxetvo to nedBAnua: todo wotyods yormata éxtLy(114) vdvat, moAdoi wotyevovo | xai xataBdAdovor yorpmata, xal yodyet tic 20 utElvely TODS poLyovs Evtatia yao xal eio~ooa vduov xai Advouc éoti: Hal MOOMATAOTAGLS YEryOETAL TiS OinyHoEews, Sti unte exetvoy &yory

yeyodgta: toy vouov toy Epi THY yonudtwmr xai bt tobtoy éyony

3 yao, supr.dé,P;déAc || 4 unlxétem.2supr.] Ve || 5 AudvAc || 6 uy,om. 8&,Pc || 7 thy dpytvom.V || 8 |xal tv cuuBeByxdtev] ? (fort. , v.l. aberravit, quae ad 1. 1 ascriptaerat) || 11 cf. Prog. p. 26,14 Rabe | etotv (om. wdva) Dox. 11554, 10 W. || 12 % xatkotacig Ve || 12-13 yevfioetar tio dunynoewms V || 13 abtym.2exh adtyH Pc | ofovom.V || 13-14 tbv véuov

xeto0ar Pc || 17 pnotAc || 18 eBaabeex BrAceba Pa | whom.m.1 Ac _ || 20 xorrxBkAROv-Tote Ve || 21 yapom. Vc Ac || 22-42.1 sic Pa, (&pyx7Oev om.) Pc, (ypeqpecOan tov rept tHV yoNUdTMOV véuwv; 5 St. OM.) Ba; bt. UAT exetvov ExeTY yeypapba tov véuov apyxHWOev ... woryovs’ xal Ste tobtov gyejy yeyoapOat voy Tept TOV xoNUdTWV véuovm. I Vc; St. NTE exetvov éypyy yeypaqdar tov Tel TOV YONUaTOV vOuov aoxTHOEv tov aE. xt. tT. woryods m. 1 Ac

ON INVENTION, BOOK 2, CHAPTER 3 AI in the first place.®? Continuing on, the argument will be supported | from the results: “For we would not have experienced (113) such and such evils. But since the law was imposed and we suffered this and that, it is right to repeal it.” Clearly one will attack a law in a problem on the ground that some evil has arisen because of the law and that some people are seeking that this may no longer be the case. For example, the Lacedaimonians, after the events at Marathon, are debating whether to repeal the law about the full moon,®3 saying, for example, “This law should not have

been laid down in Lacedaimon in the first place, for we would not have been deprived of great glory and trophies and victories and all that has resulted.” As I said, speeches against and for laws should be related to some circumstance, for without a reason and a circumstance, proposals for or against laws are only exercises (gymnasmata) and thus do not have narrations. °4 If we draft a law and introduce it, the prokatastasis of the die-

gesis will be similar; for example, “This law ought to have been laid down long ago, right from the beginning, for if it had been in effect, we would not have suffered the things we have suffered because the law was not in effect.” For example, after the events at Cyzicus,°>5 Alcibiades introduces a law that no general is to be recalled from an expedition. He will say, “This law ought to have been drafted and ratified long ago, for it would have prevented the harm to you of recalling Alcibiades from Sicily.” Or consider this problem: (The law requires) adulterers to pay a fine; many men are committing adultery | and paying down their money, and some-_ [114] one drafts a law to put adulterers to death. Here there is both a proposal for a law and one to repeal a law, and the prokatastasis

of the diegesis will be that that law about fines ought not to have | been drafted and that this law authorizing the killing of adulterers ought to have been drawn up from the beginning. 62 There seems to be a corruption in the Greek. Read dein gegraphthai with Pe; see above, app. crit. p. 38, 21. °3 The law prohibited taking the field for war before the full moon; cf. Herodotus 6.106. 64 Cf. the Hermogenic Progymnasmata, ch. 12, p. 26, 14-15 Rabe, which draws a similar distinction. 65 Where Alcibiades had won a decisive battle over the Peloponnesian fleet in 410 B.C.E., thus recovering the prestige he lost in being recalled from Sicily. There is no evidence that such a law was considered.

42 MQMEPI EYPEZEQX B veyouyvat Tov vduov aoynder tov a&todyta xtelvery tods poryods. 1

[Tepi no,éuov kai eipyvys. ‘Onoiws xdv roheusiv yodgwpéy tiow 7 xatalvew nddemor, yon-

odueda taig neoxatactdoeow obtwc ay wéy yod~wuer modesty tow, ei¢ ta noeoPitega thy EyxdAnudtwv aratoéyortes nal Aéyortes 5 dtr «tovtoig adda éyohy noleusiv: &yPoot yao xai 200 tovtwmy THY adiunudtwr GAda sic Huds moda sioyacuévow», sita xataPaivortes Eig TA viv yeyernuéva. TA WEv yao noeoPitEQa THY Adiunudtwy m00-

xatdotacic gots the Oinyyoews, d dé viv dia tov adAEuoy yodq@ets, n Ounynots’ oiov éxyonoev 6 Bedc tH Kooiom todco doiotove éhéobat 10 tov “E.nvwr ovupayous, etdeto Aaxedatpmoviovs, xat cvuBoviedvet tts “Adnvaiots Kiem ovpupaysivy «&det Kooiom xai adhat noheusiv: 2& 06

yao tHyv aoxny dvedéEato napa “Advattov tot natods, xal toic “EA(115) Anlow éxeBoddeve, ual toic év tH "Aoia Awotstor nai “Iwo nai AioAsbo 200 yao tho Kooioov adoyhic nayteg “Eddnvec joay éledPeoo», 15 “al TOOTO MAATVYOMEVOY MPOXATAOTAGIC ZotTaAL xal mpO0dLHyNOLC’ Elta 1

dinynots «énel O& xal voy, yojoavtos abt tod Beod tovds doiotovs THY

‘Edijvey éElécPat ovupayous, etdeto Aaxedatmoviovg xal tHy nddw nudy &Poioe, todeudueyv abt@ ovupayotyvtes Kiow». Kai nddw déopats vixnoas “Adutpiddns "Oddburuia, goouévov "Hiciwy bbe ein, «tho 20 aototns» pn «ndlews», Euaotiywoay adbtér, énavedOay yodvet oteateveoVat ént todo “Hisiovsg 7) mpoxatdotacic tic binyHoews « éxory ‘Ahsiowg adda nodepseiv’ éy Poot yao Hudy siot xat BonDotytes dei Aaxedatuoviors xal KoguBiowc, xal vatd¢ diddvtEc xal yonuata eic TOY xa?”

2 om.Ac || 3 xatm.1Pa || 5 dvatpéyovtecante 4 cic V || 6 zcovtovg Ac || 7 modAkceom.Pc || 9 éot.om.V | dStasupr.(m.1?) Pa || 10 cf. Herod. 1,53 || 10-11 t&v EAAhvwv Ersabar Pc, cf. 1.18 {| 11 xat om. Pc || 12 ofov ge Vc || 13 dvdrtov P, dAvaettew V (-&tew Ac); ex Herod. 1, 6, de eodem exemplo cf. Dion. Hal. Dec. v.4 I] 1 p.18 Us. | tod sovtov tatpog Ac || 14 éxeBovAcvoe V || 15 yao PV; dé Herod. | eddnvec hoav Ac Ba, Herod.; Aoav gAAyves¢P Ve || 16 Sort Pc | xat |ap0m. 2 supr. | duyyynots Ve || 19 budvm.1 Pa || 21 Lon mbAEcoe Pa | xat éraverOov Ve | yodkper éraveaN@vPc || 23 hudvom. Ba

ON INVENTION, BOOK 2, CHAPTER 4 A3 CHAPTER 4: ON WAR AND PEACE

Similarly, if we introduce a motion to go to war with someone or to end a war, we shall use prokatastases as follows. If we are introducing a motion to go to war with someone, we shall run over earlier complaints and say that “we ought to have gone to war with these people long ago, for they are enemies and have committed many other wrongs against us before these,” then coming to what has now happened. The earlier wrongs provide a prokatastasis of the diegesis, and (an account of) the present wrongs, for which you propose the war,° constitutes the diegesis; for example, the god in an oracle told Croesus to choose the best of the Greeks as allies;°7 he chose the Lacedaimonians, and someone advises the Athenians to make an alliance with Cyrus: “We ought long ago to have made war on Croesus, for ever since he inherited power from his father Alyattes | he has been plotting against the Greeks and the Do- [115] rians and [onians and Aeolians in Asia, for before Croesus came to power all the Greeks were free.” When this is extended it will provide a prokatastasis and prodiegesis. ‘hen the diegesis: “But since now, after the god told him to choose the best of the Greeks as allies, he chose the Lacedaimonians and insulted our city, let us join with Cyrus in making war on him.” Or again, when AIlcibiades won the chariot race at Olympia, the Eleans asked where he came from,® and he said, “From the best city.” They flogged him, and he went home and introduces a motion to make an expedition against the Eleans. The prokatastasis of the diegesis: “We should long ago have gone to war with the Eleans, for they are our - enemies, going to the aid of Lacedaimonians and Corinthians and giving ships and money for the war against us.”©9 Then the die66 Accepting Patillon’s emendation of the text to read ta de nun di’ ha. °7 The declamation is developed from the report in Herodotus 1.53. 68 So that the name of his city could be proclaimed: “Alcibiades, an Athenian.” Alcibiades entered seven teams in the Olympic games, probably in 416 B.C.E., and won first, second, and third prize with them. See Thucydides 6.16; Isocrates 16.34; Plutarch, Alcibiades 11; David Gribble, Alcibiades and Athens

(Oxford: Clarendon, 1999), 16. The story about his refusal to name his city and the resulting beating is a fabrication, probably by a teacher creating novel themes for declamation. 69 Rabe here deletes the following: “Whence Thucydides said (1.27), “They asked the Eleans for hulls and money.”’ On the alliance of the Eleans and

44 MEPI EYPEZEQS B nHudy n0AEuov». [B0ev xai Oovxvdidns eionxey (’Hisiovs b& vate Htyn- 1 cay xEevas xal yonuata».| eita 7 dinynots «énei 6&8 xal viv évixnoa tov aydva xai nowtynoay Ger einy, yw Oé ta PéAtiotTa anExoivaduny, ot O&

éuaotiywody ue tHy add bPoilortes, otoatetew ém adbtods GEtor». ‘Eay 6& xatadbmuey mddemov, 7 mMQOxaTdOTACIS yEervnoEtaL THC 5

[116] denyroemg Ste «unde THY Goyny eyony xelxwhadat tobtoy tov mdAEpov», xat MoocxonoduEcta Taic a0 tic totopiac aitiaic, éav Eywmuer’ oioy oetetat &v TH NOhéuqm tH Hehonovynoiax@ Afjhoc, xal poder tic xatahvew tov mdhenov év toig “EAdnou déywr 6te «unde tHY Gorn Eyony xexivijodat todtoy tov mdAEuor év Huiv cvmpayovs ye Ovtag xal 10 pthouc xai totic BagBdootc dei wayouévovs nodtegoy, ay’ ob xai évdoEoteoot Oratehobuev Gvteg modéuov», toodto 4 mooxatdotaocts: eita 7 Oinynots «énet O& xal viv Aijloc ceietat yahenaivortos to’ Beob éeni taic nuEetéoats Otapooaic, xatadtvowpmer tov nddeuov». “Lay dé ut) Bor-

Bouela AN0 tic iotogiac, n weoxatdotactc OiaBodny et too modguov 15 6tt «ovx Exorjy o0bE THY Goyry Tov mddEuov Tobtoy doacBat xatahswOvtas Eetonvyny' yasenoy yao nmedyua mdAEuos xal ddoxohoy» xai doa

Eyer Ev abt naxd, «7H O& eionvn xaldv» nai doa éye ev adbtH nada oiov noheuotytmy twdy é&&éhinev 6 Hdtoc, xal poder tic AcAdobat tov mohenov’ évtad0a yao dy taeBéuny todnov noodinyobmEevot xaxicomev 20 TOV MOAEMOV Kal THY ELonyny ExavecduEVaA, Eita yworHoomEY Eic THY OLH-

ynow, tHyv éxdevpy Oirnyovpevot tod HAlov xai dtt 61a TOdTO MEOONXEL xatahtoar tov mdéAEpoyr.

1-2 delevit Rabe (ut p. go, 2-4) || 1 60evP; oStw V, vl. P; é[email protected]. Dox.

| Thuc. 1,27 || 2 xev&ee Pa: |em.po.] Pe Ve Ba | fom. (xatsupr.?) Ve || 3 a&velyvPa || 4 orparehecban Ve;cf. p. 42, 20-21 || 5 jHom.Ac;|I] Vc || 5-6 tg Sunyfhoews supr.(m.1?)Ac || 7 yonodyeOxPc || 7-8 cf. Thuc. 2, 8 || 9 +tévom. Ac || 10-11 cuppcyots ye odor xal plrAots ... uayouévors Ba, m. po. Pe Ve || 11-12 &vdo0or Vcd Ac; yo xat evdokou StateAobuev Svteg* td (sic) oAguov SyAovéte wy teOKEtwevov Pc, (zp0| I] xerévov) Pa; yo’ xalt év 3627

_ «-StateAoduev Svtes toAéuov Dox. || 12 éveec Pa; dvtlegm. po.]| Pe | modéuov

P; [circ. VII] Vc; om. Ac Ba V8 || 14 xararbcovevAc || 15 tH¢ om. Ba || 16 pacar vl. P; aipetcOa. PV || 17 wsv yao V | SboxorogPc || 19 6 Hdrrog éFérurev Ac Ba; cf. 12, 21 || 20 diyyoduevo. Pa | xaxtololuev Vc || 21 énatwves|d|ucOa Ve | yweholo|uwev Vc

ON INVENTION, BOOK 2, CHAPTER 4 45 gesis, “But now when I won the contest and they asked where | came from, and when for my part I gave the best answer, for which they flogged me, insulting the city, it 1s right to make an expedition against them.”

If, on the other hand, we are for putting an end to a war, the prokatastasis of the diegesis will be that “not even in the first place should we | have set this war in motion,” and we shall use [116] historical reasons if we have any; for example, Delos suffers an earthquake during the Peloponnesian war,7° and someone” introduces a motion to end the war among the Greeks, saying that “we ought not to have set this war in motion in the first place, in that we have been allies and friends among ourselves and have previously always fought barbarians, as a result of which war we are even more glorious.” This is the prokatastasis; then the diegesis: “Since now Delos has been shaken by an earthquake, the god being angry at our differences, let us put an end to the war.” But if we have no support from history, the prokatastasis will contain an attack on the war, to the effect that “we should not have raised this war in the first place, abandoning peace, for war is a difficult thing and unpleasant,” listing the evils in it, “and peace 1s good,” listing the good things init. For example, when some cities were at war there was an eclipse of the sun,7? and someone introduces a motion to

end the war. Here, giving a prodiegesis in the way I laid down, we shall castigate war and praise peace; then we shall go on to the diegesis, describing the eclipse of the sun and saying that it is, for that reason, appropriate to put a stop to the war.

the Lacedaimonians, see Thucydides 5.31. 7° In 431 B.C.E.; cf. Thucydides 2.8, who says it was the first earthquake there in memory. 71 In schools of declamation the venue was often assumed to be Athens if none other was specified. 72 Cf£., e.g., Herodotus 1.74.

46 NEPI EYPEZEQS B

[117] | ITepi acePciacs 4 povov. 1 ‘Lav 68 doeBelag xatyyoeéméy tivos, 200 tod xatnyoooupévov éyxAnuatos ta noeoPpdteoa Cyntobrtes adixrjuata mo0dinynodueta, xal ei tt GoEPéc PPdvat dAdo nooELQyaoLéevos. xdv wév iotogiay Eywpmev, aN"

éxelyns Cytnoouer’ av O& idtwtixnoy 7 tO nedBAnua, xata nagdieww 5 dtacvoeortes yrHoouey «éy@ tov wév GAdov Biov napahiundvw Aéyeww Ws

dosprc nal &vayr¢o “al xata ndvta arotedmalos, do Ay un doxoiny éyoxlsivy buds watny, wEol Ov vov ob Oixdlete, rEol todtTwY Gxovortas, GAAG tO tedevtaioy abt@ todundéey acéPynua dréerut O06 Suds »° oiov

pvovusvdcg tic Eudvn xai doeBeiac uoivetar 7) abt yao moodunynots 10 douoce: tH mooBAnjuati, elta xatapnoducda sig tHy dinynow « énet67) yao 6 xaigdc évéotyn THY wvotnoiwy xal &e pveioPar xaPagods elotovtac Eig TO Gvadxtogoy, tHvindde xal odto¢ ObtE xaPnOdUEVOS G0

thy aoePynudtwr obte ayvedtoas obtw» nai ta é&ijc. év O& toc an0 totooiac obtw xpivorvta: “AUnvaion doePetiac éni [Totibaia: bts °ADy- 15

vaio. aoy7iev aoeBeic, xal dtr Aaxedatudriot 61d tobto meds abtods [118] tov addeyor &evnrdyaot, xal dts me@tov wév t6 Kvdcvewov d&yos ovx | 7WOéhnoay éAdoa, ci?’ 6tt tas tTotaxovtodvtetc onovddas &Avoay, ciB’ but

mohetg dosPiic “EAAnvidac tag pév avéotynoay tac 6é édguoay. eita xatapnoducba sic thy Oinynow «xal viy ITotidatay dxotxov Koow- 20 Biwv odoay» nal ta E€Fjo.

‘Lay 68 anohoyoucba, avdnalw noijoouer, si ti meeoBdteoor Eyoimey thc uoicews Pondody nuiv a0 iotogiac eboepics nmenoaypéevor,

Aéyortec, et O& idtwtixdy sin td nedBAnua, xata naoddewp siodyor-

TEC, WomEO é&v Taig uatynyopiats paper. 25 1 nat Ve | 4 pévov0om. Ba || 3 &dixhuara Pa V; éyxaAquata Pc |

meonyjobuc0a Pa || 4 pOd&vor .. mooetpyacpuévoc Ba, (pOc&ver) V3, pAd&vovery

.. Tpostpyacuévo. P Vc Ac || 5 ety Pc || 8 SoxurcZete Ac || 9 toAurOev aote. Ac | adlxynua Ba || 10 xat aden (adr) Ac Ba) yao _ V VS; Dox.: tovéc TAPEAKELY EVOULGAY Tov Cxaty» ... Evtor OE... Cxal TOUTW Yao TH TMOOBAHUATL

Kpudoer H TAapOUaE teOdtHyyots» || 13 tTHvixadra 3é xal Ve || 14 obcw

om. Ba || 15 cf. Aps. I 2 p. 230,4Sp.-H. | of &Oyvato. Ba | zottdarav m.1 VcAc_ || 15-16 [&Onvato.m. po.| Vc || 16 sq. Thuc. 1, 66 126 cet. || 17 tovsupr. Vc;0m.P Ac || 19 tao EAAnVESas tag Pc | avécKxadbav, yo avéotynoav, Pe || 22 ef wt, supr. dtr, Pa || 23 tH>¢ toroptas Ac | evdoeBdc

VceAc || 28 &omep xatSc | p. 46,6

ON INVENTION, BOOK 2, CHAPTER 5 A7 | CHAPTER 5: ON IMPIETY OR HOMICIDE [117] If we are prosecuting someone for impiety (asebeia), before specifying the complaint as charged we shall provide a prodiegesis by looking for earlier wrongs and whether he previously committed some other impiety. If there is a historical record, we shall seek evidence from that; but if the problem concerns a private individual, we shall disparage him by paraleipsis, saying, “I pass over saying how impious and polluted and abominable in all ways his previous lite has been,73 that I may not seem to trouble you in vain if you hear things about which you are not now making judgment, but I

shall describe to you in detail the most recent impiety he has dared , to commit.” For example, when someone was being initiated into the mysteries he suddenly went mad and is being tried for imp!ety. The same prodiegesis will fit this problem; then we shall go on to the diegesis: “For when the time of the mysteries arrived and it was necessary for those to be initiated to go in a state of purity

into the temple, at that time this man was neither purified from unholy things nor thus cleansed,” and so on. In prodiegeses from history as follows: The Athenians are being tried for impiety for their action at Potidaea.”* (We shall say that) the Athenians were impious from the beginning, and that the Lacedaimonians went to war with them for that reason, and that first they were unwilling to expel the Cylonian pollution |, then that they broke the thirty [118] years truce, then that they impiously transplanted (the inhabitants of) some Greek cities and banished others. Then we shall go on to the diegesis, “And now they have mistreated Potidaea, being a colony of Corinth,” and so on. If we are speaking for the defense, we shall do the opposite, if we have anything to help us 1n the trial from the history of some-

thing done reverently before the trial, speaking about that, and if the problem concerns a private individual, proceeding by paraleipsis, as we said in describing prosecutions. 73 "The example of Demosthenes and Aeschines and the fact that declamations dealt with fictitious cases, often hundred of years in the past, perhaps seemed to excuse the advice to slander the defendant as given here and in the next chapter. 74 Cf. Apsines 1.54. For the incident in 430 B.c.E. on which the declamation is based, see Thucydides 2.70.

48 MNEPI EYPEZEQS B ‘Opoiws xdv pdvov xatnyoompmev 7 Bias 7 tovodtwyr ddtxnudtwv, 1 TOV ADTOY TodIOY TA MOEOPUTEGA Biata CntTHoopmEY, Et EyoimEv, a0 ioto-

oiac, ei 08 un, xata nagddewpwy TibéytEs’ nai év taic anodoyiats buoiws TAC EmlEluciag 7 aN0 totopiac BonDodbuEevot TiPEvtES 7} xaTa TapdAEupLY

etodyortes. mtotovar 0& tas toradtas noodinynostc éni uéy THY AdAEwY 5 ai modéeic, ent 6& tOv avdomy oi Biot no0ywootrtes Eis tas tho OLN-

YHOEWS YOELAC. |

[Tepi Onpociwy adoiucnuatov.

Kady dnuootwy adixnudtwv natnyoo@pev, a0 tév noeoButépov Anwpousda’ oiov toraxdotot viutwo Ta Oeoua OrnfarteEs aixyuddAwtot 10

ano thy nodeuior puydrytes HADoY sic tHY nateida, vduov xededor[119] toc vdutwo un avoiyeaBat tac abvblac ov avéméerv abtoic 6 otoaty|yoc nal xolvetat Onuociwy adianudtwrv’ évtabVa yag xal 6 xatrHyoeos G70 toeoBputéowy adixnudatoyv dogetat Aéywv 6tt «ipueic wéy ab tov éyetooTOVHOALEY OTOATNHYOY MAYTMY MoOTLUHOAYTES, O OE OvovoUs Dy GoxTHOEev 15

mwEol THY WOALy EnédELEE TOOTO xal éy TH Oteatynyia’ obtw yobr patlwe

éotoatnynosy, Bote xal HttiOynusy nal Httay Bageiay, év F tovaxoatouvg mohitag aiyual@tove ovvébyn yevéoOar weta tov TOY GAdwy yovoy» Elta emt tHy Oinynow ywornoousey «GAN ened 4 thyn MagéayxeE

toic moditatc téAuay O7Eat ta Oeoua dvrvyndijva nal Aadeiy» xai ta 20 ETC.

‘Lay 6& anoloydpueda’ «obtws &yw negi thy mdAw sbvove do-

yidev éyevouny, Bote xal tod nohéuov natahaPdrtoc buds tho éutje evvoiac éyortes OEiyuata mavtas magadinodrtecs tods GAAovs éusé otTeQa-

TNYOV EXELQOTOVHOATE». 25 Tveavvoxtoévo 68 mavtes ual aoloteEic Guoiws noodinynosic &&ovo. tovc Biovc, aw’ dy ywootpuer éni tac Oinyhoes THY NOayudtor, Ep oi¢ at xoicEtc. 2 Bloarx om. Sc; Bia, m. po. cadd., Pa || 3 Oévtecg PV; correxit Rabe | 4 BorPobueva m. 1 Pc; BoxPovpévac Pa V; correxit Rabe || 5 dunyhoers

m.1Pa || 6 ywpotvtes Ve || 8 om. Vc Ba || 10 cf. 52,15 || 11 gevyovtes Ve || 12 Odeac Ba || 13 xal 6 xathyopoc: pergitl. 21 || 14 say mocoButépmy Ba || 15 oteatyyetv Ac Ba, vl. P, m. 2 Vc; cf. 1. 24-25, p.

52,18 || 16 yao (pro yotv) Ac || 19 ywehololuev Vc || 20 AaOetv: exsp. guyovoty éraveAOety || 22 a&rodoyaucOa mpd¢ attovAc | obtwe etiam ante civovsg P || 23-24 bya morrd thy eutc edvolac Sc; Suk tH¢ ebvolac (m. 2 TOAAG et éu7%¢ supr.) Ve || 24 reapadetyuata Pe | mapadrinédvtleex alo Pa ||

24-25 otparnyety, m.1,P || 27 ywpépev Ve || 28 é— ale h xptare Ac

ON INVENTION, BOOK 2, CHAPTER 6 49 Similarly, if we are prosecuting a case of homicide (phonos) or violence (61a) or some such wrongdoing, in the same way we shall

look to see if we have any earlier strong points from history, and if not, proceed by paraleipsis. And similarly in defenses, going to the aid of the accused either by citing good actions from history or introducing them by paraleipsis. In the case of cities, their actions will provide such prodiegeses, in the case of men their lives, contributing to the needs of the diegesis. CHAPTER 6: ON WRONGS TO THE STATE

If we are prosecuting a charge of wrongs to the state (démosia adikémata), we shall derive the prokatastasis from earlier actions; for example, one night three hundred prisoners broke their bonds and having escaped from the enemy came to their native city. Since the law required that the gates not be opened at night, the general did not open the gates for them, | and he is tried for pub- [119] lic wrongs.7> Here the accuser will begin with earlier wrongdoings

(by the general), saying that “we elected him general, preferring him to all others, but he was from the beginning ill-disposed toward the city and has shown this even in his military command. He was such a bad general that we were defeated at heavy loss ina battle where the result was that three hundred citizens were taken prisoner after the death of many others.” Then we shall go on to the diegesis: “But since fortune provided our fellow citizens the courage to be able to break their bonds and escape notice,” and what follows. If we are speaking for the defense: “I was so well-disposed to

the city from the beginning that when war came upon you, having indications of my goodwill and passing over all the others, you elected me general.” All speeches about tyrannicides and military heroes7® will, similarly, draw on their lives in the past, from which we proceed to diegeses of the actions with which the trials are concerned.

73 Cf. Anonymous Problemata, no. 53 (Walz 8:411). 7© In cases where they seek a prize for their actions; see D. A. Russell, Greek Declamation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), 24-25.

50 MEP! EYPEZEQS B

epi dinynocemes. 1

Tavti uév oby mEgi THY MEOxATAOTAdCEwWY THY Ev Tai OinNyHOEOL

xal ev det Goyouévovsg ur axepddwc éuPddAdew totic aoaypaot. ‘Pr[120] téov dé é€fjc, tior nAatd|vetae % Sunynows Todmotc. Hueic wey odv ayer TO@tov yorva: tHY Aeyouévwy Exaotor xal Tolot xal TéETQAGL X%WAOLG 5

nhatdveoBat 7) xal mAstoow éxpégeoBar noAAdxic ob yao éaotevoymentat tho Oinynoews 7 Obvaputc OnTH wéTOM, xaPdnEO xal TO MEOOLmMWO?,

GA’ &Eovoiay éye nal wétoov thy BoblAnow 7 thy dbvamuy TOO Aéyortoc oiov «éy@ neoi thy ndAw edvovc ob THuEQor, OdE viv HoEduUNY ayanay ta xowwd, GALA tio Neds budc ebvoiag maAat xai noedmalat moAda 10 éEevnvoya delyywata’ xat 6tt ta 200¢ Wy~édeLay Kuiv AvacXON®, [Mvoidxic OnA@oai wot dox»* TO yao abto nedypa nodAdanic Eounverdéer xdopmoy évedetEato tod Adyov. Toéver OE xal TrHy Odbvapmty TOO OYTOEOC

2 tadcta Ac Ba,m.2Vc || 3 AéAcxtarantexaiadd. Vc || 4 ywévom.V | Sct post pxazevadd.P || 5 yey m. po. ex xpyvorPc || 6 Hom. Vc || 9 cf. 48,22 || 11 budvPc | a&vaoxords|vm. po.| Pc; dvacxonésy Pa; &vacxoray V

ON INVENTION, BOOK 2, CHAPTER 7 51 CHAPTER 7: ON DIEGESIS

The author’s insistence in this chapter on verbal amplification of a statement of facts is an unusual doctrine, presumably related to his desire to provide formulary techniques for elementary students of declamation, but inconsistent with the traditional teaching that a narration should be clear, concise, and credible, a doctrine that Quintilian (4.2.31) associated with the school of Isocrates. Aristotle criticizes tt in Rhetoric 3.16.4-6. Among later Greek writers the best discussion of the virtues of the narration 1s found in Anonymous Seguerianus § $63-104. Apsines (3.1) notes that there 1s special need in diegeses for persuasiveness and clarity. He adds 1n passing that there are two kinds—one a simple statement of the facts, the other an examination of intentions and the arguments that are being set out—and reports that others have made a division into the kind of narrative found in historical writing and that found in political oratory. See also Theon’s extended discussion of narrative (diegema) as a progymnasmatic exercise (vol. 2, pp. 75-96 Spengel).

So much then about prokatastases in diegeses and about where one should begin so as not to enter on the subject “without giving it a head” (akephalos). Next we must say in what | [120] ways a diegesis is extended (platynetat).77 Now, first, we say that each of the things said should be extended in three or four phrases (kéla) or often continued in even more,7® for the possibilities of

the diegesis are not narrowly confined by a stated limit, as in a prooemion, but the will or the ability of the speaker 1s its resource and limit; for example, “Not only today am I well-disposed

toward the city, nor have I just now begun to love the commonwealth, but for a long time, even for a very long time, I have shown signs of my goodwill toward you, and I think that I have shown a

thousand times that I am looking to your advantage.”79 For the same thing, repeatedly expressed, has revealed the ornament of 77 'The more traditional terms for “amplify” and “amplification” would be auxano and auxésis.

78 According to the anonymous commentator in Walz 7.2:725, this “is called herméneia,” varying the same thought with different words that make the language ornate and foster the power of the speaker. 79 The theme is that of the general prosecuted for wrongs to the state; cf.

2.6 above. :

52 MEPI EYPEZEQE B pddota &y taic negrygagaic toito doxodmevoy' && avayuns yao mol- 1 xihwy Gvoudtor xal dtaydowy sdxogodpuev Cytobytmy Huddy moixidotc nal wodvtodmols Gyduaot péetamotety Ta xOAa. IToa@tov péy obtw pnxdvetat & Eounvetac. énerta 6é xal to nagaheiptéev Cythiaartes AéEousy xdxsivo év x@Aoig Sooicg dv dvrvdueGa, 5 oloy «t00e ev obx énoinoa 0668 sioyaoduny, éxsivo O& od Otempagéd-

pny». “Eneita wévtot xal tod menoayuévov tiv aitiay Cnthoouey, xal (121) dtay edowper, Scots dy dvvdueda xdbhoic | Exacta dgnynodpueda’ ob-

dsic yao vots obtw alos sic xataoxevny dinyyjoews Ws aitia. 10 [Thavévovo 6& dijynow nai oi Aoytopol, ci m00 tév modéEewv Aéyoipev PeBovdsioba, Wc, et uév the noljoai, ThE AnaytHoETat,

nat meootiPévat tac aitiac si dé téde Eovaoaiuny, tédE GrartioEta. Kai nagadeiypatos évexev xai cagnrveias tHv Bewonudtwr xal ént meopArjuatoc Aéfouev’ Zotw O€ 6 oteatynyds 6 ur) Gvol~ac taco nU- 15

hac. ano tod nagahsipiévtos no@tov «Husic yao évotdytos tob noAépwov xai xatagoaysions tig uayns nal xwnelons uty modo todcs éyBoovs pthovexiag dAdoy pév obdéva THY ndvTwMY oToaTHYyOY éeyxeI-

gotorvnoauey ovde EneotHoamEy Toig modyuaow obdbé tO OtoatdénEdOP émttotevoaper», celta to nmopayHéy «todtOY O& OTOATHYEiv HELboapEy nal 20

tO atiwpma tic médews érrotedoaperv xai naoay thy Obvauy éyew xal

tattew dnws EPehnioeev énetdéaper», el? 1 aitia «oby Wo ua THY GAnPevay me0dMao0rtOS adbtob tiv aéAw ual tods éyPoods ayanoortoc, GAA’ we ebvoinxds Me00THOOMEVOY THY THuetéowy Meayudtoyr. 6 6é&

1 pddotxom. Mr | yo év tats ypapaic P; yo xal cvyypapaic xal yeapatcs Ba; Evin tev BiBAlteav «meprypapatc» Eyer Evra 38 Covyypapaticn” xat

Kran «ypapatcn 6 wey obv 2enynths «meprypapatc» d&vayvods xtA. Dox. || 2

mg. m. 1 edzopjoouev Pa; |I-I]]edxop|o} m. po.|uev Ve || 4 odv obtas Ba

|| 5 Suvi m. po. ex yod|ycO« Ba || 6 32 odd Ac || 9 &avom. Vc || 10 obtw vot¢ V || 11 of Pc, (supr.)Pa;om.V_ || 13 téde dravrjoeta Ba || 14 &vexa Ba | tio cupyvelagc Ve || 15 p. 48,12 || 16 cvotdévtos Sturm | 17 tHoom. Ba || 18 ard&vtwv Ac || 22 Oedjoereyv Vc Ba | aitta rod moayQévtos Ac, v.l. P || 22-23 pa thy &Oyvav Ac

ON INVENTION, BOOK 2, CHAPTER 7 53 the speech. When this is practiced it most fosters the ability of the orator in perigraphae,®° for we necessarily make plentiful use of different and varied words when we are seeking to recast the clauses in varied and manifold ways.

First, then, the diegesis is lengthened by the style of expression (herméneia). ‘Then, having looked for something that has been omitted, we state that also in as many clauses as we can; for

example, “I did not do this, on the one hand, nor bring it about, nor, on the other hand, did I carry through that undertaking.” Then surely we shall look for the cause (aitia) of what has been done, and when we find it, we shall describe each thing in as many cola as we can, | for there is no thought so fine for the [121] construction of a diegesis as cause. Calculations (logismoz) also extend a diegesis, if we were to claim that there had been planning before the actions took place; for example, “if I were to do one thing, this result will follow,”®? and add the causes; and “if I had done something else, this other result will follow.”

For an example and clarification of these rules,8? we shall discuss a problem, and let it be the general who did not open the gates.°3 First, from what has been omitted: “For®+ when the war had begun and the battle was raging and our rivalry with the enemy had been excited, we elected no other person out of all the possible ones to be our general, nor did we put them in charge of events, nor did we entrust the army to them”; then what was done: “We thought it right for this man to be general, and we entrusted the reputation of the city to him and ordered that he have all power and make what arrangements he wished”; then the cause: “Certainly not because he was betraying the city and loving its enemies,

but because with all goodwill he took charge of our affairs. But 8° Explained by Patillon (L’Art rhétorique, 233 n. 1) as language in which several successive cola form a certain system, such as antithesis or parallelism. A period is a type of perigraphe. The word does not seem to be used in this sense elsewhere. 81 Apantésetat; the word frequently implies encountering a difficulty. 82 Theoremata, a term found repeatedly in ch. 1 of the rhetorical handbook attributed to Apsines but rare elsewhere of rhetorical practice. 83 Cf. 2.6 above. 84 The particle gar (Latin enim) regularly marks the beginning of a narration; cf. e.g., Lysias 1.6; 3.5; 7.4, etc.

54 MEPI EYPEXEQE B tabta motevdeicy» adh && tév nagalepiérvtwmy c«obte éotoathye 1 nals obte &nyeito TOY noeayudtwr ceurds»: ei0’ 7 aitia tod magaheiptévtos «ddovovcs yao Hy megl thy adédw xai Gdixog advu: GAAd

\ ” ¢ a tr > / 2 bi \ e \ Cad Cond \ f

nal aitios Huly Httns evéveto. enel O& 6 Beds xaldc nowy nat xnd0-

/ A a -] / ~w / Cw ‘ 4 \ ~

[122] mevog TOY TH WOAEwWS NMOAYUaTwY xal éxcav|ogBod uevos TA THC WOAEWS 5

ATALOUATA “ATA voby EnoinoE TOI NOAitaLs OFéat TA OEoUa nal muysiy

durn Privat xal owPivat 2906 Hudc», eita ano tév hoytoudy « évtavBa 6 oteatnyos édoyioato, >, ci uéy Gvoiget tac abvAac, owbivai TE

Pld \ ~ tf ew > / / > \ \ 9 / ¢

AgAacKXEvaGEL TODS ToLaxoctovs xal obdEY ByEAOS atta thc meodociac

gota. xal tic tts Huiv anartyioe nagayviia, si 0& un Gvoigetey, WS 10 thnowost te THY ExtPvuiay xal navtes tedvHEovta: xal Ei¢ OTEVOY xO[Loy] HATAOTHOETAL TA HUETEQA TOOTO, 6 xal mMOaTTELY NOOEiAETO». Hal

magatyontéor, 6tt “al Ta NoattduEva “ai tac aitiac THY noatTOMévor xal Ta Mapahemdpeva nal Tas aitiac THY nagadEtnoméevwy xal TOG hoytopovs xai adyvta év nodhoic x@Aotc nat moinidorc Aéyew dvvdueba. 15 Kit 68 todxos év Oinynoe toy nenoaypérwrv nAatbyvoito, dtacxevd-

Cetar to nodpAnua, od dinyetta:: aitia péy yao Oujynow, todos Oé Otaoxevyny xataoxevdler. todnot O€ Oinynoews tosis, dndoic, éyxatdoxEvoc, Evdidoxevoc. Otay mév oby 7 TA MEdyUAaTAa TMOAAG xai moLxtha

“al ixava wat Baoy tod avtidixovc, juiv d& BonOA, andi yonodus- 20 (1231 Ba tH dunyjoe od eit yao | icyvody Adywr t6 adbtoudtws ioyoor modyua. Edy O& obytoMos F “al MoAttiny 7 Oupynots, TH &ypxatacnuedm@

2 osyvéig Ba, m. 2 Vc Ac; om. Ve Ac; 690%¢P || 4 post éyéveto Vem. 1 mg.: } S&yyynorg abt|mg. decurt.| || 5-6 tabtys ta mratouata Ac || 6 tote moAttarg¢om. Ve Ba || 6 éHEou ta Seapd rods moAttag Ac || 7

veg Ve | t&Hvom.Pa || 10 &ravthoor Vc || 12 juétepa ? cf. p. 52, 19.24 | 6 Pa, (er.)Pc;0om.V | zpoclAlem. po.| Pc || 15 [Ao “4¢)

m. po. ex tapadro|yrapots Pe | Actoot Ba | xat morxtdrAorgom. Ve || 16 Teattopevov Ve || 17 ob} P Ac; xa od Vc; oby drAdic Ba V8; xat ody &rAd¢ Sc; Dox.: &v trot tév BLBAlwv od TéHerta Td Coby ATAGS» “TA. || 17-18 Yo nat obtws (om. xal obtws Pc): aitia usv yao Sinynow éyxat&oxevov’ tod70¢ dé Sunynow éevdrdaxevov (Pc hic quoque éyxatkoxevov) xatxoxevaTer mg. P, cf.

Dox. v.l.; cf. p.56,6 || 18 duyyhocwvV || 19 FApostzomtrAnPc || 20 txava

H xatAc | Bap|ym.po.] Ve || 22 &tavBa | Hom. Mr | té& 0m. Ve Ac

ON INVENTION, BOOK 2, CHAPTER 7 55 when he was trusted with these things,” taking up again what was left undone, “he did not perform well as general, nor did he exercise leadership over affairs in a responsible way”; then the cause of what was left undone: “for he was 1ll-disposed toward the city and altogether unjust, and he became the cause of our defeat. When the god, favoring us and caring for the affairs of the city and | lift- [122] ing the city up from its fall, set it in the mind of the citizens (who were held prisoners) to break their bonds and to be able to flee and come safely to us,” then from reasoning, “at that time the general reasoned that if he opened the gates, he would provide opportunity for the three hundred to be saved, and there will be no profit for him in treason, and we will get consolation for the defeat, but if he were not to open the gates he will fulfill his desire, and all will be killed, and our affairs will be reduced to the final extremity—this is what he chose to do.” Observe carefully that we are able to say the things done and the causes of the things done and the things omitted and the causes of the things omitted and the reasonings and everything in many and varied cola. If the manner (tropos)®5 of what has been done is extended in a diegesis, the problem 1s being artistically developed (diaskeuazetai), not being narrated (diégeitaz), for giving a cause contributes to narration, while (other rhetorical) treatment contributes to artistic development (diaskeué).°© There are three manners of treating a diegesis: simple (haplous), argued (enkataskeuos), highly developed (endiaskeuos).°7 Now when the facts are numerous and varied and sufficient and weigh against the opponent and help our case, we shall use a simple diegesis, for | something that is sufficiently [123]

strong in itself has no need of strong words. But if the diegesis is brief and of a political sort, we shall use the argued manner, 85 By use of vivid description, personifications, and other figures of speech; on this use of tropos, cf. 3.15 below, p. 129. 86 On diaskeué, cf. 3.15 below. Maximus Planudes (Walz 5:390) explains that this is a matter of the quality (poztotés) in contrast to the quantity (posotés) of what is said.

87 Translated by Lindberg (2058) as “the simple, the explanatory, and | the depictive narration.” Patillon (L’Art rhétorique, p. 234) translates “simple, avec confirmation, avec représentation.” Enkataskeuos is used by Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Demetrius, and other writers on rhetoric to mean an elaborated style; endiaskeuos is not found earlier, nor is the division into three tropes of narration. The tropes identified here correspond roughly to the traditional division into three genera dicendi: plain, middle, and grand styles.

56 MEPI EYPEZEQZ B yonoducta todn@ taic aitiag xataoxevdlortes avtyy, iva yévytat On- 1 TooLHwTéoa Th moocPnxy THY aiti@y sic THY uataoxevyy PorxVovuéern. éav 6& 7 abytouos xal gadgotéoa, TH éEvdtaoxedm@ yonooueVa TOOTM Ln) pEeLvdcuevot UNOE THY G0 TOO TOdTOV HaTAoxEvoY EvdLAGXEVOS YAo-

tot Ota todto xéxAntat, 6tt toicg a0 tho dtaoxevtc pwéoeor PonPeita. 5 épapev 0& 76n pPdoartec, 6tt aitia sy xataoxevdlet, TedMOG OE OLaoxnevacet.

‘Andy psy ody Oinynows naga AnuooBéver év tH Kata Kovewvoc

aixiag «é&jAdouev cic IIdvaxtoy étoc tovti teitoy. nal we? Hudy géoxnvwoay oi Kévwvos visio xai moocobveovr te Huiv xai tag ayidacg 10 “xateoonyrvvoy»* ob yao eixve udAdoy dew@oa TH Adyw 7} Ta Medypata

héywr abta 6 Oytwo widd, & éxeattoy éxeivor poyva ydeto. Aeyoueva nhéov ioydy laBev, 7 et tig abta éxdopmet Advotc.

"Eyxatdoxevoc Oé éotw 7 Kata “Agiotoxedtovc. yaoxwy yao [124] Xeoodrvyoov xivdvvevew tH mdAEt tac aitiac | héyet, OV dc éo@leto, wal 15

tac aitiac, & dy anoheitar’ «#ott yao toito, tedevtjoartoc Kotvoc Bnowoddny xai “Auddoxoy nai KegooBiéntny toeeic avd? Evdg Oogxne

vevéova Bacthéac’ ovupéPyue yao & todvtov abtoic pév avtinddove civat tobtovs, buds O& txéoxyeoVar xai Deoanedvew». nal xadanak 7

dunynots nmdoa Oa tig Dewoiacg nenAnowtat tavtys. 20 "Evéidoxevoy 0&8 éxeivo tO wégos THC Oinynoews év tH LTeoi tic

naoanoeoBeiac naga tH Anuootéver «Péaua detvdv, & Avdees ‘ADnvaiot, xal édcewdv’ 6tE yao viv énogevdueda sic Aclmotc, && avayunc ny Oody tadta mdrta, oixias xatecxappmévac, TElyn TMEOLNONMEVA, YO-

oav gornuoy toy év HAixia, ybvata 0& xal ralddgla GAiya nai moeoPdtac 25 avBowmove otxtoovs».

3 opodpotéox Dox. || 4 dSiaoxevdiv Ba, (8 m. po. in ras.) Pe || 4-5 yeoto. xal Ve || 6 Sthynow natacxevater Ve; yo’ xat obtws (om. xat obta< Pa): Ste aitta wév Suyynow éynataoxevov’ tedz0g 5é Sunyrow Evdudonevov xat-

acxevacer mg. P, cf. Dox. v.l.; cf. p. 54,16 || 8 % Styyyorg Pa | Dem. 54, 3.4 | |&ototm. po.Jwmvog Pa || 10 detotwvosg PV (xdvwvog m. 2 Ve Ba, m. po. P); Dox.: év trot tév BiBAtwv «ol Tod xd6vwvos viol» yéyeamtat xtA. | pr.

xatom.P || 11 Snddoar, ecvm. 2, Vc | tov AdyovP,m.2Vc || 12 6 éyAtwe post WA& Pc, post 11 elyev Ba || 13 mg. wActovam. po. Ma | ioydoc Portus | nbyoe Pa; Abyoue Pc || 14 8&8 duhynots éotev Ba | Hvixsan. || 15

vy m6Atv Vc | gm. 2ex@vVc || 16 aittagom. Ve | &€& @vPc V, vi. Pa; dv &¢ Pa | got totvey & & °AO. todtO, Td teAcUTHGAaVTOs Dem. 23, 8 || 20

TavTNS TeTAHOwWTa Pe || 20 Dem.19,65 || 21 wept th¢ P; om. Vc; zepl om. Ba (cf. 64, 8. 18 cet.); tH¢ om. Ac || 22 dSenvdv post dOnvator Ac | &vSpec om. Ba

ON INVENTION, BOOK 2, CHAPTER 7 57 supporting what we say with the causes in order that the diegesis may become more rhetorical, 88 the proof being helped by addition of the causes. If the facts are few and rather clear (phaidrotera), we shall use the highly developed manner, not sparing any of the supports from the manner of treatment. It is called endiaskeuos because it is helped by features of diaskeué. We have already said earlier that a cause provides support (Rataskeuaze1), while the manner of treatment provides artistic development (diaskeuazet). A “simple” diegesis, then, among Demosthenes’ works 1s that in the prosecution of Conon for assault: “This is the third year since we went out to Panactus. ‘The sons of Conon shared a tent with us and urinated on us and broke chamber pots over our heads.”°9 The orator could not have made the speech more striking than he does by stating the plain facts of what they did, for stated nakedly they have more force than if one fancied them up with words. An “argued” diegesis is that in Against Aristocrates. Claiming that the Chersonese was a source of danger to the city, | he [124] mentions the causes through which it was saved and the causes from which it was ruined:9° For the reason is this: “When Cotys died, Berisades and Amadocus and Cersobleptes became kings of

Thrace, three kings instead of one. The result of this was that they became rivals of each other, and you flattered and courted them.” And briefly stated, the whole diegesis is concerned with this topic.??

The following part of the diegesis in On the False Embassy by Demosthenes is “highly developed.” “An awful sight, men of Athens, and piteous. For when recently we were on our way to Delphi, we could not help seeing it all—houses razed to the ground, walls dismantled, the land destitute of men in their prime, only a few weak women and mere boys and miserable old men.” 9? What is best and most necessary to know is that most diege-

88 T.e., persuasive, as in a real speech by a rhetor. 89 Demosthenes 54.34, with much omitted. 9° Demosthenes 23.8. 9t ‘The narration occupies §§8—17 of the speech. 92 Demosthenes 19.64.

58 MNEPI EYPEZEQS B To 6é dgtotoy xai dvaynaidtatoy sidévas, tt THY Oinyryoewr ai 1

pév mhelotat ndow dronintovot toig todnols, Bote tia wey adbtay éon anda sivat, twa O& éynatdoxeva, tia 0é évdidoxeva, Wo gaivetat % Oinynots abty napa tH AnuooPéver, udAdoy O& ai mAeiovc: tO pév yao Aéyew «dbpusic todtoy éyeipotovioate moEoPEvtry obY MSC THY 5 arodwoopéevwy Ta HuétEoa, GAA’ Wo THY Mudakdrvtwyr tod GAhove» THs éynataoxevov éoos Eoti, TO 0& Aépewy «6 O8 TH MOdTH TOY ExxAnoiwy

tayta sinwmy xata Didoxodtovce, ti 0 totegaia wetaBadduevoc OrjAdc (125) éots mo0diddvar» Grhdc | Aéyer nal dnAds Oinyetrau, éni tédee bé eet-

Eauev Ott &vdtaoxetvws Ta rept Dwxéac dinyeitat. 10 "Axun O& Oinynoews Torya> yivetat, 7tot to} Nodyuatos adtob 1 tho akimoews 7H tio aitiac tic aktWoews ovvexydco diagydoois xw@Aotc nat moixtdots Aeyoueryc, 7} xal tOv Ovo 7) nal THY ToLmy moAAdxIS bu-

oiws napadauBavouévwmr: obtw yao 7 axun ueiCoy yivetat nal moixidy uaddhov, éayv TO mEGyua Toot x@dotc 7 TétOQAOW sinwpuer, emi téder O€ 15

nal THY akimow xai tho abihoews tHy aitiav. oloy évdmidy tig tio Lntoos anéutewe tov vidv xata tov tay Gxoitwy vouorv, &éPaverv 7 UHTHO, “al nOlvEeTAL 6 RAaTNHO aitiac Dardtov’ «xal ovdAdaBay toy vidr

ématev, Etitowoxev, Epdvevev Ouod TH yuvatxi, Wo GAAotoiovc, wo éyDoovs, ac & twos t&v nodEuiwy yeyorOtac»” tO NEGyua TOTO: Eita Hh 20

acimotc «tic ov ayavaxtet, tic obx Goyiletat, tic ob yahenaivet Toc VEVEYNUEVOLS ; TiC OM ANALTEl THY MQ0OnxOvOaY Tiuwoiay», Elta H ai-

tia «Oe Ov nEerAnowtat piacudtwy 7 oixia, dv dy &eopwor yova, dv dv doeBeic opayat, 61° dy yévoc Shoy #ogintat nEeqyovevuévoy, mag’ ob

NXLOTA Tic AY MOOGEOOXNGE? ; » 25

3 t& (pro alt. twa) Ve | twk Pa Ba; te Vc Ac | tive 38 évdtdoneva om. Pc || 5 cf.Dem.19,12 || 6 t&vom. Ba || 7 t& Ba | Aéyerv suspect. | cf. Dem. 19,15 || 8 weraBarAAduevos V || 9 never a Senvetrc Pa | p. 56,21 || 12 to &Etmdoews P Ba, (ex tv &Eucmdcewv) Ac; om. Ve | xdAotc

om. Pc || 13 xa mouxtAorg¢om. Vc Ba | yevouévyng Ac || 14 petlwov 7 any yevnoeta. Vc Ba, (yiverar) Ac || 15 &vO0a(pro édv) Ve | [totlotPa | etrwpev (@ m. 2 ex o Vc) 7 tétpaow (téccapotv Ba) V || 16 pr.xatom. Ac | why ths aEtwosws aittav Ve | cf. 6,23 || 22 d&mortel ... de” Sv? || 22-23 aitta tho dEimcews Ve || 23-24 bvex dv Vc_ || 25 subscr. téA0c zod B’ téu0v P; om. V

ON INVENTION, BOOK 2, CHAPTER 7 59 ses fall under one of these manners of treatment, with the result that some instances of them are simple, some argued, some highly wrought, as this diegesis by Demosthenes seems to be, and many others, for to say, “You did not elect this man an ambassador in the belief that he was one of those who were going to sell out your interests but as one of those who were going to keep an eye on the others,”93 is an instance of one that is argued, and to say (cf. 19.15), “At the first meeting, having spoken against Philocrates, and at the later one changing his tune, he clearly betrayed you,” is simply | spoken and simply narrated, and finally we showed that 125] the diegesis about the Phocians is highly wrought. The akmé®> of a diegesis occurs in three ways: either when (1) the action or (2) the axiosis®® or (3) the cause of the axiosis is stated repeatedly in different and varied cola, or often two or three of these are combined, for the akme gains in effect and becomes more varied if we state the action in three or four cola and then at the end add the axiosis and the cause of the axiosis; for example, a man killed his son in the presence of his mother in accordance with the law about those not brought to trial.97 The mother dropped dead, and the father is being tried as responsible for her death: “And finding him with her, he struck, he wounded, he murdered his son together with his wife, as though they were strangers, as personal enemies, as born from some enemy of the state.” This is the action. Then the axiosis: “Who is not outraged, who is not infuriated, who is not angered at what has been done? Who does not demand condign punishment?” ‘Then the cause: “Has not the house been filled with pollution, (have there not been) unlawful killings, impious slaughter, a whole family murderously

snatched from life, by the very person whom one would least expect?” 93. Demosthenes 19.12. 94 Demosthenes 19.15. 95 For the author’s understanding of akmé, literally “peak,” see 3.13, 4.4,

and 4.9 below. Akmé is otherwise found as a rhetorical term only in Hermogenes, On Ideas 1.10, where it is the name for florescence in style, a mixture of aggressive attack and amplifying exposition. Cf. Rutherford, Canons, 105-12, who defines akmé in On Invention as “a sort of culminating effort, associated with the heat of debate, with amplifying language, with the impetus of the speaker

which makes the audience rise. The author ... associates it particularly with panegyrical epikhetremata” (107-8). 9© On axiosis, the speaker’s “evaluation,” see n. 9 above. 97 On the law, see n. 8 above.

BLANK PAGE

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3 61

| BOOK 3 [126] Book 3 discusses kataskeué, the “confirmation” or proof as the third major division in a speech after the prooemion and diegesis: everything before it 1s preparatory. The importance of the subject is here emphasized by a formal dedication and catalogue of the contents of

the book. If there was a dedication and introduction to book 1, it was omitted when our editor adapted the work for its present function in the Hermogenic corpus. Rabe pointed out (p. 1x) that there are examples of dedications elsewhere than at the beginning of a work.

Varro prefixed dedications to later books of De Lingua Latina and Rerum Rusticarum Libri, and Phrynichus added dedications in his Attic lexicon. Julius Marcus is unknown; he was apparently a student and probably from a prominent family; cf. the dedication to a student named Postumius Terentianus by the author of the treatise On Sublimity, traditionally attributed to Longinus. The term kataskeué, meaning “confirmation,” largely replaced the Aristotelian term pistis during the time of the Roman Empire

and occurs repeatedly in Apsines’ Art of Rhetoric, though pistts (described as kataskeuastikos) 1s retained in Anonymous Seguerianus (cf. $143). Kataskeué had been earlier used by Dionysius of Halicarnassus to mean “artistic treatment” (Latin ornatus; cf. On Composition, vol. 2, pp. 70,4; 156,13; 160,19; 164,12 UsenerRadermacher). It perhaps first came into common use to mean confirmation as a progymnasmatic exercise (cf. anaskeué to mean “vefutation”) and is found in this sense in Theon’s treatises on the exercises (e.g., Vol. 2, pp. 64,32; 66,32; 69,21 Spengel), usually dated to the first century C.E.; cf. also Quintilian 2.4.18; Suetonius,

On Rhetoricians 24,5. The term kataskeué in the sense of confirmation appears once in Hermogenes’ On Stases (65,16) and once in On Ideas (398,10). Forms of the verb kataskeuazein, meaning “to confirm, to prove,” are more common in the Hermogenic corpus and elsewhere in Greek of the impenal penod. Other technical terms mentioned in chapter 1 will be discussed in notes on the chapters devoted to their subjects later in this book.

[126] | 0 1 62 MWEPI EYPEXZEQ? PL

\ Kn BA / \ 2 9 ow , 4

To tottov pot obytaypa tovtt yéyovev, ® xodtiote “lovdie MGo-

xE, WEL WY HON cot PPdYw xal Ov Euavtod moAddxuic Texyvodoyryoac, TOU xoov~paiov Tis ONtToOoLXAs wéoovc’ ~ott O& 7 TE THY xEvadaiwy Eto-

aywyn xai oi todmot tovtwy xa Oc 6owyv yivortal, cita meol tov AV- 5 cewv xal && dowy ovviotartat, eita émiyetonudtmyv nal thy tonwy, &&

dv AauPdvorvta, eita éoyacimy, ai xa?’ Exaotoy tay émyeronudatov éxAaupavovoa éoyacortar, xal uny xal Toy ent tovtots évdvunudatwv éuol magevoevervtwrv, ap wv tO axodtatoy tic OoiuttTyHtos “al naga Toig aoyatois etoionetau mEpattéow O£& todbtTwY mo0Paivovoay THY ON- 10 tooinny oby evornapuer, avaxvxhovuérvny O& ye. 700 O& TodtTwY Boayéa Mol EOL MEOXATAOCxELTCS Eineiv Loker.

epi npoxatacKeovs.

“H ‘ 4 4 2 / 4 fond ww ¢ ond \ of ot \ be] w A! / A ,

mooxataoxEevy meEeoPUtTEody Eott UéOOG Adyov Tijg xaTAaOxEVIGC,

wc Onhot xai tobvoua. éoyor 0& attic tO nooextiPeoBar Ta wEga- 15 hata xai ta Cytyuata, oic neoindaxeic 6 Adyos ovundnodost Thy b210-

1 téy0g Y’. meet ebpécews P Ve Ac; zept ebeécews: téy0¢ teitos Ba; TOUOSG YY TEpl THC TOV xeparatwy cionywyyjso Px || 2-3 tovAte uxoxe P Ba; Uaoxe tovAre, mg. mM. 2 yp xal rkoxe ataAre, Vc; udexe m. 1, iovAte m. 2 suppl. Vbd; Oedqurc Ac || 3 tive tév BLBAtwv mpOcKEtwevoy Eyer TO Cxal Ot” Euavtod »

xtA. Dox. || 5 tivde tev BrBAtwv «xal of tobtwv todzot xal du” Scev yivetat»

Eyer... GAN? &rervov anal of tedzo, tadtyns» xta. Dox. || 6 yivovta: Ba | Tept émeeyetpnuatwv Sc; (circ. IIT] émyerpyudtwv Ve || 10 a&pyarotéporg P ||

12 &do0%ev cizetv Pc || 14 Hom. Pc | elye tb madrardv «mpecBiteodv éote soos TIS Sunyhoews tod AdYou THs xataoxev7Ig WS SyAct» Dox. || 15 dé LTI-111] adtrH¢ Ve

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 2 63 CHAPTER I: PROOEMION

This is the third book of my work, most excellent Julius Marcus, dealing with artistic matters that I have already discussed with you many times, the most important part of rhetoric. It concerns the introduction of the headings (of the argument) and their manner of treatment and from what they are derived, then discussion of refutations and from what they are composed, then epikheiremes and the topics?® from which they are taken, then the elaborations that are taken up and worked out in the case of each of the epikheiremes, and also, as you will see, an account of enthymemes in support of them that I have discovered along the way,99 by which the highest degree of striking effect (drimytés) is invented by the ancients. We have not found that the art of rhetoric, although often inclusive, extends beyond these matters.'°° But before tak-

ing up these subjects, I think it best to say a few words about prokataskeué. CHAPTER 2: ON PROKATASKEUE

Prokataskeué,'°* as the name indicates, is the earlier part of the confirmation (kataskeué) of a speech. Its function is to set out in advance the headings and the questions by which the speech, 98 This, 68,8, and 106,12 below seem to be the only instances of topos to mean “topic” in On Invention. Elsewhere the word usually means a “place” (e.g., Athens). 99 'This seems to refer to the unusual meaning of enthymeme as described

in ch. 8 below. The author attributes his discovery to his study of the ancient orators. too 'The author’s summary of book 3 includes only chs. 1-9. Possibly the editor has added chs. 10-15 from another part of the original work. On the basis of style and terminology, it could be by the same author, but the limitation of rhetoric to invention is strange, ruling out not only delivery and memory (often neglected by later Greek writers) but style as well, in which the author clearly has some interest. tor Cf. Rutherford, Canons, 112-13, comparing Hermogenes, On Ideas 235,8ff. and 236,21ff., where, however, the term prokataskeué does not occur. It is found in prolegomena to the Hermogenic corpus, where it is probably derived from this chapter, and occurs twice in the Rhetores Latint Minores: Julius Rufinianus §2 and Fortunatianus 2.5, pp. 60 and 110 Halm.

64 NMEPI EYPEZEQS T [127] Peau, oldy gotwy | éxeivo naga tH AnuooBéver « dixasor 6é éotwy tows 1 éus tola buiv tneoynuévory, Ev wsy WC Maea TOdvs VOMOUSG TO pHMLOMA etontat, devtEgor O€ WC Govugoody foTL TODTO TH NMOAEL, TOITOY OE WC

avaéidc gots todvtwr tvysiv Xagidnuoc, andvtwy tottwry tuiv algeouw dotvat, ti mo@tov 7 ti OevtEgor 7) tt teAevtaiov Bovdopévoic buiy Eotw 5 axotoat»* Tadta ydeto. meceimw@y ndoay Huty Ent xepadaiov thy touny Eonjuave tod Adyov, eita xal ? Exaotoy attav AaPpwoy dtereodvato taic xataonevals Tas douottovoas ExdotTm THY émLyElonoewy MECGAYAyOY

Ovvdwels. xal uny xal év tH tho LlagangeaBeiac Adyw nooxatacxEvtis &yer yoay xat Odvauy tO Aésyew adbtoy «oxépacde nag byuiv abtoic, 10 tivwy sooonxer Adyor maga ngeoPevtod AaBeiv’ nodtov wéy tolvvy ov annyyethre, devteoov 0&8 wv Enetoe, toitoy O& WY moocETaéaTE abt, ETA TATA THY yodvwr &p dnact 6é todtoic, Ei GOwEOdOxTwWS 7 LAT)

Tadta ndyta nénpaxtar»* xat yao éytabda éni xepalaiwy ta éyxAjuata mo9000nnEev, Ov xa? Exactov &ehéyEer nai anodeiées. ci O& Cntoincs, 15 El TOUTOLG TETUNHE TOiG xeqahaiotc TOY Adyor # Et TobTOIG pdvOLS 7 Et

th tage Eyonoato thc énayyeliag év th xataoxevi, Adyov tdsoy Cytei¢ Dewoiac nai téyyny tod tic LlaganopeocPeiacs nai oixovoyiay, obx

[128] dvageic tO pr) od nooentiPecVa ta | xepddaia tov Orjtopa, 6 tho MOOXATAOKELHS EotLy tOtoyv’ NOAd O€ OrjnoViEY OLEevHvoyYE TExvoAoyHoat 20

didacxahinny Dewolay } Peworjoa: dixavixiy advayxny Adyou moed¢ TO yonotwov tov Cytovuérwv dtorxovomovpéevov’ Enel xaxeivd oot GotEior Hal YAOLEY TOOELOHOVAL, WS TETNONMAMEY THY MEOXATAGKEVTY TABTNHY OO

uta yooa ovvelevypyévny GAda Oindj moté pév yao wETa TA OOOLWLA TATTEL THY TEOKaTAaGKELVHY, Oo év tH tHG LlapangeoPseiac Adym, mote 25

1 éxcivwm.1 Pa | Dem. 23,18 || 2 Sreoynuévov cizetv Ba || 3 déom. Pc | gota, Vc Ac || 4 alt. éot.0m. Vc Ac | todtov Ac Ba || 5 fpivPc Ac || 6 xegadratov Spengel, cf. 1.14 || 8 éxkororPa || 9 alt. xat om. Pa || 10 tO|1I] Vc | cf. II. #8. p. 281, 22 sq. Sp.; Aps. I 2 p. 247, 12 Sp.-H. || 11 tH mdAer post reocyxer add. Ba, Dem. 19, 4 || 13 tov xedvov

V {| 14 wévtxom. Pc || 15 [&m.1exd]rodet&erPc || 16 ter’ | I] une Pa || 18-19 d&vapetc m. po. Pc; &v épetc PV Mr (od dv m. 1, o8xovv m. 2 Vc Ba)

| 20 xatacxevjg Pe || 22 ta&t Cytouuévw Ac | dotetdv cor Ac || 23

Teocetoyjo0a Spengel :

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 2 65 when woven together, will fulfill the hypothesis,'°% as does | this [127] passage in Demosthenes (23.18): “Since I have promised to discuss three things—first, how the decree is worded contrary to the laws; second, how this is inexpedient for the city; and third, how Charidemus is unworthy of obtaining these things—it is probably right for me to offer you a choice among them as to what you want to hear discussed first, what second, and what last.” By these

introductory words he signaled to us the division by heading in the speech; then having taken them one by one he continued with the confirmations, bringing forward effective arguments suited to each of the epikheiremes. In the speech On the False Embassy (19.4) as well, the following statement has the place and function of a prokataskeué: “Consider among yourselves what are the points on which it is proper to expect an account from an ambassador: first, then, what he reported; second, what he persuaded you to do; third, what instructions you gave him; after this an account of the dates; and in addition to all these things, whether all these things have been done with or without taking bribes.” Here he has set out in headings the complaints that he will prove and demonstrate one by one. If you ask whether he has divided the speech into these headings or if into only these or if he used the announced order in the confirmation, you are seeking a specific account of theory as found in the art and arrangement of On the False Embassy and you are not considering whether or not | the [128] orator set out the headings in advance, which 1s the property of the prokataskeué. There is certainly a lot of difference between an artistic account of theoretical teaching and seeing the constraints in a judicial speech that 1s arranged for the utility of what is under consideration. You (fulius Marcus) have perceptively and gracefully remarked earlier that we have found such a prokataskeué not only attached to one context but to two, for sometimes he puts the prokataskeué after the prooemia,‘!°3 as in the speech On the False

Embassy, sometimes after the diegesis, as in the speech Against

'02 "The prokataskeué thus performs the functions of what in Latin is called the partitio; cf. Cicero, On Invention 1.3 1-32. 103 Late Greek rhetoricians often use prooemion in the plural, regarding separate points made as each constituting one prooemion; cf. Anonymous Seguerianus §3'7; Apsines 1.14—15.

66 MNEPI EYPEZEQ:Z PL , O& META THY OlHynow, Oo év TH Kata “Agtotoxeatovse Adyo. 1 Kai tobto wéy &&joxeoer Gy eineiv GAA, bts dittyy yer ydoayr, GOL O€ 00x ANoxOvpPOUAL MAGACTHOAL, Ti MOTE TH ONTOOL Evevonoa. xal

yao obv xal abt@ Oranoehjoai uot Nagéotyn yevouérv@ tod modyuatos éy émtotadoelt “al ebpov Tov Orjtooa, Ei wév GnatHhoew uy méAdot TovS 5 dixaotdas, GAAd aAnowoew thy énayyehiay xaBaedc>o, meta THY OunyNow TUPEVTA THY MEOKATAOKEVTY HAL GUA OVYANTOYTA Kal Enayorta THY

xatacnevny, Mote ete tho uvnuns ovens évavdov tho xata trHy énayyehiay undéy pedvdcoBar doxeiv, GAN’? do énnyyetdato tuPéyta THY xataoxevny obdtws’ dtav 0& méddy Oixaiws pév Ooxsiv énayyéAdeoOat, 10 thy énayyehiay dé nag’ obdéy TibeoPaL, THYLXaTTA META TA TOOOLWA

mooxatacxEevalovta wal wetagd try Oinynow tattovta, et} obtw tic pvynuns 01a tio OinynoEews &EeAdvta thy éenayyediay xataoxevdlorta

(129) Botegor, do Bovidetar xadd|neo ody év tH tio TaganpecBelac édAwxe Aoym xal yao évtatda wihoas Osiv nomtov edddvacg dnaitety My 15 annyyethe, TO Cdvet0vvoc ent Adyoicy meta t0AAd TéDEIxE nEDaAaa,

nat dAws thy tae tho enayyediac ovyyéac oby WS Ennyyeidato xateoxevacer. et O& Eic tov Adyor abtoy déot Aéyewv, nad? Exaotoyv THY peody iWtag éyer téyvag nal anopoertovc, ob uévtot TA THS otxovopias

Exeivnc tia xowd Oloacxahiac texyv@y totodvtwy ddbvatat yevéodat. 20

2 &AA[ wt, ex org?| Ve || 4 m&kpeott V | yevouévi[wm. po.|] Ba || 7-8 pr. xat — xatacxevyvom.Pc || 9 teOévon? || 12 xat why xat we Str ddvarar uynxtotyy tavtHy ToLet post tattTovtTa add. Ac, (zovotvra) v.l.P || 14 tH¢P Ve

Ac; 7ept Ba | p.64,9.18 || 14-15 épwed0y m. 2 Ba, vl.P || 16 Dem. 19, 182 (cf. p. go, 21); cf. Aesch. 3,205 | d&vebdOvvovAc, ?m.1 Ve || 17 cf. schol. Demosth. p. 351, 19 Dind. || 19 idStac tae téyvas éyer Ac, (om. t&s) Ba; [ITT] idtag Eyer téyvac Ve

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 2 67 Aristogeiton.'°4

It would be enough to say to somebody else that a prokataskeué has two possible places, but I shall not hide from presenting to you what I once noticed in the Orator.?°5 For when I was at a loss about the matter and stymied, I discovered that if the Orator was not going to deceive the judges but to fulfill his initial statement of the case in an honest way, he put the prokataskeué right after the diegesis and immediately brought in the confirmation, so that, memory of what was said earlier still being fresh, he does not seem to be lying but to provide the confirmation in accordance with his claim; but when he intended to seem to make a claim rightly but was not going to give serious attention to it, in this case he put the prokataskeué after the prooemia and between them and the diegesis, letting memory of the claim be lost because of the diegesis and later confirming what he wants.'©° | [129] ‘This is exactly what he did in the speech On the False Embassy, for saying there (19.4) that it was first necessary to demand scrutinies of what the ambassador reported, he put the phrase “subject to scrutiny for his words” (19.182) after many headings, and completely rearranging the order of his initial claim, he confirmed it but not in the form he had announced. If there should be need to speak about the speech itself, UJ could point out that) it has its own special and unusual techniques in each of the parts; however, the special characteristics of that arrangement cannot become general rules for the teaching of such arts. '°7 104 Dionysius of Halicarnassus had rejected the authenticity of the two speeches (Demosthenes 25-26) Against Aristogetton (cf. Opuscula, I p. 292

Usener-Radermacher), and modern scholars have generally agreed, but the work remained of interest to the rhetoricians; cf., e.g., Apsines 2.13; 2.19; 3.11; 8.11. tOS A regular term used by rhetoricians to refer to Demosthenes and only Demosthenes. 106 The author’s observation does not seem to apply to speeches other

than On the False Embassy. Demosthenes’ usual custom was to insert a prokataskeué (i.e., a partitio) after the diegesis and before the proof; cf., e.g., Against Metdias 21; Against Aristocrates 18; Against Timocrates 19; but in On the Crown, Against Androtion, and several other speeches there is no prokataskeué. '°7 "The author views the function of his handbook as supplying practical suggestions for students in composing their declamations and not as the appropriate place for a rhetorical analysis of Demosthenes’ speech. It may be that in this passage he is counteracting the claims of some other rhetorician.

68 MEP! EYPEZEQS PL

/ \ 3 / 3 Pld 3 / \ / lord \

Edoor xat dAdo nooxatacxevts eldog mapevosD ev toic Goyaiow, 6 1 xegpahatwy uev éenayyehiay obu Eye, anoderéww O€ magiotyot Tob xata Tovs vOuous Ooxetv eicéoyeoat THY xololy. Nooxataoxevt O° dv xadoito “Hal TOOTO EixOTwc, btt Adyos éoti 200 THY xEyahaiwy AEyomEvos Eixdot

hoytopmoig mdoay thy xatacxevty mooxadotuEevoc. nal tovt@m xéxyonv- 5 tat moAdoi THY Goyaiwy, GAAa xal Anuoobévynsg évy tH Kata Mevdiov. THC yao otdoews ovons Oolxijc, xal Teuvouérwmv TOY Gowy oic toner TOMS, xEYONTAL vorjpuact Toi OilWotot “ata THY obtws AdinnodYTwY

meol THY EootHY EFovalay eivat meoBodjc tots xatnyoosivy EonovdaxOoW, Eb Maega TA OtwoLopéva Tic éx THY vOuwY ev Toig Atorvatotc 10

novel, xal tovto anodei~acs nal avayvovds & vduwy obtw>s éywonoer sig THY wedetyy tod Soov' xaitot TO ye THy xatyyooiay & vouwy Eio[130] wévae tadtyny obbév Eucdde | dtoicew obte TH natacxevfh tod 6oov odtE th vixy tod tO noaxdéev doéPerav sivat doxeiv, ody bBow. Kat pwévtor

\ 2 / 2 load \ 4 f ow be ~~ , ow

xat Aioxivns év tH Kata Tiudoyou Adyw tH att@ todnw tho moo- 15 HATAOHELIG EYOVOATO. “Al YAO ExElvoS MOEVEIAS yoagry EvoTHOaMEVOS

xaL TOO TA MAaTo@ma xatednooxévas tov Tiwagyov meoxatacxevyh xéxon-

Tat TH Oldovon xata THY aoehyas Cnodrvtwyv éEovoiar eivat xatnyooias Hal yoayrnc xaitot TodtO ObTE TOO OTOYaGMOd THY HEVahaiwy GnTETAL OvTE MOOS THY vixNY ALTH To Tov xoLvOMEVoY aionoE ovvaywrilEetat 20

\ b) > A 4 / t / 4 > / ~ f

xal yao et Ta uddtota diddaow oi vouot THY &ovoiay Toc Bovhomévots xatTHyooEly xata THY obtw Cyodrtwr, obdéy Tt MAGA TodtTO UGAAoY 6

2 a / 2 / > > of 2 / ne /

Tiwaoyos élijheyutat tovodtos My & todtwr THY vonudtwy, oiov abtor év totic xegadaiots anodeiEet, GAN’ Eotiv annAdotoiwpévn tov Cyntnudtwv 4 tordde MQOxatacxEevH. Hi dé wot Aéyou tis, Wo 6 Anpuoowévync 25

éy t@ Kata Tipoxedtove Adym wetaéd thév d00 vouiuwr, tod te naoavouns cicernvoyéevat TOY vounovy / / \ e ‘ if / /

70 NMEPI EYPEZSEQS Lr

eloevyveymévoy sivas magavouorv> toy b20 Tiuoxedatovs yoapévta, ué- 1 Om “xéEYONTaL TOUTM TH vorjmatt &v toic xeqadaios, Ott xaTa THY [7

[131] monodytwr, & noootdttovow of vduot, vouoBetobytes xail | TO nec,

dtddaow éEovoiay xatnyogias toic Bovdouévoic, 9 tac aitiac, xa” dc éxet mév xeyahaiwy uéoos éyéveto, mooxatacxevis O& évtadda. Stay 5 psy yao GAdnc otdoews 6 Adyos 7} xeyahaiois GAdotc Staigovmérncs, TH vouium O& 08 xatacxevacProouérys, TOTE MEOKATACHEVH] TO YOULLOV

vivetat, wc é&vy TH Kata Tiudoyou otoxyacpuod thc otdoews otons mQ0HATACHEVT TO vOUuLMoY EyévEeto xal Ev TH Kata Mewdiov 6oov obans thes OTACEWC AIO TiS MPOKXATAOXEVTS TO vOULWOY EyévEeto: obTE yao Boos ob- 10

TE OTOYAGUOS TOUTM TH xEevahaim téuvorvta. 6 dé Kata Tiwoxodtove

Adyos Noaypatixys Ov tho xata vduov sio~oeds 6yEeiAwy TH voutu@ natacxEevacdnvat TO éx too vouov Bondoby uwéo0G abTH TEtHONXE TH

vonit@. d&tov 6& xdxeivo tThohoa THY Ontdowy év tovtotc, St xavovs ayavac siowdrtes 6 wév moeveiac, 6 O€ THs wEQi TA Atovdota mo0BoAfc, 15 oig odu Hoary “Adnvaio: ovveBiouevor tH undéva toLodtoy moedTEQOY

sioeAviv, avaynaiws éyonjoayto tabvtn Th mooxataoxevyj, wc ay py) uoocxoovoley Toic Oixactaic éx tod ta medG uNOEevos GAhov yevduEeva toAudy eiodyew, GAA noocEXtTIxXOG Hal OLOaoxaMxds Tis xatNHyoQlas 6

Adyos yévotto toic Otxactaic wadodouw, 6t, mEpl Mv mOdtov dixdlov- 20 ol, x vOUMY Wounvtat xal aso tic TOY vouwy Povdnoewe.

1 tov bd Tinoxpatove yeapévta del. m. po. Pa, om. Portus | tod twoxpatoug Vc Ac | post ypapévta mg. m. po. Ba: xat tod St. évavttos gortiv 6 véu0g TOUTOV TOIG TAAL xetévors (cf. Dem. 24, 32) || 2 cf. Dem. 24, 18

|| 3 eornodkvrwy m. I, tovetvm. po., Pe | xat post véuor add. m. 2 Ba | vouoQetotvtes Pa Ac; vonoberéuvtwy Pc Vc Ba | vopo0etrodvtes — dbo om. Portus, del. (690@¢ supr.) m. po. Pa | xat tod mé¢del.m. po. Ba | +d scripsit Rabe coll. schol. P (W VII 742, 1); ro} P Ba;om. Ac,m.1 Ve || 5 éyéveto Pa

V; cickyerorPc || 7 véutovm. po. (ex véyua?) Vc || 13 adbtér uéo0¢ Vc || 14 véumrPc || 14-15 sic Dem. 19, 120 &yOvac xatvodc (cf. schol. Dem. 255a Dilts) || 15 cf. Dem.21,1 || 16 of &Oyvator. Vc Ac | ctOtouévor Ba; ovv| ex ex y|Oropévo. Ve | torol|brolv Pc; té&v torobtwv Ve Ac || 17 éyehoaro Pc

|| 18 ywdoueva Ve || 20 SvP; 0d V_ || 21 douynta: Ac Ba; (ver.) Vc | KOAKGEWS, M. I BovAy supr., Pc

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 2 71 Demosthenes used, in the midst of the headings, the consideration that legal provisions, directed against those who do not do what the laws enjoin and | not in the way specified, grant the right 131] of prosecution to those who wish (cf. Dem. 24.18)—(if someone were to say this to me,) I shall explain the reasons why the part with the headings is where it is and the prokataskeué is elsewhere. Whenever a speech is a matter of another stasis divided into other headings, and confirmation is not going to rest on the issue of legality, then the question of legality becomes a prokataskeué, as in Against Timarchus, where, since the stasis is conjectural, consideration of legality has become a prokataskeué, and in Against Medias, where the stasis being that of definition, consideration of legality is handled by the prokataskeué, for neither stasis of definition nor of conjecture are divided into this heading.'!° Since the speech Against Timocrates deals with the legality of the introduction of a law—thus is a matter of pragmatic stasis''! and needs to be confirmed by a legal consideration—the part about coming to the aid of the law has looked to the issue of legality. It was right for the orators to keep to that treatment in these speeches, because when undertaking novel cases, in one case prosecution for prostitution, in the other of an appeal to the assembly (probolé) about the Dionysiac festival—cases the Athenians had not previously been accustomed for anyone to undertake—they necessarily used this kind of prokataskeué€ so as not to startle the judges because no one

else had dared to make an indictment, yet the speech would interest and inform the judges about the charge, knowing that the issues on which they were for the first time making a decision arose from laws and from the intent of the laws. 1??

The order of chapters 3-6 given here follows the rearrangement in Rabe’s edition.

T° T.e., the validity of laws applicable to a case are not a necessary heading in stasis of fact or definition. "tt Cf. the scholion on Demosthenes 24.1b, p. 314,14-15 Dilts: “Every prosecution of a document creates pragmatic stasis.” Pragmatic stasis is a subdivision of stasis of quality and concerned with the future, e.g., that a proposed law will not prove advantageous to the city; cf. Hermogenes, On Stases, p. 38,45, and pp. 76-79 Rabe. *t2 T.e., concerned the legality of the law, not its interpretation.

72 MEPI EYPEYEQs PL

[132] | epi kepadaioy. 1 ITeoi pév tic tév xegadaiwy sigécews uata thy Otaoetiuny &&eDéueda téyyyny, xal boa Exdotys THY otdoewy tdta xal Goa xowa xal Ta tobtwrv Otdg~ooa’ vuvi O& modxEltat OeiEat, MH Tho Ovaigetimhso téeyvNs

bstopaddouévyns thy xepadaiwy Exactoyv nusic éexdaPdrtes abto xata- 5 oxEevdoomuey’ TO yao may Tho Ontooixhc taoxyvoeorv évy tovtotc totatat xal TO THS vinns xOadTOS Ev TH natacxEvH THY xepahaiwy dtapaivetat.

Kepddaor toivuy tot mag’ Udy avtdy etodyousy, 6 Oettat xataoxEevys, 7} mapa thy éyVody tietat, 6 deitat Adoews. oiov éay pév

dsoloyducba éy toig otoxyacpois, thy thy éhéyywr anaitnow just 10 clodyousy Aéyortec «éléyyous mdgacye», eita xatacxevacouey Ex THY EMLYELONUATMY GvvLaTartEs Ott «Ost Maytos medypuatos Eléyyous maA9e-

évyeobat xal mavtoc éyxAnjuatoc». éav O& xatnyoo@muer, avayun tod évydoob to xepadatoy tiévtos ual Aéyortos «édévyous MdpacyEe» UGC

(133) Avew | Aéyortac «od bei éléyyous napéxeoDa navt6s medypatos» wal 15 Ei¢ TOOTO “ataoxEevijg ebmoohoat Tho an0 THY Entystonudtwr, iva dei-

Ewuev, Ott un Ost Tove EAéyyouc anately. xal éy taic Moayuatixaic, Et TbyoL, H TUEUEDA xEpaddaory AéyortEes «ob Osi xatvotomEty» 7H «od dEt

maoa ta Odfayta Aéyew» 7 «od dei Fos nataddew»y, nal 6 te Ay tovTov eiodyopusy, &x THY Ertyetonudtwy Eig Tag xatacxevds Bor Podueda 20

detxvbrtes, Ott undéy tovtwy dei molEiy, 7} xatvotousiy H ta OdEarta Abew H #0c¢ nagapaivew: 7H teBéy napa tThéy avtiixwv Aeydrtwyr, 6tt 1 -— 96, 19 ordinem commentarii Mr secutus est Rabe; cf. Spengel, Praef. p. XI, Miinchener Gel. Anzeigen 1835 p. 265. Ordo Ba: 7. xeparatov, 7. Bratov, 7. émuystpnuctwy, 7m. évotdcemsg xal aveimapactkcews. P Vcd Ac: x.

Bratov, 7. xeparatoy, 7. émtystonuctoy, 7m. évotkosws x. &vt.; Dox.: unr csotvuv &etvov } (Hv VS) Aéyewy ANON tv avervypdqpwv to Tepl Bratov mpotaYYjvar TOD meet THV xeqaratwv, SpetrAov S76 THY Evataow avtitapcoTtAcL

TayOFvon peta tov tepl xeparatwv Adyov. Portus: 7m. slanywyiis xeparatov, 7. ETLYELENUATWV, Te. claonywyiys Kal AVasms xeqparatwv xar” Evotaciy xal avTiTta-

ekotaat, mT. AUGEwWS xeparateav xata Blarov pov || 2-3 é&e0éunv Ac Ba, wl.

Pa, W VII 55,10 || 3 wé0odov(pro téyvynv) W VII | liber ille deperditus est ; cf. etiam IT. or. p. 28, 12; 36, 3.43, 15 sq. || 4 trodtlawvexors| Pc || 8 adtéev

om. Ac | stowyetarvl.P,m.2Vc Ba || 9 wévotvAc || 11 cf. 88, 8 sq. || 12 ouviatdvtes Pa; ovviotésvtes Pe Ac, (&v m. 2 supr.) Ve, (ex cr. m. po.) Ba || 12-13 mapacyéoOo m. 2 ex mapéyec0an Ve (cf.1.15) || 13-14 1d xepcéAatov

tod éy0o00 Vc || 15 rapacyéoOat Ve || 16 evdrophoouev Ba, vl. Pa || 18 cf. 80,5 || 18-19 4 — Aéyetvm. po. suppl. Ac || 19 ye’ mapaBatvery P || 21-22 pr. 7%} — rapaBatvervsuspecta || 22 St1.0m. V

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 4 73

| CHAPTER 4: ON HEADINGS [132] We have published a discussion of the invention of headings (kephalaiot) in our Art of Division, explaining the properties of each of the forms of stasis and how much is common and what is different among them.''3 Now it is our purpose to show how, when the art of division is presumed, we take up and confirm each

of the headings, for the whole strength of rhetoric rests on these things, and the power of victory is revealed in the confirmation of the headings. ''4 We introduce a heading either from our own case, which is in need of confirmation, or one is taken from the case of our opponents, which requires refutation. For example, if we are speaking for the defense in cases where the facts are at issue, we introduce a demand for evidence, saying, “Provide evidence.” Then we support this from epikheiremes, ''> maintaining that “there is need to provide evidence of every fact and for every complaint.” But if we are prosecuting and the opponent is stating a heading and saying, “Provide evidence,” we must refute this, | saying, “There is [133] no need for evidence of every fact,” and we must have an abundance of argument from epikheiremes in order to show that there is no need to demand evidence. And in pragmatic cases, '"° if that happens to be the situation, either we state the heading, saying, “There is no need to make innovations” or “There is no need to speak contrary to common opinion” or “There is no need to depart from custom,” and whichever of these we introduce, we support the argument by adding epikheiremes, showing that there 1s no need to do any of these things, neither to innovate nor to contradict common opinion nor to depart from custom. If itis claimed by the ™t3 "This was wrongly understood by later readers to refer to Hermoge-

nes’ On Stases. Headings (Heads in Heath’s translations) include the major categories of stasis (conjecture of fact, definition of act, quality of act, etc.), the so-called “final headings”: the legal, the just, the advantageous, the honorable, and the possible (cf. Apsines ch. 9), and more generally any proposition to be supported by argument. ‘4 As usual, the author is primarily interested in providing formulas that an elementary student of declamation can apply to an assigned topic.

5 A supporting argument. On the author’s conception of an epikheireme, see ch. 5 below. 116 As when new laws are in question; cf. n. 111 above.

74 NMEPI EYPEZEQE CF ov dei tabta noveiv, Husic atdidic Oeducda Adoewc, iva deiEwmev, Ott 1 dei xatvotopeiv xat ta OdEarta Advew nal E9oc napaPaivew, nai Eig THY tobtwrv xatacxevryy PornPotucia toic émiyetonuace. TTodAd@y 68 0dda exBeuévwv neoi entyeronjnpuatoc xal modAdby ay-

ahwodytwyv Adyor nal undevos OvvnPévtos Gapms mapacthoat, wE1od- 5

couat 6tt uddota oapéotata diaxpivat, tic ebdoeoic Enryelonjuatoc, 6 xataoxevdler tO xEegddaoy 7 tHv Advow, xal tic eboeots Eovaciac, 7 nataoxevacer TO émtyeionua, nal tic evoeotc EvOvunuatoc, 6 xataoxevalet tTHv Eoyaociay. gay uév ody Husic elodywper negadaor, andiic denoet tho DécEews “al Thc Eig TOOTO xatTaocxeEvijc EebnogHoomEY G0 THY 10 ETLLYELONUATWY META TOOTAOEWS. TO O& EvtedéotEoOY, EaY TLD TAL a0

tov ExySomy xal eiodyytar’ tote yao dei xoouHoat TO xEe~ddaLoy nQ0-

[134] tdoe, bxogood, drtinoo|tdoet, Adoe: tH xai dvOvn0poea xalovpéry. 6 d& tottwy Exactov éOTL, CAPH>S Nagactyjow: medTactc wév yao éotLY n émayyEelia tig buopoeds, Vo0goea Oé€ 6 tod éxyPood Adyoc, GvTimed- 15 taoig 0& 4 THG AdoEews Enayyedia, sita 7 Advotc, vy notoduEeda &x TiC TOV ETULYELONUATWY xaTaAOKXEvTC. Oloy ei THyOL xataToéyer XEQodvNoOY

Dihinnos, vodgver Anuoodéerncs dtopdEat tov “lodudy: «tdya toivuy xa

4 émuyeteyuatos Pc Ac, (wv m.1 supr.) Pa; émyerpnudztwv Vc Ba || 7 16

xeperacov 4m. po. suppl. Pc || 10 xal thy tobtov xatacxevty ebejcopev Ve || 11 576 Ba |] 17 auveyGo xaratpéyer p. 92, 1 (Aps. I 2 p. 226, 19. 233, 18. 254, 20. 255, 10 Sp.-H.)

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 4 75 opponent that there is no need to do these things, we need refutations in turn, in order to show that there is a need to innovate and to contradict common opinion and to depart from custom, and we support the argument about these things with epikheiremes. Since many have published much about epikheiremes,'*7” and wasted their words because none of them has been able to give a clear description, I shall try in the clearest possible way to explain how to invent an epikheireme that confirms the heading or the refutation (lysis), and how to invent an elaboration (ergasia) that confirms the epikheireme, and how to invent an enthymeme that confirms the elaboration. Now, then, if we ourselves introduce a heading, we shall fill the need for a simple proposition (thesis) and confirmation (Rataskeué) of it by epikheiremes with an introductory statement (protasis). ‘This takes a more complete form, however, if a proposition has been stated and introduced by our opponents,!'° for in that case there is need to adorn the heading with a protasis, a hypophora, an antiprotasis, | andalysis, [134] which is also called an anthypophora.*?9 I shall clearly state what each of these is. A protasis is the introduction of the hypophora, and a hypophora is the proposition of the opponent, and an antiprotasis is the introduction of the lysis, followed by the lysis, which we make from the confirmation of the epikheiremes. For example, let us say that Philip 1s overrunning the Chersonese and Demosthenes is introducing a motion to dig a canal through the ™7 "The fullest earlier discussion in Greek is that by Munucianus

in Spengel-Hammer, 340-51; see Prentice A. Meador, “Minucian, On Epicheiremes: An Introduction and a Translation,” Speech Monographs 31 (1964): 54-63. Minucian (341) defined an epikheireme as “whatever is taken for proof of the question at hand,” and he divides epikheiremes into example and enthymeme. Apsines (8.1) uses epikheireme in this same sense. In Anonymous Seguerianus, on the other hand, derived from Neocles (second century’), an epikheireme is a reason in support of a heading or premise; cf. §§36, 158, 216, and 248. See further the introductory note to ch. 5 below. 118 That is, if it involves refuting an objection imputed to the opponent. t9 "These terms might be translated “introduction, proposition of the opponent, denial of the proposition, refutation of the proposition,” the latter requiring supporting arguments. Hypophora, anthypophora, and antiprotasis are not elsewhere found in pre-Byzantine Greek texts, but they do occur in Latin; cf. Fortunatianus 2.27, pp. 117-18 Halm; Martianus Capella, On Rhetoric §52, pp. 490-91 Halm. The author is providing beginning students with a technique to develop propositions logically.

76 NEPI EYPEZEQS PF tovobtos H&E Adyoco naga tay artiinwy» TodtO 7 MEdTaOLG, «Hs ya- 1 Aenov dtoovEat Xeoodvyoov» todto 7 bsogoed, «éote O€ todtov abtmy

ov yalenoy dtadioa tov Adyoy» todto 7H aytimedtacic, «TO yag dtoovoocew noadyua Odd.oy» tobto 7 Adboic, ttc dettat éntyetonudatwyv. To psy ody mhijoes xepadaoyr obtw. Asiner 6& nolAdduic 7 nodtacic obdbéy 5 BAdntovca tHy dnopoedy xdouos ydo éott tod Adyou nai maAéov obdEv

rohhanic: go? 6te yao xal Vewoiac évdeiypata xadhiotns EupaviCovow 1 TE MEOTAGLC “al 7H) GYTITOOTAOLC, si TiS EoUNVYEiAS TOs Gyduaot

moocéyoiueyv, &E dv to eldocg tho bro~oeds bnwe diacvostat xat dta-

3¢\ fb 3\ \/ aw > ~ / / 3 4 PL f / 2 A -

deixvetat Dewoobuev, oiov «ayavaxtyoe toivuy abtixa 64 udia, ws 10 éyo mvuvOdvouat, et udvos TH évtavdoi noditevouéevwmv Adyowv evid-

vac byétet». Et wév yao élevye KnvvPdvoua tolyvy adtoy mEoLdyorta xata THY ayooay Aéyew, A xa viv tows medc bude éoEt dyavaxtay, El

f ~ 2 o~ f > 4 ¢ \

povos thy évtavdoi noditevouérwv Adyor ebOdvac bpéEEL», UETA T100-

[135] tdhoews | xerto- év ofc yao Adyous élnileta 4 bnoqood, tobtd éotw 15 1 meOTactc’ TO O& Aéyew MayavaxtHoet Tolyur, Et “Ovos THY Evtavbot

tohitevouéevoy Adywr etddvac tpébet» todtd éotw 7 tnogood. LToTE OE 4 AYTIMOOTAaOLS AEinEl, TovTéoTLY 4 Tho Aboews Enxayyedia, oior

«éott O€ ob% Gdndov, @ “APnvaiot, tob#, 6t1 Aentivys, xdv tic GAdoc

¢ \ Fond / / A > | 2 ww \ 2 fut / /

veo Tod vouov Aéyn, dixatoyv uév OBEY EOET EOL abTOO» éyoL TOUTOL 20

7 odtacic’ «pnHoEt O& Gvakious tivds avPodnovs edpouévove atéhEetay éxdedvuxévat tac Aeitovoyiacs» todto bnxogood «éya@ Oé 6tt wév TIyoOv xatnyogobrta marvtacs agaiosiova: thy dOweedy TOY Gdixwy éotir, édow» totto ebPémc 7 Avot. Aginer 68 7 Gvtinodtaots: Hy O& Gv nAijosc, et Eleye «yon O€ buds, & "APnvaio, undauds anodéyecBat tobtoyv 25 tov Adyor’ TO yao Tivdy xatnyooobrta mdytas apaipeiodat THY OwoEdy Gdixov». Kat 4 dvtinedtacig pwévtor Acinovoa obbéy TH vorjuati Avpaivetat, GAAa try adbtiy exer Obvauly TH Me0TAOEL, TtI¢ UdvoYy xdoMLOC Eotl TH Ady: eet moAddutc “al Ywoeis MOOTACEWS “Al GYTIMEOTACEWS

2 xeppdévycov m. 1, tov iofudv m. po. Pa | tobdtwv Vc Ac | adrdv Ba

|| 4 +rod76 gotev Ac || 5 obtmm. po. ex rodtTo Ba || 6 cf. 1. 28-29 || 8 7 om. Pc || 10 Dem.19,182 || 10-11 ao éy& tuvOdvou.n m. po. suppl. Ba

|| 11 évtad0« Ba || 13 xatk&m. po. suppl. Vc | hus Ba || 14 évradOa Pe VcAc || 16 Aéyew StxPc | EvtadOaVe || 19 Dem. 20,1 | & &vdpec dOyvato. Ba || 21 ebopapévove Vc Ba || 23-24 té&v — tkaowom. V || 24 76

ev0éws Pa V; éx tod ed0E0¢Pc || 24-25 mAnpes Pa; (em. 2 ex y) Vc; mAHENs Ac

|| 25 &aevyeo Pc; Zreye|I] Ve || 26 mwéevtrwv Ac || 27 hm.2suppl. Vc | tv voynuetwov ttm.1 Ve || 28 adrod Pc | udvogm.2suppl. Vc_ || 28-29 1.6 || 29 xai PV; xepcrAnra? | mpotkcewms xalom.m.1 Vc

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 4 77 isthmus. (He can say:) “Probably some such argument will come from my opponents,” which is the protasis, “about how difficult it is to dig through the Chersonese,” which is the hypophora, “but it is not difficult to refute this argument of theirs,” which is the antiprotasis, “for the excavation is an easy thing,” which is the lysis and needs epikheiremes (to support it). A full heading takes this form. But often the protasis is omitted with no harm to the hypophora, for it is an ornament of the speech and often nothing more. Sometimes the protasis and antiprotasis are manifestations of the finest art (thedria), if we pay attention to the words in the expression, from which we observe how the appearance of the hypophora is disparaged and revealed; for example (Dem. 19.182): “He intends then to express immediately, as I understand, his indignation if he alone of those in public life here will have to render account of his words.” If he had said, “I understand that he is going around the marketplace saying what probably he will say now to you, expressing indignation if he alone of those in public life here will have to render account of his words,” it would be stated with a protasis, | for the protasis consists of words that arouse ex- [135] pectation of the hypophora. This is the hypophora: “He intends to express his indignation if he alone of those in public life here will have to render account of his words.” Sometimes the antiprotasis—that is, the introduction of the lysis—is omitted; for example (Dem. 20.1): “It is not unclear, Athenians, that Leptines, and anyone else that may speak in favor of the law, will have nothing right to say about it.” Up to this point it is a protasis; then the hypophora: “He will say that some unworthy men, having acquired immunity, have shirked performing liturgies.” Then the lysis follows immediately: “But I leave aside the objection that it is unjust for one who prosecutes some to take away the grant from all.” The antiprotasis is lacking. It would be complete if he had said, “But it is necessary, Athenians, for you in no way to accept this argument, for it is unjust, by accusing some, to deprive all of the grant.” Omission of the antiprotasis does no harm to the thought, for the antiprotasis has the same function as the protasis, which is only an ornament of the speech. We often find omission of both protasis and antiprotasis in ancient writers;

78 NEPI EYPEZSEQS PL etoioxouev maga toic aoyaiows, olov «GAd’ ddixms, ynoiv, Hogac» Hy 1 bTOp~ooa ywels moeotdcEws’ «Elta nagwy, 6tE we Eiojyoyr oi Aoytotai, [136] od xatnydoets ;» 4) Adotcs ywols avti|neotdoews. TO 68 nAfjoes an0 THY doyaiwy obtw «Dihinnos yao doysetat pév meot “Adovynjoov Aéywr, O¢ bpiy didwow Eavtod ovoay, duds Oé ob pot dixaiws avToy analteiv’ ov 5 vao buetéoay ovoay obte Aapsiv obte viv éyeww. Eheye O& nal 106 Huds totovtous Adyousc, btE ME0G adtoy ExoeaPevopmey» tobto doy NEdTACIC’ cita 4 dropoea «a> Anotas apEddmEevoc TabTHY THY viOOY XTHOAITO, Hal MWooGHHEL AdTHY Eavtod Eivat», TOOTO 7 bOyoEa’ «tObTOY O€ TOY

Adyor, wo ob #ott dixatoc, ob yahendy éotiv adbtob apehécBat» tob- 10 TO 4 avtinodtacic’ «dnarvtes yao oi Anotal todvs aAAotoiovs TdstOVG xatalaupdvortes xai tovtovuc éyvoovs nototpevot évtedV ev tovdc GAAovs xaxw@s movototy. 6 07) tods Anotas TLUWOENOALEVOS HAL xOATHOAS Obx GY

djnov eixdta Aéyot, et pain, & éxeivor ddixwc nai GAAdtoLa Elyov, tad-

ta éay Eavtod yiveodat» tobto 7 Avot’ xal 7 tod xeyadaiov Eioaywyh 15 Ex TOY TETTAOWY MENAHOWTAL, WOOTACEWS, UOpOOasS, aYTIMPOTACEWS, AboEews.

ITepi évatdcems Kai aytInNapactacEnc.

‘lotéov, bts tHyv svotacw xai artinagdotacw évartia xepddaa tho avttAjpews 7 dtawgetixyn nagédwxe téyvy’ olov «étty wow xtEi- 20

[137] va tov vidy» t6 xepddaor, | eita 4} %otacig «otx sé», eita 7 | avtimagdotaoig «et O& “al e&ijv, GAN’ obxu evbmuov tho untedc». xal

odotactc. 25 nahi «avedPvvoc émt Adyots» tO xEegddaov, «aAd’ on avetOvv0sy” 7 évotacic, «et 0& nal avetdvvoc, obx va bBoilys Thy noAw» 7 avtina-

1 Dem. 18, 117 (Ap—x; om. pyatv) || 2-3 elta — avtimpot&oews m. po.

suppl. Ac || 2 ywév(proue) Ba || 3 dc& tt ante od add. Ba, m. 2 Ve, m. po. Ac; cf.96,17 || 3-17 70 — Adoews potius p. 76, 5 tractandaerant || 4 Dem. 7,2.3 || 6 modtepo0v post d& add. Ba || 7 % medtacig Ba || 9 ze00|%xo m. po.|v Ba; mepoajxew Sc, Dem. | toto P Vc Ac; péyer todtov Ba, mg.P || 10 ovdé (pro od) Ve | (alt.) 2orr Ac; om. Pc || 12 éyveob¢ Pc Ve Ac, (6 m. po.; ex ¢?) Pa; é6yvp0bvc Ba || 13 xax|&om.2,exa] Ve || 14 Aéyy. Ve (|| 15 tovUTO M. po. ex tobTov Pa || 19 sq. cf. Il. ot. 67, 2.4 | thy post xal supr. m.2Ba || 20 ty¢om. Vc Ba || 20-21 cf. 58, 16.6,23 || 21 d&vreAnntixdds ante v6 add. Sc, mg. (vix v.l.) P; &vtAnmtxdvm. po. PaVc | [I] obx Vc; % od% Ac Ba; st obx Sc || 21-22 elta h davtirapaotacts P, suppl. m. 2 Vc; (om. etta)

N aviirapkotacis post 22 untpédcadd.V || 23 cf. 90,21 | én’ dAtyorcm. 1 Ve Ba || 24 &AV ody Pc; cf. IT. ot. 48, 18. 73, 13 ann.

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 6 79 for example (Dem. 18.117): “‘But’ he says, ‘you performed your office wickedly””’; this is a hypophora without a protasis. “Then you were there when the auditors brought me in and you did not accuse me?” ‘The lysis lacks an antiprotasis. | An example of the [136] full form from one of the ancients is the following (Dem. 7.2—3): “Philip begins by saying about Halonnesus that he is giving you what belongs to him and denies that you are rightly demanding it ‘back,’ for it was never yours to take nor to keep now. He was saying something of the same sort to us when we went on the embassy to him.” All this much is a protasis. ‘Then the hypophora: “Since he acquired this island by taking it from pirates, it is fair for it to be his.” “But it is not difficult to deprive him of this argument as not just”; this is the antiprotasis. The lysis follows: “For all pirates who take over places that do not belong to them and make these places a secure base, from there do harm to others. But someone who punished the pirates and overpowered them would certainly not be speaking credibly if he said we should let a place be his that the pirates wrongly held when it was not theirs.” The introduction of the heading is made complete from the four parts of protasis, hypophora, antiprotasis, and lysis. CHAPTER 6: ON ENSTASIS AND ANTIPARASTASIS

You should know that the Art of Division described enstasis and antiparastasis as headings opposed to a counterplea (antilépsis); *?° for example, if the heading (of the counterplea) is “I had a right to kill my son,” | then the enstasis is “You had no such right,” and [137] the antiparastasis is “Even if you did have a right, it was not in the presence of his mother.” !?? And again, if the heading is “I am not liable for what I said,” *?” the enstasis is “But you are not without liability,” and the antiparastasis is “Even if you are not liable, it is not so you can insult the city.” 120 Cf. the opening of 3.4 above, and Hermogenes, On Stases, pp. 6571 Rabe. Lindberg (2058) translates enstasis and antiparastasis as “direct and indirect refutation.” Patillon (L’Art rhétorique, 246) transliterates antiparastasis as “antiparastase” and enstasis as “instance”; an enstasis is often an objection to a claim in a particular instance. 2% On the theme, cf. pp. 7 and 59 above. 122, Cf. Demosthenes 19.182.

— 80 NEPI EYPEZEQS LT Xo7 0& Huds xad?? Exactov thy xevadaiwy évy mdon otdoet mEt- 1 odoVat tac uayas “nal Tag xataoxEevac xat’ sixdva tig &votdoEews xal GYTIMAPACTAOEWS EiadyEew MdvYTWS yao dvoiv BdtEgoY, 7} TO Tho évotd-

CEWS 1) TO THC avtimagactdoEewc, Piardtatoy tor 6rjtoea ano0delEEL, oiov

éav Aéywmer 6tt «det xatvotousiv», xepddaor, eita Aéywuev Ott Cxal- 5 votomEely WooGHHEL ENL TH GvupeooYtL»* TOOTO yao GYTITMAVACTATLHOS

elodgopev’ eita 6tt «(undé xawvdy», tobto évotatix@s. xal nad rt «ddaxohoy tédE mothoat», xepddaoy’ «aAd’ od Odboxohor», évotatinc «él OF xal Ovoxohor, moLnTéoY», advtinagactatind@s. “Aua ydoto. nal 4 EvTtogia THY vonudtwy xal THY érryetonudtwrv autvintos xai 10 ohn yivetar Cyntovrvtmy Hudy, cite tiv &votaow nowtny Peinuey eite THY ayTinagdotactw, xal Eig éxeivny MOM@tToY THY NQOKELMEYHY ANO THC

mEeorotacems Cntodytwr ta emiyelonjnuata, eita cioaydrvtwy try Etéoay

wal wah sic éxetyny an0 tic abtijc megtotdoews Cytovytwy ta ém[138] yetonuata, xal cic dneigov odtos 6 Aoyiomods tA | vornmata édyer ei 15 vao 4 évotaotc evoot Ovo Entyelonudtwy niotEls xal 7) GytinagdoTtaotc Ovo xal sic Exaotov éntyelonua éovaciay O@pmev xal xa? éExdotyy Eoyaciay abdic évOdunua, TH Gvtt Eig Gnetoov 6 tovobtos Aoytopuds Ta

vonpata éayet. tobto O& anogrjoaca GAiyduic 4 téyvy adoxe. On O€ noxéodnoay oi mahatoi nodddnic nai diya tay éntyetonudtoy éy taic 20 hiceow abt@ tH évotatinx@ xal dvtinagactatix@ yonoacIai udvosc, Wo pvelaxic év toic aoyaioc eniWeiEomer. taéw O& obu Gel THY abtyy

éyet, tt Mo@tTov Vetéor, votaow 7 avtinagdotacw, GAdd tO magadoEdtegoyv adtm&y xat Pratdteoor Oev’tegoy tattTETaL, MdoxEL O& TOOTO NOTE

Lev 4 EVOTACLC, MOTE OF 1) AYTLMAGAOTACLC. 25

A anodstEer tov 6ytopx Ve || 5 cf. 72, 18 cet. | ette(?)m.1 Ve Ba | A€éyouevm.1 Ve | Strom. Ac || 6 GAA ante éxtadd. Sc, m. po. Ve _ || 7 slad&wuev Ba | xowvév P Ac; xavorouetv Vc Ba || 9 xatom. Pc || 10 nal tay émeyetonuctwmvom. Ve || 13 SytyntéovV;0m. Sc || 18 éepyactayv om. Vc Ba | évOvuypata Ve Ba | we épOyyv cixnmy ante te add. Ac || 19 amopnoxca post draryextg V Mr;del.? || 20 dt|ya] Vc; ex did Ac; dud ex Stya Ba

|| 21 Yoyjoacbon kat dverrapactatixéds Bdviorg] Ve || 22 madraotePc || 23 tL — avTtiTAPKOTHOLY SUSpecta (o7 mg. P; fort. nota mg. irrepsit; onuctwoat’ tt

TEGTOV xTA.) || 23-24 mapadoEétatov Pc || 24 dSedtepovP, vl. Vc; ceGtov

V (cpoCévtws m. 2 supr.) Ve | adtd V

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 6 81 In each of the headings in all forms of stasis we must try to 1n-

troduce objections (makhaz) and confirmations (kataskeuat) in the form of enstasis and antiparastasis, for 1t is always strongest for the orator to demonstrate one or the other, either an enstasis or an antiparastasis; for example, if we say, “There is need to innovate, ” *?3

that is a heading; then let us say that “to innovate contributes to what is advantageous,” for we shall introduce this like an antiparastasis;'?4 then, like an enstasis, “It is nothing new.” Again, “to do this is disagreeable” is a heading, “but it is not disagreeable” takes the form of an enstasis, “and even if it is disagreeable it must be done” takes the form of an antiparastasis. At the same time, the supply of thoughts and epikheiremes is untold, and many are found when we seek them, whether we put the enstasis first or the antiparastasis, seeking from the circumstances epikheiremes for the one put first, then introducing the other and again seeking epikheiremes for it from the same circumstance, and this reasoning will lead our thoughts to limitless possibilities; | for ifenstasis [138] provides the proofs of two epikheiremes and antiparastasis of two more and we supply an ergasia‘'?5 to each epikheireme and an enthymeme in turn to each ergasia, such reasons will in fact lead our thoughts to limitless possibilities. The art rarely suffers a lack in this respect. Old writers often made sufficient use of enstatic and antiparastatic statements alone and without epikheiremes in their refutations, as we shall very often show in the case of the ancients. The order of what should be put first, enstasis or antiparastasis, 1s not always the same, but the more unexpected and stronger is put second, and sometimes this is enstasis and sometimes antiparastaSiS.

723° Unnecessarily emended by Patillon (L’Art rhétorique, 247) to become an enstasis: t.e., “There is no need to innovate.” 124 T e., in answer to the opponent’s objection. The full sequence would be: A. There is need to innovate. B. There is no need to innovate. A. This is nothing new (enstasis). B. It is new, and innovation is not advantageous. A. Innovation contributes to what is advantageous (antiparastasis). But the order can be rearranged so that when B objects to innovation A can reply with the antiparastasis rather than the enstasis, leaving the latter for possible use later. Note the parallel to stasis of fact and to stasis of quality. 725 An “elaboration”; see ch. 7 below.

32 NEPI EYPEZEQS Pr

[Tepi Praiov. 1 “Eott xal toitoy sidocg Avcews, tO nagadoédtatoy xai ioxyvedtaTOV “al vinntixmtatoy, 6 xai Blatoy xéxAnrar yivetat Oé, Otay sic tO évaytiov meguotava. dvvdueda tov Adyor && abtadyv aigobytes tov aytidinoy, oi¢ Pagowy siogoyetar, Wo 6 Anuoodévyg «GANG GyavaxtHoE 5 Dihinnos, éav tHv neeoPevodytwy try sionyyny xatapnplonove». dv é vao éxéivoc otetat owtjocoBat, did tabta Oeixvvowy abtor anodwiévat [139] dixasov 6 uéy yao groe deliv puddttecdat tors “APnvaiove, | m1) eis doyny nooxahéowrta Dihinnor, 6 68 deixvvow abtor tium@elas GEsov &

avtob tovtov uddota, ddtt toig “ADyvaiots totatdta wnpioacda: ma- 10 paxedevetat, Ov Gd un yahenaiver Dihinnoc: énipéoes ydo obtwc «éy@

d€, et todtd éotw alndéc, ovu yw oxonotvuevoc edosiv, 6 te weiloyr tTOUTOV xaTHYOEHOW. Ei yao 6 Tic siorjyns yorpata avaddoas wotE

tvyelv avtys, odtocs obtw viv yéyove moPeods xai wéyac, Mote tHy doxwy xat tov Otxaiwy duehhioartac buds bn ti Diiinnw yaousiode 15 oxoneiv, ti nadortes Gy of tovtwy aitiot tHy me0orxovoay Oixny dEOwxdtec elev ;» H étav évaytia deiEy mototyta toy dytiditxoy, OY ynoly etoydobat, w>o én? éxelyng tho baoyoeds «dy toivyuy ayti TIvidy xai Dwxuéwy do Xeoodvynoos néEoicow tH adda Aéyy, uy anodéEnove, & ‘Adnvaiot, unde m00¢ oic éx tic nosoPeiac HOixnove, xai &x tho Gnoho- 20 viac 6veldoc me00xataoxevacdijvas Th mdAEL»* xal yao éxet xeyonuévoc

th évotdoe: yaveods, dtr wy dtd Dwxéacs Xegodvyoos obletat 1) 100 TETTAowY NnvOy omlouéevn, wétErow Ext td Piatoy devxvde tO é&vartior,

od pnow 6 ayrtidixoc, St un Udvoy abtyy ob towle dtd Bwxéac, GAN’ 6tt xat nuvdvvevery adbtyy énoinoe 61a Dwxéac dnodwiddtac «eita xal 25 vov éy weilCov xivddv@ tiv Xeoodvnooy edbojoete 7} tote’ mdTEQOY yde

2 d&xai Ve || 4 téov Adyov SuvmucO« Ac {| 5 Dem. 19, 134 || 7 éxetvo|>¢| Vc; éxetvovAc || 8 prot Ac, (evsupr.)PaVc || 9 éxxadrAgowvrot Pc

| tov platmrov V || 11 yorercactvel, m. po. supr., Ba | Dem. 19, 134 || 13 évexa post sipyvyg add. vl. P || 15 |tm.po.] Ba;om.Sc | @taAtrrov Ba

| xaptetola. P Ba || 17 &v etevPc || 18 cipycéoucOa sic Pa || 19 xepebvycos &>¢ V, Dem. 19,78 || 20 uydéom.m.1 Vc; pyd’ Sropetvyte Dem.

| maparpsoBetac Ba || 21 mpoxatacxevacO7varm.1 Pc Vc || 24 uh P Ve

Ac; 0b} Ba || 24-25 &A& m1, m.2 6t:supr., Ve || 25 Dem.19,79 || 26 mo dtepov Ac, m. 2 Vc

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 3 83 CHAPTER 3: ON BIAION

There is a third species of refutation,'?© the most unexpected and strongest and most effective, which has been called biaton. !?7

It occurs when we can turn around the argument and catch the opponent with the very things he has boldly asserted,‘!?° as Demosthenes did (19.134): “But (Aeschines will say that) Philip will be antagonized if you (the Athenian jury) vote to condemn those who arranged the peace.” He shows him rightly destroyed by the very arguments by which he thinks to be saved, for Aeschines will

say that the Athenians should beware | lest they provoke Philip 139] to anger, but Demosthenes shows that Aeschines deserves to be punished especially for this very reason, because he is urging the Athenians to vote in such a way that Philip will not be offended, for

he continues as follows: “For my part, if this is true, I can imagine, on consideration, no more serious charge I shall make than this. If he who spent money so as to get this peace is now become so fearsome and great that having forgotten your oaths and justice you are considering how you can please Philip, what penalty would be appropriate for those responsible for this to suffer?” Or when he shows the opponent doing the opposite of what he says he has done, as 1n the following hypophora??9 (19.78): “But if now he (Aeschines) says that Chersonnesus belongs to the city in return for

Thermopylae and the Phocians, do not, Athenians, accept the argument, and do not allow shame to be prepared for the city from his defense in addition to the wrong that you suffered from his embassy.” Here, after clearly making use of the enstasis that Chersonnesus, saved four months earlier, was not saved because of the Phocians, he goes straight on to the biaion, showing the opposite of his opponent’s claim, that not only did he not save it because of the Phocians, but he caused it to be in danger because the Phocians had been destroyed: “You will find that Chersonnesus is in 126 In addition to simple refutation and the use of enstasis and antiparastasis.

727 T.e., forcible or violent refutation. Biaion is not found as a rhetorical term in any earlier text, but “has been called” here as elsewhere points to the author’s reliance on some lost source. 128 Cf Aristotle, Rhetoric 2.23.7. 729 Hypophora is the proposition of the opponent; cf. 3.4 above, n. 119.

84 MEPI EYPEZEQS PL [140] evsoodteooy | ay dixny Zowxe Dilinnoc sapagtoy cic abtiy» nal ta 1 étijcg: aAny tt tHg évotdcews odd dta—éger tO Piavoy 7 wév yao évotaclg Gvaiget tO Aeydusevoy we odu dy, TO Biatoy O& NaglotnoL TOO Aeyouéevov tO évaytiov. &vagydc> O& Eunvvoey évtat0a éExateoa, TH Mev

cineiv, od dia Daxéag Xepodvncos o@leta tHv &votaocw mAny- 5 omoac, tH O& einsiv, Sti xal xivdvvedter 61d Dwxéas Xeoodvnooc, td Biawoy magactHoas.

Tepi énizetpyuatov.

1 &vom. Ba || 4 évrad0« gunvvoevV || 5 addidit Rabe | cafetar yeodvvynoog Pc || 6 xatom. V

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 5 85 greater danger now than then, for | would Philip would have more [140] easily been punished for trespass against it (then or now)?” and so on. Nevertheless, biaion is much different from enstasis, for enstasis counters what is being said on the ground that it is not true, while biaion sets out the opposite of what is being said. Clearly he employed both here: by saying that Chersonnesus was not saved because of the Phocians he completes an enstasis, and by saying

that Chersonnesus is in danger because of the Phocians he provides a biaion as well. CHAPTER 5: ON EPIKHEIREMES

An epikheiréma 1s literally “a laying hands on, a grasping.” The term does not occur in Anistotle’s Rhetoric, where its place is taken by enthyméma, but is found in the Topics (8.162aI16) meaning a dialectical, as opposed to an apodeictical, syllogism, that 1s, an inductive argument that 1s probable but not certain. Diogenes Laertius’s list (5.43) of the works of Theophrastus includes eighteen books

of epitkhetremes. Possibly he used the word of a rhetorical syllogism, possibly that development was the work of Stoic philosophers and grammarians. In any event, by the early first century B.C.E. epikheiréma had come to refer to a five-part argument, consisting of a proposition, supporting reason, proof of the reason, embellishment,

and conclusion; cf. Rhetoric for Herennius 2.2 (where epicheiremata appears as a Latin word) and 2.28; also Cicero, On Invention 1.61 (where the term is attributed to the followers of Anistotle and Theophrastus). Quintilian says (5.10.1) that enthymemata, epicheiremata, and apodeixis are distinguished by the Greeks but have much the same general meaning. Subsequently (5.10.5-6) he says some regarded an epicheirema as a completed proof and that it has at least three parts. Among Greek authors, Minucian regarded an epikheiréma as the general term for an “artificial” proof and dtvided it into example and enthymeme (cf. n. 117 above), a meaning used also by Apsines (8.1). In Anonymous Seguerianus $ § 36, 158, 216, and 248, derived from Neocles, an epikheiréma is a reason in support of a heading or premise, which is the meaning here in On Invention. Byzantine commentators express surprise at the use of epikheiréma in On Invention, and the anonymous commentator of Walz 7.2:752 and Maximus Planudes (Walz 5:395) cite Neocles’

86 NEPI EYPEZEQS Pr

Kite otv siodyowmeyv tusic xegddaioy site tedév Advoimsev, Osi Cn- 1 tely ta Extyelonjnuata Ober evoeDyoEetat xal AN0 TodmWY Om00WY. EiTE

yao xataoxevaloimey eite Advoimev, AMO THY abtmyv ai yevéoess THY VOnNUATWY TOIG EmLyELOHUacL xal Taga Tadta ovdEic ay edosiv EtEQOY Ovvalto. EvoloxEtat Tovey Way EnLyElONnUa YLYdMEVOY AIO TiS MEQLOTA- 5 GEWS’ MEQLOTAGLG OE EOTL TO NAY Ev Huiv xa Adyolsg xal NOayYUact xal

/cy ¢~¢ b]/ aoA7 la¢Plaidg loud\ oé \ 2f/ ow \ v4 TAA

dixaic xal tnodéceot xai Pim, tém0¢, yodvoc, Todm0¢, MOdCWROY, ai-

141] tla, nodyua: noootiPéacr 6& of piAdcogor xai EBdo|udy tt, THY BAny, nv 0 ONTWO Ox tdia ywoioas éyet, TUDavdc O€ EnipeoiCe: THY GAhwy

2 led ww b] \ / \ A aN A 4 f A

Exdotm, dtm av nal Ovrnta. cite oby Gktoivey yevéoDar tL, PHOOMEY 10 Entyetoobrtecs Oeivy adto yevéodat, xadov yao elvat 7} Ota tov Ténoy 7 Oia TOV yoOvor 7 OLA TOY TOdNOY 7H OLA TO MOdCWNOV F OLA THY aitiay 7

dia TO NoGypua’ cite avtidéyowuer GktobytEs uy Oeiv yevéodat, prHoopev

\ fm > A lod ww A) z= NK A A / bal \ A

pn Oeiy adto noaxdijvat, padioy yao civat 7 61a Tov Ténov 7 Od TOY

4 BA \ A f aA A} A 4 aA \ s > ff a ‘ A

~~ + 3 \ ~ 4 ” 2 \ o~w / ,

yoovoy 7 OLA TOY TEOMOY 7 OLA TO MOdGWNOY 7 OLA THY aitiay 7 Ota TO 15

modyua’ site émi tov napeADortos site éni tod wéAdovtos: «noayty-

Getat TOE Ola TOV TOnOY 7 yodvoy» xat ta EEN 7 «Kod noayPryoEetaAL Ota TOY tdOstoyv 7} yodvoy» xat ta EEKje.

1 etre teOdv P; elite nat Oévtec Ac; efte Oévtec Sc, (ex } tePévtoc) Mr; |I-I1] etre Oévteg (m. po. yo’ etre teBev) Vc; | 4m. po.|re0|é]v [ITT] Ba; Dox.: Ev trot TOY BLBALv «CH teVEvtOs » cdoov, Ev ErEpOtS SE Cette Oévtec», Ev KAAOrS Ss

«ay et teDEvtes», év éviorg 58 «7 ci tefEv AVouevy xtA. | AbouevPc || 2 ard TPOTOYV OTbGWY (Yo xal ard tLvwv) P, (to in ras.) Ba; ard thvwv (om. tedrwv)

Ac,m.1 Vc || 2-3 etre yao a&vacxevaTotmev elte xatacxevatorrev Sc || 3 yoo m. po. suppl. V- | etre Abouwtevom. Vc Ba | alt. tv om. v.l. Dox. || 6 tO—Ypivvix sana || 6-7 xal moc&eou xal Biw nal dStxats xat Sro0écewv

meptotéoect Dox. W Il 215,1 || 7 cf. Il. ot. 43,1 || 8 schol. P Gn Herm. IT. é3. p. 276, g sq. Sp.) W VII gar, 2: 6 peAdcopos [loppdbprog... Eta || 12 } dia tov todzc0v om. Vc Ba; supr. post tém0vm. 2 Vc || 13 [Setv] yevéoOan ? || 13-14 hooey émryerpodvtes py) Setv Sc, v.l. Pc, (pHoowev xat) v.l. Pa; cf. 1. 10

|| 14-15 % dua tov yodvov 7 dia tov todz0v post 10 aittav Vc Ba || 16 ete — péArovto / f \ 347

A ¢ , lord 2 / / 7 \ 2 4

va. olov tO émyeionua éotw ei téyot AN0 Npocw@nov: NoAAdxtc MEV Etc HATACHEVTY TOD ELyELOn MATOS TOD G0 Tob NMeccMNOV Evontat Eoya- 15

2 ~w , b A 2 , \ BJ ~~ = id

cia && nagadelyuatos wdvor, moAddntc O& nal &x Magadelymatoc xal éx maoaPpodAnc, ntoAddutc O& xal éx TovtTwmY xal éx Tod évartiov, moA-

~ 4 ¢ 4 ¢ o~ ~~ > /

Adis 0& nal éx mrhewvwv. Odmev O& nai emi Magadelypatos. «ov dei xawwotouciv », xepadaoy. 4 Avots 6tt «Ost xaLvoTOMeEty, EL CUUpEDELY

éntyeionua a0 tod mo0cm@n0v btt «xat dst xawvotoueiv “APyvaiovs 20 dvtac’ xawotduot yao éouev»* Eita éoyacia Angisioa éx nagadelypa-

A ¢ / ¢ o~ > , 4 \ / \ A > cs] ¢ la 4 > b ld \ ~ \ 2 / Pld

TOG ei HATAOKELTY TOO ExLyELlojuatos TotTOV tt APryvaiot xaLvoTOMot (HAL OF MatéoES HUGY Exawwotounoay Td0E xal THdE»* xal MOALaxIC OOY

\ 3 3 , ¢ ~ \ > Pd lA bd 3 5 / b)

éy etoioxetar nmaopddetyua GAha mAetova, xai toic pmév ameiooic &do0kE

¢ / 3 , > ‘' / 3 4

tohha. civat émryerorjuata, Huiv O& obx émtyetonjuata GAA’ éoyacia, “at 25

[150] | éoyacia dno nagadeliypatoc pla, xdy 7 ta wagadelyuata moAAd. xal 6 Anuootévyns einé nov Aéywmr «od O67 Davuaotor, El OTOATEVOMEVOS

2 vixsan. | tH>o post add. Ac, supr. Pa || 3 4% PaV;xatPc || 4 thy xatacxevyy Ac || 6 schol. P: Mevovxsavoy Aéyer’ xat Mnyteopavyy (de interpretis auctoritate dubitat Gléckner, Quaest. rhet. 44) || 8 meprot&cews P || 10-14 et rodAAdcxrP || 12 ext rod éxryerpyuatos P Ba, m. 1 Ve; éxryereyVv

uatos evec0évtos (om. éxi rob) Ac, m.2 Ve, v.l.P || 15 alt. to}om. Vc Ba ||

16 wdvov Vc Ba || 16 xatom. Pc || 18 cf. 80, 5.92,3 || 19 Str xat det

V | é&v cuugéoyt V || 20 to¥om.Pc | xatom.Pc || 22 tod[rov]? || 23-24 sic V V8; &v mapaderypa ody evetoxetat P; Dox.: ta mAciw tHv BLBALeov avtl tod «etic &v edploxetar émiyetonua» «cody Ev ebploxetar mapaderyua» Eyer

|| 24 &AAw nal mActova Pc || 25 cf. 98,5-6 | gpyactean Ve Ba || 27 Dem. 2, 23

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 7 99 CHAPTER 7: ON ERGASIA OF EPIKHEIREMES

Now just as after a lysis has been invented for each heading we need epikheiremes either from enstasis or antiparastasis for confirmation of the lysis, so we shall need in turn an ergasia’3® for confirmation of the epikheireme. Every epikheireme is elaborated from these things that some think to be epikheiremes;*39 for example, from comparison, from example, from a lesser, | from [149] a greater, from an equal, from an opposite. The source of the epikheiremes is from the circumstances, but these will not have been sought for each heading but for each epikheireme. Just as when a heading has been postulated, on the one hand we sometimes have an abundance of many epikheiremes for its refutation or confirmation but sometimes, on the other hand, only a few, so for an epikheireme: sometimes, on the one hand, from the ergasia many things are found for the confirmation of the epikheireme, and sometimes, on the other hand, few things. For example, let there be an epikheireme, say from a person. Often for confirmation of the epikheireme from a person an ergasia is invented trom an example alone, but often also from an example and from a comparison and often from these and from the opposite, and often from even more things. Let us propose the following as an example: “There 1s no need to innovate.” That is a heading. The lysis is “There 1s need to innovate, if it is advantageous.” An epikheireme from a person is “and there is need to innovate since we are Athenians, for we are innovators.” ‘Then comes an ergasia taken from an example for confirmation of this epikheireme that Athenians are innovators: “and our ancestors made this and that innovation.” Often not only one but many examples are invented, and to the inexperienced in these matters there seem to be many epikheiremes, but to us they are an ergasia, not epikheiremes, and | they make upa single erga- [150] sia from example, even if there are many examples. Demosthenes said somewhere (2.23), “There is no wonder if he (Philip), going 138 The author uses ergasia (literally, “a working”) with the meaning of an “elaboration” to provide support for an epikheireme; cf. Fortunatianus 2.29, p. 119 Halm. 739 A scholiast in Parisinus 1983 identifies “some” as Minucianus and Metrophanes, but this may not be reliable; see the apparatus on p. 98, 6.

100 MEPI EYPEXEQS P& éxelvog nat magwy ép dnaow nudy wehdovtwy nai Oadvuobytwr mE- 1

ovyivetat», toot Eotiy Entyeionua and tod nodypatos: eita éoyacia xEYONTAL AO Tod évavtiov «totvartioy yao Hv Bavuactdy, et undéy dy Osi moLvodytes Hueic tod ndyta & mp0 MEL MOLODYTOS NEOLAMWEY». AY

d& Aéyyns «xadhodv to tidy yoréac», éuiyeionua ano tot modyuatos, 5 émipéons O& «xat yao ta Onoia toito nolei», éx nagaBodfhc éoyvaciay tH Erryeronpuate Otdws. “ay Aéync entyeionua nddw «é€eot tH mdAE

mao éavty movsiv, G Bovdetar», sita énipéons «xal yao é&y taic oi-

pixootéoov Aéyetc. 10 ntats &Eeotwy Exdotw deondty noteiy, d BovAetar», &oyaciay ano tod

TTepi évOounpatos. To 6é évOdurnpa ddEav Ooiudtyntoc anogvégetat ueilova yrwmodéyr,

6 ti té éott xal dws edeioxetat xal 6nov. xal yao 7 tats abty THY tis Oowudtntoc Odéay && avdyunce abt noootiOyou dei yao tePévytos

xepalhatov dicat ne@tov a0 tic évotdoews 7 GvtimagactdoEews, eita 15 moocdapeiy tO éntyeionua Eig xataoxevty G20 THs MEQLoTdoEws, ita 151] éeydoadda ay’ dy thy | éoyactay épaperv yiveo9au tod éncyeronpuatos, cita tO évOdunua éeneveyxeiv th &oyacia. oiov xepddaov bnoxeicdw «yaherov dtoovéar Xegodrvynooy», eita 7 Adoics ano tHe &votdoews Ett «ob yahenorv to dtopvEar», eita éntyelonua ano to’ mOdyuatos KyHY 20

yao doviouev, nadia O& tO 6odooe», eita éoyacia & nagadelyuatoc 6tt «nat Paotheds [Tegody dendeic note dibovée tov "Abw», eita évOdunua sic tobto «xaitot éxeivoc wév Oibovocer Gos, Husic O& yrv

dovEouer» Honeo yao égyaoia xataoxevdler t6 éntyeionua, obtw nal TO Ev unua xataoxevaler thy éoyaciay, xal mddww doneg nad? 25 Exactoy éniyeionua Cntoduev Eoyaociay, o8tw xa?’ éxdotyny éoyaciav

2 tovom.Pc || 5 St. xxAdvPc | to¥om.Pc || 6 émoégpero V_ ||

7 thom. Vc Ba || 8 &6V | émepéperoV || 9 SV | to¥om.Ac || 11 capita 7. évOuunuatos, (7. érevOuhuatos,) 7. TOV an” kpxH>o Kyou tEAOUS (100,

II~120, I) post caput 7. diaoxeviic (126-134) transp. Mr | évOvuyucéerav Ac || 12 cf. Aps. 12 p. 289,18 Sp.-H. | d&80m. Mr | év gaurd d&rropépertat v.l.

P || 13 adem PV || 15-16 citxa— mepiat&oewom.2suppl. Vc || 16 tH AVGEWSs Post xatacxevhy add. Ba, (m. 2) Ve, v.1.P || 17 éoyéCecbar Ve Ba |

p.98,5 || 19 cf.94,12 | Hom. Ac | tH¢om. Vc | 8t1.0om. Vc Ba |] 23 dSt@eveev Portus || 23-24 dpdbEouev yyv Pc || 25 xatom. V

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 8 IOI on campaigns and appearing everywhere, should get the better of us who delay and take our ease”; this is an epikheireme from the act. [hen he has used an ergasia from the opposite: “The wonder would be the opposite, if we who do nothing that is needed were to get the better of one who does everything that is appropriate.” If you say “It is a good thing to honor parents,” it is an epikheireme from an act, and if you add “for even wild beasts do this,” you are giving an ergasia from a comparison in support of the epikheireme. If you state the epikheireme “It is permitted to the city to do what it wants with its own” and then add “for it is permitted to each master to do what he wants in his own house,” you state an ergasia from the lesser. CHAPTER 8: ON ENTHYMEME

Enthymeme (literally, “something in the mind”) 1s the name in Anistotle’s Rhetoric (e.g., 1.2 and 2.22) fora rhetorical syllogism, often

with one term implied. It thus can take the form of a statement (the conclusion) with a supporting reason (the major premise), or the form of a condition: if something 1s the case (and it 1s), then something else follows. Enthymeme in Anrtstotle is one of the two forms of

artistic proof, the other being example. Quintilian reports (5.10.12) that the term enthymeme was used to mean anything conceived in

the mind or a proposition with a reason or a way of completing an argument from consequents or conflicts. Anonymous Seguerianus ($$146, 157) and Apsines (ch. 8) echo the Aristotelian concept, but the former also reports ($158) that “according to some, an enthymeme 1s a conclusion of an antecedent epitkhetreme related to the question at issue in one period.” This seems similar to the view found below. An anonymous commentator on this passage (Walz 7.2:76167) lists twenty-one kinds of enthymemes (from the opposite, from the included, from the related, etc.) and continues with mention of more traditional definitions of enthymemes made by Neocles, Harpocration, and Alexander (who were the sources for Anonymous Seguerianus ).

The enthymeme has a reputation for striking effect (drimytés),

greater when it is understood what it is and how it is invented and where, for it is the arrangement itself that necessarily gives it the reputation of striking effect. When a heading has been proposed, one should refute it first from the enstasis or antiparastasis,

102 MEPI EYPEZEQs: PL Cyntobuer évOdunua. Bote sic dnetooy nooywosiv dvvacIa tHyv dowudt- 1 tTyta, Et 4 Adots wév EvrOOHOELEY EVOTADEWS TE HAL GYTINMAQGADTAOEWS,

tovtwyr O& Exdoty madi entyeronudtwv Ovo 7H ToLdy, THY O& ExtyELon-

patewy Exactoy Eopyacimy 6uotws Ovo 7 totdy, tic 6& &oyaciac éExdotns

iOtov évOdunua edoovons adaduy. 5

4 2 / vd > ¢ / 2 / \ 3 , 2 A

‘Totéov 6&, 6tt xal noddduic éoyacia wia noAda edoloxe: évPvpr-

pata, xal et Cntoin tic obtw xa? Exdotny éoyaciay to évPdunua, amo [152] thy abtdy neguotdloewr Cythoe, dy’ dy &lytnoev dy ta émtyevonjuata tov teBévtoc xegadaiov. étt 6 Aéyw oapéotegoy ExPyjooua, bt xa?

ExaoTyy Eoyaotay ta evPvunuata evtoioxetat oxHjua Uév EYOVTA GVYXOL- 10 Tix0v, EvoEoly O€ EV TH OvyxoloEL AO TOD TOOL 7H YOOVOY 7 TEdNOV 7

Me0GMs10V 7) aitlas 7H} Medyuatos cuuPHoEeta yao obtws év éoyacia mid

zal Ovo xal mtheiova sdoePHvar ta éyOvunuata, deo esoedévta ddéay ETMEVOVUNUATOY TWAVEYEL.

S 4 2 4 rd A f 4 A 4 r

‘EnevOdunua yao gots xvoiwcs éni pbdvortt évOvunuate Etegoy 15

EmevvoovmEevoy éevOdunua’ oioyv tO magddetyua «xal yao Pactheds did-

ovée tov “ADw», sita to évOdunua, 6 Ontéov 6ti ovyxoitinds may EVOLOXETAL OVPXOLYOMEVOY AIO TH Eoyaciac xal 200¢ adbtO TEivor, olor

1 ywpetv Vc Ba || 2 ei Ba; xat Ac; xat ef P Ve | schol. P: mpocenaKOVETEOV TO ULAALOTA... Kal otLxTéov ard TOD Wel xal H Adatc» rscAS Kypr TOD

«edpovans mkALV», éxetoe SE otixté0v teAgav | edroopyjoe. Ac Ba | te om. V

|| 4 et xatPc || 5 ad mé&Awm. 2 Ve: Aetrer et mg. xeluevov’ elo &rerpov Teoxwpet 6 Advyos; schol. P (W VII 767 ann. 23): tevds ... proxover errr Eyewv TO ywptov Aetrovtos TOD «mAcLwv } SonwdtHS yivetat»... AAX dvov 790-

ouTaxovety Set TH Cet xal Hh Adotg» TO wkALoTA “TA. || 7 xatom.V | xal

TAAL ante ao add. Vc Ba, méAw xat Ac || 8 Cytrhoo P | td éreystonua V,

, > 8 ~ + ~~ / 3 > Oo 29 f ‘ U . ~ ;

v.l.P | aliav.l.: yp’ elmeo Cytoty tug obtw xxl’ Exkatyy épyactav vd évVOduynua

TukALY ard chav avtéiv meprotkcewy ap’ dv ecamer TH Emiyeronucra. TOUTO de

cot. capeatspov Pc (om. yp’) Pa || 13 t&om. Ald. || 14 émevOvounuctov P || 15 wept éxevOvuyuatocgsupr.P Mr || 16-17 cf. 100,22 || 17 ma&vex mavta Pa || 18 xatom. V

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 9 103 then bring in the epikheireme for confirmation from the circumstances, then elaborate it in the way | that we said the ergasia of [151] the epikheireme worked, then add the enthymeme to the ergasia. For example, let a heading be proposed that it is difficult to dig a canal through the Chersonese; then the lysis from enstasis is that it is not difficult to dig through; then an epikheireme from the act: “for we shall dig earth, and the excavation will be child’s play”; then an ergasia from example to the effect that “the king of the Persians once dug a canal through Athos when in need”; then an enthymeme for this, “yet he dug through a mountain while we shall dig earth.” For just as the ergasia confirms the epikheireme, so the enthymeme confirms the ergasia, and again, just as we seek an ergasia for each epikheireme, so for each ergasia we seek an enthymeme. The result is that the striking effect can be limitless if the lysis is well supplied with enstasis and antiparastasis, and each of these in turn has the support of two or three epikheiremes, and each of the epikheiremes in the same way of two or three ergasiae, and if again there is a particular enthymeme for each invented ergasia.

You should know that often one ergasia acquires many enthymemes, and if someone thus were to seek the enthymeme for each ergasia, he will seek it from the same circumstances | from [152] which he sought the epikheiremes of the proposed heading. I shall explain what I am saying more clearly: the enthymemes invented for each ergasia take a comparative form, ‘'*° and invention in comparison 1s derived from place or time or manner or person or cause or act; thus, the result will be that in one ergasia two or more enthymemes have been invented, which, when invented, have the appearance of epenthymemes. CHAPTER 9:

An epenthymeme is, properly speaking, another enthymeme, thought up in addition to a preceding enthymeme; such as the ex-

ample, “for the king dug through Athos,” then the enthymeme, which, it must be said, is all invented comparatively, the com14° Explained in the next paragraph. Note the comparison in “He dug through a mountain while we shall dig earth.” The isthmus of the Chersonese is relatively flat.

104 MEPI EYPEZEQS &

4 > ~~ \ bid / / Sod ¢ ~ \ ~

«xaitot Exelvog péev Boos OujoEL, OvoxoAW@tEooY NOGyma, Husic O€ pry 1

dlacxapouer, todyua ob Ovcyeoés», eita ano tie aitiac «xaitor éxeivoc mév iva mdeovexthnon, Husic O& va un ndoywuev nando mAeovexTOUMEVOLY* TOOTO EvObuUNUGa pév EOTLY a0 THC aitiac edoeDEr, EnipeE-

¢ aw A c / > , / bd

oduevoy O€ TH TOOTH EvOvunuate TH 6te «EexeElvm wév OvaoyeoéotEgoy, 5 nity O& OddLoy» EnevOvuruatos OdEay Tveyxe.

[153] Kai pry got xai dAdo évddunua edboeiv cic thy adlthy éoyaotay ano tod xaiood «xal 6 uéy tabta énotet éneiyortos abtov tod moléuov

,>2/a©¢~f/\3/

MAGEOYMY YOMMEVOS TH Modypatt, nucic O€ év Eoym tobto VéoVar bvvaueda». ob% ayvontéoy O&, @> 7% tod Adyou pEtayeEiovotcs TO EvPduNnua 10

> \ 2 A \ / 3 b) Aj 2 A A

tO OevtEooy EvoeBév motel Ooxeiv ExnevOdunua sivat, Ei Tic TO TOTO

cinwy evPdunua nai mavodusevoc, cita abto énavahapoy nddw ovrapEele, xai TO OEvTEGOY MECGTIWEIC TH MOMTH xaldneg abt Aeindy ti

stoocetsvowy, ot% GAdo edody oiov «xa 6 wév ITeoodyv Baotheds iva theoventnon OrmovEer, Hueic O& iva ut rAcoventobueda», eita émava- 15 haportes nddw papév boneo énevOvuotmevor Cxal 6 wév enevydytwmy avtoy pelovwy Gums tod wheovextsiv Evenev énoler ta yahendteEoa, nusic O& ovdevdg AGAhov unahodytoc Huds, H va un Cnutodduev, TO todyua oby bmootnob Meda ; »

LTodhduts 6& xai 4 yboig THY noayudtor exevOvunuatos idiay 20

evoeow xataoxevdle, tod évPvuruatoc xal? éavto pév obx anagtiCats, Me0OUHxNS O€ Tivos GAAns NEQLTTOTEQaY OoLUiTNHTA yaoilouéerns

s > A > ~w = / ‘ h3 2 ~ / C4 2

avt@ tH évPvuruati: otov ei Aéyou tic «OEtvov TO Gdixely natoiba», eita éoydoaito &% tov évavtiov «yon yao Adixsiv nohEuiovs», eita évDounpa Bein bt «yahendteody gotw 6 noditys Adindyv tod modEuiov, 25

vg i) h 3 ‘ A / 7 Pla en \ 2 / A b} f

Ott O pév Oa TO Yévos ovyyvMpuny Eyer, 6 O& éruttetver 6ta tO mOditNHS

[154] elvar tO uoeioDa», todt@m ei noooyévoito tH év|Ovuruats tO «xal

1 Sthipe. dp0g Ac || 4 pwévom. Ac | edpectvV || 5 éxetvo Ac, m. po. Ve || 6 uty P Ba, ?m.1 Vc; totto Ac, m. po. Ve | post 6adrov add. cveclév Ve, Sree cbpc0iv Ba | dd€av éxevOvunuartos Vc Ba || 7 nat uny gore (om. alt. xat) Ve Ba; (pr. xatom.) om uty xai Ac || 9 roto gyew Oé0001 Ac 6

|| 10 38% Ac || 12 efvaretiam post évOduynuaadd.V | adtt&Pa || 13 ade] ds ex 6,m.1?] Vc; adt& ante 14 00x Ac || 14 mpocevpmv Vc Ba | xal Bacrrcds

uev tepadv Ac, (om. tepcav) Vc Ba || 15 Stapvccev Ac || 18 Hom. V_ || 20 moAAdu P | xat post meayuctev V, cf. schol. P (W VII 767, 14) || 21 natacnevacer Ac || 25 yadreramtepog Ac || 27 todctom. po. Pa

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 9 105 parison coming from the ergasia and applying to it; for example, “although he breached a mountain, a rather difficult thing, while we shall dig through earth, a thing not difficult”; then from the cause, “although he acted out of aggrandizement, but we in or-

der not to suffer from being aggrandized.” The latter is an enthymeme from cause, and when added to the first enthymeme— that is, “it is harder for him and easier for us”—1is regarded as an epenthymeme. And surely it is possible to find another enthymeme for the | ergasia from the occasion: “And he did these things incidentally (153)

when war was oppressing him, while we are able to give full attention to doing this.” One should not fail to recognize how the treatment of the speech makes the enthymeme that 1s invented second seem to be an epenthymeme if, after one has spoken the first enthymeme and paused, then returning to the subject, one should join on another, adding the second to the first as though filling in something left out, not as inventing something else; for example, “The king of the Persians dug a canal out of aggrandizement, while we do it in order that we may not be aggrandized,” then taking it up again we say in the way of an epenthymeme, “and he did these more difficult things when great pressures were, nevertheless, on him to aggrandize, while we shall not undertake the action when anything is urging us other than that we not be harmed.”

Often the nature of the subjects provides a particular epenthymeme, since the enthymeme in itself was not complete and the addition of something else contributes greater striking effect to the enthymeme; for example, 1f someone were to say, “It is a dreadful thing to wrong the fatherland,” then added an ergasia from the opposite, “for it is necessary to wrong enemies, ” then put an enthymeme, saying, “The citizen who does wrong is a worse thing than the enemy, because the latter 1s excused because of his origin while the former increases hatred of himself because of being a citizen”; and if to this | enthymeme is _ [154]

106 NEP! EYPEZEQS © pahota gay 6 noditns galynta: todvtovc adindmy, ob éddxet modtE- 1 gov eb nenownxévat», Aownov tobdtd éott TO éx tHS Pboews tod adbtod rodayuatoc aAndivoy énevPdunua ueta mooCIHuNS TivdS MEOITTOTEQAY OELUOTYHTA yaoLCOMEvoy ALT@ tH évPvunuatu xat Aoinov obtw yivetar

nal xaheitas év Evi nal TH abt nooPArjuate dindf ovyxoitiny enitaci 5 mEotttotéoay Ooiuvtyta yaollouévyn abt@ tH évOvuruate.

Ilepi tov an’ apyic adypi tédove. Ta an’ adoyfics dye tédove tote wey TO CvvEextin@tatoy madytTwy

tov xepahaiwmy evtev yao xai ta GAda yiverar xeyddaia, eye 6é 06 THY ABTHY KaTaoxEvTy THY ErryEelonudtwy, olay xai ta Aoind: ob yao 10

7 MEolotacic xataoxevalel TA aN aoxijs Gyo. tédovs, GAN’ done id10¢

émryetonudtoy tosocs gott tev an’ aoyic Gyo. téhovc, 7 brodtaigecic xahovpévn. got O& 7 bn0dlalgeotc 7) Tod GDodov nodypatos sic AemtOv touy evoroxouéyy mo0AAy, xal yivetar obtwe, ei tig ta Gm’ GoyThs you

téhouc 6oicac Eavt@ ddooyeods nal dnagadsintws nad’ Exactov 6voua 15 toy Aeyouévwy ev adbtoic ddvaito taodtagsiv o8tw nAdttwv «ei yao [iss] yum tbe éxoinoac GAAd wEetoLdtegoyy, «ei yao un tooadta | éxoin-

| cag ahha éAdttova». oiov toeic tig anéxtEwe naTa TOY THY Axoltwy yOouoy vieic xal aétoi Onuooia toévecdar véuov xehevortos tov GnaIda dnpoola toépecdat. yerduevoc ey toic ax’ doyhc dyer tédove o8tw 20 dtaoxonnosic’ Sov tosic anéxtEevev visics, TO ToEic dnodtalonoets «Ei

1 patvyta P Ac (aptotebde 7 supr. m. po. Pa Ac); d&ptatedor(m. po. patvy-

cat) Ba, (m. po. &ropatvor?) Ve | Séante todtovssupr.m. po. Ac | doxet Ac || 2 xoab Aowrov Ba, Pm. 1 Ve || 2-3 yp xalb Aouxbv todto Td éx To Pboews

ToD aUTOU mocyyatos Pa (om. ye xat) Pc || 2 éot.om.m.1Ac,vl.P || 4 yoortouévov, m.2supr., Ve |] 7 roB Ac || 8 rd(pro&) Ac |] 10 ofavm. 2ex ofa Vc; olfo]lv Ba | yp od yao F rp 0! xnatacxevacerP || 11 tO Vc Ba || 12 toy Pa; tot¢ Ve Ba || 17 ad éxouqoaus (oportebat referri ad wetoretepov) mg. P: ob eer edOdbvac Srocyetv; cf. 110, 26 cet.

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER IO 107 added “and especially if the citizen is shown to be wronging those

whom he earlier seemed to have benefited,” the result is a true epenthymeme from the nature of the subject that with some addition contributes greater striking effect to the enthymeme; and the result is created in this way and in one and the same problem it is called “a double comparative extension,’ "4? contributing greater striking effect to the enthymeme. Chapters 10-15 are not listed in 3.1 as subjects to be discussed in this book. Possibly the editor has moved them from elsewhere. On grounds of style and technical terminology they seem to be the work of the same writer as chapters I-9. CHAPTER 10: ON AP” ARKHES AKHRI TELOUS

Ap’ arkhés akhri telous'4* 1s the most essential of all headings—for the other headings are derived from it'43—-but it does not have the same confirmation from epikheiremes as do the others, for the cir-

cumstances do not confirm headings from-beginning-to-end, but there 1s, as it were, a specific topic (topos) of epikheiremes belonging to from-beginning-to-end, which is called hypodiaeresis. ‘44 Hypodiaeresis is the invention of numerous cuttings (tomé) of the subject as a whole into small parts, and comes about if, after defining from-beginning-to-end in itself as a whole and without leaving anything out, one is able to make subdivisions (hypodiairein) in terms of each word of what has been said, forming them as follows: “for if he had not done this but acted with more restraint,” 41 F’pitasis, cf. 4.1 below, p. 140, 13; an emphasis or exaggeration; cf. On Sublimity 38.6. 142) Ap’ arkhés akhri telous, hereafter “from-beginning-to-end,” variously

translated as “sequence of events” (Heath), “presentation of the case” (Lindberg), “examen des faits” (Patillon); in Latin a summo ad imum (“from top to bottom”), Fortunatianus 2.8-9, pp. 106-7 Halm; Sulpicius Victor (Zeno) §26, p. 326 Halm. In On Stases (47,9-48,2 Rabe) Hermogenes says that ap’ arkhés akhri telous is a heading generally belonging to the prosecutor and is used to exploit and amplify certain facts to his advantage; the defendant may sometimes use it to exploit and amplify certain other facts. See Heath’s note, On Issues, 84. ‘43 Rather than being a heading, it seems to be a technique in support of a heading. 144 Cf. 1.2 above.

108 NEPI EYPEXEQS © vao Eva améxTEWE), TO ViElG DIOdLALONOELS WEL yao Uy adtod nalda», 1 TO ANMEKTELVEY DIOOLALONOELS “El YAO anEexnovéer». avTAa O€ TadTA voET-

tat wév obtwe, ioxdy O6& AauBdver and tod Adyou: éxei Odbvatat xal &¢ rvEed ua arotadyjvat xata TO tod avtiPétov oyhjua, ddvatat O& “al META TO tAnowdhvat to mvEetua Exactoyv abtady, ei Péloic, xal xata mEpiodor $5

anohaupave. xai ddvatat @>o mvebua. Grotabivat xata tO Tob aytuPéTov oxiua obtws oiov «Ei yao undéy MOOOHKOVTAS AnéxTEWas, Et Yao

GAhotoiovs, ci yao dbveiovc, ci yao Eévouc, obx dy Hyavdxtnoa xai tdte; ob% ay édvoyéoarva ; obx ay anyjtynoa tiumpiay ; vuvi dé piAtatove,

odc évévynoac, otc Eoewac, tréo wv &et udyeoat, das wv &et Oe- 10 dvévat uy tig adbtods GAhoc anoxteivyn, pPdoasg todto éEnoinoac’ doa TO

totodtov ayo xatadeEaiuny ; obu Eotwy sinety». et 0& Poddet, xal ovrayetat wdE «dAdos mév oby Tic dtxaiws Av dndoxo. Tiuwmolar, si xai TWA TOY UN MECGHXOrYTMY améx“TELvEV’ ODTOG OE idiovG visi¢ Toei AnO-

xteivas avedyjoeta;» ddvatat O& xal Exdotyn trodtaigectc OoLoDEioa 15 [156] yhoav noocwnonotiacs dvadéEacBat. nolxtAde J& | toig oyHpaow oioy «ei yao &va anéutewas, obx dy sinov xal téte, Ste pdvos doePHo aor tTETOAUNTAL ; »

Divetat 6€ trodtaigeoic mote wéy adtob tot medypuatos eic Aemtov TEMVOMEVOV, OTE O& Ex THY Guoiwy AauPavonévy. nal am adbtob uéy TOK 20

toayuatos o8tws, olov nooonADe udyos natoi aitémy Ovyatéoa m00¢

1 viet¢m.1 Ac; eto P,m.1 Vc Ba | matdaoSce || 4 mvebuataV || 5 ci OéAarg adt&Hv Ac | xateéom.V || 6-7 xai—obtwoom.m.1 Vc Ba || 9 ovx— tiuwoelavom. Pa || 11 &’ &vSpengel || 12 xaradéEarus Ba, m. 1 Ve;

natedeEaiuyy (sic) Pa || 13 obvom.V | Srdcyorto Ac || 14 dsoxretvorev P | tStouc vietc tect Vc; teetc iStouc vietg Ac | viobg Pc || 19 &x’ adrot Vi,vl.P | Aext& V; cf. 18, 1. 106, 13. 110,15 || 20 rots — AxpBavowévov suppl.m.po. Pc | AnpBavopévy scripsit Rabe (cf. 110, 11); AxuBavopévov PV

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER IO 10g “for if he had not done so many things | but fewer.” '45 For exam- [155] ple, a man killed his three sons in accordance with the law about

the untried'4° and demanded to be supported at public expense under the law requiring a man without a son to be supported at public expense. When approaching this with from-beginning-toend you will examine it as follows: Where you mention that he killed three sons, you will subdivide the three: “for if he had killed one”; you will subdivide the sons: “for if it was not his own son”; you will subdivide the killing, “for if he had disinherited.” These

are thought of in this way, but they get their strength from how they are spoken, since it is possible to arrange them as a pneuma‘*7 in the figure of antitheton, !4° and also possible, after completing

the pneuma, to take each of them up again, if you want, in a period. It is possible to draw them out in a pneuma in the figure of antitheton, thus: “For if you had killed people not connected to you, if strangers, if outsiders, if foreigners, would I not have been distressed even then? Would I not have refused to put up with it? Would I not have demanded punishment? But now against your nearest kin, whom you fathered, whom you reared, for whom you ought to fight, for whom you ought to fear that someone else might kill them, you took the initiative. Should I accept such pollution? That cannot be said.” But if you want, it can be concluded as follows: “Now someone else might justly suffer punishment if he killed someone unrelated to him. Will this man be let go free who has killed his own three sons?” It is possible for each hypodiaeresis, when defined, to take the form of a prosdpopoiia.'*9 Vary hypodiaereses | with figures;'5° for example, “Forif you had killed [156] only one person, would I not have said even then that you had dared an impious murder?” Hypodiaeresis sometimes results from the action itself being cut into small bits and sometimes is derived from similarities. From the action itself as follows: for example, a wizard came to a ™45 As often, the author is here teaching a method of amplification. ™4© Cf. n. 8 above.

47 On the pneuma, or extended period, see 4.4 below. 148 On antitheton, see 4.2 below. 49 JT.e., a speech-in-character or personification. 15° Probably regarding “would I not have said” as a prosopopoeia, even

though the first person has been repeatedly used earlier and seems natural. Rhetorical question has also been used repeatedly.

I1O MEPI EYPEZEQsS P-

?/ > b #Ld be]¢ ~~ >\ ow sy) ¢>, /\ Pld , i iA/ > ~

yauov, ovu édwxer, £0 EldWAov 1% xO0N, xa xOiVETAL 6 UayOS Yao- 1 paxwrv. évtad0a tmodtatgotrtecs tov tod etdwdov ~owta Aéyouey « E04 eldwmdov’ Et yao avdeds Hoa tivdc, ob ay émt o& Hyayor THY aitiay ;

> ; > A > 4 of 4 5 bd 2 \ A by4 A >. ff .

ei yao ood avtobd oa, obx dv énnjyayoy éni o& tHy aitiav;» tadta bmodtaioeals EotLy Ex TOY ULHQOTEOWY’ TOV yag Tod Eid@Aov ~owta bro- 5 OtatootuEeyv G0 THY wLxootéowy Eic AAhovc. “Ano 6é THY 6uoiwy obtws «Et yao uy Hoa, GAA’ Evdoet vooor GAAny TH OWpatt, obx Gv xal TOTE OE

> \ { 0 > > 5 , , eld lawl , J >) A) 4

éxowa ;» Kaddhov 6é, wc paper, xai THY Guoiwy xat THY idiwy ai AemTat bnodiaipéoets avadéEortat tag me0cwnonotiacg Gvayuaiac ovoac, dc, et Déhowc, xal mEoLddolc “al navti todnm e&Eoti cow unxdbyvey. 10

)déio-, iva wr aet totic Aentois Oé tobto, ote4nagacyeiv ~ $ éni‘ mo9@ ¥, font 3 SN , [v4 0° peda qyawvouev@ ydoute f Agyortes 6tt «0b [157] el pel|Cova édl00v». oioy mémouger Exatov tadarvta Dihinnocs noiacIat Bovdéusvocg tov Anuoodévny’ sic Aentov tnoteumy éoeic «obdé GAAov 15

‘ Lad 4 ot bd A, / / 4 \ ¢ ‘ J 2 lod 4 2 A > 4 / 4 3 Q> KN /

Tia tov toyortwy &dwxa ay, uy ti ye Anuooiéryny» ta dé Exator tahayvta éx tod peilovoc «ovdé ei tora bLd0in tddayvta 006° dy nddetc 0v0° ay &yn, arti Anuootévove Arjppoua».

"AAX’ iva ur te00x00Es 7) TO &E brodtalpécEwS Gel TH ATH OYH-

pate etoaydpuevoy, AAdAattéodw ta oxrjuata mote wey Obtw AEeyortwY 20 el yao t0dE Exoinoac, obx &dEt oe Sodvat Tiuwolay ;» mote O& O8tWE «éy@ pév yao xat én éxeivm oé Tiuwmolay anyjtnoa ay, xaltoL uLxQdY”

3A‘ ?A6s \ \ 4 bid ‘ cs >. 7 a\ / Bld b lA f ¢ / > 2 /

HY HAL METOLWTEOOY HY», MOTE OE ObtWS «GAdos MEV ObY Tic EulonoEY AY

nal Ova tHE». &ott O€ TObTwMY xadhiwv 7 wETaxEtoLotc, Ei GvacToeéq—ol

tig xal Choy TO noGypua, obx ano tod nodypatos eic tyuwolay Eluwy, 25 adi” avactoégwy tHy tium@olay, oloy «et xai te tod'TOV METOLMTEOOY

1 6 ueyogm. po., ?m.1, Pa || 2 Srodiapodvtes th clSwaAov Aéyouev (ye tov tod cid@Aov Zowta) Ac || 2-3 ge%X cidS@Aovsuspect. || 4 emyycvyouev Ve Ba || 6 etc &AAouc ex ta&v Utxeotéomv Vc Ba; suspect. || 8 p. 108, 15-16 || 10 &¢om. V | 3dé& post et add. Ac, post @éAoug m. po. Ve_ || 11 880m. Ac

|| 12 &tavP Ac; Avixne Ve Ba || 14 6 ptaummogV || 14-15 cf.116,22 || 15 épetc¢om. Ve Ba || 16. yp xal t&v éxitvydvtwy 7} mapatvyévtwy P | gwxa Oo

ay tv toyé6vtwv Vc Ba | te Pa || 22 ceantexatAc | éxetvo Vc Ba || 23 [xat uetoprm@tepov Hv?] | alt. Wvom. Vc Ba | &Adolym. po.| Ve || 24 de

om. Vc Ba | totvtov V,v.l.P | om. Ve Ba,v.l.P || 26 ofovom. Vc Ba

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER IO III father seeking his daughter in marriage; the father refuses, the girl

, falls in love with an ezddlon,'5' and the wizard is tried for poisoning. '5? Here, if we subdivide the love for the image, we say, “She is in love with an image. If she loved some man, would I not put the blame on you? If she loved you yourself, would I not put the blame

on you?” This hypodiaeresis is from the smaller (mikrotera), for we apply hypodiaeresis to the love for the image by arguing from small things.'53 From similarities as follows: “For if she was not in love but had contracted some other disease in the body, would I not then too bring you to trial?” All in all, as I said, subtle hypodiaereses from similarities and from particulars will contribute to the speeches in character that are needed, and, if you want, you can extend them in periods and in every way. Hypodiaeresis is also sometimes taken from the greater, so we should not always pay attention to the small elements. This happens whenever we are thought to be providing something for what seems to be pay or a favor and we say that “(J would not have done this) even if | you had given something greater.” Forexample, [157] Philip has sent a hundred talents, wanting to buy Demosthenes (from the Athenians). If you divide into small elements you will say, “I would not have given up any other of the ordinary people, to say nothing of Demosthenes,” but speaking of the hundred talents from the greater: “Not even if someone gave ten thousand talents, nor even cities nor whole peoples, will I take them in exchange tor Demosthenes.” But in order that the use of hypodiaeresis may not become

tiresome because introduced always in the same form, let us change the figures from time to time, as when we say, “If you had

done this, would it not have been necessary for you to be punished?” Or at another time, “I demanded your punishment for that, although it was a little and more moderate thing.” Or sometimes, “Someone else, then, would have felt hatred even for this reason.” The treatment of these is finer if one reverses the whole thing, not going from act to punishment, but putting the punishment first; for example, “Even if you had done something less ‘3! Perhaps a phantom, possibly a picture of a man. 152, Pharmakon, drug, probably intended as a love potion. For the theme, cf. Anonymous Problemata no. 48 (Walz 8:410). 53. Itisa “smaller” thing to love a man than to love a phantom; one might have expected ellattona, “lesser things.”

I12 MEPI EYPEZEQ? PL

> / vg 4 b 2 A lend 4 2 , 2 2 /

énoinoas», va moté pév G0 tod modypatocs aoyouevol Eig agiwow 1 xatapaivwpuev, mote O& G0 tho AkiwoEews AoYouEvol Eis TO MEGyua aveoyaopeda. "Otay 68 ai trodtaipécets Ghoyot yiyywrtat pacxdrvtwmy HUY « El

\ 4 2 / b D4 Pf , 4 \ 2 4 2 ww

[158] yao téde ésoinoac, obx dv exoudy oe;», | 61a TO GAdywc By xoivar 5 dd&at obtw oynuatiogts «si tédE Exotetc, odx Gy ExoLVOY ;» WC 6 avY-

>bd2 >f s22led f 2 ¥ f 2 A f Pld ; Fad 2 ow ivd > 2 4 b aA évodrytioa; ei magexabélov tH tag, obx dy éurvioy;» xaitot xal 10 ,> FABiaoal ? 2avaiosiv, ~ “Of owndoay ¢€bn0tote, et Odvacat, 6 €Owxac.\xaifxaPdlov

Bawac thy ydaptoa tH eowpévm xal wy xoutoac & tho addodantic

éytetiapévov éxelvov' évtatda ydo, émei wwody gots tO Aéyew «éxotva dv ot, ci xual éddxoves ovvey@c», Eosic Ste «ei EdAxOVEC, OVX AY

dtaiocow dy neipadeing ovyywonoas avelsiv, cita avehwy enevéyxoic, tolhanhacidosis tov Adyor doiuéws Aéyor o8tawsg «ei wév THdE Enoincas, ovyyyvduncs Gévoc’ eet 6&8 tdde, obxEeTL’ HaiTOL OVE TOTE»* OdTH

vao xai ai moocmsnonotias ywoay EEovor pveiay. iva d& un MECTKOENS 15 civat d6&n¢ 1a tH¢ tQp0cwWRONOLiag tAnOdy Adyouc, Pavuactos paryOn OFTHE TO yYdoLoUaA abtHS Gparody nal yowpevoc avth el yao uy Aéyots «sinoy dy», GAdo tt yaivetat MEdTEQOY 7) MPOOWNONOLIA.

1 &er ce Sodvar Stxyv post éxotyaas suppl. m. 2 Vc; mg. m. 1 P: éAAmG@>¢ TO (scr. ToD) «Eder ce Sodvan Sixyv»’ 6 Set mpotetayOor (tpoctet&yOou ?’)

4 > > NOAG > EtG

ért totes; cf. 106,17 | thy &Elwow Vc Ba || 3 dvepyducOa Ba, (@ m. 2 ex 6) Vc; goyapeOa Ac, v.l. P; éxavepyoucb« P || 5 éroters Pa; éxolnoac, m. 2 supr., Vc | wh post to supr.m. po. Ve Ba | yo’ ph & dAdymoP | &vom. m.t Vc Ba || 6 émotyoag Ac | &xeevov |I-IT] w¢ Pa; cf. m. 1 mg. P: mapyGELG THY of avtTwMvuUtiav || 8 tOom.Ac || 9 ovveyég Ac | ovveydic etiam cA

ante o}xm.1 Vc || 10 éuyvievV || 11 &vaociv P; avedcty V (p m. 2 supr. Vc) | dédwxagPc || 12 ef post &veAmv add. Ma, m. po. prog &v Ba |] 13 ELC

TOAAATIANGLKGAS, EL¢ M. 2, Vc; moAAarAactk&o|e Mm. po. ex o|tg Ba; trodAvTAacrcé-

cetc Ac | Spiémc modrcuts tov Adyov Ac, (om. zoAAkuts) Ve Ba || 16 doxijrc V_ | t&v moocwror7oudv P

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 10 113 serious than this (J would have demanded punishment),” so that sometimes beginning from the action we go on to the evaluation, and sometimes beginning from the evaluation we go back to the action. Hypodiaereses may become unreasonable if we say, “For if you had done such-and-such, would I not be bringing you to judgment?” | Because of this seeming to be unreasonable, you will [158] change the figure and say, “If you were doing such-and-such, I would not be bringing you to judgment.”'54 Thus, the case of the man who buried his own cloak with his beloved and did not take one from a stranger, although the boy had enjoined him to do so;'55 for here, since it 1s silly to say, “I would have brought you to trial even if you were crying continually,” you will say, “If you were crying, would I not have cared? If you were stretched on top of the

grave, would I not have been enraged?” And yet, then too, if you can, be forced to take back what you granted. And all in all, having tried to take back every hypodiaeresis that you granted, then, after taking it back you should bring it in again, multiplying the argument forcefully by speaking as follows: “If you had done this, you would have deserved forgiveness; but since you did this other thing, not so; at least, not at that time.” For thus speeches in character will have many applications. But to avoid seeming tiresome by filling up the speech with too many of them, let the speaker be admired for removing the signs of it and still using it, for unless you say “I would have said,” it seems to be something other than a speech in character.

‘54 Dropping the question mark of Rabe’s text, as suggested by Patillon, L’Art rhétorique, 265 n. 2. *55 "The theme is not otherwise known, and the situation is obscure. Apparently the speaker is prosecuting a man on the charge of murdering a lover, and the cloak 1s evidence. ‘The boy may have been fatally injured in a hunting accident. The prosecutor probably was a relative of the boy, possibly also an enemy of the accused. The boy may have realized the danger to his friend.

114 NEPI EYPEZEQs LP

[1odoxettat toic an’ aoyhc Gxyou téAove Woneo tdidy Te Ent TH 1 téhet xal TO tAaotoy éruyeionua xahoduevor. tives O& O8TMS abTO éxd-

decay mhaotoy obu siddtes, tt xal nadca bnodiaigeots nAaoth Eott. [159] 16 ydo un yelyduevoy mAattémevoy 6& Oo nal yeréo0ar Ourduevoy THC abthc dy sin dyjnovley cigéoews. nal TO wey xvoiws mAattoOMEvoy Ent- 5 peoduevoy O& mGot tots ax’ Goyhc Ayou téAove obtws Evoioxetat xadohinds’ ei wey Ex” Gyat@ tin noayPévts Oweedy aiteic ual RAATTELC, obtws «sita O& Ei mov 7H} NOLhoat TO ayaor Ftovy OweEdy, Obx AY [ol édote; obx dy &pyngicacte éexnayyeddouév@ noinoew ;» xal Ent tobt@

Eoeic «dewvor O& énayyeddouévm sv notjoew pyyicoacba, uy dodvat 10 O& mErtoixott» et O& Eri xax@ tin moayPérvts maAw tiuwoiay anattéeig xat mAdttEtc, Guotws «et O& noly 7 yeveoIat tO xaxdy Eyvmper, dt Eotat, ovu ay épidotiunodueta xwlioa ; dewwoy 6& wéAdoy pév yiveoDar xwmdtew, vervduevoy O& un Tiumpsio9at». xal &peéfic todt@m TH oYnUaTL tTHS CHTHoOEWS YOMMEVoS MOoAvTEONWS EdENOELS TA AM GOYXTS 15

yo. téhovg xatTacTHoa. Ta 6& ahaota ydoay éyer weta thv ADoday sioBodny taéy an’ aoytc ayo. tédovc, ydoay O& &yet nat év taic éoyaciatc taic dno nagadelypatoc, ei Aéyoimer Eri TH MOdYUatTL TH “akc nmoayPévts 7} naxOc

to mAaotoy énipéogortEs: oiov «od Osi éyDO@ éenitattorts neiPecBat», 20

[160] todto té ényelonud éotw: % éoyacta éx | magadelypatos «obdé yao oi matéoec Huddy énxsicoOnoay tH HéoEn pry aitotyts xai Bdwe, GAd’ éEehPovtes nodda nai xala éxoagay»: sita mhaotoy pége «Et O& TOte ovvEepodvdevé tig dotvat pry xal Bdwe, ob dy xatedevodn ; &yd@ wéev 1 inter scholia tantum est titulus wept to xaAovpévov mAaotod Pc ||

2-3 éxdAcosey adtO Pc || 5 av Ac | xat td pévP; cd wev yao V, v. |. Pa, (yeeom.)v.l. Pe || 7 ettém’ Ac | airotyg Ac,m.2Ve,vl.P | maderere Pa, (m.2supr.) Ve || 8 etta dé ci P; ct 32 V; cf. Arist. Rhet. B 23 p. 1397b 28: "Ipixpatns év ty tpd¢ ‘Apu sddtov Ste ci molv rortjoa HElovv tie cixdvoc tuxetv Edv ToLyow, Bote &’° toLhoavete 8° &p’ ob} Swoete; Uy Tolvvv xtA. | THY Swpedy

V ii 9 novhoetv Pa (reloetv coniectum propter II. ot. 59,19) || 10 d&om. Ac

|| 11 merouredet Pa || 12 yevéoOo. P; roryjoa. Vi [| 13-14 yevécba. P || 15 yemmevoc Pa Ac, (¢ m. 2 ex v) Ve Ba; om. Pc || 16 m. po. xatacxevdcar

supr. Ba || 19 modypat. V8; mapadetyyat. PV || 20 tO60om.V || 21 114, 20 éx tapadetyuatocom. V,v.l.P || 22 yo d&rottodvtrP || 24 couveBodbAcuce (om. tts) Mr

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER II 115 CHAPTER II:

What is called a plaston'5® epikheireme is added to argument from-beginning-to-end as a special point at the end. Some call it “plaston” without realizing that every hypodiaeresis is fictive (plasté), for what has not | happened but is imagined as able to [159] happen would clearly belong to the same kind of invention. What is plaston in the proper sense of the word and applied to all arguments from-beginning-to-end is generally invented as follows. If you are demanding a gift (from the city) for some good deed and you use a plaston argument, you will say, “But then if, before doing the good deed, I asked for a gift, would you (plural) not have given it to me? Would you not have voted in favor of one who promised that he was going to do it?” And at this you will say, “But it is a strange thing to vote in favor of one who proclaimed he was go-

ing to do something but not to give it to one who has done it.” If, on the other hand, you demand punishment for some bad deed and you use a plaston argument, you will say similarly, “But if before the evil deed was done we knew that it was possible, would we not have eagerly endeavored to prevent it? It is strange to hinder something that is going to happen and not to punish it when it has happened.” And by using this form of the question in succession you will find how to employ from-beginning-to-end in many different ways. | These plasta have a place after the complete expression of

arguments from-beginning-to-end and have a place also in ergasiae'57 from example, 1f in speaking we add the plaston to what

has been done well or wrongly; for example, “One ought not to obey the orders of an enemy”; this is an epikheireme; the ergasia | [160] from example is, “for our ancestors did not obey Xerxes when he demanded earth and water, but they marched out and did many fine things.” '5® Then bring in a plaston: “If at that time someone had advised them to give earth and water, would he not have been stoned to death? For my part, I think so.” In the case of some15® Te, fictive; literally, “molded, formed”; cf. Quintilian 5.10.95—99. ‘57 On an ergasia as a supporting statement, see 3.7 above. 158 Cf. Herodotus 7.32.

116 NEPI EYPEZEQS Pr

24/23>/>/]4s

oiuat». ét 0& TH xaxa@c¢ oiov «ov dei miotedew Dilinnwm yaoilopé- 1 vo amatewyv yao got»: eita Eopyacia é% magadsiyuatos “OvOE yao toig “Ohvybiows ovvijveyue netobciow abt@, Ada [lotibdasay AaPovtec dravta moocanwdAecay»: eita miaotor péoe «ei 0& tétE, Ste tHY LTotidatav éAdupavor, sing tic abtoic Deddev, 6tt Mo0canoAobot Kal THY 5 “Ohvvbor, doa dv édéEarto ; obu Eotiy eineiy».

aEt:Card fod \ t 3“ai A ww 3 Cnteiy ?~ naganeiodotat dei ta\tAaota ano tay évaytioy

s , 9 9\ t 2 / 2 ON / ” . ¢

MAATTEW, HAL TOOTO vOLAxIG EvoioxETaL’ Cio” Ei MEY EW AYAD® aitoinc

véoas, Aéve «et O& xaxdy Tt EcerconnEe, Ox Ay Tiumoiay EOwWxA;» GC

6 Anuoodérync év t@ [lode Aentivyny: dvegedOov yao tas mod&erg too 10

ow \ 4 o\ > vA ~ \ ~w Fld \

Xapotov Aéyer &« tod évartiov aAdttwy «GAl’ si ev piay anddeoe vaoy, meol Pavatov ay éxivddvevoe»* TobtTO uévtoe xat Oundjy Exe THY tio thdoews Vewoiay, ano yao tod évartiov yevouevoy TH uUtxooTéoOw@

ouumdénetat. 7 av tia xehedyco dobvat tiuwotay éu adinjuatu Evcote yao Aéyew «ei & EPlawev ednoyéetyoe, Owoeac ay Elape* Oodoac 15 [161] 68 xaxd¢ | 0d xodacdjoetat;» mavtdc 6& TOO Aeyoudvov Crjtet td évavtiov xal moAddxuc evonoetc tobto nag Gdov tov mhaotob tov Adyov,

/ \ , ¢ , lard > ~ lord \ ,

méurnuévos Ott ws ent tO 2OAd F GPQdoYr TO noayBEer Wo ob yerduEvor tAattEetae 7} TO évavtioy adbtod: oioy éni tvgavvoxtdvov «Et O& OLY 7

/ nA A 2 / be) led rs > \ 4 ) 4 \ bh

2 ~ »] 4 Lard ~w 6D f ? ¢ A /

anoxteiva: éanyyeddouny», todto tod adodov aAdopa un yEevouée- 20 vou, xal GAdo &x tod évaytiov «Ei O& wy xatdodwoa GAla élijgbny, Ti av énador;» nat et AnuooBérny aitoin Dihinnos 7H tt tovodtoyr, didthacov éx tod évartiov «Et 0€ tusic EBodbdscode AaPeiv tt tév Didinnov, MOTE AY OVVEYWOYOEY DULY |

hi 6é xai ebtedéoteody ti ovveydoet } pbotc, ob% dy Muvyoa Oia 25 TO Capéoteoor. od O& MapaTEUTE TH v@ tac Vewolacs TH ONtTooLx@ cov

1 émt déP;% emt V | xandd moayOéver Ac; cf. schol. P: émaxovaréov

7 (scr. tO) meayOéver. || 2 epyaota post mapadelyparog Ve Ba;om. Ac || 4

o; om. V nec

norat Anon. II] 111, 5 Sp. | té& post réAovg add. Ac, v.l.P || 5 péBodog xat moos tadta Vc Ba; xat rede tattran uéBo0d0¢g Ac | dé Avovv.l. P || 7 % Ac,

m. 2 Vc; ety PVc Ba || 8 atta Ve Ba || 9-10 xai morcotuwev Vc Ba || 11 AvatteAodvtTa Pc Ac || 12 8& xai Ba, Pm.1 Ve || 13 ywéuevovAc | mP Ac; 76 Vc Ba _ || 13-14 yuyvéuevov Ve, (ywv-) Ac {| 14 &&otuev Pc Ba, (6 m.

2) Ve | ofov Str Ac || 15 cf. 36,2 || 16 adtods Pc || 17 totvov P; ci Ac; om. Vc Ba _ | pete Ac || 18 &matpouev Vc Ba, (0 ex w) Pa, (wm exo) Pc | obvom. V

, ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 12 119 bring these theories to the thought of your speech while adorning your art with rhetorical language. Be continually aware that by studying the ancients, and especially their leader, '®? we discover countless fine things, but I am giving you (only) what contributes to impressing the teaching on the mind.!% CHAPTER 12:

From-beginning-to-end is difficult to rebut in a pragmatic case. !%4 A method has therefore been invented for this to provide facility to

the one rebutting from-beginning-to-end, and I shall set out this teaching (mathéma) very clearly. If | the actis of our doing and has 162] been brought 1n by our enemies to our hurt, we shall rebut by seeking out and stating the antithetical stases that are most profitable to us, as we do in cases of antilepsis, '©5 and often we shall state argu-

ments from other kinds of stasis that contribute to our advantage. If the heading of the plaston epikheiremes include metalepsis, 1% we shall sometimes state this and refute it in the form, “What happened does not relate to us.” And especially if it is natural for something to have happened and we think it did happen for that reason, the speaker who is resisting an action will say that “it is not happening because of us but because of its own nature.” For example, fire continually runs down from Aetna on Catania, and someone urges the inhabitants to emigrate. ‘The person advising them to flee will say, “We are 1n danger of the fire coming down on us and let us go away from here”; we shall then reply thus: “The

simple, I do not fear to use that so the subject may become clearer.” 162 1 e., Demosthenes. 163 Rendered by Patillon as “mais je n’en donne que ce que m’impose la nécessité d’explique” (L’Art rhétorique, 268). 104 Here meaning a case where the point at issue is the nature of an act; see n. 111 above. 165 Cases in which the speaker claims the act was legitimate in the cir-

cumstances: cf. Hermogenes, On Stases, pp. 72-75 Rabe. The “antithetical stases” might include counteraccusation, shifting the blame, or some excuse for the act. 166 ‘Transference of the cause of an action to someone or something else; here, the opponent is imagined to have blamed the speaker for something.

120 MEPI EYPEZEQ2 PL obtws «od Ol Huds OE TO 2OO GAAd Oia THY adtod pio». 1 Ilepi tagewmc éenizerpnuatoy. ‘l 0é taétc thy Encyetonudtowyr dindy. ei yao thyot Ta ev AbTOY amodentixa elvat toditixtjs Epunvetac udvync dedmeva, Ta O€ NayNnyrOlnd, THOHOELS TA Naynyvoelna Tedsvtaia modG TO Ooxely adbéew NQOYw- 5

[163] oobdvta | tov Adyor én td dxpaidtegor, va ta tH téxvNs nat’ oixelay taéw mooywootrta ddgay axutco tH Aéyorts magdoyn ws b10 Ths év TH héyew BSeoudtytos éut tO axuatdteooyv mop0ayouév@ GAdwo te dé xal nOtwy Toic axovovoly 6 G0 THY an0dElHtTLn@y énl TA MarnyvoltnwmtEeoa ywWOMY, ObY 6 ANG THY RAaYHyLvOLHOY Ent TA ATt0dELHTLHA. 10

Attn pwéyv idéa moat. devtéoa 6é éxeivne copwtéoa iddvta ta EMLYELONUATA, O00Aa EOTL xal Oia, TO MEOKANTIXMTEQOY TOO EkijC HE-

gahaiov tehevtaioy tiWévar, va, && Tio avaynno tod éntyerorjuatos aviotauévov tod xegmadatov tod éyegijc, Bpoc év 6 Adyos yévntas xal obua, wy Ovacnmmevoc év taic bxoqgogaic, aGAAa abtoc abtob doxdy 15

éyeotat xat dviotacdva: Ou attod:' doneo ody iouey nal &y taic aytiAyjpeot TO avtitagactatixoy meta THY Evotaow TEhevtaioy tuPéuEvoy,

2 cf.122,16ann. || 3 d&P AC Pr;0m. Vc Ba | Ste&takes Ac || 4 Sevxtexem.1 Ba | pwévygom.P Ac Mr || 5 SoxodvPc || 5-6 mapayweotvTa Pe || 8 mpocayéuevwr Ve Ba | te P Ac Mr; om. Vc Ba, v1. P || 9 mavnyupexmtata Ve Ba, (te9a_m.1supr.)Pa || 11 mpadryP; ula V,vl.P || 14 totvl. Dox.; 76V; xat&e 16 P | teoc, tv P, m. 2 Ve, m. po. Ba; Spév Ac; Se’ évdc Ba, (ut.vid.) Vc; cf. Dox.: totydc¢ 5é edpov thy yoaphy év totic BBAtorg’ ta prev... “xeparatov, tb Epes, Ev b—pog 6 Adyoo’ ... ta S8 11. KEparatov xata tO EpeEyjc, Heros Ev Adyoo’ ... Erepa SE... “xeparatov rob epeEyjc, Ev Bepoc 6 Adyoo’ xta. | xa V, cf. vl. Dox.;om.P || 15 d:acrmmpevov

Ac, (om.1supr.) Vc || 16 cf. 78, 19 sq.

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 13 I21 fire does not flow because of us but because of its own nature.” !©7 CHAPTER 13: ON THE ARRANGEMENT OF EPIKHEIREMES

There are two ways to arrange epikheiremes.!©8 If some of them happen to be apodeictic, requiring a political style of expression alone,'°9 and some are panegyrical, you will keep the panegyrical ones for last to seem to amplify | the speech as it advances to [163] a higher peak,'7° so that the progression of artistic skills in their proper places may enhance the speaker’s reputation for achiev-

ing heightening, as he is led on by his warmth in speaking to a higher peak. Moreover, movement from apodeictic to panegyric epikheiremes is more pleasing to the audience than is movement from panegyric to apodeictic. This is the first style (¢dea). ‘The second and more clever than

that is, after looking to see how many epikheiremes there are and of what sort, to put one provocative of the next heading last, so that, from the cogent connection of epikheiremes arising in each heading, the speech may have a single texture and body, not being borne off in separate directions (hypophorat) but seem to be held together by itself and to grow from itself. ‘Thus also in cases of antilepsis'7! we see that the antiparastasis is put last after the 167 The author has jumped from an example in a judicial to one in a deliberative theme: whether the inhabitants should emigrate because of the frre. Both fall under pragmantike. Cf. 2.2 above, where the fact that this is a natural phenomenon is given as a reason against emigrating. 168 The author offers a nuanced teaching differing from, though not necessarily conflicting with, standard doctrine, which recommended putting the strongest arguments first or last and weak ones in the middle, where they would be more easily overlooked; cf. Rhetoric for Herennius 3.18; Cicero, On the Orator 2.314; Quintilian 5.12.14; Anonymous Seguerianus §§192-193; Cassius Longinus, Art of Rhetoric 2.3. An emotional epikheireme might well prove effective as the last heading in an argument. 169 The prose style used in political assemblies or in the law courts, relying, in the author’s view, more on logical demonstrations (apodetktika) than on emotional appeal. 17° Akmatoteron; on akmé, see note 95 above. ™7* T.e., counterplea; cf. Hermogenes, On Stases, pp. 65-71 Rabe. The

defendant pleads that an action is permitted, and the prosecutor admits that might be true in theory but not in a particular circumstance. On enstasis and antiparastasis, cf. 3.6 above.

122 MWEPI EYPEZEQO? P&P

> A ) / 2 a~w vd € 2 ow > ~ A ¢ ¢ bla b) Pd Nand > A \ 3 nd > > b | aw ” f ~ \ , Ooiva] ediéwc f ec 6ttbo0¢2 anarvtion, vA / A / éott 2 Banto. Vavatov», ti tO” aitiv

émeton Eyeotixoy éott tod Goov, oiov «ésijyv anoxteivat tov vidy», Hh 1 évotacic «ovx &Eny et O& nal Eby, obx Eni TH aitioyv yevéodat GE Ti

vatov yevéotat. et yao xal arvtimagdotacic éotwy 7 Gnarvtioaca obx [164] émuyelonua, Gums sic magadelypatos Adyor | édyjxaper, Ott yor nai 5 Emi THY ErLyELoOnUuaTwY ObTM TUPévat TEAEvTAaiov TO TOO WéAdoVtOS xE-

gahaiov mooxdAntinoy’ énet xal 4 Evotacic xal 4 avtimagdotacic TOY

- id 2 > $ b) Lond VA ¢ / c\ id

avtoy éyovot Adyor, 00x GEL Tig EvotTaOEwWS H THS arYTIMAQACTAGEWS

sowtns tieuéervyc, GAL’ évahdaE tobto nacyovons Exdotnc, dv Todm0Y”

¢ / bd b \ 5 , / , A ‘ \ o~ /

pauey Osiy Gvacxonety nal Ent TOY EMLYELOnUAaATwWY' “al yao TOUTwWY 10 ExaOTYH 1 OLA TO AxmaLoteooy OEvtéoa TEP HOETAL 7H OLa THY TO UMéAdor-

tog xEgyadaiov moo00oxiar.

[Tepi opov. “Ogos xai avbogtauds xai avdhoyiouds xai Adots tod ovAdoyitopmod TEGOA0a MEV EOTLY Ovouata, TH O€ Ovvduet Oto" 6 TE yao TOY door Eywmy 15

xat TOV ovAdoytomoy Toig avtois éntyelonuact xataoxevdlew éExdteoa

dvvatat, 6 te tov avPogiopor xal tHy Adow tod ovdhoytouod tois ab-

1-2 H Evatactc P; % (om. évotactc) Ac Ba, (ut vid.) Vc; efma Se || 2 éfyjv° eita’ et Ac; fort. é&%v’> ‘ei dé...” {| 8 allt.

sy¢om. Vc Ba || 11 Rom. Ve Ba | cf. 80,23 || 13 Dox.: twee m9d tod mepl taEEWS ETtLyELONUcTwY (p. 120, 2) &véyveov T6 TEP Soov xTA. || 16 6 post

xat supr.m.2 Ba | Dox.: d:dpopov... thy yeaphy edoov... te pev.. ‘6 te yap tov Soov Eywv xat Toy cvAACYyLoov Totc adTOtS EmLyeLohUact xaTaoKevaTeLv Exateon Sdvavta.’ ta Se OUtWS “6 te yao Tov Spov Eywv xat tov &vVOopLopbv Tots avTOLS éTULYELONUAGL xaTaoxevateLy Exktepa Sbvavtar... Ta SE... °6 te yaO Tov

dpov Eywv xat 6 tov awoprauoy Tots adtots émryerpyuaor xatacxevatery Exckteoa dvvavtTa’ 5 te tov GvAAOYLoOV xal 6 THY AVaLY TOD GLAAOYLOUOD Tots adTOLC ETWYSLON UAL xnaTAOKEvaCELY Exaktepa SOvavtTaL...6 wevtor EEnyytIhs obtws avEYvw TO TAPOY OYTOV “6 Te YAO Tov Soov ~ywv xal Tov GUAAODYLOWOY TOLS ADTOLS

ETLYELONUAoL naTaoxevrdaterv Exktepa Sdvavrar 6 te Tov &vVOopLGWoy xal Thy Adawy TOU GVAAOYLOLLOD TOL AUTOIS ETLYELONUAGL xatTacxevdTely Exktepa SOVavTaL’...

UNTO youv &uetvov obtas Exewv Thy ypaphy ‘6 te yao tov Spov ~ywv xal Thy AvbGLY TOD GVAADYLGMOD TOLS ADTOLS ETtLYSLONUAOLY ExktTeOA xaTaoxevVdTELV SUvavTaL’

KTA. | xatacxevcoar V || 17 6 post xat add. Ac, m. 2 Ba

ON INVENTION, BOOK 3, CHAPTER 14 123 enstasis, since it prepares for the definition; for example, “It was permitted to kill my son,”'?7? with the enstasis, “It was not permitted, and if it had been permitted, not so that you might be the cause of death to the mother,” in order that the definition of what was the cause of her death might occur immediately. Even if this rejoinder is an antiparastasis and not an epikheireme, ‘73 nevertheless, | we have used it for an example because it is necessary alsoin [164] the case of epikheiremes to put last what is provocative of the next heading. Since enstasis and antiparastasis have the same function, neither the enstasis nor the antiparastasis always being put first but either in turn, we say that one should look at epikheiremes in the same way. For each of these will be put second either to heighten the intensity or in anticipation of the next heading. *'7”* CHAPTER 14: ON DEFINITION ‘5

Horos and anthorismos and syllogismos and lysis of syllogismos are four different names'!7° but in effect only two different things, for in the case of definition (horos) and syllogism (syllogismos) one can

confirm either by the same epikheiremes, and in counterdefini- | 72 On the theme, cf. n. 8 above. 173 "There seems inconsistency here, since previously enstasis and antiparastasis have been referred to as epikheiremes; cf. esp. the first sentence of 3.7 above and more generally 3.5—6. Possibly the text should be emended to read “the rejoinder is an antiparatasis and not an enstasis.” '74 In the example given, the progression of epikheiremes (it 1s not per-

mitted; even if permitted not in this case) leads to the heading of definition (What was the cause of the mother’s death?), but it is hard to see how any other order of epikheiremes would be likely to occur. The chapter would have been clearer if the author had illustrated the possibilities of the arrangement of multiple epikheiremes in support of a single heading more extensively. ‘75 Not definition in general, but stasis of definition; see Hermogenes, On Stases, pp. 59,10-65,8 Rabe. Rabe (app. crit. on 164,10) quotes John Doxa-

patres as reporting that “some” read this chapter before the chapter on the arrangement of epikheiremes. 17° On these technical terms, see Hermogenes, On Stasis, pp. 60,6—8 and 81,6-18 Rabe, with Heath’s commentary, On Issues, 104 and 139. The names can be translated as, respectively, definition, counterdefinition, syllogism (called “assimilation” by Heath and Patillon), and refutation of syllogism. In syllogism as understood here, an epikheireme is used to support the definition of an act; cf. the example of tyrannicide below.

124 MEPI EYPEZEQ2 P[165] totic énryeonjmact xataoxevalery éxdteoa | dbvatau. téyvy 68 Davuacia 1 mao’ Huiy eBontat mod¢ TO Ate neptodat Tov Adyoy uurjtE Arogor Elval

dinonuérns tio Stavoias, Moneg nal éni thy éerryetonudtwr, iva 6 TE tov boov pehetady xai 6 tov dvPogiopoy arytitieic tovTM TA NEO TOD ody uatos ciwidta ovuBaivery Aéywot, xal 6 wév Tov Goov xatTacxEvda- 5

Cov o8tw $yth «rdde 200 tod nodypatoc ee yevéoDat, ob péyover», 6 6& toy dvBoolouor xatacxevdloyr iva obtw Aéyy «eet THE ypevéoal

00 tod} modyuatos, yéyove”. tadta pév a0 THY NEO Tod NEdypatoc: oloy wawwduevoc anéutewe thQavv0Y, OWYEOYHOAS aitEi TO yeas,

éviotatal tic abt «od tobtd &ott TvEarvvoxtovia». 6 dE YHoL «TOOTA 10 éott tugavvoxtovia’ set avedPeiv eic thy dxodnodw, avidGor Ede azouTElval, MEepdvevxa)”, TADTA 200 TO’ NMEdypatoc. 6 OE TOY avPogLtopor

xatacxevacwy gost obtwo «eet Bovledoaciat nomtov tov pwéAdovta TVOAYVOXTOVELY, Ob} paLydmEVOS Ob EBovAEtow DMPEOVObYTwWY yaE ~o-

yoy éotiy», Hote THY 6pEtAdytwy Te 100 TOO NOdypatos yevéoVal Maga 15 too tvgavvoxtovov Aciner’ «&dEt cidévat TOY TYGAYYOXTOVOY, Ti TOLEL, OV

d& obx FOEtc». 6 O& ovAdoyltouds And THY EntovuPaiwortwy TH MOEay-

pats éminataoxevacdyjoetat, oiov «ovdéey Orapéoel, cite Ewatvouny EiteE

[166] éowyodvovy | & yao &¢ oweyeovotytog dnoxtetvarvtos euod éntovvé-

Bn dy dyad, tadta ual viv yéyover’ eu tov tigarvvoy aynotjoVat, 20 ayjonta get éhevdegiay yevéoDat, yéyover’ &et wndéva sivat emt TiC dxoonddews, obdsic Foti». 6uoiws xal 6 thy Avow tod ovdAdoytopod Eywv & TOY weta Tadta ovuPatwwdrtwr, et te uy Extyéyove, AauPavewy

a> énuyetonua prnoe dtt «odd dtayéger’ A yao ay éntovvéByn ow—oo-

1 xatacxev&tew V,v.l.P;0m.P | Sdvavra. Ac | a nobis Laurentis, apud nos Sturm (at cf. Sturmiicommentarium) || 3 tH¢om.V | xatom.V | > @ f ,

tobto obyi xaldc éyew ddFat tial tO wryiopa ; MOTEQOY, 6Tt TAEA TOC vOmous ; xal ury wdvoy Eotl xaTa TOS VOMoUG. GAA’ 6tt TaEEMS AdOtC ;

xal pny tobto, d>o ob GAAo, Deuthiog edtakiac. GAN’ bt tédE» xal anodwdoes abté. yivetat 6&, 6tayv xal dvo xai toia vornuata &ync, oloy 10 el tic éxelyny Bednjoee wetanotjoat tHy megiodoy, mEgiodunry waddov otoay 7} meolodov, «viv O€, a wév adetdoacw Hv o@oa, Padilew xeAebowrv anolddsxerv odbtoc, & O° einobot tadnOF, pevddpEevos», xai mddwy

«dia ti yao dy, vy) Ala, dia ti peioattd tic Aioyivov ; motTEQoy 6tL THY

ZEodoy énetdyurve ; xal uny mAsiv Bet xai un) Badilew. GA’ dtt tady- 15

On 2006 buds ynoe; xai uty pevoduevoc advta anolddenev». “H dé [180] TH pEetanoijocews doet? too SnotEPEvtos | voruatoc nay oxhua ob-

> 4 tA 4) aw 2 2, 4 2 > /

two Epagudoat Obvatat 6 uGAAov éxadjtre yiwdpevor & adbtooxediov 7} yoayy magad.odpuevor.

[178] Eioi 6&8 xai dnodeintinal toic oyrjuacw oloy «év | wey yao TH 20 yodapa: undéva eivat ated todo &yovtac agsideto try atédeay, év O€ TH ooovodpat undé TO Aoinoy éEsivar dodvat buds to dovvat buiv é€&-

civat.» tadtys tO oxrjua xadov wéy Cydoty nal ano tic éounvetac, xoeittoy O€, ct tO éAdeinoy Ano xolvod Nolet Tic Ev Taig pETANOLHOEOLY,

ij A ¢ f e \ 3 ow A b) / > ~ if / 2 b! w 6 6D we ,

iva tO &y tH mootdoe sionuévov év tH anoddcet Asinn wév pH AEeyome- 25 vov, paiyytat 6& > AeyouEevor, Wo nai évtab0a tO «apeidetoy Ev TH mootdoe. Aéhextat, év O& TH AGnoddcEt Cvvvmaxotvetat.

1 teom. Vc Ba || 2 t&vom.Ac || 3 xat yao xat Vc Ba || 4 & gyoathas V, Dem. 22,7 | dtxny Sar¢ vdvPc || 5 ye dv arapyHe keEntat tre StarcopetvP || 6 cf. Dem. 24,81 | th ye &eaV || 7 76 Yhqprcua ante Sdgar

Vc Ba, post 36€a. Pe || 9 xotb uhv xi P || 11 éxetvwyPc | eeaAjoce V || 11-12 otoav w&AAovAc || 12 Dem.19,181 | pévom.Pc || 13 obdto¢ om. Vc Ba | |xat mé&Av|] Spengel || 14 yao &VP Ac; ye &ea Ve Ba | did

stom. Vc Ba || 15 ét&yvve Ac || 18 SuvyoetasPc | Dox.: vor... «8 od uaxAAOVy» xtA. || 20 Dem. 20,2 || 22 mpoyepddoarAc | dytv ro Sodvan bus

Ac,m.2Vc | td|I] Ve Ba | jyivBa || 23 déante to add. Vc Ba || 25 uy suppl.m. po. Pc || 26 gatvera: Ba, (ysupr.) Ve | 1.21 | év pév Ma

ON INVENTION, BOOK 4, CHAPTER 3 149 ing an apostrophe and invective (Dem. 19.120): “Then, O you —; what name would anyone rightly use to address you?” Or again (Dem. 19.120): “Stand up and answer me, for you cannot say you do not have anything to say because of lack of experience.” | ?%3 [179,3] Briefly put, if after selecting examples of periods from the ancient writers one were to imitate them, one would find a good supply of periods by variations (metapoiéseis). ‘The figure from

comparison is best (Dem. 22.7): “For just as if any of them had been condemned, you would not have introduced this motion, so if you are now punished, another will not introduce it.” And it is possible to compose periods as if in doubt, if one begins as does Demosthenes in Against Timocrates: “Why then, by Zeus, why does this decree not seem to be good to some? Is it because it 1s contrary to the laws? In fact, it is the only one that is in accord with the laws. But because it destroys the order? In fact, unlike everything else, it is the foundation of good order. But it is because of such and such,” and you will give the apodosis.?"4 This happens when you have two or three thoughts; for example, if you want to alter the following period, which 1s periodic rather than actually a period?!5 (Dem. 19.181): “But now, all that could be saved

by sailing he has lost by ordering us to come by land, and what (could be saved) by speaking the truth (he has lost) by lying”; and again, “For why, by Zeus, would anyone spare Aeschines? Because he hastened the departure? Surely it was necessary to sail and not to go by land. Or because he spoke the truth to you? Surely by ly-

ing he destroyed everything.” It is the virtue of metapoiesis that | it can harmonize every figure of the underlying thought in this [180] way, a thing that amazes more when done extemporaneously than when transmitted in writing. | "here are also periods that are apodeictic because of their [177,23] figures; for example (Dem. 20.2): “In [178] the provision that no one is to be exempt he took away exemption from those that have it and in the further provision that exemption is not to be granted

213 'The translation follows Patillon’s insertion of 179,3-180,3 Rabe at this point. 214 A very free adaptation of Demosthenes 24.81. 275 Because it is not part of an epikheireme. The same applies to some of the examples that follow.

150 MEPI EYPEZEQE A "Eote nal émitiuntixy mepiodos tH oxnjuatt, 6tav Aéyouev «et?’, 1 & Dihinnos dy ebEatto toic Peoic, tatV’ Sudy tives évPdde roLodovw ; »

nanel add «sita ov atoytveote, ci und’ & addot’ dv, si ddbvatt’ éxeivoc, tadta noijoat xagov eyortes ob todunoste ;» yivetat O& xal éx ovpsthoxic Odo adinnudteoy oloy «viv 68, d uéy ahedboaow Hy o@oal, 5 Badilewy xehetdwv anolddener obt0c, & O° cinotot TAANOH, pevddpmevocs».

Kaddhov 0é nE0i oxrjjuatoc nEeguddov Aextéov. megioddcs éott ox7pa atbtotedéc Gdov tod émyeionjmatoc év Eounvelac OvOuGd ovvtdéuws amNnoTLopwévoy, TA O& Ev AVTH ovvtduws bneoPata xaldso oxynuatiler TAC WEOLOOOUS’ «6 yag oic ay éyw AnyBeiny», EoTL yao TO EHC «6 yae 10

tTabta moattwy, oic dy Anybeiny &yd». ‘Totéov 6&, > THY tEQtodoy Fito icooxEedy xai iodadevoor ano THY

[179] xdbdwy elvat dei xata thy Eounveiar | } ovvtouwtéoay éy tH anoddcet’

TLOOTAGEWC. 15 atovia O& 6ytTOOS THY anddooLY Tic mEgLddov HaxpoTéoaY NOLHOaL THC

LTivetat 0& nai wovdxwdos megiodos, yivetat 6& xal dixwhoc xal

toinwhoc % & tory xbAwy ovveotnxvia nal tetodxwdos 4 éx teEttdowy. x@hov O& éotiy 7 annotiouéry Oidvoia. 4 wey yao wovdxwdos éxeivn, EmELon “OEMaTat 7 Otdvota abthc Exo too tédovs TH bnEeoPat@

ottw oxnuatiovsion oyowoterds OretAnnta «sita obx aicybveoBe, ci 20 und & wavot ay, et Odbvait’ éxeivoc, tadta noljoa xatody #yovtes ob toAunoete ;» Oixnwdos O& éxeivy 7 MeoTACEwWS LovoxbdAov xEtuévync and-

doo anaitotoa povdxwhor uddiota O& ai yrwuixai mdoyovow abto: éott O€ yrmpinn mEepiodos abtyn «tO yao eb nodttEew naga tHYy délay

ayooun too xax@ yooveiy toic avortotc yivetat». toixwdoc Oé éxei- 25 yy, Otay Ovo xbAwy draydowyr mootabévtwr Goxf uwovduwiocs éxatéootc

1 d&xaiV | Dem. 8,20 || 2 tée OeGt Vc Ba | évOdde rorodet tive

Vc Ba || 3 Dem.1,24 || 4 coruhoere P; cf.l.22 || 5 Dem.19,181 || 6 cittovoty &AyO% Ac || 7 3é got. Ba || 10 Dem.g9,17 | ofovante 6 add. Ma

|| 16 cf. Demetr. De eloc. 16.17 || 16-17 xot toefxwAog dt V || 18 alt. 7 om.V | wévom.Pc || 19 toB}om. Vc || 20 cynuaticfetongP Ac | Dem. 1,24 || 21 xotpdv gyovtes roryjoa, Ac || 22 nodwhoere Pc; cf. 150,4 || 23 toUTO OE UcALOTA TH&OXOVOLY ab Yyvaptxat Ve Ba || 24 Dem.1,23 || 24 thy

eautou post a&tav add. Ba, (del.) Vc || 26 mportePévrwv P Ac

ON INVENTION, BOOK 4, CHAPTER 3 151 in the future (he took away) your right to confer it.”?!® It is good to look for the figure here in the verbal construction, but better if one

makes a departure from the usual in changes such that something said in the protasis is left unsaid in the apodosis but seems to be said, as here “he took away” has been stated in the protasis and implied in the apodosis. There is also a period censorious (epitimétiké) in figure, as when we say (Dem. 8.20), “‘Then what Philip would pray for to

the gods, this would some of you here do for him?” Or again (Dem. 1.24): “Are you not ashamed 1f what you would suffer if he had the power, these things you will not dare to do to him when you have the opportunity?” It also occurs from interweaving (symploké)?'7 of two wrongs; for example (Dem. 19.181): “But

now, all that could have been saved by sailing, he has lost by ordering us to come by land, and by lying all that could be said by speaking the truth.” I should say something in general about the figure of a period. A period is a figure, complete in itself, belonging to a whole epikheireme, in rhythmical language, brought to a concise end, and the concise hyperbata2’8 in it beautifully give periods their figure; (for example,) “For he, by what things I would be captured” (Dem. 9.17), where the normal order would be “for he doing the things by which I would be captured.” You should know that a period ought to be expressed with cola of equal legs and sides??? | or the apodosis should be shorter. [179] It is a failing on the part of an orator to make the apodosis of a period longer than the protasis. | here are monocolonic peri-_ [180,4] ods, and there are dicolonic and tricolonic ones, consisting of three cola, and tetracolonic from four. A colon is a completed thought. A period is monocolonic when its thought is suspended until the very end by hyperbaton; thus figured by stretching it is divided as in this example (Dem. 1.24): “Then are you not ashamed, if what you would suffer if he had the power, these things when

216 Patillon has suggested moving this and the next two paragraphs to follow the first sentence of p. 180 Rabe; cf. Patillon, ANRW, 2129. 217 Cf. Alexander, On Figures 2.5. 218 Changes in word order, as in the examples cited 219 “Legs” in the case of monocolonic and dicolonic periods, “sides” in the case of the others.

152 WMEPI EYPEZEQZ A 2 f v4oiov e cy 2 ad A wév > fGpethet ~w toic ¢ \béo¢ adtOD ondMEnoAtEv- 1 and000tc, «dv oby éxeivos

7 / Cw \ / cA ~ / 4 ¢ ,

uévots ydow, duiv 0€ dixny nooonjxet AaPely», EXO TOUVTOV 7) MOOTACLC,

cita émnoxecev Exatéoots toig x@Aotc 7) andd00tg povOxwhos «TOUTMY [181] obdyzi viv 6o@ tov xaipdy tod Aéyeww». | tetEdxwdoc dé éxetyn H ev TH

mowty nootdoe: anddoow idiay éyovoa xal év tH devtéoa meotdoe 5

> Ed 9Q 7 ” rd 3 \ \ Load , , cy »]

anddooty idiav éyovoa, oiov «éy uév yao TH yodpat unodéva sivat ateAn todo éyovtac aetdeto thy atéleay, év O&€ TH MOOTYEAapat UNE TO

howndy é&eivar dodvat buds tO dobvat buiv é&eivat». tio tetoax@dov

dé tadtys nai 4 yoeia xadliotn év Taig petanoimocow, 6tt xat ddvvaTat otoépecDal’ TEtoaxig yag wetaoyynpatilouéeryn é% THY MEOTAGEWY 10

nal tov anoddcewy GAdmws ddbvatat AeyPivat Tetodxic: et O& Cel nal yraoPivat abthy, téte 07) TOtTE OtvaLTO Ay Tig AvTHY Ex THC THY VOH-

uUdtor avayxys xai wAcovdxic oteégpew’ 08 adoa O€ yraodiyvat Ovvatat

/ \ eo \ la = > \ \ ~ , ,

tetoadymvos mwEeoiodos. Eotw Oé no@tov abty MoAAdxnic MEV AvacToE-

pouévy, undé dnaé 6& yralouévy, otov «év pév yao TH yoadpar undéva 15 civat atedh tobds éyortac agpeiheto thy atédetay, év O€ TH MOocyeapat

\ A >é PEeivat y) ~ ~dobvat ¢ om ¢buiv owé€etvary. 2 od lA | unodé tO\Aoinoy tudcxtoond dobvat dvvatat

6& abty dVodws advactoayEetoa xai GAdws yevéoBau 7 yao devtéoa m00taclg xal Gmddoots yivovtat me@tat oioy «ev WEY YAO TH NOocyeayal

A A \ > ~ lod ¢ aw A ~ Cc mw > fe 5 / »]

undé tO Aownoy é€eivat dodvat budc to Oobvat buiv éEetvat agetheto, év 20

[182] 6€ tH yodwar | undéva eivar atelh tiv atédevay todc &yovtac»: 7 tac dvo mootdaoetc éxAaBwv ovytiOnu «év wey yao TH yoapar unoéva Eivat ately xai éy TH NOocyodwpat unoé tO Aoinov é&Eetvat dodvat nat TOVG

& do 1 brd60eorgPc | ofovom.Pc | Dem. 2,4 || 1-2 zodrrtevpévorg Ve Ba || 2 todrtov, wvym.2supr., Ve || 3 eita post xmAorg Ve Ba | aeeporépors

Vc Ba | Rom. Vc Ba | todtwv P; todtov Ac; totté got Ba; totTé Eat: s, ULdvo dé StaywelTeoOat TH UEtTOW THV GVAAA-

Bav and yao tecokpwv xtaA. || 4 Sésuppl.m. po. Pc | 38 &AAHAwY Tots

V,vil. Pa | (62 0m.) t6 pev yee Ve Ba | péype P Ac, W VII 931, 19; xak uéxyets Ve Ba || 5 énmde yetpoduevovom. W VII | exsp. bade tao 8& || 6 ult. xatet tom. W VII || 7-8 6 — repivevénra: suppl. m. 2 Ba; om. W VII 931, 31 || 8 48x P Ac Mr, cf. shcol. P W VII 822, 2;0m. Vc Ba || 8-9 KEXAyTAL —TePELBoAats om. W VII 931, 22 || 9 82e9 yeyouxov év Anon. ITI

113,29 Sp. || 10 of 8&P Vc Ba; &or 88 W VII 931; ofov Ac || 11 Dem. 18, 71

ON INVENTION, BOOK 4, CHAPTER 4 157 of words completing a thought in cola and commata, measured by the supply of breath in the voice of the speaker. ?74 Since we mentioned colon and comma, you should know,

briefly put, that both comma and colon should complete a thought.?%5 They differ in length, in that a comma consists of from four and five up to six syllables, while | anything beyond [184] seven and eight and ten syllables, approaching the length of a trimeter and going up to that of a hexameter, becomes a straight extended colon.??© [The number of syllables has already been considered. |?77 What exceeds the heroic meter has been called skhoinotenes,??® especially useful in prooemia and elaborated pas-

sages??9 in prooemia. Some say that the epode is a colon and anything shorter a comma. Now the following are cola?3° (Dem. 724 T.e., a long periodic sentence, said in one breath. In 4.5 we are told

that a pneuma becomes a tasis when it cannot be said in one breath, but the examples of pneuma given by the author would require brazen lungs if the requirement of delivery in one breath is taken literally. Quintilian 11.3.53-54 supplies some advice: “When about to deliver a lengthy period (longiorem perihodon) we should collect our breath but not take a long time over it, do it noisily,

or make it in any way obvious; at other points, the best plan will be to recover breath at the natural breaks between phrases.” 725 Cf. Aristotle, Rhetoric 3.9.5—-7; Demetrius, On Style §§1-11; Dionysius of Halicarnassus, On Composition chs. 7-9.

220 The note in the apparatus (p. 156,3) may be understood as follows: cf. Walz 7:931,15 (scholia P to Hermogenes, On Ideas; the author is Lachares, according to Wilhelm Studemund, Pseudo-Castoris excerpta rhetorica [Vratislava: T'ypis officinae Universitatis, 1888], 9), citing Apsines’ discussion of the comma, “for he thinks that in terms of the thought a colon does not differ from a comma, but is only distinguished by the number of the syllables; for “ Lachares lived in the fifth century. Apsines, in the third century, may have derived the passage, which is not found in his extant work, from the treatise used by the author of On Invention. On a possible second-century date for On Invention in its original form, see the introduction above. Rabe regarded Lachares’ reference to Apsines as a conjecture; cf. above. 227 'T*his sentence is omitted in most mss and in Lachares’ quotation. 228 Elongated, stretched; cf. 1.5 above, p. 27. As a metrical term found only in these passages. 229 Peribolé; cf. Hermogenes, On Ideas 1.11; translated as “abundance” by Wooten, 41-54. 73° In the Greek there are two participial phrases of fifteen and seventeen syllables (fourteen and sixteen if the conjunctions are not counted), thus creating two cola on the basis of the definition above.

158 MEPI EYPEZEQZ A nal xatacxevacwy énitelyioua ert tyv “Attinny», sita émipéoet xou- 1 pata «(xai xatahaupaveoy “Qosdv xat xataoxantwv Iloodudy», sita duadéyetat xai x@dAov nddw «xual xatrotac éy wéy “Qoe@ Didcotidny

tv0earvvoy», eita xduua add «év 0° “Koetoia Kisitagyor» 7 xa@dhov étwd@ toov. xai diddAov t6 rvebua tovtotcs ovvéyetat obtE yao aowug@ 5 obte &et tnoninte:, GAAd tO nagatvyoy Aéyetat, Ov GAdwy pévtot ob

vivetat. lotéov 6, bt xal ano thy névte ovddapoy, Oo paper, nal TETTAOWY OF YE HAL HTTOYWY OCLVYiOTATAL TO xOUpma’ Et yao anaotilol-

to Otdvoia, xal év Odo ovdAdafaic xoupa gots xoupma O€ Eott obvPEots

[185] dtavolac pinootéoa udbdov: énel tO nvedua adto pet’ Gdiyoy xal | sig 10 totabta xatadnéer xoupata, Stay Aéyy «ndtTEQOY Tadta moldy HOlxEL HAL MAVEGMOVOEL “Al THY ElonvnY EAvEV TH OU ;» “al yao at ent téAEt dvO

ovihapai «7 o}» xdupua éotiv, EowtayYtog GhoxdArjows avPownov THY Ovavotay.

Kiéyn 6& avevydtwy ddvo: 7tot yao év vonua AaPortes xai tob- 15 to éoyaldusevot tH Eounveia mtdeioon x@dotc, Mo Egyy, O1ragxoduEv TO

éy énextelvortec, oiov «éte yao negiov 6 Dihinnos Tivo.ods xai TorBaddode, tiwag O& xat tév “EAAjvwv xateotoépeto xat dvvduetc toddas Hal mEevahas Enoleito bm EavTOY, xai TiWES THY Ex THY MdOAEWY ETL TH

tho elonync &Eovoia Badilortes éxeioe dtepecigovto, wv sic obtog Hy, 20 tote OF TOtE MaVTES, Ep od¢ tadta nageoxedbaley Exeivoc, Enoleuodyto. &t 0& un Hobdavorto, EtEgos odtOSG Adyos, OB MOOG EUEY», TOOTO yao

ovpnay éEvdcg éott vonuatos Eounveta Tod 6tt adda Dihinnos toicg “EAAnow éneBoddever’ 7} Stav 20Ada nodyuata GBodws éxortEs sineiv xad?®

1 émterylopataPa || 3 xalom.Ac Mr | x@Ax Ve || 5 xaOddAov Vc Ba || 6 &e. Ac; Aé&er Pe Ve Ba, (A er.) Pa, schol. P W VII 822: tH Svvauer

tod Aéyovtosg | Sorte: tO mvedU« Ve Ba | Aéyetat Vc Ba; yivetatP Ac || 7 w¢om. Vc Ba | p.156,4 || 8 ouviotara: Pc, (post x6uuo transp.) Ac; ouvtotacQat (post x6umotransp.) Vc Ba;om. Pa | ouvlotarer t6 x@Aov cvAAaBay

W VII 931,25 || 9 gota. W VII | xdupo dé ott om. Pa; xduye yao gor? || 10 aatyo P || 11 sc. p. 156, 11 sq.: Dem. 18, 71 || 13-14 Epmtésvtocg TOD PHTOPNS GAOXANOMS ETA THY SO ovVAAGBAYV TOUTWY THY TPOKELLLEVYY TKOAY

dstavorcayv W VII 931, 29 |] 13 thyom. Vc Ba || 16 éepyacdkuevo. Vc Ba ||

16-17 p. 154, 26-156,1 || 17 Dem. 18,44 | mepttovP Mr | 60m. Vc || 18 dSésuppl.m.2Vc || 19 &é« t&vV; om. (mg. yp tHv woAcutwv) P- || 20 atoytvyns post nv add. Vc Ba || 21 Sy téte hic om. Dem.; v. p. 152, 12 ann., 164,25 || 22 Adyoo obtog Ve Ba | 6 Adyog Pc || 23 Sr ct mxAne Ve Ba

ON INVENTION, BOOK 4, CHAPTER 4 159 18.71): “But he who was appropriating Euboea / and preparing it as a stronghold against Attica”; then he brings in commata: “and seizing Oreus / and raising the walls of Porthmus”;?3! then he uses a colon again, “and setting up Philistides as tyrant in Oreus”; then a comma again, “and Cleitarchus in Eretria,” or a colon equal to an epode.?3? And altogether, a pneuma consists of these parts, for it is not a matter of anumber or rule of art but of what happens to be said, and it does not result from other things. You should know that, as we said, a comma consists of five syllables, or indeed, four and less, for if the thought is completed, there is a comma even in two syllables—a comma being a expression of thought shorter than a colon—; this very pneuma (Dem. 18.71) a little later | willend in acomma of that sort, when he says, [185] “In doing these things was he guilty of wrong and did he violate the truce and break the peace, or not?” Here the two syllables at the end, “or not,” are a comma, since the man’s question contains the whole thought. There are two kinds of pneuma. In one kind, after taking a single thought and elaborating it in expression with numerous cola, as I said, we continue to stretch out that one thought; for example (Dem. 18.44), “For when Philip was going around and subduing the Illyrians and Triballi and some of the Greeks as well, and was bringing under his control many large forces, and when some men from the cities, taking advantage of the peace to go to Macedon, were being corrupted there, of whom this man was one, at that very time all those against whom he was making preparations were really being attacked. If they did not realize it, that is another subject, not my concern.” All this is the expression of the one thought, that Philip was plotting against the Greeks long ago. Or (in the other kind) when we have many actions to mention

23" ‘Two participial phrases of nine and seven syllables (eight and seven if the connectives are not counted). 732 T.e., eight syllables, as in the epodes of Archilochus.

160 MEPI EYPEZEQX A Exaotov x@dov nodyua anaotiCwper, Oc év éexelym «add 6 tHv Ho- 1 Bovay éxsivos opeteoildusvos wal xatacxEevdlwy éemitetyioma Ent THY

"Attiniy nai xatalaupdvwr “Qosoy xai xatacxantoy Llogbudy», xat [186] dudAov todto tO nvebua ovvanagtile: tH nodypate | xal x@Aov. xal

mapa tadta obx gotw dAdo sidocg nvebuatoc. 5 "Edéyyetar 6& to mvetua nat yivetat TH enipovy too oyNHpatoc: dei yao éntpueivarta TH oynuate tH Guowdtytt TOO oxnpwatos OetEat TH

téyyny. ovvdcitat 0& tO avEedua xal ovrtibetat uddiota xat edtovoy vivetat toig ovveyéot ovvdéopmots Toig ovumhEextinoic, xal mdoxet O€ VE HOOMOVMEVOY aN aoxXic Ayot Tédovc. xal Maoadderyua ovu EPynna’ OVEY 10

yao got, 6 te un obtme Exe. Ayyuata o& mvevudatwrv, doa xal Adywv: &eott yao dev Bovdet oot to avebua AaPorvtt nat Aéyortt udvoy Enipmstvat, 6t@m O° ay Exipeivys, mvEeOua oleic. wEtoiws O& Gnd THY NagadEtyuatwY Tas THOHCELS ava-

yvunatoy éxPeivar. ott yao abtamy tO uésy Groyartixoy xata THY 6oPrTY 15 at@oat oiov «aAd’ 6 thy LbBoway éxsivoc opeteotComevoc »* a0 yao Tob «opEeteotlomevoc» 1) Emtmorn yevouéry TO oxHua toonyayer. “Hott nat

nat éo@tyow, édy tic Aéyn «tic yao 6 thy HbBovay éxsivos ometegrCouevoc; tic 6 xatahauBbavwy “Qoedy; tic 6 xatacxdatwy Llogduor ; tic 6 xataoxevdlwy énitetyioua ent thy “Attixnny ;» ual didAov GAAd- 20 Eac tO oyfjua oor énoinoas tO mvetbua, xdv atta Aéyng ta Onuata, pdvoy aytt tod doVoov tod 6 to tic nagahafwr Oia TO oxYHua MdoLOY.

(187) “Hote nai éheputindy, édv tic Aéyn | «ody obtds éotw 6 tiv E’Bouay opetepilouevos ; oby ObTOC EOTLY 6 xatTaoxEvaCwr EnitEiyLoua EL THY

"Attinny;» nal ta éEfjc 6uotwc. Kai devetimoy ypivetar addw tod ov- 25 yt apaivetévtoc oiov «odtoc 6 thy HbBotay oeteoilousevoc, obtos 6 1 mpkyua? | draptiGonev Vc Ba | we éxetvo Ac,m.2 Vc | p.156, 11 || 3 xat peykoousg éxryerpav post artixhy add. Ac, post meedv Sc

|| 4 tobrov Ve Ba | té0m. Ac | ovvanaprtiFeta: Ve Ba; cvvaptiter Ac | x@aov P Ac, Anon. II] 114, 26 Sp.; tots xmAowg Vc Ba; 6 xGAovm.2 Vc || 5

cata vl. P, robto PV || 6 xat yiverarom. Ac || 7 érupetvavt, Ac | tod oxnuatogom. Vc Ba || 11 S(om.t1)V | gyer obtmc Ac || 13 éexupetvor xat P {| 14 d&8 xal dnxdAc || 15 aropatexdvV || 16 ofovom.V | p. 156, 11 || 17 maphyoyey Ac; mexotynxev Vc Ba | Séante xatadd. V_ || 18 te om. Vi | Aéyntg Ve Ba || 19 xataxdrrev (pro xatacxartwv) Ba || 22 pédva avtt TOD 6 &eDeov 7d tig dptov mraparAauBavey did 76 oyHua Ve Ba | dra 7d

om. Ac | ayo xai udotov Ac, vl. P (at recte hic scholiasta P interpretatur: to tic TAPAKAKBEYV UdpLov, St& TO oYFUa) || 23 S58 xat Vc Ba | dv Aéynis V_ ||

25 xal—dyolwcom. Vc | é&%o moabtwc: duotms xai Ac || 26 odtd¢ got 6V

ON INVENTION, BOOK 4, CHAPTER 4 161 together in each colon we complete a subject, as in this example (Dem. 18.71): “But he was appropriating Euboea / and preparing it as a stronghold against Attica / and seizing Oreus / and razing the walls of Porthmus,” and throughout this pneuma he fits one

colon to one thought. | There is no other kind of pneuma. [186] The existence of a pneuma is proved by the continuation of the figure, 733 for by dwelling on the figure one necessarily shows

his art by the sameness of the figure. A pneuma is held together and to the greatest extent composed and made vigorous by repeated conjunctions connecting the parts, and it receives ornamentation by use of from-beginning-to-end. I have not offered an example, for there is no pneuma that is not like this.

There are as many figures of pneumas as there are figures of language, for it is possible to derive the pneuma from anything you want and in speaking to linger on it, and whatever you continue you make into a pneuma. It is necessary, however, for us to give some moderate attention to the examples, for some of them are declarative in the nominative case, as is “but he who was appropriating Euboea,” for the continuation from “was appropriating” carried on the figure.?3+ There are also interrogative pneumas, as if someone said, “Who 1s he that is appropriating Eu-

| boea? Who is capturing Oreus? Who is razing Porthmus? Who preparing a fortification against Attica?” Although changing the figure throughout, you preserve the pneuma, even if you say the same words, only substituting the particle “who?” for the article “he who” for the sake of the figure. It is elenctic?35 if one says, | [187] “Is not this man the one who is appropriating Euboea? Is he not the one who is preparing a fortification against Attica?” And the rest similarly. A deictic pneuma, on the other hand, is one in which the “not” is dropped; for example, “This is the man who is appropriating Euboea, this the one preparing a fortification against

733 T.e., by the grammatical inflexion; cf. the examples below. 734 Patillon (L’Art rhétorique, 295 n. 5) reads to skhéma pepoiéken, “a pro-

duit le pneuma.” 735 J.e., incriminating.

162 MEPI EYPEXZEQE A xataoxevdcoy énitelyioua éni thy “Attixny.» Kai 7 évotacig pévtow 1 too mvEevuatos moet oxrjua xaAdotory, éav Aé-ywper «ob tHv E®Botay

éoyeteoilov ; ob xateonedvalec énitetyioua Eni thy “Attinny ;» Kai xaDddov anootoopr mica Eig mOdCwWNOY EntuEivaca TVvEbma EyévEeto, “AY

cic Euavtoy éentotoépas Aéyw «eyo pwév Huny 6 thy HéBoway oyeteot- 5 Copmevoc, éyw 08 6 xatacoxevdlwy éniteiytoua ent thy “Attixyy, éyw Oé 6 xatahauPpdvwry “Qoedy, éy@ 6& 6 xatacxdntwr [lopdudy»: ddbvatar yao mov éy no0PpAyjuate xai Dihinnoc Aéyew tabta. “H aovntimoy addy nvebua, dv tig Aéyn «Kobu éy® thy HbBoway éoyeteoilouny, obu éy@

xateoxevaoa émuiteiyioua ért thy “Attixyiy». “Hote xat anuoteentinov 10 oxnua, 6 éntipeivay nvedua yiveta, Otay Aéyyn «uy pot pwvetovs undé diauvetove Adyous undé TAC EmtotoAuaiovs Tabtac OvvduEetc MEOMEPE ».

Totéov Oé, bt éal ndvtwy tottwr al te tHv aowudy adhayal Evindy xal rtAndorvtixdy aAAdooovor xa wetaoynuatiCovow ai te THY

[18s] yerdy nal téy athboewr nal | ai tHv éyudicewr. dovdudy uév, 6dtay 15 tig Aéyn «obtds éotL 6 Tbe MOLbY», OTE O& AEyH «OdtTOL EioLY Ot xAT-

ahauPpdavortes “Qoedv, obtoi eiow oi xatacxdpartes loopbudy». yerdy dé, dy moté wey Gooevixoy Gvoua nooDijc, moté O& Ondvxdy, motée Oé

obdétEgor, cita éntusivns: ypévovs yao GAdayr, oynuatds éotw évaddaVI}. ATOOEWY O&, EAV OTE MEV OVOMACTLHMC, MOTE OE YEVIHMS, MOTE OE 20

HATA THY OOTLAHY, MOTE OE XaTA THY altlatinny éEevéeyuNc TO OYH Ua’

“nal TAC ATMoELs Evindds psy ExpEowy GAAo avedua oteic, nAnBvrtt-

xo 0& GAdo. nal xata tac éyxdicets 6uoiws. Tatta pév ody pbow eye totavtyny xa ndvta, iva un xa? Exactoy Aéywmpmev’ ndoa yao mtTHotc, nioa éyxdotc, mac dowudc, may yévoc, ndoa metoxyn, Mica avTwMVrupia 25 metarolovmevat xal wetaddattousvat TA OxHuaTa GAAdtTOvOL.

1 éxiom.Pa || 4 émoteophPc || 5 arootpédbw AéywvV || 7 éyo— Ilop8@uév0m. Vc Ba || 8-9 xvedua méAw Ac; [mvetual? || 10 xarecxedaTov Vc Ba | &xayopevtexdy Ve Ba || 11 éyévetro Ve || 12 Dem. 4, 19 (Eévoue pro Aéyous) | érrotoAuwatas Ve Ba || 13 sq. cf. Alex. III 33, 15 sq. Sp. II.

bb. 23 | tobtav méevtmvV | of te ai Pe || 14 oynyartiGovow Vc Ba | xal

ai tOv Ac,m.2 Vc || 15 alt. tvom. Vc | atom. Ba; af tvom. m.1 Ve || 16 Aéyrn tug Ac; Aéywuev Ba, (yom. 2) Ve | 16 odtédg Ve Ba | xat Ste (om. 6&8) Ac | Aéyer Ac; Aéyerg¢ Ve Ba || 17 xataoxdmrovtes Ac, (Yav m. I supr.)Pc | [II-III] zop6udv Ve || 18 a&poevxdv Svoua Ve Ba; OnAvxdv (om. dvoua)P Ac | OnAvxdv Vc Ba; d&poevexdvP Ac || 19-20 évarranyy P; ddArayy

V_ || 20-21 zoré 38 yevixtic — Sotexhvom. Pc || 21 1d oy Fa xat Ac, (m. 1 cr. tk oyquata) Po; te oynuata xat Pa;om. Vc Ba || 22 xat ta¢ mra@cers: P

Ac; tag mrmoeig? xai Ve Ba || 23 cara Pa | dyer pdow Vc Ba || 26 va om. Ac

ON INVENTION, BOOK 4, CHAPTER 4 163 Attica.” Enstasis of a pneuma makes a fine figure, if (for example) we say, “You were not appropriating Euboea. You were not preparing a fortification against Attica.”?3° And in general every apostrophe repeatedly addressing a person becomes a pneuma, and also if turning to myself I say, “I was the one appropriating Euboea, and I the one preparing a fortification against Attica, and I the one capturing Oreus, and I the one razing Porthmus.”?37 Philip might say these things somewhere in a declamation. Or a pneuma, again, can be negative, if one says, “I was not the one appropriating Euboea, not the one preparing a fortification against Attica.” And the figure is apotreptic, which becomes a pneuma by continuing, when he says (Dem. 4.19), “Do not speak to me of ten and twenty thousand mercenaries23° nor of any of these paper armies.” You should know that in all of these pneumas there are al-

; ternations of number between singular and plural, and changes of gender and case and inflection provide different figures. | Of [188] number when one says, “This is the man doing this thing,” but then says, “These are the ones capturing Oreus, these are the ones razing Porthmus.” Of gender when at one time you offer a masculine name, then a feminine, then a neuter, and then continue. Change of gender is alteration (enallagé)*39 of figure. ‘There are changes of case when sometimes you express the figure in the nom-

inative, sometimes in the genitive, sometimes in the dative, and sometimes in the accusative, and by expressing the cases in the singular you make one pneuma and in the plural another, and similarly in changes of declensions. ‘These things all have the same nature, so we need not discuss each separately: every case, every declension, every number, every gender, every participle, every pronoun, when changed and exchanged, alters the figure.

23© As Patillon notes (L’Art rhétorique, 296 n.1), Rabe’s punctuation of the text as questions 1s wrong. 237 Tf this is also an apostrophe, these cola should be regarded as questions: “Was I the one. . .?” 238 Read xenous with the text of Demosthenes. 739 Cf. Phoebammon, On Figures 1.5, where this term applies to a variety of alterations.

164 MEPI EYPEZEQS A ‘Exxeivo 0€ GEtoy eidévat, btt meoywooty TO mvebua ev TH OYT- 1

pate eic ovyva u@ia ogeider nal wetaneceiv cic GAdo oyijua Adyov tooywooty xalt TH Oevtéom add éeninintew Ei THYOL TO TOLTOY’ 7H yao xolvmvia 7) ToLravtTn xat % Otadoy?) Woeatoy motel Tov Adyoy év TH vEv[189] patt, olov éay a0 Tho anopydavoews Etc THY | MEDOLY KHATAOTHS, WOO 5

Anuoodévyns ta nota xia anepryvato «add’ 6 thy Hbpowtay éxetvos

b f4 ‘\ 4 ; a \ >t 2 , > A \ a\ 2 bd \ 2 / vd \ 2 / fw ;

opeteoilouevoc», eita xatépy eic thy medow KnOTEQOY Tadta MOLOyY

HOixEt xal Mageonovest ;» 7} TO &unadw, ay EowtHoas Eig TO dEtnTixOV”

4 ~w = A , 4 3 \ bla ~~ ,

petaBadne 7} sic GAdo tt. adn iovéov, 6tt nadov entpmetvarta TH nvEvpate év TH Evi oynpate xal cic OradoxHy GAdov nooyworjoa nodAdxtc 10

yao tovto obtw meoixaddi tov Adyor énoinoey, Hote xal Eig toitov oyna uetapatvortas avactijoat tov] 4 2 2 / \ ; 3 ‘) \

Ld / 3 \ \ » La > A f 2 4 ~ \

6 0& axpaiocg Adyosg oby 6 adtdcg EotL &v AOy@ xual vorjmMattL, Gxur O& 15

dAho tt dtavoiacg éoti xat GAdo Adyou: axun yao éott Adyou THY xata MvEoUa oxNUaTwWY UEtapodAN, vonuatwr O&, 6tay mANnOw@oas Tic Ev vON-

pa év avetuatt etc dAdo vonua dadwov wetapy udxeivo now avebua, eita an éxeivov etc GAAo nvetua: xai obtweo éx tév AdjAws GAAnjha dradexyouevor 7 axun yivetat. Oo O° én nagadelyuatos TO Anuootert- 20

3 > > 3 / > BLA ow 3 wa > ~ 2 / BL

xOVv ONTEOY, Orwc EldEinuEr, OTL THY TvEvUaTOY OVvVOnuN axur EOTLY’

Load ¢ 4 / \ , . \ \ / > ft

«dte yao nmeot@y 6 Dihinnos Tdvorods nai TotBaddods, twas O& xai tay “Eddnvey xateotoéveto “al dvvduets moAdds xai weyddac énoteito [190] bp’ éavtdr, xal tives THY éx TOY nOhewn éni tH THC | eionyns éovoia Badilortes éxeioe Ore~Deioovto, dv eic obt0s Hy, tétE OF TOTE MAYTEC, 25 ép ovc tabta nmageoxevdleto éxeivoc, étodeuobrto. et O& 1) HoOdvorto,

A bj / 3 > 7 Pld a ] / > \ A h

Eteooc Adyos odtoC, ov 200 Eué», UEXOL TOUTOV TO AVEbua’ Eita TO KOO

moog éué» DVehyoas éoydoacVat dAdo nvetua éenoinoey «éy@ wéev yao 1 évom. Vc Ba || 2 xat petamecety xal cic Vc Ba | Adyou m&Aww Vc Ba

|| 3 mpoyweetv Ba,m.1 Vc;om.Ac | et toyor érumtrtetv Ve Ba, (gun-) Ac || 4-5 tov év mvebuate Adyov Ac || 5 a&mopéaewso V | cf. Demetr. De eloc. 279

| peractyc? || 6 Dem. 18,71 | éxetvyyvVe || 7 peréBy? || 9 xckAALOV Ve Ba || 11 @¢ (om. te) Ve Ba || 12 Gomeop PaV; date Pc || 15 Adyos Ev Adyuu xal Ev Tokyuate ObY G adTtEO¢ (om. gaTtv) Vc Ba || 16 pr. Tob Adyou

Vi | pév yee V {| 18 movetP Ac Ba || 19 &dHAwWS aAAHAWV Ba, m. 1 Ve; aKdHAwV (Mm. po.: aAANAwV) cic KAANAa Pc; a&dHAWS cig KAANAx Pa Ac || 20 F

om. Vc Ba | we éri mapadelypatos dé Ac || 22 Dem. 18, 44-49 (cf. 158, 17)

| mepttovP | d60m.Pc | pr.xatPaV;%7%Pc || 24 gaurd Ac,m.2 Ve | tHe tOAcwMo Ac || 26 mapeoxedatev Vc Ba || 27 odtog Adyog Ac | 6 &v mveUua schol. P (W VII 828, 20)

ON INVENTION, BOOK 4, CHAPTER 4 165 It is worth knowing that a pneuma continuing in (the same) figure for many cola ought then to change and fall into a different figure, and perhaps a third might follow the second in turn, for such continuity and succession makes the language in the pneuma rich; for example, if you change from the declarative to | the in- [189] terrogative, as Demosthenes began with declarative clauses, “But he who was appropriating Euboea,” and then ended with a question, “whether in doing these things he was doing harm and was breaking the truce?” Or, conversely, if you change to the deictic or to something else after having asked a question. But you should know that after remaining in one figure it 1s good to change to another, for often this has made the language in the pneuma so beautiful that when speakers changed into a third figure the hearers leaped to their feet, as though the course of the speaker’s eloquence was reaching its peak (akmeé), which the change of figure

has conveyed to the hearers. Speculation about what an akmé?*° is has misled many. The akme of a speech is not the same in language and in thought, and

the akme of a thought 1s something different from that in language. An akme in language is a change of the figures in a pneuma;

an akme in thoughts occurs when, after completing one thought in a pneuma, one changes to another thought without being noticed and makes that a pneuma, then goes from that to another pneuma. In this way an akme comes into being from things succeeding each other unnoticed. As an example, this Demosthenic passage should be cited, that we may know that the combination of the pneumas is an akme (Dem. 18.44): “For when Philip was going around and subduing the Illyrians and Triballi, and some of the Greeks as well, and was bringing many large forces under his control, and some men from the cities, under the | opportunity [190] offered by the peace, going there were being corrupted, of whom this man was one, then, then it was, that all against whom he was making these preparations were at war. But if they did not realize it, that 1s another question, not my concern.” ‘The pneuma continues up to this point; then wanting to elaborate “not my concern” he composed another pneuma (18.45): “For I was con-

24° Cf. note 95 on 2.7 above, p. 59. In 4.9, p. 177 below, the author cites what he regards as a wrong definition of akme.

166 MEPI EYPEZEQE A

‘\ 4 ‘ / 4 > C w= > \ , oo 4

nal woovAEyor nal dtEe“agTVeOUNY xal ag buivy Gel xat Oro MEupDeEiny’ 1 ai 0& mdhEtcg Evdoovr», xai tTodto wéxot THY MOODOTHY NOoywoody év

mvebud got: eita Aéyer «ual ta GAha adjy éexeivovg bums GAdove

A \ f \ 2 4 2 ot 3 / Lond / of / 4 / “A ld 2 / land f \ ~~ 2 \ 4

olouévoug mwAsiy mewWtOVs Eavtods NENoaxdTac HoPjoDalL», a0 yap

TovTOV xatahinwy mad TO «EéyM ovx aitiog» Eoyaletat avedua Tt GA- 5 ho, 6tt oi nooddtat me0 Thy GAdwy Eavtods mINpdOXOvELY «arti Yao pihwy nat Eévwmv, d tote @voudlorto, viv xddaxec nai Psoic éyVool xal UwavTa Gd woochxEv Axovovol», xat Ta Nagadeiyuata Angiérta sic xat-

aoxeviy Eott tovbtov, xal foty évtatda «énel Od ye budic nal mada dy anwiwddette»* Hote h thy tory mvevudatorv obvieois axur yéyo- 10

> \ 2 ld ct 3 4 A / 2 ~ [v4 2 \ A / \ me \ 2 f vg > ow 4 2 \

vey &vtelncg & vonudtwr otoa. “Eni todtm nooot_etéov éxeivo, bneo [191] éotl Aaynody advv xal noteiv nai eidévat, btu | dxptic ywopévns ano tov vonudtwy Osi tedevtatoy tyosiy TO MOOLUM@TEQOY Osi yao GEL TOY

~ LA bal ~ v4 ‘ ond f \ f

Aoyor abfew, mooiudteooy O€ gots TO &x nagaderyudtwyr tHy oboTa-

ow AaPsivy duvduevoy 7) sagaPody. obtw yde tis téyvyns tH tae O€ 15 dilWacxovons “nal Eni tO xoEittoy xat dAiyor np0ayoméerng Hal avayovonc evdoximsiy 4 poyn Ooxei, tig téyvncs Ov dy nmoeoohjuer 6devotvons:

xat yao 6 Anuoobérns ta regi tode mo0ddtAas nagadelyuata TElEevtaia

éptiate, xat “Ounoos to xata x@dov nvebua év nodypaot rAnodoas

ént thy naoapodAny nAdev 20 «donc Go aonid’ ose, xdpUvSG xdovr, avéoa O° ar7\0° watoy 0° inndxopuot xdovBEec Aaunpoion pddotot VYEVOYT@MY’ WC Muxvol Epéotacay AAAjdotoly »,

ei?’ 7 magapodr 1 xat P; om. V, schol. P, Dem. 18, 45 | dreuaptupcuyy V, schol. P || 3 Dem. 18, 46 | Yo tote 3& mpoeotynxdcr (mo0exatyxdar Pa) nal tTKAAX’ TAHY Exvtodload lf f ~ 2 la aed > 7 / ? cy Ad es / > 4 Pd \ \ 2 4 \ ¢ / ow ” be] \

vao Tivos x00NC, MAHc Ein drvegUaguéry, CEe“VHs AYNnyHoato Nedyua ai- 1

cyoov 6vduact Pedtiotoig « Atovvoiwy Hy noun, 6 6& wot Hxohov0yoE uéxot [ta] 200 tHv Pdoayr, EnEetta Portdy ual xohaxevwy THY UNntéoa

éyyw wer tO yao épPdoda: xai bpotodar cemvds «éyvw pe» Etzt@y éxdounoe todyua ainyoov oeuvotéoa Adyou ovrBéoet. yivetat mév oby 5

xn 9 / ¢ pet 3 > 3 4 / PA! f > \ f \

7} OvOMATL HuoY art” Gvduatos yowméeve, 7} MoAAaxic OvdE AéyEetat TO

nodypa, &ay aioyoor 7 mdavv, GAda ta 100 TOU NEdypatos Eiwhdota yi-

veodat Aéyovtat xai ta értovupaivorta TH aioyo® noaypati, azeg &€€ avayune évaoya@s nai ceuvdc OnAoi xai atta ta OlyMpmeva, CEUv@ @ 4

/ \ a / > a lend 4 ‘ / \

téxeto, Ov én texeiv’ evtaida yao tiv ovvovotay Edjdwoe TH xal Ta [202] yevdpmeva 206 tho ovvovotac eineiv | «Aice 6é nagBeriaty Cbyny» nai 15 éneveyuely, & weta tHY ovvovotay yivetat, «1 O° dbnoxvooapéery ».

ITepi raxoCn ov. To 6& xaxdlniov yiveta } xata TO Addvatoyr 7 “ata TO GvaxddovDov, 6 xai &vartimud Eotw, } HATA TO AioYOOY 7] KATA TO GOEPEC 7H naTA

‘A \ vA 2 7 ¢ 3f 4 oe 4

TO GOtxov 7} HATA TO TH Poet MOAEMLOY, xa? obs TOdMOVS Hal GvacXEVA- 20

Couev udhiota ta Oinyyiuata éxPdaddortes Wo Anwtota. dia ToL TOOTO Qamev xal Tas OtaoxEevas méexoL TOD EixOTOS MEOYwWoEIY, Wc, El MAEA TO

eixog ebvoeBein tt, MaYTMS nal xaxdlnhov EodmEvOY xal EuTEGOUMEVOY Th avacxevy xai yao éxel Aéyomuer (ovdx eludc TOdE MOAYDHYaL», 7 OTE

~w «=D ww ‘ b} ] a f > 2 \ f ~ nN OS

2 / nN CO 2 4 \ \ ¢ ~w / \ A , iv \

addvvator 7 dt aioyoor xat ta E€ijg. pivetas O€ TO xaxdlCyAoy Gums xal 25 1 |I-II]mpe%yun Ac || 2 we Ve Ba || 3 t& PV, Anon. II] 118,1 Sp.; a tod Sc; del.m.2Vc_ || 4 drepOdeOar Pc; éaytobo Ba; | ob m.2|O0. Ve || 5

ovvOyxnt Vi | ev ody P; odv ota V,vl.P || 6 Hom. Vc Ba | yoeopévoy ante avt’ Pc || 7-8 yiveoOar xat AsyecOat Pa; AdyeoOat nal yiveoOar (8 « supr.

m.1)Pc || 9 SyAotP; uynvwerV || 12 Hom.A245. 254 | mapQevinv Ba, ex

cr. Vc | xara(proémi) Ac || 14 yao xat Ve Ba || 15 zapQeviyy Vc Ba | 7G. add. ante xat P Ac, post xabSc || 16 téxetoadd. Ac; téxeto bv Epy texety

add. Vc Ba, cf. p. 182,14 || 20 tHom.Pc Ac || 21 totré tor Ac; todto yee (om. tot) Ve Ba || 22 p. 128,14 | mpoywpectvV,v.l.P;0m.P || 23 pr. xat om. V_ || 23-24 ti. avacxevyt éuttecovmevov V

ON INVENTION, BOOK 4, CHAPTER I2 183

when a maiden was asked how she had been sexually violated, she | narrated a shameful act solemnly in well-chosen words, saying, “It was at the procession of the worshipers of Dionysus, and the man followed me to the gate; then he kept coming back and flattering my mother and ‘knew’ me.” By referring to the harm and insult done her in the solemn phrase “he knew me,” she adorned a shameful action by a more solemn turn of phrase. Now this happens when we use one word for another, or often the action is not even stated, if it is quite shameful, but things that usually happen before the action are stated and things that ensue the shameful deed, all of which necessarily also makes what is left unspoken evident in aclear and solemn way: solemn because not stated but clear

because it is suggested by the attendant circumstances; as indeed in Homer (Odyssey 11.245 and 254), “He loosed her maiden girdle,?°5 and shed sleep upon her /... And she, having conceived,” gave birth to those he said that (Poseidon) had begotten. He indicated their coming together by saying what happened before their coming together, | “He loosed her maiden girdle,” and by [202] adding what resulted from their intercourse, “And she, having conceived.” CHAPTER 12: ON KAKOZELON

Kakozélon?®® originates by (stating) what is impossible or inconsistent, which is also incompatible, or what is shameful or

irreverent or unjust, or what is hostile to nature. ‘These are the main ways we most refute narratives, rejecting them as incredible.2°7 For this reason we say that artistic developments (diaskeuat) should only proceed up to the limit of probability, since

if something is invented beyond what is probable it will be quite inept and subject to refutation; for then we say, “It is not probable that this was done,” or that it 1s impossible or shameful, and so on. Kakozelon also occurs when we use one metaphorical term 265 Poseidon is described as impregnating Tyro, who gives birth to Pelias and Neleus. 266 Literally, “striving for what is bad”; affectation, bad taste, a faulty style; cf. Demetrius, On Style 186-189. 2©7 Cf. Theon, vol. 2, p. 93 Spengel; Pseudo-Hermogenes, Progymnasmata, ch. 5.

184 MEPI EYPEZEQEZ A

~w , ow ‘4 sz hj ow ~ ~ 5 ~

toominy Ager mG yornoauévwr, eita tO MAhoEes THs toonrc anodobval 1 un Ovvapéveony.

loréov pévtot, te ta xaxdlnla gore wodddxtc idodat tH me0xatacxEevh xal mo0oVcoaneia’ ta yao noopadaydérta tH Eounveia voy ciodyet, Bev xai tO téAunua mo00d0xGTat Toic axovovow, 6 xal NelY 5 Aeydijvat dogaiés elvat doxei, yovoy O° dy ted 100 Thc uatTaoxEvijc

[203] tod Adyou, xaxdlnhoy okey 7] tH v@H | 7 tH Ady. xal oxdnet, mH¢ xalt “Ounoos énoinosry’ do yao AéEew Eueddev

«hue 0° anogonsac xogvgry doeoc peyddoio »,

woPotuevos tovtov to advvatov mpoxataoxevdle Totobtoy dvdea TH 10

eizely 15

Aoin® Oinyyuats, Oo unde tov nEgt todtoV Adyor AnLotTOY xaTACTHvat

AeyBévta, TH Te toopas abt nagaveivar pseiCovag 7} xata avPowsnoyr t@ te anodotvat abt@ Odnadoy Baotdleww, oiov obx% avPownoc, xal Xi-

Dov nat tH thy idéay adtod dielBeiv Wo wEeyadny nal poPeoay nal ta

«obdE EMxEL

avdoi ye ottopay@, GAda Oiw bAnEevttY’

A B) ¢ \ , 4 ld A 2 - zs

MAVYTES YAO Ot MEQ. TOUTOV NOOyLUVaDDErtTES Adyot MLOTOY Enoinoay Ei-

vat doxety tO magddoéoy tO meol too Kbxdwanoc 6rév to

«nue O° astogornéas xoovyry Boeocg weyddoto »: 20

? \ \ lod zs 3 hj / > \ x A A

el yao xal tolodtoc Hv, oloy avtoy mooxateoxetaley, OVOEY TY TO xaAl TOLOotTOY adbtoy moLijoat OvynOhyvat.

Tivetat 6é t0 xaxdCrydov xai xata to ebtedés modAddxic, we exsivo «oiuot, doedxwmy mov yivetat TO Tutov».

1 prxom.Pc | yewyévwv Vc Ba; yenoapévev Hudv Ma || 3 cf. IL. 6. 32,3 || 4 tH add. ante xai Vc, (m.1 supr.) Ac; post xat Ba | mg. év &AAotgs TY, tOOVsparrela xaxAovpéevyn P | xadrovpévyt post mp00ecparnctaradd.V || 5 6Oev

ett60m.Ac | OP; &ét Ve Ba; duvl.P;om.Ac || 6 mooxatacxeviig Ac || 7 xat oxédrerom., O¢ pro mo Ve Ba || 9 Hom.+481 || 10 sq. cf. schol. Odyss.1 187 || 11-12 AcyOévta xaraotHvar Ac || 13 déradrov adtér Sodvar Vi | avec P; &V0E Vc, m. 1 Ba; &vov Ac || 16 Hom.tigo || 19 +O érOév Vv

mapKdso—ov rept tod (tod om. Ac) xbxAwrosg TOV || 22 torotrov? || 23 yao (pro 8&) Ac || 24 Eurip. fr. 930 N.?

ON INVENTION, BOOK 4, CHAPTER 12 185 and then cannot continue with what completes the trope.?® You should know, however, that kakozelon is often remedied by preparation (prokataskeué) and preventive treatment (protherapeia), for what 1s softened 1n expression ahead of time introduces

a thought from which the hearers expect something daring; it seems to be safe even before it is said, but if baldly stated before given support by the language, it would seem kakozelon either in thought | or in word. Consider how Homer managed it (Odyssey [203] 9.481). When he was about to say (of the Cyclops), “He broke off and hurled the peak of a mighty mountain,” fearing the 1mpossibility of this, he prepared for such a man in the rest of the narrative, so that the remark would not be incredible when spoken about him, by attributing to him food greater than a human eats and by giving him a club to hold that a human could not, and a stone, and by describing his appearance as large and tearsome, and by saying (9.190), “nor was he like / a man who eats grain but like a wooded peak”; for all the preparatory words (progymnasthentes logot) about him made the paradoxical statement about the Cyclops, that “he broke off and hurled the peak of a mighty mountain,” seem credible, for if he was such as Homer had earlier described, it was nothing for him to be able to do something like this. Kakozelon also occurs often by cheapening something, as in “Alas, the half of me is becoming a snake.”?°9 These kakozela

268 Cf 4.10 above, p. 180,1. 269 Euripides, frg. 930 Nauck?, of Cadmus; cf. Hermogenes, On Ideas 2.10, p. 391 Rabe.

186 MEPI EYPEXEQX A Heoanevetae O& ta xaxdlyia ob tH noodwogPMoE. Ory 7 TH? MeOKA- 1 [204] taoxevf, dco edelEapev, GAAA xal tH éntdvoe|Padoe xahovuéyy. det dé eidévat, Ott Ta EbtEAds sionuéva % oeuvdtnys dtogpPodtar, Wo maa TH Kéountoy

«oipuot, Ooduwy pov yivEeTal TO TuLov», 5 TOTO yao xowwds nal edtEeddc cinwy éVeoanevoe TH Enipooda

«téxvoy, meginhdunth tH Aoing@ natet»: tobto O& ob udvoy cEeuvdds Eetontat, GAAG xai Enipwrvnpatinds 61a TO TE-

tohunjoba. ob t6 évarytioy, éay ovpPh tit meta CEuvdtyta sic aloxodor

xateveryPivar, xaxdlndoy &yéveto, Wo EtéowWHL 6 abTOC 10 «fH 0& xat Bryoxovo” Guws modAny rodvotay Eiyer evoynumc mEcEty »,

tooto oEeuvrids cindy éniveyuer ebteléc nal xowdrv nat xaxndoyndoy

«xotvatovo’, & xovrtEw Guat apcévwyv yoEwyY».

ITepi éoxnpationévoyv npopdnuatov. 15

‘ ca

7.

1 70* xaxdGyrovPc | xat(pro#) Ac || 2 p.184,3 || 8 toto de P; xat totto Ve | octoyxxev Vc; eto Ba || 11 Ovyoxovo’ Pc, Eurip. Hec. 568;

mixtove PaV Mr || 12 evoynudvws Pa Ba,m.1 Ve || 13 cf. Elsperger, Philologi suppl. XI 87 || 14 Supyaow Ba; ?m.1 Ve || 15 zmept tHvSc_ || 15-190.5 cf. IT. t8. p. 286, 5-8. 386, 26sq. Sp.; [Dion.] II 1 p. 295 sq. Us.; Fuhr, Nov. Symb. Joachim. 1907 p. 112

ON INVENTION, BOOK 4, CHAPTER 13 187 are remedied not only by preventive treatments and preparations, as we have shown, but also by what is called epidiorthdsis (subsequent correction),?7° | and you should know that solemnity corrects [204] whatever is meanly said, as (here) in Euripides, “Alas, the half of me is becoming a snake,” for after saying this in a common and mean way he remedied it by this addition: “Child, embrace what. remains of your father.” This is not only said in a solemn way but resembles an epiphoneme?2”! in its daring. The opposite of this, if someone happens to descend to what is shameful after a solemnity, becomes a kakozelon, as elsewhere (Hecuba 568) the same poet says, “And as she was dying, nonetheless she kept much care to fall modestly.” This is solemnly spoken, but he added what is cheap and common and affected, “hiding what it is right to hide from male eyes.”

CHAPTER 13: ON FIGURED PROBLEMS

The final two chapters probably derive from a source or sources other

than that on which the rest of On Invention is based and may have been added to the text by the creator of the Hermogenic corpus in the fifth century or by some subsequent editor. One kind of evidence for this conclusion 1s the use of terminology common in other rhetorical texts but either unknown to or deliberately rejected by the author

of On Invention: forms of the verb meletad, meaning “to practice declamation,” and the adjective meletikos, for example, or the term ephodoi, meaning “approaches.” Other differences include the phrase ta auta noémata, used here to mean “and so on,” but not found in that sense earlier in the work, and of course the special terminology describing “figured problems.” The original author of chapter 13 may be Apsines of Gadara. Syrianus attributes to Apsines a declamation that the author of this chapter claims to have invented and published.?”* Furthermore, ex279 Cf. Alexander, On Figures 1.3-4. 27* Cf. 4.9 above, p. 175. 272 See 4.13 below, p. 193.

188 MEPI EYPEZXEQX A

~w > / f \ f 2 b) A ?

Tév éoynuatiouévmv oopAnudtwmy ta wév EOTL xaTA TO Evay- 1 tlov, Ta 0& mAdyla, Ta O& naTA Euqaow.

[205] | "Evartia péy oby sotw, 6tay to évartiov xatacxevdloper, ob hévomev’ oiov rtnoav “Abnvaios naga Aaxedatmovimy eionyyy, ot O€ ayvtytynoay ITeoixiéa, Bovievopérwy tev “ADnvaiwy adtoc 6 [Tepixdyjc 5

¢ Dod > \ ~w w = w =3 / ¢ f A e¢

‘od > A f / f / / ? l4 > \

bPoronaday éni th Bovdf a&tot anéoyecBar' 6uohoyovpuéevwcs yag 6 LTe-

ouxAnc, ei xal Aéyer «néupaté me, oxjpuatt povoy Adyou Aéyet, ErEt nal wETayeloloeol yorntat taig xataoxevalovoaic, dt ob yor mEugynVal ADTOY.

ba , ¢ f rf , ? ~ e / , A / bd / \ f \ / > Pld ¢ Mond c /

IThaytov 6€ got, 6tay peta tod xatacxevdlew tO évavtioy xal 10

dAdo tt nEgaivy 6 Adyos: oiov mhodotos ev Aim bnéoxeto Poepe THY n6Aw, et AGBou tov névnta med¢ ogayrny, obx EdwmxeEv 6 OFu0C, 6 MEVNC

éavtov moocayyéhet. évtata yao to évaytiov Bovjetat 6 mévyc, ObTEO héver’ anodavety yao ob Botdetat, xataoxevacet O& &x MAayiov xal TO

un elvat Tov ottoy xai TO Ei ot anldc Aapeiv. 15 [206] | Kata gugaow 6é éotwy, btav Aéyew ar) Ovvdpevor bua TO xExoAvobat xal nagonoiay uy éyew ent oxrjuats GAAns akimoews Euqaivw-

b} \ / led 4 \ \ > 2 A > #~ e 3 f

pev xata tHy obvbEow Tod Adyou xal TO obu EEOv Eiojovat, Wc Eival TE

1-2 xata to évevttov P, Aps.; évavtia (om. xata 6) Vi || 2 mAdkyra V, Aps.; xat& t6 mAcyrovP =| gupacw V, Aps.; thy 2upacw P || 3 évavetta V, mK

Aps. ; évavttov Pc; évavttov Pa(m.1supr.!) | +6 évavttov post 1. 2 xatTaoxevECwouevPc || 4 AéywuevPa, ApsinisB | &OyvatorV, Aps.; of dOyvato.P | cf. 190,14 || 6 6uoAoyounévas P Ac, Aps.; @uoroyrnuévwg Vc Ba | yao om. Ac

| 8 yohoetat V {| 11 mepatverPa Ba, Pm.1 Ve || 12 cf. 10,15 | mévyra m.2suppl. Vc || 13 yee P, Aps.; yao xat V | cf. [Dion.] II 1 p. 329, 15 Us. || 14 schol. P: nap& + mAovate SyAovéts pH civar otrov || 15 tov Pa V; 0m. Pc, Aps., cf. schol. P || 16 Aéyew V, Aps.; te Aéyeww P; ad Aéyetv suppl. aver

m.2Vc || 17-18 éuopatvouev P, Aps.; gupaivwuév 11 Vivi. P || 18 76 P Ve Ba; 6 Ac, (om. xat) v.l. Pe

ON INVENTION, BOOK 4, CHAPTER I3 189 cerpts from the first four paragraphs of the chapter are preserved elsewhere and attributed to Apsines (Spengel-Hammer, 330-31; see Heath, “Apsines”). These excerpts appear in small print above the apparatus criticus in Rabe’s Greek text but are not reprinted here. The earliest reference to figured problems is found in Demetrius,

On Style $294, dating from the first century B.C.E., the fullest discusstons are found in Pseudo-Dionysius, Art of Rhetoric 2, chapters 8-9; Quintilian 9.2.65-g2; and Apsines in Spengel-Hammer, 330-

39 (= Patillon, Apsinés, 112-21). Some problems are figured (eskhématismena) by saying the opposite (of what 1s meant), some are deflected, and some contain an implied meaning. | Problems are “opposed” (enantia) when- [205] ever we are arguing for the opposite of what we actually say; for example, the Athenians sought peace from Lacedaimonians, but the latter demanded the surrender of Pericles in return. While the Athenians are debating, Pericles himself, indignant at the Council (for not rejecting the proposal immediately), proposes giving himself

over. Even if he says, “Send me,” Pericles is admittedly only using a figure of speech, since his treatment of the case demonstrates that it is not right for him to be sent. Itis a “deflected” (plagion) problem whenever, while arguing for the opposite side, the speech also accomplishes something else;

for example, in time of famine a rich man promised to feed the city , if he could take a poor man and slaughter him; the people refused,

and the poor man denounces himself. Here the poor man wants the opposite of what he says, for he does not want to die, but he argues by deflection both that there is no grain and if there is it

can be simply got.?73 | [206] It is “by implication” (emphasis) whenever we are not able to speak (openly) because hindered and lacking freedom of speech, but in the figure of giving a different opinion we also imply what

cannot be spoken by the way the speech 1s composed, so that the hearers understand and it 1s not a subject of reproach to the speaker; for example, the law has ordered persons suffering from madness to go into exile. There being a rumor that a father has had intercourse with his son’s wife, the son claims he (/umself) should 273 If grain cannot be obtained otherwise, he should be put to death so the rich man will supply it; but if there is grain somewhere (as there clearly 1s), there are other ways to get it (by taking it from the rich man).

190 MWEPI EYPEXZEQZ A

ow ~ b] 4 \ ‘ 3 / fond rJ A

vojoat toic axovovot xat un entAjpipuov civat t@ Aéyorte’ oiov tov wat- 1 yomevoy pevyew 6 vdmos Exéleve, pHuNns obons, btt ObvEOTLY 6 MATHO TH

tod viobd yuvaixt, atol 6 nmaic Wo pwawduevos gevyew évtab0a yao TH pév Ooxeiy mEgl tic yuyijs dtadéyetas xai tobt@ tH Adyw énegeidetau, OidAov O& Euqaiver THY wotyelay TOO MAaTedS xaTAa THs yuvaltxdc. 5

Ta péy oby mAdyia nal ta évartia éy todt@ diadddtter pdvor, 6t. ta wey Evartia év wehetG, ta O& aAdyia ual dindody éxpéoet tov voov, mohddnic O& xal mdsiova. } wévtot metazeiololig 7 abt1, ay’ Hc TO wehetay etdévar ylyvetat. wedet@vta yao THY toobtwmy mooBpAnud-

twv ai bxoyoeai a0 tig “ataoxevijg éxpeoduevas xaxeiPev mddww &x 10 toy émiyetonudtoyr, doa dy sbtoioxnta. 6 yao maga thy éyDody Advoc toyvoonolovbusvoc, dodevectéoac dvayxdlwy eiva tac Advoec, exet [207] | deixvvor Botlecdat nAéov tov copiotHy 7} xata TO doxody sicdyeodat, oioy 6 ITeguxdijs &v tH abtdc Gévoby anedBeiy sic Aaxedaiuova. 6 yao

bso abtod Aéywr tatta éx tho tuopoeds xatacoxevacPfvat momoet, 15

a“ lod aN 3 A ¢ \ i Lond / A + > \ of \

d Ileguxlijc ciney Gv abtdc tnéo adbtod ndytws 7 et tic abtov GAdos mr}

dvddvat Aaxedatmoviows Héiov: «gyHoet toivur tows napEedday, Wo ob bei

2 id b/d ~ Va > ~ f \ 3 V4

toic éyVooic énitdttovor neiDeoBa dewdy te yag eivat TO nOGyya xal nAiPvov, Et tig yaovettas xEeledvdovow éyBoois pihoig yao émitdttovet dst meiVeoIat xai ob modEpiows», xai dte «obd8 Of matéoes Sudy bu7j- 20 xovoay undevi, unte Séoéyn unte Magdoviw urte Aageiw pnte GAh@ Tivi», wal Ott «unde Gusic unte Aaxedatmoviots o0ddd énitattovot nE-

ot Ilotiaiacg nai negi Aiywnta@y xai neoi Meyaoéwy». xai xaddnaé pia petaysiovotc &v totic éoynuatiopévols 7) THY bropoo@y xatacxevn.

2 O6P,Aps.;om.V | cf. W VII 24,15sq. || 6 évom. Vc Ba || 8 38 Pc;om.PaV || 9 yeep PAc;8é Vc Ba || 10-11 xd&xetOev— exiyeronucteoy P, (éx om.) V; xaxdv éxryetpnucdtev (om. cet.) Sc; ye xa tay Emryeronuc&ctwv m. 2Ve || 13 té&t BobAccOa Ve Ba Mr | yo dSetxvucr td exet BodAccOar rA¢ov

civar tov copLotyy “ta. P | mAéov civat P; elvotcom.V Mr || 14 cf. 188,5 | abtovP Ac | &&téiv Vc Ba || 15 &vOum0~0p%> Ve Ba || 16 & — adbrdc Pa, (om. &v) Pc; &rep &v adtdg 6 mEpLxATsc eimevV | om. Ac Ba, (er.?) Ve | py om. V_ || 18 émré&rtover tots éyOpotg Ac (om. totc¢) Ve Ba | similia Diodorus

XII39,5 || 18 te V;0m.P, Anon. III 118,26Sp. || 18-20 elvor... det: vix Tt

utrumque sanum || 19 émt&ocoverPc || 20 0088 P Ac, Anon.; wydé Ve Ba

| HudvV, Anon. || 22 Huetg V, Anon. || 23 xoridalag (non rot daLatév) etiam Anon. | cf. Thuc. 2,139 || 24 &vOur0@opév Ve Ba; cf. 1. 15

ON INVENTION, BOOK 4, CHAPTER 13 IQI go into exile because he is insane. Here he seems to be talking about exile, and he puts stress on that argument, but throughout he is hinting at the adultery of his father with his wife.?74 Deflected and opposed problems differ only in that opposed problems practice (meleta) only one thing and deflected ones convey a double meaning and often more. ‘The treatment by which one learns to practice this is the same. The treatment of hypophoras?75 in such problems is to present them with their supporting arguments and whatever epikheiremes have been invented. The argument taken from the opponents, being strongly made and requiring the refutations to be weaker, shows in this case

| that the sophist means more than what he seems to be propos- [207] ing; for example, the case of Pericles claiming that he should go off to Lacedaimon. Someone speaking for him will cause argument to be confirmed from a hypophora, (citing) everything that Pericles himself would have said if arguing in his own defense, or everything someone else (might have said) who thought he ought not to be given up to the Lacedaimonians: “Now perhaps he27® will say as he goes on that there is no need to obey the orders of the enemy; for it would be a terrible and stupid thing for anyone to favor the enemy’s orders, for one should obey the injunctions of friends, not of enemies, and (he will say) that our ancestors hear- _ kened to no one, neither to Xerxes nor Mardonius nor Dareius nor anyone else, and that you did not obey the Lacedaimonians when they gave orders about Potidea or about the Aeginetans or about the Megareans.”?77 And supporting the argument of the opponents is generally one treatment in figured problems. There is also another treatment, which is to introduce the thoughts by attributing the speech to someone else; for example, “Now some other person might speak and demand that he not be 274 See the treatment of this theme by Libanius in Declamations 39. The speaker assumes that the hearers are familiar with the rumor about his father’s actions; the son can then say, for example, “I can no longer bear my embarrassment before my fellow citizens”; see Rabe, Prolegomenon Sylloge, 211. 275 T.e., the opponent’s arguments as taken up by the speaker; cf. 3.4 above, p. 75. 27© T.e., the opponent. This is the hypophora, taken up by the speaker.

277 "These are strong arguments against surrendering Pericles; the speaker attributes them to his opponent and pretends to be rejecting them, but they are being “figured” and thus validated by his dwelling on them.

192 WEPI EYPEZEQs A “Lote xat GAAn metayxeto.oic, TO mEegituPévta Etéom Tov Adyoy Eio- 1

ayew ta vorjuata, olov «dAAos pév ody Gy siné tig un) néuneodat xEAedwv adtov Aaxedatpmoviots, wo 0b yor ModEuiots Exutattovoet mEiDeE-

ota dewdy te yao slvat TO modypa nal HAiioy xal uNtEe tods Matéoac

[208] pte | dud note toodtdy ti menoaxévar», xal ta adbta vonuata, Kéya 5 dé 08 mnt tabdta». ote O& nat &y GAd@ petaPadeiy oyjuatt, dy ttc héyn «éya O€, ci wey Gxovta pmé tic Hélov PraCduevos aneddsiv med¢ Aaxedatpmoviouc, eizov dy tdde xa Td0E», Kal TA AUTA VOHUATA, ANEQ,

ei “al wn éoynuatiouéymc éuchet@ueyv, EAéyouey dy Oia todto yao nal goynuatiouéva xadeitat ta toradta nooPpAnuata, éetd7) TA aAbTA 10 det AéyeoDat vornuata, dee, ci xat uy Eoxnpatiouévwc Ewehetoper, cizouev dy. Ost O€ wEtayeloloews xal ToLlovtov oxnUatos dogahods evnoofjoat, iva un Advortec tac Eupdoets yuuvods eiodywpeyr todvcs Adyousc

ad>o dvtixpug uy Pédortes. Kai tavti wéy eol nhayiwy nat évartioy. To 6& xata éuqaow oxjua towobtdéy éotwv, oioy xai mo0ELOHMAa- 15 bev. wehetata. O& Eviote mév OyNnuatos Evoéoel “xaxEivo ToLovToV, iva tig Gvtixovse Aéywv TO NEGyua un Ooxy Aéyew, 6 67 xal esonud éotL éuov év uehéty yevousvoy uf xal éxdédotar’ oiov pyun jy, dtt obvEeotwy

6 Mato tov viod TH yuvaini, Eynvoc éyéveto 7H yurn, Exonoer 6 PEdc [209] 6 yeryndnodpuevoy wovéa éceoPa | tod natodc, ob BovAetar éxtiPévar 20 TO yevynverv 6 mais xal bn0 Tod natods Anoxnobvooetal. Evtatda ydoe 6

1 t6PAC;7& Vc Ba || 2 cirev&vV | unre V || 4 civor xal rd Texyu« HALOtov Ve || 65) (bes Ld, (hm. 1 ex 5) Pa; Hue PCV | td waded V (ad7T&v m. 2 Vc); toratra Pc; rece Pa; schol. P solam lectionem tavt& novit

|| 6 ta adta Vi | ueroBddrenv (sic) Pa; wero Bdarsiv Pe || 9 ult. xatom. Ac | elzouev Vc Ba || 10 ta péev adbtae Vi || 11 gpedreté&Suevom. Vc Ba_ || 12 éAéyouev &V Vc Ba | xatiom. Vc Ba |] 13 ‘yupvods post Adyousg Ac ||

15 p. 188, 16|xatom. Vc Ba || 16 xal adtd post ugvadd. V | xd&xetvo om. V_ || 17 d6&y. Vc Ba || 18 ésdvom. Ve Bald | yeyevnpévov Ac; Acyéuevov (m. 2 yéyovevsupr.), mM. 1 mg. ye yevéuevov, Vc | guotLd | ofovom.

Vc Ba || 18-194.7 sq. cf. Syr. 1 p. 36, 22: éoyyuatiPévta 58 Cythuata ciaw we mapd& "Adivy tH Dadapet év éxetvea +O Cythuate’ phy jy, Ste cbveotiv 6 MATH TH TOD madd (V; vied S) yovaext, «xat to} noryod AnBédyevocs

EBdwv aratep», od SE Ao oddayod»* xal maka év tH tepl tH¢ ExOEcews Tod TaLdtov ptAoverxta, Sep 6 Oecd avetAs tov TatéEpa povedcety Cady elvat véuLooV, & ma&tEp, TO TrHLdLOV, OOx sudv. [ExtIOete bv Zortetpauc Alrtetc] ExttOns (exrBeic

V), 5 éyéwnous, dlrrets th teardtov (obx gudv — meardtov V, om. S), od yéyovac

matyo» || 19 tH ante tod V, Anon. III 119, 16 Sp., Diac. f. 431 v_ || 20 Ecca0ar povéa V

ON INVENTION, BOOK 4, CHAPTER I3 193 sent to the Lacedaimonians on the ground that it is not right to obey the enemy’s orders, for it would be a dreadful and stupid thing and neither your ancestors nor | you ever did anything of [208] the sort,” and the same thoughts (ta auta noémata), “but I for my part do not aver these things.” And it 1s possible to cast it into still another figure if one says, “But if someone, being forced, demands that I go to the Lacedaimonians unwillingly, I would for my part say this and that,” with the same thoughts that we would say even if we were not practicing in a figured way.27® It is for this reason that such problems are called “figured,” since it is necessary for the same thoughts to be said that we would speak even if we were not practicing in a figured way. There is need to exercise careful con-

trol of such treatment and figure, lest we refute the implications and introduce the arguments in a bare form, as if openly opposing them. So much about deflected and opposed problems. . The figure by implication is such as we stated earlier. It 1s sometimes practiced (meletataz) by invention of a figure of such a sort that when saying the thing outright one does not seem to say it, which is my own discovery in a declamation that has been published;?79 for example, there was a rumor that a father 1s having intercourse with his son’s wife. ‘The woman becomes pregnant, and there is an oracle from the god that the child to be born will be the murderer | of the father.28° The son does not want the child [209] to be exposed, and (as a result) he is disowned by the father. Here, when defending himself against being disowned, the son ought to reveal the current rumor of adultery by implication, so as to defeat his father in an unexceptional and seemly way without openly

278 'The same thoughts, but said in such a way that a different meaning is conveyed. 779 'This is the passage attributed to Apsines by Syrianus (1:36). 280 Cf. Quintilian 9.2.69—70.

194. NEPI EYPEZEQS A mais me0¢ THY anoxnovéww anodoyotmevos Ogethe tHy Evtoéyovoay Mry- 1

ny Tho worysiag xata Euqaow dydloby, wo aventAnatws éléyyew tov WATEOA XAL EvOYNHUOVC, PavEeods O& uN AéyeEty Ott «motyevEt THY yuvai-

xa tHy Eunvy» nat dndody, 6tt todtO yiveta. obtw>o Oty ebm0oHOAapLEV OXHUATOS TOLOvTOV Hal AvTinovcg EindvtEs adto Aéyeww odbu EdOEauUEV’ 5

~ott O€ tTédE “oor Eivat Adytoal, matEG, TO MaLdioy, Obx EudY ExtTi-

Ons, 6 évévynoas, Ointets madiov, ob yéyovas nathno». Asi dé &y toic Totovtotc, toig xat’ Eugaow Aéyw, xal Gvoudtwrv ednoofjoat Oitta OnAéoa dvvauévwr, xal tO avedPvvoy xal TO ceonuacpuévoy’ oiov wHuN ny, tt obveott Th idia Pvyatol 6 mato, andoentory tL) untNHO Eimodca 10 TQ vim annyeato, nvvPdvetat 6 Mato TO AandoeNTOY xal ob Aéyorta TOY viov anoxnovooel, oioy Huiv &Eevrvextar xal meEot toOdE MOOOIMLOV

devtEooy THOE “THS mév obv Anoxnodvb&ews tabtns #Aattov éuot wéet:

[210] Avodart dé bxé0 tod natedc, ei peta tooab’tny EbOnviay yévovcs udry | ovvéotat tH Dvyatol nal ovlyoetat»* xowa wey yao éote xal tod GAdov 15

Biov ta totabta 6vduata toig avbodsoic, doxet 6& uddiota ibia sivas Th brtoxepévyn Eugaces ws OnA@oat dvvdueva xal to avedvdvvoy nal TO CEONUAGMEVOY, TO TE KOVPEOTALY GHW xal TO Kovoyoetaty. “AdAa xat

n tho ovvécews naw axohovdia ovyxemuévy wév GAdo Onhoi, Otatgovuévn O& GAho Eugaiver’ oiov nun Hy, 6tt obvEeotLv 6 NAatIO TH TOD vio’ 20

yuvaint, moryov xatahaPpwr éypxenahvupévoy 6 vidg apie xai amoxnOvOOETAL V0 TO MaTeds: eget yao «d20v xal Tob potyod AaBdmEvoc épowy «mateo» TO yao d6voua tod mateds EbDéws TH wory@ nagaxeipevov év tH ovvbéoe Enoinoe THY Eugaot. xal tO éenevynveymevov OE Guoiwms éyer (xa Tod poryod AaPdwevoc EBowy «ndteo»* ob O& Ho Ob- 25

dapyod«* TH yao “ory xal tH nate meootedEev ebéws tO «od O€ Ho»

1 dgetarcr xat V || 2 xatante éréyyeevV || 3 3éP;teV | potyederc? . | pr.thyvom. Ac || 4 odvom. Ac | edrophoapev P (sc. év tH uedréry, cf. 192, 16); ev7topjoouev Ve Ba; edrtopyooruev Ac {| 6-7 éxtiOetg¢m.1 Ve Ba ||

7 tO teodtov Pa, Syr. || 9 pr.té0m.P || 10 etxodaa h uhtyno Ve || 12 droxnpirrer Pe || 13 76de P; rotto Ac; om. Ve Ba; gore 3& t6d5e Sc, m. 2 Vc; totto xat mpdBAnua Erepov Ma || 16 tote avOpmmots ta ToLandra d6vénaerTR

Vil 17 xai t6 Po V; 76 te Pa || 18 ult. t6om.V_ || 20 ofov [Str er.] o. Ve | cf. 192, 1g ann. || 21 schol. P (W VII 951, 24; in I. id. 286, 7 Sp.): «xat te goynuatialévra tv Cytnudtwrv od} aapdds Agvet te moa yLATHA)’ @y thy O760cow 6 “Aaotaaros suqavtixds Alav dunyyoato’ Agyer yao obtwW< «nxatetanrto (Pc; xatetAnntat Pa) yao cuynexadvuuévos 6 woryds’ ya dé EBdev matee, ov 5é HoOa oddapno0d». Vide ad 192,18 || 22 épet yao vl. P; elonta: PV

(schol. P: cloytar, prot, map’ god év TH yedéty otc) || 25 & mateo Pc, Eustath. in Iliad. K 330 || 25-26 od8aud¢Pc || 26 td 38 od ele Ba

ON INVENTION, BOOK 4, CHAPTER 13 195 saying that “he is committing adultery with my wife” and yet making it clear that this is so. Thus we made use of such a figure, and

when speaking openly we seemed not to say it. This is the statement: “Reckon, father, that the child is yours, not mine. You are discarding what you begat; you are throwing away a child of which you have been the father.” In such cases, those by implication I mean, there is need for a facility with words that can have two meanings, both what is unexceptionable and what is significant; for example, there was a rumor that a father is having intercourse (synesti) with his own daughter. The mother, after telling her son some unspeakable thing, hanged herselt. ‘he father asks what the unspeakable thing was and when the son does not say, he disowns him. An example of this sort has been published by us and has the following as a second prooemion:

“Now this disinheritance is of little concern to me, but I am distressed for my father if after such abundance of family he is left with (synest1) only | a daughter and will live with (synézetaz) her [210] alone.” Such words—synesti, I mean, and synzésetai—are common of other aspects of human life and seem most suited for the underlying implication as being able to indicate both what is unexceptionable and what has been implied. But again the sequence of composition indicates one thing when the words are closely joined and implies something else when they are separated; for example, there is a rumor that a father is having intercourse with his son’s wife. ‘The son had taken him in adultery when disguised but let him go?°! and is disowned by the father. (Here the son) will say,?82 “When seizing the adulterer, I was calling ‘Father”’; the word “tather” when put right close to “adulterer” in the sentence created an implication. Similarly, what is added: “And seizing the adulterer I was calling ‘Father,’ but you were nowhere.” By adding “you were” right next to “adulterer” and “father” in the sentence he revealed the implication, but in each case “nowhere” preserves the ostensible meaning.

281 Te., the son does not recognize the father because of the disguise. 282 See Rabe’s apparatus, citing scholia in Paris manuscripts (Walz 7:951)

that add, “Aspasius narrated this hypothesis very allusively, for he speaks in this way: “The adulterer was taken in disguise. I cried Father, but you were nowhere.”

196 MEPI EYPEZEQE A th ovvbéoe thy Euqaow edyjAwoe, tHv aogddsiay O& yet ExatTEVOY AMO 1

tod «ovdapod ».

[Tepi tOv ovyKkpitikoy npopinuatovy. Ta ovyxoitina nooPAnuata et sy OTOYaoUm Eolinéoolt 7) bow,

[211] 6aday éyer tiv dtaloeow: Sindois yao | tois xepadatoig xa Exactov 5 yowueba, &y usr toig otoxyaopoic taic BovAnoeot xat taic dvvducot, Aéyortes «éue pmév ob sind Bovdndivat tdde moijoat dia tddE, Oé 6& eixdg BovdnOijva téde notijoat Oia tédE», “al navta expéoety sic déov ta émtyeiojnuata’ cita nddw «éué pév obx elxdc duvndijvat téde motjoar Oia tdde, o& O& Eixdg TOdE MoLHoaL Ola TOdE», “al TOUTO 10 HATACHEVACOYTES HAL TO YOMMA TO MEV HuEeTEQOY TLEVTEG Kal xaTa-

oxevdlovtes, TO O& naga tod éyBood tEeév AbortEs Toig éntyEtlonuact, nal THY marry anohoyiay thy Exeivov wév AdoytEc, “oaTtbvoYTES O& THY TUETEOAY.

Kai uny nai ta év toig Geog 6moiwes dumdd> wedet@rtes Aéyouer, 15 oloy «tobtd Eott TO Eoydoaotai TL, 6 mEenoinna &yw@», eita éveyxeir,

deo sioydow, sita émeveyueiy «od O€ Tovtwr Enoinoac obdév», ita aviuneveyuseivy éxeiber ta éxcivw nenoaypéva xal Aéyew, Oc Tadta ovd&y éoTt.

Xonoducda O& toic Entyerojpuact xal taic éyddotc taic wedetytt- 20 naic xal év toic dutdotc Gootc, aic édddéaper deity yonotat, xal év totic [212] dhoic dnd te tév n00 tod | modyuatoc nai dnd THY peta TO MEGypUA

ovupaiwortwy exetDev yao 7 andj ebxogia évtata Oundh yiveta.

1 évTtHV || 3 tévom.AcPxr || 4 taP Prj ta d8V || 5 xa ante thvadd.P Ac || 6 alt. totg¢om.Ac || 7-8 o&—alt. téde0m.Pc || 8 BovarnOyvo t6de P; om. Vc Ba; BovarOyvarom. Ac | éxpépovteg? | td ante cic Ba;om. Vc || 9 yo elta dvararAwP | |dovm. 1 | yO%vae Ac; BovarOFvat Sc || 10 +~éde ror%oor Pc; ror}ou t6de V; t68e reorFjoa SuvvOFvar Pa || 12 mapc tov éy0eo0d PV, mg. év &AAots map” éxetvov P || 13 pwév éxetvou Ac || 15 SumA@oom. Ac || 16-17 6 — alt. etva sic Pc; 6 merolyxa eyo: |circ. XXV; m. po.: xat eimetv &rep cipycouto|: celta Pa; bre9 érotnon éyw (xat elmev mg. m. 1 Ba): efta éveyxety &rep cipycrouto (nal ciety & cipydouto cita émm. 2 supr. Vc)’ celta Vc Ba; bmep éxotynoan ey xal cimetvy & ecloydoauto: celta Ac ||

18 éxetvor Pa V; adrade Pe || 20 88 wal totg Ac | mat rato weretytexats épddorg Ac || 20-22 xal taic weObdorg talc wedetyntixatc alc eddaEapev Seiv xe7joOar év tots SuAotc Spots xat Ev tots amAote and Vc Ba || 21 toteom. Pc

ON INVENTION, BOOK 4, CHAPTER 14 197 CHAPTER 14: ON COMPARATIVE PROBLEMS

Comparative problems, whether falling under stasis of conjecture or of definition, have an easy basis for division, for | we use double [211]

headings in each.?°3 In conjecture?4 (we use) intentions and abili- | ties, saying “It is not probable that I wanted to do this for such and such a reason, but it is probable that you wanted to do this for such

and such a reason,” and expand all the epikheiremes as needed; then again, “It is not probable that I could have done this for such and such a reason, but it 1s probable that you did this for such and such a reason,” and confirming this and adding our explanation (khroma) and confirming that, and refuting the proposition of the enemy with epikheiremes and refuting persuasive features of his defense while strengthening our case. Similarly, when practicing (meletdntes) cases of definition2®5

we also use double headings; for example, “This is doing what I have done,”?8° then adding what you did, then further adding, “but you did none of these things,” then in contrast bringing in next what was done by him and saying how those things amount to nothing. We shall use epikheiremes and approaches (ephodot)?®7 practiced in declamation (meletétika1) both in double definitions, as we

have taught it should be done, and in cases of single definitions from both | what happened before the action and what happened [2121 after the action, for from that source the simple argument becomes double.

283 See Hermogenes, On Stasis, pp. 56,5—59,3 and 61,21-65,9 Rabe.

284 Cases in which the issue is whether or not something was actually done. 285 Cases in which the issue is the legal definition of an acknowledged action; e.g., murder or homicide. 286 Te., is defined in a way that we state. The speaker is probably competing with someone else for a reward for performing some deed; his action 1s not in question, but whether the action satisfies the definition is disputed. 287 E'phodoi appears only here in the Hermogenic corpus; otherwise, see

Rhetoric for Herennius 1.6; Apsines 2.1; Aphthonius 13 (Aphthoni progymnasmata [ed. Hugo Rabe; Bibliotheca scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana; Rhetores Graeci 10; Leipzig: Teubner, 1926], 42) and John of Sardis’s note thereon.

198 MEPI EYPEZEQS A Ki 0é noappatiny auqiopytnots mageuméoot, Tote Osi Cyteiv, ti- 1 va ott TA ovyxolvdueva, Ovo 7) wal wAEiova, “al obtw> Ex THY MagAxoAoviobytwy Exdot@ tac ovyxolcEetc Moijoetc. udAtoTa O€, Ei MOOTWNOY ovyxoivoltto, tote &yew Osi THY an0 THY Eyxwplwy xal poywr obyxol-

ow, nal pévyn nal Enitndedbuata xat modgeig nal thyas “al dmayta ta 5 ovyxowwomeva. Ouotws O& &yEt xal ta &x tho GAdnco mEegiotdoews: 6 Tt

dv sic ovyxotow éunéon, ta nagaxodovdotyta Exdotolis ovyxoivomer’ naopaxohovist 0& GAha wév tomo, AAda Oé yoovotc, GAha Oé Exdotatc tov GAhwy mEQioTdoEwr.

1 CHrynorg¢ Ac | rapeuréon Pc; meptméco. Vc Ba; cf. 196, 4 || 3 motetoVar Vi || «63-4 ye ef modcwrov ovyxolvorto éyov thy ard t&v “tA. P ||

3 medcmna? || 5 prxatet taom. Vc Ba || 6 ye xat cuyxoelvouev Pa, (om. xat)Pc | gyerom.Se | te&om. Ba, ?m.1 Ve | &AAngom.Ac | xmeprot&oewcs Pc, m. 1 Pa; meprovatas V; schol. P praefert meprotécews ; aliud schol. P: é« tév

KAAwv meptaotatix@y || 6-7 6c. yao &v Ac, (om. &) vl. P || 7 bunton Pa; éuméoot Pc Ac; éuméoor' 4) Vc Ba | xat ta Ve Ba || 9° subscr. téAo¢ tay evpéoewv P; téA0g tod tev&ptov téy0v Vc Ba; om. AC

ON INVENTION, BOOK 4, CHAPTER 14 199

If the question at issue falls under the category of pragmatiké,?®> then it is necessary to ask what are the things being compared, whether two or even more, and in this way you will make comparisons from the consequences of each. Especially if a person is being compared, then there is need to make the comparison by praises and blames, speaking about origins and habits and actions and fortunes and all the things that can be compared. Sim-

| ilarly, in the case of another circumstance; whatever comes into the comparison, we compare what results to each. Different results follow from the places (of an action), different from the times, different from each of the other circumstances.

End of the Treatise On Invention

288 T e., referring to a future action; see p. 71 n. 111 above.

BLANK PAGE

ON METHOD OF 414) FORCEFUL SPEAKING As Found in the Hermogenic Corpus

At the end of his discussion of forcefulness (deinotés) in the treatise On Ideas (2.9), the author we know as Hermogenes gives a perceptive account of all the many things that should be discussed in a general treatise on style, which he hopes to complete and to which he proposes

the title On Method of Forcefulness (p. 380,2 Rabe). The treatise preserved under this title, however, has little resemblance to hts description and 1s certainly not by Hermogenes.' One telling difference 1s that the term “forcefulness” occurs only in the title, which was probably given to the treatise by an editor who assembled the Hermogenic corpus and knew of Hermogenes’ reference to such a work. The term methodos does occur in the treatise (e.g., chs. 2, 22, 26, 28), where it usually refers to prose style and means ways, sources, or Verbal techniques of saying something, including especially use of figures of thought, a meaning found also in On Ideas.

The name of the author is unknown. Not only is the treatise not the work of Hermogenes, but it 1s clearly not by the same author as On Invention, for each work has its own distinctive terminology; compare, for example, the difference between the account of antitheton

in On Invention 4.2 and that in On Method 15. Some similarities to Pseudo-Dionysius’s Art of Rhetoric (2.10-11), identified in the notes and apparatus criticus, suggest that the author of that work may have used the same source as did the author of On Method. Fust as " ‘The evidence was carefully examined, with this conclusion, by E. Burgi, “Ist die dem Hermogenes zugeschriebene Schrift Peri methodou deinotétos echt?” Wiener Studien 48 (1930): 187-97; 49 (1931): 40-69. See also Barbara P. Wallach, “Pseudo-Hermogenes and the Characterizing Oath,” Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 22 (1981): 257-67.

| BLANK PAGE

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING 203 the author of the treatise On Invention shows no awareness of tradttional discussions of that subject, the author of On Method shows no knowledge of discussions of style by Antstotle, Demetrius, Dionysius of Halicarnassus in his genuine works, Longinus, or other writers on the subject, nor does the author make any use of the common division of style into diction and composition or the division of the ornaments of style into tropes, figures of speech, and figures of thought, though these concepts would have been useful to him. The treatise was already attributed to Hermogenes tn the fifth century, when it was cited by Syrianus (1:96; 2:2,) and there 1s a collection of scholia by Gregory of Corinth printed in Walz 7.2: 1090-1352. Although at first glance the treatise seems a miscellaneous collection of chapters dealing with figures and some other features of prose

composition, the sequence of chapters indicates some intent to organize the subject systematically. The first four chapters deal with word choice; chapters 5 to 16 with figures, mostly figures of thought, though

chapter 11 on asyndeton and chapter 16 on parison deal with verbal figures; and chapter 12 on preliminary headings and recapitulation is unexpectedly inserted in the middle of the series. Beginning with chapter 17 and continuing, more or less, to chapter 32, the author seems to be discussing matters of invention, though with some attention to stylistic features of the thought. Of the remaining chapters, 33, 34, and 36 deal with kinds of style; into this is inserted chapter 35, in which the author tries to answer critics who have found ambiguities in classical authors, and chapter 37, on negation (litotes), 1s tacked on

at the end. It is possible, of course, that a later editor 1s responsible for some of the confusion, and it is also possible that some of the later chapters were added by an editor from other sources. Note, for example, that pardidia as described in chapter 36 1s quite a different thing from par6idia in chapter 30. In making this translation I have consulted, though not always followed, the French version by Marcel Patillon, L? Art rhétorique, 511-50.

«a IEPI ME®@OAOY AEINOTHTO2 ITéy wéoog Adyou ebentat wéy Ext punrboet Modypatoc, xatgod dé idtov tuydyv, 6 O& xalgdg xata Hove noocDyxny yiwomevoc tdiar dtdvotay aregyaletat, ob udvoy idiay, GAAa xal dtd~ogor, ob} pdvoy O1dpoooy, GAAd xat dtagdeovs, ob udvoy dtagydoous, GAAd xal évartiag. olov 5

xaxobvoyos mac 6 xaxdv tt Eovalduevoc, tdiws O° 6 xdéntnc. dtaqogor dé, oiov Onunyooeiy to év Onu@m ayoostey, dims O& TO xExaoLoUéva héyew nai to anaidevta Aéyew. dtapdgovue Oé, oioy GvPowmnoc yévous dvoua xal Hove tugoov xat téyNCo Gvoua xat navovoyias. Evaytiac Oé, Wo TO «usivat’ Ent yoovoy», Tov nodAby, tor diiyoy, xai naga IlAdtwri 10 [415] «yodvoy» 61) tov noddy Sydot: xal td «adtdc, & Daldwr, nagelyévon ; abtéc, ® "Eyéuoates»’ 6 wév pag Hoeto do Vavudlwyv nai waxaoicwy TOY MagayEvdUEVOY, O OF ANOXOIVETAL DEMYVVOMEVOS HAL LEYAMEOYOY.

Hepi macys éGewe. ITdons AéEews tig Gyvoovupérvns év nel @ Ady@ tosig uéDodot tig 15 cevoécems: 7} yao &Ovixy got 7 Aéétc 7} teyviny 7H vou. 6 yoodyv maga-

oayyns obu olda tic oti’ E0vixdv ydg éott xal [Tegoixov 6600 pétoor,

1 sic P Vc Sf Ph; ‘Eppoyévoug om. Ac Lb Md Og Vil, m. 1 Ne; éppoyévous TExVIS SNTOELXTIs TO Trepl weOddov SewvdtyTOG Of || 3 pr. dom. VF | vix

san. | 6—-ywduevos post 5 a&nepyaCetarSc || 4 éeyelerat Vc SfPh,vl.P |

xatodLd | xatadd.anteodP || 5 xatadd.anteodOd | ofov? || 6 Som.m.15Sf || 7 d8&o0m.Ph | cf. Plat. Gorg.502CD || 8 xai Vt | xat—Aéyervom. Va || 10 Hom. B299 | [+rdv roddv] Spengel; schol. Ven. A: &t. Zyvédotosg yokes «ett yodvov», amOavwg’ Erpacis yaxo yivetat moAAod

yedvov dia tod «ete» =|] 11 Plat. Phaedr. 278 D (év yedve), Tim. 21 D (dre yoovov) ? fortasse 1. 10 nap& Movxvdtdy [2, 18] vel tale quid submotum est, cum glossema treap& TTAdrww ad 1.11 ascriptum eoirreperet | Plat. Phaedon. 57 A

|| 12 etpeto Vc || 13 d-moxplveran Pa || 14 mg. P Px; om. Vc Sf; rept meons AcEews Kyvooupevngs év meCGe Adyoot Lc Pe; rd00n wreé00Sor tHe &yvooupEevys

AEEews Ev weCGe Adywu mg. (m. 1?) Ac; mécar xat rota, pé0odor tHe ebeéoeus aKyvooupévns AéEews év weCGe A6ywemg.Ph | mg.%PAc || 15 aliter [Dion.]

Art. Il 1 p. 366, 18. 386, 13 Us. || 17 tt Ald. | xatom. Ne Ov Viq

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 2 205 | CHAPTER I: (ON DIFFERENT POSSIBLE MEANINGS OF A WORD) [Rabe 414

Every piece of language is applied to designating something in a particular context, and the context, by addition of moral character,” creates a particular meaning, not only a particular meaning, but also a different one (in different contexts), and not only a different meaning but several, and not only several but even opposite meanings; for example, everyone who does something evil (kakon) is an “evildoer” (kakourgos), but in a particular context Rakourgos means a thief. As an example of a different meaning, to address the people (démégorein) 1s to speak in public but has the particular meaning of saying things that flatter and things that are vulgar.3 As an example of multiple meanings, anthropos is the name of a genus and of a civilized character and the name of a lot in life+ and of roguery.> Opposite meanings are, for example, things like “Abide for a time” (Lliad 2.299), which can mean much or little time, as in Plato (e.g., Phaedrus 278dqQ) “time” indicates much time. And (there are different meanings reflected in Phaedo 57a), “Were you present yourself, Phaedo? | I was myself, O Echecrates.” One per- [415] son asked the question in admiration and thinking him happy at having been there, but the other answers gravely and seriously. CHAPTER 2: ON ALL (UNFAMILIAR) DICTION

There are three sources® of all unfamiliar vocabulary in prose, for either the term is foreign (ethniké) or technical (tekhniké) or legal (nomtiké).7 | may not know what a parasang is,® for it is a foreign 2 Seen in what is said just below about positive and negative meanings of démégorein and anthropos; cf. “sophist,” a teacher of rhetoric or a deceitful speaker, depending on the context. 3 Cf. Plato, Gorgias 50ac-e. 4 ].e., the human condition. 5 Anthrépos was sometimes used contemptuously in Greek to mean a bad fellow or slave, especially in the phrase “O, Man”; cf., e.g., Herodotus 3.3. 6 Literally, “three methods of invention.” 7 'The author seems unfamiliar with the term gldssa or glotta, used by Aristotle (e.g., Rhetoric 3.3.2 and 3.10.2) and many others to refer to a strange or foreign word. 8 The term would be familiar to readers of Xenophon’s Anabasis.

206 MNEPI MEOOAOY AEINOTHTOS | ol Totdxovta otddLot’ ayoivocs b& Aiyintioy, ot EEHxovTA OTAOLOL. VO- 1 ptxov O& Gvoua TO ToLodtOY (noumEdEel aYTL TOK xatnyooEiy Eideto»*

éy “Adyjvats toic Atovvaiowg éndunevoy nai Gddrjdotc dtedotdogobrto nat ToOTO Exadeito nounedveyv’ xal 7 eloayyedia xai wdot wal GA-

ha totadta dvouata vouind got. teyvina O€ éxsiva’ «Cedbeartes tag 5 tahaas vats» vavanylxoyv 6voua, xat dic dtd TEGOdOWY LOvOLxXd”Y, Xai

pooyevely pewoylnoyv, xal doa to.adta.

ITepi tv kata tyy A€€tv Gmaptyuatoy. Ta dpaothiuata xata tHy AéEw xata dbo toedmove yivetat, axv-

[416] lav xai nagayoody dxvoiay pév, olov, | éay einn tic «éowtm xai 10 tagaxald» avti tod dgoua, axtbows elonxe’ tO ws yao nagaxahsiv 7 naheiv éotty 7 tooteéneodat, TO O€ Eowtay nvvbdvecBdar. nagagioear dé, olov, 6 xahobor Oialwua, éay tic einn dtaC@otear 7 tO aipwoeiy AUUwosiy xal TA ToLadta.

[Tote tavtétyt Ovonatoy ypynoouc0a Kai note nomKtdia. 15 [Tote tavtdtntt dvoudtwr yonoducda xal note noixtdia; tTavtTOTYHTL ev, Stay Tob nodypatos év dvoua y TO évagyéotatov’ TOtE yao ov Cyteiv Osi yoonyiay agavilovoay try évdgyetay Tob MOY UaTOS, gay O€ tic nagadapn, éniderEty ev Gxaigorv éenoijoato, tHv yosiay Oé&

1-2 oyotvog — torodtov om. Pc; cf. Herod. 2,6; Athen. II] 121 fisq. ||

1 atybrtiog Ac | of om. Vb, cf. Herod. || 1-2 vourxdv 880m. Ph || 2 Dem. 18,124 || 3 tray ev wAAots (vel AAW?) mg. Ph | yao totg Ac || 4 cioayyeAta dé xat Ald. || 4-5 ta &MAaLa || 5 Thuc.1,29 || 6 16 dvonn Se Vt | d& macdv Md Oh Vs, v.l. Lb || 8 supr.P Px;0m. Vc Ac SfPh_ | mg.BPAc || 9 vd rept thy AgEw a&uancotrnuatae Sc Vt, cf. [Dion.] II 1 p. 365, 3

Us. || 10 xatom.Ph || 11 cf. Suid.s. v. mapaxarctv | dxvetwsPh | yao om. Ph || 13 Sataorteav etx Pc | A(proxat)Ph || 14 de eodem verbo: [Dion.] II 1 p. 366, 2 sq (cf. 365, 3) Us. {| 15 Px, mg. P; om. Vc Ac Ph; zeol TAVTOTYTOS OVOULATOS Kal TOLKLALag mg. Sf, (6voucetwv) Vt | mg. YPAc || 16 Ot

myurata (sic) Ph || 17 He dvonaAcSfPh || 17-18 téte yae om. Vc Ph || 19 pevom. Sf Ph | cf. [Dion.] II 1 p. 366, 16. 17 Us.

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 4 207 word, a Persian measure of a road, equal to thirty stades, while a schoinos is an Egyptian measure, equal to sixty stades.? A legal usage is something like, “He chose to abuse with jests (pompeuein) rather than prosecute” (Dem. 18.124). At Athens at the Dionysia they made processions (pompaz) and verbally abused each other, and this was called pompeuein. Eisangelia and phasis and other such words are legal terms. !° ‘Technical terms include “having undergirded (zeuxantes) their ancient ships” (Thucydides 1.29), a word used in naval architecture, and dis dia tessaron (“twice every four”) is a musical expression, and moskheuein (“plant a sucker”) is agricultural, and everything of that sort. CHAPTER 3: ON MISTAKES IN WORD USAGE!!

Mistakes (harmatémata) in word choice occur in two ways: failure to use the proper word (akyria) and corruption (paraphthora). Itis failure to use the proper word; for example, | 1f someone says erotd [416] kat parakalo (“I ask and call for”) in place of deomai (“I need”’), he has spoken improperly, for parakalein is either “to call (someone to come)” or “to urge,” and evdtan 1s “to make an inquiry.” It is an example of corruption if one says diazdstra for what they calla diazoma (“girdle”) and says ammodein tor haimdédein (“to set teeth on edge”), and the like. CHAPTER 4: WHEN TO USE THE SAME AND WHEN TO USE VARIED WORDS

When shall we repeat the same word and when use a variety of words? Use the same word whenever one name for the thing 1s the clearest, for then there is no need to seek a supply of words obscur-

ing the clarity of the subject, and if one does, he has, on the one hand, made the demonstration unsuitable and, on the other, de9 Cf., e.g., Herodotus 2.6. ‘0 'These are terms of Athenian law meaning indictment and denunciation.

1T For another account of this subject, see Pseudo-Dionysius, Ars Rhetorica 10.7 (vol. 2, pp. 365-67 Usener-Radermacher). Neither author seems aware of Aristotle’s discussion in Rhetoric 3.3, nor of the grammatical categories of solecism (= akyria?) and barbarism (= paraphthora?).

208 NEPI MEOOAOY AEINOTHTOZ

anole tig ovyyoagis. “Ounoos 1 «aso O& YLOY xaTAaTHxET Ev AxoomdAoLOW OOECOL,

Hy t Edooc xarétnger, énny Zépvoos xataxervyn, tynxouéervyns 0° doa tic notauol wAnjGovot GéortEs:

Oo tho thxeto xala naorjia daxovyeotons.» 5

obte tO AciBetat odte tO yeitat ote tO AdEtat ObtTwWCS Goudler WC TO

«theta Gpic ydo éott yLdvog avahioxomévncg 7) THxEdOY. “Oray 6& moAhd Gvduata éyn tig iodtiua xal Guoiws ~xovta évdgoyetay yonotuoy, 7 mottdia deudlet, olov “Ounoos

[417] | «ado 6°’ 6tay Wdivovoay yn Bédocg 6&0 yovaixa, 10 dowd, té te mooteiot woyootéxo. KiheiPuiat, “Hons Pvyatéoec mixoacs Wdivac éyovoat»: Eyouev 6€0, oid, muxody, étel 0° obn Exes GAAo iodtipoyr, Ent TO MEMTOV ENAVEOYETAL

«dco 6&si’ 6ddvat OBvor wévoc *Atosibao ». 15 xal 6 Oovxvdidns &v tH Moooimim tEexprjo.oy, onusiov, maeaderyua, paotvouoy, xai del xdudov notsitar THY Gvopdtwv’ «éx O& TEexuNoiwy,

dy éni waxodtatoy oxonodyti pot suotetoa Evupaiver», nat « uaothotoy O& Anjlov ydag xadaoouéerncs b210 “ADnvaiwy», xal «onpetoy 0 got tabta tho “EAA dbo¢ &tt ob8tw veudmeva neot te Aoxpods tovc “OCd- 20 hac xal Aitwihod¢o xai “Axagprvdvacs», xat «nagdderyua tddE TOD Adyov obx éAdytotdéy gots bid tag petotxiac &¢ ta GAda pw 6pmoiws adb&qd7-

va.

1 yoaoyoSf || 2 Hom.t205 | d80m.Ph || 5 Sdxeva xeobon¢Pa || 7 avadtoxouévy )Ph,m.1 Vc || 8 tig wh iadtipa whdE Guotws Ac || 10-12 Hom. A 269 || 10-23 cf. [Dion.] II 1 p. 385, 15-386, 8 Us. (loci Thucydide

simili modo turbati) || 11 té60m.Ph || 13 @yer psvAc | mxpdv 6&0" deus Ve | ered), 8’ Ve SfPh || 15 Hom. A272 | d&eta.P Vc | d&eteco: ddvatPh || 17 Thuc.1,1 | Thuc.1,8 || 18-19 xat uaptiprov d£0m. Vc || 19 xaOapovuévygP Ac Ph | Thuc. 1, 6: onuctov— veudueva; ea laudat etiam

[Dion.] 1.1. 386,7 | Som. Sf || 20 veudyeva Se Vt, Thuc. 1, 5; yevoueva Vc Ac Ph, (ye* xat vendueva Hyovuyv xatorxobueva m. 2) Sf; ywwdueva P || 20-21 meot te — "Axaovavac leguntur Thuc. 1, 5 (xat péypt todde 7OAAd tio “HAA&SOG

TG TraAaLG todma véwetar mept te A. xtA.); om. [Dion.] || 21 Thuc. 1, 2: *aL TrHPADELY LA “TA.

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 4 209 stroyed the usefulness of the composition. Homer (says, Odyssey 19.205—208):

And as snow melts in the high mountains, snow that Eurus has melted, when Zephyrus has blown upon it, and as it melts the rivers run full; so were her beautiful cheeks melted as the tears ran down.

Neither “is shed” nor “is poured” nor “is dissolved” fits so well as “is melted” (téketaz), for “melting” gives a vision of snow disappearing. But when one has many words of equal weight and similar clarity, variation is suitable; for example, Homer (says, [liad 11.269—-271):%?

| As when a sharp shaft strikes a woman in pain, piercing, [417] which the Eileithyai, goddesses of childbirth, send, daughters of Hera keeping charge of bitter pains.

We have “sharp,” “piercing,” and “bitter,” but when he does not have another word of equal weight, he goes back (272) to the

first: “Thus sharp pains came upon the mighty son of Atreus.” And ‘Thucydides in his prooemion speaks of evidence, sign, example, witness, and makes a circuit of these words: “from evidences (tekméria) that an enquiry carried as far back as possible leads me to trust’(1.1); and “there is a witness (martyrion); for when Delos was being purged by Athenians” (1.8), and “a sign (sémezon) is that

these customs are still maintained among the Ozolian Locri and the Aetolians and Acarnanians” (1.6), and “not the least example (paradeigma) ot what I am saying is that migrations were the cause of there not being similar growth elsewhere” (1.6).

2 With what follows, cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, Ars Rhetorica 11.9 (vol. 2, pp. 385-86 Usener-Radermacher).

210 QEPI ME@®@OAOY AEINOTHTOZ

[Tepi nepittotytos. 1 ‘H neoitrdtns éori bundy, nai xata AgEw xal xata yrduny’ éxatéoa O& Oinlf, xai 7 “ata AéEw nal 7 xata yrOuny, xal 7 wey xata (41s) Ads pivetae diatobH xal | wAnOe, 4 68 xata yrduny xata éenevOv-

unos nat Adywv xadohixay totic tdiowtg cvundhonny. 5 Atatoipy éott Boayéos dtavonuatos HOtxod Extaotc, va éupeivy to 7006 too Aéyortos év tH yroun tod axobvortoc, oioy «THY wév BBoww

Mewoiov ndvtec tote», &étewe 0 adto obtws «tH wéy Goédyetay xal thy &Bow, 7 me0¢ Gnayvtac adel yontat Meiac, ovdéva ob?’ buy ovtE tov GAdwy nohitady ayvosiv oitouat»: xai to [egi to otegdvov mgo- 10 oiutoy Ouotws ExEt. TTAgBo0¢ 6é éott noixiAwy dvoudtowyr icotiuwy éniyvows sig xiyn-

ow 7Oovc, oiov «tod O& nagdytog Gydvoc % moo0aigeotc abty éyPood pév Ertyoetay Eyer xal SBow nal Aovdogiay xat neomndaxtouoyv Guod xal

WAaVTA TA TOLAdTA», Snov ual tO RAHOOs Reker cinwy «du0d». 15 ‘1 6é éxevddunoic éotiv évOdunua eripeodpuevor, 6 ur) MoooTED Er pév ob moteitat, moooteDéy O& TO nay MepEdei. of O& xaDodtxot Adyot

Ojdov 6 ti noté ior. nagadsiypata ual Téy EnevOvunoewY nal THY xadodindv Adywr magadAdé siow, wo év tH Oovxvdidov éutayi@: oy 6 “aod obtOG* m00G Ev TA OxANOad xai abUddy Otavonuata éxevPvu- 20 oelg nagadauPdvortat, va waddéwot ta HON, mod O& THY niotw THY iOtwy Adywy ot xowvol Adyar nal xadodtxot. Gugotéowy O° Hy év TH Estt-

tapim yoeia’ xai yao abPadéc éott xai Gmotoy to Aéyew «odbx et (419) AdpeoDar éxitagpioy», tov | adda obtw doxipacdytwr. modc Mey obY to abdadec ai éexevOvunoetc, 200 O& tO Gntotoy oi xaohixol Adyot. 25

1 supr.P Px, mg. Sf;om.VcAcPh | mg.S8PAc || 2 pr. xatom. Sf || 3 pr. xat—yvornvom. Sf | utrumqueyjom.Ph || 3-4 xal } pav xara AMEwom.Ph || 6 dtaterBH de oti VS | Exatactg Ve Ph || 8 «drs Ve Sf Ph; adt}vP Ac | Dem.a21,1 || 9 mé&vragPh | ypFrot wedtac cet Pc | 080’ Ve Sf;om.PAcPh || 10 +6 tod wept ote—pavov Ph {| 13 Dem. 18,12 | attycodd. || 18 d&é(proxat) Sf | évOvuhcewvPh || 19 maparAdée cicty Of, m. po. P, v.l. P; maparrcEerg Ph, m.1 P Ve; mapaarrck&erg cictv Ac =| &so om.

v1. P || 20 votquara Ac || 24 yevécOat Pa | p. 210, 24 tote m&kAat obtwc

édoxrzao07 Thuc. 2,35 | odv Ac Sf; yee Vk Nc;0m.P Vc Ph || 25 Ve: a short addition as in the following (Dem. 1.2): “The present crisis, Athenians, calls on you, almost with an audible voice, that you take into your own hands control of those events.” And again, elsewhere (Dem. 18.50): “as it were, having drenched me with some dregs of his villainy.” And Plato (Phaedrus 243d): “to wash away the brackish sound with potable water”;

this is presumptuous. What, then, is the brief addition? “Brackish sound, as it were.” ‘here is an example of acknowledgement of rashness in Against Timocrates (Dem. 24.104): “For even if the statement seems to be strong language, I shall say it: put him to death so he can pass this law for the wicked in Hades.” CHAPTER 7: ON PARALEIPSIS AND APOSIOPESIS

When do paraleipsis and aposidpésis occur?!?® Whenever we want

to implant greater suspicion about the subject | inthe mind ofthe [420] hearers than we actually state. Let us take the first example from the remark, “How this man has treated his father—” I am perhaps saying that he contradicted him or did not obey him, but the aposiopesis has increased suspicion that he was plotting against his father. Demosthenes uses a complete aposiopesis in On the Crown (Dem. 18.3) as follows: “But for me—I do not want to say anything harsh at the beginning of my speech.” In affecting paraleipsis, mention of things is made in three ways, either when the things (passed over) are minor but useful to the speaker, or when they are known and he claims he is 'S Cf. Aristotle, Rhetoric 3.7.9; Longinus, On Sublimity 32.3-4. (© In paraleipsis (praeteritio in Latin) the speaker claims to pass over some matters without discussion but itemizes briefly what is to be omitted; in aposiopesis (veticentia in Latin), the speaker starts to say something and then breaks off suddenly, leaving some impression on the audience of what was about to be said. The terminology was in common use; cf., Alexander, On Figures 1.16 and 19; Lausberg, §§882-8g9.

214 WEPI ME@OAOY AEINOTHTOZ naoadizeiy, dua O& TO yonotwa eivat Aéyer adta’ } 6tay énayOh FH, yor- 1 oiua 0& tH Aéyorts, Ota wév tO EnaydH civar pyot nagahineiv, Oia O€ tO yornowua eivan Aéyer adbta.

ITapadsiypuata todtwr, tov psy minody éy tH Kata Mediov

a\ f A , ¢ ‘ 3 / ww

«(doa uéy ody 7 tTovs yooEevTas xwddbwv AapEePhvat Tig OTQATEias HYd- 5 yAnuev, 7) to0PadAduEvos nal xedetdwv Eavtov cig Atoviowa yewgotoveiy

éripedyntyy, 7 tadAda Goa totabta, édowY, sita tH aitiay énipéoel tod moocnotcio0at nagahineiy «ob yao ayvod tod, dt. tH pév Ennocalouévm try abtyy tobtwy Exactoy 6oyry Hvaeo GAN’ Otioby THY

[421] dewotdtwy nagiotn, | duty 6&8 toic #w tod nodypatos obow od ay 10

bd ofabta2xa?Aéavta>ayawvoc ¢ \ 2gavein». a f Taylaod \ / >év ~ iows Agia O& yrwoiuwy tH

ITepi tho atedeiag «éyad O° bt wey twdy xatnyoeotrta ndytas aqaiocioPat tHy Owoeay tév Adixwyr Eotiv, dow», cita THY aitiay énipéoet

tot mooonotsio0a: nagahineiy «xal yao eiontat todmoy tid xai by" buddy tows ywodoxetar». Thr 68 énayIav nagdderyua évy t@ [Tei tod 15 otepavov «éy uéy O17) Toi idiots Ei un) marTES tote Ott “oLvdS nal pLAdrDowsmos xat maou toic deopmévois Enagx@y, ocwnd nai ovdév ay einoupt EOL AVTHY, OUTE El Tivac Ex THY ROAELio” EAvoduny, obtE Ei TLot Ovya-

> ‘) , A A ict , ~ ww A / \ /

téoac anogotot ovvetsdwxa», eita thy aitiay tod nagadineiv éripéoet «éy@ vouitw tov uév Eb naddrta Osiv uEuvioVat maga mdvTA TOY yOd- 20 voy, tov 0 eb rotjoarta Eb0ds énthedfjobat, ei det TOV WEY YONOTOD, TOY

O& uy. utxoopbyov noleiy Zoyvor GvPodmov. TO O€ tac idiac ebepyeciac avauturvnoxew uixood dsivy Guotdy Eott TH Gverdilew ».

epi nepiniorns.

/ et \ \

To neoundéxew Otapdddetau wéy Oo nxaxia tod Aéyewy, et O& &v uat- 25

0@ yiyvotto, CyAwtoy dy oytjua edoeBein. xaiods oby Thc mEpUtAoxic

1 Aéyy Pa || 2 pév td Pa Ve Ac Sf; 58 td Pc; [rd del.| pév vd Ph |

a maparetret Ph || 3 Aéyye Pa || 5 Dem. 21,15 | tao Pa | otpatias Ph

|| 8 spoc7orstoBat hic et p. 214, 14 suspect. | mapadcetrerv Ac; mapaAetmety Ph

|| 9 |4Hvm. po.|rep Vc; donee Sf || 10 maptory Ac Ph, (ot add. m. po.) Pc Ve

Sf; maptorys: Pa || 12 tHoom.PAc | Dem. 20,2 | tiwvavm. po. suppl. Sf || 13-14 efta — mapadtmetv om. Sf Ph, (m. 2 suppl.) Vc; utique meccroretoBan

suspect., cf. p.214,8 || 15 Seayryvmoxeta: Pa | tod}om. Ac || 16 év 8 zcotg Dem. 18, 268 | Som. VS || 16-17 xowds xal prravOp@nmwe Ph || 18 tobtmy Ve Ac Sf Ph | trotvPh || 20 detvP, Dem.; om. Vc Ac Sf Ph || 23 ptxpod detvom. Pc || 24 supr. Vc Sf, mg. P; rept tod meprmAéxer Px; TEPLTEPLTAOKYS OTE TEPLTTAcKELY eUuatpov xal TocayYa @ > ,MaeciuPootos Ss > ¢ 4 ww cio’ bx0 yaiay, 5 000° dn Hédtog 006° éan avveitat: GAda yoaldpueda Baooor»:

et yao slorjner (@ yilot, poaCdusda Daooor», Etagaker ay abtovds xai émoinoey EQwtijoal, ti yéyove’ Ota TootO Ota éoov tac aitiacg tod yodCeotat Bdoooyr étage. xai Oovnvdidns «oi dé “APnrvaio: époPyOnoay, pn mohéuat Hoar ai vijec» dia ti; 6 Oovuvdting érake dia wéocov tHy 10 aitiay tod pdpov «Hy yao vtE»: dia TodtO xal 6 THY aitiay onuaivwr

> ?- o~ 4 zs A) 4 4 lod + ¢ A > /- ld

OVYOED MOG WOONHYELTAL, 6 yao.

Maxooyv 6é yivera tneoPatov, 6ndtay 7 aitia évéoac aitiac yoeiay éyy, olov «énetdy O& of te “Adnvaiwy téegarvot xai ot & tig GAAns ‘EAAdOos et t0Ad xai noly tvparvevBeians oi mAciotot wal Tedevtaiow 15 rAiny tov &y Linedia tno Aaxedatpoviwy xatelbdnoay» n>, @ Oovxvo0idn ; «7 yao Aaxedaiuwy Eta THY utTiow THY viv Evotxobytwy ev

avth Aworéwy éni nAsiotoy yodvoy otacidoaca bums & nadaitdtov [431] al | Evvounon xat Gel aTvEeadryvEevtos Hy»* aitiay tic aitiac anodidwouw

a \ > > h) f 4 4 > fd Jd /

“éty yao éott uddota tetoaxdota, Gd Aaxsdatmdriot tH abti noditeia 20 yowvtat, xal Os abto dvvduevot xat ta éy taic GAhaicg addeot xadiotdy» sita éEnavéoyetat ent thy Goyry «meta O& THY THY TvOdyvwY xatahvoly ». To 6& nag’ “Ourjow

(advtag ene Od te oxdAonas nal Td~oor EBryoay | 25 MEvyortEc»

1 od pudédvov om. Ph (etiam in argumento mg.) | [od pévoly |odx

er.|éott Pa || 3 ofovom. Vc AcSfPh || 4 Hom.x190 | |] Vc; mor’ Sf || 6 cd&vwetroat Ph; &|I|vetra: Vc; dvettrar P Ac Sf {| 7 goncmucO«P || 7-8 étaxpaktev |ydo m. 1 supr.| &v adtods xat écolynoev gpwrtijca th yéyovev et cloynxev

® plror ppacwpcOa Q&acov Siatotro Pe = [| 7 &¥om.Ph || 8 &ra&e ante rod

Ve Sf, (€€éta&e) Ph || 9 cf. Theon II 82,20Sp. | of 388 Keopxvpator et @®ow Thuc. 1,51 | dé yee supr.(m.2?), Ve || 10 &ra&e post uéoov Vc Sf

Ph, post aittav Ac || 11 60m.Ph || 18 étépa¢om. Vc || 14 Thuc. 1, 18 || 17-18 év advyt ofxobvtwv Pc || 18 maAratoré&rou Sf, (oer.) Ve Ph || 19 etc

aetAc || 21-22 xaBloracav Thuc. || 22 yao (pro dé) Ac || 25 Hom. O1 | t&pov Ph

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 14 229

an ornamental figure but it is even a necessary thing. It occurs whenever a speaker puts 1n the middle (of a sentence) the reason for what is being said,33 something the hearer is going to want. Thus hyperbaton becomes a tool of clarity; for example (Odyssey 10. 190-193):

O Friends, for know we not where lies the underworld, nor where the dawn nor where the sun, the light for men, goes under the earth nor where he rises; but we soon shall tell.

If he had said “O friends, we soon shall tell,” he would have confused them and made them ask what is going on. For this rea-

son he hastened to put the cause of telling in the middle. And Thucydides (1.51): “The Athenians were frightened, lest the ships

be those of the enemy.” Why? Thucydides put the cause of the fear in the middle: “For it was night.” It is for this reason that he introduces the connective indicating the cause: ho gar. A hyperbaton becomes long whenever the cause has need of another cause; for example (‘Thucydides 1.18), “When the Athenians’ tyrants and those from the rest of Greece, for the most part having earlier been ruled by tyrants, the most and last of them except for those in Sicily, were put down by the Lacedaimonians.” How was that, Thucydides? “For although after the settlement of the Dorians who now inhabit it Lacedaimon was troubled by strife for a long time, yet from an early date | it was well governed and [431] always was free from tyranny,” and he gives the cause of this cause, “for the Lacedaimonians have used the same form of government

for over four hundred years and as a result been able to arrange affairs in the other cities.” ‘Then he goes back to the beginning: “after the deposition of the tyrants...” The following line 1n Homer [liad 14.1), however, is not a hyperbaton, as it seems to be to some: “But when through palisades and trench they went in flight.” No reason is placed in the

33 'This meaning of hyperbaton is not found in earlier texts; otherwise it refers to placing a word in an unusual position in a phrase, clause, or sentence; cf. Alexander, On Figures 2.14 and Phoebammon 1.4.

230 MEPI ME@®OAOY AEINOTHTOX ovx goTly, Wo OoxEi TLoiv, UnEeoPatov’ obdEUia yao aitia uéor xEitaL, 1

ahd’ do évéveto 4 dvoxolia tic 6006 bia cxolddnmwy xal tdg~oov, sita Ouadn &od0¢ év tH puyy, obtw xai % éounveta exer, tO mados THY pevyorvtwy tho AéEews wtpmovuévyc.

TTepi avi0éroo. 5 To aytibetov oxfjua avartioontdy got yivetat yao bid TOY 6pohoyoupévay. ott O€ Otavorjuatt OravdOnua artixeiuevoy. dstAovoTator d€ Ov ioxvody éottv, oiov «&didaoxEes yodupata, yd O° époitwy: été-

hei, ym O° Etehobuny étoitaywriotec, éyw 0° &edoovy’ éyoaupdtTEves, EyM O° ExxdAnoialoy: é&énintec, éyw O° Eodoittoy». 10 [432] Toito 68 t6 avtiBetov 6 Anuoodévns énoinoe xaxd|nBec, TO mév rodypa adndéc AauPdavoy, to 6& avtineipevoy wevdss Ov do év TH LTeol tho MagangeeoPeiacg ciodye: ovundovoy Dilinnov xai tov “Odduria

veminnxnotov xat diddoyoy Latieov tod xwuixod bnoxgitob, obtw 0é WLoyaywyEl TOvS Axovortas, WoteE oindijvat év cvusootw sivat’ eita av- 15 titiONoL Cvumdctoy EtEoov WC yevduevoy Aiayivy pevdduevos undémotE vevomevoy, iva Epoyaywynuéevot O14 THY MOOTEOQWY Adywy oi dLxaCTAl TLOTEVWOL HAL TOIS ENLPEQOMEVOLS WC Ouoiws GAnOéoL. TOdTO nxaxdy PEC

avtietor.

[epi napicov Kai nc yivetai. 20 [Tdgioov oyfua gots te xal Aéyeta, Stay tO abto évoua GAAny xat GAdny nooodaBoy ovddabry Ovapeootoas diavoiacg éyn. maod

1 wttotv: cf. schol. Ven. A (irepBatov yap 6 tod7t0c) || 2 zdeppeov Ac; capwv Ph || 5 supr. Ve Sf; mg. P, (rod dvr.) Ac, (add. th got: xat ofov) Ph |

mg. ty AcPh,:SP || 6 cf. p.140 || 7 |circ. [X]dvtexetuevov Vc || 9 post etedovuny add. Vc: xat ob uésv éydpevesc ym 8 éyophyouv, quod explicat etiam

Diac. || 9-10 ordo mutatus est, cf. Dem. 18,265 || 11 S&0m.AcPh || 11-12 7o wev—dvom. VS || 12 petdogAcSfPh | b¢?cf.218,1 || 12-13 tae rape tH mecaBelacPh | meptom. Ve Sf; wept trHoom. Ac | Dem. 19, 192, 196 || 13 etonyer Adyur Vc; siokyer yao VS | éAvurtae Ac; ye’ év 6Avurta Pe || 14 zcovom. Ph | post broxpirot add. Sf: aéttovupévov thy Ouyatéoa &roaAAwmopavous ;

repetunt Vc Ph: xae prAtmzov xal tTédv 6A. vevexnxdtwv | obtw 352 P Ac; xat

otbtw Ve SfPh || 16 aloxtvn, m.1P; aicytvov Ve AcSfPh || 18 motedowor Ve Ac Sf || 20 sic mg. P Pr, (xat om.) supr. Vc Sf; mg. rept maptoov (om. cet.) Ph (raptcwv) Ac | mg. td Ac Ph, te Pa

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 16 231 middle of anything, but as it happened, the difficult path through the palisades and the trench, then a level opening for their flight, is there in the expression, the wording imitating the suffering of those fleeing. CHAPTER 15: ON ANTITHETON

The figure antitheton is not open to contradiction, for it derives from things that have been agreed upon.3‘ It is thought balanced against thought. It is strong although very simple; for example (ct. Dem. 18.265): “You taught letters; I went to school. You conducted initiations; I was initiated. You played the third part in plays; I was a spectator. You were a clerk; I was a member of the assembly. You were driven from the stage; I hissed.” Demosthenes created this malicious antitheton | by opposing atrue [432] fact to a lie.35 Similarly, in On the False Embassy (19.192-195) he

brings in an account of a drinking party attended by Philip and the Olympic victors and a conversation with Satyrus the comic actor, and he so leads the listeners on that they think they are at the party. hen (196-198) he contrasts this with another party that never happened, falsely claiming that Aeschines attended it, in order that the jurymen, having been enchanted by his previous words, may believe what is added as equally true.3© This is a malicious antitheton. CHAPTER 16: ON PARISON AND HOW IT OCCURS

It is the figure called parison37 whenever the same word acquires different meanings by compounding with different syllables. For 34 Contrast the discussion of antitheton in On Invention 4.2 above. 35 "The author regards the statements about Aeschines as false. Some or all probably are based on facts, but the antitheton makes the passage invidious. 3© At this second party, in Macedonia, Demosthenes claims Aeschines, when drunk, was involved in mistreatment of a respectable woman; Aeschines denies the charge (2.156). 37 As the scholia note (Walz 7.2:1262—63), parison, also called parisosis, was originally used to refer to clauses or phrases with an equal number of syllables; Aristotle used both terms in this sense in Rhetoric 3.9.9. Aquila Romanus (23-24) distinguished parison from isocolon on the ground that 1n isocolon the number of words in the clauses or phrases are the same, whereas parison is an

232 NEPI ME@OAOY AEINOTHTOX pév ‘looxodte obtwso «éay Ho gpidouadics, gon modvuadjc» tO yao 1 pavddvew &y augotégoic Eotiv, GAN’ dnov pév TO OAV mOdOxKELTAL xal

onuaivet tov woAdd ciddta, daov O& tO Miho nodcxettar nai sot 6 nOéwso pavddywy. xal maga TH Oovxvdidyn «xual nooentBoviedew ad-

toig wGddov 7 avtentBoviedvew»: tO yao éntPovdedew év Guqotégois 5 [433] slon|tat, GAA’ bxov méy modoxertar noo nal onpuaiver tO ~Odvew émtBovdsdorta, 62o0v O& avtt nedVEctG nal OnAoi tO Gudveobat devTEGOY.

spi npoonoicens. [16te 64twe meoonomostat oxEedialeww ; Tomy obo wy Wewy ONTO-

ounc év tH ovuPovdevtiny uddota Osi xai 6uodoysir, 6tt &Bovdedoato’ 10 ov yao avéyetat 6 ovupovievduevos ta Entdvta Aéyortoc tov ovpuforAebovtoc, tobvartiov dé yor éoxépbar 6uodhoyeiv xal neyoortixévat, ac 6 AnuoodBérns «aAl’ wo Foixev 6 xaiodc éxeivocs 0b udvoy edvovy Huiv xat shovotoy dvdea éxddet, AAAd xai magnxodovd0ynxdta & adoxiis toic

toaypaot»* uddiota yao tovto Osi mo0cEivat TH ovuPotsm@, Euneioiay 15 TOAYUATOY.

‘Ey 6& tH Oixaving, xdv goxeupévoc tjunc, mooono.od adbtober déyew, Oneg novobdot mdytes of nadatot- yodpartes yao nadytes b20xolvovtar oxedidalety Oa ti; Ott 6 Otxactys bwontEvEeL TOY OFTOOA xal

dédoixe, un eEanatnOnj ti dvvdue tis Ontooixhc. abto toiyvy tobtd 20 éott TEXYN TOD ON}TOEOS TO OoxEty atbtdBer Aéyewv, iva nai obtws 6 b1-

[434] xaotr>o napayOt xal moootua cc | abtéder edoloxortes Aéyovot adda

1 Isocr.1,18 | Ao|é6er.] Pa || 2 xatom. Sf || 3 ado Sf Ph; gas Vc; ptaov Pc Ac; ptateov (cr. ex plategov?) Pa | pr.xatom. Sf || 4 Thuc. 1,33 || 5 tO yap émBovrAcdervom. Ph | yxoom. Sf || 6 +d 766 Vc AC | xatom. Sf || 7 4) dvtiMa | moorlOerar? | xatom. Sf | dSedrvep0vom.

m.1 Ma || 8 supr. Vc Sf,mg.PAcPh | oyedsacyotd add. Portus | mg. téAcPh,t¢P || 13 Dem. 18,172 || 15 pd&Atota yee tobdro scripsit Rabe; udAtota todtTO Ph; uddArota’ totro yao Pa Ac Sf, (yao supr., m. 1?) Ve, (8& m.

po. supr. post padAtota’) Pe || 17 éoxepyévwcPh || 17 cf. Dem. 21, 191 ¢. schol. || 18 éoxeyyévoc— adrdé0ev: cf. I. id. 358,16 || 19 60m.Ph || 20 cotvev xat Ve Ac Sf Ph || 21 géotwSfPh | téyvy tod Ph, vl. P; teyvitov P Ve Ac Sf | cf. Alex. II] 14, 10 Sp. || 22 mapayOF%e Ac, (7 m. 1 ex t) Sf vl. Diac. ; tapay0% P Vc Ph, v.l.m.2Sf | xatom. Ph, add. (m. 2?) Ve

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 17 233 example, in Isocrates (1.18): “If you are philomathes (‘a lover of learning’), you will be polymathés (‘learned in many things’).” “T’o learn” is a part of both, but when poly is added it signifies one who knows many things, and when piilo is added it means one who enjoys learning. And in Thucydides (1.33): “proepibouleuein (‘to make plans against them ahead of time’) rather than antepibouleuein (‘to deteat the plans made against us’),” for epibouleuein is said in both, | but when pr7o is prefixed it signifies anticipating [433] one who is plotting against us, and when anti is prefixed it indicates defensive action in response to an attack. CHAPTER 17: ON PRETENCE (OF EXTEMPORANEITY)

When will an orator pretend (prospoiésetat) to speak impromptu? Among the three species of rhetoric, it is in deliberative oratory that there is most need even to acknowledge that one has made a plan, for someone offering advice is not suffered to advise on the basis of what suddenly occurs to him, but quite the opposite: he must acknowledge that he has considered the matter and thought it out, as did Demosthenes (18.172): “But, as it seems, that occasion was calling out not only for a man of goodwill toward you and wealthy but one who had followed the course of events from the beginning.” The quality that most should belong to a deliberative orator 1s experience in public affairs. But in judicial oratory, even if you have come to court with your speech thought out, pretend to speak off the cuff, which all the ancients do, 3° for although having written their speeches, they

all affect to speak extemporaneously. Why is that? Because the juryman is suspicious of the speaker and is afraid that he may be deceived by the power of rhetoric. This, then, is the art of the orator, to seem to speak extemporaneously, in order that in this way the juryman may be led astray. And having constructed prooemia approximate parallelism allowing for a differing number of words; cf. Alexander, On Figures 2.26. What the author of On Method calls parison is sometimes called paromoiosis (similarity of sound); see Quintilian 9.3.56; Patillon, Théorie du discours, 320-21.

38 Cf. Quintilian 10.6.6. Many “ancient” judicial speeches were prepared in advance by logographers (Lysias, Isaeus, Demosthenes, et al.) and delivered by the litigant, who affected extemporaneity.

234 MEPI ME®OAOY AEINOTHTOX oxepdpuevot nal xepddAaia do petakd dvauynodéytes uatda mdoac tas 1 dixac. Ey 6€ ye évxuwmiactinh idég 0b xwmddvet Guqotéoots yorjodail note,

nat ouohoyia years xal mooonoijoe oyediov.

[Tepi abg&yoews, note ypyotéovy év Oikaic ebKaipac. 5 [Tote 6jtwe abejos yonoetat éy dixasc, eita téte tais anodetéeot; Ovo On xalool ths yonoEews xai uéPodol, Stay tO NOGyua Guehfrat 1 TO 2oCcwIOY TO xoLvdmEvoY Evdogoy 7. Ta’tTH TH téxvy yorta Aioxivyns évy tH Kata Tiudeyou xai é&vy t@ Kata Krnowdytoc. &y pév

yao tm Kata Tiudeyou nal to noedyya auedeitat Aoidogia yao doxei 10 7 Etalonots civat xal OXDUUa TamEewdtEegoy, xal TO MOdOWIOY TO xOL-

vouevoy éEvdosov Eotw 6 yao Tiuaoyos tiudtar xai Acdettovoynxue nal

aeyas Hoge xal ~ott nel wéony Hlixiay . xai év tH Kata Krnowdytos 7 TOY MagavouwY yeagry auchsitat 01a TAG GvuMoEas thc MOAEwWs TO TE

rodownoy tiudtat, AnuooBérvns, nal akiwpa &yet. 1d tobto medTEGOY 15 av&«., sita tote anodsixvvow, iva éotoéwn nal dvayxdon moocéyeuw TOUS OLHAOTAG HAL MITE TLL TOD MECDM0V MUTE xATAVOOYTGEL TOO

[435] modyuatoc ur éAwow dxovtew. abtn % aitia too xai tH | abtH tage Ev augotéootc toic Pipdiowg ta mEot THY mOdttELmy OreEedPeiv.

1 xatom. Ph; supr. Vc || 3 yeom. Vc, add. (m. 1 ?) Ph || 5 supr. Vc Sf; mg. P Ph, (om. métve — edxatows) Ac | mg.t¢ Ac Ph, +P || 6-10 cf. IT. t8. 377, 19 (283, 19) || 6 adb&hjoer? | técve P Ac Sf Ph; xére

m.1 Ve, vl.m.po.Pa || 7 d&SfPh, ?m.1 Ve | at (pro xat) Ph, m.1 Ve || 8 xat(pro}) Sf || 10 yapom. Vc || 14 t&¢ etiam ante tHe Vc Ac Sf Ph || 15 Sypoodévous Ph, (-y¢) Ac; del.? | cf. II. #3.290,3. || 16 tye [IT er.; un?| Pe || 18 mokyuc| + uy mM. po.ex tog] Pe | OéAovervPh | tod om. Ph | Aesch. 1, 4; 3, 6

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 18 235 | as though on the spot, (speakers) also deliver arguments thought [434] out long before as spontaneous, recalling them (as needed) in every trial. In the encomiastic kind of rhetoric there is nothing to prevent using both approaches at times, both an admission of writing and a pretence of extemporaneity. CHAPTER 18: ON AMPLIFICATION: WHEN CAN IT BE OPPORTUNELY USED IN TRIALS?

When will an orator use amplification (auxésis) in trials and then follow it with proofs?39 There are two occasions and methods of its use: whenever the action is little regarded*° or the person being tried is well respected. Aeschines uses this technique in Against Timarchus and in Against Ctesiphon. In Against Timarchus the subject is little regarded—for a charge of prostitution seems slanderous and a rather low blow——and the person being tried is honorable—for Timarchus is respected and has performed a liturgy and held offices and is in middle age. Also in Against Ctesiphon the indictment for contravening the law is little regarded because of the disasters of the city, and the person, Demosthenes, is honored and has a good reputation. For this reason, Aeschines uses amplification early in the speech (3.6), then offers proofs, in order to deflect criticism and force the jury to pay attention and not refuse to listen out of respect for the person or contempt for the matter. This is the reason for his | following the same order [435] in the account of constitutions in both books. *?

39 The author thinks of amplification as a kind of digression or excursus, inserted early in a speech to forestall some possible objections, an unusual view. Elsewhere amplification is often regarded as a feature of the epilogue; cf., e.g., Anonymous Seguerianus §230. 4° T.e., the charge might be dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or inappropriate. 4* T.e., both speeches, as found in two papyrus rolls. See Aeschines 1.4 and 3.6.

236 NMEPI MEO@OAOY AEINOTHTOS ITepi éyvmopévon webomatoc, Note ypyotéov avTto. 1 [Tote 6jtwo pevoetat ovveiddtwmy tay axooata@y, ti pevdoeTat ; 6tay TO peddos ovupéon totic axovovor Oia yao TO oixeiov AvoitEdéc ov éhéyyovot tov 6ytoea. obtw AnuoodBérns eEyetoato év tH LTegi tod otepavou’ Aioyivov yao Aéyortoc, btt of “APnvaiot tno tov adbtoy 5 xatoov moéoperc mo0¢ Dihinnov éneupay megl eionvys “ai me0G Tods OVUUAYOVS MEOL Ovupayiag xata Dilinnov, xal todto nenomxotwv ‘Adnvaiwy, pnoty tt «xat diafpddsde ta wéptota try 2ddwW, év ois perdeta Et yao vueic dua todo wév “EAAnvac cic naddeuov nagexateite, avtol O& neo sionvns mod0¢ Dihinnov noéoBetc énéunete, EdovBdtov 10 MOAaY UA, OV M0AEws Eoyor ovdE yonOTaY av¥odnwy OlteTodttEceE».

Tlepi Opkov, noiov ovk Omeital Kai Noiov OMErtal. [Tote 6jtwo Gudcet xai boxw yornoetar; obdénote éni mEdyuatosc Gueitat, oiov «énoinoey odtOG Ydovoy 7 me0d00tay 7 THdE TL», GAA’ eri

[436] 70ovc BeBardoes, Oo 6 An|uooPévns «ao wey Euol doxel, bu’ dupdtega, 15 wd “Adnvaiot, v7) tovds Beods, xauée vouilortes dewda nenovPévar» xal madiv «nohiac 6& Oejoetc nal vy) Alia anetddc tnopuetvac». éx todtov dndodtat, 6tt O7TWO TOAypmaTixo”v doxov ovu Guvvow GAN’ HOLAdY.

ITeaétoc 6& 6oxov Hindv “Ounoos omooer, sita Tddtavr surproato, eita AnuoodBévng éxAnoovounoe LThatwvos: Hdixoy 6° Exaotos 20 1 mg. P, (xot méte) Ph; supr. (xat méte) Ve Sf; met Eyvwouéven mé6te

xyenotéov adbtotgsupr.Ac | yehoetatPx | mg.t@AcPh,tHP || 2 6 éArwe Ac

|| 5 todD}om. Ph | Aesch. 3,68 | ofom.Pc | ridexéo] Ve || 7 tod ptatrrcov Ac || 8 gactvPh | Dem. 18,24 | xatom. Pc | thy mda Ta peytota of¢ Ve | thyvom. Ph (|| 9 mapaxarette AcPh || 10 néurete Ve; anmenéurete Ac; €xeurovPh || 12 supr. Ve Sf; (xat om.) mg. Ph; om. P; tept doxov THd¢ Guetta. PYTwWE (om. cet.) supr. Ac | mg.ty Ac Ph, OP || 13 mOtTE — yohosta. Vc Sf (6 éHAtwoe) V3, (6 er.) Ph; mg. P;0om. Ac | zodéypere

Diac. || 14 moo0didsmow Ve SfPh | cf. IT. id. 326,24 || 15 Dem. 21,2 | & (om. *AOyvator) Ph || 16 voutoveecPa || 17 Dem. 21,3 | 3¢om. Ve SfPh || 18 &AX 7Orxdv: cf. IT. t8. 327, 4s8q. || 19 Sunpos dpxov HOrxdv Ac | 20 6 dyuooBévyns Ph =| TWAdktmvoc scripsit Rabe; m&vtwv codd.; Quint. XII 10, 24: non illud tusturandum « per caesos in Marathone ac Salamine propugnatores retpublicae» satis manifesto docet praeceptorem eius Demosthenis Platonem fuisse ? || 20-238.1 éxk&otov Ph

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 20 237 CHAPTER 19: ON A PATENT LIE: WHEN OUGHT ONE TO USEIT?

When will an orator tell a lie, his hearers knowing that he 1s lying? Whenever the lie is expedient for the hearers, for they will not criticize the orator because of what is to their own advantage. This 1s how Demosthenes lied in On the Crown; tor Aeschines says (3.68) that the Athenians, about the same time, sent envoys to Philip about a peace treaty and to their allies about an alliance against Philip, and although the Athenians had done this, (Demosthenes) says (18.24) that “(Aeschines) is slandering the city to the greatest extent in the lies he tells, for if you were at one and the same time summoning the Greeks to war when you were sending envoys to Philip about peace, you were doing the deed of a Eurybates,+? not the act of a city-state nor of honest men.” CHAPTER 20: ON OATH: WHAT IS NOT SWORN AND WHAT IS SWORN

When will an orator swear and use an oath? He will never swear to an act; for example, (he will not swear,) “This man did mur-

der or treason or some such thing,” but he will swear an oath to strengthen moral character, as does | Demosthenes (21.2): “C1 [436] brought Meidias to trial,) it seems to me, for two reasons, Athenians, by the gods, since you thought me to have suffered serious wrongs,” and again (21.3), “having had to withstand many appeals and, by Zeus, threats.” From this it is clear that the orator 1s not swearing to a fact but swearing an ethical oath.

Homer was the first to swear an ethical oath, then Plato imitated him, then Demosthenes continued the tradition from Plato.43 Each swore an ethical oath, and each used a special form of character, Homer in tragic style (Odyssey 20.339), “No Aglaeus,

42 A proverbial deceiver; according to a scholion on this passage, derived from Ephorus (frg. 58), he was given money by Croesus to recruit mercenaries and absconded to Cyrus. 43 Oddly stated, since the oaths in Homer and in Plato are, of course, attributed to speakers in epic and dialogue and are not the oaths of the writers. On Demosthenes’ imitation of Plato, cf. Quintilian 12.10.24.

238 MEPI ME@OAOY AEINOTHTOX Oudoac xal dia Exactos idéa tod Hous Exyonoato, “Ounoos méy Toa- 1 VLAOV

«ob, ua Zh, "Ayéhas, nai GAyea natods éucio», TAC OVvupoodas Tob matedc Soxov éxoijoato, [Thdtwv 6é dimoy wey

duotws, HOixov 0° &x tod évaytiov Hove «od, ua tov Zhy’, & Kad- 5 hindetc», AnuooBévync O68 HOudv roditinoy «0b, ua tods év Mapadarr mooxiwdvvevoartas xal tods évy Ladapin nagatagapévore».

[lepi cvvynyépoy, tit dotéov. [Tote éy toig nooPAjuact 67two wéoeci tTiot ovynydoove ddcet

[437] xal xata mdo00Vs Todo ; tTéooagas 7H Ota | goo, et yuvy tic Eott, 10 curyyooor OMoopuev’ 7 Ou HAixiay, st matdiov éotiv 7 tnéoynows xal

aoveryc 7 dia toyny, Et dodAdc éotw 7) Atiyuos, Ooneo év tH Kata Mewdiov Anuoobévns Xtedtwv ovvayooetvéu’ 7 ei bv cbnoénetay natéyvywmotal tic, xal tovtT@ OWooLMEY OV yoooY.

epi tov évavtia Aéyovta KatopOody évaytia. 15 Tic wéBodoc t0b évaytia Aéyorta, oic Bodvsstat yevéoPat, xatooDoty, 6 PodtAetat, uy Ooxobrta évartia oic Oéher Aéyew ; 4 xaxla 7 ev hoyotc évtatda dgety waivetar. tic O& gots xaxia év Adyoc ; ebdudAvta

Adywr agety yivetat. 20 héyew ual évartia xal otoepdueva. tabta év tovtm TH oynuate TOY

1 tdéan tod AOoveg Pc Vc; tod AOove idéa Pa Ac Sf, (rod ex +d) Ph |

éxyejoato P Ac; yenokuevog Ve SfPh || 3 Hom.v339 | éuotoSf || 5 pa sov ZyVov, om..ob, Plat. Gorg. 489 E; Diac.: opéAua éatt ypapixdv wd tov Zivar reaped meow (év K&reaot W VID) yao tote Br Bators u& (om. W VII) tov Z7Oov Eyer (&Arbpvvcw W VII) || 6 Dem.

18,203 | cf. IT. id. 327,15 sq. || 8 supr. Vc Sf, (om. ctor Sotéov) Ac; mg.

PPh | mg.8€AcPh,¥P || 9 6 éyrwePc || 11 cvvyydeloucex wv?] Pa |

ot

xat P Ac, (postea add. m. 1) Sf; ef Ph; y, utrumque m. po., Ve_ || 12 d&obevie

gottev VC SfPh | gon tc Ph | APAcSfPh; ct Vc | &rude gory Ve SfPh || 13 Dem. 21, 83 sq. || 13-14 Diac.: toutéoti 6 Ararpyxas — || 13 ovvyyopeder Pa | ciom.Ph || 14 tobrovP || 15 supr. Vc Sf, mg. P Ph; the 4 év Adyous xaxta supr. Ac | mg.x Ac Ph,x«P || 16 Aégyovtac... doxodyta Sf, (og m. 1 supr.)P || 16-17 cf. [Dion.] II 1 p. 296, 15 sq. Us. || 17 évavttovPh | alt._;0m. Vc || 17-18 sq. cf. [Dion.] II 1 p. 327, 19 sq. 328, 25 sq. 322, 4. cet. Us. [Plut.] De vita et poesi Hom. 166

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 22 239 by Zeus and by my father’s sufferings,” where (‘Telemachus) made

an oath on his father’s sufferings. And Plato similarly swore an ethical oath, but from the opposite ethos (Gorgias 489e): “By Zeus, no, Callicles.””» And Demosthenes swore an ethical oath in a polit-

ical style (18.208): “No, by those who stood in the front lines at Marathon and those drawn up in ranks at Salamis.” CHAPTER 21: ON ADVOCATES: TO WHOM SHOULD THEY BE GIVEN?

When in problems (of declamation) shall we grant advocates (syn€goro1)*+ to some of the parties and in how many ways? In four. Either because of | gender, we shall grant an advocate if the client [437] is a woman; or because of age, if a child or very elderly or ill; or because of lot in life, if he is a slave or deprived of civic rights, as Demosthenes speaks on behalf of Straton in Against Meidias (ct. Dem. 21.87); or if someone is being prosecuted because of good looks,4+5 and then we shall grant this person an advocate. CHAPTER 22: ON SUCCESSFULLY ACCOMPLISHING OPPOSITES BY SAYING OPPOSITES

What is the method of success in saying the opposite of what one wants to be the case in order to accomplish what one wants without seeming to say the opposite of what one wants?*° Here the fault in speaking seems a virtue. But what is a fault in speaking? ‘To say what is easily refuted and contradictory and turned against one. In this figure of speech these things become a virtue.

Homer has done it.47 Agamemnon is making trial of the Greek force and wants them to remain while saying that they 44 T.e., when will a declaimer speak in the role of an advocate or spokesman? Ordinarily the speaker is imagined to be a principal in the case. 45 Understood by the commentators to refer to a male prostitute who has lost the right to speak in person. 4° The reference is to figured problems as discussed, e.g., in On Invention 4.13.

47 Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, Art of Rhetoric (vol. 2, pp. 327-28 UsenerRadermacher), where the author argues that Agamemnon is intentionally goading the men to oppose what he seems to be ordering; see also PseudoPlutarch, On the Life and Poetry of Homer 166.

240 NMEPI ME®@OAOY AEINOTHTO2Z “Ounoos adbto nenoinney’ “Ayauéurwy éotly 6 aroneipdpevos too 1 ‘EdAnvix0b’ nat Bovdduevoc adtods pévew Aéyor dsiv uy pwévety adda wevyew, xat Ov dAnco the Onunyogiac ebtdidAvta Aéyer nal otoEyo"E-

déywr’ TO yao pavat 5 va, dvdovs GyttAafds Toic évaytiovpévotc, emt TéAet O& xal Evarvtibuata

«xat 64 dotea ofonne vedy nal ondota Aédvytar»” [438] | dndovdte évartioy éoti paveods TO «pebywmmey»* nH pao peb&ovtat vais ovx &yovtes ; tobto O° ay eine nal xwhiwy tic abtods anozheiy, ob xEhevwr O& mévely Toig Adyotc.

‘Ey 68 taic oyolixaic tbno0éceow Eott xal GAAn tig téyvn, } Bon- 10 Bei taicg tov avtiOixov meotdoEect xal Ota paxody mooPdAdetat xal did paotuei@y Eo? 6te. GAda artidévyety nooonol0d’ obtw yao Aéywv oby

bsontevdyon, xal 6 Bovset, ool ota. év yao tH torovtm oxyuate TOV Ady 0 pév vixioo Aéyorta ittnOfvai éort, to 68 HrtnOfvat Aéyorta

vixioat éote yéyove yao, 6 Bovdducba. 15 Ilepi tod npoteively tag tov évayvtiov NpOoTacElc. ‘O natnyoom@y tas tod uéAdovtos anoxoivecbat oby dndl@>s n00telvel meotdoets, AAAa xata todnove TtoeEic, EmtotHuny, ddEayv, axonv

émtotHuny ev «oida, beg vy) Aia éget» xai doa torabta, ddEay dé oiov (TAYA Tovey tows EpEty, OG AGugiPdAAwy EOL THs MQOTAGEWS, GxoTY 20 d& M>o axobwyv El THS MeOTdOEwWS «LYPdvOMaL Toivuy Wéddew adbtoYr

hévew ».

[439] | Ta wey 61) oxHpata tio meotdcews THY TOO dnoloyoupévov xegpahaiwy tadta’ 6 O& xalodcg Exdotov tic; Osi yao cidévat, nOtTE TH

1 6P; ante &yapéuvwv Ve Ac Sf Ph || 2 xatom. Vc Sf || 4 cf. [Dion.] II 1 p. 321, 1. 330,6.7 Us. || 6 Hom. B135 | vedvom.m.1 Ve | AéAvtar Ac || 7 Hom. Br4oc. schol. Ven.B || 8 & &b efme |xat m. 1 supr.| Pe || 9 d&80m. V3 | wévery P Vc Sf Ph; év Vh; udvorg Ac; rdvov V8

|| 10 cf. [Dion.] II 1 p. 329, 14.sq. Us. | connate Ac || 10-11 BoyOet Ve Ac Sf Ph; Boretra: P || 11-12 di& uxptuprésv P Ac; d:& aptuptas Ve Sf; dua

waptuptats Ph, vl. P || 12 yap xat Ve AcSfPh | cf. IT. 28. 250, 1 sq. 366,

17 sq. || 14 pr.gotlom.Ph || 16 supr. Vc AcSf,mg.PPh | mg. xe Ac Ph,x@8P || 17 cf. [Dion.] II 1 p. 362,17sq. Us. | (6 yao) — p. 242, 7 laudat Dox. (in Herm. II. i8. p. 238, 14) | 0d xatyyopotvrac to} Ph || 19 otda Spengel | &tt (pro Sree) Fuhr; cf. [Dion.] 1.23 | otov P Sf Ph, Dox.;

om. Vc Ac || 20 cf. Dem. 21,191 | a6 postea add. Vc (m. 1?); om. Sf Ph | thy medtacwv Dox. || 21 &xobw ¥ (om. reel mys mpotK&cews) Dox.

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 23 241 should not remain (at Troy) but should flee, and through the whole harangue what he says is easily refuted and reversed, giving handles of attack to his opponents and at the end saying contradictory

things; for he says (lad 2.135): “The timbers of the ships are rotten and the tacklings are loose.” | Certainly thisis clearly anar- [438] gument against fleeing. How will they flee if they have no ships? He would have said this to prevent them from sailing off, not in ordering them to do so. There is another technique used in school hypotheses, which supports the propositions of the opponent and defends them at length and sometimes with witnesses, but you are pretending to speak against them, for in so speaking you will not awaken suspicion and you will get what you want. In such a figure of speech, to win (the argument) is for a speaker to be defeated, and to be defeated is for a speaker to win, for what we want has come about. CHAPTER 23: ON FORESTALLING THE CLAIMS OF THE OPPOSITION

A prosecutor forestalls the claims of a speaker who is going to answer him not only in one but in three ways: on the basis of knowledge, opinion, hearsay.*® By knowledge: “I know what he will say, by Zeus,” and things like that; by opinion, for example (cf. Dem. 21.191): “Probably then he will say,” as it were, conjecturing about the claim; and by hearsay, as though hearing about the claim: “I am told that he is going to say...” | ‘These then are the forms of forestalling the headings of the [439] defendant. But what is the occasion for each? You should know, therefore, that sometimes we shall use knowledge and sometimes opinion and sometimes hearsay, for an inopportune use often has the opposite effect. Some of the things that are going to be claimed

48 Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, Art of Rhetoric (vol. 2, pp. 362,21-363,1 Usener-Radermacher).

242 MEPI ME®OAOY AEINOTHTOX ENLOTH UY “at TH OOEN xal TH axoh yonooucda: 7 yao axaipia moAAduic 1 nal Evartia moet. TOY wEAArvtwy neotEetvecda 620 TO anohoyovupéevov

[tod ody dytidixov| ta wév oti ioxyvedtega, ta Oé doBerh, ta 08 péoa' Ta wév oby Godevi tod avtidinov wc eidwco TH EntotHiun moeoPalf, ta 0& uéoa TH EEEt Wo OTOyalouevos, Oreo Eoti tH O6En, ta Oé ioyvod @> 5 muviavewEevoc. iva doxyco axovew advtda, un ovvetdévat O€ ioyved Grta. Odtw pév On Osi mo0TELvety.

Anuoodérngs 6é ta Gutxta Etter év tH Kata Mediov, émuotiuny Ouod xal axony, Aéywr o8twc «éote O& ME@TOV wey éxsivo ob% GdNAos

éomy, && wy iia 2006 tiwag adbtoc OteEt@y annyyéddeto por»: Ota mer 10 vao THY wvol Tob NEayuaTOS xal THY ioxdy TOO xEepahaliov TH axo#, “xéyorntal, Ola O& THY MQ0CMOinOW Tho xatTap~eoryoEews TH émLotH uN.

ahha nai év t@ L[Teoi tic ateheiac toyvoedtatoy nooteivwr to’ Aentivou xEegadatoy, TO tH akéiac, TH emtotHiun mooetewerv obtawc «&ott O°

ov% Adnhov tobd’, dtu Aentivnc, xdv tic GAhoc bnéo tod vduov Aéyy, 15 [440] Oixavov wév obdéy épet negi adb|tod, pyoet Oé dvaklous tide edoouévove atéhevay Exdeduxévat tac Aettovoyiac». Aéyouev oby, btt 6 Anuoadévnc

EvAVTOY. 20

YONHTAL Tig OYHMACL Hal xaTAa Yow xat naga glow, xal évtatia TH

pév Aentivyn toyvedtator éott tobto tO xepddaor, tH O& Anuooéver

[Tepi tov der,nOotac ta abdta Aéyetv H Eavt@ H A) AoIc.

Tob tatta Aéyorta H Eavt@ 7 GAdw tivi ut doxeivy ta abta Aéyelv OintAy uéPodoc: ta&ews petapody, xal urjxn xal Poaydtntec. 7 O€ avty xal tod nmagagyedlew wéDodos 7H yao thy Taéw pEetaBdadlets, H2E0

2 ta wédArdovta Dox. | éxt Dox. || 3 tod odv avtidtxov P Ve Ac Sf Ph; om. V8, Dox. | ioyved Dox. || 4 mpoBadret Ac Sf Ph, Dox. || 5 77, reer Ph; tH ta&er, € supr., VS; | I] ]7| 4% m. po. ext; Ler. |é%et Ve; cf. Syr. 1 p.

35,6 || 6 Sox Ac Ph, Dox. | adta& dxobeww Sf | ovverdévat Vc Sf Ph, m. 2 Pe, cf. Syr. 1 p. 35, 4 (addit tote a&vredtxots), [Dion.] I] 1 p. 363, 7 Us. (addit tote

évavttots); cuviévat P Ac, Dox.,m. po. Ve | d&0m. Vc Sf Ph || 7 |[etrety del.| mpotetveyvPh || 9 6éu0o00m. V3 | Dem. 21,25 || 10 éxnyyéAderd Ph || 14 dF tac (tam.2?)Vc| Dem. 20,1 || 15 tod0’om.Pah Vc Ac || 16 zepl avtod épet Ve | ebeoyévoucg Ph, m.1 Ve, (am. 1 supr.) P; eboapévoug Ac Sf || 18 xal mapa pvowvom. P Vc Ph; yp xat obtwcg: nal nata pdow xa xata téyvyy.

7 obtws' nal xata pba xat mapa pvow Pa; ye’ xal xara téyvnyvm.2Sf | we nat évtad0a Ac ll 21 supr. Ac Sf, (tote &AAotc) Ve; mg. Pa, (om. t&) Pc, (om. vod) Ph | mg. x8 Vc Ac Ph, xY¥P | % tote kAAotg Ve; % wat KAAorg Px =|] 24 uetaBaretc Vd

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 24 243 by the defendant are rather strong, some weak, some intermediate. Now you counter the weak claims of the opponent by saying you have knowledge (of them), and the intermediate claims by saying you conjecture (what they are likely to be), which is using opinion, and the strong ones as having learned (about them) from inquiry, so that you may seem to be hearing of them but not to recognize that they are strong. This is how to forestall.

In Against Meidias (21.25) Demosthenes mixed the pure forms, knowledge and hearsay, together, saying, “First, it is not unclear what he will say from what has been reported to me that he

told certain people in private.” Because of the nature of the subject and the strength of the argument he has used hearsay, but by the affectation of disdain he has claimed knowledge. And in On the Immunity (20.1), forestalling a very strong argument of Leptines, that of the (lack of) worthiness (of some given exemption from litur-

gies), he forestalled it by his knowledge, as follows: “This is not unclear, that Leptines, and anyone else who may speak in favor of the law, will say nothing fair about | it but will say that some un- [440] worthy persons have used their exemption to avoid liturgies.” We say, therefore, that Demosthenes uses these figures both in a natural and an unnatural way, and here this argument is very strong for Leptines but easily refuted by Demosthenes.*9 CHAPTER 24: ON ESCAPING NOTICE WHILE REPEATING WHAT YOU OR OTHERS HAVE SAID

‘There are two methods of repeating your own or someone else’s words without seeming to do so: change of order, and lengthenings and shortenings.5° “he method is the same as in paraphrasing,35! for you either change the order the other speaker used or the measure; for if the first version was lengthy, you will say these things compressed into few words, or the opposite. 49 Since the point is strongly in the opponent’s favor, it is “unnatural” to claim knowledge, but since the point is easily refuted, Demosthenes’ usage is “natural.”

5° Méké kai brakhtytétes, elsewhere often referring to long and short syllables in poetic meter (cf., e.g., Plato, Republic 400b8) but here meaning amplification or concision. 5? As taught in progymnasmatic exercises; cf. Theon 15; Aphthonius 3; Pseudo-Hermogenes p.7,13 Rabe.

244 IQEPI ME®OAOY AEINOTHTOX éxeivos éyonoato, 7} TO u“étooy’ EimEeg yao O1a paxo@y éxetvoc, tatta 1 éy Boayéo. ovved@y Aéyetc, 7} TO Evaytiov. Tic 6& Exatégov tovbtwv 6 xaiods ; 7 wév OvuPovdevtint Unun xal

Boaydtyntac énidéyetar tis yao taEews petaPodny od ddvatar eye, 6tt év ovupovdy ndvtwso mE@toyv to xateneiyoy elvar Osi mMaQa Mar- 5 tl ovppoviedvortt. év 6&8 TH naynyvoltxt vduoc éoti tH xeqgahaiwy Tic taEews ApuetdpdAntos 4 yvots THY Noayudtwr. yowbusla oby Toi wH“EOL nal Taig Poayvtnow, woneo év ovupovievtixy usy (déa Enoinoer 6 [441] Anpuoodérne é& te toic "Ohvvdiaxoic xai év c@ ITeoi tév év Xeooo|yjow OToaTLwtTov ta abta yao Aéywr Eavtd udhota thabev. év 6&8 mavy- 10

yvuoixy iéa IThdtwr ta atta Aéyov Oovuvdidyn év tH "Enitagyi@ od povoy éhadey, adda nal GAda Aéyew Moke ta yoty neol tHv nodéuwy Oovnvdidns pév értuvynoBets naghxer, 6 Tidtwv 6é éneEevoydoato: tobvartiov O& IThdtwv wey naotxe ta nEol tho noditelac, Oovxvdidns

d& Enebtlder. 15 ‘Ey 6é tH Otxanixf tiga xal 4} tho tTaEews petaPodnh ydoay éeyet,

doneo Anuoodévns éxoinoey év t@ ITeoi tic atedeias: Boouiwvos yao MOOHATHVOONHOAYTOS TOD vOuoV xal yonoapévov Toic xEpadaiots Tho dtal-

oéoews, TH Otxaim, TH ovupésoortt, TH xal@, tH tic aéiac, avéotoeweE

thy taéw petapadlwy: mc 6& todto énoinoer, év totic mEgi too Adyov 20 dveEnABouer.

ITepi to’ avenazyO@s éavtov éenarveiv. Tob éavtor énatvety Enaydovs bvtocg xal edbutontov, Gayve-

moocwnov tbrahhayy. 25

rayPas norjoat uePodot tosic: xowdtys Adyou, dvayuns nooonoinois,

Todvtwv nagadelyuata. 6 "looxedtys év tH nodtw Adym THY

TLAPALVEDEWY TO MOM@TOY MoOOCiMoy Eavtob énavov xatecxedvdace’ Pélet

1 yap et éxetvocom. Ve Ac SfPh || 3 d80m.VcPh || 5 év pév Ve

AcSfPh | révtwv Sf || 5-6 navel tt Pc || 8 60m. VcSfPh || 9 7 V3; coig¢P Ve Ac SfPh | éxtPh || 10 cf. Theon. 1163, 32Sp. || 12 ént Vc , | moAéuwv Ve Ac Sf Ph, vl. Pa, cf. Thuc. 2, 36; moAcutwv P || 13 wévom. Sf

| Plat. Menex. 239 Asq. || 14 t&Sf;0m.P Vc Ac Ph | tHoom. Ac || 19 dvtéotpeve Ve Sf || 20 petaBdAAwy Ph; wetaBarwdyP Ve Ac Sf | scil. év tots cig tobs Sypoctous brouvhuaony, cf. II. id. 308,12 | eet adrod Adyous Sf, (robtov) m. po. Vc || 22 supr. Vc Ac Sf, mg.P Ph | mg. %¥ Vc Ac Ph, x8

Pe (er.? Pa) || 23 cf. Alex. III 4, 13 Sp.; Aristid. II 506,8 Sp. | Svrwe Ph

| addidit Rabe || 26 t& mapadetypataAcSfPh | 60m.Ph || 27 éautod mg.suppl.m.1Ph | cf. [Dion.] II 1, p. 24, 19 Us; Plut. De se ipsum laudando c. I sq.

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 25 245

What is the occasion for each of these? Deliberative oratory is open to lengthenings and shortenings but cannot accept a change of order (of the arguments), because in deliberation there must always first be something urgent for every speaker, while in panegyric the nature of the subject provides an unchangeable law about the order of the headings.5? ‘Thus, we use lengthenings and shortenings, as Demosthenes did in the deliberative species in the Olynthiacs and in On the Soldiers in Chersonese. | Although re- (441) peating himself, he mostly escaped notice. In the panegyric form, Plato escaped notice by saying the same things as Thucydides in his E'pitaphios but seemed to say other things; at least Thucydides dismissed the subject of the wars after brief mention (2.36), while Plato elaborated it (Menexenus 239aff.). On the other hand, Plato passed over the subject of the constitution and Thucydides elaborated it.

In the judicial species change of order has a place, as Demosthenes did in On the Immunity, for after Phormio had spoken against the law, using the headings of division—the just, the beneficial, the honorable, the question of worthiness— Demosthenes reversed the order. How he did this we described in our exegesis of the speech.53 CHAPTER 25: ON PRAISING ONESELF WITHOUT OFFENSE>*+

Although praising oneself is offensive and easily detested, there are three methods of doing it without offense; generalization of language, claim of necessity, change of person.

Here are examples of these. Isocrates in the first of his speeches of exhortation (1.1) constructed the first prooemion as praise of himself, for he wants to say that “I am | a man of most [442] excellent character and the only good friend of your dead father, Demonicus, out of goodwill toward you.” How, then, does he do 52, As the example below indicates, the author is thinking of the conventional order of topics in funeral oratory. 53 Cf. Hermogenes, On Ideas, p. 308 Rabe, where there is a similar reference, but this is not evidence of authorship, since many rhetoricians published studies of orations of Demosthenes. 54 Cf. Plutarch’s essay On Praising Oneself (vol. 7 of Moralia; trans. P. H. De Lacy and B. Einarson; LCL; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1992), 110-67.

246 MEPI MEOOAOY AEINOTHTOS [442] ydo einely bt «éym dvyjo | eis omovdaidtatog ual udvos pihos Gaya- 1 Dos dnoBardytoc tot matods, ® Anudyixe, coi ebvody»: no obv abto most ; “ow tH Adyw yortat mEeol te onovdaiwy avdedy xal paviwy héywr nat Otaxoivwr HON ayabOy xai novnody pilwy, odtw 0é gaiveTal AVTOS My THY ayabar avdodr. ‘O dé AnuooBéeryns év tH [Tegi tod 5 otepdvov wéhdwy éavtoy éenaweiy xal thy Eavtot noditeiay modAduic th avayun yornta: Aéywr «éav O° éE—~’ A nal nEnoinna xal mEenoditerpat Badilw, modlduic Aéyew avayxacdyjooua meol Euavtotd ». “Exetd7, 6& tH dvayun modhdutc yowmEevos Buo0ntOs EotL, xal TH TO’ MQ0CMNoVv

bnadhayh yorjta. govt O& tobto’ tay tt wétovoy Aéyy, TOTE MOOG TOvG 10 "Adnvaious Aéver, dtayv O€ brEoHMavoy xat Enayés, 200¢ Aloylyny’ «ov ido éteiytoa thy nodAw ob0é ahivOotsg Eyd, GAAA TOY Euov TELyLtoMoY

eit Bodvidet oxoneiv, cbonoets Sada xai adhetg ual ovupayovs», “at 2dAw adidayod «dy pévtot &x tho diac oboiac énédwxa, ovdEeuiav uéoay omev0vvos sivat wnul. axodvetc, Aloyivyn;» anéotoepe Tov Adyor, iva 15 doxoin tov éyVoor Avasiv, uy “Adnvatoic dvediCery.

[443] | epi nadaionuatoy oixactypioy, & AnnocBévys étexvycato. Avo nahaiopata Oimaotnoiwy Anuootévng énetexynoato, t6 TE oixetov ioyvody, “dv ur xolwduEvoy 7, bic xolow ayayely xal tO TOO avtioixov ioyvooy xowwduevoy éxPadeiv. tadta toivyuy dugdtega notEt 20 Anuootévns xat Aavidve nodttwr’ Stay yao to oixetov siodyyn yao.louevos Eavt®@, advdyxny nooonoteita, Stay 6& tO tod aGytiOixov éxPdddy navovoyay, anAdtnta bmuoxoivEetas.

Tobto énoinoe ual éy dvol Adyotc, &y te TH Llegi tod otepadvov

xal év tH Kata “Agiotoxodtove. étay yao td tho moditeiac wal aEiac 25 2 edvodv Pa, (vm. po. inras.) Pc; e6vo Ve AcSfPh || 3 Isocr. 1,1 sq.

| pabrawv: Aéywv yao xat Sf || 4 380m. Vc AcSfPh || 7 Dem. 18,4 || 8 Saurod Ph || 9-16 cf. [Dion.] II 1 p. 336, 11.13 Us. || 10 Aéyerom. Ph || 11 Dem. 18,299 || 12 éteryhowtroPh || 13 éd&v Boban: Vc Sf Ph, cf. Dem.

|| 14 Dem. 18,112 | wav tHe dx tHGPh || 15 ciut(procival pyur)Ph || 16 dSox7tPh | &Onvatoucg Ph, (vext,m.1?)Sf || 17 mg.P; supr. (émetexvaouro)

Ac, (tov dixaotyptav ; éeteyvnoato) Ve Sf;om.Ph | mg. xd Ac Ph, xeP || 18 Sypooévouc Vc Sf Ph; & Synuocbévovg Ac | éeneteyvhoaro Pa, (Ex supr.,

m.1?) Pc; émreyvnuata Ve Ac Sf Ph; yo ext téyvy etd Syoobévyy Pa; yp’ emuceyv he SyocO’ Pc || 20 xat ante xetvéuevovsupr. VS || 22 &xBc&rn Sf

|| 23 wat &nAétyta VeSfPh || 24 xatom. Portus | toB}om.Ph || 25 xl — d&ptatoxpétous Ac, m. po. Pa Vc Sf; om. P Vc Sf Ph | y&e P Ac; om. Ph; suppl. m. po. Vc, m. 2 Sf

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 26 247 it? He uses general language, speaking about good and bad men and distinguishing the characters of good and evil friends, and thus he seems himself to be one of the good men. Demosthenes in On the Crown, when he is going to praise himself and his policy, often excuses it by necessity, saying (for example, 18.4), “If I proceed to what I have done and what my policy has been, I shall often be forced to speak about myself.” But since using the excuse of necessity often is suspect, he also uses change of person. This is done as follows: whenever he is saying something modest, he addresses it to the Athenians, but whenever what he 1s saying is arrogant and offensive, he addresses it to Aeschines; (for example, 18:299): “Not with stones did I fortify the city nor with bricks, but if you (singular) want to inspect my fortification, you will find arms and cities and allies.” And again elsewhere (18.112): “I do not admit for one single day—do you hear, Aeschines?—that I am liable for audit of what I gave from my private funds.” He changed the statement to seem to annoy his enemy and not to reproach the Athenians. | CHAPTER 26: ON TRICKS DEVISED BY DEMOSTHENES [443] IN THE LAWCOURTS

Demosthenes devised two tricks in the lawcourts: (1) bringing a strong point of his own into the case, even if it was not under judgment; and (2) rejecting the strong point of the opponent that was being judged. Well then, Demosthenes does both of these things and escapes notice in doing them, for whenever he introduces something relating to himself that is in his favor, he alleges necessity, and whenever he deceitfully rejects an argument of the opponent, he affects simplicity. He did this in two speeches, in On the Crown and in Against Aristocrates. Whenever he introduces the question of his policy and merit, he represents them as necessary; (for example, 18.4): “But if | come to what I have done and what my policy was, I shall often be forced to speak about myself”; but when he evades

248 MEPI ME@OAOY AEINOTHTO®S EnayY, avayuny bmoxolvetat « Edy O€ EM a xal MENOoinxa xal MENMOAiTEV- 1

pat Padilw, modAhaxtc Aéyew avayxacdiooua neol éuavtod»* dtay O€ tovs vouovsg xhénty, anddtHTAa nMoocmoteitar AéEywr obtws «éeTL WEYTOL

“at TOUS vVOMOUG dEtxtéov Eivat pot OoxEt», WS Nagégyov urnuovetwr

tov toxvoeod TH avtiixw. Kai anddw év t@ Kat’ "Aovotoxodtove eio- 5 [444] dywy tov mepi Xeooorvyjcov Adyor | oddbév noooHxortTa TH ayovt wyolv «avayuy O€ ott NE@tTov anarvtwy dsigar, ti note Zott TO XEQOdvNoor

aogalds éyew Huds menounos», eita navoveyoyv nal mohitny éoyalouévos tov Xagidnuor, iva avt@ ioxydy 6 mei THY vouwy Adyos, érupéoet «Pedoaote toivur, Mc Oixaiws nat dmAd@> mommjooua todo Adyous, dc 10

cic wév tabtyy tideuat thy taéw adbtor, &v 7 adeiotys ay tvyyavot Tiuijc, & O° 000° Huiv toig péver moditaic éotiv, 060° éxeivm deiv oipat yevéotat maoa Tovs YOMOUS».

[Tepi devtepodoyidy, 01a noias aitiag MepiCetai Adyos,

KOi NMS yivovtal. 15

Aevteoohoyimy eidn tade’ 7tot yao 1a wéyEedocs Tob aym@voc mE-

oiletat 7) xatnyooia 1 1 anodoyia’ 7 mpoxatyyoonoartds Tivos xal tooaywvicamévov 6 dEvtEQos AéEywr advéhjoe yorjtat, doneg of Kata ‘Aototoyeitovos Adyou Eyovow’ 7} ta atta 6 OettEgos Aéywr obx abEet pév, toootidynot O€ Tiva 7) agpatost, WonEQ xatooVay ta eionuéva, WS 20 éyet 6 tod Néotogos Adyos év tH devtéoa daywoia peta thy “Odvocéws dnunyooiay’ 7) mo0aywrioapévov Etéoov 6 Cet’ tEQos Aéywr Ta uéAdovta

dettEoa Aéyeoat 020 TOO aytiixov nooxatasaupdve Aéywr, bone 6 Kat’ *Avdgotiwvos &yet, mpoxatnyoonjoavtos yao E’utiuovoc, & wéAhet Aéyew “Avdootiwy, 6 Atddwoocs aooxatahaupdaver. Odtoe técoages 25 Todo. OEvtEoodAoyias.

1 éexayayn Vc Ph; éxetonyynt Ac | Dem. 18,4 || 3 &Adtytla ex t| Ve | 248, 8: cf. [Dion.] II 1 p. 302, 23 Us. (de Demosth. II. mapazpec8.): KTMASTYTOS TOOGYHU.aTL KASETTOV THY TaVOUPYLaV TIS xatacxev}s | Dem. 18, 58

|| 4 m&kpcpyovPh || 5-6 xat m&Aw Agéywv Deccac0e — tods Adyous (sicut p.

248, 8-g) xar m&AwW év Ve, (om. ult. xat) Ac Sf Ph || 7 Dem. 23,8 | +6

om. Ph || 8 tya&e VS; cf. IT. #8. 235,22 || 10 Dem. 23,24 || 11 et Pc | tuyxevye Pe || 14 supr. Vc Sf, (Seuteporoytacs et yiyvetat) Ac; mg. (yiverae)

PPh || 14-15 mg.xeAcPh,x¢P || 16 yaoom.VcSfPh || 17 4 xatnyoota 7H (om. H) Ph || 19 ad&hoer (om. odx et wév) Ph; [odx m. po. supr.] aEl er wév

m.po.| Ve || 20 Hom. B337 || 24 xartyyooenoavtog Ve Ac Ph | yao m. 2 suppl. Sf

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 27 249 the laws, he affects simplicity, saying something like, “Further, it seems to me one ought to show what the laws are,” mentioning the strong point of his opponent as though in passing. And again, in Against Aristocrates, introducing the passage about the Chersonese | that has nothing to do with the trial, he asserts (23.8), “Itis [444] necessary first of all to show what has made you hold the Chersonese securely”; then in a deceitful way making Charidemus a citizen, in order that the passage about the laws may strengthen his case, he adds (23.24), “See, then, how justly and candidly I shall treat the questions by assigning him to the rank in which he gets most honor, but I do not think he ought to have in contravention of the laws rights that do not even belong to us who are citizens by

birth.” CHAPTER 27: ON SECOND SPEECHES: WHY A CASE IS DIVIDED AND HOW THIS IS DONE®5>

The kinds of second speeches (deuterologiat) are as follows.5®© Ei-

ther because of the importance of the trial the prosecution or the defense is divided (among two or more speakers); or when one speaker has introduced the prosecution and argued it first, a second speaker amplifies it, as seen in the speeches Against Artstogeiton (Pseudo-Dem. 25 and 26); or the second speaker makes (many of) the same points and does not amplify them but adds or eliminates some things, as though correcting what has been said, as in the speech of Nestor in the second book (liad 2.337—-368) atter the harangue of Odysseus; or after one speaker has begun the argument the second speaker refutes in advance what is going to be said in a second speech by the opponent, speaking as in Against Androtion, for Euctemon began the prosecution and Diodorus refutes in advance what Androtion is going to say. These are the four kinds of second speeches. 55 It is unlikely that second speeches were much practiced in schools of declamation, but the progymnasmatic exercise in commonplace was sometimes

regarded as like a second speech; cf. Aphthonius, ch. 7, and the comments of John of Sardis thereon (A phthonit progymnasmata {ed. Hugo Rabe; Bibliotheca scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum ‘Teubneriana; Rhetores Graeci 10; Leipzig: Teubner, 1926], 94). John identifies four kinds of second speeches, distinguishing them by changes in speaker and subject. 5° On second speeches, cf. Hermogenes, On Stases, p. 52,7 Rabe; Nicolaus, Progymnasmata, p. 38,2 Felten.

250 MQMEPI ME®OAOY AEINOTHTO2X

[445] | ITepi dinyycenc. 1 Oi nadatoi dunyotpevor Oindyj tint wePdd@m yowrta, dvapooda bv

aogdlsiay xal 1a niotw BeBardoet, oiov “loonedtns « Zedvs yao “Hoanhéa nal Tdvtahoy yerynoas, o> oi woBot Aéyovot xal mdytEs muL0TEvorOL”, TO wey (HS ot wo0ot Aéyovowwy» avagood, TO O& (xal naYTES TU- 5 otevovow» PeBaiwotc. xal Kdéownidns «Zebvs, Wc Aédextat» avagoed,

«ths adnPeiac B20» BeBaiwous. xal “Hoddotocs «obtw 67 Aéyovot Kooivbiot» avagood, «éuodoyéovat 6 o—t AéoBior» BeBaiwots. xai Oovxvolons «Aéyovot O€» Gvayoed, «xat oi ta cayvéotata ITehonovynoiwy pvnuyn maga thy mootégwy Oedeypuevot» PEeBaiwous. xal Anuoodévns 10

«as O& éy® thy éy abth tH yooa yeyernuévwr tivds Hxovor, avde0¢ ovdauds oiov te wevdsotat, obdévwyv sioi Bedtiovc»: xai todto Thdtwvosg tlaBpev «a> éyd tov napa Paotléwc éADdytos Fxovoa, avdoos aktoniotov».

ITepi kowav Olavonnatoy, n> adta idim@aopmeyv AéyovtEs. 15 Oi nahaoi xowa Aéyortes dtavonjuata 6uohoyia tig xowdtNTOG [446] idta adtdyv xotodow. Tooxedtns «dnaytsc | pév sidPaow of magudytec Evade tadta wéytota pdoxew elvat, wept Oy Ay adbtol notmytat tOovs Aoyous: ob uny GA’ si tw nai GAA@m tabta Fouoce Aéyew, nal éuoil mtooonnxer, xat AnuooBérnc évy tH Kata Tiwoxedtove «siddact wév 20 ody of noAhoi», xai Aioyivncs év 1 Kata Tiudoyou «xual wo toixer oi elwtotes Adyou Aéyeoat éni totic Onuooiots GyHow obu eiow pevdsic: ai yao tdat &éyBoa: nodda ndvv THY xowdy énavooPotot», xal mddw 1 supr. Vc Sf, (Styyhoewv) Ac; mg.P Ph | mg. x¢ Vc Ac Ph, xZP_ || 3 Diac.: twee cig TO CdopdAELaV» otiGovoLy, celta Td EEXs avayry~v@oxover «xadt

thot BeBarwaer»... Eveor dE ade” aapdrcrav xal mlotiv» dvaeyeyv@oxovaty, eltx

70 SEHo «BeBormoer» | Isocr.1, 50 || 5 of om. Vc || 6 Eur. fr. 591 N.7; Rhein. Museum 63, 1451.13; 1461.1 || 7 «at tH¢ Ve | Soom. Ph, (m. po. suppl.) Vc | % BeBatworg Ve SfPh | obtwP Vc Ac, v.l. m. 2 Sf; té Ph, Her.

1,23; 70Sf || 8 6podroyoto. Ph | Thuc.1,9 || 8-10 xat— BeBatwors om.Pc || 10 SedidSayuévorm.25f || 11 Dem.2,17 | yeyevwnuévwvPa | Hnovon twvo>g Ve || 12 xat td to¥ Ph || 12-13 mapdadd. Ma, cf. II. 8. 348, 6

|| 13 Plat. Alcib. 1123 B | tov Pe Ve Ac; mov Pa, m.1 Sf; 7Hv Ph || 15 supr. Vc Sf, (t3tacépyc0x) Ac; mg. Pa, (vonuctwv) Pc, (xat ms) Ph | mg. xZ Ve

Ac, xP || 16 Stavoquata Aéyovteg Ac || 17 Isocr. 8,1 || 18 zorodvrat, mg. &v,Ph || 20 Dem.24,4 || 21 Aesch.1,2 || 21-252.1 xal— trrcoyov m. po. suppl. Vc

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 29 251

| CHAPTER 28: ON NARRATION [445] The ancients use two different methods in narrating, anaphora for reassurance and bebatésis5” for proof; for example, Isocrates (1.50): “For Zeus, having begotten Heracles and ‘Tantalus, as the myths say and all believe”; “as the myths say” is an anaphora, 5®

while “and all believe” is bebaidsis. And Euripides (frg. 591 Nauck?): anaphora, “Zeus, as has been said”; bebaiGsis, “by the

truth.” And Herodotus (1.23): “This is what the Corinthians say,” anaphora; “and the Lesbians agree with them,” bebai6sis. And Thucydides (1.9): “They say,” anaphora; “those of the Peloponnesians who have received the wisest traditions from their ancestors,” bebaidsis. And Demosthenes (2.17): “As I have heard from one of those born in the same place, a man not of the sort to lie, no better than ours.” He took this from Plato (Alcibiades 1.123b): “As I have heard from one coming from the king, a man to be believed.” CHAPTER 29: ON COMMONPLACE THOUGHTS: HOW WE SHALL MAKE THEM OUR OWN WHEN SPEAKING

When the ancients spoke commonplace thoughts they made them their own by acknowledging that they were common. Isocrates: “All those | coming before you here are accustomed to claim that [446] these subjects on which they are themselves speaking are the most important; nevertheless, if to say this was (ever) fitting for someone else to say, it is fitting for me (now).”59 And Demosthenes in Against Timocrates (24.4): “Now many have become accustomed (to say that whatever they happen to speak about 1s most important for

you).” And Aeschines in Against Timarchus (1.2): “And it seems that the words usually spoken in public trials are not false, for private enmities correct very many problems of the community.” 57 “Strengthening”; not regarded as a figure by other writers. It is the term for confirmation in the Rhetoric for Alexander (36.1142b34ff.).

58 T.e., it “takes up” (anaphorein) what has just been said, an unusual usage of the term, which elsewhere 1s a verbal figure utilizing a succession of statements beginning with the same word; cf., e.g., Phoebammon 1.3. 59 A somewhat cumbersome paraphrase of what Isocrates says at the beginning of On the Peace.

252 MQEPI ME@®@OAOY AEINOTHTOX Aioyivyns év t@ Kata Tiudoyov «obtx ayvod Oé, 6tt d wéhlw éy nedtot 1 hévew ».

‘Ey 6& toig “Odvvbiaxoig Anuoodévns tH nOdtw Ady@, YowpEvos xoww® dtavonuatt TH avtl nwoAddy yonudtwv abtodvs aionoeoVat to xOLWT, OVUMPEOOY, OD YOHTAL TH Ouodoyia tho xowdtyTOSG, Ovdte Mavove- 5

VOV yorntat, xal magadeine: ty 6uodoyiay, mpoxatacxevdaler dé 1d Tod moeootpiov Ta Bewoixa yornuata dsiv Anodobvat toig oteatimtaic. et wey oby Muoddyer thy xowdtyta, Epaoxe 6é AvowtEdeiy nal abt@ cizeiv, Onwartedveto’ voy O& xowd yonoduevos dtavonjnuatt nat Aaday avdtovs Ouodoyotytac BotEepoy avautuvyjoxe Aovelodat aioyvvoméevovs 10 EOL TOV DEewolnmy yonudatay. Oia tooto xal éneoyoayioato év aoxy TO dtavonua obtws> «édte Ttoivuy tobe obtwe éyet». Moc b& Anuoodévove éotiv, Otay tt Ototmnontar EavtT@ yYorjotuoyv, ur) MedtEgoy AgiotacVat,

[447] oly 7 éniopoaplonta. xe|noinxe tobto éy toic tétoact Adyoic, év TH Ilegi tob otepavov, év t@ Kata Mediov, évy tH Kata ’Agiotoxedtovs, 15 éy tH tOMt@M TOY Ohvrvbiaxev.

Ilepi ypyoems env év neC@ Aoyoo. Kata mdoovce todmovus év melC@ Ady yorjot éndy yivetar; “ata Ovo, xdAAnow xal nagmdiay. xai xdAAnoic pév Eotiv, 6tay 6AduxAnooy TO

émoc evyvas xolAnjon tH Adym, botEe ovupwreiy doxeiv’ oiov mapa TH 20

Aicyivn éy t@ Kata Tiudoyou ésuotadod nov 7 tob Latodxhov pry? xavevoortt TO “Aythisi Entonrinter megt tod 6udtagos att@ yevéoOat «ob yao étt Cwot ye vidwy andvevder Etaiowy Bovdag éCouevor Bovledoouer »

nal Ta EEC, nal addy wyolv Hioinidns 25 1 Aesch.1,4 || 3 tév "OdrvvOtaxdv? | Syyocbévygom. Vc Sf Ph | év t@ vulg. cf. p. 252,16 || 4 tOPh | vopt@ew add. ante adtods Vc Ac Sf Ph, cf. Dem.1,1 || 6 mtpomapacxevdGer, Ve Sf Ph || 10 Dem.1,19.20 | aicyuvéuevog Ph {| 12 Dem.1,1 | 8&m.po.suppl. Vc | Sypoobéver Ve AcSfPh || 14 émogpeaytoera:P Ac Ph | zerotyta. Ph; meotyxev 5¢ Ve | tote om. Sf (cf. 246, 24) || 15 to¥}om.Ph || 16 AvvOLaxd (om. tév) Ph

|| 17 supr. Ve Ac Sf, mg.P Ph | mg. %yVcAcPh,x8P || 18 xat rolouc add. ante évSf | évtétVcAc | cf. II. id. 336,15sq. || 19 alt. xxtom. Ve

SfPh || 23 Aesch.1,149;Hom.77 || 25 épe&%oVcSfPh | 6 ono Sf; pyotv 6 Ph

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 30 253 And Aeschines again in Against Timarchus (1.4): “I am not unaware that what | am going to say at first (1s something you will undoubtedly have heard from others ).” In the Olynthiacs, in the first speech, although making use of

a common thought—that (the Athenians) would prefer what was advantageous to the community to a large amount of money— Demosthenes (1.1) does not make an acknowledgement of the

common nature of the thought because he is acting in a deceitful way and omits the acknowledgement but throughout the prooemion is anticipating the need to transfer the theoric moneys to pay soldiers. If he acknowledged the commonplace nature of the thought and claimed that it was profitable for him to speak, he would be viewed with suspicion. But now, by using a commonplace thought and escaping the notice of those agreeing with it, he later reminds them that they denied feeling shame about the theoric moneys. For this reason, at the beginning the thought is given special note (epesphragisato): “Since then this is so.” It is the custom of Demosthenes, whenever something is arranged 1n a way useful to him, not to leave it until it has been specially noted. | [447] He did this in four speeches, in On the Crown, Against Meidias, Against Anstocrates, and in the First Olynthiac. CHAPTER 30: ON USE OF VERSES IN PROSE

In how many ways are verses used ina prose? In two: by quotation and by adaptation. It is quotation (kollésis)°° whenever one quotes

the whole verse gracefully in the speech so that it seems to harmonize with it; for example, in Aeschines, in Against Timarchus (1.149), the shade of Patroclus standing, I suppose, over the sleeping Achilles enjoins him about common burial with him (lliad 23-77-78): For we no longer as 1n life, sitting apart from our dear companions, shall lay our plans together,

and so on; and again, Euripides says,

6° Literally, “gluing.”

254 MEPI ME@OAOY AEINOTHTOZ «6 0 &i¢ TO OMMOOY EX AvETHY T Aywv Eows 1 Cyndwtos avbodnotow, dy sinv &yo».

Kata napmdiay 6é, dtav wéoos einwy tob énove nag’ adtod to Aotmov melds Eounvedon nal addw tod enove einwy Etegov éx tob idiov

ro0007, wo piav yevéoda. tHv idéav’ oiov Anuoobévyns év tH LTa- 5 [448] oangsoBelac «bots 6° duly Abeta tabta nocoBedwv Diloxodten, | OVNWIMOT Howtyoa ywmdoxwyr, tt aoyto.ov eiAngyev obtoc, Woneo Di-

hoxoatns 6uohoydy».

[epi tOv Kekpatykotoy Ev tois aKpoataic nadov. Ilooc¢ ta xexoatnxdta 2d0n od Osi Grytiteivey, GAN’ sixovta ma- 10 opapvtetaotat. “Ounoocs énoince, Oovxvdidns éutunoato, Anuoodérns dtedéEato, “looxodtys nagédwuerv. “Ounoos «nH uny xal mdvog éotiy avintévta véeodat:

xat yao tic P &va ufjva wévwy a0 Ho dAdyoto |

acyahda ody vni sodvlbyw». 15 Oovnvdidyns év Teouxdéovg Adym «dovdoi yao podvnua to aigvidioy xai

anoood0xntoy xal tdsiotw naogaldym EvuBaivov». Anuoodévng «ei dé

tig Vuay tov Dilinnoy ebtvyobvta bev tatty poPeoor nooonodeuhcat vouiler, cwpooros uév AVOEdS Aoytou® yontat’ weyadn yao bonny». ‘Tooxodatys 6& capac o8twe abté nmagadidwot « undé 1005 TAG THY MA- 20 oandnovalovtwy doyas toayéws anavta@yv, adda Pvuovpéevors wey adbtoic elxwy, memavuévoic O& THC Goyic émunAjttwy».

1 Aeschinis 1, 151; Eurip. Stheneboeae fr. 672 N.?; Rhein. Museum 63,

148 1.19 | oddete (ex dvd’ cig?) Ph | apery, Ve,m.1 Sf || 2 @¢Ph | naya Ve || 3-4 meC&co Aorzdv (om. 76) Pe || 4 etepov? || 5-6 mept traparpeoBelag Ac || 6 Dem. 19, 245; Eur. fr. 812 N.? | td& ader&e Ac Sf

Ph; tata Pc; xat tatita Dem. || 9 mg. Pa, (rept om.) Pc; supr. (tv om. ; axovdwot) Ve Ac Sf; mg. mepn xexpatyxdtwv, om. cet.,Ph | mg. x8 Vc Ac, AP

|| 10 cf. [Dion.] II 1 p. 281, 8.9 Us. || 13 Hom. B2gr || 15 doadrckatc Ph || 16 Thuc.2,61 || 17 Dem.2,22 || 18 tadry tor poBepdv me0cmoAcuioat voztco. Vc || 19 voultce. Sf || 20 caper Vd || 20-21 mAnowaCédvtwv Ve Ac, Isocr. 1,31 || 21 dravrayv Ve Ac || 22 elxenww Ac | érudnrrew Ac

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 31 255 There is a love that makes men chaste and virtuous, an envied thing among men, of whom I would be one.

It is adaptation (pardidia)®! whenever, after quoting part of the verse, one in his own words expresses the rest in prose and then quoting another verse adds something of his own, so that it becomes a single idea; for example, Demosthenes in the False Embassy (19.254): ““Who on an embassy delights in the company’ of Philocrates, | ‘I never inquired, knowing’ ® that he took money, [448] as Philocrates admits he did.” CHAPTER 31: ON POWERFUL EMOTIONS AMONG THE HEARERS

One should not oppose powerful emotions but should yield and allay them. Homer did this, ‘Thucydides imitated him, Demosthenes took up the tradition, Isocrates passed it on. Homer (Jliad 2.29 I-293):°3 Indeed there is pain to return home disheartened, for if one remains even one month apart from his wife he has vexation of heart in his benched ship.

Thucydides in a speech of Pericles (2.61):°* “For the mind quails before what is sudden and unexpected and least within calculation.” Demosthenes (2.22): “If any of you, seeing Philip’s good fortune, thinks in this he 1s a formidable antagonist, he reasons like a prudent man, for (luck) is a great weight in the scale.” And Isocrates clearly transmits it thus (1.31): “Not harshly opposing the angry moods of your associates but yielding to them when in a passion and rebuking them when their anger has cooled.” ®5

61 Another unusual usage; the word otherwise means “parody,” as below

inch. 34. 62 This is thought to come from Euripides’ Phoenix; cf. frg. 812 Nauck?. ©3 Odysseus is addressing Agamemnon about the morale of the troops. °4 Pericles is defending himself to the citizens after the second invasion by the Spartans. °5 The author may not realize that Isocrates’ speech of advice to Demonicus antedates Demosthenes’ Olynthiacs by about twenty-five years.

256 MEPI ME@OAOY AEINOTHTO®S

[epi onpodoyovupévoy aoixyudtoy. 1 Tév 6uohoyoupévwy Gdixnudtoy pia nagapvdia 7 6uohoyia xai [449] dzodoyia. “Ounoos tobto éldagev, “Hod|6ot0c éutijoato. oioy ‘Edévy tov xaxdy aitia mado, xat “EAAnow xat BapBdeots, xai uddtota toic Towoty éuohoyoupévasg xaxdv édAnjdvite: ti otv noret; Stay draléynta 5 tov Todwy tiv, Eavtijc xatnyoost nati 6uodoyei thy adixiay, xai tootO ov wovoy adbth anodhoyiacs, GAAd nai édéov xai nagapvidiac aitioy yivetat’ avt@ yoby tH LToidum dtaheyouéryn éEavthic xatnyooet, Mote tov

véoorta, éi xal éuioe abthy, uetapahéodar xal éheciv’ anoxoivetau ody

«ob té wot aitin éoot Deot vd} pot aitioé Eiot». 10 Kai nag’ ‘Hooddtw 6 “Adgaotds éotw, tao Kooicov ebeoyetndeic xal

, xadagvetc xat ptvAag tod naddc abtod éuneugieics: cita anoxteivas tov “Atuy éy tH Onoa xai tod Kooicov Bodytos xai ayavaxtobdytos EQUTOY MOOTElYMY, xaTHYyOOEL EavTOD “al GnoxtEtvat xehetder’ Hote TOY

Kooioov nao’ “Hooddétw tiv tob ITouduov wavy agiévar m00¢ TOY vea- 15 viouov «sic O€ wot 08 od tovtwyr aitios, GAAa Dewy xod tic, 6¢ mot MOoEOH Maver EY TH Oveiow».

[450] | Hepi tod tpayixds Aéyetv. To toayinds Aéyew “Ounoos wév &didake, Anuoodévys O& éutyCato. dtl wey yao Teay@dds xal natio toeaymodias “Ounoos, [TAdtwrv 20 paotvest’ ws O° EtToaymdnoEy ey TH Eavtob noijoe, Dewontéoy.

1 supr. Vc Ac Sf, mg.P ph | mg.’ Vc AcPh,dA«xP || 2 sic P Sf Ph; N aroAoyia xat Guoroyta Vc; h Gporoyla xat Hh xatyyopta Ac || 2-3 Diac.: YH 88 obvtaktc Zot, Toradty’ ula mapapvOta xal d&roroyla tév 6uoAoyoULEVeoV Kstxynudctav h Guoaoyla tod dduxynuatés gotiv; cf. [Dion.] II 1 p. 314, 6. 367, 8

Us. (de elocutionis vitiis); Fuhr, Nov. Symb. Joachim. 1907 p.114 || 5 xaxdv Ac; xaxdd¢ P Vc Sf Ph (xaxdv HAvOe de Achille ® 39, de Ulixe y 306) || 6 totro

om.Ph || 7 &modoyta Ac Sf, (ex cr. m. po.) Vc; éuoAoyta Ph, ?Vcom.1 || 8 [Dion.] II 1 p. 314, 6. 334, 4.14 Us. || 9 peraBarAAcoOa. Ac Ph | yodv V8

|| 10 Hom. F164 || 11 Her. 1,35 sq. || 12 efta adtdc drcoxtelvac Ve SfPh || 13-14 mapedidov gxutév Kpoltow mootetwwwv tas yetpag Her. 1, 45 || 16 %¢oAc | xodP VcAcSf; xat Ph; yp xat o8 tr1g KAAOSP || 17 mp0cohwavev

Ve Ac; mpoepjvucev Sf || 18 supr. Vc AcSfPh,mg.P | mg. Aw Ve Ac Ph, ABP || 20-21 Plat. Reip.X 598 D || 21 adrod Ac

ON FORCEFUL SPEAKING, CHAPTER 33 257 CHAPTER 32: ON ADMITTED WRONGDOING

‘The one remedy tor admitted wrongdoing is confession and apol-

ogy. Homer did this, Herodotus | imitated him. For example, [449] Helen was the cause of evils for all, both Greeks and barbarians, and especially her arrival was admittedly an evil for the Trojans.

What then does she do? Whenever she converses with one of the ‘Trojans she denounces herself and confesses her crime, and this becomes not only a source of defense to her but of pity and compassion. Even when conversing with Priam himself she denounces herself so that the old man, even if he was hating her, changes and pities her. Thus, he answers her (Iliad 3.164), “You are not, I think, the cause; it is the gods who are the cause.” And in Herodotus (1.35ff.) there is Adrastus, favored by Croesus and purified and dispatched as a guard for his son. ‘Then after he killed Atys on the hunt and when Croesus is crying out and in distress, offering himself up, Adrastus denounces himself and demands to

be put to death. As a result, according to Herodotus Croesus adapted the words of Priam to the young man: “You are not, I think, the one cause of these things, but some one of the gods is and signified it to me in a dream.” | CHAPTER 33: ON SPEAKING IN TRAGIC STYLE [450] Homer taught how to speak tragically, and Demosthenes imitated him. That Homer was a tragedian and the father of tragedy, Plato testifies,°© but one must examine how he made his poetry tragic.

66 Cf. Republic 10.598d.

258 MEPI ME@OAOY AEINOTHTOS ‘Lhiov GAwow obx sine, téyvyn nagalindy ob yao Houoley abtot 1 Th Tis Mowjoews Toaymoia éEvdg modAtyviov népDnotc’ ti ody noLEi ; ma4-

onc mdhews eine nd00now év Ovo Exeow

«dvdoas wey xtelvovot, nod O€ te niQ Guatiyvet,

téxva 0&€ T GAhot &yovot BadbvCw@vove te yuvaixac». 5 dv 0 “Extwo anoddary, “Avdooudyy Aéyet te wat “HudBn, Gdda xai ‘EXé-

vn nat yoo0s Tomddwr, xal nodAld Ooduata w¢ eineiy anondAnootyta THY Toay@oiar. ti obv &% TOUTMY TOY yonoTOY voulcouev “Ounooy Aé-

vew yuiv; ta weydda tH Boaydtyte tic Eounvetac muddtre: pweydada, ths ovytopulas tO wévedos abtoic diacwlotons, ta & uLxod xal yada 10 tH mEotpolf ta&v Adywv péyeBoc nooodauparer.

Taita novet AnuooBévyns xal obtw toaymdsit Bwxéwy GAwow [451] &vove Sdov év Gdiyous 6ruaot Aéywr «hy | ibety oixtac xateoxampévac, tTeLyn TMEoinonuéva, yooay Zonuoy thy év HAixia, pbvata 6& xai matdd-

oa Ghiya xai noeapitac avPoeamnovc oixtoods»* uwovovovyi magéyoace 15 tO ‘Ounotxdy. év 66 t6 Kata Kovwvoe aixiacg tic bBoews neoujnynow énoinoey axoipa> Exacta dinyobuevocs, Ondovdtt tHy gpavddtynta too

odyuatos aiowy sic wévedoc tH megittotéoa Eounveta xal tHv Bow TOAayYMOayY.

[Tepi tod kopiKkds Aéyerv. 20 Tob xwpmixds Aévew dua xat oxdatew aoyalwso tocic wéPodot' TO HATA MaQMOiay OYHUA, TO MAPA No0GdOxiaY, TO évaytiac noLEioDal

TAG Eludvas TH toe THY Moayudtwr. todtwr nagadeiyyuata AdBwper TA pév Ex TOO xMptnod, Ta O& Ex tod Biov, ta dé & TOO OxjtOVOC.

To péy xata naomdtay ob8tws eyet 25

1 téyvy vix. san.; Laurentius vertit «artificiose eam relinquens» | xataditovP || 3 ndepO0yow eirev Ve AcSfPh || 4 Hom.1593 || 4-12 cf. Theon II 62, 24; 31. 63, 3 Sp. Aps. 12 p. 317, 3 Sp.-H. || 4 [ID]xtewvover|v

er.| Ve | &uarOdverPh || 5 3’ (om.7’)AcPh || 6 Hom. 02725. 748.762 |

t|t xatm. po.;ex | Vc; (om. xat)Ph || 8 tévom.Ph | voulowyevPh || 8-9 uty ante 6uxpov Ve, ante Aéyew Sf Ph; om. Ac || 9 gvAdcrrew Ve Ac Ph || 10 cysexpe Pc {| 11 maparapBdve. Ve Sf; mp0ckapBcverw Ac || 12 obtos

Sf; obtwg Ve Ac Ph || 13 Dem.19,65 || 15 6Atyaom. P; yo yuovatua dé “at Trardcpra drtya Pa, (ybvorx) Pe | povovovyt mapaptxpov tapéppace Sf ||

16 Dem. 54,3 sq. || 20 supr. Ve AcSfPh,mg.P | mg. A8 Vc Ac Ph, ay P

|| 21 76Ph || 22 cf. Auct.ad. Her. 16,10 || 24 td 38 é% cod Btov post entopos Pc; del. Spengel, at cf. 260, 11 sq. | &rd(proalt.éx) AcSfPh || 25